« 上一頁繼續 »
SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE DAYLIGHT SAVING BILL. 55
21 May, 1908.]
1059. You are quite aware of it?—Yes, I am quite aware of what you think of it. 1060. Suppose you want to start from a place like Liverpool to spend the day at Windermere and go back to Liverpool by the last trainto leave at nine o'clock is an exceedingly desirable arrangement after spending a day in the country; to leave at 7.40 would be exceedingly inconvenient, it would spoil a summer evening entirely ? —Yes. 1061. Obviously, unless you added another train, an excursionist holiday-maker would lose as much at one end of the day as he gained at the other ?–I quite see that, but I say again we should make the train suit the traffic. For instance, we have a 5.45 train; that would be leaving at 4.25, about. Probably we should not want that train at all and we should put on another in the evening. 1062. You would entirely contemplate extending a good deal of your service at any rate 2 —I do not say “a good deal” at every place. We will keep you right at Windermere, Sir ; I will promise you that. 1063. You regard the possibility of running trains rather later in the day as one of the advantages 2—I think we should get traffic to justify it. The Great Western Railway is the best example of that, I think, with their river traffic now. It would lead to more trains being run from Henley, Marlow and all those places on the river in the evening. People would not be content to come off the river an hour and 20 minutes earlier than they do now. 1064. In fact, it would do more harm than good if people had to come off the river an hour earlier ?–It would be very awkward; it would do no good to that traffic anyway. There would be some increase in trains to pretty places outside big towns. 1065. The probability is that you would not make any alteration while the first two or three “20 minutes” were going on, and then at the end, when the whole hour and 20 minutes was gone, you would have to put extra trains on ?—We should have to wait to get experience; we could not tell at all to begin with what we should want to do. People would not get used to the change the first summer probably, to take full advantage of it. 1066. But you do not think there would be any inconvenience to the traffic 2–No, Sir, I do not think so at all.
1067. May I ask what are the three principal railway newspapers connected with the interests of the railways, both as regards the companies and also the men; do you know?—The “Railway News,” “Railway Times,” and the “Railway Review"—that is a Unionist paper.
1068. I am not talking of politics 2–No.
1069. I beg your pardon, it is “Union ?”—I know nothing about it.
1070. And there is the “Railway Gazette,” is there not ?—There is the “Railway Gazette.” There is another paper just started. “Railways.” I think it is called.
1071. Do you know at all what views they take of this?—No, I have not asked them, Sir. 1072. Are all the clocks at your stations corrected by one master clock; are they synchronised ? –Yes, the time goes all down the line from London. 1073. Over how many miles?—Right down. At 10 o'clock every morning it goes right down the main line, and all the junctions send it down the branches. 1074. What is your total mileage—about 2– 2,100 miles. 1075. Over 2,000 miles 2–Over 2,000 miles. 1076. And there is no difficulty at all with the synchronisation of your clocks over a mileage of over 2,000 miles 2–No, not a bit. 1077. You expressed an opinion that the change of time might be more advantageously made on a Monday morning than on a Sunday morning, and I suppose you had in your mind entirely the interests of your own railway ?–Entirely Sir. 1078. I may say it was a personal reason— I do not mean to use the word offensively— selfish 2–It was personal to myself; I do not mind saying that it would give me a little more trouble to have the alteration made on the Sunday morning than on the Monday morning, but it is not worth talking about. 1079. Do not you think there would be an advantage in this change taking place on the Sunday morning, from the fact that, if any minority did happen to be forgetful people, they would not suffer so much 3–Yes, I can see that would be a benefit. 1080. And as regards the fractions of time at which it is proposed to change—the 20 minutes, the half-hour, or hour—those are the three alternatives—do not you think that perhaps the middle of the three—the 30 minutes—would offer some advantages, inasmuch as it would be an easier fraction of an hour to change 2–I would rather stick to the 20 minutes, Sir—I like the four 20-minute steps. It would cause very little dislocation, the 20 minutes; I look at it as being, on the whole, the best. 1081. The four fractional changes, of course, extend over the month ?–Yes. I would rather have the three “thirties” than nothing. 1082. You would rather have that than the hour?—I would rather have that than the hour.
