The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1884-12-23

Il
! tween stations, and usually had twenty
or thirty men on the train. bur on this
| trip he ONLY counted eleven while they
were unloading iron at Spanish Fork.
| 1t was customary to keepa man out half
a mile ahead and one behind half mile
/ behind with a flag, only when on an
other trains time-only when train
! was expected. IL train left Clear Creek
at 935, she should not reach the scene
OF the accident till 11.30, and he thought
he had ample time to get to the siding
before '2l'' came along. 1t was not the
! practice, when train was not expected,
to keep out flagmen; when on the main
| track, on another trains time, they pro
/ tected themselves both ways. Iinita-
tons were usual in orders, bat on the
18th the order simply said work
extra" When he saw the smoke
1T the curve where the accident took
place he had no idea ''21" was coming.
He here explained how he Immediately
I reversed his engine and stopped it; that
he was about to slow up to flag.
/ Mr.. HARNESS put few questions TO
| the witness, to which he replied that 1t
was not the duty of a work train to flag
only against trains not on schedule
| time; when q train is late and it is not
| known where it is, the conductor tries
to find out by telegraphing; if he does
not succeed, then tagging is TesOrted to !
that he left Spanish Fork on the run up
a few minutes after TO- that the accident
occurred between the 672d and 673d mile
posts, about a mile and half from the
! Gravel Pitt
By Mr.. VARIAN-YOu say YOU were
| about to slow up to flag?
| Ayes, sir.
Mr.. V.-Wasn't it, rather, that if the
conductor had told you you would have
stopped to flag?
He didn't know.
Now you say you were slowing up TO
flag, when you hadn't any idea Of
| tagging, but was running up to get on
the siding before "A'' came along"
To which an indistinct reply was
made.
NELSON. the brakeman of the work
train, said he was in the last end Of the
| cabOOSe; saw the smoke first when the
4 trains were about thirty cars apart;
| that Seaboldt was on the steps of the
caboose and put out his left hand rs
signal to stop and stepped off the
cabOose; the witness then put on the
| brake and jumped; that the conductor
and he usually took precautions in
| going around curves. He understood
what tagging was. The caboose was
stopped just before the trains met.
At this point, the witnesses in the
! Simpson case were arrayed before the
! Commissioner and excused until 2
| O'Clock on Tuesday.
Mr.. Bowers, an old railroad man,
! took the witness chair and gave his
views as to the import and meaning of
| the. diSpatcher'S order. He said 1T
would give work train the right OF
I ! 4. 20
! O'Clock of the 18th; the order was very
informal; all orders he had ever seen
would have specified that a regular
! train was expected, and for the work
train to avoid all regulars; the order
did not; he considered that the work
train had the right to occupy the track.
/ An order superseded all schedules and
printed rules.
Mr.. Hardness piled him with a few
| interrogatOrieS, to which the following,
in substance, was returned: The word.
extra" was unnecessary, only as
designating the train to do extra work;
| it was SuperhuOuS. A work train was
controlled by orders; it had to take care
of itself, and could not leave a station
| without orders. 1t was supposed to
keep out of the way of regular trains.
From that order it had the right to oc-
cupy the track and not look out for any
train until u o'clock. The word extra
only had reference 70 the character of
| the work train.
Somebody here said: "Better have
no work trains" when Mr.. Bowers re-
marked Better have men who under
stand giving orders" The order was
defective, he added
With the testimony of this witness
the defense and prosecution rested,
when the Commissioner. who had been
! furnished with copies of the rules and
regulations governing the employees of
the road said he would hear the other
case before passing upon this one.
ThereupOn the examination of Engineer
OSterwald's case was proceeded with,
and the names of the witnesses required
to testify were read. They were Gray.
Russell, Brenning, Welsh, Nelson,
Finch, Hamill, Nicholas and Tucker.
and were all sworn.
The charge against OsterwOld was
similar to that of SeabOldt's, and was
brought under section 200 of the Com
piled Laws of Utah, which says:
Every conductor, engineer, brakeman,
switchman or other person having charge,
wholly or in part, of a railroad car, loco
metive or train, who willfully or negligently
suffers or causes the same to collide with
i
subject or thing, whereby the death sf
! human being is produced, is punishable by
/ imprisonment in the penitentiary not less
than one nor more than ten years.
Mr.. Hoffman appeared for Osterman
| Mr. GRAY was first called. He was
conductor on engine "21," a regular
train, which was off time on the 18th,
/ but not being twenty-fOur hours off
had not lost the right to the read; he
had thirty-one cars and cabOOse in his
train. The accident occurred about
1880; he heard no signal before striking;
was running about fifteen miles an
/ hour.
| BY the defense-The maximum time
/ allowed by the rules was fifteen miles
an hour down that canyon he left Clear
Greek at 9.35 and at 10 80 struck the
work train; the schedule time gave
about an hour and forty-live minutes to
/ get to the scene of the accident; the col
liSion occurred between the 672d and
673d mile posts; the distance was twenty
and a half miles, which would make the
run, between $50 and 1880, one hour
and quarter; between stations the
conductor had sole charge of a train.
/ By Nh. HARKNEss-If a conductor
+ gives an order in opposition to the rule
/ the engineer is not bound to obey them