Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-07-02
WHO WAS TO BLAME 2.
THE LATE RAILROAD ACCIDENT 1T
ST. ANTHONY CROSSLYG.
Tho Railroads Investieating.--very Con-
dicting Statements, But 1t Looks AS
Though the Minneapolis & St. Louis En-
gineer Had the Most Responsibility.

Yesterday morning Messrs. Edmund Rice and
VIM. b. Fisher, of the st. Paul g. Pacific, and
Messrs Hatch and Gaylord, of the Minneapolis
& st. Louis railroad, met at the offices of the
former to inquire into the late collision at the
st. Anthony crossing. Governor Marshall, rail-
road commissioner, was also present. Several
witnesses were called, whose testimony showed
that there has been considerable amount of
carelessness practiced at the crossing for some
time, which on one or two occasions narrowly
escaped ending in an accident. Both sides
seemed to be anxious to throw the blame on
the other and of course the testimony was con-
ficting.
Mr.. Delano, passenger on the st. Paul 4 Pa
citc train. saw the train he was on stopped at
the ''stop board, f" according to regulations and
then proceeded toward the crossing; when some
distance beyond the stop board he saw the Min
neapolls & st. Louis train just leaving the
depot, and he thought the st. Paul & Pacific
train would get over before the other came up,
but as she came along she increased her speed.
Fearing collision he stepped on to the plat
form and jumped off.
Mr.. Gardiner, engineer on the Minneapolis &
st. Louis train, testified that he had no SWITCH
ing to do that day but set out seven cars. He
saw the train on the main line standing; also
saw the train on the branch line coming up;
he was past the stop board before the banch
A4A4C tldAu SOG up w GuC1l DOdIus ne UQOuPQU
they would stop; did not know if they stopped
or not at the board; they frequently would
come down to the crossing and stop and let him
pass; thought they would do so then; when
he found they were increasing speed he
signaled for brakes and reversed his engine,
but was unable to prevent the collision. Mr..
Baker conducted the evidence of Mr.. Gardi-
ner. LaClair, brakeman on No. 8 train-ac-
commodation on main line, described the acct
dent as he saw it from the top of freight
car. He saw the NJ. q st. Louis train start
from the station; it did not stop at the stop
board; saw Gardiner on his side of the cab talk
ing to third party; saw the two trains when
they started; the st. Paul & Pacific started
first; the st. Louis train was half way from
depot and board; saw them switching; have
| seen them go over crossing and back up again
when switching.
M. A. Denny, ar other brakeman on same
train, gave similar evidence; he saw Conley's
train coming on branch line; saw him stop
saw the other train start; Gardiner, engineer of
Minneapolis & St. Louis train was talking to
some one in the cab; saw him turn round and
look at the approaching train and signal fol
brakes; saw him run into the other train.
F. Harrison, fireman on the Minneapolis and
st. Louis train, was sure his train started from
stop board first; the other train was going fast
as IT to make the crossing first.
j. ONeil brakeman on GARDENERS train.
! said he was positive the Minneapolis and St
Louis train started first.
P. J. Comfy, engineer on the st. P. & p train
stated that he stopped at stopping board, ther
went on after seeing crossing all clear; could
not see the st. Louis train because of houses
but could see the smoke; pulled down toward
the crossing; saw them coming; saw they were
making no effort to stop; saw they were com
| ing right on, opened the engine wide anC
ran to clear the crossing; they ran into us al
the center; his impression was Gardiner did not
stop at the post; had steam shut off, but seeing
| the other train coming on pulled engine wide
open; Gardiner was coming eight miles an hour
was on the crossing when I pulled her open
Mr.. GARDENERS engine was a little beyont
the stopping board when he saw her; could no
see before because of houses.
2. Murphy and G. F. Yeage gave similar evi
| dence, and G. 3. Pennock and Patrick Fun,
corroborated it.
Some little discussion took place after thu
evidence was in upon the question Of right o.
way. 1t was found that the St. Paul & Pacif,
! had the right of way.
Mr.. Hatch said he blamed Gardiner very
much; he had been culpably careless, and hi
should certainly discharge him, but he though,
the engineer on the other line was also t.
| ities of which the officers of both lines hac
been kept ignorant Men who did mo-
report accidents narrow ESCAPES
| ought to be dismissed. He thought ;
good way to prevent recurrence Of tn.
trouble would be to have target and let tn,
man attending to it give the right of way by
signal to I'll trains or if that could not b,
done the next best thing would be to have tn,
stop boards moved within few feet of tn,
crossing: He thought when two trains were
approaching crossing both should stop anl
not consider the right of way, but the safety
OF the passengers. After some further talk til,
definite UNDERSTANDING