1083. But you would rather have the hour than nothing, I gather?—I would rather have the hour than nothing.
Chairman. 1084. Would you prefer it six-monthly or permanently?—Six-monthly. Mr. Pirie. 1085. Of course an “hour ’’ alteration in the 24 hours would be very serious 2–It is a serious alteration I know. Chairman. 1086. You are not afraid of disorganisation bein CauS
21 May, 1908.]
caused to your Irish traffic owing to the fact that Irish time varies so much 2–No Sir, it would be all in proportion, the alteration would go right through. - 1087. You have some service in the Isle of Man, have you not—a boat service 2–We have no boat of our own, we run trains in connection with the boats from Liverpool. 1088. You do not apprehend any dislocation accruing to that traffic at all ?–No. 1089. Can you tell the Committee what proportion the Continental traffic bears to the traffic of the whole country?—We have not any, Sir, we could not tell. Our traffic, you see, is booked to London chiefly. 1090. Mr. Gooday told us that it was about one per cent. ?–We do not know. 1091. Mr. Gooday the other day doubted whether it was one per cent. of the whole, you have no means of telling that ?—I have no means of stating that. 1092. Do you as a railway expert regard it as at all impossible so to adjust English trains— or “British trains” call them—that they may
natural way would be to alter the trains on the English side.
1093. You think that could be done 2—That is the only way to do it, but I would rather leave that to the railways that carry Continental traffic, to tell you about.
1094. With reference to the suggested “hour.” alteration. 1095. If that were put in the Bill, there would be two short hours of only 30 minutes each in April 2–Yes. 1096. And there would be a double hour in September ?—Yes. 1097. How would we distinguish between the two successive hours in September ?—I should not like to say. I have not thought about it, because I have thought that it was rather impracticable. 1098. I suggest to you that any difference of that sort would be got over by calling the September hour, putting it on the time-table, as a day from a.m. to p.m. ?—I have not thought about it. It is a big change, an hour.
(The Witness withdrew.)
Mr. J. F. S. GooDAY again called in ; and further Examined.
1099. Since you gave your evidence here you have had the figures taken out and you find that the actual number of passengers to and from the Continent in 1907 was 181,531 ?—Yes, by our line. 1100. By your line—that being a percentage of 0.135 on the total number of passengers carried over the Great Eastern Railway during the same period, so that is scarcely one per cent ? —It is about a seventh of one per cent 1101. About a seventh of one per cent. ?–Yes. I said less than one per cent. in my evidence, but I find it is much less han one per cent. ; it is only 0.135—that is about one-seventh per cent. 1102. In this same letter you say: “With reference to the request which was made by the Chairman of the Committee (Q. 285), the goods traffic passing over this railway during the year 1907 amounted to 6,909,467 tons. In addition there were 317,607 tons of goods conveyed over the line to and from the £ making a total of 7,227,074 tons. These figures do not include coal traffic ’’?—Yes, that is so.
1103. With reference to the proportion between Continental and Home traffic, you give the tonnage of goods?—Yes. I have given it there.
1104. So that it works out under 5 per cent. ? —Yes, I wrote that letter because in some of the papers I was reported as having said that our Continental traffic was nine-tenths of our whole; and I have been considerably laughed at for having been supposed to have made such a statement.
1105. Then you say: “Both as regards the passenger and the goods traffic to and from the Continent, the statistics include not only traffic by our own vessels, but also by the General Steam Navigation Company's boats between Harwich and Hamburg, and the United Steamship Company's boats between Harwich and Esbjerg. In Q. 213, should not the word ‘behind be ‘before, see Answer 210, where I say “Holland time is 20 minutes in advance of Greenwich.’” —That is a verbal correction.
1106. 1907 was rather an exceptionally bad year for your Continental traffic, was it not ?— It was. 1107. I imagine that a Continental passenger on an average—I mean from the railway point of view—is a much more important person than the average of the other passengers, because it includes the very small local person ?–Certainly. 1108. The average man, in the case of the Continental passenger, is considerably more important than the average local man 2–The Continental passenger always pays more than the twopenny workmen. The twopenny workmen are more numerous than our Continental passengers. 1109. The distance travelled is much greater in the one case than in the other ?–The Continental passenger must travel, in our case, all the way to or from Harwich, if not further. 1110. What distance is that ?–70 miles. 1111. You do not happen to know what the average passenger does travel, for instance 2– No, we have not got that.
