TOOTH'S BANK

1st September 1897


Involving Eastbourne Driver James McKinlay

and his Fireman Louis (Lewis) Minns

extracted and adapted from the report by G.W. Addison Lt. Co., R.E.


evidence from Drivers George Major, William Miller & Joseph Henry George







Additional information has been gathered from the Railway Herald

See below


PHOTOGRAPHER UNKNOWN 








An accident  occurred on the 1st September, between Heathfield and Mayfield stations, on
the Eastbourne-Tunbridge Wells line of the London, Brighton, and South Coast
Railway.

In this case, the 8.18 a.m. passenger train from Eastbourne ran off the line at a point about 2 1/2 miles north of Heathfield station. The engine and leading carriage were over-turned on their right sides, just clear of the rails and overhanging the eastern edge of the high embankment on which the line is here carried ; the under-frame of the second carriage was on its left side across the top of the embankment, with the body of the carriage upon the slope, and near the bottom, of the embankment on the west side of the line ; the third and fourth carriages, the former on its right and the latter on its left side, were at the bottom of the embankment parallel to the line, and more or less on the top of one another; the remainder two carriages were on their left sides, partly on the slope but also nearly at the foot of the embankment. The train was separated between the second and third carriages, the coupling being broken, and the body of the former carriage had evidently rolled down the embankment, turning completely over at least once. The engine stopped in about 100 yards from the first mark of a wheel being off the rails.

Thirty passengers have complained of injury, but, so far as I a.m aware, only in a few cases were the injuries of a severe nature. The driver was fatally injured and died a few minutes after the accident. The fireman was badly hurt, and the guard was cut and bruised on the head and body.

Details of the damage to the rolling stock are given in an appendix.

The permanent way was completely destroyed, the sleepers being splintered and the
rails torn up, for a distance of about 80 yards, and it was disturbed and damaged for a
further length of about 20 yards.

Description.

The line from Eastbourne to Tunbridge Wells, running approximately from south to north, is single from Polegate to Eridge, a distance of about 20 1/2 miles out of a total length of 29 3/4 miles. The portion between Hailsham, 3 miles north of Polegate, and Eridge, was opened in 1880, the permanent way consisting of :-78 lbs. steel rails, in 21-feet lengths, carried in cast-iron chairs, weighing 33 lbs. each, fastened to 9-feet by 10-inch by 5-inch sleepers by three hollow trenails and spikes; there were eight sleepers to each rail length, laid 2 feet 2 inches apart at the rail joints. The rails were fished at the joints with fish-plates weighing 23 lbs. per pair. The bottom ballast is stated to have consisted of chalk, and the top ballast of shingle.

From Polegate to Horeham Road, 8 1/4 miles, the line presents no special features which need be referred to, but from the latter place to Eridge, 12 1/4 miles, there are numerous short, reverse, curves, and steep gradients alternately rising and failing. The following table shows the curves and gradients between Heathfield and Mayfield, 3 3/4 miles, commencing from the south end of the former station,

The accident occurred at a place known to the railway men as Tooth's Bank, where the line is carried on an embankment, at the foot of the falling and rising gradients of 1 in 50, and where the line is on a curve to the right of 24 chains radius.

The engine of the train, No. 297, is a six-wheeled side tank engine, with four coupled wheels, 5 feet 6 inches in diameter, and trailing wheels, 4 feet 6 inches in diameter. The centre of the boiler is 6 feet 11 inches above rail level. The total wheel base is

15 feet, and the total length over the buffers is 31 feet 7 1/2 inches. The total weight, in
working order, is stated to be 38 tons 10 cwt., distributed as follows:-

Weight on the leading wheels 13 tons 10 Cwt
Weight on the driving wheels 13 tons 10 Cwt
Weight on the trailing wheels 11tons 10 Cwt.

It is stated that the engine was thoroughly repaired about 12 months ago.

The engine was running chimney in front.

The following table gives particulars of the carriages composing the train :-

3rd class, No. 482. 
No. of Wheels 6, Weight 12 tons 1 Cwt, last went in to workshops Finished in June 1896
1st and 2nd class composite, No. 88.
No. of Wheels 4, Weight 7 tons, 16 Cwt, last went into workshops December 1896
3rd class brake, No. 622
No. of Wheels 4, Weight 7 tons, 17 Cwt, last went into workshops March 1897
Van, No. 217
No. of Wheels 4, Weight 7 tons, 16 Cwt, last went into workshops June 1896
1st, 2nd, and 3rd class composite, No. 277
No. of Wheels 6, Weight 12 tons, 5 Cwt, last went into workshops July 1897
3rd class brake, No. 428
No. of Wheels 6, Weight 11 tons, 17 Cwt, last went into workshops September 1896

In the Appendix to the Working Time Table it is laid down that, owing to the gradients of the Tunbridge Wells and Eastbourne line " for a passenger train from 10 to 12 vehicles, including brakes, will be an ordinary load, and 15 vehicles, including brakes, the maximum load, according to the class of engine, state of weather, etc.; one bogie carriage to count as two ordinary carriages.

The whole of the engine wheels were braked, and in the remainder of the train about
tour-fifths of the total weight would be on braked wheels.

So far as can be ascertained the engine and carriages were in thoroughly good order
previous to the accident.

Evidence.

