Mt Kembla Mine Disaster Report 1903 part 4 by UOW Library

732 Jrit11ess-Dr. J. R. M. Robertson,

u Mo.rch,

1903.

2l3!0. Nr. Wadi'.] I object. Tba~ is llimpl_v an nnswer to a Jong s~ring of questions which were aeked the witnN'S. The l ook was the 01d1nary book kept under the Coal. Mmes Act. . . . 2-132 l. His H unor.] Tho only object of this evidence would be lo induce the witness to modify his own opinion.

· Mon day.J [The Commission, at 4 p.m., adjourned until 12 o'clock the f o1!owing JUOSDAY, 0 Mil.ROH, 1903, 12 NOON.

[T!tc Commission met at tlic Supreme Court, King-street, Sydney.] t)rc~ent:-

C. E. R. MURRAY, D. A. W. ROBERTSON, EsQ., COMMISSIOXER.

E SQ.,

D.C.J.

{ P RESIDEK.T). D. RITCHIE, Es~.• CoMMISSIONEn.

Mr. Bruce Smith, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by }\fr. W ood, Crown Solicitor's Office, appeared on behalf of the Crown. Mr. A. A. Atkinson, Chief Inspector of Ccal-mines, assisted l'.Ir. Bruce Smith. M r. A. A. Lysaght, Solicitor, appeared on behalf of(a) the representatives of deceased miners, wheelers, &c., (victi:ns of the explosion); (b) the employees of the Mount Kembla. Colliery (miners, wheelers, &c.); and (c) tho llJa.warra Colliery Employees' Association (the Southern Miners' Union). 1\1r. C. G. \Vadc, Barrister a.t-Law, inst ructed by l\Iessrs. Curtiss and Barry, Solicitors, was present on behalf of the l\Iount Kembla Coal and Oil Corupany (Proprietors of t he Mount Kerubla Mine).

(Mr. J. Garlick, Secretary to the Commission, was pr~sent to take sh0rthanu notes of tl:e evidence and proceedings.) Dn. R OBE.RTSO~. pre'i'iuusly swor n, was further examined as -qnder :-

Crnss-examina.tion by Mr. Lysaght:2:1,322. Q. You tolJ Mr. ·w ade that "subsequently to the disaster wo wore naturall.v casting about in e,·ery possible woy to account for it" ;-when did you fix on this suggestion about the heated hlast oE win<l? A. I do not think that I could gire you any particular time; but I began to think about it-I began to study it very earnestly; and then J wrote t o sC1me friends in tbe north of England ; and they suggested that I might see Mr. Dickenson's suggestion as to the Udston explosion. • 213:!3. Q. I t is clear, then, that you could n ot have had this wind theory until after the month of ~eptembcr? A. Yes. The very day that we examined, we could see nothing beyoud the effects of a wi nu blast; but we coul d not account, Mr. Lysaght, for the carbonic oxide. We knew that there must have been heat; and, probably, some of the examiners t hought that tbere must have been fire. 2-132 t Q. You said that the day you examined the mine you formed the theory of the wind blast? A. No theory nt all-tbe opinion. :!-l-:32.;. Q. Do you mean the first da.v that you went in ? A. Yes. 24H2G. Q. 1'he night"of the di!>Mter ? A. ~o. 24327,. Q. The 4th of August r A. The 4th of August. 2 rn2s. Q. But on that day you liad not seen one.quarter of the evidences of force? A. I hnd seen t bem al ,. 2-:1,l29. Q. Did not you tell Mr. WaJe that it wns o,Ying to the suggestion you got from a friend in the north of England that you looked into t hi::1 theory of Mr. Dickenson'.:;? A. No. I do not know how it may h:i.,·o been conveyed; but I <lid not quilo mean that. I suggested the matter to Mr. F oster of Newc:i..stle-on-Tyne; and, in replying-, he l>aid that it was not a new matter, but thnt it had been rath~r a fav ourite theory of l\1r. Dickenson'!', by which he bad accounted for, or suggested the r eason of, some of the great eollit!ry explosions. 2!-:3:JO. Q. Now, you ha.re no other suggestion lo make to the Commission concerning the cause? A.. No, I ha'"c no other sugJe~tion. :! l "i31. Q. Let me clParly understand, now, what it is you do suggest: it is that the fall , you say, of 4.4 square yards - - [In!f"1·ruptl'(l] ? A. FvrLy-four yards sq uare. 2~332. Q.11ho fi.11 of 4t yarJs sq uare in tho 4Lb Right forced out air at n \'elo,;ity of 700 miles per hour? A. About that. 2433,3. Q. Whit:h generated he:it by reason of lho fri ction? A. AuJ compression. 2-1'l3-t, Q. By reason of the fri ction and the compression ;-do you want to add anything to that? A. No. ~.1,a~.;. Q. Do you know that that is what Mr. Seller~ has tolJ 1ho Commi~sion? A .. I think it very lik ~ly. 243.~6. Q. And do JOU know thnt l\1r. Sellers admitted that he ma.fo his calculation on the ass umption thnt the roof fell i11 vacuo? A. No, I did uot know that. 21337. Q. I>id you know that? A. No, [ diJ uot kuow that . It woulu be of no use to make that l!ll,!?gestion, because - - [Interrupted ]. 24:33S. Q. One moment, please ; - if Mr. Sc:llers slated that his calculations were made on the assumption that the. roof f ell in vacnn, the result;1 would be manifestly absurd. would they not? A. It is :ill assum_pttun: Iu any case, I really c:rnnot understand why anybody could suggP,st that the roof fell in the 4th Right rn vacuo. 2·.l:339. - <?· But I am puttiog it to 5ou that, iE l\Jr. Sc:Ilers admitted that he made his calculation on ·the a..;surnp_twn. that the roof ditl _fall in vacuo, his conclusions woulJ be manifestly absurd-would they not? A. I thmk m that branch of 1t probably they would; but that is only one branch of the calculations. In the other branch, of course, be aE1sumed a press~re; and theI.l - - [Interrupted]. 24340.

733

Jl'itiie~j- Dr. J. R. 1\1. Robertson, 9 )1arch, 1903.

24340. Q. \Vait n moment; I want to get it cleal' ;-if he did it on .that basi~, it would be absurd ? A.. I think Mr. Sellers had better answer that himself. 2434-1. M r. B arr!/] I think, your Honor, that Dr. Robertrnn might be allowed to explain. 24342. Wilneu .] I really do not see how you can do more than assume that that is more than n. reasonable suggestion, becauee you rn.n nerer get at the facturd. 24343. Mr. Lysaglil.] Q. Do yo:i know n.lso, or do I tako it that you put it foma.rd ns pa.rt of your suggestion, that tho roof fell in a block rnlidly, momentarily? A. Ob, yes; I think it bas nll the appearance_of that. 243441. Q. So that th e actual fall of the r oof would be ~omrti1ing about a quarter of a second in time? A . Rath er more than that. 24:H5. Q. Half a second in time? A. W ell, just a little ove r half a second. 2434u. Q. In the whole of your mining experience, ham you C\"er known the r oof to fall in Lal[ a srcocd? A. I think any individual part of the roof would fall in half a second. 24347. Q. Did you ever know of an instance where an area of 44 yards square has fallen in Lal£ a second? A. W elJ, I do not suppo~e anybody e ,·er took the time of a fall. I would not like to be near 4:ll yards square·fnlling. 243!8. Q. D o you mean to s:iy, as a l\iiniog Engineer, that you believe that an area of r oof 44- yards Fquare could fall in l,alf a second? A. I think so. I see nothing to pre,·ent it. 24'349. Q. You sny that seriously? A. Yes, I do. 2-1350. Q. Now, did you work out the i:peed of 700 n1iles per hour yourself-the mathematical part of it? A. Y es 2435l. Q. You did? A. Y es. . 24352. Q. I want to fiorl out h ow you get t.his velocity-mn.tbema.tica11y? A. Ycs. 24135:3. Air. R ifc 1iie.] Q. Before you get away from that, do you mean that the fallin~ roof came a.vay Fquare in a bod.r, or one end of it ahead of the other? A. Pradicall.v, so far a. T coulll judgc the fall, it appeared to come aw:iy almost bodily. Of coursC', I coulu not say whether the free end came away fir~ t or n ot, but probably it would come nway fi rst; but it is cnt clear off, sh orp off, by the side of the rib. 24354. Q. Then, your opinion is, that the body came away practically as quickly frcm one end as from the other? A. I think so, pretty nearly that. . 2-1355. M r. Lysa_qht. ] I s i t n ot essential for the maintenance of your suczgestion that the whole 4-1 yards square area. should hare fallen i11 a solid body in about halE a second? A. Oh, no. \Ve allowed about 50 per cent. to have .escaped. 24356. If you d o not mind, will you kindly follow me while you work it out. I want you to show me b ow you get the 700 miles per hour. You said you worked it out yourself ;-will you kindly tell me how you did work it out to get 700 miles per hour, because I can only get 47 at the outside? A. Very well, take the cubical capacity of the air t hat would be diaplaced. 2-1,357. Q. Will you do it for me: I want the figures from you that you worked out: I want them on record from you? A. I only throw it out as a suggestion; I know the frailties of it quite well; it m ust all be based on an assumption. 24358. Q. I am n ot speaking of an assumption at all; I want it mathematically. Will you just give me the figures, so that they can go down on the notes, whereby you mathematically get 700 miles au hour? A. Y es. 2445!) Q. You had an area of H yards square ? A. Yes ; and then the area displaced-G feet of air. 2 l360. Q. Wh ere did you get G feet of air from ? A. From the vacancy. 24361. Q. Did you not know t hat 2-! feet Lad already fallen? A. No. Still there would ban~ been G feet above. 24362. Q. Are yon aware thR.t Mr. Sellers took it as 4!, and got this? A. No. 21363. Q. Then, do you say that you took it as (j feet, and got 700 miles per h our? A. Y es. 24364. Q. And you never knew that Mr. Sellers took it at 4 feet G inches? A. Not so far as I am aware. 24365. Q. Wi11 you tf'll me the amount that was displaced? A. Something like 2,0JO yar ds. 24356. Q. W ould you mind giving it to me? 24367. H is Ho11or. ] After all, it is a calculation that is f,,uuded on all s rts of co-efficients, which have to be comidered. 2.1:368. Witness.] Oh , yes. I would be ,·er.v glad to hand it in. This is no place to go into a calculation. 21169. His Honor. ] The air must be cOmpres!!ed before it can acquire the velocity. 2-1370. Mr. Lysaglit ] Q. , v ill you admit that, malhernaticJlly, you cannot get it to 'iOO miles per h our? A. No; mathematically, you can get it. 2437 l. Q. Yo u will undertake to S\'ork that. out so that th e figu res can appear on the re~ord? A. Oh, yes. 24372. Q. Lea\'ing the mathematical part of it, now, I want you to consider the fi rst datum-that :s, 1f it fell in a solid body; did n ot you know that 2 feet G inches had fallen ? A. No. 2 1373. Q. Whe n did you first hear-th1t? A. I did nnt bear that until uow. 2 l374. Q. D id not I tell you last wt'ek, on Thur$day? A. W ell, of course, I meant that I heard it in this Court. Jf you did tell mf', I did not recollect it; but it is since I came into this Court. 24375 (j. D id you ask Morrison whether the r oof had fallen before? A. I did n ot ask him whether any bad folleu; but I asked him the area; he said about 15 or ,J,(.j yards; but he cert:iiuly diu not say that any had fallen. 2 l:Hu. Q. W ht'n you went to view that waste, the stones noar the edge:\ of the goaf were all brokt'n up? A. Ko, they were in very large Bags. 24"J77. Q. 13ut they were n ot one solid flag? A. \Yeli, there were some of them, I could ~et', vrry Jarae 8uas · 0 0 ' they were probal,Jy u; inches thick, or pcrhap.i a li~tle less. 24378. Q. Did they not inriicnll3 that the top stones were <:lean? A. I could u oL see the top; it wns too far up. 24379. Q. I mran at the edge of the goaf? A. ~ o, I did not see anything to draw my attention to that. 2*:jS0. Q. Did you not sec anything indicatiug tltat the fall !tad not finished before the disaster? A . .Ko. 2 L·B t. Q. D id you not tell m) yo•.irs')lf that in o:l) of youl' eumi nations you could see that the fall had been completed bet1rnen the time you first went thero and the rncond time? A. Of course, that is a very different thing; all nloog the roads there were stone~ falling every day . . 24382. Q. I am speaking o: the goaf? A. No. ·

2'138 3.

734 Witne.~.~-Dr. J. R. i\f. R obertson, 0 March, HI03.

24383. Q. You did not tell me that? A. I do not think so. . . 24381!. Q. This is it, pn,ra. 242!:JO, "Q. Do you not, lrnow that an inspection 1·evealed the fact .thnt. the stun.es were clean-in fa ct they fell afterwards? A. Some of the stones had fallen between the time of my firat o.nd second visit; bu~ (do not think that that indicated anything. I do not see how, in falls of tb11;t large extent, the stones can be coated with dust; because the fa.ll would expel the whole of the dust with the air" r A. Tbat is a totall v different thing. 24383. Q. There you sny that between your two visits some of the stones ho.d .certainly fallen? A. Ob, it was falling every day. 2438G. Q. Uo you mean to tell me you were not referring to the waste? A. Oh, no; I was never in the waste. 24387. Q. Do you meau to tell me that, when you n.nswered that question, you were not referring to the vmste ? A. No, I wa.s not. . 24388. Q. What were you referring to ? A. ThA roads. 2!380. Q. !\ow, this i.~ n. question before that; "Q. And, the ·first fall havmg come down a week before the disaster, is it not pos:,ible that the roof .would contiuue to fall in emall pieces?" and you answered, "The evidence is that it came down all at, once."? A. Yes. 2!390. Q. That is tlie roof of the goaf, is it not? A. Yes. . 2439 l. Q. 1'hcn, "Do you not know that an inspection re\'ealed the fact that the stones were clean-in fact, they fell nfterll'ards r" That referred to the stones in the goaf? A. I did not take it that w11y at all. It wM impossible for me to answer a question like that, or any other body, because nobody could get in. Oh , no; there were individual stones falling from tho roof in that r.eighbourhood during the whole of the six weeks or two months n.ftcr. 24:39~. Q. Can you give me any instauce of a f.~ll -:1:4 yards square coming in one solid block in your mining experience? A. No. I l"ee nothing to prevent it - - [£•Mer1·upted]. 2!H93. Q. But you cannot give any instance of it. Now, leaving that p:irt of the data-the solid falland coming to the height, do you say that tbe first fall of 2 feet 6 inches would no.t make any difference? A. I <lo not know anything about the ffrst fall of 2 feet 6 inches. · 24394 Q. Io your opinion, would a fall, a week before the disaster, of 2 feet 6 inches, make any difference iu the suggestion ? A. Prncticnlly none. 24395. Mr. Ritchie. ] Q. Would the first fall of 2 feet G inches produce a blast of wind equal to that which you have calcula.teJ to be produced by the second fall? A. I do not think so. I do not think i~ would materially :J.,lter the second. Besides, I do not kno"· anyt.hi ng about the fall of 2 feet 6 inches. 24896. Q. I do not think you quitP. grasp the question. We have evidence here that there was a fall of 2 feet 6 inches, which has not been contradicted. This evidE>nce has b.eeu given by the deputy, who· went tp see whether it would fall or not. Would this full, a solid fall of 2 feet G inches thicl<, produce the same volume of wind that you say h9.s been produced by the second fall? A. Ob, no. 24397. Q. Why ? A. It would not have tho weight to do it. l t would not have the weight to force the air out of the narrow, constricted, space. Be:-ides, 1 do not know anything about the 2 feet 6 inches fall. 'rhis is the first I have heard of it. I am sure Morrison and Rogers were there; and they would have told me of it. 24'!08. Mr. Lysa.qlit.J Q. Do I understand .vou to ~n.y that the weight of a falling bod.,·, in a <li~tanco of 6 feet onlr, is of no ~rea.t importance 1;pou the rolume thn.t would be forced out? A. I do not think that 2 feeL G inches of a fall would be likely to eome down a!l in a piece. That trnuld come down in dribs and driblets. 24399. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Do not you know in practice tbnt the first fall is the most likely to be a solid fall P A. I do not thiuk so. 24100. Q. I suppo~e you ha\'e seen falls yourself frequently? A. Oh, yes, ian,U).llerable time!!. 24-101. Q. And you say the first fall generally comes in dribs and drabR, and th e second solidly? A. Yes, I think so;. in fact I saw some falls in Newcastle a few weeks ago, and t~ey came down very gradual'. y. 24402. Q. ls that your ex pericuce in the south? A. That is my experience altogether. I do not ·know that it is different in the south from the north. · · 24403. Q. Are the strata the same? A. They are \'ery similar strata 2·.1404. Q. Do the strata. in the north and the south differ? A. I think that in the old pits in Newcastle the strata are pretty much the samo ns in the south. 24405. Q. lo the falls you h:we seen, did they come down in a sq-uare block, or hoop themselves out in falling? A. No; they came down from the outer margins, and came clown gradually. 2440U. (J. Ooes the fall come in a square block? A. There is no rule for that. 2+407. (2. No rule at all ? A. No rule at all. 24-!0S. Q. Do~s it appeal to yonr common sense very strongly to imagin~, even if you had not seen it, that the first fall would be likrly to come away more solidly than the second fall, which would be a broken surface? A. No, I do not think i;o. 21409: M,·. Lysaglit.J (,!. ·.rhat does not an:-wer the question as to whether you say tha.t a falling bod_y is ma~er,ally affected by the \\'P-ight of it fo_rciog out air, in a fall of only 6 feet? A. Th:it is to say, the resistance ol: the air would affect the time of falling? · ~ 14LU. (/No; whether the weight of the solid body falling ha'i any appreciable difference to the air that 1,, fo1·ced out , when the fall is only 6 feet high? [ Witn ess did not ansicer. ] 2HLI. Q. Do you mean that a fall 4 feet G iuches in thi ckness would have any greater power in forl.!ing out air than a fail 2 feet G i nche:. in thiclrnesti, when toe height of the fall is only G feet? 11. Yes. 2HI 2. Mr. Robertson.] (I, In other wordil, the velocitv of the air would be aoverned by the weight of the falling body ? A. Certainly. • ~ 24413. His Honor. ] lt is simply that the fall of that mass of matteL' is converted into horizontal force of the air. 244l4. Witness .] If thera were no openino to the air I could conceive that the air would impede the 0 body falling completely. ' 244!15. M,_-. L1jsa.9lit.J Q. When you were making your calculations, did you allow anything for the atmo~pheric .pre!!sure beneath the fall of 16·7 lb. per square inch? A. l-.b·7, I think. · 2441G. Q. Did you make any allowance for it? A. Yes. 24417. Q. And you still got 700 miles ? A. Yes. 2-1:418.

.: I

735

Witne.is- Dr. J. R. M. Robertson, 9 March, 1903.

24:418. Q. Do you know that Mr. Sellers slated that be allowed for it4 and he g0t 700 miles? A. No; I .do,not know what anybody stated here. I lrnre not read a single word of the evidence. 244.19. Q. But you do know that you both got the 700 miles? A. Yes; and you can get it another way. 24420. Q. Then t hose two of the data. are wrong. Y 011 see tl111t the height is wrong, because there "as a fall of 2 feet G inches already. Xow, coming to the next datum, llid you allow anything for the relief that the pressure of air would get from the back heading? A. Ob, yes. 1442l. Q. What did vou a.Jlow for it? A. I allowed in the calculation · 24422. Q. What did. you allow for it? A. To get the energy of the air yon do not require any relief at all. W orking out the time the body took to fall, the cubical capacity of the nir displaced, and the area of the pa~sage, would gfre you the velocity. 2U23. Q. And the firt1t opening in the arra of t.h:it passage would natur11lly relie\'C the pressure, would it not? A. I do not quite understand you. 2442-!o. His H ono1·.] 'f ha.t only comes in as far as the comprestiion is cor.cerned. 2-t425. j}fr. L.vsa_qht.] Yes. 24426. Q. Would not the back heading relieve the compression of the air? A. I have nothing to do with that portion of the calculation at all, the batk heading. 2:1:427. Q. Did you make any allowance? A. It does not nquire any. 24 ~28. Q. Did you make a11y allowance? A. In t bat branch of the ca.Jculation you would requi re to make no allowance. 24429. Q. I a~k you did you? - 24430. His H onor.] The Doctor is natu rally rather tro uoled by the question, because the allowance fo r relief would be a negative quantity. T he moro relie f, 1he more Yelocity; the more relief, the Jess pressur~. 2:1:431. Mr. Lysa_9ltt.] Q. 1 ask you did you make any allowance? A. Ko. • 24!-!12. Q. Taking that current, as I take it you do, that it struck the face of the main level - [interrupted]? A. Yes, 1 unde,stand. 2J 433. Q. Do you make any allowance for the <li,·ersion of forces there, and the consequent reduction? A. No: It is not required. Tb e dama~e is done then. 21484 Q. Then do I unJer3tand thaL this blast of air you speak of would. only travel up and do~n the main level? A. Oh, no; it would dissipate into all the oren spaces a~ it went along, just as any other force would. 24435. Q. Can you account for the fact that it did not do MY damage do\rn the 5th Bight? A. At the 5th Right you mean. 24136. Q. Wl;iere the nth llight intersects t'1e main level? A. It practically diJ no damage either on the 5th Right or the 4th Left, a. dry road. 244::37. Q. Oh, yes, it did considerable damage in the 4th Left? A. No; it diJ n o damage at all in the 4th Left. 24438. Q. You know that it did no dn.mage in the .3th Right? A. Yes. 24439. Q. But it did !\. cousiderable amount of damage down at Price's Flat-blew o,·er ~kips and things P ..ti. Well, I do not think the blast of air would do that much. 1'hat would be due to vibrations. 24 140. Q. Wi\1 you tell mo what it was? A. The ~evere vibration or pe rcussion of the air. 24141. Q. Not the initial blast? A. I do not think tho initial blast did it. 2H4'!. Q. And you account for any evidt-nces of force along the ,Jtb LPft and at Price's Flat by percus~ioo of air? A. I think so. Certainly a little pressure \\'ent down- a few yards down--the 4th Left; but it did no damago. 24443. Q. 1'hat was all done by percussion of air? A. Yes. 2-144-J.. Q. Now, if Frost and E van·s have stated that they were blocked, when they were trying t o get down to Powell's Flat, by the heat, dust, and smoke, how do you account for the smoke? A. It was carried wi th the ventilation. 244:15 . Q. Srooke? A. Yes. 2-1446: Q. Smoke of what? A. Distilled dust. 24H7. Q. Smoke from distilled dust! Do I understand you then to say that all the smoke thnt was rn the mino after the disaster was the result of <lis1illed dust? A. Y('s. Of rourse I ~aw none. 1iHS. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. But then you did not get there until prPtty late? A. I t was not before 10. 244!9. Q. You were uot in the. mine berore 12, were )OU? A. Oh, ye:1 1 I was in n.t n quarter pa.st 10. 24450. Q. What time did you arri\'e in ·wollongong? A. Wh en Joes the train arrive~ About !) or8·30. I \\ent sl raight away. 2J.15L. Mr. Barry.] I may tell you that Dr. Robed::!On started from \ Vollongong Station at five-and'twenty minutes to nine. 1 en~aged the trap. 2:1452. Wit nus ] I was certainly at the mine about 10 o'clock. I think it was about a quarter past 10 when 1 went in . I know that at midnight I was down nt the shaft district. 24-1-53. Mr. Ritcltie.] Q. You admit lhis 1 that you got in the mine at 11 o'clotk, and the explosion took place at 2, and that, the ventilation going on sti ll, there would not be a great deal of smoke left fo r you to see? A. Oh, yef!.. Of course I saw none. 2-U!H. Mr Lysa_qltl.] Q. I think you told :Mr. 1,\T 11,dc I hat you could observe no heat anywhere in toe mine? A. No, I did not quite say that. 24155. Q. But, when you went in, the rnino itself was not hot? A. No, it was not. l,

( At 12·45 the Comm.isflion adjourned till 1 ·45.)

(

)

AFTERNOON. •

·,

ll'ilne-s,;-Dr. J. R. M. Robertson, 9 March, 1903. AFTERKOON'.

(On resuming n.t 1·45 p.m. Mr. W. R Pratt attended to take shorthand notes of the eYiclence nnd proceedings.) Dr. JAMES ROBElU' MlLLA..R ROBERTSON, previously sworn, ""as further examined ns under:- · Cross-examination by Mt·. Lysaght (continued):2 H.3 i. Q. Do you know thnt Mr. Rogers ndmilted o~ the .night of the disaster that he. d id not go too for into the 4th Riaht on account of the heat? A. I think rightly so. I do not know a srngle word of what he ~aid in the c~lliery. I think it is likely, because he reported it tom~. . . . 24-.1,57. Q. You admit that there was considerable heat Lhrougbout the mme? _A. Only m the 4th Rtght. 24153. Q. At page 41 of the Depositiom, taken at the Inquest, Mr. R ogers sa1d : 1 rlid not think it advisable to go in too far in No. 4 Right. on the night of the 31st, because I felL a killd of a brat ; tha.t was just a.t the mouth of the 35,a.cre goaf. Do you know that ~ nu.mber of olh~t· witnesses ha,·e stated that heat was gi,en off in different prts of thP- mine ? A. I thmk m the 4th Right only. .

2 H5!l. Q. At Price's Flat and Stafford's Flat? A. I d9 not know a single word that has been stated rn the evidence here. • 2H60. Q. Can you account for that heat? A. I cannot account for the heat; I ncrer hearJ of it before. J'robably the deranrrP,ment of the venlilalion may :v count fo r it. 2,UGL Q. fo what :n.y would the der.rngement of the ventilation account for it? A. Because it would interfere with th'e circu lation of the air, and you would approach the natural !·eat of the strata. 24462. Q. That was only 70 or 80 degrees? A. Kembla. is only 65 degrees. 244'.i3. Q. That is not heat? A. Did the witnesses state what extent of heat they found? 24464.. Q. They said it was very hot - - [inf P.rrupted]. 24163. Mr. Wade.] I do not thiuk anyone said it was bot in Price's Flat. 2.t+6G. Mr. L,ysa,qlit.] B1·o:idliend said it was ho~ in No. 4 ~ight. 2J,1G7. Tlie }Vitness.J I think they were stumbl10g out as fai,t as they could, and that made them hot. 2416S. His Jlonor.J I do n ot thi11k, Mr. Lysaght, you r,hould cross-examination a witness on the nssumptiot:i that cerlain facts are true. unless you know the exact facts on which) ou l'.:re cross-exnmining him. 24460. Mr. Lysa.qllf.] Q. You said that you never heard of any difficulty in getting the roof down until this last erent. What was this "last event "? A. This 4th I{ight r oof. 24.470. Q. Do you mean at tbe time of the di~a~ter? A. The 1·oof did not fall with the same freedom that it had done before. 24:t71. Q. Why? A. I do not know. 24i72. Q. I" ou did not know that. it hatl fal'.en 2 feet G inches previously ? A. No ; no or.c told me. · There was no difficulty furl her than the fact that the roof did not fa]l. 244i3. Q. Now, l tell you that Morrison swears that there had been a previous fall of 2 feet G i:.: ches. Do you still say that there was difficulty iu getting the roof down? A. Yes. 21474. Q. What difficulty? A. Because the roof came down in a body, and did not fall immediately we took the props away. 24475. Q. What prel·at1tion can be 1aken if a roof is expected to £all? A. No further precaution. 244:76. Q. What precaution can you take? A. You can take no further precaution. 24177. Q. When you expect a roof to fall over a large area, would it not be wise to witLdraw the men inbye? A. The1·e were no men in the vicinity. Nobody could expect a fall such as this. 24478. Q. You expected it after the disaster? A. No. 24:t.79. Q. Y ou suggested that the £all forced out air after the aisaster? A . Yes. 244SO. Q. Was it not just as rnsy to suggest it as a probable consequence? A. Ko. 2148 1. Q. Do you say that, where a large nrea of roof is expected to come down solidly, the men shoµlJ n ot be withdrawn inbye? A. H ow can we say how it will come down i' 2!182. Q. Yc,u said that you expect<.'d a fall of a large block? A. I said that it fell in a large block. 2 usa. Q. Was it a remarkable thing for it to fall in a large lilock? A. We neYer had a similar f.,11 before. 2418!. Q. I"ou ne,er before haJ a similar fall to this within your expc·rience? A. Not with similar consequences. 24!85. Q. You ham nernr known a fall OYer as large an area as this? A. I ha,e kno,"n a fall ov<r as large an a.ren., but it -:ame down gradually. 2418G. Q. You never knew of a solid fall over so large an area? .A. This particular piece of roof is particularly strong. · 2 1487. Q. J£ a fall of any particular magnitude is expected, shonlJ not the men be withdrawn inbye? A. No. 24483. ]!Ir. Ritchie.] Q. In vi<:w of what has happened, should not somethir.g be doM? A. It depe11ds on the circumstances. 2,U89. Q. If the circumstances were similar, what would you do? A. I think "e :!hould cast about to do eTerything we could thiuk of. 24190. Q. W bat would you think of? A. As for as I know, we have no area of conl being pillared un<ier the same circumstances. 2H!H. (( Suppo!>e you had, what woulJ you do? A. I think, if the roof wne OYer so large an area, ,, e would w1Lh<lraw the men. If the circumstances were the same, thtlt is all we coul<l dv. :l4492. Q. The only thing you could tlo woultl be to \\'ithdraw the men? A. l do not thiuk we could <lo anything else. I ahoulJ. l>e glad to l,ear any suggestion anybody could make to m ~· as lo what coulJ Lie done under th e tin·umsf ance::;. 24493. Mr. Lysnglit] Q. What t·i rcum~ta.nccs? A. The cond1 Iiom1. 24494. Q. Wha~ tonditions? A. I siay, it there were pillaring in the neighbourhood of,, here a nu n1ber of men ~re re working, qnd where n. bln;s~ would affect th em, I would certainly \'fit! dra.w them. 2419 ,. Q. These were not the cond1t1ons a.t Kem bla? A. No. 2449.3. Q. There _i:1 r.o connection between the conditions at Kembla and the conJitions under which rou say y~u would w1thd.r~w the men? A. I think, if you would come to the point, it we u!<l be better.· lf you s ate what conditH n~ you mran 1 would consider it. 244!>7.

t .,J . •;, l

•t

~ '•

•.

737

JYitnes.s-lJr. J. R. M. Robertson, 9 March, 1903.

24:497. Q. You said that, under sitailu.r couditions to what took place .at Kembla, you would withdraw the men? You now say that the conditions at Kembla. were not su<:h as \l'Ould lead you to withdraw the men? A. I mean iu the light of ~ubsequent events. 24198. Q. You would withdraw the men if any large fall ~ms espc-rted? A. I think so. 24190. Q. W ithdraw all the men outbrn? A. Y cs. 24500. Mr . .Robertson.] Q. Supposing-· you had n. la.rge are i of roof from which the timber had been withdrawn, and the roof Jid n ot fall-how Iona are you ::roincr to withdraw the men for? ] f it ditl not come down for tPn years, would you ke<'p "'eutawa.v? A. Y~u can easily sea that it is sc:1rcely possib 1e for a similar accident to occur again. • 2!501. Q. Ilow is it practic.lble to withdraw the men if t h J roJf doe, not fall. It woulJ mean stoppin~ a number 0£ collieries altoge1>her. 1f the roof did not fall , and yon had to withdraw the men until it fell, you might ha.\•e to shut up a collier.v? A. I can sec that it i,, a difficult question to a.r.swn. Unless sou put the position exactly before me, l cannot amwer it. A suppusititious case of this kind cannot well be answered. 21502. Q. It often happens tbat a large area of roof is left slandin~. where all the pillnrs ha"e been withdrawn? A. Ye~. At the Aus •inmer Colliery at North Illawnrra, there was a case of that kiud; and I in,ipected it several times within a fortnight. 24503. Q. At Coalcliff there are 3{ acres standing now. Should all tho men bo withdrawn altogether? A. I do not underst.,nd why that roof has not come down. · 2450:1,. Q. The suggestion ha3 been made that the moo should be withdrawn. That roof bas been standing for years. J£ the men were witbdr:\\rn the colliery woulu h:i.re to stop for a number of years? A. I think that the case you are referring to is the greatest areal have known. I saw n,n are::i, at North l llawarra which remained up for a consi<lerablo time; but, fortunately, it begnn to come down from the centre, and came down gradually. 24505. Q. At the Greta Colliery there is a large area which has been standing fvr years? A. Yes. 24506. Q. Io the Greta Collier.v the roof has been standing fo r the last fifteen or twenty years? A. Ye~, fo r nineteen or twenty years. There were fourteen b')rds all holed into one anothe1·. 24507. Q. And a 15 or 16 feet seam? J.. Yes; it is a difficult thing; aod circumstances must guide you. . :H,508. M r. Ritcliie.] W ould it have made any difference at Kembla if the miners had been wor 'cing wiL h safety-lamps? A. Not the slightest. 24509. Q. You say that nothing was lighted by the lamps which may ha.ve been stir red up by the blast? .A. N o. 245 LO. M r. Lysaght.] Q. Do you think the blast of a.ir stirred up coal-dust? A. I think so. 2!5 11. Q. Do you think in large quantities? A. l think a considerahle q_uantity came out of the goaf, and from the ski ps. 24512. Q. And from the main roads? A. Practically there was no dust on the r oad~. 245l3. Q. How l,>ng before the disaster were you in Kembla.? A. A. short time before. 2i 5 l4. Q. A. mouth? A. No, a week. I think that Mr. Ritchie and myself were in t here t wo or three weeks before the disaster. 24515. Mr. Ritcliie.] Q. Now that you have got to hear that a fall actually took place a week before the fall at tho time of the disaster, would not tho dust be cove1·ed up by the previous fall? A. It depends to what extent it would be. 2!5l6. Q. We ba.ve evidence that there was a fall? ..d. There might ha.\'e been a lot of dust from the stop pings. No. 1 was practically a dustless road. 24517. Q. In your opinion, the dust was sent out by the fall? A. Yes; or else it would come from lhe stoppiogs, the skips, or the roads; but the roads were pr.ictically dustless. 24518. Q. Would the fall have a large quantity of dust to play on in the goaf? A . It would drive out a large quantity of dusl. 24519. Q. Wh ere would it come from? A. We have eridence that a large amount of dust came out of the goaf. 24520. Q. You 1:1ee the first fall would force out du:<t? A. I woul<l like to know more about that fi rst £all. I am not satisfied. I shou ld like to know much more about it. You are asking me to give an opinion on a subject which I have oot imesl igated. 24521. Q. If a fall took place a week before the cli!:>asto1· surely the dust, previously adhering to the roof, 1Vould be swept a.way? A. I do n ot think it would come from the roof at ali. I think it would be debr is from tho pillars and Just on the fl oor. 24322. Q. If the evidence as to the fir st fall is cor.ecL, the dust would be covere<l over? A. I do not think so. I cannot say it would be. 24523. Q. If that were so where would the dust come from then . You would hare no dust lo work on? A. I can hardly think the first fall would be so complete ns to cover the floor; I cannot see it. I very much doubt whether much roof came down at first. The roof was a hnrd, whi te sanddtone. Jt is not a roof to fall io portions. It is a different kind of roof from that on the dip side of No. 1. I have doubts abo ut the fi rst fall. · 24!52 .t-. Mr. Robertson.] Q. The evidence of the firsL fall seems lo be conclusive? A. I have seen the roof, and doubt it. 24525. Mr. Ritchie. ] Q. In your opinion, the roof would fall in one block? A . The appearance 0£ the fall convinced me of that. 24526. Q. The only thing you are in doubt a.bout is the fir:$t fall? A. The appeara.nce of the roof is such that I very much doubt it. 24527. M r. Lysaglit.] Q. You said that there was evidence of dust ha1•iog come from the goaf-where was that evidence? A. In No. 4 itself-in the mouth of Ko. 4. 24:i28. Q. What were the evidences? A. There were accumulations of dust swept round the corner!'!. 24529. Mr. Robertson. ] Q. Du you mean the comers of the main roan? A. Of coursr, portions may have come out of the stoppings and have been deposited after tho air wa~ still. The du5t you see on the roof and sides has been deposited subsequent to the accident. 24530. Q. On the main road? A. Y cs. ,

16825

29- 5 A

24531.

i 38 IJ'it11e,,-Dr. J. R. ~1. Robertson, !l Marcb, 1903.

!:!1531. Q. _.\.s to tho outlet from the 4th Right, it was wet? A. There was always a little water coming out oE the 4th Bight. . . '.? 15:32. (/ Dust wouH not be there? .J. Tt woultl come pt·obluly [1·om the side and Ooor of the pillars. 21,33:~. Jllr . .Lysn.r;ltt.] Q. '\Vh<'re was there cviJen~o of ~11st ~ comrng from the goaf? A,.. There was an nccumulnl1on of dust at the junction of the 4th l{1 ght with l\o l. . . .. 2 ~.3:H. Q. There w:is no in<licati«m thnt it hnd come from the -!th Right? A. H 1s o~ly my op1u1on. 21.;:3,5. Q. All the indi,a.tious of force. in lhe 4th Hight wcl'a that the force had gone rnbye? A. Certai11ly n~t. I • ~ b3!JG. Q. Di,I you see any props sttwl, io ~lack poiuting inb5e? A. I snw ono; but one swallow does not make a. summer. 21.3:37. Q. It had been a. prop i;upporting the roof? A. It might or might not haro been. 2!533. (/. Can you account for it? A. No. . . . . 21530. Q. Did it not show that the furco was gom?: iubye? .A. Everything else pomtcd the other way. One s1,allow docs not make n, summer. lt was ior liued to go inwards. 1'here was a large ston e there. 2.1:HO. Q. Did that indicate the force goi112 in bye? A. No, it di ,1 not indicate that. 2~.3.J.l. Q. Wba.t about the brge stone? A. Tht: pr0p had probably been put up ugaiust tho r oof, and a hrgo stone had fallen. . . . . 2 LJJ.'.?. (2. Wh ich way was 1t f"r.:-ed? A. Tt was lying Ill the mtdJb of the roa<l . 2 t:,1~. Q. ,Vn.s it not f,,r ce<l i11bre? A. No. 2-.l,.} H. M,. R!>berl.:on .] Q. [ mn)· say that. that prop and sevcr~l mere wero _PO in led ?ut. to. n number of pcop'e who insptcted the pince; :i.1.1 d no 01~e suggested other"'.1se than that 1t was pomtrng mbye, and the c'lvtks there a!so? A. Doc tor,, clrfft>r. 1 he chocks were different. They had been t<\ken from the wa~t<>; and they were strewn all along the road outb,re. . . 2 ~.H-3. (). ,It is extraordinary that people can draw dd'ferent conclusions from the same tl11ng? A. I ea1v 1t pb.inly wlien the bratlice was pu~ up. That was on the 10th of Septe!'llber. . . 2-1,34!!, Q. Thiit was six weeks nfterwards? A. Yes; but there was nothmg to disturb 1t. 2 ~.34,7_ Mr. L_1<Jn9 1il.] Have you anytbing- in your notes of 10th September n.bout it? A. I do not know, I will look: Cam·as hadng hc.?n paid up Lo foll in No. 4 R :ght, proceetlel in fall very high : force Clme out and fr;:,m sid ...s, props and chocks blown from sides towards entrance, which is \I et.

21518. Q. We ha.re the evidence of ~Ir. Atkinson that the force wa~ inbye. 21519. (). \Vith.1·egard to your notes of the 27th of August, Mr. J one::i, Mr. Seller;:, and Mr. Hay, were with you ? A. Yes. 21550. Q. i'H r. Jone3 was travC'llin,!r with you all along? A. Y 03. 2 l55 L. Q. Do you know th1t l\Ir. ,Jono3 has stated that in the main level there was an explosion of firedamp? A. Ue did 11ot subsc·ribe his nume to t hat. 24552. Q. W ns Ur. Jones \1 ith you on the 27th of August? .A. Yes. 2 .lc35:3. Q. He is a. competent man? A. Yes. 21,3H. Q. Listen to his evidence, p:irns. 2:nH, 2:3l:3o, 2.3141 of. !he shorlha.nd-writer's report: "Q. I mean 1~1:it ther e wns au e\plosion after the b ig outburst from tho goaf? A. Yes; nobody could go beyoori that fact, that there was an in•l ieatiou of a fire-damp explosion in the No. L section ; but it was to a very small extent." D i,l ho loll you that? , I. No. 21!555. Q. Let me rend it to you: 11 Q. But Ute su':iscqucnt explosion, which yon now speak of as ga.::, hns really been tie cause? A. That would kill the men inbyo-[ moa.n in tho shaft section- from the aftcr-dnmp. (2. That e,plosion of gaq would l<ill the men inL.vc; and the fall, 01· the result of the fall, "·ould kill the men outbve? A. ThC'rn i:i uo doubt about it." A. 1 do not agree "·i th h~m. ~ l~Gli. Q. Then Mr . .JQne~ wa s askcll : '· Q. Where do you say this <'xplosion of g.ts l\'0 11l,l take pl.lee? ,I. I would nvt liko to J0cate a spot. I could not dot ha.t; but I shouiJ imagine that it w,rnkl be somowhcra nrnr A itken's place, somewhere that w:i.y-some place nc:ir there I t'oqet the na'.lle of th i pl:1 .:e w!iore I sa. v sJme in dic:i.tious of flame and intense heat; but that is the only plate.'' So that you see ,Jones stated that there was evidence of a fire.d:lmp explosion in No. I. Y~ u uo not agree ,rith his conclusions? A. No. 2J..55i. (). Although he made the inspection ,dth you? A. Y l'S. 21:358. (l And he i:igne<l the statement with you? A. '\Ve all signed it. 21550. jJJ,.. Ritcl, ir. ] (2. Is that evidence by .Mr..Jou es cootr.idictory or '.ii it ad Ji tional ma ltcr? A. I think it is cootra<lictorv. ' 2 1~60. Q. Is it not n.dd.itional to your report? A. Ye\ and it is directly Ci>ntra lietory to the report. 24, i l. Jlr. L_ysn.ql,t.] (l This statement which you holJ in your hands is not on oath? A. No. 2 J..5G2. (j. Mr. ,Jones was not sworn when be signed it? A. Ko. 21-ili3. J.fr. lhu!f. ] Dr. lfobertson <lid not h:1.nd anv statement in. These aro his owu note•. 2.15G~. Af,·. Lys'.'91,t.] (l Why di.d you get six ma1;agc-r:1 10 sign thi~ stn.lcmcnt? A. Because we nil exnm10e<l the mine at the f. :tm(\ 111110; an<l it was thought a<lris1ble lo grt a, statement drn1rn up. I thi1 k lVf r..Jones was the on.:1 who took the note;:. 2~:]G.;. Q. Why diJ you get th is slrdcment signed? A. It was sug~el-ted tha.t it shouhl be tfor.e. :2J.:3GG. (l ~fr. D. l\foGeac:hie, )ir. ll.\rr, and Mr. Warburton i:igned it. D iJ you think th:tt the managers would <le part from it ? A. No. 2!,3U7. (). You know l\Ir. Jones hns dep:1.rted from it? A. Yes. 2 ~.~~S. Q. Do you know 1rhdher l\Ir. Warburton hns clepnrled fr om it.? .,J. No. 24:..>U!) .. '': Those. t hree gentlemen J menh0netl signcJ the stnle::nent stn.~:ng that the fad s dcscri'Jed were ac1:11rate Ill clcta1l? A. r(... U5i0 . (j. Do you know th·ll l\Ir. Rogers statt::d at the ioquesr, ag rcpor'.cJ in 1nge 40 of lhe depositions . I ilo not think that Intl anythinci tt> <lo wi~h iho 1J:sa;.ter; I r·1nnot m':!ntio:i anv other cause fol' the exp!osion e .cept gas an t.I- coal ,lust, 0 1 ga,- or c..al dust·~ t ·

[ No answer. ] 24571. JJJ.r. W a, 7c. ] H e rerers to a blast, at the end of the evidence.

2157:!.

...

•

739 Jl'ilnt'-'IR-Dr..J.

r..

M. Robe1tsoJ, 9 March, 1003.

2!572. M1·. Lysaglit.] Q. That contradicts your eYidencP ?' A. Ye~. · 2 ~57:3. Mr. Robertson.] Do you put the notes by Dr. Ro bertson in evidence? [ ...Yo answ •r.J 24574. Mr. Bruce Smitli. ] Dr. Robertson pr11dur-ecl his written notes of what he faw in the mine. 24575. Mr. Robertson.] l undet';:tnnd that this was a report that was bein~ read from. 2!576. Mr. Bruce Smith.] No; they are h:s o·.rn notes; it is not a report. They are notes c,f his inspections. 24577. Tlte Witness .] Thoy arc joint notes. 2 L578. Mr. Lysaglit.J You said on the last day yo11 were here that you did not know that gas had LC'cn discovered in the mine? A. I do not !rnow yet. I <lo not know that it hls been discovered since .the disaster. What I i::aid was that I askecl McGen.c:hie to tak e l\fr. Atkinson to a C'crtain place in the ui1M, to see if aoy gas coulti be fo'und there. 2! 5,0. Q. You have on your notesMr. McGcachie, with a hydrogen lamp, reported less thun one-half per cent. of gas in this pln.ce on Saturday 11igl1t; to.day it was quite sweet.

Do you not know that McGeacbie discovered gas? A. I know that. I gave you my opinion how it was accounted for. 24590. Q. It is not -iu the top heading at all? A. Where is it? Q. "At the face of Staffot·d's working l)lace no gas was found, nor was the brattiC'e cloth displaced . . . . McGeachie, with a hydrogen lamp, reported less than 1 per cent. oE gas." That was in Staffor d's working place, on Saturday night. It w:..s not in the top heading at al1? A. Read oo. 24581. Q. As it, was evidrnt that this locality was ir1 n:> way connected with the origin of the disaster, we proceeded to

No. 1 Right. A. We went on to No. 1 Right. 24582. Q. You know that gas was discovered by McGeacl1ie io Stafford's working place, whi<.!h was a.hove Stafford's flat, and that it had nothing to tlo with the gas fouutl by Mr. Atkineon in the back heading? A. The report explains it all. 24583. Q. On entering No. l .llight haulage · road, we fouu<l indications of a blast proceeding inbye. 'between No. 1 main and return road was forced open and smashell.

The ventih,tiQn door

DCl you remember thnt? A. I remernbet• everything. 24584. Q. Which wr..y was it Qlown? A. Out from the road. 245S5. Q. From the haulage road ton·ards the tra\'elling 1·0ad ? A. I£ you re:id on, you will see wl1at Mr. Jones subscribed to. As a mattct· of fact he was taking notes for the party. 24586. Q. When was that report signed? A. 'l'ho i::r1me night. 2-t.597. Q. On the lDth of ~eptC'mber ? A. No, on August 4, I think . 24583. ./Jfr. Ritchie.] A. Having had grea.ter lr.ngth of t,ma to more maturely consider his facts, has he allered bi::; opioion now r A. I do not think so. 21 5&.9. Mr. L 1sagld.] Q. Did you not say that you diJ not know that any men l1ad been burned? A. I ~aid that I did not know of anybody having been anything more than singed. 24590. Q. You have this in the report, '' At No. 8(; Aitken and son were found slighlly burned"? 11. That is a general statement-it is not very accurate. 24301. Q. You sigoed it? A. Yes. 2M92. Q. Did you find them? il. No; thi,, was a statement m::i.dP. by Morrison. 24593. Q. I thought they were your own notes? 2-!594!. Mr. Britcc Smitlt.] They arr. At this place Aitken and son were reported to have been fourvL 24595. M r. LysagM.] Q. ·• ·we proceeded up this towards the ,vaste, which sm1::lt of after-damp; but no gas was discoverable. Ur. Sellars here reported that wben iu this locality, look:ng fur bodies, the temperature was high"? A. Tha.t is in tho -1th l{ight. 24596. Mr. Wadi>.] A little time sinc1:1 Mr. Lysaght quotetl the evidenca of Mr. Rogers \Tith reference !o gas in tho miue If you will turn to page o5 of tho depositions at the inquest you will find Mr. lfogers saidThe only thing I bn."c thought, about it is what we hnse heard a good deal about in the last fortnight; that is, that a,n area of waste fell in the 4th .Right, causing a blast, and l>lowiog e,·erythi11g upside do" 11; I cannot say what the blast was ; I h:we 110 idc.::i.; it appears to me 1,hat the Ll11,st has come from the 4th .l{ight pillars.

24 5!17. Mr. L.1/sagltt] Q. Yon told i\fr. '\1{acle that you went down the main shaft district for a specific purpose? A. Ye~, to ascertain whether a fire whieh had been reporttd to the l\Ianager, and especially by :iny broll1e1·, was st; ll burning. Jt \Vas the burning of bratt ico. ?.4508. Q. Do you know that, on .the plan drawn by l\fr. '\Varburton, he sho,rcd. the stoppi11gs on the front an<l bac:k headings iobyc of the 5th Right, all blown in one direction? 11. I think EO. 2±590. Q. Do you say they WH<! blown iu one <lirection ~ A. Yes. Ou the outside, the bllllding stone.~ had slipped clown iuwarcl:<, in10 the mnin roa<l. 24GOO. lllr. Robertson.] (). That is beyond tho 51.h Right? A. Yet=1. 2,1,GOl. Q. Is il consistent with the explosiou h:iving lrnoc:ked down the Eituff? il. It appf'arcJ to us that two or three stones had fallen down, and th:i.t the top of the buildiug had beeu blown into the back hea<liog. I dare say any projections would probal,ly tatch the wind. 2-.t 02. Q. Do you ~ay that the evidence of force wa~ from tire back heading or il1e main heacliog? A. There was a cut-through, au<l the next pl.tee was built up with stonefl, ancl some of the stones on the outb.ro corn<'r had s1ippecl into tlie he·a ding, b~t the top stuff was blo1rn into the back heading. 2.J:C03. Mr. L!Jsa_qltt.] Q. H ave you got that pipe that \Tas found? A. Mr. lfo~er.; },as got it. 24G04. Q. vVho found it? A. Mr . .MorrLson ao<l 1\fr. Hotc!1kis some weeks afternar<lfl. 24C05. Q. It was IIotc:likis who found it? ,Ll. I think it was. 24GOG. Mr. Bruce S111itk'J J should like the rr.n,n "ho found it to come before the Commission. 2lG07. Mr. L .1Jsnglt1.] Q. Who di<l you unclet·staud found it? /l. I think .Hotchkis found it. 24UOj. Mr. ll'arle.] The eviuent·e is that Morrison and Ifo~chkis were together. 2H;0:1. Mr. Rohe1·tson.J Q. lf tha.t brattice was lit hy a pipe, somebody mustharn been smoking? A. The evjdence points that way. 24Gl0. Q. The man who lit tlte 1rallice would c:xlingui:t-h it? A. It may have hem at the s1mc moment t hat the disaster occurred. One man was fou nd with a match between bis finger and bis th•1ml>, just as if he bad been striking a match, ~i6ll.

•

740 Witness-Dr. J. R. .M. Rob€rtson, 9 March, 1903.

2 tall. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. That was in a different place? 11. It was a. pillar further. up. . . 2 Wl2. Mr. Bruce Smith.] This is a very important m:ittcr. If the theory of the pipe burnmg the bratttce is set up, it ought to be pro,_ed. . . . . . 2-Hil:3. Tl,e TVitness. ] We did not know what to thmk ot the burning of t~e bratbce. It was me?ho~ed at the time. I sn.id I did not see how it could be the result of an explos1011 of gas. I canuot unagme how the aa.s would O'Q over and tbrouO'b one inflammable material nnd light another inflammable materia1. 0 2 Hil-i. iii·. Robert;n.J Q. \\' ould yo u be surpri~c~ to learn that a piece of .newspaper could be exposed 10 the blast of a gunpowder shot and a dust explos10~, and ~be paper :rema.m unconsuQ,1ed? A. Yes, I tbinli: it could· but if there had been flame to set this brattice on fire, 1t would have set fire to the paper and to the bratlice 'which it blew do\'l"n and twisted round the props. Of course, I know that it is impossible for man' to understancl all the phenomena of fUCh 3:11 accident as this. We were .not p resent nod we do not know how it occurred. We do not know the c1rcumstances. I n all these accidents there are many circumstances that can never be explained. 24G15. Mr. Robertson.] Q. In all these explosions there is eviclence of combustible material being passed over by flame? A. It is difficult for mo to see how th:tt brattic.e could be ignited with i~flammabh gas; because the same force and flame blew down two or three bratt1ce cloths and tore them rnto shr eds. l t must also have passed ornr paper; and then there are the chocks with dry timbery bark. How could it i~nite this bra.ttice which is not more infiammable than any other which it passed 0Y..0r ? The outstanding feature of this accident is the marvellous absence of eren evidence of heat. In all other explosions which we read about, the evidence of flame and charring has been sµperabuudant. In Haldane's report it is pointed out in connection with the incandescence of coal-dust that there are intervals where there is no evidence-and then , when the oxygen h::ts become more abundant, there is·ev.idcn~e. of coking. 21,616. Mr. Lysa_qli!.] Q. Did you see the pipe? A. I saw it immediately after it was found. 24Gl7. Q. When? A. I did not take any note of the date. · 24618. Q. How long ago? A. Some months a~o-immediately after it was found. 24G 19. Q. Wpo showPd it b you? A. Mr. Hotchkis and Mr. Rogers. They told me that it was found on the edge of some white ashes. 2u;20. Q. 'rhat was after you had finished making these notes? A. Weeks and weeks after. 24621. Q. You nerer embodied it in the notes? A. No. 2 _1622. Q. You never embodied it in any other notes? A. No., they were made before the finding of · the pipe. , 24623. Mr. Robertson J Q. Did he gire you the circumstances? A. The pipe was found under some wh.ite debris of the burnt brattice. It had fallen on to the floor. '!'here was a small piece of brattice lying orer the pipe. 2!G:!4. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. A small piece. of unburned brattice 1y ing over the pipe? .a. Yes. 24'.125. Q. Was it a clay pipe or a wooden pipe? A. I am not a smoker; but it was a wooden p1pe. I t was a briar-root, with a black mouthpiece. 2462U. Mi·. Lysa.r;ht.] Q. Do you know whether Mr. Rogera has brought it this mor ning? A. I think h e · has ; he told me he had. . 24627. Q. Did be show it you to-day? A. No; be told me he bad brought it. 24628. Q. D id you know that the waste workings were only beinO' examined once a month? A. W here 0 do you mean? · 24:62!). Q. In the wastes? A. 11fost of the wastes are travelled over nearly every day. 24630. Q. Do you know a special rule that requires them to be examined at least once a week? A. I suppose there is such a rule as that. 24631. Q. Do you know it? A. No. • :L4S32. Q. Will you tell me what this special rule refers to-No. 10He shall at least once in every week examine, so far as is practicable, the state of the waste workings -

[interrupted]. 246:33. M1·. Wade.] Read the whole of the rule. 24634. Mr. L.1/saglit.J I am not taking my directions from vou. ' · 24635. Mr. Wade.] The rule addsand main airways.

246:3G. Mr .. Ly~a_qltt.J Q. Fie says nothing about the return airways. He is to examine the waste workings and the mam airways ;-the main airways have nothing to do with the waste workinas? A. I think some 0 of the m1in airways go right th.-ough the wastes. 2 ~6:37. Q. What does that rllle refer to? A. I should say in Kembla it refers t'J the unwor ked pillar workings. 24~38. Q. Is that ~ll? A. It would not refer to anything else. 24u39. Q. Would it not refer to the goafs? A. Certainly not. 24640. Q. Would it not Tefer to the 35-acre goaf? A. No. 216H. Q. ls there no rul~ requiring the ~nspect!on of the g?afs? _A. No; you cannot inspect goafs. 24~ 12. Q. ~ our construct10n o~ the rule 1s th~t 1t only applies to pillars not being worked? A. Yes. ~4G43. Q. Those that are standmg and not being worked? A. That is all. 2461<4. Q. Then, as far as you know-then as far as you knew, or know now-no examination who.tever was made of any goaf? A. I do not thi°:k the ~an is born wh? co:ald examine a goaf. 2fG45. Q. ~s far as you kn.ow, as consultmg Emgmeer, no exammat1on was made at any time of any part o ~he goaf. A. Ob, certamly not. They could not .. T~e roof is all down, and the spaces closed up. 2~u 16. Q. T~en the report ~ook that shows the exammat1on of the waste workings refers only to the p1llars standmg and not bemg worked? A. That is right. 2461-7. Q. And no more? A. Yes, no more. 2~t6:i,~t· Q. Is tht ~t your general interpretation of the meaning of was-tel workings? A. Yes, it is. It is a p1 Y 1 was pu rn at a11 ; because no man can examine a uoaf. t.Jiti~D. Mr. Rob~rtson.] Q. What is t~1e morning of" waste workings"? 11. It is a loose term. 246~0. Q. Does it :1ot mean temporarily abando~ed? A: Temporaril.v abandoned I should say. 2£.J,~}~ Q? Was this r ule formulated by the colliery officials, or was this one enforced by the D epar tment o es. A. I cannot tell you . ' 24652.

., ·~ l

-·•• . (

' }

{

741

JVitne.~.~-Dr. J. R. M:. Robertson, 9 March, 1903.

24652. Q. ·whom nre the special rnles drawn. up by? A. l!'irst , by the owners' represcntalivcEi, and then they aresobmitted to tho Department for approval, and also to the miners. 2-1:633. Q. 'l'his rule, I tako it, would be formubteJ. by the l\fonager3? A. I fancy it would be. VC'ry likely it would be taken from the old rules. 2 1654. Mr. Rite/tie.] Q. I take that if you have got a ,•ery la.r~e area with a ,·ery solid roof, from wh!ch the pillars liave been extracted, which it might be practicable to examine, there would be need to es~mtne that? A. Well, even at Clifton, since the workings there were brought under my notice, I should not like to bear of anyone going further in than the ~clge of it. I do not see what good you can' do-you can only run i nto g reat danger . 21655. Q. Js i t necessary to go to tho e<lge? A. I do not think it would do any good to go to the edge excepting to see whether it was fallen . 24656. Q. You are of opinion that there ~hould be no esamination of goafs? A. As a rule, you cannot examine them, because the roof has falleo down. 2-l65 7. Q. Are you still of opinion th1t it is not necessar, to examine wa~tes of that kind? A. I do not think it would be safe or practic:i.b!e. · 24:658. Q. lt may sometimes be safe? A. Ko. When there is no area and you are waiting for it to fall, after the props hare been taken awa.v, it would be dangerou . I think the Manager who got a man to go ~ in t hero-if a man would go-could be indicted for manslaughter if an nccideut occurred. 24'G59. Q. Should they be examined? A. They could not be examined safely. 24660. Q. Where it is regarded r.s safe? A. 1'hat is a mat'.er of opinion. 2466l. Q. D o you think they could be examined? A. No, not tht" goafs. 14662. Mr. L:vsagltt.J Q. Do you know that Biggers, the present deputy, spent five <lays ex:am1mug one of t hese goafs? A. Ho might spend five years examining one. 24663. Mr. Robertson .] No; he said that it would take five days to examine the waste workings. 2466 1<. Mr. Lysaght. ] Q. You take Rule 10 to mean the examination of pillars of coal. slandiug and not being worked, and nothing more? A. "X othing more. 2.L6u5. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. What steps would you take in a mine known to give off gas to examine the goafs? A. As a rule, the goafs fall and close up. 2 1'666. Q. I am talking of goafs that do not fall-the circumstances may arise? A. Where? 24667. Q. At Clifton i' A. That is only a case of weeks. The roof is working now. 2 1668. Q. You mentioned a lar~e go:tf that had been standing at Clifton, and which had been standing for years? ..4.. Ko, I did not say so. :l4669. Mr. Robe1·hon . I I think that it was M:r. Jones who referred to that. 2!670. Mr. Ritcliie.] Was it not poinled out to you, where you said that men might possibly be withdrawn for yea.rs? A. Mr. Robertson referred to Greta; but that was a different case. 2:&:671. Mr. Robertson.] I said that it was possible for pillars to be withdrawn and for the roof t o be left standing for years. I was speaking generally. 24672. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Supposiog you had strong slrata and it was possible that it might stand up for years-what ,vould you do to pre,ent nn accumulation of gas in a 111ine? A. I n that case yo u would require b direct a current of air through it. 240 73. Q. W ould you regard it ae necessary to do that? A. I think anyono would natu rally do that. 2467 J.. Q. Then goafs wbicb arc not safe should ha,·e a current of air through them? A. Yes. 24675. Mr. Lys(1ght.] Q. You know that since the Kembla <lisaster double doors ha,e been ordered for the main intakE.\s r A. Yes, by the Department rule applying to all collieries. 24676. Q. Do you approve of the rule? A. Yes. 24677. Q. You recognise tbe danger of single doors? A. Io some cases. 24678. Q. I am putting to you the case of doors between the main intake airways. If they are guarded by single doors, that would clearly be a danger? A. I do not say so in all caseR. 2.Ji679. Q. I am putting to you now the case of the main intake airways and the main r eturns? A. I d o not k now-it depends. It may be an advantage to have single doors. 24680. Q. Take No. l liight main level. That would be a place where, under the new rule, there would be double door s to guard the air ? A. Yes. 24681. Q. Between the back beading and the front heading? A. Yes. 24682. Q. Would it not require double doors along the 4th Left? A. No. 24683. Q. But ii; would require double doors beb,een the front and back heading of No. 1 main level? A. Y es. 24684. Q. I£ there were not double doors there before the disaster, would it be evidence of bad management? A. No; it would be an advantage to have no doors there. · 24685. Q. T o let the intake air short circuit in the return? A. No. In that particular case the ai r that ventilated the email Jt.h Right came direct from an adit, and it was practically fresh air when it reached the return, eo that it would be an advantage if it went into the next district. 24686. Q. 1'he object was to keep the intake air from going into the return? A. Thnt is what it would not do. If you took away tbe double doors altogether, and that door on the right-hand side of No. 5 i n the back heading, the whole of the ventilation would go round the face, and not by its return. 2.Ji687. Q. Do you approve of double doors? A. As a general principlo. 24688. (J. You told Mr. ade that thera was no stint of expense ;-do you know that Mr. Rogers bas stated that he would not incur any expense without consulting you? A. I do not know what be bas stated. 2i689. Q. Do you know that the preceding Manager stated that be could not incur any expenditure without consulting you? A. I know that thousands of pounds have been spent without consulting me at all. 24ti90. Q. Do you know that iL was gi ven as a reason to the Government Inspector, fo r not improvina theventilation that it could not be done without consulting you ? A. I£ you a.re telling me what transpired , a lie was told, because I curtailed no e;pense whatever. 24691. Q. There wa11 a report furni shed by Mr. Rowan - - [interrupted]. 24692. Mr. JiVade.] W haL i~ the date? 2 lG:)3. Mr. Lysaqltt .] Q. The ] 1th of J 11n uary, 1886. It says that the question of new f urnncc rentilation was put before Mr. Green, but he could only act through Dr. Robertson ;-you hear that r A. Yes; I hear that. 24691. Q. Wns Mr. Green your Manager? A. For n few months. 21095 .

•

742 Witness-Dr. J.

~1. Tioberlson, 9 i\Ia.rch, 19[)3.

Q. Do you not recollect it? 11. No; bow long is it ago. Q. 188U? A. It is pretty ancient. Q. Did yon not promise !\Tr. Rowan that you would put up a fan? 11. I cannot say. Q. Did you write a letter? A. I cannot i,a_v. . . . . ? Q. You remember your 1\lauagcr being prosecuted because of bad ventilation m the mme. A. No. 21700. Q. Do you !mow that Green was proscc·uted? A. No. . 24701. Q. Did you hear of it? A. I m:iy ham clone so, but ha\'e forgotten 1t. 2-H 02. Q. Do you know that the <lefondant':i counstl pleade~ guilty to the charge, and produced a _letter

24:Gfl5. 246!>G. 2lG!>7. 24<l93. 24:G~!> .

from Dr. Robcrtiwn slating that a new furu:1ce would be bmlt, and a fan would also be ercct~d ;-did you write such a letter? A. I cannot Eeay. 24703. Mr. Robrrlson.] Q. What if i1c <lid. I presume that tbo l\Innager may cl1ange his opinions and put up a furnace. instead? A. Ye~. . . . 2470t Nr. Lysa_r;lit.] This is on ihe question of whether the Managu of the colliery had power to mcur any expense. _ . • , . 24:70[;. Nr. Roberlson.J The Maunger could not ha~e uncontrolled command of the Company s capital. For ordinary expenses, such as for brattice cloth and for stores, he might be at liberty to spend money; but you do not s_urely expect the Manager to have coutrol of large expenditure, such as would be necessary for the building of a new furn:ice 01· a fau to impro\"e the ventilation. .. . 24:70G. Mr. L .lJSa_7lit.J Q. Mr. Rogers did consult you? A. He often asked me 1f he could ba'"e certarn things ; and I would agree. 2 bi07. Q. You changed your opinions as circumstances would ar:se? A. I c:ban5 ed my 0pinions sometimes. 2!-708. Q. You changed your opinions about the examina.tiou 0£ deputies? A. I do not see why you should assume that. 2470!). Q. Did you not give evidence before a Select Committee on the 4th of Apr il, 1894, to the effect. that deputies should pass an examination? A. I quite forget. . z4710. Q. Will you swear you did not? A. l ha,e no idea whether I was examined. , 24711. Q. Hne is the evidence; I will read it to you. You have stated now that, in your opinion, a deputy should not be examined. 21712. Mr. Wade. ] He mid no such thing. 21713. Mr. Lysagltt.] Q. The question was put to you about depu tics p1ssi ng an cxn.mination r A. ·y cs. · 2.J.714: Q. And you answeredThe exa.minalion should be made as practical and as fair as possible.

A. By the Manager. · 2 ~7L5. Q. You ,Ycre. asked whether a man who takes charge of £10,000 w,orth of machinery shoulu not be a competent man? A. Yes. 2t7 Ju. Q. And pass an exa.mination? A. Yes. 2 ~7 I7. Q. Whom did you mean by? A. By the Manager. . 24718. ]fr. Robertson. ] That must refer to somebody else above tho positiun of deputy if the person had charge of macbiner.r to that v:.ilue. 21:719. Mr. Lysa_qlit.] Q. You said that a m3:n who 11el<l a service certificate should not pass another examination as Manager - [interrupted]. 2-172 ). Mr. Wade.] 1 objert; that, is not so . 2:1:721. ~fr. LJsa_qltt.J (l Do you think that a Manager who holds a 1:er,icc cerlifica.te should pass an exa.mination? A. No. 24i22. Q. Did you state before the Select Committee that men holding service cert ifi cates ou~ht to pass some eiamination? A. 1 reany do not recollect anything about it; I. do not know, what Select Committee it was. 24723. Q. It "°as a Seled Parliamentary Committee 1 on the lDlh of April, 1'38.b? A. There have been rn many of them that I have forgotten . 2472!. Q. It was on the working of collierie3. Do you say that men who holJ service certificates sbou ld not l?as.s a.ny examination? A. I ·think 11ot. 2-1:72,:i. Q. Ha.,·e you alwa.ye held that opinion. Will you state that you did not sweir that you thought othenri::e? A. I will not s"'·ear to one thing or the other. 24720. Q. I will read it to you. Did you sa.y. _Our views were pretty much to this effect, that we thought that examinations were necessary, b:.it that under the conrhtions of the Colony it woulrl be unfair not to make these examinations to a l.1rge extent oral, i'n so far as some very ha.rd-heade<l men, w~o prolm?lY in theil' youth had not the opportunity of getting tile e<lnca.tion that is thrust upon young people now, were actmg as mme Manag~rs. A. That is for pnscns who did not hol1l cel'lificates.

24:7:27. Q. But now ha,c certificates of scnicc? A. Ko. 2 ~728 Q. Then you were asked, do JOU believe that an examination ~houlll be pa•sed by a ctrpuly, a11cl

replied that the examination sl1ould be as pradicnl and ns fair as possible. Is uot that coratrary to what you say now? A. I do not think that it is at aH inconsistent. ~J7W. Q. Did y0u not say, as regards tho first recommendation, fil'tccn yea.rs ngo, that you approved of it? A. No. 2~730. Q. You know lhat a vcry smiill accumulation of coal-dust is dangerous? Li. Under certain tll'C ums tances. 24?;H. Q. ~ou h:He found it necessary to h:.we lhe coa.l -dnst watered. Will you tell me whetbe1; you appro,·e of 1t? A. If l cliJ not approve of it, I should not do it. 24:7:{_2. Q. If the roads had been watered, would that have mitigated the disaster? A. There was no dust. on -r,;o. 1 at all. It was a dustless road. 2:1:733. Q. Was it always tlustles.s ;-did you not mention that the 4th Hiirht oulbye was d u.sty? A. T es. 0 That was hefore the dirnster. 2-173{. Q. It ,Yas not dustles;i? A. No. 2 J73.3 . Q. Where did the dust come from? A. I sucrnesteu one 0r t" o places among the pillars. 2.t73~. Q. We have ha::I evidence here that certain p~;ts of Kembla were dusty. We have had it f1om Morrison and other perwns. 1£ any parts were dusty, should they hal'c been watereJ? Li. I£ thev wero dusty enough. . 2478i.

J<'U

..• \

.. }

• T"""t

743 Will, .~,-Dr. J. 1\1. R. Robertson, 9 March, 1903.

24787. Q. What is your opinion of'· dusty enough" ? 24738. Q. H ow thick ? A. Several inches.

A. If the d~st is pretty thick on tLe floor.

24739. Q. You would not water for :my dust less than several inche!'l thick? A. I would not let you put . it that way. You asked me wh:it I thought wa::i a dusty road; and I :inswet'C'd it. 24740. Q. When would you water it-what would be the accucrnlalion of dust to make you think. it n ecessary to water it? A. If there was any dui:;t at all-to any appreciable extent at all, if impalpable. 2474 1. Q. What is" an appreciable extent at all''? A. 2 or :3 inches. 241742. Q. That is what you say? A. But, even if n. place is <lry and pnrlially dusty, I would water it. 24743. Q. What is "partially dusty"? A. Take. this road I was speaking of. There was no dust on the side of the road; that was only a dry road. · 24744. Q. Which one? A; The 4th Left. 24745. Q. Y ou ad mit that it was a dry road? A. Yes. B nt the blast missed that, and <lid not com!" down it at all 2474G. Q. W as not one recommendation of the Rulli Commission that, where dust exists, it should be periodicall.v damped by water? A. Ye~. 24.747. Q. W ould not dust less th.in 2 inches thick be favourn.ble to ignilion? · A. Yes, if il were dry and fi ne. 24749. Q. You recommend that the competency of a l\1anager should Le certified to by a specially appointed Board? A. That was a recommendation which we were asked to state our opinions upon by the Gover nment. 24749. Q. You stated, as a Commissioner on the Bulli disaster, that " T he compete_ocy of a Manager should be certified by an examination before a specially appointed Boa.rd," but now you give evidence as a witness that it should not? [No answer.] 24 750. Mr. Robertson.] Q. You excluded men. already in positions who had shown by years of s~rvice t hat t hey were competent? A. Certainly. 24751. Q. That would only apply to unknown men? A. Yes-that had no qualifications. 2-:1!752. Mr. L.11sa_qht.] Q. I will now ask yon a few questions about Mr. Rogers- you. appointed bim, I think? A. Tbe Company did. 24:75:-l. Q. By your advice? A. Yes. 24754. Q. You know he has admitted that he knows nothing about the composition of gas? I suppose he does not.

~~1755. Q. Do you know ho has admitted it?

I do not tbiuk he knows anything about gas. I do not

think be is singular in that respect. 24756. Q. D o you know be admitted thnt ho never himself took the me:isurement of the air in the Kcmbla M ine? A. I do not suppose he dicl. He bas other persons to do it. 24757. Q. Do you know he admitted that he found black-clamp and did not report it? A. The question is wltether black-damp should be reported. 24758. Q. Jt is · a noxious gas ;-do you not know that there is a General R ule that any noxious or inflammable gas shall be reported? A. I think that if a fireman or Inspector found it, ho should r eport it · - 24i59. Q. T ben it is r ight th:i.t the firemen should report it? A. It i.s right that the fi remen should report it. 2-:b760. Q. If the .firemen shoulJ reporb it, why not others? A. The l\Ianager need not r('port to himself. 2476 L. Mr. Robertson.] The Manager does not require to report to himselr". 2HG2 . llfr. Ritcl1ie.] Q. Are not the reports written as a guide for those who may ,·isit the mine afterwards? A. They are written primarily for the Manager. 24763. Q. I suppose you k11ow tlmt when the Inspectors come to the mine they look at these reports? A. Yes; so do I. 24764. Mr. Lysaght.] Q. Do you know that Mr. Rogers admitted thaL he did 11ot know what the results were in connection with the coal-dust sent from Kembla to Wool wich? A. I think I have already told you that I know n,>thiog whatever of the evidence that bas been given either here or at Wollongong. 24 765. Q. H ave you made any inquirie3 as to the way Rogers carried out bis duties as Manager? A . Yes. 24766. Q. And you are satisfied with him? ,1. Yes. 24767. Q. "\\T ere you satisfied with David Evans? A. Yes. 2-t7G8. Q. Were you satisfied with John Morrison? A. Yes. 24769. Q. You do not find auy fault with any officinJ in the mine? A. No. 2 1770. Q. You do not blame anybody? A. No. Examined by Mr. Bruce Smith:24771. Q. I wanL to make it clear what these notes are;-ihey are in type-writing? A. Yes. 2-1-772. Q. Were they typed from notes which were written out? A. From pencil notes. 2477;3. Q. Who pencilled them-there are three sets-4th August, 27lh Augu~t, and 19th September? A. For the first lot, I think Mr. Sellers was the amn.nuensis. 2H7~•. Q. Tell me how he got the authority from all who signed it lo commit them to these particular statements? A. What statements were those? 24775. Q. Any statements contained in these notes; how did you get the authority io commit the people, who afterwards !Signed the statement, to what it contained ;-did you discuss each statement b~fo:e it was put down in the notes? A. Oh, yes; we were sitting do\\·n in the mine. 1 .J.776. Q. 1t. was done after deliberation? A. Ye:-; after deliberation, but in the mine. 24,777. Q. You discussed what you should commit to paper? A. Yes. 2!778. (J. Each man having taken part in the discu~sion, and assented to it, that was put down in pencil ; it was typewritten; and you afterwards signed it? .,J. Tes. 2 l77!>. Q. Each man who ~igned these pages of 11otes assented to tho statements made in them? A. Yes. 24780. f/ On the 4th of August there were J. J ohnstone , George Cater, E. Sellers, J. H. M. R obertson , Thomas Cook, and J. C. Jones; nnd, after all the signntmes are plaeed to the stntement, there is a further subscription by Mr. D. l\1c:Geacbie, Mr. J. Barr. and Mr. S. \V. Warburlon, to the effect that they are convinced that the facts described are accurately detailed? rl. Y cs. ~4781.

744 Jrit11ess-Dr. J. R. M. Robertson, 9 Ma1·ch, 1903.

2 ti81. Q. On th<' 2ith of August there are no signatures?

A. 1 believe I took then>' CJ myse:f on ili~d~. . 2i7dl. Q. I take it, then, tl1ey are your own notes? A. I was tn.lon_g the notes. 2~783. Q. On thP. 19th of September Lhey are not signed? A. No. 2 !784-. Q. On the top of the page of the 27th of August there :n_e the names of J. R. M. Robertson, J. C. Jone~, E. St\ller.:1, and WiJlin.m ILiy ;-although tht>re are r.o signatures, these purport to be the notes of you four? A. Yes. . . 2~785. Q. And three ge11tlen~eu besides yourselres assent to this as being a correct re~ord? A. Yes. 2 ~73G. JJ.[r. Ritchie.] Q. There Wt're Dr. R oberh~n, ~n,l Messrs. ones, Sellers, an~ Hay f A .. Yes; thev asked me to send it to them, and the.v "·oulJ sign 1:, but they d1d not send the copies b:.u:k again. 2if,1. lJir. Brtt~e Smit It J Q. At the head of the note~ on H>th August you havC' the names o~ Dr. }bbertsou, Mr. E Sellers, l\fr. William Rogers, ~Ir. Willia.01 Hay, Mr. Warburton, and Mr. J. l\Iorr1son? A. Yes; Mr. Morrison was taking us· round. 2-1788. Q. I lake it that a.11 lhese people a_ssent to this report ? A. Yes. , U78D. Q. I had not seen this report when I examined you before, aud I wan~ to ask you one or t"·o questions about these notes. I ~nJ erstantl _.ro~ to sa.y, abo1,1t the _cause o~ the disaster : that y~u do not think gas or coal-dust had anything to do with 1t? A . I do not th1_nk ~ ~aid tb!l't. I thrnk [ said I could not get beyond the fact that there w&S a CJ uantity of cn.rbon-mono x1de in the mrne. 24790. Q. I am speaking of fire.damp. You d•) uot collsider fire <lamp or coa~-<lust had anything to do with it? A. I think coal-dust had. 24791. Q. You do not think there was a·.y explosion of coal-dust? A. I said that I did not see any evidences of an explosion. U7D.!. Q. I under.sta.nd you to sa.y that, in your opinion there was neither an eiplosion of coal-dust nor of fire-damp? A. That is so. ~1793. Q. And your reason further for believinr. that fire-damp had nothing to do with it is that you had never found it in the mine, and do not. believe it; was there? A. And I did not see any evidences of an explosion f ro:n fire-damp . . .. . 2:1,79 :1:. Q. You admit that you found fire-damp 011 the three occasions of your v1s1ts? ii.. I always aclmilted that, but I st.ited that I thought it w:is the product of the distillation of ccal-dust. 217~5. Q. You told the Commission that you did not believe that there was any flame in the mine?· A. No more than little puffs. 24796. Q. You believe there were little puff~ of actual flame? A. Very much the same as H aldane describes. 21797. Q. You do not belieYe there was actual flame iu the mine at the time of, the disaster? A. I could see no evidence of actual flame. 24798. Q. I did not ask you that. I a~ked you diJ you believe there was actual flame. I do not care how small. Do you believe there \\"as n.clual flame in the mine during the time of the disaster, or immediatel_v b efore it? A. Per.sona1ly I have great difficulty in answeriog the question. I think there wa'3 a little incandescence of coal-dust. 2HDO. Q. I am speaking of flame? A. I know you are. 249'.)0. Q. Do. not your notes of 4th August show this-

Whilst some flame must have accompa.'.licd the blast, t his mmt have been inconsiderable in amount?

A. I m:i.y explain. as I poinl e.i out, th:lt we saw no evidence of flame; but Mr. Sellers said that there must have been flame wh en there was so much carbon-monoxide. N301. Q. You as~ented to it? A. But, ;,ince that, we hare foucd out that you can have the production of carbon- monoxide without flame. 24(302. Q. D o you go back on what you wrote? A. I ,,·ould like to qualify it. At the moment it was written , none of us were nware that carbon monoxide could be produced without flame. ' 24,803. Q. As the flame must have been inconsiderable in amount-whv did rou accede to the conclusion that some flam e must have accompanied it? A. I was in considerable ·doubt whether distillation could bl3 unaccompanied by flame, knowing thaL carbou·monoxitlc -was prcseut. My brother and myself had evidence oE that the first night. Subsequently 1 found that carbon-ruonoiide could be produc.d without fl.1,me. I m1y say that we fouutl. tba.t out subsequently. 24804. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Who is " \'fe "? A. Auyone "ho reads the Trausactions of the Federated Tnstitution of Minin g Engineer~. 2 i805. Mr Bruce Smith.] Q. You ha Ye altered your opiniou as to flame? LJ. To a. sl ight extent. ~4803. Q. You do uot thiuk uow that flume must hn.,,e been there? A. It nec<l n ot neces~ari ly ha,·e been there. 2 t8()7. Q. You have come to t.he conclusiou si11ce that flame need not necessarily be there? A. I have. I may say that a.t the corner of the last pill:i.r there was a little coked dust; and it bas occurred to me how very accurately Haldane has described it. But this was jn a smaller amount than Haldane described . 2-1808. Q. Have you discussed with Mr. Sellers or Mr. Jones the possibility of there not being any flame there? A. Yes; bel·ause Mr. Sellers and Mt·. J ones were turning up the trausactions of the Institute. 24809. Q. When did yQ,u di~cuss the matter with Mr. Sellers? A .. Fifty times-any time we saw each other. 24810. Q. Before he gave evidence? A. Fifty times befure. 21811. Q. Are you aware that Sellers has since said-since he described it in the notes, and since he cliscussed it with you - - [Interrzipted]. 21-8 L2. Mr. Wa cle.] Discussed what? 2-18 L3. Mr. Bruce Smillt.J Q. Dr. lfobertson nnderstands it. Are you a.ware that Sellers in his evidence said," My account "-speaking of his account oE the <lisn,sler-· 1 would suppose dust explosions"? A . I suppose he refers to these little puffs. , 2-18 L4.. Q.- I want to see where the logic of i_ t carries u a. Sellers h:is tolJ us, si nee he signed the document, that h1_s account would suppose tlust explostons? A. I suppose that he considered these little puffs as e1 plos1ons. 24815. Q. H e said that it would give a flam e in the heading of No. 1, and account for the coked dust? A. It must have been very slight. I cannot say th~re was no ~am~. l e:!lw no evidence of it. 24816 .

. ~

: I

'" 1

....

.., ~

•I

745 Witness-Dr. J. R. M. Robe1t~o.J, 9 March, 190:l.

24816. Q. If you admit the probabili ty of the presenee of Ba.me in , the mine, wh:1t jt1sti fi ration have you f or ea.ying that t he coal-dust, when raised by the blast., did not cxplodo? A. Bees.us~ L eaw no evidence of it. 24817. Q. In respect of what? A. No evidenco of charring or burning-only on ono or two props in one corner of a piJJar and near to tho roof. · 248l8. Q. Caused by what? .A. You could coneei\'e it bo be from the flame of a can lie. The outstanding feature of this accident is - - [Interrupted.] 24819. You have a. knack o£ going back on anything you eay. 24820. Mr. W ade.] That is only your opinion. 24821. Mr. B ruce Smith.] I want to keep on t he line. 24822. Witness 1 I am extremely anxious to state all the facts, if I was allowed to do so, without all this cross-examination. I sholtid like to answer question8 as to facts in a n ice pleasant wav. It Fcems to me as if there were partisans in this Court. • 24823 . Mr. Bruce Smith. Q. I ask you, if there was .flame in the mine, why it should not ignite conl-dust r.aised by the blast, and you say that yo u saw no evid~nce? A. Jmt little ones; little puffs. I saw too little evidence. 2482.Ji. Q. You say on your notesAt 86 Aitkeu and son were found slighUy burned. A. That was reported to us by Morrison. 24825. Q. I s it down as a report ? A. Yes.

24826. I will read it to you : •At a shunt close by, two (2) skips were forced on the tc,p of eac'.l other. slightly burned.

At No. 86 Aitken and son were fvund

It was reported to us. A.s a mat.ter of fact, I saw Aitken mydelf. Mr. R itchie.] Q. An inspecting party fo und them? A. res. M r. B ruce Smith.] It is iu the notes, and signed by them.

24827. 2i828. 24S29. 248$0. 2!831.

Mr .. R obertson.] The bodies were remored on the' Saturday. Witness.] .Aitken was there on the Saturday morning. Mr. B ruce Smith.] Q. On 27th August, in the first part of your note~, there is t he following: -

To collec_t dust from various points and n.dditional e"idence of force and fire.

A . That was to see if we could see anything. 24832. Q. What bad you got beforehand? A. I do not think we got any. 2-183:J. Q. Then the word " additionall" is not wanted? A. No. 24834. Q. It is redundant? A. Yes. 24:!S35. Q. There was not any reason for its being there at all? A. No. 2t836. Q. You adm it that you found coked dust at the last cut-through the:.-e? the corner of the back heading and tbe cut-through. 24837. Q. You say-

A. A. little coked dust at

Absolutely no evidence of fire or coked dust beyond last cut.through to face.

•••;(

} '• ~

Up to there you did find it? A . It is not very accurate; it was written down in the mine. 24838. Q. But this WM written after deliberate discussion, when you returned from the investigat ion? A. Yes. 24810. Q. A re you aware that Sellers said that they got gas with a rnfety-lnmp whrn you were present? A. No, tbe_y got no gas. 248 1,0. Q. l l:I it untrue? A. On wh at <l:i.y was it? 248 J,J. Q. He sn.ys h,s impres~ion was t liat j ou got traces of gas at Stafford's flal? A. ·wc got none. 24842. Mr. Wade.] The ev iJ ence is that the others did not agree with him. 248 L!3. Mr. Bruce Smitli.] (). Wha t do you u11derstancl by "mel!cd dust"? A. Coked dn~t. 24844. Q. Arc you a.ware tl1a.t l\J r. :Sel lers said that the canva1.1 in th e bad( hu:tding was tharrt:d? A. ] f he said so, it would not be accurate. I hare n, small piece of it her<'. 24845. Q. H e said tha.t tho skin of the ba.rk was undoubtedly burned? A. Slighrly burned. 2484G. Q. He said that t he !lplintering was burnt? JI. It went no distance into the prop at al l. Here is a little piece of the canvas from the bal'k hea<l ing. 'J he canvas 1$ I!Ot destroyed. I should like to hand it to the Court. This i!I a. little piece from a little strip betweea two prope. And ht're is a piece of canvas the substance of which is ab~olutcly destroyed. 24S 1,7. M1·. Ritchie.] Q. I s that taken off the l.ir.1ttico? A. H is off the canvas on tho entrance to the back heading through the cut-through. 24848. M r. B ruct Smith. ] Q. I s that taken by yourself? A. Y cs. If you bend a. little piece of this other canvas, you will find that it will br, nk acr03:'(, but this piece of cama.<J came from a point in Kemb]a. Mine It mile a.wa.y, and fire was norer ncnr it. [ Tl, e brattice ddh icas marked Exhibit No. 53.J 2484!). Q. Ts ibis ~tatement by Mr. Hay in arcordanc·e with the conclusions which you gennally nrri n•cl at. Speaking of the disaster, he says, " 1 hare no doubt there wns flame in this disaste r"? Ko; it is stronger than I would put it . .2!850. Q. He \v.as as:ked" Q. Have you any doubt that flame was tra,·elJing? A . Something havelled. "Q. Have you any doubt tliat tin.me tra.relled at that disaster? A. There must h::i rc been l1eat t.o . cause it. "Q. I am talking about fiau:c·? A. I wns not there lo sec; bul t1:it're must have been fbn:e if t here was burning. "Q. H a,·e yo u any doubt at all? A. No, I ha,-e not." A. No; it is stronger than I woul<l put it. 21851. Q. Mr.Jones was with you ; aud I will n~k you whether his statement is in keeping with the conclusion you arri ved at. H e said that he ,ns willing to admit that there was an explosion of fire-damp; that 1:e belic,ed that gas would exude from the coal through want of natural atmospheric pressure; and t hat it was an exploeion of gas that killed the men inbye? A. That is not in keeping with t l:le deliberate cone] usions that we a.11 a.rrived at. 21852. Q. You told Mr. LyFaght that you had written to Mr. T. E . ·Foster, of Newcastle-:m-Tyne, and given him full particulars oE the <lieaster? A. Yes. I 16825 29-5B 24853.

•

746 'witnea.s-Dr. J. R M. Robertson, 9 March, 1903.

24853. Have you received a r~ply from hiin? ~ es. . . 24854. Q. Will you produce h is letter ? A. I wtll read 1t t~ you, .I th ink. . . 2.Je855. Q. Mr. Foster is a man who has h ad very great experience 10 coal-mining mnlters? A. Yes; and bis father and grandfather before him. 2185G. Q. You regard h is opinion as bein~ valuable? A. Ye~. . . T 24857. Q. You stated the case to him. W hat does ho say rn reply? A. His lettE'r 1s dated from No. 8, Eldon-square, Newcastle-on-Tyne, 22nd October, 1902; :md be says:1 ha.ve read your letter with interest; and it seems to me that the cause of the accident is mosh difficuH to explain satisfactorily. Mr. Walter Hrown has a~so read the a~cou~t car~fully, and informs me that _the possibility of art e~loeion being caused by the compression of the air has been ~aised 1~ this country, an? that Mr. D1ckeneo.n, who was.until la~ly the Chief Inspector of Mines, was mllch impressed ,~1th the Hlea.. Some experiments were at one time made wit~ the view of proving the possibility of such an occurrence, wh1~h _Mr. ~rown remembers to lu~ve rea~ or, and has been .t~y.10g to put his hand upon, but so far withont success. I n.m :i.t~a,cl, without some confirmatory ev1dettce of the_p?ss.1b1hty of ?our auggestion, it wonld be very difficult to carry th~ pomt. It was thought by _the C?al-di~st C~mmlse1on, 1f I remember rightly, that an e,cplo3ion of coal-dust, pure and simple, woul,d not be caused without its bemg aided _by_a hlown-ou~ shot, or something· of that description ; and, as far, as T can gather, there does not appear to have been any mc1dents of this sort.

24,858. Q. You suggested something as.to the ca~se? A . I_told him I could see no.possible cause for it. I wanted him to put me right. I was m su ch distress of mllld that l co uld not thmk properly. If he could pu t me right I should feel obliged. 2J859. Q. You do not reO'ard his letter as an endorsemeut of you r views? A . Not quite. 2 l8GO. Q. I want to com: now to a.n entirely different matter. You admitted to Mr. Lysaght that ijp to this morning you did not know there bad been a previous fall of 2 f~et 6 inches prior to t he 1ast fall? A. No, I did not h ear of it. 2486 1. Q. You ba\'e no reason to doubt it, when M orrison swore to it? A. I could not douLt Morrison; I have known him all my life. 24862. Q. H e swore that there was a previous fall; and do I understand from you that you tell t h e Commissioners tbat, if there had been a. previous fall of 2 feet 6 inches before the explosion, it would make no difterence? A. I do not think so. 248G3. Q. Which is t he most likely to be the larger fall-the first or the second? A. The second. 2486 -k Q. Supposing t he first fa.11 had fallen in the same way that the secC'nd one did, would you not expect that to produce a g r·cat wind-blast? A. No. I take it that Morrison only meant that a portion of the roof would come down. It would not come down 2 feet 6 inches there. 24865. Q. Suppose· you accept the statement? A. I hardly think so . 24866. Q. I am asking you to assume that 2 feet G inches had fallen the Wl ek before. Assuming, also, that it fell in the same complete way you assume the second fall to have fallen, would it n ot have p roduced a g reat wind-blast? A. It might, or it might not; it would depend how it £ell. 24867. Q. You assume tha.t the second fall fell in a blor k? A. To all appearances it hall <lone so. 248li8. Q. You gave an answer to Mr. Lysaght this moruing, that, in order to produce cer tain effects, t he fl ame would have to go over a. large part of the mine, and leave certain inflammable things untouched? A. T hat was in connection with the piece of brattice. 2!869. Q. That is a common practice in explosions? A. I cannot say, but it may b e. 24870 Q. You know that the testimony of ex perts is tbat the flam e does do so ? A. It 1::eeks ou t the coal. dust, as it were, wherever coal-dust exists. 2!871. Q. Y ou beard Mr. Robertson say that he made an experiment, in which the flame passed over a p iece of newspaper? - - [No answer. ] ~48'?2. Mr. Rober/son.] Yes. 24873. Witnt'ss.] It will depend on circumstances. 24.874. Q. The fact that the flame did go over certain inflammable things, and reach another inflammn.ble thing which it burned, is no argument against the flame having passed through the roadway? A. I cannot conceive it. 24875. Q. Y ou had never heard of t his pipe which had been found, until all the notes were committed to pa.per ? A . It was weeks afterwards. 24876. Q. Who told you of it? A. I was told when I was down at the mine. 24877. Q. You ca.me into constant connection with M orrison when you were making these notes? A. No. 24 878. Q. M orrison was oue of t he party ? A. I have not seen M orrison since. 2487~. Q. You would come across M orrison frequently during the inspect ions you were making ;-did he mention the pipe ? A. No. 24880. Q. Did you come across Hotchkis? A. No~ he was not in the mine then; he waR at H elens burgh. 2488 1. Q. W ere you ever told by letterr A. O ur K embla people are not much at writing letter~. You have to drag news out of them. 24882. Q. You consider that pipe is a. significant thing? A. I do. I told 1\1 r. Atk inson that I thouuht the 0 brattice was set on tire by someone smoking, before the pipe was found. 24883. Q. After the pipe was found, would you a l tribute it t o -- ? A. Smoking. 24884. Q. Would it not strike you as a g reat coincidence? A. Ko ; I ha.ve seen many inetances of . brattice being burnt. 2-1~85 Q. D o you know that in the Dudley explosion there were two fires afterwards like this? A. I think there wer~ a good number of fi res there among coal and timber. 2488G. Q. D oes 1t not occur to you t o attribute this fire at the brattice to the exolo11ion? A. No. 24887. Q. Why? I.. I do not understand rou . · • 24888. Q. W ould it not o~cur to you, apart ~rom the fi~ding of the p ipe, to assign that fire to the explosion? A. 'Yhen I ?a"! that bratt1ce, I formed my Judgment 10stantly, and I ba,·e never varied it. I told Mr. A tkmson w1th10 an hour afterwards that someone had been smoking and lit the brattice. 24889. Q. This m~kes no difference to your firm impressi on that there was no Bame? A. No. 24890. Q. Supposmg you thought there was flame? A. I would not think it would be due to the fire at all. 2~89L Q. Although y ou kno w t here were many fires in the Dudley mine? A. Among the coal-dust and timber . [The Commission, at 4 p.m., adjourned until 10 o'clock the following morning.]

TUESDAY,

- 1~ Ir

. I

:, .;.

747 TUESDA .Y, 10 MARCH, 1903, .10 a:m. [2 1/1e Commission ml'! nl

tl1P.

Su11reml' Oourl, K111,q-i,lr,.l'I, S!;d1,ey. J

l:')rcsent:-

0. E. R. MURRAY, D. A. W. ROBERTSON, EsQ., Com11ss10NEn.

ESQ.,

D.C.J.

(PRESIDENT). D. RITCHIE, EsQ., Com11ss10NEn.

Mr. Bruce Smith, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by :\Ir. Wood, Crown 'olicitor's Office, appeared on behalf of the Crown. Mr. A. A, Atkinson, Chief Inspector of Coal-mines, assisted 1\Ir. Bruce mith. ¥r. A. A. Lysaght, Solicitor,· appeared on behalf of(a) the representatives of deceased miners, whcclet's, &c., (victims of the explosion); (b) the employees of the Mount Kembla Colliery (miners, wheelers, &c.); and (c) thG lllawa1Ta Colliery Employees' Association (the, outhem Miners' Union). Mr. 0. G. Wade, Barristel'-a.t-Law, instructed by Messrs. Curtiss and Ba1Ty, Solicitors, was present on behalf of thP. Mount. Kembla Coal and Oil Comra.ny (Proprietors of the )fount Kembla Mine).