(The Witness withdrew). 1112. You
1112. You are a Director of a Public Company employing in the summer from 800 to 1,000 shop assistants; is that so ?–Yes, Sir. 1113. Will you favour the Committee with your views as to the main principle and provisions of Mr. Willett's scheme 2—Well, personally, I think that it would be one of the greatest boons that ever occurred to the workers in shops in London, far exceeding even Lord Avebury's Shop Hours Act, or Bank Holiday Bill. 1114. What is the institution you represent ?– The Bon Marché at Brixton. I do not attach the importance which seems to be attached to the recreative side of the question so much as to the saving of artificial light—not the saving of of it, but that the people who work in shops now would then be working in daylight, whereas now they are working in artificial light. I think the gain to their health would be immense. You take the number of women who are employed in shops, according to the Factory Act they can work up to eight o'clock at night; they do as a matter of fact. Well, if this hour and 20 minutes daylight were brought in there would be that less of artificial light for them to work by. The atmosphere in most of the London shops is very bad, and if you look at it from the health point of view the physique and the health of the girls employed in them, I am sorry to say, is anything but what it should be, and I think that this Bill would help them in a very great measure. I do not suppose you gentlemen are aware that at the present time the Factory Act permits the workers to remain for 30 nights during the year two hours beyond the usual time. Now I have had the figures taken out at Bon Marché, and I find that we avail ourselves of those 30 times 22 nights in the summer—in the hot weather the employees are working in that artificial light beyond the usual time. The atmosphere in shops, you will know if you observe as you go about, is anything but what it ought to be possible in the majority of places. 1115. On that point you are not afraid of the workmen being made to work longer hours in consequence of the greater daylight?–No, in a very few instances that might occur, but I do not think there would be any fear in the majority of cases that such would be the case. 1116. Are there no statutes determining the hours of work for big shops?—The Factories Acts—there are. 1117. Are they under the Factories Acts ?— Yes; eight o'clock is the limit.
the 12 hours contemplated by the Act 7–No, I believe they are regulated (so many hours a week) as well. 1121. So that there cannot be anything in the apprehension that these workpeople would be made to work longer hours in consequence of the greater daylight 2–Quite so. 1122. Will you go on and develop your argument? —Well, those are the main points, as far as my particular business is concerned. There certainly would be an extra time for recreation afterwards, but I do not know that the majority of the workpeople would avail themselves of it to any very great extent. 1123. Avail themselves of what ?—The hours of recreation, say for cricket or tennis; that appeals to the Stock Exchange and the banking world. 1124. What Parliament can do is to place opportunities in the way of people getting recreation ?–Quite so; the hours then would not admit of that to any great extent, but what it would do would be that they would be working in a purer atmosphere and when they left off work they would still have the hour or two's daylight by which to go to their homes—they would get a glimpse of daylight, which now in many instances they do not. 1125. Do you consider the tendency of modern times on the part of shopkeepers is to lessen rather than to lengthen the hours of work?— It is to lessen them. 1126. And that tendency would be accelerated and encouraged by the provisions of this Bill ?— I think it would. Of course it is very difficult to get a number of shopkeepers to be unanimous. That Bill of Lord Avebury's, the Shop Hours Act, is not a success; you cannot get them to be unanimous. A gentleman stated the other day that what you had get to do was to get people to agree and the thing would be done. That is not practicable; it is an absolute impossibility. You cannot get them to do it. 1127. Is that an Act 2—There has been an Early Closing Act passed. 1128. It is only optional in that Act—it is permissive 2–You have to get a certain number to agree to it before the thing can be done. 1129. It is a local veto sort of thing—local option ?–Yes, that is it. 1130. The Committee have had a good deal of evidence from people who, though approving of the main principle of the Bill, regard the machinery contemplated by the Bill as being so cumbersome and unwieldly as to make it practically unworkable. They think a piecemeal alteration of clocks on four Sundays every year would be an intolerable nuisance and that it would lead to great inconvenience. Have you considered that ?—I cannot see that it would be so. It is well known that you do not get a “convenience” without some kind of inconvenience, and this appears to me to have such advantages that I would still prefer to alter the whole of the clocks. The objection to having them altered is infinitesimal. 10 1131. You
1131. You have nothing further to say upon that point ?–No. 1132. Have you any preference for an alteration consisting of three half-hours, instead of four twenty minutes ?–No. I should welcome any sort of alteration, whether it were an hour and a half or an hour, I think it would be such a boom. 1133. Have you considered whether a sixmonthly alteration or a permanent alteration would be the better?—Permanent alteration is out of the question altogether, in my mind. 1134. Why?–Because that would be using the artificial light you want to do away with in the morning—it is dark in the winter time now at eight or a little before eight. 1135. Surely this Bill does not force anyone to open earlier or to close earlier or to close later, does it 2–No. 1136. It merely gives an opportunity to people to get up earlier, even in winter, if they so choose to do. I may tell you that my idea is that it might be advisable in order to obtain the benefits of this Bill, to make a permanent alteration rather than a six months' alteration; I only ask your view about it 2–Yes, in winter you will get up at seven instead of eight and you will catch the daylight at seven which you would catch at eight. 1137. Why should you get up at seven if you do not get the sun before half-past eight. The mere fact of the then nominal time being eight and Greenwich time being seven would not cause employers of labour to ask their labourers or workpeople to come at some unearthly hour ?— There would be a universal time of opening all the year round. 1138. Not necessarily: You think that would be attended with inconvenience—a six-monthly alteration ?–Yes, I think so. 1139. You are quite decided about that point ? —Yes. I have not considered that point much, but it seems to me that the six-monthly alteration is by far the best.