James Hysom states: I have been 21 years in the Company's service, 18 years a guard. On September 1st, I came on duty at 7.25 a.m. to work until about 8 p.m. At the former time I went as a passenger from Brighton to Polegate, and at the latter place I took charge of the 8.18 train from Eastbourne to Tunbridge Wells. The train was made up as follows : Engine, third-class, composite, third-class brake, luggage van, composite, and third-class brake carriages --of these the first, fifth and sixth were six-wheeled and the other three four-wheeled coaches. I rode in the rear vehicle. We left Polegate at 8.28, right time ; arrived Hailsham 8.36, left at 8.40 ; arrived Hellingly 8.44, left at 8.45 ; arrived at Horeham Road at 8.52, left at 8.54; arrived at Heathfield 9.1, left at 9.3. Between Polegate and Heathfield the speed would be about the same as usual, and I noticed no oscillation or jumping of the van. My duties generally take me on the main line, between Brighton and London ; I have very rarely been on the Polegate - Tunbridge Wells line, but I was through it on the day previous to the accident -- once in each direction. I did not then notice anything whatever wrong, or unusual, in the running of the train. After leaving Heathfield, on the 1st, everything went well until the accident occurred. I think I was kneeling on the slat in the projection of the van, looking out ahead on the left-side, when I felt the van drop down off the metals, without any previous warning, and I found myself at the bottom of the bank almost at once. The van was then lying on its left-side, with three vehicles in front attached and also at the bottom of the bank. I was able to get out without assistance, but I had to break the van to get out ; I was badly cut above the right eye and bruised in various parts of the body. I have not been able to resume duty yet. At no place, either on the 1st September or on the previous day, did any passenger complain to me of fast running, or of any discomfort being experienced. Whether the driver ran down the incline from Heathfield towards Mayfield with steam on, or not, I cannot. say-nor had I noticed on the previous day. The brakes seemed to go on at the same time as the van left the road. The train was made up in exactly the same order on August 31st and on September 1st, and the only changes in the vehicles on the two days was in the substitution of van No. 242 on the 31st for No. 217 on the 1st. The two last vehicles of the train are always detached at Groombridge, to go through to London.

Edwin Head states: I have been 38 years in the Company's service, and for 17 years station-
master at Heathfield. Although I have at times heard complaints, from residents, of the steep
gradients and sharp curves of the line no definite complaint has ever been made, and no remarks have been made by passengers passing through the station. I have not travelled over the road between Heathfield and Mayfield for some years past. I went to the scene of the accident immediately after it occurred, but I am unable to offer any explanation of the probable cause of the accident. I have walked the line from Heathfield to Mayfield, but it was usually between trains, and I have not seen them running over the spot where the accident happened.

Albert Guy states: I have been in the Company's service 16 years, and am now signal lineman at Polegate - my district. being from Eastbourne to Eridge, and St. Leonards to Berwick (between Polegate and Lewes). As a rule I should be on some part of the road between Polegate and Eridge every day, either going or returning by train and sometimes in the train both ways. I ride in a third-class passenger carriage. The road in question is certainly rougher to travel over than the main line is, and passengers in the carriage with me have sometimes commented on it. It has practically always been between Heathfield and Mayfield, near the place where the accident happened, that the roughness has been remarked. The remarks were made with reference to the carriages swaying from side to side going round the curve, and nearly always when running from Heathfield to Mayfield. The traffic over the line is worked by four or five drivers, and the speed between the points named above varies, but it is usual to run fast down the bank, and I should estimate the speed at from 35 to 40 miles an hour. On the 1st September, I joined the 8.18 train ex Eastbourne at Hailsham, and prior to the accident I did not notice anything unusual in the running of the train; the carriage I was riding in (next to the engine) swayed a little coming down the bank, but not more than usual. There were two other passengers in the compartment with me (both servants of the Company), and they made no remark about the speed or running of the train on the falling gradient. I had noticed nothing at all until my carriage left the road, when it seemed to drop down on to the ballast-it did not seem to jump at all. I said, "We are off the road." I stood upon the seat and got hold of the hat rail, and then the carriage turned over on its right side; the carriage was hanging over the edge of the bank, and I lowered the window (the glass not being broken) and crept out on to the bank, the other two men following me. None of us were hurt.

Evan Cameron, states: I have been over 27 years in the Company's service, and I am now Assistant Carriage Superintendent. I examined the passenger vehicles of the 8.18 train ex Eastbourne about 4 p.m. on the day of the accident. I found the whole of the wheels true to gauge, and there were no worn tyres; there was not a broken spring in the train. As regards the carriages, No. 482, third, was only finished in June, 1896; No. 277, composite, was built in June, 1894; No. 428, third brake, was built in December, 1895. The whole, including the new vehicles, have been in the shops within the last 12 months. I saw nothing whatever in their condition to account for the accident. The train was divided between the second and third carriages, the brake connections of the last four were intact and the frames of the six were practically uninjured ; the hotly of the second carriage became separated from its under-frame, and went down the bank, the under-frame remaining on the top of the bank, across the line.

John Woodhead states : I have been nearly 39 years in the Company's Service, and 12 years Outdoor Locomotive Superintendent. I arrived on the scene of the accident between 3 and 4
o'clock in the afternoon. I saw the wheels of the engine tried with the gauge, and they were all correct ; the tyres were in thoroughly good condition. The engine had been thoroughly repaired about 12 months ago. It is a six-wheeled side-tank engine, with four coupled wheels in front, and the engine was running chimney first. This pattern is used for local passenger traffic over all sections of the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway, and also for main line stopping trains. The total wheel base of the engine is 15 feet ; the weight on the leading and driving wheels 13 tons 10 cwt. in each case, and on the trailing wheels 11 tons 10 cwt., in working order. These engines take 10 to 12 vehicles regularly over our system, where the gradients and curves are somewhat similar to those of the Eastbourne-Tunbridge Wells line (although, perhaps, rather less severe) in all kinds of weather. Engines of this class have been in use over 20 years on the line. On the day of the accident the engine was driven by driver McKinley, who had had the engine from July 2nd previously, and had worked over the same road regularly for the last nine years. As fireman, he had been over it from the date of its opening, 17 years ago. He was a very good, steady man, and he had as clean a sheet as probably any driver of his length of service. He would be over the road on August 28th, and once or twice every week previously.

