The Sun.
London, England, 1864-03-23 00:00:00

THE SIN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 23, 1864.

THE SHEFFIELD CALAMITY.

SHEFFIELD, March 22.

The work of clearing away the mud and filth left by the
flood is being rapidly pushed forward, and the streets of the
town are now beginning to assume much of their ordinary
appearance, except that fence walls and fallen houses are
not rebuilt. Disinfectants have been freely used, and with
the best effect.

The Sanitary Committee, composed of medical men, re-
ported yesterday evening as follows :
" The committee have pleasure in repotting that from
personal examination they are able to state that the work of
cleansing the streets, cellars, back yards, courts, and lanes
is rapidly proceeding; that the health of the town is in a
satistactory condition, and that there is every reason to con-
clude that the precautionary measures that have been and
are being taken will have the effect of preventing disease."
The search for bodies continues, and two or three are
found daily, but there are yet more than 33 missing.
The question of the liability of the Water Company for
the damage is exciting great attention here. The solicitors
appointed to act for the mill and other property owners have
taken the opinion of eminent counsel. The opinion is that
the company are unquestionably liable for all legal damage
to the extent of their capital, but not beyond that. The
estimates of damage are so large that many shareholders
have feared the capital of the company (±100,000) would not
cover the damage, and that their private fortunes would be
responsible. The opinion of counsel will therefore be a
great relief to them on that point. More sober estimates
give the damage at considerably less than £400,000; but
only the roughest estimates can as yet possibly be made.
The contribution of the Prince of Wales to the distress fund
is £2OO. The Princess of Wales has contributed £5O, and
the Duke of Cambridge £5O.

M. A. Mille, the engineer in chief of bridges and cause-
ways to the French Government, has come over to examine
and inspect the dam, and visited it to-day in company with
Mr Rawlinson, the Government engineer, and Mr Beard-
more, an engineer sent down by the Government to assist
Mr, Itawlinson.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORFOLK CIRCUIT.—CAMBRIDGE, March 22.

:Sittings at Nisi Prius, before Mr. Justice Crompton and a
Special Jury.)
THE EARL OF COVENTRY AND OTHERS V. WILLES.
Mr. O'Malley, Q.C., and Mr. Bulwer were for the plain-
; and Mr. Keane, Q.C., and Mr. Phear for the defen-
Jant.

This was an action of trespass brought by the plaintiffs,
who aro the stewards of the Jockey Club, against Mr. Wm.
Wiliest who is tho sporting correspondent of the Morning

Post, writing under the nom de plume of " Argus," for wil-
fully trespassing on the part of Newmarket Heath, called

" the Flat," after notice given him by the plaintiffs
(owners) not to do so. The defendant pleaded three pleas :

First, not guilty ; secondly, denial of the plaintiffs' right o

possession ; and thirdly, that he committed the trespass
complained of by the leave and licence of the plaintiffs.
Mr. O'Malley stated the case to the jury, and then
Mr, Charles Weatherby was called, and examined by

Mr. Bulwer—l am secretary to the Jockey Club at New-
market, and have been so for twenty-eight years. Lord
Coventry, Admiral Rous, and Mr. Alexander (the three
_ _ _

plaintiffs) are members of the club. In 1563 the same
three gentlemen were the stewards. I know thut portion of

the heath at Newmarket called " the Flat." Payments have

been made by various persons in respect of occupation of
" the Flat," I have known payments made by me for the
stewards of the Jockey Club for rolling, levelling, and taking
care of the ground. Such rolling and levelling was done by
ray direction, on the part of the plaintiffs as stewards. I
know Mr. Chas, Bottom. In the intermediate times between
the races the ground is I aken care of for trying purposes.

Races are held twice in the spring, once in July, and three
times in the autumn. The grass is also sometimes let for
sheep-feed. The trainers make payments in respect of the
use of the ground to me, on behalf of the stewards. Mr.
Martin Stalling is employed to look after the management
of the Heath all the year round. He has labourers under
him. He is employed and paid by the stewards. Mr.
James Manning is also in the employment of the stewards.

