THE BRUNNER CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCIX, Issue 11557, 19 April 1898, Page 4

THE BRUNNER CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES.

There has certainly been no indecent baste on the part of the Supreme Court in arriving at a decision as to the liability of the Coal. Company to compensate the relatives of the sufferers by the disastrous explosion of two years ago in the Brunner mine, near Greymouth. On the face of it, the judgment is an extremely simple matter. The New Zealand statute dealing with coal mines declares that accident shall be presumption of negligence on the part of the owners. Sufferers have no need to prove neglect or culpability of any kind, and mine owners, having the almost impossible task of proving that the accident was the result of design or carelessness on the part of someone else, can hardly hope to escape liability. This is a more drastic law of employers’ liability than prevails in any other country. All that English working men are contending for—and, so far, contending vainly—la a law making employers liable for accidents caused by their lack of precaution or other fault; a law that'should have no loopholes of escape such us the plea of “ contributory negligence,” the doctrine of “common employment,” and other devices by which the English employer is enabled to kill and maim his workers with impunity. In the.case of a risky occupation like coal-mining it is, of course, well to ensure that every precaution shall be taken against such a frightful disaster as that at the Brunner mine. But our present law must add to the riska of capital, and the verdict and costs in the Brunner case, amounting to a total of nearly £BOOO, will impose a heavy tax upon the Company. Had it been proved that the Company might have prevented the disaster, and through parsimony or negligence failed in its duty, there would he no sympathy felt for its shareholders. There was, however, no conclusive evidence as to who or what was responsible for the explosion, and hence there will bo a feeling that the Company has fared badly, as the result of an accident that occurred from causes beyond human control. The Brunner mine is admittedly difficult to work with safety; and it will doubtless he a public gain if the Coinuany, with the knowledge of its legal responsibilities thus forced upon it, should resolve to close the mine and devote its energies to the development of the safer workings at Poiut Elizabeth. The Company has some cause to complain of the tardy operation of the law courts, for it has been kept in a .state of suspense for over a year, with important works at a standstill pending the verdict in the case just decided. We trust that the coal-

mining industry will not suffer permanent injury, or even serious check, from the decision of tlie Chief Justice iu the Brunner cases.