The Railway Navvies

by Terry Coleman

  When he said he had worked on the railway for twenty-seven years they asked him, ‘You have had some ups and downs?’

  ‘Yes, many up; not very far up, but many down.’

  Then they asked, ‘How did most of the accidents happen; were they from carelessness on the part of the men themselves?’

  It was a difficult thing, he replied, for anyone who had not been there to understand how accidents happened in the tunnels. But he went on to tell them about a man who lit a fuse to blast rock at the bottom of a tunnel, and then, as he was being pulled up in a bucket, got stuck part way up the shaft.

  ‘There was one man, the engine was stopped, and he lighted the match, then the engine could not draw him up, and he was there, and stopped there while the shot went off, and he did not get hurt in the least. Several were killed, though; sometimes when the engine was drawing them up, sometimes striking at the side, it threw them out and killed them…. These two men, thrown out of number four shaft, the pricker catched in the shaft and turned the bucket over; and the men fell out.’

  Stockton and Darlington Railway, c. 1833.

  In 1845 there were 200,000 men like Eaton working on about 3,000 miles of new line. In the eighty years from 1822 onwards, millions of navvies made 20,000 miles of railways in Britain, and thousands of miles more in Europe and the rest of the world.

  The nineteenth century is not only the railway age but also the age of the navvy. The railway brought cheap, fast travel, encouraged commerce and ideas, and did a lot to create Britain’s national prosperity and international ascendancy. But the railway was made by navvies, not by machines. A piece of engineering like the Great Western Railway from London to Bristol – known as Brunei’s billiard table because the mean gradient is 1in 1,380 – was built with picks, shovels, and gunpowder.

  Much of the glory went to the engineers, and much of the profit to the entrepreneurs. Thomas Brassey, probably the most successful of the contractors, was called a European power, through whose accounts more flowed in a year than through the treasuries of a dozen duchies and principalities, but he was such a power only with his navvies.

  The railway age began in Stockton on 23 May 1822, a Thursday afternoon, when a crowd of 300 shouting, singing navvies dragged a local dignitary in his carriage into Stockton, where, at St John’s Well, he laid the first rail of the Stockton and Darlington Railway. Then they all sang ‘God Save the King’, the dignitaries went off to the mayor’s reception, and the navvies feasted on bread, cheese, and ale at the Black Lion Inn. Some say the Stockton and Darlington was not the first true railway but more like the apotheosis of the colliery tramroad, and that the first railway, designed as a public line to carry both goods and passengers, was the Liverpool and Manchester, which was not opened until 1830. It is true that, for years, passengers on the Stockton line rode in carriages hauled by horses, and as the descents were so great that the loaded wagons would run down by themselves for ten miles out of the twenty-five, it was usual at first to take off the horse and hang him by a halter to trot after the wagons. This trotting so shook up the poor animal that in 1828 an improvement was devised. A little light truck on two wheels was fastened behind the ordinary wagons, so that the horse could ride in it down the runs and eat his provender from a manger attached. The horse, said the Liverpool Mercury, seemed greatly pleased with his conveyance, and to be aware how much labour he was spared.

  He gallops up, and jumps into it at full speed, and can be got out and attached again without stopping… should the dreadful accidents, which have recently occurred from explosions, lead to the abandonment of the locomotive engine, the saving to the Stockton and Darlington Railway from this contrivance cannot be estimated at less than a thousand a year.

  This does not sound like a modern railway. But locomotives or no locomotives, it was the first public railway of any size, and the first where great earthworks were created by an army of navvies got together for that purpose. It was the beginning of the railway revolution that was to transform the country. Those who built the first railways knew quite well what they were doing. Henry Booth, treasurer of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, said in 1830:

  We must determine… whether it be desirable that a nation should continue in the quiet enjoyment of pastoral or agricultural life, or that it should be launched into the bustle and excitement of commerce and manufacture. [But] it must be admitted that the golden age is past, and it is to be feared the iron age has succeeded. The locomotive engine and railway were reserved for the present day. From west to east, and from north to south, the mechanical principle, the philosophy of the nineteenth century, will spread and extend itself. The world has received a new impulse. The genius of the age, like a mighty river of the new world, flows onward, full, rapid, and irresistible.