The feed has been let to Mr. Bottom, who is the occupier
of the adjoining farm. It was partly let to him, for a short
time, in 18G3, but I forget the exact period. I gave direc-
tions to Starling that in certain places and at certain times
Mr. Bottom might feed it. Mr, Bottom paid me, for the
stewards, for such feed. There is also, on "the Fiat," a
betting ring, to which persons are admitted by payment.
Mr. Fuller Andrews, a servant of the stewards, has charge
of that. lie receives the money for the entrance fees, awl
pays it to me. There are two booths for refreshments, for
which payments are made to me for the stewards. Autho-

rity is exercised by the stewards by regulating on what side
horses elan go, and on what side carriages, at the races.
For all payments and receipts I account to the stewards.
Carriages are obliged to go upon the racecourse by a new
road. The pests at different parts of the heath are put up
and repaired by the stewards. Poets and ropes are lut up
to keep the course while the races are being run. Move-
able posts and rails are also put across the course at non-
racing times, to regulate the spots where the horses may
exercise. That is also done by order of the stewards. Admi-
ral Rolls and Mr. Alexander, two of the stewards, take an
active part in the management of " the Flat." On October
29, 1862, I wrote a letter to defendant, forwarding a copy of
a resolution passed that afternoon by the Jockey Club, re-
quiring him to make an apology for certain offensive expres-
sions used by him in a letter signed " Argus" in the .}torn•
ing Pest of Oct. 20. I received Mr. Willes's reply, stating
that he should be obliged by my pointing out the offensive
expressions complained of, and stating that the proprietors
of the Morning Post were fully prepared to justify in a court
of law the expressions complained of by the Earl of Win-
chelsea and Mr. Hughes, and offering to send the name of
his solicitor, to whom any process could be sent. On the
same day I received a telegraphic message, giving the names
of the solicitors cf the Morning Post. On Nov. 3d I wrote
the defendant again, acquainting him that, not having made
the required apology, he would be warned off the land of the
club, and requesting him to acknowledge the receipt of a
notice not to trespass which was enclosed. Mr. Willes, on
the next day, acknowledged the receipt. I received a letter
from the defendant on April, '2O, 1863, stating that the re-
marks complained of were penned by him solely as a public
writer, with a desire to do his duty to the public, and no
desire to give pain to any member of the Jockey Club. I
showed that letter to the stewards at ones. I did not send
any answer. On the 22d I sent instructions to my solicitor,
and afterwards received a second letter from Mr. Willes.
Cross-examined by Mr. Keane, Q.C.—ln 1562, the
Earl of Portsmouth, the E irl of Coventry, and the Hon.
Admiral Rous were stewards. I was present at the
meeting of the Jockey Club, at the rooms at Newmarket,
at which the resolution of the 29th of October, 18E2, was
passed. All three of the plaintiffs were present at that
meeting. The resolution was moved by Lord Winchelsea
and seconded by Admiral Roue. It was net carried una-
nimously. Thirteen members voted for it, and seven
against it. I have not got the names of the seven who voted
ag-oinst it. It had been previously moved by Lord Strad-

