Kingsland – Looking Back 110 Years! There are Lessons Still To Be Learnt. James Duncan As Motorman Examiner for the Western Springs Tramway at Auckland’s Museum of Transport & Technology (MOTAT), I am charged with the task of ensuring that MOTAT’s Motormen and “Motormaids” are sufficiently skilled and qualified to drive their 15-20 ton vehicles safely and with confidence. We all know it is very easy to get the tram moving, but it is the stopping of it that really demands skill. My biggest concern is to ensure ALL our driving team have the knowledge and skills to enable them to stop their tram should the air brake system fail. On Auckland’s new Waterfront Tramway, our two exMelbourne trams are fitted with low-air alarms to warn Motormen that the air pressure is about go below a safe level and to this end; they can hit an electro-pneumatic switch which will apply the brakes instantly using air from an emergency tank. This had become standard in Christchurch on the city tourist loop following a runaway some years back. However, at MOTAT, our cars are restored to historical specifications based on the period the tram represents, and so we must utilise traditional methods of dealing with air-brake failure by putting the car in reverse or using the emergency dynamic braking system. i.e. putting the controller into reverse and applying one notch of power then shutting off instantly. This pulls the tram up smartly, requiring only a few turns on the handbrake to hold the car. When considering all the above, I always pause to think about the Kingsland tram smash back on Christmas Eve in 1903. The tramway had just celebrated its first year in operation and route extensions were well underway.

On this tragic 24th of December, a double decker No.39, laden with city-bound Christmas shoppers, failed to hold on the hand brake, and ran backwards about 800 metres down Eden Terrace, only to smash into another crowded city-bound Combination tram No.32 (same as MOTAT’s No.11) with fatal consequences. 1

This tragic turn of events has always fascinated me, so recently I engaged on some heavy-duty research to learn whether Auckland Motormen were trained on Reverse and Dynamic Braking and it seems they were, known to them as “Emergency Braking”. One really must feel for Motorman Humphrey who must have had a real “melt-down” trying to control his double decker as it hurled back down Eden Terrace at what would have seemed to them, a frightening speed. All his training; “hand brake on” bell signals back to his conductor, the track brake, proper use of the “Emergency Brake”, all seem to have eluded him. Then a few days later, the humiliation of being on board another double decker in a test situation, where the whole scenario was recreated, the hand brake, which they call the “ratchet brake”, was not applied, and the decker allowed to roll back down Eden Terrace, only on this occasion, every time they tried the “Emergency Brake”, it pulled the car up smartly. The secret being in putting the reverser key in the OPPOSITE direction to the movement of the tram - in this case rolling backwards would mean keeping the reverser in the FORWARD position and taking a notch. If the circuit breaker blows, Dynamic Braking is required, which means taking the controller around to the “Full-Parallel” notch, which they refer to as the “7th notch”. With this in mind, let’s take ourselves back to 1903, and read what transpired. The phrasing of words and sentences makes for interesting reading, and reflects the reporting of the day. I believe we can all learn from the information and experiences revealed in this tragic story.

To open, here’s a rather graphic report printed in the Auckland Star on December 26th courtesy of the internet site “PapersPast”…………. “A shocking tram car accident occurred near Kingsland on Christmas eve, in which: three people were killed, and a large number— possibly 100 — received injuries more or less severe. The cars in question were No. 39, a double-decker, in the charge of Frederick Humphrey, and a combination car in the charge of Ernest Thompson. The double-decker was going up Eden Terrace, and passed into a loop to await another car. The current was shut off and the brake applied. The brake however, refused to act and the car began to go back. Finding the car unmanageable the motorman called to the conductor to apply the rear brakes, and himself, ran to the back of the car, but the brake failed to stop the car, which gathered an awful speed down the incline. The car was almost full of passengers on both decks. Soon the trolley pole doubled back and left the wire, and frequently as it struck against a cross wire or some other obstacle it lashed down with great force, striking the passengers sitting near. Some, with walking sticks, tried to steady it or guide it on to the wire, but did not succeed. A great fear then appears to have possessed the passengers, and some cried out aloud. As the car rounded a bend near George Street another car was seen to be coming up from Kingsland, not more, than 100 yards away. The double-decker was almost in darkness, as only the oil lamps were burning. The motorman on the second car had barely time to reverse the current, when, with a deafening crash, the two cars telescoped. Several passengers were hurled down from the top deck. Others, struck by the swinging trolley pole, lay insensible. Several had jumped from the car during its mad career before the impact. When all was over it was found that the combination car had penetrated the double decker for one-quarter of its length, crushing the passengers in an awful manner. 2

Children were passionately thrust through the windows by brave but hysterical mothers. Men clambered out and helped the women, and a stream of people hurried down the main road to give the aid which they knew was bound to be needed. When all who could be released were free it was found that two persons remained pinned between the cars. They were Miss Cissie Hill and Mr Benjamin Lindsay. Every able man on the spot heaved on the heavy cars to pull them apart, but they remained rigid. For ten minutes the crowd waited helplessly till another tramcar arrived, and then, with ropes attached to this, the two wrecked cars were parted. Stretchers and vehicles were hastily procured, and doctors were summoned and hurried to the scene in great numbers to give relief. Nearly all of the passengers were residents or visitors in the neighbouring districts of Mount Eden, Mount Roskill, or Kingsland. There was scarcely a household in the neighbourhood that had not a representative or a friend on one of the cars. The three passengers killed were :— Miss Ann Young Hogarth, aged 23, of Mount Eden; Mr Benjamin Lindsay, aged 70, gardener, of Kingsland; and Mr William Caley, aged 49, accountant, of Rocky Nook. Miss Hogarth, a dressmaker, was sitting on the top deck of the big car, accompanied by Mr William Hewlett. Miss Hogarth was struck by the trolley pole, which broke her neck, giving her a painless death. Mr Hewlett was also struck senseless. He received cuts about the face, and had two teeth knocked out. Mr Lindsay had a broken leg, a smashed finger, a cut over the eye, and apparently internal injuries. He was pinned between the two cars. The Caley family suffered severely, William being killed and three others severely injured. Mr and Mrs Alfred Caley came to town to spend Christmas with relatives. Mrs Caley had both feet so badly crushed that if she survives the shock it is feared amputation may be necessary. Mr Alfred Caley also had his right foot badly bruised and cut, while his sister, Miss Sophie Caley, had her leg broken, and is suffering from severe shock. The Caleys were on top of the double decker.”

