Слике страница
PDF
ePub

out of the way of an outgoing freight train, and evidently did not notice the approach of engine and caboose moving on the track on which they were standing. The engine was backing down, crew being on front end and on the caboose, which they were handling. Men were observed by engineer and warning was given, both by engineer and bystanders, but, for some reason unknown, the men did not move out of the way and were struck.

[blocks in formation]

October 14, 1893. - This accident was the result of a collision at Hamburg siding, in which one employe was killed and another injured. The report of the company shows that ten cars were pushed onto the main track, and the engine, on which the injured men were riding, ran into them. The Board wrote: It seems to us that there can be no excuse for this accident, and that men who did not know better, or did not show more care than was displayed in the pushing of these cars out on the main track, were not fit for the position they occupied. Who did you hold in fault in the matter, and what discipline was administered, if any?

The following is the reply of the company:

"We have been unable to fully locate the responsibility for this accident, due to the fact that the conductor and brakeman, who had charge of the train doing this work, left their train immediately after the accident, and the brakeman has not since been found, he having sent in an order for his time through a notary public of the city of Buffalo; the conductor turned up four days after the accident, and made a statement to the effect that he instructed the brakeman, whose duty it was to see that cars were properly secured, to go to the extreme east end of the cars on the siding and properly secure them. This he claims the brakeman did. It is evident, however, that the cars which ran out onto the main track must have been shoved down by this crew. The cars which ran out were standing there for several days, being set off loads, and the crew who put them there claim to have properly secured them by setting brakes. The conductor, after appearing and making a verbal statement, disappeared and has not since been seen. The other employes in charge of the train, so far as we know, did their duty.

"Yours truly,

"A. W. JOHNSTON,

"General Superintendent."

ROCHESTER AND LAKE ONTARIO.

May 13, 1894.- At Forest House station, two passengers slightly injured in a collision caused by a defective switch. On inquiry the company replied as follows:

"We were using a Lorenz patent split safety switch made by the Pennsylvania Steel Company, of Steelton, Pa. We found upon examination the bolt in the lever had worked out, which allowed the point of the switch to open sufficiently to catch the flangs of the wheel, causing the accident as reported.

"Yours truly,

“J. M. LUDINGTON,

STATEN ISLAND RAPID TRANSIT.

"Superintendent."

October 7, 1893. - At Port Richmond, two persons injured on cross

company replied as follows:

ing. On inquiry, the comp

"There are gates and a man to attend to same, except between the hours of 1 and 5:15 A. M. During this time only one passenger train and two freight trains pass. Station is at crossing, and crossing at these hours is little used. There is a small real estate office within fifteen or twenty feet of the track, which obstructs the view somewhat, but when about fifteen feet from the track there is an unobstructed sight line for a distance of about 2,500 feet. The party did not hear the approaching train on account of the rattle of tin milkcans with which his wagon was loaded, and the neglect of ordinary precautions of looking and listening. The driver was in the habit of going over this crossing, and knew there was no gateman there at that hour in the morning.

"Yours respectfully,

"F. S. GANNON,

WEST SH RE.

"General Superintendent."

July 17, 1893. - At Genesee Junction, an employe was killed while under a car making repairs. This accident seems to have been the result of carelessness on the part of the deceased in not taking due precaution to insure safety. On inquiry the company states that the "blue flag" was not displayed, deceased failing to place it before going under the car.

April 9, 1894. - At Haverstraw, a man was killed on crossing. Inquiry was made as to whether the crossing was protected by gates or flagman and if the view was unobstructed. The company replied as follows:

"The crossing was not protected by gates or flagman, but the view is not obstructed in any way and we can not find that any fault lies with the employes of this road.

"Yours truly,

"J. D. LAYNG,

"General Manager."

Cases Pending before the Board of Railroad Commissioners, September 30, 1894.

CHANGE OF MOTIVE POWER.

Application of the Middletown-Goshen Traction Company.

APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 59 OF THE RAIL

ROAD LAW.

Amsterdam, Johnstown and Gloversville Railroad Company.
Philadelphia, Honesdale and Albany Railroad Company.

COMPLAINTS.

G. M. Tremaine v. Western New York and Pennsylvania Railroad Company, alleged unsafe condition of Goose creek trestle.

Thomas W. Stevens v. The Lebanon Springs Railroad Company, alleged unsafe condition of road.

L. J. Rossman v. The Kinderhook and Hudson Railroad Company, in matter of proposed closing of Rossman station.

The Long Island Railroad Company v. The Brooklyn City Railroad Company, in matter of crossing tracks at grade at New Flushing

avenue.

James P. Malloy v. The Union Railway Company, alleged discourtesy on part of employés.

B. J. Cummings v. The Western New York and Pennsylvania and New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Companies, alleged overcharge on freight.

G. E. Harmon v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, in matter of fences destroyed by fire along line of his property.

Peter V. Ketcham v. The Long Island Railroad Company, in matter of crossing at Farmingdale.

John G. Pugh v. Buffalo, Rochester and Pittsburg Railroad Company, in matter of fences along line of property.

A. Bird v. The Delaware and Hudson Canal Company, in matter of toilet rooms at Sidney station.

Residents village of Deposit v. New York, Lake Erie and Western Railroad Company, relative to engine standing under bridge.

LENGTH OF STEAM RAILROADS

IN OPERATION JUNE 30, 1894.

Small capitals indicate lessees; indentations in licate leased or operated lines.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

BUFFALO, ROCHESTER AND PITTSBURG (owned)

East Buffalo Terminal Railway (owned).
Lincoln Park and Charlotte (owned)

[blocks in formation]

10.89 1.03 15.73 3.77

118.00

8.50

..

10.50

...

62.74

...

...

...

...

18.01

38.89

15.92

23.85

4.25

4.01

1.00

9.00

...

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Kanona and Prattsburgh

Keeseville, Ausable Chasm and Lake Champlain

Kinderhook and Hudson

Lake Champlain and Moriah.

.13

11.44

5.64

16.23

9.00

Lake Shore and Michigan Southern.

71.00

...........

Lebanon Springs

51.18

« ПретходнаНастави »