RAILWAY ACCIDENTS.

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 11332, 23 July 1902, Page 6

RAILWAY ACCIDENTS.

Reporting to the General Manager of Railways on the recent aceidenta on the Dunedin section, (not inoludmg the Seacliff accident, w_tic_i is still under investigation), the three heads of Departments—the Chief Engineer, Chief Mechanical Engineer, and the Chief Traffic; Manager— state that they are none of them due to either defects in the rolling stock or the track, or to an v ■want of care or forethought in the management. They add that with proper safety appliances, such as the Westinghouse brake, the whole of these accidents would hare been absolutely prevented or their results greatly minimcsed. These appliances are now being furnished as speedily as funds will permit, and it is added that the cost of these accidents would have gone a long way towards equipping the whole of our railways. Seeing that it was "The Press" which initiated the agitation which led the Government to decide on the adoption of the continuous brake system, we do not at all feel disposed to find fault with that portion of the report which we have quoted. On the contrary, the chief argument which we brought forward in favour of the system was that it would enormously reduce the risk of serious accidents on our railways. Nor do we at all question the statement of the heads of Departments that in the cases under notice there was no defect in the rolling stock or permanent way, or any want of forethought on the part of the managpment. When those gentlemen, however, go on to say that officers of the Department are as anxious as the public to ascertain the cause of every accident, and to place the blame where any exists on the right shoulders, and that therefore nothing would be gained "by an enquiry by a general commission or "any other outside tribunal," it seems to us that they are guilty of something like an impertinence. We should hardly think the Government would have asked their opinion on such a question as this, but in any case, it cannot be expected that their views will be accepted by the public. If a railway accident occurs the heads of the Department are themselves, more cr less, upon their trial. It is, therefore, manifestly inconsistent that they alone should hold an enquiry into the circumstances, and it is too much to expect that the public will at all times accept their assurance that the Department is in no way to blame for what has occurred. It an accident happens to a steamer, an enquiry is held before a Nautical Court. The owners of the vessel probably also enqurre into the matter, and deal with the captain in their own way, but as the safety and even the lives of the public are at stake, the law very properly provides that there shall foe a full enquiry by an independent tribunal. The percentage of accidents on New Zealand railways, as we showed the other day, is almost the hip-best in the world, and in our opinion Parliament ought not to separate without passing a Bill providing that in all cases of railway accidents, whether accompanied by loss of life or not, a public enquiry shall be held by a Stipendiary Magistrate, assisted by expert assessors.