COPYHOLD CUTTING TRAIN CRASH
THE FIRST RECORDED ACCIDENT ON THE NEWLY
OPENED LINE
2nd OCTOBER 1841
Involving (Leading Engine)
Driver Charles Goldsmith & Fireman Robert Marshall
& (Rear Engine) Driver James Jackson & Fireman Robert Field
EXTRACTED AND ADAPTED FROM THE BOARD OF TRADE REPORTED
BY EARL OF RIPON
This disaster occurred at Copyhold cutting, where the fatal over throw occurred on the
2nd of October, which involved the 10.45 a.m. down train from London Bridge to
Brighton. The train left London Bridge with nine first class carriages, one composite
carriage and two private coaches on trucks, holding a total of 97 passengers. The
firemen of both engines were killed together with two passengers, (servants of a Doctor).
In compliance with your Lordship's request, contained in the instructions forwarded to me by Mr. Laing. I proceeded on Wednesday, the 6th instant, to Brighton, having on my way
arranged with Mr. Statham, the superintending engineer of the line, to meet him at the
Brighton station on Thursday morning, to proceed up the line by a special engine immediately after the despatch of the 10 h. 45 m. morning train.
This I did accordingly, but as your Lordship has been already informed, on our approaching the south end of Patcham Tunnel a signal was made to stop, and on inquiring the cause we were informed of the dangerous condition of the front of that structure, which was obviously in a falling state. Of course I did not proceed, but returned to Brighton with the engine, leaving Mr. Statham at the tunnel. In a short time afterwards it appears that the front and a great part of the wing walls came down.
Before I left the tunnel a person was dispatched to end of it to warn the down train not to
advance, and my arrival at the Brighton Station prevented the dispatch of the 11h. 45m. train.
The Patcham Tunnel is about two miles and a half from the Brighton terminus. Steps were immediately taken to remove the rubbish, and by the next morning the line was again opened.
This new disaster prevented my inspection of the Copyhold cutting, where the fatal over throw occurred on the second instant, till the next day. I was then supplied with a special engine and carriage and was accompanied by Mr. Rastrick, the engineer-in-chief of the line, to the Hayward Heath Station; our driver being the man Jackson, who had charge of the
second engine (Loco No.22) on the day of the accident, and whom I had thus the means
of questioning on the spot, as I had also the labourer Copley, who had made the signal
to indicate the necessity of caution the moment before the first engine was thrown off the
line. I also saw at a beer shop the guard Hitchens, who was so severely injured, but he
was too ill to be able to give me any information. I saw this man again the next day; he
then appeared better, but could give me no account; all that he knew was the accident
was momentary. The driver of the first engine (loco No. 17 was to pilot the train to
Haywards Heath), Charles Goldsmith, I only saw at the Brighton Station. Although in a
weak state he is fast recovering, but his evidence amounts to little more than that of
Hitchens. He saw the signal given by Copley, but too late to be of any service. He states
the awe d to have been, on entering the cutting about 30 miles per hour but could a sign
no caused for the accident.
On examining the place of the fatal occurrence nothing could be seen, or expected to be
seen, after the lapse of six days, to indicate its immediate cause, although there was
sufficient evidence of the extreme violence of the concussion. Four of the rails, weighing
75 lbs. per yard, or 375 lb. each, which had sustained the shock of the engine, were bent
and twisted in all directions, and one of them had on one side its flange stripped off for
about two feet of its length, as if out by the moat powerful shears; hut these rails having
been replaced by other immediately after the accident, I could form no opinion from the appearance of the mad that could lead me to any conclusion, although from other circumstances I feel not the slightest doubt on the subject.
The place where the accident occurred is near the 36½ mile post from London, within about a mile of the north end of the Hayward Heath Tunnel, which is a little below the Hayward Heath Station. The soil in this cutting, and for some distance down the line, is of a very absorbent and treacherous character, becoming in its wet state nearly semi-fluid, mud yet when dry or well drained it appears be perfectly sound; and I am bound to state that I stood at this and observed trains passing with considerable speed both up and down the line, and that their motion was exceedingly steady, that is, free from rocking, which is generally in obvious where a line is defective.
I have watched this effect, and have experimented upon it on several lines, and I am not
aware that I ever saw less oscillatory motion. But it must be observed that at this time
everything that could be done had been hone to car off the water. For a day or two before the accident the rain had been very heavy, and I have no doubt, from the nature of the soil, and the evidence of Copley, that the road was at the time in what he describes "as a light state," which he afterwards explained by saying-when there is much rain the wet pushes up the rails and makes them uneven, but that was not the case on Saturday.I asked him, "If the road was not in that date on Saturday, and the speed not greater than usual, why he gave the signal;" hut all I could learn was they had done so for two or three days.Weighing these circumstances, viz., the nature of the soil, the great quantities of rain that had fallen, the admission that a caution signal was made, and has been made for some days before, I feel no doubt whatever that the unsound bearing of some one or more of them sleepers at the time was one cause of the accident.
With respect to the speed of the engine at the time, there are considerable discrepancies in the evidence. Jackson, the driver, states that the speed did not exceed 20 or 23 miles per hour, although he admits that he has frequently passed this spot at 32 and 35 miles per hour.
PHOTOGRAPHER UNKNOWN
Ouse Valley Viaduct
Copley, the labourer above alluded to, says, that he observed the engine at its usual speed. Hinge, the policeman on the viaduct, says he gave the signal "stead," because he observed the train was going rather faster than usual. Now the question is, What has been the usual speed on this part of the line. The average speed on the whole line for this train is 25 miles per hour, including the time lost at four intermediate stopping places, besides the stoppage at Horley to attach the assistant engine.
This will require an average speed of at least 28 miles per hour when travelling. Now for
the first two miles after leaving Horley the line ascends 1in 460 and then for four miles
before reaching the Balcombe Tunnel it ascends 1 in 264, and thence descends for nearly
six miles to the Hayward Station at the same rate, that is 1 in 264.
From the notes and memoranda made by Sir Frederick Smith and myself in travelling
together over some thousand miles of railway, and over every variety of gradient. I have no
doubt that to preserve an average speed of 28 miles per hour though this12 miles would a
speed of 32 miles per hour on the descending side.
Now it is admitted that the train was behind its proper time, a strong reason for not going
slower than usual. Jackson denies having seen the signal “steady" on the viaduct, he seems
therefore to have had no good motive for going slower. and he states that he has frequently
passed this place at 35 miles per hour; and yet he asserts that just on this particular occasion, when such a Frightful accident occurred, he was not proceeding at more than 20 or 23 miles per hour. His statement on this head is certainly supported by the opinion of John Hardy. Eq.. M.P., who was a passenger, but it is greatly at variance with probability, and with other evidence.
It has been seen that the usual speed down this plane is about 32 miles per hour, and Hinge admitted in his evidence before the jury that he thought the speed was greater than, usual. It appears also that he made use of expressions soon after the accident, which would simply that the speed was much greater than he stated before the coroner.
Since I have been engaged on this inquiry, I have had communication with two of the
gentlemen on the jury, who met me afterwards by appointment, and whose statement throws great doubt on this man’s evidence. I quote the following from their two letters.
“I beg to state that, although on the evidence brought before them the jury would come to no other conclusion than that at which they arrived, I felt, and still feel, by no means satisfied at the statement made by John Hinge, the policeman, on the highly important point of the speed with which the train was travelling at, or immediately before. the time of the accident. I was at the Copyhold bridge about two hours after the accident happened, when this police-man addressed m e and said, that when k first saw the train coming towards him he was sure something would happen from the speed at which it was going. He said he held up his hand to signal ‘ steady.' but that his heart was up in his mouth as they passed him; that he ran to a point in the mad where he could watch them farther, and in a very short time the accident occurred. He was heard to state this by other persons also, who have, I believe, informed you of the same thing The man, however, when called as a witness denied having made any such statement. Whether he had really forgotten what he previously said, or in the excitement and alarm occasioned by the accident had stated that which was not the fact, I am unable to say; but it is obvious, that the effects on the minds of the jury would have been very different if the original account of the policeman had been substantiated before them."
The other gentleman states as follows:-" Soon after the accident occurred I went to the
spot, and accompanied one of the inspectors and a gentleman, who is a stranger to me,
to the shed where the bodies of the unfortunate victims had been deposited. A policeman
was in attendance, who volunteered the following remarks:-He said that he observed the
train approaching him near the viaduct (where he was on duty) at such a rapid rate that
he was much terrified; that he fully expected some accident to happened in consequence
of the great speed with which they were proceeding, and was only surprised it did not
occur sooner than it did; that he held up his hand as a signal to slacken speed, but that
no notice was taken of it. Being one of the jury on the inquest held two days after, I
insisted upon this man's evidence being heard. It was not until after much delay had taken place, and the coroner more than once called for him, that he made his appearance. On questioning him as to his former statement he totally denied having used such expressions as those which I had attributed to him, declared that he had not been the least frightened, nor had entertained any apprehension of fatal consequences arising from the speed, Which h he then said was not extreme; yet he allowed that he held up his hand as a caution, but could not be certain that the signal ad been seen by the driver.”
“As a juryman I did not think that I could also act as a witness; and not being aware at the
time that the policeman had made similar statements to others, who could be called upon to
give evidence of the fact, I thought I ought not to allow the policeman's previous assertions to influence the verdict, as they were not borne out by the evidence. But as it appears that
Government has commissioned you to investigate the circumstances which attended the
accident, I feel that, being no longer fettered by my position as a juryman, I should not be
acting fairly towards the public if I withheld this statement from you.”
