Lee Road / 16 Blackheath Village
Blackheath
020 8852 2390
https://www.therailwayblackheath.co.uk/
https://whatpub.com/railway
Above photo 1955. |
Above photo 1980, from the Blackheath
Society. |
Above photo 1991, from the Blackheath Society. |
Above photo, date unknown. |
Above photo, date unknown. |

Above photo 2019. |
Now part of Greater London, this area was indeed Kent before 1965. Hence,
I will be adding information regarding this pub as and when I find or it is
sent to me, but at present I'll be concentrating on the areas that are
within the Kent boundary today.
Your help is appreciated, and every email is answered.
Above matchbox, date unknown. |
This was opened in 1851 and originally licensed with only a beer license
as landlords from the the "Three Tuns" and the "Crown" opposed the
application to sell spirits.
In 1877 the licensee, Alfred Alexander Cole, created the Blackheath
Pandocheion, writing "Whilst fully believing that the partaking of bodily
refreshment and pleasant surroundings not only enhances the zest of
consumption but ought materially to assist digestion, the process of which
requires tranquillity of mind, the new proprietor of the Railway Hotel...has
therefore fitted up his premises in an elaborate style (Jacobean) as
luxurious as it is unique in England and adopted for it the euphonious Greek
title Pandocheion".
The Pandy as it quickly became known did not last long, although the
diminutive was used until the 1930s and in 1893 the proprietor stripped out
all the Jacobean fitments and installed a new staircase and dining room on
the first floor.
All vestiges of its Victorian origins were removed in the 1950s when
Taylor Walker removed the Doric porch and columns from the front.
This has also gone under the name of the "Fairway and Firkin"
from 1999, but not sure when it finally changed back, probably in 2001 when
the Firkin chain was closed by the then owners Punch Taverns.
Closed in 2018 but reopened Tuesday 27th February 2018 after a
significant refurbishment which shortened the length of the bar counter to
make way for more restaurant seating at the rear.
Southeastern Gazette, 11 January 1853.
Alleged Assault at Blackheath.
Joseph Pryce, 59, a mail of gentlemanly appearance, was charged with
having assaulted Jane Box, with intent, &c. A second count charged
him with an indecent assault. Mr. Russell prosecuted; Mr. Horn
defended the prisoner.
It appeared that the prisoner, who is a stockbroker, went to the
"Railway Tavern," at Blackheath, where the prosecutrix was employed
as nursemaid. On her taking him up some coffee, it was alleged that
he kissed her, and took other liberties, but there was no evidence
to support the first count in the indictment, and after hearing the
evidence, the jury acquitted him on the second count.
|
From the Borough of Greenwich Free Press, 29 May, 1858.
FRIGHTFUL ACCIDENT TO A RAILWAY PORTER.
On Tuesday morning last, a fatal accident occurred to William
Diggins, a potter in the service of the South-Eastern Railway
Company, and employed at the Blackheath Station on the North Kent
line. It appeared that the unfortunate man was on the line of rails
for some purpose, when the express train, leaving London at
quarter-past ten for Strood, came along at the usual speed. It would
seem that he could not have heard the advancing train, as it passed
over him, death being instantaneous. The unfortunate man’s head was
completely severed from his body, and on the arrival of the train at
the Woolwich Arsenal Station, a portion of the skull was found on
one of the carriage buffers.
THE INQUEST.
On Thursday morning an inquest was held at the "Railway Tavern,"
Lee, before Mr. C. J. Carttar, coroner for West Kent, on the body of
John Diggins, aged 27, a porter employed at the Blackheath station
of the North Kent Railway, whose head was completely severed from
his body by an express train on the previous Tuesday morning. The
following witnesses were examined:-
Samuel Hopkings, a porter employed at the Blackheath station,
deposed on the previous Tuesday morning, about twenty-five minutes
past ten o'clock, he was about to clean the points, and for that
purpose he had an oil-can and scraper, which he left on the platform
whilst he went to attend to a truck. He then heard the express
train, which leaves London at 10.15, advancing, and when near the
station the engine-driver gave two shrill whistles for danger. The
train passed by the station, and witness then saw the mutilated
remains of the deceased on the rails, the body lying on one side and
the head, which was completely severed, on the other.
Barnaby Barber, signal-man at the Blackheath station, deposed he saw
the deceased on the down line of rails, engaged in oiling the
points. The express down train approached, but the deceased appeared
to take no notice, and the train passed over him. Witness was at the
time employed at the signal-post, and he distinctly heard the noise
of the crushing of deceased’s bones.
By the coroner:- His back was towards the advancing train. I made no
signal to him, as I feared that I might divert his attention from
the danger.
I felt, in fact, spellbound when I found that he did not move when
the train arrived close to him. By one step he might have been out
of danger.
Christopher Cockfield deposed:- He is an engine driver, in the
service of the South Eastern Railway Company, and had charge of the
express down train, which left London on Tuesday morning, at 10.15.
The train is express from London to Woolwich, and was proceeding at
the rate of twenty-five miles per hour. When within about 100 yards
of Blackheath station, witness saw the deceased in a stooping
posture, in the act of working the handles of the points. He then
gave two shrill whistles, and immediately reversed the engine, and
put on the break. The deceased did not move, and witness kept the
whistle open; but it was impossible to stop the train until it
passed over the deceased.
Abraham Forsham, the fireman, corroborated the evidence of the last
witness.
Sarah Skelton deposed that the deceased had resided at her house in
Blackheath. He had recently complained of ear-ache, and stated on
Tuesday morning that he had put some tobacco in his ear.
Mr. Chapman, station-master at Blackheath, deposed the deceased had
been in the service of the company about six weeks. He was a most
active, intelligent man, and was very anxious to become a good
railway servant. It was not his duty to clean the points, but he was
always desirous to be learning.
The coroner said the evidence was conclusive that no blame attached
to any person. It was strange that the deceased should remain on the
rails, when one step would have saved his life. It was probable that
the tobacco which was in his ear had affected him and produced
deafness.
Verdict "Accidental death."
|
South Eastern Gazette, 11 September, 1860.
BLACKHEATH. The late Fatal Accident in the Railway Tunnel.
On Tuesday afternoon last an inquiry was held by Mr. C. J. Carttar,
coroner, at the "Railway Tavern," adjoining the Blackheath station
of the North Kent Railway, on the body of John King Charles, aged
22, the young man whose body was cut in two in the above tunnel on
the night of Friday week.
Mr. Robinson, from the office of Mr. Rees, solicitor to the
South-Eastern Railway Company, was in attendance on behalf of the
company; and Mr. Fletcher, solicitor of Stepney, appeared for the
widow of the deceased.
