MAIN TRUNK DISASTER

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2177, 16 June 1914, Page 6

MAIN TRUNK DISASTER

TWp CAUSES STATED,

THE REEL IN THE MECHANISM ■ AND A PORTER'S LAPSE. HIS WATCH m SIGNAL LIGHT INSUFFICIENT. (Br Teleerapi,—Press Association.) Auckland, June 15. The Coronor's finding in the inquest concerning the circumstances by which three victims of the Main Trunk collision at Whangamarino met their death was delivered this morning by Mr. i\ V. Fraser, S.M. _ "I find," said the Coroner, that Orton Stevens and C. Petersen died at Whangamarino on May 27, and that George Grimstone died at Hamilton qn • the same day, tho cause fo death in each case being injuries sustained as the result of a railway collision at Whangamarino on that day." The Primary Cause of Accident. The Coroner then reviewed the circumstances of the accident very fully, and, after paying a tribute to' the driver of the express (Stone) and his hreman (Paddmgton) for remaining- at their posts until their engine overturned in a swamp, proceeded as follows:—It is my duty now to find definitely who were to blame for the collision, and to apportion the blame. The primary cause of tho defective working of the signal was, without doubt, tne unauthorised alterations made by the signaladjuster Cruickshank. He was guilty of threo breaches of the rules laid down tor his guidance—firstly, in making any alterations at all without instructions'; secondly, m putting in unsuitable-ma-terial in the semaphore mechanism (lain, reel), which did not - meet the regulation bearing on the prescribed standard; thirdly, failing ..to report in detail what he had done. In extenuation, it must be said that ho acted in all good'faith, -making'this alteration at- the request of an inspector of permanent ways, wbo was engaged in- making ah addition to the siding which would interfere with the then casting signal connections: He (Cruickshank) did not have a six-inch or eight-inch wheel with him at tho time, and had not sufficient knowledge of the principles of mechanics to tenable him to realise tho effect which the contraction of tho wire would have upon the working of the signal mechanism "as altered by inclusion of the-. lj-inch reel. I have no reason to doubt that he did his best with the material availablo on the spot, and it is clear from tho evidence that it worked quite well until the first severe cold of winter was experienced. ,His omission to report tho detads of .his work to his inspector is more difficult to understand, and I can only wsunie that he considered that a general roport which he had sent in was sufficient. I am entitled to take into consideration the excellent record which Cruickshank has held in tho service in estimating the quality of his action, and I am of opinion that be was not wilfully guilty of the threefold breach of duty involved, or, at all events, that he was not guilty of wilful negligence likely to endanger life. I consider, rather, that he committed an honest error of judgment, duo'partly to his ignorance of certain principles of mechanics, and partly to -bis failure to realise that he had dons something which required to be submitted to his superior officer for approval. He tested his work after its completion, and honestly believed, that ho had done what was necessary and proper from the point of view of the railway regulations. His breach' of duty is serious, but, from the point of vie.v.of criminal law, it docs not amount to that gross degree of negligence which <Js termed "culpable negligence," the more especially as it was the duty of the officer in charge of the station to watch tho signal vigilantly in order to guard against, the consequence of any possible defect in. its working.

The Immediate Causo. The 1 caso of the tablet porter, Donaldson,'is different. His duty to inspect tho signal frequently is clearly laid down in the Department's regulations, and in the ultimate-- issue it was on his attention to duty in that respect that the safety of the trains depended. He received a warning from Te Kauwhata that the express was on its way eight minutes before it arrived, and although it was 4i hours since he had last seen the back light of his south signal (which he knew was the one safeguard between the express.and disaster), he went away to let in the goods train without looking. at the, signal. His neglect of duty was, beyond doubt, the direct and immediate cause of the collision. He knew that contraction, of the wire, owing to cold, sometimes affected the adjustment of signals, and his neglect is the more serious when it appears that tho night of May 26-27 was the coldest of tho year up' to that date. In extenuation, however, it must be • said that Donaldson had never before had any trouble with tho signal beyond a trifling error of adjustment, that he had.not altered the platform lever governing it since ho had locked it at danger- at midnight, and that he had then seen that the signal bad answered properly. There was a slijiht fog at midnight, and ho assumed that this fog was the cause of the_ obscuration of the back light at 4.45 a.m. As in Cruickshank's case, so hero also, I am entitled to take Donaldson's unblemished record of faithful and efficient service into consideration in estimating tho Quality of his conduct. On the Watching of Signals, This fact does not, however, operate as a' sufficient excuse for Donaldson's'lack of vigilance, for it is conceivable that the signal might be pulled over by a cow fouling the wire, or by an evillydisposed person tampering with it. The rules of tho Department, and the responsible nature of a signalman's duty alike demand a high standard of vigilance, and it is impossible to say that Donaldson, as the officer in chargo of flic signal, oxeTcised such reasonable prudence and diligence as other officers, similarly situated, are ordinarily accustomed to use. I must find that the matters proved in .his favour do not operate as a sufficient excuse, thonsh they are palliating circumstances. This is equivalent to finding that Donaldson's omission to verify the position of the south signal light at Whangamarino on the morning of May 27 constituted "culpable negligence" in tho senso in which that term is understood in criminal law. Allegations as to Medical Relief. Finally, the Coroner said that the management and regulations of the Railway Department were in no way responsible for the collision. "As tin the allegations," ho continued, "regarding delay in providing relief measures after the. accident, and callousness in tho treitmont of the injured and tho disposal of tho dead, evidence has been given which shows that everything that could have been done was done. The relief measures rohVct groat credit on Messrs. Pope and Bell, of tho Mercer staff, who were the officers responsible for them. Home loss of time wnsneceßsarily involved, but thcro was no avoid- , able delay. It is regrettable that such

allegations gained currency, hut one can readily uivfestaud that the state of the mind of passengers involved in the accident, ivfrct.Jier injured or not, would not dispose them to took at the master calmly, and ill all its bearings, ft is worthy of mention that not ©iie witness appealed before me to substantiate these allegations. Arrest of Donaldson, After the inquest liad concluded, Donaldson was wasted, and charged with manslaughter. He was «?ma»ded till luosday week in 0 R« surety of £100 and two of £51) each.