These gentlemen, who have no wish that their names should be unnecessarily brought
before the public, are, notwithstanding, quite ready, if called upon, to substantiate what
they have thus stated.
It is not, perhaps, my place to make any comments in this report on the conduct of the
policeman; but it is impossible not to conclude from these statements, and other circumstances, that the speed down the plane was excessive, and inconsistent with the then state of the road; or, perhaps, with common prudence under any circumstances.
Of course the above statements impugn also Jackson's evidence; and I am sorry that the
jury seam to have given too much weight, in my opinion, to his explanations as to the
probable cause of the accident This man states that he has been a driver for four years and a half, three years in the service of the London and Brighton Company, before which he belonged to the London and Birmingham Company. He states that he never met with any accident himself from the four wheeled engines on the latter line; but had heard of a case of one of those engines getting off the line near Harrow.
Now surely this is very slight ground on which to come to a conclusion that such engines
are unsafe, and for attributing to the use of them two accidents on two successive days
within about a mile of each other.
It appears from a statement I have received from Mr. Bury, the maker of these engines, and who is also the superintendent of the locomotive department of the London and Birmingham Railway, that since the opening of that line, in July, 1837, they have used no other than four-wheeled engines; that they have travelled more than three million miles, which is nearly equivalent to making thirty thousand complete journeys between London and Birmingham; and that they have in no instance met with a single accident that can be said to have been occasioned be the particular construction of the engine.
There is, however, as stated by Jackson, some difference between the Birmingham and
Brighton four-wheeled engines. They have both the same stroke and the same diameter of wheels; but the former has smaller cylinders, viz., some having twelve-inch cylinders,
weighing, full of water, under 10 tons; others of thirteen-inch cylinders, weighing, under
like circumstances, between 11 and 12 tons.
On the Brighton line the four-wheeled engines have all fourteen-inch cylinders, and weigh, when charged with water and fuel, between 13 and 14 tons. This increased size of cylinder requires increased dimensions; and, the wheels being of the same diameter, necessarily raises the centre of gravity, and thus far they may be said to be more top-heavy, and are, perhaps, more liable to rock; but the difference must be very inconsiderable.
In order to form some comparison of the top-heaviness of the two engines employed on
that particular day when the accident occurred, Mr. Rastrick obligingly permitted one of
his assistants to make me two outlined elevations of them, that is, of a four-wheeled engine of precisely the same dimensions as that which was destroyed, and the other of the identical six-wheeled engine driven by Jackson. I forward with this report these two drawings, by which it will be seen, as nearly as it is possible to form an opinion, that there is little or no difference in the place of the centre of gravity in the two engines. The upper part of the boiler of the six-wheeled engine is the highest, but its water line is the lowest; as far, therefore, as relates to top heaviness on which much stress is laid by Jackson, I am of opinion there is little or no difference.
In making these remarks, I beg it may be distinctly understood that I am not advocating,
Or giving a preference to, the four-wheeled engines. My object in referring to the subject
is, that the jury, by giving too much weight to W at I consider to be an erroneous opinion, have lost sight of the main causes of the accident, which I feel the strongest conviction were over driving and a road partially injured by the heavy rains that had recently fallen. I think, moreover, that the withdrawing of those engines from the line, in compliance with the recommendation of the jury, has a tendency to give a false confidence to the Brighton passengers, while it is calculated to give unfounded alarm to those travelling on the London and Birmingham and some other lines.
It now only remains, my Lord, to inform our Lordship of the result of my examination into the circumstances attending the falling o the front of the Patcham tunnel This was, I believe, occasioned by the chalk being left at a considerable slope, which caused the "backing in," when impregnated with the excessive heavy rains, to slide along the face of the chalk, and thus by its pressure overcoming the resistance opposed to it. Mr. Rastrick also apprehends that a pipe. intended for a drain, had become by some means choaked, which increased ' the evil. A slight crack, it appears, had been observed early on the Thursday morning; but no danger was apprehended till immediately after the passage of the 10h. 45m. morning train.
In the fall of the front of the tunnel, a part of the brick work of the tunnel itself, for about
six feet, was fractured. It remained shored up the second day, hut was removed during
the following night. The remaining part is an extremely fine piece of brickwork, and is
perfectly safe, only requiring for the present a constant watching, to remove any fragments of chalk that may fall upon the line from the present nearly vertical face of the cutting. Steps will be immediately taken to reface the tunnel; and it is, I believe, Mr. Rastrick's intention to lengthen the brickwork of it a little towards Brighton.
In the further compliance with your Lordship's instructions, after making this examination I proceeded along the line with the special engine and carriage, accompanied by Mr. Rastrick, to Hayward Heath, stopping and examining everything that appeared to require it. Mr. Rastrick here left me to return to Brighton, having first appropriated m me the coupe of the carriage, in which I proceeded to Croydon ; and if I might venture to give a practical opinion relative to the construction and present state of the line, I should say that the engine has done, and well done, everything that could be effected; but he has had to deal in some parts with very treacherous materials, and time will be required for them to take up a firm and solid state.
In other parts, where the soil is better, the line is very perfect. The bridges, the viaducts,
and four out of the five tunnels, are, in regard of interior brickwork, in perfect condition;
but the Hayward Heath Tunnel is much oppressed with water from the late excessive
rains; but great efforts are being made to carry the water off, and a few days of fine
weather will enable much to be accomplished. Those parts of the line which have suffered most from the rains are two short pieces of the embankment south of the Redhill Station ; another considerable portion south of the Balcombe Tunnel, and just beyond
the Hayward Heath Tunnel southward.
Sir Frederick Smith, in his general approval of this line, has drawn the attention of the
engineer to certain portions of it, on which he conceived the safety of the public called
for specific precautions a d reduced speed. These precautions have been rendered more
particularly necessary in consequence of the recent heavy rains, which have also
produced some other weak points; and I conceive that it is most desirable that at
present, and during the approaching winter, more time should be allowed for the
journey, in order that great caution may be observed in those parts where the line has
most sufferer.
I have ascertained that both Jackson and Charles Goldsmith were discharged servants
of the London and Birmingham Company, but Goldsmith had never been a driver.
Driver Jackson had previously been employed as an engine driver since the early part of
1837, by the London & Birmingham company. After being discharged from this company in
c1838, driver Jackson later found employment with the L.B.S.C.R. having been an engine
driver for about a year and half.
LETTER from Lieutenant-Colonel Sir Frederic Smith,
covering Professor's Barlow's Report,
on the Accident on the London and Brighton Railway.
Board of Trade, October 15, 1841.
MY LORD,
Having carefully considered the accompanying report from Professor Barlow, respecting the
late fatal accident on the London and Brighton Railway, and, on the present state of the works on that line, I have the honour to acquaint your Lordship that I occur with the Professor in attributing that accident partly to the excessive speed used on the occasion in question, and partly to the defective state to which the road had been reduced by the long continuance of heavy rain; hut, believing as I do, that these two causes mainly contributed to produce this unfortunate catastrophe, yet I am most decidedly of opinion that the accident would not have happened but for the improper use of two en mes a-head on a long gradient, of rather severe inclination, falling in the direction in which the train was running.
Scarcely any practice can, in my opinion, be more imprudent than running a train with two
engines a-head on such a plane at n high velocity, even over a road well consolidated by time, and the danger of such a proceeding is obviously most fearfully increased when it is
permitted on a line which has not acquired that degree of steadiness which is attainable only
from long use; and, while this practice is dangerous, it is not only altogether unnecessary, but expensive to the Company.
Your Lordship will readily perceive the utter impossibility of two drivers, however dexterous they may be, so regulating the speed of their respective engines, on such a plane as that on draw chains" of both uniformly stretched, and it is quite clear that when the leading engine sometimes draws the other, and is sometimes pushed by it, an irregular motion must result, having a tendency to disturb the balance of the leading engine, and more especially if that engine be the lighter, and carried by only four wheels.The risk is much increased on a line where the evenness of the rails has been disturbed by bad weather.
In calling the attention of the London and Brighton Company therefore, to the necessity of a
considerable reduction in their rate of speed on the falling gradients, and of paying constant
and close attention to the state of their road, I would recommend that they should be urged to discontinue the use of the assistant engine in the descent of their long inclined planes.
A most important and very safe practice prevails on some of the northern railways, which
should be immediately introduced on the Brighton line, and ought to be adopted on ail those
of recent formation, as it affords an excellent, constant, and almost unerring check on the
contractors. who are generally held responsible to maintain the road in good order for 12
months after the opening:
The practice to which I allude, is that of making each policeman carry a gauge, and walk over his beat, before the arrival of every train, trying the gauge of the rails in such a number of points as to ascertain whether the line is throughout in perfect order; and it is the policeman’s duty to stop a train, or give the signal of caution, according to the degree of risk he may discover.
I find that the point where it is presumed the engine first became irregular in its motion, just
before the accident, in one to which I had called the especial attention of the Company, as
requiring careful and cautious driving and watching.
Professor Barlow very justly observes, that it will be the rase on the London and Brighton, as it is on all new lines, that for some time to come fresh weak points will be produced by
unfavourable weather, and I therefore conceive it will be proper not only to press upon the
Company the necessity of devoting the most vigilant and unremitting care to the state of their works generally and of the permanent way in particular, but that it will be indispensably necessary that this line, on which so large a traffic may be expected, should have the especial attention of this department, and be occasionally inspected during the winter after had weather, in order that such suggestions may from time to time be offered to the Com any as may relieve the Board of Trade from alt responsibility as regards the public safety on this railway.
