The Sun.
London, England, 1870-06-24 00:00:00

RAILWAY COMPENSATION FOR
ACCIDENTS.

The Select Committee bf the House of Commons, ap-
pointed to inquire into the law respecting compensation
for accidents occurring on railways, met again yester-
day, Mr. Headlam in the chair.
Mr. Joseph Brown, Q. C, (of the Home Circuit), was
the first examined. In reply to the chairman •he statad
his opinion that the railway companies of the country
had great reason to complain of the law in
this matter, and that the law had operated
to a considerable extent to encourage imposture and fraud.
He would exempt railway companies from responsibility
where it was proved that they had taken the greatest pre-
cautions to ensure safety, except in certain cases. For
instance, if a man were driving a cart over a line,
and a train ran over and killed him, and
a passenger were also killed through the same
cause of obstruction he would hold the company irrespon-
sible, but they should be responsible for the passengers.
In regard to the question of insurance, he considered it
more desirable that the companies should insure third-class
passengers more than those in the second and first classes,
because they were the least able to bear the consequences
of loss by accident. He thought all compensation in case
of accident ought to bear some proportion to the profits of
the company, derived from the traffic.
Upon the suggestion that independent medical men
should be appointed by the Board of Trade to make
inquiries into claims for injuries, the witness thought
a private inquiry of that nature would not give satisfac-
tion to the parties ; that if appointed at all, they should
be something like a coroner, lawyer, and doctor rolled
into one, and hold a public inquiry.
Mr. Forbes, manager of the London, Chatham, and
Dover Railway, gave some particulars as to the practlce of
the law with regard to accidents on the Continent.
Having had considerable experience on the Continent
where most stringent and minute laws hre enforced in the
working of railways, he was satisfied that they did more
harm than good, and he therefore deprecated any more
strict supervision by the Government, as likely to
diminish rather than ensure safety. He had always
considered it an anomaly that the amount of liability of
railway companies did not bear some propor-
tion to the premium paid ; and he thought
insurance would be reasonable and advisable.
He also thought that the fares should be reduced through-
out the kingdom if the responsibility were ssmewhat re-
duced. The number of passengers carried by the London,
Chatham, and Dover Company during last year was
690,000 both ways, that is, about 1,100 a day, and during
two years and a half there had only been three accidents.
In speaking upon the question of punishing drivers and
guards for being behind time, he stated that a great many
of the accidents ' occurring through lateness of
trains were primarily caused by passengers arriving at
the stations late with frequently a quantity of luggage.
Mr. Forbes proceeded to state that the liability of rail-
way companies in some of the United States—such, as
New York and Massachusetts—were limited, $5,000
bein r the limit in case of accident or death. Witness
quoted a number of instance of claims and actions for
compensation, mostly for trivial accidents, if accidents at
all, to illustrate the defective machinery of the law bear-
ingon such matters,

The Manager of the North British Railway explained
the system of compensation in Scotland, which was prac-
tically.the same as in England.
The committee then adjourned.

Intelligence received from the Indian North-West
frontier announces that fresh disturbances have broken
out amongst the Wuzerees.