The Sun.
London, England, 1864-08-04 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

As-
RONIE CIRCI.TIT—GUILDFORD, Aua. 3,
(Before Mr Justice Willes.)
TILE EGHAM ACCIDENT,
At the sitting of the court this morning, Thomas Lee,
an engine driver, and John Trainer, a fireman, employed
Upon the South Western Railway, surrendered to take
their trial upon an indictment which charged them with
the manslaughter of five persons—namely, Joseph Clegg,
°lan 00Ppard, Edward Hall, Robert Wilkie, and William
Winfield..
This was the case for the prosecution.
Sergeant Ballantine said he should submit to the court
tthheat;ther!really was no evidence whatever to be laid before
th ury m support of the charge that was made against
tePris"ers. In cases of this description it was difficult
-."enue lexactly what amounted to gross negligence or
; but present occasion he should say broadly that there was no evidence at all to prove that the
Prisoners had been guilty of either one or the other. With
tegsrd to the speed the evidenco was most conflicting; and
even if the train had been going at the pace stated by some
of the
i witnesses, he should submit that the prisoners were
justified in going at such a speed, when they were aware
after the
t a train would be started at an interval of five minutes
m.
t,QMr Justice Willes interposed, and expressed his opinion
there at there was not sufficient evidence to show that the pri-
aouears Were accountable for what toad occurred. It was
:leer that there was very great confusion with regard to the
toig,4alB, and after the statement of Col. Yolland it appeared
ue rationally probable that if the second guard, who had
tih:*e°llcled, had not neglected his duty in applying the break
0 train
fis might have been stopped, and the accident would
°- 4ave taken place. Another point was, that the pri-
"Mere were entirely ignorant of the fact that the first train
se to have stopped at Egham, and that, according to the
BWheals, instead of being stopped at the Rusham station,
atch Was . no great distance. from.Eg.ham,they were actu-
ktio.r cording to the regulations, invited to go on. He did
for v what the jury thought of the case, but he must say
adep,iB4e)wn part that he thought the system which had been
troaB4l.tee,d,wiivarsieas wrong_ one, and that if railway companies
70111 d persist' in pursuing such a system, and fatal accidents
would be quite justified in compelling them
pay heavy damages to the relatives of those who lost their
I* ea Under such t laces The question on the pre-
sent
__ circums a .
Ice
tu.cession was whether the driver of a train, who was
sell la ignorance of the state of affairs upon the line, was
thieve held responsible for an accident such as this, and
Was the only question for the jury to consider.
~"1. Best urged that it should be left to the jury to say
Whey
the driver was not guilty of criminal negligence in
gt°intig at such a speed as 50 miles an hour when so near the
Bran 'cal. lie admitted that there was some conflicting tes-
tulz-°ll7 upon this point ; but he submitted that this was a
atter for the consideration of the jury.
fickr Justice Willes said he doubted whether this was suf.
. Under the circumstances, and that in order to justify
41,1hbe41 in convicting it must be shown that the prisoners
1
aenetVilty of gross and culpable negligence of such
',4e4ar
Lietibtful as could not be misunderstood or considered
p 4hiter some further discussion, the learned judge said
theeal3a it would be better not to withdraw the case from
arid:llrY, and Sergeant Ballantine accordingly was about to
Thels there.on behalf of the prisoners.
conid Jury, however, interfered, and said they entirely
tillued with the view that had been taken of the case by
hiteilearned judge. They were strongly of opinion that there
and bean no culpable negligence on the part of the prisoners,
that the accident had arisen in consequence of the com-
bs 34 eUr ied Gut. having given dangerous instructions which could not
it I\lr Jastice Willes said he was of the same opinion, and
Would
position have been very wrong to convict persons in the carry
ou erred t arrangements of the description that had been re-
t
o
‘u It seemed to him that the accident was entirely
be attributed to the mistaken regulations made by the
-"(3 t
pang, and not to any criminal negligence on the part of
prisoners, and that it would only be a waste of time to
Proceed further with the inquiry.
The jury then returned a verdict of not guilty. A similar
verdict was then taken upon the coroner's inquisitions, and
rae prisoners were ordered to be discharged from custody.
There is only one criminal case remaining to be disposed
43r, so that in the course of to-morrow Mr Justice Willes
Will no doubt assist in disposing of the cause list,
Ou the civil side Baron Martin tried several common
Jury causes, but none of them presented any features of
Merest to the public.