1140. Amongst your acquaintances have you discussed this Bill at all ?—I have, frequently, and my experience has been quite the reverse of that of Sir David Gill; everyone I have spoken to has been in favour of it, in fact I think it only needs a little amount of explanation. Possibly when you mention it to them in the first instance they will laugh at it, and say it is an impossibility and that sort of thing, but they have not realised the benefits and have hardly studied the question; even people who have written to the papers seem absolutely ignorant of the true principles of the Bill.
1141. With a very little explanation or argument it dawns upon them at once 2–Quite so. If you can only get them to read that pamphlet and to think it over for five minutes their opinion is changed, but if you ask them casually in a train or anywhere, “What do you think of the Daylight Bill?” the probability is that they will scoff at it and say that it is an impossibility, that you cannot make people get up by Act of Parliament and that sort of
thing. I think that anyone who reads it seriously and has a desire to benefit the workers cannot but see that it would be an immense advantage to them. 1142. And do you think that it is not too much to say that of those who have given the least thought to it and read the Bill there is not one in a thousand who does not approve of it 2– Quite so. You will find people ready to express disapproval of anything, and they cannot tell you why; they have not read the Bill and they do not know the working of it.
1143. I think you said you were a director of the Bon Marché, Brixton ?—Yes. 1144. Do you mind telling me what the usual hours of those at this shop are, when it is opened ? —A quarter to nine. You might put the closing at seven in the winter and eight in summer. 1145. Seven in winter and eight in summer ? —Yes, seven in winter and eight in summer. 1146. Do you mind telling me why you keep open an hour longer in summer than in winter?— Of course, on account of the daylight in a measure. People come out in the evening. It does not follow that we should keep open another hour if daylight was prolonged. We close in daylight nOW. 1147. You keep open, roughly speaking, an hour longer in summer than you do in winter ?–Yes. 1148. I want to get at the real reason for that ?– It is because we find that it is the custom of the people to shop in the evening in the summer time, up to a certain point. 1149. Then it is for your customers that you keep open the hour longer?—Yes. 1150. What class are your customers; are they mostly women or men ?–They are the usual suburban class. 1151. Are they practically entirely women, or largely men ?–Practically women. 1152. It is these women who come later in summer than in winter ?–Yes. 1153. Have you any idea what makes those women come later in summer than in winter ?– Because the evening tempts them to come out, I suppose. 1154. Do you mean that women come from a distance in summer, or go nearer home in winter ?– No, I think not. You must remember this, the later closing is only just for a month or two. 1155. You see what you are doing is the exact reverse of what it is suggested we should do?—Well, we have to take things as they are, and people undoubtedly shop in the evening during the summer weather to a certain extent. They do not do it in the west end, but they do it in the suburbs. 1156. I accept what you do, but I want to try and find out why they do it?—There are a hundred and one reasons—some, we will say, of the workingclass women dress after their husbands have come home and they have had their tea, and so on, and there is leisure for them to go out and do some shopping. There would be still the same leisure when this new Bill passed. 1157. What I want to know is this: what circumstance 21 May, 1908.]
