Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1893-01-18
BOTH BLAMED.
Railroad Commissioners Report
on the Gardiner Collision.
Blame the Conductor and Enginee'
Of Both Trains for Accident,
Claiming that They Violated Strict Rules oi
the Maine Central.

l StafWiuY tuat vt0tasS0 SusSt OosNS W
the Maine Central.
| Following is the special report Of the
board OF railroad commissioners relating to
the accident on the Maine Central Railroad
AT Gardner, Dec. -, 1892.
| Chapter I20 OF the Public Laws of 1891
Il provides as follows
''Sect. 2. Whenever serious aeeiden, occurs
within the State TO passenger or freight train
on any railroad. whether ar, person bc fatally III.
itred or otherwise, notice thereof shall b. gvoa
immediately by telegraph, IL practicable other.
wise in writing, by the officers of the company
operating tte railroad on which the accident oc-
earred, 10 the railroad commissioners.
| See. g. In the event of any sueh accident, the
railroad commissioner or chairman thereof, shall
II they or he deem the public interests require IL,
| csass an investigation to be made forthwith by
| TIE board which investigation shall be held IL
the locality of the accident, unless, for reasons
| touching the convenience OF all concerned, the
commissioners shall order il TO be commenced at
some other place" etc.
Tn the afternoon of December a2i, y
collision occurred on the Maine Central
| Railroad at Gardiner, between passenger
train No. l6. leaving Waterville at = 25 7.
NJ, and passenger train No, IL, leaving
| Portland at l.3o +. NJ, in which the loco
| motive of train No II was derailed and
somewhat injured, though no passenger or
| employee on either train was fatally or SC.
riously injured.
Though happily no one, as We have sail,
was fatally or seriously injured thereby,
| such an acciden, to passenger trains cannot
he deemed otherwise than serious under the
provisions of the foregoing statute. The
travelling public are interested, and those
who are exposed to the dangers then and
there incurred, have a right TO know, so far
as may be, why and by whose fault they
were so subjected and exposed. Therefore
the board deems it its duty to. investigate
the same and report such facts and conclu-
sions as the facts might seem to warrant.
From the evidence elected at the investi
cation, it appears that train No. IL, in
charge of Conductor .Iewett, left Watervillc
at 2,25, the usual leaving time, and arrived
at Gardiner on time, and registered at 3.2S;
that Immediately the train was moved down,
away from the crossing, ON to the trestle
bridge. the double track extending some
distance farther south, and here remained
till near the time when the accident Oc-
CURED. BY the time table arrangements of
trains then in use, train No. lls{that day in
charge of Conductor Sanborn,) was due at
Gardiner at 3.2s, this being the crossing
place when both trains are on time, but. as
appears, train No. II was late, having left
Portland at or about l AZ twelve minutes
later than the schedule time.
Rule No. 8, relating to movements of
trains on single tracks of the Maine Central
Railroad is rs follows;
Irregular passenger trains moving west
have the right over passenger trains moving east,
bu, will wait at crossing places ID minutes, then
proceed, keeping 10 minutes behind card time I'M
Ill the expected train is crossed"
/ Rule No. 10 is as follows:
Regular passenger trains moving east VIII
I have the ght crossing bniits with passenger
trains until minutes behind the caIdDt me Of :,
opposite train, or will kee clear. This rule W II
apply to starting point. well AS to crossings II
! line
| By an examination of the above quoted
rules. it will be seen that it was the duty of
| those in charge of train No. l6 (train No.
| | ! not being there to cross) to wait at or
near the station at Gardiner, on the double
/ track. 3 minutes, and then if the expected
| train should not have been crossed at the
expiration of that time, to proceed, keeping
lj minutes behind card time until the ex-
pccted train should be crossed.
! ituit W. - PioNihts 'iiht
| "Engincers in charge of empty or special en-
| gnes. or in charge of any train, have the same
responsibility conductor and will be governed
| by the same rules
! 1t appears that at some time before the
arrival of train No. IL, Mr.. Jewei,, the
conductor of train No. l6, remarked that
his time was up and gave directions to the
tender of the signal and switch, at the june
/ ., &c To t,rnu hn
switch and give him the signal to proceed {;
that the switch was then thrown and the
signal ball raised, Zone ball being up at the
timel as he had directed; that he then
gave the signal to the engineer to go on
that thereupon the train started but before
Mr.. .Iewett got on, he saw the other train
No. 4 coming and Immediately he hallooed
to his engineer to back up, but before the
train could be backed much. the collision
occurred, resulting as before stated.
Now, were these persons in charge Of
train No. lG Mt fault? Did they comply
with the provisions of the rule which re-
quired that 'fThey should wait Is minutes, "
the expected train not having arrived!
Upon this poin. there is conflict of testi-
mony. Mr.. Jeweti testiGcs that he did wait
| II minutes as required by the rule above
| ltHttOiti+ titit II dS 1.tb " utu 6iIlu
started In this statement, he is to some
extent corroborated by the testimony of Mr..
Blake, the engineer, who saws he "thinks it
was 3.42 or 49,; though he has no positive
knowledge of tho exact time.
Mr.. Young of Gardiner, disin,ercsted
witness. trstifies that he was on the plat
form of the Gardiner station at the time of
the collision; that few seconds after,
l. Al. l.. Al
I cident. he consulted h;s watch and it then
lacked II minutes Of O'Clock; that be
/ compared his watch vith that of the en-
gineer Of the Yankee" at the station
I shortly afterward. in the presence of others,
AMI the watches were alike
Ms Elisha Newell an engineer, tes'fes
that he and the yartmas,er were sitting in
the engine house near the place Of the accj.
dent; that they compared watches AMI re
marked to each other hat No. II was late
it being then 3;''j; ; that come minutes after
he noticed No. IL coming down to tho
switch, and shortly aftcrwarJ his attention
was called to the slipping of the drivins
wheels OF The locomotive; that he dill no
look at his watch, but judged it vas ~
least four minutes after he looked at hi,
catch; would sooner say that il was nor,
thsn four minutes than to say il was less
and in 10 seconds or less afterw ward the col
li-ion occurred.
/ Mr.. sanborn. con.uctor of train No. a.
on the other hand. testifies that at the time
Of the collision he had his watch in hii
hand an | tina, il lacked jast 10 seconds ol
3 30; that Immediately after the acci'icn
tie compared watches as TO the time will
-Jewett. Blake, Storey and Keith and tha
I'll Al L.. - a.. T. -
hood Of ii.
In this statement he is substantially cor
federated by the testimony of Eugene
Shorey, the engineer. and Charles +
Keith, an engineer above mentioned, whG
testified that lie consulted his watch wher
under the serlaphorc down below flc yari
limit and II was thep jast 3,2s tha, afte,
the collision he went to Uhcre .Iewe,, and
Sanborn were comparing watches, AMI
lookeii at their watches and they indicated
3.sf, or ~, as near rs he could calculate
While we are not prepared 10 sly we
have entire confidence in the statements Of
the last named witnesses as to the timf
tie accident occurred, we think the weight
of evidence shows that train Na. rs wa.
started at least one, If mt two minutes, be
fore the expiration of the Is minutes limit
VIZ tbrffIbft HIush Hyt2A stf- .}eNeN aUf
Mr.. Blake, the engineer Of train No. IG. il
degree responsible for the accident Bn
by what process of reasoning these partiel
should be condemned, and those In charg,
Of train No. II excused, We are unable I.
determine. II is plain that by obedienc,
to the provisions of the rnIes and the exeY
cise of even ordinary care and caution OF
,,e part of those in charge OF train No. II
II -