Trains of Christmases Past, 1960-1968

Full-size, model and toy trains were often associated with the winter school holidays. For the benefit of extended family members, some other Montreal-based historical photos of interest are included in this selection.

1960: This toy train was built by LC Gagnon, but its first iteration had a locomotive of similar wooden construction, with something like a black-painted Johnson Klear floor wax can serving as its boiler. Here, the CPR, Great Northern and Union Pacific are represented. This rare colour print was specially-made from a slide - probably to document all the effort he put into creating this colourful set.

For some time I was puzzled by my father's persisting interest in building sophisticated toys from a large Meccano set he/we owned. However, many adults today value their Lego sets and specialized Lego kits. I've concluded that many of us 'finish off' our childhoods as young adults when we finally have the resources to buy adequate quantities of our favourite childhood hobby supplies.

Back then, my own skills with Meccano were extremely limited. The tiny nuts and bolts (mimicking rivets) for this 'Canadian railway boom era' British-designed toy were too hard on little fingers unless one had developed the necessary callouses to 'start them' ... before giving them a final tightening with a small screwdriver or wrench. Considering current corporate liability defensiveness, it is hard to imagine how impossible it would be to sell a children's toy with so many small metal parts today.

You can see the Viking TV with rabbit ears. Its manual tuner had a satisfying 'clunk' as you skipped around the dial: 2 (CBFT), 3 (WCAX, Burlington), 4 (CBM), 5 (WPTZ, Plattsburgh), 10 (CFTM), 12 (CFCF). Filtering out either very snowy or French channels ... only 3, 4 and 12 were viewed regularly in our 3-channel television universe.

*  *  *

1962: The Eaton's Train was set up just for the Christmas season. Its annual operation was anticipated with excitement at our home. It was incredibly quiet and smooth in its typical slow-speed operation. It is explored in more detail elsewhere in this blog.

1959-1962 Eaton's Train

*  *  *

Dec 1962: Outside of our 45th Avenue, Lachine, apartment. 

Our kitchen window is behind the front bumper of our new VW.

*  *  *

1963: A Christmas gift of 1960 appears here. It's a British-designed Hornby wind-up train set. This set was added to over the years. From the earliest days of my parents' marriage there was an HO layout present in the house so there was no thought of buying an electric toy 'O' gauge set for the kids. 

LC Gagnon, first model railway layouts 1955-1959

My father's 'cottage organ' can be seen with its seven stops. An Argus slide projector and a Bell & Howell reel-to-reel tape recorder are ready to document family events. 

They sit atop my father's 1950s-era Viking AM/FM/shortwave, 33/45/78 rpm record-playing, mono sound system. The automatic record changer was used cautiously with multiple 78 rpm records  ... in case their complete massive weight crashed down prematurely, breaking the previous selection. Back then, 5 hit songs (chosen at random) weighed 1.018 kg.

Socio-technical verdict of history: The Vikings may have been a fierce, fearless, seafaring gang, but my guess is that history will remember them for the very fine vacuum tubes they made for TVs and radios sold through Eaton's.

As the family enlarges with my sister, I should include my deliberately-seldom-photographed-with-trains mother in here somehow.  (She took the photo above.) There are no Christmas photos showing her with any kind of train, but she documented her own western train trip in exquisite detail.

CPR Montreal to Victoria in 1954

Her father had been with this outfit:

1915 - The Roll of the Canadian Overseas Railway Construction Corps 

& An Artifact Finally Reproduced

... And a paternal cousin ... who was the previous owner of that small rocking chair ... had a father-in-law ... who was a locomotive engineer on the Intercolonial Railway ... who was killed in a collision at Ste Rosalie Junction, Quebec in 1910. 

(You have certainly come to the right post to find obscure railway curiosities!)

*  *  *

Feb 1964: At our second home on 43rd Avenue, Lachine, here is a view of snow clearing operations. Shortly after the snowfall stopped, the sidewalks were plowed by small Bombardier tracked plows and now the accumulated roadside snowbank is being centred for the attention of the snowblower.

This is a good front-window view of a Sicard snowblower. It seems that the plow truck above also has the distinctive Sicard lines.

This fine shot shows the operation on our side of the street. 

Compared to modern Montreal snow removal vehicles, the receiving dump truck looks quite dainty.

