South Eastern Gazette, 7 February, 1860.

THE LATE FATAL RAILWAY ACCIDENT AT BEAKSBOURNE.

We mentioned in our last impression that three men, named Thos. Jackson, Richard Lee, and John Carr, had been buried alive by an immense slip of earth, at the Beaksbourne-hill cutting, and that although the bodies of two of them had been discovered, the workmen had been unable, up to the hour at which our report was dispatched, to remove them, owing to the dangerous state of the soil. One of the bodies was, however, soon got out, and in the course of Tuesday morning the other two were also extricated. Two of the men were found perfectly upright, and apparently uninjured externally, but the third man was discovered flat on the ground, with his head and face much bruised and damaged. The three bodies, as they lay together, presented a sad spectacle, and were looked upon with mournful interest by the few spectators that were present. Fortunately all the deceased men were single.

Shortly after noon, on Tuesday, Thomas Thorpe Delasaux, Esq., coroner, held an inquest on the body of Thos. Jackson, at a beershop in the village of Beaksbourne. Mr. William Gardener was the foreman. The jury proceeded to the scene of the accident and viewed the body of Jackson. There was but one other body by his side, but while the inquiry was proceeding, the third body was got out and placed by the side of his comrades. The jury having returned to the inquest room, the following evidence was taken:—

William Taylor deposed that he had been employed on the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway, for the past two months. On Friday last he was working in the cutting as driver, close to where Jackson was filling trucks. At a few minutes before five in the afternoon, Jackson was at work under the boarding, and witness asked him if he and the waggons were to go out, and he replied "Yes." Jackson then asked for a piece of candle, and witness crept by the waggon to reach it to him. He then told his horse to move on, and just as he did so, the earth fell on the waggon, and partly on himself and the horses. He was only just able to get away. He never heard the deceased speak afterwards. He (deceased) was completely smothered in by the earth. The earth, under which the deceased was working, was supported by timber, and which was thought to be of sufficient strength to bear the weight of the earth above.

Charles Cooper, a miner, deposed that he had been "driving" and "heading" on the London, Chatham, and Dover line. He had been informed that some men had been buried in a cutting, and he immediately pulled off his outer clothes, and commenced timbering the place where the men were buried, to make it safe to get them out again. He worked at the place until the men were found. He thought the timbers were sufficient to bear the earth that fell in, had it not been for the wet, which had shifted the timber. Witness found the deceased (Jackson) on Sunday night, and got him out on Monday afternoon, but did not know what time. He was quite dead, and witness had no doubt he was suffocated in the cutting. He thought the falling of the earth was the result of an accident.

Mr. Thomas Walker, civil engineer, deposed that he had been engaged for some time on the London, Chatham, and Dover line, as manager for Mr. Crampton, the contractor. On the previous Thursday his attention was called to the "heading" where the accident occurred, not because it was dangerous to life, but for the purpose of altering the mode of working the cutting. He went into the "heading," and examined it most minutely. He considered it perfectly safe, and was in it nearly an hour. He came to the conclusion that in consequence of a portion of the "heading" having given way in advance of the spot where the accident occurred, he would spare no pains or expense in order to make the place secure; and he gave orders that everything should be done to prevent the possibility of an accident. He thought, however, that it was quite secure enough, so far as accident and life was concerned.

The Coroner then proceeded to sum up the evidence, and reminded the jury that they had two things to consider in coming to their conclusion — first, as to the cause of death, and secondly, what led to that cause; and when he drew their attention to what produced the death, it would be for the jury to say, whether every precaution had been taken to prevent, if possible, such an accident as that into which they were inquiring. From the evidence of William Taylor, there could be no doubt as to the cause of death it was the falling in of the soil which smothered the deceased. The question then arose, whether the proper precautions had been taken to prevent an accident of that kind? Upon that point the evidence of the men, and also of Mr. Walker, was perfectly clear and satisfactory, and therefore the jury could have no hesitation of saying that the deceased’s death was caused by an accident, and that there was no blame attachable to any one.

One of the jury here expressed a wish to have the evidence of the foreman, as to the nature of the timber used in the cutting. This was accordingly assented to, and John Goodyer was called. He said he was foreman of the works on Beaksbourne-hill. The timbers which supported the "heading" where the accident occurred were of sufficient strength to prevent an accident under ordinary circumstances. He attributed the accident to extraordinary wet weather. He had worked on the railway works for 24 years, in the same capacity as he was at that time. From his experience he thought that every precaution was taken to prevent accident in the present instance.

