Death, Dynamite and Disaster
Page 14
James Moxley Swift (35), printer, Fitzwilliam Street, Sheffield, married
Henry Barnsley (31), tobacconist, Crown Street, Wellington, Salop, married, two children
Arthur Mitchell (29), son of a farmer, Brightside Farm, Sheffield (husband of the above Mary Mitchell).
Those who came to the dead looking for family or friends found them laid out in a row with only faces exposed, the rest covered with sacking to hide bodies grotesquely mutilated and sometimes dismembered. Husbands or wives, mothers and fathers, even friends had the painful duty of trying to find their loved and dear ones amongst the row of grossly damaged bodies. Several, such as the man whose ‘head had been fearfully smashed, his face crushed beyond recognition’ and was also ‘disembowelled’, were only identifiable by their clothes or other articles upon them. Not surprisingly, this man was the last to be identified and was eventually named as Arthur Mitchell (29) by his brother.8
The five who died later in the Infirmary were identified in news reports as: Mrs Annie Durley; Henry White (65), 31 Lansdowne Road, Sheffield, who lived with his son, who had come to him in the Infirmary, and was with him when he died; Mrs Mary Burley (46), whose husband had visited the previous evening; and Daniel Hawkesworth, of 91 Lendmills Road, was reported to have ‘died at half-past eleven [on Sunday 18 September] after suffering great pain’, which brought the number of deaths to twenty-four.9 Addy Thompson (46), of George Lane, Sheffield, was the last to die, on Wednesday 5 October, bringing the final count to twenty-five.
One of the human interest stories features four of the dead, who worked for the printers Spalding & Co. in Sheffield, all in the same shop. Edward Doherty, William Swift and John Henry Quip were all compositors, and Thomas Bradbury was the foreman lithographer. They had obtained ‘leave of absence’ to go to the races for a fun day out, all mates together. Their fun was short lived, as the first three died at the scene, whilst Quip died the following day. They all left families. Thomas Bradbury had borrowed a sovereign from another friend but had not told his wife about his trip, and neither had the others. Their family and friends only realised something was wrong when they failed to return home as usual in the evening. They then discovered the ‘jolly’ and had to identify the bodies for the inquest.
The Injured
The number of reported injured increased day on day. First forty, then seventy were reported and, finally, ninety persons were reported as having been injured. It was surmised by the press that there were probably more, not badly hurt and able to get away under their own steam and anxious not to be identified because they were taking an ‘illegal’ day off and did not want to jeopardise their situations at work. Some of the injured, thirty-one in all, were on the MS&L train, including the two guards. The head guard, travelling in the third vehicle from the front, was so unwell that he had to be interviewed at home in his bed. As the numbers of injured grew, the Infirmary struggled to contain and deal with the patients that were arriving by the cab-load, minute by minute. News had travelled fast, and locals came forward to offer their own homes to assist. Seven of the injured were treated at the Reindeer Hotel and six initially in private homes – nos 15 and 7 Young Street, and no. 35 Cartwright Street. Later that evening, these were stretchered to the Reindeer Hotel, where qualified nurses were in attendance to care for them, having been transported in by train from London by 9 p.m., to boost the Infirmary’s inadequate nursing numbers. Amongst those reported as initially remaining in private houses in nearby Balby and Hexthorpe were:
Jonathan Sanderson – Lydgate Crooks, near Sheffield; one broken leg
Austin Simmonite – 158 Alexander Road, Henley near Sheffield; both legs broken
Mrs Connelly – Britannia Inn, Lambert Street, Sheffield; broken leg and badly injured
George Savage – 25 Ashford Road, Sheffield; broken thigh, large flesh wound and generally bruised
Emily Savage (wife of George Savage), Sheffield; broken leg and seriously injured in various parts of the body
Jnno (?) Love (40) – Well Lane, Wath; broken leg and bruises
Hannah Aston (38) – 12 Church Street, Wath; injured arm and bruises
J.H. Baggeley – Hedge Bank, Sheffield; sent home as he was able to walk
Mrs Harisson – Pearl Street, Sheffield; general bruises and shock to the system.
