QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS. (Hansard, 13 February 1877)

§ EARL DE LA WARR
asked, Whether Her Majesty's Government proposed to bring forward any measure this Session on the subject of Railway Accidents? He very much regretted that circumstances should have delayed the Report of the Royal Commission on this subject; but it was now completed and in their Lordships' hands. Had the inquiry been brought earlier to a conclusion, their Lordships would have been able at the commencement of the Session to have given it consideration and perhaps discussion; but he thought it would not be unreasonable, looking to the public interest which was felt in the matter, if he asked for such information as would enable their Lordships and the public generally to know whether the Government would deal with the Question in the course of the present Session, and whether, at no distant period, the subject would be brought under the notice of Parliament?

THE EARL OF SANDWICH
said, he should like to supplement the Question of the noble Earl who had just spoken, by asking whether the Board of Trade had power to compel the Railway Companies to adopt the recommendations which were made by the Government Inspectors from time to time in their Reports? Very serious accidents had lately happened on certain of our railways; and there could be no doubt that some of those accidents might have been prevented. Referring to a recent accident on the Great Northern Railway and a somewhat similar one that occurred about a year ago, the recommendations made by Captain Tyler as the result of his inquiries appeared to have been treated with contempt. In connection with this subject he thought it was a hardship that, when an accident did happen, and when information concerning it had reached the railway authorities at head-quarters, information of the fact that a casualty had occurred was not imparted to persons who intended travelling in the direction where the accident had taken place. The result of withholding the information which was thus known at head-quarters was that many persons often travelled on as if nothing had happened, only to be detained when they reached a certain point. With respect to the Report which had been referred to by the noble Earl (Earl De la Warr), that document was unquestionably an able one; but it was to be borne in mind that it was not a unanimous one. Of the nine Commissioners only six had signed it, and they were not agreed as to the measures to be adopted, two having drawn up Reports of their own. It would be very difficult, therefore, for any Government to act upon the Report of the Commission. There could he no doubt, however, that at the present time the number of trains which were run, at short intervals, constituted an element of danger; and it was worthy of consideration whether some measure bearing upon that point might not be brought before Parliament.

§ THE EARL OF BEACONSFIELD
My Lords, the Report of the Royal Commission is now in your Lordships' hands; but, as my noble Friend (the Earl of Sandwich) has just reminded us, that Report has not been presented to the Government with the authority of 256 unanimity. There were nine Commissioners. Of the nine, the Chief Commissioner devoted, I believe, two years to the labours of the Commission; but he accepted an appointment in a distant part of the Empire, and was therefore unable to finish his task as a Royal Commissioner, and sign the Report. Another of the Commissioners, a distinguished Gentleman, a Member of the Privy Council, who has had considerable official experience, and who is a man of very business-like habits, has altogether declined to sign the Report; and my noble Friend, the noble Earl who introduced this conversation, has also refused to sign it; but he has done his duty to the public by furnishing, on his own account, a Report which is well worthy of consideration. My noble Friend (the Earl of Sandwich) has reminded us that six of the Royal Commissioners did sign the Report; but, strange to say, two of these appear to have signed it only out of courtesy—through a feeling of good fellowship with, and as a compliment to, the remaining Commissioners, with whom, however, they did not agree. They also have furnished Reports of their own, which Reports are of an elaborate character—one of them extending to 25 folio pages. Under these circumstances, your Lordships will see that, as regards the Report of the Royal Commission, it is one which the Government must examine with a great deal of critical examination, and it must be equally obvious that, whether the Report is signed by the majority of the Commissioners or not, the Government cannot come to any conclusion on the subject without reading the voluminous evidence taken by the Royal Commission —which is not yet printed—and therefore it is impossible now for the Government to give a pledge as to whether they will introduce legislation on the subject this year. I can only say what every one must feel—that the subject is of a very grave character; indeed, as regards our internal affairs, I cannot conceive one of a graver character. My noble Friend (the Earl of Sandwich) asks me whether Railway Companies are bound to obey the recommendations of Government Inspectors. The answer to that is clear. Of course they are not bound to obey those recommendations, nor to regulate their conduct on the Reports of Inspectors. Those Reports 257 are made to the Board of Trade. The Board of Trade considers them and recommends to the railway companies anything which it thinks advisable and which the law enables it to recommend. If there is anything which it thinks advisable, but which the law does not enable it to recommend, it must apply to the Legislature.