broke (the brother of Admiral Rous) " that it was not expe
dient to take notice of anonymous writers in public
papers," but was lost by 12 to 10. It was well nisderstood
that the defendant was the author of the letter. Part of the
letter was read to the meeting. At the meeting on Oct. 31,
the three plaintiffs and 11 other members were present.
'1 here are about 80 members of the club altogether. There
was a division on an amendment moved by Gen. Peel,M.P.,
that a special meeting of the club should be called to take
into consideration the letter of Mr. Willes. That was
seconded by Mr. Graville. It was lost by 11 to 6. The ori-
ginal resolution, proposing that Mr. Willes should be warned
off the course, was moved by Lord Winchelsea and seconded
by Lord Glasgow, and carried by 11 to 6. The defendant's
letter was read to that meeting. My experience of the Jockey
Club at Newmarket is considerable. Nobody has ever, to
my knowledge, been warned off before for such a cause as
this. There is the case of a gentleman who has been warned
off for affronting a steward of the Jockey Club in the exe-
cution of his duty. The Jockey Club have given the
stewards a general discretionary power to warn off the
course. The races are advertised, and the owners of horses
are invited to come and enter them. There are stands,
which are used by the members only, and public stands. Tho
public aro never warned off, provided they go into the right
places. Each of the plaintiffs has referred in my presence
to the rules of the club as guiding their conduct as
stewards. A great part of the ground upon which the
horses are trained is not the freehold of the Jockey
Club. My accounts with the stewards are laid before the
members of the Jockey Club at the annual financial
meeting in the Craven Meeting week, There is one new
steward every year, each steward remaining in office
three years. The stewards said that Mr. Willes's letter of
the 24th of April was not sufficient. I was not told to
answer it. Lord Coventry told me that he had seen Mr.
Willes on the Heath, and that he must not come. That
was on the Tuesday. I understand now that it was ar-
ranged that Mr. Willes should commit a formal trespass
on the Heath, in the presence of Mr. Kitchener's clerk.
Re-examined by Mr. O'Malley—The defendant was not
the owner of a horse, or a member of the Jockey Club.
Richard Cole deposed— I delivered a letter to the defen-
dant personally on the 22d of April. It was from Messrs.
Kitchener and Jean, stating that they had been instructed
to proceed, and informing him that, if he persisted in going
on the Heath, they should bi ing a separate action in respect
of each trespass, and apply for an injunction under the
Common Law Procedure Act. The witness proceeded—
I went on " the Flat" on the 23d of April, for the purpose
of seeing if the defendant was there. The defendant rode
up, an,i asked if my name was Cole. I said " Yes," and
he said ho was glad of it, as he had seen Mr. Kitchener,
and he had arranged with him that I should be saved a
journey to London, and that there should be no mistake as
to his identity. I then served him with the notice.
Mr. O'Malley briefly summed up the plaintiffs' case to
the jury. It was admitted that the defendant had trespassed
on the course for the express purpose of raising the question
of right. With respect to the occupation of the land, the
defendant had got enough facts to raise the point of law, it
there were any, in a court of law hereafter. He was at a
loss to understand what question there was for the jury.
The action really was an undefended one.
Mr. Justice Crompton summed up, and the jury found
for the plaintiff, damages Is. Hie lordship certified for
tbs coats of the special jury,

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—March 22,

(Before Mr. Payne.)
A SCENE TN COURT,

Robert Griffiths, 24, cabinetmaker, was indicted for steal-
ing six knives and six forks, a stock, a die, a plough-plane,
and six irons, the property of Martin James Boon.
Mr. J. P. Wood prosecuted ; Mr. Pater defended the
prisoner.
The prosecutor is an ironmonger and tool dealer living at
No. 45, St. John-square, and the prisoner rented a room at
the back of his shop tor six or seven months, and he used to
look after the shop while the prosecutor was out on business.
During that time a quantity of tools were missed. The pri-
soner was suspected of stealing them, and George Ranger,
police•constable 199 G, took him into custody, telling him
he was charged with stealing a stuck and die. lie said at
first he knew nothing about them and attempted to run out
of the shop, but he was followed and taken to the s:ation-
house. The policeman then went to the prisoner's house,
and in a portfolio found 70 duplicates for tools, three of
them relating to the tools then produced. The jAisoner was
asked how ho accounted for so many duplicates relating to
tools, and he said s ,me of them belonged to him, but the
greater portion of them belonged to the prosecutor.
During Mr. Pater's cross• examination of a witness, the
foreman of the jury remarked he thought the learned coun-
sel had no right to insinuate that witness was Lot speaking
the truth.

