The Sun.
London, England, 1866-09-06 00:00:00

The Railway Accident near Ely.

The adjourned inquest upon the late accident on the
Great Eastern Railway, between Chittisham and Ely
stations (on the Peterborough branch), was resumed yes-
terday afternoon at the Shire-hall, before Mr. W. Marshall,
the coroner. Mr. Robertson, the superintendent of the lino ;
Mr. Johnson, locomotive engineer ; Mr. Davis, engineer
of permanent way; and Mr. Sproul, the district superinten-
dent, were present.

In the morning Captain Tyler, of the Royal Engineers,
the Government Inspector of Railways, attended at the
company's station, and there took the evidence of Fuller,
the guard, and Shepherd, tho fireman. Tho inquiry was a
private one, and this over, the inspector, accompanied by
the officials of the company, again proceeded to the scene
of the accident, to endeavour again to elucidate the cause
of it, and more particularly to examine the working of the
signals, for Fuller, the guard, stated to the inspector that
the auxiliary on the day of the accident was shut or down
against the train, and that Brown, the driver, " whistled it
off," thus flatly contradicting the evidence of Clark, the
signalman, who stated to the coroner at the first sitting of
the inquest that the auxiliary is invariably kept at " all
right."
The most important evidence was that of Captain Tyler
He said—l, by the direction of the Board of Trade, have
inspected the scene of the accident. I visited the spot]
on the 31st of August, and saw the engine and the break-
van as they lay in the field in the position in which the ac-
cident left them. I afterwards requested that the engine
might be taken to Stratford, and ,saw it there on the 3d
and 4th September. I tested it on the weigh-table on the
3d, and tested the springs and other parts, and gauged the
wheels on the 4th. I caused the sleepers to be bared for a
considerable distance on the Peterborough side, where the
engine first left the rails. The permanent way was origi-
nally laid with rails weighing 721 b per lineal yard, and in
lengths of 15 feet. The chairs were secured to transverse
sleepers by wrought iron spikes. The joints of the rails
have been since fished with screw bolts and nuts. They
have been much worn, and shortened in process of fishing.
The line has since been re-sleepered, A portion require
renewing, but those behind where the engine left the
line are not in bad condition, except that the chairs,
which have narrow bases, have partly sunk into them.
Tho rails want adjustment to the line of level, and the
chairs are much lighter than would be used at present.
Where some vehicle first left the rails, the curve has a
radius of 58 chains. In the first return to the Board of
Trade it is given at 60. The super-elevation where
some vehicle first left, the rails was 2 in., whereas it was
2 1-16 in. on the Peterborough side, about a couple of yards
distant, and 1 15-16th, about the same distance on the
Ely side. The gauge was easy where some vehicle first
mounted the rand, but rather tight on the Peterborough
side of it. Tho super-elevation is adapted to a speed of
45 miles an hour on the curve. There was a key marked
on the outer side of the outer rail and some fish bolts cut
off inside the inner rail of the curve. Four yards behind
the mark on the key there was a joint rather low opposite
the auxiliary. Looking at its position with reference to
the other points I conjecture it was hero that the flange of
the wheel of the first vehicle that left the rails would have
mounted the rail, and I learnt afterwards what you have
heard that the mark as if of the flange of a wheel passing
over the rails had been seen at that point. There was no
disturbance on the Peterborough side of that mark on the
rails, but for 65 yards towards Ely the keys and chairs
were marked, chipped, or broken, and there were marks on
the ballast close to the rails. The sleepers were then marked
further from the rails. The engine was lying in the field
40 yards further forward, having gone almost directly into
the field from those marks. It lay with the break van partly
on it. I have no doubt, that the left leading wheel of the
engine mounted the outer rail of the curve at the joint
where the rail was marked opposite the. auxiliary. The
leading wheels then kept close to the rails, though off them,
for the' 65 yards referred to. The driving wheels broke
across the rails as the leading wheels diverged from them

