The Portland daily press., 1895-04-13

| I'd
at Veazie?
didfnct know that SO had crossing
order
You had not then looked at the book?
/ No
1T when You came on duty Barry had
mentioned all the trains, No. SO, lis and
81, That had to cross, you would have
had all the necessary information, would
you9
Yes.
DID you think of 90 at the time?
mo. had just set down at the wire.
| is there any information ON the book
when you take charge to let you know
that blue flag is out anywhere.
| No. The dispatcher tells of it.
IL you had looked on the book and saw
that 93 had an order, you would have
known that flag was out for 81.
| Yes.
Witness then went on to say that it was
not customary to look on the book when
the person relieved is present to tell
verbally the situation. 1t is often CUSTOM
|
self that you have forgotten nothing that
the mau relieved has told you.
From the fact that orders are not re-
corded on the book until repeated back
| signed by the engineer and conductor, it
is not possible to tell from the book
whether an order has been given or not.
Questioned by Mr.. Danfo1th, witness
said that Barry, in putting out blue
flag for GA, and giving order to the other
three trains had followed the custom of
the Off ce.
| Mr.. Elton A. Hall, assistant superin-
tendent of the Maine Central, testified
that he had held the position three or
four years. From 1887 to about 1883 he
had charge of despatching the trains,
although it is all done in his name at
the present time. The important rules
relating to train despatching are printed
on the timetables. They are the stand
ard rules used by most of the railroads
i'll the United States, and are the adopt
ed rules of the Maine Central.
In crossing TWO trains, the double or
der is almost invariably used, the same
order being sent to both trains.
But when more than two trains ara to
be crossed the double order is cum ber-
some and liable to cause confusion, so
single orders are used.
The dispatcher has train sheet before
him, On which he notes the movements
of the traints. A record of the orders is
kept. When one dispatcher turns his
work over to another, the one leaving
explains the orders if there are any out.
The new man can acertain the situation
from the book as well as from the
man he relieves. But Mr.. Hall said
that if he was taking the wire he should
rely on what the man leaving told him.
| Then, when he had time, he should
look at the book.
There are five despatching divisions,
| and seven wires.
which states as follows:
Special orders will be sent in the
same words to each train affected, and
Will be sent simultane ously to each of
the operators who are to receive it, when
racticable, but where it is not, the Or
der will always be sent first to the train
| having the right to the ROAD. The differ.
ent trains will be addressed in the order
| OF their superiority or right OF track,
| where any exists, and each receiving
| Office will take only Its proper address,. /"
| Mr.. Mortland then asked, why, No.
| GA, having the right of track, an order
should not have been sent to it, instead
of the flag.
We maintain. said Mr.. Hall, as we
construe the rule, that 81 did have the
order. We consider the blue flag an
order.
Mr.. Mortland wanted to know, if the
rule was as was read, how it could be
that an order was not sent to "a, espec-
tally as Ga had a right to the road.
MIR. Hall said that as they construed
the rule, the blue flag WAS an order to
"a to stop. An order could have been
given to GA, but it would not have been
following the custom.
II an order had been given to Ga there
would have been no accident? was asked.
Prohab bly, not. but there were other
conditions. There were three trains to
cross "a that morning, lis at Exchange
street, So at Veazie and 81 at Basin
Mills. To have given the double order
would have made it cum bersome. SIN
gle orders might have been given, but it
would have requ ired more time.
Mr.. Mortland said that this was true,
but it would have cost much less than
the accident will
Mr.. Barry was then following the rules
as they are used and construed in the
Office? was asked.
He was," replied Mr. Hall.
Then as I understand the accident
was more the result of the construction
of the rules than fault of those operat-
ing" asked Mr.. Mortland
mot at all, say the contrary"
"'rhen what was the cause?"
For getfulness."
son the part of Mr.. Barry?"
"Yes."
MIR. Mortland asked if the rule had
been construed differently, if the forget
fulness could have come in.