Terrible fatality at Wadhurst

A terrible accident occurred on Saturday at Wadhurst Hall to a man named Ben BALDOCK, a native of Rotherfield, in the employ of Mr. STARTIN, builder of Ticehurst, who is carrying out some building operations at the Hall. The unfortunate man inadvertently stepped on the end of a plank, which had been placed to protect a part of the building, the plank tipping, the poor fellow fell to the ground, and although only a distance of about 10 feet, he sustained such terrible injuries, breaking his back and both shoulder blades, that recovery seemed impossible. Dr FAZAN, of Wadhurst, was speedily in attendance, but little could be done, and he was conveyed to the General Hospital at Tunbridge Wells, where he died early yesterday (Thursday). It is understood that the young fellow is the main support of a widowed mother.

The Courier Aug 28 1903    The Fatality at Wadhurst    Inquest on the Victim

On Friday evening, Mr. Thos. Buss held an Inquest at the Tunbridge Wells General Hospital on the body of Benjamin Baldock, the victim of the Wadhurst fatality, the painful circumstances of which were reported last week.  Mr. J. H. Neale was chosen foreman of the jury, and Mr. Sydney Eraut watched the case on behalf of the Home Office.

Samuel Baldock, of Rotherfield, a bootmaker, and a brother of the deceased, said the latter was aged 36, single, and a journeyman carpenter, employed by Mr. Startin, builder, of Ticehurst. On Sunday week, witness saw the deceased, who came home from his work; he was engaged on a job at Wadhurst Hall. Deceased enjoyed good health, and did not suffer from defective sight or hearing.

After the accident witness saw the deceased at the Hospital, and asked him if there was any fault in the scaffolding. He replied in the negative.
Thos. Skinner, of Platts Cottages, Ticehurst, a carpenter, said he was employed on the same job as the deceased. They were erecting new stabling at Wadhurst Hall for Mr Drew. They had been engaged on the work for some weeks. He saw deceased just previous to the accident. He was on scaffolding about 11 feet above the ground. Deceased was sawing a piece of wood. Witness heard a noise and saw the man fall to the ground, but did not see what caused his fall. Witness ran to him and did what he could to assist him. Witness afterwards examined the scaffolding, but could find no defect whatever. There was no protection around the scaffolding, which was erected by a scaffolder. Deceased was used to working on scaffolding. As soon after the accident as possible a Doctor was fetched and he ordered the removal of the man to Tunbridge Wells Hospital.

By the Jury: The scaffolding was formed of three planks but there was no “trap”.

The Rev. F.T. Berwick, of Wadhurst Park, said he witnessed the accident. He was standing a few yards off, and it appeared to him that deceased slipped off a board, turned as he was falling, and alighted on his back. Mr. Chambers, the foreman, picked up the deceased and witness telephoned for a doctor.

By the Jury: The height of the scaffolding was 11ft 6 ins.
By the Inspector: It was a damp morning but was not actually raining at the time of the accident.

Walter Chambers, Rose Cottage, Hurst Green, foreman on the job, said the scaffolding had been erected by a scaffolder, and on the previous day witness had inspected the work. It was fixed to enable four carpenters to erect a heavy oak moulding. The scaffolding extended nine feet beyond one end of the building, and was originally formed of four boards, but the carpenters had removed the innermost board so they could sit on the remainder, and drop their legs through. He did not consider this made the work any more risky. Deceased was a competent workman. Witness saw the fall as described by Mr. Berwick, but could see no cause for it. He examined the scaffolding afterwards, but found nothing wrong with it. The boards were not wet enough to cause a man to slip.