(Mr. J. Garlick, Secretary to the Commission, was present to take shorthan<.l notes of the evidence and proceedings.) (His H onor handed to l\Ir. Lysaght and Mr. Bruce Smith a letter received from Mr. Jonathan May, giving particular.s of what Mr. Ma_y considered to be the operation, in his own case, of boycotting or black-listing. His H onor asked whether Mr. Lysaght 01· Mr. Rruce Smith wished to call Mr. May to give evidence on this point. Both Mr. Lysaght and Mr. Bruce Smith 1,aid that they saw nothing in the letter with which they would desire to supplement the evidence already adduced.) Dn. J . R. M . ROBERTSON , previously sworu, was recalled, and further examined, as under:Cross-examination by Mr. Lysaght:~4892-8. Q. H a.vo you the figures this morning by which you got that 700 miles per hour? A. I have not made them up. I will do so. It will ouly take a fe,v minutes. I will do it before I leat"e t he Court · 21894. Q. Could you do it now? A. I would rather hand it in. Examination by His H onor : 24895. Q. There is Cine phase of the matter that has struck mo, on the question of the probability of an instantaneous fall, and I would like to ask you a. few questions about it. First of all, I think it may be fairly taken , may it not, that 12 cubic :nches of average rock weigh about a pound; that is to flay, 1 foot in height of the average strata over the roof of the mine would represent, in actual weight, about 1 lb. per sq uare inch superficinlly? A. Rather mo:-e than that. 246!}6. Q. Ilow much? A. Ob, probably about one-tooth more than that. I should imagine that it would be 160 los. or so to the cubic foot, roughly. 24897. Q. One pound would be about 1~4? A. One pound would be 144. 24898. Q. Oh, yes; of course. Well, as far as the pressure of the air is concerned, as long as the rock {11 in an absolotp]y uoruptured state, the ,vhole pressure of the air operates in support of the roof; that is to say, as far as its connection witb the superincumbent strata is concerned, as long as the superin cumbent strata. can be taken as absolutely J!igid the connection of the roof with the superincumbent strata is assisted by the pressure of the air? A. Yes; that is the case all over the mine. 24899. Q. Yes ; that is so necessar ;ly? A. Ye:1. 24900. Q. Well , that pressure may be taken , allowing for depression of tension of air in westerly wines, and allowing for any cyclo ne conditions, and allowio~ also for the altitude of the place, as at least. 14 lbs. to the SCJUa.re inch? A. Yes, there or thereaboute. Yes, about 14! lbs. to the square inch. 24901. Q. Vt e can take 14 lbs. ns a minimum ? A. Vv ell, I do not know that I would go so low as 14 lbs. 21902 Q. We may take it as a minimum? A. Y c~, au absolute minimum. The altitude is about !>UO and odd feet. I did not take that into account. 24903. Q. Then, you see, you have also the tensile strength of the r ock, which may be taken, I suppose, to be able to support at kast 6 feet or so of itself-do you think it would ? A. I could not say anything a.bout that. 2!90-t. Q. \Vell, it is n. pretty considMable element, is it not? A. The roof was eridently free on, you mav say, three sides, and ouly beld by a solid rib of coal oo the road side. e11, if the roof is not free; I am taking it as a. hanging roof, but not a.b~olutely free: before 24905. Q. it can begin to let go at any point you must. have ::i. weight in excess of this 14 lbs. to the square inch, and in excess also of the tensile strength ? A. Yes, no doubt. 24906 . Q. You must bave that? A. Y es, no doubt a.bout that. ?.!!>07. Q. Well, then , is it not clear that you cannot arriYf', going upwards, at the point at which, by mere weight, the roof will begin to let go, until you reach something approaching 20 feet from the under surface of the roof? A. Oh, I think it was r ather more than that. 24908. Q. You think it would be more than that? A. ·oh , yes; I think so. I think it was more than that. 24909. Q. I am not speaking about what was-I am speaking about what would be. You see, you have the roof supported by the t.eusi le strength of the r ock added to the pressure of the air. It is banging, therefore, on the su periocumbent strata, and it cannot begin to let go unless some other element comes in, such as the hydrostatic pressure of watn, which, I supposf', may be counted out as improbable. It cannot begin to let go at any point except at a. point- I am leaving out one element which I am going to suggest to you--which woul d be something like at least 20 feet from the under surface of the rock; its weight alone, t he superincumbent strata being taken to be absolutely rigid, would not allow it to Jet go except at a point some considerable distance-I suggested about 20 feet-from the under surface of the roof 1

748 Wit11as-Dr. J. R. M. Robertson, 10 March, 1903.

f? Is not that so as a mere mechanical fact, becimRe it is balanced by the pressure o~ the air under• ~~~th, and it is also balanced by the tensile adhesJon of the rock above? A. I do n?t qui~ see that the air helps to balance it; fo r this 1 eason that the air presses on the top of tha t rock, JUSt as 1t does on the

~1i\ o~·Q. I am going to suggest that to you; I am supposing ~hat the superincumbent strata, the great thickness o~erhead, was absolutely rigid ? Yes; but there 1s no doubt that that was not so; these 0

falls in the 4.th Right disturbed the ~urface, came up to the sui:facr. . . . . 24911. Q. Now, there is another element of support, by the way, 10 ad?1tton to the~e, which wo~ld probably make that 20 feet a good deal more; that is, the lateral support of the surrounding r ocks, which . . . . . may be called friction? A. 1 did not hear you . 24912. Q. The support of the surrounding sides. If you con.s1~er a body ~h1ch ts going to slip down, you will see t hat before it can slip down it must overcome the friction of th~ sides? A. ~t .~as all ~own. . 24913. Q. B ut supposing th:it, before t.he r oof ~omes down, you cons1~e1· the po~s1b1lity of 1ts coming down. it must not only overcome the direct tensile strength of the r ock itself, but 1t must also ~vercome the lateral support., that is the friction, of the surrounding rock ? i.l. But th~re was no surroundmg r ock; it was all do,vn · the ends W(;re loPsf', and natural cleavage planes near the rib. 219 L4. Q. Yes ; 'but I mean supposing you are co~sidering the prob.abil.ity ~f a sudden fall. Well! t~at is a sma11er element in proportion to the greater s1z~ of the ar~a. which 1s g?rng to !all, because the.fr1ctt.on on the sides ,·aries with the lineal measurements, whilst tbe weight for a g1ren height of rock varies with the square of those linP.al measurements; that is clear enough. But, anyhow, that is a. considerable , element. That being so, how can n. fall be.gin at any heigh t less ~lian perhaps 20 fe~t O; 30 feet from the surface unless you introduce another elemen~? Now, I am r;oing to suggest this; .1s not the element which begins to cause a fall really th e flex1on, probably, of the whole of the supermcumbent strata? .A. The whole of the superincumbent strata, Your Honor, is not in one continuou~ piece. All these rocks have lines of, not fracture, bu t - - [Interrupted]. 24915. M r. Bruce Smitli.] Q. Clearage? .A. Cleavage. 2-19l6. His Honor.] Q. Strat ification? A . No; tho strat ific:ttions are broken bylines of clea.age that go right through them ; and that, of cour~e, weake~s the roof to a large extent; in fa ct, in ·some of the C'o:il-fields, in all the coal-fields everywhere, these Imes of cleaYage a.re so - - [lnterrupfe.d]. 24917. Q. Admitting the lines of cleavage, they do not affect the question of the barometr1cal' pressure; t hey do not allow the int roduction of air press ure, although they separate the strata of the rock ? A. Ob, yes, the line of cleavage would make it like a loose end. There is nothing more common in working coal than, when one of these lines of cleavage is relieved, that a. piece ju~t drops out. 24918. Q. Y P.S i that in point of fact, explains a good deal in those cases where the l ine of cleavage pro,es the line of weakness-the assistance of the air underneath is lost? A. That is a view of the case that did not present itself to me; bu t I think, if your Honor will just look at it, you will see that the air pressure is balanced, inasmuch as this r oof had co~e a.way, and had been dii:iturbed to the surface. 2491U. Q. I am not speak ing of any p1rticular r oof; but I am speaking of the general question of when a roof will begin to fall. Now, you can easily see that, on simple mechan ical principles, as long as you keep your superincumbent strata. absolutely r igid and without fl ection , you cannot mechanicalJy have a fail even of 2 or 3 feet. D o not you see that it is impossible r But you can easily see this, that the slightest, and absolutely ina.ppreriable-in measurement-ffection of the whole superincumbent rocks will then easily r esult in a break , which will allow air to get in o,er the top of the r ock which is to fall; and that will reheve altogether the resistance by the pressure o( the air underneath ; and there would be pressure on each side. Looking at it from that point of view, is it not a fact that every fall in a mine, unless it happens to be an enormous fall of 30 or 40 f eet thick in one piece, must invol,e a. flection of the superincumbent r ocks in order to allow it to start at all ? A. In this case we know that the r ocks were not only in a state of flection , but that the flections had been so great that they actually broke, and broke up to the surface. 24920. Q. In this fall? A. Not after this fall only, but before. 24921. Q. Befo re it? A. Yes; the surface was disturbed. 2-1922. Q. That being so, is it r eal ly possible that a fall of r oof can take place without the foll itself beiog broken acrosJ in a. great many differ<-nt places and pretty wE-11 fractured throughout; being, in point of fac t, a curve, and sloue having ,·ery little elasti.:ity to avoid fracture in case of curvature:" A. In th is case, Your H onor , I saw it. It was cut clean away; and there were only a few inches between the edge of the coal and the sandstone beds. · 2!92:J. Q. Where did you look up and see that? A. At the e ntrance to the 4th Right goaf. 249M. Q. Looking ri~ht up? A. Yes, when the brattice was put in, so that we could get up ther e easily. 21'.)2~. Q. How fat· did you see that? A. I nm quite satisfied that I could see over 20 feet ; but I did not see the end of it. 24926. Q. 0£ the fracture or of the fall? A. It all came down in a body, and apparently great flags of stone. 24?27. Q. But it was all in flags and broken pieces? A. No; flags about probably 1 foot to 15 inches th ick. · 24928. Q. But all that co'!les bac:k to this, that, in point of fact, it is a mechanical impossibility to get one great slab of roof, extendwg pretty well all over where the tn.ken-out pillars were, t o fall in one unbroken mass at once? A. I could no~ say that, because I know to the contrary. I know that it would be traver sed by ~ large number of these _Imes of cleavage. Those cleavages down in the south are every 3 or 4 feet. 24!L9. <)._ "\Yell , yo~ !mow 1t would be broken all over? A. Yes, practically; but out on the main road, where a similar. l'Oo t fell after th e fall, ver y likely after the compression and the removal of the natural suppor~s, the brnbe~ and such like, we. measured one of these flagei, and the size seemed only to be <letermmed by the s11.e of the road, anl 1t was 12! yards by .1·t about as Jonaas t his r oom is broad . 0 2 l~30. Q.. And t hat fell. in one piece? A. 1'bat was all in one piece. 2!!l3~. Q. And what thickness.? A. A?out 1 foot or 15 inches thick, probably. 2493- : Q. About l foot or 15 1uchc s th·ck only ? A. Yes; of cour~e, it is in bed:i · and it would separn.te after it fell. ' 24933. Q. It woul d split? 24934. M r . .Robertaon.J Q. Di,l you say it "'ould break after it fell? A. It was about 6 or 7 feet h igh. I t was about the height of the r oad, 24935.

749 - IVitne~-Dr. ,T. R. M. Robert~on, 10 March, 1903.

'\.

249:35. Q. I under~tand you to say that you found one slab 12! yards by 5} yards? A. Ye!', one slab. 24986. Q. 'ruen, I understood you to say it would break after it fE:11? A. 1leally, these are questions no mortal man could ans,ver. , 2.1•937. Q. I want you to reconcile the two ? [ Wil1iess diJ not n11swe1·.J 2rn~8 Hi$ Honor. ] Take the greatest fall you can imagine- would not it come to be, in effect, one great, _but not instantaneouiz, storm of ror·k, ns you might call it: a great storm of rock, in the course of the ~falliog of which. the inter-<1p:l.("e.s formed up abore would be instautaneously filling from tbe pressure of the air squec1.ed do"n below by the falling mass ; compensating, in point of £:wt, for the enormous pressure which was being put on the ai: down below, by the inru~h of the air from below up above, though no doubt expelling a large quantity of the air which had not time to distribute itself into the new inter~paces; but nothing lik~ expelling it as one great body, or as a large proportion of one great body of the air, in almost an instant of time? LI.. I do not propose to !'ay that it would expel all the air; but 1 think, from the nature of the rock that fell, an<l from the large solid slabs that we could see, it would a!low a smaller pr oportio:1 of the air lelow it to be driven into the interstices than if it bad been soft brittle rock. 2493~. Q. Oh, there would be pal'tial vacuo in places, no doubt? A. Yes; but I am quite sure, even • allowing for that, that it "ould not displace the whole of the air; that is to say, that n portion would work round and get over the top and thro~gh the crerices. 24'9±0. Q. And then, again, you see, do you not, that this great fall , or "hatc,·er it is, is, mechanically, a f~ll beginning from rest, graJually acquiring motion un1 ii in 4 feet of direct fall, it would acquire a rate of about 8 feet a secon<l, an<l that would probably be the limit of the fall? A. Yes, I i,ee. These are the points that we can never discover. We can only speculate upon them; but I put it down, myseJf, that about three-quarters of a ~econd would be the time. I admit it is one of those points we can never ascertain. 21:9H. Q. In calculating bow Joni the fall would take to take place, did you take into account the retarding effec:t of the air down below, which your calculation assumes must ha'"e been enormously comprei::sed, and must ha,e, therefore, been made much more enormously retarding? A. Your Honor, the <'a!culation necessarily must be crucle, because, as I i::a.v, we c:m neYer ascertain the factors. We can nerer get at the actual conditions. I only made the calculation to assure myself that, when I asked the question of my friend in the North of England, I would not be asking an absurdity; and he recognised that, and stated that Mr. Dickenson was ver.v sweet upon a similar opinion, an<l had put it forward as the cause of some collier.v accidents that could not otherwii:e be satisfactorily explained. 2-:t9J2. Q. Of course, his letter does not go for very much? A. Oh no; further than that I was thiuking on the same linrs, unknowingly, as l\Ir. Dickenson-nothing more than that. 24913. Q. Then again , as fnr as $hock is con<·erned, you suggested that a shock of air, dbrations as from a fall or a. blow, will cause fracture3 at n. very long distance, and may cause the breaking down of a wall even ? A. Yes. !?4914. Q. But that shock is qui tc different from the compression necessary to en.use a sudden exhibition of heat: to do that you must get an actual compression of a bo<ly of air? A: Oh yes, the two are quite different. 249 15. Q. Of course, you might understand n. shock at a di:.tancc of half a mile throwing down a. brick stopping, for instance? ..1. Y cs. 249.1:G. Q. And yet that shock would not have the slightest effect in raising temperature? A. Oh, yes; it need n ot necess:.i.rily be accompanied by the transmission of air at all. I t is merely the transmission of waves of air. In the ~ame way I have often i::ecn brick walls 8 feet thick actually rent all ways, ma.de perfectly loose, by the vibration of ri reting h:immers in ri retiug boilers. U!H7. Q. An old public-house "·as knocked down in Sydney once by a clap of thunder without being struck by ligh tni ng ? A. Yell; but this was by the actual vibration shaking the wall~. The walls were knocked perfectly louse>. 24!Hq. Q. So that it all comes Lack ngain to tbis, that the calculation is 01:e which, although certainly the sudden shutting dowu of the lid, as it were, of a mine would, if it co uld happen all at onc<', completely fvrl!e out the air through an openin~ at a mo.st enormous rate, still there are so many uncertain data that it i:1 very di!Iicult to sug•.!est evc>n that the calculation could be approximately correct? A. I must admit th:\t I wo nl<l lcare th1t to physiL"i.sts who have the proper instruments nod who have de'"otcd their lives to it. It i:1 no t for me to do that. Still, I only suggest that it is quit,e reasonable and quite feasible; and, moreo,·er, that it is a. suggestion that is rapidly gaining ground among the leading ligl1ts at Home. , 21!1.J,9. Q. The suggestion that falls have directl_y cn.use<l catastrophes? A. Yes. 140.:iO. Mr. Bruce Srnitlt.J It ought to occur to Dr. Robertson that, before he propounds a theory of that kind, it is his duty to ascertain its feasibility. 2405 l. His Hvn u1·.J Q. I understand you are an engineer, Dr. Robertson? A. Oh, yes. 2495:!. Q. Have you gone through a regular couri:e of eugineering? A. Oh, yes. 249J3. Q. Involving the higher mathematics:' A. Oh, well, not, perhaps, the higher mathematics; mining engineering does not embrace that. 2,W5.I.,. Q. 8uch ordinary mathematics as r;.in up lo and include the differential cah:ulus? .A. No; that is not included iu miuing engineering; that is more civil engineering. 210,5. Q. I thought that the differential calculus was looked upon as a sort of thing for average engineers to pla.y with. I confess I cannot pla.y with it myself. 2JD56. Mr. Bruce Smitlt.J Q. In those notices of yours, you and the gentlemen who visited the mine came to the conclusion that the evidences of force increased as they got ou.tbye? A. Well, apparently. 24057. Q. That is in your note? A. Apparently. 2J.93S. Q. That tho for..:e increased as you got ontbye, instead of decrea~ing; it has an important bearing on your theory? A. EriJent'y it di<l; but whether tbat was due to the weaker roof along the roads, or wh -ther it was due to the increased relocity of the blast, is a differ~nt matter. 24059. Hi1J Honor. ] Q. I thought you s11ggesled that there was an increase of energy through the compres:iion raising the te:nperaturo sufficiently high to final ly cause something like an explosion of coal-dust. 2:1,060. Mr. Bruce Smit!t,.J No, 110 explosion; he will not admit that. 24961. His Honor.] Do not you admit that there was an explosion of coal-dust? 11. I cannot see any appearances of an f.'xploi?ion at all. / 24962.

------------- 750 Witness-Dr. J. R. :\1. Robertson, 10 March, 1903. 24962 Q. Then, if there ,ns no explosion but a sim~le es:pul~iou, mu.st it not necessarily, and absolutely necessarily, follow that, except in the case of P?::s1bly runmng agamst a dead end, the force of t~e explosion mu t diminish as the di~tance e~tends: 1s not th:i.t an a.bsolutely necessary result? A. I cannot say whether the force was accelerated on the outside or not. The damage Wai consider ably greater some distance away from the 4th Right; but w1rnther that was due to the weaker roo~ a mong the falls and among the faulty ground that the road went through, or - - I _do not know whatit was due to. Th~ falls were certainly greater, probably after 100 yards from the 4th Right; but I do n ot know that that 1e any proof of the acceleration of tho force. 24963. Q. Then it appears that, not only d_oes the f?rce appear to have been acc_elera_ted, but also that. a large quantity of carbon-monoxide_ was ev1d_ently driven outwards as far as the Juuctwn of the two m~m roads of the mine· and thtn went in the main tunnel up towards the upcast shaft towards the furnace with the air? A. Not ~o much wen t down there al! from the inside. 24'DG4. Q. Well, it went up there anyhow? A. I do not know that there was so much there as came round the course of the ventilation. 24flG5. Q. ·well , there was a large quantity of cnrbon-monoxide generated; and it could only be ca.ul!~ by the distillation of the dust? A. just occurs to me lhat the girders taken out o~ that road (ref~r_ring to tlte Xo. l 111ai1L levl'!) nearly all had the ~ame bond on them. 1f there was any difference at all, 1t was due to the fact that the girder was weakened through some caul!c or another at one particular point. '.£he girders were all disui:ed permanent-way rail~; and, in any case where the flan ge was eaten away, or the crowu of the rail had been eateu n way by the flange of the locomotive~, the bend was different; but in all the cases wl1ere the rails "ere of equal strength they were eq ually bent ; so that, in thinki n g it over I do not see that that showed any evidence of increased velocity. 249GG. Mr. Ritcl,ie ] Q. It <loes show that the force pad been the same and had n ot weakened? A. It shows the same, but uot any inc1·ease in force. · 24967. H is Ilonor. ) Q. But your theory would invoke an. enormously decreasing energy, do not you see? If you compress gas-by gai1, of course, I mean air, which is a gas- and theu let it out through a tub~ after compre~sion, the effect, the compres1-ion, as it passes along the tube, must n ecessarily, absolu tely necessarily, d~creasc. You have no supply of force from behind - you simply have one shot, as it wereyou have no contiuuing force supplying force behind. If you had an engine working behind compressing the air, you would have n, continuous supply of force; but as you have not that, you bave compressed air continually expanding itself, aou therefore the force would be less and less? A. Probably it would b e less. Mr. B ruce Smith's question just put me mind of the~e gi rden \Ve put them on top <?f one anolhE'l' on the surface just to see; and we found thnt they were practically all bent with, as nearly as possible, the same force ; any differeuce was due to the weakening of the gi rder. · 24968. Q. W ell, th e fact that the force continued equal, if it did conti nue equal, shows that there was a. reinforcement as it went outwards? A. That, of course, I could n ot say? 24960. Q. E,·ery girder str uck represenls an expenditure of force? 24»70. Mr. Bruce Smit Ii.] Q. Did not these nine people testify to this fact: -

. I

r ..,'

.,. •.

As the evidences were so abundant that the hlast was developing in intensity as it p1·oceeded outbye, and feeling convinced that we bad disco,·ered the focus. .

A. Oh, they did not travel nll the main No. 1 outbye at all. They went to well beyond the point where the girders were bent and the roof down. Of cour se, that expr ession of opinion was put down in the mine, and without any particular considera.tion. 24971. Q. I understood that you told me that the whole of this ,vas put down after careful deliberation n11d asrnnt? A. Yes; it was as clear as possible under the circumstances of examining the mine. 24:972. Notes of this kind arc awkward things. I would like your H ono r just to listen to the whole of this sentence, because it shows, in my opibion, that this discorery of the increased intensity of the forces outbre led them to doubt t heir theory. 2±973, Witness. J '!'here was no theory at all then.

- -[Infe1·rupled].

2!97*. l111·. Bruce Smith. ] [Reodi11_9 from notes handed in b!/ tlte witness on tl1e previous day.]As the evidences were so abundant that the blast was developing in intensity as it proceeded outbye, and feeling ·convinced that we had discovered the focus from whence the force proceeded, we thought it inadvisable to further contione the inquiry, an<l proceeded to the surface by the No. J tran:lling road.

24975. Hili Hono1·.] Q. Why was it inadvis:1ble? A. There was no theory at a.11 then : there was a simple examination of the mine. It really meant this, tha.t the evidences of force were so abundant from that point outwards, and the hour so late, th:it we thought there was no g reat object to be gained bv travelling along a road that ,--ras practicall.v one muss of fal ls. . • 24976. JJI,·. Brue'! Smillt.] I th ink, yonr Honor, as these notfs may be neAJed to be r eferred t o again, Dr. Hobert~on might be asked to leave t 1! em in charge of ~Ir. Garlick, because there are several points there that 1 have dir. cted attention to. [ With Dr. Rober.'son's consent tl,e notes were handed to the

Secreltrry. ]

Re-examination by l\Ir. Wade:21977. Q. What was the nature of the damage outbyc from the telephone cebiu? A. The roof Jown. 2:1:97 . Q. The r oof fallen? A. Yes, evidently caused by the knocking out of the girders, that were s·1pported by or at each end. 249i9. Q. And would the extent of the falls there <lepcn1l on the nature of the roof ? A. Yes; there was a zone of rather faulty ground there; and the roof wa.s much worse than over the generality of the mine. 'f h e_y were very bnd fall1:1. 24980. Q. You said that the roof, or the str,1ta, had broken up to the surface? A. Disturbed the su rface, yes. 2498 1. Q. DiJ you have any indi.cations o E that, any actual proof? A. Oh, yes, it brought down the surface waters: we had to cut drams to take the surface water3 off. The seam is not very deep there. 249~2 .. Q. You were asked yesterJay if you had made inquiry as to whether Mr. Rogers had carried out his duties. DJ you remembc~ being asked that question b_v Mr. L ysaght? 24983. Mr. LysfT.fJltt. ] I did not put that question. 249~4. Mr . J:r7ade) Q. Mr. L ysaght asked you if you hau made inquirieM as t o whether M r. Rogers had carried out his duties? A. I am quite satisfied. 24985. Mr. Lysa_qM.] I did not ask tba.t question : I asked was he satisfied with what Mr. Rogers and other people ha,e done. 24986.

751 ll'itm!IIIJ- Dr . .J. R. .M. Robertilon, 10 March, 1903.

.2-l:086 . .MY. Wade.] Q. Now, I want to ask you, as that question has been put by Mr. Lysaght, what 9pioion did you form with regard to Mr. Rogers as Manager? A. I ba"e not beeo disappointed with hitri. I was told, before he got the maoagement, that l should find that he would be ,ery zealous nnci flttentive to his duties, and quite able; and I ha.ve not been disappointed. He has bcrn a careful , methodical, cautious, man: not a business man at all; but, in the performance of his duties, he has been ·;very careful and ca,utious-a very cautious man, and exceedinuly ord~rly and methodical. ~2!987. Q. Would you agree with this statement of Mr. Rowa;'e-'' Mr. Rogers is an able and experienced man, cautious, reliable, and conscientious in the discharge of his duties - - [lnte1·ritpted.] 24988. M1·. Bruce Smitlt.] Doea Your Honor think this inquiry any occa&ion for going into this aspect of tbe matter ? 21999. Mr. Wade. ] Wliy do -you want to e:cclude it? H ow cnn it possibly affect you, you appear here irt a neutral position. 249!)0, Mr. Bruce S111itlt.] I ask His Honor whether it is really aJJropos to this inquir.v-thc opinion of this witne1:s as fo the statement of a second man with rega'rd to the character of a third. 21991. Mr. Wade.] 1 hn.re kept clear of' these questions until l\1r. Lysaght introdut'ed the mat.ter yesterday afttirnoon. 2t992. H is Honor.] The quesliun is what Or. Robertson tbi11ks of Mr. Howan'd opinion of Mr. Rogers. 24~!>3. Mr. Wade.] Nn, it is a question whether he agrees witb that definition of Mr. Rogers. 2499J.. Mt·. Ly.•·a.9ht.] I submit to y:H1r Honor that i t does not matter whether l:e does or not. It is not fo r this witness to give an opinion on Mr. Rowan's opinion ; but to give his own opinion. 2.J:995. Hi's Honor.] He can gi"e his own opinion: l\Jr. Rogers was immcdjately under him, and under his eye for years. '"' 24996. Mr. Lysaght.] H e bas s:tid alread.v that. he was sat i~fiecl with everything that Mr. R ogers did. 24997. Mr. Wade.] Q. Now, you w<>re n~kPrl a nucnbn Lf questions about the evidence given by these medical men, do you remember? A. r f'I", I think so. 24998. Q. You were asked tlii:,,, whe.tht-r, if you had been told by a medical man that be came to the conclusion that the indications of burning were caused by a Bame of high temperature, would that affect your opinion. Now, supposing you heard that some medical man did nut belie,·e in combustion spontaneou~ly, and did not know anything about it, would that tend to add value to his opioion, or to weaken it? 24999. Mr. Bruce Smith. ] Bu t JOU are paraphrasing part of the witness' eridence: why not rl·ad what

he &aid?

•

2!000. Mr. Wade.] Q. Sup pose he says this, " I do not beliere in spontaneous combustion: I do not know a nything about it: l do not know that if you subject coal to ioteuse heat it will give off oxygen"? A. Tha.t is on a r>ar with some other medical man who said that he did not know what carbon-monoxide was, and wanted me to tell him what it was. 25001 Mr L.11sagl1t.] I submit that this is really wasting the time of . the Cocncnission, putting to this witness, who does not pose as a checnical authority, th?se. questions. 25002. His Honor.] Mr. '\,\Tade, it is much better to argue these mattera before the Commission than to get them in by aski ng Dr. Robertson what he him ., d£ may think to b3 invidious quc· tions. 25003. Mr. Wu e.] Your Ilu11or, Mr. 13ruce Smith askeJ thi:s witnc,-s certain questio:is from a part of the eviden(·e; aud 1 asked to hare the whole of the e,·idc1,cc put bdure tl,c mtness. 2[)004. Hi , Honor.] You can put it before the Commission. l t i::i much better to do that than to get it in indirectly by means of the examination of this witne~s. althou;.;h he is au expert; f1 r, although !Jr. Robertson is rery modt:st as to bis position and qu:tlifications ns nn expert., of course he is an expert. If he were such a thorough e1pert as SOUlC of the University l'rofessor:1, such qu~~tioni'! as these>, e,·en then, might be objec:tionable, but tbe,v would come with fOmc f'o1·ce; but, in the c:nse: <,f Dr. Hobertson, they rome, he himsE.-lf. will admit, wi1 Ii rcry lit tic weight, :111 <1 ,·er}' little dfect. 1 f you wi,h to ask Dr. Ho bc>rt~on medical expe1t quesl1011~, I ·,ielicve tha.t he wonla ha\'e a right to c.xpre~s an opinion; but that is bec;1u;ic I think his degree is a medi1·al one. 25005. Mr. B ruce Smitli.J No doubt; but c:erlain witneia;ses ha"c gt,·cn their opi11ion as to whether a. ma.n's skin had been burnt, as distinguished from being affected by great heat; and oow be is ssked by Mr. Wade whether tl1e fact that be knew that one of those witnesses knew nothing of spontaueous combustioc would affect his opinion cf the qualification oE the witcess to say whether a man's skin had been burnt. 2500u. Hi's Honor. ] That is a. quef!tion to be put before the Commission directly, and not indirectly by the examination of ariother witness . 25007. Mr. Wade .] I admit,,your H onor, that the strict legal course would be to do that; but I .,did not und er stand that the Commission would hear any addresses. 25008 . His Hono1·.] The Comcnission will not decline to hear any addresses. The Commission will leave it to Counsel to say whetber they wish to address or not; and of cour::.o they will ask Counsel to cut it as short as possible, if they do addrf'ss. 25009. Mr. Wade.] Well then, your Honor, if it comes to dealtog with the medical evidence in detail it must go to great· length. • 25010. His Honor.] T ue tnost useful way would be to mark off certain pn.ssages and call the attention of the Commission to them, stating the reasons why you call attention to tbem. Orating for three-quarters of an hour on each of them will not increase the l'ffect of (·alling attention to them. 2 ,:iOll. Mr. Wade.] Very well, You!' Hono", I will take that course, if necessary. 25012. Q. You were aske,I socne questions about <loub'.e doors: supposing you have an explosion which blows out one door, wou!J the probability be tout it would blow out both the doors? A. The chances are that it would blow out both door,: . 25013. Q. Then where does the advantage come in: in the ordin:iry working oE the mine? A. Yes, in the ordinary working of the mine. lf you are limited for air, and it is exhausted air, then, naturally, the less communication you have between the return in one district and the intake in the other the better. 25014. Q. I t pre-vents leakage? A. Yes, it prevents leakage. 25-015. Q. But it is no special protection in case of an actual ~xplosion? A. N o, they need not be any special protection.

25016.

752 JJ'it11e.1.,1-Dr. J, R. M. Robertson, 10 Ma1·ch, 1903.

25016. Q. Of cour~e you have had hundreds of falls of roof, I suppose, in K~mbla-may be thousands....; did you e,·er hear of any report of gas being found n.~ter. the roof had fa11en 10 Kembl~? A. No, never; a.nd I have e:xamin,d ofter a lnrrre fall in the sh:ift d1str1ct, when we commenced the pillars there, nod I f ound no gas. Ju fact I do not°think it is a ;100£ th.at c~uld oontnin ~as; it is almost solid snndstune ; it is as near ns p:>ssible solid 11:md:itone; thcro 1s no b1tummous matter m the roof. 2-3Ul7. Q. f 0:.1 spok(.>, just now, about waves of vibration caused by n. shock - would you get those waves att the r esult of a fall and the displacement of nir? A. Oh, yes. 25018. Q. Do you know what pace these waves travel at? A. About 1,100 or l,2CO feet a second. 2501!). His Ji,,nor.] Q. A.bout the same p:tce as soun<l? A. About the same. 25020. Mr. Wade.] Q. Somewhere a.bout a mile in fire reconde, is it not? A. es, under a mile in fh·o seconds. 2502L. Q. Can you say what effect you thi,,k those wares would have on, say, a light at the 4th Left? A. It ~·ould be cxtinaui"hed; a t<harp wave would extinguish it. 2-3022. Q. o;ld tbat be quite apart fro:n the actual rush of air which came out of tbe 41h R ight? A. It might be. 25023. Q. Aud, if the air were tran•lling at 7'-)0 miles per hour, of course there would be pretty w~ll tho same paeE,? A. Ye3. In any cni.e it would carry the pure air before it at an enormous pnce; and I do not see any possibility of any lights e:i:istiug in the mai n road at all; in fact the lights were put out . in some of the workings n consideuble distance off the No. 1, and the miners re-lit their lamps and made their escape. Examinaliou by l\Ir. Robertson: 25024. Q. Iu tbo 4th Right-ibnt i~, the roadwny from the fall to the I nck heading - there was at ka~t one prop, you admit, fo und with the head lea.11i11g. inw:11ds? A. Leanin~ im~·ard.~-yc~. ,, 2502.3. Q. How do you arl!ount for that prop being f ,rnnd there at all, lenuing 111wards or out \\'nrdi:1, Ill n. roadwnv throurih which a. b!ast had pnMcd with a ,·eloc.ty of 700 miles p:•r houri' A. I do not kuow. I underst:rnd that there were two props with a croiis girder put there to-I u11derstand that th ere were two or three props put there to support the brattice. Of co.urse, they would be wedged tight; but I only saw the one in ihc position that you state, and I can giro no explanation of it. 2502J. Q. Well, we will stick to the one ;-the moment that this Telocity of 700 miles per hour reached the back beading, there would be an e1pan:caion of the compresJ;1cd air and a reducti,m of velocity? A . .At the back hendin~? 25027. Q. Yes? A. There were all the apprar.rnces of an enormous force outwards-tons of s tcnes, and rubbish, and brattice, and props drfren into the c·revicfs of the coal. , 2S028. Q. I know· that; but when this velocity of 700 miles per hour reached the bnck head ing it would apread in other two directions? A. Yes; but it evidently did not spr ead very much. I tbink that you can see other evidences coming out of the first cut-through outbye from the 4th R ight, but not beyond. 25029. Q. Well then, when it reached the main heading, unquestionably, according to your own evidence, it spread out bye and in bye? A. I t went both outbye aad in bye. There w<>re distinct, uomi$takable evidences of tba~. 25030. Q. Then tbe rt'locity would be ,·ery much decreased-decreased by half-neglecting the retur n airway? A. Probabl.v. 25031. (J. And yet this reduced velocity going outby<>, in you r opinion, accouIJted fo r the bending of iron bars, and the destruction generally, right out to thP. tunnel mouth ? A. Y CP. 25032. Q. " Tell, if there wa.s such destruction with a reduced relocit.v of, i:ay, 350 mi)e3 per hour, how is it that anythio~ wn.s ]~ft in the 4th Right roadway at alt? A. Oh, towards the Inst, I suppose, the velocity would be a. little less.' I cannot nnswc-r-you :ire asking enigma!'!. I am on ly stntiug fact:s. l t is impossible to answer these things; you must take the facts as they are there. 2503:3. Q. \Veil, I think it is a fair question to a.sk, and I th ink it is a very easy one to answer: rnn you cive an idea of the lateral pressure of air with a rnlo('ity of 700 miles an hour r A. Yes; rnmelbing liko 87 lbs. or 38 lbs. per square inch. 250:H. Q. Well, then, n. light prop, or any light malNial , woul<l not offer ,·erJ much resista11ce to that fo!'ce? A. Probabl, not. 27035. Q. Well, when the vclo :-ily of 700 miles per hour- which gaxo you the estimated pre8rnre, I think, of 37 or 88 lbs. per square inch- reached the ha.ck heading, there would be e:,:paosion? A. Undoubtedly there would be eipans ion . 25031>. Q. ,veil, with expansion there woul<l be rcduclioo of temperature? A. Probably there woull. 25037. Q, But would not it be so inevitably? A. Probably it wouJJ. 2503S. Q. But more than probably; - cnn you have e:i:pnmion without reduction? A. At that particular point you soe no evidences of heat at a.11. There arc ab.;ioluklv 110 cY:dentcs of hen.t at all at the batk heading. • 25039. Q. I nm nc,t Mking for tl10 evidences of hC'at ;--I simply want to know "'hcther if, fo r tho sake cf argument, \\e htvl a temperature of 201 degrees at t.hc orifll'c, would that tt::mperature not be enormously decreased when it rcnched the back ho:tding? A. Probn.bly it would. 250:l-O. Q. I ll1iok you must admi r that with expansion you get a decrease in temperature? A. Prulubly. 250.H. Q. N'ow, the 4th Right being wet, and there beirig no dust, the innition of du st could not take 0 place there? A. No; you se.? no Cl'idenre~ of he:it or Hame tl1ere at all. 250 t2 .. Q. We~], thE>n, if there was no ignition of dust in the 4th !tight, and the te:nperaturJ was re<lue.:d - I tbrnk Mr. Sellers gaye the tempern.tur£>, with a hnH of the ,·clocity, at !)4 denr@es- if the temperature was reduced after .th~ 1~i r left the 4th l{ight, before it 1·eached any µlace whe:='e du~t ('OUld be ignited, there could be no 1gmt1011 of dust? 11. 1 do 110t see that there could be a.ny irrnition of dust on the main road~, simply because tht-re \\'as no dust on the m:iiu road except the dust ih~t mi"ht come from amon"' 0 0 t he pillars i11 the 4th Right. ~J01:-J.· Q. B~t. th~n. we ha,:e the e\·idence, you sec, !hat nny du~r, or any i:;01a11 coa.1, that ma_v have been !11 the 4th.Right pillar wor~10g_s, was ~o~ered. by lbe first fall? A. Yes- that is, if you can believe that it was entirely covered, which is a thmg wluch I ,·ery much doubt. It is not a roof that would fall in that way. 25:)44. His Honor ) T? give some idea. of the force of this blast, I might mention that I think it works out, on the Doctor II evidence, ~t romewhere about forty times the force of the "Dandenong" gale a!'! r egistered by Mr. Russell. 24-015 .

l l :

• I

753

ll'ilne.ss-Dr. ,] . R. }1. Robertson, 10 March , 1J03.

2J.Qt5. Mr. W ade.] I think it is five tim3.s. In 1,he "Dandonong ". g.1le the instrument broke at 120 miles e.n hour. 250! 6. H is H onor.] Of course, the pressurn variea a.s the square of the velocity, appro1imately. The "Dandenong " gale blew rather harJ. 2.30.!7. Mr. R obertson.] Q. You know, T think, th:i.t the dirii!ully iu a ~co:rnting for this disaster is tho comparative ab~eoce of flame? A. Ye~. 2501.9. Q. Hut is not that a feature in mo;t cJlli~ry explo•ions? A. Xo; the fealure of most colliery e1plosioos-gas explosions-is the prc\·alen1:e of fl ime, a11J the evidence!'! of Bame. 250:l!O. Q. But J. thiuk, if YtJU will read account~ of most collicr.v explosion~, you will find that there are portions of the mine where th t·r e are rery few indications of flame - portions? A. Y e:i, oh, yes; quite , right---dust explosions egpecially. Dust, apparentl.r. seeks out dust. The e\'idences, apparently, of the Udston explosion nnd the Fernie explO'ion, in lfriti::;li Columbia, arc these: that the explo~ion Clccurred at one portion of the mine, and that, almost simultaneou:.'ly, lhe:-e "ere other esplosions in very d istan t p ortions of the mine, without apparent pas:sa2e of flame. 15050. Q. But do you know wh~ther, in the Udston explosion, it is not n. fnct that' there were ,·cry few indications of flame beyond dust being coked? A. , \~ell, I do not know, further than readiag the e1 tracti from Mr. D ickenson's report. If I hJd had the wh~le r eport to rC'ad I would ba rn been in a better p osition to answer. 25051. Q. Well, touching upon that feature of colliery explo3ions-,·iz., the apparently simultaneous explosions in different parts of the mine-there\\ ouhl be conflicting radiation of forcej? A. Y~s; but there bas been no conflicting radiation of forces here; there bas been nc breach in the continui ty of force• here. It commenced in the 4th Right, and went inbye and outbye from the 4th Right, and there was no breakage in the continuity of lhe forces. 25052. Q. I did not suggest so; I merely refrrrerl lo some remar ks.of your3 on Mr. Dickenson's repor t. Have you read Mr. D onald Stuart's book on ' · Collier_v .E:tplosioos "? A. Yes; I ba,e. 25053. Q. Mr. Stuart is rather an able m:rn? A. I su ppose he is; I do not know him. 2505~. Q. We can onl y judge of men by their books? A. Apparently be is. 2.3055. Q. D o you know how he accounts for the independent explosion , as it were, in a mine afler a large explosion? LI.. No; I do not recollect at the present moment. 2'3056. Q. D o not you rec 1llect that he g-ires as a rc-ason, and adrnncc-s as a theory, tha.t these local explosions , as i t were, were caused by the main explosion having access to fresh oxygen? A. Yes; I

recollect that. I remember that ; so docs llaldn.nc. 250.37. Q. VI ould not you consider that ~fr. Stuart wus a careful ill\·cslig:itor, and as capable of explaining those occurrences a.!' i\Ir. Dickenson? A. He is a careful iurestigator, but l do not consider Mr. D ickensuu and Mr. Stuart in the same breath-oh, no.

. 2505S. Q. Did Mr. Dickcn~on crer write a pa.pet· n~ n.ulc: a~ )[r. Stun.rt's book? A. I do not know whethe r he bas written a paper; but Mr. t,tuarl's papers gi,e ri;;e lo a vo1y great deal of controversy ofan adverse description . I am sure he is n.u able man; but he i:1 rnther a p:irtisan, and aggressi\·e in bis t:1tyle, and gives rise to a good deal of adverse discussion. 2.30.39. Q. But are you aware whether l\lr. Didrnn ~o u's theories g:wo ri -;e to any discussion? A . No; Mr. Dickenson's theories do not seem to h:i.re given rise to much discu3sioo, but I can see that t hey are b eing taken up now. 250JO. Q. I r ecollect that at the time hii theory was ridiculed by the profe3sion? A. Y es; the dust theory was ridiculed also. 2.3061. Q. Well, t'.iere nrC' brn able c!en who, by diffoi·ent trains of reasoning, give thei r theories as to the ca.use o f these independent explosions in diffcreut p:irt!'l of the mioe;-now1 which do you favour ? A. ell, l\fr. D ickrnson, I take ic, morr confine l himself to lhe matter in hand. He gave his opinion as to an indi\'iclual explosion Mr. Stu:\rL rather ~cnerali..;cd in that partic ular place, I think. lle did really wri te his book with the Camerton and T.dorsto" n explosions in h:s eye, but I think l\lr. Dickenson was more on p:i.rticular c:i.sc~-to explain r arlil!uhr explo.~don;;. 2 ,0G2. Q. I am under the impres~ion that that i& just what Mr. Stuart <li1l; he took particular explosions, investiaated them, and ga.,·e his coodu..;iom as the rc:rnlt of lh o~c pa.rtic;ular io\'estig,,tions? A. Oh, yes. Of cou~·ae, a few years before that the brothers Atkinson wrote a book on col lie ry e.xµlosioos, where they poiottid to the fact that wet pur:s of lhc roa<l RCCrned to give an immunity beyond; but investigations 1 seem to have gone beyond that uow: certain e:<plosions :sccin to show that wet portions of the road give n o immunity whaterer in certain ca.~es. I presume that the A.Lkinsons were r efer riog more to gas ex plosions. 250(;:J. (J. Can you slate any C,lllicry where th2rc hns been an explo~ion and si multaneously there havo been other explosions in diffrlrent part:1 of the mine, wh ich were attributed to concussion -any colliery free from gas or dust? A. liow could th.:re be au explosion if ,t w.u free from dust or gas-how co uld th ere be. 25064. Q. I say, "If free from dust or gas''? .. L J do n ot see how it is possible to havo an explosion. 25065. Q. I say, " Freo from dust or gas" ; -you r.nay h :.wc one of the two, but not both? A. I see ; I thiok that in Udstoo - - [Interrupted] .. 2!50GG. Q. They had both? A. 1 think t.hcy had a. r ery slight, amouut of <lust; I nm not sure, 25067. Q. Ud::1ton adjoined B1a11tyre? ,!. ¥ es; I know. Well, Blantyre was a p trticularly fiery place. All these collieries were almost un worlrnule in the lower seam-the ::iplint seam-from the n.m:>unt of gas that was gi\'en off. I remember the time when they were practicall.v unworkable. 25068. Q. Is it not a fact that in all those explosions where this theory of conl'ussion bas been advanced either du~t or gas has been present? , I. l'bere must have been either one or the other or there could not J1 ~e been n.n explosion. 2.)06D. Q. !\ow, the UJston mine was a gas3y miur, was it not? .d. I do not think it was particularly gassy in the Ell coal. 25070. Q. T his,\ :it- t'1c splint. coal ,, here the c·x1d11:1ion occurr<·ll? .. 1. Oh, was it? It "!l.S sinre my time. 2507 1. (j. And dusty? A. Oli, ye~, it was dust.v. 25072. Q. lt was also \\orkcd with ::-a.fcty-bmp5~ A. 'fc:1. 2507:3. (i- Do you rcmembl'i- the type of s.tfct.r·l(unp? A. N o, I do n ot. I nerer wa~ in U,.bton Colliery.

16825

29-5 C

• 25074.

ll'itnr.>,- Dr. J.

:\I. Robertson, 10 1\Iarch, I 003.

25074. Q. But do ,ou remrmber the type of !:nft'ty.Jamp font was us~cl twenty odd ycnrs ag__o in Scotch ·,,5 ? I lE.;, L do. J kno\\ the onl, trpe that wa~ arn1lable; either the Davy or the Clanny. 11 ter1c co ' know ' tbat there wn~· n· part tcu Jnr type 10 • · Sco ti an d 10 · th ose d ays.? A . N o, 1·t 250i5. Q.· Do• ·not rou u~e 1.11 wn~ before that time. . . . 250,G. Q. 1),1 ycu know that it w:u: a lamp that ".11 c rndemued by the l\11111og Institute of Scot.land? A. Yery likely. . . . . · h ·h 25077. Q. A~ :i mattC'r of fact, evcr.v miner who carried ~ha! la.mp in li)s hand car1:1cd a dent -trap wit him? A. Yery likely. I do not know "hat lamp the l dstou Colliery was usmg. \Vas it n ot the Cla.nny? • 2507 . Q. No1 it was wbat they called the Sl.'otch gauze lamp. 25079. Q. Do you kuow that there was n•ry lax di~ciplinc in Udston? A. I do not know. I was here at the time. 25080. Q. I thouO'ht vou snid ,ou rend the repor l? .J. l haYe read extracts from it. 25081. Q. And y;u do not know that, on a number of the bodies, pipes and matches, and open lights were found? A. Xo, I do not know that. 25082. Q. Now, I woulu li~e to read you n bit of your eridence here, in order that you may understand my remarks later : We were very much clisturbe,l in our min<ls to nccount for the phenomena. of this disaster. and wero naturally casting about in every possible wny to nccount for it; and I recei,·c<l a hint from n. very emiuent mining engineer in th~ North of England that the la~o Chief Inspector for 11iues, )Ir. ])ic~eoson, was rather: tAk.en with the notion that some rather obscure colliery exvle>s1ons coul,l be attnhutcrl to the pcrcnsSl\'C force of the air displaced by a large fall; and, about the same period that I rcceh·ed that .information, I. read in some. c,f. ~he mining journ.als abont some of the re~a.rks made io connection with the Ud.;ton explosion. Utlston 1s a large cc,lliery in the Lanarkshire coal-field, c,n the margin of the Hamilton coal-field, adjoining Blantyre. It seemed to me. that, in tin~ colliery, the origin of the evil was f.ound to be in rise workings, where they hn<l commenced pillaring ; aud, m that coal-ficl,I, the ro.of was a. very tend~r 1·c,oI 1ndee~. A \·ery large fall bad taken place; an1I, io t 11e ..bsence of any other cogent reason, Mr. Dickenson, and, I thmk, ~fr. Atkinson, the Icspector, and possibly other Inspectors-po~sibly :Mr. Ronald\i~n, t,he Inspeclor: I think he was there-D!·· Dickenson, at all events, in his report attributed the probable cause of t,he disaster to the effect of that large fall ; masmucb as, immediately after the tirst explosion took place-this was to the rise-simultaneously, and iu different parts of the mine to the dip, other explosions to:>k pl3cc, wbich he con Id only .icconnt for by t,be percussive force of the air. (Para. 23875.) Y ou have read I\lr. Dickcn~on's report? A. Not the whole of it. 25083. Q. Ha\"e you got it here? A. X o, I h:i. vo not rea<i his report a,t n11. 25084. Q. Would you be surprised to find th:i.t Mr. Dickenson nmkes no reference whatever to a fall ? ~- I understood that he did. 25085. Q. II e made nb~ol utt·ly no referrnc<' wh:ilnE'r to n fall ; and there is .nothing iu the eridence to show th at a fall hnd occurred. I ";\ i 11 read you l\f r. Dickrn~on 's con cl us ion:On these grounds we nrc of opinion(a) That the explosion originated either at the stnppings in the west, or Blantyre, section; or nt Harkness' shot in the east section ; the former place 1,eing most likely. (h) That it was primararily c.:i.u~eJ hy the ignition of some quantity of fire-damp a.~ an open light, or at a ma.tcb, or by being draw11 through the gauze of a cotch safrty-Jamp. (c) That, being thus commcuceJ, it wn, reinforccu by gas, with which the ventilation \\'a3 impregnated, nnd by dust, together with g1S dmwn out from t]le solid coal, o.,cl from cavities at the stoopings, and elsewhere, by the suck and pressure s<:t up 1,y the explosion; nncl that some c,f the is~ues of gas were ignitctl separately by the pressure, or through the gnuze of the lamp, or at open lights. (d) That 11ome of the miners were clearly i:uilt.v or contra,·entions of the principal Act, io having lamp-keys anl matches in their possrssion, 111111 in opening their lamps. (t) That uo apparnnt cont1 nxention of the Act is pro,·ctl a~ainst U1e officials of the mine. iJ. H C1w doc& he aC'couut, the11, for it; rc:1J the p .rti, n whc:-c he accounts for the isimult:iueous e~plosions in the dip pnrt <,f the mine? 2:;osu. Q. I lrn. ,·e ju.st read it; h · doc1 111,t, as ~our e\'iJcn:e lead:i us to bt-lie,e, sug~e.st fo r a, moment that the explosion \\US C"am<>rl p1imnril_, by pHc.:t:ll~ion orb.,· a. f:111? A. 1 understood so. 25087. Q. Well, J hnre rea,l it f11r yo11; and it is tltcrc fur you to sec; now, cnn ynu st<.tfe :in instance where an explosi(lll is 1-tntcd to ha,·c l>een caused primaril.v by JWrCll!'i!lion or by n.. fal l ? A. I t is surrgestcd 0 t hat the Talk-o'-th'-llill csplosicn must h:1,e been caused through that. 25088. Q. That is by a correspondc,,t? A. Thnt is b_v a, corre$pondent. 2,>089. Q. And thnt, of course, was contradicted by the Maoager:=1; and it is not, suppor ted by t he report of the Inspector? A. But the Inspel'tor's report \\'as written before the mine had been cle:i.red up; an d when ther e w-ns, aceordin~ to the [nspecto 1·, a rca3onable rnpposition that it was caused by a. gob fi re. 8uuseq uent event:i, I understand, prmrd that there was no gob fire. 25000. Q. Then, the torrei,pondcnt,':1 lc·tter 1rn-s 11ritten II ithout any knowledge at all of the mine? A. I do not know that. · 25091. Q. W ell, the 'M nnagcr nys so? .A. I do not h ow lhr.t. The correspondent evidently knew whnt he was talking about; he 11ns a clel'<·r man. 25092. _Q. l>o not )OU i:ee that. in the c.,s<' of an esplo,ion, am) a serious exploi:ion, if you lik<', if it could be attributed to a. foll, c,r 1•trct1i>!lio11 , 11,c )la11:i r er \\ould be onlv too irlnd to t:1lce refoO'e in that . • euggri:;t1on? A . .He u:d not li11 011· at tl11· l llllL'. Th:1t II a" onl.v a thin~ tl:at could be suggc~1cd when it 11as known that 1t ,,·1s nnt a go!, fir!'. Of ,·ot!r,e. \'Ollr own }Tanager sent t,, me an excerpt l'rom flome r ema rks of ) I r. S0uthn1~. n 11rll-.k110\\l1 l<':1('hc•t· at H ,1111!'. of :t my;o:10r:011s e~plo~ion in ~outh \ Vnlel', whne thrrc \\'as n,, 011c 111 the 11:111<· at !'Ill; nn<l tl 11:1 .. !-ll1~~1·i..ted tl1at, in that cnse, there mu"t have b«-en ~ot!1 irns and coal-dust; ~r11l 1hat 1l ~rn,- lite :-p:111,s cau-«1 _hy tlic ,·clo<·i1y :ind intensity of a fall that 1gnited the gns, anJ, po,~1bly, the E.t11 n<l up cunl-du:,t. Of couri:<', 1 do not know the name of the mine· and I simply mention it. ' 250!)3. Q. Thal w:is not JlCl'\'Ufr-ion? .J. Th<'y did not ~lll!~e~t prrcu~sion then. 25ll!H. 0: That wn, !-limply C•>.mln1.stion 1-:_iu!,1•d hy spnrh bro~1ght, about by the friction of m:ts!'!es of r.1ek; but ~hn_t 1s n ,·<>ry d1ff_,·rc·11t thing lro111 tlt1.~ 1li1·01·y of l'•>11cu-s1trn lirnu,'..!ht about b.v a full. \ Vhe11 you were m~k1ng yo11·.1·ak'.1lat1.1;11s as to t 111· lieat_ tli.1t ,,·01111 Ii<' d<•11l)p('l hy thi, great velocity, did you ltaYe in mmd Dr H,,,, .. 1111 :a l'\jl<'1'1111, 11 !<! .! . \ C'!-l I n·id 1>1'. llc·d!-ion's C'\pcrime11t~. 2-30!).:;, r;. D, .rnu k,1ow "ltctli.<·r 1>:. . !~ 1,·,, ''~1wrin1c·i1b1 went to :-:how that, in ord(•1· to get heat, yo u mus~ h:il'e c1:1t111a1 d I rl'~s11 "r ,1. ::iu.h1·1< 11 1 <· •11t1 ,ucd, _,·Ps. Of course, we know that vou tuUllt ha r e · autl thnt is one of the s:\feties of continued e"r >s111·c of fir<'-c!ar.ip to 111tc ti-c· I,· t b •fot·1• iL will icrnite 0 tire-dnmp, that it COC'~ o.Jl im111(:<li 1(<..·ly ignite. ' 25096. 11

i::·.

,..

755 Wilnt>..is-Dr. J. R. M. ;Robertson, IO March, 1903.

2509(3. Q. The calcula.lions giving a velocity oE 700 miler; per hour n,re based upon the <la.tum of ha.If a second for the stroke of the piston, as it \\'('re? A. ~OJn(>\Ylwre al)l)U t thr(·e-quarters of a second. 250!> 7. Q. No, half a secoud i' A. L did nut go iuro it with that minuta>; hut l allowed three-quarters of a second. 25098.' Q. But that would not be continued pressure? A. It miglit be sufficient, because coal-dust an ~ carbonic oxide is different from coal-dust n.11J fire-damp. 2.j 0~9. Q. But that would not meet the conditions or Dr. Bedsou's experiments? A. Probably not. 2-5100. Q. And, when Dr. Bedson wa.s experimenting, be was experimenting with an air compressor, working against a pressure of :36 lb. pn ~quare i11ch, his air compressor was not exhausting to the atmos phere? A . It was simply pres~ure. Tha,t, I think, was Dancer's cxrerimcnt, not Dr. Bedson's. Dr. Bedson's exprriroents were ronducted more to explain wh:1t was at fin,t supposed to be mysterious explosions in air r eceivers. Of course, he ,\·ent to show th:it the pressure of the air was quire sufficient to ignit e all the oils that were used as lubricants, aucl all)o the coal-dust. 26101. Q. Yes, but that is by continuous pressure? A. \Vhether it was continnous be does not say. 25 102. Q. You cn.nnot draw a parallel between an explosion caused in an air compressor under continuou.s pressure with that in the mine? A. They woulcl be a11a,logous, quite analogous. 25103. Q. You knew Mr. Ralph Moo re? A. I did . .251041. Q. H e was a long time an Jmpecto r, a capable m:rn? A. He was an old Inspector. Well, of course, the man is dead; and I am vc~ry sorry to sa.v a s ingle word against a man who is not here; but1:I do not consider he had anything like the capacity of some of the otlwr Insp('ctors. 26105. Q. At all evenhs:, he was a shrewd man? A. Ob, ,es; he was a ,·erv honei,t man. 251 06. Q. And, in investigating the cause of an explosion·, I suppose hii:; e,·ldence should be given weight .t o? A. Yes. · 125 107. Q. W ell, Mr. Ra.lph Moore reported upon the Udston explo~ion; and I will read you what h_e say s: 0

·, ,. T

Upon full con.sideratiou of the whole matte1·, I am of opinion tlmt this ,ns a dust explosion; and that it originated

in some place in the rise sect ion w he1·e Sl)nie gas "as preseu t ; t hnt a shot ,ms fired in the place snrreptitiously, and withou.t ·an examination for gas; that:, when the shot \las tired, it ignited the gas which was in the place, and a. cloud of coal-dust was raised, :,

and so fort h. Now, Lhat is 1\Ir. lfalph l\foore·~ 0pinion a~ to the cause of the disaster at U dston.? A Yes; and the force in Udston was from the foce towards the ehaEt in all tl1e cases, not to the face. 2510S. Q. There were co~ilicLing f'or<:es-1 <lo 11oi know whether you have seen the diagram? A. Noi I barn not seen the report at all. Jt i~ not proturable easily here. 25109. Q. Will you adroit that•there is nu evid('nce to show that the explosion was caused primarily by a .fall; and that concussion, if it wns n faclor in an_v C'>plo~inn, was a ~econdu.ry effecL? A. I do not knol" at all. You fee here we ha·,e got nil these pr,,of,- so immediately 1o band. There is less interest in r eading u r cxplof'iorn; a yC'a.r or eighteen uio11tlt,- aft(•r tl,cy Ol'l'Ul'. 25ll0. Q. But I tuke it you your:,0Jf nllnch con-.1Jcrriulc importance to the ruport by l\fr. D ickenson on the (Jdstou explo~i()11, as bearing out your own it!C'a? A. No; J nrnde a !.'Ug!;eslion that it was t he only one feasibl e thnt I could H~e under I he cireumi-tancc:i. A gre:it many of the factors you will nernr know; and. thnefore, it" ill be i111·ompl<-te to that E>xtc nt. 251 ll. Q. But then you mm1 ioned the U dst on report ns ;;u pportin::r y9ur theory or your suggestion that a fall - - [Interrupted.]? A. -'ly princtl'n.l inl't>rmalion r('gar<ling U<lstou '"as :from the Colliery Guardian remarks. 25 ll 2. Q. There has been a sugg('stion mnde by, J think, the northern miners, that only certificates of competency obtained in th e Colony should be recoriuis('cl ;-do )'OU consider that the men holding I ro per ial certificates should be considered as undesirable perwn:-- to eome here? A. !\ o, I do not think t hey should be considered as undesirable. 25118. Q. Unde::-irable immigrants? .,1. Ko; I would condemn myself. I hold au I mperial certi ficate ; 1 could hardly be expecled to condemn my:;elf. 2.3114. Q. But do you think it is to the interesl of the inr1u;;fry nnd of the miners themselres that owners should be prevented from se<·uring the serYiccs of the r er,\· best men thn.l tlie Brifotl1 coal-fields produce? A. I think it is distinctly in the interests ot the owrier.<, a11d of tlic miuer;;, and of the trade, tha.t the very best iutellecL and espericace that can be obtninru should be ohtained. 2Slli5. Q. Well, I presume you recognise that tlte col\lliLions of' mining in the Colony are not sufficiently varied for a man to obtain the sn.rne experience here as tU British coal-fields? 11. I have already stated so. We have not the varied conditions here that tbry ha,·t> at Home. You cannot put an ordinary miner here to do the same \Tork as ti.le ordinary min('r :it Uomc woulu be put to do, because the miner here is quite inexperienced in it. 25ll6. Q. Have you paid attention to General Rule 12, ns to shot-firing-is not the structure complicated? A. Yes, I think it is, a little. I think it should be altered. 25117. Q. Simplified? A. Yes, simplified. 25118. Q. I u your experience in tho Colonil·s, have you found lhe strata rather treacher ous? A . Y es, it ' is rather treacherous from tl,ese intersecting tlcavnge:i. 25119. Q. And affccLed by atmospheric coudiLions? , J. 1 es. 25120. Q. T hat being so, do you agree that nil shahs su11k in futnre should be lined? A. Yes, I am distinctly in favour or shafts b~ing lined, even when th('rc is conglomerate; because very often , when air is admitted to that conglomerate, it frets easily. l'ure santlstone is not so li;l.ble to fret; but conglomerate is very treacherous; and I would say that not only Litumi11uu~ stratai buL also conglomerate, should be lined. 25121. Q. There was another suggf!slion mad<', that miners i;houlu have power to appoin t mining engineers to mnke their check-inspections-whn.c is your opin ion about that? A. I thiuk you could not expect owners to ngrce to that; you coulcl not expect owners to agree to any such suggestion. I think it w0uld be highly reprehensible. J?irst of all, you nppomt Managers by an examination; they are appoint ed because of their abilit:.y. T h~ miners aro alluwecl lo in,~pect; what more do they want? I do not thiuk it would be right to call in any stranger, en· any miniug e111-!ineN. I t would be quite wrong. P ersonaUy, I would prefer to go out of the tra<le nJtugcther than to be ouiigeci rn do eucl1 a thing . I would prefer to go out of the tra<le entirely than to dirulge my secrets to any mining engineer th.tt I did not choose myself. ~0 12:!.

756 Witness-Dr. J. R. i\I. Robertson, 10 ~larch, 1903.

25122. Q. 'fhe e"idence of the min ers who ha,e come before ihis Commissi~u is to the effect that they ha,e :i. difficultv in securing the seni ces of competent men? A. I do not thmk there can be a~y truth

.,'

int.hat, because competent men nro welc?m r d ~nc.l re~pect~d wh ererer they go. !hey are becommg such a r a r e Commodil)' , that thev . would be hailed .,nth sat1sfnc1Jon; any recommendations made by co~petent men would r<'ceirn instant and i;,incere attention. . . · 25 t23. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Do I understa.nd you to say that competent men are becomrng a rarity? A. Yes, n rare commoditv. . 25124. Q. Amongst the miner$? A. Among~t the n_cwer ~lass of_ mrnen 25125. Mr. Robertson.] Q. You mean men of ex_p_er1enc~ r _A_. l e_s. • 251:.W. Q. That is partly due to the easy tond_itions of rn_n~mg 111 ~e:v South Wales? A. Tes. It is holidays, play, football, hMse-racin!!, and such like. Th e ris:ng generation se<:m to be much more taken up with these tban with serious work. . . · . . 251'27. Q. I take it, from what you say, that you ham no ob.1ecllou ~tall to competent men ms~e~tmg on behalf of the miners? A. Ko; on the contrary, I would cocour:1ge 1t by e,·ery means. The opm1on of a. competent man, in my opiuion, is a YC:Y n1luable thing indeed to the ~lanager i and, personally, I would hail it ,vith satisfaction. I would give competent mrn eYery possible encouragement, an.d pay g,eat deference to their opinions. rr . • • • 2.;12 . Q. There is an objection to t.be present form of Huie. 3!>. .i he mrners r:me the O?Jection that, i\ccording to tbe wording of the rule, th_ey are forc~d to appornt men_who are actually working, although they may hare competent men not wo:krng? ~- l cs. 0£ coune, I am rather out of _that 110w; but I do not think there "·ould be any obJection nrncd to men who are not actually workmg, but who had been pra.ctical miners. I may b~ quite wrong, because, a.s I MY, it i_s h~rdly i~ my way; but I think) have heard of miners who were practi cal men , and who had ceased worlnng in ::i. mine, who _h!)id b~en appomted. 25l20. Q. But it was given in evidence here that a man "ho_ was n?t an. a~tual w?rk1ng mmer bad ~een n.ppointed a check-inspector, ~nu there was some demur to_h1s mak111~ his 10spe<'l1on at. K~m~la Colliery -that is Mr. Wynn- but ultimately he was allowed to go 1n? A. I do not know about 1t; 1t d\d not come before me. l woulJ hare made no objection, I am sure. 2-3130. Q. You do not see any objection to the rule being altered so t.hr,t any competent miner, although not actually workinrr, could be appointed check-inspector? A. 1 woul<l have no objection; 1 would not 0 make an objection. I have never heard of any objection being taken to eren l\f r Wynn. As a matter of fact, I ne\"er heard his name before; but I am sure the objection ,Yould never have come from me. 25131. Q. You have, in your evidence, said that you think tlusty roads should b.e watered. Now, I would like to know what extent you would carry this out? A. That requires a good deal of consideration. I think there can he no objection to drenching the i:;ides of the roads against the coal, and washing the dust off, and, in the majoritr of ca<:es in the Colony, the floor alw; but thE-rc is no doubt in the world, wilh regard to the roofs of some of lhe mines, you must proceed with Yery great caution; they fret so C'asily i there is so much aluminous matter in the strata immediately above the coal that it begins to swell and fall, aud cause a good deal of trouble. The roof is t.he danger. 25132. Q. l\Iy question has more bearing on the length of road you would water? A. I think I would be inclined to water certainly all main roads, and where tl:e horees travel, n.nd, as far as possible, where the roads enter the face. · 25133. Q. But supposing yon have a mine with, say. one main haulage road, and two or three travelling roads to a. particular district, and, in addition, half a dozen or more roadways, equally, if not more, dusty, not t ravelliug ways, and not haulage ways, woul<l you i:.top short at the haulage and travelling r oads? A. No. As far as possible, and ns for as it is prncticablo and possible, I think tbat the roads into the bords-is that \that you mean, the burd roads? 25l34. Q. No, I am takin~ the case of a. colliery \\hich may ha\'e 40 miles of dcsty roadway? It is a. very serious question. I think it would be b~tter that the particular case should be dealt \Vith separately. I t is a very serious question in this counll'y, unless you hn\"e plenty of water; and n. large number of collieries bave no water. 2:'.H35. But, assuming you ba,o plenty of water, would not the first cost oE appliances for ,rntering nn extensive mine, and the up-keep afterwards, be prntt:cally, commercially sµeakmg, at all events, impracticable? A. Oh, yes, in the case you gi,·e. In the rnpposititi<Jus case that you mention 1 think that it would be a qucstiou with the o,vners whether they woulJ continue the tniue. You cannot separate the cost of production from sucb questions; becau se, OYCr many years, the coal trade in New outh Wales has been conducted, in the majority of collieries, with no profit at all-absolutely at a loss. I know that, wilh every knowle<l~e of the busimss, and gh ing it every attention and every consideration, for fi,e years on end I. hare '\TOrked extensive collieries at a loss, and could n ot make the two ends meet i and I do not think there is anybody ~ho would 6nd fa.ul t with the expend iture i I wnsted nothing i and e,•erytbingthat was necessary was prov1ded. 25136. Q. Now, whn.t is your object iu watering road""ays al all? A. To damp the <lust, and to pre,·ent it from_mix_ing with the air in the ('ase of a sudJen commoti on, such as, for instance, quick haulage, or shot-firmg in the main roa.d, or any sudden commotion that would disturb the dust if it were dry. 25137. Q. B1.1:t you know that, in tie case of shot-tiring ou a main 1oa.d, the "Place has to be watered? A. Ye8, that is true; but on many roads - ! do not say t hat tht>y exist here- 011 many roads at Home it would _be almost i111po~siblc to perfecllJ and sufli t iently water the main r oad:,. You see what a tremendous explosion ha ppened, l understand, frum a shot 011 1 be m ,in road, in the Albion, one of tho newest and finest collieries that exist in.Britain. Of cou1·se, herl', whe:·<' tl:ere arc tioht skips nod endless ropehn.ulage, there is Yery little <lust escaping on to the ron.d :Hall. 25l38. q. But at the.Albion C~lliery no prorision nt all was m:iue for wntering, :rnd <l;nnmito "·as used f~r blowmg out the t11~bers wl.nle 200 or 30J men wore shoH·ll ing the.du t np? A. That was vny bad. 2., 139. Q. l3u t, suppo1;1ng that you do wn.ter t hE:' r oad wav, i:. it not ronr ci rable tha.l iu a dusty n1ine there may be ~!1fficient ~us~ in su~peu~ion in the air to carry on an explosion? .A. l think, if it .is effe;tuall_y ?amped, Ill the maJor1ty of_ mm~s m ~ew 1::iouth_ \Vales, at nil e,·ent:-t, if it is damped and continuously kept !n a damp state for some ~im_e, 1t reta10s the ~no1:oturc,. so that afler a timo you may diminish the watering. ~~140. Q. But you are thmlon~, probably, or _mines with a tempcr.1turc of GO or 70 degrees? 11. Yes. :liJl41. A. As the temperature increases-- LintcrruptedJ? A. H woulJ be a rery dducult thing.

....

25142.

,.•

757 ...·

1Vit1u·J111-Dr. J. R. M. Robertson, IO March, 1903.

25U2. Q. Bu t, even if you do water the roadways, i!! it oot possible that, in a dusty mine, there is suffici~nt dust pro<luced by the men a.t the face, and ca rried along with the ai r, to carry on an e:rplo:!icin? A. Quit<'. I kn ow of a mine where cousidnable quantities of virulent dust were collected on the sides of the road, and on the road, and we could not seE> any reason for it; but lattPrly we discovert•d that it was bt>ing sw<'pt down from the screens a.hove, and carried down with the 111takc air. ) t would be a. very difficult ar.d Perious problem indeed with these deep miuei;1, and with a hi~h temperature, and long lengths of ro:i<l, and ' dry coal, and probably fri able coal, to waler it. lt woulcl be a l'C'rJ i,:erious question indeed. Tl1e qut'sti~n of the supply of water is pl'Obabl_y a very serious one it:-clf. Of cours<', it is suggested that we t-houl<l 1111x salt with the water, in tho hope that it would keep <lamp longer; but e,,en that is not all plain failing. As I say, t 1ie VE>rJ cost of it mu::it l>e considered. 25141. Q. But, if this suggesliou of concus!'ion bolds good, clrnrly I he watering of the road wa..,R "ould be in .aio? .A. Well, I Eee i:ome writers in the mngazines doubt the efficacy of watering of roadwnys. They doubt iE even 5 or G per cent. is of any rnlue. 25l4! . Q. Are you aware that Mr. Hall, the eminent Inspector at Heme, has re>ported that the attempt to s_rstem1\tically water in his di!ltrict has fa iled? 11. Ye::i, 1 rl'a<l that some time ago. 1t would be a ddlfru1 t thing to r,iy~tematically water round extensire collieries. 25 l45. Q. I s uppose there has hitherto been 110 definition-no i;;t:Jndanl dcfioition....:...of a. ga~:;:y u,i1:e ? A. No, not RO far as I am aware. 25146. Q. Do you think it is desirable that there ~hould be r A. 1 tis de~irable that some de 6o ilion, within reason able limits, should be made. 25147. Q. Will you give your views on what you consider ~houB be the definition? A. I really bare not considered the point sufficiently to do rn. · 25148. Q. But ·this is rather important? A . Yes, I know it is. But I really have not had time t o consider it. 25149. Q. ,vould you consider that any mine giving off g1s should be designated a ga~sy mine? A. Containing a cerrain percentage in the air-I should sa.y that tb[tt would be cousidered a gassy mine ; it must be detectable. 25150. Q. But, if it is detectable, would not yo n class tho miuo in the category of ga~sy mines? A. If it is ahvays, if it continues to be, dt>te>ctable, I think it wou ld be reasoon.hle to classify it in that way. 2515 1. Q. But we have had serious di!lnsters in mines j n this State where thei r rep utation as rt>gar<ls gas • was good? A. I do not know about that. 13ulli, of coursE>, was givjng off gas. 15152. Q. But, at that t ime, would it not have been consiJcrc:d 011ly a slightly gassy miue? A. Ko; they were using !'afety-lamps in Bulli; it was considered a ga~sy mine. 25 1.j 3. Q. Was Dudley <'onsid ered a gas;.y mine? A. ~ o. Of (.'Ours<', I have not; been down Dudlt>y ~i ore th ey ~ ere breaking qff the bottom pillat·. 25151!. Q. Was Burwood cor:sidere<l a gassy miue? A. A portion of Burwood, 1 beliern, did gire off qai,. 25155. Q. Was 8eaham considered a gai;:sy mine? A. \V eil. I do not know, of o,mrse, wh .~t ce~ham has been lately. Ido not know whether all parts of Scabam grn·e off gas 0 1· not, or whether ii. could be det ected in the air. 25U6. Q. I think you said you had no knowledge of the presence of gas in Kemb]a? .A. Yei:, I s;.;id that. J 51 >7. Q. And your officials had reported that no gas could lie found? A. That is so. 25158. Q. But is it not possible that, although your officials reported, in all good faith, that no gas cou ld be found, the coal may still Lare beec gi l'iog off a slight perren tage of gae, not detectable with the ordinary lump? A . Well, i;: ince the introduction of Lhe hydrogen lamp, ,rn have failed to detect it with t he hydrogen lamp. 25159. (J. tiince when is that? A . I suppose about two .-cars ago or rn. 251GO. Q. Wh en was it examinrd? A. I do not kn ow, 1 nm sure. Of cour.;;<>, H otcltkis has been there only ::-ince the acciden t; but be bas failed to detect any g:is. 25161. Q. H as be had t ho a<lvantage of the use of the hydrogen lamp? Oh, yes. 2-3162. Q. And you still think that the coal gives off no gas? .A. l do. 25 163. Q. eH, that being so, it would be of very great importance to the company if that coulJ. be demonstrated bevond nll donbt? A. Yes. 2516-t. Q. Would you be wil ling to ha,e a l;eading brick ed off without access to the a:r for a week or i:o, and a test made? A. I do not suppose there would be nny great objection t o it; applic:ntion could be made to the company; but they hare been delayed :1. very great deal already, as far as I can sec, to no purpose, and ha.re sufferE>d exceed ing loss, and, I think, uncomplainingly . 2-3 l U5. Q. Do not yo u see that it would be of great importance to the company? A. Of course, rre are working Kembla with safety-lamps; and \,e hMe no inten tion of withdrawing them. 25166. Q. Well, then , what was you r rcai;:on for putting safet y-lam ps in K ewbla, or using snft-ty -l n1r,ps? A. Oh, well, 1 do not. know that there was any cogent ren:::on, tx cept the state of the public mind, a11J the extent of the calamity. If you cross-que~tion me urcn the point, I do not kn ow that 1 can gire nny crgt-nt reason at all for it. I have always looked 11p0n it that "e hare done it of ou r own free wili; but I ha.a alway s looked upon K em bla ns a mine where f:af'ety -lamp!. were being ust-d with out any eridcnce of gas. 23Iu7. Q. 1:itill it ,rould be of great value to the company if this doubt were ~ettleci? LI. I do not think it would .be of any rnbe to tho company at all now; 1,ecau,e the company, rn fa r :,is I know, ha,e no inten tion of' wit h<lrnwing th e 8,.ifet_y -l amps. Thc>y t hi, ,k th<'y get just about. as good n light with the t::afety-lamp as wi th the ordinary lam p. Jt is a lif tle more cxpen::-fre; but it keeps things in a. rnry mu ch better state, and yo u.ca.n presnre bet ter J :scirlino. 25l(j8. Q. I admit all tha t; but still rnf'ety-lnmps do not ab~olutely insure absolute sait'ty, though tbey gi,e n. great degree of safety, no doubt? A . Yes. , 251G!l. Q. But, apart from that, would it not be or importance to .vo u to lia,e it demons trated beyon d all doubt that the coa.1 did not girc off g,\S? A. I do uot kno w chat 1 would su):?gest any such thi ng; the c,,mp:rny have just done about as m ud1 ns it is po~siule fo r t hrm to do I r there are any of these ex perimer,ts, they mu st be tnad e with m" 1wy other thau the comp:111y·s 111oney , becau::e the corurany ham no funds at th ei r dispo:-:al 10 <lo a1 ,y such things 2,jl70. Q. But I am not making n suggPstion thaL woul,1 i11rolve nn_v larf>e espenditure be., Olhl a brick waE and I am cerlaioly 11ot ma.king the sugi:estion in any other way tha.n in the interests of the cowpany ? .A. I do not see that it would alter their opinion in the ~li gh test if 1hey korw either that there wag gas c,r no gae. Th('y-beiiere that there is no gusjui>l now; and tlwyare goi ogtocontinue the useof safety-lamps.

•

25 171.

758 Witnes.~-Dr. .J. R.

?,I.

Robertson, 10 March, l 003.

2:, lil. Q. But if it could be demonstrated that there was no gati, there would clearly be no necessity for the saft>ty-lamp? A. lt woulJ uev~r be 1lt>fec:tcd at ~11. . . 25172. Q. Then you ba'"e ao object10n to the sug~estion be1ug given effect to? A. It would never c~me

from me.

25173. Q. But, if it \\"ere made·to the company, do you think t1H•y would ob.1ect-?

A. I do not think they

would incur the expense; I· do not think they can honestly incur any more expense. . . 25li J.. Q. This is not a quPstiou of expeu~e ;-the only cost would be that of a few bricks, which could be· . . used o\"er again? A. Possibly. 25175. Q. A recommendation has been m:ide by the m10ers that furnaces should be abolished and. fa~s substituted ;-ha\"e you any objection to that? .,J. Un less they can add~ee very good r~asons for it; 1t would be hard for r.ne to supply the miners with reasons for some of t heir own sug~e.;hons; they must sta te the reasons why the_v m1ke the sug-gesti0n~. I n t h~t case some oE the. _lnrgest _collieries in. Great Bri tain wi::uld be required to st.op. I see that !lomc of the l:irgest quant1 L1es oE air are supplied by furnaces. I do not see why fu rnaces should be aboli$he<l. In many respects there is very much less damaae done to a furuace, in case of an unforeseen nccident, than to a fan. When fans are damaged in outlying districts, it is much more expensive to get them repaired than £urnac0s, and the damage is much more extensive. 25176. Q. But there cannot be any que3tion that fans are approved - - [Interrupted]? A. Oh yes, sometimes, when they can be affor<led. "Perso nally, l approve of them. 23177. Q. As a matter of fact, at all the collieries with which you arc connected, cxcPpt Mount Kembla, I think 1 fans arc me<l? A. They have nil fans; but I do not Ree that they circulate more air. 25L7S. Q. It. is all a question of powe r? JJ. OE cout·sc, it is all n. questi on of power in both case.a. 2.3 L7!l. Q. And that is a matter, of c,rnrse, at the discretion of the owners ? A. Yes. 251 O. Q. If there was a provision making fans co:npulsory for the future --[Interrupted] ? A. No, there is no reason whaterer. 25U:3 l. Q. Pardon me, I had not fiuished;-if it were co:npulsory, with· a general e1emption, say, as to mi nes empl,lying under thirty men, and special exemptions whrre there might be some difficulties in the way, thro ugh insu fficient capital. or the confi~uration of the ground rendering it unsuitable for the erection of fans!" A. I do oot think it should lie made compulsory at all. I do n >t think it is one of those t!Jings that should be made compulsory. · 25l8:!. Q. But there have been so1r.e fires caused by furnaces, have there noi? A. Yes; and there have been a great many break.downs of fans. There will bo accidents wherever you have ma'!hinery. I do not care how much foresight you display, you c:annot get out of accidents where th ere are men and machinery employed; you will hnve great da.nger, and you cannot get out of it. You may do a great dC'a l to pre\'ellt the accidents; but yo u cannot altogether prevent them. 151 ~3. Q. OJ you think th:1t gu~po"der shoulJ be prohibited f,,r use in gassy mines? A. I think it would be wise to discontinue the use of ordinary gunpowder, i11 f:ixour of some of the &more improved l1igh explosires; but we aro under a g reat dilfic ulty in that way ; we cannot get n proper supply of hi~h es plosi\·es; and those that haxe been introduced hPre have not given great sa ti-,focti on. The Jast explo~ive tha t was brought before our notice was th is Bull-dog; cerlain:y it was a perm itted explo,ive; but, on the cxperiffients that we made, it certainly gare out flnrmc>. I suppose all of them do, more or less ; for none of them is perfect immunity claimed. Bul l-dog CC'rtain)y gives off flame; and I sec, from a recent communication from H ome, that that has beea rc:uorl'd from the list of permittcJ explosfre~. '\Yell, of course, at Home, they could give effect to that at once; but he1·e there would be very likely six months' supply ir: the Colony, :ind sis months' supp!y en the ro::vl; R::, that we woultl prob:i.biy bu using a, dangerous ex!)l,>si,e for twelve months after it had ccnsed to be permitted at Home. There is a great dt al of diffi culty connected with the use of high explosi vci. h('rC. The a,en have an objection to pay the Bigher expense. Roburite was tried fo r a considerable time; a,nd that was certainly not a satisfactory explosive. 2518.1,. Q. You mean as regards the eflieiency? A. Yes, the efficiency; and it was irregular in its action. Vie are too for a.way, somehow, from the centre of these experiments. Vve <lo not know sufficient about them. 2.3L8.3. Q. Thal is ~cnrce'~, a sufficient reac:on for continuing- to 11,;;e a. dangerous explosi\"e? A. I think tln,t, if we coultl gE-t one of the permitted cxplo~ives th1t are, without any doubt or question, as sa.fo as any of the permitted explo ives p~18sibly c:rn be un.,le R:tfC', then it woulJ be n benefi t to nil that they should be used; bC'causc there is 110 doubt that they reduce the li,ibility to accident-i f they are not absolutely safe, a.t nil events t.hey red uce the l1abilit.Y t o explosion!J. 151~6. Q. And the firing of shots, rl<> you think that shoulJ be cntirel v in the hands of officials ? A. Yee, entirely in the han<l:1 of officials appoi11te<l fo r the purpo1,e. ~ ~?87. Q. The miners of Kewcaslle Disrritt hare aske, t to ha.\'C the po wer lo nominate Inspeetora oF mines ;-hMe you anythiug to say about that? A. I ha\e no sym path.v with any such suggestion. I do n~t wan t t o ha'"e anything to s:ty myself on tlie nppointm~nt of J 11~pecto rs; ar!d 1 do not see that the miners ha., e i:i,!1,v r~ason tv put_ forwa rd for n.ny sui:h :rn,ggeslion. I think it wou!d be h ighly imp'r ojrr and wrong fo r ttthet· 1hc m1cer::1 or th e owners to l,ave anything to do with the nppointment bf I n~pecto rs. · 25LH8 (/. They nrc both inlere!-tcd parties? '1 . Yes; I think it highly wrong tltat either one or the other shoulcl haYC' anythi, .g to do 1Yith it. 2-31 ~- Q. Ohjt>ct(on J1as bl·c·n tal,l'n lo_ ll_1c pre~ent methC'cl of appointing th('m ;~that is to say, to the n.ppomtments be111;.{ made by tho .Mm 1st er? , l. I th ink 1t would probably be more satisfactory if In specto rs were subjecte l to a, st:rndar<l rxnminat:011. 25H>O . Q. You know that has been trid in Great Britain? A. nut failed. 2.jl!)l. Q. And they ha\·e rel'ertPd to lhC' old system? A. Ye;-:, I believe that is so. 2-H!>2. Q. Would you conside r that there ,rn, any diffcrcnc·c iu nppoir.tments ueinrr made by the Home 8cc:retary in Great Britain and by the :'111ui~tcr tlore::? A. At all cvent-t, fur wha.te;er reason, it bas been abandoned nt H om(', l Lielie,e. 2-31D.3. Q. Woul d it b~ ~n i1:1provemcnt to ha,e appointments made by the Public Service Board, as being less _amen~ul ti to poltt 1eal 1110ut'11cc? A. Well , prob.1bly. J <lo not know that I have gi,·en it any cons1derat100 at all furl her than that the rery be::-t men ::.hould be nppoi nteJ, nn<l of the highest standard;

that

750

Witness-Dr. J. R. .M. Robertson, IO March, 1903.

that is all I desire. ].. bavo few suggestions to make as to how they are appointed -provided that the best men are appointed. The Public Serrice Board possiblv should be co·usidered; probably tbey woulJ be as goJd a body to make-the appointments as any. • Exam ination by Mr. Ritc:hie : 25194. Q. I thin'k you said that, since the hydrogen lamp was brought iuto existenc~, you have not been able to discover any gas in Mount Kembla P A. I think so. !!5l95. Q. Aud you mentioned two years ago? A. No; it is not two years ngo since we had it at Mcuni K embla. 25196. Q. Di<l you really ha,e it there as long as two years arro? A. Not so long; I t hink it is a year ago . 0 ~5197. Q. Did you have it a .yea r ago? A. Yes. 2.5198. Q. Hu"'e you one there now belonging to the company? A. Y es. 2}5199. Q. Ha.d you one there a year ago? A. Yes; I think it is fully a yea r ago sin ce we had it. 25200. Q. Rave you had any test made with it? A . Yes; I think so. I think Mr. McGeacbie might have tested about a year ago. 25201. Q. Y ou only think so? A. I am almost certain that be went down and tested about a year ago with a hydrogen lamp. 25202 . Q. Is there any record of that? LL I do not know; but since the accident there ham been very frequent tests. 25203. Q. B ut, so fat: as you know, you are not certain thnt any tests were made with the hydrogen lamp before the disaster r A. Ko; I could uot proYe it. 25:W-.f.. Q. Diu the company h::we any hydrogen lamp there before the disaster? A. Oh, yes; a. long time before that. 2 520.3. Q. You have said th:it, in your opinion, you could not advance cogenL rearnns why the safety-lamp should be used in Mount Kembla at the preseut time ;-can you gire us a cogent r eason why you have had to increase the number of deputies? A. Becau~e the use of safety-lamps necessitates the use of more deputies. . 2520G. Q. I n what way? .A. Tltc !,hot-firing requires men to attend to the shots. 23207. Q. But apart f rom the shot-firing? A. I have nothing to do with the appointment of dep'uties, Mr. Rogers appoints the n11m ~'er of deputies that he considers rioht; and as long as he considers it right, I ta.ke no exccp~ion. " 2"5208. Q. But you h:ne come here to gi vc flu opinion all lo 1he safety or othel'\vise of that mine, and you have done that ;-you h:ive already given e1pressious of your opinion here :i.s to whether that mine \"fas a safe one or not? A. Yes. 2·,209. Q. IE it is a s:i.fe one in the wny )"OU han~ described it here, what need was there to in cr earn 1110 number of examining deputies ~ince the dis:tster? A. ~lr. Hogers, ] believe, couM tell you; I do not know. 252LO. Q. nut have you not a, knowlPdge of lhe,e fact!, :om·.self now? .d. No. There has been a good deal of work to do in conne:?Lion with pulling thingl't up and getting thin~s straight, in which extradeputies h ave t"er.v lik ...ly been emploJeJ; but, bryond that, I do nnt know of any reason why they should be inrre18ed beyond the sbot-firin~ nn<l the extra work cntai!P<l b:r safety-lamp.s-everytbing i:< new t ,i th em. 252 Ll. Q. Uo yoq know whether it took one or more <ll'p11tie;1 constantly employed to e.xamiue the waste worki ngs before the disa~tcr? A. No; I do not think that any of the deputies wereemploye.l doing that bef, ,re the disa1:-ter specially. !!32L2. Q. Do you know that tliere i1:1 one ronstanll_v employed now? LL Yes; but pl'obably not c.:o :--stnnll_v. Ile uoes other work; l,c srnls off the roads lending into the goaf. There arc two of them (deputie~). , 2321 3. Q. He rniJ it would 1nl<e fire clan of his time each "·erk to examine the wasfo workings? A. Yes ; but he i$ doing oth<'r w:1rk as ,,ell. I have inquired into that. 2-32l4-. Q. He expre~!"ed the opinion to the l'omrnission that it would take fi\'e days of his ""orking time to ' examine the wat,te working'.!~ A. It may be so. 2.3215. (). D..> y(')u know any rea5ons why the examinations should be so minute now? A. Ko. W e ham been very anxious to disco\'er anything that we could discover, and [ havA put uo limitations whatsoever on the management, either on the under-manager or the Manager, as to what they should <lo .or whom they should cm ploy in order to discover UD y clue to the accident, and, of course, lbe introduction of safetylamps h:is intr0duct'<l a new :rnd extensi\'e element quite ~trange to them. 252 Ui. Q. That <locs not afft•ct the question I put to .vou? A. It <lees. 2.3217. Q. ·what would be tho nature of the duties of the tlcpu iy who would be examining waste workings; would bP. be looking for gas? .A. Yes. 25218. Q. W ould he be looking for lnrge falls that ,rnnl<l he lihly to take place? A. Very likely; and, you see, tho whole of the mine h:is not be(•n in operation since the explosion. 'J.'here ""as a large section of the mine that was n11t working at nil, and he hod to go through that. 2 ;2rn. Q. He would have mutl1 moro to du than he has 1101r? A. 1\Iuch more to do than when t he mine w aq in working order. 25220. Q. So that, insleacl of taking five da.y!I, it woul,1 prohably lake seven days, then? A. I do not e:ay t hat at all. The ne<:es~ity fur l<cepi11g men lookin!{ at. th~ waslc workings would be very ltluch more i,inrc the accident than before, uc<:nuse J'ormPrly there \\ere setlions of the mine in which men would coustantly travel which have: not \\'Orhed nt a.11 sint'e the explo~iun. 2.52H. Q. Sections of tlte mine wliidi were formerly worked nre not working now? A. Yes. 2-i2:.?2. Q. W oul,l they require to be examined e,·ery da .v P .1. They wo11ld be travelled eYery dny. :!.3223. Q. \\' hnt are you referring to now? A. The roads among the pillar~. 2.3:!2 k Q. You do not mC'an lo i,:ay they sho uld be exnmiucd every day? A. Of cour.,e they were; the ~heeler~ would be going in among 1hem. 2 .32:!5. Q. T ho whLelers wo,dd only go on tho haulage roaJs? A. Yes; but all tho traffic was going through the pillnra of the waste. 1!;:!2(:. Q. You do not mean to gin• the Cornmis!lion tJ understand that the wheelers were making an examination? A. Xo; they Rimply went nlong thPm. 2,3 22i. Q. You do not regard that as an c:i:am ination; thPy were simply travelling these ro:ids before the disas'erP A.Yeti. 25'228.

760 Wit11ess-Dr. J. R. l\l. Robertson, 10 March, 1903. 25228. Q. How does that affect the examination of the ,vorkings?

workiuis, where the traffic was going through.

A. W ell, these nre practically waste

!ew

a hours ~n one d~~ each fortnight before the disaster, why should 1t take a man fhe ~aye of his time each \\eek DO\\ . A.. I presume ~Jr. Hoge rs will very likely be n.ble to _ans""er. the quest10n; but I suppose that_ these men who have been appointed and practically called enmmers of wastes have beeu employed sealing up the wastes and- [lnterrupledJ. 2.j230. Q. One; of them has bec-ri here and ha~ !old us that his time is whol1y t~ken up c-xamining? A. Probably; but you are a.;;king me a question which doc;; not cJme under my nollce at all. I could not tell yc.u what indiviJu 11 men are doing in Kerol,Ll. _. . 1.:;231. Q. I want 10 know if you yourself, ~'"110.know about this mine, kn~w of any reason why so much time shoulJ now be der oted to tho nammn.twn of the \\astt-s? A. I g1\'e no orders whaterer. Mr. llogers will, no doubt, be able to explain e,·e~ylhing to Y?U· I give no orders about the examina.tiou of waste workings, or the employment of deputies, or any~hmg of tha.t nature. 25232. Q. Do you know any reason why the Psaminat1on s hould be made now oftener than monthly any more than before the disilster? A. No, except that we ·expressed a wish to Mr. R ogers that he should a{certnin everythin"' possible o.bout it, and sp:u·e no expense in doing so. 2i·! 3:3. Q. About what? A. Anything that would lead us to an opinion as to the cause of tho disaster. 2.323 k Q. You <lo not expect that this would necessitate the employm~ot of a man going round every dav? A .. till, l\lr. Rogers might put his own interpretation on that. 23233. Q. Do yon th :nk the 1m·n going round e,ery day \\Ould be abl<> to fiud any new clue by going l'vU11d every day? tl. J think they wou ld bo doing olh"e r ,,ork too. . :,152:H;. Q. Do you think an examining deputy g,>in; round day a. !'ter day would discover aoy new clue? A. There is no saying what he might find. 2~237. Q. Theo you t hiuk it is possible he might? A. H e might do ~o. You cannot tell what be might find. 2.3238. Q. Tl1 e only thing he might disco\'er besides "hat" we ko :)W now i:i the esi::itence of gas? A. I CC\uld nut suggest what he might discover; I cannot answer it. 2:,23). Q. I s there any other couceival,le thing thnt he woulJ be likely to discover? A. I do not know; I keep my mind perfectly open. Wl.atcvcr ~c thinks sufficiently ~mportant to !eporl ho would report. 2.324:0. Q. Do you lhiuk there would be anyt h111g else he would be likely to find exc,•pt gas? A. P roba bly not. 2.;2:1:1. Q. So that the examinntion that was made so minukly is for the c:rnminnl ion of gas, to discover · whether the mine gires off gas or not? A. Yes, possibl.v. 2.3:!!2. Q. Do you rPgard the dust a.s a more dangerous element than gas in a mine? A. So. 25213. Q. Do you think that you can deal witb the g:i.s quc tion with safaty -lamps? A. In a mir.e? 2.324t Q. In a mi ne? A. Oh , I think so. 2.3215. Q. You 1hiuk you could meet the g1s difficulty b.v lbe i11trodur.tion <,f safet., -lamps? A. Oh ; yes. 2.3:?46. Q. Now, you lrnre already to)J me that, if safcty-!amps had been at Mount Kembla., it would h:we made no difference i;o for as this disaster in c .,o rerncd? A. So for as my opin ion is concerne d. 2.3217. Q. How <lo you reconci le thei:e two qui>stions now that you can mret the gas conditions with mfety-lamps ---[ In! e1·rupted]. A. Brcnurn 1 d0 not think there was nny gas. 252-1. ·. Q. You have alr eady told me-1- [I11terru1, t e,!]? A. 1 di~tinctly a,,kerl" In a miner" and you said'' Yes;"' and l i:aiJ '· Yes, I thought the safety lamps would dt-n.l with the gas question in a mine. 25249. Q. Jn nny n,ine? A. In any miLe. . 2-3:?.iO Q. Wei!, )lount Kembla. would come wit Lin that hcarling of any mine? A . Of course it would. 25251. Q. You ha,'e a rcc:ollection of telling mC', in ansl\er to a question I put ye:ite r<l~ty, I think, that if safety-lamps h!ld bern in uso in 1\rount Kcmb!a , in yo!.l r opinion, it would l:a\'C made uo Jifferc11ce so far as t.his disaster is concerned? A. Ye~. 252-3~. Q. Ilow do you rer<.mcile these two things tl,at you consider gas to be a more danger ous element in a mioe than dw,t, and that you consid<:r that i:af"cty -lamp:1 would deal \\ith the gas question? A. Because I <lo no t think gM was present. 2.3:?53. Q.- But you have told me here that you r('ganl gas as more dangerous than clm:t? A. I think it is. 25234. Q. You lia,c told us fu rther, that, in your opinio11, the lo~s of ltfe at Mount Kembla was caused through inhaling carbon-monoxide distilled from heated dust? · A. 1 suggested that ca.rbon-rnono1ide can pra<.:tically only be produced by the incomplete combustion of coal, or dust , or c:arbonaceous matter. 2.3255. Q. And that di:;ti lln.tion from coal-dust tu:.iy take place in a mine where safety-lamps are used? A. Iucomplete combustion ? 5525G. Q. Yes, whC're sn.fety-ln.mps are U$ed? A. Nvt necessarily: if you lit a fi re anywhere it would produce carbon-monoxide. 25257. (j. But I understood .\ou to say, in anrn-C'r to that question, that this distillation of coal-dust wouJd not take place in a. mine wh ere 110 safety-1:unps were u:;ed? A. I said no such thing. 252'58. Q. You shook your bead in answer to that; and I t.ook it to mean that? A. K o such thing. 2,323!:>. Q. W ould you aa.y that you would get this distillation of coal-d ust in a mi!"e worked with safetvlamps? . A. Yes, you could get di.;;tillation of con.1 -dust, producing carbon-monoxide, whereYer incomplete combustion of carbonaceous matter took place; but there \Yould be no diff<'rencc whether the mine was worked with s:tfety-lamps or open lights-light that gas and you will get rarbon-moi,oxide. 2,j260. Q. What l wan t to get at is bow vou make ga~ lo be a more daoaerous element than dust in view of the fact t~at you think that the gns da.nge r can be met by the introduction of safety-lamps, and'you now tell us that 1t woulJ be possible-and your own eddence goes to prove, if it is worth anything a.tall, that as a. matter of fac:t it has occuned in this mioe-to get distillation or roal-dust, and to get it " here safety-la.mps were used. I want to know how you rC'ally descril:e the gas element of da nger as greater than that of coal-dust.? A . I do not think anybody could answer you : I do not think anybody ahve could answer you. 2.32Gl. Q. But you gave an opioion; and I thought prob;ibly you could ao~ner? A. I do not see how anybody could really ar.swer your question. 25262. q. I will try a.nd simplify it for yo u, in order to get an answer if I can. You ham a clear recollection, I presume, of telling me that, iu your opinion, the gas elcmeut was n greater danger than the dust element ? A. Yes. 2522!>. -Q. But, if the esamin_atioo of the waste w?rking3 was efficientl.v done

in.

25263.

7Gl Witness-Dr .. J. R. M. Robertson, 10 March, 1903.

25263. Q. Row do you make that out? A. Possib]v it is a 0"renter danger than the dust; but, of course both combined increase the danger. · 25264. Q. That is not an answer to my question. Yon gave me a most decided answer to tbe question, saying that gas is a greater element of d::m~er than dust 1,hen I asked, and 1 want to kno,v, how J'.>U arrive-at that conclusion? .A. Do you apply it to Mount Kembla? 25265. Q. I do not apply it to Mount Kembla: I apply it generally? A. I do not know that you can apply it generally. 25266. Q. Do you want to withdraw your previous answer? A. Yes. 25267. Q. Then bow do you want to quality it? A. I ]eave that to you. 25268. Q. But I :i.m not giving the evidence? A. I can hardl y put a. question and answer it. Of course, there are some mines with coal.dust; and there you have a. certain danger ; and there are other mines giving off gas, and probably no coal-dust; and the danger in such a mine would arise from the gas: and.it ~s wher!3 the two are combined that the greatest danger would be found. 25269. Q. Supposing you had a colliery wl\ich was naturally damp, and therefore had no dust; but was known to be giving off great quantities of gas? A. Yes. 25270. Q. A nd supposing you had a mine which was very dusty, but known to be giving off no gas; which would be the greater element of danger in your opinion? A. I should think the gassy mine. 25271. Q. How do you regard that as the most dangerous? A. \V ell, of course, to explode the coal.dust would require a combination of circumstances that might very rarely happt>n ; and, e,·en in these experiments that have been conducted at Home, they were conducted under conditions that could hardly a.rise in a coal-mine; that is, with dust alone. 25272. Q. But then you do know this, that it is possible to get as large a fall in a mioe which is naturally damp as in a mine which is known to be very dusty? A. Oh, yes ; but to explode the pure coal-dust at Home it was necessary that there should be great concu sion. It was not sufficient to simply introduce flame; but I think, if I am not wrong, they had to introduce the element of severe, violent, concussion. 25278. _Q. I want to bring this matter round to Mount Kembla Colliery before I fini~h with you; and I would like you to give us a. pointed expression of opir,ion to every answer, instead of CO\'eriog the same ground every time? A. I do r.ot think you are quite justified in sayina so. 0 252i4. Q. I think I am? A. I have an opinion also. 25275. Q. Very well: do you now e:ay that g::i.s would bC', or is, a greater element of daogrr to treat in a coalmine than coal-dust? A. It ,vould depend on circumstances. 1f it were pure dust in the one, and pure ~as in the othC'r, then I should say my own opinion would be that there would be more dangn from the ga~. . 26276. Q. And what facts have you got to lead you to that conclusion? A. I am just giving you my opinion in answer to your question. I think there would be more likelihood of damage to la'mps-that is, if the gas was in an exp!o~ive stale, in an explosive quantity-than there would be of the combination of circumstances that would explode the coal.dust. I think you ba\'e more cha.tl'('e of accidents occurring in a purely gassy mine, where the atmosphere is explosive, than in a mine with pure dust. 2'J277. Q. Now, \\'e will take Mount .Kembla in connection with the roat:er: supposi ng that you had known-which, of cour3e1 you say you did not know-that Mouot Kembb was giving off gas-you admit having a koow]edge of tbe state of the mine so far as dust is concerned-which would you have regard ed as the g reater .danger at Mount Kembla, if it had been known lo be giving off quantities of gas wh ich may have been, possibly, explosive? A. I would have taken precautions at once. 25278. Q. If Mount Kembla had, to your knowledge, been giving off gas in sufficit>nli quantities to make it dangerous and explosi,•e, which woul l you ha\'e regarded as the greater element of danger- that known quantity of gas, or the dust which you knew w.1,s in the mine? A. Oh, I should think the gas, because I have practically seen no dust in Kembla; there is no clmt practically in Mount Kembh; and of course I know that there was no such quantity of ga:i. 25279. Q. Then are we to belie\'e that those men were killed by the di~tillation of dust which was not in the mine? A. Oh, no, we cannot ask you to believe that; but I thin le that it got sufficient dust out of the stopping~. and out of tbe upturned.skip~. and, possibly, out of a portion of the crushed coal and pillar:1 in the 4th Rig ht-possibly that. That is the suggestion that I make. I do not know where the dust came from; I only make the su~gestion. 25280. Q. As a matter oE f,wt, if this volume of air wl,ich you have already spoken of, bariug n velocity of 700 miles pt>r hour, had come out of the 4th Right, would you .hare exprcteJ it, it it br0ught du.3t with it, to ha,·e left any deposit of dust on the left hnnd i,iJe going inbyo on tlie mn,in heading? A. Oh, yes; we know that all the dust that we see in the main headinJ-you mean No. 1? 25281. Q. Yes? A. Has been deposited after the air had subsided; after the pulsation-of the velocity o f the air had subsided. 25282. Q. As a matter of fad, was there any deposit of dust which had been apparently carried there, opposite the 4th Right? A. l cannot bear yon, you speak so quickly. 25 !88. Q. As a matter of fact, was there any deposit of dust opposite the 4th Right in the main heading? A. There was a little, I think, in the ledges of the coal. Th ere was ver.v little timber in there; the roof ,ras good; and Lhere was very little timber. I think we got samples of the coal dust from that neighbourhood; l.,ut there was Yery little there. Of course, that was after the e"ent. 2528.t Q. Of course I am spC'aking now of after the event; was there anything in the way of dust to lead you to believe that any q uautity of dust had been brought out of the -Ith Right by t bis "ind bbst? A. Oh, yes; there were accumulations of small coal, and sweat, n.nd swirled coal, and that came out. It appeared to me that a portion came from the 4th Hight; butl am quite cntain that a large portion of the dust would come from the tops of the stoppings and from the upturned skips. Of course there would be a little small coal lying on the road ; although there was very little. It was contin ually cleaned; it was es1rnotially a very cJean road. 25285. Q. I suppose the greatest velocity woulJ be about the orifice from the gonf into tho 4th l~ight? A. I expect so. 25286. Q. This prop which has been spokm so ,·ery much of, or props. as they ha,·e been de.3cribed Ly some, you say were surrounded by a quantity of dust? A. Well, not dust; small debris.

16825

29- 5D

25:Zt-7.