*  *  *

Dec 1964: It seems we only just arrived here from the previous apartment, but it's time to move again. This time we are moving from our rented rowhouse to my parents' first owned house. The family has another new member, and so we move from 43rd Avenue to 47th Avenue. Here, the camera faces south in front of our point of departure. Even the Christmas tree has been loaded with the intention of re-erecting it at 47th.

The caption in the photo book notes an endless series of VW shuttle trips with books and papers. In fact, virtually every move by every family member since ... has involved heavy, special shuttle moves with 'books and papers'. That's just how we roll.

*  *  *

Jan 1965: Another toy train set-up. This is in the basement of the house on 47th. 

While there are no proper rails with this toy, 

the track segments provide a guideway for vehicles which is quite similar to the early 'plateways' used in Britain. 

*  *  *

Dec 1968: I am let loose with the black and white print camera to make one of many expeditions to the CP commuter station at Grovehill - at the top of 40th, Avenue, Lachine. Just eight years later, I would have my chance to work on this class of engine at Schreiber. By then, my 'fantrip photography technique' would have been altered by three summers of farm work, to include a healthy respect for the dangers of heavy equipment. Consequently, in early 1977 I'd stand farther back from the track during running inspections of passing freight trains!

*  *  *

Dec 1968: At 47th Avenue, Lachine. 

We had all made a trans-Canada trip on the Super Continental during the previous summer. 

Montreal-Vancouver Round Trip Trains, August 1968

A move to Ontario would take place seven months after this photo.

It was a logic-defying shock to discover that Kingston's CBC Hockey Night in Canada only showed Toronto Maple Leaf games! 

By then, it was too late to move back.

*  *  *

Dec 1968: On a dark winter afternoon, whether in watercolours or oils, we all paint together.

*  *  *

GTR 1890 Lachine Wharf Verdict, The Three Solitudes of the Coroner's Jury

Drunk?

Asleep at the switch?

Rules which are not enforced?

Failure to properly employ the telegraph system?

Not maintaining a proper watch on the road ahead?

An early, undated postcard. The switch in the foreground may be for a local commercial track.
from: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec

Here are the previous posts on this accident and the coroner's jury.

Part 1

Part 2

A quick review:

Below is an artist's work to illustrate the circumstances of the accident. The engine of the 6-hour-late Toronto Express is submerged in the St Lawrence River and the baggage car is teetering at the end of the Lachine Wharf. The body of the engineer (the only fatality) was recovered before the inquest began. The tender had been pulled up through the ice - according to newspaper reports. There was the expectation that the engine would also be removed before the winter ice locked it in.

On the inset diagram, B marks the location of Willows. Here there was a switchman's shanty with a telegraph set. As already noted in Part 2, trains to Lachine were fairly frequent during the day. There was not just one "Lachine Train" which ran first thing in the morning.

Not shown are two manually-set (switch protection) semaphores which could be seen at a greater distance than the Lachine Wharf spur switch target. These would be set by the switchman to control traffic on the south track ... for example, if the switch was open, or if a train was occupying the south main track at Willows.

In the same December 1890's newspapers, I was noticing reports regarding one or two other passenger train accidents over on the Intercolonial. One accident killed 5, with 3 others dying later of their injuries. Back then, accidents, loss of life and investigations of railway accidents by coroner's juries were quite common. Wooden passenger cars derailing at track speed from a broken wheel ... and slamming into bridge abutments ... make the Lachine accident seem minor at this point in history. 

from: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec

*  *  *

from: Archives historiques de la Ville de Montréal

Shown above is a composite made from a few 'stereo pairs' of Montreal, taken by a commercial service in 1947. By this time, the Lachine Wharf station had been removed. Stereo pairs are not designed to fit together exactly, so my composite looks a little rough.

• At the extreme left, just beyond the Lombardi poplars, on the CNR (ex-GTR) double-track main line you can see Lachine station (built in 1888). It played no role in this accident.

• Following the tracks to the right (east) you can approximate where the Lachine Wharf spur leaves the main line at the switch (employee timetable 'station') named Willows. The switchman and his shanty were located here.
• Farther to the east - at the right edge of the photo - is Convent. This passenger station is mentioned in the accounts below, because trains passing it can be seen from Willows.

• The Lachine Wharf station was located near the circular pile of material seen to the west of the spur. It is significant because it provided the first indication to the Toronto Express engine crew - operating in the winter morning darkness, in a snowstorm - that their train had departed from the main line. The gentle left-hand curvature of the spur was apparently not noticed by the engine crew as their engine forced its pilot through the fallen snow. The Toronto Express was the first westbound released into the storm - six hours after the Bonaventure station collision blocked their departure. 
• You can see the area where the wye was located ... to turn the Lachine train for its return to Bonaventure station, Montreal.