William Smith states: I have been 39 years in the Company's service, and I have been a Chief Inspector of permanent way for the last six years. The section of line between Heathfield and Eridge was opened on September 1st, 1880, and for a year subsequently the maintenance was
in the hands of the contractor who had built the line, and at the latter date I was assisting the
Permanent Way Superintendent. From that time until July of the present year I have probably
been through the line once a month, or thereabouts. The line had not been "renewed" during that time, but repairs have been carried out whenever my Sub-Inspectors thought it necessary. My duties now extend over the whole of the northern division of the railway. I think that, in repairs, most of the original sleepers have been taken out, but the rails and chairs in use are the same as when the line was opened, and they are now in fair condition. The rails are 78 lbs. double-headed steel rails, in 21 feet lengths, with eight sleepers (of the ordinary dimensions) to each rail length; 33 lbs. chairs (original weight) fixed with-three trenails and spikes. I am not aware that the permanent way of the line has been specially troublesome to maintain, but there have been slips both of the cuttings and embankments --nothing of importance, how-ever, as regards the cuttings. There was a slip on the same bank where this accident happened, but nearer to Mayfield, last winter ; I saw the work of making it good while in progress. The bank has a good deal of chalk in it, and much rocky material has been brought down from Mayfield and put into the bank from time to time. I have issue, instructions to the inspector and ganger to pay special attention to the permanent way at the bottom of the incline. I have generally tried the gauge when going through the line; I tried it last on May 8th, it was then correct, and the road was in first-rate order. I have often seen trains running over the road, but I have never seen the road injured at all by fast running. The trains come down the bank from Heathfield pretty fast, and I am sure I have ridden down it myself at a speed of 40 miles an hour. I have officially drawn the attention of my superior officers to the fact that trains were running between Heathfield and Mayfield at too high a rate of speed. I have drawn attention to similar fast running down other banks in my district, but, perhaps, not so often as in the Heathfield - Mayfield case.

William Burt states : I have been 38 years in the Company's service, and I have been Chief Inspector of-permanent way, southern district, six years. On July 1st of the present year the line from Heathfield to Eridge was added to my district. I walked over the whole of that length about the end of July, when I found nothing to complain of. I did not then try the gauge anywhere near the scene of the recent accident. I tried the gauge a few hours after the accident, on both sides of the break, and it was then just right the super-elevation of the outer rail varied from 1/2 -inch to 2 1/2 inches. For about 20 yards the sleepers were cut through the middle, and in many places the bolts were torn right through the ends of the sleepers. I found no rotten sleepers. There was one rail broken in two pieces, both of which I saw on the bank on the west side of the railway ; one piece lay about half-way down the bank, and the other nearly at the bottom-both about opposite to the third carriage. From the gradient board, about 100 feet on the north side of the occupation crossing, for about 800 feet along the road towards Mayfield, i.e. over all the ground where the run-off occurred, borings have been sunk, at 50-feet intervals, to ascertain the depth of ballast, etc. under the sleepers, the original, or formation, level was found in each case. The "ballast" shown in the second column above would be gravel and beach ballast. My attention has not been drawn to any excessively fast running at this spot. On the 26th August I rode over the road in the brake next to the engine, to look at the road, as I often do, to see how the engine travelled over it. I was going from Mayfield to Heathfield the running was very steady.

James West states : I have been 29 years in the Company's service, and a ganger 17 years. My length extends for 2 1/2 miles, about, from Mayfield towards Heathfield, and I have had charge of it ever since the line was opened. I do not think any of the original sleepers are still in the length. In the spring I put in about 20 new sleepers on Clayton's, or Tooth's, bank and, all a rule, the old spikes would be used again. I have had no particular trouble with the fastenings, and the gauge has kept right; twice lately we have had to pull the road back into place a little near the road crossing, but nothing particular. About a fortnight ago I picked up a little bit of slack in the road. I have not had my level down there for some time, and I do not know whether the cant of the outer rail is correct. I try to keep it to 2 1/2 inches. We have brought stuff down to put outside the sleepers, to prevent the road from being pushed out on the curve. I have had more trouble round the bottom than on any other curve. There had been some heavy rain previous to the accident. I was over the road twice on the morning of the accident, first at about 6.30 and again about 7.30, and I always take particular notice of every thing at the bottom of the hill. I saw nothing there requiring attention. In wet weather we have had to pack up the sleepers, more or less, several times a week. I think the bank is very soft. We have used ashes as ballast to a considerable extent, so as not to place more weight than necessary on the top of the bank. I have sometimes spoken to drivers about running too fast, but I have not found it necessary to make any report, and I do not think they have run so fast lately as they did at one time.

Frederick Brabery states : I have been 22 years in the Company's service, and for 11 months past a Permanent Way Inspector. My district includes the line from Heathfield to Tunbridge Wells. I was last over the road where the accident happened on August 16th, when I walked through from Mayfield to Heathfield; I looked carefully at everything, but I noticed nothing whatever out of order. I go over it about once a fortnight, or once in three weeks. In wet weather the banks will give us a little trouble, but not much more than other banks. I had stuff brought to the spot after the slip which occurred, higher up, about January last, and it was placed on the outside of the curve against the sleepers, to prevent them from moving as far as possible -- probably about 60 yards in length would be dealt with. It was raining hard all the early morning of the day on which the accident happened. I have noticed trains cowing down the hill pretty fast, hut I have not reported any special case, although last winter I spoke to one or two drivers about it.

Stephen Holmwood states : I have been 26 years in the Company's Service, and a platelayer for 17 years. On September 1st, I was sent to the scene of the accident, to assist in repairing the road, and I arrived there about 11 o'clock. Just before dark one of the extra gang (from Groombridge) showed me two pieces of iron, which I produce, and which he said he had picked up during the day, about four yards on the south side of where the first chair was marked, and in the four-foot way. They belong to the brake gear of the engine. Fireman Minns is my nephew. I visited him a few days after the accident, when he asked me if any-thing had fallen off the engine and I told him I did not know.

Henry Weeding states: I am one of the extra gang, and I was sent to Mayfield to assist in
repairing the road after the accident. I showed the pieces of iron to Holmwood on the morning after the accident-not on the same day.

