§ Mr. GRUNDY (by Private Notice)asked the Secretary for Mines if he has now received the decision of the Don-caster magistrates in the prosecution of the Maltby Colliery Company, and Mr. Basil Pickering, the agent, for the violation of Section 67 of the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1911; and whether, in view of the importance to the mining industry of paragraph 2 of Section 67 of the Mines Act, he will state what further steps he proposes to take in this particular instance to secure the enforcement of the law?
§ The SECRETARY for MINES (Colonel Lane-Fox)This prosecution, as stated 1421 by my predecessor in this House, replying to the hon. Member on 20th March, 1924, was taken, not on the grounds that criminal prosecution was required in respect of anything done or omitted to be done, but solely to obtain an authoritative pronouncement on the proper interpretation of the law. That having been obtained in the High Court, the summonses were by consent withdrawn, and no further steps in this particular instance are necessary.
§ Mr. GRUNDYIs the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that in this case no decision was given by the Police Court, but that the case was brought before the Don-caster Court and taken to the Divisional Court, who referred it back to the Don-caster Court, who withdrew the prosecution; and will he see that in cases whore workmen contravene the Mines Act the same leniency is exhibited towards them that has been shown in this case?
§ Colonel LANE-FOXIt was not a case of favouring employers and not favouring workmen. The whole object of this prosecution was, as stated by Mr. Shinwell, to obtain an authoritative pronouncement as to what the law actually was. That has now been obtained in the High Court, and, therefore, the whole object has been attained.
Mr. F. HALLWill the hon. and gallant Gentleman tell the House why, in the first place, the case went to the Divisional Court?
§ Colonel LANE-FOXYes, Sir. The legal proceedings were started, as I have said, by my predecessor, and the object was to find out exactly what was the real state of the law. That having been ascertained, there is no reason for any further proceedings.
Mr. HALLIs it the fact that the Divisional Court ordered the case to be sent back to the magistrates at Doncaster?
§ Colonel LANE-FOXYes, Sir, that is perfectly true, and the summonses were then, by consent, withdrawn. There never was in this case either of the two real reasons for which a prosecution is ordinarily useful, namely, either to punish someone who has done something wrong or contravened the law, or to deter others from doing so; and there was no need for further proceedings. 1422 The management had suffered very severe financial loss, and I am quite certain that the last thing the men would wish to see would be a petty prosecution of their management. A decision of the High Court is a far better means of determining the law than any decision of magistrates.
Mr. HALLHaving regard to the fact that, the Divisional Court having given its decision, then, by consent, the summonses were withdrawn instead of there being a re-trial at Doncaster, may I ask who gave the consent for the prosecution to be withdrawn?
§ Colonel LANE-FOXIt was done by agreement between the parties.
§ Colonel LANE-FOXThe proceedings wore started by the Government of hon. Members opposite. The parties to the prosecution were the Mines Department, who started it, and the party who was being prosecuted, and, by consent between those parties, the summonses were withdrawn.
§ Mr. T. WILLIAMSIs the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that 28 miners' lives were lost in this explosion, and that thousands of miners who know the real danger of coal gas are not feeling at all safe as the result of the withdrawal of this prosecution? Further, while we have no desire for petty persecution, does he not consider that the miners are entitled to the same safeguarding regulations as would be applied to any other section of the community? May I further ask, since little or no consideration is given to miners who commit a technical indiscretion in the mine, if we are not entitled to expect that the law will be administered impartially?
§ Colonel LANE-FOXI emphatically repudiate the suggestion that there has been any question of the law not being enforced against the owners. The whole object, as I have said, of carrying this case from the magistrate's court to the High Court was to obtain a definite and authoritative pronouncement as to what the actual law was. The law is now absolutely certain, and, therefore, the miners have a safeguard they never had before.