• The Lachine Wharf was used during the summer months as a centre for providing steamboat rides down the Lachine Rapids ... and west to St Anne's at the western tip of Montreal Island.
• To the north of the Lachine station, at the left edge of the photo, is an oval with an irregular loop around it. These were elevated miniature tracks where builders of miniature live steam locomotives could operate their creations. They still existed in the early 1960s.

*  *  *

Once again, a point form summary of the newspaper articles precedes the clippings.

This is being done so you don't have to plow through the difficult-to-read originals.

However, if there are points which interest you, the original artifacts are here for you to read.

*  *  *

• Coroner Jones states to the newspaper reporter that his own mind is made up regarding who was to blame for the death of Engineer Birse. However, it is up to the jury to decide on this matter.
• A juror says that the engineer of the regular Lachine train should be called and another says the jury should see the location of the event.
• General Superintendent J Stevenson of the GTR testifies that a light engine collided with an outbound freight at the Bonaventure terminal, and this caused the delay of the Toronto Express.
• The movement of trains is reported on the telegraph [OS'd to the dispatcher on the common circuit] and operators can be aware of the trains which are approaching their stations. In contrast, in England, electrically-triggered block signals provide protection behind a train - actuated by the train's passing. The protection remains until that train leaves the block. 
• General Superintendent Stevenson says that the dispatcher notifies the Lachine Junction operator (2 miles west of Bonaventure) by a bell when a train leaves Bonaventure station. 
• Stevenson has conducted his own inquiries. The switchman was asleep at his post. The engineer was not keeping a proper lookout. Their gross neglect of their duty caused the accident.

*  *  *

• General Superintendent Stevenson indicated that the switchman was tasked with the safe passage of trains by his switch - he was asleep. The engineer was responsible for the safety of his passenger train. By the testimony of the fireman, the semaphore and switch light could have been seen from the cab. The engineer did not constantly verify the indication of the switch light before passing over the switch - in violation of the rules.
• A hand lamp for signalling and a telegraph key and sounder are present at the Willows location. Although the switchman knows Morse, it was not his duty to listen for the OS reports on passing trains.
• Engineer Samuel Birckley had been with the Grand Trunk for 17 years and he was the engineer of the Lachine (local) Train. His train was delayed because of the light engine/freight collision at Bonaventure. His Lachine Train was the second westbound released - following the Toronto Express by about 15 minutes. 
• Engineer Birckley said it was necessary to whistle (4 sounds - per the rules) TWICE for the switch at Willows (leading to the Lachine Wharf spur) ... as the switch was not attended to after the first whistle.
• The switchman opened the switch to allow the Lachine Train onto the Lachine Wharf spur. There Birckley's train came upon the markers of the Toronto Express and was told about the accident by its crew.
• Engineer Birckley continued that he usually whistled for the switch at Willows, but as the switchman could see him leave Convent, 140 yards away the switchman frequently set the switch for him without the Lachine Train needing to signal for it. The switchman was always ready for duty and never failed to set the switch when he whistled.
• Engineer Birckley of the Lachine Train testified that the switch should always be set for the main track, and rules were being broken when it was set for him without whistling, however he never felt the need to report this. On Joe Birse's engine [the Toronto Express] you could not keep your hand on the throttle all the time and also see the switch indications.
• [On the morning of the accident] Birckley whistled at 4 engine lengths, then 2 engine lengths before the switchman came out to open the switch for the Lachine Wharf spur [on which the Toronto Express already had crashed].
• Due to the curvature, the engineer of the Toronto Express would need to cross to the fireman's side to see the purple [diverging] switch light continuously as the train approached. It would take about 30 seconds for the Express to travel between the switch at Willows and the Lachine Wharf [down the length of the spur and down into the water]. It was usual for a switchman to use the coloured hand signal lamp at night, but Switchman Dubois did not that night.
• Engineer David Simpson of the Brockville Train said that after the engine of the Express passed the [manual approach] semaphore indicating 'all right' [at the Lachine Wharf switch] ... that Switchman Dubois could have had time to throw the switch in front of the Toronto Express for the Lachine Wharf spur. 
• The switch target could not have been seen by the engineer around the smokestack and height of the engine for the last 40 feet before the switch. Engineer Simpson always slowed up at this switch for this reason and waited until he had safely passed by it before he 'let her out' ['highballed']. The engineer could not maintain his proper place on the right side of the cab - with his hands on the throttle and brake - and check for the switch target light on the left side at the same time. 