Mr. Pater said it would be better for the foreman not to
get into collision with him, and iniited upon his right to
cross•examine the witness with a view of eliciting the truth,
and in his address to the jury with great emphasis exclaimed

—" I thank God there is more than one juryman to deter-
mine whether the prisoner stole the property with which he
is charged; for if there was only one, and that one was the
foreman, from what has transpired to-day, there is no doubt
what the result would be."

Mr. Payne said that was a very improper observation for
Mr. Pater to make to the foreman of the jury, and if he
went on in that strain he should consult Mr. Bodkin, the
Assistant-Judge in the other court, as to what should be
done.
This sort of thing being continued,
-

Mr. Payne left the court to consult Mr. Bodkin, and on
his return he said—l have consulted the Assistant-Judge in
reference to this matter; tut it is his opinion that at this
stage it would not be fair to interfere, as it might prejudice
the case against the prisoner at the bar; but when it is con-
cluded we shall then consider what course should be taken
as regards Mr. Pater.
Mr. Pater said there ought to be a fresh juryman in the
place of the foreman who had acted so improperly.
Mr. Payne—You are only repeating your former insults.
Mr. Pater—And I shall continue to do so to the end of
time. Things have arrived at such a pitch that lam bound
to resent, and as a great number of the remarks which have
fallen from the bench have been applied to me, 1 feel it my
duty to speak my mind boldly, and I will always do so, no
matter what the result may be. I am entrusted with an

important duty, and although the duty of the jury may be
more important than mine, yet still mine is an important
duty, for you are sworn to return a true and just verdict,
and according to the evidence. I have to do a duty accord-
ing to my own conscience and the interest of the client com-
mitted to my care, and I thank God I have discharged that
duty to the best of my ability, and which I shall continue
to do as long as I have the honour to wear a wig and gown,

Notrr•ithstanding the interruption I have received from the
toreman of the jury,let us now approach the fact c f the case,
and see how the evidence points to a conclusion to warrant

you in returning a verdict of guilty. My learned friend Mr,
Wood, in opening the case, asked you to return a verdict in
favour of the Queen, but the Queen cared very little what

result they arrived at, and I du not know why the name 01
the Queen was introduced, unless it was to give extra

weight to a case that it did not possess. He then went over
the evidence, and called upon the jury to acquit the prisoner.
Mr. Payne summed up the evidence, and the Jury found
the prisoner guilty, but recommended him to mercy.
The prisoner made a long statement that he had been
driven to the commission of tne offence through poverty.
Mr. Payne sentenced him to be imprisoned and kept to
hard labour for eight inouth3.
The Aieistant•Judge then came and took his scat on the
bench.

Mr. Payne said—There is a matter connected with this

case to which I have felt it to be my duty to draw the at •
tention of the Assistant-Judge and the magistrates. Mr.
Pater made use of some observations tos,ards the foreman
of the jury of a personal character. Those observations
were--" I thank God tiat there is more than one jaryman
to determine whether the prisoner stole the property with
which he is charged ; for if there was only one, and that
one the foreman, from what has transpired ti-day there is
no doubt what the result would be." The foreman was in

that position ; but although he wished some other person to
take his place, his brother jurymen considered that to be un-
necessary, and he remained. These personal observations
were highly unjustifiable on the part of Mr. Pater, and I
have thought it right to bring them under the notice of the
Assistant-Judge. I, therefore, wish the opinion of the
learned Assistant-Judge as to what course he would recom•
mend should be taken.

The Assistant-Judge—Such things as these are most
painful, and tend graatly to embarrass the administration of
justice. I truss that Mr. Pater wilt withdraw the observa•

ions.

Mr. Pater—Let me first inform your lordship of a fact
that has not been brought to yGur knowledge, fcr you were
not present when this interruption occurred. The foreman
on the previous dLy interfered in the same urjustifiuble
manner, and a learned friend of mine took the first oppor••
tunity of challenging him, and he was removed front the
jury box. I can form no opinion as to his reason for doing
so, unless it arises from an inability to control his own tem-
per, I conscientiously stated my opinion, that if there had
been but one juryman to decide the case an adverse verdict
would certainly be returned, and when he interfered by
making observations, such conduct was unchecked by Mr.
Payne. The foreman said ho knew the object of such in-
terruptions by counsel, and after the observations which
fell from the Bench, I do not feel warranted in withdraw-
ing the observations, and adopting the course suggested by
the Assistant-Judge. . . .

