THE
EXPLOSION.
Testimony Taken Before the Coroner’s Jury—The Verdict of the Jury.
The Coroner’s Jury commenced taking testimony last Monday in Fireman's
Hall.
Caleb
B. Hitchcock was the first witness sworn. After describing the location of
the buildings and the machinery contained therein Mr. Hitchcock said: I
purchased this boiler in Elmira, of B. W. Payne & Son. I was the main man to
purchase this boiler and make contract therefor. Don't know that I had ever
done any business with Payne & Son before. I knew the firm. Before purchasing the boiler I
talked with other makers, one firm in Syracuse that Mr. Niver is connected
with. I purchased where I thought I could do the best. I have a written contract
which was made with the firm. Contract read.
Payne
& Son offered under date of Nov. 29, 1884, to furnish boiler made of
best charcoal hammered iron, 66 inches diameter, 16 feet long, 102 three inch
tubes, horizontal, seams double riveted, shell 3/8 inch thick, heads best
flange iron 7-16 thick, well stayed and braced, dome on boiler, man head in
dome, hand hole plates at each end, blow off casting at rear of boiler, lugs on
boiler to support same, flush front with all arch trimmings except stack,
delivered on cars at Cortland. Work to be first class throughout.
The
proposition was accepted by Mr. Hitchcock Dec. 9, 1884, with the exception that
"the heads were to be 1/2 inch thick instead of 7-16, also 8 back stays,
full length from top to bottom of arch properly stayed. Boiler subject to the
approval of Hartford Boiler Insurance Company to be inspected at Elmira,
provided I can get certificate of same."
The
boiler was inspected by R. K. McMurray, Chief Inspector of Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company. Don't
know how these boilers were taken care of personally. I am perfectly ignorant of
boilers myself. This is the certificate:
NEW YORK, January 14,1885.
To the Hitchcock Manufacturing Co., Cortland,
N. Y.
The
Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance company makes the following report
on an internal and external examination of your steam boiler made January 13th,
1885.
One
new boiler built by Payne & Sons, Elmira, N. Y. is built according to
specifications, materials and workmanship are first class. Diameter 66 in. by
16 feet, shell 3/8 inches, heads 1/2 inch, double riveted, dome 30x30 inches,
cast iron head 1 1/2 thick man hole in same, 102 tubes 3 in. two lugs on each
side, 1 1/2 inches thick 12x14. Brand of iron Coatsville, Pa., shell is 50,000.
Heads best flange. Boiler is tubed up too high.
JARED DAY, Inspector,
R. K. McMURRY, Chief Inspector.
The
inspection was made before we accepted boiler. As far as I could see boiler was
according to contract. I am president of the Hitchcock M'f'g. Co. Everything
connected with shops is under my general supervision. The men working under me are
careful to report anything wrong to me, but don't come to me with everything.
Mr. Howard and Mr. Bennett have had full charge of boilers. If anything went
wrong with them I think they have had it fixed themselves. I have generally
known however. They have had the responsibility. By my contract with the
Insurance Co., the boilers were to be inspected every three months.
I was
in Hammond, Indiana when I heard of the explosion. It was about 6 P. M. of May
30. Read account in Chicago paper. Don't know all the men in my employ. Don't
know when Webster commenced work there. I did not employ him. Presume Floyd
Hitchcock or Bennett, supt. of wood shop, employed him. Didn't know Ballard was
in employ of company until after accident. Floyd Hitchcock and Bennett have
full power to employ and discharge. I had never heard of any defect in boilers.
Do not know that Elmira firm make different grades of boilers.
Floyd B. Hitchcock, sworn says:
Am son of C. B. Hitchcock and am supt. of buggy, wagon and sleigh department of
Hitchcock M'f'g. Co., am also Vice President. Am in charge of the several heads
of departments in these works. Mr. Howard, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Lines, Mr. Smith
and Mr. Ryan are immediately under my supervision. Mr. Howard has particular
charge of the power, boilers and engines. He has entire charge of the amount of
steam to be used and the amount of power to be run. I have the general hiring
of the men. Bennett hires some. Howard and Bennett generally recommend the men
they want me to hire. Howard and Bennett generally see that the engines and
boiler are kept in repair, they sometimes report to me, not always. Boilers are
inspected every three months by Insurance Company. The new boiler was numbered
by the Insurance company as No. 1. In the shops it was called the big boiler.
The boiler was inspected March 18, I believe, and has been inspected about once
in three months since it was put in.
