New-York tribune., 1871-09-22

signd was raised. IS he brought his eyes
down from tho point> whore tho masthead
should have been seen Mrough the darkness
and mist to the track intfront OF him, sud
denly, to use his own expreAive words, tho
"tail-lights OF tho accommodation train
seemed to spring up In his faceT 1t was too
late then; tho old-fashionod hand-bt.a axes were
not made for such o crisis, and the Hoflision
with all its attendant horrors was inevitable.
These ore the facts Of the case. Who, then,
is responsiblef These employees were men
whose caution, foresight, and judgment were
valued in the labor market Of the world at
about three dollars q day. They were sent
out in charge of crowded trains, starting
wholly out of time, to feel their way along
over road operated that day almost wholly
without order. One of them failed to look at
his watch, when he was getting his train for
ward as fast as he could; the other miscon-
strued an ambiguous verbal order and did not
sec light for which he at the critical moment
was in duty bound not to be looking, and
which was probably obscured by the mist.
The Coroner's jury found that the col
lision was directly caused by the negligence
of these two men. Perhaps it was; but these
two mon were that night sent out by their
employers to meet unnecessary risks and dan
gers under o system Of operating the road
which, in the words of the President Of the
COMPANY, "required constant exercise Of the
"most extreme caution to prevent continual
accidents" Under these circumstances,
while tho Company could only avail itself OF
human agencies, catastrophes soon or late
were inevitable. They take place-an en-
ploy6 has for once forgotten some apparently
trivial duty-has failed to Look at his watch,
or has calculated enormously as to the degree
of disorder existing among the trains before
him, and then at last the inevitable takes
place. The jury in the Revere inquest, as
we conceive, fell into grave E,lstake
in their process of fixing tho RESPONSE
bility for that terrible calamity. The con-
ductor who failed to look at his watch at one
busy and critical moment was guilty OF
ycnial offcnse compared with the president
and directors who operated singie-trlck rail-
road for fifteen years without the telegraph.
The engineer who miscOnceived careless
verbal order in regard to trains upon an over;
crowded road is blamelcss when compared
with those who overcrOwded the road, and
sent him ont in charge of hundreds OF human
lives to feel his way along without any system
of signals. After all, does the responsiDiLty
Of presidents and directors amount 10 any.
thingi Can they habitually incur every sort
Of risk and pcrsstently fail to make use OF
the simplest inventions of science, and only
conductors and engineers be held guilty
of criminal negligenccf AS we have
read the evidence at this inquest, 1t is there,
in high quarters. that the jury should have
aimed their blow. They should by name have
held those guilty of fifteen years negligence
responsible for what was inevitable unless sub
ordinates are exempt from moment of care
lessnpss. They should have declared, fearlessly
and distinctly, that where men of eminence
and standing through long years operate P9eaa,ds .
railroad in willfnl neglect of those safega;ards guards
their cir reach, then, when Wholesale manslapght,er
takes place, it is they, and not their subordl-
mates, who shall he held responsible for 1t.