Clippings from the Reading Eagle, May 25, 1899

FOUR ARRESTS IN THE EXETER DISASTER

Warrents Issued by Alderman Fegely for Messrs. Orrell, Rourke, Mogee and Wildermuth--The District Attorney and County Detective Move in the Matter.

Shortly before 10 a.m., County Detective James P. Kershner called at the office of Alderman A. H. Fegely, and acting upon instructions issued by District Attorney A. H. Rothermel, he swore out the information upon which the warrants were issued against Engineman Harry Orrell and Conductor A. E. Mogee, of the second section No. 12; Engineer Daniel Wildermuth, who ran the first section, and Train Dispatcher James J. Rourke, who with Trainmaster George C. Bowers, of Phila., were held responsible jointly for the collision at Exeter by the Coroner's jury.

The following is the information made against Orrell:

"Personally appeared before me, A. H. Fegely, one of the Aldermen of the city of Reading, James P. Kershner, County Detective, who being duly sworn according to law deposes and says, that in the said county, on the 12th day of May, 1899, a certain Harry Orrell, engineman in the employ of the Phila. & Reading Railway Company, by reason of negligence and wilful misconduct, failed to observe the necessary precaution or rule of the Phila. & Reading Railway Company, which it was his duty to obey and observe, whereby the death of the following persons resulted, to wit: William Camm, John H. Coulson, Isaac E. Fillman, H.C. Hartford, Normal Holmes, H.L. Hunsberger, John Johnson, John Kuntz, C.L. Laverty, Michael Lawn, Charles C. Leaf, William H. Lewis, Jacob W. Markley, Samuel McCarty, George Schall, E.E. Schelly, Franklin D. Sower, Charles T. Street, William Stahler, John Slingluff, Joseph Taylor, Henry H. Thompson, Henry C. Wentz, Daniel H. Yoder, and whereby diverse other persons were seriously injured, contrary to the Act of Assembly in such cases made and provided."

The same information was made in the charges against the 3 others held responsible by the Coroner's jury: Conductor A.E. Mogee, of the second section; Engineman Daniel F. Wildermuth and Train Dospatcher James J. Rourke.

District Attorney Rothermel did not proceed against Bowers, for the reason that his act of assigning Orrell and Mogee to the running of the second section of No. 12 was performed in Phila.

Constable Wagner and Detective Kershner left at 12 o'clock on the P. & R. for Norristown for the purpose of arresting the accused who are attending the Norristown inquest as witnesses.

The officers had instructions, however, not to take the men away from the inquest before they had testified, or in any way to interfere with the hearing after the warrants had been served. Should none of the party, however, enter bail at Norristown they will probably return to Reading with the officers on the 6 p.m. train.

"What bail shall be asked?" inquired the officers as they left.

"I want $1,000 bail," replied Mr. Fegely."

When the news leaked out that this action had been taken, friends of Mr. Rourke called upon Alderman Fegely at once to enter bail.

His attorney E. H. Deysher, offered to furnish any amount of security for his friend. D. P. Schlott, J. M. Keller and others phoned to the Alderman and wanted to offer any sums up to $100,000. The Alderman, however, stated that no bail could be taken until the warrant had been served.

FIVE MEN BLAMED FOR EXETER ACCIDENT

Bad Judgment Charged--Dispatcher Rourke, Engineers Orrell and Wildermuth, Trainmaster Bowers and Conductor Mogee Names--Important Recommendations.

The coroner's jury to inquire into the cause of the P. & R. collision at Exeter, reached this verdict shortly before midnight on Wednesday.

Reading, Pa., May 24, 1899

We the undersigned jury, empanelled by Dr. Wilson H. Rothermel, coroner of Berks county, Pa., to investigate into the cause of the deaths of John Slingluff and others, who lost their lives in a rear-end passenger train collision on the Reading railroad at 8.51 o'clock on the evening of Friday, May 12, 1899, at Exeter Station, Pa., having carefully proceeded with the investigation and having inquired into all the circumstances attending the same, agree that the said John Slingluff and others came to their deaths through the negligence of some of the employees of the said Reading Railway Company.