3

Some of the dramatic images that appeared in the Auckland Weekly News.

The Auckland Star of December 26 goes on to report; AUCKLAND TRAMWAY COMPANY’S STATEMENT – AN EXPLANATION REGARDING THE BRAKES Mr M.Carey, the company’s chief electrical engineer, interviewed the motormen who were on the cars, and made full enquiries as to the cause of the accident. The result of his investigations is embodied in the following account of the occurrence, which he has furnished for publication. “Just before the double-decked car No.39 came to the loop in Eden Terrace the motorman received a signal from the conductor to stop. He threw off power as usual and naturally applied the ratchet brake which is mostly used for ordinary stopping. (We call this the hand brake – no air brakes on Auckland trams at this stage – Ed) The brake did not act and the motorman, instead of applying the track brake or again applying the power, ran to the back of the car and tried the ratchet brake there. The car had, by then, too much speed on for the ratchet brake and the motorman ran through the car again, and applied the reversing lever. The car, however, was now going at a high speed and the motorman, in his excitement, did not use the reversing apparatus in accordance with the instructions of the company. Instead of reversing the lever and applying power gently and up to a certain point as instructed, he applied power violently with the result that the automatic circuit breakers were sent through a tremendous rush of current and disconnected everything on the car. Even at that moment, it would not have been too late to prevent the collision had the motorman simply applied the emergency brakes, which are most reliable in every respect. Even at the great speed the car had attained, it could have been pulled up in two or three times its own length had the emergency dynamic brakes been applied. The trolley-pole came off the wire shortly after the car started to run downhill. The pole caught in a span wire and was badly bent and in this condition was swinging about in all directions, but the fact that the pole was off the wire had no effect on the emergency brake, which is equally effective whether the power is on or off the line. 4

The ordinary ratchet brake had been working all day and it is hard to account for its not working at that moment. The motorman states that he found it stiff and whether that was on account of the chain having caught beneath from some other cause we will not be able to tell, on account of the car being so badly smashed. The cars are fitted with reversing gear and these were promptly used by the motorman in charge of the combination car; in fact, his car had started to go backward when the double decker dashed into him, but he had not time to avert the collision.” THE MOTORMAN’S STATEMENT Mr F Humphrey, the motorman who was driving the double decker, has been in the company’s service for over nine months. When the cars collided he was thrown out on to the footpath, but he escaped almost entirely unhurt. He has made the following statement to the police regarding the accident: “I was driving the double decker No.39, which left the Kingsland terminus about ten minutes past eight p.m. We proceeded as far as the passing loop near Charlotte Street, and I then went to put the brakes on so as to allow a car from town to pass us, but the brakes failed to act. I then attempted to drive her ahead but the switch blew out and we ran back at a terrific speed till we got as far as Glenmore Bakery, where we crashed into another car.” CONDUCTOR’S STATEMENTS The two conductors on the double decker car have made the following statements: Cuthbert Downie Carson, the conductor on the lower platform, states: “When near the loop at Charlotte Street the motorman, Humphrey, came through the car and said. ‘The front brake won’t act.’ He then tried the back brake, but it would not act. He then ran through the car again. After that the car commenced to run back at a terrific pace and the next thing I knew we crashed into another car.” Hans Peter Hansen, the conductor on the top platform states that when the car commenced to run back, he grabbed the trolley rope but the pole soon got away from him, flailing around, taking out a piece of overhead which bent it back and with every cross-wire the pole hit, it came down on the passengers. The next thing he knew was the collision with the other car.

Later, on 29 December 1903, the NZ Herald reports; A TRIAL OF THE BRAKES – HOW THE CARS ARE STOPPED.

Since the accident on Christmas Eve there has been a good deal of discussion as to the method of working the brakes on the electric cars and as to the provision made on the cars for preventing similar accidents in the future. The situation will no doubt be thoroughly ventilated at the inquest, and the examination of witnesses on the question should be materially assisted by a demonstration, given by the Tramways Company on one of their double decker cars yesterday.

5

The car was taken out to the scene of the accident and the brakes tested under circumstances similar to those which occurred on Christmas Eve. The movements of the double decker car, which came to grief on Christmas Eve, were repeated and with the exception that the car was practically empty instead of being crowded with passengers, the details were complete up to the point of the car starting off on its career downhill, and on every test the car was satisfactorily pulled up. The car started from Queen St, the party on board consisting of Mr P.M.Hansen (general manager of the Tramways), Mr M.Carey (chief electrical engineer), Mr Mahood (representative of the Brush Electric Traction Company), Mr W.Coleman (solicitor for the Tramways Company), Mr T.Cotter (solicitor, who is appearing for the company at the inquest), Mr F.Humphrey (the motorman who had charge of the double decker on Christmas Eve) and his solicitor, Mr Hugh Campbell, Detectives Henderson and Hollis, and Mr James Salinger (an electrician).

Here’s a map of Kingsland today, No.39 was at the passing loop by Charlotte St, right side of map. Running backwards about 800m would have it colliding with No.32 between King St and Bond St.

Once arrived on the scene of the accident, the car was started uphill from Rocky Nook, and, according to instructions from Mr Carey, the motorman in charge (Mr Rogers) threw off the power when the car reached the loop, as was done on Christmas Eve. It was assumed in all the trials that the ratchet brake would not work, and on this occasion, no brake being applied, the car started running backward downhill. The first test was to bring the car up by again applying power. Once the car was well underway downhill the power was applied, and the car at once went ahead again. Then a trial was made with what is known as the track brake. This is a flat surfaced block, worked from the motorman’s platform by a powerful double-threaded screw. It is a simple contrivance, on the 6