Thu Assistant-fudge—This is a gross dereliction of duty,
for the use of such language is perfectly unwarrantable. I
should recommend Mr. Payne to treat these observations
from Mr. Pater as a contempt of court, and unless they are
withdrawn I shauld recommend that a fine of £2O be in-
flicted on him, and returned to the Court of Exchequer,
and the Barons of the Exchequer will determine whether
the privilege of counsel is to be abused in that way. He
hoped it would act as an example, not much needed, be-
cause such conduct was coufined to a very few
Mr. Pater—l have acted conscientiously, and I decline
to withdraw the observations.
Mr. Warton—l wish to say a word. I confirm Mr. Pater
in what he has said. The foreman was challenged by me
for improper conduct the day before.
The Assistant-Judge—To challenge a juryman is the
right of counsel, but it was a very different thing to abuse
him.
I'Mr. Payne—l saw nothing in the conduct of the foreman
to justify the observations made on him.
Mr. Pater--I wish to make a few observations.
Mr. Payne—l roust decline to hear you, unless you with-
draw the observations. Do you do so?

Mr, Pater—Certainly not.
Mr. Payne—Then I fine you £2O.
Mr. Pater—l can now say that the opinion I have
formed of you is concurred in by every member of the bar.
Mr. Abram—l do not concur in it,
Mr. Wood--Nor I. _

Mr. Pater—You (Mr. Wood) prosecuted. The matter
shall not rest here. I shall bring the subject under the
notice of Sir Georga Grey, and very probably your removal
from the bench will be the result.

with several shillings. I suppose he must have spent a
sovereign or 265. on the Sunday and Monday.
George Hine, carter, lodging in Circus-street—Prisoner
came to my bed at half-past six in the morning. He awoke
me, and said, " George, I want you to fetch me some break-
fast." As I came down he put a sovereign into my hand.
I fetched bread, tea, sugar, and meat. I changed the so-
vereign in the Red Lion, Edgware-road, and had some
brandy. I brought it to the prisoner. When I got back
he said, "You can keep half a' Jane' (half a sovereign)."
I gave him the change in silver On Friday morning he
gave me a handkerchief, and said if I did not pawn be
would. I replied, " You may as well give it to me, as it is
not worth much. He did give it, and a man named Elms-
lie pawned it. Afterwards he gave me a watch-chain and
seal, and I took them to Woolwich. Before I went there I
picked up with a man in Chapel-street, Edgware road, and
, he sold the seal for a shilling, which he gave to me. When
I brought back the watch and chain on Saturday afternoon
from Woolwich I saw the prisoner in Circus-street. I gave
him the watch and chain, and he went to the back place
and returned with the cases broken up and the works out,
On the Sunday some one was reading about the murder,
and the prisoner said, " 'What rogues they must be 1"
Inspector Thomas Edward Hindes—" On the 15th I went
with Sergeant White to Circus-street, whrre I apprehended
the prisoner. On the 16th I received a duplicate from the
witness Hine for the handkerchief; the seal from 67,
Church-street, Woolwich ; and the pair of boots belonging
to the prisoner I received from a man named Taylor, There
is a spot, apparently of blood, on one of the boots.
Sergeant White, 16 D—On the 11th inst. I received this
iron bar (poker) from Mrs. Adams, at Marylebone station,
On examining it I found eight or nine greyish hairs at the
end. There are three or four there now.
Mary Adams, living at 6, Little Chesterfield-street—A
little boy, named Dingle, gave me this iron bar on Friday
afternoon, and I took it to the station.
Moses Charles Dingle, 7, Paddington-street, picked up
the bar in a puddle of water, in Little Chesterfield-street, at
about four feet from where deceased was found. It was
close by some blood.
Mrs. Adams recalled—l knew Mr. Duck, lie lived at
No. 2. He had a chain with ono seal hanging to it. It
had a red stone with letters deeply cut in. The portion of
the seal now produced is the same.
William Francis Faller, M.R.C.S., house-surgeon to the
Marylebone Infirmary—On Friday morning week, the 11th
March, at an early hour, the man Duck was brought in
partially insensible. I found he had three transverse cuts
on the back of the head. They were not done by a very
sharp instrument, He died at six o'clock on Friday even-
ing. The injuries, I imagine, must have been done by an
instrument like a hatchet or a hammer. I don't think the
iron produced could have caused the injuries.
Cecil Henning, assistant to Dr. Clarke, divisional
surgeon D division—l saw deceased on the morning of the
11th. I found him with three cuts, recently done, on the
back of the head, and each cut laid the head bare. I should
think the poker now produced might have caused the
wounds,

