Britain’s first railroads revolutionized the country, in a profit-making sort of way. Goods–coal, fruit, newspapers, stuff–could now speed around the country. So could people. Time was standardized. Once people could move fast enough, they noticed–or at least cared–that different places were using slightly different times.
Companies formed. Track was laid. Stations were built. More companies formed, laying track parallel to where some other company had already laid track. Money was made. Money was lost.
We’re talking about frenzied amounts of money here: £3 billion between 1845 and 1900. In 2025, that would amount to £216.5 billion, give or take a few million, because who cares about the small change?
That’s based, in case you care, on the 1900 value of the pound and I recklessly used artificial intelligence as the calculator. Sue me if it’s wrong. I’ll happily refund the money you spent reading this free post, although I draw the line at paying for your computer, your internet connection, your time, or any other background expenses.
At the end of that frenzy, Britain had something like 120 railroad companies, a lot of them in direct competition with each other, maintaining parallel tracks and parallel infrastructure and parallel administrative structures.
Irrelevant photo: crocuses
World War I
Then World War I started and the railroads were put under state control. Not nationalized–the businesses still made the business-type decisions and pocketed whatever profits they made–but under the control of a government committee, the Railway Executive Committee.
If your eyebrows just shot up, you can let them float gently back into place. The same thing happened in France and Germany. It was wartime. War has an odd habit of making the politically impossible possible. All those troops and their supplies had to be moved from here to there, and that took priority. Timetables were revised, civilian travel was curtailed, and priority was given to the military, to keeping the country fed, and before long to moving the wounded to hospitals on ambulance trains, because war, you may know by now, has certain unfortunate side effects.
After the war, the chaos of the old system was visible enough that nationalization was considered, although that’s as far as the idea got. Instead, but in the name of efficiency, the 120 companies were consolidated into 4 regional monopolies–Southern; Great Western; London, Midland & Scottish; and London North Eastern–and left in private hands.
World War II
Cue another world war and In 1939 the railroads went back into government control. The number of passenger trains was reduced. Seat reservations, restaurant cars, and some reduced fares disappeared. It was all about moving soldiers to ports, evacuating civilians from cities, and keeping the country fed.
How many people are we talking about in those evacuations? In 1939, 1,334,360, mostly of them kids but some adults. That involved 3,823 special trains. In four days.
After the 1940 disaster at Dunkirk, when retreating allied troops had to be rescued from the beaches by an improvised flotilla of small boats, no one had any idea how many soldiers would be landing or where they’d land. Trains were put together from the rolling stock from all four companies and waited at central locations so they could be sent where they were needed as soon as somebody figured out where that was. They ended up moving 319,000 troops while still evacuating children.
Add bombing raids to that picture if you would.
Enough numbers. You get the point: the trains were crucial and the logistics were–I’m guessing here–a nightmare.
Nationalization & Dr. Beeching
By the end of the war, the rail network needed serious investment and the rail companies were in no shape to do it. The system was nationalized and updated. That included replacing the steam engines with diesel and electric and repairing bombed-out track.
It’s not all a happy story, though. By now the system faced competition from roads–for passengers, for freight, and for public funds. It was losing money, and in 1962 a guy called Dr. Beeching was appointed to head the newly formed British Railways Board and make the trains profitable.
Yes indeed, folks. It was time to Make the Railways Great Again, only MRGA isn’t pronounceable and nobody embroidered it on a hat. I don’t think baseball caps had discovered Britain yet in any case.
His solution was to shrink the service, closing smaller lines and stations, and to lure more freight off the roads and onto the trains with a faster, simplified service.
And passengers who’d been served by smaller lines? They could take the bus.
The trains did attract more freight, although I can’t find a clear answer to whether it worked as well in reality as on paper. I’m not convinced anyone has a clear answer. What is clear is that Beeching overestimated the savings he could make. The trains continued to lose money. Cars and roads were the hot new technology.
Some 5,000 miles of track had been closed and more than 2,300 stations closed. Beeching is still hated today.
A couple of reversals
Time staggered forward, as it will if you turn your back on it, and in 1993 the network was privatized into a system that’s too complicated to explain, creating a ticketing system that’s even more complicated than that.
Want to buy the cheapest ticket? You’ll need a PhD.
I could find you articles arguing that it wasn’t full privatization, but I won’t. They’re out there. I could probably find you articles arguing that they had to be on drugs to put the pieces together the way they did, but I haven’t looked. Pretty much anyone over the age of five could find reams of articles arguing that it’s been a disaster. In a 2014 poll, 60% of the public wanted the trains re-nationalized and only 20% didn’t. What about the remaining 20%? They were eating supper when the pollsters called and either hung up or offered them a few of their chips.
If you’re American, those are french fries.
Four years later, that had risen to 64% and people were keeping their chips to themselves.
The main reasons people support re-nationalization seem to be 1) fares that have risen well over the rate of inflation and 2) service that on some lines is so bad you almost have to admire it as an art form, although there’s also 3) the companies making high profits while letting the system fall apart.
How high are the profits? Using a study done under a Conservative government, the rail union estimates that £31 billion has flowed out of the rail system, mostly to shareholders, and that £1.5 billion a year could be saved by nationalization. The government estimates it could save an extra £2.2 billion a year by cutting waste.
I don’t doubt there’s waste to be cut, but I break out in hives lately when politicians talk about cutting waste. It means they’ll cut funding and then shrug when things fall apart. Or if you’re in the US, they send in a team of nutburgers with electronic axes. It’s so much easier than actually thinking about what might work better–or what might work at all.
But I’ve wandered off topic, haven’t I? You have no one to blame but yourself. Who did you think was supposed to keep an eye on me?
The current government, before it was in office and when was still in campaigning mode, swore it would renationalize the trains within five years. Since the government licenses the private rail companies, that’s both cheap and, politically speaking, simple. They might even do it.
Meanwhile, trains have been making something of a comeback. In spite of high fares and poor service, more people are riding–9% more in 2024 than in 2023. You could also measure that in kilometers traveled, or in revenue, or in cups of tea consumed in transit, but instead let’s move on and go . . .
. . . back to Dr. Beecham
The current momentum is in the direction of reopening branch lines and stations that Beecham closed in the fifties and sixties. It’s more expensive to drive than it used to be, and increasing numbers of people are counting the environmental cost of driving.
So how many lines and stations have been reopened? Forgive me for getting technical about it, but it’s a fair number.
Okay, I couldn’t find a number. The best I can do is refer you to a survey of the reopened line near me, impeccably conducted by Hawley’s Small and Unscientific Surveys, Inc., which reports that the line is well used. There’s even talk of extending it. There’s also talk of not extending it because the land was sold off.
You can always rely of Hawley’s Small and Unscientific Surveys, Inc. We won’t discuss what you can rely on them for.
Notes from the U.K. 