The Sun.
London, England, 1845-09-02 00:00:00

HOLYHEAD HARBOUR.

The dredging of the packet berths which was in hand
when I made my last year's report, has since been com-
pleted to the required depth, and the skirts of the rock
near the west end of the north pier have been cut away
to the level of the surrounding surface.
Complaint having been made that the saw-pit at the
Graving Dock was too small, and without sufficient pro-
tection to the workmen from the weather, a uew one has
been constructed of larger dimensions, with a proper roof
to cover it.

A new building, consisting of a storeroom, with a
sail•room above, has been erected in the dockyard for
the use of the Admiralty establishment, and others hay-
ing vessels under repair.
The lighthouse, gashouse, and other buildings con-
nected with the harbour works, are in good order, with
the exception of the harbour offices, which are now being
repaired. The pier, quay walls, road, &c., are also in
good order.
The number of vessels that entered this harbour in the
year 1844, exclusive of Queen's ships, mail-packets, and
pleasure yachts, was 942, the registered burden of which
was M,931 tons.

THE LATE ACCIDENT ON THE

MOONLIGHT STEAM-BOAT.

The coroner, Mr. Bedford, and the jury selected to inquire
into the circumstances attending the death of James Purcell,
aged 13, on boaad the Moonlight steamer, assembled for the
fourth time yesterday evening, at the St. Martin's Tavern,
Duke-street, Adelphi.
The CORONER having announced his intention to hear the
evidence of Mr. Simonds and Mr. Flemming, passengers, to
whose examination an objection was raised on the last occasion,
owing to the presence of those witnesses during a former part
of the inquiry,
John Simonds, of Southampton-street, Russell-square, silver-
smith, stated that he was on board the Moonlight, close un-
der the captain of that vessel (who stood on the right-hand
paddle-box), when she arrived alongside the Prince of Wales,
at the Hungerford-pier, on the evening of August the 18th.
He saw the head-rope thrown over, and attached to the
Prince of Wales prior to the landing of passengers. It was
fixed to the sponson of the latter boat by a lad on deck.
Shortly afterwards he heard the captain give the order
" Go a-head," and almost simultaneously " Stop her." He
then heard an outcry among the passengers, and saw the de-
ceased, whose foot had been torn off bythe head-rope, supported
by some persons on board. He heard the passengers say that it
was shameful conduct on the part of the captain to proceed
without seeing that the rope ;was detached from the Prince of
Wales, but he (witness) did not think him blameable, as the
call " Stop her" immediately succeeded the order to 46 Go
a-head." The boat certainly appeared to move forward, but
he was satisfied that the engines were not in motion. Tho
tide was running against the vessel, towards London-bridge.
He considered the accident attributable to the absence of any
person on board the Prince of Wales to remove the head-rope
of the Moonlight from her.
George Flemming said, that at the time of the accident there
were three boats at the Hungerford-pier. The Syren, a Wool-
wich boat, moved away from the pier, and the Prince of Wales,
which stood next, with her bow facing the bridge (the same as
the Moonlight), went a little astern in order to take the place
of the Syren. The Moonlight's head-rope was then attached
to her larboard sponson. Immediately afterwards he saw the
deceased being conveyed away from the Moonlight, but he had
nut seen the accident.

As the parties affected by this inquiry, if the accident was
the result of negligence, are either the crew of the Moonlight
or the Prince of Wales, or the piermen employed by the
Hungerford-pier Company ; and as the evidence as to the most
material point was of the most conflicting nature, it may be a 3
well to give a short summary of the witnesses examined, with
their opinions as to the party responsible for such negligence.
Mr. E. 13rydges, carpet-manufacturer, of Cheapside, a pas-
senger in the Moonlight, heard the captain give the order to go
a-head before the rope was detached from the Prince of Wales.
Saw the accident, and heard the passengers calling to the cap-
tain to stop the vessel, which was then in motion. The Prince
of Wales was not moving at the time.
Mr. Joseph Marsh, a hat-maker, of Cheapside, also a pas-
senger, believed that if any one had been on board the Prince of
Wales,to remove the head-rope ci the Moonlight from her lar-
board sponson, the accident would not have occurred. Heard
the people calling to the captain to stop, but the boat was not
stopped immediately.
Mr. Walter Scott, secretary of the Harwich Railway Com-
pany, and a passenger in the Moonlight, saw nobody besides a
lady on board the Prince of Wales when the accident happened.
The passengers of the Moonlight called for some one to
unfasten the head-rope, bet no one was there to do it. The
captain might have seen that the rope had not been removed,
if he had looked in that direction.
Samuel Waller,of Chelsea, a passenger, witnessed the ac-
cident, and called to the captain of the Moonlight to stop the
vessel. The Prince of Wales was at the same moment going
astern.

James Stewart, a pierman, employed by the liungerford
pier Company, was attending upon the Syren, Woolwich
boat, when the Moonlight and Prince of Wales were along-
side her. It was his (witness's) duty to attend to the head-
ropes of the different vessels arriving at the pier, when he
could do so ; but it was impossible for him to attenl to all
at once.

Henry Tucker, the foremost hand in the Moonlight, usually
attended to the head-rope. He threw it upon the larboard
of the Prince of Wales, where it was fixed by a boy. When
the captain gave the order to go a .head witness tried to jerk off
the eye of the rope, and then let out the loose rope 1) ing on
deck, not observing that the foot of the deceased was entangled
in the coil. lie called to the captain to " stop her," and was
certain that the boat had gone a-head only about two revolu-
tions, but at the same moment the Prince of Wales went
astern.

William Giles, mate of the Prince of Wales, described his
boat as stationary at the time of the accident. The engines
of the Moonlight were in motion.
James M'Clarens, a lighterman, on board the Prince of
Wales, saw the accident, and believed it was caused by the
absence of piermen to attend upon the boats. There were not
half enough hands employed by the Pier Company for this
purpose, and accidents consequently were always happening
there. He was positive that the Moonlight was going for-
ward when the accident in question occurred.
Alexander Mill, a wood-turner, near Euston-square, believed
that both the Moonlight and the Prince of Wales must have
been in motion at the time of the accident, owing to the rapidity
with which the head-rope was run out.
Another passenger of the Moonlight, named Gordon, also
believed that bath vessels were moving, but the Prince of
Wales was going astern more rapidly than the other was pro-
ceeding forward,