§ Mr. STEEL-MAITLANDasked the Homo Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the further alleged instance of lead poisoning in the Pilkington Tile Works, Manchester, in the case of John Kelly; whether he is aware that John Kelly was diagnosed at the Salford Royal Infirmary as suffering from lead poisoning, and that the certifying surgeon for Pendleton subsequently refused to certify the case; will he say whether any inquiries have been made by the inspecting staff of the Home Office in connection with the matter; if so, by whom were those inquiries made; and will he lay their reports in full upon the Table of the House?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThe hon. Member appears to have been misinformed. No case of that name is known to the Department in connection with Messrs. Pilkington's works, but a John Kelly, employed at an electrical accumulator works, adjoining Messrs. Pilkington's works, was reported from the Salford Royal Hospital last year as apparently suffering from lead poisoning. This case was investigated by the certifying surgeon, who confirmed the diagnosis of lead poisoning, and the usual inquiries were made by the factory inspector as to the observance of the regulations 2161W at the works. The reports of the factory inspectors in such a case are necessarily treated as confidential; and as the question of compensation is not within the jurisdiction of the Factory Department, I have no information as to whether a certificate under the Workmen's Compensation Act was refused in this case or not; but I may point out that the surgeon to whom application for a certificate should have been made was the surgeon for the Bury district in which the works are situated, and not the surgeon for the district which includes Pendleton.