On November 13, 1912, fifteen people died in a train wreck at Irvington, a suburb near Indianapolis, Indiana.[1] The train wreck was caused by a lack of block signal system, according to the investigation from Indiana railway commission.[2] This accident was disastrous. Nevertheless, the brakeman of the train admitted that the accident was caused by his failure of closing the switch to a siding.[3] However, it is also reported that the train was running forty miles an hour in order to catch up and arrive its destination on time.[4] Whether the accident was caused by the lack of block system, or the failure of closing the switch, or exceeding speed, the cause was still unclear. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the social structure, background of Indianapolis, different perceptions and solutions of this disaster, as well as the influence of this train wreck. Later, we will have a better perception of the cause of this disaster, as well as how this disaster impact Indianapolis socially, politically and economically.
As early as in 1857, Indianapolis was the “place where the ways meet”, and was a center of transit by railroads than any other inland town in the world.[5] Then, railroads continued to expand and provided access of raw materials and markets; as railroads spread in the city in all directions, companies opened more sites outside of central business district in the city, residential area also expanded as the railroads developed rapidly. [6] Indianapolis experienced more significant changes after turning in twentieth century. The population of the urban area increased speedily as railroads brought more population from rural areas to urban areas.[7] For instance, the population of Indianapolis rose from 169,164 in 1900 to 233, 650 in 1910.[8] On top of population boom, Education and social facilities also developed rapidly; elementary education as well as college/university education was more advanced than earlier times; facilities such as libraries, theatres, and musical organizations began to gain more popularity in this city.[9] Nevertheless, there were still noticeable differences between rural life and urban ones. Within urban area, one had access to electricity, running water, telephones, cultural programs, libraries, and better secondary education, compared with those in rural areas.[10] Fortunately, transportations (railroads, cars, buses) increase contacts between urban and rural residents; as time passed, more rural residents moved to urban area by the convenient transportation of railroads and cars, in order to pursue better living environment in the urban area.[11]
The early years in twentieth century witnessed more enterprises being established in urban area, compared with those in late nineteenth century; for example, Indianapolis Star published its first newspaper on June 6, 1903.[12] The speedway success in 1911 brought businesses to the city of Indianapolis, and it gained a new name as “city of speedway”.[13] One year later, the city’s first skyscraper, seventeen-story Merchants Bank Building went up, and it remained as Indianapolis’ tallest building until 1962, when City-County Building broke its record.[14] It was such a good time to invest in business that the labor was cheap and plentiful, and invested capital was doubled and trebled.[15] Railroads facilitated transportation and contacts between urban and rural residents, education and social facilities advanced significantly, the city of Indianapolis was prosperous and busy in the early years of twentieth century.
The city was in an excitement of constructing, developing and accelerating in 1912, until a train wreck happened in the morning of November 13, fifteen people died and seventeen people were seriously injured in this accident, very soon it aroused neighborhood’s attention in Irvington, a suburb of Indianapolis; many homes were thrown open to the wounded.[16] Physicians and the firemen in Irvington were hurriedly summoned and ambulances were taking away the dead and injured.[17] According to the Indiana railway commission, the accident was caused by the train company’s (Cincinnati, Hamilton and Dayton railway) failure to install a block system, if the company obeyed the order of installing, the accident would not happen; however, the brakeman of the train admitted that it was his fault to close the switch to a siding, although he denied this later.[18] Besides, it was also reported that the train was running an hour late, and the engineer was trying to catch up and running forty miles an hour; then the train crashed into freight on siding.[19] From this, it implies that the block system is the major cause of this disaster, while the failure of closing switch and the exceeding speed deepened seriousness to this disaster.
Different perceptions of the disaster lead to different solutions. The Indiana railway commission insisted that if the block signal system were installed, the train wreck would not occur; and the order of installing was issued some months ago, by Indiana railway commission, and the block system was to have been completed by Jan.1, 1913; however, Cincinnati, Hamilton, and Dayton railway refused to install the block system.[20] The head brakeman, on the other hand, admitted it was his fault for not closing the switch to a siding, when a freight train was letting the exceeding-speed passenger train pass; however, he later denied he was responsible for the wreck, claimed that he was under the influence of an anesthetic when he made the admission.[21] The third cause of this disaster, which was the exceeding speed of train, made it impossible for the passenger train to avoid the collision with the freight train.[22] Three different perceptions of the causes of the disaster had three different solutions. The two later causes can be prevented by carefulness, but the first cause – the block signal system, required more effort.
As early as 1905, seven years before this train wreck, representatives in Congress expressed their support for installing block system on every mile of railroad track in the United States.[23] For example, one of the representatives Charles E. Townsend claimed, “In England, where the Block System had been used, accidents have been reduced to the minimum. Some of the best equipped railroads in the United States are now using this system and with the most satisfactory results”.[24] Another representative E.D. Crumpacker also believed “the block system is practicable and that it will be a great safeguard to human life”.[25] Furthermore, the magazine at that time observed, “every morning paper brings fresh news of deaths and permanent injuries inflicted on travelers. No change in the proportion of people killed and injured can be expected unless by legislation rigidly enforced. All railroads will not adopt the Block System unless they are compelled by law to do so and later compelled to observe the law.”[26] This demonstrates that the block system was not a small issue in Indianapolis; instead it was a crucial and urgent issue concerned by people within the entire country. It can also be seen that the Indiana railway commission was not requiring the train company to obey an insignificant order; instead, the block signal system was a safeguard to travelers.