From the evidence given, it appeared that the deceased, who resided
at 12, Hatfield-street, St, Luke’s, followed the occupation of
superintending the posting of advertising bills for the proprietors,
of several London newspapers, and was a passenger from Woolwich to
London by the 5.26 p.m. train. He was seated in a second-class
compartment next the box of the head-guard, a young woman being the
only passenger with him. According to the statement of the guard,
George Abbott, on the train leaving the Charlton Station he observed
the deceased and the young woman romping together, and after
entering the Blackheath tunnel he observed other acts between them
which induced him to make known that he was witnessing by knocking
at the carriage window with a key and shaking his finger. On the
train leaving Blackheath Abbott missed the deceased from the
carriage, and conjectured that he had alighted at that station. The
young woman in question, when her ticket was demanded at New-cross,
remarked that she had none, but that her friend (the deceased) had
it, and she would wait for his arrival by a subsequent train. This
she was allowed to do, and left at 6.50 with a person who got in at
New-cross, she giving up a third-class return ticket from London to
Woolwich. When Abbott, the guard, arrived in London with the train,
some of the passengers called his attention to a severe jolting
which was felt on the train coming through the tunnel, in
consequence of which a search was made, but nothing was then
discovered. Shortly before ten o’clock the same night, Mr. Chapman,
the station-master, not feeling satisfied at the search which had
been made, directed three of the porters to walk through the tunnel
with lights, and on reaching a distance of about 300 yards they
found the body of the deceased cut in two, the upper portion, from
the waist, lying between the upline of metals, and the feet and legs
near the wall, against which it is supposed the deceased struck
while endeavouring to get from one carriage to another, to avoid any
complaint being made against him by the guard. At this stage of the
proceedings the inquiry was adjourned for a week, the Coroner
remarking that as no doubt the case would obtain publicity the young
woman might feel it right to come forward and give evidence in the
case.
|
South Eastern Gazette, 18 September, 1860.
BLACKHEATH. The Fatal Accident in the Blackheath Railway Tunnel.
On Tuesday afternoon last, Mr. C. J. Carttar, coroner, held an
adjourned inquiry at the "Railway Tavern," adjoining the Blackheath
Station of the North Kent Railway, touching the death of John King
Charles, aged 22, whose body was cut in two in the
Blackheath-tunnel, on the afternoon of Friday, the 31st alt.
Two of the ticket collectors at the New-cross station, having given
confirmatory evidence to that which has already appeared, of the
arrival of the young woman, with whom the deceased was seen by the
guard Abbott riding in the same carriage on the arrival of the train
in the Blackheath tunnel, the coroner observed that the inquiry had
been adjourned in the expectation that the young woman in question
would have come forward and given evidence in the matter.
Notwithstanding, however, every publicity appeared to have been
given to the case, she had not been discovered, or made her
appearance, and his opinion was that the jury could do no other
than, in the absence of direct testimony, return an open verdict.
The jury having concurred in these observations, returned the
following verdict:— "That the deceased was found dead in the
Blackheath tunnel, cut in two from a train having gone over him, but
how or from what cause originating there is no evidence before the
jury to show.
|
From the Kentish Gazette, 3 January 1865.
The Catastrophe in Blackheath Railway Tunnel.
On Thursday, Mr. C. J. Carttar, one of the coroners for the county,
resumed the investigation at the "Railway Hotel, "Blackheath, into
the circumstances attending the deaths of the five men, W. M. Jones,
Henry Smith (otherwise Petchev), Robert Morris, Wm. Wade, and Wm.
Seeby, who were killed, with several others, on Friday, the 15th
inst., in the Blackheath Tunnel of the North Kent Railway of the
South-Eastern system.
Mr. Freeland and Mr. Stevens represented the South-Eastern Company;
Mr. Eborall, general manager; Mr. Cudworth, locomotive
superintendent; Mr. Knight, general superintendent, and other
officials of the company, were present. Mr. Woollett, of the Home
Circuit, attended to watch the ease on behalf of James Jones, the
signalman at Blackheath Station, who it was alleged telegraphed
through to Charlton that the line was clear after intimation had
been given that "the ballast train had parted in the tunnel."
Several legal gentlemen appeared on behalf of the other injured
passengers and other persons, and the Court was densely crowded with
the friends and relatives of the sufferers.
The Jury having answered to their names, the Coroner remarked at the
commencement of the proceedings that he should call evidence to
remove an erroneous impression that had gone abroad to the effect
that the "ballast train" had parted in the tunnel previously to the
collision.
Wm. Henry Lancaster, principal guard of the ballast train, was then
recalled, and said, in answer to the coroner, that he kept correct
account of the time he went from the Charlton Station. It was about
4.14, and it would take four minutes to get to the mouth of the
tunnel. The time to the stand still in the tunnel would be from ten
to twelve minutes. He then got down from the engine to send a man
down to signal, when he heard a noise, and did not uncouple the
train. He returned to the engine-driver, and witness asked him what
had occurred. There was some misunderstanding between them, and
witness returned and uncoupled the train, and gave the driver
directions to proceed onward with the first part of the train.
By the Coroner:- The train had only just come to a standstill at the
time the collision took place. They were four-fifths through the
tunnel. His instructions were to go back when the train came to a
standstill to signal. He did not go back more than four or five
trucks after he had spoken to the engine-driver when the collision
took place.
By Mr. Woollett:- The train was going slow enough to allow the
stoker to get down from the engine to throw gravel upon the rails.
It was witness’s duty as guard and foreman of this train to ride
upon the engine, and sometimes to attend to the break. Oilier men,
however, were put on to attend to the breaks. On this occasion the
front break was not brought into use. Witness had four or five fog
signals in his pocket, and the under guard also had some. It was the
duty of the under guard at the time of a stand still of a train in
the tunnel to run back and exhibit the fog signals.
By the Coroner:- It was the duty of the under guard upon a stand
still of the train to run back and exhibit the fog signals without
reference to witness.
The company's rules were referred to.
Joseph Wills, plate-layer, whose head was bandaged, said he was in
the rear of the train in the last carnage with four others Wade,
Seeby, Jones, and Pledge. There were other men in another
compartment. Having got about three parts of the way through the
tunnel, perhaps occupying about some four or five minutes or less,
the train came to a stand.
By the Coroner:- When the train came to a stand still, Lancaster
came and asked if any one had a lucifer. Witness said he had, and
struck one and lighted a lamp. He went away up the tunnel, and
witness saw no more of him. Witness did not feel the train go on
after that. He knew nothing of it. He heard no signal, felt no
collision, and the first thing that he knew was that he crawled out
of a lot of woodwork, and got out of the tunnel at the Charlton end.
Witness could not say how often the train slackened, but he thought
it did two or three times before it came to a stand still.
