I.—6a.

24

[a. l. margan.

go back on to the main line when this train is approaching. The train goes forward on the main line after depositing the passengers at New Lynn, and it goes right on to the line where the other train is coming in. 92. Can you give us any information as to what really caused this collision? —I am giving you my personal opinion from what I xvitnessed. 93. Do you know anything about the Railway Regulations?— No. 94. .1//. McVilly.] You said there is no discipline at the New Lynn Station?—l stated that there did not appear to be any discipline. 95. On what grounds do you state that?— From observations I have taken as a layman or as a man who has charge of men working under me. 96. You claim to have been observing the conditions for seven years?—l have been in the district for seven years, and have seen the place grow from then up to present date. 97. You said the tablet porter is junior and has no authority over the guards and their assistants?—l did not state that. 98. That is what you did state?—l stated that the tablet porter was in charge of the station as far as I knew, but that there did not appear to be the authority that there should be in a station of that kind, I did not say he xvas junior. 99. You stated definitely more than once that the tablet porter was junior?—l did not use the term " junior." 100. You said tlie tablet porter had no authority over the other men?— Not as it appeared to me. I said I was not aware of it, anil did not know whether he had. 101. This is the regulation on the point: "In all cases where trains cross or shunt at tablet stations the guards must act under the protection of and assist the porter in charge, the porter in charge being responsible for certain other duties." Who is the senior man under that regulation? —I should say the porter is in charge of tho station. 102. Then the statement you made that, the tablet porter had no assistants is not correct? —How do you mean, " no assistants " ? 103. Because as he is in charge of the station and can direct the guards and assistants on the train, while the train is at his station they are under his control and they must carry out his instructions? —I said that the tablet porter was solely by himself as far'as I could see, but there were other people there when the train arrived. 104. That should cover the guard and assistants as being of assistance to the tablet porter? —Yes, it should cover it. 105. You also said that the appointment of a Stationmaster would have prevented the accident this particular morning. Will you state hoxv the appointment of a Stationmaster would have prevented the bad rails? If a Stationmaster were appointed I do not consider that the train would have been allowed to go forward on such a morning. 106. But xvould the appointment of a Stationmaster prevent the dew of heaven falling on the rail?—l did not bring in the dew of heaven. 107. You spoke of greasy rails?—l xvas asked as to the weather-conditions, and I said that a fog did prevail, that it was a misty morning, and the rails xvere greasy. 108. How xvould the appointment of a Stationmaster prevent that?—l do not say the appointment of a Stationmaster would prevent that position. I do not know whether it comes under the Stationmaster's duty to dictate the weather-conditions. 109. In what way was the Stationmaster going to prevent this accident seeing that the tablet porter exercises all the duties of Stationmaster under that regulation?— The tablet porter may exercise them or he may not. One of the xvitnesses gave evidence here yesterday that he wilfully broke the regulations, and that while he was breaking the regulations he knew he was doing something that would be a danger to the travelling public. 110. Who broke the regulation?— The porter in charge broke the regulation. 111. Who says he did?—He said he did himself. 112. You mean Mr. McDerinott? —Yes. 113. He was not there during the period we are discussing? —He was a porter himself and he was there for two years, and ho said that during the six months he xvas at this station the regulation had not been carried out. 114. No. that is not so?— When you asked the porter yesterday was not the first law of the Department to consider the safety of the travelling public he answered Yes. You then asked him if he considered the ptitting of this train forward as a safe practice, and did he consider he was carrying out the regulations of the Department, and he said No. The point we have to consider is not what it says in the rule-book, but how it is carried out at the New Lynn Station. The man openly admitted that he broke the rule. 115. Apart from that question, he did not break the rule?—l am not in a position to say whether he broke it. but he admitted he was not working in the best interests of the travelling public when he put the train forward. 116. Taking tlie question of shunting, part of your complaint seems to be the accommodation at the station? —Yes. 117. You have told us all about your firm's business and tho business of other people. Now, wdien your firm was asked to pay for additional accommodation to deal with its business,, did it do it? —I do not knoxv if it was asked. 118. You know a lot about public requirements, but this is your own business? —We have no desire for further accommodation. We have a very good siding and plenty of room. What I said was that at times when the station was congested and the work left unfinished by the trains I had pointed out to the Traffic Inspector the unsatisfactory way in xvhich the work was done, and asked if they could get it done by later trains, xvith the result that they have always endeavoured to fix us up with later trains.