James Farris—l keep a laundry in Woodstock-mews,
and the only one of that trade in the mews. I have not
employed or paid the prisoner any money within the last
twelve months.
This being the whole of the evidence,
Mr. Yardley said—Prisoner, you are charged with the
wilful murder of Joseph Duck—you have heard the evi-
dence given against you; you can say anything you may
think proper in your defence, but I must tell you that what-
ever you do say will be taken down in writing, and may
be given in evidence against you at your trial.
Prisoner—l say I never trusted Hine with any money of
mine, because I had a bad character of him. The people in
the kitchen said he (Hine) stole a pair of boots in Molyneux-
street from a young chap, and that is the reason he went to
Circus•street to lodge. fine said he was not going to get
nailed by Teddy White (the sergeant), because he said he
heard that Teddy was after him, and that was the reason he
kept away from there. That is all I want to say.
Mr. Yardley—You aro committed for trial.
Prisoner then burst out crying, and buried his face in
his pocket-handkerchief, and so was led out to the cells by
Anster, the gaoler.
A dense crowd hid assembled to see the prisoner go away
in the van to Newgato.

THE BRADFIELD RESERVOIR,

- --- ---

(From the _Mechanics' Magazine.)

Tho first essential to the construction of a good embank-
ment is excellence of material, Unfortunately the Loxley
valley, whatever its other advantage, in this respect was
lamentably deficient; clay for puddling was scarce and bad.
The hills at either side consist for the most part of a loose
blue shale, which no care can render impervious to moisture,
or lapse of time feirly consolidate. Nevertheless, nothing
else was to be had, and, such as it was, it must be used,
The works were undertaken by Messrs. Craven Brothers,
under terms of which we as yet know nothing. The engi-
neering difficulties involved were very moderate. No springs
were encountered, no slips of any magnitude took place.
Dykes have been made before now of poorer stuff than shale.
Sand, loose earth, even shinele, hes served a good purpose
in the time of need, and as the dam was not called on to
sustain any pressure due to water, until its constructors
thought fit, the practical details of its formation involved
none of those troubles met with in the building of sea walls,
or the rearing up, tide by ride, of embankments intended to
rescue land from the sea. Even after its completion,
when in actual use, it was exempt from the action of
waves, as nothing worthy the name could be formed on a
narrow landlocked pond of a few score acres. Like
all similier structures, it consisted of a central wall of clay
puddle, supported on either side by retaining banks, in
the present case formed of the shale or earth dug from the
bottom and sides of the valley. In length the embankment
extended about 400 yards, with a height of nearly 90ft. The
top, we are told, was extremely narrow. The width of the
base is variously stated. The Times, with its usual disre-
gard for scientific accuracy, sets it down at but 40ft. From
more reliable resources we are inclined to estimate it at
about 270 ft. or 300 ft. Inasmuch as the embankment was
not destroyed frorr. below, was not " blown up," in fact,
this is a matter of minor consequence—at present, at least.
The Sheffield Waterworks Company has, it appears, of late
found full employment for its c tpital, and from this reason
no doubt economy became a matter of paramount impor-
tance. Now, had the embankment been formed of much
better material than loose shale, its proper width at the
bottom should have been, at the very least 4Uoft. As it
was, the course to bo pursued was clear. The shale was in
itself wholly unreliable. It only remained to make the
puddle-wall strong and thick, carefully rammed and solidly
beaten together foot by foot, and inch by inch ; using the
shale merely as a retaining wall, in quantity on the outside,
and as a protecting covering to prevent attrition within. We
fail to discover that any such course was pursued. Most of
