The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1913-06-17
A "DEADLY PARALLEL"
fNew Rritain Hera1d.1 )


 Every now and then the Hartford Courant protests vociferously at being classified as a defender of the New York. New Haven and Hartford rail- road. It has no one but itself to blame if that conclusion is drawn from such an attitude as it takes this morning in discussing the Stamford wreck.
 Mark the contrast between its edi- torial comment and the testimony o1 the engineer of the uI-fated Spring field express. According to the Cou- rants own story of the inquest,
 Declaring emphatdcally that the brakes had failed to respond prop erly, that he had tried to take pre- cautions and had done all he could to avert the accident, Engineer Charles J. Doherty of New Haven told a dramatic story at the inquest into the wreck in this city last ev-' ening.
 He described his trip in detail from Bridgeport to Stamford. He first discovered that his air brakes were in trouble at NorwaIk and because of that fact had applied them sooner than ordinarily and before seeing the distance signal at Stamford. When he found this was set against him, he gave the brakes ''nore air and when that did not work he '1et her have the whole thing" That failing to stop the train, he threw on the emergency brake and applied sand to the rails, but could not stop it. That was all could do" he cried, and break ing down completely, sobbed for several minutes.
 When asked if he had tried to re- verse his engine he replied that he did but the heavy lever was stiff and because of an injury to his back which he had on Tuesday he could move the lever only a few notches. He thought that if he could have gotten it over it might have made things better, but did not think it would have averted the collision.
 The Courant makes following edi- tor1al comment regarding the acci- dent:
 No one will deny that the New Haven" road has been singularly and sadly unfortunate in the series of accidents that have befallen its trains of late. When the Federal express went off the Bridgepot enbanHment, the engineer went, too, and was killed. At West port the engineer also ran by the signals set against him and he was Killed. This time the same story The man on whom depended the life of his passengers did not stop when signa1ed to do so. More over, in this case he does not seem to have attempted stopping at the very point where trains have to stop- If engineers do not follow the signals, then .one whole system fails Ingenious critics, who see in this series of neglects by engineers something to blame the executive management for, show more gift for criticism than for logic. The tragedies are there. pathetic, and pttiful. Nothing will undo them. But a management that gets tho best 1t can and pays the highest wages cannot be blamed under such conditions.
 Talking of trial by newspapers. The railroad can do no wrong. The en- gineer is convicted while he Is utter Ing plausible testimony that may se- cure his vtndication. The Courant does not even pause to deny the truth of his side of the story It con demns him outright, and proceeds with its tears for the ''singu1arly and sadly unfortunate" railway.
 We do not call attention to this to heckle the Courant, for it's attitude is pretty well known. But the same attitude may be taken by the average citizen who takes his opinion from such misleading comment without reading the testimony for himself.