•

762 Wit11t.Ss-Dr. J. R. M. Robertson, 10 March, 1903.

25287. Q. As a matter 0 £ fact, if a gust of wind came out of the 4th Right at a velocitr of 700-milea -pef• hour, do you seriouslv consider that any dust or props w?uld be _left there. after that for~e had yra~elled over that road? J1. ·well, it is very difficult to say. I t 1s carryrng out ~n 1mm~nse quan_tity o~ debris &'Qd props; but it is hard to say what would be the after effe?t. If you notice a rad~vay train going thrq1,1g) a station, you will find that it deposits dust; a gre11_t swirl ~f _dust comes up after th~ last car, a~d ts deposited. In the same way that blast would deposit dust sumlarly. . 252~8. Q. But it l\'O uld not deposit that prop there on end? A. I do not say anythmg apout the prop. 25.!89. Q. But the prop was there on end? .A. Th e prop was there on end; and there w~re other prop~ and rubbish of all kinds dri\"en out. 25290. Q. Do you seriously think tl~at blast of _air would c~me out.of tbe 4th Right and bend these iron rails at great distance, and leave this piece of _timber standing ~1p m that way? 11_. I see _no reason to doubt it, it is so very difficult· to say. S0met.1mes you say tbmgs are absolutely 1mpoas1ble1 and yet afterwards you find they are quite possible. 25291. Q. Now, clo you yourself think tha~ i~ would do so? _A. Yes_; I have seen _so many evid~n~ea pf force coming out of that place that really 1t 1s one of those little thrngs that are difficult to expli11n; bqt I see nothing improbable in _it. . . . . . . . . :.15292. Q. You think it is quite pos 1b~e that a piece of llmb?r,.wh1ch ~snot Yery we1ghty.10 itself! a prQp, would be found standing, after a temfic blast of that description, wb1<:h you bare described, had passeq by, with the head of it leaning in towards where the blas~ came from;_ and that the force, after p~s~ipg that would be sufficiently strong to bend these hettvy rails? A. I thmk so. You do not know ~~act],: the direction and swirl of the wind at that particular spot. The prop was found sticking into l\o lot of. loose rubbish, probably two feet. 25293. Q. But you know very well that, to support your own theory, there could have been 110 swirl there, for it shot 1+·ht out? A. I do not, know. I do not attempt to e.tplaiu any of these little things; they are difficuH to expla.in; there arc such a superabundance of other facts that a litlle one may escape. · [At 12·45 p.m. the Commission adjourned till 1·45 p.m.J

A FTERNOO~. , .~ I

(On resuming at 1 ·45 p. m., Mr. W . R. Pratt altended to take shorthand notes of t he evidence and proceedings.)

JAMES ROBERT MILLAR ROBERTSON, preYiously sworn, was further examined, as under:Examined by Mr. Ritchie (contini,~d) : -

. i·.

25294. Q. In view of the disaster which has been tl1e caurn of loEs of life through the distillation of coal dust, caused, ;s you my, by a wind blast, what proposal do you make with a view of preventing such a disaster in future 1 A. No proposn,l, r:xcepling watering the roads whether they contain dust or not.. 25295. Q. Do yon think this.is a provision which should be put in operation tlsewhere 1 A. Wherever there is dust. 25296. Q. Whether there is gas or not 1 Jl. Yes; anJ lea ,·ing to the management as to how it should be doue. 25297. Q. I am to.king it as your opinion that tlie ro,td.s shou!J be wntered whether they are dusty or not, and leaving ih to the maaagi>ment to cle,ise the best means 1 A. At K ew Lia we shall water, whether the roads are du-sty or not; and it will be left to the management of other collirries to say whether they will do so or not. If they do, it will be left to the Mn.nagers to provide tbe best scheme of distributing the water. 25298. Q. In your opinion, where there is dust, the roads should be watered 1 A. It is a wise provision, a.t all events. 25299. llis Honot·.] Q. Not only in the exprctation of a l,ig fall, but genernlly speaking 1 A. You c:>uhl never expect another big fall like this to occur again. I would like to make an explano.tion with regard to a s.tatrment I macli> preYiously with regnnl to an inspection with the hydrogf' n lamp. I said I tbonglit that McGeachie ha<l been ~hown a place where to work it; but I fincl that is not the cnse. I told McGeach1e to go; but I do not know whether lie went or not. 25300. Jfr. Ritchie. ] Q. Then, to the best of your recollection, no test ,ms made with the hydrogen lamp 1 A. I do not know of any . 25301. Q. Coming again to your theory as to a Lla~t of wind comtog out of the 4th Right, which split at the end of the 4tb Right on tbe main heading, ca.n you account for t.he reason wby so much damage was done by lhe outwo.rd part of the cnrrent, and so littli> damage was done by the other half 1 A. I do not think that it was an equ:ll force. I thiuk probahly that more force went outhye than in bye; but., again, the inner part of tht! roof is much better tlian the por tion of the roof outhye. There were no iron b II s was cause<l by the knocking out of the iron required to support the roof inbye; n.nd mo~t of the clamao-e 0 bars and letting I he roof down. 25302. Q. It would take tremendous force to knock these 1,ars down ? A. Y es, it wou l<l take o. great fore ~. 25303. (J. Dill you have iron bars outside the tunnel? A. Yes. 25304. Q. Do you think that the fo1·ce, from what you saw, was as great at the tunnel-mouth it.self as it appeared at t~e telephone cabin when• there was a lot of destruction 1 .t1. The telephone cabin was a weak part and a wide pa.1·t of the mine. I cannot sre much difierence in the force. Timber was knocked out, and the falls of roof were pretty equally distribnted. 25305. Q. _Can you understand, if I.his wu.s A. wind-blast, how it would be as great at the tunnel-mouth as at the cabrn 1 A. E \·en an explosion of gas would diminish as it went on. As to whether this blast was greater at the first or ,~t the last I cannot sny. 25306._ Q. Could the evidf'mCPS of force at the tnnnel-mouth- coulcl they not have been generated by dust expl9s1ons 1 A. Any such force would have left evidences of dust. There are no edclences even of beatnone whateYer. 25307. Q. How do you arrive at the conclu~ion that there wns no heat 1 A. There were no evidences of beat on the tim lier. 25308. Q. If we ha \"6 e\"idence that people were burned or singed 1 A. I much doubt it. I think you will find that Clar~ was Lui r:ed with slenm. Ilo .v anyone escn.ped there is a mystery, considering that there were three b01lers1 workrng np to GO-lb. pressure, roa1·ing out sleam.

25809.

.i''" . .'

[ I

I • .-

..... 763 ...:

.. ' ·'

·:,

~t:J·. •"I

-Witness-Dr. J. R. M. Robertsorr, 10 March, 1903•

. man's hair offJ A. There ~

25309. Q. Will steam burn a were red-hot ashes and heated portions of steampipes fl.yiug about. Really I see no evidences of burning. . · . 25310. Q. Do you think tbat these men were pappered wit h steam-pipes or hot ashe:s 1 A. They were peppered with bot dust. Clark's injuries would arise from scalding. 25311. Q. You know that Clark had his hair burned 1 A. I did not see his hair singed. ~5312. Q. Did you not see that his bn.ir was short 1 A. Clark al ways wore his hair short. 25313. Q. Did you see P addy Purcell? il. Not until be resumed work. 25314. Q. Do you know it is a fact that you could see the ends of his hair were singed 1 A. You could do t hat wit h heat. ~5315. Q. Steam would not do that 1 A. The truth is that it, is one of the mysteries of the world how Purcell ever escaped 1 25316. Q. T here would be no mystery if the flam e came out of the main heading 1 A. It would leavo traces. You can singe hair with heat. At all event-s, some of the bodies outside the mine were no more burned than I am at the present moment. 25317. Q. That is a matter of opinion 1 A. It is a matler of fact. 25318. Q. Do you know that other people say they were burned 7 A. I have seen them since they recovered. 25319. Q. Do you know that other persons say so, and t bat at least. four of these are qualified men i 25320. Q. At the tunnel-mouth 1 20321. Mr. Wade.] I do not think t~at is so, Mr. Ritchie. I think t-hat Dr. Wade said he could not express a n opinion about Clark. Dr. Nash spoke of two small boys. 25322. Mr. Bruce Sniith.J H e spoke of a man being burnt, and of his hair being singed. 25323. Mr. Wade.] There were two boys who had their clothes burnt off and straps round their waists. 25324..Llfr. Ritchie.] Their names are not gi,en. · 25325. Mr: Wade.] At the inquest someone said that one of the boys was named Silcock; but someone else • said it could not have been be. 25326. M-r·. Ritchie.] There was a boy named Nelson. 25327. Mr. B1·uce Smith.] The fact is Dr. Robertson will not accept anything which he did not see for himself. That is an explanation of the whole of his evidence. ~ 25328. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Your opinion is that there was no burning by the flame tbe1·e, notwithstanding the medical evidence 1 .A. There was no burnin~ by flam e. 25329. ·Q. How many bodies did you see yourself 1 A. A large number. 25330. Q. D id you examine them thoroughly, with a view of giving evidence 1 A. No. I saw probably a dozen with the \>Uter skin loosened, but t he true skin undetacbed below. That could be done without :£la.roe. 25331. Q. Did you examine them so that you could say they were not burnt with flame 1 .A. I never e~amined them with a view of gi\'ing evidence at all. I took no notes of tbeir appearance. 25332. Q. Notwithstanding the evidence of other witnesses you say that they were not burnt by flame 1 11. The evidences I S.l. w could h1ve been produced by he-at without flame. 25333. Q. What degree of heat would you raquire, to give the evidences of burning which you Sl~W 1 A. It would depend on the individual. . 25334. Q. D o you accept the statement that Aitken was burned 1 A. I saw Aitken-at least a person ~ho they said was Aitken. H e had a portion of his whiskers singed, and a portion of the epidermis on his neck was raised. 25335. Q. How was that caused 1 .A. I think by heat. It was not much damaged. 25336. Q. What degree of heat would it talce 1 A. l coultl scarcely tell you-under 200 degrees, I think. j f he were severely scalded, it woultl take more. 25337. His Hono1·.] 212 degrees is a severe scald with water, but not without water. ?5338. Q. Do yon know what heat they suuject you to at a Turkish bath 1 A. I do not know much about Turkish baths; 140 or 150 degrees I suppose. 25339. Mr. Robertson.] Q. D o you know that stokers in the R ed Sea work in a heat of from 160 to 180 degrees 1 A. I know that per.sons working in the open air would have portions of the , exposed epidermis removed by the heat and the dust. 2534:0. M1-. Ritchie.] Q. H ave you made a ny calculation with regard to the velocity of the air at 700 miles an hour, at the orifice at the 4th Right ;-what wouhl it raise the temperature to at that point 1 A. The velocity of the air woulcl raise the tem peratu1·a to 290 tlegrezs, I shou ld t hink. 253! 1. Q. At that particular spot 1 A. Ye:,. 253!2. Q. You do not put Lefore the Commissioners t he Yiew t hat that velocity would be maintained at that high rate anywhere besides the 4-th Right Ol"ific~ itself7 A . I do not put t hat "iew forward. 253!3. Q. H ave you made any calcuh1tion of the l'a.te at which the heat would decrease 1 A. That would be an involved calculation; and, without data, no one cou ltl do it at all. It would be impossible. 25344. Q. Are you able to account for the fact t.bat, according to your evidence, a current of air passed the back heading without doing any da111:1ge 1 ,1. It ii:; a ve,·y remarkable tlting. 253!5. Q. Are you aware that evidence has Leen given showing that some force must have gone down tho hack h eading 1 A . "\Vbern 1 25346. Q On the inhye side oE the -1th Right? A. You men,n the 5th Right. 253-!7. Q. That is ou the inbye side of the 1th Rigl1t 1 A. Of course, I think a little puff of wind went down there. 24348. Q. What velocity would t he little puff of win<l have 1 A.. No one can say. It toppled over the bu ilding on each side of a door ; but the duor was left stand ing. 253!9. Q. You are unable to explain, taking your t heory, why the wind did not show evidence of force in the back heading-you ca.nnot explain it. 1 11. I do not sre how anyone can ex plain it. It is certainly a remarkal,le thing tha t apparently no force went up tl1e back heading. 25350. Q_. I£ so much compressetl air was given off, would it not natural ly go up there~ A. It would make no difference whether it was ail' or gi\s. .An explosion of gas would tra,·el at 3,000 miles an hour. 25351. Q_. There is _no e, idence put before t he Commission t lmt an explosion took place in the 4th Right ; but, if gas was forced out, not with great velocity, but if the current took it into the front h(>ading and it m~t a, light, it would tnn·el n,t the ru.te of 3,000 mil es an hon~· afterwards 1 .A. No, it would b e the initial point of the explosion. 2535;2.

•

•-

"·

...

..,.

,..

764 Witness-Dr. J. R. .M. Robertson, 10 ?tfarch, 1903.

25352. Q. S :m1e of the eYidence does not support your theory that an air-c~rrent c~rue out of the 4th Right, · hut th'lt some mixture came out 1 · A. Then how do you accoun't for the thmg bavrng gone both ways, and . having never faltered in its cou rsr. · . . . . 25353. Q. Of course I do not account for ih. I want you to give us your vwws on t~e mattf'r. Would ~hat · be possiule, in your opin ion -that a mixture-say gas-,~as forc ed out of the 4th R ight and was depo~1ted in the in take airway of the wain heading, and that the evidenc~s of force that ':"e have got c?uld be obtained . by an explosion of gas afterwards 7 A. The evidences are z:iot in acc~rda.nce .with an explosion of gas at all. That idea wonlu not h:1.rmonise. There has been no faltel'lng or hesttation 111 the force. 25354. Q. If that blast of air came out, wou ld not the rib sides at the corner be torn away7 A. ~ do not think so. 25355. Q. Such a great f0rce as t?at would snrely do this. I.f it bent iron rails, it would .remove ~ny obstacles where it met any obstruction i A. Your theory would m vol ,·e the £act t hat there was an explosion at the outlet of t lrn 4th Riglit ~ J£ so, where was the light 7 25356. Q. I t has been 1,ut before the Commission that young Morrisou was work:ng near the 4th L eft with a li<Yht 1 A. That if not t he 4th Right. 25357. Q. Would it not have been possible for t he force to h:we been much )ess, and to have practically <lied away, hr.fore it reached Morrison's light 7 A. We see evidences of force. 25358. (2, The force wa~ wind, in your opinion Z A. Yes, because there was no evidence of gas. 25359. Q_ It may be evidence of something else 7 A. If there was a subsequent explosion, it would have ohliteratetl the previous traces; but there are traces of r,ne grea.t prevailing force. 25360. Q. You sa.y that a puff of wind came down the back heading i A. Ct blew out the stoppings as it c ime alooCT, antl this was the only place-the door on the 5th Right-wh ere any such impediment was on the ro::i.<l . .:, The wind l.,lew out the stoj)pings ou each side of the hack heading, and struck against a pillar in t 1,e sa.me w.J.y that the force struck the solid pillar in the 4th Right and divided. 2536 l. Q. Have you roaue any calculations a~ to what force it would require to displace these stoppings 1 .Ll. They are not firm stoppings; very little force would be need~d to do that. 25362. Q. This tempcratnre of 291 degrees-would that be sufficient to ignite co:i.1-dust 1 A. D o you mean to distil it 1 25363. Q. W ould it be high. enough to distil it 1 A. I cannot say. Stuart says that dust will become incandescent where the oxygen is greatest; but I have not carried out any experiments myself. 25364. Q. I s that the lowest temperature that would distil it 1 A. A liLtle lower than that, I think. i5365. Q. How much lowed A. A few degree>'. 25366. Q. You would require a current of air of 700' miles an hour to distil the coal,d ust according to your theJry. A. Something like that. It is not a theory. A theory is a calculation based on facts; if your theory is wrong, then your facts are wrong. · · 25367. Ilis Hono1·.] Call it a hypothesis. 25368. M1·. Ritchie.] Q. If the velocity was decreased, you W(?uld not get the distillation of the coal-dust 1 A. Possibly not. On that matter, of course, extensive experiments would have to be made. It is of l ittle use asking me these questions, because I have not, made any experiments; I am only giving you the result of ascertained experiments. 25369. Q. You have been speaking of what you have been able to find in works dealing with mining matters. From your own knowledge you do not know anything about it 1 A. No. 253, 0. Q. Dealing with the dust question, do I understand you to say that you have been in W ales where the dust was so thiek, and hanging in clouds, that y ou could not see far alteacl of you 1 .A. Yes, on a dull thick d..ty you would have a great black pall over the.surface of the colHery. course t hat is on a still day, like in Mount Lyell, on the same kind of day, the vailey will be filled with a sulphur ous vapoul'. . I 25371. Q. The mines in Wales a.re very dusty1 A. Yes, they are very dusty mines. The skips they use have boards phced at the side3 for the purpose of letting out evt>ryt hing and simply keeping in the large coal. 25372. Q. Do you call that good management 1 A. Some of the Managers would have something to say aho11t the matter if you called it b,id management. I should not like to work under those conditions myself. Of course, a change of system is advisable. 25373. Q. With all yonr knowledge of the danger arising from coal-dust, do you say that we ought to get a system of management exactly the same as in t.he old country 7 A. Of course yon would not follow their system of management in all cases: the 01n.nageroPnt of a pit d ,.pends on circumstances. I can scarcely conceive that there are two collieries working under the same c;rcumstances. The object is to adapt things to your circumstances. 25374. Q. Do you think the British law admits of tbat7 A. Yes. 25375. Q. Do you say that we are safe in adopting their laws 1 A. Not nec-essari ly. I gil,·e au answer to a particular question which I was asked. 25376. Q. You admit that there are some matters in which you should not follow it7 A. Itwould notsui t ll!', for instance, to have t hose skips which I have mentioned. In soltle parts of En«land they have wicker 0 • baskets which let out the dust in the same way. 25377. Q. Should we follow the English law 7 A. Not in these case$, . 25378. Q. Do you think it would be good management to allo,v the dust to be distributed alon« the sides of 0 a. colliery 1 A. I pnisume that the management woultl take steps to remove the dust. I tqink watering is pretty ~enerally rP.Sorted to now. ,vhen you commence to stir up coal-dust you get somethin« ,vhicb is worse than the disease. 1 t is a case of letting sleeping dogs lie. b 25~HO. Q. Bu~, if you do. n~t stir up the dust, and leave it in the mine, a wind blast may stir it up in a moment, and 1t may be distill ed and cause great loss of life 7 A. There is no doubt about that. 253SO. Q. I want to ask you about Rule ~9 in the Coal-mi nes R egulation Act. Do you know that, under that rule, the niinns ca.n not appoint mininl! enl!ineer!' but must appoint workin« miners to make the • • bb f ~ l b I rnspecl1on on e al of tl1e workmen 1 A. I think the rule exempts rninin<Y engineers. ~5:~81. ·Q. The rule provides that tl1e persons employed in a mine may £~om time to time a.ppoint t~o of their 7:umber, or any two persons not being mining engineers, who are practical working miners, to inspect the mrne 1 A. If there was a practical engineer working in the mine, I suppose he could be appointed. I tlo not see how you could exclude him. 25362.

. /

••

•J

765 Witnt~Dr. J. R. M. Robert.loo, 10 March, 1903.

26382. Q. You think it would be competent for tbe miners to employ mining engineers under those circomstances 1 A. That is my idea. That is bow it appears to me, having a non-legn.1 mind. If two miners were selected, and it turned out that one of them was a miniog engineer, I do not see how yoo could prevent his ,m aking the inspection. I would not be one to prevenL him. 25383. Q. If you ba<l control of a colliery, and two persons were appointed who were practical miners, and one of them wa8 a minitlg engineer, a1.d the men appointed him as a check-inspector, would you have any objection to that p erson mRking the ini;pection 1 A. No. 25384-. Q. Apart altogether from the question of law 1 A. I do not see how I could object. 2'5385. Q. Then why do you object to mining engineen:, who are not working as colll-miners, making an inspection 1 A. They ma.y be in the pmctice of th eir profession; and they may be viewers or consulting engineers to otht!r collinies. I d ll not think i.t would be nice to force people into collieries who might not be satisfactory to the owners of a colliery. .25386. Q. Is it because of the ability of mining engineers to take plans, showing the naLure of lhe workings of p, colliery, -that yon object to them 1 A. There are a great many ol~cction8. Anyone who is wol'king out.side in the practice of his profession would be able to obtain information that might be turned to the disadvantage pf the ~wners. No one who would be ohjectionable to the mine-owners should be appoi nted bo make the 10spect1on. 25387. Q. That is, aput from their ability to take plans 1 A. You cannot help a trained mining eogine<r talcing notice of wha.t hP. sees in a mine. If you do not want them to know anytLiog, do not show it to them. 25388. Q. What is the difference between the l wo men so employed. You ha"e a mining engineer working a. miner; and you will allow him to make the inspection : and you may may have other men who might be equally compett.>nt to make plans. You ohject to the professional mining engineer, l,ut not to the other 1 A. Tile professional mining engineer is trained to obsen-e things quickly. 25389. Q. Anybody could observe things quickly in a mine 1 A. Mining engineers are trained to take in the salient points quickly. 25390. Q. Do you not see the possibiliLy of the "\)est paid man we have in the State at present, M a. mining engi neer, miscond ucting himself : and he n,ight possibly be reduced to such a state as to be glad to get a job of coal-digging for a living. Is that not ·possible 1 A. But surely you would not appoint a ffrunkard 1 25391. Q. I did not add that to the question. I said that a man ruight be brought down to have to work ~n a mine for his living 1 A. In my experience of this country, I have only seen one individual of the ll~scription you givP. Socially, he was A. fine fellow; but he gave way to drink, aud could not keep a. situation ; and he was reduced so low that be had to take to coal-mining. That is the only instance I can recollect. P robably the supposition that mining engineers might be reduced to work at coal-mining is a. remote one. 25392. Q. Is it possible 1 A. I have shown you the exception ; I do not say it is the rule. 25393. Q. I hope it will not be the rnle. Tbat ma.n got employment as a coal-miner 1 A. Yes. 2f?394. Q. You have given us an instance of a man wlto was compelled to accept a humble position in order to get a livelihood; but, presuming that be does not always continue to be a drunkard, but reforms, and the miners see fit to appoint him as check-im:pector. He feel s the pinch of his poverty-stricken position ; which is the man who is most likely to gi{·e ~nformation to other people- the man who is in povertystricken circumstances, or the man who is following his profession 1 A. I do not think that such conditions would arise. 2q395. Q. That is not an answer to my question ? A. I t was a difficult qurstion and such a long one. I do not know which was the beginning and which was the end. 25396. Q. Listen ; and I will pot it again :is carefully as I can. If a mining engineer who is working as a coal-miner was appointed by the miners to itct as a check-inspector, he l,eing at the same time in po,·ertystricken circumstances-whether would he, or an absolutely independent mining engineer, following his profession, be most likely to collect information which would be of value to some adjoining company, for the purpose of getting pay out of them 1 A. I do not see that the lowness or highness of the circumstanct s of a man would have a:1ything to clo with the ca~e. That may Le omitted. 25397. Q. Which would be most lilcely to take advantage of his position as a check-inspector 1 A. That qepends on the character of the miner. I could not answer that question unless you gave me two S!Jecific cases in "·hich I knew the characters of the men. 25398. Q. Say the characters of the men are both the same 1 A. I will answer the question in this way. Tll.ke the case of an indigent min er, who war; a ruining engineer reformed and working as a miner. I do not think an owner could refuse to allow him to be appointed as check-inspector, he not being f\ mining engineer in practice Re is a coal miner practically, who has been a mining engineer; but, inasmuch as be is working as a miner, I do not me how an owner could refuse to allow him to be appointed. 25399. Q. Would you regard such a man as being competent and honest 1 A. Competency and honesty would not enter into the men's mind.:. They would tell the owners that they bad appointed So,and-So as check-inspectors, they being working miners, and the owners would accept them. 25400. Q. Do you think that mining engineers would be so dishonest as to take advantage of their position as clu~ck-inspectors for their o,,n benefit 1 A. I hope no such thing would happen. 25401. Q. Then why do you ol,ject to them 1 A. I do not see that I can answer you any further. 25402. Q. You cannot see any val id reason against their acting 1 .tl. If they are working miners, they are working miners, and not mining engineers ; and I clo not see how the owner has a right to object to them. 25403. Q. Do you ohjcct to a mining engineer who is a working miner acting 1 A. If be is a working miner, be is a working miner: If he is a man in practice 11s a mining engineer , I o~ject.. 25404. Q. I put the question to you-if he is a woi king miner 1 A. I could not ohject then. 25405. Q. Can you give me the r~asons shortly why you object to one man and not·to the other. A. Well, I do .not think that I should like to allow prrsons who are in the practice of their profession as minina 0 engineers to see through a property. The owners \\"Ould ha"e an objection to it. 25406. Q. Surely, the owners would not ol>ject to a qualified man doing this work 1 A. The owners think that the men are quite competent to do the work-I mean working miners. 25407. Q. You ha \'0 told us t hat they a.re rare Sfecimens to get hold of1 A. I said that they were a rare commodity among the young miners. The old miners are good enough. 25408.

766 Wit 11 e~s-Dr. J. R. M. Rouertrnn, 10 March, 1903.

25408. Q. The old ones will die ont 1 A. ~hen we shoulJ ha, e to renew them from tbe other colonies. :_:?j-!09. Q. Should not this work be do?e by tl~e men who are m?st competent to perform it 1 A. I · do vot sE>e anythina in the work that the ordinary minP.r cannot do. 2J 11 o. Q. You know Lhey ha~e the l'ower to inspect the shafts, levels, pltmes, working-places, r eturn a.if;ways, ventilating apparatus, ol<l workings, and_ma_chinerr-you know they have tbe power to inspect a1l th E>se thin as 7 A. :tl'liners who ha,·e been worlnng 10 a m10e for a number of years should know ,vhether the 0 roads an<l workioa-places are in proper cond ition. 2iHll. Q. They ~aht know very little ab::rnt the ventilating apparatus 1 A. They ,vould know whether it 0 was doing its duty. They would take t_he a.ii-, and see whether there wns go'l·l air in th~ mine. 25412. Q. There miaht be some defects m the apparatus i A. If there wC!'d any defects m the apparatus, H would not be doina its duty. I cannot concei,·e that any mining engineer would know more of this matter than ,vould be nec~ssary for the miners to know, under the circumstances. It is not proposed to stop the veo£ilating apparatus in orcler that an in~pecti?n of _it may take_ place: The ventilating app~ratus is 4 simple thing, and really consists of an engmc w1tb a piston rod which dnves a fan. You cannot see the £ah in detail. 25413. Q. A ruioing"engincer ,vould know more of the:;e matters than miners 1 A. As I say, you cannot see the fan--you cannot stop the apparatus in order to examine the different parts of the fan. · 25.U 4. Q. Why not, if necessary 1 .A. The Manager is there for the purpose of seeing that all the macliinery is in ordet'. 25-!15. Q. The :Mauaaer has no right over the;11 while t hey are making the inspection. You know that ii is not n ecessary for the wachinery to be stopped 1 A. The ~ime is not far distant when the miners will ham all the mines to themselves, and then they can do as they like. 25416. Q. Do you think soi A. But you do, I think. 25 ll 7. Q. Do you agree with me on that 1 A. No. 25418. Q. Would you have any objection to remove from the section of the Act the words "who are practi~al working miners." The rule provides that the men may appoint any two of their number, or any two perso~s, not being mining engineers, who are practical working miners 1 A. I would let the rule remain a.s it is at present. · . 25419. Q. Did you not say that you would remove the words "who a.re practical working miners" 1 A; ? do not think I did. You speak so fa.st, Mr. Ritchie, that I cannot al ways catch what you say. 25420. Q. I will read t.he rule Z· The persons employed ir. the mine ma.y, from time to time, appoint two of their number, <_>r any two persons, not

being mining engineers, who are practical working miners.

This bas been made a rule of cout't. No person ca.n be appointed to make. an inspection who is not absolutely working as a miner at the time of bis appointment.. What I want to put to you is this : Do you believe that this embargo should be placed upon miners who may not be in employ at the moment they are employed as check-inspectors, but who are practical miners -should that embargo be removed 1 A. You would require to make some limitation. Possibly a mau may have ceased working twenty years before. He should not be appointed; and, therefore, there should be some limitation. 25121. Q. Why should he not be appointed, if he bad been studying mining since Z A. I think a man should be working at the time, or within a limited period of his appointment. 25422. Q. All we want to do is to remove the words "wbo are practical working miners." Will you agree to leaving those words out 1 .A. I will take ti, ne to consider it. 25 ~23 .. Q. When will we bave you back after you have considered it 1 A. I do not know. I expect · the owners would base something to say to that. 254-24,. Afr. Robertson.] Q. l und erstood that you agreed wit.h t hat. I mentioned the case of Mr. Wynn, who was not working as a miner, but who had beP.n objecte~ to by Mr. L eitch. I understood that you had no objection to a man who was not working at the time1 A. I would have no objection, if a man had been at work within a limited time before. I would not be a pE>rson who would draw fine distinctions at all. 254-25. itfr. Rit,:!tie.] Q. I will put the case to you of Mr. Bower. Under that rule, as it now applies, Mr. Bower, at the end of his year's engagement as check-inspector, hacl to seek work from one of the Manaaers 0 in order to qualify himself for reappointment for another year. You think that the miners- ought to b ave to adopt that mode of procedure 1 A. I do not see that you require to get reappointments for a year. I think a man could be reappointed as often :i.s the miners choose. 25426. Q. The miners chose to have the termination of :Mr. Bower's agreement at t he end of a year; and before he could be reappointed he had Lo get an engagement as a miner 1 A. I think that is an extreme case. 25.J.27. Q. Do you think that the wording of Lhe A ct might be altered a. little 1 A. I think it should be. i\1r. Bower never did anything all his life beyond working as :.i miner. I do not see how the fact of his appointment as a check-inspector alters the fact that he wn.s a minel'. 25-!28. J.1Jr. Rubertson.] Q. Do you think that the owners would object to l\1r. B owed A. No, I would not oqject. 25129. Q. Do you tl,ink that the rule shoul,l be altered 1 A. Yes, in that respect. 25-1:30. Mr. Ritchie. J Q. "'\Yhat are your duties us "iewer l A. I ha.Ye no special duty. If the Manager wants advice, I give it. 2:H:} l. Q. Does your clu~y compel you to go inside the mine 1 A. No. :!5~:.12. Q. You have no need to go inside the mi N·? A. 1 n eed not come to Mount Kembla. even. 25-!:33. Q. You often, as a matter of fact, do go inside Lh e mine 1 A. Very irregu larly. I very seldom go through Mount Keml>la to make a regu lar inspect ion, which would take days. 2.j l:H. Q. Ha.,·c you done it ? A. Not. -since it \YM a la.rge mine. T have clone it when it was n. small one. :!.'3!:35. Q. " '" ith the exception of the visit which you made with the arbitrators some three or fou r weeks lwfore the disaster, whel'I were you in the mine h Pfore 1 A. I ca.nnot say. I took no note. 25-1:rn. Q. ~Ionths before? A. No, week'-. ~54:37, Q. Rave you no recollection of the lime wh en vou were down near the 4th Rigl1t? A.. It would be some weeks before. ' 2~4;3 . Q. Before the ,·isit of inspection 7 A. It coul<l not be many weeks before, because I was along wilh Nelson. 25.H9. Q. Did you go into the 4th Right youri:.elf 1 A. Just in the entrance, . 25440.

-.. t '

767

1fit11ell8- Dr. J. R. 1,J. Robertson, 10 March, 1903.

~ij440. Q. Was it working 1 A. I think they had the last pillal' to · take out.

I went to look at it, and

hick. 25Hl. Q. Was that in Nelson's time 1 .11. Yes.

game

I ~.

r' ,t

'·

..,.

J... ! •'

Jo•

25442. Q. Mr. Leitch had only left seven or eight weeks prior to the disaster? A. Yes, a.bout two mpnths, I think. 25443. Q. If yon went in some weeks before, it would be jw,1t after Leitch left 1 A. I think he was appointed to th~ mi ne at once. Mr. Rogers wrote up to the Doard, and asked if they had any objection to p.ppoint Nelspn. 2~444-. Q. Then it would be almost im~ediately on the <lE.-parLure of Leitch 1 A. Yes. ~5445. Q. You Sf.l.id that Leitch was not in a. position to express an opinion a.bout the area. likely to fall 1 A. I do not sP.e that he could. ~5446. Q. Can yo\!. tell the Commission how you can 1 A. I tol<l the Commission that it was through Morrison, a.nd through some other men's statements, that I knew. I questioned them about it. 254-48. Q. So we ma.y take it that it was not on your own knowledge 1 .d. I had no knowledge immediately prior to the disaster. 115449. Q. YoQr calculation was based on information given you by other people1 1.1.. You are quite right. 25450. Q. Did you get the information after the disaster 1 A. Yes, after the disaster. 25451. Q. When they were giving you the information, did they not tell you about 2 feet 6 inches having fallen 1 A. I never heard of it. 25452. A. Do you not think that is strange 1 A. I do not think it is strange. 25453. Q. Would it not be a material factor 1 A. No. 25454. Q. Would it not affect. ihe question of dust 1 A. It might. But I do not think 2 feet 6 inches would fall over the whole area. It is not like a roof of that sort. 25455. Q. You say that the whole of your evidence is baseJ on inform.a.tion given you by at.her people. Your decided opinion about gas is from information supplied to you 1 A. Yes. .And from the report books. 25456. Q. A s far as your own knowledge is concerned, you do not know wheth~r it is a gassy mine or not 1 A. I do not say that. · 25457. Q. What knowledge have you got 1 A. I have been in the Kembla Mine thousands of times. I , always look in the report book. I see the Inspectors. I saw you, and had a conversation with you. 25458. Q. You never had a conversation with rue about gas. I want to get it cle~r from you whether you have ever made an examination with a view of testing whether Kembla was a safe mine in regard to gas~ A. I have often tested for gas, but it was a matter of form. I never had the slightest fear that I should find it. 254-59. Q. Diel you ever take a safety-lamp to Kembla before the disasted A. Oh, yes. 25460. Q. Can you give me any single instance 1 A. No, how coul<l I. ,254Gl. Q. Was it years before the disaster that you took a safety-lamp into the mine 1 A. Ob, soine months b eforP-. I do not go in with a safety-lamp. 25462. Q. I want to get this clear- do I understand that you have to.ken a safety-lamp inside the colliery 1 A. I have got the lamp from one of the deputies, and ban• looked where there was a fall. 25463. Q. Did you go in for the purpose of looking and testing for gas 1 A. Oh, no. 25164. Q. Was not that the idea 1 A. No; when I saw a fall I would take the safety-lamp from one of · t he deputies ; but I never found any gas. 25465. Q. T bat has been on very rare occasions? 11. G!\s b_as nerer been reported, you see. 25466. Q. As a matter of fact, your feeling of security wn s <lerivet.1 from reading the report book, and not from any personal knowledge of lhe mine 1 , 1. No; from both. 25467. :Afr. Robei·tson.] Q. Assuming thnt fl.tme ca.me out of the tunnel mouth-you say there was uoneassnming that flame did come out;, we have it; from your evidepce that the coain tunnel of No. 1 was a. wet Foad. Is that so 1 A. Portions of the main tunnel were Yery wet. 25468. Q. May I take it that the main tunnel to the iunction of No. 1 was wet 1 ..4. It was a damp road. 25469. Q. A portion of No. 1 main roa.<l 1 A. Yes it was nPar:y all damp. 25 4:70. Q. Would not that go to show the inadequacy of watering to preYent an accident1 A. If the roadway was wet, and th ere was no du, t on the roof, it woulJ show that there was no need for watering. 254 71. (J. It would show tLat wa.trring the road way was not sufficient to stop an accident 1 A. No; I do not think watering the ro1d way would be sufficient to 1,top the flame. It would Le dry enough on the roof. It was the floor Lhat wa.s always damp or wet. 95472. Q. What wou1d be the length of the main tunnel to tbe juncti..in 1 il. Three hundred yards. 254 73. Q. Three hundred y,trds was damp, and there was no dust. If that were so, would it not show tLat watering three hundred y:1rds of a roadway was not suffieient to arrest an explosion 1 A. So far as I can learn, in tbn case of some explosions, the fact of watering tbe r..iad would not arrest an explosion at all T hese simu1taneous explosions arc by reason of percussion. 254 74. Q. There could be no case of percussion in this inst:incc 1 A. In this particular case there wou1d be no question of percussion. Of course there are various opinions held as to watering. Some people find that in an exlensi,·e colliery it is almost impossible to adequately water . 25!75. Q. It would not be a wise provision to insist on the systematic watering of a mine, seeing the doubt that exists in the minds of competent authoritie., a;; to its atlequacy 1 .A. \\Tell, I should be inclined to leave that matter to the Government Inspectors and to the Manager. I really do not think that an outsider, who does not know the particular circ11mstances1 is in a position to gi"e an opinion. 25-l-7G. f{is llonci·.] When you were spen.king of the absence of marks of fire on timber, oulbye of No. 4-, and of the absence of marks of burning, were you speaking of timber which was standing, of props which were standing, or of props which had been thrown down by the forr.e 1 A. I do not remember any timbP-t' stand ing there at all. I would refer to any inflammable matter on the road. i5477. Q. Were there any inflammable substances on the road, excepting timber1 A. Not on the outbye side. Only timber with bark on it. 25478. Q. Was no old timber left standing? A. I think it was thrown. There may have been an' occasional prop sticking up. · 25179. Q. Nothing noticeable 1 A. There may bn.,·e b~en some sticking up through tbe falls. 95480. Q. Do I understan<l ·tbat you looked to see whether there were any signs of burning 'I A. Particularly - I looked particularly. 25181. .:

•

768 Witness- Dr. J. R. M. Robertson, 10 March, 1903.

25481. Q. On the actual standing timber 7 A. We looked on .all the material we could find. In the dus} the roof, in the dust which had. sett.led on the dislodged rails, and on the props. We even looked at the 00 top of the falls, where it was futile to lo~k, because some part of them ~nst have ?ome down after~ards. 254:82. Q. Most of the timber was dirty from the falls 1 A. A portion was dirty. Some portion was standina-some of the rails were sticking with one end up. 25483. 0Q. Are you speaking of the iron rails! A. I am speak~ng of the g)rders. 1 25484. Q. They would show no signs of burmng 1 A. Tbey might show signs of coked d~st. 25485. Q. I am speaking of signs of fire 1 A. In the main tunnel there was a mass of trmber. There was the timber swept out of No. 1. 25486. Q. Would you expect to find marks of fire in the case of an explosion, upon timber which had been blown down by the explosion 1 A. I think so. . . 25487. Q. Would not that timber be thrown by the force of the air before the fire reached it 1 A. Tbe fire would pass amona it because it was piled up in all directions. · You had to scramble up over it. 25488. Q. And all throuah it you found no signs of ilame at all 1 A. No sign of flame at all. 25489. Q. Was there an; timber with bark upon it1 A. Nearly all the props were timber with bark on it. 25490. Mr. Robertson.1 The timber in t he main tunnel would be damp 1 A. There was no dust in themain tunnel. In one place there was dripping water, which was carried off by a galvanised-iron shoot All parts were not damp; but there was.a little water there from the roof. ·

ii''

WI LLIAM ROGERS was sworn and examined as under:Examination in chief by Mr. Wade : 25491. Q. What is your na.me 1 A. William Rogers. 25492. Q. You are the Manager of the Mount Kembla Colliery 1 A. Yes. 25493. Q. First of all, with regard to the 4th Right-do you know how long that 4th Right district has been at work since you have been there i A. Four years. • 25494. Q. How long is it since you first beg~n to d raw the pillars 1 A. I expe9t it should be eighteen months or two years. 25495. Q. Ts it not more than that 1 A. About two years. 25496. Q. Do you remember the Brownlee accident 1 A. Yes. 25497. Q. That was two years since last September 1 A. I believe it was. · 25498. Q. Had you been working at the pillars long before that i A. Not ,ery long. , 25499. Q. You worked blckwards-yoa worked from the extreme end towards where the 4th Right j oins No. 4 road i A . Y es. 25500. Q. D Ltriog all the time the pillars ·bad been working did you e\"er see gas yourself i A. N o. 25501. Q. Did you ever bear of any gas 1 A. No. • 25502. Q. Did yon have numerous falls of roof from time to time i A. Yes. 25503. Q. Did you e\·er have any trouble from gas or anything else after the roof had fallen 1 A. No. 25504. Q. In regard to the face of No. 1 heading i You know where I mean 1 A. The extreme end of No. 1. 25505. Q. Where Mordson and son were working at the time of the disaster7 A. Y es. 25506. Q. H ow long bau that been idle before the di.,aster 1 A. A couple of months-pt:rhaps a little more. . 25507. Q. You knew William Hay, the Company's weigbman 1 A. Yes. 25508. Q. Did you have any conversation with him in regard to either the front or back heJ.ding[i nterrupted. ] 25509. Mr . .Lysaght.] I object, We have had Mr. Hay here to give evidence. . 25510. His Honoi·.J Whether the witness had any conversation with William H ay-that cannot be objected to. 25511. M1·. Wade.] The suggestion has been mado that Mr. H ay's evidence is not true. I am now asking for particulars. 25512. };fr. .Lysaght.] I object to it. We ha,·e had Mr. Hay here. 25513. "Jfr. Wade.] H e told us that Mr. Rogers knew about it. 25514. llis llono1·.] I think it is fair undet· the circumstances that some question should be put to Mr. Rogers about it. · 25515. M1·. Wade.] Q. Did you have any con,·ersation with Mr. Ray in regarJ to N o. 11 A. Yee. 25516. Q. W hat was the effect of it 1 A. Mr. Hay was going to stand for his certificate-a second-class certificate-and he was anx ioLts to go through the mine when there would be any likelihood of seeing gas; and he askod me if I would let him go with Nelson, when lhe furni:Lce w<>.s off. They went to lots of places as well as No. 1 Right. After he had been, he told me where he had been. No. 1 Right was one of the places ; and he told me of other places. I asked him if he bad seen anything ; and he told me that he had not seen anything-he had not seen any gas or anything else. 25517. Q. Now, before l\fr. Nelson was appointed under-manager, do you know of your own knowledge whether be had any special instructions, or whether anything was shown to him 1 A. He had no special instructions. 25518. Q. Did you yourself take him round the mine i A. He knew the whole of the mine before he was· appointed under m1,nager, because be had been there a. number of yeara as Jeputy. 25519. Q. Had he been deputy in different parts of the mine 1 A. Yes. 25520. Q. Different sections 1 A. More in No. 1 than in any other part of the mine. 25521. Q. Now, let us come to the day of the disaster itself. You were in vVollonaona at the Arbitratiod_ 0 " Court 1 A. At the time of the accident-yes. 25522. Q. What part of the mine did you go into first 1 A.. 1'be shaft district.. 25523. Q. What time of the day 1 A. It would be from 4 to half-past 4 o'clock. 25524. Q. When were you in No. 11 A. It would be about 11 or 12 o'clock the same niaht 0 , as near as I can remember. Perhaps not so late as that. 25525. Q. What particular part were you in 1 A. I went fil'st of all to the travellina road and out of the travdling road into No. 1 rope road. I came up to a big fall. I had to turn back to ~ cut-throu oh into the tra._velling ro~d aga.in. I went out of the travelling road into No. 1 rope road, and 1:ack up towards tb;fall agai1u· 25026. Q. Did you get up to the 4th Right at that time1 A. No. 25527.

76~

Witne.,s-W, Rogers, 10 March, H>03.

25027. Q. Were you in the face of No. 1 heading 1 A. No, not to the face - I was in the second cut-through back from the £11.ce. • 25528. Q. Did you see the bodies of Morris or his son 1 LI. No, but I must b1we been Y'ery near them. 25529. Q. You did not go up as far as they were 1 A. No; but I must ha\'e gone up within a few yards. I saw the bodies after they were brought out of the minE'. 26530. Q. Did you notice the appearance of the bodies 1 A. I saw them. 20531. Q. Did you notice their hair 1 A. I think their hair wa,; a. little sin.,cd; it was nothing ,·ery much. 0 I do not think they were burned. 255S2. M1·. Ritchie.] Q. Does lhat apply to the two of them 1 A. Yei;, to the father and the roo. 25533. Jllr. Wade.] Q. They Loth had thcit· hair singed 1 A. I could not say as to both; but the boy, I think, was more sioge<l. I conld not say much about the father. 25!>34. Q. What about A itken, did you notice him-his head or bis bail' 1 A. I do not believe I did. 26535. Q. Which of the Purcells was it they found in the travelling 1 oad near tbe telephone cabin 1 A. Tom. 26536. Q. Did you see him in the mine or after he had been brought out 1 A. After he had been brought out. 25537 ~ Q. H ow would you describe his appearance 1 A. Bis hair was !:.ingcd. 155-38. Q. When did you first get into any heat 1 A. That same night. I did not get well into it. I r emember passing i t. On my way down I turned into the rope road, and then turned into the travelling r oad; and as I was going up to a fall I saw the body of Silcock. That was before I got to the fall. I went back ·to the travelling road a.gain towarJs No. 1 ma.in level, passing into the 4th Right. When I get opposite the 4th Right I stopped there. 255S9. Q. What did you notice 1 A. I noticed a little heat about the 4th Right. 25540. His Huno1·.] Q. You are accustomed to the use of a thermometed A. Yes. 25541. Q. What do you think the heat would be 1 A. Somewhere about 100 degrees. . 25542. Mr. Robertson. ] Q. Was it not a smell 1 A. No, heat 25543. Q. I was passing there an hour and a half before ; and I did not notice any heat; but I uoticed 11. peculiar smell 1 A. I drew the other men's a.ttention to it-·walker was one and Murphy another. 25544. His Honor.] Q. Wast.here any motion in the aid A. No. 25545. Q. There appeared to be a dead calm 1 A. Yes, a dead calm. 25546. Mr. Wade.] Q. When did you make an examination of the 4th Right roadway 1 ..4. I was not up there then. 25547. Q. A. fe w days afterwards1 A. Three l'lr four days afterwards I was along there with Mr. Robertson, · 25548. Q. H ad there been any canvas in the 4th Right roadway before the disasted A. Yes. When we took out t he pillars, we took thP. canvas out of the travelling road in to the 4th Right. 25549. Q. While you were working the 4th Right? A. Yes. 25550. Q. Do you remember the timber eight or nine days before 1 A. Yes, the timber was lying in the 4th Right. 25551. Q. Where 1 A. In a narrow place between the tra.velling road and the place where they were taking out the pil la rs. · 25552. Q. What became of the brattice 1 11. I do not remember what became of the bcattice. I think it was left there. 25553. Q. H ow was it being run 1 A. Along the right-haml side, I think. 25554. Q. I think it would be clea.r of the roadway 1 11. Y cs, so that they could take the skips away. 25555. Q. How was it supported 1 A. In the usual way, with props up to the roof here and there. 25556. Q. What was the floor of the 4th Right like; was there anything in the way of ruubish 01· dust there 1 il. Y es, a little rubbish was lying therl!. 20057. Q. Where 1 A. On the side. 25558. Q. What was it 1 A. Small dirt and lumps of stone were lying mixed up. I could not say that it was dust. There was no dust. There may be a little- there was sure to be a little dust. 25559. Q. Whilst the 4th Right had been working, was there any support necessary for the 4th Right roadway between the travelling ro.id of No. 1 and w ha.t they call the gon.f edge 1 A. I do not think there was any support in the narrow place ; but there may have heen a. few props. 25560. Q. Do you recollect whether there were any chocks before you 6riished 1 A. I do not thiuk there were any in the narrow road. 25561. Q. Look at this plan [Exhibit 29. J H ere is the travelling road, and here is the goaf edge-between these two points 1 A. I do not believe there were any chocks between the travelling rvad and what is • known as the goaf edge, in the 4th Right roadway. 25562. Q. Cau you remember if any chocks were built after you 6oisbed the 4th Rig ht 1 LL I cannot say t het·e were any there. After we 6uishe<l, the timner w,ts pilr.d up in thi'l narrow place. We had to pile it. up for the sake of getting room for it. Soru ebody may h,we taken that for a chock, but I <lo not think there was a chock th ere. 25563. Bis Honor.] Q. The timber would be piled up against the sides 1 A. Yes, against the sides. 25564:. Q. L aid along fore and aft 1 A. Yes; there was so much timber ta.ken out of the old workings that they had to pile it up. 25565. J1Ir. Robertson. ] Q. Was that in a narrow part 1 A. Yes, it was in a narrow pa.rt. I remember that y-0u called to me and asked me, what did I think of the timbed You asked me what way did I think it had gone 1 I said it had gone inl)ye. I thought at the time it was a fbock: I ha,·e thought about it since; and I do not think it was a. chock. I said that it. appeared as if it; bad been going round and round. I believe that was all that passed between you and me. Perhaps you may remember more. 25566. Mr. Wade.] Q. Whilst you were in thC' Jth Right, did you ever know of whole pillars being lost 1 .A. No, I did not. 25567. Q. I s this correct-that the roof wonlcl come clown and bury '"bole pillars of con.l because you were too stingy to supply timber to keep the roof up 1 A. No such thing; t here was never any scarcity of timbel' there, to my knowledge. I am sure there was not. - 25568. Q. Was there any difference with regard to <lust in No. 1 Right before the disaster and after it 1 .A. Yes. 26569. Q. In what way 1 A. There was a lot more dust to be see~ after the disaster than there was before it. 168t5 29- 5 E 25570.

770 Jfitne.s.s-W. Rogers, lO ~arch, 1903.

25570. Q.

In what part1 A. In the 4th Left. You could see places where there was more dost after tho

disaster. . '>5571 Q Have you been waterinosince you resumed operat10ns 1 A. Yes. 0 25572: In wha.t parts? A. We ha,·e been watering in_the ~t.h Left and in some _p arts of the 5th Rig~fl· We have been baling water out of the 4th Left: and m this way we h:i.ve got nd of the water and laid the dust;. 25573. Q. You ba,·e got a tank wit;h a. spray attached to it1 A. Yes; we have got five of them now. I have not o-ot t.hem all working. 255i4. Q~Ha,e you used them on the roof7 A. I had to stop watering the roof. I put a s})ray of ,ute'f on to the roof : but; it affected it so much that I had to stop. 25575. Q. No,~, have you got some wonderful pipe in your pocket i A. Yes. [ E~liibit No. 54.] 25576. Q. From whom did you get it ? A. From tile undet·-ruanager, 1'fr. H otchk1s. 25577. Q. "'When 1 A. I dare say a couple of months after the disaster, if not more. 25578. Q. You were not there when it was foun<l1 A. No, it was given to me afterwards. I saw the piaeu where it was found. 25579. Q. Where were you told it was found. Were you in the locality of the fire in the eighty-seven botd 7 A. I was shown where the pipe was found. 25580. Q. Did you see this eighty-seven bord i A. Yes. 25581. Q. Do you remember going there1 A. Yes. 25582. Q. Where the fire was 1 J1. Yes. 25583. Q. Was there any brattice unconsumed at that place? A. Yes, thne was braltice unconsumed,. a,ttd paper also. 2558 i. Q. Where was the urattice unconsumed-was it standing ot· lying down 7 .A. There was a small piece on the pipe according to what the under-manager told me. 25585. Q. The other piece was on the floor; and the paper too 1 A. Yes. 25586. Q. W as a.ny part of that which was lying on t.he floor burned, or apparently burned 1 A. No, I did not notice any canvas burned; nor any of the paper which was lying there. 25587. Q. Did you not.ice anything like a bole in the canYas 1 A. A hole in the canvas 7 25588. Q. In the canvas lying on the flood A. I could not say I noticed that. 25589. Q. Could you say of your own knowledge whether the men ever came to that place for lunch 1 A. Of course the men would sit a.bout there and take their lunch, but I do not k now of my o,~n knowledge that t hey would. . 25590. .V1·. Robertson.] Q. This was a bord 1 A. On the left hand side of the bo1·d. 25591. Q. It would be at the turn 7 A. There was a bend in the road going up. 25592. Q. But this was not a t the turn 7 .A. The road was t uruing up by the bord ;. and this was on theleft of it. 25593. Jlf.1·. Wade.] Q. The bord turned to the right, ; and this was to the left of tlie road 1 A. Yes. 25594. Q. Where were the papers i A. I saw some papel's on the cut-through going to the bord, and also in the road. 25595. Q. Now, did you see·any one of these dead men with a match in his hand 1 A. I did not see him; but I heard of it afterwards. 25596. Q. Who was your informant 1 if. Mr. H ay tol.d me first and the under-manager. 255~7. Air. R£1bertson.] Q. Who was the under-managed A . 1\Ir. Hotchkis. c were .i ust talking about it. They said, " \Ve heard it several times; bnt we did not think it was wo1th reporting." I think it was either Ha.nsly or Niells-it was some of the men-who saw a match between the man's fingers. 25598. Mr. Bruce Smitlt.] This is the fir,,t I have heard of it. 25599. Witness.] I was surprised wlrnu I heard of it . 25600...lh. Robe1·lson.l Q. 'Yhy shoul<l you be surprised at men having matches 1 A. Because I was not told about it. I heard at the time of men losing their lights, ancl lighting their lamps aflierwards. 25601. Jb-. Wade.] We have bad evidence of that. 25602. Q. How did yC1u ever hear of a light coming from gunpowder smoke 1 A. Y es. 25603. Q. Did you ever have experience of it i A. Yes. 2560-!. Q. \Yherc 1 J1. A.t home in Not'th \Vales. I met it myself. There was never known to be gas there at all. It was li t a fter a shot hacl been firad-what the miners call a hanging shot, and the smoke was coming through the cracks. 'fhe coal was not down. The smoke was issuing out near t he rcof. 25605. Q. I believe you lost a son in this disasted A. Yes, an adopted son. 25606. Q. Now tbere is one thing that I want to ask you about. H ave you bad any extra deputies appointed since yon resumed operations 1 A. Yes. 25607. Q. How many additional ones 1 A. I thiuk auout four more. \Ve_ll, we call them deputies; but they do a Jot of repairing as well as cler,uty work. 25608. Q. What is the nature of theit· deputy work 1 Is there any work done now which was not done before by the deputies 1 A. Yes, the shot-lighting. 2560!>. Q. H ow many deputies aro employed at that 1 A. Ob, I dare say there will be four-two in the shaft distl'ict ancl 2 in No. 1 district, attending to nothing but firing shots. '.!5610. Q. We have been told that Biggers inspe::ls the waste working;; 1 A. Biggers inspects the waste workings every clay, and has clone so since the disaster, or at least four or five days a week. 2561 1. Q. On other daya what is be doing 1 A. T ho rep:iirs. 25612. Q. \Vhen you say that he inspects the waste workings, clo you mea.n that he goes over the whole of the mine 1 A. The whole of the mine-that is, a part of it e,·cry day. 25613. Q. Does be examine the whole of the mine i11 the course of a week 1 A. Yes. 256 14. Q. Docs he do any other work on tho days t.lmt lte inspects the wnste workiugs1 A. No ; he only inspects the waste workings on those days. 25615: Q. In regard to the firemen at night-ii; there auy increase in the number of men 1 ..4. Yes · there are two extra men at night t.iroe. There is an extra man doincr the canvasing because the da.y clE>poty 0 has not the time to do it. 25616. Q. Do the night deputies do the ca.nva5ing i A. Yes; and there ia so much more repairing work...:... t here is more work for the deputies to do. 25617.

•

)' {

~·

·I

•

771 Witness-W. Rogers, 10 March, 1903. ~p617. Q. Has the work increased 7 A. There is more work, but only'in the way of shot-firing and looking after repairs. 25618. Q. What do you mean by repairs 7 A. Repairing the roads since the disaster. ~5619. Q. You do not mean the nrdinary wea1· and tcar1 A. No; putting the mine in working order after f.he qisaster. We have not fin ished yet. '25620. Q. For that special work you have a man at night 7 A. Yes. 25621. Q. For repairs 7 A . Yes. 2562g, Q. Does be do the canvasing 7 A. Yes. 25623. Q. The same men that look after t he repairs 1 A. They do a Jinle of each. Cross-examined by Mr. L ysaght:25624. ~. What is your idea of waste workings 7 A. My idea of waste workings-in what way 7 ~5625. Q. What are waste workings? A. Waste workings are places where we have taken the pillars out 'and where the roof bas fall en. 25626. Q. Do you m ean places marked on the plan as goafs 1 A. Yes. 25627. Q. You would not call a p lace where the pilla rs have not been extracte<l, but are standing, and ·not being worked, a waste working 7 A. ~ o. 251328. Q. If the bords are drawn 7 A. No. 25629. Q. You would not g ive that name to a. place wh ere the pillars a l'e not being worked 1 A. I would .call such a place noi hing but a place waiting for the pillars to come out . 25630. Q. Such a place conld not he defined as a w1.ste working 7 A. No. 1 2563 l. His H onor.] Q. How would you speak of it generally 1 A. I would speak a.bout the pillars finjshing, or the pillars being taken ou"t. ·we <lo not call i t a waste working until the pillars are taken out. 25632. Q. If you wanted to describe such a part of t he mine, how would you describe it i A. I should say "The pilla rs in the 4th Right, or the pillars in the 5th Rig ht-you know, where the pillars were not taken out." That is all I know about them. I should say, « \.Ve want to take them out." 25633. Q: If you were telling somebody where you had been, where the pillars were standing, how would xou describe it 1 A. We should describe where we had been, off the tracings. 25634. Q. You say the expression generally used is " the pillars?" A. \.Ve do not call them pillars until we start; to take them out. 25635. Mr. Robi:rtson.J Q. Do you call them old workings? A. We might say that we were going to take pillars out of such and such an old bord. 25636. Q. If there were a numbet· of pillars stand ing for some time, would not they be old workings 1 A. You would call them old workings. 25637. Q. Would not that general term be applied lo the district 1 A. We might call them old No. 4. We might say, "We are going to take the pillars out of old N o. 4.'' Or No. 5; or so on. Or we might remember the name of the bord. 25638. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. If you had borcls thn.t hacl been tem'porarily abandoned, you would say that you were going to start an old bord 1 L1. Yes. 25639. Q. The term generally used is " olcl work ings "1 A. Yes. 25640. His Hono1·.] Q. I£ a. stranger got lost in the mine, would you say h e got lost in the old workings 1 A. Yes. 25641. )fr. Ritchie.] Q. You ruigbt find him in the old workings in No. 41 A. Yes. He could get into the old workings where the pillars had not been taken out. 25642. 1lfr . .Robertson.] Q. A wast~ working is a goaf1 A. We call them wastes where it is thrown. 25643. llis Honor.] Q. What do you call a standing face not being worked, round which the air is circulating 1 A. We shou!d call it a stand ing borcl, or a. heading, or a cut-through. e5644. M1·. Lysaght.] Q. You remember the evidence you gave at the inquest at Wollongong 1 A. I cannot remember it all. 25645. Q. Do you want to alter any part of it 1 A. I do not think I was quite responsible for all I was saying at the time. I might want to al ter some of it. 25646. Q. Is there anything that you remember you want to alter? A. No. 25647. Q. You were treated fairly in cross-examination 1 A. I think you were rather hard on me sometimes. 25648. Q. You were treated faidy 1 A. It <lepPncls on what yon call fairly. 25649. Q. Ifad you time to answer t he questions 1 A. I belieYe I had. 25650. Q. The questions were all put plainly to you 1 A. P erhaps they were ; but you must remember, Mr. Lysaght., that I am not well up in the E nglish language. If you spoke to me in Welsh about the mining t erms, I could answer anything you wanted me to ans wer. I must admit that I do not know gas when you ment ion it to me in big words-I do not know what they mean. 25651. His Hono1·.J (d. " ~ere you brought up to speak '\Velsh only? A. To speak Welsh only. 25652. Q. Up to what age 1 A. Up to :W or 30 years of age. 25653. Q. English came as a strange langu age to you 1 A . Yes. 25654. Jllr. Wade]. Q. You can speak Welsh now ·/ A. Yes. ~5655. jJfr. Lysaght] Q. Do you want to alte1· anything in your evidence now 1 A. It is the scientific names that I am not well up in. 25656. Q. Can you tell me why the waste workings were not examined once a week, as required by rule 101

[No answer.]

25657. Mi·. Wade.] Are we going over tle same ground that was travelled at the inquest i The idea. was to have Mr. Rogers here on fresh rua.tters only. Mr. Lysaght is travelling over the same ground ns was d ealt with at the inquest. 25658. His llonor.] It ma.y be that, if Mr. Rogers is asked quietly now, he would be able to give more evidence than he gave before. H e might be asked in some particular instances without going o,·er the whole of the g round again. ~5659. Mr. Lysaght.J Q. '\VP. have had some evidence from )fr. Leitch on thismalter. vVhat reason do you give that the waste workings were noli exam ined once a we~k; as required hy Special Rule 10 1 A. After I read them, I thought that the rnle means once a week as fa r as practicable. 25660.

772 Witness- W. Rogers, l O March, 1903.

25660. Q. That i3 what yon toltl us at the inquest 1 A. Tli:i.t is the way it was. I had a. talk with the · Maoaaer in Mr. Ronaldson's time; and it was reported that way; and the Inspector saw the report. I bad .. no rea~on to think tht\t it should not be done the way we were doing it. 25G61. Q. Is that all you want to say in. answe_r to that 1 [ No answer.] 1 • 25661!. Q. I s it a matter of fact that Leitch pointed out to you, ~vben he went to. Ke~bla., that Spe~ia~ Rule 10 was not being carried out, and that there should be a special weekly examrnation 1 .4. No; 1t 18 nob correct. 25662. Q. Did Leitch make any statement to you when he went to Kembla about the inspection of _the waste workings being only once a month 1 A. No. But, I remember that some talk passed between L eitch and myself about it. . . 25663. Q. Diel you tell Leitch that once a month w.is the way they were exam10ed when you became Ma.naaer, and it was the way you carried it out1 A. I might have done so; but I will not swear it. 2566t Q. Do you rely on the explan;1.tion given at the inquest that you misread the rule 1 ..4. I did not misread it; I misunderstood it. • , 25665. Q. Can you give me the area of pillars remaining in the 4th Right when Mr. Leitch left1 A. I think I can. I think on the right-hand side the first pillar was left, from 30 to 40 yards long. On the left there would be two pillars each perhaps 10 to 15 yards long. · 25666. Q. I want you to say whether this is true. It is eviJence given by Mr. L eitch" Q. Did you draw the Mana.ger's a ttention to the fact that the rule was not _b eing carried out. A. Yes.'' "Q. What was the answer 1 A. That it had been the custom of the colliery while he was Manager, and also the custom of the colliery before he was Manager." · "Q. Did you consider you did your duty 7 A. I was not Manager : I was under.manager. I pointed . it out to him ; and that was the answer I got." " Q. "Who was the Manager 1 A. Mr. Rogers." "Q. Did Mr. Rogers give you any other answed A. Not that I am aware of." "Q. \Vas any question raised as to what the rule meant i 11. What do you say 1" '' Q. Can you t ell the Commission whether any question was raised as to what the rule meant 1 A. Mr. Rogers was und<'r the impression that he was carrying out the rule. I said, 'No, he was not.' He said be was, because he was exa·m ining the waste workings every day." " Q. Tbe explanation was that they were examining them every day 7 A. Yes ; be said that they were examining them every day." "Q. But that was not an excuse for not having a. report in writing 1 A. No; he told me that that was the rule of the colliery." . "Q. You took no steps to have it reported to the Inspectod A. No; I had no right:" Is that true 1 A. I do not remember it. 25667. Q. Do you remembe1· his pointing out that you did not carry out the rule i .4. No, I do not think so. (The Commission at 4 p.m. adjourned until 10 o'clock the following day.)

·l

;

.• WED.NESDAY, 11 MARCH, 1903, 10 a.m. [ The Commission met at the Siipreme Court, King-street, Sydney.]

Jrtg_ent:

C. E. B. 1\,IURRAY, D. A. W. ROBERTSON, EsQ.,

COMMISSIONER.

ESQ.,

D.C.J.

(PRESIDENT). D. RITCHIE, EsQ., CoMMISSIO~l!:R.

Mr. Bruce Smith, Ba1·rister-at-Law, instructed by Mr. Wood, Crown Solicitor's Office, appeared on behalf of the Crown. Mr. A. A. Atkinson, Chief Inspector of Coal.mines, assisted Mr. Bruce Smith. Mr. A. A. Lysaght, Solicitor, appeared on behalf of(a) the repre'Sent a tives of deceased miners, "heelers, &c. (victims of the explosion); (b) the employPe, of the Mount Kembla. Colliery (miners, wheelers, &c.); (c) the llla.warra Colliery E1nployees' A ssociation (The Southern Miners' Union). Mr. C. G. \V'a<le, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by Messrs. Curtiss and Barry, Solicitorsi, was present on behalf of the Mount K em\,la Coal and Oil Company (Proprietors of the '!\,fount Kembla. Mine). (Mr. J. Garlick, Secretary to the Commi~sion, was present to take shorthanrl notes of the evidence and proceedings.) Mr. W. R ogers, previously sworn, was recalled, and further ex_amined as under:Cross examination by Mr. Lysaght. 25G68. Q. Up to the time that Leitch left, the roof of the goaf had fallen solidly, had it not-the roof o( the 35·acre goaf 1 ...1. I could not say that it was fallen solidly. 25669. Q. Did you notice whet her it has fallen at all 1 A. Yes, it bad fallen some. 256i0. Q. I mean the coal that had been taken out up to the time that Leitch left-had not that roof, as Leitch said, fallen weightily 1 A. I cannot heat· you. 25671. Q. Had it not fallen solidly and set tightly 1 A. I could not say that it had fallen solidly and fet tightly; but I know that it had fall en. 25672. (J. A large part of it had fallen 1 A. Yes, a large part of it. 25~73. Q. And you told ns yesterday that. there was one pillar on each side remairiing to be tn.ken out after Leitch le ft 1 A. Y e~, there was one on the right-hand side, and two bits on the left-hand side. 25674-. Q._Just look at thi~ plan, drawn by Mr. Leitch. As you see, the 30-yard pillar is not toucherl at all- that is left a lways, berng next to the back heading 1 25675 .Jfr. Robertson.] Q. Is that so 1 A. That is so. 256i 6.

773

·'

Wit11eu-W. Rogers, 11 March, 1903.

25676. Mr. L ysaght. J ,J. Now then, the 8-yard bord adjoining the 30-yard pillar had fallen at the time Leitch was there1 .A. It was not fallen right to the bottom. It had fallen so far as what we call the roadside pillars- we will say within about 20, or 30, or 40 yards of the 4Lh Right. 25677. Q. And was that on both sides of the 4th Right that it had fa.lien that way 1 A. No; the pillars on the left-hand side-they were wol'king a little nearer than on the right. 2567~. Q. Had tbe 8-yard bord next the 30-yard pillar on the left of t he 4th Right fallen at the time Leitch left 1 A. I woul<l not be certain about that. 25679. Q. Then we will leave that. Then, adjoining that 8-yard bord is a 16-yard pillar on each side 1 A . It would be more than 16 yards on the right hand side; and a little less, perhaps, on the left. 25680. Q. I mean 16 yards down the 4th Right 1 A . Yes. 25681. Q. Now, was that pilla·r there on the right-hand side the only pillar on the right-hand side to be hken out after Leitch had left 1 11. I believe it was. 25682. Q. And on the left-hand side there were the 16-yard pillar, and part of another pillar, another 16-yard pillad A . Yes. 25683. Q. And that was all 1 A. Ye!l, about 15 yards in. 25684. Q. Will you tell me, please, when the 16-yard pillar remaining to be taken out when Leitch left was actually taken out1 A. Yes. 25685. Q. When 1 A. When he left. 25686. Q. But how long 1 A. Ob, abouh ten days before the accident: I believe it was about that. 25687. Q. Now, when that 16-yard pillar was taken out on the right-hand side, was the one on the lefthand side also being taken out 1 A. Yes. 25688. Q. Both working togetbed A. Yes, both working together. 25689. Q. And, when Morrison speaks of a fall 2 feet 6 inches in height, does he refer to a fall from where these pillars had been extracted 1 A. I could not say what he refet·s to. 25690. Q. Well, as a fact, are not those two pillars, tho 16 yard pillars on each side, and the small bit of the other 16-yard pillar on the left side, all that had to fall 1 A. All that had to fa!l; but you will excuse me; the two on the left hand side were taken out n. little bit before the one on the right. 25691. Q. Did the roof of the two on the )~ft-hand side fall almost within a few days of when the pillars were extracted and the timbers drawn 1 A. I could not answer that question. 25692. Q. D.> you know when it did fall 1 25693. Mr. Waie.J Only from hearsay. 25694. His Honor.] I understand Mr. Rogers is Manager of the mine, and he can cel'tainly be asked about the information which he got as Manager from l1is subor<linatE>s. 25695. M1·. Lysaght.] Q, Do you say that the roof of the two ou the left hand f.ide, that is the 16-yard pillar apd the remaining p·ut of the other 16-yard pillar, fell within a few <lays of when the timber was extracted, after the con.I bad been taken away 1 A. When the timber was taken out, some of it would fall-what we call tbe blacks. 25696. Q. And what would be the height of that fall 1 A. About l foot to 18 inches, perhaps. 25697. Q. And, after that, how long did the roof remain up, so far as you know 1 A. Well, I think I called there about two or three days after the timber was drawn, with Nelson, and it bad not fallen then; that i!., two or three days before the accident. 25698. Q. Was the roof working at that time 1 A. No, it was fairly quiet. 25699. Q. Now, regarding the pillar on the right-hand side; when did that fall i A. That is what I mean. That was standing; only the timber was taken out whim I was there then. 25700. Mr. Robe1·tson.] Q. When was that 1 A. I think it would be about four days before the accident. 25701. Mr. Lysaght.] Q. I was speaking, first of all, about the pillars on the left-hand side; and I want to know when the roof fell from those two pillar.son the h·ft-hand side? A. I could not say about when they fell. 25702. Q. And do you know nbont when the roof £ell from the 16-yard pillar on the right-hand side 1 A. No, I could not say, A little was fallen, you know, when the timber was tak~n out. 25703. Q. Then do I understand that the whole roof of the 16-yard pillar on both sides was fallen in small pieces when you went to have a look at it 1 A. Was falling io small pieces. 25704. Q. And, it would continue to fall in small pieces, as far a.s you could judge, knowing your experience of previous falls 1 A. It does not come like that. Aftel' the small falls, and when it has plnnty of room to . come, it comes in a body. 25705. Q. But had not those bords on each side fi1leJ up when you went t:-> look 1 A. I could not say that they had filled up. 25706. Q. But almost filled up- there bad been a fairly substantial fall in the bords 1 A. You see the pillars on each side kept them up a bit. 25707. Q. And was not there a fairly substantial fall in each of the pillars on each side 1 A. I do not know 'what you mean by "fairly"; there was a fall. 25703. Q. About how high, in your opinion 1 A. About 2 or 3 feet perhaps. 25709. Q. Of the bords 1 A. Yes; I could not say how far up. 25710. Q. Now, seeing that plan, and knowing as you did how much roof there was to fall, w:i.s there any possibility at all of a fall coming which would be sufficient to drive out ail' at any great velocity 1 A. Yes, l believe that there was. 25711. Q. Have you made any calculations at all 1 A. No. 25712. Q. To determine the velocity 1 A. No, I have not. 25713. Q. Do yon know that Morrison stated that the roof baJ fallen 2 ft. 6 in. a week before the disaster 1 .Lt. No, I do not know. 25714. Q. Do you know as a fact that the roof had so fallen 1 A. I know, as I said before, that a. little was fallen. 25715. Q. What would you call "a liltle" 1 A. Ob, about 1 foot or 18 inches. 25716. Q. Did not you give this evidence at the inquest: " I heard Morrison say that the first fall in the 35-acre goaf was fairly light, about 2 or 2! feet; and, after the fast fall, there would be, perhaps, a 2 feet cavity in the roof: that would be 2 feet higher than the road leading into the waste" 1 A. Yell, I might have said it. 25717.

774 Witness- W. Rogers, 11 March, 1903.

I. ;j

25717. Q. Well now, was not that correct 1 Would not your memol'y be better then than now 1 A. I do not know so much about that. I do not think it was. 25718. Q. Now, knowing that the roof might fall at any minute, why did not you have the men withdrawn. from inbye 1 A. Why did not I have them withdrawn 7 . . . 25719. Q. Yes; knowing that the roof might fall at any minute, why did not you have the men withdrawn from inbye 1 25720. .Jfr. Wade.] Inbye of wbere7 25'721. M1· Lysaght.l Q. Inbyc of the 4th Right1 A. \Veil, we did not think there was any danger, or else we would have withdrawn them. 25722. Q. You could not see that, wilh a fairly large area, according to you, to fall, there was a danger 1 .A. No· the men would know before it would come; it would give them sufficient warning. · 25723.' Q. Ilow would they know 1 A. Oh, it won Id be, perhaps, breaking, cracking, dribbling, small pieces faJlina before the large body would come. 25724. Q. Was it c.lribbling when you were there 1 A. I do not think it was. 257i5. Q. If you did not put a man on to watch it, how would the men inbye know whether it was breaking or dribbling 1 A. They would watch it themselves; as well as the man going in to make his examination. 257 26. Q. How could the men in bye watch what happened down the 4th Right 1 There ,vould be no men workina in the 4th Right within a week of the disaster ; and I want to know why you did not withdraw the me~ inbye of the 4th Right when you knew tbat the roof must come do\vn shortly, and knew it might do damage 1 25727. J/r. Wade.] I ohject to the question. After asking the question fonr times in the i:iame way, Mr. Lysac:rht puls in the words at the very end, "and you knew it would do damage." 25728. His llono1·.] Mr. Lysaght said "it might do damage." The witness, of course, if the question was put in a misleading form, can draw attention to it, and say that it would not do damage. 25729. ~1fr. Wade.J Yes ; but the witness does not always notice these little additions to questions. 25730. llis Ilonor.] I should think it was an addition that a witness would notice; although, of course, it is not fafr to add something to catch a witness-to add something to the question which the witness do~s not intend to include in his answer. I would suggest, Mr. Lysaght, that you wight put your questions in a simpler form. , 25731. .Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Mr. Rogers, I think you said, in answer to a question by Mr. Lysaght, that the men would know when a. fall was likely to take place, on account of the roof giving indications through small falls, in dribs aod drabs 7 .d. I thougM he meant the men in the 4th Right taking the pillars out. 25732. Q. What I want to ask you is this: from your experience of the roof a.t Kem bl a, how long are these warnings given prior to the fall genPralJy taking place 1 A. It just depends on the nature of the roof. All the roofs are not the same in Kembla Mine, as you know: some parts of the roof might give more warning than others. If it is a soft roof, it would not give so long a warning. · 25733. )11'. Bruce Smitlt.] l\Jr. Leitch gave us very exact evidence in regaru to that point. In the 4ih Right, he said it would £till a!; soon as the timbers were taken out, or the next morning. 25i34. },fr. Ritchie.] Q. From your knowledge of the nature of the strata in the 4th Right., what length of time would it generally gi\·e a warning of that description 1 A. It might give fifteen or twenty minutes, perhaps. '257 35. Q. Tn other words, the sm.ill falls would be corning down in dribs and drabs for filleen or twenty minutes before the bigger fall would take place 1 A. Something like that. 25736. Q. That is what yon think it would take in t,he 4th Right section 1 A. Yes; I think that part would take that much; because it is a good strong roof, a hard roof. 25i37 . Q. And then, when the big fall did take placP, wh:l.t is your opinion, based on experience, a.s to how it would fall; would it fall all in one piece, or would it come down, probably, the loose end first, and drag along until it got to the end next the pillad A. I believe it would come down in a whole body. 257 38. Q. Do you mean your answer to convey this, that the part of tbe roof nE"Xt tbe pillar would fall down squa1·ely with the part at the loose end 7 A. I beliet"e it would, because it is a big pillar, a 30-ya.rd pillar; and the roof would break by the rib side, because of the coal being so hard, and it would break as if it was sheared n.way. 257 39. Q. But ,,,ould it break wit,hout hn.ving the pressure from lhe loose end, which might break away a. little before the rib encl 1 A. It might hang a little. 25740. Q. What is your experience with regard to that; that it comes away from the solid part at the same time as at the loose enJ 1 A. Yes, just the sami>; just the same time. 257 41. 1lk Lys{7vht.] Q. What has been the largest block of stone that you have known to fall solidly in Kembla-say-in length and width 1 A. Oh, I have seen pieces there 40 and 50 tons. 25742. Q. \\'hat length-I mean solid, not broken 1 A. Yes, solid pieces; if they ha,-e plenty of room, they would come clown like that.. 25743. Q. What have you seen 1 A. I ha.Ye seen them that size; but I could not exactly tell you the length. 2574•1. Q. '\Veil, roughly 1 A. Five or six yards, perhaps. 25745. Q. And l1ow much in width? A. \VP!l, perhaps a.bout the same. 25746. Q. Well, at the outside, 6 yards square 1 A. About that. 20747. Q. That is the largest you have seen. Now, a.ccordino- to you, I think the area of the fall in the 4th Right would be about 40 yards square 1 ,1. Yes; I did;:, not measure it; but as near as I could see. The pillars were taken out. 2~~48. Q. And therefore, a fall of tliat magnitude might cause considerable danger 1 A. Yes, it might. 2o • 49. _Q. I s not that so, that a fall of such a. magnitude was a source of considerable danger i A. I never saw anything serious happen. 25750. Q. But would not the mere fa.ct of au area iO yards square beinowaitinc:r to fall be a source of 0 0 · was. d anger ~1 AN • o; I would not say that 1t 257 51. Q. Then, do you consider that there was no danger from a fall of 40 yards square 1 A. No .; e~I?.ecially when all the men '\:ere away from there and the props taken out. :fo 152. Q. And you do r.o~ thrnk thel'e is a.ny danger to be anticipated from such a fall? A No I did not. 25753. Q. Do you now, A. I do now. · ' 25754,

. l

•..

I ~

775

1J'it11e8s-W. Rogers, 11Marcb1 1903,

25754. Q. What danger do you thiuk is to be anticipated i A. From "hat has happened 1 25755. Q. What danger do you think is to be anticipa,ted now from such a fall 1 .t1. That it would send out a great force of air with the sudden fall. 25756. Q. Is th.at the only danged A. "\Veil, that is the only danger that I would think--[lnterrupted). 25757. Q. Was not that danger just as appuent to any person before the disaster as afterwards; that it might do a thing like that 1 A. Yes. 25758. Q. Was it apparent to you that it might <lo as you say, force out a lot of aid A. It never happened before. 25759. Q. But was it apparent to you that the fall might do such a thing1 A. No, I neYer thought it could do such a thing. 25760. Q. But, I ask you, cou_ld not you see that it might do such o. thing i A. No, I did not see that. 25761. Q. You did noti ..4. No. 25762. Q. Then it was not till after the disaster that you could see the possi,bility of any fall in the 4th Right to force out air 1 25763. Bis Honor.] I understand M1路. Rogers to say that he hacl never known such a thing to h:ippen before. 25764. JJfr. Wade.] He said he did not think it probable. And now Mr. Lysaght turns round and puts in "pos~ible" ; which makes a. good deal of difference. 25765. Mr. Lysagltt.] Q. When did it first occur to you that the fall in the Jth Right might have forced out a considerable body of air 1 A. Just at the time of the accident; just after the accident. 25766. Q. Before you had been to see the fall 1 A. No. 25767. Q. After you had been to see it 1 A. After. 25768. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Have you, within your experience, had falls equally as large in area as that which occurred in the 4th Right, in your opinion 1 A. No; I do not believe we ever have. 25769. Q. Not during your whole experience 1 A. No; I do not think so. 25770. Mr. Lysaght.l Q. Did you mean to say that the largest fall you have known was 6 feet square i 25771. Mr. Wade.] No, the largest slab. 25772. Witness.] I mean one block of stone. 25773. Mr. Lysaght.] Q. Now, you say that this occurred to you just after the disaster 1 A. Yes. 25774. Q. But were not the conditions there present; n.ncl should it not have occurred to you before .the disaster, that the fall might force out n. great volum(of air 1 A. It did not occur to me that there was any danger, that anything serious would happen, when that foll would take place j or else, ii it had, I would have taken precautions. 路 25775. Q. What would you have done 1 A. I do not know what I would have done. 25776. Q. Do you not know what lo do when a heavy fall is anticipo.ted 1 A. Not until I see it. 25777. Q. Do you mean that you do not know what a Manager should do when a heavy fall is anticipated 1 A. Yes; bM I would have to see the place. 25778. His Honor.] (). If yoc did see the place, anJ if you did find from the appearance of the place that a very heavy fall WM likely to ta,ke place quickly and suddenly, and that it was big enough to be likely to drive out a dangerous quantity of air, what would you do then 1 A. I would try to save its coming in a large b ody like that, if I thought it was going to do any damage, Your Honor. 25779. Jfr. Ritchie.] Q. How would you do it; how would your saving clause come into operation 7 A. I might perhaps put chocks under it, and try to break it; build wooden pillars, and try not to let it come in a large quantity. 25780. /,fr. L ysaght.] Q. Did you put any chocks in the -1th Right to prevent its coming in a large quantity 1 A. No, there were one or two chocks left there that we could not take out. I believe there were three or four. 25781. Q. Where were those three or four chocks left in the 4th Right 1 A. They were just under this area that we are talking about. 25782. Q. This are.t of 44 square yards 1 A . Yes. 25783. Mr. Wade.] Forty-four yards square. 25784. M1路. Lysaght.] Yes. 25785. Mr Robertson.] Q. Then that would have the effect of breaking up the fall 1 A. Yes, that would have the effect of breaking up the fall, and preYenting it from coming in big blocks. 25786. Q. Then it could not come in one big plock l Yes. 25787. Mr. L ysaght.] Q. Will you show me ' on this.., plan exactly where you know those chocks to have have been 1 A. I conld not. I could not say whether it is a correct plan. 25788. Q. It is drawn by Mr. Leitch 1 11. It may have been ; but it may not be correct, all the same. 25789. Q. Jnst a minute. I want to know~the exact position of these chocks; can you point out where the chocks would be situated 1 .11. I could not say. 25790. Q. Tell me how far from the 4th Right, either on tho left-hand side or the right-hand side 1 A. Th ey were along the 4th Right roadside ; and perhaps there would have been one on this side ancl two on the other side. 25791. Q. Did you see them there 7 A. I saw them. 25792. Q. Then you ought to know wbere}hey were? A. Well I did not measure the distance. 25793. Q. When did you see them the.re 1 11. I saw them many a. time. 25794-. Q. When did you last see them there 1 A. About a month or so, or a couple of months, before the accident. 25795. Q. And do you know that those four chocks at least were never removed 1 A. I was told that they were not. 25796. Q. As far as you know they were not removcJ 1 A. As far as I know. 25797. Q. Who told you they were not removed l A. l\lorrison. 25798. Q. How high were they built 1 A. From the floor up to the roof. 25799. Q. And what was about the area. of the chocks l.J.11. Abou~ 4c 01路 5 feet square. 25800. His llonor.] Q. They were we<lgecl up to the roof 1 A. "\Vedged up to the roof. 25801. 1lir. Lysaght.] Q. Now, could you tell me how many were on the left side, a.nd how many were on the right side of the 4th Right 1 A. There might be two on the left and one on the right. 26802.

77G JP'i(ntM-W.

) I

Rogers, 11 March, 190.l

25 02. Q. Tlll\t is only three 1 A. I said three or four. To the uf>st of my memory that is where they were. 25803. Q. H ow far from the inbye corner of the 30-yard pillar that was not touched would the first chock b e 1 A. I think it would be in the month of the first borJ. 25804. Q. On the left-band side1 A. Y es. 25~05. Q. And where would thP nf>xt chock be 1 A. On the opposite side, on the next bord. 25806. Q. On the rigbtrha.nd side1 A. Y es. 25 'O i . Q. And where would the n ext one be in bye 1 A. I think there were two on the leftrha.nd side in the mouth of one bord, and one on the other side. I think that is how they wen>.; I am not certain. 25808. Q. Now, if those chocks wercc', as you say, built tightly up against the roof, would it not be impossible for the roof, where those chock~ ,rere, to fall in a solid body-would not the chocks break the fall 1 A. No; the heavy fall comi ng would swing the chocks-shove them over. 25809. Q. But "'oulcl not the chocks themselvf>s, being therf>, pl'e \'ent a heavy fall, by breaking i t where it would come on the chocks 1 A. They might, a litt le; but t hey \vould not have much effect on such a great area as that. 25810. Q. But, with the bord3 already partly fallen, and with the chocks supporting the corners of those bords, does it not necessarily follow that th e fall of the roof must be broken 1 A. It is v~ry likely. 25811. Q. A nrl wa,; not that really the ohject of leaving the chocks there 1 A. No; it was because we could not take them out. 25812. Q. They were so tight ; a.II r ight. Now, after the disaster, did you get in anywhere near · any of these chocks to see them 1 A. No. 25813. Q. You ne\·er got that fa d A. I never got that far. 25814. Q. Do you know whether any other expluriug party got th1tt far 1 A. No, I do not. 25815. Q. Then, may I take it, that as far as you know, no p erson got beyond the first b ord, or the position of the first bord, adjoining Lhe 30-yard pillar, after the disaster 1 A. I never kne,v t ho.t anybody got ns far as the first bord. 2-6816. Q. So that any evidence given concerning a. heavy fttll o\·er a large a rea would be a supposit~on, Mr. R ogers, because it would be impossible, relllly, t o see what-had fallen 1 A. You could not see what had fallen. 258 17. Q. I s it not quite clear that it would be a. mere supposition that there had bef>n a l arge fall in one block, because it wa.'i impossible to get any distance beyond the 30-yard pillar to see 1 A. Yon could get not very far from it. 258 18. Q. So I.bat it is clear I.hat it is a mere supposition 1 A. You could see from the mouth of the b ord that it was a big fall 1 258U>. Q. Then it was a mere s upposition that it w·as one fall in one block 1 A. No; I tbiok you could satiRfy yourself that it waR one big fall. 2j820. Q. You <'oulcl satisfy your3elf 1 ..4. Men of experiencf>, wllen they see a fa.II like that, know, from what they see, that it bas been a. big fall, and that a big fall has taken place, without going through it. 25821. Q. Now, when the chocks are in like that, so tight that they cannot be extracted, is not the effect of the fall that the floor rises np and meets i t; that the pressure of the chock below, with the weight of the strata above, forces the chock down, and forces the floor on e:ich side up to meet the roof 1 A. Y es, ,he chocks would do that. 25822. Q. That is the efft>ct of putting in a cho'}k, that the floor on each side of it, when the h eavy pressure comes on the chock, will s urge up and meet the roof l A. I t is the pressure of the roof. 25823. Afr. R obtr/son.J Q. T hat of course would depend on the nature of the flood A. Ye:i, a good deal. 25824-. .lfr. Lysaght.] Q. I am putting it now about the floor of tile 4th Right. From what you know of the way the fl oor used to surge up in K embla., is it not a correct assumpt ion. 25825 . .Mr. Wade.] I object to this statement. There is no evidence at all that the floor i,u rgt>s up in Kt-mbla. 2j826. Mr. Lysaght. ] Q. I s it correct to say that, in the 4th Right, with those chocks there, and the roof pressing heavily on them, the floor woulJ rise up to meet the falling roof 1 .LL I do not think that floor would do that. · 25827. Q. Why 1 A. Because it was a strong fl oor. It was not a bottom that would lleo.ve. Some b oltoms heavf>, and some do not hen., e. 25828. Q. Do not yon know Lhat, during the last week the pillars were being taken out in the 4th Right district, ruen harl to be sent in to keep the roof up, right where they wero taking down the pillars 1 A. You always have to repair the road s where you are laking out piJlars. 25829. Q. Do not you know this: that, right in the \ icini ty wgere the pillars were being extracted, special men were sent in lo keep up the roof, because it had started to break down; do not you know that, regarding this p11.rticular 4th Right, about ten days before the disaster, tl1e s tone-men were in, s pecially timbel'ing up, to enal,le you to get out as much as you coul<l 1 A. No more than anywhere else. 25830. Q. B ut you know tbat, t en days before the disaster, that was so 1 A. No, I do not know it ; only the ordinary repairs would be goin"' on. 2583 1. Q. Do not you know t hat C:·owder, the stone-man, had to go in and pu t in s pecial timber to keep t he roof up, just beside t he sidP. of whPre the pillars were being ex tracted ? A. Ci ow<ler was not a. man who repaired the ron.d ; his Juties were to lift stone a.nd la.y turns. %832. (/. Do you mean to say he diJ not do that 1 A. I do not know. 25833. f/, D o you mean lo say that other men were not put on to do that 1 A. No, I do not know that anyth ing wns done out of the ordinary way. 2:i834. Q. Ts iL not a fact that, in taking out Lhe pillars in the 4th Right, directly tht>y were extracted t he roof useJ t o fall 1 A. \Vhcn we took tlte limber out. 25835. (). '!'be whole of your experience iu taking out the pillars in the 4th Right wns Lilia : directly you ext1·actt><l lhf> timber, <lown camp, the r oof. A. ~o, not directly. 25836. Q. " .ell, within what period 1 A. I t just depends; it does 11ot always t ake t he same time. 2583 7. <1 .Abont bow long, in the ,I th Righ t; when you start to t nke out the pillars in the 4th Right, is it not a fact that, whP.n you hn\'e the timber Jrawn, very s hortly afterwal'ds down would come the roof 1 A. It depends on the nature of the roof. 2,5838. (/. I o.rn sp~aking of the 4th llight ; did not it happen 1 A. The roof in the 4th R ight was not all the same from one encl to the other ; there were differ.:lnt pa.rt:1 of the roof stronger t ban others. 25039. (i. But wa'i not thit the general r ule tha.t, as soon as t he Limber was extracted, down came the l"O'lft A. No. 25840.

I I

7i7 lf'itnc.s~- W. Rogers, 11 Mnrch, 1903.

25840. Q. Do you me.1u b sa.y that the H!i R:ght was u roof that use,l to li:ing op for some time 1 A. Some parts of it. 25841. Q. You s1y that 1 A. Ye•!'. 25842. Q. For how long 1 A. I cnulci not say for !11w long. 25843. Q. How many dayid A. T could not answPr that quest ion. 25844. Q. Were these chocks stuffed wi1h solid co,d on the im,ide, or s0l id st me 1 A. Little, small stuff betwE'en.

25845. Q. They were put up \·cry tigl1t.ly i A. Fairly, not rnry, tightly. 25846. Q. How Jong, in your opinion, did it take the roof, where thP~e Jac:,t pilh1.1s liad been taken out., to fal1, when it did come-the uig fall that you spe.ik of; what \Ya,c; thFl dur1ttion of time that it took to ccmc down 1 ...4. It would be about a good few day!', Lcc:rnse-- [ Interrupted]. 25847. Q. Well, about l1ow many 1 A. About 8 or 10 da,p. 25848. Q. I mean from the time.the roof started to fall, from where the last pillars were taken out from the 4th Right., from the starting time to when the fall was pt'actica.lly completed; bow long did that take~ A. I could not say when t'l::e fall was practically completed, exactly. 25849. Q. Do you thi11k that there wac; a fall in the 4th Right d one large blcck of stone 1 A. I believe there was a big fall in the 4th Riglit. 25850. Q. Do you belie.e tbat there was a fall of one large solid ulock of stone 7 I cculd not my one solid block of stone; but there, was a l:iig fall. 25851. Q. But you do no~ answer the question . 25852. His Honer.] Mr. Rogers has said all he can. 25853. Mr. Lysaght.] Q. You could not see a large solid block of stone? A. No. 25854. Q. Could you see several smalln b!ocks of stone 1 A. I coulJ see big flags of stone. 25855. Q. Could you tell me what ..-.as the largest flag of sti:mc you saw in the 4th Right, roughly speaking7 A. No, I could not. 25856. Q. Give me any estimate you like i A. I could not givo you :rny estimate. 25857. Q. Was it clear to you, from what yon diJ see, that the roof did not come down in one solid Llock of stone 44 yards square 1 A. I do not beliere that i t would come in one soli<l block of stone 44 yards square-all in one solid block. 25858. Q. You do not belie,·e that 'l A. No. 25859. Q. And you made as cnreful an inspection as you po~siuly could after that disa~ter Z A. Yes. 25860. Q. Now what, in your opinion, ~R fu as you could see from all y<'ur inspections1 was the large st area of the largest block you saw tbat had fallt n 1 A. I coul<l not answer that. I could not say what was the hrgest stone. 25861. Q. The conclusion yon drew from everJ thing you did see wa!', you say, that it coul<l not have been anything like a solid block of 44 yards squarP. Now fix, as nearly as yon can, the size of the largest stone that you would say did fall in one block, from everything yon saw; give me your opinion from your deductions 1 i1. In my opinion it would be abont 5 or 6 feet in length, and about a foot thick. 25862. Q. I think it was clear to you tl1at, so. far as the thickness of any pa.rticular piece of stone was concerned, there wa'3 no piece of a greater thic:knes'l than a.b out a foot 1 A. Ob, I could not say that. 25863. Q. As far as you obsen-ed 1 A. As f1-w as I could see. 2586~. Q. Tbere was no piece of a greater thicknes~ than abeut a foot 7 A. As far as I could see. 25865. Q. Now·, I think that stratum bad fo,sures in it-sort of cracks all over it 1 A. Yes; but not all o ver. 25866. Q. Well, at intervals of 4 ot· .5 ya.rds, roughly speaking1 A. Ob, yes. 25867. Q. .And would it not follow from that, that when the roof would fall, it wonld have caused a break where these fractures or joints were 1 A. Ye!'. . 25868. Q. From what you observed in the .Uh Right, could you tell me about !tow fur apart those fractures were, where those last pillars were being extracted 1 A. No, I could not. 25869. Q. Have you any idea 1 A. No; they are sometimes oftener. 25870. Q. Give rue an idea, because I never saw it ; would they be within 2 or 3 yards of one another? A. Yes, and more. 25871. Q. Four or 5 prds then 1 A. Yes. 25872. Q. Well now, having told us that, in your opinion, there was no big fall in one solid b!ock of 44 yards square, I want you to tell me now what is your theory, if you have any, as to the cause of the disaster. I do not care if you ha\·e not got any; I will not l,otbe1· you ; but., if you have a theory, will you tell me what it is 1 A. l\Iy only theory is that a big fall lv1ppened there, an<l caused a big l,last of air to come out from there. That is all the theory that I ha""· 25873. Q. And is that all the tl1~ory that you have always held; or has that theory been changed' since the inquest 1 A. No. I drew the men's aHention, as I told you yesterday, when pas~ing the 4th Right. I could see the same night tbat there was something there that we had not seen before. 25874. Q. I do not think you quite a.ppreciate my question. I had better read to you what you said a.t the inquest in answer to Mr. Bruce Smith's examination:· I cannot mention any othe!' cause for the explosion except gas and co::i.l.dust, or gas, or coal-dust. would cause such an explosion, or that <lust would.

I know that gas

25875. Jfr. Wade.] Now, will you read that ou page 35 also, where he speaks auout the wind-blast 1I have thought, a good deal about it; but I canllClt make up my min<l a,bout what caused it; I ha\·e no theory at all; the only thing I hM'e thought about it is what we h,Lve heard a good lleal about in the last fortnight-that is, that an area. of waste fell in in the 4th Right, causing a blast, and blowing everything upside down ; I caru1ot say what the blast was; I h:we no idea; it appears to me that the blast has come from the 4th Right pillars; I do not suggest that it was a blast of gunpowder or of dynamite; I do not know what it was.

That is what lie spoke of. 25876. Mr. Lysaght.] Q. Now, Mr. Rogers, that was what you saiLl to me; then afterwards Mr. Bruce Smith examined you, and you said that you coulcl not mention any other cause for the explosion except gas and coal-dust, or gas or coal-dust. Now, wuat I want to ask you is this: do you tell the Commission seriously that, in your opinion, coal-dust played no part in that explosion 1 A. No; I do not mean to say that. 25877. Q. Do you mean to tell the Commission that, in your opinion, fire,damp played no pa.rt in the disaster? A. I do not know where the fire·damp would be found. 25878. 29-5 F 16825

7i8 lfit11e.,.,i-W. Rogers, 11 ;\hrch, l!l03.

