Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1899-11-09
FAVORS CENTRAL VERMONT.
REPORT OF SPECIAL RAILROAD COM.
MISSION FILED.
If the Rutland-Csnadian Crosses the
Central Vermont Tracks 1t ShouId be
Under Grade, hut Better Plan
Would be Joint Use of Tracks
and Passenger Station.

The report of tho special commission APP
pointed to consider the differences be-
tween the Central Vermont and Rutland
Canadian railroads in this city filed their
report with County Clerk Ray Tuesday.
The fun text of the report follows:
Rutland Canadian Railroad Co. vs. Cen
trail Vermont Railway Co. Supreme
Court, Vermont
To the Honorable, the Supreme Court of
Vermont:
The undersigned commissioners in the
above entitled cause respectfully report
that the parties appeared before us by
. their respective counsel on the 10Th day
of October, 1892 at Burlington, and were
heard. The petitioner offered evidence on
~ for an Embarrassing, to be constructed
at point proposed by them, and claim
ed that the commission had no jurisdic-
ton over any other question.
The defendant claimed that the commits
sion had jurisdiction over the whole mat
ter and tnat in the public interest and in
view of the whole subject, the connection
between the Rutland railroad and the Rut-
land-Canadian railroad should be made by
the use of tracks now or hereafter to
be constructed through the yard of the
defendant and that the depot of the de-
PENDANT should be used by them
The petitioner, on being asked as to
whether they withdrew any claim for a
connection and for gojHg through the yard
of the defendant. answered: Not if the
commission decide that they have iuris-
/ diction in the whole matter" The COM
mission decided that it had jurisdiction
over the whole biect of crossing and ian
view thereof of connections. This ques-
ton is submitted to the court
| Evidence was then received from both
sides on the matter Of crossing as well
as or the connection for the use of the
defendant.
The defendant claimed that an overhead
crossing should not be constructed near
the point claimed by the plaintiff. but be-
tween that point and the tunnel Of tho
defendant company.
If the plaintiff is entitled to n crossi, G,
without reference to any considerable of
the connection by use of the tracks of the
defendant company through the yard. tie
commission decides that the crossing
shouId be an undergrade crossing upon
the plans submitted by the petitioner and
herewith submitted to the court and made
a part OF this report, and the method Of
construction should be as follows: The
aputment and bank walls to be made of
hrst class masonry, of design similar TO
flans submitted. giving a clear height he
tween the top OF the rails of the Rutland
,Hlt uias Railroad company and the bot
/ tom Of the Superstructure of not loss tho,
! twenty (2N feet. and the width at rlght
angles between the abutment should nor
/ ne less than eighteen QS) feet
The bridge should be made of stoel or
IRON Orders, and proper drainage should
ne mace from the depression in the grade
under the bridge. The plans of MASONRY
"putHehts ana walls, as well as the bridge
ana drainage system. shall be satisfactory
10 the managing officer of the Central
vermont Railway company.
The bridge, bridge ties. abutments
drainage, etc, should be kept in safe con.
ditlon for the passage of trains of the
central Vermont Railway company at the
expense of the Rutland Canadian Rail-
road company.
! II IN the future the Central Vermont
Hallway company shall double track it's
line to and through the tunnel, then n
bridge for such second track should he
putt and maintained by and at the cost
of the Rutand-Canadian Railroad com
pany substantially in the manner above
described.
The construction of the said abutment s
ana bridges should be carried on in such
manner as not to interfere unnecessarily
with the prompt and safe passage of
trains of the Central Vermont Railway
( company nor with the safety of its road
bed.
The Rutland-Canadian Railroad COM
pany shah put in ard maintain at It's own
expense crossing OF the Standard oil
siding of the Central Vermont railway ut
grade, and signals for the protection of
the same, in a manner which shall be sat-
isi1ctory TO the managing officer of the
last named company but in the use of
this crossing the through trains of the
Rutland-Canadian company shall have
precedence over the switching trains of
the Central Vermont Railway company
No right Is intended to be included for
the petitioner except for crossing the road
bed and Ills of the main and side tracks
of the petitionee as specified
1,
the whole matter we find and decide that
i'm view of the convenience of the public in
connection with Joint interchange of
through and the more convenient hand
ling of local traffic, and of the inconven-
fence and danger TO the public in conse-
quence of the proposed and necessary
street crossing at grade on College street
between the city of Burlington and the
freight and passenger stations of the Cen
trail Vermont Railway company and
steamboat docks; the interests of the pub
lie as we'll as the interests of both parties
to the controversy will he best served by
a connection with and by a joint use of
tracks and station of the defendant The
connection to be made by single track to
he constructed by ard ut the expense Of
the Rutland-Canadian Railroad from the
point where their line enters upon the
lands of the Central Vermont on the
north across the side track of the Stan
dard oil company (Which shall be proper
~ protected with signals and continuing
southwark between the main track of tho
Central Vermont and the side track tC
the west thereof to a point on their main
line near the engine house as now located
where connection will be made with the
two tracks to be provided by the Central
Vermont and maintained and operated as
a double track system for both
roads to and through the Cen.
trail Vermont station to connection
with the Rutland road at the south side
of College street; to be operated undes
conditions and in the manner to be here
after described. The route recommended