  Church Tunnel by S.C. Brees, 1837.

  This glorious philosophy described by Mr Booth needed spades to spread it. An anarchic élite of labourers grew up who worked in constant danger, miles from civilization, and lived according to their own laws. At Woodhead in 1845, where 1,100 men were camped in shanty huts, they even had their own marriage ceremony: the couple jumped over a broomstick, in the presence of a roomful of men assembled to drink upon the occasion, and were put to bed at once, in the same room. They were heathens in a Christian country, they drank, had many women but few wives, broke open prisons, and were not received in good society. It was fashionable to laud the ideal of labour, but the men themselves could go hang, as some of them did. They were compared to an invading army. They came, made their earthworks and their depredations, and went, taking a few of the local women and leaving the ruin of a shanty town. Of the arrival of the navvies, the report of the House of Commons Select Committee on Railway Labourers said in 1846:

  …its suddenness, and its temporary location at particular localities, often spots before but thinly populated, have created or developed evils (touching both the welfare of the labourers employed and the interests of society), the taint of which seems not unlikely to survive their original cause. They are brought hastily together in large bodies; no time is given for that gradual growth of accommodation which would naturally accompany the gradual growth of numbers; they are therefore crowded into unwholesome dwellings, while scarcely any provision is made for their comfort or decency of living; they are released from the useful influences of domestic ties, and the habits of their former routine of life (influences and habits the more important, in proportion to their want of education); they are hard worked; they are exposed to great risk of life and limb; they are too often hardly treated; and many inducements are presented to them to be thoughtless, thriftless, and improvident.

  Lieutenant Peter Lecount, one of Robert Stephenson’s twenty-five assistant engineers on the London and Birmingham Railway, completed in 1838, did not think much of navvies either. ‘These banditti,’ he said,

  known in some parts of England by the name of ‘Navies’ or ‘Navigators’, and in others by that of ‘Bankers’, are generally the terror of the surrounding country; they are as completely a class by themselves as the Gipsies. Possessed of all the daring recklessness of the Smuggler, without any of his redeeming qualities, their ferocious behaviour can only be equalled by the brutality of their language. It may be truly said, their hand is against every man, and before they have been long located, every man’s hand is against them: and woe befall any woman, with the slightest share of modesty, whose ears they can assail. From being long known to each other, they in general act in concert, and put at defiance any local constabulary force; consequently crimes of the most atrocious character are common, and robbery, without an attempt at concealment, has been an everyday occurrence, wherever they have been congregated in large numbers.

  All this, as a celebrated woman missionary was later to exclaim, all this in Christian England. But the history of the first fifty years of the century is one of violence. The Stockton and Darlington Railway was begun only seven years after Waterloo, and only three years after the
cavalry charged into the Manchester crowd at Peterloo. Slavery was not abolished in the British Empire until 1833. It was only in 1822 that more than 200 offences ceased to be capital, and executions were held in public until 1868. Two navvies were hanged beside the line during the construction of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway for killing a ganger.

  The first railways were built in a time of political unrest. Before the Reform Act of 1832 the composition of the Commons had been substantially unchanged for 150 years, and when the Liverpool and Manchester Railway was opened on 15 September 1830 the passengers on their way to Manchester, which had no Members of Parliament, passed through the insignificant village of Newton, which had two.

  The solid, secure image of Victorian England is really only that of the second half of the century, when Britain was for a few decades, until about 1890, at the height of her mercantile and naval power. But this ascendancy had been achieved only by the frantic expansion of industry after 1815. The first railway boom of the 1830s was half over before Victoria became Queen in 1837: the London and Birmingham Railway and a good part of the Great Western were built before she was twenty. By 1840 there were 1,497 miles of railway, compared with 97 in 1830. The second railway mania was in the mid forties. In 1845 no fewer than 4,800 miles of railway were authorized by Parliament, and 4,540 in 1846. By 1860 nearly all the main lines were built.