25878. Q. Do you mean to tell the Cumruission that, in your opinion, it did not pla.y a part in the disaster1 A. I do not think it did. . 25(.; 79. Q. What did you mean l,y tellioct )Ir. Bruce Rmith that you could not mention any other ca.use for t!:ie explo!;iou cxcf'pt g!1<i and co.ii dust, ;r gas 01· co:ll·tlust. 1 A. Did I call it "the explosion" 1 25c 80. Y cs ; we c.dlecl it tue explosion. . . 25S " I. Mr. Wade.] 'S"o, he ditl not. That is the way lh.c que~tion was put. 2.3 1 'J. Jfr. Lysrrght.] (). I do not care whether you c:1.ll 1t a disaster, or an explosion, or any thing el:,e. I want to know--[/ 11lt'1Tuptd]. . . . . . . :?5883. ,Ur. Bruce Sinit!t.] In con~ect1on w1t.b that, I ti.ink it would uc fau· to say ~hat,.rn .thes~ notes, _tl:e question and answer wern summansed by the gentleman who took the~ i a.nd I_ th1~k it 1s quite poss1b.e that after l\Ir. RoCYCrs rra.vc lhe evidence as to the blast: I may have sa1<l to him, ' Do you know of any 0 othe'r causes which migl~t produce an explo ion? "-and he prouably said, "Gas or coal-d ?st wou_ld. do i~," bec.1use he goes on to s ,y, '' I know that gas would ca.u$e n.n explos10n, or that dust woult~ 1 ; a?d it 1s q.utte po,silile that the note is taken as if he btt.d s1id that gas or coil-dust would play a part m this explosion; but,: do not r emember being left wich Lhe impression that :\Ir. Rogers hn.<l absolut<-ly c:>ntrad icted bimseli by s'\ying, in one place, th:.it ~as a.ud c:nl·dust ~\·Oulu cause the explosion, an~, ~n another place, that he thou"'ht it was ca.used hy a wmrJ.blast; and I tlunk I s hould have remembered lt 1f be had. 25384 Ilis Ilon~r.] If t!.ie word II an " were substituted for th~ word "the," it would be a. cliffercnt thin~ altogether. 25885. J/r. Lys11rt1,t.] Q. Th.,n, you do now !ell thn Cvmn,islion that, in your opinion, fire-<larup playetl no part in tba.t disaster 'I A. I do not think i t ditl. ~53~6. (l You dv think cJn.l dust pl,1yed a. pa.rt 1 A. Con.l-du1>t might pln.y a part. 25~ 7. Q. DJ you thi11k it <lid? .A . Well1 I think it ha.cl something to do ·with it. 25 88. Q. Tell me what thnt soroet.Li11g was? A. Coal-dust. 25 '89. Q. Y I'S; but what had it to do with it i - 25S90. lli1J Ilon~1·.] Q. How did coal·dust work in the disaster 1 A. It might get heated by the compression of air. 25891. Jfr. Lysaght.] Q. Just under.. tand now, I am asking you what pa.rt coal-dust played in the disaster, and how, bC'c::iu-,e you say you think it clitl play a part ; -now, what p :u-t did it play, n.nd how did it play a. p::i.rt 7 A. I cou!d not answer Lh::i.t. 2.,891 Q. Di,l not you go on t:> s;i.y it was l1e1ted by the compression of air 1 A. I said i t might. 25393. Q. Wh l told you tlnt 1 Ll. Nobody. I know that compressed air gels ho~. I know that, because 1 we ltave got an air co:npressor at tl1e mine. , 2589·1. Q. Is that your only knowledge that air gets hot from compression 1 A. Ye~. 25895. Q. And you think th at the c:ia.l·dust was made so hot by t!:ie compression of the air that it ignited 1 A. I would not say that it ignited. 25896. Q. You will not say evt-n that it ignited 7 A. Ko, I would not say tl1at. 25897. (). You stick to it that it was ma.de hot 1 A. Yes; that is my belief. 25"98. Q. Then I take it that I may go further, and say that, in your opinion, you consider that t here was no flame in the disasle!' 1 A. I saw uo traces of it. • 25899. Q. You neve1· saw any men burnt 1 Jl. I S'.lw men wilh their hair sing~cl a. little; but not what you might call burnt. . 25900. Q. You never saw men burnt 1 A. There were one or two outside, either burnt or scalJe<l. 25901. Q. And you saw no indications of fl:.uoe rinywhpre throughout the mine 1 11. No; I could not say t.ltat I did. 25902. Q. And the theory that it was an explosion of gas and coal <lust would be, in your opinion, altogether ontside the-- [!rttrrrnpted] 1 .A. I would not. think it was gas. 25903. Q. So tha.t you, in effect, agree with whn.t Dr. Robertson has said 1 ,,J., Something--[ [nt,rrup'Pd]. %90+. (j. You know what he saitl ; you signed that, did yon not [r~fen·ing to tltc noie, lt'lndecl in during J)r. Ruucrtson's ei•idence] 1 H :we you got a. copy of the notes of this in'-pection made by Dr. Robertson, l\f r. Sell em, ...\'Ir. Rogers, Mr. Hay, J\,J r. Warburton , and Morrison 1 A. I lt!l. ve no notes l.Jelonging to myself or anybody else. 25905. Q. Did you get a type-written copy of a.ny notes from Dr. Robertson 1 A. No, I <lo not believe I did. i590G. Q. Do not you know 1 A. No; I do not believe I did. 25907. Jfr. Wade.] Show him those; and give him a. chance of saying whether he saw them. 25908 . .lb-. Lysnght.] Q. Just look at these notes, and t ell me if you ha.,·e ever seen them before 1 [ 1'Ae notes of the vi~it of Jlcssr$. Sdlcrs, R orrrs, 1111.y, ll'nruu.rlon, Jlorrisuri, and Dr. Robertson to JJJJonnt K embla ..lli1te on 19tlt HPpt~m !Jrr, 1902, 11:ere sltown lo lite 11•itness.] A. YE"s. I believe 1 have seen those 25909. Q. Now, wl1cre did yc.u see them 1 A. I tLink I SI\W them in Ketnbla; a.nd in Sydney, a.lso, I think. 25910. Q. A type-wtitten copy like that1 A. Yes; I believe i t was something similar. 25911. Q. And wera not you suppliecl with a. copy 1 .,-1. I bcliern I \t"a!l. 2?H 2. Q. And it was upon the copy that, you were supplied wit h that you bac;eJ your evidence just 11' w, given before tha Commis,ion 1 A. No, I would not sn.y that. I would not do it. 1591:3. Q. I supporn you ba,·e !tad a number of con\·ers-1t ions with Dr. R obert;;on al.Jout this clis:l.ster, a.11<l the cause 1 A. Y ts. 25914. Q. Yo\~ have had n. largl'\ number of con\·ersations with Dr. R obertson about the thPory as to the cause of the d1rnster1 A. Yes, we ha,·e been tnlkin" a little about it. ~5915. Q. And you have adopted !Ji;; theory 1 A. N~. 25916. (J. Do you mean to tell me that i L is your original Lheory, and that you yourself thought that the coal dust w~s l:eated by compre~sion of air-do you tell me that you th,rnght that1 A. Yes, 1 do. 25917, (J. ~ ou say you do now; uut Dr. Robertson h/\.S empltasi~ed it. Do you mf'an to tell the Commission that you, w1!hout an.y ~uggE"stion from nny pcrsou, ca.me 1.0 the conclusion that tho coal-dust was hra.ted by compression.of air m t._he Ke:mula1Hine1 A. I said it. was hc,1tcJ by something-I diJ not say what i t wa,- but 1 belteved the a.1r was heatecl; but. I could not ~a.y that the coal-<lu::;t was heated from that. 25)1~. Q. But did not yo 1 just ~y that you thought tha.t the coaJ.du:.t was heated by the compression of the a.1r 1 Do) ou say tba.·, i-t Jour opinion, the coal-dust wu.<1 heated hy compre~sion of aid A. Ye~, I do. 259U>.

J I

779

Witness-W. Rogers, 11 March, 1903.

25919. Q. Now t~cn, I want to know do you mean that you came to. that conclusion, tha.t_the coal-dust was heated by the compression of- air on your own motion, without the suggestion of any person 1 A. It was not suggested. 25920. Q. Well, what wa.s it 1 A. Well, we l1ad l,cen talking aliout it-different people. 25921. Q. Did it ever occur to you to s:1y such a thin_; until it was talked a.bout by some other penon 1 A. Yes. 25922. Q. When 1 A. Jnst at the time. 25923. Q. T hen, why did not you sa.y that at the inquest 1 When you were pressed about the causes of the disaster, and when you were talking about the wind-l,la~t, why did not you then tE-11 us that you thought the coal-dust was heated by the compression of air? A. I suppose it was because I bad not tbougb_t ns much about it then as I have done since. 25924. Q. Had not you had three or four weeks to tLink about it 7 A. No; not to thiok abl,ut tLat-I bad so many other things to think about. 25925. Q. Now, did not you say thil', "I have no idea of the causq of tbe <lisastt:r; I lia\·e no theory; I h ave no suggestion .to make; I have not thought as to what has been the cause; I have no reasons for not thinking about it; I have thought a good deal about it., but I cannot make up my mind about what caused i t; I hM·e no theory at all; the only thing I have thought about it is what we ba\·e heard a good deal ab?ut; i n t he last fortnight; that is, t hat an area of waste fell in in the 4th Right, causing a blast, and blowing everything upside down; I cannot say what the blast was; I have no idea; it appears to me that the blast bas come from the 4th Right pillars; I do not suggest that it was a blast of gunpowder or of dynamite j I do hot know what it was j I do not know how the mf>n I Ii ave mentioned (Stafford and Purcell) were burnt; my idea is, tbat when the blast c:i.we out, it blew different ways, some inbye and some outbye j I could not say whether it was ignited or not; I have no idea whether that blast was ever ignited j I have no impression about it; I do not know tba.t there was any after-damp in the pit after the disaster." Now, why d id not you say then, when you were being pressed so closely regarding this blast., that you thought this compressed air bad heated the coal-dust? A. As I told you before, I bad not as mu ch time to think about it before as I haxe had since. 25926. Q. Now, is it not a fact that you have only learned this story auout the heating of the co:.i.l dus t by t he compressed air from what was tolcl to you by Dr. R obertson 1 A. No; it was from what I he~rd, and what I thought myself. 25927. Q. From whom did you I1ear it 1 A. From different people. 25928. Q. From Dr. Robertson amongst the number 1 A. Ye$. 25929. Q. ~<\.nd yon are not prepared to give any reasons to support that suggestion, that the coal.dust was heated by compression of air 1 A. No. · 25930. Q. Can you account for the carbon monoxide poisoning in the mine 7 A. No ; only through coaldust being heated. 2593 1. Q. Without any flame 7 A. W ithout any flame. 25932. Q. Do you know what woulll cause the carbon monoxide 1 A. Tbe hrnted coal. 25933. Q. I suppoi;e you would c11l it after-damp. J do not want you lo misunderstand the term I am going to put to you, because it is a t echnical term ;---:do you know what is meant Ly carbon monoxide 1 1L Jt is a very dangerous clamp, a poisonous damp. 25934. Q. It is a gas that follows on wh11.t 1 A. On heated coal. 25935. Q. That is all you kno\V about it 1 .d. Tbat is all I know. I am no chemist, you kno,v. 25936. Q. Speaking generally, you would call it after-damp, wonl<.l you not 1 A. Yes. 25937. Q. I want you to tell me where did t h'.tt after-da.01p come from 7 A. I belicv0 it com· s from heat and distillation of coal. 25938. Q. From what7 11. Heated coo.1. 25939. Q. Without. any flame 7 A. It migM h:.i.ppen without any Oame. 25940. Q. And without any com bust:on 1 A. Y I'S. 25941. Mr. Wade.l Tell him what you mean by combuslion. 25942. jJfr. Lysaght.] Q. Do not yo u know what co:nbustion is 7 A. I do not quite u11clerslaml it. 25943. Q. What is your i<lea of combL:stion 7 A . I cou!J not exa~tly t d l you. I have no hlea. :.i.bout it,. 259'4!. Q. When you answer me, I want the Commission to see wlial your knO\\'"]euge is ;-do you tel1 roe you do not know what combustion is 1 A. I might know, if you give it to we in anod:er way. 25945. Mr. Rob£rt~on.] He is a We!shman; put it. in another way. 25946. Mr. L.'IJsagl,t.] You speak of comlil'Stion frequently. 25947. Jb-. R ubert.son.] H e coukl probab'y ask you a nnmb~r of words in ,velsh of which you woulJ not k no\v the meaning. 25948. .Afr. Lysaght. J Q. C,in you a:count for the men l,cing burnt out:iide the tunnel mouth 7 A. Yes I can account for that. 25949. Q. How 'l A. They might Le burnt or scaldecl by bteam. 25950. Q. Do not you know that the doctors have statecl tlrn.~ they w, re liurnt by flame? A. No, I do not. 25951. Q. Can you aqc0unt for the i,igns of force in Price's Fl~t, the tub3 blown o,·er, aml things like th.it 1 A. Ytis, I can account for it. 25952. Q. How i A. In Powdl's Flat the Lia.st bad to come into a narrow srace. 25953. Q. Price's F lat is where lhP, tubs were overturne<l 1 A. Ye:;;, an<l that is a nn.rrow IJ!nce. 2595-1-. Q. 'l'ell me where that Lla~t that ovnturned tlie l ubs in Price's Flat came from 1 11. It ba<l lots of r oads to come into that 0ne narrow place. 25955. Q. And, in your opinion, did iL keep up its ve:ocity all the tim~ 1 A. Not so great. 25956. Q. However, it is the wind-blast t hat came from the fall in the 4th Right )'illars"I ./.!. Yl's, it catr.e through rcveral roads int o this narrow place. 25957. Q. That is your idea 1 A. That is my idea . 25958 . .Q. And did it gain auy assistance fr0m any explo~ions of coal-Just, in ~ our opinio111 A. No, I do not think it did. 25959. Q. Aml it got no assistance from a.ny ex plosions of lire-damp 1 A. No, I <lo not think it did. 25960: Q. Can you tell me how it was that the Aitkens came to be burnt 1 A. I do not tliink tl.ey \T( re burnt; tbey were singed a. little. 2596 1.

780 1.f"itness-W. Rogers, 11 March, 1903.

25961. Q. Can you tell me how it was they were siogecl ; they were not in the line of the air-blast; they were up in their working faces. 25962. ]Jfr. Wade.] Ask him were th~y j do not you say th~t., 25963. Witness.] 'l'hey were not \Vorking anywhere near Pnce s Flat. . i 2596!. Jir. Ly1,agl,t.] Q. Ent they were not working in the line of that air-b,ast 1

A. They were not very

far from it. . 25965. Q. Do you mean to so.y that the air-lilast went up there and_ heated them 7 A. H might. 25966. Q. Is that what you say, that tho air-blast went up to their place n.nd heated and scorched them 1 A. Yes. 25967. Q. I suppose you are in the po:;ition that you cannot gi"e the Commission any more informat ion than you go. vc at the Inquest 1 11. No. · . . 25968. Q. Nothing has come to your knowledge since the Inquest wluch could give you any theory for ' the cause of the disasted A. No more than I have saiJ. 25969. Q. You have not said anything new 1 A. I do not believe I hav<'. 25970. Q. And therefore you ba\·e no theory as to the cause of the disaster 7 A. Only what I have said about the great bhtst from the 4th Right 1 . . . • . 25971. Q. Now, speaking of gas, do you deny lhat that ma.n Qu10n did l igbt gas m your presence 1 A. Yes,

I do.

25972. Q. Do you deny that he eve1· menti~tu.d gas to yon 1 .A. Yes, I do. I do not remember anything at. all about it, either tnentioning or lighting gas. 2597 3. Q. Do you deny Evans' evi<lenca, that ho told you of fire damp in the mine i A. I do not remember Emns reporting fire-damp to me. 25974. Q. But you will not swear he did not 1 A. I do not remflmber that he ever <lid. 25975. Q But you will not swear that he <lid not 7 A. Y es, I will swear that he did not. 25976. Q. Now, is it not a fact that, about a month before L~itch left, he took a safety-lamp ,~own intp P owell's Flat, and was examining there for nearly a month for ga.s 1 A. Repeat that again. 25977. Q. Do not you know thn.t, a">out :1. month before L eitch left, he took a safety-lamp down into Powell's Flat, and was narnining in that vicinity for gas for nearly a month 1 A . David Evans 7 25978. Q. Leitch 1 A. I thought you said David Evans. 25979. Q. No, Leitch 1 A. I do not know that Leitch did such a thing. 25980. Q. Do not yon know that he took a safety-lamp and examined for gas 1 .A.. Yes ; he would be going with the deputy j and the deputy woulJ have a safety-lamp. 25981. Q. Did you know that, f9r some reason, Leitch took a safety-lamp, and for some time examined for gas in Powell's Flat 1 A. I know he diJ it occasionally; but· I do not know. whether he ever did for anything special. 25982. Q. Do you know whether he ever found anything 1 A. No. If he tlid, he never told me that he did, and he never reporled it. · 25983. Q. And you come before the Commission and say that, as far a<.1 you know, gas had never been discovered in Kembla mine before the disa:;ter, with the exception of the Gallagher case 1 A. Yes; that would he nine or ten years a~o j and about two years before that I saw a little in the 4th Left. 25984. Q. Now, since the Gallagher Cll.Se--[ Inte1·rupled]. .A. No, before that. 25985. Q. But, since the Gallagher case, you told the Commission.you never knew of fi re-damp being given off in any quantity in Kembla. mine 1 .A. No; I do not. 25986. Q. You know that Mr. Hay was going up for an examination 1 .A. Yes. 25987. Q. T hat was the firs t time, I think, that he went up for the examination. He went up twice, you know that 1 A. Yes. 25988. Q. H e failed once 1 ..4 . Yes, thP. first time. 25989. Q. And passed the second time1 A. Yes. 25990. Q. As far as I remember, the time that he went up for the first examination was the time that he was anxious to try and see gas, so t hat he could say that be seen it 1 A. No, not the .first time-the second time. 25991. Q. It was not the first t ime that he ,vent looking for gas 1 .A. No j it was before the second time. 25992 Q. Then, as fat· as you know, he never went looking for gas before he went up the first time for examination 1 A. Ob, yes. 25993. Q. _Now, have not I asked you that 7 .A. Explain that again, please 1 2_5994. llis Honor.] Perhaps it would be better for l\'lr. R ogers to explain what he means, to save t ime. 2~995. Witness.] Before he went np the last time for his examination, he asked me if he could go a.long wit~ N!3lson when th~ furnac~ was off, when they were repairing the furnace, to go tbrongb the mine, to see 1£ he could see gas rn the mine. That is the first time that I knew of his going through the mine looking for gas. 25996. Q. Now, do yon know that, before he went up the first time, he ever went to look for gas 1 .A. I could not say he ever went to look for 0oas s1)ecially I· but he mi<Yht have ;::,<TOne when doin(T O 0 other thinos b " 25997 . Q. But you do know that it was the last time, when he went to look for gas 7 .A. It was the last time when be told me. · 25998. Q. Now, you told Mr. Wade yesterday that Hay ha<l mentioned to you the No. 1 Right-. [ Interrupted]. 25999. ..ilfr. , TVade. J Along with other places. 26000. Mr. Lysaght.] _Q. Now, yon know that, in the report made by Mr. Nelson, there is no mention whatever made of havmg gone to the back headings 1 A. I belieYe there is- - [[nteri·upted]. 26001. Q. Do you mean to tell me that, in Nelson's report, there is a mention of his having gone into the back headings 1 26002. lYlr: Robertson.] Do you mean on that day~ 26003. Mr. Lysaght.] Yes; I am speaking of the inspections which. Hay is supposed to have made with Nelson. 26004. Q. That is what you are referring to~ .A. That is what I am r eferring to now. 26005. Q. When was that1 A. That wasabout the 19th of June. 26006. ;

\ ...

1 '

I ~

781 Witness-W. R ogers, 11 March, 1903.

26006. Q. Now, I do not want to catch you at a ll ; before I show you .this book I want you to think aga.in ; ~wberi. was it that Hay went with N elson to make the inspection for gas, or t o look for gas-now, you tlunk carefully 1 A. I think i t was iu June; it was on a Saturday in June. 26007. J.lfr. Robertson.] Q. Was i t on a pay SJ.turda.y? A. ·y e~. 26008. Q. Cao.not you fix the date-pay Saturday would be e,·ery fortuight 1 A . Y es.

26009. Mr. Lysagltt. ] Tli e 19th of June was a Thursday. 26010. Mr. Ritcltie.] I think you will find that the date io lhe 19th of July. 26011. Mr. Lysaght.] I am perfectly aware of that; but the witness is not. 26012. Wit11 ess.J I t was on the pay Saturday that he went; they were l'epairing the furnace. 26013. Mr. Lysaght.] I tell you that I entirely cli~pute that he was there at a ll. 26014. Witness.] Y ou are wrong. 26015. J,£,r. Lysaght.] Q. I want you to tell me when it was he was there 1 A. It was on the pay Saturday in June. 26016. Q. How do yon know it was June he was there1 A. No, excuse me, I am wrong; i t was on the 19th of July. 26017. Q. H ow do you kno_w it was on the 19th of July 1 A. It was on the pa.y Saturday. 26018. Q. H ow do you know it was on the 19th? A. I know it was not long before t he accident. I belie,·c it was on the 19th of J uly1 and tha.t that was a pay Saturday. 26019. Q. Can you tell me how you know that 1 A. By memory. 26020. Q. Tdl me when be t old you that be had bet>n there on tl1 e 19th of July 1 A. On the Sunday morning. H e woulJ ask ree through the week if he could go; and then, on the Sunday morning1 he told me w here they had been, 26021. Q. And what he told you was that he had l>een in No. 1 Right? A. H e mentioned a lot of places. 26022. Q. Did he say one single word ab mt having been up the back heading 1 H r•re1 have a look at this r eport, if you like. [ lnten·upted. J 26023. M1·. Wade.] '!'he report has noth ing to do wit,h i t. The qnesLion pnt to the witness was "Diel ~fl say one single word about having been up the back beading " 1 H e is about to ::mswer it1 and then this book is put in hill face; a nd he is told "Now, look hue and see if it is here." 2602t Mr. Lysaght.] I propo,e to show him the b:i:ik, and le t him see the whole rep:>r t.1 so that he cannot say he did not get fair treatment. 26025. Mr. Wade.] Of course there is a great-I do not know what to call it-about t his book; but be bas got hold of the wrong book. 26026. Mr Lysaglit.] I£ Mr. W ade says that I ha,•e got hold of the wrong book with the report concerning the inspection of the 19 th July, I ask the Commission now to order him to produce the right book. 26027. His Ho ner.] That is one of the books that werf} produced. I thought all the books had been produced. 26028. Mr. Wade.l That hook has been in evidence here since the Inquest. 26029. Mr. Lysaght.] I ask is there any other boo!, c:mtaini11g a report of this inspection of the 19th ofJuly 1 26030. His Honor.] If it is in Court, it mu,t be produced. 26031. Mr. Wede.] If it is in Court 1 I have not got it. 26032 . .Mr. Lysaght.] I ask specifically if there is any book showing a report for the 19th of July other than the book now in Mr. Roge rs' hands 1 . 26033. llis Honot·.] If there is any other book, it ought to be produced. 26034. Jfr. LJJsagltt.] I ac;k, your Honor, that .Mr. Wade should say whether such a book does exist. 26035. His Honc1·.1 I s there any other book Mr. Wade 1 26036. Mr. Wade.] I have no other book. 26037. His Honor.] B ut does the book exist 1 26038. Mr. Wade. J I cannot tell you that. 26039. His Honor. J But you say it is the wrong book ; nncl, if it is the wrong book, the right book should be produced. 26040. Mr. Wade.] I based what Izaicl on Lhis, that Mr. Hay has said distinctly that he saw some reference to bis name in a book at the time of thfl disaster. 26041. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. I s that the signature of Mt': N ehon [t·i>ferring to the signatu1·e in tlte book in Court] 1 .tl. That is his writing. _ 26042. M1·. LysagM.] If .rou look on the cover you will see " U n<ler-manager's R eport Book." That report is the 19th J uly, 1902. Mr. Wade distinctly said to me " Y ou have got hold of .the wrong book." Now, I want to know where is the right book. 26043. His Honer.] Q. l\fr. Rogers, do you know of a ny other book in which the statement could have been made 1 A. There would be the d eputies' book1 or what we call the firemen's b:>ok. This is the under-ground manager's book. 26044. .ilfr. Ritchie. ] (). l>oes the under.manager make his report in the deputies' book i A. He might make some notes in it. 25045. Q. H ave you got any books known as the deputies' books whicli have had reports placed in t hem by the undet·-managed A. I know that there were; but I do not know if I could produce them or not ; because there were so many books destroyed at the time of the disaster. 26046. Q. Was it the custom for the under-managet· to mn.ke his report in his own book 1 A. He might leave a note in th e other report book. 26047. Mr. Lysaght.] Q. The book in which Mr. Nelson would report after his inspection with Hay would be his own under.manager's report. bouk, and not the <lflpu ties' book at all1 A. Supposing the under,manager made the examination that morning1 he would make the report in the deputies1 book. 26048. Q. You mean to say if li e ma.de the examination instead of the deputy 1 A. H e might. 26049. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. I s it the custom 1 or was it t.he custom, fo t· the under-manager to make two separate reports of an inspection in two separate books 1 A. Yes, li e would. Su pposing, on a. day like that, on a Saturday, perhaps, there would be nobody in the mine only these two: well, he would make the examination ; and he would report in the deputies' book1 along with his own. 26050. Mr. Robertson. That is to sa.y1 he was acting in the tlual capacity of under-manager and depnly 1 .t.1. And he would sign as a deputy. 26051.

782 Witnes.~-w. Roger:1, 11 1Jarch, 1903.

,, I

I '

260.'5 l. Mr. Rite/Lie.] Under these circumstances, would you expect two reports from the sa.me ·ma.n 1 .A. Yes) lie woulil make the deputies' report and his own report. 26052. Q. But wouhl the lwo reports co,·et· the same ground; would you find, or expect to find, the same matter, or the same words, in the one as in the other, covering the same inspection 1 A. No; I would nc,t finu the satnP words: I would not expect to find it worded the very same in the both books. 213053. Jlis Jlonor.] Q. Yes, but would you expect t) find the substance the same1 A. I do not know whether I would or not. 2605-1-. Mr. Rob,,rlso11.] Q. l\Ir. Hay, on that dny, did not go in an official capacity 1 A. No. , 26055. Q. Would there be any occasion for Mr. Nelson to mention that he was accompanied by Mr. Hay 1 A. Very often th('y do. Mr. Hay is a.I most sure-well, he is sure-that his nu.me was mentioned in the report book. He says he will swe:ir that his name wni:; mentioned in the report book. 26056. Q. That is not an answer to my question. \Voulu there be any occasion, 1\1 r. Hay having gone in an unofficial capacity, for :\fr. Ntlson to refer to l\Jr. Ha.y i A. No, there would be no occasion. He might do it; or he might not. 26057. J.lfr. Ritchie.] He mentioned that )fr. Alkinson read it out. 26058 . .Mr. Atkinson.] H e mentioned my name; but I do not rcmembet· it at nll. 26059. Afr. Lysaght.] I am informed by Mr. Garlick that the Commission have nenr had those deputies' books that were produced at the Inquest. I now ask for the deputies' rPport book oi t J1e 19th of July, 1902, to see whether there is any entry io it Ly William Nel<on. 26060. lfis l!onc1·.l What was clone with that book? 26061. Mr. Wade.] Every book that was in eYidence at tl,e Inquest was kept in the Court-house at Wollongong until the Commission opened, with the exception of the ventilation book and the colliery plan. Permission was given for both those to be takC'n back to the colliery. My recollE'ctiQll is that, before l lefttbe Court will rememuer that I was away from Wollongong the last day-before I left, which was on a Tuesday, I hnnded in to whoe,·er was at the desk every book that was put in at thP. Inquest. Something l1as gone wrong with those books. The Court will remember ibat some days a.go some books were asked for at Da.rlingburst, and it was found that they were not in ; and a mE'ssage was sent to Wollongong, and the books were found at the Court-house. If the deputies' reports were not among them, they must have been left down at Wollongong. 26062. (By direction of the Commission, the Secrelary telegraphed to the Police Magistrate at Wollongong rPgarding these book". Later on, a reply was received forwarding a number of ptinted books belonging to Mr. \-Vade; but the clE>putie~' report books referred to were not among them.) 26063. 1.lf r. Wadi'.] Q. Did ibo~e books go back to the mine 1 A. I do not think they did. 26064. (Several Lundles of deputies' reports, torn from the deputies' report books, were handed to Mr. Lysaght, who looked th rough them.) 26065. Jl/r. Lysa7ht.] There is no report here for the 19th of July, Your Honor. 26066. Q. Now, about this inspecti.Pn by Hay on the 19th of July, you have r ead Nelson's report of the 19 th of ,July 1 A. Yes. 26067. Q. You see there is no mention in that of his having been in either of the hick headings 1 A. He has been in the No. l back heading. 26068. Q. He bas bf'en in the :No. 1 district: show rue where there is any mention of his having been in cit her of the back l1cadings 7 A. There is only one back her.cling. 26069. Q. Show me where there is any mention of his ha·dng Leen in either of the he:idiogs 1 A. Re may have been up iu lhe beadings. 260i0. Q. You read what is there, and show nm 1 A. Yes, I have read it. . 26071. Q. Then what is it7 A. He mentions ~o. 1 Right, and it is No. 1 Right right up to the facP. 26072. Q. P erhaps I bad better read it:-"Entere<l mine at 8.15 a.m. and visited 2nd Right front and back hf'a.dings; thence to 5~b Right rope ron.d, and to a few working places in 5th Right in No. 1 Ri,ght, and found same free from inflammable gases, and in good or<ler; thence to wl1cre dam was put in to keep back water from shaft and No. 1 workings, and to ventiln.ling furnace, which ,\as being 1epaired, and arranged with furnace-men to light on the 20th, and ca.me outside at 12·l5p.m., and left mine atsame.-\V. Nelson." Now, do not you see that there is no mention there of their having been up No. 1 back heading 7 Well, Hay told me at the time on ihe Sunday mornin~ r.fter he ha.cl made the examin::i.tion - - [Intf.~·rnpted]. 26073. Q. You have already told us that what Hay sairl ti) you was th::i.t be had been in No. 1 Right; you did not s:iy anything a.bout No. 1 l1eadings 1 A. Up to the face. 26074. Q. You did not say that even to Ur. Walle 1 A. I meant up to the No. 1 heading. 26075. Q. I put it to you a.gain : When rilr. 1'ade a.skc<l you what Hay had said, yon sa.id that be told yon that lie had been in ~o. 1 Rigl1t ; but you did not say a word about his having been up to tbe face 1 A. I meant up to the face. 26076. Q. Now, Hay has told us what be told you; do you swear that Ilay told you that he had been lo the face of tbc back heading 1 A. Mr. Ray lold me that he had ueen up at the faces of the No. 1 h eadi ng. 26077. Q. Do you sweat· that )Ir. Ila.y told you that Le bad been to the face of the back heading 1 A. He told me he had been at the faces of the No. 1 hcaclin". 2607S. Q. I \Vant to ttll you tbat Ho.y ho.s told us aJteady what he told you - - [ !nt,rrupted]. 26079. ;_lb-. Wade.] I object to that ; it 1s a clear insi11uaiion to the witness to mislead the witness and intimidate him. 26080. His llonor.] I do not lhiuk l\lr. L) Saj?ht means it to intimidate the witncs.". 26081. Jfr. Lysagltt.] Q. Do your swear thaL Hay told you tba.t he had been with Nelson up to the face of the back heading 'I A. I will swear lhat )fr. Hay tolJ me that he had Leen up to the faces of the No. 1 headings. 260 2. Q. I a~k you - <li<l 1\f r. Ilay tell you that he hn<l been up to the faces of the No. l hfacl ings, front and back 1. A. He ncnir mentio1H;d front or back: he said, "the hen.d ing~," the No. l headings. 26083. lhs lf01w·.l (2. But was that referring to the No. 1 h Pndings or the headings in the No. 1 district 1 A. That would be referring to the two headings, the front nnd back: although he would not f'.ay " fron t and back," he would understand by that that I would kno(v what he meant by "up to the face of the No. 1 headings." · 26084.

1 .•

•

783

lritne.ss-W. Rogers, 11 March, 1903.

26084. M1· . .Robertson.] Q. Are there any other headings in this district 1 A. Well, to the right and left there would be. 26085. Q. Where 1 A. There is the 2nd Right, as mentioned in the report. 26086. Q. That is in lhc 2nd Right district 1 A. Yes. · 26087. Q. But when he said that be had been to the face of the No. 1 heading.;, what diJ you undersland by that 1 .Ll. That they had been up there e:rn.ruining at the face to see if they could find gas anywhere. 26088. Q. Did you say that there were no other heading~ but the t~·o 1 A. There are only those two t11ere -Morris' cut-through and those two beadings. 26089. Q. And therefore there wa.s no reason why he shonlJ pirticularise 1 A. No, there was no rea.son why he should say front or back: he would know that I would know what be meant by saying "I have been up to the face of the No. 1 headings." 26090. M1·. Lysagltt.] Q. Was there any reason why lie should go to the No. l headings 1 A. Tl:iat is the highest point of the mine ; and he would go there lo see if he could find gas anywhere. 20031. Q. Can you account for Mt'. Nelson's not having mentioned in his report anything about the beadings of the No. l i A. No; I do not see why he ditl not .: I clo not see why he should do it: he would not do it. 26092. Q. You see he bas mentioned other l1eadiogs, but there is no mention of the No. l Jrnadings 1 A. He has mentioned tho No. l before: supposing he said he ha<l been in the No. 1, but did not mention the No. 2, we would not have known that he had been in t.he No. 2. 26093. Q. Do not you see that he says he has been in a few places in No. 1 Right; meaning that there are places in the No. l Right and that he had been to those places, not that he bad been in No. l main level at all; but that he had been in the places in the No. l district. Now, do you know that it is shown that Nelson was up as far as the jig wheel the day before the l!>th of July 1 A.. I <lo not know th'.lt he mentions that in that book. 26094. Mr. Wade.] Two days before. . 26095. Mr. Lysaght.] Q. On Thursday, the litb of June 1 A. Oh, yes. 26096. Q. Now, it is clear that, he having been up a-s far as the jig wheel on Thur.sday, the l 7th of June, there would be no need for him to go up t here again on Saturday 1 11. The circumstances were different altogether. 26097. Q. Why 1 A. Because the furnace was off: the furnace was being repaired. 26098. Q. Can you tell me why Mr. Hay should tell you he was up there 1 A. He told me he was up there along with other places : be di<l not mention that plo.ce without mentioning other places as well. They were in the highest places in the mine. 26099. Q. Do you mean to tell me that you could mention any other places that he <li<l mention to you 1 .LI.. I could not exactly tell you the number; but I believe it was St.afford's and Gill's ganhon bords. 26100. Q. Do you know that there is no mention there (iu Mr. Nelson's report book) of having been in Stafford's and Gill's gaonon bords 1 A. I do not know tho.tit is mentioned; but I believe he told me tba~ he had been up thf:l'e. 26101. Q. Can you remember any other places that he tokl you 1 A. No. 25102. Q. Why did not you tell us at the In1ues~ th:.it th~ b1.ck and front he:ding~ of No. l h:id bzeu inspected nine days before the disasted A. I could not remember everything. · 26103. Q. Were not you pressed at Lhe Inquest concerning when the back and front h ead ings· were inspected; and did yon then say a single ,word about Hay being there ·? 26104. lt,fr. Wade.] No: it was abottt :Morrison he was nskeJ. 26105. To Jfr. Lysaght. J .A. I could not say that I di<l. 26106. lilr. Lysaght.] Q. Did you say anything about H ay having been there 1 A. No: I do not know that I did; and I did not remember n.t the time: I did not think about it: but, as for knowing that he had been there, I knew then and I know it now. 26107. Q. Did not you know at the Inquest that gas bad been found by )fr. AtkiusoH in the hack heading 1 A. I was with him at the time. 26 lOS. Q. Did not you know that Morrison had stated t.hat be had not examined up the back heading 7 A. Yes. • 26109. Q. Did not you know that at Woll ongong it was being set up, and that the jury found as a fact: that the explosion originated either in the back heading or along from the back heading towards Aitken's place 7 J1. I did not know that the jury - 26110. Mr. Wade.] He did not know then what the jury would find. 26111 His Honor.] Mr. Lysaght, I do not think tbere is any use in asking him what his knowledge of the jury's verdict was; because, at the time he gave his evidence, he cou ld not tell what the jury would say. You are asking him w]1y Le did not make mention of sometliing at the time he was being examined: and that was all Jong before the jury came to a conclusion. 26112 . .;lfr. Lysaght. J Q. Do not you know, Jilr. Rogers, that you were pressed for inforwalion as to when the front and back headings La<l been examined; and you could not tell us7 A. I knew that Hay had been there, at the time of the Inquest; and if I had thought about it I would hM·e called Hay there to give evidence; but I forgot all about it until afterwards. 26113. Q. Now yon admit being pressed for a statement a!'\ to when you knew th<J.t the back heading bad been examined, and you could not say : is not that so 7 A. Yes, I was pressed . 26114. Q. Although you were pn:ssed, it neYer then occurred to you to state that Hay~ had been there 1 A. No, it <lid not. 2611 5. Q. Was not Mr. H ay present at the Inqnf'st too 7 A. No. 26116. Q. Do you mean to tell me that he did n<>t attend the Court se-reral days duri11g the Inquest 1 A. No, l do not believe he did. 25117. Q. Did not you know that he attended there on some days 1 11. No, I do not belie,·e Mr. Hay was at the Inquest at all: I do not think he wa<>. 26118. (,). l\lr. Hay was living in the same house as your.self, I ti,ink 1 i!. No. 26119. (J. Not at this lime1 A . No. 26120. Q. He is a !'elation of yours 7 A. H e is married to an adopted daughter of mine. 26121. Q. And I think he does all your clerical work 7 A. Most of it. 26122. (J. Anrl you were in daily communication with Mr. Hal while the whole of the Inquest wl'!s on A, Well, no; well, perhaps - - [ lnte1-rupt~dJ. :2(31 :23.

784 ll'itnes,;-W, Rogers, 11 March, 1903. 26123. Q. Now will you tell me when it did occur to you to remember that Hay had been up this back he:i.cling 1 A. Oh, 1,y talking about i t. . . . 26124-. Q. When diJ it til'St occu1: to you 7 A. lie an:i I ,vere h a ving a talk about i t; and be sa~d to m e, "Do you not rem ember so-and-soi"; an 1, of cou1s", I said "I do." 26125. Q. Well then, H ay pu t i t into your mind ab:>U~ h :s having been up there7 .t1. No. . 26 126. Q. Now, you told me thn.t H ay aske,l yv'>l. did not you r e member so-:i.nd-so1 JI. By talking about this, I r emembered ab:>Ut bis asking m e if lie coulJ go; and th en I rememhe ri>d his t elling me on the Sand,iy morning a.bout what they h1d seen and wha t they ha1 not se"?n-:m the S :rnday. 2Gl27. Q. When w.1s t hi-17 A. A long tiu,e after the inq uPst. 2612 .... Q. \Vas it after thi-; Commis:;ion sta r ted? A. N o, it was beforr, I bt:'lien•. 26129. Q. N Jw, you liste n to m e : w,ts not it a.ft.er J ohnny Morrison g Lve evid en ce before tliis Commission that he bad n ~ver b:ien up this b .1ck heading1 11. I cl o not think it waro. 25130. Q. Was not the first occasion thit it occurrcJ to you to set up that H ay hacl l.,em up these back heaclin0'3 o.fter ~Iot·rison had been to D..1rlinghurst 1 A. I ne,·er set i t u p : i t WM H ay himself that did it. 0 2'3 I 31. Q. And was not it n.ft r Morrison had mn,de the udmi~sion tha.t thos~ ba.ck be tdi flgi Lad not b een f>xn.m ined by him 1 A. I wo ulJ not sweat· it was. 26 l 3~. Q. \Vill you s .\'ear it w J.S not 1 JI. I woc1 Id not s,Year w bet he r it was uf ter or before : I am not goincr to swear a thin,., I am not su re about. 26d'3. Q. Now, just taking you on to tint 1iipc : who, do you say, hinded th!l.t pipe to you i A. The unde rground-manager. 261:J L Q. \Vho is that 7 A. Mr. Hotcltki~. 26 l:35. Q. Where did he ha nd H to you 1 A. In the office at the mine. 26136. Q. WhPn 'I JI . I suppose :i. good while after t.be accident. 2Gl37. Q. D id yon make any i nquiry to sec to whom the p ipe bclongPd 1 11. No. 2Gl38. Q. For al l you know, it m ight hn,·c belonged to any '£om, Dick, or H a rry 7 A. So far as I know: I might ha ,·e t:iken it per·haps lo - - [ lrit,rr11ptetl]. 26 1:39. Q. L et me ask you - - [l ntcrrllJJtet!]. 26140. Jfr. WadP..] I cla im t.hat :\Ir. Ilng ... r.s shou lJ he ..i.llowed to continue Lis ans"' er. 26141. W,tn•s•.] l was g:,i11g to say that I di I not take i t to nnybocly to inquire, any of the relations of the men ,vho were working n•·ar thi ,; pla.ce: ] di<l not make inquiry at all upon that point. 26142 . .Jf1·. L!Jsagltt.] Q. Yon know i t is 1,upposcc..l to lta\'e uelongf'd to one of the Jonrs'1 A. Y es, it might : J ones or Thomas : it mig h t be belonging to one of them : I know they s·nokcd. . 26143. Q. It wa:; your supposition that, the l'ipe having bt'en found underneath a certain 1,ratt ice cloth, it bolonged to t he men ,yh'.> were wo, king in that pl:-tce 7 11 . I thought it might \;e belonging to them: I woult.l not swear it belong...d t o the m, b ee \use th e ra were wheele rs and others going a long there. 261 44. Q. D id you go and ask th eir relati,·es whether they could r ecogn ise that pipe 1 A. No. 26115. Q. So that you produce that pipe !,ere; nnd , for all yo.u know, it m igh t never ha,·e been in the mine: it migh t !tarn be'.or,g, d lo any p ~r rnn 1 A. 1t was g h' en lo me ; and I rn.,v the pl ace where it was picked op. 26 146. Q. I s Mr. lTolcbkis here to gi,·e o,·idence of tho finding of the pipe 1 .1. No: he showed me the place where he found it, and s howed me ho w i t wn s covered, a.nd all. 26 147. Jfr. Br1ice Smith.] I ol~ject to wlw.t he tolJ you. · 26 148. 11fr. Wade.] It is not what he was t old, bu t wh u.t he was shown. 26149. Jfr. Bruce S11iitl1.] I t is the sanrn thi ug. 26 150. llis Honor.] Q. Re took you to the place 1 A. Y es. 26 15 1. Q. And then he 1,howed you som£:th ing 1 11. Yes, he s howed me the ashes, n.nd Le showed rue a bit of can,·ac; t hat was lying o n the pipe. · 26152. Jlis llo11Gr. J T hat is what he told you. 26153. ,1h JJruce Smith.J E xactly; and to show him i~ to tell hiru, really. 26154. llis llon•.r.J St!eing Lite thing, on ly is wl,3.t 1\fr. R og~rs can swen.r to: he saw tbe place. 26155. Jh. Lysa,1ht.] (1, 1h<>re is some dispute us to the dustiest part of the M ount K embla Mine--

f •

,. }'

[ lrdt?TU}Jted]. 2611)6. ;l,fr. Wade.] I ol,ject to Lhis; that i:, not cor1ect; there is no dispute. 26157. Hi:s Honer.] There arc tlilfrrcnt account,, sl ightly varying accounts, as to the dustiest par t of M ount K e ml,k 26153. M r . Ly;:;ngltl,l Q. G i,·e n1c the t hree du1,tiest pbces, in your 0p inion, in R eml>la. Mine, before the disaster ; pick out the three 7 A. I do not know tl1:it any were , ery dusty; I di) not know that th(!re were any three th:i.t I could mention t.lt at were more dusty than others. 2G 159. Q. H a,·e you forgot Len tLe cn-iclence 0 i,·en at th e infJuest 1 A. Th e No. 6 Right i and,· perha.ps, the 4th L eft would be o ne of t hem . 26160. Q. You say the -!:th Lert woulJ be one of tltPm ; where are the othe r two 1 A. The N o. 6 Right in the Shaft District ; and the 5th Right in the No. l D ist r:ct. 26 161. Q. Js that a ll 1 A. Tho3E' arc t ho three. 2616:?. Q. Now, wliat is yo'Jr idea of a dusty ro1d: th:it is t o rny, h ow many inches of dust o n t he ftoor would you call a dusty ro:i:.11 J1. Perhu.ps 2 or 3 inches thick. 26 163. Q. Then I m ay t n.ke it that t he 5th Right and the 4th L eft in the No. 1 District, a nd the No. 6 Right in the Shaft District, were places a ,·naging about 2 to 3 inches of dust on the road i A . No: I would not say that that was there. 2616'1. Q. Well, l to 2 inches of dust on tl1e road 7 / J. It mig h t be t hat in one placP, and there would be nothing in the n ext. 26165. Q. H owever, there would be some accumulation of dust, b ttwecn 1 anc..l 3 inches d eep, along the roads you mrntionecl 1 A. W ell, th:1.t wo11 lJ be 1 ~ inch. 261 GG. Q. And no waterin;? "·as clone a'ong those-roads, apart fro m the natura l dampness that would come from the mine 1 JI. Y cs; the1·c was watering clone on the 4th L eft. 261 G7. Q. I am speaking of before the cli:,n.<;ter 7 A. B efore the cli~aster, water was taken out. of Stafford's gannon uorJ out of a swa.llow, and Gill's gannon hol'd out of a swallow, and put o n to the 4th Left. :l61G8. Q. Do you know tbis of your own knowleclre1 JI. Yes. ., 26169, ·

...

I \

,-=------------------------------------785

'I'

WitntSs-W. Rogers, 11 March, 1903.

·26169. Q. How long before t he disaster was it lhat this was <lone 7 A. Ob, it was done-- [ I nterrupted]. 26170. Q. Did not you say this at the inquest, page 37,-" I <lo not know the names of the men who watered the road; because they were rmployecl by tlte contractor "; ancl, higher up, "Nobody was employed actually for watering the dust"-- [!nten·u1ited J. 26171. Mr. Wade.] Q. Read the next line, plt>as~1 I ohject to this. The next line says "one of the men is named O'Donovan. " 26172. Mr. Lysagltt.] Q. Then, lower down-" The watering of the mi11e is not left to the contractor who hauls the coal ; the men who do the watering n.re employed by the contractor, ancl paid by him ; tho . watering is done by any man the contractor likes to send; the Company has control over the man O'Donovan I have mentioned, and can clischarge him ; the contra.ct includes the haulage of coal, the water-ha.ling, and t he repairing of the mine as well." Now, did you say this-" I knew before the disaster that coal-dust lying about the roads, and sides, aud roof, was dangerous " 1 A. Yes. 261 73. Q. Now you are watering the mine systematically, roof, and side~, o.nd floor1 A . Yes. 26174. Q. You spr:iy the water all over the mine 1 A. Yes. 26 175. Mr. Robertson.] Q. You bave stopped watering the roof 1 A. Yes, we have had to stop watering t he roof, because it was bringing the roof down. 261 76. Jfr. Lysaght.] Q. But you pow find it necessary to water the sid es and the flood A. W e do not do so much now as we did jast after t he disaster. 26177. Q. But still you do find it necessary to do it 1 A. Not so much. 26178. Q. But you do it 1 A. Well , in some places, yes. 26 179. Q. That being so-- [Tnterrupted]. A. We do not water as much as we did in the beginning. 26180. Q. Do you consider that the appliances you h:vl before the disa~ter were sufficient to do all the watering necessary 1 A. Yes, we did then. 26 181. Q. Do you think it now1 A. Yes, I thought it. 26182. Q. But in' view of what has ho.ppenecl 1 A. Y cs, I think it also now. 26183. -Q. That th~re is no need now for these new appliances 1 11. Yes. :?6184. Q. That is your opinion. A. Y e~. • 26185. Q. Aud that, iu your opinion, the new appliances are superfluous 1 A. I made them because it was suggested to me that they should be made. 26186. Q. Bnt you do not think them a.tall necessary 7 A. No. 26187. Q. And you do not think K eU1bla. Mine requires watering : you do not think it was necessary 1 A. I do not think it was. 26188. Q. And, if you had your way, you would not water iL i A.. I expect I will stop it irgain soon; because it is naturally damp. - 261~9. Q. Now, I want to know whel,her the openings were stopped round the 35-acre goa£ 1 A. They were blocked through the falls falling. 26190. Q. But were any stoppings built into those openings~ A. There were stoppings in some of them. 26191. Q. But in the majority of them I take it the Air was allowed to scale through i A. Yes. 26192. Q. So that I would be safe in my ing that one hn.lf of the openings in that goaf would not have any stoppings 1 A. Well, perhaps, one- half of them-- [ lnlernipted]. 26193. Q. Do not you see that intake :iir passed these openings, and went on to the men 1 A. The intake air ,vas not goin~ that way. 26194. Q. Yes it was1 A. No, they do not have an intake airway that way. 26195. (). Do not you see that the air going up this da.ylight ht:ading was going past the various openings along t he ea.st and north side of the goaf that ha.cl no stoppings in them 1 A. Yes, the intake air was coming this way (north). 26196. Q. Now, in your opinion, is it, good management to have an intake air passing an open goaf 1 26197. Afr. Wade.] H e does not say that the goaf was open. 26198. :Afr. Lysag!tt.] Q. Were there not openings along the 5th Righti A. Y es, there might be one or two. 26199. Q. If there were one or two, it might be passing an open goaf1 A. Yes. 26200. Q. Then: it is good management to h:we intake air passing an open goaf 1 A. I think so, in that case. 26201. Q. And you believe, then, in ha\'ing air passing a goaf carried on to the men 1 A. Yes; not through the goaf, mind you. 26202. Q. No, not through the goaf, but passiug it. Now, do not you know that the goaf had an accumulation of Llack-damp in it1 A. Nothing to be of any harm to a.nyone. 26:203. Q. And you know there was an accumulation thcra 1 A. There was a little. ·26204. Q. But you know that a fter the disaster it used to put out the lights 1 A. If you put them down on the Boor, it would. 26205. Q. Do you not see that the intake air passing tl1at goaf might sweep out the black-damp on to t he men 1 A. There was nothing there to do any ha.rm. 26206. Q. Then you stick to the opinion that it is good manage ment to have intake air passing an open goaJ1 A. It just depends on what is in the goaf. 26207. Jfr. Robertson.] Q. Do you really mean that it is good management; or that it may be safe under certain circumstances 1 A.. I thought it was safe under the circumstances ; that is what 1 mean. SP,eing that we found nothing fl.t any time to be of any danger to anybody, neithet· black damp, nor any gas at all. We never saw any gas there. 26208. Q. But, as a general practice, you do not mean to say that it Le, good m:magement-as a general th ing 1 26209. M1·. Lysa.qltt.] That is just what he did say. 26210. A. (To Mr. Robertson): Not as a general thing, no. 26211. Jb·. Lysaght.] Q. Now, it is a fact, I tliink, that the intake air nlong the main level depended 11pon being kept in order hy a numlier of single canv:is doors 1 A. No; not by a numl,er of si ngle canvas <loors. 262 12. Mr. Ri!chie.] Q. H ow do you know that there W,\S no accumulation of gas in that goaf which might have been dangerous 1 A. Because we had never seen any tbert>, either in the falls, or the headings, or the bords, or any where. 26213. 29-5 G 16825

786 Witni•ss-W. Rogers, 11 :March, 1903. 26213. Q. But how do you know bow much of this black-damp that you did see was contained in that goaf1 ·, A. Oh, well, we knew there was not very much there. There was no black-damp to do any harm to anybodJ,

We considered that safe. 26214. Q. But tbe evidence goes to show tlmt the go~f its~lf wn.c; no~ ex~m~necl beyond. the edge of the fall 1 A. Well, as far as pracLicable, as far as we could get mto 1t to exam1~e 1t, 1t was examined. 26215. Q. Would it not have been po~sible for a very large accumulation of black-damp to have been on top of t.he fall 1 A. No· it would ne\·er lie on t lie top of the fall; it would be on t he very bottom, amongst the stones. 26216. Q. Were tl;e inner workings of that goaf higher than the airways on both sides of it l . .A. No. 26217 . Q. Were thP.y lowed A. The air trn.velling-the workings woul<l Le lower. There L<; a fall ~ro~ t he intake airway down towards tho No. 1 (from east to west). . . 26218. Q. The inner part of that goaf woulJ be lower than the intake or return au·wa.ys on both sides oft~~ goaP A. Yes. . . . . . 26219. Q Then I snppose you do know that it would be qmte possible under those circ.ums~a~ces for a very great quantity 0£ black-damp to lie there, if the workings in the goaf were lower than the airways 1 A. T~e bla.ck-cfamp would hase a. tendency to go out into the return. . . 26220. Q. Do you know that the specific gravity of Lhc black-damp would cause 1t to have a tend~ncy to h e down in the bottom of the goGf, as you have yourFelf said 1 26221 .M.r. Robertson.] I do not think he s~id tha.t. • . : . 26222. Q. Can you tell me what is tbe relative height ~f the goaf to the surrounding au-way 1 ~· Th~t. \S the top of the fal l. 26223. Q. No; is there a. fall from the cross-cut heading towards the No. 1 return airway, a gradual f!l:i\ 1 A. Yes; that is the way t he water ran. 26224. Q. Then the outlet for the black.damp would be by the 4th Right. 26225. illr . Ritchie.] Q. The return ail'way would be the lowest part i .A. Y es; there is wate.r running O_t\t of the 3rd Right or the 4th Right now. · 26226. Q. Did you ever discover any gas, any carbonic acid gas, on the east side of the goaf 1 if. No. 26227. Q. You never saw :1ny black-damp there 7 A. N o. · 26228. Q. Did you see any black-damp on the north si<le of the goaf 1 . .A. No. · 26229. Q. May I take i t then that the only part where you did see this black-damp was at the entrance to the 4th Rigbt 1 .A. Just at the entrance to the 4th Right. ,26230. lrfr. Robert$On.] Would not the 35-acre goat be consolidated and periectly firm, the pillars having been withdrawn and the roof fallen in- would not it be consolidated i 11. Yes, it would be. I reckoned tµ at it was solid, and that nothing could come out. . 26231. Q. Can you concei\-e of any space at all, or any pocket 1 A. No; you cannot get in at all. 26232. Q. Could you get your little finger in the centre of the goaf1 A. In the centre of the goaf1 No, I do not believe I could; it would be that solid wi.th the weight and pressure of the stone. It would be so solid that you could not get anything in. 26233. Q. Were you at t!le Vl'on Colliery in North Wales when a road was driven 500 yards through I!, goaf 1 A . Yes. 26234. Q. Do you r?member what was the condition of that when the drive was put in 1 A. It was ti~hter and harder to <lri ve ·than what had been driven through the coal. . 26235. Q. Wa,s it watertight 1 A . It was watertight. 26236. J.lfr. Lysaght.] Q. You say that the goaf would settle so tightly as to be watert ight; the sam~ thing would apply to the 35-acre goaf right throughout 1 A. Yes. 26237. Q. So tbat, at the time of the extraction of the last pil lar of the 35-acre waste at the 4th Right, ali the surrounding goaf had settled solidly n.n<l tightly? A . Y f'S, ,·ery solidly. 26238. Q. Now, you know that the a ir going up the main level'depended upon single canvas doors between the front and 1.mck heading3 1 A . No. 26239. Q. Look at lhe -!th Right here [7Jointing to the plan]-single canvas doors~ A. No. 26240. Q. What, <lou ble doors 1 A. Double doors. 262-!l. Q. But look here1 A . That ma.y not be correct.. 26242. Q. Do you see this" C" at the 4th Right 1 A. Yes. 26243. Q. D o you mean to swe'.\r that there were two canvas doors between the front and back beading at the 4th .Right 1 A. Yes, 2624:4. Q. You saw them there 1 A. Yes. 262-15. Q. How far apart ? A. Not Yery far. 26246. Q. H ow far? .tl . They might be 4 or 5 yards apart. 26247. Q. And there were double door.;; at the 4th Right 1 A. Yes. 26248. Q. And this plan is not correct 1 A. YC3; showing only a single door. It might be right a.t the t ime of the accident. 26249. Q. But i am spen.king of Lhe time of the accidentj woukl this be correct at the time of the accidenti A. No. 26250. Q. There were double <loors7 A. Yes. 26251. Q. At the 4th R ight? A. Yes. ~6252. Did you s~e the plan prepared by Mr. "\Varburt~n, showing the ventilation by colouring the intake and return au·ways 1 A. After the <li:.~iste1· 7 26253. Q. Yes 1. A. Yes. 26254. Q. A plan showing what the condi tion of t he ventilation was at the time of t he disnsted A. Yes, showing the way the air travelled. · 26255. Q.. Now, do you see that the plan that he prepared, showing the ventilation, shows a single door at the ~th Right 1 il . Yes ; perhaps that is tl:e way it was after the accident. · 262JG. Q. I meo.n at the time of the accident? A. Then tbo.t woul<l be wrono-, P erhaps that was taken from Mr. Oarlick's plan .[meaning tlte plan in iise by the Gonrniission, u litltog1·aphecl 1•eduction of the Colliery plan, prepared by the ..illmes Department]. 26157. Mr. R obe1·tson.J ·what do you mem by saying that perhaps it wa..<, like that after the accident; were not they all blown away 1 i l. There used to be two canvas doors there before the accident· 1 will swear that. 26~~8. (). But this was supposed. to have b een prepared under your supervisiO'll 1 A. Yes. 26 ... o9. 1.lh. Lysaght.] Q. Why did not you alter that; you see there is only 0\1.e "0" there i .A. Yes. 26260.

I '

7S7 H'i' ,i, ,s -W. Rogers, 11 March, Hl03.

!\32o0.

Q. Why did not you put two C':; there 1 A. Wdl, there onghL to lie two canvases ther<'. 2626 1. Q. And on the day of tho dis1ster there wo11l<l lie two c·m\·as doors there before the disaster 1 A. I woµld not say. I saw them there before the disaster. 26262. Q. How long before 1 A. I could not say how loni. 26263. Q. Will you tell me what the need was for two canvas door.sin a small distance like that between tlie two headings; what -was the distance 1 A. Sixteen yartls. 26264. Q. What was the need of the two doors 1 A. ~o as to make the intake air go up the No. 1 straighp, and hot go through the return. • . 26265. Q. And would not a single door do that 1 A. Not as well. ~62.66. Q. So .that you belie\-e in double (bors between the returns ancl intakes 1 11. Not al ways. 262'67. Q. But you believe in having two canvas doors there 1 11. Yes. 26268. Q. And do you know that you aro the only witness who has ever stated that there were two canvas doors there; do not you know that Morrison and the other witnesses ha\·e stated that there was only one 1 J. At the time of the accidenL 1 ~6269. Q. Yes 1 A. There used to be two there, I will swear. Did l\Ir. L<titch say there was only one i 26270. Mr. Wade.l Ho was not asked. 2~27i. Mr. Lysaght.] Q. Now, do you say there were two canvas doors on the 4th Right rope road 1 A. Y es. 2'6272. ·Q. And two canvas doors on the 4th Right travelling ro:id 1 A. Yes, and four or five lower down. · 2'o273. Q. And do you say there were doul,le doors along the 5th Right between the two headings 7 A. One door there. · 2'6274. Q. So that , all -the time that the door would he open with sk ips passing through, the ~entilation would be deranged 7 .A . No, it would noL. 262 75. Q. Why would it not1 A. This return would go into the No. l. 262Z6. Q. If the door oetween the hvo headings on the 5th Right were open, would the return air go down the No. 1 main level to the mouth, or would it go down the No. 1 rnain heading and on to the men 7 .A. It was a balance ; it would not do anything at all. It was that way balanced that the door was not r equired, as far as that· goes. . M277. A. I am asking you, if this door between the headings on the 5th R ight were left open, would t'ne return air go on to the main level, or would the intake air go down the return~ A. No, it would not; i t was tb~t . way balanced. 26278. Q. You say it was so evenly balanced it woul<l not go either way 1 A. No. 26279. Q. Now, you see that there is a single canvas door outbye of the cut-through near Morri::;' place 1 A. Ye~i. 26289. Q. That is lo drive the air right up the back heading? A. Yes. 26281. Q. So that, if that single door ~ecame deranged, the afr would not go up along the back heading at all, but would short.cut along towards Purcell's place 1 A. No; I woul<l uot swear there were double doors there. 26282. Mr. Robertson.] Q. '\V'as there a door at all? Was it a canvas door or a fixed canvas 1 A. A hanging canvas. 26283. Mr. I,ysaght.] Q. Not a fixture? A . Not a fixture. 26234. M1· Robertson.] Q. A flying screen 1 A. A tlying screen. 2'6285. Jlfr. Lysaght.] Q. But since the disaster I think yon have had cloulile doors put along all the main intakes 1 A. No; not all of them. 26286. Q. You got some special rule ma<le to co,·er double doors since the disaster 1 Ye$, I am busy putting them in. 26287. Q. You are busy now 1 A. Yes. I h:ixc not got a cloor where you pointed out last. I have got c.anvas there still, on the bottom there. [ Referring to bottom of jig.] 26288. Q. Now, I want to ask yon a question about the appuintmerH of that deputy, Biggers; do you know that Biggers has admitted that, until be was appointed deputy, he had bad no experience whatever of gas 1 A. He bad never seen any. 26289. Q. You knew that 1 A. H e told me so. 26290. Q. You knew it at the time you appointe<l l1im 7 A. Yes. 2'6291. Q. Did you also know that he had never used a, safety-lamp 1 .tl. No, I <lid not know that he had never used a safety-lamp 26292. Q. But you admit, now, appointing as a deputy, whos<) duty i t woaltl be, of coursP, to look for gas, a man who bacl never seen gas 1 A. I asked him questions before I appointed him. 26293. Q. You admit thn.t yolt diJ appoint such a ma.n 1 A. [ tlid, after asking him questions. 26294. Q. Now, do not you . know that a.ll l3iggen;' experience was g,dnccl in Kembla, where you say gas has never heen found 1 L1 . I bel iev~ he has been in other mines. 26295. Q. D o not you know that Biggers admittcJ to m3 th1t, ou~sicle Kembla mine, he bas not ha<l any experience at all 1 11. I clo not know. 26296. Q. Has not be been working at Kemula. for twcl ve or fourteen year.s 1 A. Yes. 26297. Q. And yon set up that Kembla is a non-gassy mine 1 A. Yes. 26298. Q. Now, if he has been working for twelve ot· fourteen yca1·3 at Kembla-he is a young n1an, comparatively speaking, yet-where did he get his experience of ga.,;? 11. H e might l1ave got it somewhere else. 26299. Q. You cannot tell me where be di<l get it 7 A. ~o. 26300. Q. So far as yon know, Biggers had no experience of gas 1 A . Only by reading. 2630 l. As far as you know, Biggers, when you appointed him, h :l.'1 no actual experience of gas 1 A. No, except by reading. 26302. Q. I think you also ::i.pproved of tho shot-firers opening their ]n.mps to fire the shols1 A. Yes. 26303. Q. You approved of tlrn.t practice 1 .11. If it is s1fo to ft1·e a shot--[ lnterrupted]. 26304:. (2. I am not a.rguing- -l / nf£1'rtt7iled]. 26305. ,'Jtfr. Wade.] I would ask yo11r IIonor's ruling on this point; thC' witnes.3 is going to gi ve an answer to the queslion; an<l he should be allowed to finii.;h it. 26306. Hi's Hono1·.] Ho ought to l>e allowed to express his op:nion. 26307.

788 lfitne.ss-W. Rogers, 11 March, Hl'l3.

26307. Witness.] I say that, if a place was safe to fire a ~h ot, if he examined th e place, and if he thoughtt it was safe to fire a. shot, then it was safe to open the lamp there. . 26308 J.h. Lysaght.] Q. Thn.t is not what I asked you . ask you now:--do you appro~e .of. the practice of the shot firer openina the safety-lamp to fire the fuse with the naked hght 1 A. Yes; if it is safe to fire 0 a shot at all, I approve of tho opening of the lamp to do it. . . . . . 26309. Q. Then you do not think it necessar y to have any special means of firmg a shot 1 A. If it is safe to fi re a shot I would say it is safe to open a lamp to do so. 26310. Q. A~cl i t was being done at Kemula with your full knowleqge.1 . .LI.. Yes; until I got lamps to do it in other ways. 2631 1. Q. And is it being done at the present tirue1 A. No. 26312. Q. Now, do you know that we have evidence h er~ t ba~ shots were fired at Kembla with the naked light without any watering being done 1 A. I do not believe it. . . 26313. J/r. Wade.] You ha-:1 better find the passage, fir.st, Mr. L ysaght. You will find you are mistaken aaain. The evidence wa.s that the place was damp where that took placf'. 26314. Mr.' Lysaght.] D o you know whether Mr. Littlejohn made an y report about the Kembla disaster1 A. No, not to my knowledge. . . . . 26315. Q. Do you know that he was inspectrng 1 A. I saw him there after the accident; I <lid n ot know that he made an inspection. 26316. Q. Now, do you kn ow that l\Ir. Atkinson h as stated that, in l1is opinion, it would be negligence not to waler K embla mine now; b u t; tbat, in his opinion, it was nut n egligence not to water it before t he disaster1 because the Yarious cfa.ngers of coa1-dust and such like were n ot then keenly before you 1 2631 7. Jfr. B1·uce Smith.] Does your H onor think t hat question is of any use-a question as t o whether h e knows that certain evidence has been gi,1en 1 D oes it matter whether be knows or not 1 26318. Eis Honor.] I suppose something is going to be fou nded upon it. 26319. Jfr. L ysaght.] I am going to fix him with the knowledge of t he dangerous conditions. 26320. Q. Did you know what quantity of dust was dangerous 1 A. Y es. 26321. Q. What quanlity was dangerous 1 A. If the road was dusty. 26322. Q. W hat quantity on the road 1 A ..Say I t inch of dust. 26·323. Q. Did you know that 1\lorrison bad not examined t hose back headings 1 A. Morriw n would not examine only the working places. 26324-. Q. You kne w that was his practice 1 A. That is the deputies' practice; to examine al1 working faces. 26325. Q. And who would examine the places not working, if the deputy did n9L 1 A. When the monthly examination was made, they would be examined. 26326. Q. What montbly exam ination 1 A . W hat w.e made as we went through t he work. 26327. Q. The monthly examination of the waste workings 1 A. They might be examined then. 26328. Q. Now, do yon say that you knew that the depu ty would not examine a place that was not being worked, and that the on ly time such a place would be examined would be during the monthly examination of the waste workings1 A. Ko, I do not mean to say that. 26329. Q. Tell me any other time such a place would be examined 1 A. Tbe underground-manager would go there and examine it; an•l perhaps I would go there and examine it. 26330. Q. When would the under-manager go there 1 A. Ob, on makiug his rounds. 26331. Q. But you had no rul e about it1 A. No, there wa.s no rule about it. 26332. .Jfr. Rite/tie.] Q. H ad you no stipulated time when such places as this would be examined 1 A. No. 26333. Q. Tben, in your opinion, i t was not necessary to examine at all 1 A. Ob, yps; just to see that it wa~ standing. 2633-1. Mr. Lysaght.] Q. You mean it was to see if there was any fall of the roofi A. Yes. 26335. Q. Then we may take it that the places uot being worked were not examined for gas 1 A. They were examined for everything. 26336. Q. Now, I want to ask you about some recommendations; d o you approve of Managers, and undermanagers, and deputies, and shotrfirers being certificated by examination 1 A. No. 26337. Q. You do not1 A . No. 26338. Q. Do you approve of :l.ny of them being certificated by exaruination 1 A. Yes. 26339. Q. Who - Managers 1 A. Not if they ha.ve a cer tificate of service. 26340. Q. I am not talking about that. I am asking you, do you approve of Managers bein g certificated by exa.minat.iou 1 A. Yes. 26341. Q. Then you make the restriction that, if they have cerlificatcs of ser vice, you do not think t hey should have to pa.c,s any examination 1 A. No. 26342. Q. That would apply to you, would it not 1 A. That would apply to me. 26343. Q. And, concerning under-managers, do you think they shou ld be certificated by examination 1 A. They are examined now; but, if they have been long enough in the service, I do not see that they should be. 26344. Q. If they have got service certificates, you <lo not think lhey should 1 A. No. 26345. Q. Do you think deputies should pass any examination 1 A. Ko; only an examination by the M anager. 26346. Q. And shot-firers? A. N o; only an examination by the M anager. 26347. Q. That is to say, you think the M anager is competent to examine any person for the position of dPputy or shot-firer 1 .11. Y es. 26348. Q. And yon have shown your competency by wLat you have done. 26349. ilfr. Wade.] I object to that. 2133~0. Hi~ llono,·l That is not a proper remark to make to the witness; it is very objectionable. 263.:>l. Witness.] Excuse mP, Your H onor, BiggPrs has proHid bis ability by gel t ing a second-class ce1·ti6cate. I h~ h~d a lot to do with him before I appointed him as a deputy; and I knew be was qualified for the pos1t1on, or else I would not have appointed him. 26352. Jfr. RitcMe.] Q. Do you regard a p erson who hn.s passed, and l1 as got a certiikate by exam ination, as a competent persnn 1 A. Yes.

ExaminaLion by Mr. B1 uce Smith :26353. Q. I understand you to say that you do not think that a deputy should be examined at all, e xcept by the Manager 1 A. Only by the Manager. 26354.

I f

....

789

Witness-W. Rogers, 11 ~!arch, 1903.

26354. Q. And do I under.'.ltand yon to say that the sort of examination you put Biggers through was sufficient, in your opinion, to qualify him as a deputy of a big miner A. In my opinion it was. 26355. Q. Although you knew, ns the res ult of your examination, lhat he had never seen gas in his life 1 A. Yes; I knew that when he saw it he woulJ know it. 25356. Q. And yo:.t knew that he had never· seen LLe effect of ga, upon a lamp in Lis life 1 A. I did not know that. 25357. Q. If. a man has nel'er seen gas, he would never have seen the effect c,f gac, upon the ligltt of a safetylamp ; you do not see gas, do you 1 A. No; he had never sPcn gas. 25358. Q. Aud you knew it, from what he told you 1 A. Y el'. 26359. Q. And you knew, therefore, that he had never seen the effect ()f g;is npon a L,mp 1 A. Yes. 26360. Q. Aud you considered that a sufficient ex•1.mination to qualify uim for the position of deputy 1 A. Yes. I a.sked him, "Suppose we went into a place whera there was gas, what woulJ. you expect to find" 7 and he told me what he would expect. 2fi361. Q. Theoretically he seemed t? know_it 1 A. Yes; theoretically lie seemed to know it. 26362. Q. Now, I want to take. you t~ the question of the fall in the 4Lh Riglit; 1 want to ask~ou whether you agree with what L eitch sa.tJ, that, in the 4th Right, his previous experience ha.cl l.iee.n that, as soon as the timlieL· wa'3 taken out, the roof fell, or fell th~ next mornina. That is what he told us7 A. Well, some 0 of it might fall. . 26363. Q. H e said that W<l.S his general experience wiLh reaard to the 4th Riaht, in tl1is goaf 1 A. Yes; 0 0 t hat is my experience. 26364. Q. Well, when you found a large area of roof hanging for a whole week, did that strike you as being uncommon, with regard to that part of the mine 1 A. No, not that part of the mine. 26365. Q. I am talking of that part of the mine; the pa.rt of the mine reached by the 4th Right 1 A. I diJ not tl.iink it was dangerous. 2G366. Q. I did not ask you that; you have bearJ me S'l.J what Leitch said was bis general experience with regard to the area reached by the 4th Right; and you say you agree wilh that. Now, I ask youdid it s'rike you as uncommon that a large area should have stood fur a whole week, was it uncommon 7 A. Not in a place of that kind ; it was not, uncommon. 26367. Q. What do you mean by "of that kind" 1 A. Baca.use there was a 30-yard pillar, a strong pillar, on tho outbye sidt>, between the 4th Right and the t ravdling road. 26368. Q. The pillar running p·arallel with the travelling road 1 A. Yes. 26369. Q. Was that the only ditfe1·ence between it and other parts 'I A. Yes; that wonld k eep it hanging longer than perhaps it would if that pillar had not been there. 26370. Q. That was the onlv difference 7 A. Yes. 26371. Q. And the knowlecige tho.t that was there caused you not to be surprised that it bung so long 7 ..4. Not to l,e surprised. 26372. Q. DiJ. you expect it might come down any <lay 1 A. Yes. 26373. Q. Did you make any differance in your rnanagemeut as to that part of the mine 1 A. No. 26374. Q. What had been your experience of the way in which the roof fell 7 Did it full all in one l,Jock, 01·, as Dr. Robertson s:1id, in dribs and drabs 1 A. The first fall would fall in small bits; and the second fall might fall perhaps in big Lloc:ks or hig flag;:. It is not always the same. 26375. Q. That bas been your experi1-nce 7 A. That is my experiencl'. (At 12·45 the Commission adjourned until 1·45.J ' I

AFTERNOON.

(On resuming at 1 ·4:5 p. m., Mr. W. R. Pratt attended to take shorthand notes of the ovidP.nce and proceedings.) JOHN 0. H. MING A YE was sworn, and examined, as under : -

Examination-in-chief by Mr. Bruce Smith: 26376. Q. What is your name 7 A. John C. H. :Mingaye. 26377. Q. What is your present position ? A . An::tly:1t ancl As -ayer to the Department of Mines. 26378. Q. You are the principal officed L1. In charge of the Chemical Branch. 26379. Q. What arc your qualifications or diplomas 7 LI. I am a Fellow of the Im,titute of Chemistry, Great Britain, ancl Ireland, and a F ellow of the Cbemical Society of L ondon. 26380. Q. How many years' experience ba,·c you bad at this special brnn~h of knowledge 7 A. Over twentyfour yeus. 26381. (j. I believe you rect i ved from the D<"partment certai n samples of co:11-dust, did you not 7 A. Yes, through Imipector Watson. 26382. Q. H ow many did you recei ,·e i A. T welve samples. 26383. Q. You submitted these saruples, <lid you not, to certain tests, microscopical and chemical 7 A. Yes. 26384. Q. Before you submitted them to the t£·s!s, did you ascertain what was the a,era.ge percentage of rnlatile matter in the coal-dust-I mean in the coa.1-dust other than that contained in thcsA samples~ A. Not in the coal-dust-in the coal itself. 26385. Q. Where did you get the coal from in order to discover the normal percentage of ,olatile matter 1 A. W ell, it would be receive<l departmentally. It would be sent to me officially by the D epartment. 26386. Q. From whom ? A. From Mr. Pi ttman, the Government Geologisl. 26387. Q. H ow much did you receive 1 A. I cJ.nnot remember now. As a rule, itwonlJ be about a pound sample. 26388 Jlis Ilonor.] Q. Enough lo give yon nn opportunity of making lests 7 A. Yes. 26389. illr. BrucP, ,Smith.] Q. DiJ you ascertain the p ercentage of rnlatile matter in the coal 7 A. Yes. 26390. Q. What did that show 7 A. 23·5 per cent. 26391. Q. Now, you have had a goo<l deal of. experience in conneclion with Lhe southern coal of this place 1 A. Yes. 26392. Q. I believe that yJu have as.:-erLained that the percentage yo~ have ju~t mentioned in connection with the samp!e of coal is an average of :ilm?st all the coal in Lhe southern district 1 A. Yes. 26393.

790 Witue~~-J. C.H. Miognyc, 11 March, 1903.

26:393. Q. You have fount! the n.vcragc of the s0uthern coal to be of that particular perccntag~ of volatile

•

f •

matted .d. Ao n.verage of twenty-one samples ft·0m the South Coast gave volatile hydro carbons at 23·1 per cent. . 26394-. Q. So that there is no appreciable difference in the percenta~e of that parltcular sample of coal from Mount Kcmbla :Mine and the aYerage of all the other southern mtnes 1 A. The average comes out very close, within ·4 of l per cent. . . , 26395. Q. I tbir,k you have form ed the opinion that the Kembla. coal does not differ appr~c1a.l,ly from any of tho other southern coals 1 A. It very closely resembles .Moun t Pleasant a nd Mount Keira coal. 26396 . •lfr. Robertson.] Q. Is not th~ composition of the K embla coal diff~rent from the composition of th'e coal from some of the other col lieries1 A. From some of them-they vary. 26397. Jfr. Bruce Smitli.] Q. "\Vhal. is the lowest percentage you have got in coal ~rom the sou the m mioe31 A. l think down to 1!) per cent. 26398. Jlr. Rob£rlson.] There are some of them down lo 14 per cent. 26399. i1fr. Ritcltie.1 'l 'he Metropolitan Collit-ry coal shows 18 per cent. 26400. His Honor.] Q. T here is a statemen t published giving the results -arc these results from your own a.nalyses1 11. YE's, Your Honor. 26401. Jfr. Robe1·tson.] I do not see the value of comparing averages. 26402. Jfr. Bruce Smill1,] It is only to show that the E.-xam ination of the coal di<l not show any g reat dE'parture from the samples obtained from other mines. 26403. Witness.J I see that the minimum is given as 18·5-! per cent. 26404. Jfr. Bruce Smith. ] Q. And the maximum 1 A. 25 per cent.. 26405. Q. This coal showed 23 per cent., and you say it compares closely wit.b Mount Pleasant and Mount Keira coal 1 A. Yes. 26406. Q. That is your perce11t 1ge of the coal in its normal condition 1 A. Y ~?, 23 per cent. fa a fair average. . 26407. Q. You subjected these twelve s:unp!e~, withou~ knowing where the samples came from, to a chemical nnd microscopical test 1 A. Yrs. 26408. Jfr. Robe1·tson.J I t hought the evidenca only sh·owed microscopical tests 1 26409. JJlr. Bruce Smitli.] Both. The Commission bad some tests which were made by Mr. Hamlet. Mr. Mingaye's te3ts are microscopical and chemical. 26410. Q. They are two distinct kinds of tests 1 A. Y1 s. 26411. Q. You do not know what particul:ir part of the mine the samples came from 1 A. No. 26412. Q. They are numbered, arc they not 1 A. Y es. , , 26413. Q. You kept the numbers of tho s~mples, aucl you have prepared a statement showi ng the percentage · of volatile matter in ea<.'h sample which was band ed to you 1 A. Yes. 26414. Q. H a \'e you prepared a statement showing the number of the samples, the percentage of coke, the percentage of volatile matter, the percentage of mo£stul'e, and the perceIJtage of ash 1 A. Ye~. 26415. Q. "\Vould you ta.ke that st:itemeut from your re.port for a moment. I want to hand it to the Commission. [ The statement was then handed to the Commissione1·s.] 26416. Q. You show, first of all, the number of the samples 1 11. Yes. 26417. Q. You show the YOlatilc malter, you show the moisture, and you show the ash 1 A. Yes. 26418. Q. And that column in Lhe report hearled "Uoke" (No. 2) included the two last columns- tLe moistura and the o.sh 1 A. That includes the fix ed carbons o.nd the ash. 26119. Q. Now, with re6 ,ml lo samples markecl No. l t:> 4 ;-what l1ave you to say about these 1 A. Samples marked N 03. 1 to 4, on bein~ cxa1nined under the microscop?, using a I ia. objecti \'e power, distinctly show that the fine coal dust bas been submitted to a partial cok ing, the surface edges showing the coarse, porous strneture of the coke; bnt from the appearanc·3 of the coke particles, and the percentage of volatile matter left, the d ust does not appear to ha\·e been submittc1l to a severe heat. . 26420. llis llonor.] ·wh'lt is the temperature a.t which "se\'ere heat" begins-you might define it 1 A.. 600 degrees centigrade. 26421. Jfr. Er1.w Smith.] (/. Wlut w..>ul I that l,e F,~lm:nhc:t 1 A. 1,112 degrees Fahrenheit. 26422. Q. That is your staudarcl of se\ ere heat? .11. Ye~. 26423. Q. These samples did not reach that heat 7 .tl. °X;>. 26424. Q. With regard to sample No. 51 11. No. 5 con,;ists largely of cohd rcsit.luo, t.h~ bard, coarse porous structure of the coke being reaJily dsil,IE', a.ho pellets or globules of 6ue coke, somewhaL r~sem\,ling H na.11 shot. The chemic:1.l exo.mina.tion prO\'lS Viat t~c cJal dust ha,-, p:uteu with a Lirgi} prop::>rti0n of its YOt'.l.til ~ mattPr. · 26125. Q. Tuke sample No. 61 A. This S'lmple shows a. mor~ markeJ coking appc1ra.nc~ than i n the former sample, the hard porous str-ucture of the coke being n ·n.Jily visible, ancl the cokeJ p:ir ticles I.icing attached to one another by lhe action of the melting of the bituminous matter in coking; it :i.lso contains pellets or globules of c.>ke, re5embling shot in appea.raucP. The chemical examination shows lh:i.t the co1l-dust has parted with a large proportion of its bituminous matter. 26,~26. llis 1/ono;·.] This sample had been su~jected to a higher Lomperature 1 A. Yes. 2612 i. Jfr. Bruce Smith.l Q. Take s:i.mple Xo. 7 1 ' A. Thi;; s 1.m1,le, o:i m,icr0sc.>pi.; ex:amina.tioo, showed that the fine <lust hn.d been submitted to a p<'.rLi1.1,\ coking, the surfo.ce edges showing the coarse, porous structure of the coke; also p<!llets or glcbules of cok", resembling shot in appearn.nce. i\Iixed with the coalclust were a number of piece, of wo:icl, several of which, exainincd, showed decided evidence of having been charred by Bame. 2642~. Q. You group Nos. 8 1 9, l 0, 11, and 12 tog<lth ed A. Y Cil. All thes} sa·11p!e; disti nctly show that the fine coal-dust has been submiMied to a. partial coking, the sul'face edges showing the coarse, porous structur,:> of the coke. From the appearance of tho coked particles, and the percentage of volatile matter l1>ft, the-samples do not appear to have been submitted tJ a seve1 c heat. 26429. Q. You make a special remark about Nos. 5 and G7 A. Ye~. From the appearance of the cok", and the low percentage of volatile m'ltter found by :rnnlysis, t,hesc samples n.ppear to have been submitted to a much more se,·ere hE'at than any of the other sam ples examined. 2~4:30. Q. In your opinion, have any of these twelve samples been submitted to flame ;-you do mention "No. 1 1 A. Yes. In this sample were a number of splinters of wood which had been charred by flame. 2M31.

791

Witnl'iis-J. C. H. Miugaye, 11 March, \oo:l,

,26!31. Q. How many of these samples have been suujected to flame 1 A. In my opinion, more or less, tbA whole of them, but Nos. 5 and G especinlly so. 26432. I will now hand in this report. [1'lt1:1 report was marked Exhibit No. 55.J . 26433. Mr. Robertson.] Q. You say that samples Nm. 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 have been subjected to seve~e " he'lt ;-can you gi,·e any approximo.te icka of the temperature to which they would be exposed 1 LL It 1s a ,·ery hard thing to do. There lns no t Leen sufficient be.1t to thoroughly coke them. 26434. Q. What temperature do you think they ha.\'O been suhjected to 1 ,1. I should s1y a cherry-red heat. 26435. Q. \ Vhat is a cherry-reel heat- what tempera'.ure 1 A. Between 700 and 800 degrees C = 1,292 degrees Fahrcmhei!i to 1,472 degrees Fahrenheit.. 26436. Q. Is it po,sible that co1l-<lust might parL with some of its volatile constituents at a less heat than that 1 A. YPs. · 26437. Q. What is the lowest temperature 1 A. Possiuly :it 300 degrees Fahrenheit; but I would not say for certain, as I have not trie'.l the experiment-. 26438. llis Honor.] Q. The duration of time is oE itnportance. 1f a p;1.rticle were submitted to a liigh , temperature for an infinitesimally short space of time, would that be the same as if a particle were submitted · to a lower temperature for a longer time 7 A. Ve1·y possil.,ly. 26439. Q. Can yoa say that an infinitesimally short exposure would complete coking, if the plrticle were 11ubmit;ted to a nigh temperature, in the rnme way that a lower tempera.lure would complete it if it were • ~xposecl to that temperature for a longer time 7 A. I should expect that with a high temperature the bituminous matter would be melted more. ·w here you ha,·e a low heat, the coke would be open a little more. I may say that coal will give off gas under normal pressure. 2641:0. Mr . .R!Jb~1·:son. J Q. Th_at is the oc::luded gas? A. Yes ; it is not the g:is in che:nic.\l com bi nation.

WILLI AM ROGERS, previously sworn, was furthe.r examined, as under:Examination uy Mr. Bruce Smith (continued):26441. Q. I was asking you before, whether you agreed with the accounts given by Mr. Leitch as t.o the manner in which the roof usually fell in the 35-acre goaf, where he said tbat it usually fell the ll}Oment t~e timber was taken out, and seldom la~er than the n ext morning. I think you said generally that was a fair de'lcription i A. Generally it is. 26442. Q. Then I a.sked you, when you found that aftet· the first fall the roof had not come down, and that a week elapsed without any subsequent fall, did not you begin to think it uncommon fur that part of the mine 7 11. I thought it was standing rather long. 26443. Q. It did occur to you ? A. Yes. 26444. Q. You did not do anything, or omit, to do anything, in consequ1mce of that impression 1 A. N9. 26445. Q. Can you tell me how much coal was taken out of t he 4th Right after Leitch left 1 il. H e left <W the 5th of June. 26446. Q. Can you tell me how much coa.l was taken out 1 A. I can tell you the area. There was one pillar on the right-hand side 30 or 40 yards long, and t-here were two pillars on the left-hand side, I irnpP,o~e each 15 yards. 26447. Q. Was all th3 coal in there taken out between the lime of Leitch leaving on the_5th of June and the disasted A. Yes. • 26448. Q. No pillars at all, or a ppreeia.ble parts of pillars, were there 1 LI. No. 26449. Q. I s it true or untrue that about 1,000 tons of co:i.l were covered up by the fall? A. That is untrne. 26450. Mr. Wad~.] No one said tLat it was true. 26451. His Honor.] That was right back in the goaf. 26452. 1lfr. Bruce Smith.] Q. You deny that any con.I wc1.s left in the area of 40 square yards-that is, coal in any afpreciable quantity 1 A. No, there was not any left. 26453. Q. Well, all the coal was taken out of the area and the roJf still remained 1 L1. Yes, excepting the first fall, a week before the disaster. 26454. Q. Now, you told Mr. Lysaght that you do not believe! that the whole 40 yards came down in one solid block of stone 1 A. I do not believe iL 26455. Q. Not even after the first fall? A. No. 26456. Q. In your opinion, how did it come <lown 1 A. T think it c:ime down in big flags-larger or smaller in size. 26457. Q. Explain for how long a period 1 A. It would not 1,e long. 26458. Q. Minutes or hour.; 1 A. A few minute... 26459. Q. From the time it began to fall - n ot the first fall- uutil it eonclurled, you think it would be some minutes 1 A. When it began to fall, it would all come do,.vn in a few minutes. · 26460. Q. From what you saw in that mine, yon do not. belie ve that a great block of stonl:', 40 yards square, fell down, either ona end first, or came down altogether ? A. I do not believe it fell anything like that. 26461. Q. When you say some minutes, do you mean four or five minutes, or do you mean twenty minutes1 A. No; a minute or two. 26462. Q. And what reason ha ,e you for saying that it took a minute or t wo 1 A. It would start to fall in little bits before it all came iu a body- I do not mean in one block. 26463. Q. Suppo..e it were 5 or 6 inches thick-do you mean that some part of the fa.11 might come down, and the rest afterwards, or do you think it likely that it would come down in layers 1 A. I do not mean that. I mean that it wculd all come together over the whole of the area, one flag on top of another. I mean that; it would all come togeth.er. 26 t 64. Q. When you say some minutes, do you mea-n two or three minutes 1 .d.. I mean ono or two minutes. 26465. Q. What reason have yon for fixing on one or two minutes 1 A. ] think it would all coine in that time. It would take .that time to fall. 26466. Q. ·why do you think that 1 Yon hiwe bad no experience of similar falls. It is not knowledge; why do you think it 1 [ No answer.] 26467. Q. Do you not know why you think it 1 A. I could not say why I think it; would take that long t o fall. 26468. Q. It is a guess 1 A. It is nothing else. 26469.

792 Witness-W. Rogers, 11 March, 1903.

26463. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Are you judging from experience? A. Yes, from my experience. 26470. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Can you tell me what experience, at any time, your calculation is based on7 A. I have seen falls before '• but not upon the same extent as this one. 26471. Q. How would you know how long they took to fall ? A. 1 might be watching them. 26472. Q. A large area ? A. Fairly largP. 26473. Q. What do you call large ? A. Perhaps 15 yards square. 26474. Q. Fifteen yards square? A. Perhaps that. 26475. Q. With openings like this for the air to come eirough? A. No • larger spaces. 26476. Q. Were you blown off your feet ? A. No ; but the lights were Clown our. 26477. Q. That is the most serious thing which took place ? A. Yes. 26178. Q. On that occasion, how long was the fall from beginning to end ? A. A minute or so. 26479. Q. That is your experience; but these falls took place seldom ? A. Yes. 26480. Q. Do you think that this fall was slow enough for the air below to get above the mass of stone falling? A. No. 26181. Q. You think the stone would be too solid fur the air to get above? A. Yes. 26482. Mr. Wade.] It is like pulling the trigger, easy ? 26483. Mr. Bruce Smith] Q. Do you consider that the roof fell so simultaneously that the air could not escape into the cavity from which the stone fell ? A. I say I do not think the air would get through the stone, to get above the stone. I he way the stone came down would be that one flag would cover another, and it would not let the air go above it. 26484. Q. You were asked about the heaving of the floor. You saw timber bent as if the roof were sinking ? A. It looks as though the roof were sinking ; and some people might think that it was the roof. 2648.3. Q. But it is the heaving of the floor-does it not occur in the mine? A. Yes. 26486. Q. What is the reason for its not occurring here? A. In those places in which it has occurred in bords it is where the pillars have not been worked away. 26487. Q. You say that it did not act in this way in this part of the mine? A. Not in this part. 26488. Q. Is it not more likely to act in this way when the pillars are taken out ? A. No. 26489. Q. Do not the pillars act as a support, and keep the floor down? A. No, the pressure of the pillars heaves the floor up. 26490. Q. You remember these notes being made by Dr. Robertson after a number of you had been in the mine-you sat down and talked them over ? A. No. 26491. Q. You went in the mine with Dr. Robertson and one or two men ? A. Yes. 26492. Q. And certain notes were read over to you afterwards? A. No. 26493. Q. Do you remember on one occasion going into the mine with Dr. Robertson ? A. Yes. 26494. Q. You made observations ; and they made their own observations-did you make any notes? A.'No, I made no notes. Several of them were making not-s. I saw Mr. Hay making notes. 26495. Q. He did not read his notes to you ? A. No. 26496. Q. Did Dr. Robertson? A. No. I believe that Mr. Hay acted as note-taker to Dr. Robertson. 26497. Q. Did you have these notes read to you by Dr. Robertson? A. No. 26498. Q. You have never seen a type-written copy of them ? A. I believe I saw a copy of the notes which you hold in your hand. 26499. Q. Look at these notes. I2id you have a type-written copy of them given to you ? A. Yes, I believe I had a copy, of them, 26500. Q. Who gave you that copy? A. It was sent by post. 26501. Q. Did you ever read over the matter which it contained before it was sent to you ? A. No. 26502. Q. You never assented to it ? A. No. 26503. Q. You were never asked to agree to it ? A. No. 26504. Q. These notes which Mr. Hay took-do you know what they were? A. No. 26505. Q. Did you see them, or hear them read? A. No. 26506. Q. Do you know what they contained A. No. 26507. Q. You do not know whether they agreed with these type-written notes or not ? A. No. 26508. Q. And you have never been asked from that day to this whether these notes represent what was observed in the mine? A. No. 26509. Q. You never discussed what you saw, as a sort of committee-you never discussed it amongst yourselves? A. Dr. Robertson asked me what I thought of these notes-did I think they were something like what we saw in the mine. 26510. Q. He asked you afterwards ? A. Yes. 26511. Q. And you said yes ? A. I believe that that was what he said to me. 26512. Q. Did you ever tell Mr. Hay anything to note down A. No. 26513. Q. Do you remember coming to this passage which commences with the words, " Force going inbye "1 A. No. 26514. Q. When was this type written copy given you to read over? A. I think just after the examination was made-soon after. 26515. Q. Before the Commission sat? A. Oh, yes. 26516. Q. After the inquest was over ? A. After the inquest, I believe. 26517. Q. Did you understand them ? A. The notes-yes. 26318. Q. For instance, this passage-" From dust on main road or nearest bords possibly no flame, only heat sufficient to distil dust or from direct concussion"? A. Yes, I read it. 26519. Q. Do you understand it I A. Yes. 26520. Q. What does it mean? A. It means that the air was hot after the explosion, and that there may have been heat enough to distil the coal-dust. 26521. Q, What does " possibly no flame " mean? A. It means that it may have Le( n done witho ► . 26522. Q. Does it mean that you are in doubt whether there was flame or rot? A. No. 26523. Q. Why "possibly" A. You might take it they were in doubt. 26524. Q. It conveys that meaning? A. Yes. 26525. Q. Is that the conclusion you came to A. Possibly no flame. 26526. Q. Possibly flame, and possibly not flame? A. Yes, possibly 26527. Q. That is your conclusion? A. Yes. 26528.

793 JVitness-W. Rogers, 11 March, 1903.

26528. Q. You think possibly flame, and possibly no flame, your mind is in doubt 1 A. My mind is in doubt. 26529. Q. Your mind is in doubt whether there was flame or not 1 L1. Yes. 26530. Q. I s that the condition of mind that the others were in, do you take it as such 1 A. No. I do not know. 26531. Q. Who gave you that pipe f Exhibit No. 54] 7 .ti. The underground manager, Mr. H otcbkis. 26532. Q. When did h e give it to you 1 A. ome weeks after the disaster. 26533. Q. Did be explain "by he h ad kept it in bis possession all that time 7 A. He gave it me as soon as he found it. 26534. Q. Did be tell you that he bad just found iL 7 A. He told me that he had just found it. We went to visit the place. 26535. Q. Can you account for his not giving it you before 1 A. He told me - - [ lnte1·ruptecl]. 26536. I do not want to know what he told you. 26537. His Hono1·.] The question is asked of the witness- " can you account for his not giving it to you before 1" The only way he can account for it is by stating something which was told him by sow~bocly else. 26538. Mr. Bruce Smith.] t do not want it. 26539. His Honor.] H e wants to give it. 26!540. i1ftr. Bruce Smith.] H e cannot force it on me. 26541. His Honor.] We shoul d like to h ear it. 26542. M?·. Bruce Smitli.] In that case the witness bnd better tell us all that transpired. 26543. Witness.] This was not the first time that :\Ir. H otchkis visited this place; he bad been a dozen times before. lie went there, and dist.urbed the ashes where the canvas had been burned with his foot; a.ncl, by doing that, he turned up the pipe ; and the bit of cau"as, partially burned, was lying on the pipe. 26544. Mr. Bruce, mith.] Q. That is what he told you 1 A. He took me there, and showed me how he got it. He gave it m,:, the next day after he found it. 26545. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. D o I understand yon that he had been there p1·eviously with a view of examining . the place 1 A. Yes, he had been there. H e was shoving the ashes with his foot; and to his surprise up came the pipe. I had been there before with him. 26546. Q. Did you go on previous visits 1 A. Yes. 26547. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Did he move the dust on previous visits 1 A. No. 26548. Q. Did you take any steps to find out whose pipe it was 1 A. I have not. 26549. Q. You have taken no steps1 A. No. 26550. Q. You ha.Ye not asked the men who happened to go there after the disa.ster1 A. No. And there are no men left who were working there before the disaster. 26551. Q. H ave you asked any of t.be relatives of the men 1 A. No. 26552. Q. You have not done anything to find out whose pipe it was1 A. No. 26553. Q. There are relatives of the deceased man Jones Jiving and working at Mount K embla y et1 11 . They are there. 26554. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Do you know that the gentlemen who signed those type-written notes reported that, after finding the remains of t he burnt brattice, they scattered the dust 7 A. I am not sure about that. 26555. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Wit h regard to the watering question, you say, on 1,age 37 of the depositions taken at the inquest:Nobody was employed actually for watering the dust; the real reason for having the tanks there wa.s to bale the water out and to water the roads; the tanks were made for both purposes.

A. Y es. 26556. Q. You remember Matthew Frost's evidence on the sarue subject.

He says:-

AJI the water that finds its way on to the roadway comes from one or other of the natural springs in the mine; when the tanks a.re not in use, they are placed in the most suitable place, where it is t hough they will next be needed to bale water where it bas accumulated; the water is collected with buckets, and put into the tanks; and then they are ie.ken away : if the water doC's not accumulate, the tanks are seldom use l for carrying water along the road ; the primary use of the tanks is to carry water away, so as to get on with the ,vorking; the water is always taken to the watercourse that runs out of the mine, or to a pump to pump it out; it is taken to the most convenient place to get rid of; when a plug is taken out of a tank, the tank takes two or three minutes lo empty, the trolly is stopped, the plug is taken out, and we stay there until it is empty ; when any water is taken along the road for watering, the water is distributed wheu necessary ; the emptying can be made to extend for a quarter of ao hour; a tank would go a long way; one man, working a whole shift, might have used fourteen or fifteen tanks of water in watering twelve months ago; since then there has not been anything like that quantity used on the roads; but other parts of the mine·have been watered ; in wet weather t here is an unlimited supply of water in the 111ine; even in this dry season there are thousands of tanks full of water come into the mine and go out in a week. There is no stint of ,\'ater in the mine.

I s that true-as to the watering of the mine ,'l.nd the way you get rid of it 7 il. Y es. 26557. Q. You admit that the primal'y object was to get l'id of the wated A. Yes; and to put it on the dust in the mine. 26558. jJfr. Robertson.] Q. With regard to the finding of th is pipe. Tbis passage is from the report of the visit of inspection mads by M essrs. Johnstone, Oater, Sellers, Robertson, Thomas Cook, and J . C. Jones:Near working place 85 and 86 we founcl the remains of fire seen by two of the exploring party on the night of the expl•lsion and reported by D. A. W. Robertson and :Mr. Johnstone. The fire had consumed some bra.ttice cloth and paper, and fortunately had burnt itself 011t. We scattered the remains.

If they report that they scattered the remai.ns, there would be nothing left 1 A. It looked to me as though it had n ot been scattered. 26559. 1lfr. Robertson.] I visited the place ; and i t did not appear to me to be scattered. 26560. Jlr. Bruce Smith.l It may have been scattered a nd put together a.gain. 26561. 11Ir. Robertson.] I do not know why it should be put into the notes, if it were not scattered. 26562. Mr. Ritchie. J Q. He.cl there been many people round the place looking for the origin of the fire 1 A . I do not think so. 26563. <;. How many people 7 A. People were not allowed to go into the mine as far as they liked. 26564. Q. Do you think that some searching pa r ties dropped a pipe 1 A. N 0 1 I do not think so. 26565. Q. H ave you made any inquiries from those who have been there, as to whethar they knew who h ad dropped the pipe 1 A. I only know the party tbat was with myself. I do not think the pipe was dropped in that way. 26566. 16825 29-5 H

794 Jrihu.~!-W. Rogers, 11 .March, 1903.

26566. J/r. Brue~ Smith.] Q. You remember admitting that no one had ex&.mined the face of the back beading No. 1, the morning before the disaster 1 .A. Yes. 2656i. Q. You say that no one had examined it, to your knowledge. Do you say there was no re1¥10n t A. Because there were no men working there. . . 26568. Q. Ths.t is your ren.son for not inspecting it 1 A. Only working places were mspected. 26569. Q. How many days has it been left beyond the fence 1 A. For two manths before-no one worked there. · k' 265i0. Q. Unless anyone went beyond the fence they would not discover whether the brattioe was wor mg or not 1 A. The under-ground Manager would go there. 265il. Q. How often 1 A. He would go, because it is his practice to do that. Perhaps, he would go ,once or twice a week. 26572. Q. Perhaps, he would not 1 A. Perhaps, more often. 26573. Q. Is there any book that shows it 1 A. There is only the report book. 2657 4. Q. As far as you know, no one had been there for a week before. Do you know that Morrison says that he did not go beyond the fence: and that for all he knew it was quite possible that the bra.ttice JDight be do,vn. Do you know, of your own knowledge, for a week prior to the disaster, whether the face of back beadina had ever been examined by anybody, to see whether ga.s was there or whether the bratt.ice was in good° order 1 A. I cannot say. The. brattice was not down; because it was not down after the disaster. 26575. Q. You know that of your own knowledge1 A. I know it was up at the fa.ce. 26576. Q. When did you go up to see 1 .A. Some da.ys after the disaster. · 26577. Q. How many days 1 A. Perhaps, t wo or three days. 26578. Q. Do you not know that Mr. Atkinson found many hundred feet of gas there four days afterwards1 A. I was with him. The brattice was down at the bottom end ; but it wa.s up at t.he face. 265i9. Q. Was not the fact of the brattice being down at the bottom end one of the ca.uses to which you would attribute the gas 1 if. I could not account for i t. 26!>80. Q. Was the brattice out of order four days after the explosion 1 A. Yes. I was there at the time. 26581. Q. Do you not say tba.t you found it had been deranged after the explosion 1 A. Not at the top end. 2658:2. Q. Tbe del'angement of the brattice was not the cause of the gas hPing present 1 A. I could not say. 26583. Q. Was it deranged during the four days afterwards 1 A. Yes. 26584. Q. Which part 1 A. At the bottom end. 26585. Q. All you can speak Lo befot·e the explosion is the brattice outside the fence 1 A. No, inside the fencP. . 26586. Q. Row far in 1 A. A'I far as you could see in without going in; I could not see up to the point, 26587. J..lfr. Robertson.] Q. What fence 1 A. The fence by Morris's place. 26588. Mr. Br1ice Smith.] Q. You cannot speak of anything excepting for a week before the disaster 1 A. I cannot. 26589. Q. The brattice was in good order insid e the fence after the disaster 1 A. At the top end. 26590. Q. W hat tlo you call the top end 1 A. Near the face. 26591. Q. Where do you consider the gas came from 1 A. I could not find out; I was surprised to see it. 26592. Q. Can you find any entries of anybody ha ving gone up to the face before the day of the disaster 1 A. I see by the report book that there is an en try on the 30th of July, as follows : -

f:he

Night firemnn's report:- " At 7 a.111. everything all right. Reported the same to the Mannger and day flremr.n at 7·30 a.m. Into the mine at S a.m., and visited No. l Right main beading in company with Deputy Dungey, and measured for the length of rope required, nod arranged for landing-places for empties and full skips at outbye and tnbye end of jig. Thence to a few pillars in the 4th Left, and to a few places in the 1st Left, and to where dams were m&de in No. 6 Right district. Found e,·.erything all right, anrl came out at 9·3 p. m."

