Steve's recent comment with regard to rough wear on RR Watches in the thread about "Service Marks" surprised me and spurred me to start this thread.

I would think the average person is very cautious with regard to wearing his/her watch. I know I am everytime I wear any kind of watch. Most people do not want an added expense of repair or replacement along with protecting what treasures that do have!

Railroad guys must have been very careful with their watches as they so depended on the watch for their line of work not to mention the regimens they encountered with regard to standards of watches back then. I do realize accidents do happen but caution can prevent many.

Gentle or rough wear, what do you think?

Comments and opinions!

Stephanie O'Neil
NAWCC Member 143979

An old friend of mine, now deceased, was a fireman and later an engineer with the Missouri Pacific RR. He began his career in the steam engine days and ended it in the days of the diesel-electric, and it's primarily through him that most of my understanding about railroading has been developed.

The guys on trains who were required to wear RR watches were the Engineer, Fireman, Brakeman, and Conductor. Obviously, of those guys, the Conductor had the most "white-collar" job, and it was something of a toss-up between the Fireman and the Brakeman for who had the most "blue-collar" one.

Especially in the days of steam, the Fireman's job was particularly dirty. It consisted primarily of shoveling coal from the tender (the coal car immediately behind the locomotive engine), into the fire box beneath the engine's boiler. Depending on how experienced the man was, how fast the train moved, and the direction the wind was blowing, the Fireman ended his shift in various states of being covered from head to toe in coal dust. Those who've been covered in dust know that it fills open pockets, and permeates even the smallest cracks and crevices.

So, when men were working in dusty and dirty environments, their watch pockets filled up with the same sort of debris that was in the air, and essentially turned the fabric of their clothing into abrasive cloths that rapidly wore out the cases of their watches. That's why given the choice, many RR men, and most RR time inspectors, housed their watches in inexpensive cases wherever circumstances permitted.

Another factor my friend said was rough on RR watches was the fact that everything on a train is built so solidly. He said if you bumped into a railing, it wouldn't give at all, and the full force of the jolt would be absorbed by the watch. Of course, when the train was swaying back and forth as it rocked its way along the tracks, it's easy to see how one might occasionally "stumble" into a rigid object and damage one's watch.

Oddly enough, despite the idea promoted in watch company advertising depicting owners proudly comparing their watches, I don't think most RR men really gave much thought to them. To the guys who were required to wear them, they were really just expensive and delicate tools, which were somewhat begrudgingly worn. Someone once noted that the attitude most RR men had toward their watches was about the same as that toward their steel-toed boots. They were simply something that the RR required, and were not objects of particularly high esteem, the way we consider them today.

Whatever else one might take from this message, there's one fact that's absolutely certain: Railroading, especially in the old days, was a rough, dirty, hard job, and the watches worn by most railroad men did not have easy lives.

==================

Steve Maddox
President, NAWCC Chapter #62
North Little Rock, Arkansas
IHC Charter Member 49

Excellent, well thought out response Steve.

I get a charge out of people who believe these rough and tumble guys wore fancy gold chains, fobs and fancy watches to work. Just as real cowboys were not at all the fashion plates we see in movies, I'm sure the hard working men who kept the trains running were not either.

In any profession tools are needed and often respected, but it's always been my belief that many of these great watches led a very rough life. Your description of bumping up against immovable iron with only denim and a now-dented case protecting the watch movement conjures up quite an image.

Thanks for the perspective.

Lindell

I remember that the time of coal-fired steam engines was also for the most part before air conditioning, and the windows on coaches could be opened. In the yards, or passing a train, or even on the high iron when the wind was wrong, smoke and coal dust could blow in and coaches could be a gritty environment. Conductors and passengers weren’t as exposed as engineers, firemen and brakemen of course – but they were exposed!

Conductors also spent a fair amount of time on the coach platforms, which in those days were open.

(Crossing each two adjacent open platforms when going from one car to the next on a train going “a mile a minute” was a grand adventure for a kid! It wasn’t only the speed and the wind – it was
the shake
and the sound
and the smell!)

[This message was edited by Dog on October 07, 2003 at 0:13.]

Head enders (brakemen, firemen and engineers)watches definitely had a hard existance. Those on the back end or ground had a different existance, and those folks did INDEED wear those big gold watches and chains. My great grandfather was the head engine inspector in the Portsmouth, Ohio main yards for the N&W from before WWI until the early 1950's, and wore a gold filled Elgin 18s watch on a heavy gold chain with a 50 anniversery N&W watch fob, and he carried it everyday he worked. The only wear it had was brassing on the bottom of the case, and around the bezel, and he worked around, under and inside coal fired behemouths literally every day of his long railroad career, and carried just the one watch that entire time. Regards. Mark

NAWCC Member 157508
NAWCC-IHC Member 163

Mark,

Are you sure about the dates in your message above, and/or that your great-grandfather's watch was actually an 18 size model?

One thing that makes it seem unlikely is that by 1920, production of 18 size watches had essentially ended. Another thing that makes it seem unlikely is that by 1940, 18s watches were no longer allowed in service on most (if not all) American railroads.

Of course, the only railroad employees typically required to carry railroad approved watches, were those directly responsible for keeping trains on schedule. Since an engine inspector probably wouldn't have fallen into that category, it's entirely possible he simply wore the watch because he liked it. If so, even though he wore it while working for the railroad, that doesn't necessarily mean it was a "railroad watch" by the recognized standards of the day.

-----------------------

Say! This topic brings to mind a picture that's in one of Roy Ehrhardt's old books, which unfortunately, is now out of print.

While it certainly isn't my intention to promote any stereotypical assumptions, take a look at the two guys in the images below, and guess which one's watch probably had the easier life!