• [Just for the sake of summarizing all of this evidence: Edwards, the Toronto Express fireman, had already testified that they were in a snowstorm and the pilot flangers were down - kicking up snow. They would have had the usual smoke and steam swirling around. So, amidst all this, the General Superintendent of the Grand Trunk, J. Stevenson (above) thought that Engineer Birse of the Express should have crossed the cab ... to keep an eagle eye for a potential purple switch target ... for the last 40 feet before reaching the points ... in order to be certain ... that the switch wasn't suddenly thrown in his face. While this speaks to improving 'cab resource management' ... getting the fireman to look ... it does not seem reasonable to blame the engineer for failing to maintain a proper lookout.]

*  *  *

 A view published in 1909. You can see a locomotive on the spur ...  to the left of the houses.
from: from: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec

*  *  *

• The Grand Trunk provided a train and Coroner Jones, the jury and two railway officials visited Willows (the location of the switch) and the stop blocks beyond the Lachine Wharf station, where the engine entered the St Lawrence River.
• Question: Is it possible Engineer Birse saw the [approach] semaphore for eastbounds and mistook it for the semaphore protecting the Willows switch? Answer: This is unlikely with Birse's years of experience. It is more likely that he saw the switch target displaying a clear [white] light and that this target was changed at the last minute to the purple light indicating a diverging route had been set by the switchman.
• French-Canadian jurors: 1) Birse should have got down from his engine to examine the switch. 2) Birse must have been drunk. 3) How can you (said to Juror James R Dick) say that Switchman Dubois was asleep but I can't say Birse was drunk? Dick answers: There is no evidence that Birse was drunk, however Grand Trunk General Superintendent Stevenson gave sworn evidence that Dubois was asleep.
• There was discussion about the curvature of the main line and the curvature of the spur and whether it would have given any obvious sign to the engineer that he was on the wrong track. 
• The acting switchman at Willows was asked to switch the points - which took about one second. A juror pointed out that with the snowstorm filling in the points, this act may have taken longer. [I wonder if stub switches, built with the light rail of the era, were hard to turn in a snowstorm.]
• A juror asked a GTR official present: If the train had entered the spur at 40 mph, could it stop in time before hitting the stop blocks. Answer: Yes.

• After returning to Montreal: the coroner recommended the jurors choose 3 [anglophones] and 3 [francophones] to draw up a memorandum of the evidence. This memorandum would be discussed on the following day.

*  *  *

• The subcommittee of 6 jurors found that Switchman Dubois was guilty of culpable negligence in turning the switch for the Lachine Wharf spur whereby the engine was thrown into the river and Engineer Birse was killed. Birse evidently saw a white light at the switch target which was subsequently turned [showing purple] for the spur by the switchman.
• Francophone members thought Birse was drunk but Anglophone members said there was no evidence, and furthermore, one could argue it was more likely that Switchman Dubois was drunk.
• Coroner Jones spoke briefly, saying to the jury that Conductor Stone (of the Express) and General Superintendent Stevenson (of the GTR) had testified that the accident would not have occurred if the switchman and engineer had done their duty.
• Fireman Samuel Edwards of the Toronto Express was recalled. He testified that Engineer Birse, after passing the semaphore, had put his head out of the cab and continued to look forward until 2-3 engine lengths before the switch. He said the Express was travelling at 12-15 mph at that point.
• Coroner Jones again raised the idea that following the Grand Trunk's rules would have prevented the accident. It was now in the jury's hands (12 members) to determine their verdict in private. 

*  *  *

Circa 1909 - taken from an approaching steamboat. from: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec

*  *  *

Here is the Montreal Daily Witness account of the coroner's jury verdict.

I have not attempted to summarize it.

James R Dick - the dissenting juror - is quoted at length by the newspaper 

regarding his reasoning for not signing the verdict. These ideas include:

"The rules of the Grand Trunk were the best that experience could devise, and it was not the fault of the rules, but the fault of Dubois in breaking the rules, which led to the accident."

"Mr Dick said it was nothing less than presumption for the jurors to sit in judgment upon a Company which had over forty years experience and whose rules had been found equal to every other occasion, while the plain fact was scarcely mentioned that it was the breaking of the rules which led to the accident."