By the Jury:— The men who drove the "headings" were miners and perfectly competent for the work. They were discharged on the previous Saturday, as it was not intended to continue working the "heading," it being dangerous to do so. The timber was proper for the purpose, and such as was generally used.

The Coroner:— Is not iron sometimes used in connection with these cuttings?

Mr. Walker replied in the affirmative.

The Coroner:— Then would it not be safer to use Iron instead of wood in the "headings."

The Foreman expressed his opinion that every possible precaution was taken by the contractors in constructing the line, with the view of preventing accidents; and he mentioned that not a single accident of that kind had occurred before since the present foreman had been employed.

The jury returned a verdict "That the deceased was accidentally suffocated."

The Coroner then went and viewed the other bodies, and gave a certificate for their burial.

Funeral of the Deceased Men.:— On the afternoon of Thursday, between three and four o’clock, the remains of the unfortunate deceased were buried in the pleasantly situate churchyard of the village in which they met their untimely end. There was a numerous assemblage of spectators, considering the state of the weather, flakes of snow occasionally falling, with a strong wind from the northeast. Soon after 3 o'clock the funeral procession was formed in the following order:— The foreman of the navvies and the undertakers (Messrs. James and Thomas Kelson); the three bodies in excellent elm coffins, covered with silk palls; about 100 navvies, in clean smook frocks, each with a white bow on his breast; the public, villagers, &c., closing the mournful cortege. It was a sad and melancholy spectacle, and many who witnessed its progress wept as it passed along. The Rev. Mr. Taswell, the incumbent, read the beautiful funeral service very impressively, the church being filled, principally by navvies desirous of paying the last mark of respect to the remains of their deceased comrades. The quiet and orderly demeanour of the navvies was the topic of general observation. As they were passing from the grave-yard to their homes, Mr. John Elgar (a member of the Society of Friends) addressed a few words to them, which were well received. The superintendence of the funeral was entrusted to Mr. James Kelson, of Whitstable, who had been engaged in watching the progress of the works from the time of the accident, and was authorised to spare neither pains nor expense to render the cutting safe against further casualties. The manner in which it was conducted reflects the highest credit on the acting engineer, Mr. Walker, who, we are informed, has liberally rewarded the brave miners who risked their own lives in their efforts to extricate the unfortunate deceased.

From the Kentish Gazette, 4 October 1890.

BEKESBOURNE. Alleged breach of the licensing acts.

At St. Augustine's Petty sessions, on Saturday, before T. G. Peckham, Esq., G. Furley, Esq., C. Prestcott-Westcar, Esq., and Captain Lambert.

Charles Bushel, landlord of the "Unicorn" Bekesbourne, was charged with opening his license premises during prohibited hours on Sunday, September 14.

Mr. R. M. Mercer appeared for the defendant.

Sergeant Hancock said on Sunday morning, the 14th September, he watched the defendants house in company with P.C. Predeth. He watched from about 5:30 a.m. till about 11 a.m. Just before 8 o'clock the defendant opened the back door and came out, looked around, and then went in again.

At 8 a.m. he saw James Preston, a labourer, residing at Bekesbourne Hill. He had a look round and then enter the house by the back door. He was inside the house four minutes. At 8.10 a.m. James Munns, labourer, walked straight to the back door and went inside the house he was inside five minutes and then went away. At 9.10 a.m. a man named Green, of Canterbury, accompanied by a soldier named Kemp, whose father resides at Bekesbourne, went in by the back door. He lost sight of them for about 10 minutes and then they came from the front part of the house and at 9.20 a.m. he saw John Collins, news-vendor, of Canterbury, enter the house by the back door. He was in about 2 minutes. The door was open all the time. At 11.5 a.m. he saw George Court, labourer, Bekesbourne, go into the back door and enter. Witness then left his hiding place and just inside the back door he found Court standing with some money in his right hand which he popped into his pocket. Court did not appear to recognise witness, who was in plain clothes. The defendant did. The defendant was standing near the sink and quickly put a pint pot and a glass in a pail of lightish coloured water, he should think it was soap suds. Witness told defendant there appeared to be some cause for the complaints that had been lodged against him. Defendant said "I did not know there have been any complaints." Witness said he had sent a Constable to caution him twice as he was a young beginner. Defendant said this is the only man that has been in my house this morning, and he has had nothing to drink. There was a good deal of excitement in the house and defendant's wife produced a withered rose, stating that she had called Court to see this rose. She also said court had not had any beer. There was some beer in the pot he took from the pail. Witness shot this out and called defendant's attention to it. He told defendant this was the 6th person he had had in the house that morning. Defendant and his wife said they could swear they had not been six. Witness replied "I have been watching and I know."

