From the 1892 25" map.  Better detail.....  sort it out Ted!

To continue:

One important consideration in signal box supervision was to watch for animosity amongst the signalmen, and if it was present, that it was not endangering safe working. Where there was a problem between men in a particular box it was important to see that they were `handing over' properly between shifts. During my career enmity between signalmen manifested itself in many ways, some bordering on the bizarre. Apart from straight fisticuff, there were instances where threatening and/or abusive notes were posted in the box. On one occasion a signalman complained that his colleague had been boiling his socks in the kettle and produced the utensil containing a murky liquid in support. The subsequent report from the Chemist at Derby, `no trace of any chemical is apparent', was not very helpful to my investigations. Another man polished the box line floor to such a degree that his wooden legged relief had extreme difficulty in keeping on his feet and had to cling to the levers for support. Lest the reader be led to believe that signalmen are an odd bunch, let me hasten to add that these instances were, thankfully, extremely rare.

In spite of my earlier assertion that SMs were usually aware of what went on in their domain, it took me thirty years and well into my retirement to learn of a `passtime' which had allegedly taken place in the vicinity of Grassmoor East Box, although thankfully not on BR property, A respected former colleague, Jack Henshaw, informed me that, when covering my duties, one day when visiting that box he was told by the signalman that a few days before two or three men accompanied (and I quote) by a `certain type of young lady' had gone to his box and told him that they were going into a nearby field for some nefarious activities and, if he `kept watch' for them, he would be guaranteed `free services' when they had done. As was to be expected, the signalman told Jack that he had declined to act as lookout or have anything to do with the proposed fectivities.

Life in the railway cottages had its moments. After our first week the lack of sleep due to the sound of the express trains giving the impression that they were going to hurtle through the bedroom, Joan and i were like zombies. The noise didn't seem to affect our children and eventually we got used to it. Annoyance was however caused from time to time by bad joints on the goods lines when the passage of heavy coal or iron ore wagons were real sleep disturbers. When this occurred I lost no time in making sure that the main line ganger soon had his men packing the offending joints.

Joan carried out a running battle with the Estate Department and their repairs contractor regarding signs of death watch beetle in two of the bedrooms where she was fearful that the woodworm would get into our furniture. Just occasionally we were treated to the `pong' of sulphuric acid from Avenue Coking Plant although the nuiscance was far worse for the residents of the cottages on the hill overlooking the Locomotive Shed.

One evening I was called to render first aid to a lad (son of a driver) resident in the next block of cottages who, in jumping up to pull down the wire on the gas light at the end of our row, had got the wire through the palm of his hand. The poor lad was standing to attention with arm outstretched when I arrived but fortunately I was able to quickly release him by cutting the wire and adopting the `fish hook' first aid treatment of pushing it through.

An odd time or two, when taking our labrador dog, Honey, out in the late evening, she would stiffen and snarl at a figure lurking in a dark spot up aginst a wall at the end of a row of cottages. No doubt his intention had been to retrieve one lump, or more, of coal previously dumped from his engine tender as it proceeded along the up goods line. Other lumps, of course, occasionally fell off tenders solely due to high stacking and vibration. One tale was told that a driver struggled home with an extra large lump he had stumbled across in the darkness as he wended his way home in the early hours of the morning. He lovingly placed it in the coal house and retired to bed weary from his labours to dream of the anticipated warmth when it was doing its stuff in the fireplace. A few hour later he was wakened from his slumbers by his irate wife asking what a lump of iron ore was doing in the coal house. Coal again came into prominence witrh the fairly frequent visits from pruveyors of minors' concessionary coal touting for customers at near give away prices.

In the spring of 1961 I was called for interview by Mr. J.A.K. Gray, District Traffic Superintendent, Carlisle for the position of SM/GA, Appleby. I came away having had such a good interview that I returned home confident that I had got the job and would soon be back on the Settle-Carlisle. This did not prove to be the case but a few weeks later Mr. Gray arrived at Nottingham as D.O.S., in succession to Mr. R.J. Powell who had retired. I applied for the post of SM/GA, Class 1, Sutton in Ashfield Town early in July and was again interviewed by Mr. Reg. Smith (Mr. Gray being on holiday). This time I was successful and was appointed to the position with an allocation date of 26th July 1961.  My rate of pay on leaving Hasland was £775 per annum and at Sutton would be £830 plus £30 weekday `on call' allowance.

This completes my articles published so far in the LMS Journal, the Editor having `placed the series in a siding' to allow space for publication of tiems from other contributors. They will be continued in due course. Meanwhile I will eventually post the perhaps somewhat unexciting part of my memoirs covering my war service in the Royal Navy under `MY FAMILY AT SEA'            

Stanley, some locomen did have names (sometimes not very complementary) for various types of locos but I can't recall them now. The vast majority of my experience of steam was on the old LMS where the ex WD Austerities seem to come in for most stick - good steamers but awful bone shakers to ride on over about 25 mph when the fireman could have trouble landing the coal into the firebox. The favourites seemed to be the Stanier Black Fives (4-6-0) on passenger and fitted freight work and the good old Stanier Class 8 for the heavy work. Even GN men conceded that they had now't to beat  the Class 8. My personal view as one of the lads on the ground, I've never seen anything to compare with  the unadulterated power of the BR Standard Class 9 (2-10-0). To see the way the Annesley men (ex GC of course) handled them on the `windcutters' running between Annesley and Woodford and in shunting their train when diverted with empties to one of my collieries used to leave me, a staunch Midland man, in awe.

Robert, nowadays I have trouble remembering names from yesterday! I suppose when you're writing and signing scores of letters a month addressed to some person you never forget 'em. I remember meeting  a chap from head office a few years ago when we'd had nothing to do with each other for over 30 years, and I'd only seen about twice then, and on being introduced he straight away said my initials and name. For people who worked with you every day and came through a quite a few emergencies, I suppose it a touch of `esprit de corps'.       

Loco nicknames: it seems some were used by railwaymen and others only by spotters. But to confuse matters sometimes different groups of railwaymen had different nicknames for the same loco, and will tell you the others are not "proper".  A recent example was the Southern Q1s, which were variously known as Charlies, Spam Cans, and Coffee Pots. The first was the commo9nest, but the second was used by men on the old LSWR, and the final one by GWR men.

"Jinty" is a widely used name for the 0-6-0 tank erngines used for shunting, but this I believe was not used by railwayment.

Two for LMR locos that I think were used by railwaymen are "Black 5" for a Stanier Class 5 and "Crab" for a Hughes 2-6-0.