I have, &C.,
FREDERIC SMITH
Letter sent to the London and Brighton Railway Company,
with Extracts from Sir F. Smith’s and Professor Barlow's Reports.
October 19,1841
SIR, Board of Trade,
With reference to the late accident on the London and Brighton Railway, I am directed, &C.,
to inform you that their Lordship recommend to the Directors of the London and Brighton
Railway Company the adoption of the following precautions, which have been recommended by Sir F. Smith and Professor Barlow :-
l. That the speed in descending the long inclined places upon the line, and also upon all
portions of the line which may appear to be not perfectly consolidated, should he reduced,
and strict orders issued to prevent such limited rate of speed as is thought proper for safety
from being ever exceeded.
2. That with a view to this the time-table should be revised, and the average rate of speed
along the line, which is stated by Professor Barlow to be in some case as high as 25 miles per hour, should be considerably diminished.
3. That the practice of running trains with two engines a-head down long inclined planes,
should be discontinued.
Sir F. Smith further suggests, that a practice which prevails on some of the northern railways
might with advantage be adopted, as affording an excellent check on the contractors, who we responsible for maintaining the road in good order, viz., of making each policeman carry a gauge, and walk over his beat before the arrival of train, trying the gauge of the rails in such a number of points as to ascertain whether the line is throughout in good order, and making it his duty to stop or caution trains according to the degree of risk he may discover. Their Lordships recommend this suggestion for the consideration of the Directors.
The town of Brighton was thrown into a state of consternation on Saturday by the receipt of intelligence of a fatal accident which occurred on the line near Haywards Heath.
Rumour, with her hundred tongues was busy as usual, and the extent of the accident was considerably magnified as the report of the awful calamity passed from mouth to mouth The real nature of the accident was, however, too awfully appalling to need the aggravated colouring which, as in all similar eases, was so amply laid on.
On receiving intelligence of the accident our reporter proceeded by the next train to the spot, and the following statement is the result of his inquiries and observations.
The second down train (first class) which leaves London at a quarter to 11 o'clock, after passing the magnificent viaduct which spans the Ouse valley, was proceeding through the cutting in Copyhold hill, near Cuckfield, and about a mile from the Haywards Heath station, propelled by two engines, when, owing to some circumstances, of which we could get no explanation, the first engine ran off the line, and was followed by the second engine and three of the carriages. After getting off the rails the engines took opposite directions, one veering to the right the other to the left hand of the line, and the first engine immediately ran into the side of the cutting where it was overturned, and, probably owing to the safety
valve becoming clogged, the boiler exploded. The sudden stoppage of the engines, which were propelling the train at a rapid pace, caused a violent concussion of the carriages three of which were smashed, one of them becoming a complete wreck. The latter was of a description used only in the first class trains, combining the accommodation of the first and second class carriages, the middle compartment being fitted up in the style of the first class vehicles, and the side compartments in the second class style, the carriage being intended for families using the railway and attended to by their servants. This carriage, on our proceeding to the spot where the accident occurred, we found broken to pieces, the wheels and springs lying at a distance from the dilapidated body.
The utmost consternation prevailed at the moment, and the shrieks of the female passengers were terrific. Six persons were discovered to have suffered from the concussion. Two of them were found entirely lifeless, the head of one being severed from the body, and the other having died from a complete crushing of the chest. Two other were so severely injured that one expired in the course of a few minutes, and the other in about a quarter of an hour. No less than six medical gentlemen were passenger by the ill-fated train, and the most prompt assistance was rendered to the unfortunate sufferers.
Among the professional passengers were Dr. Carpue, the celebrated anatomist, and Mr. W. T. Elliott, surgeon of the Brompton Lunatic Asylum and the latter gentleman, more especially, was most assiduous in his attention to those of the sufferers who survived the immediate effect of the concussion. The remaining two of those who had sustained injuries still survive, but, one of them is considered to be in a highly precarious condition.
Our inquiries did not lead to the names of all the injured parties. Those on whom the accident proved fatal were the stokers of both the engines (one of whom., named Robert Field, aged 23, had been married about three weeks, and whose Wife, residing in Brighton has received a shock which we hear may not improbably have a fatal termination), and a butler and lady's maid in a family about to take up their residence in Brighton. The two Survivors are a guard on the train (the one who is considered In a highly dangerous state), and Jackson, one of the engine-drivers, a steady and clever man who has been in the service of the directors ever since the Shoreham branch of the railway was in a sufficiently forward condition to enable an engine to be employed to expedite the works, and who has since been transferred to the London line.
Among the passengers by the train were the family of M Marshal, of Leeds (We believe), the father of Lady Monteagle
We are pleased to add, that beyond what we have described above none of the passengers sustained any injury.
In consequence of the accident all the subsequent trains deviated from their usual regularity, the signal of danger having been forwarded up and down the line, owing to which the trains passed at an unusually slow pace. The line was speedily cleared of the obstruction caused by the concussion and the road was open for the remaining trains, and great care was taken to prevent the first accident giving rise to a second. Mr Rastrick, the chief engineer of the line, was speedily on the spot, and, With his subordinates, was assiduous in his efforts to remove any further inconvenience to which the melancholy occurrence was calculated to give rise.
The bodies of the deceased were removed to an adjacent public-house, and the constable of the parish in which the accident took place went express for the coroner Mr T H Gell of Lewes, who is expected to hold an inquest this day. The evidence on the investigation, before the coroner's jury will, of course, give fresh particulars of the disaster.
The train had been propelled as far as Balcombe station by an engine manufactured by Fairborn, of Liverpool when an auxiliary engine was attached for the purpose expedition. The auxiliary engine was of the manufacture of Berry , of Manchester. On entering the cutting, through the Copyhold-hill the auxiliary engine was observed to oscillate on the line, or to use a provincial but expressive term, " joggle." In a few minutes this engine ran off the line towards the left side of the cutting and almost immediate upset, partially burying itself in the cutting.
Jackson, the driver of the second engine, immediately caught hold of the "reversing lever," with a view of checking the progress the train. A small portion, however, of the auxiliary engine projecting over the rails forcing the second engine off the line on the opposite side, and it proceeded onwards in a diagonal direction till it struck against the down rails, when it received a check., but continued its progress again towards the down rails. Jackson retained his presence of mind, but, of course, the skill of the driver could avail but little under such circumstances. The tender of the second engine had broken away, and together with the first three carriages received great injury from the concussion. The uninjured carriages then came up with the second engine, of course with diminished velocity, but the second concussion threw Jackson under the fire-hole from which the first carriage lifted him by the back, inflicting only a few slight bruises. The auxiliary engine was one to which the drivers on the line had applied the name of "the top heavy engine," and Berry's engines are in general disrepute amongst them.
We have further heard that Mr. Rastrick, the engineer of the railroad, has determined on discontinuing the use of all the engines from Berry's manufactories, as, although no accident has hitherto occurred from their use, their performance has not given satisfaction.
In addition to the surgeons mentioned in the preceding account, we have learned that Mr. Kernan, one of the medical examiners at the London University, and Mr. Fernandez were among the medical men who were passengers by the train, and who rendered assistance to the passengers.
The above account contains a trifling inaccuracy. We have mentioned Jackson, the engine-driver, as one of the two persons seriously injured. Jackson, as we have just stated was but slightly injured; and the two, whom we referred to in our first account, were Kinchin, the guard of the train who now lies at a beer-shop, near the Haywards Heath station, and Goldsmith, driver of the auxiliary engine, who was removed to some carpenter's sheds in the vicinity. They are attended by Mr. Byass, of CuckfleId, and Mr. Ball, o Lindfield, surgeons, and, we are happy to add, are going on favourably.
The 12 o'clock down train having arrived at the Horley station, a second engine (one of Berry's). with four wheels was added to it, which is customary, and it then travelled on at its usual speed. When it arrived within a mile and a half of Hayward's-Heath, the engine, which was considered a top heavy one, was and observed to oscillate, then immediately went off the line, turned on its side, and was scattered in fragments—the boiler entirely riven. The engineer (Charles Goldsmith) was hurled into small cavity (the drain gutter), and deeply imbedded in clay, from which he was subsequently extricated by the assistance of three or four men, and found not to be seriously injured. His stoker, Robert Marshall, was struck senseless, and in 20 minutes breathed his last. Next to this engine was another of six wheels, of Fairburn's construction, the engineer of which, James Jackson, wishing to reserve his steam for the time when Berry's engine would be detached, had shut off his steam nearly half a mile before he reached the fatal spot, and had thus retarded the velocity which the train would otherwise have acquired. But for this circumstance, and Jackson's presence of mind in instantly seizing and acting on the reversal lever, the effects would have been much more destructive. In a moment the concussion displaced the tender, and threw his engine on the first-class carriages; the crush was terrific, breaking up in the centre the first carriage, in which, were four passengers, transfixing them in their seats, and casting the burning coals at their feet. Jackson, whose life seems to have been miraculously preserved and to whose presence of mind much of the safety of the rest of the train was hurled against the first class train, and then forced on to the embankment with only slight contusions, and started up immediately, giving great assistance to the wreck around him. The first discovery he made was, that the stoker, who stood at his left hand, was a mutilated corpse, about 40 yards from where he fell, the momentum of the train having carried it forward upwards of 100 feet. The poor young fellow, Robert Field, had only been married that day three weeks.
