Second report of the Departmental Committee appointed to inquire into the law relating to coroners and coroners' inquests, and into the practice in coroners' courts.

  • Great Britain. Committee on Coroners.
Date:
1909
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Second report of the Departmental Committee appointed to inquire into the law relating to coroners and coroners' inquests, and into the practice in coroners' courts. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    55/232 (page 25)
    Do 5 15 June 1909.] ———— (Continued. 6888. Then the only protection that you would have would be the marking of the flannelette as inflammable or non-inflammable ?—Yes. 6889. Would you provide that every article must be marked as inflammable or non-inflammable ?—Yes, that, I think, ought to be done. 6890. So that it would be illegal to sell any article that was not so marked P—Yes. 6891. You would not prevent the sale of inflam- mable articles, but would simply require them to be indicated so that the purchaser shall know what he or she is buying ?—Yes; then the responsibility would be his or hers. 6892. You also suggest that with the invoice, if I might call it so, there should be an intimation on it of the character of the article that is sold ?—Yes. 6893. And a duplicate of it kept ?—Yes. 6894. What is the object of the duplicate ?—In case of an inquest or any question arising, the person would say, “I bought the material at such-and-such a shop,” and then the invoice could be hunted up to see whether it was really proof or non-proof that the person had bought. 6895. Then you would want some means of identi- fication between the article sold and the invoice and the duplicate >—Yes, that might not always be possible. 6896. Looking at it again from the point of view of practicability, I cannot quite see the object of the duplicate unless there is some means of identifying the duplicate with the article sold?—I do not quite follow. 6897. I take it that you want the name put on the invoice of the person buying ?—Yes, and that would be kept. 6898. The name would be kept on the invoice? —Yes. 6899. But from a legal point of view that would be no proof that the article that is sold is the identical article referred to in the invoice, would it ?—It would surely be very strong evidence. 6900. You see that there is a question there to be considered P—Yes; my idea was, of course, that if that duplicate could be produced the person would say: “I bought at such-and-such a shop so many yards of flannelette,’ and it would be shown by the duplicate, if it could be identified by the name, whether it was proof or non-proof flannelette which had been served to that person. 6901. It would show that a piece of flannelette either inflammable or non-inflammable had been sold ? —Yes. 6902. But beyond that it would show nothing ?— Unless it had the person’s name on it. 6903, Hven then it would not identify the par- ticular article sold, would it ?—I think so. If it came out at the inquest that the person had bought a piece of flannelette ona certain day from a certain manu- facturer, and he produced to you the duplicate with the person’s name on it and the number of yards of flannelette sold with the word “ proof” or “‘non-proof ”’ on it, it would surely be very strong evidence whether the person had or had not received inflammable flannelette. 6904. I am merely questioning the advisability of the duplicate being retained for two years. It may be an onerous duty on the seller to have to retain these things for a long period, and to fill up all these forms, especially as the article must be marked either inflammable or non-inflammable as the case may be P— Iam inclined to think that it would not be a serious matter. 6905. How is the inspector to inspect foreign articles P—I imagine that at the present time when foreign spirits come into the country they are carefully examined and checked. 6906. But that would assume the setting up of some custom house; they would have to pass through a custom house, or bond, as the term is P—Yes. 6907. How would you get over that difficulty P—I imagine that, as you suggested just now, the whole of the flannelette from abroad might come through one or two houses at different places; it would then have to pass through bond and be inspected by an inspector on the spot to see whether it was proof or non-proof. 6908. In other words, they would have to pass through a custom house P—Yes. 6909. That would be a certain trouble or restriction upon the sale of the article, would it not ?—Yes. 6910. And further, all these things which you have referred to would raise the price of the article >— To a small extent, certainly. The fire-proofing treat- ment also raises the price to a certain extent; but ar important point is this, that even if you put a con- siderable amount on to the price of flannelette you still keep it a very long way off the price of flannel. <A poor person has the choice only of two things: either to use wool or flannel, or to use flannelette; and flan- nelette will bear a great addition before it comes anywhere near the price of wool or flannel. 6911. At present it is very popular, partly because it is so cheap ?—Yes. 6912. If you materially raise the price of the article it would lose its popularity, pro tanto, possibly ? —I do not think so; because, as I said just now, what are persons to wear if they cannot wear flannelette ? 6913. Is it not a foregone conclusion that poor people with limited means, if they had to pay more would not be able to buy so much ?—That is quite true. 6914, (Sir Malcolm Morris.) Is flannelette made in large bulk, so that the test would cover a large piece ? —Yes, it comes in in large pieces of something like 60 or 80 yards. 6915. So that one test would cover 60 or 80 yards ? Yes, I do not think the pieces are larger. 6916. (Mr. Bramsdon.) But you suggest that every two yards should be marked ?—Yes, but not tested. 6917. (Str Malcolm Morris.) But every piece would have to be tested ?—Not necessarily. 6918. (Mr. Bramsdon.) Would you consider it a sufficient test if one roll of 70 or 80 yards were tested ?—For that piece ? 6919. Yes ?—Certainly. 6920. That would be sufficient, you think ?—Quite sufficient. 6921. Can you tell me the quantity of this article that comes from abroad P—No, I can find it out for you, I know it isa very large quantity. 6922. Have you any idea of the extent to which flannelette as a whole is sold in this country ?—No. 6923. Have you any idea of the proportion that comes from abroad P—No, except that I know it is a very large proportion. 6924. Do you know how many people make flannel- ette ?—That I cannot say. 6925. In England ?—That I cannot tell you. 6926, Would there be a large number of manufac- turers ?—There are a good many manufacturers in the Manchester district. 6927. Then there would be a great many places to which the inspector would have to go ?—Yes, certainly. I suppose there would be several inspectors, and each one I suppose would be responsibie for his own district. 6928. Do you suggest that every manufacturer who makes flannelette should report that fact to, say, the Home Office >—Certainly. 6929. And that it should be penal on the part of a manufacturer to sell the articles without a test having been made and the article having been properly marked ?—Certainly. 6930. (Scr Malcolm Morris.) Is there any test in any foreign country where they make it and ship it to this country, before it is shipped to this country P—Not so far as I know. ' 6931. (Mr. Bramsdon.) Do you know how many patents there are of suggested non-inflammability remedies ?—I know there are a large number, and I have been through several of them, but I cannot tell you how many there are. 6932. Are there approximately 100 non-inflammable patents in respect of flannelette?—I do not think so. There are not many. I thought you meant, generally speaking, for wood and everything else. 6933. No, lam speaking merely of flannelette. T do not want to go into any other article. How many