§ MR. DILLWYNsaid, he wished to call the attention of the House to the frequent recurrence and magnitude of Colliery Accidents, and to the importance of the fittest persons being on all occasions selected as Colliery Inspectors; and to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Candidates for the Inspectorships of Coal Mines are subjected to a competitive examination as to fitness for such office; and, if so, whether Mr. J. P. Baker, the recently appointed Inspector of Collieries for the district of South Staffordshire, was subjected to such examination and pronounced qualified for the office by the examiners? These appalling accidents did not appear to be very generally diminishing in number, and, therefore, be thought it worth inquiring whether that result might not to some extent be traceable to the improper mode of appointing inspectors. The annual average number of accidents had not very much varied for many years, and amounted to 1,000 or 1,200 colliery accidents of all kinds. The majority of these accidents were not connected with explosions of firedamp, but with the falling of roofs, stones, and with other causes which might be prevented to a certain extent by caution and good regulations. The most appalling accidents, however, were those which arose from explosion of firedamp, which were, unfortunately, too frequent every year, and to diminish the frequency of which he confidently asserted that scientific knowledge on the part of inspectors was most desirable. During the last twelve months, he found that the explosions from fire-damp alone had occasioned the deaths in the district of Yorkshire of 13 persons; in that of Northumberland, 76; in that of North Staffordshire he had not ascertained the number; in that of Monmouthshire, 142 men were lately killed in one explosion, since which in other districts 20 more were killed, and in February last 7 men were killed. As a proof that these accidents were preventible to a certain extent he would show the average number of deaths to the number of tons of coal obtained from the different pits. In Northumberland and Durham there was one death to every 114,262 tons of coal raised; in Yorkshire, Derbyshire, and 1213 Leicestershire, one death to every 87,203 tons; while in Staffordshire and Shropshire the average was one death to 37,693 tons of coal. So that in Staffordshire and Shropshire there were three times more persons killed than in the northern collieries in proportion to the amount of coal obtained. He did not say that the inspectors were to blame in Staffordshire and Shropshire for this great ratio of fatal accidents, as the depth of the pits and other circumstances must tend to increase the number of deaths in those districts. The prevention of accidents from explosions of fire-damp certainly did require considerable scientific knowledge. Those intrusted with the management of collieries should be well acquainted with the construction and form of furnaces, and should also be good chymists. It must be remembered, moreover, that colliery inspectors had to a certain extent to lay down rules for the conduct of colleries in a whole district, and to communicate their knowledge to others, which, of course, required higher attainments and a better education than what would be required for the practical management of a single colliery, and this being the case it was essential that these gentlemen should be selected with the greatest care and forethought. He was not himself in favour of the present system of colliery inspection, which he thought might be much amended. But he was bound to admit that the inspectors were placed in a very awkward position. Their districts were too large, and they were burdened with too many duties. He believed that in some of the districts—particularly those in South Wales—the pits were so numerous, that it was impossible for the inspector to visit the whole of them in the course of a year. Another important consideration was that the appointment of inspectors had a tendency to relieve the owners of collieries from a portion of the responsibility which ought fairly to rest upon them. The less Parliament or the Government meddled with the management of pits by a system of inspection the better, as it had a tendency to relieve colliery proprietors and managers from the responsibility of working their pits properly. He was afraid, too, that in some instances, the inspectors had shown too great a desire to court popularity, while in others they had rather neglected their duty to please the large proprietors. Some regulations were however, he freely admitted, necessary, and what he would suggest 1214 was that, in all cases coalowners should be absolutely required to have their pits worked by underground overmen, and that those officers should pass an examination, and prove themselves thoroughly competent for the performance of their duties. Captains of vessels having on board only a few men, were obliged to pass an examination, but the management of a pit charged with dangerous gases, which would readily explode, in which 200 or 300 men were sent to work, was frequently entrusted to an ignorant, uneducated man, and hence, he believed, many of the accidents which occurred in different parts of the country. But, as long as the present system existed, it was most desirable and important that the very best men should be selected for the office of inspector, and that no favour should be shown to one man in preference to another. Now, if what he had heard were true, he was afraid that favouritism had been exercised in a recent appointment. He had derived his knowledge of the case from parties who did not wish to have their names brought before the House, from a belief that it might injure them in their private business; but, the facts he was about to mention were widely circulated and generally believed, and the appointment to which he alluded had created profound dissatisfaction among both coal-owners and coalworkers. Several gentlemen were nominated as candidates for the office of inspector in the district of South Staffordshire. Mr. J. P. Baker was one of the number. There was a rumour current to the effect that Mr. Baker got some promise of the appointment, but, however that might be, he alone of all the candidates was examined for his office. The Civil Service Examiners, not feeling themselves competent to examine Mr. Baker in the practical duties of his profession, called in a practical scientific man of the greatest eminence to assist them, and the result was, that Mr. Baker was rejected upon examination. It was found that he was not at all acquainted even with the very elements of mining science. Nothing more was heard of the matter for a little time, and then Mr. Baker quietly received the appointment. He was now colliery inspector in South Staffordshire, the district where of all others the greatest care and skill were required, and the utmost dissatisfaction prevailed among the coal proprietors and the colliers themselves. Such were the facts of the case as generally reported and 1215 believed. They were not very creditable to the parties concerned; but they might have no foundation in truth, and in that case it was due, both to the coalowners and coalworkers in South Staffordshire, and to Mr. Baker himself, that a correct statement should go forth to the public; if, however, they were true, he thought he had a right to ask from the Secretary of State for the Home Department, an assurance that in the case of future appointments of colliery inspectors the fitness of candidates for the office should be duly tested, and those only appointed who were found to be properly qualified for it.