Ashtabula telegraph. (Ashtabula, Ohio) 1874-1880, 1877-03-30
AsHTABUIA DISASTER.
REPORT OF TBE LEGIsLATIVE
OOMMITTEE.
The Bridge Went Down By Reason
Of Defective Construction. which
Might have been discovered by In
sDeetfon.


Might have been Discovered by In
sPeetIOn.
COLUMBUS. March 22.-The joint CON-
mittee appointed by the General Assembly
to inquire into The causes of the Ashtabu-
la disaster, made a report to-day, as fol-
lows, which was ordered printed:
On the 18th day of January, A. D. 1877,
the Legislature of Ohio adopted the follow
ing joint resolution:
Resolved, By the General Assembly Of
the State Of Ohio. That Joint committee
be appointed, cUnsistingof five on the part
OF the House and three on the part of the
Senate to investigate the cause or causes
of the recent accident by the giving wav OF
bridge on the Lake Shore road at or near
Ashtabula, on the evening of Friday, Dec.
18th, 1876. and which was so disastrous to
human life and property, and to INQUIRE
whether any additional legislation is nee
essary to render travel by rail more secure
and, IN order that the investigation NAV
he made thorough and complete, it be en-
powered to employ shorthand reporter.
The joint committee appointed in pursu-
ance of said resolution beg leave to report;
The bridge was located on the Lake
Shore Railroad, near the town of Ash
tabula, and over Ashtabula Greek. The
chasm spanned by it is about $50 feet wide
by 20 deep. Your committee arrived at
the scene of the accident January 10Th.
The purpose of the visit was to procure
testimony in relation to the cause or causes
producing such fearful consequences, and
enable them the better to understand the
testimony which might be brought before
the committee. The bridge went down on
the night of the 29th of December, 1876.
When your committee arrived, the railroad
company had just begun to remove the
bridge pieces, and on consultation it was
thought best, and your committee employ
ed three engineers to take measurements
and observations of the wreck, in company
with and under the direction of sub-com-
mittee of their own number.
The engineers, Messrs. Benz. J. Bowen,
John Graham and Thos. II. johnson, Sc
lected by the committee, are not connect
ed with any railroad, reside at Columbus,
Ohio, away from the line of the railroad
on which the accident occurred, and are
gentlemen Of high standing in their pro-
fession. For full and accurate descrip-
ton of the structure and its several parts,
YOUR committee beg leave to refer to the
report. statement and calculations of said
engineers. herewith submitted. All of the
reports Of engineers made to your commit
tee were made under oath. Your commit
tee also took the testimony OF Mr. Stone,
the President of the Lake Shore Railroad
Company at the time of the construction
of the bridge, and who was the protector
of the bridge; also, Charles Collins, the
engineer in charge of the railroad on that
division during the last ten or eleven years,
and who took his own life within few
hours after his testimony was taken; Mr..
Congdon, the master mechanic who con-
structed, and Mr.. Rodgers, who erected
the structure, and also G. ID. Folsom, the
locomotive engineer who went down with
his engine in the wreck. The eoroner's
jury, with great courtesy, permitted your
committee to examine part of the testi-
mCnY taken before it, and we submit of
that evidence the statements of Engineers
A Gotlieb, of the Keystone Bride Compa-
nv, and John D. Crehore, of Cleveland,
Ohio, and Joseph Tomlinson, who made
the original drawings for the bridge. All
of the testimony and statements made to
committee are herewith submitted From
personal observations and calculations,
and a patient and careful consideration of
all the evidence within reach, your com
mittee arrived at and report the following
conclusions:
1. There were from eighty to one hun
dred lives lost by the failure of the bridge.
g The bridge went down under an ordl-
nary load by reason of defects in its origi-
nal construction.
g. The defects in the original construc-
tion of the bridge could have been discov-
cred at any time after its erection by care
full and anylitical inspection, such as the
Importance of the structure demanded,
aud thus the sacrifice of life and property
prevented.
Among the several defects in the origi-
nal construction, your committee would
mention the following:
The members composing each main
brace were so constructed as to act sepa-
rately, instead of acting as one member,
thus reducing the carrying capacity of the
metal greatly below what it would have
carried in safety had it been differently
disposed. There should have been diago-
mails riveted to each member of the brace,
or other suitable arrangement to unite the
members of each brace, so that the brace
would have formed truss, and have act
ed as one member instead of several. Nc
provision was made to prevent lateral buck
ling or bending of the braces. The long
er members were used in compression and
the shorter in tension.
If the main braces and counters had been
fastened together at their in
which they were not, that
would have added greatly to the strength
of the main braces.
There was the same want of unity in the
comprising the upper chord as in
the main braces. No sufficient provision
was made to prevent it from lateral buck
ling. In fact, at that point in the bridge
which first gave way, both the braces and
the top chord did buckle laterally.
Only part of the members composing
the upper chord received the strain from
the braces at each angle block or panel
Joint, and the lugs on the top of the angle |
blocks, through which the strains were |
transmitted to the upper chord, it is be- |
ieved, were insufficient for that purpose. |
The lateral system between the lower |
chords was defective in this: The struts |
we're placed at every other panel point, and |
he tie-rOds extended across two panels, !
and instead of being fastened at the ends of |
struts, were fastened at alternate panel |
points, crossing each other at the middle |
If the strut.
The sway braces were too small and too
The lateral system between the upper
,hords had the same defects as that be-
ween the lower chords, with this excep-
ion: The floor beams had small lugs riyet-
d to them, and they acted as struts.
No provision was made for holding the
members composing the braces in their
places on the angle blocks, and your COM
nittee find that many of them were out of
place before and at the time the bridge
vent down. The braces were greatly weak
med by imperfect bearings, and having
heir ends chipped off.
A careful calculation shows that the
bridge laid down under load not greater
han was liable to be thrown upon it at any
ime in the ordinary and usual traffic over
t. The south truss, at the time of the ac-
ident, supported only 80 per cent, of the
Weight of one train on the bridge. The
ridge carried a double track. 1t was so
designed, and trains did frequently meet
n the bridge. There being but two truss
S, when the trains met, each truss must