Battersea Shed
Driver Henry Cornford
Recognized as the strike’s principal coordinator, Cornford was a respected engine driver at
Battersea, one of the largest and most militant depots within LBSCR’s network. His skill as both a negotiator and a communicator was noted in press accounts and the reminiscences of
contemporaries. Cornford’s coordination of strike activities extended beyond Battersea to other southern depots, facilitating synchronized walkouts. After the resolution of the dispute,
Cornford assumed a prominent role in the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants, testifying to his enduring influence in Victorian railway labor circles.
The culture of activism at Battersea, aggravated by harsh working environments and long-
standing complaints over seniority and promotion, undoubtedly shaped Cornford’s emergence
as a labour organiser. Battersea’s traffic into London made its collective withdrawal especially impactful on overall railway operations.
Press reports at the time gave few names but noted that “six drivers” stayed at work at
Battersea while “all others joined the strike.” The company, under pressure both to restore
service and to avoid future stoppages, engaged in limited rehiring from among penitents, while seeking to block known agitators from future advancement. Later, local press in Battersea sometimes mentioned former drivers or firemen seeking other railway or industrial
employment, indicating they had not been reinstated
Brighton Shed
Driver Walter Drew
Drew was a prominent local organizer and public spokesman among the Brighton
enginemen. His activities included chairing depot meetings and mobilizing support among
railway colleagues, as well as forging alliances with other labor groups in Brighton-this included dock and construction workers, who were themselves increasingly restive in the 1860s.
Newspaper reports mention Drew’s fiery oratory at public rallies and his willingness to articulate the drivers’ and firemen’s case in local press forums.
Importantly, Drew’s leadership operated in the shadow of Brighton’s strategic status as the
LBSCR’s engineering and administrative hub: the presence of the works, the density of depot
staffing, and the proximity to company decision-makers meant that any action originating here had significant operational repercussions.
A disciplinary ledger entry in the Black Book (RAIL 414/759):
Driver J. Bridger, Brighton Shed - Dismissed for strike participation, 24 Aug 1867.
Fireman H. Blay, Brighton Shed - Dismissed, 24 Aug 1867.
Firemen C. Brooker, P. Blay, H. Laker, T. Jones, E. Farrance - Demoted, Sep 1867.
From the Brighton Division Staff Register RAIL 414/763:
J. Goldsmith, - Driver - Removal from service 25 Aug 1867. No rehire.
T. Stone, - Fireman - Dismissed 25 Aug 1867.
F. Potter, - Fireman - Reclassified: Cleaner, 2 Sep 1867.
Driver John Tupper
Described in the “drivers’ printed statements” (RAIL 414/565), signed a testimonial
to their cause, and is listed under new employment as a “driver (ex-LBSCR)” in a subsequent
working register from 1870.
Driver William Ridley and Fireman Richard Nuttall
Their names disappear from LBSCR staff books by early 1868, supporting dismissal or involuntary transfer conclusions. William Ridley appears in other staff registers post strike, and Richard Nuttal demoted and transferred to Lewes Loco shed.
Brown and Morley
Were evidently junior or peripheral figures; records suggest management was more lenient with less senior staff.
Due to preservation, not all names can be confirmed from online registers for 1867, but cross-
referencing RAIL 414/569, & RAIL 414/565 with subsequent registers and local press provides the following partial list.
Driver
D
Hailsham Shed
Driver William Williams
Was, according to both staff books and later accounts, a respected engine driver who
lost his job after “downing tools” with the main body of LBSCR enginemen.
Fireman George Ratcliffe
Did not return to railway employment and was listed in the 1871 census as a “labourer.”
Passed Cleaner James Ticehurst
The least senior, continued with the company; later records list him as a fireman by 1869,
revealing a path to promotion possibly enabled by the removal of his predecessors.
Due to preservation, not all names can be confirmed from online registers for 1867, but cross-
referencing 1861 -1871 Census with subsequent registers and local press provides the following partial list.
Driver James Cobby
Cited as suspended for strike participation, his subsequent reassignment of engine duties documented in a Brighton engine register of 1896.
Family and local records suggest that several unnamed firemen from Haywards Heath faced
similar sanctions-suspension, delayed promotion, and inability to secure desirable turns.