... The Lovell's Montreal Directory of 1890-1891 indicates that there is a James R Dick, who lives at 115-117-119 Mountain (today de la Montagne - even though 'Mountain' was named after a clergyman with that surname). Mr Dick's occupation is listed as "superintendent Boys' home". The listed address is in Griffintown, which is just across the Lachine Canal from the Point St Charles headquarters (back then), and the yards and shops of the Grand Trunk Railway.

... It seems possible that the nearby Grand Trunk could have been supportive in providing employment and apprenticeship opportunities for boys. Perhaps, beyond the simple facts found by the inquest, Mr Dick's strong feelings might also be based on his experiences and dealings with the company in the course of his work.

*  *  *

Here is the editorial from the Montreal Daily Witness about the verdict and the 'mixed jury' system.

*  *  *

A souvenir postcard of the Lachine Wharf from 1907.

The faint postmark indicates it was mailed.

The photo probably shows one of the commercial tracks connecting with the Lachine Wharf spur.

from: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec

GTR 1890 Lachine Wharf, An Engineer Killed by an Open Switch - The Coroner's Inquest Begins

Most of my speculation (in Part 1) about the switchman's duties is dealt with in these newspaper accounts of the inquest. I've tried to include interesting artifacts - including some postcard images and a unique old map at the very end of the post. Although the inquest becomes quite detailed, it does shed light on railway practices in the late 1800s - in the early stages of Canada's railway boom. Operating rules and their use and enforcement are continually discussed. The inability of non-railroaders to understand these rules points (us) toward the benefit of having a national professional commission to oversee and regulate railway safety. 

There is a bit of comic relief in this serious business, as a cocksure interrogator proves he is not an expert in the rules. In a figurative sense, he must flag his tailend as he reverses his movement.

There are also interesting historical undercurrents of language and culture which are touched on in this piece. They will play out in a strange ways during the hair-raising conclusion to this account in Part 3!

1869 Grand Trunk employee timetable from archive.org

20 years before the accident, this is how part of the (then single-track) line appeared in an employee timetable.

from: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec

Above: A postcard view, circa 1900, shows a westbound Grand Trunk train passing the Dominion (Bridge) station in east-end Lachine.

*  *  *

About 67 years after the fact, here is a 'modern' employee timetable showing the relative locations of the stations in 1957.

'Lachine' here is the 1888 station which was built to the west of the Lachine Wharf spur switch.

The switch to the Lachine Wharf spur is at Willows.

The location Willows persists here, but the spur segment at the Lachine Wharf has been removed by this time.

The accounts never refer to a 'spur' but I use the term to help with the description of that piece of track.

Above, is a municipal map with 1932-1954 features.

The Wharf spur has been truncated.

The wye no longer exists.

The Lachine station (built 1888) is the elongated 'T' at the top left corner of the image.

Willows is the switch where the spur meets the main line.

* * *

A Summary of Events

On 4 December 1890, a five car express train, including one Pullman car, was running 5 1/2 hours late from Bonaventure Station in Montreal with its destination being Toronto. A derailment in the yard at Bonaventure had delayed the train's departure.

Running west for Toronto, the express approached the Lachine Wharf spur in a snowstorm at around 06hr. It departed the main line on the spur switch and the engine and baggage car ran into the St Lawrence River. The engineer Joseph Birse, a Scottish-born engineer with 30 years experience on the Grand Trunk, was pinned in the wreckage of the engine and killed. He was the only person to die in the accident.

A coroner's jury was convened in Montreal to investigate the circumstances of the engineer's death. An internal investigation would have been conducted by the Grand Trunk Railway to determine if any operating rules were violated, and to decide whether any employees required discipline or dismissal. There was no national railway commission at the time, so a federal inquiry into the circumstances of this accident was never conducted.

While all the other clippings come from the Montreal Daily Witness (via Google), the clipping below comes from a Quebec City paper and provides additional details.

from: Quebec Daily Telegraph 4 December 1890.

*  *  *

The illustration below documents the accident site, the presence of a wye and the fact that there is double track on the main line. 

from: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec

*  *  *

On 10 December 1890, the coroner's jury viewed the body of the engineer. The coroner is Jones and the foreman of the jury is S Carsley. 