However, the conflicts were not limited to the block system, later in 1913, railroads employees held a strike in downtown of Indianapolis on July 5, the strikers asked for increase of wages and recognition of the national union; it was reported that the strike began at four in the morning and it affected more than five hundred men.[27]
One decade later, Indianapolis experienced dramatic changes after the train wreck in 1912. The population of Indianapolis increased from 233,650 to 314,194 in 1920; the percentage of increase is more than that between 1900 and 1910.[28] However, transportation through railroads decreased after about 1920, since there were more choices for transportation, such as automobiles, buses, trucks, and airplanes.[29] And because of the diverse choices of transportation, migration from rural area to urban area became easier and more convenient, this is one possible explanation of the reason why the percentage of increase of this decade was significant larger than the previous decade.
Besides, there were two Indiana men played essential roles in 1910s and they were symbols of the conflict between new social and economic philosophies.[30] David M. Parry was president of the Parry Automobile Company, he was also involved with insurance companies and railroads; he was president of several boards, and he represented the new capitalism, and most of all, he claimed that the country could not run on an eight-hour day and he was anti-labor.[31] On the other hand, Eugene V. Debs used to work in the railway yards for 50 cent a day; later he became a fireman, then he went back to railroading and founded the American Railway Union; later he formed the Social-Democratic party with Victor Berger.[32] These two men played essential roles not only in political environment, but also had significant social and economic influences.
Within the Progressive era (1901-1917),[33] Indiana railroad commission was established in 1905, the State Board of Accounts was organized in 1909, and a direct primary law was enacted in 1915, but the full impact of the Progressive era is not to be found in particular legislation – it represented an increased recognition that economic and social life had become interdependent than previously.[34] This connection between economic and social life demonstrated the new social and economic philosophies in the Progressive era.
Although it seemed that the train accident did not influence Indianapolis significantly, the society changed dramatically after the time point of the wreck, compared with the society before the wreck. This accident implied that railroad was a major transportation at that time. It not only connected people in rural area with people in urban area, but also provided connections between merchants and merchants. It can be said that railroads were indispensable parts of people’s life and the society, by connecting people and businesses together; it witnessed foundations and development of many enterprises and public facilities in Indianapolis. Later, traveling by train decreased while other transportations entered and gained popularity, this demonstrated that people found out more secure and convenient ways to travel and commute, thus, the economy and society were developing rapidly and economic and social life were more interdependent than before.
Politically, the train wreck happened within the Progressive era. The two influential men in Indiana demonstrated the conflicts between new social and economic philosophies. It can be seen that social and economic life are inseparable with political ones. Besides, the representatives of Congress showed how politics could play an essential role in social and economic life. For instance, the block signal system was supported by lots of the representatives, if the block system is installed, the deaths and injuries would decrease remarkably, and the economic losses would also reduce significantly. This exhibits how political decisions and laws would affect social and economic components in a society.
In conclusion, the train wreck in 1912 in Indianapolis carries lots of importance not merely because of the deaths and injuries, but also it reflected what roles did railroads play in a society, the significance and influence of these roles on economy, society, and politics.
Bibliography
Barrows, Robert G. A Demographic Analysis of Indianapolis 1870-1920. Bloomington: Indiana University, 1977.
Chicago Daily Tribune. “No BLOCK SYSTEM: 15 DIE AS RESULT.” November 14, 1912
Chicago Daily Tribune. “Strike in Indianapolis.” July 6, 1926.
Edward A. Leary, Indianapolis The Story of a City. Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc, 1971.
Los Angeles Times. “FIFTEEN DEAD IN COLLISION.” November 14, 1912.
New York Times. “FIFTEEN KILLED IN WRECK.’’ November 14, 1912.
Sedgwick, Ellery. “HOW CONGRESS STANDS ON THE BLOCK SYSTEM,” Leslie’s Monthly Magazine, July, 1905, 345.
The Washington Post. “15 DIE IN TRAIN WRECK.” November 14, 1912.
Wilson, William E. Handbook of Indiana History. Indianapolis: Department of Public Instruction, 1961.
[1] “15 DIE IN TRAIN WRECK,” The Washington Post, November 14, 1912.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] “No BLOCK SYSTEM: 15 DIE AS RESULT,” Chicago Daily Tribune, November 14, 1912
[5] Robert G. Barrows, A Demographic Analysis of Indianapolis 1870-1920 (Bloomington: Indiana University, 1977), p. 16
[6] Ibid., 19.
[7] William E. Wilson, Handbook of Indiana History (Indianapolis: Department of Public Instruction, 1961), p. 59.
[8] Edward A. Leary, Indianapolis The Story of a City (Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc, 1971), p. 235.
[9] Wilson, Handbook, 60.
[10] Ibid., 63.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Leary, The Story of a City, 181.
[13] Ibid., 180.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Ibid.
[16] “FIFTEEN DEAD IN COLLISION,” Los Angeles Times, November 14, 1912.
[17] Ibid.
[18] “15 DIE IN TRAIN WRECK,” The Washington Post, November 14, 1912.
[19] Ibid.
[20] “FIFTEEN KILLED IN WRECK,’’ New York Times, November 14, 1912.
[21] “15 DIE IN TRAIN WRECK,” The Washington Post, November 14, 1912.
[22] “FIFTEEN KILLED IN WRECK,’’ New York Times, November 14, 1912.
[23] Ellery Sedgwick, “HOW CONGRESS STANDS ON THE BLOCK SYSTEM,” Leslie’s Monthly Magazine, July, 1905, 345
[24] Ibid.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Ibid.
[27] “Strike in Indianapolis,” Chicago Daily Tribune, July 6, 1926.
[28] Leary, The Story of a City, 235.
[29] Wilson, Handbook, 59.
[30] Leary, The Story of a City, 185.
[31] Ibid., 186
[32] Ibid., 186
[33] Wilson, Handbook, 56.
[34] Wilson, Handbook, 57.
