§ (Mr. Secretary Bruce, Mr. Winterbotham.)
§ [Progress 27th June.]
§ Bill considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ Inspection.
§ Clauses 40 and 41 agreed to.
§ Clause 42 (Powers of inspectors).
§ On Question? "That the Clause stand part of the Bill,"
§ MR. SCLATER-BOOTHasked to what extent it was intended to appoint fresh Inspectors? There was already a charge of from £12,000 to £13,000 a-year on the public for Inspectors of coal mines. The probability was that the public would have to pay an enhanced price for coals under the Bill, and would also have to pay for new Inspectors, and this would add very much to the cost of coal for the consumer. What he wanted to know was, whether the Secretary of State expected that he should have to lay an additional heavy charge on the public under the Bill, or would he be able so to utilize the machinery already at his disposal as to avoid doing so? He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would assure the Committee that anything in the shape of fees which could be raised to help to defray the expense of the Bill would be levied.
MR. BRUCEsaid, that no doubt the application of this Bill to new mines must, if the present scale of inspection be kept up, lead to an increase of Inspectors. But that was unavoidable. Whether the charge should be thrown on the public or on the owners of mines was a question which need not be discussed on that occasion. Until the Bill had received the sanction of Parliament, and the Government was aware what might be required, he could not give any information as to the appointment of new Inspectors. Since 1855, when the number of Inspectors was increased from 6 to 12, there had been a great increase in the production of coal. The number of persons employed in and about collieries was, in 1855, as estimated by the Inspectors, 242,719; according to the Census, in 1861, 282,474; and in 1871, as estimated by the Inspctors, 350,849. The number of tons of coal raised in Great Britain was, in 497 1855, 64,000,000; in 1860, 80,000,000; in 1870, 110,000,000. So that the increase in the number of persons employed in 1871, as compared with 1855, was 44.5 per cent, and the increase in the same time of tons of coal raised 71.7 per cent. The number of new mines to be brought under inspection by the Bills of 1872 would be—Coal (Ireland, where the mines were generally small), 73; coal-shale (Scotland), 49; iron-stone and clay, 615; iron ore, 183; lead and copper, 907; rock salt, 22; making a total of 1,849. These would employ—exclusive of Ireland and the Isle of Man—92,565 persons. Of these, between 100 and 200 would be subject to inspection under the Mines Bill, the remainder under the Metalliferous Mines Bill. The collieries under inspection were 3,162, giving an average of 263 for each Inspector. It would be necessary to appoint two or three Inspectors to deal with the metalliferous mines. It might, perhaps, be desirable to create another district in which to have an additional Inspector; but the provision which appeared to him best was to supply each Inspector with a well-trained assistant.
§ MR. A. EGERTONthought inspection was rather an Imperial question than one which concerned colliery owners; and, if so, the expenses should be paid not by them, but by the State.
§ MR. LANCASTERwas sorry to hear from the Home Secretary that he had no scheme for the better inspection of coal mines. He had hoped that an improved system of inspection would have formed part of the Bill; but it contained no provision either for an increase in the number of Inspectors, or for an improved mode of inspection. He agreed with the hon. Member for South-east Lancashire (Mr. A. Egerton) that inspection was a national object, and ought to be paid for by national funds.
§ MR. WHALLEYfeared that under this clause, it would be in the power of any Inspector, unless controlled by instructions from the Home Office, to put a stop to the working of a great proportion of the mines of this country. The present system of inspection had not tended to prevent accidents, and the old law had been far more efficient—that under which the jury had the power of levying a deodand, so as to control the cupidity of mine-owners, and the unwise economy which was usually the cause of 498 accidents. A controlling influence of this sort was better than anything which could be laid down in Acts of Parliament.
§ MR. LIDDELL, though he did not favour over-inspection, was surprised to hear the hon. Member for Wigan (Mr. Lancaster) complain that the Bill contained no provision for the improved inspection of coal mines. There were, in fact, two important provisions having that object, and one of them proposed that any two workmen should be allowed to apply for an inspection of a mine, and should satisfy themselves, with any workmen they represented, as to its condition. He hoped the Committee would not ride its hobby of inspection too hard, for the result would certainty be to take responsibility from the shoulders of the coal-owners.
