The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-09 00:00:00

t Gentleman opposite had his life placed in jeopardy, by an
accident on the Brighton Railway, and he would perhaps give
his opinion on the subject. Many eases of accident had come
under his notice, and from all that he could collect by the tes-
timony of competent witnesses, he was bound to state that he
considered railroad travell ng was the safest that could be
adopted. He entertained no .doubt whatever upon the sub-
ject, not the slightest. But the Bill which the Right Hon.
Gentleman had introduced was another Bill brought forward
from the back-shop of the Whig store. They had got four
them already, and for his part, he wished the Government
would take the whole batch, and bring them down to
the House, ticketing them " Whig Bills." The measures of
the Government were complainedef, and what was their answer?
" Oh, we have found the Bill in our office." It was a legacy—
Heaven protect. him from such legacies.—(Laughter.) The
Government found a measure in an office, and they, therefore,
thought they were bound to use it. That was the case with
regard to the great and all important question of factory
slavery. Then there was the Poor-law, which was not to be
brought on until after Easter, although the Commission ex-
pired in July. He did not like such tactics. Again, they had
a Bill with regard to the Customs in the West Indies ; and
there was no end to the compliments which the Right Hon.
Gentleman who introduced it paid to the late President of the
Board of Trade. He
,Mr. Wakley) had never heard these
compliments paid t.o the Right Hon. Gentleman before.—
( Laughter.) It was astonishing to see how Hon. Gentle-
men who had obtained the victory could afford to be compli-
mentary. Now, the present Bill was very inefficient last year,
and it was almost as inefficient in its present state. They would
never have an efficient measure until they had applied stringent
principles to railway proprietors and railway directors. It hap-
pened that he ( Mr. W. ) had been travelling on the Great Western
railway, within a few hours after the accident had taken place
at Sonnine-hill. It was useless for him to attempt to describe
the distressing, painful, and agonising character of the scene.
But it was known to every one on the spot, as well as to every
one connected with the railway, that if proper precautions had
been taken such an accident could never have occurred. Dur-
ing the darkness of the night, there had bean no watchman
stationed at the cutting of Sonning-hill ; and it appeared that
the policemen who was on duty had not to attend until the six
o'clock train from London had arrived. But there was no po-
licemen to watch the arrival of the luggage train to which the
melancholy accident had occurred. Was that a system that
could be sanctioned?—(Hear, hear.) It was quite true that
railways were most satisfactory, and conducive to the interests
of the public as well as to their happiness, but they should be
properly regulated; and he (Mr. Wakley) believed that the
proprietors of railways, or those persons who were inte-
rested in that way in them, should not be the sole regula-
tors of them.—( Hear, hear.) There should be a power
above them, and in his opinion that power should be vested in
the Gorernment,—(Hear, hear.) He wished to refer to the
facts connected with the accidents which lately occurred on
the London and Birminghaiw Railway, although those state-
ments were now probably irregular or premature ; he would
therefore refrain from adverting to them until the reading of
the Bill ; however, he could not but say that the proprietors
were not the proper or the best persons to regulate railways in
this country.
Mr. GLADSTONE said the Hon. Gentleman had invited
an interruption ; the report of the officer of the railway de-
partment would he on the table in a few days, and although he
(Mr. Gladstone) did not wish to stop a discussion ; he thought
it desirable that the House should be in possession of all the
facts before statements were grade.—(Hear).
Mr. WAKLEY only made those statements because he saw
the Chairman of the Railway Committee present, but he
would then refrain from any further statement as to the matter.
Mr. C. RUSSELL said that an allusion had been made to
the accidents which occurred mithe Great Western Railway; he
could not refrain from making a few observations respecting
hem. No person more deeply deplored that accident than he did.
( Hear, hear.) He did everything in his power to console and
compensate the unfortunate indivi,luals who had suffered by it.
( Hear, hear.) It was his uuty to attend the inquest which
had been held upon them, and it was also his duty to view
the line of railway upon which the accidents had occurred. He
slid so most attentively, because he was exceedingly anxious to
ascertain whether blame coned be attached t.o any particular
officer, or to the Company, and he (Mr. Russell) was proud to
be able, solemnly mid seriously, to deel re that he believed that
unfortunate occurrence was as much the visitation of God's
providence as it was the result of accident.—( Fleer, hear.)
How was it possible there could be watchmen all through, irons
one end to another of a line which extended to a distance of a
hundred and eighteen miles ? He had examined the lire of
railway, and that particular place where the accident had oc
curred was much better circumstanced than any other part of it.
Ihe Hon. Gentleman concluded by stating he would refrain
trout making further observation with reference to the matter
until such time as the Bill was introduced.