drag principle – a block, with about six square inches of surface, is forced by pressure on to the rail and acts as a drag on the car. In this test the same course was followed. The car was taken into the loop and allowed to fall backward on the down grade and once underway, the track brake was forced down on the rails and the car brought to a standstill. Finally, the same test was applied to the emergency brake and to demonstrate that the emergency brake is independent of the electric power which propels the cars, the trolley was entirely disconnected from the overhead wire. The car was taken up the hill into the loop, power was thrown off and when the car had started backward down the hill, the trolley pole was lowered away from the wire. The little party on the car had put themselves in the hands of Mr Carey, who assured them that his brake was equal to any emergency. He let the car get well underway and then partially turned a small lever, there was a jerk, which would throw passengers on a crowded car into uncomfortable positions, but nothing more, and the car was stopped almost before those on board had recovered from the jolt. Mr Carey took some pains to explain to the party the principle on how the emergency brake works, but to the lay mind, uninitiated in the uses of electricity, it is somewhat difficult to follow. This “brake” is not, in the ordinarily accepted sense of the word, a brake at all; it is rather a method of using the motor to bring the car to a standstill, instead of putting it to its ordinary use of propelling the car, and this no doubt accounts for the popular idea that the emergency brake will only work when the power is on the car. The demonstration that the emergency brake can be worked with the power off was ample, but the description of the why and the wherefore is not so easily grasped. According to the instructions of the company the lever has to be turned to a certain point, which is known as “short circuiting” a motor. The effect of this is to turn the motor into a dynamo, which generates its own current and acts against the force taking the car downhill. One motor is, according to Mr Carey’s description, pulling against the other and the effect is like a well-matched tug-of-war, the whole car throbs with the two contending forces and comes to a standstill. The demonstration was complete when Mr Carey lifted a trap in the floor of the car and then showed the little party the effect of the operation on the motor. From Kingsland the car proceeded via Khyber Pass, through Parnell, to go through the same demonstration on Alpha Rd, the steepest grade on the Auckland service. (Alpha Road is what we know today as the Parnell Rise - Ed). The track brake was first applied on this grade and worked successfully. Then the car was taken up again and started downhill, the emergency brake being applied when the car was well underway. The jolt on this occasion was more pronounced than on the easier grade at Kingsland, but the effect was the same, the car being pulled up by the use of the emergency brake alone, with the trolley off the overhead wire. The ratchet brake was not tried on any occasion, the object of the demonstration being to show that even when this fails there are three other methods of pulling up a runaway car, viz, applying power in the reverse direction, applying the track brake, and applying the emergency dynamic brake.

As regards the Inquest, the internet took me to reports printed in the NZ Herald and Auckland Star on the 6th January, 1904. The Inquest was drawing to a close and it was now focusing on the training given to Auckland Electric Tramway Company Motormen and it makes for fascinating reading. 7

Inquiry resumed yesterday at the Magistrate's Court. Mr H. W. Brabant, S.M., acted as coroner. The Hon. J. Tole (Crown Prosecutor) appeared on behalf of the police, Mr T. Cotter (city solicitor) watched the proceedings on behalf of the Auckland City Council; Mr Hugh Campbell on behalf of Mr F. Humphrey, the motorman in charge of the double-decker car at the time of the accident: Mr W. Coleman, and with him Mr J. C. Martin and Mr Jackson Palmer, on behalf of the Auckland Tramways Company: and Mr C. J. Parr, on behalf of the relatives of the late Mr Caley.
EXAMINATION OF MOTORMEN: William H. Markle, motor inspector, examined by Mr Martin, said he had been 13 months in the employment of the Tramways Company. He had previous experience of electric tramways in Canada and Sydney. It was part of his duty to examine motormen. He examined Humphrey, who was put through the ordinary course of instruction and examination. Mr Martin (solicitor on behalf of the Tramway Company): Is there any material difference between the Auckland system of training and examining motormen and the system enforced in other places where you have been employed? — None. — Have you ever seen anything to lead you to suppose that Humphrey is not a thoroughly competent, careful, reliable and sober man?—No. — In Sydney the motormen are under instruction for 16 days?—Yes; but they do not put in full time. They are only allowed on the cars during certain hours of the day. Mr Tole (Crown Prosecutor): When you joined the Sydney tramways did you pass any further examination? — Yes. They make it a rule there whether a man has previous experience or not. I had about a fortnight in training there. — You don’t agree with Mr Salinger that motormen ought only to know the notches on the top of the controller and how to turn the handle? I believe that is the rule on some roads. But you don't agree with it? — No. — You think the men ought to be a little more than mere machines? — Yes. — Did you ever know anything go wrong with the brakes on the Auckland cars? — Very seldom. Mr Cotter (City Solicitor): Do you still think that the time given and the method employed of training is sufficient for the purpose? — Yes. If they are not competent by the end of a fortnight they would practically be useless.
WHAT MOTORMAN HUMPHREY LEARNED: Since you passed Mr Humphrey have you seen him manipulate the cars? — Yes. He shaped very well as a motorman. I have never seen him reckless in any way. — Have you seen Mr Humphrey in working his car, use the emergency brake? — I can't say that I have. Mr Parr (Caley family representative): How did you know that he could use it? — He used it at his examination. — He told us he never used the extreme emergency — He explained both emergencies to me during his examination. — Supposing a conductor wishes to become a motorman, does he learn his duties in his spare time after having done his day's work as a conductor? — Not always. — Did Humphrey learn that way? — Yes; but he was a month in training. — How many hours a day would he have given to learning the motorman’s duties? — I should think about four hours.