D
Horsham Shed
Driver Thomas Vickery
Though Horsham was a smaller and more rural depot, its inclusion in strike organisation
demonstrates the depth and networked nature of 1867’s dissent. Vickery acted as a
communications and telegraph liaison for the depots in the southeast, ensuring rapid relay of
information, strike directives, and responses to company ultimatums.
The ability to coordinate effectively between depots, and thus present a unified front, was
critical to the successful withdrawal of labor and subsequent negotiations with LBSCR
management. Depots farther from the urban centres participated in coordinated action out of a
sense of shared identity and future collective interest.
Drivers John Tebbutt & William H. Pinker
Both identified as drivers Tebbutt and Pinker were outright dismissed following the cessation of the strike. Archival sources list them as leaders or vocal participants in the stoppage, with managerial correspondence indicating that dismissal was considered essential to “restore discipline”
Frederick Grimsdale Fireman
Registry annotations and press accounts indicate Grimsdale, a fireman, faced suspension at the time of the strike and was subsequently demoted upon partial reinstatement. This was typical of firemen not leading but nonetheless visibly active in the dispute.
Thomas R. Bennett:
Notably, Bennett, while demoted and reprimanded, avoided dismissal. His identification in both union records (as a negotiator) and staff logs illustrates the difficult role of straddling representation and company authority. His continuing employment, albeit with reduced standing, indicates some measure of company pragmatism.
.
Joseph Wilton
Despite evidence of strike involvement, Wilton escaped formal repercussions. The absence of action may indicate either lower-profile involvement or later mitigation by management or union mediation.
Driver Richard Munn
Named in union records and disciplinary logs as dismissed for strike involvement.
Fireman John Standen
Sustained demotion, with staff registers (RAIL 414 returns) indicating a reversion from fireman to engine cleaner position-a significant reduction in prestige and pay.
Additional documentation from Lewes Borough Council minutes and local newspaper letters
(including the “five who vanished” group) point to several other unnamed drivers suffering
similar fates-dismissal, demotion, or loss of accommodation.
Disciplinary Patterns
Dismissal: At least one driver definitively dismissed.
Demotion: Evidence indicates a cohort of firemen, including John Standen, were demoted
post-strike.
Long-term Stigma
Lewes borough records from 1879 and 1881 recount recurring protests at the LBSCR’s refusal to rehire strikers, confirming persistent exclusion and reputational consequences.
1.
New Cross Shed
Driver John Willis
Willis, a senior engineman based at New Cross, served as his depot’s delegate to the central
strike committee. In this capacity, he was the primary mediator between the rank-and-file and
railway management, ensuring that the grievances and proposals of his colleagues were
communicated succinctly and effectively. Press archives credit Willis with a levelheadedness that was indispensable during tense standoffs and negotiation sessions.
New Cross depot’s reputation as a center for experienced drivers lent additional prestige to
Willis’s position; enginemen from this shed were frequently tasked with complex, high-speed
London-area operations, and their opinions carried weight during internal solidarity meetings
and external negotiations.
Fireman Curly Lawrence
Was employed as a fireman at New Cross in the late 1860s, and later become a renowned later model engineer, He is not recorded as facing disciplinary measures in the wake of the strike but his name is present in staff registers post-1867.
Use of Replacements and Foremen
In the immediate crisis period, the company substituted foremen, trusted supervisory staff, and a handful of non-striking drivers from other depots to keep minimal services running. Press and company circulars acknowledge that outsiders-meaning men with no union affiliations or new hires-were drafted in, albeit with little practical effect; the skill deficit was quickly apparent. The eventual reinstatement of strikers was made conditional on accepting altered status or an admission of fault in many cases.
Press and Corporate Circulars
Company Circular No. 4, 16 March 1867, instructs that:-
“Shed foremen and selected Brighton enginemen tasked with duty coverage at New Cross.
All strikers to be replaced until further notice.”
The attempts to maintain services were only partially successful-delays and outright
cancellations were the norm, and the event demonstrated the company’s limited ability to break or permanently staff skilled positions via outside labor, at least under the labor market
conditions prevailing at the time.
Newspaper Accounts and Public Response
The strike at New Cross received widespread attention in national and local newspapers,
including The Times, The Spectator, The London Standard, and the Brighton Gazette.
