Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1919-04-30

testified that in the very many times
that he had had occasion to observe
this crossing and the passage Of cars
over the same during the entire time
since the branch was build he had
or even coming toward the crossing.
Counsel urged therefore that it was
not only unnecessary precaution but
that it was an undue hardship upon
the street railway to stop each Of its
cars and cause the conductor to go
forward and look for a train that new
err came. Attention was called to the
fact that in order to make the sched-
ule between Augusta and Gardiner it
was necessary to exercise the great
est of effort to eliminate all unne.
cessary stops and to run at consider
able speed; and that If the local cars
between Gardiner and Augusta got of
time it not only disarranged such To-
cal service but also threw out the
schedule Of through cars between
Lewiston and Waterville. Sug9es.
ton was made that so infrequent was
the passage Of trains or cars upon
the steam railroad over this branch
track that it was more reasonable to
require the steam railroad to afford
the necessary protection than to COM
pei the electric railroad to do the
things above mentioned at times
when it was practically assured no
danger existed or could exist. Upon
the other hand. the superintendent
and counsel for the steam railroad
urged that IL any protection was nee
essary nothing less than this double
protection would be adequate. but
asked that II the electric railroad was
excused from performing the above
named service the steam railroad
might at least be excused from stop-
ping its trains within 100 feet of the
crossing. The superintendent in an
swer to question stated that accord
ing to his understanding and belief
the steam railroad had never prac-
tised the stopping Of it's trains or cars
100 feet away from the crossing, but
that under orders issued not long ago
by the steam railroad they were
tagging all movements over the
crossing by means of a member Of the
train or switching crew. and that a
speed Of not in excess Of four miles
an hour was maintained.
Counsel for the Maine Central Rail-
road in his argument called attention
to the language Of the statute, and
suggested that the Board of Railroad
Commissioners was without authority
to issue that part of its order which
we quoted in the beginning Of this de-
cision, and that the Railroad Com
mission being without authority to
make the order this commission was
without authority to modify the same
to the extent Of SO changing it as to
require steam railroad to perform
any service in the nature Of protec-
ton at the time Of the movement of
its trains or cars over the crossing.
Otherwise stated. counsel claimed
that the movement Of trains over the
crossing was solely matter Of oper-
alton. and that the statute in question
referred only to construction and
maintenance Of the crossing. We are
unable to agree with this conclusion
Of counsel. Whether We regard the
original petition as having been
brought under Section or Section 2
Of Chapter ~ Of the Laws of 1895
(now Sections Is and Is of Chapter
Sc. r. s. 1870 our belief is that the
Railroad Commission had authority
to impose the condition which it did