  The years of the second boom, in the mid and late forties, were years of revolution in Europe and near-insurrection in Britain. In the autumn of 1846, while English and Irish navvies were scrapping it out on the new Bury line with ‘spades, clubs, and other deadly weapons’, 12,000 men attended a Chartist meeting near Rochdale and heard Ernest Jones, from London, demand why £70,000 a year was allowed for Prince Albert’s horses, and why Albert, as well as the rest of the Royal Family, was living in luxury while the working class were toiling away their days in slavery. They must, he said, never relax in their efforts to obtain the people’s charter, and possession of the land. After this, Feargus O’Connor, the most militant of the Chartists, tossed in the remark that Prince Albert and the bishops were a pest on the community. ‘Several of the county police,’ says the Manchester Guardian report, ‘attended in plain clothes.’ Several is probably all there were. The first organized police force was Sir Robert Peel’s London force, formed in 1829, and provincial police in any numbers came much later. At Penmaenmawr, in May 1846, 300 Welshmen drove away the Irish navvies on the line. Some of the ringleaders were captured by the police. One in particular, whom the police had great difficulty in capturing, they placed in prison. ‘Immediately afterwards,’ wrote a resident of Penmaenmawr, in a letter,

  the conflict became so violent that it was deemed necessary for the magistrates to read the Riot Act, which was done. During these proceedings, a party of the Welsh went behind the prison and threw a rope over the wall, by means of which the prisoner managed to effect his escape. Most of the railway contractors along the line were sworn as special constables, and were on duty in this capacity on Saturday. A body of soldiers was expected to arrive on Monday, and then the police would apprehend a number of the rioters whom they knew, but dare not take until backed by a strong force.

  Again and again the only resource of the local police against the navvies seems to be to get the magistrates to read the Riot Act and call out the military.

  What sort of men became navvies, and where did they come from? First, they must never be confused with the rabble of steady, common labourers, whom they out-worked, out-drank, out-rioted, and despised. A navvy was not a mere labourer, though a labourer might become a navvy. The first navvies came from the bankers, the fenmen of Lincolnshire who had built the sea walls, and from the gangs who had built roads and canals. Many came from Scotland and Ireland, and from the dales of Yorkshire and Lancashire. The Irish were not nearly so wild as their reputation. In 1846 Thomas Carlyle wrote:

  The country is greatly in a state of derangement, the harvest, with its black potato fields, no great things, and all roads and lanes overrun with drunken navvies; for our great Caledonian Railway passes in this direction and all the world here, as elsewhere, calculates on getting to heaven by steam. I have not in my travels seen anything uglier than that disorganic mass of labourers, sunk threefold deeper in brutality by the three-fold wages they are getting. The Yorkshire and Lancashire men, I hear, are reckoned the worst; and not without glad surprise I find the Irish are the best in point of behaviour. The postman tells me that several of the poor Irish do regularly apply to him for money drafts, and send their earnings home. The English, who eat twice as much beef, consume the residue in whisky, and do not trouble the postman.

  The railway was also the refuge of a few criminals. They tramped to a place where they were not known, gave a false name, and got work with no question asked, as long as they looked strong enough. Navvies did the hardest and most hazardous work, the blasting and cutting, and left truck-filling and menial jobs to the boys and locally recruited casual labourers. They followed the rail, and travelled with one contractor until he had no more work to offer or until they heard of higher wages elsewhere.