In the Montreal Lovell Directory of 1890-91, there is only one 'S Carsley': Samuel Carsley, living at 507 Guy Street, who is a seller of wholesale dry goods. Carsley & Co. is his wholesale business at 113 St Peter Street next to Molson's Bank - at the place where the Lachine Canal meets the Montreal harbour basin. A large retail operation was also established on Notre Dame. The reason for my curiosity about Carsley will soon be apparent.  

from: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec - source publication unknown.

*  *  *

Newspaper accounts refer to it as as a 'mixed' jury - having both anglophone and francophone jurors.

The funeral of the engineer was reported on the same day in the newspaper.

from: Montreal Daily Witness, 10 December 1890. via Google

*  *  *

The 1885 rulebook of the Grand Trunk (at archive.org) was probably still 'in date' when the accident occurred. 

Here is the link to the full rulebook.

Grand Trunk 1885 rulebook

I am including rules which will come up in the questioning of witnesses. 

While the switch to the Lachine Wharf only had a left-diverging route, these are the closest applicable illustrations.

*  *  *

The semaphores (in our case) are two signals protecting the Lachine Wharf spur switch - known as Willows. They are equipped so they can be illuminated at night. They acted as modern 'Approach' signals would. They are mechanically set by the switchman at the Lachine Wharf switch (Willows). In Rule 24, a 'railway crossing' is a track diamond.

*  *  *

The four whistle sounds (signal for switch) and the one long for a semaphore/station warning will be brought up.

In more modern terms, these would be like a 'call for signals' and a 'whistle at the mileboard'.

*  *  *

These rules will be raised with respect to conduct of the engineer.

From the Enginemen and Firemen section of the rules:

*  *  *

Back to the coroner's inquest account.

I am summarizing key points BEFORE each article, because the 'clippings' are hard to read.

My hope is that if you find a particular bit of testimony in my summary interesting ...

you will then go through all the details of the account in the 'original artifact' yourself.

... otherwise my summary has saved you from having to read the rough newspaper text.

• A civil engineer employed by the Grand Trunk named Ford testified. 
• Dispatcher G.M. Stone (John Stone was the conductor) was also interviewed by Jury Foreman Carsley.
• Train direction is designated as Up or Down. Up trains are west- and north-bound. 
• The Toronto Express (westbound) is Number 6.
• Double track existed on the southern route through Lachine. (The northern route is the original Grand Trunk right-of-way). Except for any 'wrong main running' it seems that left-hand running was in place - making this track its own separate section. It almost seems that the double-track was used to eliminate most dispatcher involvement on this section. Local semaphores were used used by station operators to create safe-following 'blocks' between trains operating in the same direction. 
• The Dispatcher GM Stone was responsible for Bonaventure terminal to Lachine Junction (about 2 miles) and St Anne's to Kingston.
• Lachine Junction (map below) is just a couple of miles west of Bonaventure ... where the Grand Trunk route from the Victoria Bridge crosses the route of the original railway connecting the Bonaventure area with the original Lachine Wharf (the Montreal and Lachine Railroad). 
• I was curious about Jury Foreman Carsley because he is certain he knows more about dispatching than Dispatcher Stone. Carsley believes that Lachine Wharf spur Switchman Dubois (who is not an operator) is owed a telegraphic message on the status of 6-hour-late No 6.
• Switchman Dubois knows some Morse, and he was diligent about inquiring to Lachine Jct about the status of No 6. However, like others working as operators ... the only information he would receive would be through hearing the OS reporting on the common telegraph circuit. In this case, Lachine Junction OS'ed the passage of No 6 to the dispatcher at Bonaventure. The next OS would be by the operator at Lachine ... to the west of the Lachine Wharf spur switch.
• Switchman Dubois's regular shift was 19-07hr. He occupied the Willows switch shanty which was equipped with a Morse set. He operated the switch to the Lachine Wharf and the remote semaphores (elevated, visible at a distance) which should be used if the main line switch was lined for a Lachine Wharf train ... or if a train was between his semaphores for some reason.
• Jury Foreman Carsley says rhetorically (and later retracts in writing) that it was the Grand Trunk which failed to enforce its own rules. In fact, you will notice a certain laxness in how employees are trained and how compliant they are with the rules (by modern standards).
• Fireman Edwards did not observe the Willows semaphore or the switch target for the Lachine Wharf spur himself.
• They had the scrapers (pilot flangers?) down on the locomotive and visibility was poor from the cab. 
• Fireman Edwards heard the warning whistle before they passed* the semaphore, approaching Willows. He assumed that Engineer Birse observed that the switch target showed a white light, indicating it was lined for the main line. (*A special instruction in the timetable requires a stop at the Willows semaphore - where the warning whistle will be sounded. This comes up later in testimony.)
  