One wonders how these home owners with good hearts felt, having to face this burden of responsibility in their bedrooms or front parlours.
A further list of the injured was written up in the Birmingham Daily Post, Monday 19 September 1887:
Anthony Fitzpatrick – near Eastwood, Notts; fracture of rib and injury to the lung (also reported with concussion of the spine by the Leeds Mercury)
John Denton – 97 Werditou Street, Kentish Town, London; concussion of the spine
Maggie Foster – Eyre Street, Sheffield; concussion of the spine and bad wound on the leg.
Amongst them were those who had ‘concussion of the spine’. Concussion of the spine was a railway accident phenomenon. It had become so common that it was part of the legal, medical, assurance and even social vocabulary of the day, not just in Britain but in many countries across the world. Right from early accidents, and over the following decades, it excited and challenged the minds of the medical profession so much that a plethora of books and articles were produced in Britain, America and Europe. John Eric Erichsen became one of the first experts in this new field. His first full length medical study of the condition, ‘On Railway and Other Injuries of the Nervous System’, was published in Philadelphia in 1867. It became a ‘classic’, the reference point for all of the opinions and theories that came after; for this reason, ‘railway spine’ is often known as ‘Erichsen’s disease’. The exact nature of ‘railway spine’ was hotly debated, some medics taking the stance that it was definitely a physical injury – a trauma of one type or another to the spine itself. Others argued the greater importance of the psychological aspects, believing ‘hysteria’ played a larger role. There was a third view, however, held by those who were more sceptical (particularly those who argued on behalf of the defendant railway companies). They maintained that the condition was not a condition at all but purely a deceitful way to claim compensation. In his book, Railway Injuries with Special Reference to Those of the Back and Nervous System and Their Medico-legal and Clinical Aspects (to give its full title), Dr Herbert W. Page, who held the office of Surgeon to the London & North Western Company for seventeen years, is sceptical. He based both his books (the previous one, Injuries of the Spine and Spinal Cord and nervous Shock, Churchill, 2nd edn, 1885) on his experiences, and case studies over five years. He cites Thorburn (another expert), ‘in the case of railway accidents … the general public of this country has been educated to expect ‘concussion of the spine’ with paralysis, and that, in the minds of the laity, the very mention of a railway accident calls up the required idea’.10
Railway injuries became a medical ‘speciality’ and ‘appearing for the plaintiff’ became an integral part of being a doctor treating railway accident patients. The Lancet medical journal carried many articles to educate, advise and assist the physicians and surgeons of the day. These covered topics such as ‘Compensation for Railway Accidents’, F.C. Skey, FRCS (6 Sept 1862, Vol. 80), ‘Railway Accidents and Railway Surgeons’, J. Jones (9 July 1864, Vol. 84) and ‘On Cases of Injury From Railway Accidents: Their Influence Upon the Nervous System, and Results’, Thomas Buzzard, MD (13 April 1867, Vol. 89). Further articles continued at regular intervals.
What is most apparent from the lists of injured from Hexthorpe is that the majority are suffering from leg traumas, many extremely serious, and many that turn out to be life-affecting, even life-changing injuries:
Tom Trimnell, solicitor, London: compound fracture of one leg, with amputation, and with a bad wound on the other, in a bad way
Addy Thompson (36), George Lane, Sheffield: compound fracture of one leg and simple fracture of the other
Wil
liam Stokes, 112 Pond Street, Sheffield: bad fractures of one leg, simple fracture of the other
Thomas Marples, Duke Street Park, Sheffield: simple fracture of the legs
William Rodgers – 23 Harewood Street, Sheffield: amputated leg and simple fracture of the other
Alfred Fordin, 84 St Mary’s Road, Sheffield: compound fractures of both legs
Henry Jarvis, Artisan View, Henley: simple fracture of both legs, fracture of one rib, scalp wounds
William Jarvis: two simple fractures of both legs
Henry Bocking, Red House, Parkgate, Sheffield: compound fracture of one leg
John Conselly, Britannia Inn: compound fracture of one leg
Thomas H. Vernon, Union Street, Sheffield: compound fractures of both legs, left one amputated
Frederick Wm Rogerson, 164 Thomas Street, Sheffield: compound fracture of one leg and simple fracture of the other
John Goldsmith, Royal Oak Inn, Sheffield: compound fracture of one leg, simple fracture of the other
Ada Barnes: bad compound fracture of one leg (amputation probable) and injury to the spine
Anna Stokes, 121 Pond Street, Sheffield: fracture of the thigh
Mary Ann Stokes, 121 Pond Street, Sheffield: fracture of the thigh
Annie Durley, 277 Shoreham street, Sheffield: (a girl of thirteen years old whose mother was killed) fracture of the thigh and scalp wound
John Loach, Jubilees Villa, Albert Road, Handsworth, Birmingham: fractured collar-bone and much bruised
Jarvis Kay, Sheffield: bruised leg
Samuel Lovell, Sheffield: fractured legs
Charles Hale, police constable, Sheffield: internal injuries and wounds at the back of the right leg
George Ackham, Sheffield: fractured leg
Michael Wood, Wormwell: fractured ribs.
