HL Deb 22 February 1876 vol 227 cc664-6
LORD COTTESLOE

, according to Notice, asked the Lord President to inform the House, if in his power to do so, When the Report of the Royal Commission on Accidents on Railways will be presented; and, whether the Government propose to introduce any Bill or Bills on the subject during the present Session? The subject of loss of life at sea had engaged no small share of the attention of the House of Commons during last Session and the portion of the present Session which had already elapsed. It might not be that the loss of life by a single railway accident was so great as that caused by the sinking of a ship at sea; but if the calamitous results of railway accidents were regarded in the aggregate he doubted whether they would not be found quite as appalling as the accidents which occurred on the sea. Their Lordships' House had already shown how sensible it was of the importance of the subject, because it was on an Address agreed to and presented by their Lordships in 1874 that the Royal Commission to inquire into the regulation and working of railways, and to report on the best means to be adopted for the prevention of accidents was appointed. He thought, however, that when that Commission was appointed few, if any, of their Lordships anticipated that two years would elapse without a Report from them. It now, however, appeared to be not improbable that yet another year might pass before the Commission reported. He by no means wished to undervalue the magnitude of the task entrusted to the Commission, and he could quite understand that the appointment of its Chairman (the Duke of Buckingham) to the office which he now filled in India had caused a delay. No doubt an elaborate Report would be presented, and Parliament might expect to see a comprehensive measure founded on that Report; but all this would take time, and there was the probability that railway accidents which might be prevented would continue to occur in the meantime. It was clear enough, therefore, that the proceedings of the Commission were not fast enough to meet the urgency of the subject. He could not but think that the Royal Commission, if directed to do so, might be disposed to make a preliminary Report on which a Bill dealing with the most pressing necessities of the case might be prepared and passed into law during the present Session.

THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON

said, that nobody could be insensible to the importance of the subject. The appointment of the Royal Commission was a proof that Parliament and Her Majesty's Government felt its importance; but, as his noble Friend admitted, the subject was a very large as well as a very important one. The absence from this country of the noble Duke the Chairman of the Commission had no doubt retarded its proceedings; but it must be remembered that in order to obtain full information and arrive at sound conclusions, the Commissioners had been obliged to take evidence over the whole country. In the temporary absence of Lord De La Warr, who had succeeded the Duke of Buckingham as Chairman, but who was now abroad, Lord Aberdeen was acting as Chairman, and the Commissioners were proceeding with their Report. All the evidence had been closed; but he could not hold out any hope that the Report would be presented this side of the Easter Recess. He could not agree with the noble Lord (Lord Cottesloe) that a preliminary Report from the Commission as a basis for legislation would be desirable. It would be impossible to expect any Department of the Government to undertake the preparation of a Bill on imperfect information, and it would be no less unreasonable to ask Parliament to legislate before it was put in possession of the matured views of the Commission and of the evidence on which those views had been formed. He could, however, assure the House that the greatest care was taken in the preparation of the Report, and that there would be no unnecessary delay in its production.