We censure George C. Bowers, the trainmaster at Philadelphia, who used very bad judgment in equipping a special train with a crew unfamiliar with the main line division, and condemn Engineer Harry Orrell and Conductor A. E. Mogee for careless and reckless running of said special train, and Engineer Wildermuth for violating the rules in passing the signal board at Exeter Station and then again backing his train northward 236 feet.

Upon the evidence submitted by Trainmaster M. E. Blaine and Assistant Trainmaster J. L. Bingaman, we find that Train Dispatcher James Rourke was negligent in not notifying the special crew of the delay of the express train and of the time of their own departure.

We most emphatically condemn the independent tower system below Reading, operating as they did at the time of the collision, and would recommend the cutting down of the section of trees which obstruct the view of the signal man from Tower No. 22.

We further recommend that the Reading Railway Company inaugurate a ten-minute rule of moving its passenger trains, believing from the late accident that the five-minute rule now in vogue is too dangerous, especially in the running of trains at night; and to rigidly enforce the prompt obedience of all rules laid down to its employees.

In witness whereof, we, the jury empanelled in this inquest, have hereunto set our hands and seal. William Groll, S. H. Reeser, George H. Nagle, A. R. Eisenbrand, J. George Hintz, Henry L. Wickel. Jurors.

Wilson H. Rothermel, Coroner of Berks county.

HOW THE VERDICT WAS REACHED

"Was the verdict of the Coroner's jury a compromise" the Eagle asked J. George Hintz, who was its secretary.

Mr. Hintz made this statement: "The verdict was the unanimous expression of the members after they talked the matter over for several hours calmly and deliberately. But one draft was made of the verdict, when the talking was done and all were of the same opinion."

"After we returned from Exeter we decided to get down to business at once as one of the party said he could not afford to lose any more time from his work. We took up the evidence point by point, and compared contradictions, making due allowance for the excitement there must have been at Exeter after the wreck, when a mistake in the matter of time or distance might easily have occurred.

"None of the jurors were wild or excited to jump on every one who had anything to do with the accident on the night of May 12, and did not desire to censure any one too severly for what was an unfortunate accident, causing a serious loss of life, and, personally, I believe that in our finding we dealt fairly and justly with all.

"There may be some who believe there should have been a more radical verdict, but I did not feel justified in going further than we did in the matter. The other jurors took the same view. We were not trying to drive any one out of the railroad business or persecute any one, but believed that the responsibility was really divided. It is easy enough to say that if one thing had not happened there would have been no accident, and that probably another contributed just as much now, but the collision did occur, those people were killed and we tried to get at the facts as far as we could."

Mr. Hintz said the Eagle reports of the inquest were the best he had ever seen of any public investigation. The Eagle was used officially by the jury to freshen up our recollection of testimony and all agreed that it was correct in every detail."

IN SESSION OVER 7 HOURS

The jury returned from its trip to Exeter at 4.06 p.m. on Wednesday. A conference was held at the Franklin st. depot, as to where and when the meetings should be held to consider the evidence. J. George Hintz offered the Board of Trade rooms for that purpose. This was accepted. The jury went into session. with closed doors, at 4.15 p.m. The session was a great deal longer than was first expected, but the members said they would not adjourn before closing up the business before them.

About 8 o'clock Coroner Rothermel sent out for a lunch for the jury and Mr. Hintz sent for paper and pens for all, in order that each juror would be able to draft his own idea as to what the verdict should be.

District Attorney Rothermel was summoned for a consultation about 11 o'clock and gave the members the information they desired.

It was just 11.46 when the doors were thrown open by Juror Henry L. Wickel, who said "We have finished the verdict."

MEANT "YARDS" AND NOT "FEET"

After the jury adjourned Juror Hintz told the Eagle "A mistake was made in the verdict as to what the jury meant to say the first section had backed. The verdict makes it 236 feet but we really intended fixing it that many yards which would make it almost what we measured when we were at Exeter."

JURYMEN MEASURE FOR THEMSELVES.

The jury paid an important visit to the scene of the collision at Exeter late Wednesday afternoon for the purpose of enabling the members to settle for themselves a number of distances, which were in dispute between witnesses, notably the crews of the first and second sections of No. 12.

