The Sun.
London, England, 1858-09-17 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 17, 1858.

ACCIDENT ON THE RAILWAY NEAR

DUDLEY.

Yesterday the inquest in this case was resumed
at 11 o'clock.
At the commencement of the proceedings a
charge was made by one of the solicitors who
appeared for the injured persons against the fore-
man of the jury, to the effect that before the inquiry
he had been engaged in the interests of the com-
pany in inducing several of the sufferers to accept
compensation. The foreman (who is a Baptist
minister) gave a long explanation of his conduct,
from which it appeared that he had been present
on two occasions at interviews between two of the
sufferers and the agent of the company, when the
question of compensation was being discussed, and
that he had taken some share in them. Ulti-
mately, in deference to an expression of opinion
from the jury, the foreman withdrew, and the
inquiry was continued without him.
Mr. E. Wilson, engineer of the Oxford, Worces-
ter, and Wolverhampton Railway Company, gave
evidence similar to that of Capt. Tyler and Mr.
Craig with regard to the experiments made subse-
quent to the accident. The side chains and coup-
lings were made of the best iron. -His opinion as
to the accident was that it was caused by the break
not being put on until the train had got a consider-
able way back, and until it had attained a great

speed.
Mr. A. C. Sheriff, the general manager of the
Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway—
I was at the station at Worcester when the train
arrived in the morning, but not on the platform.
The train arrived about half-past 12. An hour or
two afterwards I received information from Mr.
Adcock, who said that in coming up the train had
got to too great a size, that one or more of the
chains had broken, and that he was going, to remedy
it in going back by dividing the train into two
parts. I did not see the trains depart in the even-
ing, nor was my
.attention directed to the chains
that had broken in the morning. Mr. Adcock came
to me with a telegraphic message about the acci-
dent, and we sent for some surgeons out of the
town, and had a train got ready. I was so prostrate
or overcome by the intelligence that I don't remem-
ber the exact time that I received the message, but
it was about half-pat 8. By the time I got there
the dead had been removed, and there were 300 or
400 people there. My attention was immedi-
ately directed to clearing the line. I have heard
most of the evidence, and as to the cause of the ac-
cident, I am pretty much of the opinion of Mr.
M'Connell, who attributes the separation to the
breaking of the bow of the shackle, and the subse-
quent late application of the break. I don't blame
the guard for not applyin; the break earlier, be-
came I believe he lost his presence of mind. I
firmly believe that if the break had been applied in
time the accident would not have occurred.
A Juror—Who is responsible for the accident ?
Witness—That will be for the jury to decide from
the evidence before them. My duties are various,
but generally to manage the business under the
directors, and generally also to increase the traffic
on the line. All the bills about excursion trains
that have been issued for some time past have been
issued by my direction. In consequence of those
excursion trains there has not been any diminution
in the ordinary passenger traffic of the line. We
don't employ any, extra servants in consequence of
the excursion trains. We keep an ample staff of
men. We keep a larger number of men in the sum-
mer than in the winter, but do not make the differ-
ence on account of the excursion trains. I cannot
tell the number of passengnrs in this train who
were not Sunday-school children. The station-
masters who issued tickets to those who were not of
the class named, I think, exceeded their duty. At
the same time, when the bills were sent out it was
expected that no persons who were not of the class
referred to would avail themselves of the offer. If I
err in this respect it is in taking too favourable a
view of human nature in this locality. I think that
the station-masters who issued those tickets were
censurable, and probably will be censured, and
would probably have been so if this accident had
not happened. I am paid a fixed salary, and I have
a percentage upon the net receipts of the line. I
will back this company against any other in the
kingdom both for the efficiency of the servants and
for the amount of their salaries. Since I have been
with the company the salaries of the servants have
been increased. I shall lose £2OO by this melan-
choly accident. For two days after the accident I
was confined to my room, from the shock which I
sustained by the calamity.
Charles Harris, assistant superintendent at the
Worcester station, said he had accompanied the
train from Dudley to Worcester. A coupling broke
at Brettel-lane, and another at Hagley, just as they
were starting from the station. There were no other
breakages on the road to his knowledge. At Bret-
tel-lane four chain links of a cable were put on.
The coupling were all properly fastened at night,
when the train was divided, and the engineman
and stoker were sober. Cook and Cording were the
guards. Did not telegraph to an of the station-
masters that a second train was following. Did not
tell the engine-driver of the first part of the train
that another would follow. Informed the guards,
but did not say how soon.
James Healey deposed—l am foreman platelayer
on that part of the line where the accident took
place. When the train came up I was standing at
the up-platform at the Round Oak station. After
the train had come to a stand I heard a rebound, and
then a snap as though something had broken at
about two carriages from where I was standing.
I looked to the place and saw a number of carriages
begin to recede.
1 At the close of this witness's evidence the inquest
; was adjourned for a fortnight.
Le

