It will, however, be seen that there is a large class of accidents which comes within the control of responsible agents, and which would scarcely be within the control of the colliers, even if they had the discretion. For example, the sufficiency of the winding-ropes, guiders and side-rods, chairs, sliders, casing of the pit sides with brick and mortar, covers over the tubs to prevent coal falling on those ascending and descending in them, and the various other means of security in superior pit gearing, which, having been adopted in some mines with success, are demonstrably practicable, and no doubt ought to be used in all other similar cases.
But these practical measures appear to me from their number to be incapable of specification in any statute that could be discussed or tolerated in Parliament, if it should take upon itself the direction of mining operations, and they are apparently too numerous and important, to be intrusted to the discretion of any public officer. Positive regulations by statute or under legislative sanction would, I apprehend, impede changes in machinery and in operations which are commonly beneficial to the whole class of the workpeople. In whatsoever mode such preventive regulations were prescribed, the enforcement of them would, I apprehend, imply an inspection by a public officer; from the nature of the places I should doubt the efficiency of such inspection. I doubt whether inspectors could be found who would faithfully descend shafts two or three times the depth of the height of St. Paul’s, and amidst wet and damp and noxious gases crawl or allow themselves to be waggoned through miles of dark drains and subterranean caverns, with the chance of the roof falling on them or being burnt by explosion, to see that all was right, and not act on the easy assumption that it was so.
I believe, in the course of my own performance of the disagreeable duty assigned to me, I became tolerably familiar with such places; but I could not but perceive that I might easily have been deceived, and was always at the mercy of the colliers themselves for the completeness of my information.
No familiarity diminishes the disagreeable duty of proceeding through low, hot, and damp galleries, bent with the chest on the knees, under the oppression of clothes damp with moisture or perspiration, which the inspector must endure.
Proprietors themselves, whose direct interest it is to be aware of what is going forward under ground, are obliged to depend for inspection on their underlookers or foremen, who have been colliers.
In a large proportion of accidents, especially those where the witnesses are themselves destroyed, it would, I conceive, be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to prove against underlookers or proprietors the neglect of proper precaution. For example, in explosions of fire-damp the air-doors are frequently blown to pieces, the waggons dashed to atoms, the roof brought in by collapse from the exhaustion of the air in the mine, and, in short, the position of everything so completely deranged that it would be impossible to arrive at any correct conclusion as to the state of things previous to the accident.
A boy is thrown out of a tub in ascending the pit-shaft by the chairs coming in contact half way, the chairs may or may not be broken, the body is found dashed to pieces at the bottom; if it so happen that there are no marks either on the chairs or basket to show that they have been in contact, no one would be so bold as to swear that it was so. Numerous cases of this nature might be cited.
It may be a question whether extensive remedies are not practicable by the application of the principle of concentrating responsibility on those who have the best means of prevention, by such self-acting arrangements as shall give them a direct interest in prevention. Coal-owners and the underlookers of collieries assume that all the accidents which are not caused by the negligence of the workmen themselves are absolutely unavoidable, and in the present state of their interest and knowledge I believe them to be sincere in their assumption. As evidence of its truth, and in justification, they may adduce the frequent return of verdicts of simply “accidental death” upon inquests before the coroners. Conceding most fully that a large extent of accident is an unavoidable and essential concomitant of this branch of industry, the question then arises, Why should not this branch of industry bear the whole of its necessary and unavoidable consequences?
The more this question is examined, the more I apprehend will it be found desirable that the full expenses of such accidents should be borne by that branch of industry in which they are created; in which case they will be borne either by those who, as producers, have the chief profits, or they will fall, as I apprehend they ought to fall, on the consumers.
The satisfaction of the pecuniary losses attendant on personal injuries from accidents, heavy and long continued as those losses are, will be found to be a consideration of minor importance to the prevention of the accidents; and, above all, the prevention of the degraded mental condition of the reckless population amidst which such accidents occur. By imposing the pecuniary consequences, not as penalties for omissions, which at present are really not wilful, but as a trade charge or insurance payable by the branch of industry liable to the accidents, an interest will be created in their prevention on the part of those who alone have the means of efficiently preventing them. Instead of a penalty in the expense to which they might be put, they would thus have a perpetually acting bounty in the saving of every new improvement, and would be made the most efficient inspectors—having in every foreman and collier a superintendent in himself, gratis to the public.