The members took with them tape measures and on arriving at Exeter located what it was claimed was the exact spot where the engine of the second section had run into the last coach of the express.

Then the distance was measured north to the point on the curve where the jury decided it possible for Engineer Orrell to have seen the rear end of the train after it had backed up to that location. Some members walked up the road, while another stood on the tracks at the point where the collision occurred and made the test of sight for themselves. The distance was found to be 1,200 feet exactly.

"Now how far did No. 12 back?" every juror asked.

This distance was then determined by measuring from the point where the last coach was struck, to the place where the crew of the first section testified the hind car stopped when the train came to a standstill, after having run beyond the order board. This distance was decided to be 700 feet. Members of the jury said this must have been the true distance Engineer Wildermuth had backed up his train, instead of 300 feet or thereabouts. One of his crew said they had backed up four car lengths only.

The jury measured a passenger coach and found its length 58 feet and 8 inches and that of the engine, 57 feet. None of the railroad men who had been asked the length of a passenger coach would state it exactly.

When engineer Orrell was on the stand he stated positively that the express was within 1,200 feet of him when he first saw her rear lights, after he came round the curve, but that he believed he could have stopped his train had the forward train not backed at all. On being asked in his testimony by Coroner Rothermel within what distance he could have stopped his engine at the rate of speed he was running upon his approach to the Exeter station, he said he was sure he could have done so in from 400 to 425 yards.

Some of the jurors seemed to regard the measurements made as favorable to Orrell's position, as they seemed to indicate that there was a distance of 1,900 feet between the point where the rear of the first section had been stopped below the depot and the point on the curve where the rear lights could first have been seen by him, or more distance than Orrell claimed he would have needed to stop.

The jury found that at a point near the tool house the first tower above Exeter could be seen distinctly, although it could not be observed from the station. This view was had through an opening among the trees above the station and this bore out the statement of Watchman Endt, of tower 22, who insisted he had seen the lights of the first section pass the tool house.

NO MANSLAUGHTER PROCEEDINGS--THE ACT ON THE SUBJECT OF CHARGING MISDEMEANOR.

Members of the jury expressed the desire that no manslaughter proceedings be brought against the men they hold responsible for the Exeter wreck. The other legal remedy to secure punishment is charging them with a misdemeanor. The Act of March 22, 1885, says "It shall be the duty of the prosecuting attorney" to proceed on this charge. The penalty shall not exceed $5,000 fine and an imprisonment not exceeding 5 years.

The Act was signed by Gov. Curtin, and is entitled "An act to promote the safety of travelers on railroads, and to punish negligent and careless employees thereof" and is as follows:

From and after the passage of this act, if any person or persons, in the service or the employ of a railroad, or other transportation company, doing business in this State, shall refuse or neglect to obey any rule or regulation of such company, or by reason of negligence or wilful misconduct shall fail to observe any precautions or rule which it was his duty to obey and observe, any injury or death to any person or persons, shall thereby result, such person or persons so offending shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof shall be sentenced to pay a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars and to undergo an imprisonment in the county jail, or the State penitentary, not exceeding five years: Provided, That nothing in this act shall be construed to be a bar to a trial and conviction for any other or higher, offence, or to relieve such person or persons, from liability. In a civil action, for such damages as may have been sustained.

Section 2. It shall be the duty of the prosecuting attorney of the city or county where any such injuries may have happened as soon as he shall have notice of the same, to take immediate action, and legal measures for the apprehension and arrest of the person or persons who may be charged with causing the injuries as aforesaid and to direct subpoenas to issue from any justice of the peace, to witnesses, to appear and testify on part of the Commonwealth touching such offences charged as aforesaid and to prosecute the offenders as in other cases of misdemeanor.

And provided further, That no conviction of the employee shall relieve the company from any liability for any such injuries or death.

FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY

Immediately after the inquest, District Attorney Rothermel said:

"I am undecided as to what course of action to persue and must carefully examine the whole subject before reaching a decision. Under the verdict criminal proceedings can be brought against the persons mentioned, varying from a charge of manslaughter to that of misdemeanor."