Lewis Minns states : I have been nearly 14 years in the Company's service, and a fireman
nine years. On the 1st September 1 came on duty at 7.35 a.m. to work until about 8.45 p.m., and it is generally' later than that before we sign off; we have no time allowed off the engine during the day. My turn of duty takes me over the line between Polegate  and Groombridge sometimes once a week, sometimes two or three times a week, and other times not at all. The engine on the train which came to grief, No. 297, is a six-wheeled, side-tank engine (four wheels coupled), the driver's name being James McKenly, and we had been with the engine about six weeks; prior to that I was on a similar tank engine, and nearly. all my experience is limited to that pattern, but occasionally during the summer of last year I was on tender engines. I do not think that on an ordinary good road the tank engines are rougher to ride on than tender engines, but they may twist about a little more at high speed. I have never known my driver to earn any coal premium, except with goods trains, between Eastboume and London on the main line. Before the accident, the last time I was on the line between Heathfield and Mayfield was on August 27th. The road then seemed to be a bit rough, rougher than usual, but not bad enough to report. I was not aware that we were behind time on leaving Heathfield on the1st September. We had run from Polegate at about the usual speed, and I had not noticed any roughness of the road. The fastest running would be between Hailsham and Hellingly. After leaving Heathfield and coming out of the tunnel, the regulator was nearly closed, as was the custom with my driver; the regulator was not opened any more
before we left. the road. The engine would be getting a little steam, but only a little, all the
time. A bout half-way down the incline, the driver applied the Westinghouse brake, to steady the train, as usual-- my driver made a practice of doing it-the blocks would be just rubbing against the wheels, and I am of opinion that the speed of the train would be reduced by the action of the brakes. Just after coming out of the cutting, we felt the road very rough, and the driver applied the brake fully ; this would be just before we left the road, and I am positive it would be before the run off occurred. The engine was then swaying to and fro, rolling from side to side, not pitching. I should say we ran about the length of the train on the rails after we first felt the roughness of the road. I estimate the speed when the brakes were fully applied at 22 miles an hour. I am sure the speed would then be less than the average speed between Heathfield and Mayfield. The first thing I felt after the roughness was that the trailing wheels dropped down, as it seemed to me, between the rails, and the engine went away to the right ; my mate said something, but I could not catch what it was. I do not know at all what
happened to him, but the engine turned over on its right side, and I went over with it. My side
of the engine was the right-hand side. I got out, unassisted, on the top of the engine, and a gentleman asked me to shut the steam off, and to draw the fire -- the wheels were going round slowly at the time. The automatic brake applied to all the wheels. I have been off duty ever since, suffering from internal injuries. My driver had said he did not like going over this road, and the bit at the bottom, between Heathfield and Mayfield, is the worst portion of it. He had never reported it, so far as I can recollect. Platelayer Holmwood came to see me there or four days after the accident, when I asked him whether a portion of a brake-block had been knocked off the engine. I had seen the blocks all right at Horeham Road, and while on the spot after the accident, something missing from one of the blocks had caught my eye. The question had no reference whatever to the cause of the accident. In my opinion the road " gave out " under the engine.

George Major states : I have been 25 years in the Company's service, 17 years a driver. My
engine, No. 232, is a six-wheeled side-tank engine (four coupled wheels). It is practically identical with No. 297. On the 1st September I left Eastbourne at 7.3 a.m. to run to Tunbridge Wells. I believe we left Heathfield at right time, viz., 7.48. Running between Heathfield and Mayfield I nearly closed my regulator after getting through the tunnel, as usual, and it remained in that position until I got round the bottom of the bank, when I opened it. Directly the engine begins to run a bit my mate puts on his hand brake slightly, and I also use the Westinghouse brake to keep the engine steady. The highest speed running down the bank would be about 25 or 26 miles an hour, and before reaching the spot where the accident occurred the speed would always be less than I have given above. I think we run quite ail fast up the hill to Mayfield as we run down the bank from Heathfield. I noticed nothing the matter with the road that morning to take any notice of it was no rougher than usual. I have some-times spoken to the platelayers at Mayfield in reference to the condition of the road at Tooth's bank. Sometimes the running there is fairly good, at other times there is a swaying from side to aide, as though one rail (I should fancy the left-hand rail) had gone down. I should not say that bit of road was ever in really good running order. I have earned  coal premiums with passenger trains between Brighton and Tunbridge Wells, but not on the Eastbourne-Tunbridge Wells line. The roughness of the road which we generally feel begins in the cutting at the occupation crossing, and ends about opposite to Clayton's Farm. I have not complained at all of the road lately.

William Miller· states: I have been 20 year,; in the Company's service, and. a driver about 11 years. My engine, No. 318, is a bogie tank engine (trailing bogie, driving and leading wheels
coupled). The last time I was over the road between Heathfield and Mayfield before the accident was on the 23rd August, running from Eastbourne to Tunbridge Wells with the 7.30 p.m. train. On arriving at Mayfield I reported to Mr. Parker, the station-master, that the left-hand rail at Tooth's Bank was low. I could feel by the engine going round the curve that the bank was not solid, and it seemed to give way. On the return journey Mr. Parker told me he had spoken about it to the platelayers. I had been up and down the road pretty frequently some weeks before then, and the road was worse on that date than it had been previously. When I am running down the hill from Heathfield there would be a little steam on, and I should steady the train with the Westinghouse brake. On the straight bit of road coming down the hill I should let the engine go, and then steady it again on the curve before reaching Tooth's Bank. I come round Tooth's Bank at a speed of about 20 to 25 miles an hour; it is usually a bit rough there.

Joseph Henry George states: I have been 18 years in the Company's service, 11 years a driver. My engine, No. 272, is; the same type exactly as the engine of the train derailed on September 1st. On that date I left Tunbridge Wells at 7.34 to run to Easthourne, and we arrived at Mayfield about 8.3, two minutes late. Running between Mayfield and Heathfield I did not find the road any rougher than it generally is after rain, and I did not think it necessary to make any complaint on arriving at the latter station. I have never complained of the road so far as I can recollect. With a load of six carriages I should go up the hill just as fast as I come down the other hill, the train in the latter case being steadied with the brakes. I have not earned any coal premium on that road.

