Second Class Rail Etiquette

1840’s depictions of Third, Second and First Class Railroad car in Great Britain – It was only in the 1840s that a law was passed to ensure third-class carriages were covered. These drawings of 1st, 2nd and 3rd class railroad cars appeared in the Illustrated London News in 1847 – from UK.gov

  

Travel in Second-Class Cars

Editors Press: —As we have much pride in the good name that the young and growing State of California should bear, I will endeavor to point out one step that we, as well as the older States are taking, which it would seem a little thought might show unprofitable and ungenerous, if not inhuman, wicked and immoral in its tendency. I refer to second-class railroad travel. Most of the railroads have provided themselves with a plain, cheap car for each passenger train, to which they invite the emigrant, the common laborer, and all who may feel, from necessity or otherwise, obliged or inclined to economize. That is all well. Now we would invite the readers attention to the daily picture presented in this second-class car. 

The outside appearance is quite plain, needing no other sign to indicate to the traveler which one in the train it is. As you enter you find plain seats, may be cushioned, and may be plain boards, with equally cheap finish of inside work generally. That too, is all well. Seated in this plain car may be seen men of all nationalities, and possibly among them as pure hearts as can be found among the passengers of the ears before or behind them. We also find lady-like looking young women and quite frequently the mother with her precious charge of children, with a heart yearning for good influences to aid her feeble hands in teaching sobriety, good language, and decorum. But the opposite is true of the picture which this car presents. It is made the receptacle of all the bold drinking, profane language, and unmitigated old pipes, and cigars , struggling over each other for mastery in the amount of smoke they may be able to get into a small coach. To add further to the imposition on the better portion of the inmates of the befogged car, many passengers from first-class coaches feel an apparent pride in retiring to a second-class car to indulge in all those ungentlemanly and filthy habits.

We believe this state of things is unprofitable to railroad companies, as it is certainly unpleasant to many who travel in such cars. It drives many of the better class of poor from these thoroughfares and we believe its reformation would be attended with results similar to those which were noticed in the reform of the postal system. When the Government charged twenty-five cents for letters the poor could send but few, making very limited interchange of thought, and not paying mail expenses. But when the postage was reduced to three cents, a revenue sprang up. All can now afford the gratification of a correspondence. Now suppose the same watchfulness by the conductors in the second-class car, as in the first, in regard to etiquette. The mighty people, the masses, would travel; gaining information and paying back in cash. All railroad men who become instrumental in abating the nuisance complained of, and aiding the poor, but highminded, to travel in your plain but respectable second-class cars. –Way Side, 1871

Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J Graber, is the Site Editor for the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia

19th C. Etiquette and Chivalry on the Rails

"Railroad Etiquette and Chivalry"

"One of those occasions which now and then permits the sterling temper of chivalry to display itself, happened the other night on the railroad between New York City and Philadelphia. At New Brunswick, where passengers are apt to slip out in search of a cup of coffee, or a glass of more stirring stimulus, Mr. Fayette McMullen, of Virginia, left his seat in charge of an umbrella, while he refreshed himself at the counter. A Mr. Titsworth, of Plainfield, entered with his lady during his absence, and occupied the seat. Mr. McMullen requested Mr. Titsworth to give up the seat, which the latter, yielding to the entreaty of his companion, finally consented to do; but not without informing the Virginian of what might seem an obvious fact, that he (McMullen,) was no gentleman. Mr. McMullen, after the passengers had taken the boat at Tacony, encountered Mr. Titsworth again, and smarting under the imputation of ungentlemanly behavior, demanded an apology from the Jerseyman. It was not only refused, but the charge was distinctly repeated; whereupon chivalry applied his cane to the offender's shoulders, and would unquestionably have received an active return-fire but for the interference of the spectators. Mr. McMullen, who is a member of Congress, has been bound over in the sum of $1000 to answer for the assault.

Politeness consists of a good nature that cannot be ruffled, and a cheerful forgetfulness of self, that throws petty annoyances to one side, as the spray is flung off by the ship.

The rules of etiquette that should govern in travel are too indefinite to admit of dictation on the part of any individual. Of the right a traveler may have to reclaim an abandoned seat, views are undetermined. A through passenger, who leaves his seat, and marks of ownership upon it, would certainly seem to have a right paramount to that of an interloping way-traveler. So far had the affair of been simply between one gentleman and another, Mr. McMullen would perhaps have been perfectly correct. But it was not. There was a lady interested; and every rule of gentlemanly propriety requires that rights, however unimpeachable, should in such case, be relinquished. The presence of a lady ought to have shielded her escort from insult; and the blow, which might have deprived her of escort, can hardly be excused. Under ordinary social rules, therefore, we think Mr. McMullen is clearly condemned.
   

To show what he should have done to rid himself of Mr. Titsworth epithet, we have only to imagine the behavior of the gentleman under the circumstances. Finding his seat so occupied by a gentleman and a lady, apparently traveling together, he should have politely and blandly withdrawn, submitting to any self-negation rather than enter into a violent controversy in a public place, and upon such premises. No inducement could have persuaded a gentleman to take the exacting course he thought proper to pursue and his subsequent conduct places him out of the reach of excuse. Mr. Titsworth, it may be added, would have been in a better position to call Mr. McMullen in question, had he vacated the seat at the first intimation of the latter's proprietorship.


There never need be any casuistry about the duty of a gentleman in a railway car or anywhere else, so long as we remember that politeness consists of a good nature that cannot be ruffled, and a cheerful forgetfulness of self, that throws petty annoyances to one side, as the spray is flung off by the ship.

From the NY Times, 1852