Norwich bulletin. [volume] (Norwich, Conn.) 1895-2011, 1916-05-17

his report on the Bradford IA
tally. Everett A. Kingsley says:
Having been notified by Michael RI.
Scanlon, medical examiner of the town
of Westerly that one Janet Clark had
deceased in said Westerly on the 18th
day Of April, A. D. 1915, and that her
death was probably caused by the act
or neglect Of some person other than
the deceased. the undersigned pro-
decided to hold an inquest for the pur-
pose of inquiring into and determine
ing the cause of the death Of the said
Janet Clark Witnesses were sum-
moned and examined and the testi-
mony of said witnesses was reduced
to writing and signed by the witnesses
and record of said testimony is here
with fled with this report
Engineers Statement.
Engineer Mansfield of the Gilt Edge
in his testimony testified that before
he passed the distant or cautionary
signal he noticed that it was set at
green or safety and that the first in
dication of anything wrong was when
he saw the first home signal set at
red or danger. Almost at the same
time that hes the first home signal
set at red he noticed the trainman on
the track swinging his red signal.
Fireman King of the Gilt Edge tes-
titled that Mansfield called out the
customary ;thighbalP' meaning safe or
green when he passed the distant sig
nal and that he saw that it was so
set and the first home signal was set
at red.
Engineer Mansfield further testified
that as soon as he saw the red or
danger signals that he applied his
sand and emergency brakes and did
all in his power to bring his train to
a, stop.
Signal Set at Caution.
From the testimony I fail to find
anything which bears out Mansield's
testimony that the distant or caution
airy signal was set at green or safety
but on the contrary the testimony
shows that with the first home signal
set at red or danger it was impossible
to set the distant at green, but that
| 1t must have been set at yellow or
caution. Examination and inspection
of these signals since the accident
show no defect or difficulty in the OPP
| GRAFTON of them and It has been found
impossible to in any way operate them
so that the distant would be set al
green and the first home at red.
This testimony, together with the
| tests and examinations, compel me tc
reach the conclusion that Engineer
Mansf1elds contention is not support
ed but on the contrary that he ran BY
the signals when they were properly
set against him.
j Failed to See Red Light.
! Moreover, even if the engineer b.
mistake ran by the distant or caution
airy signal there appears to be ne
4 reason why, if he was watching his
track, he did not see the red light Of
the first home signal as the track i.
straight for a distance of almost &
mile at this particular point Ger.
tainly the engineer could, had he beer
looking, see the red light of the frs
home signal several hundred feet be
fore reaching it and bring his train t,
a-etop before he reached it and thu
avoided the accident. There seems t.
be no excuse both for running by tn,
a distant and also not seeing the frs
home signal set at red until he reached
it
Held Responsible.
! After a careful review of all tn
testimony I am convinced and ffnt
that said Charles Mansfield failed t,
take due and proper notice of the sig
nails that were properly set agains
him and that as a result of such fail
ure and carelessness on his part tn
death of said Janet Clarke must be at
trihuted
Respectfully submitted,
EVERETT. A. KINGSLEY.