By the Jury: There were no pieces of sawn-off timber, or trestles on the scaffold, which was perfectly clear. Witness could not say if deceased stepped backwards inadvertently.
By the Inspector: At the present time the building was 40 feet in height.
Dr. Basil. H. Thurlow, house surgeon at the Hospital, said the deceased was brought to the Hospital on Saturday, suffering from a fractured spine. The lower portion of the body was paralyzed. Death took place on Thursday morning, and was due to the injury to the spinal column.
The Jury returned a verdict of “Accidental Death”.                 The Courier Sept 04 1903 via Robin Head

Another Railway Tale
from Walter Hodder - as told to him in his youth by an old railway construction worker

When the tunnel was being built, there was a ventilation shaft in Mayfield Lane, now covered by the brick dome beside Weald Hall. The site foreman’s name was Brown - and like most ‘gaffers’ he was unpopular. One morning there a shout ‘below - Brown’s coming’ and the unfortunate foreman fell down the shaft and was killed. Years later, an old navvy lay on his deathbed in Ticehurst and confessed ‘I pushed Brown down the hole’.

Is this authentic? The 1851 census has a George Brown, railway labourer aged 42 and unmarried, living with 3 other railways labourers at The Stream, just by the Snape Beer Shop, in the house of Samuel Hubbard, an agricultural labourer aged 56. An Internet search for a George Brown dying around 1850 did not produce useful results.
Neil Rose, in his article in Victorian Wadhurst – Glimpses of Our Past, reports : ’In January 1848 Charles Johnson, employed at the top of the tunnel shaft at Wadhurst as a baulksman receiving loaded skips as they were drawn up, slipped and fell 180 ft. to his death’. Might this be the origin of Walter Hodder’s tale?

Not quite Wadhurst - from Robin Head
Times Archive 20th December 1822:

James Johnson, William Pope and William Payne were indicted of burglarious breaking and entering, on the night of 4th Sept 1822, the house of Charles Newington, at Ticehurst and stealing 14 silver spoons and a pruning knife, the property of Mr. Newington.

Mr. Newington who is a Surgeon at Ticehurst, had, on the night of the 4th of September, when he retired for the night, taken particular notice that his house was fastened in every direction. On the 5th of September, the servant perceived that the house had been broken open in three different places. In the kitchen a pane of glass had been removed from the window and the spoons mentioned in the indictment removed. As the door of the kitchen leading to the interior of the house was fastened, further admittance at that part was impossible. It then appeared that the robbers being disappointed had forced an entry into the dressing room. An attack had also been made on the parlour window, but with less success, as they had been unable to open it. The only property taken were the spoons mentioned and a pruning knife. When Mr. Newington heard of his loss he called a number of his neighbours to his assistance and sent them in every direction to obtain any information with regard to the robbery.

The effect of this search was that within the next day he heard that three suspicious persons had passed the turnpike gate at Heathfield. A pursuit was instantly commenced and two days later the prisoners were found sitting on a bank near East Grinstead. They were seized and the constable assisting in the pursuit began to search them. Pike then said “he was not going to stand all that time, for he was tired.” He threw himself into a dry ditch, as if to rest himself; but, on searching the ground where he had laid, a number of Mr. Newington’s spoons were found. Two spoons and the pruning knife were found in the pocket of Payne. On searching Johnson, they found a pocket knife, with the point broken: and in the frame of the parlour window which had been attempted, the point of a knife was found which exactly tallied with the knife now found in the pocket of the prisoner. The spoons lost were now produced and sworn to be worth £31.10s by a silversmith.

The jury found the prisoners Guilty. Sentenced to Death

Times Archive August 2nd 1838

Thomas Funnell and Edward Elliot were indicted charged with burglarious breaking and entering the dwelling house of William Pitt of Ticehurst, and stealing therein 1,200 yards of printed cotton and other articles; and George Langridge was indicted for feloniously receiving the same, knowing them to be the property of the said William Pitt. The prisoner Funnell plead Guilty.
By evidence it appeared that on the night of 7th April last the house had been fastened up as usual, on the following morning the family discovered that somebody had broken in through the washhouse where the wooden bars had been cut and the window removed.