Defended admitting having some Canterbury people in. When he mentioned Munns' name, defendant said "Oh, he brought me a few turnips." He also said that Preston came in to change half a sovereign and had a bottle of Ginger Beer. He said the others were bonafide travellers. Defendant also said that when Court came up he defendant had some beer in a pot. He gave court one glass and seeing him witness he put the other in the pail. A few nights afterwards he saw the defendant and said "I have seen Munns' and he says he gave him a pint of beer for a few turnips; is that so?

Defendant said "yes."

Cross examined, Munns admitting having taken the turnips, and said he had given them to defendant who gave him beer for them. Defendant said he had been hop drying with Munns, and that Munns came over on the Sunday to pay over his share of the money. He had every reason to believe the man did not live at Bekesbourne. He was watching from the top window of the oasthouse, and could see everything most distinctly. It was an undoubted fact that Sunday morning was used by publicans as a washing up day and that they got their bottles and glasses about for that purpose. He saw a pail which probably contained soda water.

P.C. Predeth, who was watching with the sergeant, corroborated.

He said Court had fresh froth on his moustache which he wiped off with the back of his hand.

Mr. Mercer, in defence, said the police had an idea which he thought was a common one, but which was never the less a very ignorant idea, that a licensed victualler could not have any person in his house during closing time. There was no law of the kind, but if he did so he might be called upon to prove he had not infringed the law in any prima facie case could be made against him. Mr. Mercer went on to comment in very severe terms upon the evidence of Sergeant Hancock. It was most unsatisfactory that he should have spoken in such a loose way as to whether the soldier had slept in Bekesbourne that night or not.

James Munns, of Beaksbourn, labourer, said he had been acting as mate to defend an in hop drying. He received the money from Mr. Reynolds on Saturday night. On Sunday he went to defendant to pay him his share. He also took him five turnips and was given a pint of beer. No money passed.

Cross examined: He did not expect to get beer when he took the turnips. He had never been to defendant's on a Sunday morning before. Witness received a bank note. Defendant would not take it on Saturday night because he had not sufficient change. On Sunday he would not have it, because Sunday was no payment at all (laughed).

James Preston, a labourer, residing close to the public house, said he went to the house to change half a sovereign because he was going out. He got change and had a bottle of Ginger Beer.

William Kemp as soldier, said that he went to the house with Green on the Sunday morning. He walked from 21, Burgate Lane, Canterbury, that morning, and was served as a traveller.

By Superintendent Wood- He was on furlough from Aldershot. He never called at his father's that day. He did not consider his father's house his home.

Frederick green, residing at 21, Burgate Lane, gave similar evidence as Kemp.

George Court said he lived close to defendant's house, and on the morning in question the defendant's wife asked him for a rose. He went in, but had nothing to drink.

Charles Bushell, the defendant, said he had occupied the house a year and 10 months. Every Sunday a man, named Collins, brought him in papers and he gave him a glass of beer for this. He understood this have been the custom for 20 years. He gave Munns a glass of beer, but he never received or expected payment for it. Munns owed witnessed £3 17s 6d. Preston asked for change for half a sovereign, and as he wanted some coppers he had a bottle of Ginger Beer.

Kemp and Green told him they were bona-fide travellers, having come from Canterbury. After inquiring he supplied them. He had never been cautioned.

By Superintendent Wood:- He gave Munns the beer because he had come to pay his bill. Witness had no change for the £5 notes that he was tendered in payment. Mr. Peckham said the magistrates after reviewing the whole of the evidence, and what had been a adduced for the defence, did not think the case demanded conviction. At the same time the defendant should be extremely careful and not keep his door open in this way or he would get himself into serious trouble.