The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-12 00:00:00

By a juror—Fossey was not aware that he had been
ordered to be fined and cautioned, as the result of the in-
vestigation into his first error.
CORONER—When did you receive this order ? Wit-
ness—On Friday.
CORONER—Do you consider you did your duty in with-
holding the caution and knowledge of the fine from Fos-
sey? Witness—When a man is fined, wo generally stop
it from his week's pay.
CORONER—What is this man's weekly pay? Witness
—Eighteen shillings per weeek. The men are paid on
Friday mid-day.
Mr. .1. M'Connell examined—l am superintendent of
the locomotive department of the southern division of
the London and North-Western Railway. My duty is
to superintend the general management of the locomotive
department, including the working of the engines. The
engine to which the accident occurred is constructed on
Mr. Stephenson's patent. The breaks are very easily
applied to this description of engine and tender, the
break being effected by two or three turns of the
handle. I have examined the breaks of the tender
since the accident, and find them in perfect order. We
have no greater command of the engine than to apply
the whole of the breaks on the tender and reverse the
engine. The mode of communication between the guards
and the engine-driver is by shutting off the steam and
opening the whistle. This is well understood. Various
inventions have been suggested to enable guards to com-
municate with the engine-driver, but some practical
difficulty has arisen in all. The application of the break
is the best mode of communication I know of at present.
In fine weather it is infallible, though, when the rails are
wet, it is not so secure. I do not think it would be safe
to stop a train travelling at a speed of twenty-five miles
an hour in a space of fifty yards, even if it were possible.
Mr. M'Connell was further examined at great length.
but his evidence was chiefly confined to a detail of the
various means adopted to avoid accidents generally, and
did not bear particularly on the case before the jury. At
the close of his evidence Mr. M'Connell begged per-
mission to call the attention of the jury to the remark-
able courage displayed by the engine-driver and stoker
of the train to which the accident occurred in retaining
their positions on the engine even after they must have
seen that a collision was inevitable.
The jury unanimously expressed their high sense of
the courage displayed by the individuals alluded to.
Mr. Bruyeres was here called, and in explanation of
the one shilling fine inflicted on Fossey, said that a few
days previous to the late accident Fossey had turned an
excursion train into the same siding. The circumstance
was reported, but it being the first offence of which he
had been guilty, and his previous character being very
good, on the recommendation of Mr. Bedford, who was
in the train, it was determined to reprimand him. How
ever, as a record that he had been reported, in case of a
second report, a nominal fine was inflicted. Had the
train been a regular passenger train a different, course
would have been pursued; but it was not unusual, when
regular trains were coming, if an excursion came in at a
walking pace, as this appeared to do, and signs were
made by the driver. to turn them on to the sidings. It
was therefore considered that Fossey might have made
a mistake. lie was not aware until he heard it that day
that the reprimand had not been communicated to
Fossey, and he should certainly report this fact to the
committee at their first meeting. Mr. Bruyeres here
gave a lengthened description of various modes of com-
munication between the guards and drivers of trains,
but nothing bearing on the present case came out. He
agreed with with Mr. M.Connell, that the application of
the break by the guard was the best method at present
known.

After some further proceedings of an unimportant
character the inquiry was, at half-past seven o'clock,
adjourned until Tuesday next.
The bodies of the unfortunate deceased parties have
all been removed by their respective friends for inter-
ment.

Mr. Turner remains under the care of Mrs. Hibbert,
and attended by his wife, at the Wolverton station. He
is improving daily.

THE TRIPLE MURDER AT
MIRFIELD.
COMMITTAL OF THE ACCUSED.
MIRFIELD, FalDAY.—Yesterday morning, at eleven
o'clock, the inquest on the bodies of Mr. James Wraith,
Mrs. Wraith, and Caroline Ellis, their servant, who were
so barbarously murdered on the 12th of May, was re-
sumed at the Wesleyan Methodist school-rooin, at
this village, before Mr. G. D. Barker, deputy
coroner. The evidence adduced was in a great measure
the same as that given before the magistrates at the
Dewsbury court-house on Saturday. Michael M'Cabe
and Patrick Reid, the two men in custody charged with
the murders, were not present.
Mr. Richard Green, superintendent of the Dewsbury
police, produced the razor found on the body of Mr.
Wraith, a carving knife found in the same room, and a
kitchen fire poker, all of which were marked with blood.
He also produced the soldering iron found at the bottom
of Mr. Wraith's well. Both the poker and soldering
iron appeared to have been bend,td by force of blows
\against some hard substance. Mr. Green then stated
that on Friday morning last week he first saw Thomas
Kilty, of Daw-green, and asked him if he knew any-
thing about a soldering iron. He said he had been in
the habit of borrowing a soldering iron at the house of
the father of the prisoner, Patrick Reid, and that he
believed the iron he used to borrow was Reid's father's
property. Witness asked him to give a description of
the iron, and he gave a correct description of it before
he saw it. Witness then showed the iron to him, and
he said ha was very sorry to see it again, as it was the
same. Mr. Howarth was present at the time.
Mr. John Howarth, constable of Mirfiell, corroborated
Mr. Green's testimony as to the conversation with Kill
and his identification of the soldering iron.
Thomas Kitty, of Daw-green, hawker of spectacles,
identified the soldering iron produced as the instrument
he had frequently borrowed from the prisoner Reid's
father. Witness's wife generally fetched the iron. The
day before the murder the prisoner Reid took the iron
away from witness's house, and witness never saw it
again until it was shown to him by Mr. Green. In speak-
ing to various marks on the iron, the witness said he also
knew it from having filed the copper end, where there
was a small hole, using a fine file, six days before the
prisoner Reid fetched it.
By the aid of a small magnifying glass marks of a file
could be seen on the end of the soldering iron.
By the Jury—l have frequently been with Patrick
Reid in company, and have been with him at Mirfield.
On the day of the murder he came into my house and
asked me where I was going that day, and I said I
should not go out that day. I went hawking with him
the day after the murder, and we had conversation, but
nothing particular was said about the murder. I was,
not with him more than half an hour in the morning of
that day, but I saw him at Batley in the evening. He
and I have always been friendly, and no one ever heard
me give him a bad name before. Ido not know the pri-
soner WCe.bc.
Katherine linty, wife of the last witness, corroborated
her husband's testimony t%B to borrowing the soldering