Charles Langridge Morgan states : I am Chief Engineer of the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway, which position I have held since February 1st, 1896. On the 23rd August I went by train from Eastbourne to Eridge, and then walked along the line, in the reverse direction, from Eridge to Heathtield. I went over the line in order to make myself more fully acquainted with it, but I had been over it previously several times in the train. I only examined the line generally and did not try the gauge, nor check the super-elevation of the outer rail on the curves. When riding over the line that day, and on previous occasions, I noticed that we went at a very good speed over Tooth's bank, and on the falling gradients generally. My attention was not specially drawn to any roughness at Tooth's bank. When walking through the section between Mayfield and Heathtield I found the line in very good condition ; the rails were sound, fastenings good, sleepers also good, and the ballast sufficient
(although it is not, perhaps, a fully ballasted road) and of good quality. I arrived at the scene of the accident about 9 p.m. the same evening. I examined the sleepers and I was quite satisfied with their condition. The chairs were originally 33lbs. in weight, and the average of three chairs weighed since the accident. was 32 1/2 lbs. ; The rails were double-headed, originally 78 lbs. in weight, and the average of three, weighed since the accident, shows a loss of 2.16 lbs., the greatest loss being only 2.72 lbs. The super-elevation given to the outer rail of the curve appears to have been about 2 1/2 inches, but I am inclined to think that this is rather more than necessary at the speed trains should run there. If at any part of the curve the super-elevation was not more than 1/2 inch or 1 inch that would be too little, and if such was the case before the accident it ought to have been found out and remedied. I think the road is quite safe at a maximum speed of 25 miles an hour.

Humphrey Beale states: I am one of the platelaying gang on the length between Mayfield and
Heathfield. On August 26th, 1 think, the station-master at Mayfield told me about 8.20 p.m.
that the road was getting a little crooked at the bottom, but I understood it was not necessary to do anything that night. We went there next morning and found one or two rail lengths on the curve, at the bottom of the hill, knocked out a little bit. We pulled the road back and left everything all right.

Copy of Report made by Mr. Parker, Station-master, Mayfield, dated September 29th, 1897.

I have no trace or recollection of any complaint having been made on 23rd August, but on evening of August 26th, on arrival with 7.30 up train he (driver Miller) asked: Shall you see the platelayers to-night ? I replied, I can see them -- Why ? He said there is a rough place down in the bottom again, seems to pitch over more than it should. I said, I will see them at once. Is it all right about you going back ? He replied, Oh yes, not so bad as that, but seems knocked out a bit. I replied, All right, I will see them and have it done first thing in morning. Directly the train was gone I sent a porter to find the men, but he had not got away from station before one man named Beale came into the office for his money. I told him what had been said and he replied we have orders to go there first thing in morning. The ganger, J. West, was, I believe, away on leave.

Conclusion.

The evidence in this case discloses no defects whatever in the rolling stock to account for the accident. I had an opportunity of seeing the engine and carriages a few hours only after the accident, before any attempt had been made to move them, and I agree that the cause must be sought for elsewhere. One witness, Stephen Holmwood, speaks of two pieces of iron which were picked up on the Heathtield side of the first mark of any wheel having been off the rails-forming part of the brake gear of the engine -- but further investigation has satisfied me that it is quite impossible to say where these pieces of iron were originally found. They were first noticed by another man on the morning after the accident, when the line had been repaired, and they probably were picked up elsewhere and placed where they were afterwards found during the work of repairing the line. Neither I nor the Company's officers had seen anything of them on the previous day, although the particular spot mentioned by Holmwood was carefully gone over by myself and others when measuring the gauge, the super-elevation of the outer rail or the curve, etc.

On the morning of the 1st September, the 8.18 train, with only six vehicles behind the engine, left Eastbourne at the booked time, and in due course it left Polegate, where the single line commences, also at the proper time: viz., 8.28. On arrival at Heathfield, 10 3/4 miles from Polegate, it was three minutes behind time, which had been lost at stations, and it remained there two minutes, instead of one minute as advertised, so that the train was four minutes late on leaving Heathfield. Up to this time, at any rate, there seems to be no reason to suppose that the speed was  unduly high, or that anything had occurred to make it necessary to exercise any special amount of caution in handling the train. About 2 1/2 miles after leaving Heathfield, just as the train arrived at the bottom of the falling gradient of 1 in 50, and at the foot of the equally steep gradient, it was suddenly derailed with the results already described. The guard, as it happens, did not note the time at which derailment occurred, and it is therefore necessary to consider in some detail what the speed probably was immediately before the occurrence.

The distance from Heathfield to Mayfield is 3 3/4 miles, and the time allowed is nine minutes. Making a moderate allowance for the time lost in starting at the one station and pulling up at the other, the ordinary average running speed would thus be between 28 and 29 miles an hour. As described above, the line between these two places falls sharply at 1 in 50 for a length of over two miles: and then rises at 1 in 50 for nearly 1 1/4 miles. Several of the drivers who habitually work over the line were examined at my enquiry, and they appear to think that with a light train there is not much difference between the speed on the falling and the rising gradients respectively. It is, however, quite impossible to accept such statements as being correct, although they may be made in good faith for it is difficult enough to estimate
speed on level ground, and that difficulty is enormously increased on steep gradients. Since the accident the speed has been taken for me, at the quarter mile posts, of two trains running from Heathfield to Mayfield, without the drivers being aware that this was being done. The result shows that the speed on the falling gradient averaged about 32 miles, and on the rising gradient about 22 miles an hour. What is still more important is that speeds of 35 and 37 miles an hour were measured at certain points, when running-- down hill, and that the speed was in one case 35 miles, and in the other 25 miles an hour, at a point not more than 200 yards from where the accident happened. Returns which have been got out appear to show that time is not infrequently saved, to the extent of one minute, between Mayfield and Heathfield, which must be mainly, if not entirely, saved when running down hill. I therefore
do not consider that those witnesses exaggerate at all who speak of the speed being some times as much as 40 miles an hour on parts of the falling gradient.