Mr.
Adams, boiler maker at E. C. & N. shops inspected it about 6 weeks
ago. He was there to do some caulking. There was a little blister on the bottom
of the boiler. Howard asked him if it would do any hurt and
he said it wouldn't. He said the insurance man looked at the boiler and saw the
blister and said he would not examine it any closer and it wasn't dangerous. [He
said] to watch it close. Howard said boiler maker said blister would do no harm
at present, if it did it would come slow and he could put a patch on it and fix
it. I know nothing about cause of accident. Bennett received $3.00 per day;
Webster $1.35; Fuller $1.25. Don't know what Howard got.
Henry
L. Gleason, sworn says: Am secretary of
company. Have general charge of office, sales, collections and special
contracts. Have no duties in manufacturing department. Had to do with insurance. Boilers were
insured in Hartford Steam Boiler Insurance Company four or five years ago. They
made external inspections four times a year, and internal inspections two or
three times. When a bad defect was found they notified us on the spot; if it
was not bad they reported to general office. We insured in American Company of
New York about first of this year. Hartford inspector examined new boiler when
it was first made. The boiler leaked steam through the dome. Osborn had been
working for us and he said he would fix it. He afterward said he had fixed it
up in good shape. Osborn said there was "burnt spot" or "a scale"
on the fire plate under the boiler. Said it could be patched and made as good
as new substantially.
My
attention was first called to this defect the latter part of January. Was not at
home when explosion occurred. We had $7,000 insurance. Since explosion have
examined this spot on boiler and found it intact. The engine was not driven to
its full capacity. Engineer was paid $40 per month with house rent and other privileges.
I consider Howard a competent engineer.
William
A. Howard, sworn says: Have been an
engineer nearly four years and am employed by Hitchcock M'f'g Co., commenced working
there about eight years ago, first as night watchman. Worked in that capacity
two or three years. Had to keep steam up to keep finishing room and paint shop
warm. Had to fire and feed both. Frank Sampson was engineer then. Then I fired
a little. We run night and day when Sampson was there and I run engine nights. Sidman
was engineer after Sampson a month or six weeks. They had a man named Jones three
or four months. From time Jones left I have been engineer. He left in March '83.
I had learned the duties from being nightwatch and firing and I read up some on
the subject. We used to clean out and look all through the boilers once a month
or three weeks.
Blisters is caused by the heat. It is
customary to leave blisters alone unless they are serious. Sometimes they cause
leaks. I was subject to the direction of Mr. Bennett, and used my own judgment
some. I have detected defects in the old boilers frequently. We had to put a
new patch on the fire sheet because of a burn in bottom of one of them. That
blister was of different character, it leaked. When it commences to leak it indicates
that crack is through the boiler. We used coal for small boilers, but in the big
boiler we used wood and shavings mostly. We fed boiler with pumps through a
heater. Did not have over 50 horse power loaded to engine and were running
about 2/3 of that, were allowed 80 lbs pressure; never run it to 90 lbs, usually had 60 to 75 lbs.
J. M.
Hill inspected new boiler soon after it was up and set in May 1885. It was
perfect then. Mr. Day inspected it in August or September, following. Hill, I
think, inspected it in December, externally and internally and found no
defects. In March or April, 1886 it was again inspected, no defects. It was
again inspected in the following summer and again in November or December,
external and internal. No defects. It was next inspected in March last by an
inspector from the new company, named Hotchkiss or Hutchins. External inspection
of big boiler, internal of the others. Could not make internal of big boiler
because it was hot. Kept steam in that to pump water into old boilers. Osborn
caulked about dome where it leaked, in January, called his attention to blister.
He thought it was very slight. The caulking done by Osborn came right out
again. Fuller, Webster and myself cleaned out the big boiler the day before it
exploded, not much scale in boiler.
The
explosion occurred at 20 or 23 minutes past 9 o'clock. I had just been in engine
room. Steam gauge indicated a trifle more than 70 lbs. Pumps were running regular,
three gauges of water. I had just stepped outside to a side door when I heard a
"siss" and turned and was knocked down by the brick. The gauges never
deceived us. We were careful to keep the gauges clean. I have no idea what
caused boiler to explode. There are lots of theories for
boiler explosions. Low water, foaming of water, poor iron. Have examined the iron
in this boiler since explosion. Did not look as if it was properly welded. I
tried the try-cocks and they showed water same as glass. About 1/2 hour before
the explosion the safety valve worked free at 80 lbs. pressure. I think it
worked Saturday. It would work perhaps once a day sometimes twice a day and
sometimes only two or three times a week.
