Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-06-23
Verdict of Coroner's Jury in
w., B. and A. Accident.
HEARING AT ANNAPOLIS
Causes of Collision Brought Out in
Evidence.
STORY OF THE
DISASTER
Defaced Order Received by Motor
man and Conductor-operator
Schumacher Sharply Criticised. }

Schumacher Sharply Criticised.
| Special Dispatch to The Star.
| ANNAPOLIS. Md. June 23.-The jury
of inquest impaneled by Coroner John Da
Wis to fix the responsibility for the head
on collision on the Washington. Balti-
more and Annapolis Electric Railway
| June which resulted in the loss of
nine lives and injury to score Of others.
| resumed its sessions at the courthouse
here yesterday.
After celebrating three and a half
| hours the following verdict was rendered:
I'VE find that Mrs. Mary E. Green
came to her death June 8. 1908. in
collision between car q, running extra
| from Annapolis to Academy Junction.
and train 1873, said accident being caused:
Il. By Motorman Wadsworth and Con-
ductor Bernasco receiving a defaced or
| scratched order.
so. BY the inexperience and ignorance
| of Operator Schumacher in issuing a de-
| faced and scratched order in direct viola
| ton of rule 334. book of rules, governing
the movement of trains and duties Of
| employees.
IS. That the conductor and motorman
| of car Fl should have taken precautions
to clear train 1873 five minutes. according
| to rule 800"
a. That there was negligence In the
movements Of trains on June 5. 1908.
Bernasco the Star Witness.
The particular interest centered upon
the testimony of Edward Charles Ber-
nasco, conductor of the outgoing special.
upon whom, with Motorman Wadsworth,
an effort has been made to place the
main responsibility. Bernasco, who is
under arrest, and who has been confined
| to the Annapolis Emergency Hospital on
account of his injuries. appeared and was
| the first witness yesterday. He was repre-
scented by counsel
Bernasco claimed that he received YER
bal orders from Dispatcher Schumacher
at Annapolis to proceed and that the
track was clear to Best Gate. This Schu-
macher, positively denied on the stand a
little later. He did not have his copy of
the orders received that night, but agreed
that the retained copy which was shown
told him to report at Best Gate he said
he regarded. in connection with the
statement which he alleged Dispatcher
Schumacher made to him. an equivalent to
Gate with safety.
There was also an important conflict
between the testimony Of Schumac cher
and that of Bernice G. Scott, dispatcher
fed that he was told to scratch OUT a
portion of the order given Bernasco and
Wadsworth. Mr.. Scott claimed that he
had told him to bust 1t, which Is under
stood by some that Scott had also tes-
titled at first that he directed the first or
der to be erased. but he afterward claim
ed that his instructions were equivalent to
an order to destroy it and write a new
order.
Employees inexperienced.
The testimony undoubtedly tended to
show that most Of the employees who were
concerned in the matter had little or no
experience in actual railroad work. but
that their training had been on city troll
ley roads, on double track, and at a much
smaller speed
Both Bernasco and Walraven. conduc-
tors Of the special and regular. respec-
been entirely on city trolley lines. and
that they had only been under instruction
on the Washington. Baltimore and An
napolis line for a few days.
Operator Schumacher testified that his
entire previous experience in railroad
work was since last February. He main
tanned that he had no responsibility for
the character Of orders that issued from
him at Annapolis. his duty being only to
transmit what was sent him by the dis
patcher at Academy Junction. He said
he had not been examined on the rules
and did not know 1t was contrary to gen.
eral regulations to erase or interline or
ders. He had learned that since the acct
dent, he said.
Conductor Bernasco's Story.
The opening Of the hearing was some
what postponed by the delay of the ju
rors, and it was after half past 10 when
Conductor Bernasco was called to the
stand. He is still suffering from his in
juries. His arm was in a sling. he limped
slightly and there was plaster across
his face. He said that he was the con-
ductor Of Extra No. u. which left An
napolis at 1880 on the night of June 5.
He testified that he had received orders
from Dispatcher Schumacher to leave at
that time for Academy Junction and to
operator had told him the track to this
point was clear. His orders. he said. he
had given to his wife. They had original
ly told him to look out for No. 133. but
he said. that the regular. No. 1873. had
left Academy Junction, but he expected
to pass it at Best Gate, and was trying
to reach that station.
Bernasco was examined closely by
States Attorney Green. and he was given
a particularly rigid examination by Mr..
Werntz of the jury. Mr.. Werntz made
every effort to bring out whether or not,
according TO rules OF the company, the
responsibility lay with the motorman or
conductor and whether the one in re-
sponsibility should have looked out for the
regular car.
Disclaimed Responsibility.
Bernasco claimed that the RESPONSE
bility was with Wadsworth. He also
| claimed that he had received verbal Or
ders modifying or adding to his written
orders, and that he was justified in acting
on them. and had often done so previ-
ously.
On cross-examination he modified this
| to the extent that he had proceeded from
station to station. He persisted, how
| ever. that he had acted on orders that
he considered from proper authority. and
therefore binding. Bernasco said that his
car had run at about the rate of twenty
miles an hour from Annapolis to the point
of the accident.
He was also questioned upon the rule
| of the company which requires that all
regular trains shall be given five minutes
clear at the point of passing. He &C
knowledged that he was acquainted with
this rule. but persisted that he had been
assured by Operator Schumacher that he
could proceed to Best Gate. Bernasco
| said that he had had thirteen years ex-
perience with the United Railway Com