The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1874-08-15
'cerE LAST FEARFUL MAN
SLAUGHTER.


SLAUGHTER.
For the first time in the history of rail
way enterprises in this ate, we have been
called upon to record Il terrible disaster due
solely to reckless msmanagemcnt and
criminal negligence. 1t is true that this
disaster-this fivc-fold manslaughter, the
attendant injuries to individuals, with the
danger that still threatens the lives of other
human beings on the Eastern counties rail-
road did not actual occur within the bor-
ders of our own state, but the roa'l was
Vermont enterprise. managed, n we I'M
derstand it, by Verm mt men, and the tran
had lust passed our border line when it
rushed, freighted as it was by human be
ings, into the open river TO destruction.
For these reasons, we speak OF it as YER
mont railroad disastcr--wc cannot call it
an accident The only other serious dis
aster which ever happened to a railroad
passenger train in this state, which we can
now recall, was the one known as the
'NIount Holly accident" on the Rutland
rdllTOhl, Ill Juuc, lciV. lhut was an Nv
cident in every sense of the word. As
fearful as was the loss of life, the injury
to person and destruction of property, no
human foresight or energy could have pre-
vented it. The managers of the road, the
sectionmen, the engineer and others in
charge of the train, everyone had done
all in the power of human beings to insure
safety, but the accident took place and il
Illustrated, that with all the care and pre-
cautions taken by railroad officials, that
while "man proposes God disposes. We
do not forget the terrible catastrophe Which
occurred at or near Mortified on the 18th
day of December, 1867, the like of which
was never seen before and, probably, never
will be heard of again. The loss of lille
was greater and more persons were injured
at that time than by the combined disasters
at Mount Holly and near Richford, and it
was doubtless the result of criminal care
lessness 1t was not, however, a passen-
ger train, and the individuals who lost then
lives or suffered injuries they
were Just as dear to their families and theil
lives and persons as sacred as those of any
other person-had not entrusted themselye
and their safety to the care of the railroad
company. Therefore, when we speal
of accidents to passenger trains, we leav
them out OF the account
There seems no possible excuse for thi
Richford horror. The conductor and.eng
neer of that fated train, if they had bee
possessed of the least grain of commo
sense, must have known that danger wa
to be apprehended from the result of sue
shower as deluged the earth Wednesda
night. We all know the intensity wit
which the rain poured down here; and W
are told that it was, even, surpassed nth'
region. Rivers overlooked their banks, IL
fields were flooded, crops were destroyed
the highway and bridges were submerged
and the latter washed away in large nun
beers. In passing along, these men mu
have seen all this, unless it was the d
struction of the crops, but what course {
they take Z? Only few miles before thu
reach Rlchford, they run over a brok'
rail and are delayed thereby. Here is
additional warning of danger, and with t
rain pouring down in torrents, how do In
pay heed thereto +? They have lost tr
and, therefore, regardless of the riy,
which had already broken over its natui
barriers, they increase the speed of
train to forty miles an h0ur and, IN order
make up the lost time, they rush headlo
into the open river. If men were e'
guilty of criminal negligence and carele
ness. if men can ever be convicted
manslaughter for lives lost throu
such negligence and carelessness. Il
the conductor and engineer of t
train are so guilty and the survivor can b.
convicted. We believe that they ART
guilty and can be so convicted, that ISL
as survive. There is another man equ
guilty and criminal with them. We IT
to the sectionman who, on discovering
bridge washed away, instead of goin
short distance to the place where the a
dent took place and examining its condi
so as to warn the train, coolly walked !
to the next station that he might tclegi
the train of danger at place where
train would never reach. The telcgl
operator had gone to bed as might
been expected, but if he had been a
post he could not have saved the lives
The sectionmal had he performed his
gone to the bridge and signalled the [
would have saved all these lives an
these injuries, all this destruction of p
erty. Is he not guilty of manslaughtc
But it is said, by the associated pres
porter, that "the management of the
is responsible for the disaster, on acc
of the want of ballastng, dangerous IA
speed at which the trains were run, al
the employment of inefficient and pC
paid section men," We do not propo
Justify or "whitewash" the ''managel
of the road, in fact we do not think
any facts, yet made public, justify