The inmates of the first coach of the first class train then became the subject of deep anxiety. They consisted of two Misses Kent (we understood of Southend), Mr. Loud of Dover arid another gentleman, and were literally imprisoned, the coach being nearly doubled up, and the fire, steam, and effluvium nearly suffocating them. Providentially they escaped from the splinters which flew in all directions, and Mr Loud got his leg through a hole and eventually his body, and immediately with other as-sistants, extricated the ladies and gentleman; not so favoured were two servants, one of whom was cast on his face, his skull split, and his body mutilated be moved not again. The other, a female servant, was found, when the train stopped, with her body literally under one of the wheels. A guard, also, of the name of Kitchen, was seriously injured. With the above exception no serious accident occurred. The consternation consequent on the event was great, and the excitement excessive.
Much praise is due to the neighbouring gentry and inhabitants for the offer of conveyances and use of their residences for the sufferers. There does not appear to be any blame resting on the engineer. It is supposed that the engine acquired its oscillatory motion from a slight obstruction occasioned by a peculiarly soapy clay adhering to the trains, which clay abounds in that neighbourhood, But this is not certain.
The directors gave unremitting energy to relieve the embarrassed state of the passengers who were shortly after safely taken to Brighton
Sir, The dreadful accident on the Brighton railway on Saturday, whereby the maidservant and footman belonging to one family, the engineer and stoker, were , as I am informed by an eye witness, literally smashed to pieces, besides many others dangerously wounded, arose from there being two engines to the train, which ought never, under any circumstances, to be
allowed, either both in front or one as a propeller. A moment’s thought must convince any one of the danger. If both are in front, and second is in the slightest degree quicker than the other, it must naturally and inevitably push the foremost off the rails, as was the case on Saturday; and if one be used as a propeller, and the leader be checked in anyway, the carriages must be smashed between them. If the train be too heavy for one engine, either divide it, and let each part have an engine, following at a reasonable time after; or, what be preferable, let the company have a few engines of extra power to be used as occasion may require.
I was a passenger in a train meeting that which had the accident. It will scarcely be credited
that our train, and one which had arrived afterwards, were joined about to be despatched with two engines: and would have have been so, but that a gentleman in the carriage with me fortunately perceived it, and, after remonstrating wit the superintendent who would not alter it, saw one of the directors who after our protesting against proceeding with two engines, and telling him that he would be considered responsible if any accident occurred in consequence, had the train divided, with and engine to each.
I write in the hope that through your means the attention of Government, the directors of all
railroads, and the public may be called to this point, which will tend much to lessen the
danger of railroad travelling.
The use of two engines ought to be prohibited by act of Parliament; but until that can be
obtained it would be wise if the directors of all railroads would assure the public that two
engine shall never be used to one train.
On Monday morning a highly respectable jury was empanelled before Mr. F.H. Gell, Coroner for East Sussex, at the Railway Beer Shop, near Haywards Heath station, to investigate the circumstances attending the melancholy loss of four lives, which occurred on Saturday last on the railway, owning to one of the engines running of the rails. The jury comprised Mr. T.J. Bellamy and Mr. N. Barwell, two of the magistrates for the county of Susses; the Rev. W.H. Scwabe, curate of Cuckfield; the Rev. H. Fearson, master of an academy at Cuckfield; and the most respectable inhabitants of Cuckfield and the neighbourhood.
Mr. Faithfull, of Brighton attended to watch the proceedings on the part of the railway
company. There were also present, Mr. Harman, Mr. Robinson and Mr Heaviside, directors of the company.
The jury having been sworn, proceeded to view the bodies, which had been deposited in a
beer shop about a mile to the north of the station. The names of the deceased were Robert
Marshall and Robert Field (the firemen of the engines which propelled the train), and Harry
Palmer and Jane Watson (servants of Dr. Carpue, the celebrated anatomist). The bodies had
been placed in a carpenter’s shed, and presented spectacle.
Having viewed the bodies, the jury proceeded to an adjoining beer shop, where the drive of
one of the engine was taken immediately after the accident. He appeared to be fast
recovering.
The Coroner administered the oath to him, and he proceeded to make the following
statement:-
Charles Goldsmith. On Saturday last, on arrival at Horley of the 11 o’clock train from
London, propelled by a six wheeled engine, a second auxiliary engine was put on to assist the train to Hayward’s Heath. It was a four wheeled engine, and I was the driver. The train was a very heavy one, and, I believe, was a little behind time. My engine was put before the other, and we proceeded at the rate of about 30 miles an hour. When we reached the Copyhold cutting, I received a different motion in the engine, which wavered backwards and forwards. I don’t know what followed, I was stunned and heard nothing more. The motion lasted only an instant. When I recovered I found myself n a ditch covered with sand and water under the tender. Some persons were removing the tender as I came to myself, and told me that the accident has happened about ten minutes. It was my duty to examine the engine before it left Horley; I did examine it, and it appeared to be quite safe. When we got to Copyhold, the driver of the first engine let off his steams; and I turned off mine to within half an inch. The other engine was doing nothing; mine was doing but little, merely keeping the chain tight.
There was no policeman in the cutting. The last policeman that I saw was at the Ouse Valley
viaduct; and he signalled “all right.” I did not expect to meet another policeman till I got to
Hayward’s Heath. It is customary to put on a second engine at Horley when the train is heavy or behind time. The action of a small and heavy engine is the same; but a heavy engine holds it was longer than a small one. If a driver is not very careful the large engine would cause a jerk against the small one when the steam was shut off. Never knew an instance of the first engine being thrown off in this way. Two engines of different powers and weights can run together at the same speed. I am in 21st year. I have been employed on locomotives for five years; but have been a driver only a month. I was competent two years ago. I shut off my steam because I thought I saw a man in the cutting hold up his hand. The other driver had shut off the steam previously. I understood the signal to be to slacken the speed. Where the road is not heavy, we are in the habit of going at the rate of 30 miles an hour. I felt no bumping when the steam was turned off; I could not, as the hind engine was not drawing. I have printed instructions from Mr. Hurst, but they contain no directions against speed except on the Croydon and Greenwich lines.
Examined by Mr. Faithfull. I was to have left the train at Hayward’s Heath. I was three years
on the London and Birmingham Railway, and never knew any other four wheeled carriages
used there. If one of the wheels of the engine had become loose, such a motion as I felt would have been consequence. This might have been the cause of the accident.
John Holland, a retired officer in the army, who identified the bodies of Henry Palmer and
Jane Watson, the former as the footman; the latter as the housemaid, of Mr. Joseph Constantine Carpue, surgeon, of Upper Charlotte Street, Fitzroy Square, whose family he had been in the habit of visiting . Henry Palmer was about 23 years of age and Jane Watson about the same age.
James Jackson. I am an engine driver in the employment of the London and Brighton Railway Company. On Saturday last I left Horley at 5 minutes after 12 o’clock. Was to proceed from Horley to Brighton. I had brought the engine from Horley n the morning and was to return with it. i examined the engine at Horley, and it was in complete working order. A pilot engine was attached to the train at Horley, because we had heavy train, and to help us up the hill. We came from Horley to the Copyhold cutting at the average rate of about from 26 to 30 miles an hour. About half a mile before coming to the Copyhold cutting we were running at the rate of about 30 miles an hour. On entering the cutting by the bridge we do not exceed 23 miles an hour. I believe it to have been 20 or 21. Nothing occurred here to induce me to slacken my pace. I had shut off my steam half a mile before I came to the cutting, because my engine was getting slack of steam; as we were going down hill, and other engine was going to leave me at Hayward’s Heath. I wished to reserve my steam, that I might keep a good supply with which to get to Brighton. I did not observe any signal before entering the cutting. After we entered it, just before the accident took place. I observed a man, amongst a number of men, standing with one arm up; that is a signal to slacken speed. The instant we passed the man I observed the first engine rocking very much, and, directly after, she capsized right over to left hand side. I immediately leaped behind the fire box, and laid hold of the handle of the regulator, till I was thrown back by my engine coming into contact with the end of the engine. if the other engine had rolled a foot further, I think we might have avoided her altogether. I did not perceive the slightest movement in my engine till she struck the other. I was thrown back on the carriage of the tender, and continued holding the chain till the carriages stopped. It was all over in half a minute. We had no warning nor any thoughts of the accident. Directly I got off my engine, I saw one of the guards lying on the ground on his back close by my engine. I lifted him up, and then went back, and the next person I saw was Charles Goldsmith, covered with sand and mud, and under the frame of the tender in a gutter by the side of the road. We pulled him out of the hole, and the next person I saw was Robert Marshall, a stoker to the first engine, lying dead on the ground on his back, he lying lengthwise to the railway, with his head towards London. Seeing no other person, I got through the carriages, and then found Field, my stoker, about three yards from the carriages, between the out rail and the gutter. He
was almost lifeless; the phlegm was gurgling in his mouth. I told him to spit it out, and he did so. Directly I left him I proceeded to my engine, and saw a female lying across the railway, with a carriage wheel resting on her. She was with her face downwards, quite dead. At this time some men were getting Henry Palmer from under some carriages, within a couple of yards of the female. He was quite dead. The earth in the cutting is of a greasy nature, and a number of men, who are employed there, are in the habit of walking over the trams with their boots, leaving a portion of earth on them; which, in my opinion, was the cause of the accident.
Coroner. How would that affect the engine?
Witness. The engine being four wheels, and sliding about, and being top heavy, the gushing
about of the water on the top of the fire box would almost force her over. That is my firm
opinion. As to the state of the cutting, I have ran 30 and 35 miles an hour through it many a
time. The earth has nor given way at this part at all. All I saw was the rocking motion, which
I conjecture was owing to the slippery state of the rails. You do not feel this with a six
wheeled engine. I have been over there at 30 miles an hour and never have had any cause to
slacken speed.