SERIOUS CHARGE AGAINST STAF-
FORDSHIRE COLLIERS.

The strike of the colliers in the Oldbury district,
which has existed for such an unusual period of
time without providing occupation for the police
courts in the locality, has at length resulted in the
committal of two men and a boy for trial at the
next assizes for the county of Stafford on the very
serious charge of maliciously wounding one of the
men who worked last week in opposition to the
wishes of those on strike ; and several others for
neglect of work.
On Wednesday, at the police court, at Dudley,
before C. Cartwright and J. E. Swindell, Esqs.,
John Westwood, Edward Coley, and Benjamin
Coley, the latter a youth of 15 or 16, were charged
with maliciously wounding Samuel Bennitt.
The prosecutor deposed-1 am a miner, and live
in New Bond-street, Dudley. I know the priso-
ners. I work for Mr. Tividale. They also work
for the same master, but not in the same pit in
which I work. Shortly before six o'clock on
Monday morning I went to the pit for the purpose
of going to work. I saw one of the men coming
out of the stable with some sharp picks, and he
told me I had better fetch some before they were
all gone. I then went into the stable and picked
up two, and as I was coming out again Edward
Coley, who was in the stable, said to me, " You
blackleg, you want one of those stuck through your
heart." I asked him what for. He replied, " For
going to work last Saturday morning." He then
picked up a sharp pike andstruck at me. It caught
the bottom of my trousers and passed through my
boot, but missed my foot. It stuck fast in my boot,
and while I was pulling it out he picked up ano-
ther pike. He was about to strike me again; but
before, he could. do. so I put my arm round his neck
and held him tight. He then " jobbed" the pike
into my thigh, and swore that he would run it
through me. He then called to his brother Benja-
min, who picked up a hay-fork and struck it through
my clothes in two places, but it did not touch my
flesh. He was pushing it at me a third time, when
I caught hold of it with one hand, still holding
Edward Coley with the other, and called
" Murder," two or three times. Edward Coley then
told his brother Benjamin to fetch some of the
other men, adding, "We kill the now we've
got him here." Benjamin then went out of the
stable, and immediately afterwards the prisoner
John Westwood came m, and said to me, " You
blackleg —, loose him, or I will make your brains
spottle against the wall like a drop of water." He
then said to Coley, who was jobbing me with the
pike, " Don't stick another pike into the —, I'll
quieten him." I then loosed Coley, and Westwood
struck me on the head with a piece of wood, and
made me bleed. I then went to show my master
and the other men how I had been served, and
they advised me to go and get my wounds dressed.
As I was leaving the bank I saw the prisoner
Edward Coley coming after me with a large stone
in his hand. I laid hold of him to prevent him
from throwing the stone at me. Some of the men
who were standing near said, " Let him go ; he's
had enough •," I then went to Mr. Johnson's
surgery, and had my wounds dressed. I
worked on Saturday, in opposition to the
wishes of the men on strike. I have been
threatened that if I continued to work I should
be beaten. The prisoners John Webster and Ed-
ward Coley did not work last week, and they both
threatened me because I did.
Mr. W. Eagles Johnson stated that the pro3ecu-
-

tor came to his surgery on Monday morning. He
was suffering from a severe contused wound in the
left thigh. He appeared to have lost a good deal
of blood, and his clothes were cut in a great num-
ber of places.
Webster called as a witness on his behalf Zacha-
riah Dainty, who deposed that he heard the boy
Benjamin Ooley calling. Webster immediately ran
towards the stable, and he followed him, All that

