The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1913-07-01
LOOKS TO MEN, NOT TO THE CORPORATION
Seeks to Ascertain Responsibility for Wooden Cars, and For Signal System So As to Know Where to Put Blame
 if Any Is Found = Insufficient to
 Point to Company in Abstract

They were of the usual corporation character, but indicated that the fun board consisted of 27 members.
 Clark, with a calmness not evidenced by other high officials before Coroner Phelan, easily parried the first oues- tions, denying that there were any printed or recorded rules covering the exact duties of any officials.
 He was next called upon to present any contracts that he might have brought relating to the purchase of equipment or employment of help.
 The first document read was con tract entered into between the New Haven road, October 9. 1912, between the Baldwin Locomotive works for six Pacific type engines at a cost of S2z.- 73S5O each. This figure was not to include tenders, air brakes, whistles and many of the minor parts.
 Similar specific contracts for tenders air brake equipment for which was to be supplied by the New Haven com pany, were introduced. Steel car or ders were placed in evidence signed by the Standard Steel Car company, for four large cars to cost s15,0O0 each. less air brakes, electric eq7sipmenA. etc, which was to be supplied by the com ypany or other concerns misunderstanding such appliances These orders were authorized by J. H. Sanford, pur1has- ing agent but witness Clark testified
  prices authorizing such expenditures
 A lot of IS locomotives of similar type were purchased from the Amer ican Locomotive CO, March Il. 1913.
 A startling turn in the investigation came shortly before noon today when Attorney Benjamin I. Spock arose to question the relevancy of such dnfor- nation as would show who has dfrec- tfon and control over purchase Of equipment
 Answering such criticism the cor oner made the foregoing public state ment, after which he said that he wished to have ,the railroads atbor- ney assist but refused to hear him direct or control the investigation.
 '-I am responsible to the public. Mir Spoclz, and they will be my judges said he. Then turning to MT. Clark Coroner Phelan asked him again asf to what knowledge he had of the du- ties and powers of other officials of. which he said he had none.
 Fred $. Evans, one of the signers of the Engineers agreement, took the. oath and said he was general chair man of the general committee Of ad-| jl1stment for the Brotherhood of L'o-s comotive Engineers. He explainedl many details of the agreement which covered the pare board' rule, which it appeared only became operative on May 1.
 what caused that rule to be adopt ed? was the burden of the inquiry anal the question brought forth testimony complimentary to that recorded before. the Interstate Commerce Commissions Under the old rule, competent men were called in their order to take out. passenger trains. Under the super intendency of B. R. Pollock g. change was made demanding engineers having two years experience. This was o@~ dected to upon the ground that @
 aTrre should have been given the engineers under terms of previous agreement
 Evans continued his testimony by4 saving that the one year rule was not forced upon the company by the5 Brotherhood and that fourteen mem I bers would be able so to testify In fact. the change was suggested by tne4 company and came about through the arbitrary order for a two years eX-l perience limit posted by former Super intendent Pollock
 Intination of a strike vote taken by the men under Grand Chief Stone was made by Attorney Spoek who question ed Chairman Evans upon what might have harpened ir the event of the New 1lave:, refusing to consider any thing but the 1.-two year rule"
 The intent of questions submitted by the railroad attorney were to show that while the two year rule was prac- tically iri effect. the engineers insist ed in settlement of the technical questions between the company ana the engineers.
 An effort was made to show that the company wished to better safeguard the travelling public. Evans refused to admit that such was the exact case.
 BluntIy asked as to the statement of Doherty as to the manner of shut ting off power and braking, with due reference. to signals and his opinion as to Doherty's action being proper or improper, Evans said he had used the accepted practice.
 Asked as to what could have occa- stoned the collision under those eondi- tions. Evans was of the belief that ordinarily the train should have stop ped.
 Adjournment until ? ?. m.