§ MR. SHERIDANasked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether, considering that the means of communication between the passengers and guards of Railway trains at present in use is difficult to get at if a personal struggle is taking place, and considering the cases of violence and murder which occur in Railway carriages, which the present means of signalling was not contemplated to prevent, he will consider the expediency of requiring Railway Companies to adopt the following or some other efficient means of signalling in such cases, viz.:—That the footboards and handles on the carriages should be so altered that the guard can at intervals traverse the train and look into each carriage; that a square of glass should be inserted in each compartment, so that a personal struggle in one compartment could be visible in the adjoining compartments; and that, whilst allowing the present means of communication with the guard to remain, there should 1650 be, in addition, in each compartment, chain pulls which should communicate with bells in each of the other compartments of the same carriage?
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINMy hon. Friend bases his Question, among other things, on the mode of communication between the passengers and guards of railway trains at present in use; and I think it is fair to say, with reference to the London and Brighton Railway, where there has recently been a murder, that the mode of communication adopted by them appears to be the best hitherto devised, and it is difficult to see how it could be further perfected. It has been carefully considered by the Board of Trade and approved by them. My hon. Friend goes on to suggest the expediency of requiring Railway Companies to adopt certain means of signalling. I have to point out that we have no power to make such requisitions on the Railway Companies; and as regards the expediency of these recommendations, I have to say, with respect to the first—namely, that the footboards and handles on the carriages should be so altered that the guard can at intervals traverse the train and look into each carriage—I am informed that it would be impossible to make the proposed changes without a general alteration of the bridges and tunnels on many of the lines. With regard to the second recommendation—that a square of glass should be inserted in each compartment—I am informed that that has already been done on several lines, including the London and South Western. It is, however, generally objected to by the passengers, who take such opportunities as their luggage affords them of stopping up the openings. As regards the last recommendation, I have to point out that whatever difficulty there is now in communicating with the guard by means of the existing chain pulls would, apply, of course, to the additional pulls that he suggests.
§ MR. SHERIDANThe right hon. Gentleman seems to have misunderstood my Question. The chain pulls which I suggest are not like those already existing which communicate with the guard, and are intended to communicate with other carriages. I should like to know whether the Board of Trade has tested this mode of communication; and, if so, how often?
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINI perfectly understood my hon. Friend; but what I wished to point out is this—that there already exist chain pulls for communicating with the guards, and, as shown by this recent case, these chain pulls are not always accessible to passengers; probably the pull was not accessible in this case, because, in the first instance, the passenger was shot, and the same difficulty would apply to the additional chain pulls now suggested. The Board of Trade is in the habit of testing these appliances; and I am informed that the Brighton Railway Company are in the habit of testing them before and after each journey.