and fractured the rails, which seem to have been broken.
As the engine ran into the field, the momentum of the
carriages behind carried them forward, twisted the van
round, and caused some of the wheels to strike upon the
down line, where some rails were also broken. The engine
was a single one, with a tank under its boiler, and another
under its coal-box behind the trailing wheels. The trail-
ing and leading wheels were 14ft. apart. There was a cross
spring on the leading axle with inside bearings, and volute
springs with outside bearings. The, driving springs had
inside bearings and trailing springs outside bearings only.
The left trailing spring was composed of 13 plates, of which
the lowest was cracked, but none were broken. The right
trailing spring, also 13 plates, had the first, third, fourth,
and fifth more or less fractured—the fracture in the fifth
partly old, in the fourth recent, in the third chiefly old,
and in the first broken both at tho buckle and the pinhole,
partly old. It had a very considerable set, principally, no
doubt, from the rough usage sustained at the accident. The
left driving spring, composed of 14 plates, had four broken,
the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth from the bottom.
These fractures appeared to be the result of the accident.
The right driving and the cross spring of the leading axle
had all the plates sound. The volute springs were not
fractured, but the right was three-eighths of an inch higher
than the left. In testing them with a weight of two tons
they came down almost to the same bearing, but the right
spring recovered itself. The left did not do so completely,
but showed three-eighths permanent set. I first weighed
the engine just as she came in, the weight on the leading
wheels was 6 tons 12 cwt. 2 qrs., on the driving wheels
8 tons 11 cwt. 2 qrs., and on the trailing wheels, 5 tons
12 cwt. With water in the boiler the weight came up to
7 tons 10 cwt. on the leading wheel, 8 tons 18 cwt. 2 qrs. on
the driving, and 5 tons 19 cwt. on the trailing. When the
tank was full the weights were :—Leading, 7 tons 10 cwt.
1 qr.; driving, 9 tons, 11 cwt. 2 qrs. ; trailing, 6 tons 11
cwt. 1 qr. The trailing springs were somewhat crippled. I
do not consider a tank engine with outside cylinders so
well calculated for fast passenger trains as a tender engine.
Thewheels o f this
good order. The
leading and
trailing
was timed to run 291 miles in 55 minutes, including
wheelsengine were
are
of steel. The train
two stoppages, five minutes less than the mail train. This
would give a running speed of not less than 40 miles an
hour, and, of course, more at places. With regard to the
cause of the accident I consider it is to be attribute) partly
to the road and partly to the engine, but principally to the
permanent way. Opposite the auxiliary there was the low
joint, and the gauge was rather tight behind this point,
which would assist the leading wheel in slipping over the
outer rail at the low joint. Then the engine being a tank
engine, with outside cylinders, would be more ready to
leave the rail in consequence of inequalities in the perma-
nent way. The left volute spring was an older one than
the right, which had been renewed some short time pre-
viously. Looking at the spot and all the circumstances, I
should say the train was going 30 miles an hour when the
accident happened, and what I have heard confirms me in
that opinion. All the other conditions being the same, a
high rate of speed would make the engine more likely to
leave the rail. It is a most important point for platelayers
to lift depressed joints, particularly on the outside of a
curve. It is not so usual as it ought to be to have break-
vans in the rear. Hero, in this particular case, it was fortu-
nate there was not a passenger carriage in the place of the
break, had there been one in the rear it might have had a
beneficial effect. Practically there was nothing to complain
of in the super-elevation as between the two rails. Ido
not think the speed was the cause of the accident. It does
not require the element of a higher rate of speed than 40
miles an hour, added to the other causes I have alluded
to, to account for the accident. I have no doubt the en-
gine loft the line first.

The Coroner, in summing up, said that on the first
sitting the question was whether the accident had been
caused by over speed, but the evidence of the Govern-
ment inspector had clearly settled that question, as he
was of opinion that the train might—everything else
being in proper condition—have travelled with safety at
a faster rate than it was travelling at the period of the
accident. It appeared to him that the accident was
entirely caused by the defect in the rails. The signals
had been shown to be all right. They had three alterna-
tives as to the verdict they would return—either man-
slaughter againstWilliamßrown, an open verdict by which
blame could be attached to no particular person ; or 3dly,
that it was simply and purely an accident.
The jury retired, and after an absence of about twenty
minutes returned into court and delivered the following
verdict:—" Accidental death, caused by the train running
off the rail. We are of opinion, from the evidence of Capt.
Tyler, that a break van should be attached to the lust-oar-
riage of every passenger train."