By Mr. Woollett:- After witness had given Lancaster a light, the
latter communicated with Randall, and directed him to put the break
on.
Richard Pledge, a plate-layer, who was under treatment in St.
Bartholomew's Hospital, said he was in the second compartment
nearest the break at the rear of the train.
Once or twice the train stopped and an endeavour was made to send it
on again. Some one came to the door and asked for a light, which,
was supplied by last witness. He did not know the voice. While they
were in the tunnel a train passed, and the man who took the light
stood between the two trains. Witness knew scarcely anything more.
There was a crash, and all he could tell after that was that he
found himself embedded on the up-line, but crawled out. He then
reached Dowsett, the driver, who took him on his engine, and so he
got out of the tunnel. He did not know whether the tail lights were
on.
By Mr. Woollett:- Witness had been five years in the service. He
could not say how long it was after the light was given that the
collision took place. He knew nothing about it.
By the Coroner:- After leaving Charlton Station witness thought
before the collision took place, it must have been 10 or 11 minutes.
They were three parts through the tunnel.
Joseph Squires, head guard of the 2.40 up train from Maidstone:- He
was in the break van next the engine on the day of the accident. He
was stopped at Charlton at 4.20. and was started from there at 4.34.
Nothing occurred until they arrived in the tunnel, when a collision
took place. He was certain what had taken place. He was standing up
at the time, and knocked to the other side of the break van, which
was broken up. His standing up saved his life.
By the Coroner:- Witness was sure that his train was not off the
line. They were going at the rate of 20 or 21 miles an hour. He
could well tell the speed from his long experience. While waiting at
Charlton to be allowed to go on, the station-master said he would
start them as soon as possible. Some of the passengers were
impatient as to the delay. Witness helped to remove some of the
injured.
By a Juror:- If fog signals had been used he (witness) mast have
known it.
By Mr. Woollett:- After the collision he could not see whether the
tail lights were on. The guard of that train should know. If he were
the guard of a ballast train he should have a book for entries.
Witness carried fog signals. In case of a stand still in a tunnel
the under-guard should run back and show the fog signals. It was the
duty of the head guard to look after and instruct the under guard;
but in the case of a stand still in a tunnel the under guard would
not wait for instruction but run back with the signals.
A rule of the company bearing upon this point was read, showing that
both guards were equally responsible.
By Mr. Freeland:- Witness knew that a ballast train was ahead of
him, but not in the tunnel, or they would not have caught him there.
By Mr. Woollett:- Witness was the guard of a fast train, and on
being stopped at Charlton for the ballast train, he remarked that
they should have shunted it.
Coroner:- They could not have done so at Charlton.
Witness:- But they might have done so at Woolwich.
Lancaster, recalled, said the witnesses Wells and Pledge were
mistaken in saying he asked for a light.
The Coroner:- This you remember was before the collision, the men
being afterwards injured.
Lancaster answered that he never asked any one for a light, he had
his own light. After the accident he asked a porter for a light.
Before the collision he never spoke to Randall.
Wells (recalled), in answer to the Coroner:- said Lancaster was the
man who asked me for a light. He struck the match and lighted his
lamp. He saw his face after lighting the lamp, and could swear to
him.
By a Juror:- and to his voice also.
Witness:- He also called to Randall to put his break on hard.
By the Coroner:- Witness knew Lancaster well.
Lancaster said his light was all right from Belvedere to Blackheath,
and he had never dropped it or extinguished it.
By Mr Woollett:- After a train once stopped under similar
circumstances it was almost impossible to drive it on again. The
noise was so great that they could hardly hear each other to speak.
Dowsett, the driver of the ballast train, re-examined, said that
Lancaster went away with the gauge lamp alight and returned with it
alight.
By Mr. Woollett:- They came slowly through, and at the time of
Lancaster leaving the train they were going very slowly.
By the Coroner:- Lancaster did not light his lamp at Belvedere.
By a Juror:- The gauge lamp that showed the state of the water in
the engine had been fixed there all day.
By another Juror:- Lancaster had not time to go to the end of the
train before the collision took place.
By Mr. Woollett:- He could not have got more than four or five
trucks away before the collision took plate. He said he would go
back to Tom and see if he had fog signals.
Henry Malcolm Ramsay, builder, of Paddington, said he was on the
evening of the accident in a second-class carriage, next the engine.
He was alone. The train stopped some time at Charlton. They then
passed into the tunnel, and something jerked him off his seat,
bringing him to the conclusion the carriage in which he was had gone
off the rails.
By the Coroner:- If they had been going at express speed, and not
off the rails, the carriage in which he was seated would have been
smashed up. He heard and felt that the wheels were ploughing up the
gravel between the six-feet way. He could not say how long that was
the case. It seemed to him about a minute or a minute and a half.
This was before the collision. The light in his carriage was not
extinguished, and he got out of the vehicle, and after some
communication with some of the attendants respecting lights, he kept
his hand upon the tunnel wall, and so felt his way out. He came out
of the tunnel with a guard, whom he recognised as Lancaster. Witness
asked him if he had a lamp, and he said he had.
By the Coroner:- Witness felt confident that they were off the line
before the collision took place.
By Mr Freeland:- The first shock threw him off his seat, and the
second threw him out of the window.
Witness said he entertained the opinion that the car-train was off
the line before the collision. There was but one shock. He first
thought that they would either be stopped by the tunnel wall or
turned over. Instead of that they were stopped by the ballast truck.
By a Juror:- Witness believed that he was rocked upon his seat
backwards and forwards before the collision for about quarter of a
mile.
By the Coroner:- Witness Was not injured.
Squires was recalled, and informed by the coroner that the last
witness was of opinion that the train was off the line before the
collision, but he (Squires) said that was incorrect. The break went
off after the collision, in consequence of the engine crossing the
line.
By the Coroner:- If the engine had not so crossed, and the break van
not have left the rails, it would have been smashed up.
The Coroner:- And by such occurrence you were saved?
Squire:- Yes, sir.
Mr. Ramsay said, notwithstanding what Squires said, he held his own
opinion.
Some questions were here asked relative to the speed at which the
train was going, when it was stated by the head guard, Squires, that
the speed of the train was at that time about 20 or 21 miles an
hour; but Mr. Ramsay thought it was about 25 miles an hour.
The Coroner observed that they had adjourned for the purpose of
taking the evidence of Randall, who had had his toes amputated, he
now wished to know his condition?
Mr. Freeland said he was not present, as he was in a critical state.
Mr. Woollett wished to know how it was that a head guard rode upon
the engine.
Mr. Knight replied that he was looked upon as an inspector, and had
that privilege.
The Coroner then staled that it would be necessary to prove the
weight of the entire train.