Such injuries are not surprising, as bone breakage or fracture is the usual outcome of severe impact or intensive pressure and these bodies had experienced both – from the train and from each other.
Compensation
It was obvious from the outset, even to the MS&L Directors, that there would be a great number of claims for compensation. The company immediately acknowledged that it would not dispute liability, and that all who met the company ‘in a just spirit will be dealt with quickly and satisfactorily’.
The men employed by the MS&L also realised that the disaster would cost the company dearly, maybe too dearly – job-cutting dearly! More than five hundred hands were employed at Mexborough, a major railway junction, where, on Sunday 25 September, Mr Richards the stationmaster, called a meeting just days after the accident. Such was the strength of feeling that the chiefs of the locomotive, goods traffic and permanent way departments attended, along with over 300 men. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss proposals put forward as to how best ‘help’ the company, and show the shareholders and directors that they, the men, sympathised and wished to help them with ‘the loss they had sustained’. It would, the men hoped, ‘cement the unity already existing between employers and employed as had not been witnessed on any other railway in the Kingdom.’11 What the men proposed is extraordinary, especially when one remembers that railwaymen were not amongst the well-paid workers of the time, and especially when one remembers that their chairman was known for his high-handedness and being tight-fisted. There were three proposals: ‘that every man should give two days’ pay; that each man should give a week’s pay (each to be distributed over a period of three months); and third, that everyone earning above 23s a week should give a week’s wage and those earning under to give three days.’12 The second proposal was carried by a large majority. Following this, another meeting was held a few days later, this time mostly fitters, blacksmiths and labourers. These 150 gentlemen were filled with ‘a good deal of indignation’ and stated they ‘would not submit any part of their wages for such a purpose’.13 A Special Meeting of the Board of Directors was held on Tuesday 4 October 1887, to receive a deputation of the men from all grades. Sir Edward Watkin spoke for the Board, expressing their full appreciation and stating that the offer would amount to at least £6,000 and could even reach £12,000.14 He declined, saying that the Board could not ‘allow those who lived by the sweat of their brow to tax themselves for such a purpose’.15
The cases for compensation were heard in many different localities, since several of the victims were not local to Sheffield or Derby, and they took many months, even years, (into 1889) to complete. A great many were reported in the papers. Here are a few, to give an impression of the nature of the claims and how they were dealt with.
A Sheriff’s Court was held at the Law Society’s Rooms in Sheffield, on Friday 1 June 1888, to assess the damages payable to two casualties. The first, notable for the life affecting injuries and for the amount of compensation, was Mr Thomas Trimnell, a young man of twenty-seven years of age. Trimnell was a solicitor, and it was reported that he had made a good start in business, had been successful and doing well but that it would be at least another year before he would be able to do any further professional work.16 The matter of his income was important in the equation for compensation and, being a ‘professional man’, his would be a much more substantial claim than most of the other victims.
Mr Trimnell was a first-class passenger in a carriage in the rear of the train – the first carriage to feel the full impact of the collision. The compartment in which he travelled was extensively crushed, and he was very severely injured when his left foot went through the floor of the carriage and was virtually severed from his leg. It could not be saved and was later amputated. His other leg was also severely smashed but saved by the skill of the surgeon, although it would not be of use for some time as it frequently broke out with consequential abscesses and ulcers about the wounds.