An examination of the table of curves and gradients given above, will show that the most favourable bit for fast running would naturally be on the straight length of 583 yards, which is referred to in driver Miller's evidence; this is followed by a left-handed curve of 24 chains radius, then by a short length of straight (101 yards) and the reverse, right-handed, curve of 24 chains radius on which the run-off took place. That the speed was generally reduced, to some extent, before taking the second curve, may be accepted as being probable, but to what extent it is impossible to say, and in some cases the reduction may have amounted to very little. In the particular case under consideration, the fireman states that the engine was getting a little steam all the way down the hill, and that the brakes were used to steady the train, as usual, on the curves, etc. ; the driver is given a most excellent character, as a reliable and
careful driver; and the guard, and a signal-lineman (Albert Guy) who was in the train and is constantly on the line, sny they do not think the speed was any faster than usual. The train was, as already stated, four minutes late, and it had an important connection to make at Groombridge, so that it would not be a matter of much surprise if the driver was trying to make up a little time the same thing having, beyond doubt, been done by himself and others on previous occasions. There is, however, no evidence of anything of the kind, and I am not prepared to say more than that the speed was most probably greater than was desirable under the special circumstances of the line.

Taking the condition of the single line Polegate to Eridge as a whole, it may be said to be in very fair order. The rails weighed originally 78 lbs. per yard, and they appear to have lost little of that weight and to be still in serviceable condition; the chairs are somewhat lighter than would be used at the present time with those rails, but I see no reason to think they are unfit to be in the road. At the Coroner's inquest, evidence was given to the effect that one of the broken chairs (after the accident) showed an old fracture, and that the run-off was mainly due to this cause. I think it is scarcely possible such a broken chair could have escaped the notice of the permanent way staff (the ganger had been over the road twice that morning) and
one broken chair, if it existed, could hardly be accepted as sufficiently accounting for an accident. The sleepers are generally sound, and where the accident happened many of them have only recently been renewed ; the fastenings are, generally, secure. The ballast is also, as a rule, sufficient in quantity and of very fair quality.

Turning now to the section of line between Heathfield and Mayfield, there are, as will be seen from the description given above, many reverse curves, and I found the superelevation of the outer rails of the curves to be very irregular, which should not be the case and which would go far to account for the oscillation complained of when trains run at all fast. Immediately before that part of the embankment (Tooth's bank) on which the accident took place', where the line is on a curve of 24 chains radius, the super-elevation of the left-hand rail dropped from 2 1/2 inches to 1/2 inch ; at the same spot, the road was found after the accident to have been pushed out, towards the outside of the curve, about 1 inch in four rails' length. Whether the line was thus displaced by previous running over it the same morning or not it is impossible to say, but the drivers of the two trains immediately preceding the 8.18 train appear to have noticed nothing unusual. It is, however, clear from the evidence, both of the locomotive and engineering staff, that the line on Tooth's bank has generally been rough, and that after wet weather the roughness was specially noticeable; the evidence refers to a case only a few days previous to the accident, when a driver reported that the road was in bad order, and it was then found that the line had been "knocked out a little:'' as platelayer Beale says. The difficulty of keeping this curve in proper form is practically admitted by the ganger, and the bank appears to be one which has been a source of trouble ever since the line was made; the ballast under the sleepers is here of a somewhat mixed nature too, as will be seen from the table given with Chief Inspector Burt's evidence.

I can have no hesitation in attributing the accident to the combination of a comparatively high rate of speed with a rough road.

It will be noticed that the fireman is of opinion the road "gave out," or spread, under the engine, and the general appearance of the line after the accident seemed to me to point to the same conclusion. On the other hand, the first murks of any wheels being off the rails were on the inside lips of the chairs of the outer, or left, rail, where it appeared to be almost certain that the right-hand wheels must have been outside and not inside the corresponding rail. There were no marks at all of any wheel having mounted and crossed the inner rail, but it is quite possible that the whole of the weight of the engine may have been on its three left-hand wheels, and that, on a sudden lurch caused by changes of super-elevation and the displace-ment of the line referred to above, one or more of the right-hand wheels dropped outside the inner rail. The gauge of the line on the curve was practically correct, but it was inclined to be "tight" rather than slack, and the latter would of course be preferable, on a curve. It was no doubt only after the road had been broken up by the engine and two leading carriages running
on the sleepers, that the rear carriages ran down the bank on the outside of the curve. That the injuries sustained by the passengers in those carriages were not more serious is probably due to the carriages having come in contact with the telegraph wires, which, although they ultimately gave way, held the carriages up and enabled them to slide down the bank, so that they only turned over on arriving at, or near to, the bottom of the embankment.

Fireman Minns whose conduct after the accident, in which he had been very severely injured, is deserving of the highest praise says the driver applied the continuous brakes before the engine left the rails. I think he must be mistaken in this. The point indicated by him is where drivers usually, and naturally, release the brakes. It is admitted, by Minns himself, that the driver had not altogether shut off steam, and the guard says he did not feel the brakes go on until the rear brake carriage, in which he was riding, left the rails, at which time the separation probably occurred between the second and third vehicles which would automatically apply the brakes. Minns speaks of a most unusual circumstance, viz.  that some of the wheels of the engine were still slowly revolving after it had turned over on its side. This may, however, probably he explained by the damage to the brake gear of the engine, as shown in the appendix, the regulator being partially open.

It would appear that, at different times, complaints have originated on the one side from
drivers, of the state of the road, and on the other from the permanent-way gang, of drivers running too fast. These complaints scarcely seem to me to have assumed a sufficiently definite form to necessitate special action on the part of the officers of the Company, but it would evidently have been better had they been taken more serious notice of.

The defects in this line are largely due to its original trace, and these can only be removed by large alterations, which must necessarily involve very great expense ; such alterations are highly desirable, but the question which seems to be of more immediate interest is what should be done to guard against a similar mishap on the line as it exists? I cannot believe that it is impossible to keep the super-elevation of the outer rails of the curves sufficiently regular for all practical purposes, but if settlement is still to be expected on Tooth's bank it would be necessary to reduce the speed on the bank accordingly. Between Heathfield and Mayfield 11 minutes should, I think, be allowed in both directions, instead of nine minutes as heretofore, and caution boards should be erected about 250 yards on either side of the spot where the run-off occurred.

