Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1853-08-19
The Providence and Worcester Railroad
Calamity.


The Providence Journal OF the 18th makes the
following comments upon the verdict ofthe coIoner's
jury.
The coroner's inquest rendered their verdict yes.
terday. 1t will be seen that the jury place the blame
primarily where we have had, as the testimony pro.
ceeded, an increasing apprehension that it belonged,
upon the managers OF the road All that have
said, and more, borne ont by the jury upon their
oatlls, after a full and patient investigation of the
facts
Undoubtedly Mr.. Putnam greatly to blame,
but he has the excuse of inexperence and incom.
potency. The managers have such excuse for
placing such person in charge Of the difficult
train on the road, man whose incompetency they
admit in the salary which they afiix to his services.
Tor crowdIng three trains upon one point within
space OF live minutes, and placing one of them in
charge Oi an inexperienced conductor, lahout a
match, except such a with salary of
thirty dollars monh could be expected to buy or
borrow, we have ye TO hear the excuse. None has
been offered. For continuing him in his place af.
ter his unhtness was manchester in his repeated fail
ures TO bring his train up in time, we have yet 10
learn the excuse.
The verdict blames The up train well as the
down train,and we think very properly. The down
tram started one minute too late $50 did the up train;
had either started precisely at the time, the accident
would have been avoided. The master Of transport
TALON was on the down train, the president and su
penntendent were on The up train. The directors
dismissed not only the conductor, but the engineer
Of the down train, and the master Of tanspUrtation
who, being superior officer, was charged with
neglect of duty in not interfering; but they cast no
censure upon the higher officers who were in the up
train We do suppose the blame can, with any
proprety, he divided. We suppose that the conduc
tors, and they aOne are responsible for the tine.--
We do not see how the master OF transportation was
TO blame more than the snperiors in The up train;
and certainly, the responsibility is 50 cut up that
any two persons can be TO blame upon the same
train, then the greater blame is due to those who SO
cut il up.
We are bound, as impartial Journalists to say,
that IN our opinion, the blame is chargeable pri-
marily and chiefly, upon the officer or officers who
appointed an incompetent conductor, allowed him
to conduct the train without proper time-keep
err kept him in his place after proof of his inca
paelty, in his continual failure to make his time,
neglected the proper signalling, and arranged
the timetable so as to bring three trains to-
gether within five minutes. We think that the
engineer OF the up train, who left the engine, and
thereby delayed the fatal moment, was more to
blame than the engineer of the down train, who
only obeyed the orders Of the conductor; we do
not see why the master OF transportation in one
tram, was more to blame than the superintendent
n the other. We do not suppose that either of
them was properly responsible for the collision,
put the superior officer was responsible for the
arrangements which endangered the collision
we think that in the officers whom they have
dismissed, the directors have not exercised wise
selection. Finally, we think that the verdict Of
the Jury is honest, manly, and independent, and
th8t II is IN accordance with the facts in evidence
ana with the high duty which the Jurors were
called upon TO discharge.