Mr. Eborall, the general manager, said the weight of the load was
200 tons including the trucks; the engine weighed 27 1/2 tons, and
the tender with the fuel 15 tons, making the total weight 242 1/2
tons.
Mr. Culworth said that the engine was one of the best on the line,
and was capable of drawing 300 tons.
Some general remarks wore here entered into, the principal question
being the necessity of taking further evidence.
The Jury felt they were not free to discuss the question openly, and
intimated their wish to retire, which was at once complied with.
After a deliberation of about three-quarters of an hour, the jury
returned accompanied by the coroner, when another witness was
examined.
William Ware, travelling inspector in the service of the company,
said he joined the train in question at Woolwich. He rode in a
compartment in the centre of the train, and not as usual -
fortunately for him - in the break-van or on the engine. On arriving
at Charlton Station he found the ballast train had preceded them,
and being stopped he got out and received the signal "All clear." He
then got into a second-class carriage, and they proceeded onward
into the tunnel. After the collision he returned to Charlton. By the
lights in the carriage at the fore part of the train he saw that the
engine and one of the carriages were off the line.
The Coroner:- That was after the collision?
Witness:- Yes.
The Coroner then said that as Randall, the under guard, and Hunt,
the driver of the passenger train, were yet unable to attend from
the severe injuries they had sustained, and as it was necessary that
Captain Tyler should also be present before the jury gave their
decision, a further adjournment should take place.
The jury were also of that opinion, and it was announced that a
notification should he sent to Captain Tyler.
The further investigation was then adjourned for a fortnight.
|
From the Kentish Gazette, 17 January 1865.
THE COLLISION ON THE NORTH KENT RAILWAY.
On Thursday afternoon the adjourned inquest on the bodies of the
five unfortunate men who were killed in the recent collision in the
Blackheath tunnel of the North Kent Railway was resumed before Mr.
C. J. Carttar, coroner for West Kent, at the "Railway Hotel,"
Blackheath.
Mr. Freeland again represented the company. Mr. Woollett appeared on
behalf of the signalman Jones; and there were also present Mr.
Eborall, the general manager; Mr. Cudworth, locomotive
superintendent; Mr. Knight, traffic superintendent of the company;
and Mr. Claydon and Mr. Chapman, station-masters at Charlton and
Blackheath.
The first witness called was Joseph Groombridge, who said that when
the collision took place he was riding in the break next to the
engine of the express train. When the collision took place he got
out of the carriage window and walked along the tunnel, which was
full of smoke and steam. Hearing somebody say that a down train was
coming, he got into the carriage again.
A lamp was handed into the carriage, which he supposed came from the
guard, but he did not know Mr Chapman, the station-master at Blackheath, was asked whether
there had not been a train stopped in a similar manner in the tunnel
the next day.
The Coroner, however, intimated his opinion that the question had no
bearing on this particular inquiry, and it was not pressed.
Mr Woollett asked whether, according to the rides of the company, a
signalman ought to receive instructions with reference to a telegram
from a boy by word of mouth.
Mr. Chapman said that a signalman ought not to receive any such
instructions by word of mouth except from himself, as
station-master. Instructions from others ought to be in writing.
Mr Woollett asked whether, under the revised and supplementary
rules, all trains travelling at unusual hours, and not specified in
the time-table — in which description would he included ballast
trains were not required to be telegraphed from station to station
of the "speaking telegraph."
Mr Chapman said he did not conceive that such a ballast train as the
one which had caused the accident was a train travelling at unusual
times. "Unusual times" he considered to be hours after the ordinary
working of the trains was over. Special trains were telegraphed by
speaking telegraphs.
Mr. Freeland said that there were special regulations as to ballast
trains.
Mr. Woollett called attention to the rules, by which any train not
included in the time service was to be treated as special, whether
ballast, coal, empties, light engines, or otherwise.
In answer to a further question from Mr. Woollett, Mr. Chapman said
that this ballast train was not telegraphed by the speaking
telegraph. It was telegraphed, however, in such a way that everybody
would know it would be a ballast train going to "Bricklayer’s Arms."
Captain Tyler, R.E., the Government Inspector of Railways, was
called and said:- I inspected the Blackheath tunnel, in which this
accident took place, on the 19th December. There was one mark on the
side of the tunnel where the engine was said to have come into
contact with it, but no other mark. There was a good deal of water
dropping, and the rails were in a very wet state. I had read a
letter in the paper to the effect that the express train had gone
off the line before the collision, and I made particular examination
of the line with reference to that point, and I came to the
conclusion that there had been nothing of the sort. The gradient of
the tunnel is 1 in 168 from Charlton to within 215 yards of the
collision, and up to the mouth of the tunnel there is a steeper
gradient 1 in 132. There is a curve in the tunnel, but not such a
sharp one as would seriously impede the progress of a train. The
gradient is not a severe one, but it was too severe for this engine
with the load it had to bear. Probably the engine might have carried
the load through if it had not been stopped at Charlton. It came to
a stop on the second or steeper gradient in a very wet place. Under
the circumstances the tail lights of the ballast train would not
Invisible more than ten yards off. The engine-driver of the express
train could not see them until he was well on the train. I saw the
engine of the ballast tram after the collision. It appeared in good
order. The driver told me that it was in good working order before
the collision took place, but that afterwards the pumps had gone out
of order. Being a ballast train, however, the collision would not be
so much felt in the fore part of the train. I have drawn up a
memorandum as to the causes of the accident if the jury would like
to hear it.
The Coroner:- I presume it is drawn up from information you have
received?
Captain Tyler:- Yes, it is.
The Coroner:- Then, I hardly know whether we can receive it in this
court.
Captain Tyler:- Some juries wish to hear such memoranda, and some
object, and I came prepared for both contingencies. At the end of my
memorandum I have stated my conclusions as to the cause of the
accident.
The Coroner:- We shall be glad to hear them.
Captain Tyler then read the following portion of his report,
embodying his conclusions as to the causes of the accident.
"The different circumstances which have contributed to produce this
collision may thus be stated:-
1. A load was attached to the ballast engine heavier than it could,
after being stopped at Charlton, take through the Blackheath tunnel;
and this ought not to have been done, if only on account of the risk
incurred of inconvenience and delay of the heavy passenger traffic
of the company.
2. The station-master at Charlton sent a message, "Train waiting" to
Blackheath, independently of the signalman, and by thus interfering
with the train signals, though with the good intention of avoiding
the chance of unnecessary delay, he was the means of causing the
mistake which led to the collision.
