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.

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.