8

Mr Tole: You can see that so far as the safety of life is concerned, the emergency brake is the critical thing? — Yes. — And don't you think there should be some special test for that? — There is at the examination. — Is he taken to a heavy grade and asked to pull up a car by the emergency brake? — No. There is no test like that. They are taught during their fortnight's training to use the emergency brake. I think a man doing a fortnight's training on an ordinary car would get better training than on a special car. He has the actual work to do on an ordinary car. Mr. Martin: You can't get people to stand in front of the car and let the motorman practise? — No. Mr. Campbell (representing Motorman Humphrey): Is there any instruction in the company's book as to the use of the emergency brake when the car is going backward — I don't think so, but it is explained at the examination and during the training. The Foreman of the Jury: Does the use of the extreme emergency brake cost anything to the company? — No. Mr. Brabant: Why are they not made to do it? — I am satisfied that they know how to do it. — Can you swear that you ever did explain the matter to Humphrey? —Not on the road, but in the shed. — But can you swear that you did explain to him how he was to pull up a car when it was running away — No: he explained it to me. That was one of my questions to him. — Are you quite sure he explained it to you in answer to your question? — Yes. — Well, Humphrey, in his examination, said. “I don't know that I was asked a question about the emergency brake”. How do you account for that? — Later on he said it was explained to him on two or three occasions by Barnes, the man who trained him. — But I am quoting what he said regarding your examination, not about Barnes. You can't explain it?—No.
A FORTNIGHT'S PRACTICE: Hiram Barnes, motorman, in answer to Mr Martin, said Humphrey did his training under him. He was very intelligent; in fact, the best man he ever trained. Mr Martin: You were trained at Brisbane? — Yes. — How long? — Fourteen or 15 days. There is no material difference between the training in Brisbane and the training in Auckland. Mr Tole: Are the cars the same in Brisbane as here? — No; they have different electrical equipment, but the use of the handles is practically the same. — Are the brakes different in Brisbane? — No, except that they have no track brake. — Then that is an extra brake on the Auckland cars? — Yes. — In Brisbane there is only the ratchet and emergency brakes? — Yes. — Were you trained on a special car in Brisbane? — No. I was trained on the road. — Do you do all the training for the company? — No; I do a good deal of it. I have been 15 months in the Company’s service and I have been training for about 10 months. I may have trained 20 or 25 motormen. — Do you recollect, showing Humphrey the emergency brake? —Yes. — Having trained 20 to 25 men, do you mean to say you recollect showing Humphrey in particular the emergency brake? Where did you show him? — Between the Epsom Hotel and Bell's store. — Do you recollect the places you showed the other motormen the working of the emergency? — Some of them I do. — What was the nature of the illustration? — It was a demonstration. — Did he use it in your presence? — Not the extreme emergency. — Do you know if there is any feeling of reluctance among the motormen to take the Kingsland route? — Never heard anything of that kind. 9

Mr Campbell: When a motorman is getting instruction, does he simply stand beside you? — No; he drives most of the time. He has actual practice of the use of the brakes. — He never has to practice putting on the emergency on a car running backward? — He might not require to use that once in a lifetime. — You say you showed Humphrey how to use it once? — Yes; I let the car run backward on purpose and showed it. — It was you, not Humphrey, who handled the brake? — l handled it. — How long would it take to give this demonstration you gave on the Epsom Road? — About a minute. — Therefore a minute out of 14 days' training is spent on this important operation? — I showed him on other occasions. A Juror: Do you still think a fortnight under one motorman is sufficient instruction? — Yes. — Are you eight hours on duty without an interval for a meal? — On one shift I have half-an-hour. — Would two four-hour shifts be any advantage? — l would rather have my shift right through than have a long interval between the shifts. Mr Brabant: Are you satisfied that Humphrey understood the use of all the brakes? — Yes. — How do you arrive at that? — He was a very intelligent man, who could understand anything explained to him. I saw him use the ratchet brake, the track brake, and the ordinary emergency brake. — The extreme emergency brake was shown to him? — In order to show him I allowed the car to run back, knocked out the automatic switch, and put the controlling handles into the position required.
EXPERIENCES WITH CAR 39: John Moyes, motorman, was questioned by Mr Campbell, and said he had been on electric cars about four years, and had been a motorman in Auckland since the service commenced. On December 22 and 23 he was driving the double-decker car No. 39. On December 22 he wrote on the waybill, “Track brake will not apply," and on the following day he wrote again. "Track brake will not apply." Mr Campbell: When you got the car on the 23rd was it any better than on the previous day? — lt could not have been, or I would not have reported again. — When you got it in the morning it was no better? — l did not have it in the morning. In the afternoon I found the track brake would not apply. — Did you look at the track brake and blocks? — Yes; on both days. They appeared all right. There might be about half-an inch of the block left on the 23rd. — Did you make any test? — Yes: I got the conductor to screw the brake on while I was on the ground. — What did you find? — That they were not effective on the rail; they had no pressure. I could not say whether that was on December 22 or 23. — Have you instructed any motormen? — Yes several. — Is there only one emergency brake? — There is only one emergency brake that the motormen are taught to use. — Is there not an extreme emergency brake? — Yes; it could be used, but I have never known it to be used here. It is the same as the emergency brake on the cars I was used to in Sydney, but I was never instructed in the use of it here. Mr Brabant: How do you know of it, then? — I have tried it myself. I came to Auckland as an experienced man. Mr Campbell: When instructing motormen you do not explain this extreme emergency brake to them? — No. Mr Martin: Did you explain to them what to do in the event of a car running back? — No. I was under the impression that the ordinary emergency would stop her running either way. — You were instructed in 10

Sydney what to do in the case of a car running back? — Yes; in the use of the extreme emergency or backpressure brake, with the power off. — You would run the same car pretty well day after day? — Yes. — Have you always found when repairs were necessary that they were affected by morning? — Yes; on the car I drive. Mr Tole: Have you seen car 39 since the accident? — Yes; two days after. — Are you in a position to say whether the defect you pointed out on December 23 was attended to? — No. — In Sydney do the motormen go through a thorough course of instruction? — Yes. Mr Martin: For how long? — You have got to be a conductor for 12 months, during which time you classify as a driver. Mr Cotter: On the last day you drove car 39 you found no difficulty of any kind with the ratchet brake? — None.
THE TRACK BRAKE: Mr Cotter continues: - As to the track brake, what was wrong, independent of the thickness of the wood? — I could not state. — Did the conductor, who applied this brake for you, exhaust the thread? — The brake had reached the rail, but there was no pressure. — You found this to be the case on December 22 and again on the 23rd? — Yes. — How many hours on each of those days did you drive the car? — Six hours in the afternoon. Mr Brabant: If this evidence is to be relied on as to the defect in the brake, we should have the evidence of the morning driver as well. Mr. Cotter: Do you say that during the hours named you manipulated the car without the use of the track brake? — Yes. — You came down the steep grade of Wellesley-street for 12 hours relying only on the ratchet brake? —l did. — Was not that, contrary to instructions? — It was but what was I to do? — Could you not have complained? — l did go to the motor inspector, Thrussell. — What did you say to him? — l said my track brakes were not effective , not applying. — What did he do or say? — He went and had a look at them. I do not recollect whether he said anything to me or not. I know I continued on my journey afterwards. — With an imperfect car? — Well, I had to take something. — Supposing in going up a hill, your car had begun to run back, what would you have done? — If I had the current I would have given her one notch. — Independent of any brake at all? — Yes. — Have you ever noticed any other car except No.39 with the track brake not doing more than touching the rail when the screw was run out? — No. — When you got the conductor to turn the wheel did you try it at both ends or one? — Only at the end I was working. I was running to Arch Hill and only wanted the track brake on the end I was coming down Wellesley-Street with. Mr Martin: Have you spoken about this track brake not being alright on December 22 and 23 after December 23? — Not till yesterday afternoon to Mr Carey. — Do you say you spoke to Mr Thrussell at the corner of Custom Street and Queen Street? — Yes, about the brake. — Did he speak to you about a man named Speirs wanting to give up the Onehunga line? — He might have. I do not recollect. — Do you swear positively that you said anything to him about that brake before the car stopped at the Queen Street terminus? — lt may have been when the car stopped. — Did you not tell him you could manage with the 11

