Arizona republican., 1912-04-10

them more checker playing for the
 dispatcher along the line more de- lay to the shipper. Also there is no train limit in the states east or west
 at connecting points so trains woull all have io be remade at these places. congestion of traffic would follow etc Moreover there would be q greater delay in delivery of local shipments. For instance a 70 car train arriving at Yuma rom the coast If cut down to 30 cars would naturally mean picking out the cars that had through | freight leaving the local freight to
 take later trains.
 He said % cars meant a re-
 duction of g per cent in locomotive
 efficiency; reduction in earning ca- pacity of equipment amounting to 2S per cent and 40 per cent increase in 1 the number of trains required tO i handle the traffic. Mir Cox outlined most of the above and the rest was 1 supplied by the witnesses introduced ! in support Of his statement and brought out by the questioning of the attorney and the members of the l house. These witnesses included Geo | A. Hickey assistant superintendent of the Tucson division. Charles NJ Mur- l phy trainmaster and Mr. Moore road ! foreman of engineers. These gentle | men all spoke clearly and strongly | in harmony with the above reasoning ! unqualifiedly supporting it. w A l Drake general manager of the S F P. X P railway was put on the stand | by Santa Fe counsel and corobOratel the testimony of the others as to all ! theories of train handling and in re- spect of his own line wherein condi- tions were similar
 IL was sought to show that there was more danger to trainn'cn in the 1 long trains than the short ones but that seemed to he well controverted l by the witnesses. some of them ;le- claring the contrary to be true for ! the reason that shorter trains run faster and the velocity of the train 1 has mucn to do usually with acci- dents and their seriousness Respect ing car limits for trains Mir. Drake said he knew of no valid reason why there should be any limit except the limit of motive power.
 for the number of men in a train crew, among other things requiring a pilot. either conductor or brakeman
 as a third man in case an engine is running alone. The theory in support of the bill was that one of the en- zine men might become incapacitated and the other would be unable to flag forward and back in. time to prevent trouble in case of break down to his engine This was ans wered by repeating the train rules telling what the crew should do in similar emergencies. The railroad men all agreed as to facts in this matter also Tn regard to having the third brakeman it was sta,ed that he was always put on long trains where needed as q theory of econ- omy for the railroad to prevent ac- cilents etc
 House bill 42 requires all lOcOmo- tives tO be equipped with electric headlights The railroad men seemed ro offer little opposition to that measure They admitted that they were considered better lights where only a single track is used. though S against them But where there is a double track it was agreed by all that the electric headlights are apt to confuse by their glare. the crews of trains approaching each other. How ever. MT. Cox said the s r is rapid ly putting in electric headlights and all il asks is sufficient time to finish the job Mir. Drake sa1i the santa Fe used them almost exclusively and his line had it's newer engines so equipped. They are expensive and the roads dislike equipping old en- zines with them.
 Concerning the limiting Of passen- ger trains to twelve cars it was brought out that ordinarily the trains do not exceed that number but on the occasion of the moving of large eX- cursons more are added to accom- mojate the public and hasten trans portation. If limiting tO F it would often necessitate running extra sec tions with two or three cars which would involve an expense that would probably make transportation rates higher or eliminate the profits of the company. It is an emergency practice the railroads thought they should be allowed to employ.
 Before concluding the session Mir. | Cox asked that he might have an | other hearing for oral argument and 1 Judge Kent asked that they might ! file brief statements on these ques- tions and also appear again in re- | spect of house bill 90 and house bill | 15 which there was not time yester- day to discuss.
 -0-
 HOUSEkEEPERS