§ MR. B. SAMUELSONthought that in the districts where accidents most frequently happened, all the parties concerned—managers, mine agents, miners, and all—would be found to be too deeply indoctrinated with the existing practices to be likely to give such information to the Inspectors as would be of much utility to them. What he desired to see was a system of real inspection, so that at proper intervals there should be a bonâ fide examination of every mine in the kingdom. To do this, as suggested by the miners, once every three, or even every six months, was impossible; but there was no good reason why it should not be done at such times as the Secretary of State might direct. At present it was only after, and not before, an accident that the Inspector's duties came into play, so that when the explosion took place there was no competent independent evidence as to the condition of the mine at the time. He did not see that a system of thorough inspection would be difficult to establish. The mines in many districts—for instance, in the West Riding of Yorkshire—were very shallow, and five or six of them might be inspected in the course of one day. The number of mines actually in operation was also greatly overrated in some of the Inspectors' reports. Until within the last year or two, the list of mines returned to the keeper of mining records by the mine proprietors of South Staffordshire included a very large number which had not been worked for six or seven years. There would never be a real security 499 for the prevention of the deplorable catastrophes that now occurred, until some such census of the condition of mines as that which he had suggested should be regularly taken. At present, he believed that matters would not be much worse if the existing system of what was called inspection was altogether stopped. Last year the men demanded inspection at short intervals; but the Amendment to this effect had disappeared from the Notice Paper, and the substitute provided would be futile—so much so, that he felt disposed to object to the Vote for inspection when it was brought forward.
§ MR. FOTHERGILLthought that, among the many faults of this very faulty Bill, the want of an improved system of inspection was the most flagrant. He had not persisted in his Amendment respecting the appointment of sub-Inspectors, because it had met with such little support in this House. The principle of the Amendment he should have wished to propose, if there had been any chance of carrying it, was that sub-Inspectors should have been appointed to assist the Inspector in the way that the colonel of a regiment was assisted by subordinate officers; but the Government objected to the principle of efficient inspection for a reason he could well understand, which was, that it would throw responsibility upon the Government, and in particular upon the Home Secretary. The term Inspector was improperly used, for the Inspectors were really reporters, who inspected mines after and not before any unusual occurrence. The number of Inspectors was not sufficient for adequate inspection; the only way in which that could be secured was by appointing sub-Inspectors and throwing some responsibility upon the Government. He hoped that, so long as the present system was continued, the expense of it would be thrown on the mining community, because in no other way was it likely that their attention would be called to the improprieties and deficiencies of it.
MR. BRUCEsaid, no doubt the hon. Member was one of those who wished the Bill at the bottom of the sea, and who thought interference on the part of the Government not only unnecessary, but mischievous. The hon. Member ought to have declared his opinion on the second reading, and then the Government and 500 the House would have known who were the opponents of the Bill. If the hon. Member had moved the Amendment he had referred to, it could have been disposed of; but, as it was, he had shown conclusively, while putting it forward in deference to others, that it was impracticable. Indeed, he was surprised to see it on the Paper in the name of the hon. Member, who must have put it there against his own wishes for the gratification of others. The Government was not prepared to grant an annual or other periodical inspection of mines with a report on their condition. No good, but rather the worse would result from such a plan. The number of Inspectors would have to be enormously increased at a very considerable expense; for only men of ability, in whom the public could have confidence, could be employed, and their remuneration must be high. Moreover, the result of their appointment would only be this—that the responsibility which ought to rest on the owners of the mines would be shifted on to the shoulders of the Government, which would be most objectionable. Inspectors were never appointed upon these principles. He did not at all accept the description given of the position and duties of Inspectors. They not only inspected and reported when accidents happened; they also received and acted upon complaints, so that, even when accidents had not occurred, prosecutions were often instituted with the view of preventing them. It was a fair question whether or not inspection might be carried further in this direction and additional Inspectors appointed, so as to give individual Inspectors more time to visit mines; but that was a question of detail for the Government, who had power to do what was necessary; of course, with the authority of the House. There was no ground for the apprehension of the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. Whalley), that the provision for inspection by the workmen would interfere with or stop the working of a mine; indeed, such inspection had been in operaation in some mines for many years, and he had never heard any complaint of it.