It would also be advisable to add one minute to the present booked time of trains running from Heathfield to Horeham Road, and between Mayfield and Rotherfield (in both directions). What is, however, of still greater importance is that the running
of the trains should be most carefully watched, any attempt to save time being put a stop
to at once, and every effort being made to equalize the speed on the up and down
gradients as far as it can reasonably be done.


APPENDIX

DAMAGE TO ROLLING STOCK

ENGINE 291.
Repairs to brake gear. Four new brake-hanger brackets, six brake hangers straightened and re-bushed, three new cross bars, new right-hand rods complete, left-hand rods straightened and re-bushed..

Repairs to framing and side tank.
Foot-plate and angle-iron straightened, right-hand cab wing straightened, new back for coal
bunker, two steps straightened, new stays fitted, leading life-guards straightened, two new drag-hooks, new tire-hole door, one side tank cut to pieces and re-riveted with new ends and splasher, eight new tank-screws, and six studs fitted.

Repairs to pipes, cocks, &c.
Two exhaust-pipes straightened and re-brazed, three new sand-pipes fitted, four new oil-pipes fitted, three oil-cocks ground in, new right-hand sand-cock fitted.

Repairs to carriages.
No. 482, third-class carriage.-One new corner-pillar, three new corner rails, one bottom side
spliced, one new end-panel, seven quarter-lights, three door-lights, two new step-boards, three door-panels, one body-panel, one body corner-panel, one waist-panel, one new coupling, one new buffer casting, three new step-irons, two new axle-boxes complete, one spring repaired, one headstock straightened, two draw-bars repaired, seven step-irons straightened, three pairs of wheels turned, painting, lifting, &c.

No. 88, composite carriage.-Body knocked off frame, doors broken off, glass broken, bottom rails and pillars broken, and body much twisted.

No. 622, third-class brake.-Roof very much shattered, side of carriage shattered, corner pillars
broken, end compartment broken away from body, frames much strained, and cross-bars broken.

No. 217, luggage van.-Roof entirely smashed off, body ends and sides knocked out and standing pillars broken, one side of under frame broken.

No. 277, composite carriage.-End of carriage entirely broken, also roof immediately over the
end, doors all broken, and corner pillars all broken, and bottom rails of carriage sprung.

No. 428, third-class brake.-Under frame very much damaged by being in collision with end of No. 277 composite. Roof damaged, doors all damaged on one side, under frame broken.

Permanent Way renewal.
104 sleepers, 125 chairs, 200 bolts, 100 spikes, 700 trenails-, 200 keys, 49 yards rails.





Additional information has been gathered from the Railway Herald







THE RAILWAY HERALD

11TH SEPTEMBER 1897

RAILWAY DISASTER ON THE L.B. and S.C. RAILWAY



The 8.18 train from Eastbourne to Tunbridge Wells on the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway, was on Wednesday morning 1st inst. hurled over an embankment between Mayfield and Heathfield, and near the former station, for which it was making. The driver, an Eastbourne man, was killed, and several passengers were seriously injured, while others had most miraculously escapes. The engine and one carriage of the wrecked train fell on the down side of the road, and five carriages rolled over the embankment on the upside of the track. The telegraph wires were broken by the train. It is said that these wires were the mean of lessening the gravity of the disaster, as they somewhat steadied the fall of the carriages down the embankment until the strain caused them to collapse. The unfortunate driver of the train, James McKinlay, leaves a wife and five children, including an infant born the previous week. George Agsam, of Brighton, the guard of the train, had his head cut and his back injured.


At the the time of the accident the passenger probably numbered some thirty of forty, and most of them belonged to Hailsham and Heathfield and surrounding district. Generally speaking they escape with less serious injuries than might have been anticipated. Many of them were able to walk to their homes. 


The following is a complete list of the injured so far as could be ascertained:-


Louis Minns (Fireman) Eastbourne; George Agsam (guard), Brighton; Miss Alexander, Heathfield Park; Frank Covell, Cross in Hand; Mrs Tompsett, Hailsham, Mr. Daw, Hailsham; Mr. Hollomby, Heathfield; Mrs. Hampton, Heathfield; Miss Hampton, Heathfield; Mr. and Mrs. Sands Heathfield; Dr. Lammiman, Tunbridge Wells; Davis, Hailsham; Ford, Waldron.


The following passengers were shaken and bruised: Stapley, Horeham Road; Cressy, Warbleton; Captain Bill, Dennington; Elphick, Hurstmonceux, Cousins, Maidstone; Dawe, Hailsham;Miss Cassell, Hailsham; Clark, Dicker; Reid, Hurstmonceux; Tanner, Hailsham; Mrs. Dennes, Eastbourne; Rees, Stroud Green; Eade, Blackboys; Hunt, Heathfield; Miss Piper, Eastbourne; Mr. and Mrs Phillips and Child, Heathfield.


A large gang of men were at work throughout the day endeavouring to move the one courage left on the embankment and the engine. 


It appears that on the engine leaving the line towards the right, the driver jumped off on the opposite side. The remains five carriages crash down the embankment on his left hand side, and one of them struck McKinlay, causing mortal injuries. His body was removed to an hotel at Mayfield, to await an inquest.


The inquest on the body of James McKinlay, the driver, was opened at Mayfield on Friday. Sir Philip Rose, solicitor, on behalf of the railway company, expressed deep regret at the accident, and sympathy with the widow and children of the deceased, and with the injured passengers. The inquest was adjourned for three weeks to enable the fireman to attend. The jury then proceed by special train to view the scene of the accident.


