The Daily News. MONDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1914. THE HUNTLY DISASTER.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LVII, Issue 118, 12 October 1914, Page 4

The Daily News. MONDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1914. THE HUNTLY DISASTER.

The Commission which has been enquir ing into the Huntly disaster has con' eluded tho hearing of evidence on the spot and adjourned to Wellington, where it is possible that further enquiry may take place, so that it is not justifiable to refer to matters connected with | the disaster itself. There is, however, | one very important phase of the affair that may he commented upon without in any way intruding upon the quasijudicial functions of the Commission, inasmuch as the matter in question concerns only the action of the Mines Department. It has been established by oflicial evidence that the dangerous state of the miuc3 at Huntly was brought to the attention of the Department both by the inspector of mines for the district, Mi Boyd Bennie, and the inspecting engineer of mines, Mr Frank Reed. The former suggested to the Under-Secretary of Mines that the manager should be prosecuted, and the latter not only endorsed that recommendation, but on six or seven occasions warned the head of the department of the danger of an explosion, and yet no action was taken. It is, of course, impossible to say whether or not the terrible calamity would have happened if tho prosecution had eventuated, but there are strong grounds for inferring that steps would have been taken to prevent the existence of the causes of danger, had a prosecution been entered upon, and regardless of whether it succeeded or failed. This theory is certainly suppoitcd by the subsequent developments as the result of tho enquiry by the Royal Commission, the company having stopped blasting operations until further orders in consequence of the statements made to the Commission by the Inspecting Engineer of the Mines Department that monobel was a dangerous explosive, and that the use of it was risking tho lives of the company's employees. Tho question naturally arises as to whether, if publicity had been given fo tho suggestions of the experts mentioned relative to the prosecution of the manager, the hands of the departmont and of the company woul4 not have been forced, and muQh. trouble, sorrow, and hardship ■"prevented. That, however, is only speculative. The real point that concerns the public is the attitude of tho Department in face of the warnings given by its officers. Why was nothing done? That is what the Minister has to find out and explain to the country. It is extremely satisfactory to find that the Minister himself is absolved from ' blame in all but allowing the need for tho prosecution to slip from hi 3 memory. From the indorsement made by him on the memo, sent to him by the Under-Secretary on tho day of the explosion, it is evident that he had given instructions to prosecute tho manager, and it is also clear that theso instructions were not carried out. Why? In face of tho terrible loss of life that hj;» been caused and the responsibility that attaches to the Minister as the head of the department, there is only one honorable course to pursue. The Minister can only justify himself by making a frauk and full statement in the House as to why his instructions were disregarded, it would be unfair to condemn either the Minister or his subordinates until they liavo presented their side of the question; but there should be no delay, and no equivocation. The public will j not be satisfied .with tho lame excuse that a prosecution might not have succeeded, but there may still be some reasons to advance that may bo acceptable, and those explanations should be forthcoming at once. The first and greatest considerations in relation to the working of coal mines are adequate ventilation and effective safeguards against explosions of gas. It is the duty of the Mines Department to seo that theso and other requirements are enforced, and if there is any laxity in this respect the publio rightly demand to know who is responsible, and what guarantee can be given as to the future. Apparently, the prop on which tho public faith has depended has proved too fragile for use.