The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1910-08-18
B. & M. EXPLAINS.
An Attorney For the Railroad
Tells What the"Joint Plan"
Stands For
HEARD HERE TUESDAY

the Decision Of the Public Seryic,
Commission Which Ordered tn,
Road to Build Underground Pass.
hearing in the appeal of the Cen.
trail Vermont Railroad from a recent
order of the Public Service Commits
sion compelling the Central Vermont
and the Boston and Maine railroads
to build an underground pass and
make various changes about the sta
tion at White River Junction in or
der to make the approach to the sta
ton safe, was held Tuesday at a
special term of Supreme Court in this
city
! Attorney John Young of Newport,
counsel for the Boston and Maine
Railroad explained the Joint Railroad
Plan which the two railroads inter-
ested had asked the Commission to
adopt but which the Commissioners
turned down. The plan of the rail-
roads was to eliminate the grade
crossing and to construct an under
ground pass for teams and passeng-
ers running under the tracks to the
station. The passage was was to have
20-foot roadway for teams with
height of IL feet. The passageway
for the passengers was to be built
beside the team pass, but was to be
four feet above the level OF the road
way for the teams and to be separated
by an iron screen work four feet high
The order as issued by the Public
Service Commission calls for the
building of an underground pass for
passengers only and that a platform
and small station be erected on the
westerly side of all the tracks to re-
ceive baggage and express and for
transfer on the passenger trains, but
does not take into consideration, ac-
cording to the brief as submitted by
the attorneys for the railroads, the
manner in which the baggage shall be
transferred to the trains.
The contentious as set up by G. W.
Writers and H. H. Powers, attorneys
for the Central Vermont, in their brief
are as follows:
1. Two questions arise upon the
report of the Public Service Commits
sion. The two railroads ask the Com
mission to adopt what is known in
the case as the Joint Railroad Plan
This the Commission refused. This
plan entails the expense of $4,000.
| the whole of which is paid by the
| railroads. If no other parties are fin
ancially interested, it would seem to
be the duty of the Commission to
adopt whatever plan the railroads
proposed, if they paid the expenses
and third parties were not prejudiced.
The railroads presumably know best
what change can be made at White
River Junction that will better en-
able them to operate their road to the
best advantage. The complaint as TO
the condition of things at White River
Junction, rests upon the danger in
cident to crossing the tracks at grade
This danger threatens the passengers
going to and from the trains, also
threatens the employees of the road,
threatens the passengers on the
trains and threatens the commercial
men in taking goods to and from
trains. The testimony shows that the
American Express Company crosses
/ the tracks on the West side of the
station on an average of 20 to 20
times daily. Swift e Co.. Smith & Son,
the proprietors of the Junction House
and others cross these tracks several
times daily. The plan of the Commits
sion only eliminates the dangers
which threaten foot passengers. The
Express Co., the Hotel, all the local
dealers of White River Junction, the
mail wagon that must go to the sta
ton, will be obliged in some way to
cross the eight tracks. All baggage,
express matter. mail matter and
goods going to or from the station
must be taken across the eight tracks
on trucks. The trains of the road will
therefore necessarily be held up and
delayed more or less by this traffic,
and will be exposed to derailment
from collision with 1t. The Commits
sion in its report gives no reason why
this plan should not be adopted, ex
tcept that 'it is subject to most of the
criticism recited in our last report"
and that public service requires that
the plan be rejected This Court has
Jurisdiction to modify the railroad
plan in any way to make 1t more conf
plete. We submit that as long as the
railroads pay the bills, and that the
railroad plan relieves the situation at
White River Junction; that it ought to
be adopted.
"2. The other objection to the re-
port Ia that II destroys the team track
at the Junction. II was decided by
this Court at the last term, that the
Public Service Commission has no
Jurisdiction to destroy the four tracks
on the West side OF the. station which
the Commission In its report had ell
noiuotad Wa. iuaiat that tha aama raa-