brake? — I may have done that. — Was not the impression you used that your brake was a bit crook but you could manage with it? — I cannot say the exact words. — Did you not, as a matter of fact, on your subsequent journeys down Wellesley Street apply the track brake? — I may have, but I do not think so. Mr Campbell: The ordinary emergency brake is marked on the controller. Is there any mark to show the use of the extreme emergency or back pressure brake? — No. A Juror: Do you teach its use to a learner? — I have never done so. Mr Brabant: Can you say why? I was under the impression that the ordinary emergency would stop the car going either way. A Juror: It is not laid down in the book? — No. Mr Brabant: The other man says he did teach it. I do not see why one instructor should teach it and another should not. Mr Campbell: One wonders why it does not appear in the book. Mr Brabant: Perhaps Mr Carey will be able to throw some light on it.
PREVIOUS RUNNING OF CAR 39: Alfred Thrussell, motor inspector, examined by Mr Martin, said he remembered Moyes speaking to him about the brake on car 39. He did not remember what day it was. Mr Martin: Where did you see him? — At the junction of Queen and Custom Streets. He did not beckon to me. I got on his car to speak to him about taking the Onehunga run instead of Motorman Speirs. — When you got off at the terminus, was anything said about the brake? — He made a remark about his track brake being “a bit crook”, but added in the same breath, “It’s all right; I can get along with it”. The remark being made in that way, I paid little attention to it. I looked at the wood, and there seemed to be enough wood left to make the brake effective. — Did he say anything about the screw of the brake? — Not a word. Gilbert Elliott, motorman, was called as he was on car 39 on the morning of December 23 on the NewtonPonsonby run. Mr Martin to Mr Elliot: Did you find anything wrong with the track brake? — No. Mr Brabant: Do you recollect using the track brake? — No; I had no occasion to. I only ran half-a-trip with it from Queen Street to the barn. — Then you cannot tell us what condition the track brake was in? — No. Motorman McIver was recalled and said he ran car No. 39 on the morning of December 22 on the Kingsland line. Mr Martin: Did you find anything wrong with the track brake? — No. Mr Brabant: How many trips did you run with it? — Six to Kingsland and one to College Hill. — Did you use the track brake? — Yes, from the Eden Vine to Porter's Avenue, and from the top of Symonds-street into Queen-street each trip. (This would be down Wellesley St – Ed)

12

Mr Martin: You worked the car again on the morning of the 24th? — Yes. — The track brake was in order then? — Yes, slightly worn down, but effective. (McIver earlier testified that he had warned Motorman Humphrey not to rely on the track brake too much as it was worn – Ed) A juryman suggested that the conductor who was with Moyes should be called; Mr Martin said he had seen the conductor and did not call him because his evidence would have been entirely negative. He saw Thrussell and Moyes talking, but did not know what they were talking about, and he corroborated Moyes to this extent, that he remembered screwing down the track brake for him, but he could not say anything about the pressure there was on the rail. Mr. Brabant: The important question is, what was the state of the brakes when the car went out on the morning of the accident.
THE CHIEF ELECTRICAL ENGINEER: Mr M. Carey, chief electrical engineer to the Tramways Company, was then called. In answer to Mr. Martin, he said he had charge of the electrical work and general supervision over the running of the cars. He spent two years in the Electrical School of Science, Toronto: one year with the General Electric Engineering Co., Peterburg, Canada, from whence he was transferred to the American General Electric and Engineering Co. With that company he served a further four years at electrical and mechanical engineering in America. He was then employed by the same company for four years as travelling instructing engineer, travelling through the United States, Canada, Mexico, and South America. After that he was engaged by the British Electrical Traction Co., and carried on engineering work for them in British Columbia for about nine months. He was then transferred to the company's London office, and was engaged on the preparation of specifications, etc., for the Auckland electric tramways. After completing that, he was engaged as resident engineer to the Auckland Tramways Company, and had been in Auckland since June, 1901. He had investigated the mode of running electric cars in Leeds, Sheffield, Blackpool, Dublin, Paris, and other cities.
STARTING THE AUCKLAND SERVICE: Mr Martin to Mr Carey:- This being the first electric car service in New Zealand, you had to commence with an entirely new staff and teach them? — Yes. I engaged Mr Rogers as assistant after careful inquiry at Honolulu and San Francisco, where he had been employed. He has proved in every way satisfactory. — Amongst American electricians there is not too much attention paid to a man's certificates. — None at all. Dependence is placed on his recommendations from the parties he has been working for. Mr Carey proceeded to explain that he imported another two experts, one electrical engineer, and one man who had experience in the traffic department; also 18 motormen from Sydney. Most of the motormen had certificates. Mr Martin: Did you find the certificates any guide as to their competency? — As a rule no. I think we dismissed about ten of them for incompetency. — Is the training given in Auckland the system adopted, speaking generally, in the places you have experience of? — Yes. — That is all you say is necessary for a motorman to take charge of a car? —Yes; that and a cool head. Fourteen days is quite sufficient to learn what is necessary. — Do you test their seeing and hearing powers? — Yes. At the commencement I did it myself. Now Mr Duncan does it. A motorman must be able to hear a watch tick at arm’s length (a stop13

