§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that Colonel Yorke, when conducting the inquiry into the accident to a train at Caeharris on 18th November last, did not allow representatives of the workmen to be present, nor did he call any witness from the workmen, and that the whole of his evidence was confined to railway servants, three of whom he holds to have been 821 responsible for the accident; and whether, as Colonel Yorke makes allegations against the workmen who were injured, he will order a fresh inquiry to be held at which all the available evidence could be taken, and at which the workmen could be represented?
Mr. BUXTONI have already explained to my hon. Friend why the inquiry was not held in public. The circumstances of the accident, as known to Colonel Yorke on his arrival at Dowlais, were such as to suggest the possibility of criminal proceedings being taken eventually. When this is the case our inspecting officers hold their inquiries in private, and Colonel Yorke took this course in the present instance, only admitting representatives of the railway servants immediately concerned. The object of the inquiry was simply to ascertain the causes of the accident, and the evidence of workmen who were in the train was not required for this purpose. I do not see that Colonel Yorke's remarks regarding the practice of leaving trains while in motion constitute an allegation against the men, nor that exception can properly be taken to them. I do not propose to order a fresh inquiry; and I hope that the result of the inquiry will prevent a similar accident in the future.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the manager of Messrs. Guest, Nettlefold, and Company, the employers of the workman, was allowed to be present, while the men specially concerned were not allowed to be represented?
Mr. BUXTONMessrs. Guest and Company were specially affected. I have already given the reason why it was not thought necessary that the men travelling by the train need be represented.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEIn view of the fact that there were workmen specially competent to give evidence as to the cause of the accident, and as they were charged with having caused the accident by being outside the railway carriage, may I ask whether, in these circumstances, Colonel Yorke should not have received the evidence of the workmen?
Mr. BUXTONI do not agree that the men were censured. I have already explained the reason for the action of Colonel Yorke.