The Sun.
London, England, 1861-01-31 00:00:00

THE LATE _FATAL ACCIDENT ON THE LONDON
AN]) SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY.

INQUEST ON DR. EALY-(THIS DAY).

This morning, at half-past ten o'clock, Mr. W. Carter,
coroner for the eastern division of Surrey, openad an in-
quiry at the White Hart Inn, Merton, as to the death 01
Dr. William Baly, M.D., of 45, Queen Anne-street, Caven-
dish-square.

Several of the directors of the company were present,
amongst whom we observed Capt. Mangles (chairman),
Sergeant Gazelee, Mr, L. Crombie (secretary), and other
officials.

The Coroner said he should on that occasion merely take
the evidence of the superintendent who started the train,
the stoker, and police-constable, and then adjoura the in-
quiry in order that Captain Yolland, the GoNtrnment
Inspector, might have an opportunity of inspecting the line
where the accident occurred.

George Smith, inspector of traffic to the 'Waterloo-
station, deposed that he started the train at 5.10 p.m. It
was the express to Guildford. The engine-driver's name
was Cooke ; he did not know the name of the fireman.

Harris, police constable 14 IT, said, on hearing of the
accident on Epsom Junction, he went to Wimbledon sta-
tion, and there saw the body of a gentleman lying on the
door of a first-class carriage. He found a gold ring and
other property on him. His linen was marked "W. B."
Richard Maisey, the coachman in the service of the de-
ceased, identified the body as that of his master, Dr. Baly.
He drove him to the Waterloo station on Monday night,
and never after saw him alive.

Walter Chapman, surgeon at Tooting, said, I have made
a hasty examination of the body of the deceased. The whole
of the frontal bone of the skull was completely fractured
and knocked in. The globe of the right eye was completely
ruptured or burst. The right cheek bone wss frac-
tured, and the lower jaw was completely fractured.
I believe the whole of the ribs were fractured—the whole
chest, is fact, was driven ix. The right thigh bone was
fractured in two places. There were marks of injury, con-
tusions, and abrasions all over the body. In my judgment
the injuries were sufficient to cause instantaneous death,
and would be caused by compression from some heavy body.
The fracture of the skull was quite sufficient to account for
death.
Coroner—Did you know it to be Dr. Baly ?

Witness—l heard it was Dr. Baly who was dead, or Ido
not think I should have known him. I wish further to
state that in my opinion those injuries must have been
caused while he was on the ground, from the immense
quantity of dust and gravel found in all the wounds. This
is important to show that he did not die in the railway
carriage.

By Mr. Bedford—Do I understand the dirt was in all
the wounds—that all of them were caused while on the
ground ?

Witness—No. I am not positive as to that.
By Mr. Dalrymple—l see nothing to show to the con-
trary, but that all the wounds might have been caused by
a railway carriage falling upon him after he was on the
ground.

Frederick Holler, a passenger by the 5.15 train to King-
ston, said on arriving near the signals of the Epsom junc-
tion, the train came to a standstill, and then he heard an
accident had occurred. He jumped out and ran along the
line for some distance with two of the porters. They found
deceased lying under the third compartment of a first-class
carriage.

Dr. G. Wyld said he was a passenger" in the same car-
riage with deceased. There was another gentleman also in
the carriage. He did not know whether the windows were
down. The second gentleman made no attempt to open
the door, neither did deceased to my knowledge.
The Coroner hoped the statement made by the witnest
world be satisfactory to the friends of the deceased, as to
the deceased not having thrown himself out.
Mr. Dalrymple expressed the regret of the secretary of
the company; but the fact of the door being open, and alp
deceased underneath the carriage, it was reported the door
might have been opened by the deceased.
Mr. Bedford had objected to the statement being made
at all.

A gentleman, named Geach, who was in the next com-
partment of the carriage, said it was impossible for any one
to have opened the door.
The jury then proceeded to view the scene of the dis-
aster, and the inquiry was then adjourned.

LAW INTELLIGENCE—(This Day.)

COURT OF CHANCERY.
(Before the Lord Chancellor and Lords Justices.)
APPEAL.-JVDOMENT.-JENNER V. MORRIS.

This was an appeal from Vice-Chancellor Sir Richard
Twin Kindereley, holding that tho defendant was entitled
to set off against the plaintiff's claim the advances made by
him for necessaries actually supplied to the plaintiff's wife,
and direoting an inquiry to ascertain what the amount of
such advances were, during the period of 17 years the
plaintiff and his wife lived separate.

The Lord Chancellor said tho question to be decided
in this case was, whether the defendant has made out his
right to have an actual set off against a judgment debt. I
am of opinion that the decree of Vice-Chancellor Kindel..
sley in his favour ought to be affirmed.
After stating the facts of the case, Lord Justice Turner
concurred.

Lord Justice Knight Bruco also concurred.
The Lord Chancellor dismissed the appeal, with costs.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Sir John Stuart.)
JUDGMENT.-BOOTIT V. COULTON.

His Honour the Vice-Chancellor said—ln this case of
Booth v. Coulton, the question which stands for judgment
is merely to settle the right of the annuitant to have the
interest calculated upon the arrears of her annuity. The
case has been very ably argued at the bar by Mr. Elmsley
(Q.C.), in behalf of the annuitant's claim of interest, and I
have carefully read over the whole case with every case
that has been cited, and every case I could find in the
books at all connected with this question, and I have con-
sidered the case with a very strong impression in favour of
the rights of the claim of the annuitan t to the arrears of
interest, but I find they are all claims through
some strong private circumstances. They seem
to have considered in general that interest was
not payable on the arrears of annuity. After
considering the cases referred to in the course of the argu-
ments in the House of Lords and before Sir Anthony Hart
in Ireland, and the whole balance of authorities, I have
come to the conclusion that I cannot allow the arrears of
interest in this case to be taken into account. The certifi-
cate of the chief clerk will remain. It is a remarkable fact
that the question never seems to have been argued or de-
cided on the simple question whether in the distribution of
assets between an ordinary legatee or mortgagee the an-
nuitant was to be allowed the arrears of interest. The
cases that have been decided rested on some private claims
of the annuitants.

His Honour said tho costs had been previously settled.