I'm not absolutely sure, but I think the guy on the right is a brakeman.

=================

SM

Yes sir, it was indeed an 18s. I owned it from the age of 10 until it was stolen from my Dad while in his possession about 10 years ago, so I knew it well. Like a dope, though, I had the case number memorized, but never wrote the movement number down, so it's lost. Fortunately I was able to recently obtain one that's about as close as I can get (price wise), but instead of being a 21j, mine is a 19j BWR of about the same age, but a dead ringer for the lost watch. I digress..... In P-town, yardmen, especially the old grey beards such as my great-grandfather, were, well, 'grandfathered' as to the size watch they were allowed to carry, as long as it was not for road use. Where he was attached permenantly to the engine house in the yard as head inspector, he fell in that slot allowed by the local watch inspector. Technically you're right, the watches worn by those inspected were responsible for the train schedules, but as he was responsible for the engines, it was up to him to be sure they were on the ready track in time for the engine crew to pick one up for a run, so his watch did indeed figure well into the equation. He was required to stop by the yardmaster's office every day to check his watch against the standard clock to make sure it was correct. I remember my Dad telling about seeing him just about everyday doing this as HE walked to work at the east end freight hump where he worked for 4 years from 1948 until 1952. When my great-grandfather left the yards by forced retirement in the mid 1950's, he swore to his dying day that the N&W had run him off, as he had no intention of ever retiring, and was still wearing his 18s BWR Elgin the day he passed away in the nursing home in Lucasville, Ohio in the early '60s. Regards. Mark

NAWCC Member 157508
NAWCC-IHC Member 163

Steve M.,
I really hadn't thought about the kind of work certain RR employees did casting a different light on the subject of watch wear, especially the Fireman & Brakeman.

Every point you make, makes complete sense. Sad lives those RR watches lead back then.

Thanks for your input.

Lindell,
Thanks for your response.

Dog, thanks for you input as well. Thanks for the link.

Mark,
Yes, and I'm sure there are other besides your great grandfather who carried their watch in chain til retirement. Thanks for your story Mark.

Steve,
Great picture, really tells the story of clean vs. dirty work.
Would love to have seen what's in their hands!

Mark,
I'm sorry your family heirloom was stolen. It sounds like the watch really meant alot to you as it should.

Stephanie O'Neil
NAWCC Member 143979

I did, Stephanie, as I carried it myself for almost 25+ years before taking it to my Dad for safekeeping while on the job in Florida. Wasn't THAT ironic? But that said, I have a 19j BWR that's substituting for it so I can at least show my kids what the original looked like, so though not the original, it's as close as I can get. I have not been able to find a chain like the one lost, though, and as to the 50 year anniversery N&W fob, you can FORGET finding one of THOSE anymore! Ah well....Regards. Mark

NAWCC Member 157508
NAWCC-IHC Member 163

Hi Mark,

Did you record the serial number of the stolen watch? In what state was the watch stolen? This kind of stuff really bothers me. Do you have a picture of watch? Do you have a picture of watch chain? If not, describe it? I sound like a police woman, don't I? I'm very curious and saddened for you. Surely something could or should be done about the robbery.

Stephanie O'Neil
NAWCC Member 143979

Like a dummy, back in those days I thought the serial number of the case was the same as the movement, but I have THAT number still memorized to this day...6099959. It was stolen INSIDE the bank my Dad was putting it away in a safe deposit box by (and I'll always believe this) a bank employee, as my Dad had specifically taken the watch in to put in the box, but got side tracked with some paperwork in the box, and somehow the bag with my watch was left behind on the private office table in the safe deposit bank area. He realized what he had done moments after reaching the sidewalk, and immediately returned to the bank. The watch was gone, and of course NOBODY knew anything. They were supposed to investigate the theft, but nothing ever came of it. This occurred at the Portsmouth Banking Co. in Portsmouth Ohio in 1988. The watch I have as it's proxy that is a dead ringer is a gold cased Elgin 18s BWR 240 grade, but is a 19j instead of 21j version. I really wish I had been more informed back then, as this watch would have more than likely turned up by now if I had recorded the correct numbers, but needless to say, that's now all water under the bridge. My watch and chain have never surfaced to this day. The chain was a solid gold medium link vest chain with the clover leaf divider type link with one end to the vest bar, 2nd to the fob, and the 3rd to the watch itself. The fob was a 1938 Norfolk and Western 50 anniversery round fob, antique brass (or patina made it so) and about the size of a silver dollar. I hope my experience is a lesson to those who have never bothered to record their collections somewhere separate from their watches. At least a record would have helped the investigators to find our lost family heirloom. Regards. Mark

NAWCC Member 157508
NAWCC-IHC Member 163

Mark C,

Again, I'm sorry for your loss. If you had the serial number of the movement, do you think it would have turned up? I'll bet chances are the movement and case are still together. At least you have the number of the case. You sound devastated and rightfully so. I'd have stayed on Portsmouth Banking Co's case until they investigated and responded. Your dad must have felt terrible about the incident.

Sorry.

Stephanie O'Neil
NAWCC Member 143979

I didn't find OUT about it until my Mom told me more than a year later. By then to much water had gone under the bridge, but I did pass the word to folks around town who operated pawn shops (yes, like a LOT of you do/did, I wandered in and out of those shops looking at pawned pocketwatches, and was well known) about the loss, and the case number to watch for. It never surfaced in the Portsmouth area. To date my Dad has yet to say anything to me about it, so you KNOW how much it has to bother him. As to PBC, they went belly up not to long after that, and have changed hands several times since, so the company and personnel involved is no more. Regards. Mark

NAWCC Member 157508
NAWCC-IHC Member 163