Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1889-05-14
READY FOR THE JURY
The Final Arguments in the Trial of
Superintendent Starr.
GOWEKAND JOHNSTON LOCK HORNS
Did the Witness Cunningham Tell the
Truth, or Act Vindictively?
JUDGE EWINGS REBUKE TO STRIKERS

The trial of Superintendent Starr, Of the
Pittsburg, Fort Wayne and Chicago Rail-
way was resumed in Criminal Court yester-
day. j. Sharp Mcdonald, Judge Stowe,
Robert Wilson and Frank Osborne all testi-
fed to Mr.. Starts character as citizen,
gentleman and a railroad man. John E.
Edmundson, an eye witness of the accident,
described it, but produced no new facts.
John n. Neeb testified to the protests of cit
izens against the ringing of engine bells.
Trainmaster Turner was recalled, and tes-
titled that there was no blowing of whistles
in the city limits. John Kirschner, an cleo
trician in charge of the company's telegraph
system, testified that the electric warning bell
at the Federal street crossing is not entirely
reliable.
l. A. Hall, formerly chief clerk for Superin-
tendent Starr, explained the rules and regula-
tions for the government of employees of the
Pennsylvania Company, which are prepared by
the general manager after conference with
the division superintendents, and that the su-
perintendents are as much bound by the rules
as any Of their subordinates. Order No. 55was
referred to Mr.. Starr by the general manager,
and it applied to Allegheny alone. The wit
ness then read to the jury the communications
passing between the higher officials and Super
intendent Starr bearing on the issuing of order
No. %.
THE ARGUMENTS SUBMITTED.
At the afternoon session Mr.. Gowen for the
prosecution, submitted his points to Judge Ma
gee and spoke at length, holding Mr.. Starr
guilty of the death of Miss Weyman and Mr..
Culp, by the issuing of order No. IS, forbidding
any blowing of whistles and ringing of bells.
Mr.. Johnston for the defense, argued that
the defendant was simply acting under orders
of higher official, and had no discretion In
the matter. Mr.. Johnston said that the prose-
cutor, Constable w. D. Carlisle, was ashamed
TO appear and face the man he accused. If he
had the material outline of the defense could
have been different. Further, the suppression
of a number of witnesses to the accident on
the part of the prosecution was in itself an act
of no little consideration. Men like Gregg,
Parke and McCord had to be produced by the
defense. Mr.. Johnston appealed to the jury to
consider the influence brought to bear on Mr..
Starr about the nuisance OF whlstIng. etc,
and said that the order 55 was ordered by Mr.
Starts superiors The testimony of several
witnesses was reviewed in detail s. 8. Cum
ningham, the gate keeper at the time OF the
accident was accused of perjury in his tesu-
mOny while on the stand. The evidence OF
MIR. Duncan was that Cunningham had said
he would send Mr.. Starr to the penitentiary.
DOWN ON CUNNINGHAM.
Mr. Johnston argued for some time on the
action taken by Cunningham, who, in his evi-
dence, swore that he turned his back on the
locomotive when he saw it coming. Mr., John
ston asked if a man of irreproachable char
acter should be sent to the penitentiary on the
perjury of witness.
The defense also presented the points that
the driver of the street car should have looked
I'D the track; that the sad death of two passen-
gers could have been avoided by those parties
remaining on the car; that the engineer of the
train had whistled and rung the bell, which
many witnesses had sworn to. In closing, Mr.
Johnston asked that Mr.. starr should not De
branded as criminal
Mr.. Robb. another of the counsel for the de-
fense argued after Mr.. Johnston's close, and
followed to a considerable extent in that gen.
tleman's vein. He told the jury that if there
was a reasonable doubt, they must acquit the
defendant. Mr.. Robb made a cursory review
of the testimony and placed the entire respon-
Sipi!ity OF Cunningham.
Mr.. Gowen spoke for long time, reviewed
considerable testimony e1pounded good deal
of law to the court and jury and brought his
technical knowledge of railroad science TO
bear with much force on his argument. He
held that Mr.. Starr was
THE MAN RESPONSIBILITY
for order IS, and that the nuisance referred to
in the petition sent Mr.. Baldwin, and which led
tothe issue of rule 55 was not the whistling or
ringing of bells, but the shifting and escaping
of steam in the Allegheny parks. Mr.. Gowen
said he never thought of such thing as Mr..
Starr being sent TO the penitentiary; but he
wanted a warning to railroad managers that
human life is to be jeopardized if the bell is
not rung at crossings. Mr.. Gowen said he did
not accuse Mr.. Starr of committing a felony
but that he was guilty of a lack of necessary
precautions. As an evidence, the modern cleo
trical bell was not used at all posts on the road
for signaling hence it is not yet time to DIS
penss with bell ringing. The speaker made
also many pointed remarks about whistling
signals and said that, had the enforcement of
the rules in the Pennsylvania Company's book
been made, the gateman would have been ap-
prised of a trains approach.
The testimony of Cunningham was upheld
by Mr.. Gowen, likewise his action at the time
of the accident Mr.. Gowen closed by saying
he desired to blast no mans reputation, least
of all Mr.. Starts, which could not be done; but
he desired laws better adapted for the safety
of the people
The court was adjourned, and Judge Magee
will charge the Jury this morning.