3. The Blackheath signalman, who was comparatively inexperienced,
and who was put out and confused by the verbal message, ‘Train
waiting,’ at Charlton, committed the fatal error of signalling the
up-line clear to Charlton, in spite of the record which was plainly
before him on his instrument of an up-train being already between
Charlton and Blackheath. The railway company had done what they
could in this case to provide for the public safety by establishing
a good system of train signals, intended to prevent more than one
engine or train being upon either line of rails between Charlton and
Blackheath at the same time. But there remained the defect, which I
have had occasion to point out in other cases on the North Kent
Railway, of the signalman being unprovided with speaking instruments
in addition to Tyer’s train instruments. It is no doubt, desirable
after a certain period has elapsed that a signalman working trader
that system should have the means of ascertaining from the next
telegraph box whether a train has been delayed in its progress for
an extraordinary length of time or whether the signalman in that
box, as may occasionally happen, has forgotten or been unable to
give ‘Line clear’ as it passed him. But it is better that this
should be done in a recognized manner; that the train about which
the inquiry is made should be specified, and that a clear statement
should be given in reply as to the passage of that particular train
before another is allowed to follow it. The danger of allowing any
other sort of interference with the train signals is illustrated by
the mistake made by Jones on this occasion. If, on the one hand, he
had been let alone, and had received no verbal message from the
clerk at Blackheath, it would not of course have occurred to him to
give ‘Line clear’ to Charlton until the ballast train bad passed
him. If on the other hand, he had been provided with and been able
to use a speaking instrument and had received a message upon it from
the signalman at Charlton. 'Has the ballast train passed
Blackheath?' in place of receiving verbal message from a porter, it
is impossible that either he himself, or even a less experienced
man, should have replied otherwise than wilfully, ‘Ballast tram has
passed,' unless it had really done so. While, therefore, the
speaking instruments, under the control of the station-masters, from
being worked independently of the signalman at Charlton and from
interfering with the signalman at Blackheath, may be said actually
to have caused this accident, it is evident the same speaking
instrument if placed in the telegraph boxes and worked under proper
regulations by the signalman themselves to each other, would, by
affording a safer means of asking for and obtaining the required
information, hate prevented its occurrence."
The Coroner:- Assuming that the guard of the ballast train when it
came to a standstill did not go back to warn the following train,
should you say that it was his duty to have done so?
Captain Tyler:- I have considered that point in my report, and the
conclusion I have come to is, that if the guard went to the tail of
the train and asked the breaksman to put on his break and give him a
light, it was preparatory to uncoupling the train and sending half
of it out of the tunnel. Then the question arises whether the train
had been standing long enough for the break-man to go back and
protect his train.
The Coroner:- You are of opinion that the coming away from Charlton
was the act of the signalman Jones in signalling “Line clear?”
Captain Tyler:- There was a double process, — telegraphing the line
clear, and then telegraphing for the passenger train to come on. The
passenger train could not come on until it had received permission
from Blackheath.
Mr Woollett:- The guard said distinctly that the moment the signal,
"Line clear," was made, the train started at once.
The Coroner:- We certainly have not had anything brought out about a
second signal.
Captain Tyler:- If you examine the signalmen at Charlton and
Angerstein you will see that that is so. I have called attention
frequently to the necessity of having speaking instruments,
particularly in a report on an accident at the Commercial Docks in
1861.
To Mr. Freeland:- I think Tyer’s system of signalling a
very excellent one — one of the best; but in my opinion it ought to
be accompanied with speaking instruments. I know that there is a
difference of opinion among railway men on the subject.
To the Coroner:- I don’t consider from 7 in the morning to 6 in the
evening unusually long hours for a signalman. I wish there were no
signalmen employed longer. I have had to report on cases where they
have been employed 25 hours, and in one case 37. It was not with
reference to this company. I don't think the message from Charlton,
“Train waiting,” was sufficiently explicit; it ought to have been,
“has the ballast train passed?”
To the Jury:- The want of air-shafts had nothing to do with the
accident. On the contrary, the tunnel would have been more liable to
get wet, and the accident was in some decree attributable to the wet
state of the tunnel, which impeded the progress of the train.
The jury retired to a private room, and after remaining in
consultation with the Coroner for some time, the Coroner announced
that they had decided to adjourn the inquiry until that day
fortnight, in consequence of the inability of the breaksman of the
ballast train, who was still confined in the hospital, to appear
before them. Their intention was then to hear his evidence, if he
was able to appear before them, and if not, to go down to Woolwich
Hospital to hear his evidence there. They would then be able to call
Jones and hear his statement, if he thought fit to make any, and the
case would be complete.
The inquiry was then adjourned until Thursday, the 26th instant.
|
From the Kentish Gazette, 13 June 1865.
DREADFUL RAILWAY ACCIDENT AT STAPLEHUEST.
TEN PERSONS KILLED — UPWARDS OF TWENTY WOUNDED.
The two fatal accidents on the Great Western Railway have been
followed by one even more startling on the Southeastern line, and
from the character of the train to which me disaster occurred the
intelligence will be read with unusually Painful interest. The fast
tidal train, timed to leave Folkestone at 2.30 p.m. on the arrival
of passengers from Boulogne, who quitted Paris on Friday morning at
7 o'clock, started, as usual, with about 110 passengers, anil
proceeded nearly 30 miles on its journey, when, at Staplehurst, the
accident occurred which has been productive of such lamentable
consequences. It appears that at this point the railway crosses a
stream which in winter is of formidable dimensions and of
considerable depth, but in summer shrinks to the proportions of a
rivulet. On the bridge itself a plate had been loosened by the
platelayers, and the engine running over this was thrown off the
rails. Though displaced from its proper track the locomotive adhered
to the permanent way, but the train broke into two parts, and seven
or eight of the carriages plunged into the stream, a fall of several
feet. These vehicles were so crushed and shattered to pieces that
together they did not occupy the space of two whole carriages;
cushions and luggage were thrown out, into, and upon the mud in all
directions; and of the occupants several were killed and many
injured.
Mr. Eborall, the manager, and Mr. Knight, the traffic
superintendent, on receiving information of the accident,
immediately left London-bridge, and proceeded to the spot in a
special train, taking with them Mr. Sidney Jones, of St. Thomas’s
Hospital, Mr. Adams, of the London Hospital (surgeon to the
company). Dr. Palfrey, Dr. Maule Sutton, and such other medical aid
as could be procured at the moment. Assistance was also summoned
from Ashford and Tunbridge, so that before very long 20 medical men,
at least, were on the spot. There was but too much need for the
services of one and all. A glance at the condition of the train and
a hasty recognition of the class to which its occupants belonged
showed that it was no ordinary accident which had occurred. The
carriages that went down into the water were so twisted, flattened,
and turned upon their sides that it was impossible to say whether
the unfortunate travellers inside had been killed outright by the
shock or suffocated as they lay in the water and mud. Those of the
passengers who escaped injury in the first instance behaved nobly
towards their fellows in distress; there was no standing irresolute
on the bank; everything that willing hands could do was done, and
done at once; but in spite of every effort ten lives had been lost
beyond recall, and 20 was the lowest estimate that was formed as to
the wounded.