from: Montreal Daily Witness, 11 December 1890. via Google

On the map below, you can see an inverted triangle of track where the lines from Montreal's Bonaventure terminal meet the track from the Victoria Bridge. Lachine Junction would be in this 'triangle area'. The Montreal & Champlain (i.e. Montreal & Lachine etc) is the double-track GTR route of 1890 which runs through Lachine. The Grand Trunk route shown to the north is the original GTR route. The wye at Lachine (in 1890) is not connected to the main line (see the 'crash illustration', above) as this undated map suggests.

from: BANQ. Map by Montreal Bridge Company circa 1890.

*  *  *

• Conductor John Stone testifies, stating the only stop before the crash into the river was Lachine Junction.
• After the sudden stop at the crash site, he ordered flagging protection.
• He attended to the emergency and the rescue of the fireman.
• He says the accident was the fault of the driver for not observing the switch and for not stopping if he could not see it.

*  *  *

• After the break in the inquest, Conductor Stone seems to change his opinion about who was at fault.
• The switchman should have had his switch set for the main track. He should not have turned the switch until he heard the whistle for the 'junction switch' - a signal which his train would not have given.
• Conductor Stone was busy collecting tickets and did not see the semaphore or switch target himself.
• He thinks the engineer had adequate time to stop the train safely after passing over the switch - before the crash.
• He thinks the engineer must have run against the switch which was lined for the diverging route.
• He says, furthermore, that the switchman should not have allowed the Lachine Train to enter the Lachine Wharf spur after it was occupied by his train - the switch should have been locked for the main line. [You'll remember that Conductor Stone ordered flagging for his crashed Express train's tailend ... and this protected the Express when the Lachine Train was subsequently allowed into the Wharf Spur.]

• Operator Anderson of Lachine Junction (two miles west of Bonaventure) testifies. He reported the passing of the late Express train when it passed Lachine Junction and entered the double track section passing through Lachine. 
• Operator Anderson also tells Jury Foreman Carsley et al that his OS of the Express train on the common telegraph circuit is for the benefit of the dispatcher back at Bonaventure. Switchman Dubois would not have a special message sent to him to alert him to the late Express train running before the regular Lachine Wharf train. But anyone listening to their telegraph sounder could have been aware of the fact that the Express train was coming toward Lachine.

• I don't know who the witness Walker is. He states that Dubois at the Lachine Wharf switch is a switchman [at $1/day and not an operator at $1.15/day]. Dubois knows some Morse.
• Walker testifies that Switchman Dubois would be guided by the 'whistle calling for the switch' which would be given at the semaphore before Willows. [Then he would turn his switch for the Lachine Wharf spur. Otherwise his switch should stay lined for the main line. Switchman Dubois testifies in the next piece - watch for his account of his training and how the whistle/switch rules are employed at the Lachine Wharf spur switch.]

NOTE: I don't know that I have pinned down absolutely all of the articles regarding the coroner's jury. To keep these blog posts shorter then 'book length' I am working with what I currently have.

• Switchman Emory Dubois (age 22) testifies. He has been working at Willows for about 5 weeks.
• During his night shift there were 4-5 eastbound freights, but after 21hr, there were no westbounds.
• At the inquest, it was then decided to put down question and answer in French, and then translate them into English. Some of the English jurors are hearing the questions, but not the answers - which Dubois is giving in French.
• In the [8x9 foot] switchman's shanty there is a bench.
• Dubois's [approach] semaphore remained green because everything was all right.
• Although he doesn't know how many whistle sounds came from the Toronto Express, he opened the switch to the Lachine Wharf spur upon hearing the whistle because that was the time for the arrival of the Lachine train. 
• The engine which passed into the spur was not that usually seen on the Lachine train. But he concluded that the engine for the Lachine train had been changed.
• The fact that the train did not return to the main line from the wye caused him to wonder if something was wrong.
• The whistling of the actual Lachine train - following the Toronto Express - caused him to conclude that the train on the Lachine Wharf spur was the Toronto Express.
• He had inquired [via telegraph] on the status of the two trains - consistent with the Lachine Junction operator's testimony.
• The engine of the Lachine train does not whistle (four sounds - 'for the switch') when he finds the switch lined for the Lachine Wharf spur.
• Switchman Dubois had trouble seeing the approaching Express train and it took some time for it to reach the switch and enter the spur. [It was the first snowstorm since he began working at that location.] 
• Next, after it whistled, he allowed the Lachine train to run onto the Lachine Wharf spur. After about 1/4 hour, he was aware that the Toronto Express was on the spur and that he had allowed the Lachine train to follow it onto the spur.