Coroner. If there had been no pilot engine would the danger have been less?
Witness. I do not think my engine would have gone off, on account of its weight and having
six wheels. Only three carriages, those next to the tender, were thrown off the line. The others were not affected. Thee were 11 or 12 carriages in the train. I do not know how many
passengers; but there seemed to be a considerable number, and a good deal of luggage.
Mr. Barwell. do you consider the construction of the pilot engines safe or unsafe?
Witness. I consider them unsafe. There is a difference of opinion among engineers; but I don’t like four wheeled ones. This was as safe as other four wheeled engines, but I prefer six
wheeled ones. I think a four wheeled and six wheeled can act in unison together, if the stroke be the same. If a six wheeled and four wheeled were stopped at the same time the six wheeled engine would stop sooner than the four wheeled, because there would be less friction. Goldsmith took no notice of me, but shut off a part of his steam shortly after me.
Cross examined by the Rev. Mr. Fearon. I don’t think there is more danger in having two
engines than one. If we had had two four wheeled engines on Saturday the consequence
would have been still worse. I am quite sure that my speed between the viaduct and the
Copyhold cutting, about three quarters of a mile, was not above 30 miles an hour. We were
behind time a little at Horley, but did not go above our ordinary speed. The pilot engine was
put on because we had a heavy train. The accident happened about half past 12.
By Mr. Barwell. A foreman is kept at Horley and Brighton to examine the engines. I saw Mr.
Hurst go round mine at Horley, and believe he looked over both.
By Mr. Allen. I am quite certain, from experience, that the slippery state of the rails would
cause, and not prevent, oscillation.
It is the same in chalk cuttings. I have been a driver four and a half years. Goldsmith was
perfectly sober, and I always knew him to be so. I can suggest no other cause for the accident but that iI have described.
By the Coroner. The weight of the carriages behind did not cause any movement in the
engine; it would make it go steadier. I saw a policeman at the viaduct give the signal “all
right,” but saw no other. The man who gave the signal was the foreman of the works there. I
never had signal there before. The engine went off immediately we had passed him. all the
engines are new ones. The pilot engine was in good working order.
Mr. Barwell. Did you ever state your opinion of four wheeled engines to any of the company?
No; not before yesterday.
Foreman. Have the engines ever run off the line before?
Yes; on Friday last I saw an engine, a four wheeled one, run off the rail at the Hayward’s
Heath tunnel. I did not know the cause. I have never seen any other case.
By Mr. Faithfull. When I saw the signal I pulled the retard lever, but it could not stop the
other engine.
By Mr. Barwell. I never knew a six wheeled engine go off the rail unless there was some
obstruction, or the points were wrong. The London Birmingham Railway uses four wheeled
engines, bu they are not so high as these and therefore require less heavy cylinders, and are
consequently less top heavy. I know a similar case to this occurring on the London and
Birmingham. they are made on the same principle, except that our boilers are larger. I should
not like to drive a four wheeled engine.
By the Foreman. Neither of the boilers exploded. That of the pilot was burst from falling
over. I observed the state of the rail after the accident. It was bent a little, a very little indeed,
owing to the carriages running against it. The rail was in the same state as that in which I had gone over it at 30 miles an hour, and believed it perfectly safe.
James Copley. I am a labourer employed on the railway. I recollect being Copyhold cutting,
about a quarter past 12 o’clock on Saturday last. I saw the down train coming at about its
usual rate. I made a signal to it to come steady just before they came to the bridge. We have
done it for the last three or four days on account of the wet, and for fear they should come
light. There was no reason more than the usual one. I did not see the accident. As soon as the train passed I went away.
Mr. Barwell. Were the rails greasy?
No, sir. In that part soil is sandy. There is some black clay at the top. I had been told to make
the signal by a policeman. There are veins of black soil running down the cutting. I had not
observed in particular the clay from the labourers’ boots on the rails.
Juryman. What do you mean by the road being light?
Why, the wet pushes the rails up, and makes them uneven, but that was not case with the rails on Saturday.
Mr. Faithfull then called.
Mr. John Hardy. I reside at No.3, Portland Place, and am member for Bradford, in Yorkshire.
I was a passenger by the quarter before 11 o’clock train, from London, on Saturday. I was in
the middle part of the carriage next to the engine, with an open coupee on each side. The first thing I experienced was a great shock and dreadful screams. I was in the middle of the
carriage, with my face to Brighton; and by the shock a lad, who was sitting in the corner
opposite to me, was thrown on my knee. There was immediately great crashing. I and my son in law, Mr. Wood, spoke to the ladies, when new were suddenly lifted and turned around, and, in the course of a few seconds instead of being with my face towards Brighton, my face was towards London, and the carriage leaning against a sandbank. Just as we were first struck a quantity of steam and water came into the carriage, but there was no escape for it. As soon as we were still Mr. Wood, who was next to the window got out, there being room between the window and hill, and assisted me in doing so. I immediately jumped across the ditch, and found the carriage had been completely turned round. I went round the engine, which was in the road, and the first thing I saw was the guard, very disfigured. I spoke to him, found he was still alive, and called for a surgeon. Mr. Elliott came. A little further on I observed the engine lying on the ditch, on the left hand side. A little beyond it was one of the stokers lying, apparently dead. I have travelled a great deal by railway. I have been 11 times by this railroad, and, to the best of my judgement, we were proceeding at the rate from 20 to 24 miles an hour, just before I had been complaining to my companions of the slowness of the speed, and said we should be half an hour behind out time at Hayward’s Heath.
By the Foreman. I thought this was a very long train. I had taken my place in the coupee, but
my son in law persuaded me, just before starting, to leave it. Had I remained most probably
your inquest would have been upon me.
By M.r Faithfull. I cannot give a scientific opinion upon the point, but from experience, I
should say the heavier the train the steadier the motion.
Mr. John Wood, of Thaddon Grange, Alton Hampshire, corroborated the evidence of Mr
Hardy. in going through the cutting, I should suppose the speed to be from 20 to 25 miles. I
frequently travel on railways.
William Beedham. I am a builder and surveyor residing in North Street, Brighton. At the time of the accident I was near the railroad, about half a mile from the place where it occurred. I heard the train coming. I took my watch out, and also the railway table to see what train it was. It was just half past 12. According to my judgement it was going about 25 miles an hour.
I had a full view of it across the viaduct, about half a mile from the accident. I could not say
whether it slackened before I lost sight of it.
Richard Hodges. I am a labourer on the railway and live at Copyhold. I saw the train, on
Saturday, in the cutting. It was coming along at the usual rate. I saw the first engine jump up
and down as it came along, it might be about half a minute, and then I saw it drop right off
the rail. I then turned and ran away; either the tender or the engine caught me, and one of the
stokers fell across me and knocked me into the ditch. When it jumped the fore wheels rose up and down. I did not see any oscillating motion.
Matthew Hall, assistant engineer. It is my duty to inspect that portion of the railway on which the accident occurred, and to see that it is in a proper state. I had inspected it just previous to the accident. I was a little advance of the train, in the cutting, at the time. The road was in a fit state for travelling at 25 miles. it was in as good a state of repair as it has been in since the line was opened. I am of opinion that a heavy train is steadier than a light one. I am stationed on the line for 16 miles, to St John’s Common, and it is in a perfectly fit state for travelling. I did not observe anything on the rail to make it slippery. The soil is sandy.
Mr. Elliott of the Brompton Lunatic Asylum, who had been a passenger by the train, and had
attended on the wounded engine driver and guard, had been subpoenaed, and was present
during the investigation; but as he was not able to give any additional evidence, he was not
called.
The Jury expressed a wish to have the policeman who was on duty at the Ouse Valley
viaduct, a mile north of Copyhold cutting, when the train passed, examined as to the speed at that time; and a messenger was despatched to summon him before the Coroner.
In the meantime the jury having expressed an opinion that the cause of the accident was the
use of four wheeled engines.
Mr. Faithfull said that Mr. Rastrick, the chief engineer, and Mr. Statham, one of the resident
engineers were present and ready to explain any matters which the evidence might have left
in doubt.
The jury, however, did not ask them any questions.
Jackson, the engine driver, re-examined. I think that the water and the top heaviness of the
pilot engine, coupled with the slippery state of the rails, was the case of the accident. I have
known four wheeled engines run off on the Eastern Counties line, but I never knew six
wheeled engines to do so.
John Hinge examined. I am police constable, No. 37, on the line of the London and Brighton
Railway, and reside at Cuckfield.
On Saturday last, between 12 and 1 o’clock, I was on duty at the Ouse Viaduct. I saw the
down train coming towards me, and held up my hand to give the “ all right” signal; and as it
passed me I gave a signal to go steady, as I observed that it was going rather faster than usual.
I did not at that time observe any particular motion of the engine or train. Shortly after I heard a great noise in the direction of the Copyhold Cutting and as I thought the bursting of a steam boiler. I ran in that direction as hard as I could, and some labourers ran also. As soon as I got into the cutting, which is about three quarters of a mile, I observed that an accident had happened, and I got up to the spot, and rendered assistance to the sufferers. I do not know how it happened. I had no apprehension of an accident occurring when I saw the train pass along the Viaduct. I did not say my heart came into my mouth when I saw the train coming along, they were going at such a rate. The road where the accident happened has been out of order lately in consequence of the bad state of the weather.
The court was here cleared of strangers, and at half past 6 o’clock the jury returned a verdict
of “ Accidental death, with a deadand of one shilling on the engines; and the jury are of the
opinion that the four wheeled engines used on this line are not of a safe construction, and they recommend their discontinuance.”