watch is used), and distinguish a half-inch letter at a distance of ten feet. — How many men have you tried since the service has been running? — About 140. — Do you intend that your system of training motormen should stop at what they have already learned? — No. We have most of our forms printed now in regard to lectures which will be given three times a month, dealing with the various apparatus used and the theory of electrical working.
USE OF THE EMERGENCY: How is it that the book of rules contains no instructions regarding the extreme emergency brake? — l never heard the term til it was used in this Court, but I understand what is meant. Ninety-nine accidents out of every hundred happen to cars travelling forward. On numerous occasions in the United States and Canada it has been found that experienced motormen become confused between the backward and forward brakes. It was carefully thought out by various engineers how best to impress on motormen when to use the proper brake, and several companies adopted the system of training them to use the forward brake, and simply teaching them the backward brake, and explaining the working of it. — Experience has proved that to be the best? — Yes. Mr Brabant: Until this accident. Mr Martin: This is the system generally adopted? — Yes: it is used on several of the leading roads through the United States. — You saw car 39 on the morning after the accident. Was it possible to come to any reliable conclusion as to why the ratchet brake did not act? — l could not form any conclusion, owing to the wreckage. — Can you suggest any hypothesis at all for the ratchet brake refusing to act at both ends? — No, I cannot. This striking 1908 view of Double Decker No.18 shows the lack of protection afforded to passengers on the top deck from the trolley pole. Unlike Wellington’s double decker No.47 at MOTAT, with its high handrails and trolley pole that extends just over the end of the railing.
THE TROLLEY POLE: Mr Martin continues; Could any means be taken to prevent a trolley pole from swinging and injuring people? — l have given considerable thought to that matter, but so far I have been unable to devise anything. — The system here 14

with regard to the pole is the system adopted throughout the world? — Yes. Engineers everywhere have been trying to devise something, but so far no solution has been found. The rope has been found to be the best means so far known, of holding the trolley-pole. An iron or steel rope would be quite unsafe — Are the brakes with which the Auckland cars are fitted ample? — Yes. I have proved by experiment that any of them is sufficient to control the cars on the steepest grades in Auckland. So long as the wheels are going round it is impossible for the emergency brake to fail. — What could the motorman have done when car 39 commenced to run away? — When the ratchet brake failed he should have immediately applied the track brake and if the track brake failed he could have applied power to the motors. When the circuit-breaker blew out the controller handle could have been brought rapidly round to the seventh notch and the car would have stopped in less than twice its own length. — You know Humphrey? — Yes; I have always found him a sober, steady, capable man Mr Martin continued: Would it minimise the risk of accident from the trolley pole, to heighten the railing at the end of the double-decker cars? — No because the trolley pole does not extend over the end of the car by about 20 inches. Mr Brabant: The evidence is that the accident was caused by the trolley pole being bent. — I don’t believe it would have struck Miss Hogarth unless it was bent. A Juror: Would not two iron standards on the sides of the car with a cross wire prevent the trolley pole from swinging round? — That might work, but it would have to be considered. Mr Martin: What is the reason that double-deckers are not much used in America? — Mainly because it takes too long to load and unload passengers. — What have you to say about Moyes saying he was not told to teach motormen on the use of the backward emergency brake? — As an experienced motorman he ought to have known it was impossible to stop a car going backward by using the front movement emergency brake. Had I known that he was not instructing candidates in the use of the backward brake I would have discharged him immediately, as he had been engaged by the company as an experienced man. He is the first motorman in our employ that we have found to be so neglectful in the performance of his duties. — No regulations have been made by the Board of Control here? — No; we practically use the English Board of Trade regulations. The Board of Trade regulations provide for a brake applied by a screw, an electric brake and a slipper brake. Our cars are fitted with all these.
AIR BRAKES: Have you any experience of the air brake? — Yes. It is a very good brake, but I maintain that the brakes adopted in Auckland are the safest brakes for heavy grades. — Who inspected your electrical equipment on behalf of the Government? — Mr. Meddings. We have never received any request from the Government to alter the brakes on our cars. The track brake we use was adopted in San Francisco after 10 or 11 years experimenting, and San Francisco is supposed to have the steepest grades in the world. — During the year ended December 31 last, how many passengers have been carried over your lines?— Fifteen million some odd hundreds. — How many serious accidents have you had brought to the door of the Tramways Company? — Eight before this one. Mr Brabant: Eight deaths? — No, eight serious accidents. 15

Mr Cotter: What objection would there be to using twisted wire instead of rope for the trolley pole? — lt would be impossible to properly insulate it, because owing to its vertical position the water would flow over the insulation in wet weather. The conductor, or even a passenger, on the back part of the car might be injured by the current. — How far can the track brake with two inches of block on it descend before the screw is given out? — At least seven inches below the level of the rail and in the case of a car loaded with passengers, more than that. Before such a result as described by Moyes (the screw having given out and the block not pressing on the rail) the lever would have to be bent to such an extent that the motor inspector ought to have noticed it. I have looked at the car, but I could not come to any conclusion as to whether the levers were bent or not, owing to the smashed condition of the car.

Mr Tole: To the best of your belief your instructions were that all motormen should be taught the use of the back emergency brake? — Yes. — You have felt no anxiety about the want of knowledge of motormen in regards to the emergency brakes? — No. — Is the screw of the track brake the same on every car? — Exactly the same dimension. — What is the weight of a double-decker? — About 12 tons altogether, seven tons the truck and five and a-half tons the super structure. — Have you in all your thinking over this matter, formed any opinion as to how the ratchet brake refused to act? — No. I’ve never known a ratchet brake to act like that before. I have known parts of the brake to become disabled. — Have you been able to form any opinion as to the maximum speed of car 39 when she ran away? — I don't believe she was running more than 25 miles an hour. Mr Brabant: How do you ascertain that? — From experience. 16