Prior to the accident, Trimnell had been of previous good health, describing himself as ‘very fit … a good athlete’, but in the months following the accident he had been in great pain and ‘nervous distress’. Giving evidence himself, Trimnell told the Court:
There was a tremendous smash … I was jerked upwards and hit the hat rail … Then the carriage telescoped … the roof gave way and the flooring gave way … I was sitting in the left-hand corner facing the engine, the right-hand portion of the compartment telescoped completely, fortunately my end didn’t … my legs were fixed in the material above the bogie engine … railway officials broke part of the carriage and extricated me … I was taken away leaning on the shoulders of two men. I noticed that my left heel was in front and my toes behind, my foot hanging on by a small piece of skin … I was attended on the embankment by a doctor and was one of the first taken to Doncaster Infirmary.
Mr James Smith, the surgeon who had treated Trimnell at the Infirmary, said he had not seen the plaintiff since he left hospital but that he found him ‘much deteriorated, more emaciated’. It was obvious to all that the young man was in a very poor way and finally the Under-Sherriff advised the jury that the case had been put in a ‘very fair way … without exaggeration’ and to ‘use their own good sense and give the plaintiff a fair and reasonable sum’. After just a fifteen minute deliberation, they awarded Trimnell £4,000 in damages. (£4,000 would be roughly £350,000 now.)
The same jury was also involved in assessing the case of Arthur Forster, a commercial traveller in the employ of Messrs Earl & Son, iron and steel merchants. His left leg suffered a ‘comminuted fracture’ whereby the bones of the leg were broken into small pieces. At the time of the hearing the bones were not all healed and ‘there was a gap in the bones’. He had been treated first at the Infirmary, and then taken to Reindeer Hotel to be nursed, where he had remained until 28 November, for the most part confined to bed. Like Trimnell, Forster claimed he had suffered a ‘severe shock to the system … from which he still suffered.’17 Forster was claiming for his ‘medical attendances, loss of earnings, expenses, cab fares, etc., totalling £373 6s. The jury awarded him a more generous sum of £950.’18
; Mrs Carey, a small shopkeeper of Peterborough, had her case heard at Huntingdon where she was awarded £550 for her injuries.19
Another held a good distance away, was one in the Middlesex Sherriff’s Court. Here, on 18 December 1887, before Mr Under-Sherriff Burchell and a ‘common jury,’ stood Mr Henry J. Leeman, and his brother William Leeman, both fishmongers of Bishopgate Street. Under the direction of the Under-Sherriff and with the defendant company (the MS&L) allowing judgement to go by default, the jury awarded Mr Henry Leeman £200.20 For Mr William Leeman, however, it was a slightly more contentious situation and he had brought two medical men, Dr Brendon and Dr Gibbon, to give expert opinions on his behalf. William Leeman told the jury that, being in Sheffield at the time, he had decided to visit the races and so he took a third-class ticket on the ill-fated train. He further informed them that fourteen persons in the same compartment had been killed outright, whilst he had been thrown from his seat and had then to make his escape through the window. At the time he did not think himself severely injured, and went to the assistance of several other passengers but, the sight of seeing three people having ‘their legs cut off and their wounds dressed’21 made him need to leave the place quickly, and he returned to Sheffield and thence back to London. Back home he found himself experiencing bouts of great excitement and great anger against the company. He consulted Dr Bredon in Norton Folgate, explaining he was having dizziness, nervousness and ‘a want of sleep’. Dr Bredon sought a second opinion and this doctor advised ‘a change of air’. Taking this advice, Leeman had incurred expenses in being ‘driven around the country’ and visiting Brighton in an attempt to improve his health; however, he was still suffering from ‘great nervous prostration’ and complained of the effects of the accident. Called to give evidence, Dr Gibbon proffered the opinion that, ‘it was no use giving patients suffering from nervousness arising out of railway accidents any drugs, but the best thing to do was to advise them to be in the open air as much as possible and give them a “bromide of potassium” in order to induce sleep.’22