Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1901-02-15

William Fielder came to his death al,
a result of accident on the Northern Pa
cific on the morning of the 18th, and
the cause of accident was negligence and
carelessness on the part of the railroad
officials in sending out engine No. So and
a train of cars improperly equipped with
air brakes and in other respects untitled
for service the hill.
This, substantially, is the verdict rem
dered by a coroner's jury appointed to
investigate.
The inquiry was begun yesterday
afternoon, and did not conclude until
about l o'clock this afternoon.
Louis p. Sanders appeared for the
company. Il. S. Thresier conducted the
case for the heirs of the dead brakeman,
" lillian Fielder The examination was
thorough, and served to impart a great
deal Of knowledge respecting duties and
responsibilities of railroad officials and
train employees.
Frank b. Jones, first witness, testified
that he was Il foreman and switchman
in the employ of the Northern Pacific
and had charge of the crew of the rum
away train. At the time of taking the
train out of the yard on the morning
of the 18th, there We're 10 cars on the
train, but at the time of the accident
there were only four cars remaining
loaded with lumber When going up
the hill, and when near the St. Law
renee ore house, upon coming round the
bend, the air hose became uncoupled,
and there being no back sand. the en-
CINE stalled. The engineer called for
brakes. Witness ran to see what was
repair the hose. Not succeeding, wit
ness ordered the engineer to mold the
engine while he ran back to turn the
switch 50 as TO get the train into a
place Of safety. He had not proceeded
more than three or four car lengths
before the engine slipped and went
down the lNll. Fielder and the other
brakeman were both the two last
cars. trying to fix the brakes. The en-
gineer. the witness testified, was
competent man and he had worked with
him for about 10 days. Asked as to his
best judgment as to the cause Of the
accident, he said that if the driver
brakes of the engine had been in good
working order and there had been back
sand. the accident would not have hap
pened. 1t was his opinion that the en-
CINE was not in as good repair as it
ought to have been. He had heard the
engineer complain of the engine. He
considered it unsafe to work with it on
hill of that kind. The hand brakes
We're in good working order but air
brakes We're not
The witness attributed the accident or
the engineer losing control of the train,
to the fact that the air brakes would not
work or that the air could not be applied,
and also the absence of back sand. The
engine had not been in good condition for
over two weeks. The engine brakes in
working on such a hill should be in alb
Solute working order.
Cross-examinsd by Attorney Thresher,
witness said that the employees and
officials must have been aware of the
condition of the engine as to the driv
brakes.
"As an experienced railroad man do
you consider it absolutely necessary for
the safety of employees and others in the
handling of a train of that kind. work.
ing in that particular place. or piece of
road. that the engine should have back
sand?"
II certainly consider it necessary. In
backing, the sand is absolutely neces-
sary."
'rhen you think that if in this case
there ldu DeeI TUBES dpplGu WIN Udck
sand, the engineer could have handled
the engine. providing tsi brakes had
been in good working order?'
II do"
Now, as an experienced railroad man.
do you consider it necessary in handling
a train of that kind to have the air
brakes in order?''
provided the back sand was in order,
I would not
In reply to Attorney Sanders, counsel
for the Northern Pacific, the witness re-
peated the evidence given above.
The grade was per cent or 210 feet to
the mile, where the slip took place. The
witness was not shaken in his opinion as
to the cause OF the accident. He said it
might have happened with any man, but
he still maintained that he had COM
planned about the defective brakes sew
eral times, not, perhaps. to the higher
officials, but to the men on the train. He
admitted that with the knowledge of the
defective air brakes he was taking
chances in trying to go up the hill, but.
he added, IF you don't care to take
chances, you can quiet"
VIM. Cahill's testimony differed from
that of the former witness as to the
cause of the accident. He thought it
was altogether due to the absence of the