§ LORD ELCHOsaid, those who sought to throw responsibility upon the Government must be anxious to relieve themselves of such responsibility. The question of inspection interested the mining population more than any other point in 501 the Bill. His own first thoughts had been in favour of a regular inspection of every mine in the kingdom; but when he came to look into the matter, and when he remembered that in some mines there were 60 or 70 miles of workings, and that some Inspectors had as many as 400, 500, and even 600 mines under their charge, he became convinced that it would be impracticable to establish such an army of Inspectors as would be required if every mine was to be examined. It seemed to him that the only plan to meet the difficulty was that which had been suggested hy his hon. Friend near him—namely, that there should be a form of schedule—similar to the one attached to the Bill—to be filled up daily by the person responsible for the working of the mine. At the Miners' Conference the opinion of the majority was in favour of that plan being tried.
MR. STAVELEY HILLsaid, that it would be very undesirable to take away from the owners of mines the responsibility that properly belonged to them of taking all possible precautions against accidents. He could assure the Home Secretary that his sole object in proposing Amendments was to assist the Government in passing a Bill which would be a protection to both the miners and the mine owners.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clauses 43 and 44 agreed to.
§ Clause 45 (Report of inspector).
§ MR. STAVELEY HILL moved, in line 10, to insert—"But no such report shall be published pending any judicial inquiry." It was a serious inconvenience to both sides when such Reports preceded the investigation of a matter which had not been adjudicated upon.
§ MR. BOUVERIEwould remind his hon. and learned Friend that the judicial inquiry might take place months or even years after the accident, and he could only accomplish his object by prohibiting the publication of such Reports altogether.
§ MR. RODENobserved that this subject had been discussed by those who thoroughly understood it, and who had come to an unanimous decision upon it. He therefore hoped the Amendment of his hon. and learned Friend would be agreed to.
MR. STAVELEY HILLsaid, he would have no objection to alter the words of 502 his Amendment to "published pending the inquiry."
§ MR. BOUVERIEcould not admit that because parties who were interested had agreed to certain amendments or compromises, the House of Commons was debarred from considering the matter. It might turn out, when the question came to be examined, that all the facts had not been taken into consideration.
§ MR. RODENrepeated that the Amendment had been carefully considered and agreed to by the representatives of the owners of mines; but that, he admitted, did not bind the House; although he could not help thinking it ought to have considerable weight with them.
MR. BRUCEwas extremely glad his right hon. Friend (Mr. Bouverie) had again adverted to this subject, for he must say a most improper use had been made of these meetings of parties representing mine owners and miners. There had been a sort of give-and-take system adopted, which he would undertake to demonstrate. Things of great importance to the workers in mines had been given up by them, and matters of value had been in turn given up by the mine owners, and the consequence had been that provisions of great importance had been mutually agreed to be sacrificed. It was wholly unprecedented that such agreements should be quoted in that House, in order to influence their opinions. He did not regard this Amendment as one of very great importance, although its effect might be inconveniently to postpone the publication of the Inspector's Report.
§ COLONEL WILSON-PATTENthought if the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary lived in a coal district, surrounded by mine owners and mine workers, he would be very glad to find any objects in which both parties could agree. He did not say they should finally be guided by such agreements; but it was too much to deprecate them or refuse to be at all influenced by them.
MR. BRUCEsaid, he had not the slightest objection to such discussions and agreements, but they ought not to be used to influence the decisions of the Committee. There had been combined action the other day between the mine owners and the workers in mines, the effect of which, as expressed in the hon. and learned Gentleman's Amendment, was to reduce an important clause 503 to a nullity, and to deprive young persons employed in mines of the protection which it was most desirable to extend to them.
VISCOUNT GALWAYthought these agreements between parties were a great advantage, and tended very much to smooth the progress of a measure. If the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary had done more to consult the feelings of the licensed victuallers with reference to the Bill he brought forward last year, it would no doubt have facilitated matters very much with regard to that measure.
