§ 83. Dr. CHAPPLEasked whether the police take any steps to protect the travelling public against the danger of riding in a train, motor omnibus, or car in charge of a driver who immediately before undertaking this duty has consumed sufficient 1691 strong drink to bring him under the influence of liquor and make him careless, foolhardy, defiant, or irresponsible, though still sober in the police sense?
§ Mr. McKENNAThe police are not authorised to inquire what amount of liquor a driver has consumed, and even if they were informed by eye-witnesses of the quantity, they would not be justified in acting on this information alone; but if a driver shows by his conduct and appearance that he is unfit to drive without danger to the public, they would be entitled to intervene, and would do so.
§ Dr. CHAPPLEHave the police power to take any steps to protect the public against dangers such as those implied in the question when a man is not drunk in the police sense?
§ Mr. McKENNAI think I have explained fully to my hon. Friend that the mere fact that a driver or anyone else consumed liquor does not render that person amenable to arrest, but if after the consumption of liquor a person is found to be unfit to drive, then it is the duty of the police to intervene.
§ Mr. J. H. THOMASIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the event of a railway accident the men running the greatest risk are those in charge of the train, and that obviously from that fact they would only go to work in a condition that would enable them to do their work properly, and whether he does not think that in the recent case to which this question refers the only people who were found guilty of being careless, foolhardy and irresponsible were the magistrates who convicted Knox?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat is not a proper question.
§ Dr. CHAPPLEHas the right hon. Gentleman access to any figures to show how many such persons have been found under the influence of liquor?
§ Mr. McKENNAI must have notice of that question.