Mr. Hoare, a resident in the district, placed his carriage at the
disposal of the medical staff, and valuable assistance was rendered
by this agency in dealing with cases of the greatest emergency. In
the confusion which prevailed, and owing to the manifest reluctance
of most of the sufferers to alarm their friends by disclosing their
names, the greatest difficulty was experienced in collecting
anything like accurate information as to the casualties. Several of
the dead remain still without identification, all that is known of
one party being that they were persons of some position returning
from India.
In the course of the evening successive trains conveyed to London
those of the party whose condition fitted them to travel; but
frequently it was evident that they themselves were scarcely
conscious of the extent of the shock they had undergone. One
gentleman had sustained serious injuries about the head. In two
three instances members of a party into which death had intruded
proceeded sadly and unaccompanied to town. One case of this was
peculiarly affecting. A gentleman, evidently in acute pain, but in
still greater distress of mind, carried, half unconsciously, the
bonnet worn by his wife on the journey that was so lamentably and,
in her case, fatally interrupted. Among those conveyed to London by
their friends in the course of the evening were Mr. Graham,
suffering from injuries to the leg and face; Madame Gouverneur,
contused and shaken; Mr. Blow, severely injured about the head; Mr.
J. P. Lord and Mrs. Lord, Mrs. Lord having received severe injuries;
and Mrs. Adams Hampton, who had received cuts on the head and face,
this lady's husband being among the killed.
Mr. Charles Dickens had a narrow escape. He was in the train, but
fortunately for himself and for the interests of literature,
received no injuries whatever. The disaster, it is thought, would
have been even great if had it not been for the unusual amount of
break-power incorporated with the train. In addition to the ordinary
leverage power exerted in the three guards’ vans, there were patent
breaks as well, of the kind known as Cremer’s, an American
invention, supposed to possess properties of peculiar value in
arresting the progress of a train. Taking into account the control
exercised over the engine, there were no less than seven breaks in
all regulating the speed of the train.
The railway authorities appear to have recognized and admitted from
the first the very severe character of the accident, and the
necessity of affording full information to the public. Mr. Dyne, the
superintendent at the London-bridge Terminus, in reply to eager and
incessant inquiries, afforded all the information that was in his
power; and his superiors added, on their return to town, such
further details as the result of their inquiries enabled them to
furnish. The provision made for the relief of the sufferers was, as
already stated, prompt and ample. With the exception of one of the
guards, who receive I contusions, and of the engineer and fireman,
who were shaken but not otherwise hurt, the company’s servants
escaped miraculously, so that in this case there will be no
difficulties in the way of a searching inquiry, such as are commonly
encountered when death has withdrawn one of the witnesses whose
evidence might be most material. The police have felt it right to
take into custody the foreman of the gang of platelayers,
responsible for the condition of the portion of the line at which
the accident occurred. It will, of course, be matter for enquiry
hereafter whether the plate, was, in fact, improperly removed and
the accident thereby occasioned; whether the flag protecting the
operations of the platelayers was sent back to a sufficient
distance, and there placed so that it could be seen by the
engine-driver.
It is the first time that any casualty has befallen this particular
train, notwithstanding that the hour at which it leaves Folkestone
varies almost from day to day, and that it travels at more than the
average speed. On Friday the tidal train, with about 110 passengers,
many of whom had come from Paris by way of Boulogne, ran its usual
even course until it had passed Headcorn and arrived at a bridge
which is situated about a mile and a half from that station and
about an equal distance from Staplehurst. At this spot the railroad
at each end of the bridge runs for a considerable way along almost a
perfect level, and is raised only a few feet above the land on
either side. The bridge itself which is about 100 feet in length,
and which is supported by six stone piers, crosses a rivulet, which,
when swollen by the rains of winter, flows in a considerable stream,
but which is now nothing more than a muddy ditch, overgrown with
weeds. The fall from the bridge to this ditch is about 15ft.; the
breadth of the ditch itself about 50ft. Between 3 and 4 o’clock on
Friday several platelayers were employed in laying down new metals
on the left-hand side of the bridge on the way to London, and at the
end of it nearest Folkestone. Shortly after 3, just before the
accident took place, their task, it would seem, was still
incomplete, and two lengths, or about 40ft., of iron rail remained
to be laid down on the side of the very track on which the train was
advancing. They saw it hasten onward to destruction with fearful
though somewhat abated speed, and in a few seconds more they saw
nine or ten out of the 14 carnages of which, inclusive of the break,
luggage, and guards’ vans, it consisted, precipitated headlong, with
their human freight, over the side of the bridge into the ditch
beneath. Then ensued such a scene of agony and bewilderment as
happily is but rarely witnessed. Assistance came with all haste and
it came in time to rescue some from positions of the utmost peril,
but far too late to be of any service to others in whom life had
been instantaneously extinguished in the first terrific crash. Those
who were on the? spot from the first, and those who came to it a few
hours after, described the wreck which met their view as a sight
perfectly appalling. At the end of the bridge next to Staplehurst
the engine and tender lay partly turned over against a hedge.
Immediately behind the tender stood the break van, and a few paces
back, suspended as it were from the top of the bridge, with one end
buried in the ditch below, was a first-class carriage. At the other
end of the bridge stood upon the line the guards’ and luggage vans,
which were in the rear of the train, and which were altogether
uninjured. A little in front of them were two second-class
carriages, with one end resting on the bridge and the other in the
ditch in just the same position as the first-class carriage already
mentioned. Between these two extremes and all across the ditch
huddled, and crushed, and bruised into one another, lay the five or
six first-class carriages which formed the centre of the train.
Through their broken sides and shattered windows were to be seen
protruding human legs, and arms, and heads, and from every one of
them was to be heard the piercing cry of human suffering. In more
than one carnage a wife lay dead, or on the point of death by her
unconscious or helpless husband. Some who survived, and who might
recover from the injuries inflicted on them by the shock, were
actually smothered in the liquid mud in which they were imbedded.
One young lady, on being rescued from a position in which
suffocation seemed imminent was found to have been fearfully
mangled, and had blood issuing profusely from her nose and ears. The
faces of other passengers were so blackened and swollen and battered
as to retain scarcely any traces of the human countenance. Some on
the other hand, escaped with barely a scratch, but there were few
indeed in that heap of ruin who did not bring away with them some
token of the tremendous ordeal through which they had passed. The
work of extrication proceeded at first but slowly, but by 6 o’clock
it was fairly accomplished. Those passengers who were uninjured or
whose injuries were not so serious as to prevent their travelling,
were at once despatched to London. Some 17 or 18 others, whose
sufferings rendered it dangerous that they should make so lengthened
a journey, are being watched over with tender care at the residence
of Sir H. Hoare and other houses in Staplehurst and its vicinity.
