New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-01-13

, Riordan declared that he would DO
+ no such thing. The only concession he
would make was to allow those named
i'm the prcsentment until o'clock to-
I day 20 file bonds.
Meantime the directors of the com
panv had arranged to furnish bonds
last night 50 that formal arrest would
not be necessary. Those not IN the
state will file bonds with the rest this
afternoon.
Early last evening, after confer
ence with representatives OF the Hearst
papers. Coroner Riordan told the re
porters he proposed reporting Burke
and Ouackenbush 20 the Bar Associa-
ton for discipline.
They had been guilty. he said, OF
gross disrespect to the Coroners court
az there were not five Of them to-
gether." he said. land only one oihcer
in court to take orders, would have
had them thrown out of court. Ohe
man couldn't handle them.
Coroner Riordan was then inclined
to treat the affair as joke, more par
ticularly the threat. said to have been
made by one Of counsel, to proceed
against him.
Riordan's charge to the jury, as
taken by the stenOgraphers, was
strange mixture of decisions IN the
courts Of the state, Of definitions OF
the various degrees of murder ana OF
various legal terms. He LAID especlal
emphasis on what constitutes culpaDIe
negligence and read the statute DEM
ing il as criminal negligence, and MAX
ing death through such cause man
slaughter in the second degree.
The train hands he eXonerated.
Though il was in evidence that the
company provides telephone Tor use
of employees at the south terminal, he
charged that it had neglected to do so,
and told the jury to consider whether
or not this failure of the responsible
officers of the company to provide such
a simple safeguard as a telephone for
the protection of its passengers constl-
tutes culpable negligence
Failure of employees TO observe rules
for operating in case of defective ma
chinery he excused, because the com
many did not provide higher officials at
the various stations to see that the
rules are obeyed. The fact that there
was no one to compel Rolls, the con-
ductor. to use a lantern as signal
after the train had become disabled
was also to be considered to determine
culpabiiity.
After absolving the employees for
violating rules, the Coroner told the
Jury that all the testimony showed
Hedlev and the directors of the com
pany responsible for these omissions
Of duty as officers of a common car
riers corporations;
Charges Against Directors.
% Failing to provide that a red
light or lantern be conspicuously
carried at the front of any train that
is being operated from any other but
the first motor of such train as dan
ger signal for the switchman at eX-
press stations. such as the ll6th ST.
station, compelling him to give such
red lighted train the signalling tor
pedo. which the motormen OF such
trains must obey.
~ Failing 10 provide. through a
competent signal system, that no tram
should approach and enter a station
while another train stands at such sta
ton.
i3) Failure 10 secure inspection OF
motors until they had exceeded the
safe mileage estimate of 1000 miles
given by Manager Hedley.
(N Failure to provide against the
transportation of passengers on any
train operated from the fourth car from
the front of such train.
49, Failing to supply sigma lanterns
to local as well as express trains.
80 Failing to provide an extra man
on local train 10 meet an emergency
/ in which Messengers lives would be en-