Norwich bulletin., 1913-07-12
Findine of rhe Commission.

After @ careful review and exalnina- ton of the testimony and documentary evidence connected with the investiga- ton, the foregoing report of C.. C. FL well, Chief Engineer and Inspector. giving the "cause, facts and circum- stances'' of said accident, is accepted, approved, and made part of the Com missions record.
 One Of the principal questions invoiy- ed in the somewhat lengthy investiga- ton Of this case was as to the euuip- ment and especially as to the brake apparatus and the efficiency of the air brakes on locomotive and tender No. 1888 and the several cars making nm the second section of train No. 53 at the time of the accident. The loco motive and tender and all the cars on said train at the time of the accident were equipped with Westinghouse air brakes, designed and built. for high speed passenger service, and the brake shoes were Of recognized standard
 Airbrakes Were Capable.
 Charles J. Doherty the engineer run ming said engine, testified that the brakes would not hold and did not work to suit him at the time of the accident, and on his first run out with that particular engine on June 10, 1913. he reported the brakes no good" and the Water-glass not working. From the testimony of the six other en- gineers who handled engine No. 1888 the testimony of the air brake inspec- tors at terminal points and at stations While the engine was in service, the testimony and report of the air-brake experts and from the record of re- suits obtained in the experimental tests made over the line and at and near the point of accident, we are firmly convinced that the air brakes on said locomotive and tender were of the latest and best type and were in first class condition, that the air brakes on the cars were in fair condition. and that the air-brakes on the engine, ten der and cars combined. were in service able condition, capable of safely stop ping said train at Stamford at the time of the accident if timely and prop erly applied.
 The Railroads Responsibility.
 This was new, and one of the larg est and most powerful type of pas- senger engines in service on the New Haven system, and Elnginen1an Dohertv with his limited experience in handling this type of engine. must have under estimated the speed of his train and failed to start braking as soon as was necessary.
 Engineman Doherty, having passed the required examination to become an SA5AHcSI, WdS Oil the spare list of loco motive engineers, with no disqualifyins marks against him and was, under an agreement in force between the Rail- road Company and it's locomotive en- gineers apparently qualified for selec- ton by rotation to handle the engine and train in question. This record qualification, however, and the com potency of Doherty were subject to in- vestigation by the Company, and if he was in fact incompetent to run an en- zine or incompetent to run that partic- ular engine and train, it was the Com pany's duty to be aware of such in competency, and it's privilege as well as It's duty, based upon such incom- potency, to select some other engineer and not permit Doherty to make the run.
 Responsibility of Engineers.
 The individual responsibility of a locomotive engineer, especially on fast passenger express trains. is very great and the primary and ultimate respon- operation of trains Is necessarily great or agreement should be entered into which would lessen the high degree of efficiency necessary to meet these i'm portant responsibilities.
 The officers of the Company and the general employees of the Company are charged with responsibilities as public servants In operating public utility and the safe and successful operation of trains requires tbe maintenance of proper discipline and the harmonious