Mr. EW ART observed that the proprietors were interested
for the safety of those who travelled on their railways, as much
as the Government or any other persons could be. The old
system of railways was, in his opinion, the safest. However,
he hoped that the superintendence would be more efficacious in
future; and it was extremely aatisfac:ory to find that in pro-
portion as the superintendence was increased, the number of
accidents were diminished.—( Hear.) If an accident hap-
pened to a person travelling by railway, or by coach, and that
he survived it, he had a good action for the injury he sustained
against Vie proprietors of the railway or conveyance in which
the acci4ent had happened, so that the railway pro-
prietors were -most interested for the safety of the passengers.
It appeared, therefore, that if the person suffering from a
railway accident survived the effects of that. accident, he could
recover compensation from the railway proprietors ; but if he
died, his relatives had no remedy at all. It was true they
might punish the Company; but they could not compensate the
sufferer. It struck him that such a state of law wasanomalous,
and required correction. He was sure that accidents had di-
minished, as the experience of railway directors had increased.
He gave his cordial support to the present measure, which,
while it exercised a judicious control over the management of
railways, did not improperly interfere with the directors of
these undertakings.
Mr. HARDY approved of the Bill as far as it went, but
thought it did not go far enough for the security of the public.
The principal accidents which had happened showed what mea-
sures might be adopted for the prevention of accidents in future.
He happened to be a passenger by the Brighton Railway when
the accident occurred on that line. On that occasion two engiries
had been used for the train. One of them was more powerful
than the other, and he felt convinced that the second engine
had driven the first off the rails, and thus caused the accident.
Of the whole of that long train only three of the carriages had
been injured, and those were the carriages nearest the engine.
On the Great Western Railway the accident had happened
through the engine being stopped by a slip of land, and thus
becoming itself an impediment; in both cases it was only the
carriages nearest the engine which had suffered. Ile hoped,
therefore, that some provision would be introduced in the Bill
to prevent carriages being placed near to the engine, and he
was convineed in that manner the fatal consequences of similar
accidents might be prevented.
Sir R. PEEL thought that if effectual precaution could
he taken for the prevention of accidents by legislative enact-
ments, the Legislature would be fully justified in interfering,
and he felt perfectly certain thet, in such a case, no influence
of any railway proprietor with that House could stand against
the sense of the nation. He doubted if all the railway pro-
prietors of the kingdom united could prevent the adoption by
Parliament of effectual measures for the regulation of railways,
if such could be the case. But what he deprecated was the
carrying tits interference of Parliament beyond its proper limits.
He considered it injudicious for, Parliament to undertake too
minute an interference with the regulations of railways, and
any attempt to do so would, he considered, be greatly injurious.
Whenever an accident occurredi the number of passengers on
a railway were diminished, and they adopted some other mode
of conveyance. But before a gentleman came to a conclusive
opinion on the details of such a provision, he ought to read the
evidence that had been laid before the Committee last year.
He would then see that if the Government were to suggest a
certain interval between an engine and the carriages, the con-
sequence would be an increase rather than a diminution of ac-
cidents ; for Railway Companies, feeling their responsibility
much lessened, would shelter themselves from the indignation
of the public, by saying that these regulations had been forced
upon them against their remonstrances by the Government,
which ought tobear toe blame. But as to the silk :1y of cross-
ings, and the establishments of gates, and such things, the Go-
vernment could do something; but as to determining the num-
ber of watchmen that should be employed, and that the trains
should net travel beyond a certain rate of speed, it would be
utterly impossible for the Government to,interfere with pro-
priety. This could only be done by those who had acquired
that nice tact, and minute exper ence, that resulted from con-
stant personal application to the practical study of these ques-
tions ; and any interference of the Government in those de-
partments, so farfrom answering their object would defeat it.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said the Bill of the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman differed in some respects from that introduced by him
last year. for his was more stringent. and gave more direct
powers to the Board of Trade. His Bill was referred to a Se-
lect Committee, and the result of the investigation was, that he
lost a great deal of the confidence he first had in that measure.
He was now convinced that the safest course for the Govern-
ment was, to let the undivided responsibility of the manage-
ment of the railways rest en the directors and officers ; and,
therefore, he thought the Right Hon. Gentleman had exer-
cised a sound discretion in excluding some clauses which he
(Mr. Labouchere) had introduced. This subject was by no
means so ,imple as Gentlemen might think at first ; the more
the examined it, the more they would see the difficulty of
dealing with some questions that at first seemed very easy. He
was sure that the safer way for the Government would be to
interfi re too little, rather than too much, with the railway
directors. As their knowledge increased they might interfere
farther • but, at present, he thought the Right Hon. Gentle-
man had exercised a sound discretion in giving the Board of
Trade the power of making suggestions, leaving it to the Rail-
way Companies to refuse them at their pleasure.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.