cumstance happens in summer to induce these people to come to your shop an hour later than they arrive in winter. Do they go and play tennis, or something of that sort in the interval before coming to your shop ?–No, I think not. I may tell you that it is more particularly in the workingclass business that they shop late. 1158. In working-class businesses the people come later ?—Yes. 1159. Is that, so to speak, extra custom, or do the same people come at an earlier hour, or do you get additional people in the winter ?–No; they come at an earlier hour in the winter. 1160. It is somewhat curious ?—Yes, but it is so, unfortunately. 1161. Under the Factory Act you cannot employ women except between the hours of eight in the morning and eight in the evening ?–Yes. 1162. Suppose the Factory Act was altered, and it was laid down that you might only employ women between eight in the morning and seven in the evening, would not you be in practically as good a position as you would be by the passing of this Bill ?—No, because it does not affect the workers in the shops—the assistants; the Factory only applies to those who work in the workrooms— those who sew and make up things. 1163. That does not apply to sellers ?—Not to sellers. 1164. To the people at the counters ?—No. As a matter of fact, we let our factory part go earlier—half-past seven–earlier than we close really. 1165. These hours of keeping open apply to the actual shop, the actual buying and selling ?– Yes. 1166. What hours do the factory people work 2– That is the factory, eight to eight. 1167. Yes, I know ; that is the lawful hour of the factory; but you told me that the shop is opened at 8.45 in summer, and that it is closed at seven in winter and eight in summer; does that apply to the factory too ?–No. 1168. The factory is always run from eight to eight all the year round 2–It is varied at some houses. That is the limit. Then in addition to that you are allowed to keep them, on 30 nights during the year, an extra two hours if you Want to. 1169. You have really got two different departments which happen to be in the same building ?– Yes, the factory would receive as much benefit from the extra daylight of this Bill as the other. Where they are now working in workrooms with artificial light, they would be working then by daylight. 1170. And in the shop there is no legal restriction ?–No, there is no legal restriction. 1171. None at all ?—No. 1172. The point of the argument you suggest in favour of altering the hours seems to me to be quite conclusive in favour of an alteration of the legal limit for keeping the shop open, during the summer months at any rate 7–That would be a very great advantage, no doubt. In the case of the factory it has been tried, and it has been found a success. The Act has not been passed yet that gets over that difficulty. I believe M
the present Government are going to introduce something very soon, which will no doubt be as near perfection as one can hope for. 1173. At the same time, suppose we passed an Act of Parliament compelling all shops to close at seven o’clock in the evening, then the shop assistants at the Bon Marché would be in exactly as good a position as if this Bill were passed ?– Precisely; and if you pass this Bill they are in as good a position as they would be if you passed the other, which is totally unlikely. There is already a Shop Hours Act in existence, and it has not worked at all well. It was tried in Camberwell, and a very few months afterwards they appealed and got it revoked. 1174. Supposing your customer, who has now got this curious habit of coming an hour later in summer than in winter, on the passing of this Act still came an hour later, what would happen? Supposing they said:—“We have got so much more daylight, we will put off going to the Bon Marché an hour later ’’?—They are regulated; they have got to get back to supper, and their many duties at home; their time is regulated to a certain extent by the clock. 1175. You have told us that in summer, of their own accord, they come an hour later to do their shopping ?—An hour later than they do in the winter. 1176. Yes, an hour later than they do in the winter?—They can put off doing it. 1177. Now if the daylight goes on an hour longer, what is likely to happen?—It does not follow that they would stop out an hour longer. 1178. Does it not suggest that they might do so? They have already got the habit of keeping out an hour longer in summer than in winter; if they got the chance of a further extension of an hour, do not you think they would do it then, too ? —No, I think the hours of labour in the shops in London are now as long as it is possible to make them. If the shopkeeper himself felt inclined, seeing there were people to shop, to keep his shop open a little longer, I think the feeling of his assistants, and the general feeling would be that he could not. A large firm like Bon Marché would not alter their time, of course, but smaller shops
might; one would think that they might, but
these shops are open now until half-past nine; well, you would not expect them to keep open until 11 every night in the week. They must close at some time, and half-past nine seems to be the limit in a way. If the people took advantage of this hour and a half of extra daylight, and kept open until 11, well, every night would be a Saturday night, would it not ?
1179. It would 7–You might as well ask me to explain why people shop so late on the Saturday. The very people who shop late are people who have finished work at mid-day, and leave their purchases until the evening.
1180. They often do not get paid until four or five o’clock, do they ?—I am not sure that I am correct, but I believe Woolwich is one of the latest shopping districts in London, and I think the people in the Arsenal get paid on the Friday.
10* 1181. I