  The men who gathered at Stockton in 1822 were true navvies, who had probably been working on canals. They came together, as a body, to do the work, and lived on the line. Up to the middle of the century such men were always sharply distinguished, in newspaper reports, from local labourers who were taken on for the moment. Lecount, who described navvies as banditti, also claimed that the London and Birmingham had been constructed not by such men but by what he calls the ‘surrounding agricultural population’. For three years, he said, 15,000 to 20,000 men, taken almost invariably from the nearby towns and villages, had been employed. But Lecount had an interest in saying this. The ravages of the workmen on the line, navvies or not, had been much condemned and he was no doubt concerned to defend his company. He went on to say, to the greater credit of the railway, that nearly £4,000,000 had been paid in wages to the local labourers, some of whom would otherwise have been out of work and a burden on the poor rates. It is strange also that Lecount should be able to assert so firmly that few navvies were employed, because the men would have been taken on not by the railway company, nor by the company’s engineers, nor even by the contractors themselves, but by the sub-contractors and gangers on the works. At any rate, even if the contractors did employ local labourers, 15,000 of them, it is very likely they ended up by creating 15,000 navvies. It took a year’s solid work to turn an agricultural labourer into a navvy. When a man first came to the railway he was likely to be an indifferent specimen of a labourer. At about three in the afternoon he would down tools and be too exhausted to go on, and would not be worth more than two shillings a day. But he gradually got better, his wages rose, he could buy better food, and in twelve months he was about as strong as he ever would be.

  The word navvy itself comes from navigator. This was the name given to the canal-builders of the eighteenth century, and was inherited by the railway men. The Rev. D. W. Barrett, a railway chaplain in Northamptonshire in the 1880s who frequently softened his hellfire with whimsy, adds his gloss to this:

  The term navvy is simply an abridgement of the longer and less poetical word navigator, which savours too much of the sound of alligator to be pleasant. And in fact some people have a rough idea that the navvy is a sort of human alligator who feeds on helpless women and timid men, and frightens children into fits.

  The word was in any case interchangeable with several others. The men who worked at Woodhead during the years 1839–52 were most certainly navvies, but those who were killed were written down in burial registers not only as navigators but as miners, bricklayers, railway labourers, tunnellers, masons. The word was sometimes used more particularly to mean a man with pick and shovel, an excavator, as opposed to, say, a mason or bricklayer, but navvy almost always meant any man who regularly worked on railway building. The spelling varied too. Before 1850 the word was generally written as navey, with the plural naveys
. Later it became navvie, plural navvies, and the modern spelling, navvy, did not become regular until the 1870s. Early on, the word was usually put in quotation marks, and was plainly regarded as slang: the polite term was railway labourer. ‘Navvy’, however spelled, was generally used either as a term of condemnation, or, later, in an attempt to be friendly, as in the Quarterly Letter to Navvies (published by the Navvy Mission Society) in which the men were addressed as ‘Dear Mates’. But after the great railway works were finished the word went out of fashion again. In 1893, for instance, the Society changed the name of its pamphlet, apparently without explanation, to Quarterly Letter to Men on Public Works.

  What, then, are the tests of a navvy?

  First, the nature and severity of the work, which must be excavating, or tunnelling, or blasting, or bridge-building, on public works. Not necessarily railway construction, although most navvies, in the railway age, did work on the railways. They also worked, often between railway jobs, on docks, reservoirs, and roads, and a celebrated gang erected the Crystal Palace.

  The Crystal Palace Gang that built Sydenham station, first known photo of navvies, 1853.

  Second, the working together, the living together in encampments by the line, and the inclination to move with the railway to new works.

  Third, the ability to drink, and eat, like a navvy. Two pounds of beef and a gallon of beer a day, and a man was accepted.

  The dress, too, was distinctive. They wore moleskin trousers, double-canvas shirts, velveteen square-tailed coats, hobnail boots, gaudy handkerchiefs, and white felt hats with the brims turned up. They would pay fifteen shillings, a great price, for a sealskin cap, and their distinct badge was the rainbow waistcoat. They were often known to the contractor, and to everyone else, only by their nicknames – Gipsy Joe, Bellerophon, Fisherman, Fighting Jack.