Ten persons at least have lost their lives owing to this sad
catastrophe.
Nearly all of them were dragged out of the ditch quite dead, two or
three of them being in a dying state and surviving a few brief
minutes only. Seven of the ten were ladies, the majority of whom
were wives, and comparatively young wives too. All the bodies, with
the exception of two, were, as will be seen by the report of the
inquest held on Saturday, identified. One of the ladies was the wife
of a Liverpool merchant, named Rayner, who was on her way home from
Paris, and who has left six children to mourn her untimely loss.
Another was the wife of Mr. F. Bodenham, solicitor, of Hereford,
who, with husband, was returning from her wedding tour.
A third was the wife of a Mr. Whitby who was anxiously awaiting her
return to him by that fated tidal train. A fourth is a Mrs.
Condriff, whose husband lies severely injured at Staplehurst, and
who in moments of delirious wandering fondly imagines lives. A fifth
was Mrs. Faithful, whose husband is said to be on his way home from
India. The two remaining ladies are Miss Caroline White, late of
Regency-square, Brighton, and a young lady whose name is supposed,
from an envelope found in her pocket, to be Beaumont. The latter and
a foreign gentleman, whose name, it is thought, is Mercier, are the
only two whose bodies have not been identified. On this gentleman a
paper, with the following address, was found:- “M. Leon, 16,
Rutland-terrace, Thames Bank, Pimlico." He had also in his
possession a tailor s bill receipted and endorsed M. Mercirr. The
names of Mr. Hampson and Mr. Dunn complete this sad list. It was
currently rumoured in Staplehurst on Sunday that a comparison of the
number of tickets issued at Folkestone with the number actually
collected after the accident afforded ground for the surmise that
two or three more bodies were buried under the carriages; but as all
the carriages were raised in the course of the day, and no new
bodies found, this surmise has happily turned out to have been
incorrect.
It simply remains for us to say a few words as to the cause of all
this suffering and loss of life. It seems to be beyond all question
attributable to the fact that a portion of the metal rail along
which the trains run was not in its place, and that, as a
consequence, although the engine, tender, and break-vans, as it
were, jumped the gap and ran for some way along the iron girding
which lies parallel to the rails, the carriages generally were
thrown out of their course and upset. Upon the charge of not having
the whole length of rail duly laid down when the accident occurred,
Henry Benge, the foreman of the platelayers is now in custody, and
it is understood that he attributes his failure in this respect to
the circumstance that he by some mistake took the statement in his
time-book of the later hour at which the tidal train was expected to
start on Saturday as having reference to the afternoon on which the
accident occurred. But independently of any remissness on his part,
it will also be matter for investigation whether the platelayers
while engaged in their work, having as usual displayed the danger
flag, the signalman whose duty it was to hoist a similar flag as
soon as he saw the train approaching, so as to enable the
engine-driver to pull up in good time, was in his proper place, or
whether, having been in his proper place and having hoisted the red
flag, the engine-driver paid the necessary attention to the signal.
The arrival of the train at Headcorn was, it appears, telegraphed in
the ordinary way to Staplehurst, but then the platelayers midway
between the two stations were not within reach of telegraphic
communication. Whether their foreman is solely to blame, or whether
others must share with him a great responsibility, it is at present
impossible to say. The company, at all events, seem desirous that
the subject should be thoroughly investigated. Nothing less than a
most searching inquiry would, of course, satisfy the public mind.
Mr. Eborall and Mr. Harris were down at Staplehurst during the
greater portion of Sunday, and were unremitting in their exertions
in procuring aid for the unhappy sufferers.
THE INQUEST.
An inquest was held on Saturday afternoon at the "Railway Hotel,"
Staplehurst, on the bodies of the deceased. The jury, of which the
Rev. Mr. Moore was the foreman, were summoned by the coroner for
West Kent, Mr. Neve, and immediately after they had been sworn went
in company with Mr. Eborall, the traffic manager of the line, Mr.
Knight, the traffic superintendent, and Mr. Harris,
deputy-superintendent, to the scene of the accident, where the
information they required was readily given them by the officers of
the company. Having spent upwards of an hour in minutely examining
the spot, they proceeded to the railway shed to view the dead bodies
which were lying there, and on their return to the "Railway Hotel"
the following evidence was taken:—
Mr. Lloyd Rayner, merchant, of Liverpool, was called, and said:- I
identify the body of my wife, whose name was Amelia. She was on her
way from Paris to Liverpool. She has left six children. She was 37
years of age.
Mr. Frederick Bodenham, solicitor, of Hereford, identified the body
of his wife, Hannah. He was a passenger in the same train. His wife
was 28 years of age, and had left no family. He saw her the moment
the accident occurred. They were together in one of the centre
first-class carriages, and fell into the water. He was at first
stunned, but came to his senses in a few minutes, when he found his
wife dead. The train was going at the same rate at the time of the
accident as just previously. He felt sure there were no breaks
applied, at all events not when the front part of the train got off
the line.
John Lomax, of Bolton-le- Moors, auctioneer, identified the body of
Adam Hampson, who he said lived in that town, and was a surgeon, and
41 years of age. He was on his way from Paris to London, but he was
not with him.
The body of Lydia Whitby was identified by her husband, a merchant,
who said she was 28 years of age. He was not travelling with her,
but expected her by the tidal train.
The Rev. Arthur Thompson, British Chaplain at St. Petersburg, was
next called, and identified the body of Caroline White, late of
Regency-square, Brighton. She was on her way to stop at his house in
Bryanston-square. He believed her age was between 45 and 50.
Richard C. Mansell deposed as follows:- I am carriage superintendent
of the South-Eastern Railway at Ashford.
I was at Ashford on Friday afternoon, when I received a telegram
informing me of the accident. I proceeded to the spot immediately
afterwards. I cannot say how soon. I saw seven ladies and two
gentlemen lying dead. One dead body had been sent away before my
arrival. They were all taken from the wreck of the tidal train. I
believe they all died from the injuries received in consequence of
the accident. A gentleman named Faithfull identified the body taken
away as that of his brother’s wife. He saw her lying dead on the
line, and he was kneeling by her side.