Sir, Observing that in the melancholy accident on Saturday last the passengers in the first
carriages were the only ones killed, which I recollect has generally been the case in all
railway accidents occasioned by the engine getting off the line, it has led me suggest, either
that the luggage of the passengers should be placed on one or two luggage trucks between the engine and first carriage, or else to have a break of some elastic material, say pass of wool made almost the length and breadth of one of the carriages, so that the first concussion would be on it, and not on the bones and heads of the poor passengers, though of course they must feel, but in a less degree, being at a greater distance from the engine than at present.
Report on the Inquest - the report of the inquest is somewhat confusing as the inquest seems to have been held in various Beer-Shops , the report is quite long so this an abridged version where I am using text directly from the report this is in blue.
On Monday morning a highly respectable jury was empanelled before Mr F. H.Gell, coroner for East Sussex, at the Railway beer-shop, near Hayward's-heath station, to investigate the circumstances attending the melancholy loss of four lives, which occurred on Saturday last on the railway, owing to one of the engines running of the rails. The jury comprised Mr. T. J. Bellamy and Mr. N. Barwell, two of the magistrates for the county of Sussex ; the Rev. W. H.Schwabe, curate of Cuckfield ; the Rev. H. Fearon, master of an academy at Cuckfield and the most respectable inhabitants of Cuckfield and the neighbourhood.
M. H. Faithfull, of Brighton, attended to watch the proceedings on the part of the railway company. There were also present, Mr. Harman, Mr. Robinson, and Mr. Heaviside, directors of the company.
The jury having been sworn, proceeded to view the bodies, which had been deposited in a beer-shop, about a mile to the north of the station. The names of the deceased were Robert Marshall and Robert Field (the firemen of the engines which propelled the train,) and Henry Palmer and Jane Watson (servants of Dr. Carpue, the celebrated anatomist). The bodies had been placed in a carpenter's shed, and presented a dreadful spectacle.
Having viewed the bodies, the. jury proceeded to an adjoining beer-shop, where the driver of one of the engines was taken immediately after the accident. He appeared to be fast recovering.
John Holland - a family friend of the surgeon Mr.Joseph Constantine Carpue and a retired army officer - identified the bodies of Henry Palmer and Jane Watson, respectively the footman and housemaid
he said they were both about 23 years old.
Charles Goldsmith the driver of the - Bury 0-4-0, the first engine - was still recovering from his injuries and gave evidence in a beer-shop
He stated that the Bury had been attached in front of the Fairburn at Horley and they proceeded without incident to Copyhold, travelling at about 30mph, where the rear enginge were closed down and the front engine was almost closed down (this is a dowhill section) the engine started rocking and the next thing he remembered was being pulled out from under the tender.
Under Examination by Mr Faithfull I knew the state of the engine behind, and I shut my steam off accordingly. The accident could not have been occasioned by my slackening my speed. I have no fear of four-wheeled engines; I always found them safe till now. I have been in four-wheeled engines at greater speed than 30 miles an hour.
then By Mr. Barwell.—I do not consider four-wheeled engines so safe as six-wheeled engines. If one wheel of a four-wheeled engine should break, it would cause such an accident as this. A six-wheeled engine would be less liable to such an accident.
and lastly by Mr. Faithfull.—I was to have left the train at Hayward's-heath. I was three years on the London and Bir¬mingham Railway, and never knew any other than four-wheeled carriages used there. If one of the wheels of the engine had become loose, such a motion as I felt would have been the consequence. This might have been the cause of the accident.
The jury returned to the beer-shop I assume this is the railway beer shop mentioned previously
Evidence by James Jackson - driver of the second engine, the six wheeled Fairburn
I examined the engine at Horley, and it was in complete working order. A pilot-engine was attached to the train a Horley because we had a heavy train and to help us up the hill. We came from Horley to the Copyhold cutting at the average rate of about from 26 to 30 miles an hour. About half-a-mile before coming to the Copyhold cutting we were running at the rate of about 30 miles an hour. On entering the cutting by the bridge we did not exceed 23 miles an hour. I believe it to have been 20 or 21. Nothing occurred here to induce me to slacken my pace, I bad shut off my steam half-a-mile before I came to the cutting, because my engine was getting slack of steam ; and, as we were going down hill, and the other engine was going to leave me at Hayward's-Heath I wished to reserve my steam, that I might keep a good supply with which to get to Brighton.
I did not observe any signal before entering the cutting. After we entered it just before the accident took place, I observed a man, amongst a number of men, standing with one arm up; that is a signal to slacken speed. The instant we passed the man I observed the first engine rocking very much, and, directly after, she capsized right over to the left hand side. I did not perceive the slightest movement in my engine till she struck the other. I was thrown back on the carriage of the tender it was all over in half a minute.
The earth in the cutting is of a greasy nature, and a number of men, who are employed there, are in the habit of walking over the trains with their boots, leaving a portion of earth on them; which, in my opinion, was the cause of the accident.
Coroner.--How would that affect the engine
James Jackson —The engine being on four wheels, and sliding about, and being top heavy, the gushing about of the water in the top of the firebox would almost force her over. That is my firm opinion. As to the state of the cutting, I have run 30 and 33 miles an hour through it many a time the earth has not given way at this part at all. All I saw as the rocking motion, which 1 conjecture was owing to the slippery state of the rails. You do not feel this with a six-wheeled engine. I have been over there at 30 miles an hour and never have had any cause to slacken speed.
Coroner.—If there had been no pilot-engine would the danger have been less
James Jackson —I do not think my engine would have gone off; on account of its weight and having six wheels. Only three carriages, those next to the tender, were thrown off the line. The others were not affected There were 11 or 12 carriages in the train. I do not know how many passengers; but there seemed to be a considerable number, and a good deal of luggage.
Mr Barwell—Do you consider the construction of the pilot-engines safe or unsafe
James Jackson —I consider them unsafe. There is a difference of opinion among engineers; but I don't like four-wheeled ones. This was as safe as other four-wheeled engines, but I prefer six-wheeled ones. I think a four-wheeled and six-wheeled can act in unison together, if the stroke be the same. If a six-wheeled and a four-wheeled were stopped at the same time the six-wheeled engine would stop sooner than the four-wheeled. because there would be less friction. Goldsmith, took no notice of me. but shut off a part of his steam shortly after me.
James Jackson answering the Rev. Mr. Fearon-1 don't think there is more danger in having two engines than one. If we had had two four-wheeled engines on Saturday the consequences would have been still worse. I am quite sure that my speed between the viaduct and the Copyhold cutting, about three quarters of a mile, was not above 30 miles an hour. We were behind time at little at Horley, but did not go above our ordinary speed. The pilot-engine was put on because we had a heavy train.
James Jackson answering Mr. Barwell—A foreman is kept at Horley and Brighton to examine the engines. 1 saw Mr. Hurst go round mine at Horley and believe he looked over both.
James Jackson answering Mr. Allen.—I am quite certain, from experience, that the slippery state of the rails would cause, and not prevent, oscillation. It is the same in chalk cuttings. I have been a driver four years and a half. Goldsmith was perfectly sober, and I always knew him to be so. I can suggest no other cause for the accident but that I have described.
James Jackson answering the Coroner.—The weight of the carriages behind did not cause any movement in the engine; it would make it go steadier. I saw a policeman at the viaduct give the signal "all right" but saw no other. The man who gave the signal was the foreman of the works there. I never had a signal there before. The engine went off immediately we had passed him. All the engines are new ones. The pilot-engine was in good working order.
Mr. Barwell.—have you ever state your opinion of four-wheeled engines to any of the company
James Jackson No; not before yesterday.
Foreman.—have the engines ever ran off the line before?
James Jackson Yes; on Friday last I saw an engine, a four-wheeled one, run off the rail at the Haywards-heath tunnel I did not know the cause. I bare never seen any other case.
James Jackson answering Mr. Barwell—I never knew a six-wheeled engine go off the rail unless there was some obstruction, or the points wrong. The London, and Birmingham Railway uses four wheeled engines, but they are not so high as these, and therefore require less heavy cylinders, and are consequently less top heavy. I knew a similar case to this occurring on the London and Birmingham They are made on the same principle, except that our boilers are larger. I should not like to drive a four-wheeled engine.
James Jackson answering the Foreman.—Neither of the boilers exploded.That of the pilot was burst from falling over. I observed the state of the rail after the accident. It was bent a little. a very little indeed, owing to the carriages running over it. The rail was in the same state as that which i had gone over it at 30 miles, and believed it perfectly safe.
I saw the down-train coming at about its usual rate. I made a signal for it to come steady just before they came to the bridge. We have done it for the last three or four days on account of the wet, and for fear they should come light.
Juryman.—What do you mean by the road being light
James Copley Why, the wet pushes the rails up, and makes them uneven; but that was not the case with the rail on Saturday.
John Hardy MP was then called, Hardy was a passenger, and MP for Bradford more here:- Hardy MP
I was in the middle part of the carriage next to the engine, with an open coupee on each side. The first thing 1 experienced was a great shock and dreadful screams. I was in the middle of the carriage long description of crash etc of little relevance omitted
I have travelled a great deal by railway. I have been 11 times by this railroad, and, to the best of my judgment, we were proceeding at the rate from 20 to 24 miles an hour. Just before I had been complaining to my companions of the slowness of the speed, and said we should be half-an-hour behind, our time at Hayward's-heath.