26593. Q. Is that what you take as a. visit to t he back beading 1 A. Yes. Re-examined by Mr. Wade : 26594. Q. How often have you been over the scene of the disaster altogether 1 A. I could not se.y. I dare say I have been twen ty or thir ty times. 26595. Q. It has been cleared up now 1 A. It is not all clear. 26596. Q. Between the 2nd Right and the 5th Right-that ha.s all been cleared up i .4. Yes. 26597. Q. H ow often have you been over that ground since it has been cleared Y ,d. Ha.If-a-dozen times or more. 26598. Q. Is it more 1 A. I should think so. 26599. Q. I want to know whether you have been sufficiently often to recall things you sa.w 1 A. I have been fifteen or twenty times. 26600. Q. I am talking of what you saw 1 A. I saw no dust. 26601. Q. You saw t imber down, and skips turned oved A. Yes. 2660~. Q. How often did you go there-between the 2nd Right and the 5th Right 1 A. There were nry few skips knocked about thei·P. 36603. Q. I want to know how often you were there 1 A. Fifteen or twenty times. 26604. Q. There was one thing which l\Ir. Leitch was not sure about, and that was-Wll8 there more than " 30-yard pillar left as a harder to the 4th Right 1 A. There w11'1 a 30-yard 'pillar, then a bord, and then a 16-yar<l pillar, in the 4th Right when Leitch left. 26605. Q. Mr. Leitch has drawn this rough sketch 1 A. Yes. We worked all the coal up to the 30-;yard pillar, but not before Mr. L eitch left. 266~6. Q. When you finished the 4th Right, was there any other pillar ltft besides the 30-yard pillar t .d. No. I thought you wanted to know what coal there w11s left when Mr. Leitch went away. :26607. ·(/ You say you sa.w something had fallen in thi,; at'ea in the 4th Right. Would that be the firs$ fall 7 A. Yes, that would be the first fall. 2660 . Q. \\·hat is the time that usually elapses between the two falls 1 A. It depends on the ciYcumstances an<l the place. 2h660?, Q. Was there anything alarming in the roof standing for a week before the second fall f A. Only t u 1t was close to a 30-yard pillar. 26610.

795

W-itne88-W. Rogers, 11 March, 1903.

26610. Q. Was there.anything alarming or dangerous in this roof hM·i~g stood for a week before the second fa111 A. I do not thmk there was anything alarming about it. 26611. Q. There waa a bord between the pillar you were extracting and the barriet· pillar. Some of that had not fallen. Do you know how much 1 A. Morrison told me tho.t be had been round that pillar on the right, and that the men were working. . H e went round that pillar and tho next one. 26612. Q. You do not know of your own knowledge 1 A. I am not sure. There could not be much down, or else he could not have goue round. 26613. Q. Although the roof was standing for a week before tbe second fall, do you think there was any danger from that roof to the men who were working up in the face of No. 11 A. No, I do not think there was any danger at all. 26614. Q. You said that there were three chocks left on the bord next to the barrier pilla.d A,, I believe there were. 26615. Q. Would that make any difference in the way of the breaking off of the roof where the pillars had b6en 1 A. It would . not make much difference in a big fall like that. It would break over the top ; it would break on the half of ea.ch chock. It would split itself on the chock. i6616, Q. You told Mr. Lysaght that you could not tell where the biggest stones were 1 A. No. 26617. Q. H9w far could you see in 1 A. Not very far. 26618. Q. How fa.r 1 &. A few feet. 26619. Q. Could you see up above 1 A. Yes. 26620. Q. How far could you see an opening1 A. 15 or 20 feet. 26621. Q. Do you know, when a roof falls in big flags, the flags break after they fall 7 A. It depends on the. thickness of the flags; if they are thin, they wil] ; if they are thick ones, they will not. 26~22. Q. You were asked whether Aitken would be near the blast 7 A. Yes. 26623. Q. Is there any connection between Aitken's place and Powell's Flat 1 A. Yes ; you can travel from it. 26624. Q. That is the way the air goes 7 A. Yes, it would go that way. 26625. Q. You say tha.t you heard of gas before Gallagher's case 1 A. In the 4th Left. 26626. Q. Were both these cases before the furnace was put np 1 A. No; the first one was. In Gallagher's · oase, the fumace was up. · 26627. Q. You were asked a question by Mr. Lysaght: "Do you not sa.y that no one was actually employed to water the dust 1" A. No; they had other work to <lo. Tllere was one man employed doing nothing but watering; but there were others who would assist him. There was only one man who was always with the water. 26628. Q. You were asked the question : "Do you not know that dust is dangerous 1" And you said : "Yes. 11 Under what conditions is it dangerous 1 A. I£ there is a lot of dust lying on the floor, and any blasting is going on near it. 26629. Q. Do you mean in the presence of a shot 7 A. Yes. 26630. Q. You would not say it was dangerous if a man were walking along there and dropped, a. match 7

.a.No. 26631. Q. You mean if blasting was going on in the neighbourhood 1 A. Yes; I should consider it dangerous. 96632. Q. If blasting is going on in a road which is dusty, you would take precautions 7 A. Yes, certainly I would. 26633. Q. What would be tbe simplest thing to do 7 A. Either clear away the dust or water it. 26634. Q. You say that you have got some new appliances for watering 1 A. Yes. 26635. Q. For watering what part 1 A. You can water the floor, and a little of the sides, by the way you fix the plug in the tank. That was before the disaster. 26636. Q. I am speaking of since the disaster. What are these appliances for 1 Are they for watering the road and the roof, or what 1 A. They are to water the road and the roof and the floor. 26637. Q. What appliances have you got 1 A. Iron tanks with pipe.s round them, and holes in the pipes; there is something attached to the wheel of the tank which pumps the water; ancl you can spray the roof. 26638. Q. Have you stopped spraying the roof in consequence of anything 1 A. I found that I have had too many tanks made ; and I have had to stop watering the roof because the water was bringing it down. 26639. Q. Mr. Lysaght said, "I think, if you had your way, you would stop them." H as anyone prevented you from having your way in regard to the matted A. No. 26640. Mr. Lysaght.] H e said he would, if he had his way. 26641. Mr. Wade.] I know he said it-you put it into his mouth. 26642. Q. You say that there are openings from the 35-acre goaf to the ct·oss-cut heading 1 A. Yes. ·26643. Q. How long have they been there 1 A. They have been there for many years. 26644. Q. Two years 1 A. Yes. 26645. Q. Has there been any trouble a.tall in the way of gas coming out of the goaf into the intake 1 A. No. 26646. Q. Suppose the goaf was giving off gas-would not that be a likely way of finding it1 A. Yes. 26647. Q. Do not men pass a.long t hat intake every day i A. Yes. 26648. Q. In and out 1 A . Yes. 26649. Q. And does coal go out that way 1 A. Yes. 26650. Q. Is that cross-cut such an area. as you would expect to find black-damp in 1 A. No, I would not expect to find it. · 26651. Q. With regard to Mr. Biggers-did he get his certificate before or after you made him depu~y 1 A. After. 26652. Q. Did you make any inqumes from anybody abont his capabilities 1 A. No; only what I asked him myself-and only Mr. Jonathan May. 26653. Q. Who is he7 A. He wl!'s his teacher. He told me what he thought about him, being a very steady fellow and being industrious, and he thought that he would make a good man. He asked me to <lo what I could for him. · 26654. Mr. Ritchie. J Q. Rad Mr. Biggers gone np for an examination and failed before you appointed him 1 ..4. Yes; he Jiad been up for a second-class certificate and did not pass; but be had a good report. i6655. Mr. Wade.] Q. Was that an ex;amiqatioq for an ·qnder-mana~er's certi6cate1 .A. Yes.

•

796 Wilne.~s-W. Rogers, 11 March, 1903. 26656. Q. A question was put to you in this way :- " This fence, across No. 1. heading, beyond which rou could not go." Is that correct-you could not go 1 A. The Managers or deputies Cll.n go any~here they hke. 26657. Q. What is the purpose of the fence 7 A. To stop the miners or the wheelers from gomg through. 26658. Q. If there bad been any gas in the faces of No. 1 heading, it must have been collected there 1 A. I beg your pardon. 26659. Q. What was the first place-t,he first bord 1 A. Morris's. 26660. Q. That would be examined daily 1 A. Twice a day. . . • 26661. Q. If any gas had been given off from the faces of No. 1 headmg ·durmg. all these months, do you think that it would have sl10,vn itself Eit these places where Purcell, Tost, and A itken, were 1 A. Certainly I think it would, because they were on just about the same level. 26662. Q. :{'he air current would be going to them from th~ face of the c~al 1 A. Ye~. 26663. Q. Jo regard to this pipe-do you remember when 1t wM HotchklS was a.ppomted under-managed A. I could not fix the day he was appointed. 26664. Q. Can you fix it by the inquest-that went on to September l llh-that is six weeks-was it after that 7 A. Yes, after that. 26665. Q. Do you remember bow long after he had been appointed under-manager it was, when he gaveyou this pipe 7 A. It might be a fortnight or more, I would not be certain a.bout it. . . 26666. Q. You said that you thought tbe underground·manager would be at the face of No. 1 Leadmgtw1ce a. week 1 A. Yes. 26667. Q. What you a.re speaking from is the ordinary practice-was it the duty of the undorgroundma.naaer; or are you speaking from what you have seen 1 A. From what I have seen, and from what I 0 know of him. I may say that the deputies are men in whom I have every confidence, as being steady, honest, upright, conscientious men, who have be<::n in the mine for many years; and they are men who, I know, would not give me :i. wrong report.

•

f''

Exami ned by Mr. R obertson : 26668. Q. You say that you have had twenty-eight years' experience in mining1 A. Yes. 26669. Q. Some in North Wales, and some in Scotland 1 A . Yes. 26670. Q. You were in the position of under-manager in North Wales1 A. Yes; at three different places. 2667 1. Q. Were t hese extensive mi nes 1 A. Yes. 26672. Q. Did they work a large number of seams 1 A. Yes. 26673. Q. Of different thicknesses1 A . Ye~, of different thicknesses. 2667 4. Q. And by different methods of working 1 A. Different methods of wor~ing. 26675. Q. Were they gassy seams1 A. Yes. 26676. Q. And were you also in a similar position in Scotland 1 A . Yes, for five years. 26677. Q. In deep mines 1 A. In deep mines. 26678. Q. Where they employed a large number of men 1 A. They employed a large number of men. 2667!>. Q. And having machinery 1 A. Having machinery of different descriptions. 26680. Q. Did you ever, during the course of your con nection with these mines, have any serious accident; or did any serious accident occur under your supervision as under·ma.oa.ger 1 A. Nothing serious. 26681. Q. You hM·e had great expel'ience with gas 7 A. Yes. 26682. Q. With all the gases met ,vith in a mine 1 A. Ye;, I have ll'>t had much experience with white· damp, but with black damp and fire-damp I have ba<l great expe1ience. I was fireman in North Wales for a considerable time in a gassy mine. 26683. Q. And under your management, at all these mines, I presume you bad had considerable experience with falls 1 A. Yes. 26684-. Q. For instance, at Brymbo, how thick was tha.t seam 1 A. Tbe part of the seam that was worked would be 6 or 7 feet. 26685. Q. Would it not run up to 10 feet1 A. Yes, it used to run up to 10 or 12 feet in thickness. 26686. Q. Do you know of a.ny large falls in i t 1 A. Yes. 26687. Q. Did you e"er know of any damage done by them 1 A. I know of the blowing out of stoppings, the blowing down of doors, and the upsetting of skips. I do not know of anyone being killed. 26688. Q. Ur of anyone injured 1 A. Not to a g reat extent. 26689. Q. Did it seem to you that this area of roof standing in the 4th Right was in a ny material respects different from your experience in the British coal -fields 1 A. No ; there was nothing there, I think, anything different from what I have seen before. 26690. Q. Then this area of standing or hanging roof did not give you any cause for alarm 1 .A. No; I never thought about it being dangerous. . 26691. Q. It did not occur to you that it was in any way different from what you had had experience of before 1 A. Nothing that I thought a.bout. 26692. Q. Did the area seem to be exceptional 1 A. Well, It was a big area. 26623. Q. Have you not at Brymbo found roofs standing over an equally large a rea 1 A. Yes; but there might be more openings going into it than here. 26694. Q. The Main coal mine was a gassy one 1 A. Yes; and so was the Brassy and the Crank coal mine 266~5. Q. Then, .if you had uot had t-rouble with roofs before in gassy seams, you could not expect that a fall m the 4th Right was likely to bring about a disaster of this nature 1 A. No; I had no suspicion n.t aH that it would do so. 26696. Q. If you had any idea that gas was to be found in the 4th Righ t, would you have taken particular pains to have had an examination made 1 A. Yes. 26697. Q. Would you, at the risk of your life, have done so1 A. Yes, I would. 2669~.. ~. If you knew of tlie existence of gas in any quantity, would you have allowed naked lights in the v1c1.mty 1 A. No ; I would not have felt myself s:i.fe. I would not ha,~e allowed naked lights to go nE>ar gas, either in the intake or the returns. 26699. Q. Your own life was at stake1 .A. Yes. 26700. Q. You lost an adopted son 1 A. Yes, I did. 26 701. Q. And you st ill thi11k .that the Keml)la coal ~ives off no ~as 1 A. I would not say th~t it gave off no gas. 26702.

r '

797

JVit1vn- W . Rogers, 11 March, 190!l.

26702. Q. Do you think it possible that it does give off gas 1 A. I should think it does-a. littl(.). 26703. Q. Whit quantity do you think has ever been given off-up to any serious extent 1 .4. 1 do not think that. 26704. Q. You admit that, previous to the new furnace being put into operation, ga.s was bt-ing given off1 A. I sa.w gas in Kembla before the furnace was built, but not in large quantities. 26705. Q. The construction of a. new furnace would not have any other effect than to dilute tho gas issued 1 A. Yes, it would it give more air. 26706. Q. But it could not prevent the issue of the gas, if the gas is in the coal 1 A. No, I do not say that. 26707. Q. I s it not possible tbat there may have been an issue of gas tbat could not have been detected in the ordinary way with the ordinary safety-lamp 1 A. It is possible it could have been detected with the ordinary safety-lamp. 26708. Q. Was any test ever made with the hydrogen lamp previous to the disaster 1 A. No, not to my know ledge. 26709. Q. Do you remember being one of a party who accompanied l\fr. Atkinson, i\fr. McGeachie, Mr. Humble, and myself, and going into the 4th Right on the th of August 1 A. I remember beiog there. 26710. Q. Do you remeruhP.r tbat I brought under the notice of the party evidences of force going inbye in the 4th Right 1 A. Yes. 267'11. Q. Did you notice several props leaning inbye, half buried in slack 1 A. l could not say that I noticed them; but I remember youl' calling my attention to timber piled one log on top of another. I thought it was a. chock. You asked me what I thought of it. I s,.id that it looked as though the force bad been blowing inbye. 26712. Q. Did I not call youl' attention to three props, bul'iecl halfway up in slack, with the heads leaning inbye 1 A.. You might; but I do not remember it. I remember well about the chock. 26713. Q. There is evidence that I did- even l\lr. )IcGeachie admits it, for one1 A. I cannot rsa.y you did. 26714. Q. Do you remember your altention having been called to a large stone 1 A. Yes. 26715. Q. Which apparently had been driven inbye. Do you not remember that the stone was located to a point on the back heading from where it had fall en 1 A. I remember one person saying it came from the 4th Right; and others said it ca.me from somewhel'e else. I thought we could not find the place where the 11tone had fallen from. · 26716. Q. I thought we cli<l 1 A. I thought we did not.. 26717. Q. What was the condition of the 4th Right with respect to dampness1 A. It was damp; water was running out of it. 26718. Q. It was pretty damp 1 A. It was pretty damp. 26719. Q. There was no dust there 1 A. I would not say no dust. Thero might be a little. It was damp; and water was running out. Wat.er was running out of the 3rd Right too. We have had pipes run into the 3rd Right to take the water a.way by gravitation. 26720. Q. Now, it bas been suggested that, when the roof is hanging, aiter the timber has been withdrawn, the men should be withdrawn. Would it be possible to work collieries if that were given effect to 1 A. No; you would often have the whole of the colliery stopped. 26721. Q. Ts it not the custom for a considerable portion of the roof to hang after· the props are withdrawn 1 A. Yes; in my experience I have seen it often. 26722. (J. And possibly if no steps were taken, by working away more coal, the roof might bang in such a position for years 1 A. It might. 26723. Q. Therefore, if the men were withdrawn when the rorif haags, do you think colliery operatior.s would be seriously interfered with 1 A. I can take you to a place where the roof bas been standing over a fairly big area for 8 or 9 years. 26724. Q. Ar,d, if the men bad been withdrawn until that rvof fell, that section would have been at a standstill for eight or nine years1 A. Yes. · 26725. Q. You have never known any serious results to follow from men working in thA vicinity of a hanging roof 1 .ii. Never. 26726. Q. I£ the road is hanging after the timber bas been withdrawn, is there any possibility of bringing it down except by woL·king more coal awt1y 1 A. Tbat is all. That is the only wa.y I know of-by ma.king a. bigger area, and letting it all fall at once. 26727. Q. Did you e\•er know a fall, in your experience, do anything like the damage you suggest has been done by this one 1 A. No. 26728. Q. If you bad been asked before the disaster if a fall from a large area. could cause such a blast of air as to bend iron girders, and to work destruction throughout a large mine, would you have credited it 1 A.No. 26729. Q. Do you seriously thmk now, as a practical man, that a blast from this large fall did all this damage 1 A. I cannot see anything else for it. 26730. Q. Wel~ if there was a force coming out of the .Uh Right sufficient to do that damage in No. 1 main road would not that force ha\"e swept away every chock in the mouth of the 4th Right and every piece of limbed A. Well, yes. 26731. Q. Would you expect to find anything Jeft 1 A. No. 26732. Q. Would you expect to find any small coal in the 4th Right 7 A. I would not expect to find any small coal left. 26733. Q. When it reached the back heading the force would divide, would it not ? A. Yes. 26734. Q. It would divide into three 1 A . .At the corner. 26735. Q. If you have 700 miles an hour to start with, it would then be 233 miles an hour or thereabouts 1 A. I suppose about that. 26736. Q. And, when the force reached the main heading, it would divide again into two 1 A. Y es. 26737. Q. That would gi\·e a force of ne:wly 120 miles an boud A. Yes. 26738. Q. Do you think that a force of 120 miles an hour would bend iron bars and work all that d estruction 1 A. I do not think that would be enough. 26739. Q. Did I understand you to say that there had been no bu ming i A . I saw very little burning. 26740. Q. You saw dust coked 1 A. Yes, I did.

26741.

•

'198 Wit1U!.ss-W. Rogers, 11 :\!arch, 1903.

26741. Q. And brattice at the back heading burnt 1 11. Well, yes, it was as t hough it had been hea.ted-1 could not say that it had been burned. 26742. Q. It was not there- it had been burned away 1 A. Either burnt away or blown away. 26743. Q. And the brattice in Aitken'A place also 1 11. It was blown a.way. 26744. Q. Do you remember seeing l\lorrison's boy, and ~ixon's ~od! 1 . A. I ~aw Morrison's bof, 26745. Q. Do you think he was burned i A. He bad coaJdust stickrng mto him by the force. 267 46. Q. You rernem her a horse at the top of the 4th Left 1 A. Yes. 26747. Q. Was the hair of lhe horse singed 1 A. I did not see it. 26748. Q. Did you see Tom Purcell. A. Yes. 26749. Q. Was he burned 1 A. Bis hair was singed. 26750. Q. And young Silcock 1 LL Yes. . 26751. Q. Had he any hair on 1 A. I could not say; he was covered all over with coal-dust; I could not say whether he was sinaed or not. I do not think his body was burned. ~6752. Q. Do you rem:'mber, when the Commissioners visited the mine-was the incident of that pipe mentioned to them 1 A. No, I do not think it wa.i:. 26753. Q. It was found before then 1 A. No; I think it was after the Commissioners were in the mino. Examined by Mr. Ritchie:26754. Q. How far is the jig from the face of No. l main heading ? A. About 40 yards. 26755. Q. Listen to this entry in the diary again-on the 13th of July, 1902 :Entered the mine at 8 a. m. and \Âˇisited No I Right main heading in company with Deputy Dungey, and mea.sured for length of rope required, and arranged for landing-places for empties and full skips at ontbye and inbye end of ~ig. Thence to a few pillars in the 4th Left and to a few places in the 4th Left, and to where dams were made in No. 6 Right District. Found everything all right, and came outside at 9Âˇ3 p.m. A. That says No. 1.

26756. Q. Do you put that before the Commission as being the result of an examination of the ma.in heading 7 A. I take it that he was up at the heading face that day. 26757. Q. I s there anything in this report which I have read-look at it-to show that 1 A, We were making a jig there, and he was arranging about the rope. He went for general purposes. 26758. Q. Did he go for general purposes, or for one purpose 1 A. No, not for one purpose; for the ropes, and about a. wheel. 26759. Cao you account for that report not being 1,igned by anyone 1 A. I saw that it was not signed; but it has been written by Nelson. 26760. Q. There is no signature 1 A. I noticed that before. 26761. Q. Do I understand you to say that, after the new furnace had been erected, there was no need to dread any gas, and that you had not seen it 1 A. Not after the furnace had been erected. 26762. Q. How do you account for the burning of Gallagher after the furnace had been erected 1 .A. Gallagher broke into some old heading. 26763. Q. Does that not indicate that the .9oa.l gave off gas 1 A. I said before that the coal gave off gas. 26764. Q. In driving into old headings, what precautions would you take 1 A. I would put bores in front. 26765. Q. Have you had occasion to drive into any headings like tbat one since you have been Manager 1 A. No. 26766. Q. Gallr.gber was burnt by gas after the new furnace had been erected 1 A. Yes, I believe with gas. (The Commission, at 4 p.m., adjourned until 10 o'clock the following morning.)

THURSDAY, 12 ,1fAROH, 1903. [Tlie Oommission me/ lit the Supreme Oourt, King-street, S!Jdney. ]

t)re!;ent : -

0. E. R MURRAY, D. A. W. ROBERT~ON, E sQ., ComJiss10:rnn.

~SQ.,

D.C.J. (PrrnsrnEN'f'). D. RITCHIE, Es~., Comm s1ox1m.

Mr. Bruce Smith, lla.rrister-at-Law, instructed by Mr. Woori, Crown Solicitor's Office, appeared on behalf of the Crown. Mr. A. A . Atkini:;oo, Chief Insrcc:tor of Ccnl-mines, assisted Mr. Bruce Smith. 1\Ir. A. A. Lysaght, Solicitor, appeared on be'.111If of(a) the representatives of deceased miners, wheelers, &c. (viuti:ns of the explosion); (b) the employees of the Mount K cmbla Colliery (miners, wheelers, &c.); and (c) the lllawarra Colliery Employees' Association (the Southern Miners' Union). Mr. C. G. Wade, Barrist.er-at-Law, instructed by Messrs. Curtiss and Barry, Solicitors, was present on behalf of the Mount Kembla Coal and Oil Company (Proprietors of the Mount Kembla Mine). (Mr. J. Garlick, Secretary to the Commission, was present to take shorthand notes of proceed ings.)

tr.e eviden<'e and

MR. W. HUMBLE was sworn nnd examined, as under:[This witness was called by the Commission, who asked Mr. Bruce Smith to conduct the examina.tion-inchief as a. matter of convenience. l\1r. Bru~e Smith asked whether the Commission desired that M r. Humble sboulq be examined upon t ' e whole subject-matter of the inquiry. The President r eplied that they did.] Examination-in-chief by Mr. Bruce Smith :2G769. Q. What is your name? A. William Humble. 26770. Q. What are you ? A. An Inspector of Collieries. 26771. Q. For what? A , Principally- for the Northern District,

799 W'itnUB-W. Humble, 12 March, 1903.

26-772. Q. ·what is the extent of your experienc(I? A. Thirty-four years underground. 26773. Q. That is, since you were first connected ia any way with coal-mining? A. Yes I commenced as a boy of 15, and I am now 33 or 3 i years older than that. 26774. Q. Tn what positions have you been during those thirty-four years? A. I have held e,·ery official position. Wben I was a boy, I worked at boy's work. }'rom that I became a deputy when I was 20 years nE age; a.nd I have been an official ever since. 26775. Q. Where has your experience been obtained? A. Principa11y in the north of England, in Durham ; and the last fourteen years here. 26776. (J. What was the highest position that you occupied in Enaland? A. Assistant Manager. :, 26777. Q. Of large mines ? A . Yes, fai rly large. 2677 8. Q. You might name them? A. The Adelaide Colliery; and pa.rt of the St. Helen's Colliery, owned by Pease and partners, the Quakers. 26779. Q. Now, had you any knowledge of this Mount Kembla Mine before this disaster rn July ? .A. Yes; I made one inspection at the Mou nt Kembla Mine in 1898. 26i80. Q. In your capacity as a.a Inspector? A. Y Cil. ' 26781. Q. On the 1st of A ugust, I think, you had a telegram from the Chief Inspector-the mornin~ after the disaster at Mount Kem bla? .a. Yes. 26782. Q. And you went to the mine aL once, :ind arrived there at noon on the 2nd? A. Yes. 26783. Q. And I think at about 4 o'ciock on that aftern oon you went into the mine with Mr. A.tkinson, Mr. McGeacbie, Mr. Barr, and two deputies ? A. I did. 26784. Q. You went, I think , straight into what they call the No. 1 district? A. Yes, 26785. Q. I n search of bodies, at that t itne? A. In search of t\\'o bodies- Stafford and Nees. 20786. Q. What. ca.used you to go particularly in search of those two bodies? A. Well, for the time beiog they were lost. The rest, with the exception of three, had all been recovered. These two men could not be found. 26787. Q. You found them? A. Y es, we found them. 26788. Q. In the back heading off Stafford's Flat? A. Yefl. 26789. Q. And I think the positions are marked on :Mr. Atkinson 's plan? A. Yes. 26790. Q. What i mpression did you form from the place and po jit ion in which yon found them? ..&. W ell, I concluded that they had come out of their working-place and had met the after-damp in coming along the going bord, and had turoed through a cut-through and gone into the back bord, where they fell. 2679l. Q. r think there were no marks of violence or injury of any kind upon them.? A. No. The bodies were then decomposing; but there were no marks of violence, so far as I could see. 26792. Q. Did you make any test there for gas? A. Y 1:s ; we made several tests iu that vicinity, and got small quantities. I thin k in one C:lse we got l per ceot. 2679:l. Q. Was this at that time? A. Yes, during that inspection 26794. Q. What did you find? A. W e found 1 per cent. in one place-in Stafford's place-and a t per cent. in another one. 26795. Q. That was with the hydrogen lamp? A. Of course, with the hydrogen Jamp. 26796. His Honor.] Q. At that time, in what state was the ventilation? A. Well, while the afler-dllmp had been removed, the ventilation was all awry-all disarranged; the stoppings were out. 26797. M r. Bruce Smith. ] Q. That is, at t he time you found the gas ? A. Yes. 26798. Hi1 H onor. ] Q. The furnace was going ? A. Yes, I understand so. I did not see t he furnace until several days afterwards. 26799. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. These two men bad been working together? A. Yes; I was told that they were mates. · 26800. Q. Did you 6nd them some distance apart? A. Oh , ye~; they were some 95 yards apart. 26801. Q. Well, that is about all you did on that first visit? A. Yes, I t hink so. W ell, we visited other places, I think ; but I have not any clear recollection of their whereabouts. That was my first visit. 26802. Q. Now, on the 4th of A.ugus~ that is, tho next day - you ,vent in again with Mr. Atkinson , Mr. Rogers, Mr. Barr, Mr . McGeacbie, and Mr. Littlejohn ? -A. Yes. 26903. Q. And you then went into the right-hand side of No. 1, via the 5Lh Right? A. Went down the main travelling road to the 5th Right; and thon worked th rough the 5th Right, right ou to those first r ight-hand places. 26801. Q. W here all those people were saved? A. Yes. [Meaning the cross-cut heading rope r oad district. ] 2680,3. Q. Did you find gas there? A. No ; we found no gas until we got into the face of the first right-hand beadinge. 2G806. Q. T bat is really the face of the main heading? A. Of the main beading. 26807. Q Tiack and intake? A. Yes. 2680S. Q. What did yon find there? A. Mr. Littlejohn and I examined the goaf edges, as we went along that lower 5th R ight; and we found no gas; but I think we came to some places before we came to the first right-hand headings - - [Inf,orrupted]. 26809. Q. Can you locate them? Were they before you came to Morris' place? A. Yell, I think I can locate them as we go along. 26810. Q. W ill you tell me the fir.st place you came to? 268 L1. Mr. .Robertson.] I think it would be bet.ter to·try and place them on the map. 268 12. His Honor.] Q. You have seen a plan of the mine ? A. I ha\'e, Your Honor. 26813. Mr. Robertson. ] Q. Just show with the pencil on the plan where you started? A. We came down here ; there is a 5th Right hne [ pointin,q to the slwjt di:strict]. 2681-i. Mr. B ruce Smitlt. ] Q. That is No . 5 Right? A. 'J:hat is No. 5 Right. We worked all along here ( No. 5 Right). Mr. Littl ejohn and I tested for gas in this goaf (the 6-acre goaf). 26815. Q. In the li-acre goaf, to the lefi; of No. 5 Right? A. Yes. 26816. Q. Did you find anything there? A. No, it was q 11ite clear. 261317. Q. Then? A. We worked all the way along the No. 5 Right. 26818. (). Up to where? A. Past Powell's Flat. 26819. Q. A.nd up to Price's Flat? A. And up to P rice'8 Flat. 26820. Q. Did you find anything there? A. No, no gas ; we fo u nd several other things, but no gas . ..20821. Q What did you find ? A. Two or three dead horses. 26822.

·•

800 Witness-W. Humble, 12 March, 1903.

•

26822. Q. From there? A. From there we worked all the way up into Stafford's place a.gain. That was on the Monday. There was a test made fo1· gas in Stafford's place. 2GS23. Q. Did you 6od anything? A. Three-quarter per cent. my notes have there-three-quarters per cent. in Stafford's placP. 26b2i. Mr. Wade. ] Q. I s that the same p1ace that you went on to.on the 2nd? A. Yes. . 26825. Mr. Brtt"e Smifli. ] Q. Do you think the gas of the l>rev10us day had be~n carried off by the venttilaion? A. No; I think simply that that was the approx1ma,te amount of gas m the atmosphere. 26~2G. His Honor.] Q. How far from the roof was it? A. It was as near the roof as we ~ould get the lamp. and in the face. 26827. M1· . .Robe1·tson.] Q. Theo that would not be the approximate amount in the atmosphere, ur~.less you could get the three-quarter per cent. lower cown ? _A. Well, we .did not test lower down ; b_ut I think it is very likely that, if we had, we would have got the same, seemg that there was no current of air flowing at that time. 26~28. M1·. B1·uce Smith.] Q. That is your impression, that the air all about that particular part of the mine - - ? A. Was stagnant; and I think that that was about the mixture. 2GS29. Q. Well? A. \Ve made furthE'r tests at the edges of this small goaf, the three-quarter acre goaf (between Stafford's going bord and Gill's going bord) ; and we got l per cent. 26830. Q. On the edge? A. On the edge, several feet above the seam. 26831. Q. Was there a fence round that? A. No. 2H832. Q. everal feet above the seam ? A. Yes. 26833. Q. Where the fall had taken place? A. Yes; we climbed up se\'eral feet above the seam on the fall, to test. 268:34. Q. :From there? A. \Ve went to No. 80 pillar. Six f eet above the seam there we got threequarters per cent. 26835. Q. You are still on the 4th of August? A. Yes. 26836. Q. Well? A. With the ordinary Bame of the safety.lamp, the top end of this goaf ~bowed no gas. 26837. Q. Well? A. From there we ,vorked all the way along those faces, from Stafford's going bord to Gill's going bord, and from there on to the first right-hand headings (No. l main level headings). , 268:38. Q. On to the headings of the No. 1? A. Yes, we came along here. 26839. Q. Along the cut-throughs? A. Along the cut-th roughs to the No. 1. 26840. Q. How far did you go up there? A. We worked along here, and went right to the face; no, we did not; we went to about right in front of the last cut-through (the last cut-through between the No. 1 front and back headings). 2684-1. Q. The Inst cut-through to the west, that is to the left, of the No. 1? A. The last cut-through between the two No. 1 places. 26842. Q. What did you do there? A. We stopped ; we found that our lamps were full of gas; and we stopped ; and came hack for a certain distance. 2684:3. His Honor.] Q. Yonr lamps were full of what? A. Full of fire-damp. 26844. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. What lamps? A. The safety-la::nps we carried. 26845. Q. How far did you come back? A. We came back some six or eight yards down below the cut-through, and there tested. 268!6. His Honor.] Q. South of the cut-through? A. There is the last cut-through [pointing] ; we came down, outbye, 8 or 10 yards below that cut-through. 26847. Mr Bruce Smith :] Q. Outbye of the last cut-through? 11. Yes, outbye of the last cut-through. 26848. His Honor.] Q. It would probably be very convenient to bear in mind that that No. 1 main heading bears due north and south; and so you can fix yourself very easily by compass bearings? A. Yes, Your Honor. Well, we moved south. 26849. Mr. Bruae Smillt.] Q. 'l'o that point which you have described? A. Yes. 26850. Q. What did you do there? A. ~re tested for gas with our lamps. Finding none, we moved inward again. • 26851. Q. Finding none with the safety? A. Finding none with the ordinary flame of the safety-lamp, we moved inbye again until we got abouh 4 yards on the outbye side of this last cut-through ; and there we found tbat we got the tail-end of the gas; we could find ~as on our safety-lamps at that point. 26852. Q. From which you infer that it extended right in to tho face? A. Yes, as the places ,vere rising, we inferred that they were full of fire-damp. 26853. Q. Can you give us an idea ot what quantity you ascertained to be there? A. Yes. After allowing for the tailing-because gas does not stand as a straigh t wall up and down; it tails out, wedge shape- after allowing for that, \Ve estimated that there were 10,000 cubic feet. . 26851,. :Jfr. Robe1·tson.] Q. 'l' hat was, of an explosive mixture? A. That wae an explosive mixture. 26855. Mr. B ruce Smith] Q. N ot pure gas? A. No, not pure fire-damp, certamly not ; but gas, as we speak of gas in the mine. 2685G. Q. You could not, of course, ascertain what percentage? A. No; it would be fairly large; that i8 if the proper proportion of air was there. 26857. H is H <.inor.] Q. Getting richer as it got higher and further in? A. Yes. 26858. Mr. Bruce Smitli.] Well, I thi11k while you were there, you were joined by Dr. Robertson's party? A. Yes. 26859. Q. Who were present on th at occasion, r oughly? A. Dr. Robertson, Jacob Jones, George Cater, John Johnson, Thomas Cook. I do not remember any more. 26860. Q. What did you do about it ; did you show them the gas? A. Yes, I showed D1·. Robertson the gas on my lamp. 26861. Q. Did he dispute those indications of gas? A.. No, he did oot. 2!:>862 . . Q. Did you expres.s any opinious to one another as to the probable quantity? A. No, I think not. 268G3. Q. I suppoi:e tho rnference you barn drawn as to the quantitv is one that anybody else would draw? A. Well, I think so. It is deduced from measurement. 268G.J:. . .Q. 'l'h~t i: what I say; it is not from any fa1~~y of your own as to measurement:i, or anything of that so1t? n. No; we afterwards were able to get into those places· and we measured them and took the length, width, and height. ' ' 26865 .

•

...

•'.

Sf1l Witn")S-W. Humble, 12 March, 1908.

26865. Q. Did Dr. Robertson express any doubts as to whether it ,ms gas? A . No. 268GG. Q. as t o the extent of it, al state:i by you at, tbat time? A. No, rnothing of the kiod. . ::W867. Q. D1d ·you have an.v discussion with him, or with any other members of his party, as to where tl11s had come from? A. K o, I think not. 1 do not remember it.. 26868. Q. .Further, I think you went on tu the site of that fire? A. Yes. 2()860. Q. Did you forr!'l an opinion as to what thut inflammable mixture was? A. That we found thore? 26870. Q. Yes? A. Yes, I ca::ne to tho conclusion that it was fire-cla.mp. There was no question about it ; it was fire- dam p. . 26871. ]!is Hono_r.] Q. It. was quite in odor ous, I suppose? A. Well, there was a sli~ht smell wilh it; but I think that, m coal-mrnes generally, it is al1Ya ys accompanied b_v a smell of some kmd. . . 26872. JJ.lr Bru,ce_ Smith.] (J. Was there anything about it to iead you to suppose that it differed m _a ny way f~om the ordmary fire-damp? A. Noth10g whatever. J might explnin to your Honor that, generally speaking, whene ,•er we fiod fire-damp in a mine ii' has some smell about it. 26873. His Honor.] Q. Ar!othergas mixed w1t.h it? A. Yes. 2GSH. Q. What sort of smell? A. W ell, I could scarcely de1'cribe it. ,ve called it a _gassy smell. 26875. Q. Anything like the smell of ordinary illuminating gas? A. Yes, pretty much lik e it. 2687G. Mr. R obertson J Q. Is not the smell of crdioary illuminatino gas a sulphur smell? A. Yes, I 0 suppose it i:i a t5ul phur smell. 26 ~77. Q. And is n ot t he odour of fire-<lamp, when it is found, rather pleasant, if anything? A . Well, I have not fou11d it so. 26878. ]fr. B ruce Smitli. ] W ell, that is a matter of taste. 26S7n. M1'. R obertson. ] As a matter of fact, it is ~o. 2o8SO. Witness.] It may be pleasant to some palate!". 2G8Sl JJ.lr . .Robertson .] Bu t, as a matter of fact-I do no t say invariably-it is pleasant. 2G882. M 1•. Bruce Smi t/1. ] Perhaps, Mr. Robertson, you mean wholesome, like tho smell of tar. 20883. Mr. R obe1·tson.] No, all joking aparl, I can take yo u into fire-damp that has quite a pleasant smell, not dne to the fire-damp, but to some other gas. 2688~. His Honor. ] Q. There nr e t'i\'o distioct se:s of smell which you might expect to get. One set ?f smells is purely the smell of mrious hydro-carbon co:.::pounds, which all the liquid hyd ro-carbons ham m va1ious fo rms; and the other set of smells i:,; that of i,-;ulphur compot.nds, which is somewhat similar in most of the compou nds of sulµhur; al though, of course, it vaTies from th e smell of rotten eggs to that of matches? A. Yes. I ~ houl<l be inclineci to agTee with Mr. ]fobertson t hat there is a sulphur smell about fire-damp generally. 2688.3. Mr. Robe1·tson.] I did not say ihnL I said that the smell of illuminating gas would be a sulphur smell. I said that the smell 11£ fire-damp would be rather p leasant than otherwise. It would be something like chloroform. The fire.damp that I ha,·e been cle:iling with for rnme years now is something like chloroform . 26886. Witness. ] You bare a peculiar l<in<l of fire -damp in your district. 2688 7. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Then what do you say about t.he sug~estion that that inflammable mixture which you found " as the result of distillation? A. I i:,ay it is highly improbable. 26898. Q. Did you notice ::rny difference between tbe smell of that an d tnc smell of fire -damp that you have met with on other occasions l A . None; just the same smell. 26889. Q. I mean botweon tliat and the smell of fi re-damp which has been produced in the ordinary way in the mine without anv 6re at all? A. Yes; I th ink, if it was tl1e result of di~tillation, there would mixed with it that wou!J hnve bP-en ea~ily detected by the smel l. have been some other 2u890. JUr. Robert.;o.l ] Q. Therr would be the odour, probably, of fire -stink i' A. Y cs; CO would be t here. 2G89l. Q. Which is quite <lislinct :md unmi~takable? 11. An unmistakable s·mell. 26892. Mr. Bruce 8mitli.] Q. And tnere was none of that? A. Ko. 2u893. Q. And , if you had no t founJ that there had been an explosion, or, as we may call it, ai accident, in that mi ne, you woul,l have detected nothing about that fire damp to differentia"te it fr..:>m any other P A. Kothing whaterer; I \\'OulJ have looked upou it, as I did look upon it, as ordinary fire-damp. 268!J4. (,!. Did you espress th:l.t opin ion i11 the prese nc(\ of Dr. Houerlson and bis companions i' A. Yes, I think so. I specially 2sked Dr. ltober tsoo to look at my lamp nnJ sec the fi re-damp that we Wt\lked into a little before they came. 268%. Q. A.nd you treated it as or<l inary fi,e-damp? ii . Yei;t. 26806. Q. And neither he, nor his compnniom, took any exception t o it? ·A. No, none whate,er. 2tiS97. Q. Did you l1ear any suggesti J n made that it was a mi xture ari:;in g from t he d isti llation of coaldust? A . Ko; I think th at suggrstion was not b0rn until a little afterwards. 268!)8. Q. You wen t on to the fire , did you not (bord l\o. 87)? A. Yes. 2G599. Q. What did you seo ut that fir e? A. "\Ve found so rne brattice, the remains of brattice, cinders from brattic·e; we found some singed paper; and we noticed that the feet of two of the props were aJl burnt and charred. 26000. (). And these were quite close to th e fi re ? A. They were part of the fire. 26901. (d, l'hey wer e actually part of the tire? A. Yes. 21.i902. Q. Was there any heap of ashes at that time indi cating tbe position of the fire? A. No; thero was a la5er or ring of ashe:;; but there was certainly not a heap. 11here bad evidently been ver y litt le stuff to burn ; and I do oot suppose it wa s more than a cou ple of iuches deep in the deepest part of it. I know I poked about, and edged my hand into it; an<l it did not appear to be more tban 2 or 3 inches JP.ep. 26!>03. Q. Do you think it is possible that an ordioary woo<l ec pipe was amongst thoso ashes; and that yo u did not fee l it? A. W ell, it is possible. 2ti!l0.J,. Q. D o you think it is probable? A. No, I do not think it is probable. 2u:J05. Q. You mean that, if there was any thing in the ashes, you would £eel it with your fingers that you passed through them? A. r t·s, I th ink so. ~6906. M r. W ade.] It has not been sug~ested that 1h3 pipe was in the fi r,'. 2?90 7. JJ.lr. Bruce Smil!t. ] I understood that it was in kicking the ashes of that fire 011 one side that the pipe was found.

gas

1682.i

:!9-5 I

26908,

•

802 Witll<'<"·)-\Y, Humble, 12 )!arch, 1903.

26903. Mr. Wade. ] The evidence is tb11,t tbere wa,s cauvas there a.~ l ashe~;. and, kicking amoagst that, they found this pipe. It is clear that that pipe was not in the fire itself ; 1t 1s not burnt. . 26909. Mr. Bru.ce 8mitl1 J Q. You tol<l us of the c::um1s 11,ud the ashe.i-that was al:>out an rnch or tlvo deep, I think you said? .1. A couple of inches deep. . r:: • • • • 26910. Q. An<l spread in a circle rather tha.n a heap? A. A. circle of som3 ~ or u or <,. tee,1 1n d,ame.ter. 26911. Q. And you passed your ha:<l through the whole of that? A. Not the whole of 1t; but I certaml, examined with my hand the cenlral .pnrl,. · . . 26912 . Q. \Vas th~ call\·as oYer the top of it? No. The canvas h'ld been burnt; and tb1s wasthecmder from the canvas. · 25913. Q. Then there was no canvas iu your way to interfere with your exa'.Dioa.tion of these a.shes? A. No. These ashes were only just like a white sheet lyiug on the floor. . . 26914. Q. What wa1:1 your object in pnttiug your band through it? A. Merely cu1:10~1ty. Tc> find the te:tture of the ash, J think, was one object I must h:tve h:\d; the other would be curiosity. 26915. Q. Did you fiud the ash fiue? A. Very fine. 2G!ll6. Q. And you did not come across anytbing? A. No, I did not find anything. 2G917. Q. Then you will go to this extent; you will say that it is improbable that you would hare missed an ordinary wooden pipe, if it had been there? A. Ye~, I think so; it is improbable. 26918. Q. Then you picked up some singed pieces of paper? A. Yes. 26919. Q. They did not throw any light on anything? A. N'o. 2G920. Q. They were lunch papers? A. Yes, something like that. I broughL them o ut of the mine; and we had a look at them; and there was nothing particular about them, except that they were singed, and we threw them away. !W921. Q. Cvuld you see anything a,bont that fire to suggest its cause ? A. No, it was off the wheeling road; and, therefore, no person would be likely to go down there. It appeared lo me to ho simply the result of the explosion, the result of the £lame that ha<l tra,·elled along aod set fire to some brattice-a. fire on the floor. 2G022. Q. You came to the conclusion, you say, that it was what? .A. That it had been the result of flame; of course, that flame being present as the result of the explosion. 26923. Q. That is the conclusion you came to? A. Yes. 26924. Q. And you saw nothing whatever, around it, or about it, or in connection with it iu any way, to make you doubt that that is how it carol\ about? A. No; I saw nothing. 26!>25. Q. Then you met Dr. Robertson's party again? A. _Yes. 26926. Q. On the No. 1 Right? A. On the travelling road, at the entrance to the 4th Right. 260.27. Mr. Robe1·tson.] Q. Was that before or a.fter you visited this place? it. After, about 5 o'clock at night, as we were coming out. 26928. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. You made a test at the goaE edge on the 4th Right? A. \Veil, either I or one of the party; I was present, and saw what was there. 2G920. Q. You saw a test made? .11. Y es. 26930. Q. .And you found no gas there ,vith tbe safety-lamp? A . No . 26931. Q. But .Mr. M cGeachie found some with the hydro~en lamp P A. :Mr. l\1cGeachie found some with the hydrogen lamp-I think it was l per cent. 26032. Mr . Robertson.] Q. That ,vas at tho 4th Right? .,1. Yes, that is the 4lh Righl-[r~ading fron ~ foolscap sl1eet of ~zotes]. "Fouud none with ordioar·y flame; but l\fr. M:cGeachie found 1 per cent. with hydrogen la,m p. " 26933. M r. Bruce Smith.] Q. I want to be quite clear; that is, at the edge cf the goaf on the 4th R ight? .&. Yes. 269!34. Q. Were you in the 4th Right at the time? A. Yes; we went up from the tr.welling road to the edge of tbe fall purposely to test. • 26935. Q. That 1s, right in l1ere? A. Yes ; we came up from the travelling road to t his point, and tested at the fall. 26936. Q. What was ti'ra.t that you found? A. \Vdl, it showe<l to me quite clearly, with the hydrogen flame, that it was fire-damp. 26937. Q. Where did you find that? Tbnt is to say, at what part? .tJ. '\Veil, we came up on to lhc fall; and, I suppose, we would be perhaps 2 or 3 feet above the roof of the seam. Tbe la'llp would be about 2 or 3 feet high in tho roof. 26938. Q. .At the time this ~as detecte1? A. Yes. 26930. Q. Did you see Mr. Atkinson ma.ke a n ote nt that time? A. I d o n ot rem ember. I suppose he did; because I saw him make notes very frequentl_v. 2(HJ-10. Q. You did not see the note, to check it at the lime? 2u0H . M_r. Wade.] This i$ the fir$t time we have heard of fire-da.mp being found in the 4Lh night. Mr. McGeach1e was never asked about it. 269!2. Mr . .Brnce Smilli ..l (J. I want you to be very careful; just look at your nole.3 :iga.in-have you any doubt whatet"er ~bout this, about your finding or ~eei11g Mr. McGcachie find this 1 pn cent. up on the edge of the goaf m the 4th Bight r .A. I have no doubt whatever. I wa~ cloi::e to him, and saw him use the lamp, and sa,, tbe result he got. 2(HH3. (J. And he got up on the stones, you sa.y, 3 or 4 feet? A. Tes; and I climbed up after him. 269H. 1Jlr. Robertson] Q. Do you reinember being th ere with men.bout the 8Lh of August.? A. Yes, I do. 26945. Q. Do you remember rnal<iog a test? .I. Yes, I do. 2694G. Q. Could you get anything lheo? A. " 'ell, I will tell you-I think I got nolhing that day. It was on the 8th of August. 26017. (J. D o _y ou ren:icmbcr- \,c went up together? ~r. Yes, I do; and I must ha\'e got it somewhere h~r~-[N(crnn.1 to lws notes ]. l remember tnakiog a note of it. [ R,,adi11g .] " TcstcJ for gas i n 4th J<,~,1t goaf edge, and got ! per <:ent" 1 hat'e got here. ~~Ui . fl. Of course, {percent. is ~ery Une? A. Yes. 2G9.J:9. Q. A nJ two ob:;errnr~? A. One mi(l'ht say " Not hin(l'" · and the other mi 0~ht sn.y "~- " -I am 0 0 ' • quite pre pared to admit that. '.lti050. Mr. Bruce Sn,;11i. ] Q. Was Mr. Atkinson wi th you ai this timo? A. Yes. 26951.

t' I

803

Witness-W. Humble 12 March, 1903.

2G9.51. Q. Did Mr. Atkinson go up "ttith you at all? A. 1 do not- r emember; I think not; I t hink there would only be two, Mr. Robertson and I. 26952. Q. Y ou are speaking now of McGeachie and yourself? A. No; I was speaking of myself and Mr. Robertson . 26953. Q. I want you to go back again. l\fr. Atkinson has not gi'\'en evidence of that; and I wa?t you to be particular about it. I wan t to lmow whether you and McGeachie went up alone on to this atone? A. Well, I am almost certain Mr . .Atkinson was close behind, because he bad the electric lamp, and we put on our hydrogen flame long before we got to the point of testinty,·because we though t that the atmos.phere was rather extinctive in going t1p to the place; and l\f 1·. A.tkin;on followed . us up very closely, to give us light. 26954. Q. Do you moan to the stones? A. N o, up to tho edge of the sto ne ; I do n ot suppose there · was room for t hree people on the stones; but he was close by, I think. 26955. Q. Well, when you had found this 1 per cent. of gas, did you report, it when you came down to tbe others? A . Yes, it would be spoken of. 26S>S'6. Q. A.re you sure of that? A . I cannot sl'l'enr to it, because I have not it in my notes. 26957. Q. I mean, if Mr. Atkinson does not r emember that - - [Inten·upted] . 26958. Mr. ·Wade.] That is not the way to put it. Ask him if he spoke of it. 269:59. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Did you say it? A. I am certain we would speak of it to some of the party ; and there would be no one more likely to be told than Mr. Atkinson. 26960. Q. You are quite certain you saw it? A. Yes. 26961. Q. And McGeachie saw it too? A. Yes, McGeachie was handling the lamp. 26962. Q. Who mad e a note of this? 11 . I made a note of it immediately we came out into the road. 269u3. Q. Did McGeachie make a note of it? A. That I cann ot tell you~ I am inclined to think he did not. 26964.. Q. What did you do then? A. Well, I think we went out along the travelling road, and finished the sh1ft for that day. 26965. Q. I think you and Mr. Littlejohn examined some other place off No. 5 Right? L1. Yes, I have already told you. 26966. Q. That was the same day ? A. Yes. We are speaking now of the Monday; well, it was on the

;

Monday when Mr. Littlejohn and I examined this goaf edge.

26967. Q. Then it is a little out of order. Tell me what you did after that; you came out then, did not you? You see you have not got your notes numbered in pages? A. They are a little bit mixed. 26968. Jfr. W ade.] It is only a concession that you are a.llowed to use them at aU. Nobody else has been allowed to use them. 26~G9. Mr. Bruce Smith. ] D oes your H onor notice that remark? H ow can a man re.nember all these things without notes? 26970. H is Honor.] A. man taking notes of all these things in a mine cannot remember the:n all. Every other witness who has taken notes has been allowed to use them. 26971. M r. Bruce Smitlt.] Q. Go on to the next yjsit? A. WednesJay morning, Gth August. A party of us entered by the daylight tunnel; and we moved right away r ound in a northerly direction and examined those places-I do not know their names. 2v972. Q. The faces at the end of the 2nd Right; Muir and Quinn, and Filby and Heff~rnan, Nos. 102 and 104? A. Yes . 26D73. Q. You took a note. I think, of the air that was passing at that time? A. Ye!.l, we measured tho air, and found i.t to be 36,000 feet per minute entering the tu®el. 26!)74. Q. That is more than the requirements, is it n ot? A. For that district, yes, I should say. 26975. Q. Well ? A . Then we traYelled northward from these headings. 2697G. Q. Then you took the air in the two bords employing seven men? , .A. Tbose two bords and the h eadings. 26977. Q. And what did you find there? A. \Ve found 8,000 feet of air fl owing in tbose headings. 2G9i8. Q. Tha,t is in the :.!nd Right headings, which, with two bords, employed seven m en? A. Yes; we found 8,000 feet of air there. 26979. Q. Now, yo u tested in all the openings between the rope r oad and foe goaf edges? A. Yes. 26980. Q. That is on the east side of the 35-acre goaf? A . Yes. 26J8I. Q. You found no gns there at all? A. N o. 2698 2. Q. Then you have a note-the lowest place next No. 1 Right rope road? I.. That is this place

[Pointwg to tlte plan]. 269S3. Q. That is on the 5Lh Right; it is the nor th -west corner of the /j5-acre goaf you tested? A. Yes. 26934. Q. W hat did you <lo? A. Yes, I tested for gas there, a,ncl found none; but obserrnd slight Bigus of force passing from the r oad into the goaf. 26985. Q. Signs of force going from the road into the goaf? A. Yes. 2G9S6. Q. What were those signs of force going from the road into the goaf? A. Drifts of dust chiefly. It was r ather dry there; and the cl u~t had been dri \'en from off the road into the old place, and was lying more or loss drifted up. 26987. Q. At wha.t level? A. On the fallen stone, aud round about the feet of two or three props. 269SH. Q. That indicated a force? A. Y es. · 26989. Q. From what direction? A. From this 5th Right rope road in to this goaf. 26990. Q. But the compass direction? A. South. 26991. Q. Did that clearly indicate to you a force going south ? A. I think so. Whatever force there wns thern had been going south. 26992. Q. From the 5th Right; o:.it of the 5th Right? A. Yes. 269!13. Q. You tested all the pl11.ces to the left of tbe 5th Right rope road? A. Yes. 20D!H. (J. That is nortb? A. All the places on the rope road. 2690.3. Q. At the edge of the goaf? A. Yes. I tested the gonf edg<'s n,t the same time as Mr. .Atkinson was testin~these working places [I ndicating Llie working places to the nortli of the 5th Riqltt]. 2Gf.l!JG. Q. r ou tested all the placa:s on the northern si<le of the goaf, and on the southern side of the 5th R ight rope-road ? A. Yes-. 2(HJ97. (2, Did you find anylhing there? ,!. No; we found uo gas.

269~8.

804 Tl'itnes~-"· Humble, 12 )larch, Hl03.

269:)8. Q. What was the next thiug JOU did or ouscrved ? A. '\Yo worked o~r ~ny up into the 1st Righth:1nd beadings, I think. [11lea11in7 lite Nol. main level front and back headw,qs.] . 26999. Q. Follow your notes? A.' We observed ::i. door-the door between the two headings through which the tubs pa~sed to the .3th Right. We obseT\'ed that the door was open. 2i000. Q. Which door? A. This door here. [Shoi~ing it ~n the plan.] . 2700l Q The door in the 5th Uio-ht. between the No. l Right front and back headings? A. Yes. 0 You found that open:' A: Let me sec, now. I beg pardon-,-ve follnd that closed; it had been 21002: open before. 27003. Mr. Robertson. ] Q. It bad been open before? A. It was open on the Monday; but it was closed then, on the Wednesday. 27004. Q. That had been left open, I bdievc - - ? A. To get some ·air for the rescue work; so I was informed. 2700.3. Mr. Bruce Smitli.J Q. Yes. Then you found a door on t.he back heading? A. Yes. 27000. Q. It was open then ? A. Y el'. 2i007. Q. A.od it was partly destroyed ;-can you point Lhn.t out? A. This door here. [Tl1e door on the back headi11g, in.bye of the 5tli Right.] . 27008. Q. Wh.tt condition did you find that in? A. Well, tho sides bad been built of mine-stone, mine debris; und this bad been thrown out. 27009. Q. Whi; h "·ay? A. Outbye, thrown south. 27010. HiJ Honor .] Q. Was tha.t building built with clay or mortar, or anything for mortar, or was it only the dry stones? A. Just the dry stones, it appeared to bi>. I did not see any sign of mortar. 27Ull. Q. You could ensily see if there had been? A. Yes. It was ju!!t the dry stones. 27012. JJ.Ir. Bruce Smith.] Q. Did the direction in which the material of that door ha l been thrown corre~pond with the direction of the dust which you saw thrown into the north-e:ist corner of the ~5-acre goaf? A. Ye!l, the same direction. 27013. Q. How had that door opened originally? A. It ha<l. opened to tho south, and clo!-ed tot.he north, I think. 27014. Q. Unless you are sure of it, do not say? A. I would not be certain. 27015. Q. What do you think? A. '\Yell, seeing that the 5th l{ight, where it crossed the back beading, was a return, I should thiok that that door s'.1ou!d ha.,·e dosed to the south and opened to the north. 2701G. Q. That is just your opin ion of what it ought to do? A. Yeii. 27017. His 1Iono1·. J WeU, what it ought to do is prvbaLly what it would ha.,·e done, as the mine was worked on reasonable principles; and, therefore, if Mr. Humble cn.n say that, under certain conditions of Yentilation, that door should open in a certain way, it probably <lid open that wny. 27018 Mr. Robertson.] Q. I would suggest to you that thn.t is just a position where, unless you know, it is very hard to say which way the door ,vould open? A. Yes; that is my difficulty. Considering that Morris' place was the first place in the split, I think that this door was put there to prevent the air going down that return, and, therefore, that it opened to the north and closed to the south. 27019. M1·. Robertson.] I think I did hear it said that the ventilation in that particular part was not in the usual way, and did not follow the usual course; and I think .that the door was placed in the opposite way to what it would usually be put. 27020. Mr. Bruce Smitli ] I will leM·e that, ns there is a <loubt-as you say, and Mr. Atkinson says, that that is a position in whicb there would be some doubt as to which way the door would open. 27021. Q. A.tall events, the material was blowu south? A. Yrs. 27022. Q. Indicating force from the north? A. Yes. 27013. Q. Now, you did not see the bodies of Aitken and his son, did you? A. No. I did not. 27024. Q. But, from what you know now of the position in which they were found, could you say in what direction they were - - ? .4. They were found to the ~est of their working place ; they had evidently Leen carried by the blast west of their working place. 2i025. Q. Did you see the bodies, to jud~e whether they ha.<l walked there or been blown there? A. No. 2702U. Q. Then you cannot express an opinion? A. No; but I sa.w the two. tubs they had been filling, and they were clearly driven to the west. 27027. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Was not where their bodies were found a place thickly supported with props? A. \Ve1l, there were a few props; but there was quite sufficient r oom for any man to get in. 270::!8. Q. Do you think tha.t Aitken aod son could have been blown in there without beiog mutilated? A. Well , it all dependg where they were found. I do not think they were found any distance down the bord. They were simply found close to their tubs, and close to the side of the bord. 27020. Q. That is not 10 accordance with my ioforma.tion : I uoderotood they were found in the midst of a forest of props? A. Of course, I cannot say where they were found. [ Tlie position in whicli tl1e bodies of Aitken a11d son werefuu1ltl was pointed out on Mr. Atkinson's plan.j 270:30 . .Mr. Bruce Smitlt.J Q. You cannot tell , of your own knowledge, "helher they walked there in trying to escape, or whether they were blown there ? A. No. 27031. Q. But you are able to say as to the tubs? A. Yes; they were blown clearly. 27032. Q. And in what direction? A. They were blown along the heading west; and the inference is that, the tubs having been blown, they (Aitken and son) were blown as well. 27033. Q. Now, you met with a canvas door, did you not? A. Yes i the canvas door was blown in the opposite direction. 27034. Q. Just sbo,v us where that canvas door was? A. I think it was in this cut-through. 27035. Q. How would JOU describe that? L1. It would be a can\'as door at the boru end [west of the place where A itken and son were found]. 27036. Q. l.l'or what purpose ? A. F or turning the air into one of the working bords. 27037. Q. Are you able to say what had happened to that canvas door P A. It had e,·idently been blown down; aQd it was blown in the Ol:Jposite direction to the other forces uJono- that heading. 27038. Q. In what direction wa.s it blown ? A That was blown ea~t. Th; others were blown west. 27039. Q. It was a door, not a banging c:invas? A. A hanging can,·as 1 yes. 27040. Q. ~ as it blown off th~n ? .A. Well, the lower part had been t a.'ken off; and there seemeJ to be shreds hangmg to the supportmg wall. You see these doors are hung by being nailed to a stretcher. 27041. (J. Do you mean to say that this was blo,vn into tatters? A. 'fbe lower part had been stripped off, just leaving about a few inches next the roof. 27042.

.,.

,·

..• i

805

WitM~-W. Humble, 12 March, 1903.

27012: Q. It would not hM·e bl'\en taken off because it was not ~rnn.tcd to be ut>ed? A. No. I think it ·bad been in use at the time of the explosi1>n; but l could not say what took it off; it was some force .. 270:1!3. Q. How could you tell it w~u taken off? A. B ecause we found the remains; we found the piece to the eastward of where it "'as buug. Jt was wrappe<l rountl the foot of one of these props. 270H. Q. 'l'ha.t is the conclusion you came to after carefully examining it? A. Yes. 27045. ~is Honor.] Q. vVas it wrnppcd round in such a wa.v as to indicate how it had struck the prop? A. Yes; 1t had come from the we.,t, and gone eas~. and caugbt this prop, and was wrapped round as you would put your arm round a. posL. . 270.l!G . .Mr. Bruce Smitli.J Q. The'n you c:i.me to a fram e door ;-,\·here was the frame door? A. T ~1s one between those two headings [betu:cen the baclc and jl'ont headings of No . 1 in the cut-through opposite the

~L~. . 27017. Q. What had happened to thnt? A. There had been a very strong force on that door. 270.1,8. Q. In what direc~ion? A. Dri\·iug it iu an easterly direction. 2704!>. Q. Easterly? 11. Ea~terly. 27050. Mr . Robertson.] Q. Where are you now? A. At this door in between the two beadings at the

4th Left. 27051. Mr. Bruce Srnitll.] It was a wooden door, in lhe cut-through between the back and front headings of the No. 1, opposite the 4th Left? A. Yes. 27052. Q. You say that was d riven to the east? A. Y<>s; nnd that force was ,ery pronounced; t here was no mistakin~ it. 27053. Q. That would be produced by a force going up No. 1, and dividing? A. Yes, going north along No. 1. 2'.70,H . Q. ,vell, you cannot tell, of course, whether it was a for~e going up [nortlt] and turning to the r ,gbt, or whether it ,vas a force coming out [south] and turning to the left? LL No. . 27055. Q. But it is qnite con.ststent with a force going up No. l [northwards] and turning to the nght? A. Yes: 27056. Q. That had been blown the opposite way to its opening? A. Yes; it bad been driven right t~rough the frame; and one post had been turned r .mnd through an angle of about 90 degrees-about right angles - and gone with the door. 27057. Q. Did you find any dusl ju~t there? A. Yes; there was dust driven in the flame direction ns the door, into tbe tra,elling road. 27058. Q. What did you next obser.e? A. FurthP-r along the lra.velling road, muc:h further outbye, we came across the broken over-cast, and another damaged wooden door. 27059. Mr. Robert'son.] Q. The over-cast would not be on the travelling road? A. No; the do01· was on the travelling road. 27060. Q. But you i,aid the over-cast? A. Oh well, I am a little before my time . The over-cast, of course, is on the m:i.in road. 27061. Mr. Bruce Smitlt.J Q. Where is that? A. There had been two doors at one time; the frame of the second door is there, and no door. 27062. Q. A door fr.ime not in use? A. Yes. 2706:3. Q. And a door in use? A. Yes. 2706 t Q. Well, it is the door in use ? A. Y<'R. 27065. Q. It is the second door in bye of the 2nd Right in the travelling r oad? A. Yes. 270G6. Q. What did you see? A. Tbe sides of that door wera dt·ivcn outbye. They consisted of mme debri~, the same as this other door thn.t I have spoken of. 27067 . .Q. They were all driren in the same direction ;-driven out.bye? A. Ye.s. 270G8. Mr . .Ro&ertson.] Q. Did you uotire the door on tbe 4th Right, or where tbe doors had been? A. They were canvas door.s, l think. ' 27069. Q. DiJ you uotice whether they were single or double doors? A. No; I did not. I. saw the remains of one canvas door, but I could not see whether there were any more, but I certainlJ saw one. 27070. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. W ell, the overcast, whi ch is close by, was bn.dly injured? A. Yes. 27071. Q. Could you tell in what dire::!tion that bad been driven? A. The remains were driven m a westerly direction, towat'ds the furnace. 27072. Q. That would be produced by an outbye fo rce, would it not? A. Yes. 27073. Q. I mean a for..::e from the 4th Right out bye r A. Y< s. 27074. Q. Well, theo, you sn.w a fall of roof on the 2nd Left rope road? A. Yes; that was awny down here In dicating.] 27075. Q. About the 2nd Left? A. Yes. 27076. Q. \Vas that extensive? A. It seemed to be about a pillar length- about 83 or 40 yards. 27077. Q. Was it sigoificant? A. No. The most of it had fallen since the explosion; we could see that by the stona being clean. 27078. Q. Well, then, you came to two frame door.s, but you cannot say anything about the direction? A. No; they probably were driven toward::i the furuac e, but the forces were not very distinct there. 2707!>. Q. You would not exp ress a definite opin ion? A. No. 27080. M1·. Robe1·tson.] Q. How were these doors? 270Sl. Mr. Bruce Smitlt.] ·Q. v\ihere were those doors? A. Iu the road ; somewhere here [Indicating on tlie plan]. I think we went down one of those place.:1, but 1 rlo not know which. 270S2. Q. You are not sure of the position? A. No. 27093. Q. Now, a frame door on the 2nd Le£ t, in the back heading ;-you saw that destroyed? A. Yes; that is the door I am unable to locale now. 27084. Q. Now you come to Thursday, the 7th of August, when you went in again? A. Yes. 27085. Q. Accompanied by? A. Messrs. Atkinson, Watson, Morrison, Adam lfrost, and McGeachie. 2708G. Q. How did you enter that time ? A. vVe entered by the mn,in tunnel that moruin~. 27087. Q. Travelling down it? A. 1'o the first right hand [maanin_q the No. 1 Ri_qltt main level]. 27088. Q. What did you notice there? A. We noticed that tho forces had been ontwM<l on the tunnel. 27089. Q. From where? A. From the No. 1 Right. 27090. Q. When you came to the No. l you found that all the forces wer~ outbye? A. Yes; and also the forces were outbye here. 27001. Q. Outbye from the jnnctiun to the tunnel mouth? A. Yes. 27092.

806 JJ"itne.s.~- \V. Humble, 12 ~larch, 190:l.

••

27092. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Do I understand you to say that the forces at the junction wer.e all. outbye? A. From tbe 4th Right to the junction the forces were all outbye, and also those from tbe JUnchon out to the tunnel mouth, so for as I could see. 27093. Q. Have you anything to s~y a.bout th<' main tunnel below the jucction-to the north-west of the junction? A. No; I hav-z not. That is a pnrr of the mine that I was not along. I was not along that road. 270!H. Mr. B1·uce Smitli.] Q. You simpl.v say that from the No. l Right to the tunnel mouth all the forces were outb\'e? .tl. Y<>s. 27095. Q. Now, you saw ihe rail-girders on the roof? A. Yes. 2709G. Q. 'rhey wera bent in one direction? A. They were bent in an outward dir ection. 27007. Q. That is a part of the effects you mentioned? A. Yes. 27098. Q. To what extent were tl1ey bent? A. Well, they were 9, or 10, or 11 feet long, and they woul<l be bent out of a straight line, perhap!!, a foot. Some of t'hem were out fully 12 inches io the mi~dle. 21000. Q. In your opinion, would that be done by a blast of air? A. ·well, no, I think not; 1t was a blast of something, buL it certainly was not air, in my opinion. 27100. Q. Then you came 38 yards in from the 3rd Left, and you came upon some tubs? A. Yes. i710l. Q. The force which drove those was an outbye force? A. Yes; a very considerable force ou tward there. 27102. Q. '\\Tell, the atmosphere-I think yon wanted tc say something about it a.t rnme point there, the edue of the fall? A. That is the edge of the 4th Right. \Ve tested the 4th R ight agai n. 27103. Q. w·bat did you find there ;- how did you find the atmosphere? .!.. 'l'he atmosphere was dull that morning. 27104. Q. Do you mean duller than usual? A. Yes; duller tban usual. 27105. Q. Do you mean there was no movement in the air? A.. None then, none wl1atever; that was a stagnant atmosphere in there. 27106. Q. Did you examine th~ edge of the fall t11en? A. Yes. 27107. Q. More closel_v than before? A. No; I do not thin·k that it would be more closely than before, simply because - - [I11terrupted]. 27l08. Q. '\Vell, you have noted something here that you have not noted before? A. Yes; I hare n oted now that the stone was quite clean, but, of course, that was observed the first time we visited it, but not noted. 27109. Q. Well, what deduction did you make from thn.t? A. 'Well, it appeared to me as if the stone had been falling either a.t the time of the explosion or had fallen for some time afterwards. It not being coated with dust on the upper side, it seems reasonable to think that it bad· fallen since the dust-cloud bad passed. 271 10. (J. And that opinion, I think, is based upon an authority in Atkinson Brothers' book, by which t hat is made a test? A. Y cs; we had an inst.an<:e or two of that in the Dudley ColliE>ry fou r years ago. W e couJd distinguish betwee11 th bords that had fallen before the accident, and the bords that fell after t he accident. 27111. Q. How did you distinguish? A. I knew severn.1 bords that had been fallen befor e the accident. I bad travelled over thorn several times before the accident. 27112. Q. How did you find thorn after the accident? A. The fa~len stone was corered with a thick coating of dust. 271 13. Q. .And you say there were others that had fallen - - [Interrupted] ? A. A.fter the accident. 27114. Q. And how di<l you find that? A. 'rhe stones were quite clean. 27115. Q. So that presents you with the different appearances of stone which bad fallen before, and stone which bad fallen after, the e:tplosion? A. Yet;. 2711G. Q. And, applying your experience, you express your opinion that that stone fell after t he dust h ad been·precipitated? A. Yes, I do. 2711'7. Q. Tben I take it that your opinion is that some of that fall in the 3u-iwre goaf in t he 4th R ight had really come down after something else had happened to precipitate dust? A. Yes. 27118. Q. And after the worst damage was dQ.!1e? A. Yes. 27110. Q. You saw the heap of coal in the road? A. Yes, I did. 27120. Q. Wer e you n.ble to form any opinion about that? A. Well, I am at a loss to know where it came from; and I cannot fin<l anybody who can help me. 27121. Q. It is as groat a mystery to you as to other people? A. Yes; I do not J..uo,v where it came from. It was lying on the tram road. It could not ham been there before the accident. 2'7122. Q. Now, you sec the remnants of a wood chock there? A. Yes; the wood chock was a fe,v yards on the outbye side of the coal-henp. 27123. Q. Does that throw any light on it, in your opinion? A. Yes. Of course, I ucver saw lhis chock before; but I was told that, before the a~cideut, it was standing at the corner of the 3rd Left. l£ that be so, t hen the force has gone outbye, aod has driven the remains of the chock 5 or G yar ds. 27]2.J.. Q. That is just another indication of an outbve force? A. Yes. 27125. Q. Then you saw a tub-wheel? A. Yes. · 27126. Q. That has been represented on l\Ir. Cam bage's plan ? /,. Yes. 271~7. Q. And that, in your opinion, indicates an inbyc force north of the 4th Riuht? L. Ye~, thi\t is so. 27128. Q. There is a second pair of wheels-those are also on Mr. Cambage's pla;? A. Yes. 27129. Q. And that, in your opinion, indicates a force? A. Iubye. 27130. Q. Now, there are a uumbet· of other indications there showing force in the same direction? A. Yes; broken tubs and signal-wire!.'. 27131. Q. You agree that they all indicate a force from the 4th Right northwards? A. Yes, I am satisfied of that. 27132.· Q. Then Adam l'rost, junior, and yourself left the' party at the 4th L eft? A. Yes. 27133. Q. And you travelled down to, and through, Gill'::i, Stafford's, Price's, and Powell's F lats? A. Yes; and w~ walked right away r ound here to the 2nd Left, to the telephone ca.bin. 27134. Q. Did you sec anything on that journey that is significant at all? A. No. There were two or three falls of roof, but nothing about them to indicate direction of force· and all the way alon(J' this road 0 the destruction was very small. ' 271 35. Q. Then you joinecl the pn.rty again at Powell's Flat? ,1. Yes. 2713G.

•

807

ll'ilness-W. Humble, 12 March, 1903.

27136. Q. And travelled down to the shaft headino? ,1. To the sl1aft beading. 0 27137. Q. Do you mean down No. 1, till you ca me to the slrnft hcauiug? A. We went down through these praces [pointi,ng to the plan]. 27138. Q. You travelled due west? A. Due west from Powell's Flat, in the direction of the furnace. 27139. Q. Then you and Mon·ison went to the face of the place in which Mr. l\IacCabe and ~fr. McMurray were lost? A. Mr. Atkinson and I, I tbink. 27140. Q. Mr. Atkinson, and Morrison, and you? A. Yes. I may say that we were searching, in a general way, for the two boys, as we went along there. 27141. Q. You ultimately went to tbe furnace? A. Yes. 27142. Q. AnJ you te~ted the air? A. Yes. . 27143. Q. ,vhat did you find ibe air? A. 124,200 cubit! feet ~·e found at that time. 27144. Q. A~d you divided it into beliind and before? A. Yes; it, was necessary to make two measurements-behind the furnace 86,40'), and in front 37,i;OO. 27145. Q. Was that much more than the quantity required. in the mine? A. It was certainly a great deal more than the minimum quantity. 27146. Q. That is what I mean? Ll. Yes. 27147. Q. And then you went out? A. Yes; we trarelled outbye by the shaft travelling road. . 27148. Q. And you ~ent in again on Friday, the 8th of August? .tl. Yes. 27149. Q. Accompamed by l\fr. D. A. \V. Robertson, l\Ir. Atkinson, Mr. Jeffries, Mr. ·watson, and Mt·. M cGeachie? A. Yes. 27150. Q. Into the 1st R ight? A. Yt~s. 27151. Q. And you came across thirty-four tubs? A. Yes-that is, up there in the 2nd Right. 27152. Q. And these tubs were all forced in one direction? A. Yes; they all showed a force in a north-easter! v direction. 27153. Q. Now, the angle is very acute from the No. 1 main road to the 2nd Right- very acute? A. Yes. 27154. Q. Would that force, do you think, be the force that came down the No. 1 ? A. Yes, I think so. 27155. Mr. .Robe1·tso11.J Q. D o you call that an acute angle? ,1. Yes; it appears to me to be about 60 degrees. 271~6. Q. I do not call call lhat acute? A. I call anything less than 00 degrees an acute angle . 27157. M1·. Br1tce Smith.] It is acute from this side (north). 27] 58. M1· . .Robertson. J lt is not very acute. 27159. Mr. Bruce Smit/1.J No, not very acute; but anyfoiug less than a right angle is called acute. 27160. Q. You have a note here that one tub was found ,Yith a large hole in it, as if a stone had been blown through it? A. Yes; it was an iron tub, and there bad been a stone or some other body driven right through the end. It was a jagged lwle. 27161. Q. Had it gone through both ends? A . .Ko. 2716:.!. Q. D id you find it in the tub? A. Ko; but we fouu<l the hole, and it was a hole that had been. newly made. 271G3. Q. Djd you fiud .t11e stone? ,!. Ko. 27164. Mr. Ritcltie.J Q. It ~ hat direction was it? A. It was in the way that the empty tubs had been going up here, north-east. 27165. Q. And it went through the outbye end? .A. Yes; the outbye end of the tub. 271G6. Mr. Bruce Smith.] You made a test for gas at the 4th Right goaf edge again? A. Yes. Now we are coming back to what .Mr. Robertson was speaking of before. I have got here that I got { per cent. 27167. Q. Who was "·ith you? A. Ur. Robertson was close by, and there may have beon another one close by; but the remainder of the party would be down-- [ Interrupted]. 27168. Q. How far were you up on the stone? A. About, 2 or 3 feet above the roof of the seam. 27169. Mr. Robertson.] My recollectiou is that there was noM; aud you .admit that, with t · per cent., the indications arc so vc1·y fine that different conclusions might be come to by two different obser.ers? A. Yes, I admit that. 27•170. His Hono1·.J Q. ,vith a hydrogen lamp? A. Yes. . 27171. Mr. Bruce 8mitlt.J Q. Well, if! per cent. was really found, it would indicate that gas was being produced there? A. Yes; if we could say positiye}y tLat there was t per cent., it would certainly indicate that gas was there. 27172. Q. How much did you finu on a previous occasion? A. Well, I sa" l\IcGeachie find 1 per cent. 27173. Q. You say" no force obsenable." \Vbat do you refer to there P A." No force observable as coming from the same, except a pile of timber." That means that there was no force observable, as coming down this single roa<l, until we got to the tra,·elling road and. the engine r oad, where·there was a pile of timber. 27174. Q. You mean 11othing to indicate force? A. Ye~. 27l75. (J. Tben you came to that pile 0f timber; and tha.t force is outbye? 11. Yes. 2717G. M,. . .Robertson.] Q. Do not you recollect your attention being drawn tv indications of force? A. I recollect a large stone. 27177. Q. Do not you recollect the prop~? A. Yes, loose props. That is what I speak of. 27178. Q. I am referring to tbe props nearer the waste. Do not you remember some props buried half way up in slack, with their top en<ls leaning in? ~1. I do not remember that. 27179. Q. Do not you remember our havi11g t~ di~c11:ssion? A. You may have had a discussion with some other person; I do not remember it; but I certainly remember a heap of timber that had been scattered away down here dose to tbe rope road, whil'h one of the deputies said had been thrown out. 27180. Q. D u uot you rcmembcl' discussing how it could ocCUl' for these props to be pointing in wards? A. I do not remember that. I <lo not di~pute wliat you say, that the di!'cussion took place. 27181. Mr. Bruce Smit!,.] Now, a piece of roof stone, 3 feet square aml S inl!hes thick, was foumi. 6 yard:c-1 up this road? A. Yes . 27182. Q. Did that in dicate anything? A. It indicated an oppo~ite force. 27183. (J. You fount! tliis c; yards up this roa.<l ? A. Yes. 27184. Q. Up from where? A. Up tM ron.<l from the trrwelling road.

27185.

808 ll'ilni·.~1- W. Humble, lZ March, 1903.

27185. Q. What direction oE force did tha~ indi.cate? A. That app~ared to be. par~ oE. a fall ~n t ~e travelling road, and therefore it had been driven rn townr<ls the goaf m the opposite d1rect1on to this pile of timbt>r that I ha.ve just spoken of. 27186. Q. vVa,s that as thickly coated withcoal-d_ust as ~lie par~ t.ha.t appear~d to you to be first affected? A. No; I do not think that there was much coating on 1t ;, I thmk 1t was fa,r.ly clean . . 27187. Q. Could you t race it so as to ~o able to say that 1t bad been blown.rnto the 4th ~ 1ght from the travelling roan? A. ,vell , the only evidence that we bad then was that 1t had gone rnward . I t bad come from this fall ou tho travelling road. 27188. Q. Did you see the place where it ~ad fallen fr?m? A. We~), it was only par t of the fall ; t here were other blocks still lying on the travellm~ road, which had .constituted t,he fall. 271S9. Q. So that you found it to the east or the place where 1t had fallen P A. Yes. 271DO. (2. So that it must either ha.ve fallen there or been driven thera? A. It could not have fallen there. It had been dri,·en there.· . 2719l. Q. How do you account for the~e opposite forces? A. Well, I suppose ther e are always op.pos1te forces in an e:cplosion of that kine!. The re is the reaction of the air a.ftor the blast has expended .1t~elf; and that re-entry will have considerable force in it, although it may not. be so Btrong as the ongmal: there will still be considerable power in it. · '27192. Q. That is, supposiu/1' that there is only air going out and comiog io ? A. That is, supposing that, when the explosion·took pl;ce, ernrything was driven in front of it; and then, when the exp losion was over, the air would rush back. 27193. Q. Then you a.re not supposing any other force at work but air? A. Yes; I suppose there is gas and coal-du st as tho initiative. 27194. Q. Now, what conclusion do you come to from all these indications of fo rce, as to the cause of this explosion? I think you have framed it here [ref't:1-ring to Mr. Humble's notes] ? A. Yes. 27195. Q. Then read your notes; because that is deliberately written ? A. Yes. 27196. Mr. Wade.] It would be a better test of the value of it if he would n ot read it. 27 Hl7. His Honor.] I£ l\fr. ·wade prefers to have Mr. Ilumble':1 i<len. withouL the uoteR, then perhaps it would be better. 271!'18. Q. Yon can gire it just. as well without the notes-you hn,·e thought it out? A. Yes. · 27199. Mr. Bruce 1:imitli ] Q. You have thought this out? A. I have. 27200. Q. And you wrote your thoughts down on paper? A. Yes. 27201. Q. A.nd in as concise a way as you could? A. Yes ; and perhaps in a little better way than I can ~ive it to you now. I wrote this out, so that 1 could put it as shor tly as possible; but I think I can give it. A fall of roof occurred in the inner part of this 35-acre goaf ; this fall of roof drove out some fi re damp; that fire-damp was ignited b.v n. light, either on the travelling road or on the rope r oad; the explosion commenced frou1 that. point, and went both right and left along the rope road. 27102. Q. When you say "right and left" wh:1 t do you mean ? A. Weut inward 1rnd outward along the rope road-of course, I may say it was helped along by coal-dust, directly it got to the r ope road. 27203. Q. That is what I mean: what do you mean by being he!ped aloug by coal-dust? A. It was aggravated. 27204. Q. .Aggravated by what? A. By co:il-dust. 2i205. Q. Doing wbat? A. Lighting. 2720G. Q. You belie,·e that the coal-dust raised b_v this blast lighted? A. Yes, lightecl. 272U7. Q. A.nd what? A. And continued the explosion. 27208. Q. You mean lighted and fli ckered, or exploded ? A. Exploded . 27209. Q. I want you to tell it? A. The inward force no douht displaced some gas, or ignited some gas, at the fal'C of the first right.hand headings [mraning fl,e No. 1 main level headings]. 2 7:HO. :Jb·. Wade] Q. Did you say di:iplaced? A. No; I withdraw the woru displaced. 272 ll. M,·. Brnce S mith.] Q. What do you mean by the first right-hand headings ? A. The headings of the No. l main level. 27:H2. Q. The force ignited gal:! in the face of these No. 1 main hea<liogs? A. Ye!:!. 27213. Q. And it was this gas that burnt the canvas, and burnt M orris and son, and blew out those Btoppings on to the m :110 road? [Nv answer.] 27214. Q. Is it possible for you to form nn opinion as to how far the dust explosions travelled. I mean that there is a recognist>d form or seri es whit!h coal-cl ust c>xplosions take, is there not? A. Yee. ~7215. Q. Is an_vbody able to say ho\v many <lust explosions take place in such and such an area? A. No; I tbi11k it is impossible to say. T here may be a. series of explosions-a series of ignitions. 272 W. Q. The11 I understand you to ha,·e formed the opini on that th ere was a blast of air, a gas explosion, a.nd a. coal-dust explosion ? A. Yes, the gas was forced from the goaf bv a fnl I : that gns ignited i and the explosion com menced at that point. · 27217. Q. And that accounts for the two for~cs , inbye and oulbye? A. Yes. 2721 8. Q. Andyo11 believe that was followed byfurthergas ex plosions upintbeend of tbeNo. l ? A. Y es. 272W. Q. An<l by coal-dust explosions? A. By a further gas explosion at the end of No. 1, which burnt those men, aod burnt that canvas, and blew o ut tho::>e sto ppings on to the front road. 27220. Q. And that was fo llowed by coal-dust explosioniil r A. Yes, accompanied by co:1-l-dust explosions . 2722l. Q. Now, if there is evidence vf contradictory forces in the mine, woulc.l thnt solution of it accouDt for them? A. That solution would not nccouut for all the contradictory forces; lmtl think tbissolution accounts for the great bulk o-f the forceR that were ob~erved. 27222. Q. I£ you canoot tell where coal-dust explosions take place, you can hardly t race erery indication of fo r ce, can you i' A. Ko. 2722\ Q. Do not you expect, aftet· an explosion in which coal-rlust takes part-a series of coal-dust explosions- a scri~s. of contradictory forces? A. Yes, I sh ould always expect that. 27224: Q. Neutralising one anot.hel'? A. Yes, ne utralising one auotl1er ; 1 think that is always t he case. ~7225. Q. What opinion have you formed on thid wind-blast theory that has been promulgated by Dr. Robertson- the theory that a. wiod-blast ak,ne is the cause of this disastJr ? A. I cannot u nderstand it. I cannot un<lerstand how a wind-blast would burn canvns and burn men and generate carbon monoxide nnd all the other gases found after a coal-d ust and fire-damp explosion. 'r cannot understand a wind-blast doiog those things.

27226,

"l•

..i

.I ~ I I

809 ll'itnes.,-w. Humble, 12 March, 1903.

27226. Q. Can you reconcile the contradictory directions of force 路which you saw with a single blast, as Dr. Robertson has suggested? A. No, I cannot reconcile them. 27227. Q. Do you think it is possible, practically possible, to say how the roof of that area in the 4th R ight fell? .A. No; it is not possible to say bow it fell. 27228. Q. Do you think it is probable that 40 yards square of roof fell simultaneously so as to occupy onlv half a second in falling? A. No, I think not; '\"ery improbable. 27229. Q. Very improbable? A. Yes. 27230. Q. Do you think it is a safe premise to base a theory of an explosion upon the assumption that a 路roof 40 yards rquare fell in one block simultaneously in hi!.lf a second ? A . No ; I do not think it is a safe premise. . 2723 1. Q. Do you think it is a sensible assumption? A. Ko, I think it is the opposite. 27232. Q. H ave you ever known such a thing to occur-to be ascertained? A. No. I have known fa]ls of roof to occur in a goaf, and drive out large quantities of gas; but I never knew a wind-blast to come out that did the destruction done in this mine. 27233 . Q. A. roof that was tenacious-bow would you expect it to fall? A. Well, it falls in pieces. '!'here may, occasionally, a large block come down; but, generally speaking, a goaf fal1s in pieces. It may dribble on for hour~. 2'7234. Q. You know it bas been suggested that the gas, or the inflammable material, which you found at the end of No. 1 was the result of the distillation of coal-dust following upon this blast? A . I cannot accept that. 27235. Q. You see no reason for accepting it? A. Ko. 27236. Q. And you see no reason for doubting that it was the ordinary common or garden fire-damp? A. Fire-damp. 27237. Q. W hat do you understand, Mr. Humble, by a gassy mine? A. A mine in which gas is frequently found by tl1e ordinary flame. I should not say "frequently found by the hydrogen lamp"; but frequently found by the ordinary flame of a lamp. 27238. Q. From what you saw yourself of the gas found in that mine, and from what you knc;w of the case of Gallagher, have you any doubt whatever, the slightest doubt, that gas is given off in that mine? A. No doubt whatever. 27239. Q. .A.nd, if you bad never seen it or beard of it, would it be reasonable to assume that that mine is absolutely free from gas; from what you know of the other mines in that district? A. No. I think, even though I had never heard of gas, or never seen gas-I think it is a mine in which it is likely t hat gas woula be seen. 路 27240. Q. .A.nd then, when you get the experience which you have had yourself, and know of that which is acknowledged by other people, that removes any doubt from your mind? A. Yes, it does. There are very few of the mines absolutely free from fire-damp. 27241. Q. If you once accept it as a fact that it is a gassy mine, and then know of the indications which resulted from this explosion, do you see any possible reason for doubting that gas played a part in the disaster? A. No, I am satisfied that it did play a part, a very important part, in it. 27242. Q. I think you examined the mine in 1808 ? A. I did. 27243 . Q. And you did not find any gas then? A. No; T examined with the l!lafety-lamp at the goaf edges, but did not find any gas. 27241. Q. Now, you know that a number uf recommendations Lave been made by the Miners' D elegate Boards for alterations in the law? 'A. Y cs. 27245. Q. Supposing that it were thought desirable to submit firemen ann depufas to an examination, what sort of examination should it be, do you think-an oral or wr itten examination? A. Chiefly, if noi entirely, oral; because those men, while being good men at their work, may have bad very little education. 27246. Q. You are oue of the Board of Examiners, I think? A. One of the three examiners, yes. 27247. Q. And you think there would be an advantage, without any disadvantage, in ll}.aking this examination oral? A . Ye.s; I know that we get t-he best results out of' a man in the oral examination. 27248. Q. It is suggested that the Inspector should have the right to require safety-lamps to be put into a mine, and that the management of the mine should ha,路e the right to have the question referred to the arbitrators under section 25 of the .Act. Do you think that a fair proposal? A. I think so; yes. 27249. Q. It will give both sides, where there is a differeuce of opinion, an opportuuity of stating why? A. Yes, care should be taken that the arbitration proceedings are not prolonged indefinitely; s0 that there might not be an explosion in the meantime. 27250. Q. You know it bas been suggested, further, that, in the meantime, pending the decision of the arbitTators, lamps should be put into the mine? A. Yes ; that would satisfy me. 27251. Q. .And, further, that the Department might keep a stock of lamps on hand, so that, in cn.se the award should be that lamps are not to be used, a mine would not have been compelled to purchase a lot of lamps for which there was no use? A. Yes; I think that is reasonable. 27252. Q. You think that is reasonable ? A. Yes. 27253. Q. Now, I want your opinion on the proposal, the absolute proposaJ, to substitute fans for furnaces in all cases in mines? A. It would inflict g reat hardship upon the smaller collieries. There would have to be a line drawn somewhere beyond which it should not apply. The line might be a certain number of pers-ons employed. 27254. Q. Outside that restriction, do you consider that the fan is in all cases so necessary that you would compel all existing minf's to abolish their furnaces and adopt fans? A. No ; I could not go as far as that. The fan is not absolutely necessary in every mine at the present time; we have some small mines which are very well ventilated without. 27255. Q. Do you see a.oy objection to treating that in the same way, and, where the Inspector requires a fan to be adopted, and the management object, to let it be settled by arbitration? LI.. No; I see no objection t o ihat. 27256. Mr. Ritchie.J Q. You might ask him if he has a.ny proposal in the way of drawing the line t hat he speaks of, as to the number of men. 27257. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. You said something just now as to drawing the line at the number of men? A. I thought that all mines employing more than thirty persons undergr<rnnd ought to be asked to ventilate by fan.

16825

29-5 K

27258.

810 Witness-W. Humble, 12 March, 1903.

.,.

27258. Q. Indiscriminately? A. Yes; aJl mines employing more than thirty persons. 27259. Q. Take Mount Kembla ;-do you mean to say th~t you w~rnld requil:e ¥ountKe~bla to adopt a fan in substitution for its furnace? A. I mean to say that, 1f there 1s any alteration made m the law, Mount Kembla. should be brought into it; and that, therefore, having drawn a line at thirty persons employed, it would bring ICembla into it. 27260. Q. Woul<l you refer those questions to arbitration, or would you make it an absolute rule? A. I would be likely to make an absolute rule about tbe thirty persons. 27261. Q. I know tlmt. With regard to those over thirty persons, do I understand you to express, as your opinion, that all mines contai~ing .over thirty miners should. change from fans to furnaces at once; or that it should be referred to arbLtrahon? A. I took your vers1on to be that the Inspector was to have the power to direct; and I should certainly say that he should have the power to direct suc'b a. mine as KP.mbla; and tl.ien the o,vners, if they object, can go to arbitration. 27262. Q. Then I understand you would allow all mines employing under thirty men to use a furnace ; nod all over thirty you would make subject. to the Inspector 's order, and subject to arbitration i£ the management object? A. Yes, that is so. . 27263. Q. I took it at first that you would make an absolute order by hook or by crook? A. I lost sight of your question for the time-being. 27264. Q. Now, with regard to sealing off; a pr oposal was made by somebody to absolutely seal off waste workings-" Waste workings to be absolutely sealed off, and surrounded by return airways; such return airways not to come in contact with intake"? A. Well, it is not advisable to seal off old workings, except in case of fire. . 272G5. Q. You discard that part of it? A. Yes; it is in many mines impracticable to have them surrounded by returns. I think that, if there is a breathing hole left beween the old workings and the return airway, that would be sufficient. 27266. Q. A proposal was made that a.11 places, exc~pt prospecting drives, should have cut-throughs not more than 30 yards apart; do you approve of laying down a hard and fast r ule of that sort? A. No, certainly not. 27267. Q. Is it practicable to adopt a hard and fast rule for all mines, irrespective of their conditions? .A. No; it is not practicable. • 27268. Q. What does it depend upon? A. The difference in depth precludes the idea. Take the Sydney Harbour Colliery; they could not go on on that line ; they "·ould have to have pillars very much larger than that. The Metropolitan pillars are larger than that. . 27269. Q. So it really depends on the individual conditions of the mines, and ~be depth fro m the surface? A. Yes. 27270. Q. Whom would you leave that to-the question of the size of the pillars in regard to the safety of the mine~ A. I should leave it to the Manager, I think. Ile is the right man to have it. 27271. Q. I suppose the safety .o f the mine and the freedom from loss of coal is as great an incentive as the greed to get coal? A. Yes. 27272. Q. You know that as a. Manager? A. Yes. 27273. Q. Do you approve of the proposal that has been made to have a monthly examination and report by the deputies ? 27274. Mr. L:1Jsa,qht.] It is changed to tl10 under.manager. 27275. Mr. Bruce Smit!,.] Q. Do you approve of the proposal that the under-manager should make a monthly examination with the hydrogen lamp? A. Well, while it may be desirable that they should do it, I do not think it is worth while making any law on the matter; because I think in the futu re it will be done. It is done now in several mines; the under-manager and the Manager carry their hydrogen lamp~ occasionally. 2727G. Q. Do you see any reason for altering the air provision that exists at the present time? ii. No, I do not; I think we have a provision now, which, for the amount that is at present supplied, is equal to the 500 cubic feet required for Pach horse. The amount of air that we have flowing tbrough the working districts now in most cases gives more than 500 for each horse, and 100 for each man and a boy. 27277. Q. You made several tests of the ventilation in Mount Kembla in your later visits, after the mine had got into working order? A. That is, measuring the air. 27278. Q. ,Yes; and you ascertained how much air was going into the parts of the mine where men were employed? A. Yes. 27279. Q. What was the result of that ;- did that show that the nir was being effectually separated, so as to give sufficient t-0 the men? A. It appeared to me that, when in working order, the mine would give 300 cubic feet for each person employed. 27280. Mr. Bobertson.l Q. ·what is t.be value of Mr. Humble's measurements, taken at a time when the ventilation was a.11 unsettled ? 27281. Mr. Bruce Smith.] I asked him was it on his later visits, when the ventilation was restored. 27282. Witness.] The ventilation had 'not been restored when I made my measurements. 27283. Mr. Robertson.] The verv fact that the ventilation had not been restored miaht be a r eason why 0 Mr. H umble should get more. • 27284. Mr. Bruce Smitlt.] (). What is your view about the automalic action of doors? There is a proposal that all doors should be erected so as to close of their own accord? A . As a rule, they do close now. 2728!). Q. Would you lmve them self-closing? A. They are self-closing. 27286. Q. Do you approve of that being made compulsory? A. It is compulsory now; there is a special rule to that effect. 27287. Q. That is, since t.he disaster? A. No, before. The special rule was proposed to the whole of the northern collieries, I think. 27288. Q. And adopted ? A. And adopted. 27289. Q. You do not know about the southern? A. I do not know about the southern. 272~0. Q. What .do .V?U think of the suggestion that there should be weekly measurements of air in each sect10n? A. It I? quite unnecessary; quite unnecessary. It is measured now once a month; and it is measured by the mspector when he goes round, perhaps once in eight or ten weeks· and further than that, I think there is not anything r equired. ' '

27291.

811

Witne~W. Humble, 12 March, 1903.

2'1291. Q. What is your view upon the subject of watering ? A. Well, the haulage roads certainly ought to .be watered, except those that are naturally wet throughout. 0£ courae we are pretty well all a~ree~ on that; but it is the system of watering, the method to be adopted; and my opinion is that no watering ts effective unless it waters both the roof, the sides, and the floor. We have had several attempts in the north to wn.ter roads ; but, unfortunately, they watered the floor and left the other part umvatered. 27292. Q. What is your view of the possible danger of watering the roof, and so causing falls? A. W ell, in some cases yon may induce falls ; but there are other cases where the roof is· not affected. Take Dudley, for instance ; they water their roof, and sides, and floor, and everything else, and it does not affect it. 27293. Q. All over the mine, or just the haulage road!!? A. Certainly on the haulage roads, where they a,re dusty. . 27294. Q. You will admit that the conditions of each mine should regulate the treatment of each mine? A. Yes. 27295. Q. What would you think of the suggestion that the Iospector11 should have the power to order more extensive watering, and, if the management object, put that under arbitration also? A. Ob, dear; well, I suppose so, having assented to ihe other; but I really think that is putting too much on the Inspector. 27296. Q. Can you formulate any rule applicable to all mines as to watering?' A. No. 27297. Q. Would not you leave it primarily with the Manager? A. Y cs. . 27298. Q. With power to the Inspector to differ, A. Yes. 27299. Q. And power to refer it to arbitration where they do differ? A. Yes; but I should certainly leave it to the Manager first; he knows the conditions. He knows where the water would damage or not damage bis roof. . 27300. Q. It has been suggested that the Manager should give more personal time to the management of the colliery; do you think it is possible to lay down any rule? A. It is not possible to lay down any rule; t hat would not be very irksome to some people. 27301. Q. 0£ course a Manager has a gi·eat many other duties besides? A. Yes. You may say that a Manager ought to go down a mine twice a week; but what is the use of it. 27302. Q. Can you lay down any rule at all as to bow often the Manager should go down a mine, or how much of the mine be should see each time? 11. No, I could not. 27303. Q. Is it practicable? A. It is not. 27304. Q. How often do you think a Manager should go practically through the mine ? A. Well, if I were a Manager in one of those mines that I know of in this State, I should see it once a week-see all working parts of the mine once a week. 27305. Q. Do you think that is practicable in all mines? A. I think so. 27306. Q. Would it be practicable in the Metropolitan Mine for the Manager to see all working places · once a week? A. I can do it in three days, I think. 27307. · Mr . .Robertson.] I venture to say you could not do it in a fortnight. 27308. Witn ess.] Do you mean all the working places? 27309. Mr. Robertson.] There are other parts. 27310. Witness.] I would confine myself to the working parts. 273ll. Mr. Bruce Smitli.J Q. I am askiug you whether you think it is practicable to lay down a definite rule in words ? A. No, I do not think so. 27312. Q. Is it possible to lay down any practicable rule? A. I do uot think so. 27313. Q. W ould you think it wise to lay down a rule that every Manager should visit all the working places of his mine, irrespective of its size or position, once a week? A. No, I would not consider it wise to do that. 27314. Q. Some parts require special attention,do they not? A. Yes, some parts might require the Manager's attention dt1>ily for a week, as was the case in Stockton a while ago; it required the Manager's daily attention for five weeks. 27315. Q. There is just one other subject I want to ask your opinion upon: the practicability of giving instruction to the employees as to the means of escape in case of an explosion? A. Y ~s, that could be done, l think. , 273 l6. Q. How would you propose that to be done ? A. The outlets ought to be indicated, and well denned, as they are in some of the mines in the uorth now. 273l7. Q. How? A. By finger-posts at all junctions, and by having the return road fenced o:ff on each aide, or the old places opening into that return fenced off, so that a person, having got into that return, cannot get out without getting to the far end. FJ;e is put into a road that is fenced off on each side. 27318. Q. Is that done at many mines in the north? A. Yes, it is doue at the Hetton Colliery now; and, to a less extent, it is done in two other mines, the Seaham Mine --[Interrupted]. 27319. Q. Then a man cannot rnry well get off the track? .LL Not very well; not inadvertently. There is another mine where the deputies, at regular intervals, lend the men out by the retw·ns and by one of the outlet shafts. 27320. Q. How long has that been gc,ing on? 11. For the last twelve months-more than that. 2732 L. Q. Before the Kembla disaster? 11. Oh, yes; it is two years ago. ~7322. Q. What mine? A. The Stockton Mine. 27323. Q. And do the men willingly go? A. I do not think they are very willing to do it; but they do go. 27324. Q. In sufficient numbers t'.> make it worth while ? A. Yes; about a dozen will go with the deputy at one time. 27325. Q. It bas been suggested that all mines should be required to brush their travelling roads up to 6 feet high? A. That all tl'avelling roads should be not less than G feet high ? 27326. Q. Y es? A. Well, it is right enough to talk like that when we have thick seams, as we have at present; but it woulJ be very costly, and almost impracticable to do it when we are working thin eienma. 27327. Q. Well, what is a thin seam up north? A. We have one seam 3 feet 6 inches. 27328. Q. Would that be commercially practicable? A. No, it would not. It would be a very heavy cost . 27329. Q. In your opinion, could the mine go on? A. If there were many roads, it would certainly take away all the profit, and they do noL work the mines £or the benefit of the men employed.

