The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-22 00:00:00

THE LATE FATAL ACCIDENT

ON THE NORTH KENT RAILWAY.

Yesterday the inquiry into the circumstances atten-
dant upon the deaths of Frederick Messenger and Mary
Tvvistleton, caused by the falling in of the arch of the
Gravesend and North Kent Railway (now in the course
of erection), crossing Great Russell-street, Southwark,
was entered upon by Mr. William Carter. The inquiry
was held in the board-room of St. John's workhouse, and
excited considerable interest, a large number of persons
officially connected with the railway being present to
watch the proceedings.
The usual preliminaries having been gone through, the
jury proceeded to view the bodies, and then inspected
the spot where the accident occurred.
Evidence was first taken for the identification of the
bodies.

Policeman George Hooper, M 179, deposed that he
was on duty on Friday evening in Great Russell-street,
when he was informed that the accident had taken
place. Having ascertained the nature of the accident,
he forthwith sent to the station for assistance, and forty
men were immediately sent. The faalle❑ materials were
removed, and in about an hour the two deceased persons
were found.

The CORONER—Was your attention directed to the
arch during the day? Witness—Nothing further than
that in my usual walks round my beat I stood looking
at the men striking the centres.
The CORONER—Did you take any particular notice of
them ? Witness —Nothing beyond stopping a few
minutes to look at them.

In answer to a series of inquiries from the coroner
and jurors,
The witness stated that the men engaged appeared to
be labourers or carpenters, and that they seemed to be
fully competent to their work. The ropes from the
different poles upon the arches were so fixed that a cart
might pass through without being entangled, provided
the driver were very careful, but he did not believe that
two carts proceeding in opposite directions could pass at
the same time. There was a great deal of lime and
stone lying on one side of the road under the arch, so
much so, indeed, as entirely to block up the customary
pathway. He saw two or three of the centres lowered,
and they were done easily and without any apparent
danger.
Charles 'Smith, shoemaker, of Maltby-street, Ber-
mondsey, said he was standing in his shop, contiguous to
the railway, on Friday evening, when he heard a noise,
and saw under the archway a cart, and a horse rearing
up on his hind legs. He ran and seized it by the bridle,
and was] assisted by some man who came up at the
time. He saw some ropes hanging from the cart, which
was entangled amongst them ; the horse was endea-
vouring to effect his escape, and was plunging in the
most violent manner. The cart contained sand, or
something of the sort, and belonged to some of the work-
Vf.lthy.
street. He did not think (he ropes belonged to the cart,
but to the tackle under the railway arch. He looked up
and saw the top of the arch rise, the light showing itself
through. It then fell with a fearful crash. The horse
and cart became released, but by whom he did not know.
William Houghton, who drove the cart alluded to,
said he worked for Mr. Dawson, who was connected
with the line. He stated that at the time of the accident
he was going to the railway with some ballast, and was
passing through the arch for that purpose, walking in
front of his horse. Suddenly the cart became entangled
in the ropes, and the horse plunged violently in his at-
tempt to get away. The ropes were connected with a
pole in the middle of the arch, but he did not know what
was the use of that pole. Shortly afterwards the arch
fell in, and the horse was released.
Thomas Dunner, a wheelwright, resident on the spot,
was examined at great length with respect to the cause
of the accident. He expressed his conviction that it
arose from the loosening of the " ribs" and " centres,"
consequent upon the entanglement of the horse with the
ropes. He considered that the arch was well constructed,
that the workmen were very skilful, and that the arch
would have been perfectly safe had not the accident
alluded to occurred.

A lengthened discussion took place between the jury
as to the desirableness of appointing some competent
person to inspect the works. This was eventually
agreed to, and the inquiry was adjourned until Monday
next.