safety devices. Some of the railroads in Kentucky are equipping their lines with this block signal system and are fast adopting many other safety appliances, but we are firmly of the opinion that all railroads, whether small or large, should be required to adopt this system.

The Interstate Commerce Commission, in its report to the Congress, December 19, 1904, discusses this question at length. The Commission urges with added emphasis, if possible, the same means recommended in its last annual report—the adoption of the block system. As to whether the cost of introducing the block system would be a burden on the railroads, no definite claim upon this point has been presented, and it has been mentioned only in a vague way. The cost of introducing the manual block system can scarcely be called a burden when we see it introduced on single-track lines of not very heavy traffic, and find no prominent mention of expense in the annual reports of the companies. The same reasons that existed for the introduction of the automatic coupler and air brake by the provisions of the safety appliance act of 1893 apply to the prevention of collisions by compulsory use of the block system. The report discusses the use of automatic versus non-automatic signaling, and says that the question is one of immediate capital expenditure. Considered strictly on its technical merits, the block system is the acme of simplicity. It is the simple embodiment of the theory that no train shall ever be started from a point on any mainline track until it is known that such track is clear of all other trains up to a certain point beyond. In other words, a space interval must always be maintained between trains and no dependence placed on the maintenance of time intervals at stations.

The block signal cures faults due to mistakes in reading time, failures of time pieces, miscalculations of speed, neglect or laziness of employes, and numberless other faults familiar with those who read collision records. In addition to the cost, a final objection has been mentioned that, unless a large number of new stations are established, trains may be delayed at stations waiting for preceding trains to clear the block section ahead. The only adequate remedy, if traffic is active, is to divide the long section in two. In some cases

permissive signaling is often resorted to for delayed trains, but the general answer to this, and to all objections, is the experience of roads of all classes, doing all kinds of business, on which the block system has been intelligently applied and been in use for years past.

The Commission further recommends that the report of accidents in the annual reports to the Commission should be abolished and that the law be made to require the monthly reports of accidents to cover all classes of accidents. The difficulty in obtaining reports from all companies within the time prescribed by law is mentioned. The extent of these omissions may be inferred from the fact that sixty-four roads admitted having omitted to report accidents after their attention had been called to them by the Commission. These omissions amounted to a total of 109 deaths and 226 injuries during the year ending June 30, 1904. Suits have been brought against a number of railroad companies for failure to comply with the law. The great increase in the number of train accidents during the year has led to widespread discussion, and the causes assigned for various accidents have been numerous and conflicting.

Among those mentioned are laxity of discipline, long hours of labor, employment of inexperienced men, overtaxing the facilities of handling business, and many others. The fact that there exists SO wide a diversity of opinion on this important subject and a careful examination of the reports sent in by the railway companies covering the more serious accidents suggests that if the public is to be supplied with full and accurate information concerning the causes of such accidents the facts ought to be made the subject of impartial investigation on behalf of the Government, and various reasons for such investigation of railway accidents by the Government are set forth in the report.

ASSESSMENT.

The valuation of the tangible property of the railroads by this Board has been increased over the assessment of last year $1,927,495. The total valuation last year was $52,253,536. The total valuation this year is $54,181,031.

The past year has been a very busy one for the Commission; a large number of complaints have been filed, heard and determined. A synopsis of these complaints and the steps taken therein are shown in "Appendix A."

The Commission has visited many points in the State in making these investigations. Experience has shown that where shippers are required to come to the seat of government to prosecute their complaints, they prefer to abandon rather than incur the cost and annoyance which this entails, therefore the Commission has adopted a rule to require the representatives of the railroads to appear before the Commission at the points from which these complaints are made thereby rendering the complainant every facility for presenting his complaint. We find this is no hardship upon the representatives of railroads, for the reason that it is no more expensive for them to appear before the Commission at these various points that it would be to require them to go to Frankfort.

LITIGATION.

Since the injunction procured in the Federal court by a number of the railroads against the Commission was dissolved in 1902, the Commission has been able to discharge its duties without litigation of any kind until October, 1904, when a decision of the complaint of the Lumbermen's Club

was rendered, and new rules governing demurrage and car service on all the railroads in the State were issued by the Commission. A test case was sought to be made by one of the railroads in an action instituted in the United States Circuit Court at Louisville. A temporary restraining order was granted against the Commission by Judge Walter Evans, prohibiting the publication and enforcement of these rules. A day was fixed for. hearing the motion to grant a permanent injunction. Prior to the date so fixed, on motion of the plaintiff, the action was dismissed, and the rules have now gone into effect and are being observed by all railroads and shippers in the State.

A number of important complaints are now pending and are being investigated as speedily as possible.

Respectfully submitted,

C. C. MCCHORD,

A. T. SILER,

MCD. FERGUSON,

Commissioners.