27330,

812 Jl'itness-W. Humble, 12 March, 1903.

27330. Mt·. Ritchie. ] Q. Are there any mines in the Northern. District where that is done at present? A.. Yes, we have several mines in the nol'th where the travelling roads are more than 6 feet where the seam is less than 6 feet. . 27:33 l. Mr. Bruce Smitlt.] Q. \Vbat. was that done £or? A. _It w~s do~e for the purpos~ of making a good airway, I think ; and I think there has been some cons1dcrat1on given to the travelling of the men as well. 27332. Q. That is, on the tra.,·elling road? A. Tbat is, on the travelling road. 27333. Q. Has that been an expensive thing? A. No; I s.uppose it would cost 3s. or 4s. per yard to get that roof down. 27334. Q. What was the nature of tbat roof? A. It was fairly easy. It was good blasting ground. 27335. Q. I£ that is so, how do you reconcile tba.t with your statement that it would be too costly? A. It is done there because they have another object in view. They have large horses to travel down that road. 27336. Q. Ia it advantageous to that mine to use those large horses? A. Yes. 27337. Q. Does it pay them to do t~is large brushing in order to use those large horses? A .. Yes. 27388. Q. Then there is a commercial advantage there? A. Well, tbey could not work their pl.ace very well with smalJer horses; because tbe seam is dipping aud the tubs are very large, and they require those large horses. . 27339. Q. Ca.u you name any mine in the north in which the same thing is done, without a corumerc1al purpose? A. No, I think not. 27340. .Mr. Ritcliie. ] Q. What mines is that done at, th{\t you know of? A. Brown's collieries, a:t ~nmi. 27341. Q. 'l'hey have individual names? A.. :Brown's No. 4 and No. 2, and the Duckenfield Col11er1es. 27342. Q. Now, on the subject of explosions, I want to ask you what do you think of allowing the use of gunpowder to continue? A. I think the time has arrived when the use of gunpowder ought to be abolished in dry mines. 27343. Q. And what would you substitute? A. Well, there are several of the " permitted" explosives I suppose we would have to take one of those. 27344. Q. Do you approve of publishing a list of permitted explosives? A. Yes, as in England. I do not think we can do bet.ter than follow the lead they have set us m Great Britain in regard to their Coalmines Orders. (A.t 12·30 p.m. the Commission adjourned till 2 p.m.) AFTERNOON. ~

(On r esuming at 2 p.m., Mr. W.R. Pratt attended to take shorthand notes of the evidence and proceedings.)

JOSHUA JEFFRIES was sworn, and examined, as under:-

....

(This witness was called by the Commission at his own request, and Mr. Bruce Smith was asked to conduct the examination-iu-cbief as a matter of convenience.)

Examination-in-chief by Mr. Bruce Smith : -

27346. Q. What is your name? A. Joshua Jeffries. 27347. Q. You a.re at present Manager of the Metropolitan Colliery? A. Yes. 27348. Q. :For how many years have you been Manager? A. Two years. 27349. Q. Wbat general experience have you had? A . Sixteen years. 27350. Q. Has that been gained exclusively in New South. Wales? A. Yes. 27351. Q. Is that two years the extent of your experience as Manager? A. I was Manager at Greta ColLery, I was Assistant Manager before that, and 1 bad a practical general experience. 27352. Q. You were Assistant Manager at Dudley? A. A general assistant. 27358. Q. Have you made a study of the theory of coal-mining in addition to gaining practical knowledge? A. Yes. 27354. Q. What is the extent of the out.put of tho Metropolitan, of which you are now Manager ;-can you give roe any idea? A. 1,100 tons per day. 27355. Q. What is the area over which the mine has been, or is now, working? A. Roughly 111peaking, from 2,000 tc, 3,000 acres. 273?6. Q. \Vhat is about tbe length of the longest road? A. The length of the longest road would be 2 miles. ~7357. Q. And what is about the aggregate length of all your main roads put together? A. The main mta.ke and the r eturn airways, which we consider our main r oads, would be about 31 miles in length. 27358. Q. You have the management of the whole of that colliery in your hands, and have had for two yea.rs? A. l!'or two years. 27359. Q. You have other duties appertaining to the mine to discharge? A. I have the responsibility of the management under the Coal Mines Act. 27360. Q. ·will you tell me .what is the mean depth of the Metropolitan Mine? A. Tbe shaft is 1.,lOO feet deep, and the cover varies from that depth to 1,700 feet, the latter depth being where we are working under the hills. 27361. Q. Generally speaking, 1,700 feet is the deepest part from the su rface? A. Yes. i7362. Q. Will that depth increase as you go in? A. The depth will increase coming northerly-towards Sydney. 2!363. Q. Have you had any experience of gas in that mine? A. Yes; I have. The M etropol itan Mine yields m_ore gas than any otber mine in the world. An examination made by the hydrogen lamp of tbe 1·etu~n a.mvays shows that 6,000 cubic feet of ~as is exhausted every minute and carried away by the veotilabon through the ll;PC~st shaft, and 430,000 cubic feet of air per minute are given off. 2736t Q. Yoa have ventilation by fan? A. Yes; and we haveasecond fan in course of erection. 27365. Q: ~re there any other peculiarities about the Metropolitan Mine apart from the qnestiou of gas? A. Yes; it 1s a very dry and dusty mine, and it is subject to outbursts of gas and to small crushes of coal. 27366. Q. Perhaps any minute ~00 to~s of coal may burst out by reason of the gas or pressure? A. Yes. 27367. Q. What staff have you 1mmcd1ately under you? A. An under-manaaer ten deputies and twenty 0 r0adsmen, who are practically assistant deputies. ' ' 27360.

813

• 1Vitne.9s-J. Jeffries, 12 M~rch, 1903.

2'7368. Q. They are the understudies of the deputies ? A. Yes. . . 27369. Q. What number of men have you working? A. There are 400 men underground-that 1s, all bands. There are 240 or 250 miners, and the balance would be wheelers, shiftmen, and so on. • 27370. Q. What means of locomotion have you? A. The endless rope haulage. 27371. Q. Is there any other special infoL·mation that you could mention? A. l think that is all of a general descriptive character, so far. 27372. Q. Now, you know that a number of recommendations bave been made to the Commission, with a view of an alteration of the law in regard to coal-mining? A. Yes. 273i3. Q. This is one of them(1) Mana.gers, under-managers, deputies, :ind shot-firers to hold certificates of competency by examination, ancl to have had five years' practical mU1ing experience, before being eligible for respective positions. Have you anything to say as to that? A. With regaru to Manager:i and under-manageri:i, I think the law

should remain as it is at present. 273·74. Q. What about deputies and shot-firers? A. I object .to them holding certificates. I think that the l\fanager should appoint them. U oder the present Act he is compelled to appoint competent persons to the position, and even now, if he does not appoint competent persons, he can be dealt with. The Manager knows the conditions of bis own mine; and he comes in contact with the miners every day. We generally draw the deputies from the miners; and I think the Manager is the bestjudge oftbecapabilities of the men £or that position. What is more, there is a possibility, in a mine like the Metrop.olitan, of having to take men who have bad no experience of gas ; in fact we have had men come down with un~ermanager's certificates, and we have employed them so as to let them gain experience with gas, with a view of their getting a first-class certificate. Vve think there are excellent men who have never seen gas, and it would be unfair to take the matter of the appointment of deputiPs and shot-firers out of the Manager's hands. The Manager knows better than a stranger what men he shouid appoint. . 27375. Q. You know that it is not proposed to curtail the power of the Manager, but to offer add1tional security? A. My idea is that this examination would curtail the power of the Manager. 27376. Q. Suppose that you only curtail the power of the Manager to the extent of requiring him to make a selection from men who have passed a theoretical examination-not a technical examination, but an examination as to gas. The examination might be as to the me.tbod of finding gas, of testing it, of firing shots, and questions of that sort. Do you see any objection t o a.n examination of that kind being passed by the men, in addition to the more practical examination by the Manager? A. I think that I am more competent to test men whom I require for the Metropolitan Mine than any other examiners would be. 27377. Q. You think the passing of an examination would curtail your choice? A. Yes. 27378. Q. It would preveut you from appointing men who might be practical in every way, and perfectly competent, but who would fail by reason of not having the presence 0£ mind or the necessary confidence, to pass an examination? A. I will give a case as an illustration. Three weeks ago we required three deputies; and it so happened that we did not have t hree men with certificates, but we had men who were perfectly competent to fill the positions. lf we had been limited in our choice, by being compelled to take men who bad certificates, we might have had to turn round and take men from another mine-men who are only used to a mine with no gas. 2737g, Mr. Ritcliie.] Q. Do you require a practical knowledge 0£ gas by the person whom you employ as a deputy ? A. Yes, we do. 27380. Q. You require it in any mine? A. That opens up a large question. It almost brings the question down to one of appointing men 0£ a class. For a fiery mine you want a man who has had experience of gas. In any other mine you do not necessarily want such knowledge. .,. 2'738L. Q. You know that gas is given off in nearly every colliery? A. I know that there are mines in the State where I should be justified. in sa.yiog that gas has nerer been seen. 27382. Q. I suppo1$e you know that, even in mines where gas has uot yet been discovered, it might be possible for gas to be gi,·en off at any minute? A. That is quite possible. 27383. Q. Should a person who has not a certificate know, iu a practical manner, when gas is given off? A. Yes. 27384. Q. Then you do require it, as a necessary qualification, that a deputy should have a practfral knowledge of gas? A. I will not go that far; but I think it should be left to the Manager. J£ the mine is a gassy one, a knowledge of gas is necessary. If gas has never been seen such knowledge is not so necessary, and a good practi<:al man might fill the position satisfactorily. What I say is that the power 0£ the Manager should not be curtailed. Let him choose bis own men. 27:185. Mr. B1·uce Smitli.J Q. It is not his power of choice which would be limited? .A. I take the two things to be the ~ame. 27386. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Suppose you have a miue where gas is not given off-gas may be given off at any time; and you may have a disaster? A. Then you raise the question of not employing hundreds of men, as deputies, who have never men gas. 2i387. Q. You can manufacture deputies who have seen gas in a fortnight? A. A fortnight is not long enough for a man to get a knowledge of gas. 27388. M ,r . Bruce Smitli.] Q. Tell the Commissioners some of the tests which you give? A. We take the deputies from the a~sistant deputies, these roadsmen are working under the deputies; they go round the workings with them, and step into the deputies' shoes as vacancies occur. 27389. Q. ~L'hey are students? A. We know for years that they a.re coming on. 27390. Q. You are preparing them? It. Ycs. 27391. Mr . .Rilcliic.J Q. Do you regard all Managers as being equally competent to select men as a. board would be? A. For their own mines-yes. 27392. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Almost more so? A. I think the Manngers are most competent. 2'7393. Q. You think the Manager is the most competent person to examine for his own mine? A. Yes. 27394. Q. You take exception to a stereotyped naminati on for all deputies for all mines? A. Yes. 27395. Q. It should be a special examination for each mine? A. 1" es. I think if you could send an examiner into a mine, and let him see the practical work of a man, that might assist him. 2739G. Q. You would not. appoint a man as deputy unless you had schooled bim for some timo? A. No. 27397. Q. And you want him to be accustomed to your mine? A. Yes. 27398. Q. Whatever exam ination be might have passed, you would not choose him as deputy unless he had bad this experience in your own mine? A. lt would be unsafe. 27399.

. f14 Witness-J. Jeffries, 12 March, 1903.

, ~I

27399. Q. Do the peculiar circumstances 0£ your mine make it undesirable to allow men to be ~ppointed by any hard and fast rule? A. Yes; there shou]d be no hard and fast rule regarding such appomtments. 274:00. Q. This examination would curtail the men's chances of appointment. I suppose there are plenty 0£ men who would be competent, but who could not get appointed to such a position unless they w~re qualified by a certificate? A. Since this suggestion has been mooted, one 0£ our most comp.etent deputi~s has stated to me that, if au examination was made compulsory, he would take to workmg coal agam rather than pass one. . . . . . . 27401. Mr. Ritcltie.] Q. What sort of an examination have you gotm your mmd, that 1t would be reqmred these men should undergo ? A. I should aay an oral examination. 27402. Q. Then you have iu your employ men who could not undergo an oral examination? A. I believe they would not do so. 27.Ji03. Q. Have you got any such men ? A. If you asked some 0£ our best men to pass an examination as to a theoretical knowledge 0£ gas, they would fail. 2740i. Q. Does that occur to your mind as par~ 0£ the examination? A. Do you mean a theoretical knowledge of gas? 27405. Q. Yes? A. Yes, it does. 27406. M,.. Bruce Smith.] Q. You do not mean the chemistry 0£ gas? A. No; the properties of the natural gases. 27407. Q. That would include the chemistry of gases? A. If you . took th:i.t knowledge away, it would simply be a question of testing with a lamp, and shot-firing. 27408. Q. And shot-firing? A. Yes. 27409. Q. Supposing that an oral examination included the practical methods of testing for gas, and shotfiring with safety, would such an oral examination be objectionable? A. 'You would still have to run the chance of having to appoint to a mine a man who ha.a had no local knowledge. I think local knowledge is a great thing. . 27410. Q. You would still have an objection? A. I would object to the Manager being interfered with. 27411. Q. You would object, on the ground that it would curtail the chances of the selection of men who might otherwise be capable? A. Yes. 27412. Q. You think th'at if a man is put through a direct education suc.:h as he gets at your mine as ~n under-deputy, fo r a. certain period, you do not require that he should qualify himself in other ways? A. I t hink that is the proper way to train and select them. 274l3. Q. If a certificate were necessary, you might not have among your assistants sufficient men who may have p:issed? A. Not at the time you required them. 274a. Q. I£ you wanted to appoint men quickly, would you be delayed by the routine of the men being examined? A. I suppose tbe Hoard would sit every six months. 27415. Q. Do you think that you are a fair sample-if I may be allowed to apply a mercantile figure-of the Managers who would have to choose deputie~? A. P erhaps they would not all have the same knowledge 0£ gas. Thore is no necessity. Of course, we are dealing with n mine carrying as much rei!ponsibility as any mine in England. 274-16. Q. Take a mine like the Mount Kembla Miue ;-would you think a man qualified for appointment as deputy who has never seen gas, and never tried it, but bas merely read a book about it, and heard it explained, and has perhaps seen a picture of a lamp with gas on it? A. In a case like that, he might gain a sufficient knowledge 0£ gas, beC'a.use knowledge may be gained in that way-at any rate, sufficient for a mine like Kembla. 27417. Q. You disapprove 0£ this recommendation-lock, stock, and barrel? A. Yes. 274l8. Q. On the ground that it curtails the choice of the Managers and the cha.uces of the men -? .A.. Yes. 274l9. Q. Supposing_ such an exam~ation.as I mentioned was .required, would such a man be competent to become a deputy rn the Metropolitan Mme? A. No, I think not. 274t0. Q. Now, you know it has been proposed, by Recommendation No. 2, that Inspectors should be vested with the absolute power to order the use 0£ safety-lamps in a mine? A. I think that power should be left to the Managers. 2742l. Q. Do you not think that there is a tendency on the part of Managers, where the indications of gas are small, to try and work without safety-lamps? A. No ; I think they are pretty well alive to their own responsibilities. , 27422. Q. Do you know that, in a great many cases where the Chief Inspector has asked the Manager to aclo pt safety-lamps, because in hi s opinion t hey are necessary, the Manager hns refused? i l.. I suppose it is a matter of opinion. I think power should be given to r efer a case of that kind to arbitration. 27423. Q. I was goiog to ask that ;-suppose the Inspector has power to order the use of safety-lamps, and the Manager has power to requir0 that the question should be submitted to arbitration, would that be sufficient? A. I think that is a fair solution of the difficulty. 2742!. Q. Do you think that ventilation by furnace should be prohibited, with a view of substituting fans (No. 3)? A. Yes; I have heard 0£ that recommendation. 2742!). Q. A further suggestion has been made that in the case 0£ small mines-those that employ from twenty to thirty men-tho change should not be required ;-what do you say a.bout the limitation? A. What I would suggest would be this : that in all mines, opened after a certain day, which a.re required to be contl'olled by a certificated Manager, fans should be made compulsory. 27426. Q. You know that there are plenty oi mines where only about twenty men are employed? A. I am referring to mines which have to be controlled by certificated Managers It should be required that they should be ventilated by fans. 2742 7. Q. ~ines where under .twenty men are employed can be worked without a certincated Manager? A. Yes. Mtnd, I a~ ~ot spe~krng in favour of the abolition 0£ the present furnaces. 2H2_8 . .9. As to ex,stiog 1moes ;-what do you say about indiscriminately ordering the means of vent1lat1nn to be changed? A. I think it should be left as a.t present. ~7429. r;. Wbat_ :\bout the _p~oposal, which has been suggested, of giving the I nspector power to order fans to .be sub~t,tuted, and glVlng power to a Manager to require the matter to be referred to arbitration? A. I obJect to ao luspector having the power to interfere in the matter 0£ whether £ans should be used or not. It is a question that practically interests the owners. 27430.

' ·I I

815.

WitMM-J, Jeffries, 12 March, 1903.

27430. Q. Suppose the Inspector of Mines comes to the conclusion that t.be conditions of a mine make it desirable that n fa.n should be, as soon as possible, substituted for a furnace ;-do you think that would be a good reason to call upon the Manager to show "by a fan should not be substituted? A. I do not think that. 27431. Q. You know that some Managers are pig-headed about these things, just as Inspectors mn.y be? A. If you have a mine where the return air become$ bur-iened with gas, I do not t'hink that any prudent Manager would object to put up a fan. 27432. Q. Suppose the Manager is not a prudent man? A. A mine Manage~· should.be prudent. . . 27433. Q. I£ the Inspector came to the conclusion that the safety of the m10e required the substitution of a fan for a furnace, you say that you would not give power to the Inspector to call u pon the Manage~ to show why this should not be done? A. If you would give me a hypothetical case, I might answer 1t. . 27434. Q. You cannot conceive of a case where that would be desirable? .A. No. 27435. Q. Have you had experience of mines ventilated by furnace? A. No. 27436. Q. Have you a theoretical knowledge of ventilation? A. Yes. 27437. Q. What do you think of the matter yourself? A. 1 think that, upon the grounds of efficiency · and economy, a fan is superior. 27438. Q. Efficiency-do you mean regularity? A. I mean uniformity of ventilation; and I may say that, as regards the quantity of ventilation, generally speaking it is better. 27439. Q. The explanation that you give, then, is this: where more than twenty men are employed, they should have fans in all new mines; but, as to existing mines, you would leave the furnaces until the Managers thought fit to make a change? A. Yes. 27440. Q. It has been suggested (No. :~) that waste workings should be absolutely sealed off, and surrounded by return airways ;-1 think you may leave the matter of sealing off out of the question? A. I think that would be introducing a danger. 27441. Q. Where would you have the outlets from these. waste workings? A. Opening into the return airways. 27442. Q. Not opening into the intake? A. That is prohibited by General Rule 1. 27413. Q.· You would have the outlets from tbe wastes ar:d goafs opening into tbe return airways?' A. Yes; really it is a safety.valve. 27441. Q. It has been suggested (No. 7) that there should be a monthly examination and report, by under-mana.gers and District Inspectors, with the hydrogen flame? A. I think that is impracticable. I made a test under these conditions, and I found that I could not carry it out. 27445. Q. You tried to put this recommernhtion into actual work ? A. Yes. 274i6. Q. What is your opinion- why did it hil? A. The hydrogen tube, when used in a mjne in which the air is laden with coal-dust, gets choked after twenty or thirty minutes, and the result is useless. 27447. Q. The test is only useful for special occasions? A. Yes-and you cannot make· a test with a hydrogen lamp where there is coal-dust. The value of a test with a hydrogen lamp is because th e flame is not luminous; but if there ill coal-dust, the flame becomes luminous, and you cannot detect the cap of gas-you cannot see the cap at all. Then, the hydrogen lamp is worked under tremeJ?dous pressure, and the man might turn the flame up too high. 27448. Q. It would be, a dangerous thing to bandle,' and there might be an explosion? A. It is quite possible there might. 27440. Q. A general rule of that sort, which ignores the conditions of different mines, would be unwise? A. Yes. 27450. Q. The hydrogen lamp would not work where there is dust present? A. No; I am quite sure of that point. 27451. Q. What is your opinion of the present requirements with regard to ventilation? It has been proposed- " A minimum of 500 cubic feet of air per minute to be provided for every horse, instead of 100, as at present"? A. I think it is absurd. I will· give ::i. case as an illustration. We had a district where 800 cubic feet of air was going, this week we have bad to increase it to 1,200 feet. 27452. Q. Why? A. On account of the yield of gas. Such a recommendation would operate against the safety of the miners. 27453. Q. You have gone far above the reguirements of the Act, because the circumstances of t he case required it? A. Yes. 2'i45i. Q. Is that any objection to raising the minimum? . A. I think so. The word "adequate" meets all requirements. 27455. Q. In whose opinion should it be adequate? A. Under present conditions, under General R ule 1, the Inspector has power to say whether tbe ventilation is adequate or otherwise; and, for the benefit of the men, it would be wise to leave it at that. , 27456 . .Afr. Rite/tie. ] Q. How will a regulation to increase the quantity of air, to be supplied to eac~ man, from 100 cubic feet to 200 cubic feet-as suggested by the Newcastle proposal-affect the latter portion of the rule? A. If you have adequate ventilation, you must have sufficient ventilation for all requirements. 27457. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Mr. Ritchie has mentioned to you the Newcastle suggestion, which is, tba.t 200 cubic feet of air should be provided for each man and boy ;-tho lllawarra suggestion is to increase the supply of air for each horse to 500 cubic feet per minute? A. Yes, I understand that. 27458. M.1·. Ritchie.] Q. You say that it would be a source of danger if the proposal is agreed to ;-I want you to explain to me how increasing the minimum quantity of air to be supplied could interfere with the safety of the miners? A. I think it would be possible for a Manager to take refuge behind the minimum. 27459. Q. Would it not be possible for a Manager to take refuge behind the niinimum quantity now? A. l think there should be no limit. 27460. Q. How would it affect the safety of the miners? A. I have given you a case where we had to increase th e supply from 700 or 800 feet to 1,200 feet. I think it would be better to learn in the word "adequate." l think that would be bette1· for the benefit of the miners. If 100 cubic feet is sufficient there is uo ncc:d for more. You may require a small amount to-day, and to-morrow mu mav want more'. 27461. Mr. Bruce Smitli.J Q. In Great Britain the word" adequate" is used? A. Y ts. · 27462.

·316 JJ'itne-ss-J. Jeffries, 12 March, 1903.

•

, ,. I

./,•

27462. Q. And that provision has remained for many yurs? A. Yes. 27463. Mr. Robertson. ] Q. How many men are employed at night in your mine? A. Sixteen. 27461. Q. The total ventilation is 430,000 C'ubic feet? A. Yes. 2H65. Q. I£ the ventilation was governed by the number of men underground, you would only have 1,400 feet? A. Of course, you must govern the ,entilation by tho conditions . 27466. Q. The Act assumes that the ,·entilation is to bo governed by the number of persons employed? A. That seems to be wrong on principle. 27 .l:G7. Mr. Bruce Smitlt.] Q. There is no minimum in Great Britain? A. No. 27468. Q. Simply, an adequate supply is required r A. Yef.'l. 27469. Q. Here we require an adequate supply, and the minimum fixed ag well? A. Yes; and 100 cubic feet are required for each man, and boy, and horso. 27470. Q. lt is proposed to increase the supply for e:icb hor.;e to 500 cubic feet, and the supply to each man and boy to 200 cubic feet? A. There is no necessity for the increase 2747 L Q. Do you know of any reason why there should be any increase? A. I know of no reason. 27472. Q. It bas been suggested (No. 9) that all doors should be self-C'losing? A. I o bject to the ~ci~ 27473. Q. Why? A. On the gr ound that, if you compel all doors to be se1f-cloeing, you have no redr2s3 against a man who lcavei, them open. In a mine, it is nlmost impossible to have doors self-closing, as they are blocked by pieces of coal and rubbish. 27474. Q. You mean that the knowledge in a man that a door is supposed to be self-closing remove3 the responsibility? A. Yes. That rule was submitted to u1,, and we objected to it on that ground; and the Department accepted an amendment we suggested. 27475. Q. I take it that it is your opinion, if doors are not self-closing, every door which a man opens is a reminder to him that it has to be clGseu? A. Yes. 2747G. Q. How do you find t,hat rule work out? A. ·we 11ave go1d results. 27477. Q. What do you do if a man leaves a door open? A. We prosecute him. 27478. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. What do you do in a case where a door is blo,rn open by a blast of air, and ~oes not close itself? A. I think that is improbable; but I think, if you do have a blast, you could not make it so that the door would shut. · 27479. Q. You might get a slight puff? A. Generally speaking, a door will shut; but you cannot always accomplish it; little bits of coal and rubbish may prevent it. If a man passes through a door, the lea.st thing he can do is to close it. · 27480. Q. Some men may be thinking about something, and leave the door open, and divert the current. Do you not think it would be a better security to have self-closing doors? A. I think double doors would be an additional security. You c:i.n hardly think of a man going through two doors, and forgetting to shut both of them. 274dl. Q. Do you not think that self-closing doors are au additional security? A. No; I do not think you can have doors self-closing. If you make a man alive to his re3ponsibility, then you will hM·e no trouble. 27482. Q. You have the human elemant to dell with? A. With d l)uble doors we have had good results. We havo not had a case where both doors have been left open. 27483. Q. Do you think they would have been left open if they had been self-acting? A. I cannot say that. 27484. Mr. Bruce Smith.] D o you think people would be as careful? A. If they knew them to be self-closing, they would not take the care. 27485. Q. Are your doors bung so that they close to ? A. Yes. 2748G. Q. They are self-closing? A. They are not self-closing; but we try to hang them that way. It is possible that you may open one, and it will not shut again of its own accord. 27487. Mr. Robertson.] Have you many cloors? A. Oh, yes; a. hundred doors. 27483. A. Would it be Rafe to say that there are a.s many door3 in the Metropolitan as in any three avernge miues? A. As many as in any three others on the coast. 27489. Q. This rule has been in operation for many years? A. F or thirteen or fourteen yearf.'l. 27490. Q. It is a gassy mine ? A. Yes . 27491. Q. If the syslem of individual responsibility had not been a good one, would trouble have ensued before now ? A. Certainly. 27492. Q. Has there been any trouble? A. Practically none. . 27493. Q. Are you satisfied that a system of individual responsibility with rPgard to closing doors is best? A. Yes, I think so. ' 27494. Q. Have douule doors been in use at the Metropolitan Colliery for a long time? A. From all accounte, ever since it has been a colliery. 274fl5. Q. Since you hM·e been there? ii. Y es. 27496. Q. You have not been forced to h,we double doors by the Department? A. No, it was done before the Department suggested anything of the kind. 2H97. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. It has been suggested (No. 11) that a weekly measurement of air should be taken io each section? A. I do not think that is necessary. 27498. Q. Do you think it is practicable? A. 0£ course it could be done; but I know of some mines where a man would require two days to do it. 27i99. Q. I s it necessary? A. No. 27500. Q. Is there sufficient rnriation in a properly l'"entilated mine to make it necesi:ary to have the test? A. No. You have the deputy goiug round daily; and ho is the man I would depend oo. 27501. (J. As to the division of the air, you mean? A. Yes. 27502. Q. The men are not changed from their working-places e,·ery week? A. No. 27303. Q. Where there is any cause for complaint by the men, have you known of any tendency oo their part not to make complaint, if anything is neglected? A. No; we invita complaint. 27504. Q. You do not, think it necessary; and you do not think it practicable? A. N o. 27505. Q. Do check inspections take placo regularly in your mine? A. I think we have bad two inspectic ns during the last two years. 27506, Q. One a year? A. We have had two inspections in two years. 27507,

...,... 1 I

817

JVilnes.~- J. Jeffrie!!, 12 March, 1903.

27507. Q. Now, with regard to an extra supply of safety -lamps (No. 12) and their requisites, equal to one-third of the number of persons emploved below ground, to be kept constantly in good order and r eady for use. It is not intended now that they should be kept trimmed, but merely kept re:tdy. What is your opinion as to the extra number? 11 . It is difficnlt to make any hard and fast r ule. 27508. Q. H ow many ha,e you, for 500 men? A. \Ve keep a re~erve of 120 lamps. 27509. Q. Over and above what are in full u -e. If both shifts are in the mine, you have 120 o,·er? A. We have had that number iu filtock; but lately we have sent some of them to other mines. 27510. Q. You keep a surplus of about a fourth'? A. Roughly speaki11g, a fourth. 27511. Q. Do you think that a difference should be made with regard to mines whore lamps are uot used. Where, say, 300 men are employed, would it be reasonable to require them to h:we 100 lamps ready for use for rescue purposes? A. I think the rule applies to one mine as much as it does to another, in the event of an accident. 27512. Mr. Robertson.] Q. In a mine worked with safety-lamps, if 400 are supposed to be in use, there are always a number left in the lamp-room? I.. We general ly have 30 lamps left each morning. 27513. Q. Mr. B 1·uce Smitli.J The others a re being used the whole of the worki11g day? A. Yes. 27514. Q. If the men ,rork in t"o shifts, ther e is only a part of the day during which the whole of the lamps will he out? A. Yes, you "ould have the night-lamps on the surface during the day. 27515. Q. They would be valuable in case of necessity? A. Yes. T hose would be the Jamps you would make for at once in the event of an accident. 27516. Q. D o you n ot see the reason for making a distinction between mines where lamps are in use and mines where they are not? A. I think that, if you ,were to say that an adequate supply should be ready, that would meet the case. A 11 debils should be considered b.v both parties. 27517. Q. You would lea-ve itto the Inspector? A. And to the M anager s, to have an adequate supply ready. 2751 8. Q. Now I come to the question of watering. It has been suggested (No. 13) that travelling ant haulage roads and other places should be properly watel'ed . The pr oposition is a little vague? A. I object to it altogether-totally. 27519. Q. You object to the compulsory character? A. I object to the principle of watering the roads. 27520. Q. What arJ you doing at your mine? A. We do not water, except in a few hundred yards, for the convenience of the men. 27521. Q. And yet yours is a dusty and gassy mine? A. V cry dusty and gassy. 27522. Q. What precautions do you consider should be taken against a coal-dust explosion in the event of an e.x:plosoin of gas? A. Our idea is that preYention is better than cure. W e take precautions, where shots are fired; and we see that within a radius of 20 yards everything is scrupulously clear of dust and that the place is watered thoroughly. 27523. Q. I s that an absolute rule? A. Yes. And we go on the other side of the solid coal. . 27524. Q. H ow do you get there? A. I mean when the heading is separated by a pillar of coal. 27525. Q. D o you water with a spray? A. vVe wa,ter with water under a pressure, with a pipe and hose. 27526. Q. Do you water the roof? A. Everywhere; the sides, the r oof, ancl the floor. 2752i. Q. What is the effect of watering upon the roof? A. In ordinary working-places we have had trouble with the roof because of the water. 27528. <). Under what conditions do you fire shots-what explosives do you use? A. We use a safety e xplosive-roburitc. 27529. Q. Do you use gunpowder? A. It is not allowed in the mine. 27530. Q. H ow do yon fire a 11hot? A. Electricall_y. 27531. Q. You have no flame? A. \Ve have obserYed no flame. W e wet a,Jl the timber in the locality ; and we hang. up a wet piece of brattice cloth t0 intercept t he flame from a blown-out shot. 27532. Q. Is that practice always observed? A, Yes, by special rule. We remove all explosive matter within a radi us of 20 }ards-take it away altogether . 27583. Q. 'W ith regard to watering, you do very liltle in the mine? A. We water simply at the seat.of firing the shot. 27534. Q. And the travelling road for the men? il. Yes. 27535. Q. You do not water the main road- the 1·ope road? A. Ko. 27536. Q. Although it is dusty? A. We do not water it. 27537. Mr . .Ritchie.] Q. H ave you no shooting in bords at the present time? A. N o. 27538. Q. H ave you had shooting in bords since you hn.re been there? A. No, not in the coal. 27539. Q. How do you know of the effect of watering in bords? A. I have taken the water in, to see what it would do. 27540. Q. Would it be practicable to water the haulage road in t he Metropolitan mine? A . No ; we · have had 3 l miles of road. 2754-1. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Have you a waler supply? A. We have a water supply. 27542. Q. Where do you get the water from ? A. We have a dam. The supply is for ordinary purposes. 275!3. Q. Have you a supply which would enable you to water the roads? A. No; we would require twice the water we have at present. 2754-4. Q. Have you always bad a good •sater supply? A. We had to purchase water from Sydney six months ago at a cost of £3,000. We l1ad to fetch it up in tanks by rail. 27545. Q. From your reading, is this theory of watering becoming more widely believed in, or not? A. No; it is being done away with in the dusty mines in England, from what I have read. 27546. Q. Name yout· authority? A . The Imperial Jnspcctors' Report-A. H. Stokes and Henry H all. 27547. Q. Watering is being thought less of? il. In L '.mca ~hire they are doing a way with it, and are taking precautions, like we are doing here, at the seat of shot-firing. 27548. Q. You have experimented on the roof in the bords-was it dangerous? A . Yes, it was- too dan gerous for tl1e miners to go into the place and resume work. 27549. Mr. Robertson.] Q. lfave you ever made any calculat.ion as to the cost of watering the Metropolitan Colliery- the cost of the piping? A. Yes. 27550. Q. Can you tell us what it is? A. To install the plant the capital outln.y would come to £ l2,500. 27551. Q. What sort of a plant? A. J llSt using wrought iron piping, 4 inch down to 2 inch. That is the capital outlay, and the cost per year would lolal £5,000. -

16825

:W-5 L

27552.

818 Witn.es.s- J. J effrie~, 12 Morch, 1903.

27552. Mr. Bruce Smitli. ] Q. That is, assuming you bad to buy water? A. No. 2755!-3. Q. What would the £5,000 be for? A. lfo r the staff nnd labour to kee~ up the system. 2755 f. His Honor.] Q. Not tbe cost oE tho water? A. That would be outside the co3t of the water

,,,

altog~thel'. l . · f S dn ? A y 27555. Mr. Bruce Smitli. J Q. And you ~pent £3,000_recent y 10 gettin~ water rom J ey . es. 275::iG. Q. Was i t an abnormal year? 11. I t ~·as d urrng .tbe late drought. . 275.37. Mr. R obPr!son .] Q. Did :,ou calculate the quant ity of water that would be required? A. Yes; that is, allowing au ordinary cask for orer 20 yards. . 275.38. Q. What would be the total qu:111lity? . A. S?,000 gallons daily. . 27559. Q. llave you any idea whe r~ that quantity of wa~er could bo got fro~? A. I do not k~ow a site where we could buita a dam; and, 1f you got. that quantity of water m the pit, how are you gorng to get it out again P The fact is we could not do it. . 275li0. Mr. Bruce Smit Ii. ] Q. Would you propose that the waterrng _should be left.to t_he Manager; and that, in the first place, the Inspector should haxe the p~wer_to require more wate~mg 1£ he thought fit; and, if the Man:iger objected, to refer the matter to arb1trnhou? A. I would obJect to that. 1 would agree to the general principle of Ruh>. 12. . . . . 27561. Q. \V hat is that? LI. That rule has r eftlrence to the precaubous taken m the way of watering when firing shot. I would agree to give the lnspector power to refer to arbitration tho question of whether a. mine is dry and dusty; anJ, therefore, whether it is necessary that the precautions set out in that rule should be taken. 27562. Q. Y o u would not invest the I o!lpector with the power of ordering a Man:iger to do additional waterinrr? A. I think yoL1 can accomplish the object JOU desire without watering at all on the main roads. 27.3U3. Q. The Inspector woulJ be aware of the difficulties in the way of watering, and of the cost. 27564. Q. \\' hat objection do JOU think there wo':1ld be to him havin ~ the. po~er, if he ~hought there was du.nger, of ordering the wntenng, and then referrrng the matter to nrb1trahou m case of d111pute ? A . Why should I object. 27565. Q. ·what would be the objection? A. 'To watering throughout? 27566. Q. No; to the Inspector's having power, where he thought i t necessary, to require a Manager fo do the watering, and to refer the matter to arbitration if required? A. Do you mean watering throughqut the mine? 275 67. Q. Suppose t he Inspector is dissatisfied with the watering done in the mine-you admit it is impossible to lay down any general rulot1. A. Yes. 27568. Q. S upposing the Maoagn bad the matter left iu bis hands, and the Inspector had power, where he thought su ffi cient wateriug ,vas not bei ng done, to r equire extra watering; and then you could allow the Manager t6 require that the matter should be settled by at·bitration? ..1. I see no need for such a provision. • 27569. Q. If other people see need, do you see any objection to it? 11. Y ou have my idea. I say you can accomplish this object in another way: . 27570. Q. On the principle that prevention is better than cure? A. It would n ot be fair for me to express an opinion as to whether the matter should go to arbitration ; and I would rather not. 27671. Q. You do not think such a provision necessary at all ? 11. I do not. 27572 . Q. There is a recommendation (No. 14) that Managers should be compelled to give more time to the management of their collierie~ . Is it workable to lay down a hard and fast line as to how long a. Manager should be in the mine each week? A. It is impracticable. 27573. A. The conditions would vary according to the mine ? A. Yes. 27574. Q. How olkn do y ou get through the more important portions of your mine? A. Generally, once a week. 27575. Q. Do you see any objectio11, in any of the mines, to that being done? Ll. I think it is a question on which you cannot lay down any hard and fast rule. 27576. (j. Would it be injurious to you, if you were compJlled to go t,hrough all the mine once a week ? A. It would be impossible in cer tain cases. · 27577. Q. You do not go through every place? A. There are some places I do not see once a month. You may ha,e one d istrict requiring a lot of attention; and another district may not require so much attention. It is best to leave the malter to the Managers. 2757~. Q. Do you think it would be a fair thing to require a Manager to go into a mine twice a week? .1. It 1s better to leave the matter to the Manager's own judgment. If he is a conscientious man1 he will do the correct thiog. 2~579. Q._ I am afraid that you idealise the position of l\fanager. You gi,,e every man the credit of being ahve t o his duty? A. You have a r emedy under the present Act, if he is not. 275SO. M1·. Robertson.~ Q. Is the Manager's responsibility not a sufficient check on his work? h. I should think so. 27581. Mr. B ruce Smitli.] Q. What would you say to requiring a Manager to go through his mine once a. month? A. I would rather leave the matter alone. 27582. A. There is a proposal (No. 5) that all places, except prospecting drives, should have cut.tb1·ougbe no t more than 30 yards apart. I s that practicable? A. No ; it is impracticable. 27583. Q. Can you lay down any dimensions for pillars which it would be well to put in all mines? A. No. 27584. Q. '\\'hat is the extent of your own pillar.a? A. Fifty yards by 100-that is, cut·throughs every 100 yards. 27585. Q. Is that size necessary? A . I would not like to Ray it is unnecessary. ?758'3. Q. I s that the greatest length ? A. That is the rule right through-GO yar ds wide and 100 yards 10 length. 27587, Q. You have some longC'r? A. We hnve some 300 yards long. 27588. Q. Is th~t ne~essary for the safety of the mine? A. I would not go so far as to say that we could not work the mme with cut-throughs at less than that distance; bu t what we have to think of is that we should get ~ore crush on the conl. There is the supcrincumbent i:;tro.ta to be considered· and even now we are contmually losing places, with pillars of that size. Pi!Jars are constantly falling 27580. Q. You lose the coal? Li. No, we get the coal; but we have to get it in another way. 27590.

in.

819

Witness-J. Jeffries, 12 Marob, 1903.

27590. M r . .Robertson.] Q. What percentage of coal is left in pillar~? A. Twenty per cent. first, and 80 per cent. afterwards. . 27591. Q. What is the effect of these lon(7 len(7ths without cnt-throu(7hs on the ,·eutilation-is it detri0 men!al? A. Tb ere is nothing detrimental nbout ii'. If you hn.ve tbe air at your disposn,I, you can ventilate 200 or 300 yards as well as you can 100. 27592. Q. What would be the effect oE 30-val'd cut-throu(7hs? A. It is doubtful wheth~r the mine would be workable; because the length oE the piilar.3 would be f"e3s than their widt.h. We should have sJ many openings that the co1l would bo sim;>ly cru,he.:l to stick. The weight would c:>me on it., a.ud sim;>ly crush the coal. 27593. Mr. Bruce Smith. ] Q. That must be left to the Ma.nn.(7er? A. Yes. 2759! . Mr . .Robertson] Q. Even with large pillar.-, how do~s the cost of timber a~ the Metropolitan Colliery compare with the cos~ of timber n.t other collieries? A. I believe it costs us four or five times more. I n some of our places you cannot get through, becaus6 of the timber. 2759S. Mr. Bruce Sm,ith] Q. Wh1t collieries are you comparin(Y the Metropolitan with - Mount Kembla? A. We have five times more timber than thev have at Mount IC~mbla. · 27596. Q. What is the average diameter of the timber used in your colliery ? A. It is 8 inches in diameter. 27597. Q. W hat is the diameter of the timber ordinarily used? A . Three to 4 inches . 27598. Q. D o you find it necessary to have timber 8 iuches in diameter? A. Yes; even now the timber is broken like broomsticks - thousands of them are. 275!">9. Q. D o you think this is a matter which should be left to tbe management? A . Yes. 27600. Q. Is there any object in having cut-throughs so far apart, excepting to provide fo r the safety of the mine? A. No. It would be better for us to have cut-throughs at less distances. 27601. Q. It has been suggested (No. 18) that instructions should be given to employees regularly on t he means of escape. You have had some experience of that matter? A. We carry that principle out. 27602. Q. When did you bE\gin it? A . Three or four t:1onths ago. 27603. Q. What has been your experience? A. If you wish to show the men all the means of escape, yo u must make provision for it in an Act of Parliament. 27604. Q. Why? A. Some of the men do not take kindly to it. 27605. Q. Some 0£ them? A. T hree or four men out or our lot have complained. 27606. Q. Do th e otherE: readily re~poud? A. Most of the men to whom I have talked take to it kindly, and think it is a wise precaution. 27607. Q. You have not had much difficulty in the matter? A. We put a danger-board. up at the or dinary travelling road; and there is no option for the men except to come out the way t hey are taken . 27608. Q. Why did you put a danger board up? A. We thought, perhaps, that some of t he men would slip out by the ordinary road. 27609. Q. What is the effect of putting a danger board up? A. It is a breach of the Act to pass it. 27610. Q. You have not tested the voluntary spirit of these people? A. I think it is better to put a danger board up, and the1·e is a.n end of it. 276 11. Q. W ho grumbled about it? A. It was only in a few cases. 27612. :Mr. .Robertson.] Q. Did yon show the men every way out? A. No . 27613. Q. Suppoi,iog you had orders to travel the men out by every possible e-xit? A. T hat would be impracticable. 27614. Q. You instructed the men in an alternative road out? A. Yes. 27615. Q. Not in all? A. No; I think one is sufficient, if you make them travel out by the return. It is too much to expect the men to travel out by the ol<l bords. 27616. Q. There is a suggestion maile that the men should be shown the way out by all the roa.ds ~ A. Thatwould be too drastic a provision. 27617. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. You a.re showing the men out by one a1ternatfre road? A. Ono road from ea.ch district. 27618. Q. Would that always be tho roacl by which these men sl1ould go out in the event of an explosion taking place? A. You could not tell that. That r oad might be travelled by an explosion. 27619. Q. I s there not a danger that, by showing the men out by one ro11d from a district., they might go by that road at a time when it would be the most dangerous for them to take? A. There is that chance. B ut I think that the principle of showing the men out by an alternative road is a good one. 27620. Q. Are there not, in fact, half a dozen places in ea.ch district in which an explosion might take place which would render Lhat particular road, by which · they had been shown the way out, the most danger ous? A. Yes. 2762 1. Q. What is your view as to a provision compelling the reporting of gas by miners. That is under General Rule 4? A. That is by the deputy. It is almoRt impossible to carry out that r ule in its entirety. Take our case; you would have to report the presence of gas in nearly every bord. 27622. Q. What alteration would you propose in the rulo? JI. I would make the rule reacl: "Explosive gas," or "Accumulation of explosive gas." I would make that rule apply to mines usiug safety-lamps ; and, in all mines using naked lights, where no safety-lamps are used, every colour of gas should be reported. 2762:3. Q. How woulcl you make the rule reacl? A. The rule would then rC'ad as follows:-" A repor t specifying where" ; and I would insert "1n the case of n, mine worked with naked lights"; and the r ule would continue to read, "Noxious or inflammable gas, if any, was found present"; and I would iusert "And in the case o-f a mine worked with safety-lamps, where noxious or e.xplosivo gas"; and tbe rule would 'continue to read, ".The conditions of the ventilation, and what defectfl, if any," and so on. 27624. Mr . .Robertson.] Q. BuL that would not get O\'er the difficulty ? A. I t~ke it that there is a difference between explosive gas and inflammab~e gas. 27025. Mr. Bruce Smitl1.J Q. Who is to judge? A. If you get gas in tho lamp, and it explodes, it is explosive. If you get colou r, it is not explosive. 27626. Q. Take the case where lamps are not usecl? A. All gas should be reported. 27627. Q. Would that require any alteration in the rule? A. No, I think not i it reads, "where noxious or inflammable gas" is found. 27628. Q. Thllt refers to gas generally? A. J ust so.

i7629,

820 Witness-J. Jeffrietz, 12 March, 1903.

,I.

, J

I I

27629. Q. There is an obligation on the part of tho men, where lamps are not used, that gas i,hould be reported? A. Yes. . . . . 27630. Q. Would you limit that obhgat10n, 1~ mmes ~ here lamps are used, to cases where only explosive gas is founcl? A. Yes, to cases where there 1s explosive gas. . . . 2763 J. Q. Does that not leave it open to a l?ers?n to s.iy th~t he d_id not ~now that 1t w_as explo,s1ve gas; and, if any attempt was made to dispro,·o him, 1t would be 1mposs1ble to find the gas ngam? !.. .. rbe same thina applies now. You ioight. find gas one moment, and go a moment afterwards and not find 1t. 27632. Q. Suppose someone was present? A. That would mean douhling the staff. . 27ti33 . .fl.i s Honor.] Q. Could yon not introduce a. percentage? A. You can get l } per cent. with the ordinary rnfety-lamp. . . . . 27634 . .Mr. Roberlso11. ] Q. Is not the d1fficully, not tho reportmg of the gas, but the withdrawal of the men after the gas has been reported as b~ing f~und? . A. That ~s the d~fficul ty. If you r eport gas, you prevent the workmen going into th.at portion of th~ m111e where lihe ga!.I 1s. . 27G3.3. Mr. Brure Smith.] Q. Gas 1s not reported 10 the book now? A. " re have had dozens of cases m which tho men have reported gas to the depuly, and the deputy has not put it down in the book. The deput.y has to fiod the gas himself. 2763U. JJI,·. Robertsrm.] 'J'be deputy ha.? to r eport. what h~ has sec_n, nnd not ,~hat he_has. b~en told. Wo want to get over the difficulty of reportmg every time gas 1s seen, in a gassy mme where 1t 1s known that gns ilc!sues from the coal. . . . • 27637. M1·. Bruce Smit/1.] I understand that the witness means tl1nt iL would be 1mposs1ble to r eport every particuiar cns3. 27638. M1'. Robertson.] '!'here is no difficulty in detecting the gas. W e· know it is quite possible to detect it. 27639. Witness. ] You would have to have a staff of clerks to report itcrnry time it was detected. 27640. Mr. Robe1·tson.J 'L'he difficulty is, how to get over the fact that you must not admit men into a part of the mine where there is gas. 2764 l. Witness. ] Under tbis rule, the deputy bas to report the gas, and you cannot allow a "!orkman into a bord if the deputy has reported that he found gas there. 276!2. M r. Bruce 8mitlt.J Q. I s not that an incentive to exclude the reporting of gas from the book? A. No, I would not say that. 'H643. Q. If the deputy were to see gas, he might not report it? A. As a matter of fact, we cannot report gas every time we see it now. 276!4!. Q. ,vith r egard to the larger mines in which lamps are used, you think the word "explosive" should be introduced into the rule? A. I am in doubt whether the rule should not be made to read "Accumulation of explosive gas." But say "explosive gas." I think that would be sufficient. 27645. Q. Now with regard to not reporting gas. Do you think it is at all necessary to make auy further provision, unrler which men could report gas when they find it? A. There is power under the Special Rure now to report it, I see no ueed for auy further p1·ovision. · 27646. Q. With regard to the use of explosives in a mine you make a provision ? A. Yes. 27647. Q. You propose to erase the present provisions, General Rule H, par. (9), 1-2, and to substitute in its place the following : Unless the place for a radius of 20 yards has been cleared of material accumulations of fine small coal or dus~, the roof and sides aud timber brushed clear of dust, and the roof, sides, and floor th-:>roughly sa.tura.ted with water; and unless he is in possession of an order signed by the Manager authorising him to fire a shot. A. I would uot allow shots to be fired unless th9 pe.rs?u wa.i authorii!ed by the Manager, and unless those

vrovisions are taken. 27G48. Q. You would not allow shots to be fired e:Icept by a pcri!on having the authority of the Manager; and you would require him to water the floor, the roof, and the sides, within a radius of 20 yards, and to clear away all dust. You said something before about your practice of putting up' brattice? A. We have a wet cloth placed in position to intercept the flame of a blown out shot ; and I think it is a good thing, and should be made general. 276!9. M1·. Robertson.] Q. That rule is in force in your colliery now? A. Yee. 27650. Mr. Bruce Smith,.] Q. You approve of tho prevention of gunpowder as an explosive? A. I approve of its abolition . 27651. Q. Aud the introduction of the other permitted explosires? A. Yes; in mines where safety-lamps arc used. In all dry and dusty places. 27651. (j. There has been a proposal that men should be withdrawn from a mine when there is a likelihood of the roof falling? A. It is impracticable to withdraw men, and keep a district at work. What I mean to say is that, when you hare finished the pillar working, it is good mining practice to take ou·t the timber immediately. If the roof does not fa.II, you take out the next slice of coal. I do not seo any necessity for withdrawing the workmen fr0m a district uotil the roof bas fallen. \Ve have four or five lots coming do,vn. 27G53. Q. You do not always know when it i:$ cowing down? A. You g~t good warning. If a deputy was in the place, and hearrl the roof working, he would take the men out. 27654. Q. For how long might it be working? A. For a week, or two weeks. 27655. Q. Does it always give notice? A. Perhaps you get uolice before. 276~6. Q. M1'. Robe1·tson.J Q. Is it not po~sible that some portions of the roof would never come down unless you took away oth er portions of t he coal? A. I have known roofs stand for ten years. ' 270:57. Q. If the men bad been withdrawn - - A. They would have to stop out for ten years. 27658. :iJir. Bruce Smitlt.] Q. You have had a good experience of falls iu all p~rts of the mine, where the roof has held up for a week? A. Yes. 27659. Q. Does it fall gcmerally o~er a large area? A. It varies. As a rule, it commences to come down in small pieces. 'fhen you get a heavy fall. It commences to work, and then reaches its climax. 27660. Q. Over what area did your largest fall extend? A. Perhaps 20 rnrds by 10 yards. I do not mean that it all came down at once. · 27661. Q. You mean approximately at once? A. I h,wc known 800 or 000 sq u:iro yards to come down. 27662. Q. I mean the largest area that has come down, but not in ·lantly? .d. I should say 10 yards square. 27663.

821

ll'itness-J. J efkics, 12 March, 1903.

27663. Q. Have you seen 10 yards sq_uare come down like one block of stone? A. No; in small blocks, and eventually in a fairl.v large body. 27664. Q. Do yo u think it p robal.,le that iu the Mount Keml>la Mine a roof extending oYer an area of 40 yards square came down in one block in half a second? .A. Oh, no. 27665. Q. !Jo you think, if anyone were to sn.y that it was p:issible-would you think it at all probable? A. No, I do not think so. I never hea.rd or thought of sttch a thing, and I have seen a good many falls. to C()me down . W hat do you 27666. Q. Taki ng nn area where a roof has held up £,Jr a week and beoios 0 think is about the longest period it would take to come down? A. If you commence from when the roof begins to work, it might be a matter of hours. 27667. Q. What is the shortest period ? (d- I have seen the roof come down i n a quarter of an hour; and I have seen big falls follow the men as they ,rere wit:idrawino the timber. 27668. Q. Do you think it p r obable that 40 yards square co;ld come down so completely in one block that tho air would not have sufficient time to get through? A . I would not think that. 276u9. Q. You do not think it at all feasible? A. I do not think it at all possiblo. 27670. Q. What would you think of the ~heory of a wind-blast depending u pon the hypothesis of 40 yards square coming down in half a £ecoud? .,J. I would not entertain it. 27671. Q. You would not entertain it? A. I would not consider it. \V c have fall s every day which sti r up the dust. 2Z672. Q. T o what extent? A. L '.lrge falls; but they break g radually. 27673. Q. How long do they take to come down ? A. The matter -of a quarter of :m hour. 27674. Q. Is there any willd-b1ast from them? A. We !tad one the other day. 2767!5. Q. To what extent? A. Three or 400 yai'di::, but it broke gradually. 27f,76. Q. Was there any wind-blast from it? A . Ye~. 27677. Q. Wha.t did i t do? A. You could not see your haod iu front of you; it stirred up tho dust. 27678. Q. Was anybody hurt? A. No. 27679. Q. Were there any horses hurt? A. No. 27680. Q. Did it put an:y lights on t ? A. No. 27G81. Q. W e re there any people in the immediate vicinity? A . No. 27682. Q. W ere you there? A. No; I was not there. 27683. M r. R itchie.] Q. You bad no lights to blo,v out? A. No naked lights. 27684. Mr . W ade.] He ,ras not even there himself. 27685. M r. B ruce Smitli.1 Q. What is your opinion upon the relative positions of Manager and what are called agents? A. I think that agents should have some qualifications. 27686. Q. Some qualification in mining, and not a qualification as a commercial man? A. I think, if be takes an actire part in colliery management, he should have some qualification as a mining man. 27687. Q. Are your powers curtailed in the way of spending money? A. As far as I am concerned, everything which is required is got. 27688. Q. Supposing any emergency ari~es that requires the spending of money instantly, have you the power to spend it? A . Y es. 27689. Q. Do you think you should have? A. Yes. 27690. Q. D o you think the Manager should be required to wait until the agent visits the place to consult him? A. No. 2769 1. Q. W ould you consider that a Uanager was a Manager ju fact iF he had to do that? A. A Manager should have power to do what you say; he should have power to do whatever he thinks is necessary for the safety of the mine. 27692. Mr. R obertson.] Q. If the Mannger said it was nece~sary to have a fan co!:<ting £ 10,000, do yo u think he should ha\'e the power to order it? .A. I think anything in r eason. 27693. Mr. B 1·ucc Smitli.J Q. I said that lhe Manager should have the power in a malter of emergency? ..4.. I mean a case occurring where some accident happens; in fact, the Manager would be to blame if he did not take such a p:rn-er. 27694. Q. What qualifications were you referring to just now when you were referring to agents? A . It is a difficult, thit1g to say what qualifications they o ught to haxc. 2 7695. Q. A r e you r efening to the business of coll! mining generally ? A. I may tell you that I had the supervision of the reopening of a Mal mine in the Northern district after a large fire. After canying on for ten days, I thought it became necessary to ~eal it down. Before doing so, I had per mission to call in Mr. R obertson , l\f r. Dickson, Mr. Atkinson, a11d Mr. l3ntes. 27696. Q. Y ou had permi~sion to call them in ? A. They ""ere good enough to come and consul t with me, and we decided to seal down the mine as the only practical method of dealing wi th the fire. A fortnight after a letter was sent to me from au agent, who had no qun.li fication, who stated that he could h ave done the work of sealing it down for the cost of £70. 27G97. Q. What was his posi rion ;-w?S he the agent for your mine? A. I do not know the man. 27G93. Q. What have you to complain of with regard to his saying that he could do the work - -

[Inte1-rupt.cd].

27699. M,·. Robertson. ] Q. Whom did be say it to? A . He sent the letter to the sec retary of the companv. If the company had been weak enough to allow him to do the work, he would pi-obably have lost ten or twelve men . 27700. Mr. B ruce Smi:tl1.] Q. Tha.t mnn may have been the ngent of your mine, and may have done that in the teeth of a, competent Manager? A. Th ere is no danger t o be apprehended from a man who knows his business. lt is from these men who do not know their bnsiness that there is danger. 2770 l. Q. 'Where an agent has power over and above the Manager he should be qualified? A. Yes. 27702. Q. Otherwise he should not have the power? A. No; he sbould not. 27703. Mr . Robe,·tson.] Q. The1·c would be nothing to prevent ibe directors opening up a mine, even if tho Manager did not think fit. ? A. I hardl y think they would do that. 2770!. Q. How can you interfere with the undoubted right of owners to do anything they lik e in the way of snperintending their own busin ess. H may be want of experience, but they haYe the power of veto? A. 1'he Act was never intended to npply to cases of that kitlcl. 27705. Mr. Bru.ce Smith.] Q. Harn) ou anything else to suggest? A. That ie.t with resp 2ct to ~ hot-firino-. U oder General Rule 12, if you r eport gas, unless that gas has cleared away , you are pro hibited from firin°g shots in the district. That might be remedied. :37706.

822 Jritness-J. Jeffries, 12 March, 1903,!

,, ~

27i06. Q. What do you propose? A. I would propose that no shots sho uld be .fired within a radius of 100 yards, if gas is reported to be present. 27707. Q. Not until it bas cleared away. . 27703. Q. You are not p1·oposing that the electric apjl:tr.1tu3 should be used under compuls10n? A. I think it should in sRfety-lamp minei.. . . 27709. Q. Where gas is known to have ac~umulated, n.:,d has n'lt cleare~ away, it .may last for som~ time? A.. rou may haven. fall in c,ne of your bords, perha.ps 30 yard-1 long. 'Ihe bord 1s full of explosive ga.s, and vou cannot get in to clear it out. You have to drive a. place behind it. 277l0. Q. In the meantime you limit your shot-firing lo a di3tllnce of 100 yards aw~y? . .A. J;es. . 277Ll. Q. Ha\'e you anything else .to.sugges_t? A. In the caso of a dry and dusty mine, 10 wh1~h w.atermg would injure the roof or t~e floor, 1t 1s provided th~t n~ sh_ots sh~ll be fi red unless the explosive 1s ueed with water or other contriraocc, so as to prevPnt 1t from 111fla.m111g the gas or dust. I would suggest the addition of the words "01· that no shots ~houltl be fired until after the per;;ons ordinarily employed hare left the mine." 27712. Q. At present you w:1ter the mine for 20 y~r~s and tu.ke other preco.u~ions? A. Yes; and I.wo~ld suagest, in a mine where yo u cannot water, the add1t10n of the words "or until after the persons ord1.na.rily 0 em ployed have left the mine." [The Commission, at 4 p.m., adjourned until 10 o'clock on the following Tuesday morning, at No. 2, District Court, King-str£et.]

. TUESDAY, 17 M&ROH, i903, 10 a.m.

[Tlie Oommission met at the No. 2 District Oourt, King-street, Sydney.]

:G.

tJrcscnt:R l\1URRAY, EsQ., D.C.J. (PnEsIDEKT).

D. A. w. nonErt'l'SON, EsQ., ComIISSIONER.

' .

D. RITCHIE, Es~.• Com11ss10xrm.

Ml'. Bruce Smith, T3,tl'l'iskr-a,t-Law, instructed by Mr. ,\~oorl, Crown Solicitor's Office, appeared on behalf of the Crown . l\lr. A. A. Atkini;on, Chief Ini:pector of Coal-mines, assisted 1\1r. Bruce S1:iith. i1r. A . .A. Lysaght, Solicitor, appeared on behalf of(,,) the representatives of deceased miners, wheelers, &c. (victims of the explosion); (b) the employees of the Mount Kembla Colliery (miners, wheelers, &c.); and (c) the lllawana Colliery Employees' Association (the Southern Miners' Union). )Ir. C. G. Wade, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by Messrs. Curtiss and Barry, Solicitors, was present on behalf of the l\fount Kembla Coal ~md Oil Company (Proprietors of the Mount Kembla Mice).

(Mr. J. Garlick, Secretary to the Commission, was pr':lsent to take shorthand notes of tl:.e evidence and proc~edings.)

)in. W. HUMBLE previously sworn, was recalled and further examined, as under:-

~·'

Examination by Mr. Wade:277l3. Q. I understand your evidence is that there was a gas explosion in the 4th Hight roadway? A. Gas ca.me from the 4th Right ; a.nd there was a gas explosion on the rope road inward and outward from that point . 277 H . Q. Where-where is the initial point of the explosion? A. Somewhere near to the junction of the h'Melling road with that road that comes from the 4th Right goaf. 27715. Q. Then you put it in the 4th Right roarlway? A. Yes. 27716. Q. And which side do you say of the No. 1 travelling road-on the goaE side or the rope road side? A. Oh, neither side; I should say it was ignited somewhere on the travelling r oad; but as to which i;ide-whether the goaf aide or the rope road side-I could not say. 27717. Q. What do you consider was tho force? D id the gas come out gently do you think? A. I think so. 27718. Q. No force, no rush? A. No rush. 277L9. His Honor.] Q. Do you say you think the explosion occurred so mewhere on the travellll!g r oad ? . A. I think the gas was ignited at that point. 27720. Mr. Robertson.] Q. On the travelliug road? A. Somewhere on the travelling road, yes. 2772L. M1·. Wade.] Q. L ook at this map. 1'hcre is the travelling road and there is the rope road. You will not say whether it was actually in the travelling road or not; but it was somewh ere in that vicinity? A. Yes; but I will say that I think it is probable that it was ignited in the travelling road. 2i122. Q. D o you want to draw a distinction bet.ween the ignition and the explosion? A. Well, I do not think there was much explosion until it got on to the rope road, where there was dust; but there was inflammation before it reached the rope road. 27723. Q. Where was the first explosion ? A. Tho explosion proper wouM commence on the rope road. 2772-t.. Q. At what point? A. Somewhere about the junclion of the 4th Right road with the rope r oad. 27725. Q. You say at the junction? A. W ell, I "ill say at the junction. By that time I think it would have got into the dusty part of the road. 27726. Q. Did you uotice the cam1 as doors that bad been hanging between the travelling 1·oad. and the r ope roau ? A. res, I noticed the remains o.f on<>. 277'i.7. Q. In the 4th RigM? A. In the 4th Right. :!;728. Q. R.-twrrn the rope road and the travelling road? A. Yes. ~77;;9. Q. Where did you find that? A. I noticed part of it hanging on the stretcher-a. part of the canvas. i7730. Q. On its support? A. On its support; bqt I did not find th e other part of i~ though.

27731.

....

822 Jritness-J. Jeffries, 12 March, 1903,!

,, ~

. TUESDAY, 17 M&ROH, i903, 10 a.m.

[Tlie Oommission met at the No. 2 District Oourt, King-street, Sydney.]

:G.

tJrcscnt:R l\1URRAY, EsQ., D.C.J. (PnEsIDEKT).

D. A. w. nonErt'l'SON, EsQ., ComIISSIONER.

' .

D. RITCHIE, Es~.• Com11ss10xrm.

(Mr. J. Garlick, Secretary to the Commission, was pr':lsent to take shorthand notes of tl:.e evidence and proc~edings.)

)in. W. HUMBLE previously sworn, was recalled and further examined, as under:-

~·'

27731.

....

823

JVitness-W. Humble, 17 Marcl1, J~ .

27731. Q. Did you see any other canvas? A. I saw other canvas,. but I really could not say whether it belonged to that door. 27732. His Honor.] Q. By the stretcher you mean the horizontal piece? A. Yee, the bead piece for it t o hang from. 27733. Mr. Wade. ] Q. Now, there is another canvas door on the cut-through between these two headings on the 011 tbye side of the 4th Right? A. Tes ; I did not see that. 2773':1,. Q. How do you mean you did not see it; did you see where it bad been? A. Yes, I think I saw where the stretcher had been placed into the coal. 27735. Q. Aud the canvas was gone? A. l think so, so far as my recollection serves me. 27736. Q. We ha\'e been told that that canvas was found in the No. 1 rope roap, on the outbye side? A. Yes. . 27737. Q. Supp,o~ing it was, how do you account £or its getting there on your theory? A. It shows that there was force that dro,1 e it from the travelling road towards the rope road. 27738. Q. What force? LL. That force might be the ignition of gas; there would be a certain amonnt of force in it. 27739. Q. If there was no cxplosion with the ignition of gas, would you expect it to travel down there? A. What to travel down? 27740. Q. The inflammation or the flame ? A. If there was any explosion. 27741. Q. Supposing there was an ignition of gas only? A. There would be a certain amount of force in it before it really got to the dusty part; and therefore anything in its path, like a canvas door, would naturally be blown in the <lirection of t he rope r oad. 27742. Q. Would not you expect to find signs of flame on the canrns in that case? A. WelJ, yes, I suppose I would. . 27743. Q. Then if the canvas was proved to show no signs of flame, would that interfere with your theory? A. No, it would not. 27744. Q. Not at all? A. I think no.t. 27H5. Q. Why? A. Because it is common enough that there are certain things burnt and other things lying close by are not burnt. It is just possible that the canvas may hafe been damp, and in that case it would not be likel.v to show any sign of tire. 2i7·H3. Q. Now, whC're is your naked light; can you tell us about that? A . Yes; in my opinion the light most probable to sfart it was the light of Purcell, who was travelling along the travelling road, and whose body was founa some considerable distance further out. 2774.7. Q. And you think that Purcell was able to travel something like a quarter of a mile? A. I think -he bas done so. 27,748. Q. Do you think it was damp in the 4th Right road? A. There was certainly water going from the travelling road up to the goaf edge. 2i749. Q. Do you think the dust was damp? A. No; there was dry dust on the travelling r oad opposite that r oad end. 27750. Q. Did you ever know of a case before, in your reading or experience, of a man who 8tarted an explosion like that being able to travel nearly a quarter of a mile afterwards? A. No; but I have known: 0£ a case where the person wl10 started the explosion lived for some time afternards and did travel some distance. 27751. Q. But how far ;-what is the farthest you ha,·e heard of' a man t ravelling after he started an explosion? A . In this case I am speaking of, be was found 40 yards away from the place where we thought the ignition had taken place; but he may have travelled that di~taoce several times over. 27752. Q. Backwards and forwards you mean? A . Yes. 2 i'i53. Q. ]'or what purpose? A. ·w ell, we ha,•e evidence that the man · lost his reason for the time being; and was demented. I think you know the case; George Hindmarsh, at Dudley. That man was found with his boots clasped in his hands, showing that he must barn lived and have done something after the explosion. 27754. Q. However, that is the farthest you know of a body being foun<l from the initial point of the explo.sion, about 40 yards, that person being the cause of the explosion? A. Yes; a man may be burnt by ianiting gas and still be able to travel SoI!le diRtance. 27755. Mr. Robe1·tson.] Q. His light would be blown out? A. His light would be blown out by the explosion, yes; but he had a straight road to travel on. · 27756. Q. BuL had not he a very difficult road to the No. 2 Right ;-lad not he to travel over tumbled-up skips and falls? A. Yes; I think he had tumbled-u p skips to tra"el over there. 27757. Q. And falls of stone? A. The falls of stcme may not have come down at that time. 27758. Q. They would be shortly after? A. Yes; it would not take long to complete the whole destruction. 27759. Q. I saw Purcell an hour and a half after the explosion? A. Yes. 27760. Q. So that the fall must have occurred between the explosion and the finding of Purcell's body ? A. Oh, yes; but the few minutes between the ignition and the fall taking place would admit of his getting through, I think. 277Gl. Q. But he would not travel that half a mile, or quarter of a mile, in the dark in a few minutes? A. Well, that is my opinion. I have thought it out. I think that is the likeliest light to start it. 27762. Mr. Wade.] Q. You admitted that the light would be blown out, if it was the initial cause? A. By the explosion-yes. 27763. Q. Now, the after-damp, the carbon monoxide, would soon be coming after him? A. Yes; in a few seconds, I suppose. 27761-. Q. And be \\"Ould not traYel ,·ery fast in the dark? A. Well, it depends; a man who is sur prised like that would trafel, probably, as fast as he could run. 27765. Q. In the dark!' A. Yes; that is common enough. 27766. Q. And do not you think he would have a very good char.ce of being overtaken by the ca1·bon monoxide? A. I think be eventually was. 27767. Q. Not till he got to the - - [Interrupted]? A. Not till he got to where he was found. 27770. Q. All the stoppings between the rope road and the travelling road, from the 4th Right to the 2nd Right, were blo\\"n out, or most of them were? A. How do you mean blown out? They were 2777 L displaced towards the travell ing road.

824 lVitness-W. Humble, 1; March, 1903.

, ,·

l" I

·,'..

•

27771. "Q. Yes. Now, if Purcell was in the travelling road, and lit t~10 ~~s, the explosion, if it took place at the 4th l{ight junction, would be almost instantaneous? .A. Tbe 1gmbon of gas would. . 27772. Q. The ignition of gas from his light on the travellmg road would be followed almo~t ms~anta.neously by the explosion in the rope road at the 4th Right? .A. Well, there would be some ltt.tle time. 27773. (). ·what tirne;-it would be less than a second, would 1t not? A. No; I should say 1t would take several secouds. 27774. Q. Now, would not Purcell be actually in the middle of it? A. Well, he certainly was burnt by the ignition. . . . . . . , 27775. Q. Would not be be only a few yards from the 1gmtrng pomt at the time when the explosion toog: place? A. No ; I th ink be would be farther away than that, but how far. I cannot tell. . . . 27776. Q. O oly the distance he would travel in a few seconds at the outs1de? A. Well, 1t 1s a question whether the after-damp wonld reach him. . . . 27777. Q. I am not talking of after-damp at all ;-I am talking of the explos10.n, the force? . A. I th~nk he travelled some distance; how far I coul1l not say; but there would certamly be some time durmg which be could rush away from the gas. 27778. Q. The explosion would travel a good deai faster than be would? A. Yes. 27779. Q. It would be out oast the 2ncl Right before he got there? A. Yes; along the rope road . 27780. Q. An<l do not you think you would expect t.> find sol!le indications of injury or broken limbs, or something of that sort, j f he had been in the centre of this in the 4th llight? A. No; it is sometimes observed that there is the leasf, amount Qf damage done at the point of ignition. 27781. Q. But he has gone away from the point of ignition? A. Yes. 27782. Q. And the explosion bas taken place between the junction of the 4th Right and the No. 1 rope r oad? A. Yes. ' 27783. Q. Well, there was g,·eat force in that, was there not? A. Thera was not great force on the travelling road. 27784. Q. Did not you find that chock at the 3rd Left knock ed right down? A. That is on the rope road. 27785. Q. I am not talking of the rope r oad? A. I am talking of the explosion at the junction of the 4th R ight and the travelling road. 27786. Q. You talk sometimes of :m ignition and sometimes of an explosion. The explosion, you say, took. place at the junction of the 4th Right and tbe rope road? A. Yes. 27787. Q. There would be violence there, would there not? A. Yes. 2778S. Q. Did not you have great violence in the rope road? A. Yes, I saw several tubs thrown about. 27789. Q. Anything else? A. That chock you are speaking of, and severa1 rail girders that had been supporting the roof. . 27790. Q. D o you think that those things showed great ,•iolence or fo1;ce ? A. Yes. 27791. Q. Do yo u think that that force that travelled down the rope outbye displaced those stoppings? A. Yes. 27792. A. Now, do not you think that Purcell must have been right in the thick of it? A. Well, he certainly was in it, as proved by his body. 27793. Q. As proved by bis body? A. As proved by the position in which his body was found. He was in the thick of it, no doubt; but - - [Inte1·rupted]. 2779:1,. Q. Do you mean to say that the mer e singeing of bis hair would be quite consistent with his having been in the thick of the explosion? A. Well, I think that there were others that were very close. 27705. Never mind about the others; I want to know about him? A. Well, I think so. 27796. Q. When did you first come to that conclusion, about the igniting poin t being P urcell's lamp? A. Shortly a£Ler my last visit to K embla. 27797 . Q. When was Lhat? A. The last visit was on the 3rd of September . 27798. Q. Then you had co:ne to some other conclusion before that, had not you? A. Well, I came to a 1Jartial conclusion before we had finished the investigation of the mine; but I bad to modify that. 27799. Q. What was that? A. That was tbat the ignition had started in the first right hand headings [meanin,q the No. 1 Right heading]. 27800. Q. Near the faces? A. Yes. 27SOI. His Honor.] Q. That is at Morris' light? A. Yes. 27802. Mr. Wade. ] Q. When <lid you come to thnt conclusion about the faces of No. 1 beadings? A. I think on the Monday morning, the 4th of August . 27803. Q. D id you examine all the indications of force and the directions of force in the neighbourhood of Morris' body? A. Yes, I think so. 27804,. Q. An~ had not you been along the 4th R igh t r .:>:tcl on the 4th August, and the No. I rope road? A. The 4th Right road? · 27805. Q. Yes, the r oad into the goaf? A. I had beeu in that 4th Right road on the Saturday night. 27806. Q. And you were on Monday too? A . .13ut not until after I had left the No. l R ight beading.i. 27807. Q. When did you first come to the conclusion that your idea of the exptosion starting in the face of No. 1 Right w~,s not correct? A. W ell, two or three davs after, while we were at Kembla, before we finished our inspectiou on the 8th of August, I came to thi conclusion that that point did not reconci le itself with tbe whole of the forces. 2780S. Q. When did you first come to the conclusion that the 4th Right was the originating point? A. Soon after I made my last inspection on the 3rd of September. 27809. Q. Do I understand you had formed no conclusion at all when you left in the middle of August? A. I bad not finally made up my mind. 27?10, Q. What was your view then? il. . I w:\s hovering for a pnl't of the time between these two p omts. 27?1.1. Q. But you had given up the faces at that time? A . No; I s'Jy si mply that I bad formed the opm1on 1J1at the Ko. 1 Right face was the ig nition point; but s :ion afterwards I gave it up. 27812. Q. What vi e\~ did you bold then? A. I did not hold any pronounred view. 27813. Q. "Whether 1t was pronounced or not, what was your view? A. M y view was that the 1st Right ( meaning tlic .No. l Ri,qlitfuces] did n ot account for the whole of the forces; and that the 4th Right accounted ~or a gr~at deal more than the ht Right; but I say I had not finally made up my mind until after I bad mspected on the 3rd of September. 27814.

~.,

": .

:~ I

825

Witness-W. Humble, 17 March, 1903.

27814. Q. Did you discuss the question of the 4th Right with Mr. A.t.kinson? A. I did. . 27815. A. D id you tell him what you bad seen or found ? A. With one exception, I did. 278 l6. Q. What was that? A. I saw 1 per cent. of gas on the hydrogen flame, which, I am sorry to say, I did not tell Mr. Atkinson of. 278l7. Q. When did you think of that; when did you come to the conclusion that you bad not told him about it? .A. I only discovered last week, when I was giving evidence, that I had not told him. 27818. Q. But you told us. in the box last Thursday that you spoke of it as soon as you came down from the fall, and that Mr. Atkmson was there? A. Did I say that? 278l9. Mr. Bruce Smith.] He said he thought Mr. Atkinson was there. 27820. His Honor.] I thiuk he sa.id that he thought Mr. Atkinson was the most likely person he would mention it to; and that, most likely, he did so. 2782 1. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. You have your original note here? A. I have. 27822. Q. In your note book? A. In my note.book. 27823. Mr. Wade. ] Q. Do I underatand this, that on the 4th of August Mr. Atkinson went up close to tp the goaf edge with you? A. I said I thought he did. I am sa.t.isfied now that be did not. 27824. Q. What bas happened since Thursday to change your mind? A. vVell, it is not a change of mind. 2782~. Q. It; is a change oE opinion? A. Last week I was not positive about l1is being there. I now say that, ha?ing re-considered the matter, I do not think he was there. 27826. Q. Did not you say that Mr. Atkinson gave you a light up to the face? A. I said I thought it was possible that Mr.' Atkinson accompanied us up there with the electric lamp; I am now satisfied he did not. 27827. Q. Did you speak about it when you came down? A. Well, I have no recollection of it. I remember coming down and making my note-sittinO' down and making my note in the note-book in the 0 travelling road, but whether - - [Interrupted]. 27828. Q. I am asking you, dtd you speak nbout it when you came down from the goaf edge? A. I say I have no recollection 0£ having spoken of it. 27829. His Honor. ] Q. You got to "but whether"? A. But whether I spoke to Mr. Atkinson then about it or not I cannot say ; I am inclined to think now that I did not. 27830. (Mr. Humble's original note-book, in which he made memoranda while in the mine, was then handed to the Commission by Mr. Bruce Smith, who sho\Ved to the Commission the note made as to the finding of gas on the 4th of August. 27831. Witness.] That note was made immediately after we came down on to the travelling road. 27832. Mr . .Robe1·tson.] Q. Were yon with Mr. McGeacoie? A. I was. I lay alongside of him. W e bad to lie on the stones. I lay alongside him, and watched the lamp, and saw it just as well as he would be able to see it. 27833. Mr. Ritcliie.J Q. What you have put down here is really what you saw yourself? A. Yes. 27834. Mr. Wade.] Q. Do you say you never thought of referring to this during all your discussion with Mr. Atkmson? A. I never thought of making mention to Mr. Atkinson about the 1 per cent. of gas. Whether I considered that be would know of it I do not know; but I never mentioned it. 27835. Q. How could be know if he was not there? A. W ell, Mr. McGeachie acd he had some talk, I understand, about the amount of gas in the mine. , 27836. Q. Did you bear them talk? A. No, I did not. 27837. Q. Wbat do you base that statement on-on what you have heard, or what you have been told? A. What I have been told by Mr. Atkinson. 278~8. Q. Pid not he say what part of the mine he was referring to? A. He did not say. Mr. McGeachie was asking him if he would gire him a copy of the gas findings. ~7839. Q. Yes? A. That is all. 278-!.0. Q. Did Mr. Atkinson never tell you that one difficulty in the way of his theory was that be could not find gas in the 4th R ight? A. Yes; I think he has told me that. 27841. Q. Do you say it never occurred to you then to tell him this? A. It did not; and I am sorry to say I cannot explain it. • 278!2. Q. D iJ. not you say this on Thursday (par. 26953) in answer to Mr. Bruce Smith,-

! am almost certain M:r. Atkinson was close behind, because he hatl the electric lamp, and we put on om· hydrogen .6.ame long before we got to the point of testing, because we thought the atmcsphere was rather extinctive in going up to the place, and Mr. Atkinson followed us up Yery closely to give us light ? A. Yee; well, I thought that last week.

27843. Q. Is that correct? A. It is not correct, as applying to that time. 27844. (}. As to that time? A. As to that time. 27845. (J. Did he follow you up and give you light? A. At some later period; yes. 2784G. Mr. Bruce Smitli.] Mr. ·wade is constantly talking about Mr. Lysagbt's only reading parts of the evidence; now I call upon Mr. Wade to read the whole of this. 278t7 . .Mr. Wade.] Q. Is it correct that Mr. Atkinson followed you very closely up to give you light? A. No, not on the Monday night. 27848. Mr. Wade to Mr. Bruce Smitli.] Which part of the evidence do you want me to read? 2784D. Mr. Bruce Smitlt. ] " D o you mean up to the stone?" 27850. Mr. Wade.] (Reading from pat·. 2695:L) : "Q. Do you mean up to the stone? A. No, up to the edge of the stone. I do not suppose there was room for three people on the stone; but he was close oy, I think." 27851. M1·. Bruce Smitli.] "I think." 27852. M.1·. Wade. ] (J . .Will you say that Mr. Atkinson wai; uot there? A. I will say that he was not there on the Monday rnght. 27853. Q. Then it is not a question of thinking at all; you will &ay be was not there? A. He was not there on the Monday night. 27854. Q. 'fheu how far do you say now he was away? ,I. About 30 ot 40 yards away. 27855. (J. 1'hcn he could not possibly havo giren you any liglit? ,..1, Oh, no. 27856. Q. Did you go up to that goaf edge with Dr. I~obcrtrnn? A. No. I remembe1· Dr. Robertson being on the travelling road along with the rest of the party ; but I do not remember going up to the goaf edge with him. 16825 29-5 1\1 27857,

826 Witness-W. Hurttble, 17 March, 1009.

c.'

27857. Q. Do you remember the lights going out? A. I remember some of tie regai.hed our Ughts. . 27858. Q. Then they must have gone out ; did yours go out? A. No ; I saved my light o~ each occasion. 278G9. Q. Who was with you at that time? A. I could not say. I was there several times, and each time with different groups of men. 27860. Q. On the 4th of August? A. On the 4th of August I only remember McGeacbie and I being there. . 27861. Q. Were you only there on one occasion on August the 4th ? A. That 18 so. 27862. Q. Then, when you made any tAst on August the 4th, Mr. Atkinson was n ot near you-was not within 30 yards? A. No. 27863. Q. Did you hear McGeachie speak about the result of the test when you came back from the goaf edge? A. Well, we certainly spoke about it; but what was the substance of it I cannot tell. I think we must bave·agreed ; otherwise there must have been some argument afterwards. 27864. Q. Surely they asked you what you f.ound, after you came bac~? A. No. 27865. Q. They did not ask you ; and you d1d not tell them ? A. I did not. 27866. Q. Did not you think it was a very important discovery that you had made? .A. Not very important. 27867. Q. Did you think it important? A. Yes, I thought it important. 27868. Q. And the rest were waiting for information of what you had found? A. No ; the rest had been there before we arrived, and, nat1tra1ly, they had seen something; and Lhey invited us to go up, and McGeachie and I went up. 27869. Q. Did they tell you what they had seen? A. No, they did not. 27.870. Q. You say," Naturally they had seen so~thing "? A. No; I any natura11y they asked us to go up and see. 27871. Q. Did they tell you what they had seen? A. No. 27872. Q. Did they ask you to go a.nd look? A. Yes. · 27873. Q. Did t hey tell you they had found black-damp? A. I do not remember. . 27874. Q. Did they tE:11 you they had found black-damp only? A. I do not remember. 27875. Q. I s this correct [1·eading from paragraph 26955] : "Q. W ell, when you had found this 1 per cent. of gas, dicl you report it when you ca.me down to tbe others? A. Yes, it would be spoken of"? A. It is likely it would be spoken of; but I cannot remember it. I do not know whether McGeachie did; but I cannot remember sEeaking of it. 27876. Mr. Bruce Smitlt.J He sa.ys (paragraph 26956): " I cannot swear to it, because I have not it in my notes." 2787]. M r. Wade. ] 'Yes. Then there is this question (para.graph 26959): " Did you say it?" and the answer was-" I am cer tain we would speak of it to some of the party; and there would be no one more likely to be told than M1·. Atkinson." 27878. Mr. Bruce Smith.] H e is only speaking of a method there. 27879. W itness.] I am satisfied, now, that I did not even mention it to Mr. Atkinson-and I certainly would not have mentioned it to anyone before mentioning it to him ; and therefore it bas not been spoken of by me. 27880. Mr. Bruce Smitl1. J Q. You have spoken to Mr. Atkinson since, as to whether he was there and whether you told him? A. Yes. . 27881. Mr. W ade.] Q. That is since you left the Court last Thursday ? A. Yes. 27882. Q. Then it is Mr. Atkinson's recollection that has caused you to correct this evidence about his following you up? A. It is Mr. Atkinson's saying that he found no record of gas being found that has cnused me to go over my notes again to see whether I could fin d any record of having mentioned it to him ; and I could not. 278S3. Q. It is from what Mr. Atkinson said that you altered this statement-" Mr. Atkinson followed us u p very closely, to give us light" (paragraph 26953)? A. Yes; he has t old me that be did not go up that night. 27884. Q. Then you would take his recollection in preference to your~ on that point? A . I do. 27885. Q. Did you have any n ote about that? A. No. 27886. Q. Now, with regard to the 8th of August, you say you fou nd gas again? .A. Yes. 27887. Q. I s there any doubt about that? A. Well, I am satisfied that it was a t per cent. Mr. Robertson said last week that he was there, and he thought there was none ; but the difference between none ·and a t per cent. is so sl ight, when you are making observations in a, coal-mine, that either might be correct. 27888. Q. But one is gas, and the other is not? A. Well, there is a slight cap on the hydrogen flame. The presence of it depends more upon the eyesight of a person t han anything else, I think. At times, one man might say there was a. t per cent., and another might say there was nothing. 27889. Q. Did you ever discuss that with Mr. Atkinson? A . No, I J o not think so. 27890. Q. You never mentioned it in any shape or form? A. No, I do not think so. 27891 Q. Do you mean io say it never occurred to you, in all these discussions with Mr. Atkinson, when he told you the difficulty in his way was the not finding gas in the 4th Right? A. Well, that was mentioned by him in a way; but really it did not bring itself to my mind with sufficient force to cause me to think that I had found 1 per cent. of gas, and he had not. 27892. Q. Do I understand that be did tell you that the difficulty in the wo.y of his theo,y was that he had not found any gas in the 4th Right? A. Yes, I think he did tell me that. 27893. Q. And you never thought of supplying the gap in his chain of evidence? A. No; it never occurred to me, as I have already told you. 27.894. Q. Have you discussed tl,is question with Mr. 1.\Tatson, the other Inspector? A. No, I do not thmk so. I have talked with Watson, both in the mine and going to the mine; but I have never discm1sed the location of the explosion. 27895. Q. You have not discussed the cause of the explosion? A. We have talked about the ca.use being gas. 27890. Q. If you went as far as that, have not you discussed the location? A. No. 27897. Q. Yo~ ~ay you we~ in the mine with him, and you have not discussed the questionata.11? A. We dtscue~ed t h~ rn1tiaJ fact bem~ ~as ; but, be!o-qq t~atJ t do not think it wae ever tailked of.

27898,

(·

827

..... ,(

.,.

Witneu-W. Humble, 17 March, 1903,

27898. Q. Did not Mr. Watson advocate the faces of No. 1 Right as the starting point? A. So I have been informed. 27899. Q. Did be never tell you himself? A. No. 27900. Q. Not lately? A. No; I do not come against Mr. Watson every day in the week. 2'7901. Q. You were with him day after day in Kernbla? A. Well , three days. 27902. Q. Have not you seen him since? A. I have seen him twice since. . 27903. Q. Now, when you say McGeachie found this gas in the 4th Right, did you say anything to him? A. I do not remember. We would talk while the test was going on; and we would probably remark what amount of gas there was. 27904. Q. Can you say that you did? A . I cannot say, now, that I did. 27905. Q. Can you say that he made any reference to finding 1 per cent. ? .A. No, I cannot say that. 27906. Q. You were with Mr. Atkinson's party all the time after you first went in on the 4th August, were you n0t? A. Yes. 27907. Q. Until you came out? A. Yes. 2f908. Q. What does this mean-" Copied from Mr. A's notes made on t he 4th"? A. I copied his notes after we bad dinner that night. 27909. Q. On that day ? A. Yes. 07910. Q. Which part did you copy-what co:nes aft er? A. There is a complete copy m that book of his notes made during that day. 2'1911. M r. Bruce Smith.] Q. There is an arrow there, is there not, to show? A. Yes. 27912. His Honor.] Q. I s that what we are reading just now ? A. No, those are my notes. The subsequent paragraph is what I copied. 27913. M ,r. Wade.] Q. What is this that you copied out; and what was your reason for it? A. No reason, perhap§!, except to get perhaps fuJler notes than I made myself. · 27914. Mr . .Ritcliie.] The matter, I presume, bore out more fully what you yours~!£ had seen? A. Yes. 27915. Mr. .Robertson.] Q. What notes had Mr. Atkinson on the 4th Right? A. He has a note: but it has no mention of any 1 per cent. of gas. 27916. Mr . .Ritcliie.] Q. Was that note taken on the same day that yours was taken? A. Yes. 27917. Mr. W ade.] Q. Do you mean that all the rest of these which you have here are copied from MD. Atkinson's notes? A. Three or four pages there. . , 27918. Q. And do you mean to say that all you took that day was just one page? A. Y ou will find the date, the 4th of August. 27919. Q. Here it isAccompanied Messrs. Rogers, Barr, .McGeachie, Littlejohn, and Atkinson, into right-hand side. Found gas (12,096 feet) in first ri~ht headings; and saw site of fire seen by Robertson and Johnst-On on Friday, the 1st instant . J oined party led by Dr. Robertson on first right travelling 1·oad, where they were inclined to think there was a force from the goaf alongside this road. Tested for gas in goaf edge and found none with ordinary flame; but McGea.chie got up t.o I per cent. with hydrogen flame. Those are all the notes you made yourself on that day? A. Yes. 27920. Q. And all the rest were made by Mr. Atkinson? A. Yes. ~7921. Q. Where is the 4th l{ight referred to here? A. You will find it towards the end, three or f.our

pages further on. 27922. Q. This is itGoing outbye we came across Dr. Robertson's party, and they asked us to examine some goaf edge on the left side 0£ No. l travelling roa.d (going outbye). :Found atmosphere slightly extinctive. .A.. Yes, that is his note. 27923. Q. When did you copy this out : in Mr. Atkinson's presence? A. :Yes, on the night of th.e 4th. 27924. Q. And you kaew that referred to the 4th Right? A. Yes. 27925. Q. And that did n0t remind you ? A. No, it did not. 27926. Q. And whose are the other uotes here ? A. Those are mine. 2'7927. Q. Are those all yours? A. Yes.

'l'i

...

27928. Q. There are two sets here dated the 6th? A. One ought to be the 7th, then. 2'7929. Q. They ought to be the 6th and 7th, instead of two dated the 6th? A. Y es. 27930. Q. And all the rest are yours? A. Yes . 27931. Q. Now, to come back to the explosion for a moment, this took place at the junction of the 4th Right and the No. 1 r ope road? A. Yes. 27932. Q. Do you say you think there was flame? A. Yee, I think so. 27933. Q. Intense flame? A . Well, .flame sufficient to ignite the dust. ~7934. Q. D o you think it would be intenser A. I think it would be. 27935. Q. Do you think the flame travelled along the No. l road, going inbye? A. Yes, both inbye ~nd outbye. 27936. Q. Flame all the way? A. Yes, flame all the way, certainly, until it got beyond the 5th R ight. 27937. Q. Why not farther? A. T here is a lack of dui:;t fo r a certain d.istance beyond the 5th Right; and possibly there might be no flame there; it is just as likely that there was, though. I think there would be flame all the way along. . 27938. Q. Now, if there was flame, and, I suppose, a large quantity of dust, between the 4th Right and 5th Right, would not you expect to find signs on the skip:i between those t wo points; either coked dust, or charring? A. Well, I think there was some coked dust, or some dust that was charred somewhat. 27939. Q. On what? . A. On the tubs and on the sides. 27940. Q. D id you get any of it? A.. I took several pieces off; but I did not keep them. I understand there was some collected afterwards from that road. 27941. Q. From those tub3? A. I could not say whether it was from those tubs. 27942. Q. Did you see anything on those tubs, that you could saJ definitely was coked dust, between the 4th Right and the 5th Right ? A. ~ot on the tubs; but I think I have seen some on the timbers. Mind you, there was not very much coking ; very little beyond that point . .!7943. Q. Would you not expect, if the explosion began at the 4th Rigbt junction, and you bl\d both gaa and coal-dust at the 'start, that you would have a lot of coke? A. That is, providing there waa sufficient dust to coke; but it may be that there was just sufficient dust t o car ry on the explosion without leaving anything to be deposited. 27945. 21944. Q. What do you mean by "j ust sufficient"? A.. The road was n ot a very dusty one.

828 Witne.~s-W. Humble, 17 March, 1903.

27945. Q. Was iL dusty at all? A. Yes: . . . · . 27946. Q. Do you think there was suffic1eut to create a great 1gn1t103? of coal-dus.t? A. Yes; I .thmk there was sufficient to transmit the flame; but whether there was sufficient to leave a large deposit of coked dust, I think not. 27947. Q. Do you think there was sufficient to leave any deposit? A. As I say, I collected off the sides some slight deposit of coked dust. . .... 279i8. Q. But you cannot say definitely that that was coked d~st? Well, 1t certam1y was not very pronounced ; but I think there was evidence to the nake~ _eyo ~f its havmg been coked. 279t!>. Q. Did you see any comparison between the cond,t)ons 10 the No. 1 roa~ there and what you saw in Dudley? A. There was a great deal more coked dust in Dudley; and yet, 10 parts of Dudley, there was no more deposit of coked dust than there has been in Kembla. . 27950. Q. In Dudley it was the exception to find an absence of coked dust? A. No; m Dudley there was a large deposit of coked dust on only two or three of the roads. . 27951. Q. ·was not there coked dust deposited on the timbers in every one of the main roads 10 Dudley? A. No; not in the main road itself, because there was not any timber in it except a few baulks; and they were not caked with dust. 27952. Q. And were not there skips in the main road at Dudley? A. Yes, some skips. 27953. Q. And were there not coked dust or indications of charring on those skips? A. Yes, on some of them. 27954. Mr. Ritcl,ie.] Q. Was Dudley a more dusty mine than l\fount Kembla, in your opinion? A. Yes; but it was not dusty throughout; there were placel! that were decidedly moist. 27955. Mr. Wade.] Q. Where were they? A. All the workings to the high side of the 2nd Right-hand headings were all moist and damp. · 27956. Q. That is the extreme end of one part of the pit? A .. Yes; and the narrow bords themselves, the continuation of the main road, were wet. 27957. Q. Did not you get indications of flame up there? A. In the narrow bords? 27958. Q. I do not say the narrow bords; but right in the extreme end, where it was wet? A. No; l do not remember seeing any indication of flame. 27959. Q. Now, where did the road cease to be dusty (the No. 1 Right in Kembla), was it at the 5th Right? A. A. little beyond the 5th Right, where the road is practically a stone drift, the r oof has been taken down; and it has practica11y stone sides as ,vell as roof. 27960. Q. And what length would there be of the stone sides and roof ?-and stone floor; too, was not there? A. A.nd floor too. I think there would be 2 or 3 chains of it, so far as I remember; I did not measure it. · 27961. Q. Tben, what is your view about Morris; what part did be play in this matter? A. Morris and son, I think, were burnt by some secondary ignition of gas in the 1st Right-hand back beading (No. 1 Right back heading). . 2796:l. Q. How do you get your secondary ignition of gas in the No. 1 Right back heading? A. Either by the flame from the· first ignition, or by the force exerted brinoing out gas from the face of that heading 0 . on to the Morrises' lights. 27963. Q. How do you mean "by the force e:terted " ? A. W el1, a force going inbye would certainly act as a compressive force on the faces of those two headings; and would displace whatever wa,s in the face. 27964. Q. When you say "face," do you mean the actual interstices of the coal ? A. No; I mean beyond the innermost cut-through. 279..i5. Q. Then you think n. force going in might have cushioned out some of the gas in the face? A. Some of the gas existiug in the places themselves, between the innermost cut-through and the face. 27966. Q. Do you think Morris was ever farther in than where his body was found? A. I think it is very unlikely. 27!)67. Q. Have you any evidence to show that he actually or probably was any farther in than that? A. No. 2796~. Q. Then, as this force rushed up towards the face of No. l, it would go past Morris' in the back heacl1og? A. It would go straight up the front heading, in all probability. 27DG~. Q. We do not want a probability; we want what you saw ? A. I think it went up the front headmg . 27970. Q. Did the indications of force show that? A. Yes, I think they did. 27971. Q. Did you see any indication:, that the force had trave!led up the back heading? A. No, n one at all. I ~aw indications that I think showed that the force had come down the back heading. . 27972. Q. Do you know where Morris worked? A. Yes. 27973. Q. Did you see any indications of where the force had travelled there? A. No. A. According to my 27974. Q. Did you notice the canvas in their place and across the headinu? 0 recollection, the canvas was standing. ~7975. 9· Was it standing upright, or leaning? A. It was not leaning. It was in the working face, and m workmg order. 279?G. Q. Then it was not affected at all? A. I do oot remember seeing anything to show that it was. 27917. Mr. R9bertson. ] Q. Do you mean the canvas on the face of the back heading? A. There was some of tbe can_vas _down at t~1e top of the back beading and the front heading; but, so far as I remember, the cam·as leadmg mto Morris' place was standing. 2797 · Mr. Wade. ] Q. lt showed no sigo, I take it, of being disturbed by a force, either in bye or outbye? A. So far as I recollect, the canvas was standing in Morris' place. :279_7~. Q. Have you a ~ote of this ? L1. No. I have a note of the gas found in Morris' place, and of the position where the bodies were found, and that there was a slight deposit of coked dust on the inbye side of the props; but I have no note about brattice. 27980. Q. Now, you were rather taken with thnt idea on the Monday that the oriuinating point was in the 0 faces of the No. 1 Right? A. yes. ' 27981. Q. And a:i important thing to find out would be the indications of force, and their direction? A. Yes. 27982. Q. Did not you look at Morris' place? A. Yes, I was in there twice. 2798!~. Q. Cannot you say wbat the condition was? A. I do not remen1ber whether any of the outer brattice was down ; but certainly the inner part of it was. etandiog. 27984,

,. ~ I

' I l

.I,,

•

829

Witness-W. Humble, 17 M.arch, 1903.