Hardy answering Mr Faithfull (his question not reported) 1 cannot give a scientific opinion upon the point, but from experience, I should say, the heavier the train the steadier the motion.
John Wood another passenger, corroborated the evidence of Mr Hardy. In going through the cutting, I should suppose the speed to be 20 to 25 miles. I frequently travel on railways.
William Beedham.—Builder and surveyor, living in North-street, Brighton.At the time of the accident was near the railroad, about half a mile from the place where it occurred. I heard the train coming. I took my watch out, and also the railway table, to see what train it was. it was just half past 12. According to my judgment, it was going about 23 miles an hour. I had a full view of it across the viaduct, about half a mile from the accident. I could not say whether it slackened before I lost sight of it.
Richard Hodges.—Railway labourer ] I saw the train, on Saturday, in the cutting. It was coming along, at the usual rate. I saw the first engine jump up and down as it came along—it might be about half a minute, and then I saw it drop right off the rail. I then turned and ran away; and either the tender or the engine caught me, and one of the stokers fell across me and knocked me into the ditch. When it jumped the fore wheels rose up and down. I did not see any oscillating motion.
Matthew Hail, assistant-engineer.--It is my duty to inspect that portion of the railway on which the accident occurred, and to see that it is in a proper state. I had inspected it just previous to the accident. I was a little in advance of the train, in the cutting, at the time. The road was in a fit state for travelling at 23 miles. It was in as good a state of repair as it has been in since the line was opened.. I am of opinion that a heavy train is steadier than a light one. I am stationed on the line for 16 miles, to St. John's-common, and it is in a perfectly fit state for travelling. I did not observe anything on the rail to make it slippery. The soil is sandy.
The jury then called the policeman who was on the viaduct - he was not present and a messanger had to be sent to get him.
Meanwhile the jury expressed the opinion that the accident was caused by the use of four-wheeled engines
Mr. Faithfull (acting on behalf of the railway company) said that Mr. Rastrick, the chief engineer, and Mr. Statham, one of the resident engineers, were available in the jury had any questions
The jury, however, did not take up the offer ask them any questions.
Jackson engine driver of the Fairburn was questioned againI think that the water and the top-heaviness of the pilot engine, coupled with the slippery state of the rails, was the cause of the accident. I have known four-wheel engines run off on the Eastern Counties line, but I never knew six-wheeled engines to do so.
The Policeman John Hinge had now arrived I was on duty at the Ouse Viaduct. I saw the down train coming towards me, and held up my hand to give the "All right" signal; and as it neared me I gave a signal to go steady, as I observed that it was going rather faster than usual. I did not at that time observe any particular motion of the engine or train. Shortly after I heard a great noise in the direction of the Copyhold cutting, and as I thought the bursting of a steam-boiler. I ran in that direction as hard as I could, and some labourers ran also. As soon as I got into the cutting, which is about three-quarters of a mile, I observed that an accident had happened, and I got up to the spot, and rendered assistance to the suf-ferers. I do not know how it happened. I had no apprehension of an accident occurring when I saw the train pass along the Viaduct. I did not say my heart came into my mouth when I saw the train coming along, they were going at such a rate. The road where the accident happened has been out of order lately in consequence of the bad state of the weather.
The jury returned a verdict of "Accidental death, with a deodand of one shilling on the engines; and the jury are of opinion that the four-wheeled engines used on this line are not of a safe construction, and they recommend their discontinuance."
The names of the jury having been called over, Mr Bellamy, the magistrate, chosen foreman,
those of the deceased persons were declared to be as follows:- Robert Marshall, and Robert Field, who were firemen to the engines, and Henry Palmer and Jane Watson, the latter servants to Dr Carpue, the anatomist.
Amongst the gentleman present were, Lord Sheffield, Mr Harman, the chairman, Captain
Heaviside, major Beauclerk, Mr McLean, directors, Mr Wood, secretary, Mr Rastrick, engineer, and Mr Rallet, chief superintendent of the Company; and Mr Faithful, their solicitor was also present.
The jury having been sworn proceeded to view the bodies, which were at a beer shop, called the Copyhold, situate about a mile and a half from the Hayward's Heath Station. They were placed in a shed, and presented a frightful spectacle. The body of Henry Palmer was most ghastly. The wheels of the train appear to have passed over him just above the eyes, and the whole of the upper portion of the head was completely crushed. The female, Watson, also presented a shocking appearance. She was covered with blood, and the train had evidently passed over her body, which was nearly severed in two at the pit of the stomach, and her bowels were protruding.
The bodies of Marshall and Field were also much disfigured. The jury then inspected the spot on the line where the catastrophe took place. The remains of the pilot, or first engine, were lying on the east side of the railway, in the Copyhold Cutting, with a tarpaulin thrown over it. The tender lay some distance off, also shattered to pieces, and fragments of broken wheels and carriages were strewn about, although the greatest portion had been removed.
Charles Goldsmith, the engineer of the pilot engine, was first examined. He was lying in a cottage near the place of the accident, where the coroner and jury attended to take his deposition, he being unable for the injuries he had sustained by the shock to be removed. He, however, appears in a fair way of recovery.
He said – I am an engine driver in the employ of the London and Brighton railway company. On Saturday last I was acting as engine driver to the down train from London to Brighton. I came from Hawley only, and drove the pilot engine. The other engine brought the train from London. My engine was the smaller one of the two. The small one was in front of the train, and the large engine driven by Jackson behind me and in front also.
I went in front of the train at Hawley, because the train was so heavy. We went on at about the rate of 30 miles an hour. When we had passed the Ouse viaduct we did not go quite so fast. On arriving at a place called the Copyhold Cutting. I perceived a different motion of the engine. I had scarcely made this observation an instant, when the engine went off the line, and I then neither heard or saw any more of the accident. I came to myself shortly after, and found that I was in a ditch by the side of the railroad, with the tender of my engine upon me, and I was covered with mud and water. I found that some workmen were moving the tender just as I was coming to myself. I was in the hollow of it.
I enquired how long the accident had taken place, and was informed about 10 minutes. I examine my engine before I left Hawley. As far as I could see it appeared to be safe.
Jackson let off steam just before we entered the copyhold cutting, and I let off mine within about half a minute of the same time. The whole of the work was done from that time by my engine, as I had shut my steam off within half an inch. There was no police man at the spot where the occurrence took place. The last I saw was at the booze viaduct. He gave a signal that all was right. There was no policeman station between the viaduct and Hayward's Heath. It is usual to put on a small engine at Hawley, when there is a heavy train. A heavy engine will hold its way longer than a smaller one. When two engines were together, and anything happens, we communicate to one another by signals. I have been a driver on the Brighton line 1 month tomorrow, but I have had practical experience for five years.
My reason for shutting off my steam, and slackening my speed at the copyhold, was as I thought I saw some person hold up his hand in the cutting. I understood the signal to be not to stop, but to slackened. The motion of my engine was vibrating before the accident. Mr Hurst is my employer.
We have written instructions, but we have no regulation in them as to speed, except on the Greenwich and Croydon portions of the line. When I received the signal I understood it to slacken. I slackened to speed properly.
I do not think that the accident could have been occasioned by my slackening my speed. I have been in the habit, for the last five years, of driving four wheeled engines. I have always found them to be safe, and never had any accident happen to one of them until Saturday.
I have seen accidents with them, but never experienced one myself. I have driven them a greater speed than 30 miles an hour. I do not think a four wheeled engine so safe as a six wheeled one. I cannot form any opinion as to the cause of the accident. If there was a strain either in the wheel of a six or four wheeled engine, it was liable to go off and cause an accident.
I know that the steam was shut off the large engine before we entered the cutting. I was three years on the London and Birmingham Railway, on which line only four-wheeled engines are used, but they are not quite so high as those on the Brighton line. I do not know at what time we started from Hawley.
Mr Holland, 15, Cockspur Street, London, examined – had seen the bodies of Henry Palmer and Jane Watson. They were servants to Dr Carpue, of Charlotte Street, Fitzroy Square. The man was Butler and the woman housemaid, they were both 23 years of age. I have not the slightest doubt as to their identity.
James Jackson, examined – I am an engine driver in the employee of the London and Brighton railway company. On Saturday last, at five minutes after 12, I started from Hawley to accompany the down train from Hawley to Brighton.
I took charge of the same engine which had come from London. We turned her round at Hawley, and another engine was attached also at Hawley in consequence of the train being heavy.
When we started from Hawley we went on between that place and the copyhold cutting we went on between that place and the copyhold cutting at the rate of about 31 or 32 miles an hour.
About half a mile before we got to the copyhold cutting, I should say we were going at the rate of about 30 miles an hour. At the moment the accident happened I do not think our speed was greater than 24 miles an hour.
When we entered the cutting I did not slacken our pace, but I shut off the steam of my engine about half a mile before I got to the cutting. My reason for doing so was that we were going down the hill, and the other engine was going to leave me, and was slack of steam, and I wished to reserve it in order that I might get into Brighton without stopping to take in water. The other engine was to leave me at Hayward's Heath.
I observed no signal in the cutting before I entered the cutting, but I did shortly after I had entered it. The signal was the green shade, which signifies caution to slack on the speed.
A minute or two after I observed the engine before mine rocking very much, and immediately after it turned over on the left hand side of the line.
On observing this, I instantly seized the regulator handle of my engine, and I had scarcely done so, when I was thrown off the engine onto the tender. I felt no extraordinary movement of my engine until the shock of the collision struck the upper part of the foremost engine. It was instantaneous and tremendous. When I recovered myself, I found I was on the foot plate of my tender. I nearly jumped off, and the first thing I saw was kitchen, the guard, lying on his back. I then saw Goldsmith, the Driver of the first engine, between the engine and the tender of the first engine.