On Sunday last, notwithstanding a storm of wind and rain, the funeral of McKinlay was largely attended. About 250 of the railway employees attended. There was a choral service at St. Anne's Church, Eastbourne, where the Rev. W.P. Jay, vicar, and the Rev. H. VonEssen Scott officiated. The interment took place at Occlynge Cemetery, and moist of the railwaymen walked through the pouring rain. Several contributions for the widow have been sent unasked to Mr. Dean, the station superintendent at Eastbourne.



OCTOBER 2ND 1897


We do not wish to throw doubt upon the veracity of the foreman of the jury at the East Sussex Coroner's inquiry into the cause of the death go our late subscriber, Driver McKinlay, who was killed in the recent accident at Mayfield, on the L.B. and S.C. Railway line between Eastbourne and Tunbridge Wells, but his. statement (as reported) that within  two hours of the occurrence, he "with his own eyes saw some chairs rusted through, "savours to us somewhat of the marvellous, and it would be interesting to learn from the intelligent juryman at what points the chairs he alludes to were "rusted through." We have heard a good many tales about the bad condition of railroad track, but this certainly "takes the cake."



EASTBOURNE


At the Railway Hotel, Mayfield, on the 24th ultimatum., Mr. Geo. Hillman, the East Sussex coroner, resumed his inquiry into the cause of the death of our late subscriber, James McKinlay, engine driver, who was killed on the occasion of the recent accident on the London and Brighton Company's branch line between Eastbourne and Tunbridge Wells. The engine and one carriage were overturned and five carriages were thrown down an embankment.


Sir Philip Rose and Mr. Ellis appeared for the Company; Mr. Lawson Lewis represented the relatives of the deceased.


Lewis Minns, fireman of the train, said the there were nasty curves on the line. The accident occurred at the foot of a hill, where there was an S-shaped curve. A great speed could not be attained on the line. On the day of the accident he noticed something wrong after leaving Heathfield. He saw that the metals were rough, and that the train swayed and wobbled. The engine left the line because the metals gave out. Railwaymen regarded that as a dangerous piece of the line. By the Jury: He had noticed the road worse shortly before the accident, but it was not bad enough to report.


James Hydon, guard, said the train was travelling at the rate of from 20 to 25 miles an hour.


James West, ganger, stated that he went over the line twice on September 1st, and found no defect.


Charles Langridge Morgan, chief engineer to the Company, said that he walked over the line on August 23rd, and found it in very excellent condition. He was certain there were no old cracks in the "chairs," and he did not think that the road was in ant was accountable for the accident. if it came to theory, it must have been the speed that caused the mishap. There were on this railway such gradient as could not be found on a first class line. If there was a level gradient there would be 250 feet of banking at this point. The Board of Trade limited the speed there to twenty five miles an hours.


The foreman said he was at the scene of the accident within two hours of the occurrence, and with his own eyes saw some "chairs" rusted through.


Frederick Tompsett, a Hailsham tradesman, said that he was a passenger by the train, and that on account of the speed at which it was travelling he threw down his paper and held on to the seat, say he was sure that they would go over.


James McKinlay, engine driver L.B. and S.C.R., Eastbourne, was killed in the lamentable disaster which occurred on the Eastbourne and Tunbridge Wells line between Heathfield and Mayfield station on the 1st inst. The deceased who was only thirty nine years of age, leaves a widow and five children, the eldest being 13. He was a subscriber to our Extra Insurance Edition.


James MacKinlay was a Passed Cleaner at Brighton aged 19 in 1877. He becAme a member of the Eastbourne branch of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants, on the 10th December, 1887, and he is recorded being a driver at the time of joining the A.S.R.S.






 PHOTOGRAPHER UNKNOWN 






ADDITIONAL INFORMATION GATHERED FROM OTHER LOCAL NEWSPAPERS

On the morning of Wednesday 1st September 1897, Driver James McKenlay was working the 8.18 a.m. service from Eastbourne to Tunbridge Wells West, with a Class ‘D-tank’ No. 297 Bonchurch. The train was running around four minutes later and Driver James McKenlay was trying to pick up time in order to meet a connecting train at Groombridge. As the train entered the Tooth Bank curve, at about 40 m.p.h. it suddenly left the track at speed and over turned on. Driver James McKenlay was killed and his fireman Lewis Minns, was seriously injured, and 30 passengers suffered minor injuries.

At the inquiry Lieutenant Colonel G. W. Addison found the speed excessive because of Driver  James McKenlay attempting to make up a four minute late departure and keep his Groombridge connection for London and Tunbridge Wells. On inspection the track was was found in poor shape with many rotten sleepers and curves having irregular elevation, which must have tipped the scales against the locomotive’s successful passage at high speed. As a result much of the line was hurriedly relaid and the Heathfield - Mayfield allowance increased from nine to eleven minutes to ensure easier running.




Mr J. Daw, a lay preacher, described his experience in a little book which was published in 1905. He joined the train at Hailsham, and as it neared Mayfield he felt a jolting.

"In another moment the engine was off the rails and on the sleepers, the broken ends of which were knocking against the bottom," he said.

"Not knowing what was the matter, I turned to the window and saw the fourth carriage from the engine leaving the line on the opposite side to that on which the engine went over, and the fifth carriage following it and crushing into the end of it as they bounced down the embankment together. The middle part of the train was forced down the bank, the remainder of the carriages following after.

"The appalling crash that came upon the carriage I was in is beyond my power to describe. When the noise was over I opened my eyes and looked up, and to my astonishment I was alive.

"The roof, sides and doors of the carriage were gone. My head was cut in five places and blood was pouring down my face from a deep cut over my right eye, but I was perfectly conscious.

"I stepped out of the ruins of the carriage and looked around. The engine was lying on its side on the eastern bank, puffing and panting like some monster in its dying struggles. Passengers were moving about, such as could walk. Others were being rescued from the broken carriages, some through the windows, some lifted out from the doors as the carriages lay on their sides, and some came through the bottom of the carriages that had been wrenched away from the framework.

"As I glanced around the bank I saw the body of the engine driver. The men that had come to help the injured had found him under the wreck of the carriage I had been in."







PHOTOGRAPHER UNKNOWN 

Make a free website with Yola