27984. Q. How is it you have no note of it? A. I suppose I did not consider that it called for any special note. . 27985. Q. I£ that brattice is standing, from Morris' place across the heading, do not you think that, if any force comes down the heading, it would displace it? A. Yes, I think it would. I am not sure t~at that place was ?ratt.iced in any other way than the ordinary run of places ; and in that case the brattice would not be nght across th.e heading. . . . . 27936. Q. How would the air be taken into Morris' place? A. It would bo turned 10, as 1t 1s tur1;1-ed mto a dozen of other places, not by a closed door, but by a brattice that would only reach partly into the heading. 27987. Q. Then you canuot tell us what the conditions were? A. I know that, above that, there were signs of :rn outbye force,· and below that there were signs of an outbye force; but I do not remember the canvas in Morris' place being blown down. 27988. Q. You say it was standing upright? A. Yes. 27989. Q. And undisturbed? A. Yes, in the place itself. 27990. Q. Now, let us take the condition of tqe canvas across tlrn };leading? A. Yes. 27991. Q. Was that standing, or blown in bye, or outbye? A. Whatever bad been placed there was standin·g; but I do not think it was stretched right across the beading. 27992. Q. Was some of it down? A . No ; all that I saw was standing up. 27993. Q. Did you see none of that canvas that was in the heading blown partly inbye? A. No. I saw pieces of canvas in the heading; but I could not say from where they had been blown. i7994. Q. Which props were they r ound ;-were they round a.ny props at all? A. In some cases they were round the high side; and in other cases they were up round the other way. 27995. Q. In Morris' place? .A.. Well, there was one piece a little above Morris' place. 27996. Q. Within a yard or two of Morris' place, did you see any canvas wrapped round a prop? .A.. Yes, I did. 27997. Q. What direction bad that apparently come from? A . From the face of the No. 1 heading. 27998. Q. Did you see any sign of canvas having been driven · inbye near Morris' place? A. Not there. 27999. Q. Did you see any sign of canvas having been <lri,,en inbye between Morris' place and the face ? .A.. Yes. 28000. Q. lnbye? .A.. No, no; between Morris' place and the face I said the force was outbye. • 28001. Q. You saw no canvas anywhere between Morris' place and the face which appeared to have been driven in bye? A. No. 28002. Q. Did you see a water-bottle with a strap on it? .A.. Yes, I did. 28003. Q. Was that driven outbye, or in bye, do you think? A.. I could not say. I could not say where it was at the time of the explosion. ,, 28004<. Q. What did you think ? .A. I thought they had hacl their food up there, or bad gone up there for some purpose. 28005. Q. Wbat was the condition of the strap and the bottle ? A. I do not know. I saw it. 28006. Q. Where was the strap; was it loose ? A. It was attached to the bottle ; I did not touch it. 28007. Q. You cannot tell us the way they were lying? A. I know they were lying on the left-hand side going up. . · 28008. Q. You cannot say whether they showed a force going inbye, or how they were lying? A. No. 2'3U:'>9. Q. Now, you say the first two stoppings on the in bye side of the 5th Right were blown towards tlie rope road? .A. No; they were blown towards the ba~·k heading; but the stop pings higher up were blown t owards the rope road. 28010. Q. Very well: these two were blown towards the rope road? A. Yeii. 28011. Q. Which do you say were blown in the opposite direction ? A. Those higher up. 28012. Q. How many r A. I think they were the top two. 28013. Q. It cannot be that one (pointing to the plan) - tbat is the airway? A. Yes; then it was this-the second and third iobye of~tbe 5th Right. 280l4. Q. Then, there were not two with their stoppiogs blown from the travelling road to the rope road; but really only one? A . Two, with that door blown in. 28015. Q. The first inbye of the 5th Right was driven from the rope road to the travelling road? A. Yes. 280 l6. Q. And the second and third inbye of the 5th Right were driven from the travelling road t o the rope road ? A. Yes. 28017. Mr. Ritcliie.J Q. A.re you speaking from memory entirely with ref!ard to this place> or have you made notes of it? A . I have no notes; but I have seen the plan that has been drawn. 28018. Q. H ave you a clear recol1ection of that: does what you saw on the plan compare correctly with wh~t you saw in the mine? A. Yes; and having seen the plans they confirmed my view. 28019. Mr. Wade.] Q. You are clear n ow, from what you saw, that the fir.,t stopping inbye of the 5th R ight was blown to the travelling road ? A. Yes, I think so. . 28020. Q. Now you say "think"; are you sure? A. I have not any note of it in here; and therefore I would not pledge myself as to '•hether it was blown towards the travelling road; but I think it was. 2802 1. Q. Did what yo u saw ou the plans correspond with your recollection with regard to these stoppings ? A. Yes. 28022. Q. I t corresponds with your recollection as to those three stoppings inbye of the 5th Right ? A. Yes. 2S023. Q. Now, here is the first stopping inbye of the 5th Right blown tbe opposite way to what yo u say, according to this plan (E.:cldbit 2G shown to witness) ? A . .According to t he plan, there are only two stoppings shown. 28024. Q. D o you say the plan ought to show three ? A. 1 suppose it has not been extended far enough. 28025. Q. Theo, you will admit thil'I, that this plan does not c ,rrespond with your view of the first stoppiug inbye? A. Yes, I must admit that: this plan shows the first stopping as having be~n thrown over towards the rope road. 28026. Q. And yonr idea is that the first stopping was blown to the travelling road, and the next two to the rope road? .A , Yes; but I cannot dispute this.

28027,

830 Witne.ss-W. Humble, 17 March, 1903.

2 027. Q. And you have no note at all 1 A. No, I have no note about that. . 28028. jJfr. Ritchie]. Q. You said you had seen the plan indicating the way that these stoppmgs had been blown· what plan was it you bad seen 1 A. This plan [ Exhibit 26]. 28029.' Afr. Wade.] Q. How was it you took no notes at all at that stage.1 A.~ ?id not take any note~ of the two stoppings being blown out, because I thought that they were quite sufficiently fixed on my mmd without recording them in my book. 28030. Q. And you took no notes of the condition of the brattice in Morris' place 1 A. No. 28031. Q. Was that sufficiently fixed in your mind 7 A. I think so. There was nothing there broken, and therefore, I took no note of it. 28032. Q. And you did not take a note of the bottle and the strap 1 A. No, I did not attach much importance to them. 28033. Q. Did you take any note of the condition of the canvas at the face 1 A. Yes. 28034. Q. What does your note say 1 A. I do not think I have it in my notes; but I have a distinct recollection of that. 28035. Q. Then, it is not in your notes 1 A. Yes, it is. [ The witness' note-book was handed to him, qnd he looked through it.] I have not any note there; but I Wl!S in th11.t place afterwards. I cannot find any note ; but I can speak very distinctly on the state of the canvas in these two places. The canvas in the front beading was blown against the right-hand corner of the cut-through. 28036. Q. Showing what 1 A. Showing a force having gone inward. There was part of the back place where the canvas was blown over towards the right side, and part of it was burnt. 28037. Q. When you· say "part blown to the right side" what do you mean by that 1 A. A portion of it. 28038. Q. ,vas it blown over 1 A. Y.es, the canvas was down, and had been torn from its props. 28039. Q. What length 1 A. I cannot tell-several feet . 28040. Q. Do you mean blown to the east 1 A. Yes, to the east. 28041. Q. Whore was that ;-was it near the part that was burnt 1 A. The part that was burnt was Oil the low side of the cut-through. 28042. Q. On the southern side 1 A. Yes. 28043. Q. And the part that was blown was where 1 A. Was on the high side of the cut -through. 28044:. Q. You say there was an ignition of gas in the face of No. 1 heading. I want you to tell me definitely, if y.eu can, about which of those theories it points to ;-do you think there was flame going in at the time the air passed Morris' working place 1 A. No ; I think it is not so likely as that there was a. compressive force which brought out the gas from the faces, and tba.t it ignited at Morris' light. 28045. Q. Now, you have said that there was a prop with coked dust on it inby-e of where the bodies were • found 1 A. Yes. 28046. Q. When would that coked dust be deposited, do you think, inbye of where Morris was found 1 A. SometiIQe during the explosion. 28047. Q. When-at what stage1 A. WelJ, during t he blast caused by the ignition of gas there would be a. force coming down the heading, and that coked dust would be put on that prop a.t that time. 28048. Q. Would t hat take place when the force of the explosion first went into the faces, or when it went back 1 A. No, that would take place when the gas that had been ignited was passing that prop. The same force that brought out the gas would certainly raise the dust, and the dust would be in the air. 28049. Q. But, according to your theory, at that time the gas had not heeu ignited; it bad not got back to Morris at that stage; and this coked dust WllS on the in bye side of Morris' place i A. Yes. ~8050. Q. And you say that at that time there was no flame i A. I think it was likely there was no Ba.me ; but, assuming there was one, then Morris' light ignites the gas; it is a common thing for the dust to be on the lee side of props ; in fact, it bas been observed many times. 28051. Q. How do you account for that there 1 A. I answer in that way, that it bas been observed in many cases that the clust bas been on the back side of the props. 28052. Q. W hen do you say it occurred i A. Immediately after the ignition of the gas. 28053. Q. Immediately after it came back to Morris' light 1 A. Yes. 28054. Q. Then, at Morris' place, it must have split, and some must have gone ha.ck to the face and some have gone outwards 1 A. Well, there is no doubt t hat there would be a force l.,ackwards. 28055. Q. If that is so, that must be the case 1 A. There is no doubt t here would be a backward fot·ce as well as a forward one. 28056. Q. Can you tell us what the indications of force were between the 1st Right headings and those cutthroughs towards Aitken's place 1 A. Yes; there were two tubs partly filled which had been blowu to the west-[ Interrupted]. 28057. Q. Were the forces all going to the west, with the exception of that one piece of canvas you spoke of 1 A. Yes. 28058. Q. Now, did not you see another canvas door on the eastern side of that piece of canvas which you spoke of, which door bad also been stripped and torn 1 A. Well, yes, I think I did ; I think I saw more than one door along there ; but I did not take particular notice of them, except this one, where the can vas • bad been driven back in an opposite direction along the prop. 28059. Q. Did you take that up and measure it, and compare it with another piece that was left on the western side1 A. No. 28060. Q. How can you say that it did not come off tbat door t hat had lost its canvas on the eastern side, rather than tho ,vest 1 You told us you found on the westem side of Aitken's place a piece of canvas which you t.hought baa come off t he door and been blown from the west to tho east 1 A. Yes, I think so. 28061. Q. Now you say there is a door also in this line of cut-throughs on the eastern side of where you found this canva~1 A. Yes; there hava been sever~l of those. 28062. Q. T~ke the nearest; had not the canvas been displaced off t hat door on the eastern side of where yon found the can "as 1 A. Yes. 28063. Q. Did you i,ver trace that canvas 1 A. No; I was quite satisfied with looking at the main forces along Lhere; and I did not pay much attention, or I did not regard with much attention, the canvas being blown ; the tubs were quit,e sufficient. 28064. Q. You did not give much attention to the canvas 1 A. No, the tubs were of much more importance, an.cl re,ceived more of my attention. ' 28065.

',.·

. !

•.

831

lf"ilne.98-W, Humble, 17 M&Tchi 1903.

28066. Q. Then you did not pay attention to the canvas 1 A. I did not, any more than I have told you. 28066. Q. Did you notice a man's coat near there 1 A. No, I did not. 28067. Q. Or the direction in which it bad been blown 1 A. No. 28068. Q. Now, you said the other day that your theory of a coal.dust explosion would reconcile all the contradictory evidences you saw; what were yon referring to when you said tha~what contradictory evidences 1 A. Well, there were two or th ree forces on each road, I suppose, that were in contradiction to the other forces. 28069. Q. Give us one; take the No. 1 Right road first of all; tell us the contradictory forces you saw on that road 1 A. Two of those tubs about the 4th Right, or the 4th Left, I thought there migbt be some contradiction about. . 28070. Q. Do you think so now 1 A. No, I do not think so now. I think tl1at they were all trending in an inbye direction. 28071. Q. Well, tell us the signs of contradictory force you ~ot in the No. 1 Right 1 A. You say this theory . of yours reconciles them all ; then what are they i A. I said t hat my theory of t he ignition of coal.dust was quite reconcilable with the contradictory forces. 28072. Q. No; you sai.d that it reconciles them, if I am not mistaken ; well, tell us the other contradictory forces, while you are about it 1 A. I do not remember very many ; there were very few. 28073. Q. Well, give us any 1 A. I thought that one of those full tubs just beyond the dead horse on the outbye side of the 5th Right showed an outbye force. 2807 4. Q. Do you think so now 1 A . Y es. 28075. Q. Where was it 1 A. Olle of those five full tubs beyond the dead Jlorse. 28076. Q. That would be at the 5th Right, as near A.S possible 1 A. Yes, on the outbye side of the 5th Right. 28077. Q. And what did the others show 1 A. I think they showed force inwards ; I think· the first one showed an inward force. 28078. Q. Taking them as a whole, do you think they are consistent with an in bye force 1 A. Taking them as a whole, I think the inbye force is the more probable. 28079. Q. Where is it then; is there anything else you can give us showing contradictory fortes 1 A. No, I do not remember any, except that piece of canvas that we have already spoken of in Aitken's heading. 28080. Q. Now, you told us the other day about some drifts of dust from the 5th Right rope road towards the goaf 1 A. Yes. 28081. Q. Would not that be consistent with a force going up the No. 1 road 1 A. Yes, I think so. 28082. Q. Turning into tbe 5th Right and swirling round the corner, and making that dust deposit at the goaf edge 1 A. I t hink so. 28083. Q. It bas nothing to do with the second ignition which you spoke of at the face of No. 1 1 A. No, although the force of the second ignition would probably be exerted in the self-same direction. 28084. Q. Now, did you see the t ravelling road just inbye of the 4th Right; the buildings of an old door 1 A. No. A wooden door. 28085. Q. I do not know what the door was; I am speaking of the stone buildings 1 A. I saw the stone buildings of two doors on t hat travelling road ; but I think they were both on the outbye side of the overcast. 28086. · Q. I do not mean those; a few yards only, going up t he t ravelling road, from the 4th Right, did you see the buildings of the doors there? Suppose you were going from the goaf, aud you struck the t ravelling road, and then turned in bye; now, a few yards inbye, did you see the buildings of a door t here 1 A. No, I did not; I did not ~ee a door there. 28087. Q. Would you expect to find any indications of force going inbye there, on your theory 1 A. Well, slight; I t hink there were slight indications of dust drifting. 28088. Q. Only of dust drifting 1 A. I did not see any other force. 28089. Q. Would you expect to 6.n<l the building stones displaced, on your theory 1 A. Yes, if there were any building stones on the side. 28090. Q. What would displace them i A. Well, the expansion of the gas which first lighted. There would certajnly be an expansion both inward an<l outward along the travelling road. 28091. Q. I£ there is no explosion, but simply an ignition, would you expect the gas to go in all directions 1 A. I£ there was an ignition, t here would be an expansion. 28092. Q. That would be an explosion-would there be an explosion, or not 7 A. Yes, it would be an explosion ; the force would be inbye and outhye, probably, for a short distance. 28093. Q. Well, if there was an exJ)losion at the very firs t start, as you say now, in the travelling road; which might displace these building stones of this door inbye, would not you expect it to have some great effect on Purcell too i A. No, it does not take very much force to displace a few rubble building stones. 28094. Q. It takes very much less fo rce to displace a human body, does it not 1 A. I t might knock a man down ; bu t it does not follow that it would kill him. 28095. Q. If there was an explosion, there was flame in this travelling roa<l 1 A. Yes, I suppose there would be. 28096. Q. If there was a flame, it would be intense? A. Yes. 28097. (J. If it was sufficient to burn his hair would it not be sufficient, to burn his clothes too 7 A. I do not know ; sometimes men's hair and skin are burnt, and their clothes show no signs .of burning. There are plenty of instances of that, where men are burnt by small quantities of gas, and burnt very severely, but t here is no sign of burning on their clothes. 28098. Q. I am not talking of small ignitions; I am talking of t his case here 1 A. Well, it is possible that a man might be burnt, and that bis clothes might not be burnt. 28099. Q. Well, I take it that your theory is that there was no rush of air out of t he 4th Right at all 1 A. No great rush of air. 28100. Q. You say "no great rush," now; was there any rush at all? A. No rush at all; I think it would be squeezed out gently. 28101. Q. What we call oozing 1 A. No; but it would be forced out; but t here would be no great velocity. I t would simply be forced out as goafs do force gas out. 28102. Q. Do you think that the air, if their was any forced out at all, would drive a cushion of air in .front of it 1 A. Yes; certainly the air would be driven in front of the gas; any air t hat existed in that road between the goaf and the travelling roatl wollld be driven outward j but it need not t ravel at any great velocity, 28103.

832 H'itness-W. Humble, 17 Ma.rcb, 1903.

2 ' 103. Q. Supposing the a ir t ravelled at 20 miles an hour, and _went in bye and. outbye from the 4th Ri~ht, do you think that the air displacer{ in front of it would blow a light out 1 A. If 1t were a.t that rate, I thmk it would · but I do not think i t was travelling at that rate. Did you, when you were making your inspection in 1898, t est for gas on that occasion 1 A. Yes. 28104. 28105. Q. Did you test in all the likely places 1 A. I did. Those likely places were the goaf edges for each district, and the winning places. 2 106. Q. Did you see a swirl of <lust on t he north-eastern angle of t he junction of the 4th Rig ht with the No. 1 rope road [pointing it out on the plan, Exhibit 26) 1 A. Yes, that is, in the cut.through beLween the t,vo headings. 28107. Q. H ow do you think that got there; did it seem .to have been blown 1 A. Yes, I think it had. I think that that was t,he back-lash from the explosion ; it had returned to t hat point, and no doubt swept that dust in there with it. 2 108. Q. You think that after the explosion had travelled up to the face of the No. 1 a back-lash came along bringing dust, which it deposited just at the j unction of the 4th Right with the No. 1 road 1 A. Yes; I think that t he back-lash which follow.3 all explosions would ~arry that dust in there. 28109. Q. Do not you t hink that, if tLere was sufficien t back-lash to deposit that dust., yolt wJuld have found sufficient indications of its going outbye 1 A. Yes. 28110. Q. Did you see any indications of it 1 A. N o, I did not see any indications on the main 1·oad; bu t I saw this. 28111. Q. But, I say, if this was caused by the back-lash going outbye - - [Interrupted]? A. Not necessarily going outbye; it might bll,ve been coming in bye from the tunnel mouth. 28112. Q. Take it as going outbye 6rst; would not you also expect to find indications of dust up against the timber, and so on, going outby'e ? L1. There was very little timber on that road. 28113. Q. W ere not there roller seatings 1 A. Yes. 28114. Q. Were not there indications t here? A. No, they werejambecl with dust on tbe outbye side . . 28115. Q. Apparently caused by an inbye force 1 A. Y es; but I ditl not see any dust on the rope road. 281 16. Q. If this dust on the 4th Right corner was causP.d by the back-lash going outbye, would not you expect to find dust Leaped up against the inbye side of the roller seatings 7 A. But there was no dust there to give indications; bul there was plenty of dust in the travelling road to account for that. 28117. Q. Supposing the force came from the tunnel mouth, and deposited this swi rl of dust against this corner, would not you expect to find drifts of dust on the outbye side of objects 1 11. It need not necessarily have come from this rope road; it may have come from the travelling road. 28118. Q. You told us it came from some,vhere on the rope road 1 A. No; I do not think I did. 28119. Q. Do you say it came by a back-lash 1 A. Yes. 28120. Q. \Vhere did the back-lash come from 1 A. From both parts. 28121. Q. What road 1 ii. Both travelling road and rope road. 28122. Q. Take the rope road; if it came from the rope road, would not you expect to find indicat ions of drifts of dust on the side the dust came from 1 A. I do not mean to say that the dust you find there came from the rope road. I mean to say that that dust was taken up in the travelling road by the back-lash, and deposited there. · , 28123. Q. Then you think this dust came from the travelling road 7 A. I think that dust was picked up in the travelling road . ~8124. Q. How did it come 7 A. It had been carried by this rul\h of air that I call the back-la~h ; as it entered that place, as it would do, it had the dust and depositt-d it on t he corner. 28 125. Q. W hat does back lash mean ; does not it mean filling the vacuum caused by the passage of the explosion 1 A. Yes. 28126. Q. And you see no indication at all of the explosion ba.ving travelled the travelling road 1 Jl. No. 28127. Q. H ow do you expect a ha.ck-lash there then 1 A. BecausP, when these forces went right out, or got to be so large out on the rope road, it would certainly, in coming back, pass along the travelling road, as well as the rope road ; all parts of t he mioo t hat the blast had past along would have a partial vacuum, and those would be afterwards filled by the return force. 28128. Q. Then, if there is sufficient dust to deposit here at the corner of the 4th Righ t and the No. 1 rope road, which had come a long the t ravelling road, would not you expect some drifts of dust in t he travelling r oad 1 A. \Veil, the t ravelling road was not dusty in all parts ; it. was only dusty in some parts. 28129. Q. You said there was a big stone in the 4th Right1 A. Yes. 28130. (J. Did you t race that stone home to where it came from 1 A . I t hink so. I think it came from that fall on the t ravelling road. It had every appearance of having been taken up there from that fall on the travelling road. 28131. Q. ·what do you mean by "taken up tbe.-e" ·1 1J. Some force ho.cl carried it there or driven it so. 28132. Q. Did it seem to have come from the same place as the main body of t he fall on the travelling road 1 A. Yes; I think it was part of the fall. 28133. Q. Do you think it rolled there 1 A. No, I think it was taken there. Th e fall occurred probably during the time of the e.x plosion; one of these stones, I think, was taken by t he re-entry of the a ir and carried on. 28134. Q. Re-enfry of air from where 7 A. From all parts of the mine into the 4th R ight hand. 28135. Q. \ Vere t here smaller stones in that fall than t he one you saw 1 A. Yes; I think there would be; but I did not particularly not ice the size. I was satis6cd when I saw this that it w as one of the stones from that faU. 28136. Q. Now, you said the other day that the wind-blast t heory would not reconci le the different forces that you Sl,w ; do you remember saying that 7 ,J. I remember s~yiog something to t hat effect; perhaps it was unfortunate to use tl1e word " forces." 2813 7. Q. I s that correct ; or do you want to alter it 1 ,J. The wind-blast the:,ry does not reconcile itself · to all I saw. , 2~ ~ 38. Q. [ Rr;adi"![J fron~ paragraph, 27 226] "(J. Can you reconcile the con trn.d ictory directions of forcP. w?1ch you saw with a single blaet, as Dr. R o\.,ertson has suggested 1 ii. No, I cannot reconcile t hem." "\\, hat cannot you reconcile wiLh the wind-blast 1 11. I do not know about the direction of force: but I · cannot reconcile the burning of men. · 28139.

, I /

833 ,-.

Witness- W. Humble, 17 March, 1903.

28139. Q. You say there t~at you cannot reconcile the contradictory directions of force w~th a single ~last; now, what were you speakmg about that you could not reconcile 1 A. I ha~e already said that I did not J;ee many contradictory forces. · 28140. Q. Whether you saw a few, or a lot, I want you to explain that answer, that you could not reconcile the contradictory directions of force with a single wind-blast 1 A. Well, a blast of air would not displace the stop pings from the rope road to the travelling road in one part, and from the tra,elling road to the rope road in another part; I think a single blast of air would not do that. 28141. Q. Do yon see anything improbable in this: If a force of air went up the main rope road, passed the 5th Right, and displaced the first two stoppings; and supposing it got through into the back heading, would not the force be likely to split then, in bye and outbye 1 A Yes; but it would have an equal opportunity of going straight up the fore heading, you know. bla~t, the forces would 28142. Q. Could not it go both ways 1 A. Yes. I think, if it had been a sincrle 0 have been all in the one direction. 28143. Q. Oould not it have been caused by the blast goincr up the main heading, and these stones toppling down afterwards into the main heading 1 A. I t may liave been caused that way; but I do not think it is likely. I think those stones showed a certain amount of force outward. Cross·examination by Mr. Lysaght: -

.. \I

••

·l>

•

28144. Q. You said that the fall of roof occurred. in the inner part of this 35-acre goaH A. Yes. 28145. Q. What do you mean by the " inner part" 1 A. I mean some distance from the edge; a. distance to which no one could travel. 28146. Q. Oan you express that in yards1 A. No, I cannot. I could not say how many yards. It was certainly at a point to which no one could travel. 28147. Q. About how fad A. Ob, it is impossible to say how far; there is a gob 35 acres in extent; the gas was forced out from some part of it, certainly not from the edge. 28148. Q. I am not speaking of that; but of the fall that occurred in the inner part; where was this fall 1 A. It was somewhere in the inner part. 28149. Q. But how fat· from the edge 1 A. I could not tell you that. It is impossible for any one to tell you how far from the edge. 21150. Q. Had you any information as to what area of roof remained to fall in the 4th Right 1 A. No, I have heard it said that there was some 44 yards square to fall near tl1e cdgP. 28151. Q. Then you rlo not assume a fall any further in than 44 yards from the edge 1 A. I do. 28152. Q. Do you not know that the whole of the goaf, with the exception of that area of 44 yards, had fallen heavily and weightily some time before that 1 A. No, I do not know that ; and, if I had. been told it, I would say it was vAry improbable. 28153. Q. Well, if it has been sworn here by Mr. Leitch, the under-manager, that, up to the area of pilla.rs that had not been extracted, the goaf had fallen heavily and weightily, are you prepared by any facts to dispute it 1 A. No, not by any facts ; but I say it is very improbable. 28154. Q. Then, have you not imagined a fall farther than 44 yards from the outlet 1 A. Ye~. 28155. Q. Without any data 1 A. Yes, there is very little difference between imagining and making an assumption. 21156. Q. You have imagined it without any data 1 A. I say that a fall occurred in the goaf; I have no data to say how far in. 28157. Q. Will you tell me what data you have to say that any fall occurred in that goa.fi A. Only that it follows as a matter of course that falls did occur after the extraction of the coal ; and that thE>y continued to come. 28158. Q. That is not data; that is a conclusion i A. Well. 28159. Q. I want to know what data have you on which to say tba.t any fall occurred in the 35.acre goaf ~ .A. There is certainly the fact t.hat the stone was quite clear, and not covered with dust, at the entrance to that goaf ; that is sufficient proof to my mind, either that the fall occurred at the time of the explosion ; or, perhaps, it had not finished, and finished some time afterwards. 28160. Q. Is that the only data you have1 A. Yes. 28161. Q. That being so, do not you see that the clean aspect of the stones would be quite consistent with a f,.11 of only a few yards back 1 A. Quite so. 28162. Q. That being so, what right or what justification have you for assuming that there was a fall any farther in than a few yards. 28163. JV/r. Bruce > 'mith.] He does not say there was. 28164. Mr. Lysayht.] Q. I understood you to say that you did say there was a fall farther in than the 44 yards 1 A. I say it is very probable that there had bef'3n a fall. 28165. Q. Your theory is partly based on that i A. Yes. 28166. Q. As your only datum for saying there was any fall is the fact that there were clean stones at the e<lge of t he goaf, is not that quite consistent with a fall only a few yards in 1 A. Yes. 28167. Q. And therefore you have nothing to warrant the assumption that there was a fall any farther in than about, say, 20 or 30 yards i A. Nothing, except that the gas would be likely to be lodged in a higher pa1t of the goaf than that 44 yards would br. 28168. Q. Theu you are basing the a~suri1ption that the fall took place some distance in the goaf upon the fact that a considerable quantity of gas came from that goaf, in your opinion 1 A. Yes. 28169. Q. That assumes, then, a fairly large accumulation of fire-damp in the goaf i A. I think so. 28170. Q. ·would the failure to inspect tbat goaf weekly, as required by special rule, in your opinion, be negligence in the management. 28171. ~Mr. Wade.] I ohject to that. 28172. His llonor.J That is really a deduction that lhe witness is asked to draw, which the Commission can draw just a8 well as he can; but, without going as far as that, you might cut the question short, and still arrive at the same conclusion as you wish to arrive at, Mr. Lysaght. 28173. Mr. L1.Jsaght.] Very well, Your Honor. It was on his practical knowledge of the working of a mine tha.~ I based the question .

16825

29-lS N

28li4.

83.L Witness-\\". Humble, 17 M~rcb, 190?.

, I

28174. Q. Yout· theory assuming a fairly large ~ccumulat,io~ of fire-~~~p in tJle.goa.f, ,'rlu~t '.voll]d_yot_! hi\'~ done if you bad been Manager, to dE>.al with that danged A: I th1.nk I shoulc! have· o\:iserve.d my spec1~ rule · if there was a special rule sayincr that the goaf had to bo ~ammecl, I should have done 1t. 2817'5. jJfr. Ritchiei] Q. While you a~e on that point, do you dr:aw a. distinction between waste workings and goafs 1 A . .Practically they are the same. 28176. Q. Do you understand, and do you interpret a special rnle which pro,•ides for a weekly examination of waste workings to mean, the weekly examination of the goaf 7 .ti. As well ~s tho <:>tb er old workings. 28177 . .Mr. Robe1·tson.] Q. You mean that "waste workings" is a comprehenstvo term 1 A. Yes, I do; I think it embraces goa.fs. 28178. Q. It embraces goafs, wastes, and old wo1·kings1 Q. Yes. 28179. .1..llr. Lysaght.] Q. Tbis special rule would be ta.ken by rou to comprehend ~ny goafs [r~ing 8_1Jecial Rule No. 10, p. 64-, notes of inque.~t], " He shnll a.t least once m every week exam me, so far as 1s practtcablP, the state of the waste workings, &c., &c. "1 A. Yes; to examine as far as practicaule those goafs. · · 281 80. Q. Inasmuch as tbe piU.ars were being worked at the edge of the goaf before the disaster,~ your opinion was it practicable t'> give that goaf such an ·examination as would have detected this fire--da.mpi ..4. No, it was not; you could not have ,c:;ot far enough in to have detected that fire-damp. . ; 28181. Q. How do you know1 A. :Because I am assuming that the gas came from the highest p11rt ·of the cro:if. I have alrea.dy said that you could not get to that point to make an examination. 28182. Q. But you are assuming that it had come from a place that bad 'settled solidly 1 A. No, I have not. You have told me that it had been asserted that it had settled solidly ; but I se.y it is vei·y improbaqle. · · 28183. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Why 1 A. Because, as the pillar extt·action goes on,:even if you had bad a large fall which went to the surface, after the pillar extraction was carded along there would bo large holes made by the fa.ll which woultl not b~ filled in by the debris. 28134. Q. Do you mean to say that, after the pillars from 35 acres had been extractfld, the goaf would not have consolidated absolutely tight 1 A. Not all ·round the edges; it may be sp in the middle; but it. would not be so all round the edges. 28185. Q. What do you mean by round tho" edges" 1 A. I mean round the edges of tbat part tbat hall fallen right up to the surface, or that has settled tight. I mean to say t~a.t in a goa( it is impossible to get tue place absolutely fi)led up. . .· . .. 281 l:S6. Q. Rave you ever had any experience of driving through a goa.f 1 A. I have; and I have crone across open places, as well as plnces that were solid . . 28187. Q. Was it a large goaf 1 ·well, I suppose it would be 500 yards across it. I do not know the extent in the other direction ; but there would certainly be 500 yards. across it 28188. Q. It is a very extraordinary thing, because I ha,·e a. place in my mind wh·ere a. drive was made 500 yards through a. goa.f, antl it was water-tight 7 A. This was not so._ .The!·e were certaiu 1,laces that were very cavernous-like looking. . -28189. Q. Was there any considerable cavity in this goaf1 A. We could not see any; but I am reasoning on what I know of other goafs. I have been able to see other goafs; and I know that there is considerable space righ t round the edges that is never filled up, e,·en though they seem to he fallen very close. 28190. .Mr. Ritch·ie.] Q. What thickness of fall have you got in your mind as having taken place beyon<l th~ area. 44 yards square that is spoken of as having fallen 1 A. Probably 20 feet high from that. 28191. Q. And you assume that the gas was on the top of this fall, that you speak of, beyond the 44-yard area, or in the H-yard area 1 A. :N'0 1 beyond that, and higher t,hnn that. ~3192. Q. Are you also assuming that the fall beyond the 44-yard area. although you state it was open, was sufficiently closed to prevent people from making any examination i A. Oh, yes; there can be no doubt of that. It ,voukl not be safe for anyone to go in to that part to make an exmnination. 28193. Q. If it was 15 01· 20 feet thick, if it was loosE>, as you say it w11s, what space would there qe on top for a fall to take place, in a seam original1y 6 feet thick 1 A. You rnu&t bear in miad that t his stone, being hard, would certainly not bl! tight; n.11d there would be quite sufficient sp~ce for gas to be in. 28194:. Q. Do you assume that there was sufficient space on the top of that fa.II, after allowing for the expansion of the stone, to enable another fa.II to come which would drive the gas clown in that locality 1 A. Yes, I think so. Even if there were only a foot, there would still be rooru for a large amount of gas; and a subsequent seltling of the roof would simply force out that gas. 28"195. Q. Dut would the subsequent settling of the roof be likely to fall suddenly, or to dribble down so as to allow that gas to go higher up 1 A. No, I think the gas would be driven out; it has been so in dozens and score!! of cases. 28196. Q. But you would want a tremendous fall to drive it out1 A. Not necessarily, but a. large fall. I have seen a fall not larger than this 44-yard square drive gas out. 28197. Q. Do you assume tbat the fall beyond the 44-yard square took place before the fall in the area 44 yards square, to bring out the gas before the 44-yards square area fell 1 A. Yes, oh yes. I think that the fall, as it, were, had its commencement in this higher part; it drove out the gas; and this 44-ya.rds square area. must have fallen after that. 2819 . Q. Do you assume that the fall in the 44-yards sq uare area. fell subsequently to the ignition of this gas, or prior to it 1 A. It was probably falling at the ti roe, and continued falling, even after the ignition. 28199. Q. Would it not ue more likely that the 44-yards square area would, in all probability, it being the last part of the roof, foll first ; and that any fa)l that affected the area beyond the 44: yards wou!d be a. subsequent fall 1 A. Well, yes it might be so. 28200. Q. In that case would it not be probable that the gas was under the area covered by tbe 44-yards roof 1 A. Well, it is possible; I will not say it is probable. 28:Wl. Q. From yout· experience, would not that be the area likely to fa)l first, tbo 44-yards square area 1 A. Yes, I t.hink so. · · 28202. _Q. A fall taking place in this ,l 1-yards square area would, to a. ,er:y large extent relieve the hicrher strata, which would subsequently fall i A. Y es. · .' b · 28203. Q. Now, do you assume, in view of those facts, that the first fall was in that 44-yards square area 1 A. Yes, I say I think it is likely. 28204. Q. That the first fall would uo in tho 44-ya,rds square area.1 A. Yes; aqd that wo~ld be followeu by the higher part~ falling.

2s2oi

.. , , I I

t35

TVitne~R-W. Humble, 17 March,

19M.

!6.205. Q. What thickness do you assume that the first fall in the 44-yards square area would be 1 A. I could not say that. I really could not say that. . · 28206. Q. You have no idea 1 A. No. I do not know how it fell; but I certainly think it; would be

several feet in thickness. 28207. Q. Do you think it woul<l be sufficiently thick to fill up the roadway leading into the 4ih Right 7 .Ll. No, I do not think so. 2-8208. Q. Do you know that a fall bad tlken place in that area 2! feet thick before the disaster took pl.ace 7 A. Yes. . 28209. Q. It would leave an opening of probably 3! feet or 4 feet in from the 4th Right 1 A. Yes. 28210. Q. Now, do you consider, or do you not, that the second fall, this· fall of the 44-yarcls square area, would be sufficiently thick to completely fill up that 3! feet or 4 feet 1 A. It would block it, so that nobody could travel in it; but it wonld not block it so as to prevent gas coming out, because those stones <lo not fall so. You cannot get that roof to fall anything like air-tight. · 28211. Q. Do you think thi:i gas was in the 44-yards square area before the first fall took place1 A. I think it is possible, but not probable. · 28212. Q. What reasons have you got for coming to that conclusion 1 A. I think this 44:-yards square wou1cl ee more or less under the influence of the air current, which would tend to keep it clean. 28213. Q. What evidence have you got that there was an air current at all 1 11.. I know from the plan that the air current reaily passed through or round the edges of that goaf. 28214. Q. What edges 1 A. The outer parts of the goaf. I understand that the air current came from the high side. 28215. Q. Show me on the plan where the air would be likely to get in 1 A. I understand that the air current passed through some of these openings on the east side and at the north-east corner of the goaf. .28216. Q. Would the current which was travelling through from the points whicu you have fixed on the plan not have been just as likely to affect the higher area as the lowel' area 1 A. No, I think not. 28217. Q. Wh.11 A. Because it would be prevented by the stone that was fallen from getting up into these places. It would certainly take the edges, where there was the least amount of stone fallen. That is where the air would flow around. 2.8218. Q. Round the edges i A. Yes. 28219. Q. And it would not percolate through, and go to the top 1 A. No, I think not. I think that the higher parts would be always more or less away from the air current. 28220. Q. Would not that condition apply with equal force to the 44-yards square area i A. It would apply to some extent, but not with equal force. I say that the 44-yards area would be ·more subject ·to the infl.uence of the air current than the higher parts beyond it. 2822,1. Q. You think that the probabilities would be that it would take the shortest way of getting round 1 .t1. It would take the easiest wa.y ; and that would be the most open way; and that wou1d be round the edges; and, in going round to those men, it would sweep through this 44-yards square area better and easier than it would do in the other parts which were fallen. 28222. Q. If, as was stated, the fall was sufficiently close to prevent the air travelling round that way, would that alter your conclusion 1 A. Yes. I do not mean to i:iay that the air did pass right through the middle of the goaf ;-I mean to say that the air getting in from the easb and north points would simply find its wa.y through the easiest, the most open, parts. 28223. Q. Do you think it is easier for the air to pass out west through the fallen area, where it was fallen across, than to go round the roaclways 1 A. No; I think it would be easier to go round the roadways than to get through a place which was fallen closely. · 28224. Q. Then, is it likely, if the fall was very close, as we have it here in evidence, that any air at all would travel over there 1 A. Not pass over it; it conld not. 28225. Q. Would it go round it, in view of the fact that it would be more likely to encounter more friction in going round than in going through the airways 1 A. Yes, but even that does not show that no air wou1d go. We know that, if left to itself, the air goes even in places where it encounters· more friction. There would certainly be some air going through that goaf; but it would not go thtbtlgn toe centre-it would pass through the edges. You see it would have to pass round and come out of the' 4th Right:hand. I understand that is the only outlet; there may be others further on ; but that is the principal outlet. 28226. Q. Which do you think would be the most likely way for the ventilation to travel through that; goaf ;-would the intake air have a stronger force to the east; or would the.return a.fr be the stronger, and draw it to the west i I think the return air would be tile stronger, and the current would be in that direction. 28227. Q. Both require to be open to get a current at all 1 A.. Considering there was a current of air coming in from the daylight tunnel close by, part of that air would enter the goaf and pass through it, and come down to the lowest part of the travelling road, which was tht:l return. 28228. Q. Did you make any minute examination of these openings which you have pointed out on the plan 1 A. Yes ; I examined all these openings on the east and the north side myself. 28229. Q. And what, in your opinion, was the state of the fall ;-was it close or opeu 1 A. They were certainly not close. They were not safe to travel very far over; u'.lt they were not close. I was down several of thom for 9 or 10 yards. 28230. Q. Did t.he fall appear to be a thick and heavy fall 1 11. No, so far as I could see ahead, it, in almost every case, would permit you to crawl along. 28231. Q. What was the apparent size of the stones which hn.d fallen there ;-were they very large blocks 1 A. Large blocks! I suppose some of them measured 9 or 10 feet on the side, and some less. 28232. Q. And about what thickness did you observe 1 A. Some 2 feet. I do not think I travelled over stone that was thicker than that. 28233. Mr. Lysaght.] Q. You say now that, in your opinion, the air did not scale through that goaf on to the travelling road 1 A. I say it did do so. 28234. Q. From the air that was coming up from the daylight tunnel 1 A. Ftom the air entering by the daylight heading. 28235. Q. In your opinion, is that good management 1 A. Well, in my opinion, I think I would not do ib myself. 28236.

836

f...

J /•,

Witnm-W, Humble, 17 M&roh, 190S. 28236. Q. Is not it ba.d management to have a.n intake air scaling ~hr?ugh a. gon.f and going on h? the travelling road 1 A. N O ; I will not say it was bad management; but 1t 18 certainly not an exact comphance with General Rule 1. 28237. Q. It is a questionable practicei A. Yes. . . . 1 28238. Mr. Robertson. l Q. I do not quite understand that i A. It 1s not. a comphance with General Rule 1. 28239. Q. Why not 1 A. That intake air must not travel over old workings. . . 28240. Q. But it is not intake air if it travels through t hat goaf to the r eturn 1 . A. Yes, if it goes to these men at work. . • f1 28241. Q. You do not mean to say that intake air cannot be ta.ken for the purpose of vent11atmg a goa A.No. k' ,, 28242. Q. Then what do you menn 1 A. But Mr. Lysaght is asking me about when t~e ~en were wor ~ng 1 28243. Mr. Robertson.] Does your question assume that that was the system of ventilating those workings when the men were working? . . 28244. Mr. Lysaglit.l Q. My question is-would not the air go up to these men ~orkm~. at the 5t!1 Right, north of the 5th Right 1 A. I thought you meant the few men that were working takmg the pillars out (from the 4th Right). . 28245. Q. Do you think, then, that it is right to ha,•e the ventilation for those men scalmg through that goafi . . 28246. M1·. Wade.] The s,uggest.ion now is that the whole ventilation to keep these men gomg, drawmg these last pillars in the 4th Right, was got by a mere scale through the 35-acre goaf from here to there (from the cross.cut heading to the 4th Right). I object to that. . . 282{7. M1·. Ritchie.] I do not think your question implies that that was the sole system of vent1lat10n, :Mr. Lysaght 7 28248. Mr. Lysaght.] No;' but that the men would be getting tainted air, inasmuch as it came through the goaf. 28249. M1·. B1·uce Smith.] Mr. Humble does not say that it was designedly taken through the~e for the~e men• 28250. llis Honor.] That would be entirely disconnected from the theory of the cause of this explos1on. 28251. Mr. Lysaght.] As a matter of fact one of the notes you made in your notebook is that !11akin~ that ventilation in that way irs a questionable practice i A. That is not a. note; it was struck out 1mmed1ately after it was made. 28252. Q. Why was it struck out i A. Because it was made under a misapprehension. I thought when I made this note that this travelling road was an intake. • 28253. Q. Just read out the note 1 A. But I say it is no longer a note now, you see. · 28254. Mr. Lysaght.] Not after you struck it it out. 28255. .i.llr. B1·uce Smith.] Nor when it is made under a misapprehension. 28256. A. (To M1·. Lysaght.): It is here [reading from his notebookl "Understand air current from daylight tunnel passed through this goaf and then on to the travelling road, which is an intake-a very questionable practice "; but that was cut out immediately afterwards; and the following that is " which at this point is a return." 28257. M1·. Lysaglit.] Q. Now, at the time the men were working in the 4th Right pillars, does not it necessarily follow that the air had to come up the tra.vell:ng road 1 28258. Mr. Wade.] I object to this. How can he t ell how the system of ven~ilation was when he was not there i 28259. A. (To .Mr. Lysaglit): I do not know. 28260. Mr. Lysaght.] Q. Do not you see that the only way the men could get air in the 4th Right pillars was through the travelling road 1 The way the men working in the 1th Right pillars would get their ventilation would be through the air coming up the travelling road 1 A. But that travelling road was a. return. 2826 1. Q. But the men must have an intake air from some quarter ; and that quarter must have been up the travelling road i A. No, I do not think they got the intake air from there; I think they got the intake air from some of t hese places her e [indicating the north-east corn£r of tlte goaj]. 28262. Q. Do yon mean to say then that the air would scale through the goaf to these men 1 A. Yes. 28263. 1lfr. Lysaght.] That is what I put to you originally. 28264. Mr. Robertson.] This is working in a fog, I think ; we have no evidence of the system of ventilation then. 28265. ilfr. Lysagltt.] This witness has marle a note which he withdraws for a certain reason ; and I want to show that he had no reason for withdrawing it. 2826 6. His Honor.] With what object 1 28267. Mr. Lysagltt.] For t he purpose of showing a negligent system of working the toine at the time the 4th Right pillars were extricated. 28268. Hi~ Hon0t·.] Could you say that, that had any possible connection with the eJcplosion-or accident, whatever it was! ~82.69. 111-7·. Lysagltt.] Perhaps I could not do that; but I did not take it that the scope of the Commission limited me to show a particular negligence which helped towards the disaster ; I took it that the Commission allowed me to show any negligence which might have caused a disaster. If I show that foul air was have ho.d the effect of carrying allowed to scale through the goaf to the men, it will be seen that it mi(Yht 0 fire-damp to men with naked lights. 2827.0. ~fr. Roberlso.n.] How can you show that, when we know nothing at all about the system of ventilat10n at that time. \Ve have bad no evidence as to the system of ventilation there; and none of us know1 28271. M1.. Lysaght.] I submit with every respect that it is clear that it could only come from the goaf. 282 72. .1l. fr. Robei·tson.] Why soi It might have been -ventilated by a split from the return. 28273. Mr. LysagM] But that would be down the travellinCY road · and the air scaling throu"'h that goaf 0 0 ' goes down the travelling road. 28274. His :7Ionor.] T~ese questions all touch on a state of affairs which was absolutely over and had ceased to exist at the tune the accident took place· and therefore they touch somethin(Y which cannot in any way be connected with, and is, as far as I can 'see, absolutel/disoannected from, t his accident. 28275.

1. I

837

Witnua-W. Humble, 17 ~11.Nb, 1903,

28~Tts. Mr. Lysaght.] With all respect, if the air scaled through the goaf, that would be air, posBibly carrying fire-damp, scaling out on to the return airway right up to the time of the disaster; and that return airway was a travelling road. 28276. His Honor.] lf the air was scaling through there, that of course might carry fire -damp through to the 4th Right, and that may be material to show the probability of the gas having got through in that way; but how can it be material to this inquiry to go into this question of whether or not, under a former state of things, that may or may not have affected the health or safety of men who wero working there on an occasion which wns completely over, and at work which was ab;;olutely closed before the accident happened 1 28277. Mr. Lysaght.] I was laying the foundation to nail this witness down to the fact that the way the fire-damp would come out was by the air scaling through thi5 goaf, and not by a fall at all. I wanted to put him o~ the fall altogether bJ: showing that the natural way of ventilating the mine would drive the fire-damp nght out on the 4tli Right. · 28278. His Honor.] That may be material for the purpose of showinO' how this accident happened; but to go into the question of the treatment of the men on a former occasi~n for the purpose of discrediting the management in relation to that past action- [ lntt1·1·upted]. 28279. Mr. Lysaght.] I will not go into that matter now,· Your Honor. 28280. Q. Now, you say that the air would scale from the east and the north side of that goaf clown towards the 4th Right 7 A. I say it could do so. 28281. Q. And, in your opinion-(interrupted) 1 A. Pt·obably it did do so 7 28282. Q. And, that being so, there would be a constant scale of air to clear the goaf of any fire-damp that might have been in it i A. No; the air would circulate round the edges; but it would leave some of the inner parts unventilated. 28283. Q. But, if the attraction drawing it was in the 4th Right, would not it draw the air right through the goaf 7 11. It would not come straight through. The air current would certainly not pass straight through the middle of the goaf. 28284. Q. Then you desit·e this note that you bad here to stand 7 A. What note is that. 28285. Q. "U nderstaud air-current from Daylight tunnel passed t.hrough this goaf, and then on to the travelling road, which is an intake-a very questionable practice "7 A. No; you are reading the two parts, the part taken out and the other part. 28286. Q. Do you say now that the air scaling through the goaf would not be sufficient to sweep it clear of any fire-damp 7 A. I say that there would be still some fire-damp left in the . inner parts of the goaf, beyond where the air-current could get. 28287. Q. From where would that fire-damp come 1 A. It would be generated partly by the coal a.nu partly by the strata. 28288. Q. And you think that fire-damp did come from the strata above the seam 1 A. I th~ that firedamp was in the strata above the seam, and it wo.s forced out by a fall. .. 28289. Q. You have never heard of fire damp being in the strata above the seam in any of the ·southern collieries before, have you 7 A. No. 28290. Q. That is a mere assumption on your p1r!; 7 A. Well, from the many cases where fire-damp has been found in stone drives, apart from the coal altogether. 28291. Q. In the Southern District 7 A. No. 28292. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Do you mean in England, or in the north 7 A. I think there was one case in Newcastle (N.S. W.) ; but the principal ones a.re in England. 28293. JJfr. Lysaght.] Q. Then do I undersLanJ that this fire-damp wa-s partly from the coal and partly from the seam above the coal 7 A. I think that both would tend to generate flre-damp-fire-damp would · he given off. 28294. Q. And you think that no current of ~ir scaling through the goaf would be sufficient to have driven it ont through the 4th Right 1 A. 1 think that no current could have got to this part that I have spoken of. 28295. Q. That would be because of the size of the fall 7 A. Because it would be too high. 28296. M1·. Ritchie.] Q. Have we got that clear: do you assume that there have been two falls in the 35 acre goaf1 A.. I suppose falls were going on more or less constantly. 28297. Q. Would not the 44-yard square fall first 7 .A . It may have been as you assume, that the 44-yards square fell first, and was then followed by a subsequent fall of a larger area and greater height. 28298. Mr. Lysaght.] Q. Listen to this evidence given by Mr. Leitch [par. 22422 J: Well, I kno,v she used to fall pretty well then; ancl I have often seen us try to go up above, and we could not. You see she would fall down pretty tight. If a place falls clean 10 or 12 feet up, and she comes close to the rib, it is a matter of impossibility for :i. person to get up between the rib and the stone.

And [par. 22424] : Yes, t.he Main Headin~ that was, that is, the 4th Right was, she was close <lown: you could not get up there: it was fallen down. And the p1llar3 on either side-I believe it was McDill, and Stafford, and Jim Fitzgerald-on eithar side of those it had also fallen pretty tight.

Now, Mr. Leitch told us that there were a cou ple of pillars only to be extracted when he left; and

Mr. Rogers told us that the coal bad been extracted as far as pos~ible over this 44-yard square area : do not you see that, if Mr. Leitch, who saw these places, is correct, no gas could be forced out from 30 or 40 feet above the seam: the aperture would be blocked up by the fall 7 A. It would not be made afr.tight. You could not get in to test for it: but it it certainly would not be air-tight or gas-tight. 2d299. Q. Then you do not think that the fall of the 44 yard square area liberated any gas, do you 1 A. I do not think that that would force out any gas. 28300. Q. Do you think it liberated any gas 1 A. It may be possible for another fall to take place which forced out gas. , 28301. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. If the gas was there before the fall took place, would it force it out then 1 If the gas was there below the roof of that 44-yard square area would it force it out then 1 A. Yes. 28302. Q. What reasons have you got, if any, for assuming that it was not t here 1 11. I have already said that I think that part would be traversed more ot· less effectually by the air current. 28303. Q. Do you mean by that return air current coming down the travelling road 1 A. No; I mean the air passing through or round the edges of the goaf. 28304:. Q. Sea.ling through the goafi A. Yes; it would traverse that 44-yard square area j and, therefore, it would be unlikely that there would be any gas there. 28305.

Wirness-W. Humble, 17 March, 1903.

(..

; '·

,, t

I '

28305. Q. Now, to sum up, the whole of that assu1;11~tion about a fall o~ .t~e inner part fs not based op any data at all 1 A. No, it is not based on any data: 1t 1s based on proba.b1hlies, an<l on things that have been obsen·ed before. 28306. 1lfr. Robertson.] Q. On possibilities 1 28307. Mr. Lysagltt.] Q. On po3sibility rather than on pr.:>bability 1 A. On prolm.bility, I think, because the higher part of the goa.f is the more pro~a~le place in which ~as would lodge. 2 308. Jfr. Ritchie.] Q. That ma.y be; but 1s 1t probable that tins second fall took place 1 A. I would not s11.y it is probable; but I would say it is possible. · 28309. Q. Is it very possiblP, or a. remote possibility i A. I think it is very possible. 28310. Q. Jlr. Lysagltt.] Q. In your opinion, where did the gas that you found in Morris' plu.ce come fro!° 1 )1. Io Morris' place I think it would come from the coal. We found l i per cent. of gas; I do not think you mean that, though. · 28311. Q. Yes, that is what I do mean1 A. I think it ca.me from the coal. 28312. Q. You do not think it came from the distillation of the coal-du!>U A. I think not. 28313. Q. And the same thing applies to the gas found in that large quantity in that back beading 1 A. Yes. 28314. Q. Did you test to see if this gas went from the back into the frpnt heading 1 A. We tra.,·elled up the front heading. 28315. Q. Did you make a tel;t in the front heading 1 A. Yes; on· the outbye side of the cut-through; 'but that was only after we had walked into the gas and filled our lamps with it. 28316. M1·. Ritchie.] Q. Where 1 A. Filled our lamps in the front heading, as we were passing the cut-through. 28317. Mr. Lysngltt] Q. Then there was gas right up to the cut-through, both in the back and the front heading 1 A. Yes. 28318. Q. In making th~s calculation, I think you said about 10,000 cubic feet of inflammable mixture; did you include the front and back heading and the cut-through; or did you only take the lack heading mixture 1 A. We took the front and back beading and the cut-through. 28319. Q. You worked that out to something more than 10,000 feet 1 A. Yes. 28320. Q. How much 1 A. I worked it out to 12,960 cubic feet; but that was without making an allowance for tailing of the gas, which is always the case; and I ruake an allowance, and say there was about 10,000 cubic feet of gas. 28321. Q. That is iuclusive of the front and back headings, and the cut-through 1 A. Yes. 28322. Q. And you are clearly of opinion that that gas was given off by the face of each of the beading8 i A. I think so. 28323. Q. IE the ventilation was travelling as it is shown on the plan to have been travelling on that date, do you think it could have accumulated 1 A. On the da.y we found it.. 28324. Q. On the day of the disaster, if the ventilation had been travelling. as it bas been shown to have l>een travelling, up the back heading and through the cut-through on to Purcell1s place, do you think that gas could have accumulated i A. That gas would not be th~re on the day of the explosion; that is ,\"hat we round afterwards. 28325. Q. Do you think that quantity of gas did accumulate within two days 1 A. Yes; but it was because the. ventilation was all destroyed. 28326. Q. So that you think that the coal was giving off gas to that ex.tent in two days 1 A. Well, part of it may have bei!n given olf by other places besides those two places. 28327. Mr. Robertson.] Q. I£ the ~as was not in the heading at the time of the explosion, how could tLere be a. second explosion of gas i A. I say that t his gas which I have recorded there was not there at t he time. 28328. Q. Quite so; but what other gas would be there. A. The gas that I have recorded and estimated to a.mount to so and-so-that clearly applies to the gas found after the explosion ; but I <lo not mean to say that there was no gas there at the time of the explosion. 28329. Mr. Lysa9ht.] Q. Do not you say that there was gas there at the time of the explosion 1 28330. 'Afr. Ritchie.] Q. You mean that that was burnt 1 A. Yes. 28331. 'Jlr. Lysaght.] Q. And that that had all been consumed, and the place cleared of gas by reason of the explosion; and, within four days afterwards, this considerable quantity accumulated there 1 A. Yes; but that must be qualified by saying that the ventilation was destroyed. 28332. Q. That does not matter; I want to sho,v that the faces were giving off gas. It was clear that, all along the faces, or the majority of the faces, along the 4th Left, the cod was giving off gas, as shown by the results you got in Stafford's place and othel' places a.long there 1 A. I think it is quite evident that that coal was giving off gas. 28333. Q. And I suppose it was quite evident that it had been giving off gas for some time 1 A. I should say that is likely. :28334. Q. Before the accident 1 A. No, I cannot say that. 28335. Q. Io your opinion, it is not probable that the faces along the 4th L eft and the faces of the back heading bad been giving off gas for some time before the explosion 1 A. Yes, I think it is probable that they had been giving otf small quantities. 28:$36. Q. And, in your opinion, had the back heading been examined daily, do you think that gas would have been detected 1 A. Yes, I think it would. 28337. Q. Jlfr. Ritchie.] Q. While on that accuroula.tion, what other place can you suggest that the gas would be likely to come from, and land in that back heading 1 A. Well, any gas that was generated in :Morris' place wonld probably move up that way ; the air current was going in that direction. , 28338. Q. That is the only place on the venlilaLing current 1 A. Yes. 28339. Q. So that the gas that was in the back heading could only come from Morris' place and the back heading 1 A. Yes, assuming that it is given off entirely by the faces; but it m'a.y be given off hy the coal in a gener:ll way, by the sides of the pillars. 28340. Q. In thnt case it would have the length of the heading 1 A. Yes. 28341. (J. It would only have the length of the heading from the 5th Right 1 A. Yes. e8342. Afr. Lysaght.] Now, in your opinion, if the faces of the 4th Left had been examined every morning, do you think gas would have been detected, apart from the back heading 1 J.. The 4th L eft 1 28343 Q. Yes, ~vbere thes~ men ~ere working: do you think gas would have been detected there before the disasted A. No, I do not think so. .26344,

!j I

.. I

839

·Wiw.n-W Humble, 17 March, 1900.

~ ~S$44. Q: Tha.Vi~ betause tl:rey were using a safety-lamp for the e1camination; but

if they had been using a hydrogen larpp, do you think it would lave been dete~ted 1 .L1.. Yes, I think it is probable they would detected some small quantity of gas. 28345. Q. And I think you have a note here that the 4th Left is a. dusty road 1 A. Yes. 28346. Q. You observed that to be the fact 1 A. Yes, I saw that. 28347. Q. Was that the dustiest part of the mine that you saw, the 4th Left 7 A. II; was certainly the dustiest part of the hauling road that I saw. 28348. Q. Now, dealing only with the hauling roads, about bow many inches of dust would you say ba.d 11,cqumulated on the floor of the 4th LefL 1 A. It might be an inch 9eep. 1 28349. Q. ]3efore the disaster 1 A. Yes. _-28350. Mr. Wad1.] H e c_a nnot say before the disaster. 28351. Witness.] I cannot say before: I can only say what. I saw aft.erwards. · ~8352. Mr. Lysught.] Q. Do you think some of it had been there liefore the disaster; or was it, all placed there n.fter the disaster 1 I think some of it bad been there before the disaster. 28353. Q. Speaking of the travelling road, how much did you obser,e on the t ravelling road 1 A. I uoticetl on the sid_e~. of the travelling roads there were occasional patches of dust. 28354. Q. And 6n the ftoor 1 A. It was fairly bard and moist where the men had walked. 28355. Ta:king ~ho No. 1 travelling road 1 A. Yes. 28356. Q. Was not that dusty either 7 A. Some parts of it were. There were some patches of dust by the side of the road away from where the man were walking. 28357. Q. About how deep would those patches be 1 A. About an inch deep in some par ts. 28358. Q. So that it is clear tbn,t you observed conditions there, which were there before tpe disaster, whiQh were dangerous in certain events 7 A. Dangerous in what way 1 _283[?9. Q. As liable to cause a dust explosion on certain contingencies happening 1 A. Yes; if t here bad been a shot fired there. . . 28360. Q. Or if there had been an ignition of fire-damp 1 A. Yes. 28361. Q. In either the haulage or t he travelling road, if t here bad been an ignition of fi re-d~mp, or .a . : . fire-damp explosion, there were conditions there aggravating an explosion 7 .A. Yes. 28362. Q. Then, what, in your opinion, should have been done to nullify tbeso dangerotJ.S conditions-that is, to render the dnst harmless 7 A . Well, watering would have rendered it harmless: . . _ . . 28363. Q. And, in your opinion, had the 4th Left travelling and rope roads been thoroughly watereq, would t he extent of the disaster have be en mitigated 1 A. On the 4th LP.ft rope road. 28364. Q. I judge that the disaster split from the No. 1 Right and went along thfl 4t.h LefL; if it bad be~n watered, the extent of the explosion would have been m:tigated, iq. your opinion 1 A. Had all tho roads been watered, there certainly would not have been the damage done that has be>en done . .28365.· Q. The explosion would not have been so ex.tensive i A. No. 38366: Q. And a number of lives would not have been lost; consiuering the number of men along the 4th Left, if these roads had been well watered, and the dust rendered harmless, do you think t hose men would have been· injnred 1 A. Well, I think there would not have been the loss of life, and the destruction, if tl)e • roads had been wet. (The Commission then adjourned until 2 p.m.) AFTERNOON.

(On resuming at 2 p.m. Mr. vV. R. Pratt attended to take shorthand notes of the evidence and proceeding~). WILLIAM HUMBLE previously sworn, was further examined, as nnder :Re-examined by Mr. Bruce Smilh : 2836 7. Q. You were asked a great number of questions by I\fr. \Vade as to how this explosion worked out in detail. You do not undertake to say how it worked out 1 A. I cannot. It is impossible to say how it works out in detail. 28368. Q. Ha ve you any difficulty in denouncing the wind theory as impracticable and impossible, as far as your knowledge is concerned 1 A. None whatever. 28369. Q. Whether you can account for the different steps in the explosion, or not 7 A. Whether I cn.n account for them or not, I have no hesitation in saying that the wind theory is impracticable and improbable. 28370. Q. H ave you any doubt as to the presence of gas and coal-dust. in the explosion~ A. None whatever. ~8371. Q. You have no doubt that there was gas in the 4th Right 1 A. I think so. 28372. Q. Now, when yon gave evidence-part of which was read to yon - you say" I a.m almost certain Mr. Atkinson was close behind, because he had the electric lamp, and we p~t on our hydrogen flame long before we got to the point of testing; because we thought the atmosphere was rather extinctive in going up to the place; and Mr. Atkinson followed us up very closely to ghe us light Q. Do you mean up to the stone 1 A. No, up to the edge of the stone. I do not suppose there was room for three people on the stone; but he was close by, I think. Q. Well, when you had found this 1 per cent. of gas, did you report it. when you came down to the others 1 A. Yes, it would be spoken of." Wha.t do you mean by " it would be spoken of "~ A. I thought it would be spoken of to Mr. Atkinson. 2837 3. Q. And then you were asked ." Q. Are you sure of thali 1 A. I cannot swear to it because I have not it in my notes." Your note was a llote made at the time 1 Yes. 28374. Q. Yon ha,·e spoken to Mr. A tkinson since about your notes 1 A. Yes. .28375. Q. Mr. Atkinson has assured you that he has no recollect.ion of it 1 A. Yes, · 28376. Q. That makes you less certain of-having told him 1 A. Yes. 28377. Q. You were not certain before 1 11. And I am less certain now. 28378. Q. Are you sure of the fact that you found the 1 per cent. of gas 1 A, Yes? lam fQSi~ive tha.t 1 ~r cent, of ~a,s W!JiS found 1 and put d9w11 at the time in my not~boolr,

•

840 Witness-W. Humble, 17 March, 1903.

28379. Q. You said in answer to Mr. Wade that there was very little evidence of contradictory force 1 A. I think I said, afterwards, excepting two stoppings in the 1st Right which had been blown in one direction. 28380. Q. They are contradictory to the majority of force inbye of the 4th Right 1 A. Yes. 28381. Q. And, therefore, you think that there was more than one explosion 1 A. I think so. 28382. Q. You were about to give Mr. Wade some instances of gas found in the strata.1 A. Yes. 28383. Q. You have met with that in the north! A. Yes, and I also met with it in Durham, where we were troubled with gns in a stone drive. 28384. Q. How far were you driving 1 A. Tbil'ty or forty feet at the time when we were troubled with the gas. 28385. His Honor.] Q. Was it, above or below the seam 1 A . .Above and below. W e were driving through some sloping rr.easnres. 28386. Mr. Bruce Smith]. Q. How did you identify it with the coal-how could you tell that it had not tl'a.velled up from the coal 1 A. I could not tell that it had not. It was above one coal seam and below another. Whether it had pa.ssed from a coal seam I could not say. 28387. Q. Would it come from the stohe 1 .A. Yes; we were working in stone; and yet there was a fairly large amount of gas to be dispersed. 28388. Q. You say that the gas was above one coal seam and below another one1 A. Yes. There was one seam above and there was anothet· coal seam below it. The gas was found in the drive ; and I am satisfied that most of it ca.me from the stone itself. 28389. His Honor.] Q. What sort of a seam was it- and what sort of stone 1 A. We wero in fairly soft shale, but not in bituminous matter. 28390. !Jfr. Robertson,] Q. It was shale between two seams 1 A. Yes. 28391. Q. Is there any parallel between that and Mount Kembla, where there is no seam higher up 1 A. I should think the coal strata would give off gas. 28392. Jfr. Bruce Smith.] Q. You had 120 feet of it 1 A. Yes, about 120 feet of it between the two seams. 28393. Jfr. Robertson.] Q. That was in sha.le 1 A. Yes. 28394. Q. The strnta in Mount Kembla. is stoue1 A. Yes, but 1 have known another ca.se where there has been gas in stone. 28395. .ilfr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Did you find gas there ? A. Yes. 28396. Q. You formed the opinion that the gas was in the stone 1 A. No; I acknowledge that a fair amount of it would come from the coal proper. 28397. Q. You think it is feasible, where coal is taken out of a. large area, and there are falls above the roof level, that gas will be found there 1 A. Yes, I think it is likely that gas will accumulate there. 28398. Q. From the coal or from the stone 1 A. Partly from each. 28399. Q. You think that, if the slone has fissures, the gas will work its way up there 1 A. I think it will be given off from the join ls; but whether it is generated from the coal seam bebw, or whether it lodges there, I am not a sufficient chemist to say. 28400. Q. H ave you known of this in the northern coal-fields 1 A. I have not found it ; but I think there was gas at South Waratah; but I have not seen it mysolf. 2840 l. lJfr. Ritchie.] Q. Are there any reports on it 1 A. No, I think not. If there arP, they a, e ten or twelve years ago. 284.02. llfr. B1·uce Smitlt.] Q. After the coal is taken out, and what is called the blacks are left. When they fall, and the material above falls, that gas would be got from the blacks in the higher part of the · strata 1 A. Yes. 28403. Q. And when another fall came the gas woulcl be swept out i A. Yes. 28404. Jlfr. Robertson.] That is not gas from the strata. 28405. 1lfr. Bn,ce Smit!,.] Q. I am taking it apart from that altogether. You do not undertake to say from what part of the goaf this gas came 1 A. No. 28406. Q. Or whether it came from the stone, or escaped from the crevices of the goa.f 1 A. No. It is quite immaterial to my point where it originated, as long as it came out of there. 2 407. Q. Since you brgan your evidence, you have ma.de notes of three important falls of stone and their effects. One, I think, was at the Lambton Colliery 1 A. Yes; on the 15th of August, 1890. 28408. Q. What was its extent 1 A. Twenty-four acres of roof fell. 28409. Jfr. Wade.] Q. I s this from an official report 1 A. It is an extract from my official report. 28410. M1·. B1·uce Smith.] Q. What did the roof consist of 1 A. Strong sandstone; an<l the thickness of cover was about 400 feet. 2841 1. Q. What was the effect of the fall on the dust ·} A. There was a shower of dust observed at the furnace, which was 35 chains away, and the a.fr current was reversed at the tunnel mout h, wbich was 104 chains away. At one of the shafts there wa. a cradle upon which two mt>n were working. 'Ihis was in the " Centre Pit " shaft; and it was lifted 2 feet by the rush of air. That is ten yeal's ago. 28412. )fr. Wade.] Q. How far was this shaft from the nearest point of the fall 1 A. I cannot say; but I think it was nearer than 35 chains. 28413. Jfr. Bruce Smith.] (J. This cradle wiLh two men on it was 104 chains, or 2,288 yards away 1 A. No ; the air current was re\·ersed that distance awa.y. The cradle was less thn.n 35 away. 28414. Q. The cradle was lifted bodily for 2 feet i A. It was lifted bodily for 2 feet with the ruen on it. 28415. Q. You do not say that the 24 acres of unsupported roof fell at one time 1 A. No. The seam was about 7 feet thick. There were 8 yai-ds bords driving, and 4-yard pillars. The pillars were unable to support the roof ; and it weighed down on them, broke them, and fell. 2 416. 11/r. Robertson.l Q. Was it a crush or a. fall ? 11. I t bad the same effect as a fall. It was a heavy fall, after the pillars were broken. 28417·. Jlfr. B1·uce Smith..] Tbe case depends on the amount of force which resulted from the fall, and which had the effect of driving this cradle with the two men on it for some distance, although a third of a mile away. 28418. Q. Was that a. greater force than the force eviocel in the ~fount Kembla Mine 1 A. I would not S'\J greater. 28419. Q. As great 1 .4. Not quite so great. 28420. Q. Was it approximate to it 1 A. Yes. 28422. 28421. Q. The force was Marly the same 1 A. Yes.

Ir ,. I

841

...

Witnes8-W. Humble, 17 March, 1903.

28422. Q. Was there a single man or horse burnt in any way 1 A, No. There were a large number of men in the mine a.t the time-a number of men beina on the rnad,vays-but none were burnt and none 0 injured. 28423. Q. You have had eKperience of a fall in connection with Wickham and Bullock Isla.n<l Colliery 1 A. Yes. With a fall in conuection with tbe Wir.:kham and Bullock Island Colliery, on the 24th of August, 1896, when 55 acres of roof fell. In this case 6-yard pillars bad been left. 28 424. Q. What was the cover 1 A. The cover was 200 feet. 28425. Q. Wh.at happened i A. It occurred on a Sunday. It forced air out of the space; and that reversed the air current at the downcast shaft, and blew dust out of it. 28426. Q. How far was that from the scene of the fall 1 A . 700 or 800 yards. It blew dust out of the top of the downcast shaft. 2.8427. Q. What were the evidences of force 1 A. Excepting that the dust had been driven a little to one side, and that dust was blown out of the shaft, there were no other sians of force to be seen. There were thr~e men ~n the pa~h o~ the blast; and they were all right, exceptint that one man had his eye cut by falling agarnst the rib side as be was running away. 28428. Q. There was a second fall there, was there not 1 A. There was another fall at Wickham and Bullock Island on the 1st of October, 1897. There were the same sized bords and the same sized pillars as before; and there was 240 feet of cover. 28429. Q. What was the effect1 A. The dust and air were driven out along the haulage road with great velocity. Several persons, including the manaaer and the under-manacrer, were in the direct; path of the 0 air blast ; and their hands and faces were pitt~d with coal-dust which was afterwards thrown out of the top of both shafts. 28430. Q. How far away were the nearest effects 1 A. In that case the dust was blown out of both shafts, the upcast and the downcast shaft. The upcast shaft would be the nearest. 28431. Q. Beyond the pitting of the coal-dust, was anyone burnt 1 A. Nobody was burnt; and nobody was injured. I may say that my son was in that trouble; and he gave a very graphic account of the force. He waR partly knocked over; and his light was lost. 28432. Q. The force blew him along? A. Yes. 28433. Jb·. Robtrlson.] Q. You might call that a shocking example of the evil of small pillars 1 A. Yes, I certainly would do so. It shows the necessity of ha.vinrr larrrer pillars. Since then tllese collieries have 0 0 had larger pillars. 28434. 'Mr. Ritchie.] Q. 6-yard pillara are exceedingly small 1 A. Yes. But 6-yard pillars are greater than 4-yard pillars. Twenty or thirty years ago it; was common to find 4-yard pillars in t he Newcastle district. Examined by Mr. Robertson : 28435. Q. Do you remember the 8th of A ugust, when you were in company with Mr. Atkinson and myself, and went to the back heading of No. I 7 A. Yes. 28436. Q. You found no gas then 1 A. No. 28437. Q. The brattice was sWl deranged 1 A. Yes; but the stoppings had been put in; and the force of air was up to the innermost cut-through. · 28438. Q. You found no gas 1 LI. I do not remember having found any gas. 28439. Q. Do you not think that the condition of the place on the 8th of August, after the explosion, when the brattice was deranged, would give a fair idea as to the condition of the place prior to the accident, with the brattice up, as to the freedom from gas 1 A. Provided there had been as much air travelling up to the innermost cut-through before the accident as there was afterwards; but of that I have no knowledge. 28440. Q. Have you any reason to suspect; that the ventilation, in its ordinary course, would be any less effective than after the accident, when the ventilation arrangements had been partially deranged 1 A. A fter the accident, these things may have been attended to, and everything made closer than before. 28441. Q. I do not think much conld have been done. It was only a week or fout· or five days after the bodies had been discovered 1 A. The stoppings had been put; in, which is a material thing. I was satisfied with the air passing up at the time we wel'e there, because even if there had been less air there was sufficient to go to the face. 28442. Q. Have you any r eason to believe that the.re was less current after the explosion than before 1 A. No; but I think there was more after the explosion than there was before. 28443. Q. Why more 1 A. Because I think, having in view the fact that gas was found there on the Monday, special attention ,vould be given to the putting in of stoppings. 28444. Q. Do you not think that sper:ial attention, if given, would embrace the restoring of the brattic;e cloth 1 A. They would restore the stoppings. Aftel' restoring those, tb~y probably thought that the brattice cloth did not require restoring, as there may have been sufficient current going in wi!ihout restoring the brattice. 28445. Q. Have you any reason to know that the brattice was deranged before or after the explosion 1 A. I should say that it was deranged by the explosion. 28446. Q. Have you any reason to believe t hat this place, having an air-current, would show any signs of gas 1 A. I should say no, provided I was satisfied that the air current did get up there. 28447. Q. What reason have you to think that the air did not get up there1 A. Perhaps the door ,was not so close before. These things are attended to better after an explosion than they are before . 28448. Q. Do you suggest that; the ventilation was not properly attended to by the Manager 1 A. I only say that I think there was not sufficient air going up to the face of the place to keep it clear of gas before the eKplosion. 28449. Q. Why do you say that 1 A. Because I cannot imagine how the burning took place up there without the ignition of gas. The next thing to search for, being satisfied of that, is the most likely place in which there might be gas; and I think tba.t a likely place is the 1st Right heading. 28450. Q. Would not a coal-dust explosion cause the burning 1 A. Yes. But whether there was coal-dust up there to carry that explosion to the face or not I am not satisfied. 28451. Q. Did you not see any coal-dust 1 A. I did, in the back heading; but there are seYcral lengths in that heading that would be fr.ee from dust.

16825

29-5 0

28452.

8t2 Wit ne.,s-W, Humble, 17 :\farch, 1903.

./ ,'

28452. Q. Supposing there was no brattice at all, that. pince would get the force of ~~e. ai~-; ~nd, hM'ing been standing for several months, do you not think it 1s probable that 1:0 .gas could possibly !leach thette t A. 1 do not think that applies. You see it would get the first of the a1t· m the Leadmg; but whethet the first of the air went to the face or not is another matter. 28453. Q. Do you admit, tha.t if the Yentilatiou was in its normal condition, the back beading would be kept clear of gas 1 A. I do not say that. If the ventilation arrangements were as favourable before as they were afterwards, the heading would be clear ; but whether they were or not I could riot say. 28-154. Q. For anything you know to the contrary, th ey may have been 1 A. They may have been. 28455. Q. You remember being in thr 4th Right with that same party1 A. Yes. 2 456. Q. Do you recollect a stone which was found 4 or 5 yards inside, which you looked upon as having come from the tra,·elling road 1 A. Yes. . 28457. Q. Do you recollect any props further in, near the waste 1 A. You asked me that last week, and I did not recollect. Since then I have thought O\"Cr the matter; and I am inclined to think you were right, and that there were props there; but I did not recollect it last week. 28458. Q. Do yon recollect the chock next to the waste 1 A. Yes. 28459. Q. Do you recollect in what direct.ion that was blown 7 11. No, I <lo not think I do; bu~., speaking without dist.inct recollection, I should f.ay outwards. I remember tbe~hock very well. . 28460. Q. Do you remember which way the props were blown 1 A. Yes, I think they were blown head o~er towards the goaf. I n.m satisfied that was so, although I did not make a note of it. 28461. Q. All these important indications of force having been confirmed by one or other of the party, would you he inclined to agree from that tha.t t.he forces were driven inbye1 A. I am inclined to agree that these things show a large force going inbye. 28462. Q. I think that. you implied that the force inbye was due to a bac~-rush 1 A. To a re.entry. 28463. Q. \Vhy a re-entry 1 Would it not be in accordance with your own theory of gas having bee11, ignited on the travelling road 1 A. I think it would tra\"el in an opposite direction, because the gas ignited wa.s only the pioneer of other gas coming out, and it was really ignited at t hat point. 28464. Q. Would not the force as readily travel to the 4tb Right as in another direction 1 A. It pt:obably did. I think the second result was inward, although I think the first was outward. 28465. Q. Do you mean the blast from the fall 7 A. I mean the ignition when the gas was lighted. 28466. Q. If that gas bad been ignited some way from the main r oad, would that heap of slack t here be consistent with an explosion 1 A. The dust which Mr. Wade referred to was on the travelling road; 28467. Q. No, at a corner of the 4th Right-tbe main haulage road 1 A. I s that so 7 28468. Q. Tbat would not be quite as consistent with a force going into the 4th J:tigbt as ,vith ib coming outwards 1 A. I think it would. 28469. Q. Do you define a gassy mine as a mine where gas is frequently found with an ordinary fiJ.me 1 A. Yes. 28470. Q. I take it that that would not embrace Mo~nt Kemula 1 A. I do not k now how often gas w&s found there with an ordinary flame. 28471. Q. You say frequently founcl 1 A. Yes. I say that a gassy mine is one in which gas fa frequently found by the flame of the ordinary safety-Ja.mp. 28472. Q. How do you define Mount Kembla 1 .LL From the evidence gi,·en, and from what I know, I should say no, it was not a gassy mine, because gas has been rarely r eported. Wltethe1· it bas been found or not is another matter. 28473. Q. Then, would you consider it necessary to advise the Kemul!J. Company to work with safetylamps i A. I think it is necessary they should do so. I think they are wise in doing so. 28474. Q. How do you reconcile that with your opinion that it is not a gassy mine 1 A. It does not necessarily follow tha.t, because a mine is not a. gassy one, safety-lamps should not be used. Lamps should be used in a mine in which gas has been found. 284 75. (2, Do you say that a gassy mine is a mine where gas has been fou nd 7 A. Not necessarily 28476. Q.1'be evidence goes to show that gas has been found at Kembla, but not frequently. You net"er found it there, and therefore - - 1 A. Therefore you could not define it as being a. gassy mine; but I think they a.re right to use safety-lamps. 284 77. Q. You th ink it is necessary to use safety-lamps in a mine which you do not distinguish as being a gassy o.ne 1 A. Yes. They should be used wheire gas has been fou nd, whether in large quantities or otherwise. The question is- what meaning you attach to the term "gassy." It is only a matter of degree. 28478. Q. You know that all the explosions have happened in the so-called safe mines1 A. Not in all of them. 28479. Q. In many of them. You say you would not consider Mount Kembla a gassy mine 1 A. Under that definition-no. 28480. Q. Would you consider Burwood a gassy mine1 A. No, I have no knowledge of it-only from hearsay. 22481. Q. Would you consider Dudley a. gassy mine 1 A. Yes. 28482. Q. Y?u did 7 A. Y es-in the sense in which I have defined it, that is, t hat gas was found frequently. 28483. Q. Did you ever request the Dudley proprietorK to put in safety-lamps 1 A. No, not to use them regularly-although on one occasion the importance of using safety-Ja.mps wn.s talked of beLwecn l\ir. Humphl'ey and myself. There was never any for mal request made. 28484. Q. A number of serious accidents have occnrred in mine!;:, which - .:to say the least-are only slightly gassy_? A. Have we got any mine in the State which is gassy, except the Metropolitan. 2848.J. _Q. ~robably not, according to your definition; but the question is-wba.t can be done by the way of s~ifety, m n ew of ~vbat has occurred 7 A. It n.ll depends whai; meaning you attach to the word "gassy." 'Ihe amount of gas 1s only a. ma.ttrr of degree. In some cases you find gas every day; and in some places you only .find gas once a. week. Do you call them both gassy i I do not. 2 486. Q. You consider it necessary to use safety-lamps in a. mine which, according to your definition, h not gassy. I could not say that. 281-8i . Q. You did say it 1 A. I have alrea<ly said that saf~ty-lamps should be used in all mines in whicl1 gas has been seen. I ha\'e said that., I think. 28488. Q. Coming to the question of watering the roacls. I think you said thei·e was no method effective, unless the roof, and sides, a.nd floor, were watered 1 A. Yes. 28489.

E43

Jrit1~s,- W. HumLlc, 17 t.f~rcb, 1903.

JU~4:8.8. _,Q. If you ~ave a roacl where, by reason of injury Lo the roof, water is not perruissib.le on t,ho roQf, 11:nd it 1s Joa.de~ with dust, w!tat good coul<l be clfected Ly watering on tbc floor and on the si<les 1 A. Very h l,Ue good, 1f it wei·e a question of shot-firing. . 28490. Q. Apart from that! would not the dust lodging on Lhe timbers carry 011 nn explosion 1 A. Y cs. A~d generally the dust on the timbers is tLo most dangerou~ because it is much finer. '£Lero is more danger m .it than even in the dust on the floor. ' 28491. Q. If you water the haulage road, and there arc three or four or half a-dozen other roads, equa11y dusty, leading to the same district, I presume you woul<l siy that an explosion might t ravel by them 1 A. Y; QU woul~ only minimise the danger to a certain ex lent; but you do not remove it, if there is not efficient watermg. 98492. Q. The watering, to be of any practical rnlue, must ba complete and thorough 1 A. Yes; the watering rpay be effective on one road, if it is a question of shot-firing. . 28493. Q. I am not s11gge3ting there should not be wate1·incr in tbe vicinity of shot tiring; but whnt 1s Lbe practical value of watering the floor and sides of a road ancl°Jeaving the roof untouched-or if there arc O\'e cw six r.oads which are not watered 1 A. That would be of nry li ttle rnlue, so fa r as the results of a.n explosion are concerned. 28494. Q. Some witnesses have found a difficulty in arrivina at any reason for the absence of evidences of flame. From what you have seen, and from what you barn ~ead, can you say whether that is not a £ea.lure of n.early all explosions 1 A. I think I can say th:lt there have been cases observe<l where there bas been a ,b.,ir amoun t of damage done, but the roads were not dusty. 28495. Q. I mean, may you not, after a large explosion, fin<l a comparative absence of evidences of flame, or of coking, over a considerable area 1 A. Yes. 28496. Q. Have you read a report of one of the last explosions in Wales-in th e Abertysswg District 1 A. That is the district-do you mean at t he McLaren Colliery 1 28497. Q. Yes, it is. This is the extract : There was comparatively little indication of force having been developed at the bottom of t he shaft-nn<l e\·eµ throughout the workings it was ,·ery slight. The greatest force, apparently, was exerted in the return airway; where, at A nnd B, two heavy falls occurred. Evidence of a certain amount of Oame or heat wa.s noticeable on tho Limbers which bad resin u :pQSed, nearly to the shaft, and short dist:>.nccs down the dip heading; but there was practicatly a total a~cnce of coking!

A. I have read that. 28498. Q. D o you agree wiLh it ? A. Yes, generally. Yon sec something impoL·tant at, the end about watering, too. 28499. Q. Then there was nothing in tlJe circumstances of Kembla.-the apparent absence of .Bame inconsistent with an explosion of 6re-cla.mp and coal dust 1 A. Nothing inconsistent. 28500. Q. Did you notice No. 1 main r oad anrl mair1 tunnel. From the tunnel mouth to the junction, was it, not wet 1 A. Yes, part of the road was wet. In one part of the main tunnel there was a dripping of water from the roof. 28501. Q. Was not the main tunnel wet up to the junction 1 A. I would not say it was all wet. 28502. Q. Was it not damp 1 A. I think there would be places where there wou ld be dust on the roof and the sides, if not on the floor. 28503. Q. Y ou have paid some attention to General Rule No. 12 7 A. I ha,·e. 28504. Q. Do you not think there should be some aruendment to that rule with ad ,·antage to a.II concerned 1 A. I think H could be amended with ad vantage. 28505. Q. It might be boiled down 1 A. Ang made more explicit in parts. 28506. (2. H ave you found that the strata, exposed in the shafts in New South W al~s, a re treacherous 7 A. As a whole I shouJd say not; uut Lhcre have l,een c.c'l.ses where it has fretted away, and broken. 28507. Q. Is it not affected wore hy atmospheric iniluencos lh an the strata you are accustoroeu to meet wiLh in the British coal-fields 7 A. Yes. 28508. Q. W ould you approve in future of all shafts being lined 1 A. Yes; all the import9.nt ones- not all the small ones. · 28509. Q. The small ones where men tra,·el up and down 1 A. Yes, I agree with it. I think it would be safer and more economical to t he owners iu the long run. Examined by Mr. Ritchie :28510. Q. In speaking abou t the .McL aren Colliery, you said there was an important recommendation abou t watering at the end of the report.. What is iti A. I can g i1·e it to you . lt says that the roads were provided with wa.ter pipes 1 ~ inches in diameter, and that taps were provided every 40 yards. · 28511. Q. What did it recommend 7 A. I t said : This is, perhaps, the first practical proof of artificial watering limiting the effects of whu.t would otherwise ha,·e proved a very widespread and much more disastrous affair. It is certainly an objecL lesson for all collier y managers.

285 12. Q. In view of that statement, do you approve of wateri~g generally? .LI.. I do. It make.s the roa.ds better ; and in the event of a.n a ccident happening it makes them safer. !:!8513. Q. Coming back to this fall in the 35-acrc goa.£. You believe, from what you have been told on.Jy, t hat there was any fall there 1 A. Well, it is not necessary that I sbouJd be told that them was a fa.JI; I know t here was one. 28514. Q. I am asking you- you believe a. fall took place at Lbe time the disaster took place 1 A. ~ot .from what I have been told, but from what I have been able to see. H aving rega1d to the clean state of the stone at that place, I am satisfied that n. fa)l took place at the time of the accident, and did not finis h un,til afterwards. 28515. Q. What evidence have you to offor that Lbe fall took place before, if you say t,ha.t the s tone was clean 1 A. I infer that the slone which had fallen had dri,·en the gas out, of Lhc goaf. 28516. Q. Was all the stone clean 1 11. In that part. 28517. Q. Would not that indicate that the faJJ took place after the explosion 7 A. That part came down afterwards ; but it does not follow that the inner part did not come down befo1·e. 28518. Q. Have you any definite eviqence that a fall did take place 1 A. No, I ha,·e not; you can on.Jy r.eason iro.m prob+1,bilities. ·

28519.

844 Jl'it,~ss-W. H umble, 17 March, 1903.

,·

,/ I.

21519. Q. I s not that the evidence to the effect that the fo.11 took place subsequently 1 A. The outer pa.rt . . may ha,e taken place subsequently; but the inner part occurred before. 28520. Q. Is there anything to guide you to t he belief that there was a fall in th? mner part of the goa~ 1 11. Nothing beyond the p1·obability that fall s do occur and do force out gas, and m some places that gas 1s lighted. 2852 1. Q. Is it not likely that the gas came from some other place, and that the shock brought this fall down 7 A. It is possible, but not probable. 28522. Q. You do not think it probable? A. N o. 28523. Q. You told us that au explosion took place in the back heading1 .A. I think an ignition occurred there. 28524. Q. Would there be an explosion there 7 A. There would certainly be an explosion of a kind; but it would only reach its greatest intensity when it got on the main road and got hold of the dust 28525. Q. Was there a separate explosion in t he back heading 1 ..4. No ; an initial one. It travelled r ight along. 28526. Q. The initial explosion took place in the back heading 1 A. Somewhere at the junction of the travelling road with the road going down from the 4th Right. 28527. Q. Do you mean the face of the back heading, or t he 4th Right 7 A. I mean the 4th Right. · 28528. Q. And you say that an explosion also took place near the face 1 A. Yes. 28529. Q. What leads you to suppose t hat t he explosion in the back heading, near the face, was subsequent to tbe explosion in the 4Lh Right 1 A. Because the indications of force on t he rope road point to the 4th Right as having been the starting point. 28530. Q. That is your ground for putting the initial explosion there 1 A. Yes. 28531. Q. You say that the explosion in the back heading was a separate one 1 A. It was scarcely a. sP.parate one. It was all one; but there may have bP.en an interval. 28532. Q. You were in doubt whether the Bame extended to the back heading, or whether t he gas ignited from Morris' light 1 A. I am not satisfied which. 28533. Q. You are not clear even now 1 A. I am not certain now. 28534. Q. You took it that a fell took place in t he 4th Right 1 A. Yes; I am clear about that. W e can only look at the probability of what took place, and to what has taken place in other parts. Falls have taken place which have forced out gas from points in a goaf which were beyond reach. 28535. Q. What is the evidence of the force which you have b een able to collect with regard to the goaf 1 A. I say that part of the ground there was accessible to the air current, and this would not be so likely to contain gas as t he inner pa.rt of t he goaf would be. 28536. Q. You are assuming that a sufficient quaniity of air was skirting round that goa.f to clear it from gas 1 A. I am assuming that a sufficient quantity of air was skirting round that goaf. 28537. Q. Suppose you were told t hat there was not a sufficient quantity of air there i A. I should then say that your suggestion was the more likely- that 44'yards of ground fell, forcing out the gas. I think that t he probability is that the gas was forced out from t he inner part of the goaf. 28538. Q. Do you think it at all probable t hat the second fall which took place would take place almost immediately afterwards 1 A. I think it would follow the first one very rapidly. 28539. Q. Do you think gas was brough t out by the first fall 1 A. I t is possible, but not very likely ; seeing that the air.current bad access to that part. 28540. Q. You think the fi rst fall evidently blocked the afrway, but clicl not bring the gas out; but that the second fall caused the disaster 1 A. 'l'he second fall, induced by the first fall, brought out the gas. 28541. Q. Do you think that the gas would go out by the goll.f or by the return airway 1 A. I t hink it is more likely t hat gas would be forced ont by the return airwa.y. 28542. Q. What quantity do you think went by the return-some of it would circulate higher up the goaf1 A. I have made no calculation. 28543. Q. How would the goaf settle down 1 A. The higher part of the goaf would settle down, and that would cause the gas to come out. 28544. Q. Have you ever got up in a goaf 1 A. Yes, to examine them. I have seen some falls; and the higher part generally settled down close. 28545. Q. How far have you been in 1 A. Fifteen or 20 feet above the seam. 28546. Q. Have you found the blocks larger t here 1 11. It dP.pends on the stone. You may have sandstone underneath and shale on the top. 28547. Q. Can you give us any idea of thf\ area which the second fall would coved A. It is impossible. 28548. Q. Do you assume aa area 1 A. No; it is impossible. His sufficient for my contention t hat a fall of roof took place and forced out gas. You might .say that it was an extensi,·e fall, without assuming ,vbat size. 28549. Q. If the gas was forced out by the second fall there would be great difficulties to contend with in the way of room 1 11. There would be all the room round the edges of the fall for the gas or air to be squeezed out of. A fall does not come down as close to the edge as it does in the middle. There is room outside of the fall - I mean on the outskirts of the fall. 28550. Q. What percentage of gas would be forced out by the second fall 1 A. Now you get beyond me. 2 551. Q. It would not all be fo rced out 1 A. A ll the gas would not be forced out ; but I think most of it would be forced out by the la.roer fall. 28~52. Q. What percentage .wiuld percolate upwards 1 A. I hn.ve no itle:1. 28::>53. Q. Take 44 yards square, would all t he air be forced outwards 1 .A. The whole of it, I think; as it would have free access to the road, and to the return. 28554. Q. You do not think any would make up,vards 1 A. No; I think it would all be squeezed out. 28555. Q. That applies to the second fall 1 A. Yes; I think most of the gas would be squeezed out. 28556. Q. The whole of the air present between the first and the second fn.ll would be forced out 1 A I · think so. 28557. Q. Which way do yon say the ail' would go 1 A. The tendency of what was displaced would be towards the retu rn, and not to t be intake. 2_8558. Q. If we ha.ve an area of roof to f11ll, and there are two openings on one side, and one on the north side, _and one on the west side-when the fall took place would the whole of it be forced out through the opening on the west 1 A. Seeing that the return airway was nearer the fall than t he other t he 011as would ' 28559. be forced out of the opening t hat wav. . .

.i I

845

WitnP.M-W. Humble, 17 March, 1903.

28559. Q. You t hink that the first fall which took place forced the whole of the air out of the 4th Right, and that the second fall forced the whole of the gas ou t in the same way, although you said there are other openings 1 .A. I think the principal fall forced the ga<J to the travelling road on the 4th Right. 28560. Q. Have you anything to guide you to your belief that the strata. gi\·e off gas abo\"e the c?al measure 1 A. I think I could give you au instance. "\Ve have had one or two instances, in fact, in which gas has been seen before the coal seam was reached. I think in the Killingworth Colliery they were 20 feet above the seam. 28561. Q. What kind of strata 1 A. Shale. 28562. Mr. Robei·tson.] Q. What was the seam 1 A. They were going in search of the Bore·hole seam. 28563. Q. They passed through certain seams 1 A. But got no coal. 28564. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. They were in shale 1 A . They were in shale and rnndstone from the top of the shaft. 28565. Q. Do those strata c0mpare with the Kembla strata 1 A. Some of the sandstone is like Kembla, but not much. 28566. Q. Have you seen any shaley matter in the south 1 A. No, I do not remember any. 28567. Q. With your knowledge of the strata in the south, do you think it at all feasible t hat gas would be generated from it 1 A. It is quite likely that the sandslone would yield :fire-damp, the same as the shale. 28568. Q. You sai<l about Dudley-have you any other information you can give to support it 1 A. I believe they had some trouble with gas in Balraain before they got to any coal-seams. 285 69. Q. What kind of ground was it 7 A. Shale. 28570. Q. You know that shale is likely to give off gas 1 A. I t is more frequently found associated with coal. 28571. Q. There is more vegetable matter in it 7 A. True shale does not contain vegetable matter; but gas is associated with shale more than with 'sandstone. 28572. Q. H olding the opinion you do,.that gas is likely to be given off in the strata, what would you suggest as a means of safety 1 A. The use of safety-lamps. 28573. Q. Is that the only means 1 A. I know that there have been wild suggestions about boring holes from the surface to liberate the gas. 28574. Q. You think two holes, or shafts, are sufficient 1 A. I would sometimes have a third one. 28575. Q. Should safety-lamps be used in all collieries~ A. I n all collieries iu. which gas is likely to be engendered. 28576. Q. How would you construe that-would you wait until there had been a big fall 1 A. You might get the first indications of gas in the old workings. 'l'herefore safety-lamps ought to be used, particularly when pillars are taken out.. l do not mean it to a pply to Kembla particularly ; .but, where,·er gas has been found in the whole workings, safety-lamps should be used. 28577. Mr. R obertson.] Q. What bearing has gas issuing from the coa l on the question of gas issuing from the strata 7 A. In goafs tLerc is always a possibility of gas being forcecl out ; and what I recommend, with a view of bringing about greater safety, is that sarety-lamps should be used. 28578. Q. As a precaution against what 1 A. As a precaution against gas being forced out of the goa£. 28579. Mi·. Ritchie.] Q. I s the gas generated by the coal 7 A. P artly by the coal and partly by the strata. I think that the gas comes out of the pores of the stone as it does out of the coal, but not to such a large extent. 28580. Q. Suppose you had not received any reports as to gas, and you were labouring under the impression that tl:e examination of the colliery had been carefully made; and supposing you thought that the sandstone might give off gas, what would you do 1 A. E ven in that case I should be inclined to work the pillars with safety-lamps. 28581. Q. What protection would that give you, if a fall took place and forced the gas out beyond t he pillars Z A. I should think that a mine, if laid out in a right manner, would be so designed, with regard to the ventilation districts, that the gas forced out of one district :would not go into another distri ct. 28582. Q. You say tha.t t he whole of the air and the gas at Kernbla would be forced into the return ·a irways 1 A. Yes. 28583. Q. And yet we have bad a disaster at Kembla 1 A. V{as there any pronounced division there between the intake and return 1 28584. Q. We ba,·e evidence of a door there 1 A. I think that, if a district were laid out as I have seen them laid out, there would be no fear about using a naked light in the whole workings and a safety-lamp in the pillars. 28585. Q. Would there be no fear that the air forced out would be sufficient to remove a door 1 A. I do not subscribe to the idea that the air came out of the goaf with hurricane force. I think it came out gently. 28586. Q. I£ the roof came down gently, the air would have been able to get on top of the stont: 1 A. T he stone might ba ve been so close that the air could not get on t op of it. 28587. Q. Which was the part of the roof likely to giYC way first-that part which was loose and hanging, or that part which was o\·er the pilJan, 1 A. T hat part which was loose and hanging wonld come :first. 28588. Q. Do you not think it likely that the air under t he falling part would make its way to the top ~ A. I t hink most of the air would be driven out. Very little would find its way through the broken part to the highcl' part. 28589. Q. Would it not be just as likely, a.t the edge of the fallen parts, to go out the other way 1 A. N o; I think it would be more likely that the force would go to the road, as it would have the air behind it. 28590. Q. Do you not think that the atmospheric pressure would force it the other way 1 A. The atmospheric pressure would force it towards the return. 28591. Q. In your opinion, although there was a vacuum created by t he fallen mass, the ventilation under the fallen mass would be forced against t he atmospheric pressure instead of going over the top 1 A. It would certainly be forced toward s the return. 28592. Q. Did you read Mr. Atkinson's evidence before you came here 1 A. Y es, I read it as soon as he gaYe it. 28593. Q. Before you came here 1 A. Yes. 28594. Q. Do you remember, Yery well , the notes which you took on the occasion of your visit Z A. I ha<l tbero written down ; but, as you see, there are sernral things J have overlooked and forgotten. 28595. Q. Did you compare your notes with Mr. Atkinson's 1 A. N o. 28596.

Jl'it,iess- \V. Humble, 17 March, 1903.