he saw Webster do was to pull the prosecutor off
Edward Coley, whom he was trying to stifle. The
prosecutor and Coley were roiling about on the
floor, and he accounted for the cuts on the prosecu-
tor's clothes by the circumstance of there being a
number of sharp picks lying about, Coley's clothes
were not cut.
Mr. Swindell—Were you at work last week ?
No, sir, I was at play.
On strike ?—Yes, sir.
Mr. Prince—How long have you been on strike?
—Well, I was at work the week before last, but I
played last week.
Are you on strike now ?—No, sir.
Did Bennitt play last week ?—He did some of the
time.
Did he work some of the time ?—I believe he did.
Was it contrary to the wish of the colliers that
he should work at all ?—lt was, sir.
Did they complain about it P—l complained my-
self, and so did several others.
Have you ever heard any one threaten him ?

No, sir.
The prisoners were fully conunitted for trial at
the next assizes at Strafford.—Birmingham Daily
Post.

with stabbing Henry Pugh, a private in the
Grenadier Guards, in the neck.
The prosecutor, who exhibited a cut just under
the left ear, said that on Wednesday, the Bth inst.,
he was passing along Newington-causeway with a
comrade, when the prisoner came up to him and
made use of a beastly expression, at the same time
pushing him rather roughly. He told her to go
away, and as he was about to turn she suddenly
rushed at him and stabbed him on the neck with
some sharp instrument she had in her hand. She
was about to repeat it when his comrade seized
hold of her and prevented her, and at the same
time she threw away the instrument. She was
detained until a constable came up, when he gave
her into custody, and immediately afterwards he
proceeded to a surgeon, who dresssed the wound.
The prosecutor's comrade said that he saw the
prisoner rush upon him, and afterwards he per-
ceived that she had stabbed him in the neck. As
she was about tojepeat it he seized hold of her,
when she, threw away what appeared to him a
white-handled penknife ; and as he was struggling
with her another female who was with the prisoner
picked it up and ran off with it.
The prisoner, in a very impudent manner, denied
having had a knife in her hand at all. It was all
false about picking one up.
Sergeant Gardiner informed his worship that the
surgeon who dressed the wound told him it was
inflicted with something like the blade of a pen-
knife. Had it been a little lower down the jugular
vein would have been cut, and most likely it would
have proved fatal.
The prisoner was committed for trial.

WANDSWORTH.—AIfred Patey, a tall power-
ful-looking " navvie," employed in Battersea New
Park, was charged with committing the following
assault upon William Wilcock, a labourer, living in
Battersea.
The complainant was very lame in consequence
of the severe injuries he had received, and was
unable to walk without the assistance of a stick.
On Sunday evening last the complainant was sit-
ting outside his house with others looking at the
comet, when the prisoner came up and invited him
to have something to drink. He accordingly went
into the Swan public-house, when the prisoner
behaved in a very strange manner, and with an
oath said, " Why should he treat him." The com-
plainant, who had never had any previous quarrel
with him, told him that he had not come there to
be insulted. The prisoner then made use of the
most disgusting language, and said he had, and
immediately struck him a violent blow in the face
with his fist. The prisoner also said he had done
for two or three others, and that he would do for
him. He further said he would show him " Lan-
cashire," and then commenced kicking him severely
upon the legs. The complainant got away from him,
and while he was standing outside, the prisoner,
without saying a word savagely kicked him with his
heavy boot. The prisoner threatened to kick him
' again, and was about to do so when the complainant's
brother interfered, and knocked him down. The
complainant was severely injured by the kick, and
had to be carried home, and had since been under
the doctor's hands. The parts were very much
bruised, and he was still suffering great pain. The
complainant was proved to be sober, but not so the
prisoner, who appeared to have been drinking.
The prisoner set up a defence that he was struck
in the public-house, but that was positively denied.
Mr. Dayman said he had not heard a more ruffi-
anly and cowardly assault than the one committed
by the prisoner. He happened to know what was
meant by the term " Lancashire," and he was sorry
to say that it was the practice to get a man down,
and stamp upon him with their heavy nailed boots.
He should mark his sense of that ruffianly practice
by fining him 50s. for the assault, and 50s. costs,
or to be imprisoned for two months. He should
also require him to find bail for his good behaviour
for the next six months.
The prisoner was then locked up.