"The members of the jury, however, have expressed the opinion and desire that I should not bring proceedings under the charge of manslaughter, and I shall respect their judgment in the matter."

"According, if any criminal proceedings will be instituted, they will be on the charge of misdemeanor. I will carefully examine every phase of the question to determine whether the institution of criminal proceedings is justified."

A GLANCE AT ENGINEER ORRELL

Harry Orrell, engineer of the second section, which dashed into the express at Exeter on the night of May 12, scarcely looks like a railroad man, at least, an engineer. To a casual observer, Mr. Orrell appeared to be a student, as his face indicates intelligence above the average. He has hazel eyes, which now and then twinkle good-naturedly. A phrenologist would say that he had excellent perceptive faculties, which give the ability to see things clearly. He stands about 5 feet 2 inches in his stockings, and is quite spare. A brown mustache adorns his face, while a heavy mass of brown hair covers his head. His hands are not large and one seeing them would scarcely think that the owner handled a throttle on a locomotive that frequently reeled off mile after mile in less than a minute each. Seated in the court house at the investigation, Mr. Orrell had his head still bandaged. He was dressed in a neat fitting brown suit, wore a soft hat, white collar, polka dot bow necktie and a Madras shirt. He was an interested listener to all that was going on.

Testimony Repeated at Norristown

Norristown: The testimony heard at the first day's session of Coroner McGlathery's inquiry to fix the responsibility for the Exeter horror, was largely a reiteration of that heard at the Reading inquest. It is probable the jury may close its inquiry by evening.

Two jurors are sitting, one from Pottstown and another from Norristown, and in all 52 witnesses have been subpoenaed. Fourteen had not been called for the inquest at Reading, and two of these are the engineer and conductor of the milk train, which was following the second section of No. 12. In opening a number of witnesses testified to the death of victims at Norristown.

Frank E. King, of Phoenixville, supporting himself in his walk with a cane, stated that he was in the third seat from the front of the rear car on the express, and he testified that when he saw the brakeman rush through the car with a red lantern he followed to the rear. "When I got on the platform," he said, "I saw what was going to happen and jumped, landing on my knees and arm. The train was still backing and the special was rounding the curve. I should judge that if I had remained five or six seconds more I would have been caught in the wreck."

"When the brakeman jumped from the car, was it still in motion?" he was asked. "It was. He was up the track a considerable distance when I reached the rear platform."

H. Harry Rowe, another of the band, stated that the special left Reading at 8.36 by his watch.

"I want to state right here," he said, "that I was never surer of anything than I am now when I say that the difference in time of leaving of the two trains was not more than three minutes."

"Do you base that conclusion on the fact that you looked at your watch"

"Yes, sir."

He added that no dead were robbed that he saw.

Major Pennington, Mahlon N. Kline and other witnesses told the details of the wreck and their ideas as to how it was caused, practically repeating their testimony given at Reading.

Trainmen were the next examined, and the first called witness was William G. Fox, of Schuylkill Haven, conductor of the coal train that caused the flagging of the express at Exeter. Fox told of the shifting of his heavy train that had to be shifted at Birdsboro. He had 73 cars to care for, 23 of which were to be left at that place. He got permission from the Reading station to shift from the south across the north bound track, and was delayed by the breaking of one of the cars. Between 8.42 and 8.45 p.m. his train left Birdsboro for Monocacy.

"Had you an idea you were losing too much time at Exeter?" he was asked.

"Indeed, I had. I was blocking both north and south tracks.

"According to our schedule coal trains lay off at Monocacy at 8.12, and the express is due there at 8.52. Just at that time we were going into the siding there."

The session concluded with the examination of Daniel F. Wildermuth, of Phila., engineer of the express. His train was four minutes late, leaving Franklin street, Reading, and at Exeter, when he caught the red signal. It was not as clear as it should have been. He gave three whistles after coming to a standstill, seven car lengths from the station, and backed up so that the conductor could alight from the centre car to get orders and to save time by not being obliged to run back.

"What would have been the effect upon you if you had run by the board?" asked the Coroner.

"I would have been taken off, probably discharged, for all I know."

pages 1 and 2

Submitted by Marcia.


Last Modified

News Clipping Index            Home