• Jury Foreman S Carsley writes to the newspaper to clarify his statement about 'the fault lying with the Grand Trunk which didn't enforce its own rules'. He says his statement was just in 'general conversation'.
• The Montreal Daily Witness reporter, via the newspaper, counters this. The witness [I think it would be Bonaventure Dispatcher GM Stone] during/after his testimony would not agree with S Carsley ... that in the dispatcher's stated opinion in his testimony 'it was the Grand Trunk's fault that the accident occurred because the railway had not enforced its own rules'.

• Switchman Dubois's testimony continued that he was 'knocked off his head' [perhaps another expression in French to that effect] when he subsequently heard the 'real' Lachine train whistle for the junction switch. Being 'knocked off his head' he consequently allowed the Lachine train onto the spur behind the crashed Toronto Express.
• With two semaphores (one on either side of the Willows switch) it seems Dubois was asked if the semaphore beyond the switch could have been used to stop a train in this emergency. If I understand the question properly, Dubois said that the semaphore to the west of Willows was not lit by night and he had never had any instruction to light it. This semaphore was for the governance of eastbound trains.
• There was no telegraph communication between Lachine Wharf station and Willows. [Perhaps a message to Dubois could have prevented the Lachine train routing into the Wharf spur?]
• He arrived late at work at 2130hr instead of 19hr because he was trading hours with a co-worker.
• Switchman Dubois did not hear the OS regarding No 6, the Toronto Express, as it passed Lachine Junction.
• He might have been asleep between 01hr and when the OS reports were made from Lachine Junction about the westbound Toronto and Lachine trains.
• The [actual] Lachine train did not stop at Willows and he had no communication with its crew.
• Switchman Dubois testifies to the difference of whistle signals given at the semaphore by through trains and those wanting the junction switch. Given the storm, he thinks he was unable to hear the complete whistle signal of the 'Lachine train' and so he lined the Express into the spur.
• After the switch was lined into the spur - admitting the Express - he did not re-line it for the main line. He anticipated that the next train over his switch would be the same 'Lachine train' (in reality, it was the crashed Express) as it came off the wye and spur ... and as it returned eastbound toward Montreal.
• Switchman Dubois testified that relying on the size of the train to identify the Express would not necessarily work as the Lachine train often had seven cars.
• When he started at Willows he asked the operator there [which operator - at the Lachine station?] about his duties and was told that the [Lachine operator OS'd the passing trains - I speculate].
• He had not been asleep at the time when the Express had whistled at the semaphore.
• Switchman Dubois had worked for the Grand Trunk for 3 years as a switchman.
• He was never examined by anybody regarding his duties at Willows.
• He understood that the normal position of the switch is lined for the main line.

The conclusion of the inquest account will become somewhat exciting.

*  *  *

Bonus Features

Four years before the accident, here is the frequency of train traffic between Bonaventure and Lachine.

Grand Trunk 1886 public timetable from archive.org

Here is the link to the timetable at archive.org.

1886 Grand Trunk public timetable

*  *  *

On the main line: Lachine station (built 1888) looking west circa 1914.

The reflectorized oil platform lamps are typical.

Notice the semaphore at the right.

from: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec

*  *  *

Here is the Lachine Wharf station (undated) - looking back toward the main line.

It has different platform lamps. You can see the point where power or telegraph lines enter the building.

from: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec

*  *  *

The beautiful map of Lachine below is from 1856. 

It is part of a larger sheet/plan subdividing a tract of land into building lots.

from: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec

At the left, is the track (later a spur), wharf and station which is referred to as Lachine Wharf in our 1890 case.

Of course, this is before the Grand Trunk's continuation of this route toward Dorval.

And its subsequent double-tracking.

To the right is the original wharf used by the 'Montreal and Lachine Railroad' and its other corporate successors.

You can see that this wharf was designed to load rolling stock on a 'car ferry' bound for Caughnawaga (Kahnawake) and the US via Hemmingford, etc.

After the Victoria Bridge was completed, this process was unnecessary.

Speaking personally, three generations of our family attended the 'Scotch Church' shown here.

To us, it was known as St Andrew's United.