The Portland daily press., 1897-01-15
A FLAW In THE RAIL
Caused the Accident to Train II ON the
Grand Trunk.

- ~e~- -"
road Commissioners Yesterday-Ths
Defect in the Rail Could Not Have
Been Dete cted Before tho Accident by
Amy Ordinary Inspection.
The railroad comm issioners held an In
vestigation yesterday afternoon at tne
Grand Trunk depot on the accident
which occurred to the Portland and Lew
isson local train on that road on the
morning Of Monday, December 81, by
which the entire train, excepting the
locomotive was derailed, the cars badly
demolished and several passengers slight
" injured. The accident was caused by
broken rail which threw the cars from
the track into ditch and the seventeen
passengers on the train had an almost
miraculous escape from death.
Many witnesses were examined and the
Investigation was thorough one, going
into every detail of the wreck and It's
cause. At the end of the hearing the
commissioners rendered no decision, but
the trend of the testimony seemed to be
that. no one was responsible for the
wreck, which was due TO flaw in rail
which could not have been detected by
any reasonable amount of inspection,
and the general opinion il, that when
the railroad commissioners render de-
cision on the matter, it will be to this
effect.
The hearing commenced In the fore
noon and the three railroad commission
ers, B. F. Chad bourn, Col. J. b. Peaks
and Frederick DAnferth, were present.
The Grard Trunk was represented by its
attorneys, A. A. Strout and 9. A.
Hight, and many Of the officials Of that
road were also in attendance.
The hearing was conducted In rather
an informal manner, the railroad COM
misioners and the attorney for the road
asking many questions of the witnesses,
whose testimony was taken down ~ the
commissioners stenographer.
On the table in the room where the
hearing took place was section OF the
broken rail which had caused the acci-
dent. 1t was about eight feet long and
on the end where the break had occurred
could be plainly seen a flaw or seam in
the steel which was not visible on the ex-
terror of the rail. There were also several
small pieces of the rail on the table and
in the heart of these the flaw could also
be seen, but the exterior of the rail
showed no indications Of its having been
defective one. This large section of the
broken rail and the smaller pieces were
frequently referred to and examined
by the saveral witnesses in giving their
testimony.
The first witness was @. 8. Foster of
Woodfords, a passenger on the train
which was wrecked, known officially as
train No. II. Mr.. Foster said that Mon
day morning, December 4, was very cold,
| in fact the coolest Of tie winter. He told
how the accident had occurred and he
believed the frost had been responsible
for the break in the rail. He highly COM
mended the behavior Of the train officials
Of No II, and the treatment the passen-
gers had received at the hands of the
Grand Trunk road alter the accident.
Roscoe G.. Hilborn Of Portland, an en-
gineer on the Grand Trunk, ran the en-
CINE on train No. 8, which left Lewiston
on the morning of December 81 at the
same time that the train which was
wrecked left Portland for Lewiston. He
passed over the rail which broke and
threw No. II into the ditch, half an
hour before No. II came along. At that
time the rail was all right. He also testi-
lied to the condition Of the road bed and
to the grade of the road at this point, etc.
| Brakeman Jeremiah Courtney of train
| No. 8, testified in substance the same as
Engineer Hilborn.
| Frank e. Pickett, a passenger on train
No. II, told how the accident had oc-
Cured, and corroborated the testimony
of MIR. Foster in everything.
David 6. Stuart Of Island Pond, the
roadmaster Of this division of the Grand
Trunk, testified to the good condition OF
the road red and track of his division; to
the careful system of inspection made
daily on the road, and said that the flaw
in the rail which caused the accident
could not have been distinguished from
It's exterior appearance.
Jonas Hamilton, superintendent OF the
Mountain Division of the Maine Central,
has been forty eight years in the railroad
| business. He was questioned altogether
as to the nature of the defect in the rail
| and gave 1t as his opinion that the flaw
in the rail was in the steel when the
rail was rolled. The flaw was confined
entirely to the interior Of the rail and
could not possibly have been distin'
guished by any reasonable inspection.
The engines in use on the Grand Trunk
in this division, Mr.. Hamilton believed
to be light and he thought that 60 pound
rails, such as are In use on this road,
were heavy enough. The witness didn't
think the frost in the rail had much tc
do with its breaking, although il
probably had something to do with it.
Col. Peaks asked if the flaw In thu
rail could have been discovered at the
rolling mills. Mr.. Hamilton didn t thint