Connecticut western news., 1886-05-19
WEDNESDAY, MAY l9, 1886.
THE EAST LEE DISASTER.
Judge Branning's Verdfct--Culpabie
 Negligence Net the Cause.

Negligence Net the Cause. Judge Branning of the Lee police court, before whom the inquest as to ;he cause of the death of the persons who lost their lives by the bursting of the East Lee reservoir was held, filed his verdict last Wednesday forenoon. He says ssthey came to their death by drown ing in a flood caused by the bursting of the reservoir" An! that clears up the mystery. That settles that point, builders of the dam clear of all respon- sibiity for the disaster are about as clear as mud; not as deep, however, as the mud that swept down that beautiful valley on the morning of April 20.
 After lengthy review of the testi- mony taken at the inquest Judge Bran ming concludes as follows:
 None but the wisdom of Omniscience ing to deluge and destroy the little viii lage at it's feet. It was testified that re- peated statements of apprehension on the part of different individuals as to the safety of the dam to some of the owners were regarded in the light of unfriendly criticisms, rather than from any real ap- prehension or fear worthy of serious consideration. Yet the event has proved that their fears as to the safety of the dam were we'll founded. In view, how ever, of all the testimony given at the inquest 1t does not appear to this court that there has been such culpable negh- gence in regard to the dam by its own CTS or any one of them as to require fur ther proceedings in the premises.
 Notwithstanding that the verdict seems to exonerate everybody supposed to be responsible, it is known that one or two suits for damages are in the hands of counsel to be prosecuted un. le ss the claims are otherwise settled.
 The Springfield Republican, in an ed itorial commenting on Judge Branning's verdict. says:
 has reported his findings, based on the testimony given at the inquest held over the bodies of the victims of the recent reservoir disaster at East Lee. He be- ieves that nothing can now be done about the matter, and perhaps he is right in way. No amount of money damages would suffice to put life into the dead or undo injuries inflicted, though the payment of money would re- place property destroyed. But Judge Branning's report of the testimony taken at the inquest is such as shows conclu- sively that somebody was to blame for that concealed peril among the Berk- shire hills, and that we need not have ''the wisdom of Omniscience" to under. stand this fact. The contractor who built dam of "bowlders and flat stones found in the vicinity" without cement or mortar, and the mill owners who di. rected and permitted him to do it, are very much to blame. It is not as if this was our first broken reservoir, for after the Mill river disaster, with its sicken- ing loss of life, contractor and owners knew or ought to have known that their work done before that time was stand ing invitation for another flood. They read or should have read the columns of testimony taken at tue Northampton inquest, which showed that the Mud pond dam was totally inadequate structure. The contractor and manu. lecturers knew their work as the public did not; but no one proftted by the terrible lesson of the Williamsburg val ley, and the mill owners of East Lee waited for the destruction which was sure to fall on their property. Now God Is not in such work as this, and ii Is little short of blasphemy to couple his name with it. The shabby work O. man is directly and beyond all disput. responsible for the disaster at East Lee