the evidence goes ro show that the puddle-wall was interior,
both in workmanship and material, while the embankment
when finished wanted breadth of bsse—in a word, it was too
weak. The inner side was protected by a thin pavement,
of small sandstone blocks laid without cement. We pre-
sume the slopes were concave on both sides, as they usu-
ally are in such structures. Now te formation of a mound,
for such we may call it, 1,200 feet long, 90 feet high, and
400 feet broad at the base, is a rather expensive undertak-
ing, and we have every reason to believe that the deposit of
shale was curtailed as touch as possible. The pressure on
the embankment when the reservoir was full must have
equalled more than the seventh part of the weight of the
darn. Nothing retained it in its place and prevented it from
sliding down the valley save the friction—due to its weight
en the surface which supported it. We cannot estimate the
co-efficient of this friction at more than half the insistent
weight, and we therefore find that the margin of safety al-
lowed, even while the soil of which the dam was composed
remained free, or nearly free, from moisture, was run very
fine indeed. It is the fashion unhappily just now to leave
little margin of safety in any of our structures, and it would
not be difficult to find embankments held to ba good, re-
garded as models, and thought worthy of every confidence,
where the line of safety is quite as nearly approached, when-
ever the reservoirs of which they form a part are full, as it
was in the Bradfield bank. When we consider the Bradfield
darn was afflicted with congenital weakness, that it was a new
structure, not firmly consolidated—if shale ever can consoli-
date—it is not difficult to comprehend how the accident, so
called, occurred. The thickness of the bank at a distance
of some 12 or 15 feet from the top, must have been com-
paratively insignificant. The reservoir had never been full
before. However carefully the first part of the work had
been executed, it was natural enough that this, the upper
portion, exposed to a comparatively trifling strain, would

receive less attention, less labour. As a result of all these

circumstances, tending to the one point, water found its
way into the very heart and substance of the dam ; there,

acting as it always does in such cases, it dissolved the sole
bond which held the upper sections of the darn to those
which were lower. It reduced the coefficient of friction
to such an extent that the upper portion of the embank-
ment seems to have been pushed fairly off the lower por-
tions on which it rested, to which it never adhered. The
water found a vent at once through a wide chasm, and
quickly wreaked its fury on the external slope of the em-
bankment, down which it poured, tearing it up as though
it had been so much running sand. The total destruction of
a vast section of the embankment followed in a moment,
and then commenced those horrors which England will not
soon forget. It has been urged in defence of those who are
responsible, that tho event must be attributed to the pre-
sence of an unusual quantity of water in the reservoir ;
to the recent formation, and almost incomplete state
of the embankment ; and to the inclemency of the
weather. The reply to all these arguments is clear. if the
embankment was not intended to sustain the strain, why
was it piled up to a height of 90 feet ? If it was not in a
fit state to receive the preseure due to this immense depth of
water, why was the water suffered to accumulate ? 'We are
told that up to the last the engineer in charge was reluc•
rant to draw off the water, as by doing so ho ran the risk of
being unable to fill the reservoir again during the spring.
Every cubic foot stored up represented so much pecuniary
value, which he was unwilling to waste. We trust that
his assertion is unfounded. At the eleventh hour we find
iim endeavouring- to blow up part of the embankment with
gunpowder. Alas I all power in the matter 11,41 by that
iire been taken out of the hands of man. A Government
inspector hoe been cent twu IQ ilaY,;etig/lIL ;very pqrtiQUltt"