§ LORD ELCHOsaid, he was rather surprised at first to hear the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary denounce so vigorously the conferences which had been held on this subject; but his second speech in great measure explained the first. He obviously referred to the Amendment by which the word "knowingly" had been introduced; by which the right hon. Gentleman had sustained a great defeat; and, therefore, he naturally felt a little sore. Why should the right hon. Gentleman speak of these conferences with so much indignation? Had he not sent two of his Inspectors to them?
MR. BRUCEwhen asked had allowed them to attend, but only on condition that he was not to be in any way bound by what should take place in their presence.
§ LORD ELCHOPrecisely. Seeing the difficulty of carrying such a Bill, the right hon. Gentleman thought it not unwise to allow the Inspectors to be present as amici curiæ. The right hon. Gentleman talked of giving and taking; there was nothing of the kind. The masters gave up nothing they ought not to have given up, and the representatives of the miners had conceded nothing they ought not to have conceded. And then as to the result—had not the Amendments proposed to be made in the Bill been handed to the right hon. Gentleman en bloc, and did he not undertake to consider them, if not to put them into the Bill? If the right hon. Gentleman had adopted a few more of the agreements, he would not have had occasion to speak under so much excitement. He had had the honour of being chairman of the conference, which sat five days. It consisted of practical men, who had a common interest in the subject. They 504 had discussed the question in all its bearings, and all he would say for their Amendments was that, coming from such a quarter, there was a primâ facie case made out in their favour. If the difficulties had not been got over and smoothed down at that conference, the right hon. Gentleman might have found it not such an easy task to pass a Bill of this kind.
MR. GATHORNE HARDYregretted the introduction of any imputation of motives, and still more so that under a clause which had no connection with that dealt with the other day the right hon. Gentleman had dragged in the question respecting the word "knowingly." The right hon. Gentleman himself had put in the word "knowingly" in Clause 16. But there would be a full opportunity of discussing the matter when the right hon. Gentleman brought up the Amendments, and to put that part of the Bill on the same footing as the Factory Acts.
§ MR. B. SAMUELSONproposed to introduce, in page 21, line 10, after the word "public," the words "at such time and."
§ MR. GOLDNEYsaid, that if an Inspector were to make a Report, and no one was to see it pending a judicial inquiry, its value to the public would be gone when they did get it. It would be a different thing if this were a matter of agreement between masters and men; but the object of the Bill was to prevent loss of life, and to provide that due care should be taken for that purpose, whether the men liked it or not; it was to counteract the dangers that resulted from the over-anxiety of the masters to get coal and the recklessness of the men in the desire to increase their wages. If an Inspector made a Report it ought to be laid before Parliament and made public. The Home Secretary seemed to be endeavouring to hold his own gallantly, and standing with his back to the wall in the interest of the outside public, and he ought to be supported in securing for the public the advantages that were sought by this Bill.
§ MR. LIDDELLprotested against the view which seemed to be entertained in many quarters, that because certain things were required to be done in factories by the Factory Acts, therefore they should be done in mines, and he proceeded to point out the differences 505 between a factory and a mine, the chief one being that a factory was carried on in the light of day or of gas, and that in the darkness of a mine, with its miles of workings and small detached parties of miners, anything like the supervision of a factory was impossible.
§ MR. F. S. POWELLsuggested the omission of a few words from the clause, so as to leave the Report of an Inspector to be dealt with by the Home Secretary at his discretion.
MR. STAVELEY HILLsaid, he would accept the suggestion of the Home Secretary, withdraw the Proviso, and insert the words proposed by the hon. Member for Banbury (Mr. B. Samuelson).
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Amendment (Mr. B. Samuelson) agreed to.
§ Clause, as amended, agreed to.
§ Arbitration.
§ Clause 46 (Provisions as to arbitrations).
MR. STAVELEY HILLsaid, there was no necessity to invest the Secretary of State with arbitrary discretion as to the amount to be paid to an arbitrator, because a well-known scale of fees was already in operation. He moved in page 22, leave out lines 40, 41, and 42, to "with," inclusive.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ MR. BRUEN moved in page 23, line 12, after "mines," insert "of the description in respect of which the arbitration shall be had." There were wide differences, and knowledge of the working of a copper or tin mine would not be applicable to a coal mine.