Mr Tole: Was it or is it in contemplation to have air brakes on the Auckland cars? — No. — Why is the study of air brakes put in the rules? — Just to provide in case we should get them. The air brakes at present are not suitable.
HOW THE CARS ARE MANNED: I gather that your cars are not sufficiently manned, for instance, all through the book, there is reference to brakesmen? — That is only in reference to trailers. — It seems to me that there ought to be another man. — I consider there is not the slightest occasion for that. Mr Brabant: It appeared from the evidence that it was the conductor’s duty to put on the brakes when he gets three bells from the motorman. What would happen if he was collecting fares? — He would have to go out on the platform and apply the brake. — But would it not be an element of safety to have a man always at the brake? — lt would only be an element. Mr Tole: It you did not intend to have brakesmen on the cars, the rules are very deceptive. — The reference to brakesmen is entirely in connection with trailer cars. It was never intended to have brakesmen on the ordinary cars. Mr Campbell: Confusion in the mind of the motorman is not an unknown of accident? — lt has happened. — Don't you think the fact that Mclver had told Humphrey not to rely too much on the track brake might have operated on his mind and helped to paralyse him? — l don't think so. The rules strongly impress on the employees to use both brakes on heavy grades. The Jury Foreman: Don't you think it would be beneficial to have an extra man on the cars, say, between five and six o'clock, when there is a great rush for cars? — Yes: but it would be difficult to get the men unless we could find employment for them for the rest of the day. Mr Brabant: I don't think it has been shown that overcrowding had anything to do with this accident.
THE SPEED OF THE CARS: Another juror (Mr Spinley) asked whether the company had not received complaints as to the rate of speed on the Kingsland line. Witness (Mr Carey) said he was not aware of any such complaint. Mr Hansen: There was one complaint a few weeks ago. In reply to the Coroner the witness said a maximum speed of nine miles an hour was fixed for Queen Street, but no maximum was fixed for the other portions of the lines.
SOME CLOSING QUESTIONS: (The Coroner): In view of the evidence given, do you still consider it the best plan not to include in the book of rules an explanation of the use of the backward brakes? — Yes I do. — Are you not of the opinion that the system of examining these men can be improved? — I do not see that it could, so far as the practical work is concerned. — Do you not think a system of written papers would be better? — That is what we intend to do after schooling the men. That system would be of no use in regard to new men. — What have you to say to the action of the motorman in leaving his station and going to the back of the car? — He did wrong- he should have given the signal to the conductor to apply the back brake. — Could not an 17

examination of the good end of the ratchet brake gear show whether anything had been wrong with the brake? — Nothing appears to be wrong with it. — Should the motorman on the combination car have reversed his car? — Yes, if he had time; but I will not say he did not do his duty because he did not reverse, as he might not have had time. If he had not jumped off the car just before impact, it would have meant instant death. A Juror: If the runaway car had not met the combination car, would it have taken the curve all right? — lt is hard to say, but the result would probably have been far worse. Mr Tole: After hearing Humphrey's evidence, are you satisfied that he knew how to use the back brake? — Yes. This concluded Mr Carey's examination and the inquiry adjourned till eleven o'clock next day.

Otago Daily Times on the 11th January, 1904. SHOCKING TRAMWAY ACCIDENT – RUNAWAY ELECTRIC CAR THE INQUEST

An inquest touching the death of the three victims was held before Mr Brabant, S.M. Coroner, and a jury. Very exhaustive evidence was taken and all witnesses who could say anything likely to throw any light on the accident or its cause were examined at length. During the inquiry practical experiments were given by the Tramway Company’s officials on the severest grades in the district to show that the brakes were efficient. Repeated experiments proved that the cars could be pulled up with the emergency brake after it had attained great speed on a down grade. The trolley pole was repeatedly disconnected, but by starting the motors and so converting them into dynamos the car was pulled up in a little more than its own length. The Coroner summed up. Every opportunity, he said, had been given for a full inquiry into the state of the company’s rolling stock and its method of working. He did not think that they could attach any blame to Mr Hansen or any other of the employees of the company for the trolley pole becoming adrift. There was no evidence of the failure of the conductor on the lower deck to do anything required of him. Motorman Humphrey was in charge of the car which ran away and their duty would be to go carefully into his conduct. He had borne a good character and had been considered to be a capable driver. Humphrey had not attempted to get out of his responsibility by misrepresentation or perjury; indeed, his own statement was a confession of his own incapacity to cope with such an emergency as had arisen. There was nothing in the evidence to show how the ratchet brake became unworkable, nor was there anything to show that the track brake would have refused to act if called upon. They would have to consider Humphrey’s conduct and say if he was, incompetent or negligent, in addition to saying whether he disobeyed orders by leaving the front of the car as he did. That he was incompetent and lost his nerve was evident, but that incompetency might have been the fault of his employers. However, he left his post in front of the car, when he was bound to remain at the handles and give three rings to the conductor to apply the rear brake. This was his own act, not that of the company, and if the jury found that to be an act of negligence, it would mean manslaughter, and they would find their verdict accordingly. If, however, they believed Humphrey’s earlier statement that he considered the conductor incompetent to apply the brakes, it might be only an error of judgement. 18

There was, Mr Brabant said, no evidence of dereliction of duty on the part of the conductor on the combination car. The next point was as to whether the company was responsible through its officers other than those directly concerned in the casualty. Experts were, on the whole, of opinion that it would be no improvement to attach air brakes to the cars used by the company. It was admitted that the trolley pole was an element of danger. It was pointed out that the same system was in force all over the world, and the only way to avoid the danger was to have an underground system. There was no evidence of defect in the company’s rolling stock, but the evidence as to the stock was that it was in good order and condition; this applying also to the brakes. Another point for consideration was whether sufficient care had been exercised by the company in the selection and examination of its motormen and conductors. There had been strong evidence that the employees of the company were not thoroughly conversant with the working of the brakes. This seemed to him to have contributed to some extent to the cause of the accident. It was clear that Humphrey’s knowledge of the use of the electrical brakes was deficient. He did not know whether the ordinary electrical emergency brake would or would not have stopped the car when it was running backwards. The jury had ascertained that it would, and that another brake was not necessary. Probably his knowledge that he was not fully acquainted with these brakes contributed to the confusion, which he said he was in, when the car ran away. One of the conductors had said that he did not understand the brakes, not even the mechanical brakes. Motorman Moyes (the company’s senior motorman – Ed) said that he had never given a candidate placed under his charge, instruction in the use of the backward emergency brakes. He had used this brake in Sydney, but understood that it was not in force here. This was not evidence in the case of Humphrey, who learned from a man who did use this brake. Mr Carey considered it better not to mention this brake in the book of rules, but it appeared that sufficient care had not been taken in giving instruction in regard to it. Further on in the report…. The following is the verdict of the jury: - “That Ann Young Hogarth met her death on the night of December 24, 1903, on a double-deck car, No.39, proceeding from Kingsland to Auckland, by the trolley pole breaking away from the conductor, the said trolley arm, becoming unmanageable, striking her on the head and causing her death. That the death of Benjamin Lindsay was caused through the colliding of car No.39 and combination car No.32. That the death of William Caley was caused through collision between cars Nos. 39 and 32 on the night of December 24, 1903. The jury also find that the cause of collision on the night of December 24 was through the ratchet brake failing to act, causing the motorman to lose his head and through his want of knowledge he did not use the other brakes under his command.” The following rider was added: - “That in consequence of the steep grades in and around Auckland the use of double-decker cars be discontinued. We recommend that the company’s mode of teaching motormen and conductors is inadequate. More stringent measures should be adopted. We agree that the brake power on the cars is quite satisfactory when in proper order and in the hands of persons who understand the brakes. We also agree that motormen and conductors should be subject to medical examinations as to their fitness. We are also of the opinion that the speed on the downgrades should be reduced.” 19

It concluded…. Mr Hansen, managing director of the Tramway Company, wrote to the Auckland City Council at the close of the inquest stating that so far as it was possible he would give effect to the recommendations of the coroner’s jury.