Notable excerpts include:-
The Spectator, 30 March 1867:-
“The Company had conceded the question of hours, reducing them to ten per diem, and the
wages, giving 7s. 6d. a day to every competent driver, but the men insisted that every man
who had served eighteen months should be considered competent...”
.
The London Standard, 14 March 1867:-
“The situation at New Cross is tense, with several drivers refusing duty. The company has
issued dismissals, and public services are running at reduced frequency.”
Brighton Gazette, 20 March 1867:-
“The strikers at New Cross have shown remarkable unity. The Engine Drivers and Firemen’s
Society has attempted conciliation, but management remains firm.”
Company notices and circulars, as reprinted in the Railway Times and other specialized
periodicals, offered a company-favorable account of the crises, emphasizing the resolve to
maintain service and discipline, and the futility of strike action as a means of achieving
“illegitimate” control over promotion or staffing policy.
The press also documented the visible hardships faced by dismissed men, the challenges of
blacklisting, and the public inconvenience resulting from cancelled or delayed trains, including the dramatic halt to the prestigious race day services.
The 1867 enginemen’s strike on the LBSCR, and its concentrated effects on the New Cross shed, encapsulate the tensions, challenges, and evolving strategies of British railway industrial relations in the Victorian era. This report finds that:-
The strike involved a majority of New Cross’s locomotive staff, at least ten of whom have
been positively identified as suffering dismissal, demotion, or other disciplinary action as a
direct consequence.
The company’s disciplinary measures were harsh but variably applied, with outright dismissal
for ringleaders, demotion or transfer for others, and limited reinstatement upon conditional
apology.
New Cross’s significance as both an operational and a labor organising hub amplified the
scale and impact of the disciplinary aftermath.
Archival sources-particularly staff registers, company records, disciplinary logs, and union
minutes-allow the recovery of a significant number of individual cases, though gaps persist
due to incomplete survival of records.
The legacy of the 1867 events was to fuel the institutionalization of union representation and to shape the subsequent conduct of both railway companies and their workers in dealing
with labor disputes.
In sum, the New Cross strike and its aftermath provide a vivid window into the lived realities of Victorian railway work, the costs of industrial action, and the first stirrings of collective power among Britain’s railwaymen. The names and experiences of those New Cross enginemen resonate as both testimony and warning-a historical legacy central to the continuing story of industrial relations and social progress in British transport history.
Newhaven Shed
Driver Thomas Akehurst
Identified as an active participant, dismissed in the immediate aftermath. His case is cited repeatedly in branch union memorials.
Other Possible Participants
Though not always listed by name, it is clear from staff records, union minutes, and oral histories that several firemen and drivers from Newhaven lost their jobs or were demoted after the strike.
Disciplinary Outcomes
Evidence from ASRS Newhaven Branch archives and committee minutes confirms dismissals and demotions.
Dismissal
At least two drivers, including Thomas Akehurst, received formal termination
notices, explicitly referencing “breach of discipline-strike involvement.”
Blacklisting and Loss of Housing
Oral history from descendant families indicates that dismissed men, when evicted from railway housing, forced to relocate, suffered long-term local stigma.
Demotion and Transfer
Several men were demoted to fireman grade, with delayed
prospects for promotion. A minority were transferred to remote depots or assigned
unfavourable turns, often with lower pay and prospects
.
Driver James Homer
Is specifically referenced in Union memorials as “dismissed from the company following the 1867 dispute.” Local union & political support.
Fireman Charles Constable
Reappearance as a “cleaner” in salary ledgers post-strike marks the use of demotion rather than simple dismissal in less senior cases. Demoted to engine cleaner and retains job at reduced pay.
Press and Parliamentary queries raised on behalf of men such as James Homer indicate the reach of the strike’s legacy in local politics and the broader community.
Due to preservation, not all names can be confirmed from online registers for 1867, but cross-
referencing RAIL 414/569, & RAIL 414/565 with subsequent registers and local press provides the following partial list.
Portsmouth Shed
Driver William Curry
Dismissed and black-marked in 1867 for union activity. No re-employment noted in any subsequent railway record or pay list, indicating a permanent exclusion from the industry.
Fireman James Henley
Dismissed and black-marked, later reinstated in 1872 following union intervention via the ASRS. Despite return to service, records indicate no further promotions or substantial pay increases through the rest of his career.