The prosecutor (William Pitt) then being examined stated that on the 27th May the prisoner Landridge called upon him and producing a hat asked him if he knew it. He replied “No” upon which the prisoner said that it was part of his property which had been stolen and after some further conversation went on to add that if search were made in the houses occupied by Funnell & Elliott more of the lost property would be discovered. A search warrant was obtained, the statement of the informant proved to be correct. Evidence was produced to show that Langridge had been a party to the robbery.

The Jury found the prisoner Guilty. Lord Denman then sentenced the three prisoners to transportation for the following terms - Funnell for 10 years: Elliot for 15 years; and Langridge for 14 years.

Victorian Scandal at its best
The case of Amelia Payne Guilford.

On 18 March 1900 Amelia Payne Guilford was charged with having feloniously caused to be inserted in the registry of births for the Frant sub district of Ticehurst Sussex, a false entry relating to the birth of a female child at Tunbridge Wells on March 10 1900, and with having unlawfully made false statements with reference to the birth of such child.  The prisoner, who was stated to be 60 years of age, married her present husband Mr. Walter Sale Guilford in 1897, she being then a widow with two children. Under the will left by Mr. Guilford’s father, any children of Mr. Guilford would have been entitled to a share in the estate which was valued of £30,000.

The prisoner had on March 10 called at the Registry Office in Frant Road Tunbridge Wells and asked to register the birth of her child.  She stated that the child had been born on February 3, that the name to be given to the child was Violet Alice Muriel, that the father was Walter Sale Guilford, and she also gave her name as that of the mother. She then obtained a copy of the entry in the register.

The child in fact belonged to a woman who had shortly before advertised in a local paper for somebody who would be willing to adopt a baby.  The prisoner, who lived at Wadhurst, took lodgings in Tunbridge Wells for a fortnight on February 2; she then called upon the mother of the child at 61 Frant Road, took the baby back to her lodgings, and represented to the landlady that it was the daughter of her niece.  She returned to her home with the baby at the end of February and there gave a circumstantial account of its birth to her husband’s relations. Their suspicions being aroused the prisoner was watched, and she was arrested soon after she had caused the birth of the child to be registered. The jury found the prisoner Guilty, and she was sentenced to eight months imprisonment in the second division.

Family History
Amelia Paine WILLIAMS was born Mar 1840 in Liskeard Cornwall. In the 1881 census we trace Amelia who is now Mrs. POTTS at 20 St Stephens Avenue Middlesex.
Tom Tomalyn POTTS aged 44 - born Daventry; Northampton Chemist’s Assistant
Amelia POTTS aged 40 Born Liskean [sic], Cornwall

Using the Free BMD website we find a birth recorded in Fulham Dec Qtr 1881. ( 1a234)
Mina Alberta V TOMALYN - POTTS
Followed in the Jun. Qtr 1885 by the death of Tom Tomalyn POTTS age 47 in Paddington.
Amelia Paine TOMALYN POTTS then marries, in July 1887 in Fulham, Walter Sale GUILFORD (1a 645)

By 1901, we can only assume that Amelia has served her sentence and the family is still living in Colleens, Cousley Wood and have managed to adopt the baby!!

The census shows:
Walter GUILFORD aged 47 born London, Hanover Square living on own means
Amelia GUILFORD aged 45 born Cornwall Liskeard
Alberta GUILFORD aged 19 born London Shepherds Bush
Edith GUILFORD aged 17 born Birmingham
Hazel WYATT aged 1 Adopted Baby born Tunbridge Wells

Note the age stated for Amelia in 1901 is 15 yrs YOUNGER than when she was put on trial in 1900.
Hazel Wyatt was the baby in the court case.
Alberta GUILFORD married Yung Hsi HSIAO in Marylebone Dec Qtr 1904 and had at least one child Murial Olive HSIAO in Jun Qtr 1907.
Anybody know what happened to Hazel WYATT??
P.S. £30,000 in 1900 is equivalent of £1.8 million today

Sources:  Courier March 21st 1900;  Times July 16th 1900                               Courtesy of Robin Head