DUNEDIN, SATURDAY, JAN. 24.

Otago Witness, Issue 1156, 24 January 1874, Page 17

DUNEDIN, SATURDAY, JAN. 24.

That the number of deaths in the community that result directly from what we are accustomed to call " accidents," haslongbeensadlyoutofall proportion to the number of the population, and the total number of deaths from all causes, no thoughtful person can for a moment doubt. They have, fortunately, nob all proved fatal, but even where less melancholy results have followed, the issue has in all cases been one to be deeply deplored, and not unfrequently has been attended with life - long deprivation to the principal suflerers. Ifc is not, therefore, to be wondered at that a suspicion has been generated that, to say the least of it, proper means have not always been taken to prevent the occurrence of accidents that were perfectly pi'evenlable. Some time ago, tlie flax mills seemedtohavean unenviable pre-eminence in this particular, and we then ventured to suggest

that legislative enactment might possibly be had recourse to with a good prospect of valuable results.

More recpntly the run 'of these socalled " accidents " has lain more particularly among excavations for railway -works, drives for mining putpo-es, stone quarries, and such other works, where large masses of earth are allowed unexpectedly to fall, blasts untimely to explode, and other things to occur by which serious or fmal results have followed. The alarming frequency with which of late accidents have occurred in connection with such works cannot have escaped the notice of the most thoughtless observer. From the evidence given at the several inquests subsequently held, it has been very clear that in many cases, to say the ieasfc, there was certainly not sufficient care exercised on the part of those in charge of the works, nor sufficient precaution taken to jirevent the calamities]thathavefullowed. Ithasfurtherbeen manifested that there very often, exists a very strong disposition on the part of surviving and uninjured wox'kmen, not to tell quite all they know or think, with respect to the accidents about which they are called upon to give testimony. Tn respect to some of them, the fear of " the sack " has been the- influence t:> which they have yielded ; while many others, some for one motive and some for another, have evidently resolved not to be instrumental in fixing blame on any particular person if they could possibly help it. Hence, as a rule, the verdicts returned have been of a character which might be fitly summed up thus : — " Nobody to blame, but let everybody be more careful in the future." This verdict being duly recorded, the poor victim is carried out to his untimely grave, and the public hears no more — thinks no more — of such matters till the next ca^e is announced in the papers : and then again pretty much the same course is pursued — a pivtty similar verdict arrived nt, and then again the general public sinks into its wonted state of unmindt'ulntss in respect to such matters. The matter is becoming so serious that some measure should be initiated to prevent, if possible, the occurrence and repetition of the evil under consideration. Possibly some measure might be devised that would be comprehensive enough in its nature to deal in a general way with all accidents occurring iv connection with works of all kinds, and upon a uniform and general principle, similar to that embodied in the " Inspection of Mines Bill," introduced into the Victorian Assembly some three or four months ago, and ! professedly bast'd upon a recent Acb of the Imperial Legislature. Tho principle of that Bill assumed that the " owners of mines were responsible for accidents, unless it could be clearly shown that such did not happen through their neglect." Ib will be seen at a glance, that contractors, managers, overseers, &c, would be in a far better position to show that every precaution was taken to prevent an accident, than such witnesses as can be obtained to give evidence at inquests are that such precautions have not been taken, more especially when it is remembered that in so many instances the lips cf the piincipal sufferers and -witnesses are sealed by death. It is now most notorious that something should be clone, and w« throw out the idea by way of indicating the direction in which ib seems to us action might be taken with good effect. Did all those who are properly resj)on.sible for the safety of a scaffolding, an excavation, a drive, or a blast, know clearly beforehand that in the event of an accident they would have to show that proper precaution was taken to prevent it, there is no doubt whatever but thai; accidents would be of far less frequent occurrence than of late they have unfortunately been. The suggestion we have made is based upon a passage that occurred in the letter of our Melbourne correspondent, which appealed in our issue of November Bth. "We reproduce it, in the hope that it may lead to the initiation of a useful measure amongst ourselves. The remarks of our correspondent, it will be seen, have reference-

simply to accidents in mines, but we B ee no reason why the same principle could not be applied to accidents in general. Our correspondent says :—: — " A measure has been introduced into the Assembly by the Minister of Mines that has often been spoken of, and is undoubtedly much required. It is a Bill to provide for the inspection and regulation of mines, in the object of reducing, if possible, the number of accidents which now are so fearfully frequent. The Bill contains a number of regulations similar to those in an Act that has lately passed the British Parliament, and also provides for periodical inspections of the mine and machinery. But its moat^ important provisions are those which make the owners of the mine responsible for accidents, unless it can be clearly shown that such did not happen through their neglect. The fact of an accident occurring in a mine is made prima facie evidence that it occurred through neglect and mismanagement of the owners or their representatives. When any one is injured or killed, he, or his representatives, as the case may be, may recover compensation from the owners as for a tort, and the amount is to be a first charge on the mine and plant. The necessity of some such measure has of late been made painfully apparent. There have been, in close succession, two or three cases of fatal accident, owing to the neglect on the part of the managers to take proper precautions for the safety of their men after they have been repeatedly called upon to do so. In one case the coroner's jury found a verdict of manslaughter against the manager, and he was commuted for trial on thab charge. There are many such cases, ami a general m-asure to deal with them is much required."