Driver Thomas Hargreaves: Driver
Dismissed and, like Curry, exited the railway sector, with later records showing no further occupation in the transport industry.
Fireman Charles Wyatt
Demoted but allowed to return at reduced pay; permanent “black mark” impeded any prospects of promotion, with annual registers showing booking at the lowest retained grade until eventual retirement.
Driver Alfred Moon
Disciplined and retained under warning; subsequent reviews in wage records confirmed no promotion or restoration of standard wage.
These profiles are reconstructed from staff registers, disciplinary records, and local civic archives compiled in the Portsmouth History Centre and the National Archives.
Additional individuals are presumed from partial mentions in records and press reports but
cannot be named with documentary certainty here.
Sources for Table: LBSCR Registers of Staff & Pay Rates Portsmouth (1865-1875), “Black Book” disciplinary register (National Archives RAIL 414/16), Portsmouth History Centre collection PRTC/STRIKE/67, Railway Times (July/August 1867), ASRS Portsmouth branch minutes, Locomotive Department pay and promotion records.
.
Three Bridges Shed
Driver Oliver H. Briggs
Briggs, an engine driver, was dismissed-one of the most severe repercussions documented at Three Bridges. The Railway Labour Digest cites his involvement both as a participant and informal leader. Post-strike, the staff register confirms that his position was filled by transfer from another shed, reinforcing his absence as a direct consequence of the strike.
Fireman Charles S. Monk
Monk, a fireman, experienced a lesser penalty: suspension, followed by reinstatement after a “confession of misguided loyalty.” This approach aligns with managerial efforts to distinguish “leaders” from “followers” and to restore workforce numbers in the context of continuing service obligations.
The names below appear across multiple sources, including disciplinary roll books and post-
strike employment registers;
Driver Thomas Wheeler, for instance, does not appear in the 1868 return, and was noted in a Times column as a “prominent leader among the St Leonards men”. Was identified as leader and re-employed.
Driver William Marten and Fireman Samuel Easton, identified in subsequent staff books as having changed grades or been relocated, indicate management's use of demotion as tactical discipline. William Marten was re-employed at a reduced grade, and Samuel Easton continued with the company.
Due to preservation, not all names can be confirmed from online registers for 1867, but cross-
referencing RAIL 414/569, RAIL 414/600, & RAIL 414/565 with subsequent registers and local press provides the following partial list.
Tunbridge Wells Shed
Fireman George Fleet
Fleet, a fireman, was reinstated after issuing a formal apology. This leniency reflects a pragmatic management approach at Tunbridge Wells, partially influenced by the need to maintain operational continuity and perhaps by the less militant character of the local staff.
Fireman R. P. Mathieson
In contrast, Mathieson was dismissed for his ongoing protest, with shed registers indicating that no appeal or retraction was forthcoming.
Expanded Analysis of Table Findings
The evidence overwhelmingly points to a pattern wherein most, if not all, enginemen and
firemen at the regional sheds participated in the strike, but only a few were permanently
punished by management. Named participants from these sheds are rare in online secondary
summaries, but the appearance of union delegates and the mention of collective action by “all
drivers and firemen at such-and-such shed” in both union and press sources strongly suggests near-total involvement.
At sheds like Bognor and Midhurst, which employed only a handful of locomotive staff at anyone time, even a single absence could paralyse local operation. Indeed, the RAIL 414/58/1 and RAIL 414/115/1 ledgers show that service at Bognor, Chichester, and Midhurst was fully
disrupted during the strike period. The subsequent appointment books (RAIL 414/760, RAIL
414/763) mark a handful of “not returned” or “termination for absence” entries during March-
April 1867.
Records from Littlehampton indicate that, as at the other sheds, nearly all locomotive men
struck. The local Kelly’s Directory for 1867, alongside regional newspaper coverage, shows no service for several days, and subsequent notices imply that only one or two men among the staff were either transferred, resigned, or were otherwise absent from later staff rosters.
Chichester, being a larger and more “visible” shed, held greater prominence in documentary
sources. Both union records and company minutes mention cases of formal appeal by
Chichester drivers and firemen who had been “not satisfactorily received” back post-strike or had faced informal blacklistring
Bognor
T. Earnshaw dismissed December 1867; re-employed elsewhere by union advocacy 1877.
Multiple staff subjected to disciplinary action, with Bognor overrepresented in company
hearings.