Lewes
S. Hayes sworn, says: I examined boiler
since explosion. The place where the blister was seemed to be intact. Examined
safety valve. It seemed to be free and clear. Defects to stem and valve are the
only ones that might cause explosion in boilers.
Fred
S. Bennett sworn, says: Am superintendent of the wood shop. I examined the
blister after explosion, and found it all right, no cracks in it through sheet.
There was no charred place on the plate except this blister. Have tried safety
valve. It worked free and clear. Explosion would start it some I suppose. In
most respects this witness' testimony was substantially the same as Howard's.
Benjamin
N. Payne, sworn says:
I reside in Elmira, am builder of boilers and engines. Sold Hitchcock M'f'g.
Co., a boiler about 2 years
ago. It was 16 ft. long, 66 inches in diameter, 102 three inch tubes in it.
Horizontal tubular boiler. Am not a boiler maker myself but have been in the
business 25 years. Nine braces over flues, 3 below. They were distributed on
first sheet 4 feet wide. The iron was bought of Worth Bros., Coatsville, Penn.
We don't test these sheets of iron before putting them in boiler. They are
tested before they leave the mill. They are tested by pulling to pieces. They
have a standard for tensile strength. It is difficult to ascertain if there are
flaws between layers of iron. They test it some by hammering. Blister occurs by
one of the sheets of iron cleaving off. It is liable to start at any place not
solid. These places are almost universally small and the excess of strength is
such that the strength of boiler is not materially impaired. Boiler was
inspected by Hartford Company before it left my place. A charred place or burnt
place would detract from strength of iron. Have examined boiler since
explosion. It was thoroughly destroyed. It is evidence of
its strength because it was so thoroughly torn to pieces; shows there was no
one weak spot. This is the iron universally used for making shells of boilers.
Shouldn't think it could be torn to pieces so with 70 lbs. pressure. I can't
account for the explosion. One other of our boilers has exploded. Saw some
evidence of burns, but there seemed to be no crack in that place.
John
M. 0sborn, sworn, says: Reside in Cortland and am boiler maker. Have worked
at the business off and on at different places since 1866. I also repair boilers.
Was called to repair this boiler one Sunday in Nov. last. I found stay-bolt
over the fire-box was leaking, they hold head and cylinder together. It
indicates strain. Did not leak badly, had just started. Leak was stopped. I
noticed iron had begun to color 18 inches back of bridge wall. It was small
place not as large as hand then. Changing color or burning diminishes strength
of iron. Did not consider it serious and did not speak of it. Never saw one
start there before.
Was
there again in December and Howard called my attention to this same spot. It
was then as large again as it was in Nov. Called John Sager's attention to it.
He referred me to Gleason. I thought it was a weak spot and might give out
there. Told Knickerbocker, Howard and others about it. Told Howard it wouldn't
be safe to run it a great while in that condition. Howard said he wished I
would tell them and get it fixed. Had talk with Gleason. I told him it would
run 3 to 6 months. Told Gleason would have to go to Syracuse and get iron and
have it rolled there to fix it. Told Gleason it would cost $100 or more. Asked
him if I should measure boiler and get iron rolled. He said "wait for a few
days and see." The largest place was 1 foot across, can't tell which ring
course it was in.
I
consider it unsafe to use boiler in condition it then was. Told Gleason so, told
Howard same. Never called to make repairs on that place. I noticed other defects. The caulking below dome on side soon gave way.
They sent for me to fix it, I tried but was sick and couldn't. Saw no blister
only a charred spot. Was at work for the company at the time. Have not examined
boiler since explosion and don't know at what point it gave way. Don't know
whether that spot was ever repaired or not. The company never found any fault with
my work except price of boiler I made for them.
Joseph
Adams, being sworn says: Reside in Cortland. Am boss boiler maker in E. C.
& N. shops. I did some caulking on this boiler last February. I fixed
double roll seam in top of boiler in shell and not in dome. This was a week
day. Did not have my attention called to any other part of boiler. Couldn't do
a good job with pressure of steam on, told them would fix it Sunday. Was there
fixing one of old boilers first Sunday in April last. Was asked to look in furnace
of new boiler just before I went home and see what I could find. He said
"I think there is a blister." I found scale, don't call that a
blister. That is an unsoundness in the iron in the manufacture. Sometimes it
don't amount to anything, but when overheating surface it is best to keep an
eye on it. It was scant 1/16 inch deep and located in front of bridge wall.