Once the Inquiry was concluded, the following was published in the Auckland Star January 8, 1904 THE TRAMWAY INQUIRY MR HANSEN'S STATEMENT - THE COMPANY'S STATEMENT. The Auckland City Council last evening received the following letter from Mr P. M. Hansen, general manager of the Tramway Company: "With reference to the sad accident which happened on our Kingsland line on December 24 last, caused through one of our motormen losing his presence of mind, and more particularly in regard to the rider added by the jury to their verdict, I take this early opportunity to place the following before you:— "DOUBLE-DECK CARS: I will immediately place before my company the jury's recommendation to discontinue the use of the double-deck cars. This is an important question, and, as far as my company is concerned, will have to be decided by the board of directors in London. Meanwhile I have given instructions that only the most experienced conductors will be employed for duties on the upper deck, and my company's engineer will immediately consider what steps can be taken to improve, if possible, on the apparatus generally in connection with and for controlling the trolley-rope. "TRAINING OF MOTORMEN: When last time in Wellington, I was informed by the Under-Secretary of the Public Works Department, that the Government intends to specially examine all motormen employed on electric tramways, and I have no doubt that this regulation will now be put in force forthwith. Meanwhile I have given instructions that all our motormen will be re-examined as to the various brakes, and practical trials of their abilities will be made on next Sunday morning, along Jervois-road and along Epsom-road. Unfortunately, Sunday morning is the only time when any of our line is available for such purpose. "SPEED OF CARS ON DOWN GRADES: I have this day given instructions that the medium speed of any cars on a down grade is to be in future, not more than the medium speed laid down by your Council for Queen-street, which, I feel confident, will meet with your Council's approval. "Your Council can rest assured that my company is fully alive to the great responsibilities it has undertaken, and also that we will spare no labour or expense to safeguard in every possible direction, the safety of the public." This edition of the Auckland Star also featured the interesting “Letters to the Editor” reproduced below; DISMISSAL OF A MOTORMAN. The following correspondence referring to an incident connected with the recent tramway inquiry, has been addressed to the press:— (To the Editor.) Sir,—the sequel to the recent inquiry into the Kingsland tram accident is that Motorman Moyes—the man who gave the Court the information about the brake of the double-decker being in a bad condition—has been discharged from the employ of the company. The dismissal followed 20

somewhat speedily on the decision of the coroner's jury. The jury's announcement was made on Wednesday afternoon, and Moyes was informed on Wednesday night that his presence at the company's office was desired at eleven o'clock the following morning. Now, sir, I think that the public should know how this motorman has been treated. In the public interest he gave true, straightforward evidence, Moyes was summoned to the Court and told the truth. That truth, unfortunately, was not in the interests of the company, and he got the sack. Moyes has been driving a tramcar for about four years without the most trifling accident. It appears to me that the Auckland Tramways Company should retain the services of such able men in order to safeguard the lives of Auckland's people.—I am etc., ROBT. F. WAY. (To the Editor.) Sir.—I consider it advisable that the public should know at least some of the principal reasons why it became necessary, in the interests of the public, that my company should have dispensed with Motorman Moyes' services. It is clear from Moyes' own evidence that he seriously disobeyed the company's regulations by running a car for several hours knowing all the time, as he alleges, that the track brake was not in good order - Moyes also admitted that he failed to instruct the learners under his care in the use of one of the most important electric brakes, the working of which, according to his own statement, was quite familiar to him from his Sydney experience. I also append in support of our action, a copy of a letter I received from my company's legal advisors, engaged at the recent inquiry. By which you will see the advisability, from the legal standpoint, of my company dispensing with Moyes' services.— I am, etc, P. M. HANSEN". Managing Director Auckland Electric Tramways Co., Ltd. "Auckland, 5th January. 1904. "P. M. Hanson. Esq. General Manager Auckland Electric Tramways Co. Ltd. "Dear Sir.--We draw your attention to the evidence given by Motorman Moyes to-day at the Inquest connected with the Kingsland accident. This evidence was so extraordinary that we are strongly of opinion that your company will incur the most grave responsibility, if It allows Moyes to continue to act as an Instructor of motormen. We feel it incumbent on us, as legal advisers to the Company, to bring this to your notice, and to further suggest, that whatever may be done in other cases, any motormen who have been instructed by Moyes should be further examined. If this be not done, a jury would, we think, very probably give vindictive damages in the event of an accident caused by a car driven by a motorman instructed by Moyes.— Yours faithfully, "(Signed) W. COLEMAN, J. C. MARTIN. JACKSON PALMER."

Double-deckers did continue to operate in Auckland, but in the control of senior men, until their rebuild to single deckers in the early 1920s. Auckland had, from day-one, employed two conductors on the deckers, and as noted above, again only used experienced conductors on the cars while operating as double-deckers. No.39 was rebuilt and returned to service, its declining years were spent as a steam cleaning booth at the back of the Royal Oak Tramway Workshops in Manukau Road. Combo No.32, also rebuilt, lasted into the early 1950s, before being retired with the rest of the original Brush built 1902 fleet. To this scribes best knowledge, no other NZ city had two conductors on its double-deckers. I am certain the Kingsland accident had an impact on the construction of both Christchurch and Wellington deckers. Christchurch double-deckers had two “hoops”, one at each end of the top deck to protect passengers from any anti-social behaviour by the trolley pole. Wellington, particularly on the six “Big Ben” deckers, had railings that were higher than the heads of seated passengers and a trolley pole that extended just over the end of the railing, so should it come down it would only strike the top of the railings. 21