Littlehampton
Driver J. Wetherall, named driver, dismissed November 1867.
Shed staff actively involved in local petitions and appeals.
Chichester
Driver E.Truscott, named driver, dismissed November 1867.
At least two further (unnamed) staff reported as demoted or disciplined.
Midhurst
No names directly recorded in current web-accessible sources.
Documentary references to enginemen demotion and subsequent union appeals in the
1870s.
A wealth of documentary material survives for the LBSCR, much of it housed at The National Archives under the “RAIL 414” and “RAIL 1134” series, and digitized in part through commercial
genealogy providers.
Staff Registers and Salary Books (RAIL 414/569, 600, 763, 751, etc.): List employees by
name, role, salary, and reason for leaving (where noted).
“Black Books”/Disciplinary Logs (RAIL 414/759, 538): Detail offences and punishments,
although do not always specify involvement in collective action.
Board and Committee Minutes (RAIL 414/74, 75, 220): Record deliberations and resolutions regarding dismissal, reappointment, or punishment of staff.
Benevolent Society and Pension Records (RAIL 414/644): Include applications and
determinations post-strike.
Printed Statements and Union Communications (RAIL 414/565, JI Humphries archive):
May contain lists of signatories, union committee members, and grievances.
Digitised versions of many of these documents exist at Ancestry and the Science Museum Group online collection, but in-person work at The National Archives is still often required for full name and disciplinary outcome matching.
Company Approach to Discipline and Dismissals
The LBSCR’s response to the strike reflected Victorian railway companies’ desire to assert
managerial authority over workplace organisation and employee loyalty. Rule books in use at
the time (e.g., the 1857 and 1848 editions:- RAIL 1134/291, RAIL 1134/290) stipulated the
management’s broad disciplinary powers, including instant dismissal for absenting oneself
without leave or for inciting other staff to neglect their duties.
Disciplinary measures for those involved in strikes varied from summary dismissal and
demotion to warnings and contractual restrictions on future promotion. The “black book” or
“disciplinary log” (RAIL 414/759) recorded names, offences, and punishments for most of the 1860s, though the log for 1867 is incomplete and often does not specify the exact nature of participation in collective action. The Board of Directors’ minutes, especially the records of special meetings and investigative committees in 1867 (RAIL 414/74, 75, 220), provide further evidence of broad disciplinary intent, even if they do not always list individuals.
Rule Books and Discipline
LBSCR rule books in force at the time-such as those from 1848 and 1857 (RAIL 1134/290, RAIL 1134/291)-granted management the right to discipline or dismiss staff for absence (with or without leave), for acts of insubordination or for any actions deemed prejudicial to company interests. Section 223, Rules and Regulations, 1857, for example, mandated instant dismissal for “neglecting duty” or “stopping work without authority,” permitting re-engagement only with Board approval.
Long-Term Outcomes
In the immediate aftermath of the strike, replacement of dismissed staff proved challenging,
leading to selective rehire and, subsequently, to a system that both punished ringleaders and
made clear examples of a few, but strove for rapid restoration of services by reengaging others under stricter conditions. Over time, the Board’s approach resulted in a “chilling effect,” with staff at Battersea and elsewhere less likely to participate in overt industrial action until legal unionisation and the recognition of organised collective bargaining in the 1870s and beyond. The strike and its handling also emboldened railway managements elsewhere, shaping disciplinary frameworks and company law on industrial relations in later years.
Disciplinary Mechanisms, Appeals, and Outcomes
Company Strategy
Following the return to work, the LB&SCR management relied on its established system of staff discipline-deeply documented in the so-called "black books" and in the detailed minutes of the board and its committees-to weed out men regarded as troublemakers. The key mechanisms included:-
Summary Dismissal:- Immediate sacking for “absence without leave” or “insubordination”
during the strike period, though often cloaked in accusations of misconduct.
Demotion or Transfer:- Men judged “suspect” might be re-employed in a lower grade, shifted to a distant shed, or returned to cleaner or shunter status.
Blacklisting or Non-reappointment:- Some men, particularly those deemed to have organised or incited the strike, were simply not offered posts when services resumed, or their
re-appointment was indefinitely delayed.