Told him it didn't amount to anything at present but to watch it close and
should it go any further to let me know. I saw no other defect. Didn't go over
the bridge wall to make examination. I examined it last Friday. The weakest
point was on radius from single row of rivets on side, about 5 feet 4 inches from
back head of boiler, six or seven inches back of bridge wall. I couldn’t see
any particular fault. This was weakest point both in quality and workmanship. There
was no such thing as a burnt spot around the boiler, no crystallized. The iron was No. 3 grade shell iron, same as 1
am using in boilers I make. The braces go back far enough but ought
to have been heavier. Shell was thick enough. Saw no evidence of low water. If water had been low flues would have had no
coating on but would have the same color of iron just taken out of blacksmith fire.
My
theory of cause of explosion is "the steam gauge may not have been
right." I have known of steam gauges being 10 to 20
lbs. wrong. Think from violence of explosion must have been more than 70 lbs.
pressure. If there had been a place "mud burnt" I would have seen it
on boiler after explosion. There is no such spot.
S. Knickerbocker, sworn says: Am
engineer at Hitchcock Foundry and Machine shops on Port Watson street. Osborn
told me after he had been down to repair boiler on Elm street, that it would
not last more than six months the way they were using it. He did not tell me
the nature of the defects. I never told anyone I would be afraid to stay around
the boiler as it was not safe.
AFFIDAVIT.
Geo.
B. N. Tower, affirms and says that his residence is in Brooklyn, N. Y., that his occupation is Chief Engineer and expert of
the American Steam Boiler Insurance Company of New York, that he examined the
boiler which exploded on the 30th day of May at the Hitchcock M'f'g Company's works,
Cortland, N. Y., upon the 1st day of June, 1887, and found that the back head driven
in a northerly direction from the boiler about 250 feet with nearly the whole of
one ring course attached to it. At the same time and about a hundred feet from where
the boiler originally stood found a strip of the next ring course which had broken
and flattened out, found a middle portion of the boiler to which the steam dome
was attached flattened out and lying about 25 feet to the west of the boiler
and the front head of the boiler driven in a southerly direction into the
blacksmith shop. The tubes of the boiler were scattered in a northerly and
northeasterly direction at distances varying from 75 to 125 feet. This boiler
was 66 inches in diameter, tubes 16 feet long, 102 in number, three four ring
courses each composed of a single sheet of 3/8 iron, the heads were 1/2 inch
steel. It opened apparently in several places nearly simultaneously.
The
iron was of poor quality and badly laminated but the outside of the sheets had
a smooth appearance and nothing to indicate its poor quality except by
examining the parts fractured. Iron of this quality deteriorates very rapidly
in strength when in use in a boiler and no extra amount of pressure would be
required to cause it to explode. There was ample evidence in the interior of
the parts examined to show that there was plenty of water in the boiler. There
was no evidence to show that the boiler had been overheated in any part at any
time. A violent explosion cannot take place when there is but little water in
the boiler: The action in that case being the softening of the iron by its becoming
red hot and its tearing open allowing the escape of the pressure, seldom moving
the boiler from its seating. I consider, however, that this was deficient in construction,
the heads not being properly braced to the shell of the boiler. I examined the
wreck and saw the destruction done; I am of opinion the cause of the explosion was
the inability of the boiler to sustain the pressure owing to the deterioration
of the iron from use. Have seen as much destruction and damage done by
explosion of boilers with less than 70 lbs. of steam.
Geo. B. N. TOWER.
Affirmed and subscribed to before me this 2nd day of June, 1887,
Geo. D. BRADFORD, Coroner.
The
testimony of Hoel C. Pierce of Homer , and J. A. Tisdale of Cortland, who examined
the boiler after the explosion, was mainly corroborative of other experts. John
C. Sager denied that he ever talked with Osborn or heard him talk with Gleason
about this boiler. Dr. Jewitt was examined at length in relation to the cause
of death and the evidence was closed.
The jury
found that "Henry A. Webster, William P. Ballard and Frank H. Scott came to
their deaths on the 30th day of May, 1887, by means of the explosion of the
large steam boiler situated in the works of the Hitchcock Manufacturing
Company, on the south side of Elm street in Cortland village, which boiler was
known and designated as No. 1, in said works by the boiler inspection company,
and that the cause of said explosion of said boiler is unknown to this jury."
No comments:
Post a Comment