DAMAGE TO WOODS, ETC , BY SPARKS FROM RAILWAY ENGINES. 293 



of damage by fire, due to sparks from railway engines, and in 

 which the loss occasioned is estimated at about <£3130, £i only has 

 been paid " without prejudice" to one out of the sixteen owners 

 or occupiers who applied for compensation ; and in the remaining 

 fifteen cases it was not thought worth while to apply. It was 

 well known that after the decision of the House of Lords in 1893, 

 the companies were disclaiming all responsibility for the fires 

 caused by the engineSj and proof of " negligence " was, generally 

 speaking, impossible. Perhaps if Mr Justice Day's decision of 

 June 1900 had been more widely known, some of those who 

 suffered loss might have been encouraged to press their claims on 

 the companies with greater urgency, or even to carry them before 

 the Courts. But however that may be, the judgment in question 

 is a very important one. It is difficult to understand why rail- 

 way companies should continue to be " worked under a certain 

 system of protection " ; and why an Act entitling a company to 

 construct a railway through the country should involve the 

 neighbouring owners and occupiers in a risk of serious loss for 

 which they are practically unable to obtain compensation, and 

 should force them, besides, to expend large yearly sums on measures 

 of protection which cannot always secure their pi'operty against 

 the fire which the companies are carrying through the land. 



Every possible effort should be made to alter our law to that 

 which prevails in foreign countries, where, as Mr Justice Day 

 says, if railway companies cause damage of this kind they have to 

 pay for it. As the learned judge observes, the companies are 

 then " more likely to study everything which would protect their 

 own pockets." 



It is obvious that the railways must continue to run, and their 

 number will be added to; but it appears to be only simple justice 

 and common sense that they should not enjoy " protection " when 

 carrying fire, for their own profit, through the property of others. 



Mr Jeffrey's Bill was blocked ; but it is understood that he 

 will re-introduce it during the current session of Parliament ; 

 let us hope that it may receive strong support from both sides of 

 the House. 



VOL. XVI. PART II. 