I dragged him out. He appeared apparently lifeless, and was covered with dirt and sand. The next body I saw was the deceased Palmer lying under the wheels of one of the carriages across the line, he appeared quite dead.
I subsequently saw my stoker, Robert Field, between the engine and tender of my own engine. He was not quite dead and I heard of gurgling in his throat. I believed he died about 20 minutes after.
I then went down amongst the carriages, and saw the deceased, Jane Watson, under one of the wheels of the carriages, and her body appeared nearly cut in half. Palmer was about 2 yards from her.
I can account for the rocking in the cutting in no other manner than that the soil of it is of a greasy nature. It is a sort of blue clay. It would affect the line, I think, in consequence of the engine having four wheels only and being top-heavy, which would cause it to slip and slide about, and the clay would get on the rails. I have frequently driven through the cutting at the rate of 32 miles an hour. All I saw was the rocking of the engine before the accident. The rails are generally slippery from the wet in this cutting. If there had been no pilot engine I do not believe the accident would have happened. I think that my engine was far better, as it was a heavy engine, and had six wheels. There were three carriages off the line when the accident took place.
I believe the train consisted of 12 carriages.The three carriages off the line were very much broken by the collision. I do not know the number of passengers that were in the train.
I consider the pilot engine, being a four wheel engine, is unsafe, and that that was the cause of the accident. All the four-wheel engines are subject to wobbling. I think a four wheel and a six wheel engine are eligible to act in unison together, if they are the same size and/of the wheel. I think a six wheel engine could be stopped sooner than a four wheel engine, and from its height was not so likely to run off the line. I do not know their comparative heights.
In answer to the jury, – I did not shut my steam off from any signal I received. Goldsmith shut off his steam soon after I shut off mine. I do not believe there is any more danger in a train having two engines than one. Had they been both four-wheel engines the danger would have been far greater. Between the viaduct and the copyhold cutting, I am sure I was not proceeding at more than 30 miles an hour.
We were rather later with our trains than usual, in consequence of the train being so heavy. It was a first class train. I should say the accident happened at as near 12:30 on Saturday as possible. It is my duty to examine my engine before I start with it. I did sell at Hawley, and also did the foreman of the locomotive engines at the holy station.
I believe he also examined Goldsmith’s engine too. I am convinced that the greasy nature of the rails is the usual cause of oscillation. I have been for years and engine driver. I have no reason to believe the weight of the carriage behind would cause the engine to sway; on the contrary it would make them run all the smooth. The pilot engine, when I first observed the strange motion, jumped and oscillated sideways. I saw no policeman to give us signal from the viaduct.
Just before the accident took place I saw a man give a signal on the line, but I was not aware what he meant. The pilot engine is not an old one. I received no order as to the speed which I was to go. The only orders are the companies bill, announcing the time of arrival at the various stations, which we adhere to as nearly as possible. I have known engines to go off this line before. One on Friday last, near Hayward's Heath. It was a four wheel engine. I saw it, but I was not aware of, nor did I enquire the cause. I have been examined before this, since the accident, by some of the directors, as to the cause of it, but by no one else. It is my usual custom to stand on my engine with the reverse lever in one hand, and the regulator in the other. I was doing so at the time of the occurrence. I never heard of a six wheeled engine running off the line, except occasioned by some obstruction, or by the rails getting out of their place.
I have been a driver on the London Birmingham railway. They have four wheeled engines employed on that line, but they are not so high as those on this one. I recollect a four wheeled engine getting off the line on the London and Birmingham railway, at Woodcock Hill, and which was attended with serious consequences. I never complain to the authorities about the four-wheeled engine being dangerous. I examined the rails of the line after the accident, and they were in good working order, except where the engine struck, where they went off, and there they were bent.
George Copley, a labourer in the employ of the company said – about 12:30 o'clock on Saturday for noon last I was standing in the cutting of the Brighton railway, at Copyhold Hill,and saw the train coming along the line. As it approached, I held up my arm as a signal for it to come steadily. I did so in consequence of the road being "light," owing to the late heavy rains. I can't say what rate of speed the train was coming. It was not out of its ordinary speed. The meaning of the road being "light" is the rain getting under the sleepers on which the rails rest, and train them up. I cannot say whether the rails were slippery or not, or if there was any clay on them at that part where the accident took place. The signal was not directed by any officer connected with the company; but I made it of my own accord, and have done so the last three or four days since the rain. The soil where the calamity happened is sandy. There was no policeman stationed near the spot.
Witness, in answer to a question by a juror, added that the train might have been going at the rate of 20 miles an hour. The gentleman, who was understood to be a surgeon, declared that the speed, at the time of the accident, was upwards of 25 miles an hour, and that previous to entering the cutting the train was bowling between 30 and 49 miles an hour.
Mr John Hardy, MP, was next examined – I was a passenger by the 11:30 train, from London to Brighton, by the railway, on Saturday last, and was in the same carriage as the unfortunate deceased persons Jane Watson and Henry Palmer – namely, the carriage next to the engines, but was in the centre part of the vehicle, which contain first and second class places, the front and back part being open. Then first thing I experienced of the accident was on arriving at the cutting that has been mentioned, a violent shock, following immediately by dreadful crashing and screaming of the passengers. At the moment, I was sitting with my back towards Brighton, but instantly the carriage was lifted up and turned completely round, and fell over against the embankment.
There were two or three persons in the carriage who, by the shop, were thrown in all directions, and a lady who was sitting on the opposite seat was pitched on to my knees. For several seconds the carriage was filled with steam and water from the boiler of one of the engines, and immediately it had subsided a little a gentleman, named Wood, who was with me, contrive to get through the carriage window, and he afterwards assisted in helping witness out. On reaching the ground, I proceeded to ascertain whether there was anyone injured, and I'm going round the engines, I don't know which, I discovered one of the guards lying on his back on the ground much disfigured, and I'm looking further observed one of the stokers, dead, line close to the rails and dreadfully mangled. The engine that had caused the mischief had capsized and was lying in the ditch.
A juror – can you inform us, sir, the speed of the train at the period of the accident?
Mr Hardy – we were going not more than 20 or 25 miles an hour. A few minutes before I was complaining to my son-in-law, who was with me, of the slow rate the train was proceeding, and expressed an opinion that we should be half an hour late in reaching Hayward's Heath station. I have travelled several times before on the Brighton railway, and I have also travelled on different other lines.
Mr Hardy, in answer to a question by a juror, said on his arrival at the station at Brighton he got into the open part of the carriage facing the engine, and would've remained their head not his son-in-law, Mr John Wood, prevailed on him to go into the centre portion where he was, and that for that circumstance he would, he said, inevitably have suffered with the unfortunate deceased individuals.
Mr John Wood, residing at Shedding Grange, in Hampshire, confirmed Mr Hardy’s evidence in every particular. With regard to the speed, he supposed it was under 25 miles an hour.
Similar evidence was reduced by Mr Beaton, of North Street, London, who happened to be walking within half an mile from the spot.
Richard Hodges labourer, living near the village of Copyhold, and employed on the line, said he was standing in the copyhold cutting on Saturday, and, observing the train approaching, he endeavoured to run out of its way, but had not gone far before he was knocked down by one of the steps, and in falling into the ditch one of the stokers of the engines fell on him. He feared an accident would happen to the train by the jumping of the engine. The train was coming at its usual speed. (The witness apparently had received considerable injury and was scarcely able to walk.)
Mr Matthew Hall assisting engineer employed on the railway, deposed – It is my duty to inspect the line in and about the cutting where the engine got off the rails, and also the 13 miles through Hayward's Heath. I examined the rails in the cutting on Saturday, before the accident, and was in it at the time the catastrophe occurred. I was walking up the line, and hearing a peculiar noise behind me, turned round and saw the upsetting of the carriages.
The line of road was in a good state of repair and soundness before the accident as it was on the day of opening, and is now perfectly safe. I am positive there was no clay or earth on the rails, as has been stated by a former witness.
Jackson, the engine driver, re-examined – I think that the water and the top heaviness of the pilot engine, coupled with the slippery state of the rails, was the cause of the accident. I have known four wheel engines run off on the Eastern counties mine, but I have never knew six wheeled engines to do so.
John Hinge examined – I am police constable, number 37, on the line of the London and Brighton railway, and reside at Cuckfield. On Saturday last between 12 and 1 o'clock I was on duty at the news viaduct. I saw the down train coming towards me, and held up my hand to give the open "All right" signal; as it neared me I gave a signal to go steady, as I observed that it was going rather faster than usual. I did not at that time observe any particular motion of the engine or train.
Shortly after I heard a great noise in the direction of the copyhold cutting, and, as I thought, the bursting of a steam boiler. I ran in that direction as hard as I could, and some labourers run also. As soon as I got into the cutting, which is about 3/4 of a mile, I observed that an accident had happened, and I got up to the spot and rendered assistance to the sufferers. I do not know how it happened. I had no apprehension of an accident occurring when I saw the train pass along the viaduct. I did not say my heart came into my mouth when I saw the train coming along, they were going at such a rate. The road near where the accident happened has been out of order lately in consequence of the bad state of the weather.
The court was here cleared of strangers, and at 6:30 o'clock the jury returned a verdict of "accidental death, with a deodand (1) of one shilling on the engines; and the jury are of the opinion that the four-wheeled engine as used on the line are not of a safe construction and they recommended their discontinuance."