David Ovenden, superintendent of police, Cranbrook division, stated
that he had charge of the bodies since the accident occurred, and
that on searching the body of a young lady now lying in the shed he
found an envelope bearing the following address:— "Miss Beaumont,
11, Rue de Chaillot, Champs Elysees, Paris." Post-mark—Angl, 27 May,
A. M. B., Calais; postage stamps marked 458 - 6d., Poste a Lincoln."
There was also the body of a gentleman which was not yet identified.
He appeared to be about 45, and his socks were marked "H. M." He
believed by what he had learnt that the name on the envelope
produced was that of the young lady. The bodies had been placed in
coffins. Coffin No. 6 contained the body of a lady whose linen was
marked "H. Condriff." There was reason to suppose she was the wife
of a gentleman lying injured in the neighbourhood.
John L. Elder, 333, City-road, identified the body of James Dunn,
same address. He was a warehouseman, and was expected by the train
from Paris to go by the quarter-past 9 train to Dundee. He was a
single man and was travelling alone.
John Frederick Wilkins, surgeon of Staplehurst, deposed to his
having gone to the scene of the accident about half-past 3 o’clock
in the afternoon, and having seen the bodies of those who died taken
from the carriages. Some were dead at the time and some in a dying
state.
Samuel Simkins, of Staplehurst, schoolmaster, said he had attended
to a gentleman named Condriff on the previous day, and from the
description given by him of his wife, who, he said, was travelling
with him, he thought she must be one of the ladies whose bodies he
had seen.
The inquiry was at this point adjourned till yesterday.
THE ADJOURNED INQUEST.
Yesterday afternoon the jury previously empanelled, reassembled
before Mr. W. T. Neve, of Cranbrook, the coroner for the district,
at the "South Eastern Hotel," Staplehurst, for the resumption of the
inquiry, adjourned from Saturday last, relative to the numerous
deaths which had occurred by the recent railway accident, between
Headcorn and Staplehurst.
Mr. Robert Winter, of Bolton-le-Moore, appeared as the
representative of Mr. Hampson (deceased) and his surviving wife, and
also of Mr. and Mrs. Ralph (who were injured). Mr. Fowles, from the
office of Mr. Vining, appeared for the representatives of Mrs.
Whitby. Mr. Freeland, solicitor to the South Eastern Railway
Company, watched the case on behalf of the company, and there were
present Mr. Eborall, general manager, Mr. Knight, the traffic
manager, Mr. Harris, the deputy traffic manager, and Mr. Cudworth,
the engineer.
The jury having answered to their names, the Coroner said that at
the last meeting they were only able to identify seven out of the
ten bodies. They would now proceed with the further evidence of the
identification.
Witnesses were then called to identify the three bodies not
identified on Saturday, and which proved to be those of Miss Emma
Beaumont, of 11, Rue de Chalons, Paris, aged 24; Hypolite Mercier,
cook at the Admiralty House, Devonport; and Mrs. Hannah Condliff,
wife of Mr. Martin Condliff, of the Queen's Hotel, Waterloo.
Inspector Ovenden informed the coroner that that completed the
evidence of identification.
The Coroner said that Capt. Ritchie, the government inspector, was
then examining the scene of the accident, and until he came they had
better proceed with the evidence. The prisoner Benge had better be
brought in.
This having been done, the first witness called was Lawrence Mercer,
who said:- I was guard to the tidal train on Friday. I have been
driver 13 years. We left Folkestone about 2.30. The train consisted
of the engine, break van, one second-class carriage, seven
first-class carriages, two break vans, and one second-class carriage
without a break. There were about 100 passengers. George Crombie was
driver, and William Beattie fireman. There were three guards. I was
the foremost. After we left Folkestone Junction we passed all
stations until we arrived at Headcorn. We passed Headcorn station at
11 minutes past 3. My attention was first called to danger by a
signal about a mile and a half beyond the Headcorn station.
Captain Ritchie here entered the room and took his seat by the side
of the Coroner.
Witness continued: The danger signal was given by the driver. That
signal was two whistles closely after each other. I had not seen the
danger flag then. I did not look for it but put on the break, I did
not see the danger flag until I got out of the train. Steam was shut
off immediately. I applied three breaks, one ordinary and two patent
breaks. That was about half a mile from where the accident occurred,
but I cannot speak positively as to the distance, I was able to
slacken the speed considerably. We had been travelling at the rate
of from 45 to 50 miles an hour. I applied al the break power I
could. We might have reduced the speed to about 15 miles per hour,
when the train ran off the line by the Star Bridge. I did not see
that any rails had been removed. The engine and break van, one
second, and it appeared to me one first passed the accident, but got
off the metals and remained on the permanent way. Six first-class
carriages went off the line, and were very much broken. The depth of
the bridge to the soil was about seven feet, or it might be ten.
Many passengers were killed and others injured, but I do not know
how many. I did not see the danger signal. The line from Headcorn to
Staplehurst is very straight, and is on a level. I know the driver.
He has been with the Company 11 years, and is a very careful man.
Travelling at the rate of 45 miles an hour, on the level that this
line is, it could have been stopped in a mile but I should say not
less. As we passed the Headcorn station, the signals were "All
right." The distance we can see a danger flag depends on the state
of the atmosphere. A brilliant sun will take the sight off more than
a dull atmosphere. There was a brilliant sun on I was not aware that
repairs were going on that day.
By the Foreman:- I might have seen the danger signal at a short
distance. I was looking out, but not for the signal. The steam
sometimes blows back, and prevents our seeing anything in front. The
guards have more particularly to look out for signals at the
stations, and the driver for other danger signals. I should not like
to say that I could see a danger flag at a greater distance than
half-a-mile. It ought to be waved. I saw the man hold up the flag
about 150 yards before we got to the accident. When I heard the
danger signal, I applied three breaks. I considered it a loss of
time to look to see what was the matter.
Mr. Freeland said he appeared on the part of the Company, and for
the sake of saving time he was instructed to say that the Company
would not dispute their liability. They had no wish to stop the
inquiry but made the suggestion solely for the purpose of saving
time.
Mr. Winter said the question he wished to arrive at was the degree
of negligence the company's servants had been guilty of, and for
that purpose should like to ask a few questions.
Mr. Freeland said:- By all means, we do not wish to stop the
inquiry.
The witness then underwent some further cross-examination by Mr.
Winter, Mr. Fowles, Mr. Freeland, and Capt. Ritchie, but his replies
were not material.
The inquiry was then adjourned till Friday next.
|
|
LICENSEE LIST
MOORE James 1852-58+
MOORE Edwin Davis Aug/1866+
COLE Alfred Alexander 1877-81+ (age 45 in 1881 )
TAYLOR Joseph 1891+ (age 44 in 1891 )
FOX William 1907-11+
???? Bill & George 1980s
https://pubwiki.co.uk/RailwayTavern.shtml
Census
|