HC Deb 21 June 1892 vol 5 cc1729-30
MR. JOSEPH C. BOLTON (Stirling)

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has observed that the Return "Railway Servants (Hours of Labour) (Inspectors' Reports)" contains instances of railway accidents other than and differing essentially from those ordered by the House of Commons to be reported as instances in which the Inspectors of the Board of Trade have represented that the hours of any of the railway servants on duty on the occasion of such accidents have been unduly long; and whether he will take the necessary steps for the correction of the Return and its compliance with the Order of the House of Commons dated 26th April, 1892?

*SIR MICHAEL HICKS BEACH

It will be seen from the column of extracts from the Reports of the Inspectors that in nearly all cases the words "unduly long" would be generally admitted as a correct description of the hours. The term, however, is indefinite, and it was thought right to include in the Return every case in which the Inspector reporting upon it had expressed an unfavourable opinion either as to the length of the hours worked or as to the insufficiency of previous rest. Of course, it is for those interested in the Return to form their own opinions as to whether the views of the Inspectors were justified.

MR. BOLTON

Has the right hon. Gentleman noted the fact that the Return ordered by the House referred to servants on duty on the occasion of such accidents having had hours of duty unduly long; whereas the Return made to the House is of instances in which Inspectors have called attention to the hours of work, not restricting it entirely to those occasions on which accidents happened?

*SIR MICHAEL HICKS BEACH

It is restricted, as I have endeavoured to explain, to those instances in which Inspectors thought the hours were unduly long or the previous rest insufficient.

MR. BOLTON

But I think the right hon. Gentleman will find that in some instances the hours were not unduly long, unless he calls six hours and three-quarters unduly long?

*SIR MICHAEL HICKS BEACH

That is a matter of opinion.