MR. BRUCEsaid, copper and tin mines were not included in this Bill, and he admitted that knowledge relating to coal mines would not be applicable to them. There was a class of men well known as mining engineers, who had special knowledge of certain classes of mines, and from whom competent arbitrators could be chosen; but it would be tying the hands of the Secretary of State too much to limit his discretion.
§ MR. CAWLEYsaid, there was great danger in describing the qualifications of the arbitrator too minutely, for such description would furnish ground for calling in question afterwards the legality of the appointment, which, therefore, had better be left to the parties concerned.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 47 (Adjournment of coroners' inquests on deaths from accidents in mines).
MR. STAVELEY HILLsaid, that as the section stood, the Coroner, within a certain number of days, was required to invite the Inspector to be present, and to adjourn the inquest for his attendance. The Coroner and Inspector were the only persons who had a right to examine witnesses in the Coroner's Court, and he proposed as an Amendment that the owner and manager of the mine, and the relatives of the persons killed, should have the same opportunity of assisting at the inquiry as was given to the Inspector.
§ Amendment proposed, in page 24, line 1, after the word "inspector," to insert the words "owner, agent, or manager and representative of the person whose death has occurred."—(Mr. Staveley Hill.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
MR. BRUCEobserved that the power was given to the Inspector as the representative of the public interest, and what was now proposed would be a great change in the existing law, leading possibly to very serious inconvenience and confusion. He had never heard of an instance in which the Coroner had refused to put questions suggested on behalf of the relatives of injured persons, nor indeed of any grievance arising out of the present practice. He hoped the Committee would adhere to the clause as it stood.
§ MR. RODENcontended that if liberty were not given to the relatives of the person into the cause of whose death the Coroner inquired, the Coroner's Court would practically be a close Court. He hoped the Home Secretary would 507 reconsider the matter, and that the hon. and learned Gentleman would press his Amendment to a division, if the Home Secretary would not assent to it.
§ MR. PEASEpointed out that the Coroner's Court was an open Court, but it was a Court for inquiry into facts, not for prosecution.
§ MR. GOLDNEYsaid, that the Coroner did practically examine all witnesses, and if liberty were given to every interested person to put questions, the inquiry would be interminable.
MR. GATHORNE HARDYthought the best way would be not to make special exceptions as to any one. If they were designing to make a change in the Coroner's Court, it would be far better to make such change by a general enactment. Why should inquiries into accidents that occurred in mines be put on a different footing from accidents that occurred from fire or other causes?
§ MR. LIDDELLinquired what the practice was in cases of railway investigations?
§ MR. DENMANsaid, the Coroner had a right to allow an owner, agent, or manager, or the representative of a deceased person to appear and cross-examine witnesses, and there was no reason to apprehend that the Coroner would ever refuse to exercise the right in a proper case.
MR. BRUCEbelieved that the law regulating railway investigations was the same as under the present Bill. The examinations before the Coroner were of a preliminary character, so as to secure the best means of ultimately arriving at the truth.
MR. STAVELEY HILLaffirmed his belief that the Bill ought to define the locus standi of those who were to appear before the Coroner.
§ MR. WOODSsaid, it had been argued that the introduction of the Amendment would lead to confusion; but as he found that the whole proceeding would be subject to the order of the Coroner, he should support the Amendment.
§ MR. FOTHERGILLthought it would conduce to good feeling amongst the mining community if it were clearly understood that the representatives of the person whose death had occurred should without difficulty have the opportunity of examining the witnesses at the inquest. In his own neighbourhood a great deal of feeling had been excited 508 on account of the inability to probe accidents to the bottom. Unless this provision were introduced such feeling would not be got rid of.
§ DR. BREWERopposed the Amendment on the ground that it would really tend to restrict the power which the Coroner already possessed.
§ LORD ELCHObelieved that the mining population approved of the introduction of some such words as those contained in the Amendment.
§ Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 126; Noes 146: Majority 20.