, I ,'

i /

28596. Q. Did you notice that part of Mr. Atkinson's evidence where he sa.icl that he wa~ jp somewJia.t ef ~ dilemma as to the discovery of. gas 1 A. I remember reading it ; but it did not stri~e me as being sigoificaJ!t! otherwise I would have told him of the 1 per cent of gas I ha,·e alluded to. It did not occur to me, and the evidence is very voluminous. 28597. Q. Did it only appear to you to be a prominent matter afterwards 1 A. I saw tbatit was a proniin~nt matter afterwards. 28598. Q. Did you not regard it as a n important matter at the time 1 A. I regarded it as an hnportii,nt matter at the time; and I also regarded the gas fo und in other places as important. 28599. Q. You knew that importance was attached to the 35-acre goaf 1 A. Yes. 28600. Q. And you knew that certain parties were tryirig to prove to the Commission that t}le disaster WM the result of a wind blast 1 A. So the newspapers told me. 28601. Q. Did not that impre~s on you the importance of the matter 1 A. That did not bring to my min4 the 1 per cent. of gas which I had seen found. . 28602. Q. What makes you so decided now that you did not mention the matter to Mr. Atkinson 1 A. I said tbat I thought he ,,as with me. I am satisfied now that he was not with me. 28603. Q. You are guided by bis coll\·ersa.tion entirtly 1 A. O.ertainly not. If he had been with us ~ would have a note of it. As he does not know of it he was not there. 28604. Q. You }1 a ve no note of his being there 1 A. No. 28605. Q. You held the opinion that lte wa.s there 1 A. I said I thqught he was there. 28606. Q. You ham been asked about Rule 121 A .•Yes. 28607. Q. I think you are conversant with General Rule 39 1 A. Fairly well. 28608. Q. That rule gives the employees power to appoint two persons to make an inspection on tJ1~ir behalf 1 A. I know of it. 28609. Q. Do you b~lieve in that part of the rule where it says that the persons may from time j;o tiIIJ~ appoint any two of thei1· number, or any two persons not beingmioiog engineers to make such an inspection 1 A. I think that restriction should remain. 28610. Q. Why 1 A. Any mining engineer who would be likely to offer himself for the purpose of makiQg such an inspection would be a man disappointed with t he profession, and perhaps possessed of ill-will towi,.rds collieries in general; and he would be an unsuitable man to go into a mine. 28611. Q. D o you mean to tell me that all mining engineers are spiteful and vindi.cti vc 1 A. N o ; but yo11 would get very few of them who would undertake the work. 28612. Q. Why 1 A. Because it woul<l not pay them. 28613. Q. Why 1 A. Because their time would bo occupied with other work. 28614. Q. Why would it not pay them to do this work as well as it would pay ·any one else 1 A. I do not think they would get sufficient remuneration. 28615. Q. Have you any evidence that mining engiMers would refuse to work for the men 1 A. They would refuse to work without pay; and it would not be sufficient pay. A mioiog engineer would not pe available, unless he was a man out of work, and a disappointed man generally. You would h_ave to get that kind of man to do the work. 28616. Q. Thell .the matter should remain with unqualified men 1 A. I think, with mining engineer~, yo» would not get men who would be prepared to look at t he matter from an impartial point of view. 28617. Q. D oesnotthe rule laydownwhatthe duties are1 A.Yes; but there are differentways of carrying out duties. 28618. Q. You think that the employees should be compelled to take people who are not qualified, becau~ the mining engineers would be vindictive, and could not be trusted to do lbe work 1 A. They would not b~ men who would do it impartially. I should like to say that there are men available from the ranks of ~ workers who can do the work at the present timC'. 28619. Q. What would ruining engineers do that they ought not to do 1 A. They would see things whicl} would strike them from a professional point of view, and which might be prejudicial to the owners; ~nq. tbey should not be allowed to see tbem. · 28620. Q. Do you mean by taking surveys 1 A. Well, when the mines are being w9rkcd nearr the b01mdary. 28621. Q. Could they tell whether a mine was crossing the boundary or not 1 A. They wo:..1lcl be ah)e to offer a better opinion, and to form a. better idea as to what was approximately the bouude.ry, than a workipg man would. 28622. lb. Robe1·tson.] Q. Could such an examination be made use of for Stock Exchange purposes 1 A. Yes. 2862 3. Mr. Ritr.hie.] Q. With regard to the thickness of the coal and the quality of it 1 ..4. Yes. 28624. Q. Could not a working man get that information too1 ..4. Not so well. H e would not be ao likely to do it as a. mining engineer. 28625. Q. You t hink that the working men wou Id be so honest that they would not ta.ke a tip 1 A. I tpinlc that the working men are quite able to do the work of inspecting, as is done at present. 28626. Q. You think that the powers of the Act should be restricted 7 ..1. No; I think they should not be eqlarged. I thirtk the me.n have a pretty large choice now. 28627. Q. Is not this a. restriction 7 A.. The law is sufficiently large. They hMe plenty of choice as it j.s. 28628. Q. Do you know any of the men who have been doing t his work 1 A . I know plenty in the north. 28629. Q. Are they well qualified i A. With a. few exceptions they are well a.ble to do it. 28630. Q. Are there a.ny who would be able to take the bearings of a colliery 7 A. Some of them might be ab1e to; but I am of opinion that mining engineers should not be allowed to go into a mine on beQalf of the miners. 28631. Q. The rule says men "who are practical working miners." I suppose you know the interpretation that bas been applied to the word working 1 .A. I have heard that it excludes men from occupying th~ position a fter certain periods of time. 28632. Q. After the period for which a man has been first elected 1 A. Yes; if he has been elected for tweh·e months, these words would prevent a man occupying the position for another twe!Ye months, unless he qualifies again. 28633. Q. Do you thin k that is right 1 A. No. 28634. Q. D o you think that the word "workina ,, should be struck out 1 A. Yes; it is absurd to ~ that a man would qualify by two or three days' ~vork. 28~3:(5. 28635. Oi :{t woqld not make him a ~et-ter II!~n practically 1 A. No.

817

-~_86S6.

Q. H would -give a good opportunity of shunting him 1 ~h~~ him \VOttid be the people who elected him.

• Witness-W. Humble, 17 March, 1903. A . Yes; but the. only people who could

28637. Q. If the proprietors said he was not a qualified man would not that shunt him 1 A. Yes. ~8~38. Q. It would be in their power to refuse to receive uiw 1 A. Yes; that is how it would work out. 28639. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Did you ever he1r of its working out in tha~ way 1 A. Never. 28640. Mr. Ritcltie,l Q. Did you ever hear of n check-inspector qualifying himself 1 A. I know that one went to work to requalify himself for the position of check-inspector. 2864:1. Mr. R1!Mrtson.] Q. With regad to the Killingworth Colliery, is it not intercepted by a dyke 1 A.

Yes.

~8642; Q: Would that acconnt for the presence of gas 1 A. I think the gas would have been there, if the dyke had not been there. The gas was between the seams-one of the seams immediately above the lr<:>M-hble. ~~64:3. Q. The gas may have found its way there through :fissures created by the dyke 1 A. It may. 28644. Q. Do you know of any cases where gas has been found excepting in carboniferous shale~ A. No, ~2;cepting those eases I have given you. 28645. Q. Now, the gas you have found in the strata has al ways been between seams 1 A. Yes; and in some cases the strata have been thick.

JOSHUA. J EFFRIES, previously sworn, was further examined, as under :Examined by Mr. Bruce Smith:28646. Q. I think yon have made a calculation as to the quantity of water which would have to be removed from a mine like the Metropolitan if watering was cat·ried out in a systematic manner 1 A. Yes. The water t_o be removed afterwards would amount to 300 tons daily. 28647. Q. Of course, you would have to get it in .first and take it out afterwards 1 A. Yes. 28648. Q. You would not take out all which yon put in 1 A. I should allow a certain percentage for absorption. 28649. Q. Can you speak of tlrn experience of mining engineers of the effects of watering upon coal-dust, where the d U!it lies thick 1 A. The general impression is that it is useless to water coal-dus~, if it is thick, because it simply comes off it again. ·watering, without removal of the dust, is of no value. 28650. Q. You say that it is the general impression on the matter which you refer to1 A. Some of the leading authorities in England think so. I could quote from them. 28651. Mr. Lysaght.] I object to that. These authorities could be put in. 28652. His Honor.] That would save time. 28653, Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Will you supply a list, so that I can hand it tci the Commission 1 A. I have it with me now, and I will put it in. 28654. Q. You have observed yourself some results of this kind 1 A. I have seen a foot of water, and you could put your hand through it and bring up the dust dry. 28655. Q. The water cloes not penetrate the dust 1 A. Yes. I mean that you must remove the dust. 28656. Q. Now what are these authorities which yon wish to put before the Commission 7 .LL It is the second report of f-.be Royal Commision on explosions from coal-dust in mines. 28657. Q. I think we haYe tbat already. Wh ich Commission is it, the Chamberlain one 1 A. Yes. I have marked t he passages. 28658. (Oopy of the Second Report of the Royal Commission on Explosions from Coal-dust in Mines was handed to the Commission by tbe witness and marked Exhibit No. 56.) 28659. Q. You can say something as to the e1foct on the miners of moistening the atmosphere of a mine by watering1 A. One great authority is Professor Galloway- -[lnte1Tupted.] 28660. Mi·. Lysa,ght.] I object ; he is going to quote from a book. ~8661. .1.lfr. Bruce Srnitli.] Q. We have about one hundred weight of books quoted from 1 A. I tis his latest book on mining. I can put it in afterwards, if you like. 28662. You might mark the passages and give them to Mr. Lysaght. 28663. Mr. Robertson.] Can you speak from your own personal experience 7 A. I can say that at a t emperature of 77 degrees the conditions are not very pleasant in a mine which is fairly saturated with moisture. 28664. .1.lfr. Bruce Sniitlt..] Q. You show that the conditions of watering, which are held to be doubtful, are also disadvantageous1 A. Yes, in the way of working the mine. 28665. Q. That is mentioned by Galloway-at what page 7 A. I cannot tell the page; but I can send it to the Commission. 28666. Q. Have you seen the report of the McLaren Mine 1 A. No. 28667. Q. H ave you seen that it speaks in praise of watering1 A . No. I thiuk you can accomplish the same object as watering in the way which I have already related. We have never yet bad an explosion with coal-dust, where the high permitted explosives are used. 28668. Q. You mean to say that gunpowder should be prohibited, as you suggest 1 A. Yes; and the use of the high explosives would prevent explosions of dust. 28669. Q. You have prepared some ngures with regard to ventilation 1 A. Yes. And, increasing the quantity of ventilatien from 100 to 200 feet per minute, you would have to increase the horse-power at each colliery eight times its present strength. 28670. Q. You mean that you would have to increase the strength of the engines eight times, and not in proportion to the quantity of the air 1 A. Yes. I t is like taking the cnbe of a quantity. At present some of the mines a re supplying from 99 feet per minute to 13-1 feet per minute. To give this tremendous increase, and to get 200 feet per minute taking the present power at 3-horse-power, you would require, at one colliery, 10 horse-power to provide for it. None of the ventilating fans ha,e that margin at present; and t.he present engines would be useless. 2867 1. Q. The fans would be useless to give the increased quantity of air asked for 1 .A. Yes. 28672. Q. You have some correspondence relating to the coal-dust trials at Woolwich which you desired to draw :\ttention to 1 A. I drew attention to the fact, with regard to the dust sent from the Metropolitan Colliery, that the experiments were of no practical value under O\lr conditions of working. 28673. Q. Was that done by correspondence 1 .A. Yes. 28674.

848 Witnesa-,T. Jeffries, 17 March, 1903.

;

•

2867 4. Q. On what arounds do you make that statement 1 A. I pointed out that the testa were va.lueles11, as far as the Metrop~litan Colliery was concerned, as the explosive used was one which was prohibited here. 28675. Q. What did they use nt Woolwich 1 A. Gunpowder. We suggested thllt one of the permitted explosives should be used. 286i6. .Mr. lJrtice Smith.] Q. You say that to a mine like the Metropolitan, where no gunpowder is used, the test at Woolwich had no appl ication, ns it was made under conditions which do not apply to the Metropolitan Mine 1 A. Yes; and we suggested furth er that experiments should be ma.de at Woolwich under our conditions. Here is the letter which I received in reply from the Home Office:Sir, Home Office to Agent-Genera.I, Whitehall, 13 October, 1002. I have laid hefore the Secretary of State your letter of the 3rd instant (No. 14,146-1902), asking that certain samples of coal-dust from the Metropolitan Co!liery, New South Wales, which have been sent direct from Sydney to t~e Home Offict! Testing Station, may be tested with roburite, and I am directed by him to say that the Testing S~tion 1s very fully occupied at present, and the test cannot be carried out at once; but that, if the Department of Mmes and Agrieulture of New South Walc3 desire it, he will be happy to have the experiments carried out as soon as opportunity occurs. He would be glad, however, if, before the test i.s made, you would inform the Department of Mines and Agriculture that he is advised that the carrying out of the tests in the manner suggested in the letter of the 19th of August, which you enclose, would add nothing to our existing knowledge. If an explosive of the roburite class is used for the test, and if the c-0al-dust is not placed in immediate proximity to the muzzle of the gun, the officer in charge of the station reports that it is 9.uitc certain that an ignition would not be obtained. Perhaps in those circumstances the Department of Mines may not think it necessary that the tests should be made, or may have some other suggestiou to offer as to the way of making them . The Secretary of State would further be glad if you would ascertain whether the Department or the management of the mine will bear the cost of the experiments. The cost is considerable, as the shots with high explosives wear out the guns very rapidly; English manufacture.rs and mine-owners invariably pay for experiments made on their a11_plication. I am, &c., The Agent-General for New South Wales. (Signed) HENRY CUNYNGHAME. Re-examined by Mr. Wade:28677. Q. .A<; to the question of wc1.tering the roacls. If you water them at all, you must water them universa.lly 7 A. I think so. 28678. Q. Is there any known limit of damp road, up to the present, which will stop an explosion 7 11. Not that I am awareof. 28679. Q. Have you beal'd of explosions jumping over damp stretches? A. I have heard of explosions occurring in mines when they were watered. There was a colliery in England where an explosion occurred; and Mt·. Martin said that it was more damp than any mine which he has seen artificially watered. 28680. Q. Do you remember seeing an account of the Fernie Colliery 1 A. Yes. 28681. Q. D., you remember whether the explosion was traced across any <la.mp sections there 1 A. I could not tell you; I do not remember the details. • 28682. Q. Do I understand that you lay down, as a prelimina.ty, that if a place is dusty you should water within a certain radius of shot-firing 1 A. As the .Act says at present-within 20 yards. 28683. Q. If that step is taken, do you consider that there is any risk, in the ordinary practice of working the mine, in lenving the hauJage roads unwatered 1 A. I say none whatever. 28684. Q. Take a haulage road having no shot-firing there- would you expect to find any gas there 1 A. No. 28685. Q. Do you know how many gallons of water it would take per mile to water a mine thoroughly 1 A. I should say 40 gallons for 20 yards. That is the estimate we work on. 28686. Q. That would be 3,000 or 4,000 gallons per mile1 A. Yes. 28687. Q. We have heard this expression used pretty often- I think it is "Olle pound of <lust in 160 cubic feet of air is dangerous "1 A. Ye3. 28688. Q. Is that a. proposition that you would accept without qualification 7 A. We must take it on the authority of the man who ma.de it. · 28689. Q. U oder what conditions 1 A. Ordinary temperature and ordinary pressure. 28690. Q. Without shot-firing 1 A. Without shot-firing. . 28691. Q. D.:> you think that that applies to the ordinary working of a mine. If you have dust from a quarter to ha.If an inch thick you run a danger of an explosion from coal dust1 11. Of course, if you have the necessary percentages of the dust- and air, then you have the conditions n ecessary for a. dust ex plosion. 28692. Q. I want to ask you how you get an explosion. Supposing you have dust less than a quarter of an i nch thick on the roadway and on the roof ancl sides-what is going to bring about o.n explosion 1 A. I take it that, if you have the oxygen percentage properly adjusted, a naked light will do the rest. 28693. llis Honor.] Surely it requires to be mixed up first. 28G94:. Mr. Wade.] Q. That is what I am trying to find out-and the presence of a. shot would be necessary 1 A. I have a. book with it in. I read it in the way I have stated. 28695. 1lis Honor.] Q. You me.1.11 if it is mixed up and comes in contact with a naked light 1 A. Ye~, I think it must be mixed up. 28696 . .1l1r. Robertson.] Q. Are you sure that it is a naked light 1 A. Yes. 28697. Q. Without any gas 1 A. Without any gas. 28698. Q. Do you remember that explosion at the Brancepeth pit 1 A. That wa.s through coming in contact with a naked ligut. 28699. Mr. Wade.] Q. You say that there is no occasion to water the haulage roads at all, if you water in the vicinity of a shot 7 A . We do not water the haulage roads, but only in the vicinity of a shot. 28700. Q. Do you know of this quotation from the Second Report of the Royal Commission on Explosions from Coa.1-dust in Mines :That there is practically no danger in the use of naked lights in mines, so far as dust is concerned, if the entire absence of fire-damp could be guaranteed, is the opinion of most of the witnesses who have been examined on the point. It is pointed out by se,·eral witnesses that accidents have ta.ken place on the surface owing to coal-dust coming into contact with a. naked light; but it is generally admitted that it would be "very improbable," and only by a "remota possibility, " that coal-dust, even when raised iu the shape of a dense cloud, would explode at a naked light. The flame, or fire, must go with considel'able force in amongst the fine dust to cause an explosion ; and this condition is not pl'esent when a naked light is the only cause of ignition. A. On the other hand, we have a record of an explosion by dust coming into contact with ~ naked light. 28701. Q. Which is that 1 A. I t is in Galloway's work. 28702. Q. That is by shots1 A . No, without shots. 28703.

•

849

Witnesa-J. Jeffrie~, 17 March, 1903.

28703. Mr. Robertson.] Q. ·was there not a suspicion of gas1 .A. simply makes that statement. It refers to the explosive qualities of coal-dust; and it says there are instances where dust has exploded through coming into contact with a naked light. It is some mines in France that are referred to. 28704. Mr. Wade.] A. I s this the quota.lion you mean:It is possible, howeve:, if coal.dust could be made fine enough, and were thoroughly fixed with air, i;1 prop~rtio? of I lb. of coal-~ust to 160 cubic feet of air, the mixture might be inflammable at ordinary temperatul'es, or? if not, it might be so neal'ly mfiammable that an explosion begun in it, in a confined space, might be propagated through 1t.

A . Yes, that only says "might be inflammable." (The Commission, at 4·10 p.m., n.djourned until 10 o'clock the following morningl

WEDNESDAY, 18 MARCH, 1903, 10 a.rn.

l'I'he Cornm·ission met at the No.

2 District Court, Sydney. ]

tfresmt:-

E. R . l\tIURRA.Y, ESQ., D.C.J. (PRESIDENT) . D. A. W. ROBERTSON, EsQ., ComIIss10N1.m. I D. RITCHIE, EsQ., CoMMISSIONER, Mr. Bruce Smith, Barrister-at-L aw, instructed by Mr. '\Vood, Crown Solicitor's Office, appeared on hehalf of the Crown. Mr. A . .A.. Atkinson, Chief Inspector of Coal-mines, assisted Mr. Bruce Smith. Mr. A. A. Lysaght, Solicitor, appeared on behalf of(a) The representatives of deceased miners, wheelers, &c., victims of the explosion); (6) the employees of the Mount Kembla Colliery (miners, wheelers, &c.); and (c) the Illawarra Colliery Employees' Association (the Southern Miners' Union). Mr. C. G. Wade, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by Messrs. Curtiss and Barry, Solicitors, was present on behalf of the Mount Kembla Coal and Oil Company (Proprietors of the Mount Kembla Mine). (Mr. J. Garlick, Secret:lry to the Commission, was pl'esent to hke shorthand notes of the evidence and proceedings. Mn. J.C. H. MINGAYE, previously sworn, was recalle<l, and further examined, as under:Examination,in-chief, by Mr. Bruce Smith : 28705. Q. Yon gave the result of your analyses in general 1 A. Yes. 28706. Q. Now, I asked you in the course of your examination, what was the temperatnre which would be required to produce the Jargest amount of distillation that you found in some of the coal-dust samples; and you gave me a Centigrade temperature; and I asked you what was the equivalent in Fahrenheit; will you tell me again, if you told me before, with regard to these twelve samples, what were tl1e respective temperatures required to produce the amount of distillation which had taken place 7 Have you done it with all of them 1 A. No. 28707. Q. Which di<l you do it with 1 A. Since I gave that evidence I havP. made some experiments. 28708. Q. Further experiments 1 A. Yes. 28709. Q. Will you tell me first of all the temperature Centigrade, and the temperature Fahrenheit, at which the volatile matter in these coal-dust samples begins to distil off? A. I found that at at emperature of from 300 degree3 Fahrenheit, that is auout 149 degrees Centigrade, to 350 degrees Fahrenheit, that is 176·7 degrees Centigrade, the volatile matter UP.gins to distil off. 28710. His Honor.] Q. Is not that by the continuous application of heat? I mean that the temperature continually gradually rises up to those temperatures which you have given as the beginning of distillation 1 A. Yes. 28711. Q. It is not a flash of hen.ti A. No. 28712. Q. I t is a gradual rising of temperature 1 A. Yes. 28713. Mr. Bruce Smitli. J Q. It is between those two points that the distillation begins i A. That is so. 28714. Q. You could not fix it exactly 1 A. No, it is impossible to 6x. it exactly. 28715. Q. How did you perform this experiment 1 A.. I took the fine coal.dust from sample No. 12; and it was placed in a covered platinum cruciule having a hole in the centre of the lid, and in which was suspended a Fahrenheit thermometer. 28716. Q. Take them singly-sample No. 11 A.. Experiment No. 1 7 28717. Q. Is that with sample No. 11 A. It is with sample No. 12. 28718. Q. It is a series of experiments made on sample No.12 1 A. Y es. 28719. Q. Why did you take sample No. 121 A. Because the volatile matter given off was only ·96 per cent. 28720. Q. It was the lowP.st, and left you a larger margin to play upon 1 A. Yes. 28721. Q. E xperiment No. 1 1 A. On heating a weighed quantity of the fine coal.dust for five minutes at a temperature not exceeding 300 degrees Fahrenheit., the coal·dust lost ·46 per cent. of its volatile matter. 28722. Q. That is of the volatile matter that was left in it after the original ·96 was taken out 1 A. Yes. 28723. Q. Now, experiment No. 21 A. On heating a weighed quantity of the coal-dust, as in experiment No. 1, at a temperature of from 350 degrees Fahrenheit, equal to 176·7 degrees Centigrade, to 360 Fahrenheit or 182·2 Centigrade, the fine coal-dust parted with 3·3 per cent. of its volatile matter. 28724. Mr. Wade.] Q. That is a rise of 10 degrees 1 A. Yes. 28725. Mr. Bruce Smitli.] Q. Now, tha.t percentage wl!ich you got, 3·30, was over and above the previous curou-lative percentages 1 A. Yes. 28726. Q. Now, experiment No. 31 A. Using a higher temperature, approaching 500 degrees Fahrenheit, or 260 degrees Centigrade, to 550 degrees Fahrenheit or 287 ·7 degrees Centigrade, the fine coal-dust lost 4·58 per cent. of its volatile constituents. 28727. Q. That is a further fall of 4·58 per cent. 1 A. Yes. 28728. 29-5 P 16825

850 Witne-i~---J. C. H. }.l[iogaye, 18 .March, 1903.

l '•1

28728. Q. Now, you have added those together, have yon not 1 A. I made another experimen!, No. 4. 28729. Q. Very well, go on 1 A. At a heat over 550 deg~ees F~hreuhe~t, som.ewhere approa.ch!ng, I should think, 600 degrees Fahrenheit-I am not absolutely certain, as 1t was 1mposs1ble to measure tt a.ocurate)y with tbe thermometer in use - - [Interrupted.] 28730. Q. What is the Centigrade equivalent to that temperature 1 A. I should say 315·6 degr£t:9. 28731. Q. Repeat that~ A. Experiment No. 4; taking it at a heat above 55~ degrees Fahren_he1t, that is equivalent to 287 ·7 degrees Centigrade, up to about 600 degr~es Fahrenheit, or 315·6 Cent1~rade, there was a further loss of 4·28 per cent. of the volatile matter, which has to be added to the previous loss. 28732. Q. Now, you have reached there a. maximum of 600 degrees Fahrenheit 7 A. As near as I can go. 28733. Q. Adding all those together, what is your total percentage of distillation 7 A. 13·58. 287 34. Mr. Robertson.] Q. What was tbe temperature of the first experiment, when 0·46 was lost 7 A. That came off at a temperature of 300 degrees Fahrenheit.. 28735. Jllr. Bruce Sm.ith.] Q. It took, therefore, 600 degrees Fahrenheit to get 13·58 per cent of the volatile matter out of that coal-dust 1 A. Yes. 28736. Q. Well, that you take as a basis throwing light upon your other experiments 7 A. Yes. 287 37. Q. Now, in ascertaining the amount of volatile matter remored from Nos. 5 and 6, you got 11 ·54, did you not., and 12·961 A. Yes. 28738. Mr. Robe1·tson.] Are those other samples 1 28739. Mr. Bruc8 Smith.] No, they at·e two of the twelve samples. You see just now he has been dealing entirely wit.h one sample. 28 740. 1vlr. Rabertson.] How could he get that 1 That is more than the coal contains. 287 41. J1fr. Brnce Smith.] He first of all found what the coal-dust contained, by taking these samples ar\d twenty-one othP-t' samples; and he gave us a standard I think of 23 per cent. of volatile matter in the coal; then he took these twelve samples and ascertained what volatile matter was left in them, and dedncted that from the standard, and got the result showing the amount of the volatile matter that bad been removed. 28742. His Honor.] Q. One sample aggregated 13·56, another 11·54, and another 12·961 A. Yes. 287 43. Q. Those were three separate experiments 'I A. Yes. 28744. 1lfr. Bruce Smit!i.] Q. Now, I think you wished to refer to some experiments made by the late P ofessor Freire Mariaco 1 A. Yes. 28745. His Honor.] Where was he a Professod 287 46. Mr. Atlcinson.J He was Professor at the College of Physical Science at Newcastle-on-Tyne. 28747. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Those experiments showed what 1 A. The experiments showed that at a temperature of about 600 degrees Fahrenheit, or 315·6 degrees Centigrade, the c9al began to decompose; that temperature was required to produce appreciable decomposition of the coal. 287 48. Q. What do you call "appreciable decomposition" 1 Is that what you call the distillation of the volatile matter 1 A . Yes. 28749. Q. That is the same thing 1 A. Yes, the same thing. 28750. Q. And that experiment shows that it requires that temperature to begin the distillation 1 A. According to the Professor, yes. 28751. Mr. TVade.J Have you the papers here 1 It would be better to put them in. 28752. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Have you the Professor's experiments here 1 A. I have a note. [ Witnes, handed a text-book, " Uhemical Technology, ,:ol. I, Fuel, by Mills ct Rowan," to Mr. Bruce Smith. ] 28753. Q. You have a note of some experiments by a Mr. Thomas, which show a slightly different resulU A. Yes, Mr. Thomas' results show that the reaction commences slowly, a.nd at a very much lower temperalure than has been supposed. 28754. Q. He is not more de6ni.te than that 1 A. No. 28755. Q. Then you have another authority, M'r. Glenn : who is he 1 A. It was a discussion on a paper on an explosion of Grahamite dust. 28756. Q. Where was that discussion 1 A. At the Virginia Meeting of the American Institute of Mining Engineer.;;. 28757. Q. .Is that quoted in this book [pam7?hlet ".American 17lstitute of Mining Enpineers "] 7 A. No. 28758. His •Honor.] Q. What is Grahamite 1 A. It is more like Alberlite, like pitch. It contains about 61 ·32 per cent. of volatile matter: it is a hydrocarbon compound. 28759. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. It is like the New Zealand coals 1 A. It would more represent our shales, I t,hink, considering the amount of volatile hydrocarbons present. 28760. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Some of our shales have 80 per cent. 7 A. Up to 80 per cent.: I have seen them over 80 per cent. 28761. Q. What did Mr. Glenn say 1 A. He says:To be brief, we find that the greater ~art of the volatile matter was gi VElD off below a. red heat. This was checked

about ~ve years ~go by aoo.ther set of experiment.s; so that I am sure that certain coals are dangerous from the fact that they give up their gas readily and at once. In some of my experiments the greater part of the volatile matter went off at a heat so low that it could be called black.

28i 62. His Honor.] Q. That would imply what 1 28763. M1·. Bruce S,nith.] Q. H e means without becoming a. rod heat i A. It would be jost under a red heat. 28764. His Honor.] Q. A dull glow in the dark 1 A. Yes. 28765. Mr. Bruce i)',nith.] Q. That is in the transactions of the Atnerican Institute of Mining Engineers 1 A. There are separate papers. 28i66. Q. ~ow, in your experiments which you have made since you gave evidence-the other day, have you ~ot a.scertam~d the .perc~ntage of moisture that is in tho3e twelve samples- this, Your Honor, is a very 1mport,rnt pomt, which did not come out in Mr. Mincraye's evidence before-you have ascertained the percentage of moisture in those twelve samples 1 A. Y;s. 28767. Q. Now, you a:;certained the moisture in the avera<Ye of Mount Kembla coal-dust that ha.J been 0 supplied to you, did you not 1 .A. Yes. 28768. Q. Aud what did you find that avera<Te percentacre of moisture to be 7 .A I have ta.ken for these 0 0 experiments the moisture as 1 ·2 per cent. • 28769. Q. That is of Mount Kembla coal 1 A. Mount K embla coa,1. 28770. Q. What did you find the moisture in that coal to be 1 A. 1·2 per cent. 28771 I

851

Witneu-J. C. H. Mlngaye, 18 March, 1001.

287'71. Q, Now, wbllt did you find ,vith regard to these twelve samples: did you find t.hat the moisture was less or more t.ha.n the average 1 28772. Mr. R_obertson.l Q. I understood you to say that this was the 11,verage of the twelve samples 1 A. No, that was m the Mount Kembla coal, l ·2 per cent. 28773. M1·. Bruce Smith.] Q. You might .iust mention about these samples, becauso it may be a disturbing factor in your experiments: when did you get the sample of .M ount Kembla coal, opart from the twelve samples which had been in the explosion 1 A. The samples were handO'l to me by l\ir. Inspector ·watson, o.n Tl:h1t's day, the 25th of August. 28774. Q. And where have you had them since th'.l.t tiine1 A. T hey have, since the microscopic and chemical examination, been in my safe. 28775. Mr. Wade.] Q. When was the test made for moisture1 A. About t\vO da.ys afterwards; in fact fh?Y wel'e started on the same day. They were gradually going througb. They would be two to three days gorng through. 2tS776. Q. Y ou tested the moisture of . the. sample apart fro m the twelve samples; but the sample of the eeam JOU tested two days after you received it 'I A. Not the sample of the seam. I am taking for the start the average moisture in the Mount Kembla coal at l ·2 per cent-. 28777. Q. How do you get that i .A. From the ~nalysis of the Mount Kembla coal. 28778, Q. Made when 1 A. I cannot say when it was made ; but it is in .Mr. PiUman's book on paga 353. 28779. Q. Oh, I see, you took that from Mr. Pittman's Book.on Coal mining 1 .A. Yes, on work thil.t I bad done for him, 28780. His Honor.] Q. Did you e.ay that those returns appearing in Mr. Pittman's book were from your own analyses 1 A. They are my own analyses, or m!l.de by my assistant under my supervision, 28781. Mr. Robertson.] Q. I understand no\v that there was not a sample taken for the moisture 1 28782. Mr. Brttce Smith.]' No. 28783. Q. In that statement in Mr. Pittman's book-does tbat refer to Mount K embla co!i.l, or to all the cools in t he Southern District 1 A. Mount Kembla is not included in Mr. P ittman's total; but I made E!tperiments, which are given on page 353, on coals that were sent in C)nnection with washing experiments that were tna-de on the Mount Kembla coal, for coke-making. 28784. Q. So, while it is in Mr. P ittman's book, it is not one of those included in his average. You might say how that percentage, which you ascertained on that occasion, compa.res with the average percentage published in another pa.r t of the book l Li. It is higher than the average of the coals for Lhe Southern District. The average will work out to ·97 per cent. 28785. Q. Now: I ask you how your special experiment compared with the general experiment 1 28786. Mr . .Robertson.] I really do not think tbat is of the slightest value. 28787. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Yes, it is ,·ery important. I only want that as a cbeck. 28788. Q. I s there any connection at all between the percentage which you brought out for all the Southeth coals and the percentage which you brought out in regard to Mount Kembla alone1 A. The Mount Kembla alone is 1 ·2 per cent. ; and, taking the everage of twenty-one of the Southern coals, the moisture is ·97. 28790. Q. Then it is a d ifference between 0·9 and l ·2, a difference of 30 per cent. more, you make t he moisture-as 12 is to 9 i A. Y es. 28791. Mr. Bruce S mith.] Q. Now, you ascertained what percentage of moisture there was in t hese twelve samples1 A. Yes. I n No. 1 there was ·91 per cent.--[lnterrupted.J 28792. Mr. Wade.] H e has given that before. 28793. Mr Bruce Smith.I Very well. 28794. Q. I s there a gain or a loss of water in the twelve s:1mples 1 A. There is a gain in every c:ise. 28795. Mr. Bruce Smith.] That is the point, Your Honor. 28796. M1· . .Robertson.] What is the average percentage 1 28797. Mr. Bruce Smith.l l ·2. 28798. Mr. Robertson.] What is the average of the moisture in the samples 1 28799. Witness.] ·97. 28800. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Mr. Mingayc will show that t hose twelve samples contained an increased • moisture ; and he will say, as a scientific man, what that evidence is. 28801. Q. What do you say that that evidence is1 A. The evidence is peculiar, taken with the other results; because in an explosion of coal, one of the products formed is steam, which very likely would cause moisture in the fine dust. 28802. Q. And you say that there is an increase in moisture in the whole of Lhe twehe samples 1 A. Yes. 28803. Q. I ndicating lo you that there has bean an explosion, a generation of steam, and the addition of moisture in consequence 1 A. W ell, I say that it looks very peculiar, getting that increase of moisture, t a.ken in conjunction with the other results of the analyses. 28804. Q. It confirms the other results1 A. Yes. 28805. Mr. Robertson.] Q. What does it confirm 1 A. It confirms what I found in the other samples that had been coked ; and a lso in one of the samples that contained pieces of wood that had been slightly charred by heat, and had been in flame. 28806. Q. You think that, by reason of this i ncrease in moisture in the dust as compared with the coal, you can draw the inference that an explosion occurred 1 A. Yes, taking the other evidence into consideration. 28807. Q. But one would expect that the dust would contain more moi~ture than the coal: it would absorb the moisture, particularly in the relurn airway-it would absorb the moisture in the air 1 28808. Mr. Bruce Smith.] But what he would say is th is, that, up to a certain temperature, the tendency would be to take all the moisture out of the coal, if there wa~ no flu.me; but, beyond that, there would be steam, which would add to the moisture again. 28809. Mr. Robertson. ] Quite so; but this was taken some days afterwards; and t he dust ha·J had t ime to nbsorb moistu re. If you will lift any of that dust, you will find it is quite damp. 28810. Mr. Bruce Smith.] That is an argument; but here is an experiment. 28811. Q. You found an increase of moisture in the whole of the samples 1 A. Yes. 288 12. Q. And you found a greater increase of moisture in which samples i A. No. 5 and No. 8. 28813. Q. An.cl No. 7 comes next to t hat 1 il. Yes, · 28813t· (J. Nos. 5, 71 and 81 A. Yes,

~88H

8ts2 Witnus-J. C. H. MingayP, l S March, 1903.

. r

'·

28814. Q. So that you found the greatest increase in moisture in the same samples in wb_ich your other experiments proved to you that they had been subjected to the greatest heat 1 A. Yes, that is so. 28815. .1.lfr. Bruce, mit!t.] Nos. 5, 6, 7, ancl 8. 28816. ;l/r. Wade.] Q. Diel you say Nos. 5, 6, 7, and 81 A. No, 5, 7, and 8. 28817. 1llr. Robtrtson.] To dri-ve that home you would require to take dust from parls of the mine that were not affected by the explosion. . . . 28818. )fr. Bruce Smith] Q. Well, it is the result that you woul~ expect, from scientific authority~ where there has been flame and an explosion 1 A. Well, you would cer tarnly expect that steam would be given off after an explosion. 28819. Q. Will you show me that authority 1 A. It is a well-known authority. 28820. Mr. Rober/son.] It is well-known. 28821. Jfr. B1·uce Smith.] Q. It is in Professor Galloway's R eport on the Universal Colliery E xplosion, I think 1 A. Yes. • 28822. ]l[r. Wade.] I will not dispute that. 28823. Mr. Bruce Sinith.] Q. Now, supposing you are right in your standard percentage, a.nd that you are right in the conclusion that there is an increase of moisture here: is that consistent with the wind theory t hat has been advanced in this case as producing heat up to 291 degrees 1 A. Well, if a. current was passed over coa.1, the first thing that would be given off would be the moisture, under a. t emperature of 100 degrees centigrade. • 28824. Q. And when you find the increase, that throws doubt upon the mere heat by wind theory, and suggests to you an explosion : is not that so-state it in your own way 1 A. The microscopic a.od chemical enmination of the coal-dust certainly indicates that there has been a Bame ; if I can arupver it in that way. 28825. iJfr. Robertson.] Q. Does not coke absorb moisture readily 1 A. That is so, yes. 28826. Q. Well thmi, most of that moisture was taken up after the explosion 1 A. Well, the excess of moisture here is rather high. 28827. Q. I s it not so, that, if this dust was coked or partially coked, it would have a. tendency to absorb moisture readily 1 A. To absorb a small a.mount. I would not expect all t,his here, without it had been through steam or something of that sort. You see i t is very high : in one case it is nearly 50 per cent. in excess. 28828. Q. But still you du not know that that coal-dust had not absor bed moisture from the moment of the explosion until the sample was collected 1 A. I cannot say that at all. I give these figures on my experiments. 28829. Q. The samples would require to have been ta.ken immediately after the explosion 1 A. It certainly would have been beUer. · 28830. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. You gave the date of these samples in your first evidence 1 A. Yes. 28831. Jfr. Ritchie.] Q. H o w ma ny days was it that the samples reached you after the disasted A. I received the samples on the 25th of August. 28832. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Now, in this authority that you referred to, in the Universal Colliery Explosion Report, Professor Galloway has foll owed exactly the same process, has he not; he has taken coal from the faces, dust from the floor, a.nd the crusts of coked dust collected from the timbers ; and he has made a. dednctioo from the fa ct that he finds a. li\rger percentage of moisture in the coal afoer the explosion than in that taken from the face of the coal i A. H e says that there is more, yes. · 28833. Mr. Bruce Smith.] That, Your H onor, is the page in which he has compared the figu res. 28834. (Mr. Bruce Smith here showed to the Commission page 17 of the R epor·t on the Universal C.>llicry . E xplosion by Professor Galloway.] 28835. (). So this is no theory of your own 1 A. No. 28836. Q. You are not claiming any originality for it 1 A. No. 28837. Afr. Bruce Smitli.) I tender these transactions of the American Institute of Mining Engineers. 28838. [ A report of a. discussion at the Bridgeport meeting of the American Institute. of Mining Engineers in Octobe1·, 1894-, on "Coal-dust as an Explosive Agent," with reference to a. paper by Mr. Glenn on "An Explosion of Ora.ha.mite Dust," was put in and marked Exhibit No. 59. F or copy see A ppendix. 28839. A i:'eport of a further discussion of the American Institute of Mining Engineers on the same subject at the same meeting was put in and marked E xhibit No. 60. 28840. A paper by Mr. Donald M. Stuart, F.G.S., on "Coal-dust as an E xplosive Agent," printed in the "Transactions of the American Institute of Mining Engineers," Pittsburg meeting, F ebruary, 1896, was put in marked Exhibit No. 61]. Cross-examination by Mr. W ade : 28841. Q. W ere thece samples of dust, as you got t hem, in very fine particles? A. Yes. 28842. (J. You <lid not grind t hem up yoursel f 1 A. They were not ground at all : t hey were thoroughly mixed. 28843. Q. Were they very s mall, minute i A. They were minute particles; but there were also coked particles where t hey hacl adhered together. 28844. Q. Where the various parts of t he dust have united 1 A. Yes. 28845. (). By what you call the coking process 7 A. Yes. 2884:6. (J. They were what yon call fine dust i A. Yes. 28847. (). The dust is almost impalpable 1 A. It is very fine. 28848. Q. It is the very finest of fine dust 1 A. Yes. . 28849. Q. Do you say now that there had been an explosion where that dust had been 1 A. I say that, taking my results there, from the microscopical examination and from the chemical examination, they indicate that there had been an explosion. 28850: Q. I s that t he conclusion that you come to, that there hacl been a gas explosion, or a. coal-dust explosion 1 You have thrust this explosion upon ,1s for some reason-or Mr. Bruce Smith has; but I want to- know what your conclusion is, or what his conclusion is 1 A. My opinion is that there was an explosion of fire-<lamp in the mine, which was fired hy a. nnkcd light; a.nd also that the coal-dust, to a large exte~nt, accelerated the force of t he explosio11. . 288.J 1. (2. ,Now, that being so, I suppose your idea is that this small coal-cl11s~ was in the afr when it was acted upon.by the heat o~ flam e--in suspension u1 the aid A. Well, it is possible some of it may have been; but 1t woulJ be ra.1setl from the timbers by the explosion, in fine <lust, A.nd from the floors all.round. 28852.

853

Witne.,s-J. C. H. Mingaye, 18 March, 1903.

28852. Q. In a coal-dust explosion, is not. there a kind of advance , blast of air and dust i A. I cannot say that. . 28853. Q. Do you know that the flam e pla.ys upon the dust actually in suspense in the aid A. Yes. 28854. Q. What is the temperature developed by a n explosion of firP,-damp 1 Do not look at your notes. Do you recollect, of your own knowledge, what the temperature of a fire-clamp explosion is 1 A. I think it is a temperature of about 658 degree centigrade, if I remember rightly. 28855. Q. Do you think that is the highest i A That is from memory. 28856. Q. No,v, look at your notesi 11. No, I have made a mistake, it is 780 degrees. 28857. Q. That is pretty near 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit i A. 1,436 degrees. 28858. Q. Do you say that is the ordinary temperature of a fire-damp explosion 1 A. That is the temperature at the ignition of t,he gas, as given by an authority . . 28859. Mr. Robertson.] What is that 1 28860. Mr. Wade.] H e says the temperature of a fire damp explosion is not more than 1,436 dt>grees Fahrenht>it. 28861. Witnl!ss.J That is when the gas will ionite. 28862. Mr. Wade.] Q. Is the temperature higher in the case of an actual explosion 1 A. It is possiblf'. 28863. Q. I do not want to know whether it is possible ; I want to know what you, as an expert, say 1 A. I should expect the temperature to go up to 700 or 800 degrees centigrade. 28864. Q. Not more than that 1 A. No. 28865. Q. Do you know what the highest explosivA mixture of fire-clamp is with air ; what proportion is most explosive 1 A. I have all my notes here. 28866. Q. Never mind about your notes 1 A. I prefer my notes. 28867. Q. I want to know if you can say from your own recollection 1 A. About 6 or 7 per cent. 28868. Q. That is the most explm\ive proport.ion 1 A. Yes. 28869. Mr. Robertson .] Q. Six or seven what 1 A. I would sooner refer to my notes, if you will allow me. 28870. Mr. Wude.J I would prefer you to tell me from memory. 28871. Witness.] I cannot remember all these things. 288i2. Mr. Bi·uce 8m.ith.J How can a man be expected to remember all these things. 2887 3. Mr. Wade.] Q. Then, if you cannot remember, refer to your notes 1 A. When fire damp forms as much as one part out of thirteen of the air, the mixture becomes explosive, so that, if ,i gnited by an exposed flame, the mixture is converted into a mass of flame. In that state of the mixture, however, the force of the explosion is comparatively feeble. When there is only one part of fire-damp to nine or ten of air the explosiou is greatest. 28874. Q. What is the temperature developed with a mixture in the proportion of one of fire-damp to tt:n of aid A.. I could not say. 28875 Q. Do you know it runs to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit and O"ore 1 Did you ever hear it was 2,000 dt>grees centigrade 1 [ Witness did not answer.] 28876. Q. Supposing there is a temperature of 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit acting on small particles of coaldust in the air, even rapidly, would not you expect them to be entirely consumed, ;:i,n<l to get beyond the coking stage altogether ? A. Not if there was not a sufficient supply of oxygen in the air. 28877. Q. Not even the small particles i A. A certain proportion of it may be ; but you must have oxygen. 28878. Q. Now, when you spoke of ash in your experiments, was that the ash you yourself obtained from your experiments 1 A. Th e ash in the analyses 1 28879. Q. Ye~, in your analyses 1 A. Yes, that is the result. 28880. Q. It has nothing to do with a ny ash that came in the sn.mples iu the form of ash 1 A. No, it is the percentage of ash in the samples. 28881. 1.l fr. Rob•wtson.] Q. Bn t t he dust may h1:.1,V e contained foreign matter apart from what was chemically combined with the dust1 A. The ash consisted of fine stone dust lal'gely. 28882. Q. Not in chemical combination with the dusti A. No, not in chemical combination; separately altogether. 28883. Mr. Wade.] Q. Now, just tell us how you arrived at this result in your analyses; what is the first thing you did with your samples of coal-dust 1 A. The first thing I did was to determine the percentage of moisture. • 28884. Q. H ow did you do that~ A. By taking a given weight of tbe coal-dust and submitting it to a heat of 100 degrees centigrade for one hour ; the difference between the weight of the dust and its weight when dry at 100 degrees Centigrade would give the amount of moisture. 28885. Q. Did you use that dust again in any further experiments 1 A.. No. • 28886. (J. You put it on one side 1 A. Yes. 28887. Q. Then, how did yon get your volatile matted A. By taking a given weight of the fine coal-dust and igniting it in a covered platinum crucible over a three-burner and then using the blast, until all volatile matter was given off. That is weigh ed; and the difference between the original weight, and its weight when taken from the cruciblt>, gives the loss, which equa.ls the volatile matter plus moisture. Taking the moisture off it will give you the volatile matter. 28888. Q. \Vbat did you get for the volaUJe matter for No. l i A. l ·91. 28889. Q. What does that mean 1 A. That is l ·91 per cent.. 28890. Q. \Vhat i Left, or abstracted 1 A. That,_is the moisture in the coal-dust, contained in the coal-dust 28891. Q. I am not talking of moisture; I am talking of the volatile matted A. I got 18·59 pe1· cent. of volatile matter. 28892. Q. And what proportion of fixed carbon <lid you get in that 1 A. I have not run it ont here ; but, the coke equ::i.ls the fixed cn.rbon and the a.sh. 28893. Q. D o you mean that the dust which you sul)jected to heat in the crucible gave you, as a result, then and there, n. loss of 18·59 pel' cent., which you attributed to the loss of volatile matted A. Yes, taking off the moisture found . 28894. Q. And what i, the tempera.lure n.t which you did that 1 A. That temperature wa8 pretty high; it was over a th ree-lmrner, using a blast. 28895. Q. T hat does not help me mucl1, T am afraid ; I am a layman ; can you give me any idea 1 A. It is a. temperature of over 1,292 degrees Fahrenheit, I should say. · 28897 . 28896. Q. For how long did you try it 1 A. For a.bout five minutes.

85:1, WitMSs-J. C. H. l\liogaye, 18 ~Ja.rcb, 1903.

'·' ·

23897. Q. What did you get left-ash 7 A.. No, the coh iii left; and that equals the fixed carbon and the asb, which is 79·5. 2°898. Q. The coke that was left in the crucible after this process consisted of the fixe<l carbon apd the ash, and you afterwards resolved it into coke and ash i A. Hy burning off t~e fixed cubon the ash 1a left, By burning that, allowing the acce3s of air to it, the carbon is burnt off, leavmg the a.sh. 28899. Q. Now, I want to understand about those s!l.mples you spoke of: You got 1·2 as the percentage of moisture in the co~l that hnd come from Kt}mbla for the purpose of washing; is that so 1 A. That is so. . 2~000. Q. ·would there be a.ny difference between that and tho c:>a.l that came from th"} face 1 A. It 1s p,ssible. '£nere is alway.i a slight difference in the coals taken, unless a thorough average is taken from the face right through. There must be slight differences; but, if you take t he mean of the twenty-one samples, that will give ·9i. 28901. Q. That is for all the coals except Mount Kembla 1 A. Eiccept Mount Kembla. 28902. Q. Did you make an analysis of any coa l from Mount Kembla itself1 A. Yes. 28903. Mr. R obe,·tson ] Q. I cannot se3 what is th!} value of comparing a.n average of twenty-one southern coals with K emhla ; some are very high, and som~ very low; and I cannot see what is the object of it 7 A. It is this : I had not a sample of an a.vdra.ga of Kembla. sent to me with those dusts, and I mu&t take an average. 28904 . .Mr . Wade.] Q. But you had a sample of Kembla.1 A. No. 28905. Mr. Bruce, 'mit!i.] Q. But you had had it b3fore A. Oh J liad had it before; in fa.ct, I have had some that have not been published in Mr. Pittman's book. 28906 . .ilfr. Wad~.] Q. N o w, is this the fact- that, if yoa apply a lt:mp3ra.ture of, say, 100 degrees Fahrenheit to coal-dus~, there is some giving off of volatile matter at once 7 A. At 300 degrees it appears to commence to distil off. 28907. Q. At once~ yon have not gvt to wait five minutes 1 A. I took the experiment on five minutfls, 28908. Q. You admit this, that, if you apply a temperature of 300 degrees Fahrenheit to coal-dust, distillation takes place at once to some extent 1 A. With this coal-dust it did. 28909. Mr . .Robe1·tson.] Q. Would it take place in half o second 7 A. It is possible; I would not like to say-I ha v~ not tried it; but it is very po3sible with a. flash. 28910. Q. It would take place with a. Ba~h 1 A. Possibly; I would not like to say. 28911. llis Honor.] Q. Supposing the tempera.tu re of what is called the fla.'llt is, itself, only 300 degrres Fabrenhoit, not that tho flash is enough, for a moment of time, to raise the dust to 300 degrees Fah renheit, but that the flash itself does not exceed 300 degrees Fahrenheit-that is what Mr. Robertson really meane, I think-,vould it be possible for that to cau'ic even an incipient decomrosit.ion i A. I should expect so, to a slight extent; but very 1,mall. 28912. Mr. Wade.] Q. And would not the access of oxygen to that incipient decomposition tend to produce further heat and further distillation 1 A. Yes, it is possible. 28913. Q. Once you get a certain temperature, and yon supply oxygen to it, it will go on rising, will it not 1 A. Yes. 28914. Q. And it is perfectly fea.'ii ble scientifica.lly, is it not, that you might, in that way, get an a.-0tual reel heat of coal-dust 1 A. I do not know that I can say that ::i.t all. 21:S915. Q. Do you me~n to say that, if you ahrt with a temperature of 300 degrees, which will p,roduoe distillation to some extent of the coal-dust, and oxygen has access to that, you would not get a. further increase of temperature 1 A. I do not think it woulJ be much. 28916. Q. Would there be some 1 A. There might be some; I could not say there would be much though. It is impossible, without trying these experiments. These men who have given opinions on it have made a. vast number of experiinents to settle the matter. It is a very difficult question to answer . . 28917. Q. Do you koow what temperature co!l.1-dust will ignite at 1 A. I should say between 700 and 800 degrees Fahrenheit. 28818. Mt·. Robe1·tso11.] Q. Did you got ignition in any of those experiments 1 You got distillation ; yon did not get ignition 1 A. No. Of course, these expel'iments could only be carried out in a closed vessel. It is very different where the air is passing over it. 28910. Q. Do you think you would ha,·e got ignition with that temperature with access to air 1 A. I do not think so. 28020. M1-. Wade.] Q. However, your dust, I suppose, was lying in this crucible to some depth, was it noti A. Yes. 28921. Q. H ow deep 1 A. About an inch and a half, with the bulb of the thermometer in the centre of it. 28922. Q. An inch and a half in depth J A. Yes. 28923. Q. And what was the diameter 1 A. About an inch. 28924. Q. To the outside surface 1 A. Yes. 28925. Q. The action of heat on that would be much slower than if the particles were in the air 1 A. I should thiok so. I think if there were a flash you would get more distillation over tbe surface. 28926. Q. You will admit this, that your test n-s to the different temperatures which gave off different amounts of volatile matter are not exactly analogous to what would take place in a mine in case of the l\pplication of great beat 1 A. No; certainly I will admit that; but I think that, in passing over a large quantity of fine coal-dust, I shoµld expect more taken out in proportion. 28927. Q. How do you mean more ta.ken out i A. More of the gases liberated. It ,vould extract more of the gM. 28928. Q. That is at a great temperature i A. Or at the low temperatures. lt only takes ·42 out a.t 300 degrees Fahrenheit: that is something large, if it is passing over a large area of fine coal-dust. 28929. Q. Then do you mean to say that., with a temperature of say 300 degrees passing over coal-dust in suspension in the air, even instantaneously, you would quite expect to find a loss of say ·46 of volatile matter i . A. I should say so, perhaps ruore. Of course, in a case like that there may have been a series of explosions: that gas, once ignited, would ignite perbn.p3 in different parts of the mine; and you may have a serie3 of ex:plosions, w liich would cause heat. 28930. Q. Now, can you tell me, besides CO and CO2, what gases are given off, say, in an explosion either of fire- damp or coal-dust 1 A. In an explosion of coal-dust 7 28.931._ Q. Yes, t!lke an explosion of coal-dust 1 A. In an explosion of coal-dust you would have carbonic acid: 1f you have incomplete combustion, you would have oarbon monoxide given off, and also you would · 28932, have §Ot:µ e other products, including free. niw:gen and steam.

1. ,,

t. i

f55

f:, .. .-

Witness-J. C.H. Mingaye, 18 March, 1903.

28952. Q. Would you gE>.t the ordinary coa}.aas given o(f1 A. Iii wou"ld be given off but decomposed by the 0 explosion. 28933. Q. Anything like it 1 A. No. 28934. Q. What is the chem ical composition of ordinary coal-gas i A. It consists largely of marsh-gas or fire-damp, and hydrogen. 28935. Q. What are the chief constituents 1 A. [Continuing ]Jrevious answer] With nitrogen and oxygen and carbon dioxid<>, and carbon monoxide, &c.

The percentage Composition of Coal-gas. Carbon dioxide . .. .. . . .. . .. .. . Nitrogen Oxygen Ethylene Propylene Benzine vapour H ydrogen Marsh-gas Carbon monoxide

3·01 2·15 ·65 2·55 l ·21 l ·33 46·20 34·02 8·88

100·00 28936. Q. What are lhe chief constituents of marsh-gas 7 A. It largely consists of a series known as OHf in the formula . Marsh-gas, when impure, also contains nitrogen, carbon, dioxide and oxygen. 28937. Q. D o not you get any C H 4 in coal-gas 1 A. Yes, by destructive distillation. 28938. Q. And would that be distilled and separated in the course of an explosion 1 A. In the course of an explosion it would be decomposed. 28939. Q. What do you mean by that 1 A. It would be decomposed to an extent, and would form carboµic acid, and free nitrogen, and carbon monoxide, if you had incomplete combustion; and also you would ha.ve steam. 28940. Q. Then there would be no coal gas at all evolved which could be found 1 A. Not after au explosion. · 28941. Q. Is it in the case of complete combustion or partial combustion that you would get steam i .A. Well, after any explosion steam to a certain amount is fcrmed. 28942. Q. Whether the combustion is complete or partial, do you mean 1 A. Vl ell, with a violen t expl~ion you may have a fairly complete combustion. 28943. Q. Then you limit it to the case of a complete combustion 7 .A. Not necessarily. 28944. Q. Now, with regard to those samples you examined, do I understand that only part of the remnant wa.s coked 1 A. The edges of the fine d ust show that it had been coked on the surface in samples Nos. 1 to 4 and 7 to 12; but in samples Nos. 5 and 6 the coke was showing very plainly. 28945. Q. Then you put the heat in Nos. 1 to 4 and 7 to 12 as, as far as you can see, being certainly les.s than 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit 7 A. No, I do not say that. 28946. Q. Did not you say the other day that it would be less than 1, l 00 degrees Fahrenheit 1 A. Yes, less th.an 1,100 degrees Fahren heit. 2894 7. Q. Is not t hat so 7 A. As regards Nos. 1 to 4 and 7 to 12 ; but not as regards Nos. 5 and 6. 28948. Q. Can you gi v-e any definite opinion as to the heat that was applied to Nos. 5 and 6 ; or were those results obtained from the heat being applied more continuously 1 A . I consider that it is most probable that Nos. 5 and 6 have been up to a temperature probably of 700 or 800 degrees Centigrade. 28949. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. What is the equivalent in Fahrenheit 1 A. 800 degrees Centigrade is 1,472 degrees F ahrenheit. 28950. Mr. Wade.] Q. Now, in what form was the coked residue in Nos. 5 and 6: wa.!l it in larg~ particles 1 .A. No, it was not iu very lal'ge particles; but it wa'! held together by the melting of the bituminous matter; a.ni, if yo:i will allow me t0 r ead my original paper, No 5 consisted large1y of coked residues, the hard, coarse, porous, structure of the coke being readily visible; also pellets, ot· globules, of tine coke, somewhat resembling small shot. Tbe chemical examination proves that the dust bas parted with a large proportion of its volatile matter. 28951. Q. Now, these globules of fine coke were really partially melted bituminous matter, in No. 51 A. Yes ; in one case a small bit of tbe bituminous matter had melted, and you could see that the bubble l1ad burst and that there had been an escape of gas. 28952. Q. So that No 5 had a lower temperature than No. 6: is that so, according to appearances1 4. It is possible. It is very bard to say what temperature they had been subjected .to. 28953. Q. Might I ask where Nos. 5 and 6 came from : I think a document was put in ; but I have not seen iL 1 28954. (Mr . Atkinson pointed out on a plan the places where these samples of dust had beim obtained from, viz., No. 5 from a. point 325 yarJs outbye of the 2nd Right on No. 1 R ight rope road, and No. G from 341 yards outhye of 2nd Right on same road.) 28955. M1·. Wade.] Q. Can you tell me this: supposing there had been a long tongue of gas flame, not actually explosive, but that the gas had lit in a long tongue of flame covering, say, the areas where s::i.mples Nos. 10 and 12 were obtained from, would you expect to find indications of coking on those samples 1 A. Yes, to a small extent, i£ the gas had played over it, 1 should. 289!i6. Q. What would you expect, if there was dust in suspension in the passage where the gas Ba.me lit; would you ex pect the flame to communicate itself to the dnst too 1 A. Yes, certainly, if there were dust in suspension I would expect a. big explosion. 28957. Q. Then, if the gM itself was not in an explosive combination with air, or rather a highly explo:;ive combination-[interrnpted] 1 A. It would want to be in the proportion to explode. 28958. Q. Supposing you bad 5 or 6 per cent. of gas in the air, would not that ignite 1 A. Ye3. 28959. Q. R eadily 1 11. Yes. 28960. Q. Supposing you had that, a large body of gas in that proportion, and it lit, and the flame travelled a.nd passed through dust in suspension, what would you expect under those conditions 1 .1. I would expect a. big explosion. The explosive power would be very high, I should say. 28961. Q. When you light gas, is there an expansion t hrough the heat developed 1 A. Uo you mean through an explosion 1 28962.

856 JVitnus- J. C. H. Mingaye, 18 Maroh, 1903.

28962. Q. When you .first light .fire-damp-suppostng fire-clamp is travelling along the roof, say, of a. po.ssago in o. mine, and you apply a light to _the nearest e1:d ~s. it comes towards yoq-do not you get a.n increase of energy and beat, and an expansion from the 1gn1t1on 1 A. Yes, you would do so; and also clri ..e all the gas out., and tend to form a vacuum. . . . 28963. Q. W oulcl not you expect, from that ignition,. that the fore~ woulu ext~n.d rn ·ev~ry direction 7 A. Well, that is a ha.rd question for me to answer. It 1s ~ ore a question for a mmmg engllleer.. 28964. Mr. B1·uce Smith. J Q. vVhat was the Fahrenheit tempP-rature that would be necessary m the case of Nos. 5 and 6, to deprive them of their volc1.tile matted A. About 1472 degrees Fahrenheit.

Examination by Mr. Robertson:28965. Q. Would not the temperature at .~hich .t~e volatile constituents of coal are distilled depend to some extent on the relati ve percentages ; for instance, would not ,you expect that the volatile constituents of a shale, or a Grahamite or an Albertite would par t more readily than from, say, an anthracite 1 A. Coal higher in bituminous matter~ I should think, would part more readily. 28966. Q. T herefore, the temperature at which distillation would commence would depend really upon the character of the coal, that is to say, upon the relative percentage of voJatile matter in it 1 A. To a large a~~~ . 28967. Q. I think you said that the dust would com.mence to distil at a.bout 300 degrees Fahrenheit 1 A. I am taking it from my experiments ; and I found that it started from 300 degrees Fahrenheit. 28968. Q. Supposing a wind blast had come out from a cer tain part of Kembla mine, and met with coaldust at that temperature, that is to say, the wind blast was at 300 degrees Fahrenheit; would that distil the coal-dust 1 Q. I t possibly might take a small percentage of the gas off; but it would take the moisture first. You see the moisture is given off at 100 degrees Centigrade. 28~69. Q. I t would only occur for half.a-second. Do you think that half-a-second, or a second, or two seconds, would be occupied in driving off the moisture 7 You see, in your experiments, I understand, you had first driven off the moisture 1 A. My experiments were made in the usual manner; t he moisture was taken first; and a separate lot was taken, to arrive at the volatile matter and the coke. 28970. Q. But when you expressed the opinion a short time ago that a period of time of hal£-a-second, that is to say, practically a flash, would be sufficient to commence disLillation of the coa1, did you bear in mind t he moisture 1 I s it coal free from moisture, or with moisture? A. Well, I should take it as coal free from moisture. 28971. Q. Well, if a wind-blast came out in half-a-second, do you think that half second, or more or less, would be occupied in driving off the moisture from the coal dust 1 A. I should hardly think, myself, that a wind-blast; would take off any small quantity of the volatile matter : certainly -with a wind-blast I would not expect to find the dust in t he coked state I did find from the microscopical examination of it. 289 72. Q. Would you expect a wind-blast at; a temperature of 291 degrees to ignite the coal-dust1 Q. No, certainly not. 2897 3. Q. Would it make any difference if that wind-blast was under pressure 1 A . I should not expect ignition; but it is a very difficult matter to say anything-the whole thing is a new theory altogether. 2897 4. Q. W hat is a new theory 1 A. The wind-blast. · 28975. Q. Do you think it is improbable that the wind-blast at that temperature could bring about an explosion 1 A. I do, very improbable. 28976. His Honor.] Q. And you see that, by the action of turning the water in association with coal dust into what would be very high-pressure steam, there would be an enormous deprivation of heat in the air at once, a reduction of temperature 1 A. Yes. 2897 7. Q. I suppose, for every given weight of water so turned into steam, there would be something like a drop of one degree in somewhere about 1,000 bulks of that water, or, if you like, an equi \·alent of 10 degrees to every 100 bulks of that water, so turned into steam 1 A. Yes. 28978. Q. And tha.t would be a very important facto1· in preventing any further chemical action which would require such a temperature as 291 degrees to star t it 1 A. Yes. I cannot conceive that, by that theory of the wind-blast, you could get sufficient to 61·e it, and that the fine <lust would be left in the coked state that it is in. Not only that, but in No. 7 some of the chips of wood showed that there had ·been flame there- they werP. cha.rred just on the surface, showing that there had been flame passing over them. 289i9. Jlfr. Robertson.] Q. 0£ conrse that is not conclusive, inasmuch as some of the props come into the mine, I believe, with tbeir fibres charred in the bush ; some of the props, before t hey are brought into the mine, are subjected to heat in the bush 1 A. Y cs. 28980. Q. And it is just possible that what you ha.Ye got there m:;.y have been charred before it entPred the mine 1 A. Of course that is quite possible. I can only go by what I find. 28981. .,lfr. Robertson.] Yes, I do not; question what you say. · 28982. J.lfr. Bruce Sinith.J Mr. Mingaye brought his microscope here, in case the Commission cared to see those particles of coal-dust through it. 28983. His Honor.] The Commission are prepared to trust to Mr. Mingaye for that. Mr. Mingaye has been in the habit of making these examinations for years. 28984. Witness.] Yes, Your H onor. [ Exaniination concluded.]

Mr. J. D. GOODWIN was sworn, and examined as under:(This witness was called by the Commission, as he had written offering some suggestions. As a matter of convenience, and o.t the request of the Commission, Mr. Bruce Smith undertook his examination in-chief.)

' ,·•' ,>I ,_.

Examination-in-chief by Mr. Bruce Smith :28986. Q. What is your name 7 A. John Dickinson Goodwin. 28987. Q. And what are you i .A. At the present time I occupy the po~ition of Municipal Engineer for the Borough of Ashfield. There is one matter, Your Honor, that I would like to lay before the Commission before I give evidence. I am here to-day to answer any qgestions bearing on the subject-matter contained in

857

.., .

Witness-.T. D. Goodwin, 18 March, 1903.

in my ~etter ad?~essed to. the President of this Commission. It Âˇis my desire to be add_ressed as John Goodwrn, Municipal Engineer of the Borough of Ashfield. Your Honor, I will place m your bands cor respondence that will identify my position as a. mining surveY,or. It is my wish that you will treat this ~orrespondence as con~dential, for the following reasons :-To be made public might be detrimental to ~be mterests of those parties I_ represent who are interested in mining properties inNewSouth Wales, on wh~ch I have to report from time to time; and which miaht have t.he effect of debarring me from g~ttmg informal.ion that would be to their advantage. Ou tho~e conditions I am prepared to be questioned. 28988. His Honor.] Mr. Bruce Smith, you know nothiu..., of this correspondence, do you 7 0 28989. Mr. Bruce ::Jmith.] No. 28990. W~tness.J It only identifies my position ~nd qualifications as a mining engineer. 28991. His Honor.] We have your own word. Vie have no doubt of that, on your own word. 2~992._ Mr..Br_uce S!'iith.] Q. ~ill you tell me what has been your experience in connection with coal-mini?g, either m Br1tam or m Australia 1 A. I ser ved over twenty years in mining life before I came to the colorues. 28993. Q. In what county 7 A. In South Yorkshire. 28994. Q. And in more than one mine 1 A. Yes; I have been in many mines there. 28995. Q. You might just name t he principal ones 1 A. I made an inspection of the Ma.overs Mine, also Denaby. I have also inspected the Hoyland Silkstone Mines. I have also been in the Skierspring Ironstone Mines. 28996. Q. H ave you worked in these, or have you occupied any official position 1 A. I worked in t hem and raised mysetf from hewing coal to the position of mining surveyor. ~8997. Q. Then you have a practical knowledge 7 A. Yes. 28998. Q. And you have got coal 1 A. Yes. 28999. Q. And you have been a sur veyor in one or other of these coal mines 1 A. I have been an Inspector. 29000. Q. H ave you ever been Manager or under-manager of any mine. A. No, I have not. 29001. Q. Then I may take it that you have been a miner and a surveyor? A. Yes. 29002. Q. And when you say you reported on these mines, do you mean you reported when you occupied the position of a surveyor 1 A. Yes, as an Inspector. 29003. Q. Y ou have never been asked by the Horce Office to report specially on any of these mines 1 A. I have been asked by the owners. 29004. Q. Will you tell me which one 1 A. I reported on the Hoyland Silkstone Mines, when it was alleged t hat t hey were not safe to work in. 29005. Q. For whom did yon report 1 A. I reported on belialf of the owners and of the men, at that time. I am proud of it. I was appointed by both. 29006. Q. You were surveyor a.t that time in the mine 1 A. I was appointed by the owners to iuspect on that occasion. I was brought from Wharoclifff', Silkstone Coll ieries, to report on the H oyland Silkstone Mine. 29007. Q. And you were employed at that time by the owners 1 A. I was appointed to inspect it by them on the question of safety. 29008. Q. Now, have you had any experience in Aus tralia in mining 1 A . Yes. 29009. Q. Which mines have you been in 1 A. I inspected the Kaitangata in New Zealand, after the explosion. 29010. Q. 1!,or whom did you report 1 A. F or Rober t Fulton, Esq. 29011. Q. The owner 1 A. I think he was an arbitrator. 29012. Q. Will you tell me any other mine in Australia that you have been connected with 1 LL Yes, I baYe been; but I <lo not wish to go into those pl'ivate matters. 29013. Q. You have not heen employed in any Australian mine 1 .A. No, I have not. 29014. Q. And how long is it since yotl had any practical connection with any coal-mine 1 A. The last inspection that I made of a coal-mine was in 1888. 29015. Q. You havo not forgotten your cunning, I supposf', in connection with coal-mining 1 A. I do not t hink so. 29016. Q. H ave you followed the evidence in this investigation of t he Mount Kewbla explosion 1 A.. Yes, I ha.Te read part of what has been published in the daily p ress. 29017. Q. You do not know the lVIount K embln mine 1 A. I know where it is situated. 29018. Q. But you have not been in it 1 A. No, I have not.. 2!>019. Q. Now, from what you have read of the investigation, is there any information which you \\ish t o place before the Commission which will throw any light upon the inquiry 1 A. Well, I formed my r rivate opinion upon that matter. 29020. Q. Take the question of gas; what has been your experience of gas, as bearing upon this matter 1 A. I have been present in three explosions of fire-damp. 29021. Q. What mines were they 7 A. Two t:xplosions in ironstone mines, in the Skierspring Mines. 29022. Q. Were there any coal seams near that ironstone i A. ThP.re were not. 29023.Âˇ Q. And what was the effect of th e explosion 1 A. It was only very local, keeping in one district; and there was not ruuch damage done. A few men were burnt seriously; in one case three, and in another case four. 29024. Mr. Robertson.] Will you say where they were 1 A. At Skierspring, near Barnsley, Yorkshire. 29025. Q. In the carboniferous measures 1 L1 . Yes. 29026. Q. In the coal measures 1 11.. No coal mf'asures within hundreds of feet. 29027. Jlfr. Brtice Smitli.] Q. Well, yon have had experience of fire-damp in coal -mines 1 A., I have. 29028. (2. Was there any difference in t he manner of the explosion or the effect of it 1 A. No. 29029. Q. No difference 1 A. No difference. 29030. Q. You recognised just the same agent in both cases 1 A. Ob, yes; but to a rather greater or less deoree. 29031. Q. vVas it known t hat there was tire-damp present in this ironstone mine 1 A. F ire-damp had been found once ; but many years prior to the explosion. 29032. Q. And you were working, I presnme, with open lights 1 A. They were working with open lights 29033. Q. You say the men were burnt in lhosecases? A. Yes. 29034. (J. What were th e indications of burning there? A. Scorching of the skin, wh ich turned very brown ; and, in some cases, you would find this a great l'ising of the skin, which is like a Uister. 29035. Q. Were you in the locality when this explosion took place 1 A. I was. 29036. Q. Did you see the flame from it 1 A. Yes; a.nd rescued three men myself. 29037. 16825 29-5 Q

• 858

JJ'it11ess-J. D. Goodwin, 18 March, 1903.

t I I

•

29037. Q. And that bad the effect of raising the skin from the flesh and turning it brown 1 A. Yes, }jke blistering. 29038. Q. And what etfect had it on the hair 1 .A. Singeing. 29039. Q. Now, tbat is an account of both of the explosions you speak of1 A. I saw an explosion in Wharncliffe Silkstone Mine. 29040. Q. That was a coal-mine? A. Yes. 29041. Q. Was that a gas explosion 1 A. Yes. 29042. Q. What was the effect of that 1 A. Five men were burnt, three seriously, and two slightly. 29043. Q. Were you in the locality 1 A. I was in the next district to it. I was the first that rendered them aid. 29044. Q. And that originated with gas 1 A. That originated by gas being ignited by:a naked light. 29045. Q. Was coal.dust an element in that explosion 1 A. No; that was a mine where there was very little coal-dust, because all the holing is done in a band of fire-olA.y, which raises very little dust ; and it is one of these hard splint coals. 29046. Q. You have not had any personal experience of gas in Australian mines, have you 1 A. No. 2904 7. Q. I think you advocate the universal use of safety-lamps 1 A. I do. 29048. Q. Then you think there should be no exception 1 A. None whatever. No naked lights should go into a mine wherever gas has been found, even if it is years ago. 29049. Q. You think then that gRs should have been found in a. mine before they should be compelled to use safety-lamps 7 A. Once found, always there-liable to outbreaks. 29050. Q. Now, with regard to blasting, I think you wish to express some opinion upon that; first, with regard to material used for blasting, what is your view 1 A. Twenty-five years ago it was all black powder, and compressed powder. 29051. Q. What has been the result of the experience of t,he last five and twenty years in determining the particular explosive to be used 1 .A. I believe the last two explosions that I remember well were both caused by shot-firing; they were the Oaks and Mitchell's Main. 29052. Q. Shot.firing with gunpowded Ye~. 29053. Q. What do you advocate 7 il. No blasting whatever. 29054. Q. .AnJ you would get the coal down by other means 1 A. Yes. 29055. Q. You know what the "permitted explosi\·es" are in England 1 A. Yes, I have read them. 29056. Q. You do not even believe in using those 7 1t. No ; I do not believe in a.ny kind of explosives in a. mine. 29057. Q. How would you get coal down economically, commercially 7 A. By hewing. 29058. Q. And what do you suppose that would do to the cost, as comp1'red with· blasting 1 A. N othiog, if you introduced machinery and coal-cutters. I saw coal-cutters used thirty years ago. 20059. Q. Blasting is used in Great Britain to this day 1 A. In some mines; not where I come from. 29060. Q. Not in what county 7 A. Not in South Yorkshire, in the mines that I have mentioned; there is no blasting there. 29061. Q. Do you mean to say that blasting is not used at all 7 A. No; only in very special oases; nnd then the men are withdrawn from the mine. 29062. Q. That is the Loogwall system 1 A. Yes; I am versed in all three systems; the Bord and Pillar, the Longwall, and the End-on system. 29063. Q. It would be necessary to adopt those systems if blasting were a.boli!ihed 1 A. It would, certainly. 29064. Q. You do not know of any ol~ection to those systems being applied to tho .Australian mines 1 A. No; I have been in some Australian mines where they could ndopt the Longwall system. 2906f>. Q. vVuere is that 1 A. West Wallsend. 29066. Q. Ts that common to all Australian mines1 A. I cannot say. 29067. Q. From what you saw in tbnt mine, yon think there would be no difficulty in working on that principle 1 A. The system of working coal depends very much on the class of roof that you have to contend with. For instance, take HoylanJ Silkstones; it was impossible to work that on tho Longwall system, or on the pillar and stall system; they worked it on the End-on system; that is, making all their travelling ways through the roof, that they worked away from them. 29068. Q. In all those cases it is a quPstion of roof 1 A. Yes. 29069. Q. In West Wallsend you saw the condiLions, and you think t,bey would be fa\'ourable to the Longwall system 1 A. Yes. 29070. Q. But you will not express an opinion on the southern mines 1 A. No, I would not. I have inspected a mine on the suuth where it could be worked on the Longwall system; and not very far from Kembla either. But that was a fiasco; it was not a mine at all. It is where they built that new jetty; I think they call it South Kembla. 29071. 1lfr. Wade.] Q. More gold t.han coal, was not it 1 A. I think it was. 29072. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. You bave formed the opinion that no miner should be allowed to fire a shot 1 11. No. 29073. Q. Shots should only be fired by authorised people1 A. Yes. 29074. Q. And then only when the working places have been tested for gas1 A. Yes. 290i5. Q. Do you believe in watering about where shots are to be fi red 1 A. No; I do not think it is ~ecessary in working places. I believe in travelling ways and haulage roads being watered; but my opinion 1s that there is not that amount of dust that scientitic men say there is in t.be mine 29076. Q. Are you a reader of coal-min ing literature now1 A. When I have time to do so. 29077. Q. Yon do not know, a.coordiog tot.he latest authorities, what is the minimum quantity of coal-dust necessary to produce an explosion 7 A. No; not scientifically. 29078. Q. You know that it is recognised as a. greater danger now than it was twenty-6 \'0 years aP"o 1 0 A. Oh, .yes; but it is not the primary cause of explosions though. 29079. Q. What, in your opinion, is the primary cause 1 A. Fire-damp. 29080. Q. And, in youl' opiniQn, I see here, that is the first thing to be looked for; first, fire-damp, second lamps, third, ventila.tion 1 A. Yes. 29081. Q. Now, what ~s you~ opinion upon the snbject of ·ventilating old workings 1 A. Old workings I Well.' I am a great belu~v~r ~n 11tll aba..qdo.qed workings being properly bulk-hes.cled off. I t is impossible to veptila.te the~. · 29082,

859 Witneu-J. D. Goodwin, 18 March, 1963.

!a9082. Q. ·That is what is called "se!lling off" 1 A. Yes; that is adopted in many of the large' mines down in Yorkshire. When a large area of coal is worked out, that district is completely sealed oft: . 29083. Q. So that nothing can come from it 1 A. Nothing at all. If you have bulkheads of brickwork, with 20 feet fillings in between the bulkheads, it is impossible for any fall of workings to force out those bulkheads. 29084. Q. Is that a very expensive process 1 A. It is carried out rega.rdless of expense. 29085. Q. And you advocate that 1 A. I a.dvocate safety first, before expense. 29086. Q. You have found gas in old workings 7 A. Yes; many times. 29087. Q. You do not think it is sufficient to have an outlet from the goaf into the return airways, taking care that there :i.re no openings into the intake ail-ways 1 A. Well, if that was done, it would be only on condition that those workings had direct communication to the return airway, and that that return airway did not pass where men were working. . 29088. Q. I think you have some experience of fire-damp being found in a mine in which it bad never been found before, and an explosion taking place by a fall 1 A. Yes. 29089. Q. Naked lights were used in that case7 A. Yes. 29090. Q. What was the extent of the fall 1 A. Not a very large one; not more than the space of this room. Five men were seriously burnt.. 29091. Q. Just let us hear what took place; a fall took place; what did that lead to 1 A. The fall took fllace, and forced the fire-damp out of t he goaf; and, about 100 yards away from where the fall took place, there was a man working with a naked light ; and men were working further along. An explosion took place at the first man's light, and the men further along wet'e burnt also. 29092. Q. How far did that explosion extend 1 A. I was in another district more than a. quarter of a mile away, and I felt the force of the explosion; and I bad some idea where iL had come from, and I made for the place. 29093. Q. And how far was the naked light from the outlet of the goaH A. About 100 yards, be was working, from where the fall of roof took place. 29094. Q. And after the fall, were there evidences of any injury, any forcfls1 A. None whatever; not. with a very small matter like that. 29095. Q. Was anybody hurt in that explosion 1 A. Five men were seriously burnt. 29096. Q. Then the conclusion you came to was that this fire.damp was in this goaf, up in the roof, I suppose 1 A. Yes. 29097. · Q. Could it be got at beforehand with safety 1 A. It could have been tested and found there ; but i t was never thought of. 29098. Q. And how could it have been got at 1 A. By ventilation. 29099. Q. And what height was it1 A. Not many feet; a few feet. 29100. Q. Supposing it had been sealed off, and the fall he.d taken place, what would have been the effect 1 A. In that case it would not be sealed off, because it was in the original working place, on the LongwaJl system. That was a working in progress, not an abandoned working. 29101. Q. Had that place been inspected 1 A. No, it had not. Gas was nevflr found in the mine prior to that time. 29102. Q. If it had been inspected, you say it would have been found, and carried off by ventilation, and the explosion preventecl 1 A. Yes. 29103. Q. Would you advocate old workings being inspected for gas 1 A. Yes; every cavity in the roof should be inspected. 29104:. Q. Where the cavity rises to great heights, and there is a likelihood of further falls, would it be safe to go in 7 A. I have been in many time to a height of 20 feet. 29105. Q. And can you ventilate to that height 1 A. No; that is the difficulty. 29106. Q. You have formed an opinion as to the relative merits of fans and furnaces, as means of ventilation 7 A. Yes. 29107. Q. Which do you prefer 1 A. Certainly I should be greatly in favour of fans for ve~1tilatioo. 29108. Q. That is, if you were starting a mine 1 11. Yes; of course the old system of ventilating with furnaces is dying out in all the large coal districts in England. 29109. Q. D o you admit that some mines are well-ventilated with furnaces 1 A. Yes; I know one of the finest mines in the world that was ventilated with a furnace; but they have now put in a fan. 29110. Q. What is the name of that mine 1 A. Whamcliffe Silkstone. 29111. Q. What was the fault that led to the adoption of the fan 1 A. On account of their ex.tensive underground workings. 29112. Q. The mine was being developed very rapidly; and the fan became a necessary development 'I A. No doubt about that. That has been erected since I came out to Australia. I have a photograph of it; here, which I will show to the Commission. 29113. Q. You do not think ventilation a remedy for all the difficulties of coal-mining 1 A. No. Ventilation is very good, but there are other things to be taken into consideration as well as ventilation. 29114. Q. And which do you think comes first as a precaution 1 A. The adoption of safety-lamps, 29115. Q. You put that first i A. First of everything. Abolish blasting second. 29116. Q. Now, I have gone through your letter. If there is anything else you would like to say, bearing upon this inquiry, and suggested by the evidence that you have read, you may state it yourself 1 A. I do not think I can make any further suggestion than I have made in the letter to you. As regards the adoption of safety-lamps, I t hink I was the first per;;on in New South Wales that ever introduced a modern safety-lamp into the colony. I took great interest in the Bulli explosion; and I got out a safety-lamp from Eogln.ncl and submitted it to the Minister for Mines; and I have correspondence here to-day in which be thanked rue for the part I took in it. 29117. Q. Which lamp was tbati A. The Museler. 29118. Q. And what year was that 1 A. 1887. 29119. Q. Have you, in the whole course of your experience, beard of a case in which a fall, of itself, without gas, and without coal-dust explosions, has produced such a heat, by reason of the force, that it burned people; that is to say, singed their hair and burned their skin in the manner described by you 7 ..4. No; but I can give you a very important instance of that. I well remember the great fall ofrooi in the

Oa.ks,

•

, I'

860 Wit1te88-J. D. Goodwin, 18 March, 1903.

1.· I

~ /

r•

Oaks, in 1877, when every lamp in that mine was extinguished by thl'l fal l. Men ,~e!e k nocked about, and skips were k nocked abont, and some were slightly injured ; but there was no expJos1on of fire-damp or coal-dust 29120. Q. Was there any burning 7 A. No. , . . 29121. Q. Or singeing of the hair1 A. No, and no explosion. 29122. Q. Was there anything in its effects that corresponded with what you told us of 1.0 th~t other m! ne where the gas was found in ironstone 7 A. No. The Oaks is considered to be a fiery. mme 1? Yorkshire. I remember that great calamity in 1866. They sunk a new sha ft at Ardsley, and m opening out new workings in the course of years there was a g reat amount of worked-out mine; and the first fall of roof took place, and there was a panic in the mine. There was a concussion of the air. It was a ":'ell-worked mine, worked with safety-lamps; a nd there was no explosive used in it. There is no doubt 1t caused a panic. Some men were knocked about by being k nocked against tubs and props ; but there was no explosion of fire.damp, and no explosion of coal-dust; and no one burnt. 29123. Q. What was the extent of the fall 1 A. I could not say; but it was a very large one. 29124. Q. An acre 1 A . More than that. It was the very first fall. They had been working then for some years. 29125. Q. What distance did it fall 7 A. It was a 9-foot seam: 29126. Q. A nd the seam was out 7 A. Yes. 29127. Q. .And no pillars left in 7 A. There were, in certain cases; but this was a portion where the pillars I were out. 29128. Q. It was a. fall of 9 feet over more than 11,n acre area i A. Y es. 291 29. Q. Was it a sudden fa.11 1 A. Y es. 29130. Q. And what was the size of the outlet 7 A. I could not say. 29131. Q. At all events, the force wa.s sufficient to overturn skips, and men, and injure men 1 A. There were some men slightly injured by being knocked about. 29132. Q. But not an instance of burning the hair or burning the skin as you ha,e described 1 A. None. I was not the.re, of course. Cross examination by Mr. Wade : 29133. Q. You say you were not there 1 A. I was not there at the time; but I remember the case well. 29134. Q. Then it is simply hearsay,- it is not your own knowledge 1 A. I have the knowledge that it occurred. 291 35. Q. But the details you have no personal knowledge of 1 A. No. 29136. Q. You do not know how the roof fell, or under what circumstances 1 A. I tell you I was not present in the mine at the tiwe. ·. 29137. Q. Now, you say t.hat in one of these fire-damp explosions t he men bad A. raising of the skin like blistering 1 A. Yes. 29138. Q. Were those what you would call cc water blisters'' 1 A. Yes; they would take place a little nfter, some fe w hours a.f ter, burning. 29139. Q. Are those what you call "water blisters " 1 A. Y es. 29140. Q. Do you mean with water in t hem 1 A. I do. 2914 l. Q. And you get t he same kind of wa ter blister from a sea.Id 1 A . Just thG same. 29142. Q. A nd that is a distinctive mark of burning by flame, is it 1 A. Not always. I have SP.en men burnt to that degree that you could not recognise them. 291 43. Q. There is no chance of blistel'ing then; the moisture is all gone ;-H is all charring 7 A. Yes. Slight burning in an explosion wouJd caurn a. blister; but where it is a. severe burning you will find it is c:harre<l. 29114. Q. If flame is applied t.o t he skin, and it does not char the body absolutely, it will draw the moisture to the surface 1 A. My experience of the bodies that I have seen after an explosion is t hat, not only is the hair singed off, and t he skin burnt very brown, but, if you find slight burns on some parts of the body, you will find that great blisters will arise. rExamination concluded.]

(MR. Wade asked that Mr. Mingaye should be recalled.)

Mn. J. C. H. MINGAYE, previously sworn, was further examined, as under:Fur ther examination by Mr. Wade:2914.5. Q. Did you make any examimition of coal-dust for Mr. Atkinson as far back as August last, apart from what you have told us a.bout 1 A. I only examined twelve samples for Mr. Atkinson; no others. 2914.6. Q. Who is the Mineralogist ; -ar~ you the Mineralogist to the M ines Department7 A. No. 29147. Q. Who is 1 A. Mr. Card. 29148. 1lfr. Wade.] On page 55 of Mr. Atkinson's evidence at the Inquest he says tha.t he gave some samples of coked coal-dust to t he Mineralogist ; -I want to know if that is the present witness 1 29 149. iJfr. Atkinson.] No. It was Mr. 0'1rd.

LExamination

concluded. J

MR. THOMAS PAR T ON was sworn, and examined as under:(This witness was called by the Commission, who asked Mr. Bruce Smith, as a matter of convenience, to conduct his examination-in-chief.)

Exaruination·in·chief by Mr. B r uce Smith :29150-l Q. What is your n:irue 7 A. Thomas Parton. 29152. Q. A nd you are wl1at7 A. Mining Engineer. 29153. Q. I think you are Consulting Mining Engineer at the present time to one or two mines, are you not 1 A. Fot· the Metropqlitan Colliery; and I visit other collieries occasionally. 29104.

861.

Witness-T. Parton, 18 March, 1903:

29154.-. Q. And I think you are one of the examiners for the Colliery .Managers' certificates under the Coal Mines Regulation Act 1 A. U oder the Coal Mines Re"'ulation Act. 29 155. Q. Now, what has been your experience in coal-~ining 1 A. Over tLirty yf'.ara in active management; but I have been connected with mines for forty yearR. 29156. Q. And had you practical experience from early life 1 A. From the age of 15 I have gone through every department of it. · 29157. Q. Where were you Manager first 1 A. In Staffordshire. 29158. Q. In what mines 1 A. Rough Hay Colliery, Priest6eld Colliery, Aldridge Colliery, and others. 29159. Q. How many years ~n England 1 A. Over twenty, really thirty-five years from the time I was 18 years of age, but active management for about thirty years. 29160. Q. Had you active management in New South Wales 1 A. For ten years in the \.Valla.rah Colliery. I de,eloped it from nothing, under a ten years' agreement, as General Manager and Manager. 29161. Q. Now, I believe you visited the Mount Kembla Mine after the explosion, did you not 7 A. Yes; I went and offered my assistance, and spent the whole of one day there, on the Saturday following the explosion. 29162. Q. Had you an opportunity of observing things, apart from assisting in the rescue work 1 A. Oh, re?. 29163. Q. Whom did you go over the mine with 1 A. Mr. Rae, of Balmain Colliery, and Mr. Jarvie, bis assistant, and Mr. Littlejohn, and Mr. Cater, who is now dead, and several others-about seven or eight others. 29164. Q. That is one day you spent in it? A. The whole of one day. 29165. Q. I think you entered by the Daylight Tunnel 1 A. Yes: we brought out thirteen bodies that day, . I think. 29166. Q. What part of the mine did you devote yonr attention to 1 A. I cannot remember the district, because I was then a stranger; but we went up the rope road, they said, as far as the No. 2 Right, to look for some bodies there. 29167. Q. On to the main road 1 A . Yes, and travelled ovet"thewreck to these places [indicating on map]. 29168. Q. That is in No. 11 A. Yes. 29169. Q. You found everything in a very disturbed condition, did yon not 1 A. Yes. 29170. Q. Did you notice any bodies that appeared to you to be burnt 1 A. Y es. 29171. Q. Whose were they 1 A. There was one body in particular that I handled. 29172. Q. Whose was it 1 A. They said they were Morris and son: there were an old man and a young one. Morris was the name given to U1e. Anyway, I noticed the young man was burnt very much about the arm. The skin was in ribbons. I touched it, and called the attention of Mr. Rae to it. The skin was blackened and burnt and curled up, and twisted up like ribbons hang~g down. 29173. Q. And the hair1 A. The hair was singed. 2917 4. Q. Have you had any experience of an explosion in which there was undoubtedly flame, in the old country 1 A. I have had a great many experiences of mine explosions; and I have seen a great many dead bodies, as the result of explosions. 29175. Q. Where there had been flame 1 A. Oh, yes, a great many. 29176. Q. Were the indications on this body similar to those you had seen 1 A. Similar to some of them. 29177. Q. Have you any doubt whatever, from your experience, that the effect on the skin and hair of this young fellow was produced by actual .Bame 1 A. No, that was my impression. 29178. Q. And based on all that experience 1 A. Certainly. 29179. Q. Have you had any experience of large falls producing important" results 1 .11. Yes. 29180. Q. Just tell me the largest you know of 1 A. I cannot give you the exact area, because I have had so many, especially in the thick coal district, where the coal is 30 feet thick, and where \Ve take out, not only first workings, but two or three workings afterwards j and in some cases we have had tremendous falls of rock there. 29181. Q. Name one 7 A. One at Whyley. . 29182. Q. Can you give me an idea of the area that fell in that case 1 A. I suppase it would be over a couple of acres, probably; but it did not come all together. 29183. Q. What deptb did it fall 7 A. We could not see the top of it. It came in a circle, and the mine was 150 yards deep. 29184. Q. What was the space that was open before the fall 7 A. Not the 30 feet, but probably about 16 or · 17 feet. 29185. Q. But there wa.s that space for the base of the upper part of it to fall 1 A. Yes. There was a lot of rubbish on the bottom. 29186. Q. Have you any idea of the time over which it extended 1 LL It was some little time. It commenced fi rst like a creep, cracking the timber, and bursting the pillars j and then the men were withdrawn j and then it came like thunder, and it lasted some time. · 29187. Q. What do you call some time 1 A. Perhaps five or ten minutes. 29188. Q. What was the effect of that fall 1 A. The effect was that it frightened us, and blew the ligl1ts out, and some of the men ran helter-skelter, and that was all. 29189. Q. Were any of the men moved without running1 A. No. I was in the mine: it frightened me to death nearly. 29190. Q. But you were not knocked about 7 A. No ; but you could feel the concussion ancl the force distinctly. 29191. Q. Were the tubs knocked about 7 A. They were blown, but not off the rails. 29192. Q. There was no burning1 A. No. 29193. Q. What is another large one you know oH A. Another one was in a different seam altogether, what we call a new mine and fire-clay coal, two seams coming together in a certain position in a certain part of the district, and forming a seam 11 feet thick. That was worked out en tirely, exceptinP" small pillars about 9 or 10 feet square. j and after we had worked out a certain area we would filch all w~ could from these small areas on purpose to throw them in; and sometimes it would stand, and apparently we could not throw it in; and in that case we bad very extensive falls. 29194. Q. What do you mean by "throw it in" 1 A. Letting the roof fall. 29195. Q. Over what area were those extensive falls7 A. From an acre upwards. 29196.

862 Witness-T. Parton, 18 March, 1903.

1,' I"'

29196. Q. Now, did any of those falls that you have ever met with do a. great deal of damage by the concussion and the force1 A. No. They would put lights out very often. That is very common. And they would ra.ise clouds of dust and frighten the men occasionally. 29197. Q. But they would never injure anybody pbysically1 A. No, never. 29198. Q. What opinion do you hold as to the accumulation of gas in the upper strata above the coal,Eeams 1 A. Do you mean in the solid 1 Âˇ 29199. Q. Yes. A. Well, to start with, it is quiteirupossil.Jle for a sandstone of any ki~~ to generat~ fire-da~p. 29200. Q. To generate it 1 A. Sandl:!tone, as you know, is composed of quartz-s1hca.-:-and ~1~ged ~1th oxide of iron, and may cor.tain clayey matter; but it is impossible for it to generate CH4 ; but it 1s possible to find fire-damp in the strata abol'e coal-seams, coming out of the 6ssure3 and cracks yards and yards before you get to the coal. 29201. Q. You meau above 7 A. Ye3. Of coun:e the gas has gone through the fissures into the sandstone. For instance, in t he Balmain sinking in the sandstones, I suppose about 1,000 feet above the coal-seam, they met with gas; but they found some vegetable matter, pieces of coal pipes, and little thin shales, containing a lot of fossils, showing that there was vegetable mattar which batl generated the gas: but they went down later towards the main seam, and they got yards and yards of gas from the seam. 29202. Q. In the sandstone 7 A. In the shales and sandstones; and as they got nearer it pushed the whole bottom of the shaft up bodily. What they l1ad been blowing (blasting) before, now, for two or three turns' work with ten ruen 1 they could simply shovel it up. It was pressed up by the gas. I saw it myself. 29203. Q. Did you form the opinion that;, in all the cases except where the fossils and vegetable matter were, the gas had come out of the coak,eam and worked into the fissures 1 11. It is impossible for it to have come from anywhere else. 29204. Q. Then it is not an uncommon thing to find 1 ...4. No. 29205. Q. To find itin the strataabovethe coal1 A. That is very common; but it is given off from the coal-seam. 2~206. Q. Now, take the Mount Kembla. Mine, is it feasible that gas should have accumulated in the strata. above that seam 1 ..d.. I do not think there would be any accumulation in that sandstone there. 29207. Q. In the fissures, if there are any 1 A. I do not trunk so, there. I think that gas might accumulate in the old workings, in the waste, from the coal, and fill up the top part of it. 29208. Q. You mean up in the apex, so to speak, of the opening 1 A. Yes. 29209. Q. Even where the sandstone had fallen a.w,ty 1 ..d.. It is qnite possible for gas to have accumulated there, from the coal-seam and the pillars left, at a spot where it could not reasonably be examined with the ordinary examination. It is quite possible for it to have been there for a long time without anybody knowing it, and even after the ordinary examinations had been made; and it is quite possible for ga.s to have beeu there in a position where it would not be safe for men to examine. It is quite possible, if you pass a current of air over the waste, that the air will not go rig ht up, and, above a certain line, you may be able to find gas any time; though, underneath that, the current will almost blow the light out. I have seen that many times. So it is quite possible, that, even with the goaf ventilated, there may have been gas there. 29210. Q. So that a subsequent fall would force that out 7 A. Yes. 29211. Q. You did no~ know you would be called as a witness ; and you have been listening for some time to the evidence here 1 A. I have been trying to learn something. 29212. Q. You heard Dr. Robertson say something a.bout a wind-blast: what opinion have you formed as to its feasibility, as an explanation of what you beard resulted from the disaster, and what you saw yourself in the mine 1 A. Well, from my own experience in all kinds of mining that you can mention, and from what I have read-and I have read most of the literatu re that bas been written about these subjects-and from what I have heard in this Court, I do not see anything that favours that theory at at all. I think it is altogether fanciful. 29213. Q. Have you seen anything your.;elf, or heard anything in the course of the case, which leads you to think it very improbable 1 A. I think it most improbable. 29214. Q. Have you heard anyth ing, in the cour.se of the case or of the evidence, which you think would contradict the possibility of such a cause, as accounting for everything 'l ...4. I think that what I saw myself, of the disastrous affects that I saw in the road, a.nd the piling of t he skips together, and what I saw on the surface at the entrance-all that could be accounted for by an ordinary explosion-the effects of an ordinary gas explosion. 29215. Q. Could it be accounted for by a. blast of wind only 1 A. I do not think so, for one moment. 29216. Afr. Wade.] Did you say gas only 1 A. Gas and coal.dust. 29217. Jfr. Bruce Smith.] Why not by wind 1 A. I do not think it would produce sufficient force, under those conditions of a fall, to do it. There are too many open spaces for the air to pass into. If you could compress. the force of a big fall in:o a tunnel, or funnel, or pipe, then you might get tremendous effects; but, when you have all these outlets for it to go into, I do not see how it can generate a force or hea.t such as has been mentioned. 29218. Q. Supposing the only outlet of that goaf was what we call the 4th Right ; the dimensions of that are 6 ft. x 12 ft. Supposing that were the only outlet, what would you say then as to the possibility of the wind-blast producing the effects that you saw 7 A. I do not think so, for a moment. . 20219. Q. Now, apart from these effects of force, are there any other effects which you saw, and which you have hearJ evidence of in this Court, which, in your opinion, could not be produced by the blast 7 .A. Well, the blast could not produce flame to singe the brattice cloth, or to singe the hair of the beads of these men, or to burn the skin to the t:xtent that it will curl up as I saw it, and in ribbons-I do not think it would, for one moment. 29220. Q. Have you l1eard enough of the case, added to what you saw, to form an opinion as to the cause of this disaster, taking what you saw, what you read before you came into Court, and what you heard in the Coul't 1 A. I can only express an opinion, not knowing the details of those plans; but, from what I have foll~wed and digested, it is quite feasible t hat gas existed in that gonf to an extent, and that there was a fall winch ÂŁ?reed that gas through thil open space you speak of on to the nearest lights, when there would be an e:cplos1on; and then that the coal.dust-you know it would lay hold of the coal.dust-would, of course, increase the force of the explosion ; and it would account for the effects which I have heard mentioned and which I saw myself. 29221. Jfr. Wade.] Q. What would lay hold of the coal-dust 1 A. The ga<i. 29222. il:fr. Bruce Smith. J Q. The lighted gas 1 A. Yes. 29223.

1.' ~ I

•

868

Wi4n.eu-T. Parton, 18 Maroh, 100&

29223. Q. Now, in your opinion, how would that gas trail out1 come out, from that goaf on to the naked light 1 A. It would be forced out; I cannot tell you exactly. It would be the s~me as you force wind out. 29224. Q. Would it come out in one block, a.s it were, or would it trail down 7 A. It might trail down, to some extent. 29225. His Honor.] Mr. P arton has not seen the plan; if you put the question to him on the plan, it will be more readily answered by him. . 29226. M1·. Bruce Smith] ( Ajte1· explaining plan to wit~ss): Q. Now, how do you suppose that the gas would come down to that point (Morrison's light) 1 A. It would be forced from there (4th Right), and the point would touch the light there (4th Left). 29227. Q. Would the centre of it b5 at the point a t which the tongue caught, or would the £re travel up towards the 4th Right 1 ~9228. Mr. Wade.] Please do not lead. 29229. His Honor.] It would be better to a sk Mr. Parbo where he thinks the opera.ti ve centre of the explosion wonld be, under those circumstances. 29230. Mr. Bruce S niitli.] Q. Where would the operative centre of the f'xplosion be, if the gas came from the 4th Right and was ignited at the 4th L eft 7 A. If the gas was trailing some distance down there, tailed out to the light, then the centre would not be where the light was; but it would come back into the body of the gas and t he force would be from there. 29231. Q. Then, ~hen the gas was lighted and that explosion -took place, I take it that that would raise . coal-dust and ignite the coal-dust 1 A. Certainly. 29232. Q. And then would you expect one or a series of explosions1 A. That would depend upon the extent of the coal-dust in the mine; it may be ju patches, and it may not; it all depends on the conditions of the coal-clust there. . 29233. Q. Now you have heard a number of recommendations : What is your opinion as to the advisability of r equiring deputies and shot-firers to pass an examination 1 Does Your Honor wish Mr. Parton to be examined on t hese 1 29234. His Honm·.J I should imagine Mr. Pu.rton can give us very rnluable suggestions on various matters. 29235. Mr. ll1·uce S mith.] Very well, Your Honor. 29236. Q. What do you say about that 1 A. There is no serious objection to the deputies and the firetnen. having to pass an examination; at the same time, I think a competent Manager would be able to judge best who was most competent to appoint as a fireman; but ! see no serious ol.jection, supposing that the examination is carried ont properly. There must be a condition, to start, with, th:it the candidates must have had experience in that actual work; otherwise, yon might get young fellows who were very smart and would answer every question I could put to them as well as I can myself. They must have had experience in the mine; and then. we could test them as to their experience in the mine, and see wba.t they had done and how they shaped. 29237. Q. You mean that a purely theoret ical examination will not do 1 A. It must be a practical examina tion. You may have a man there who does not understand t he nature of gases: but he may understand t he behaviour of them as well as you do. 29238. Mr. Robertson.] Q. I Slippose the only man who can testify as to tho experience of the candidate wou ld be the Managed A. Yes. 29239. Q. After all, it comes back to the Manager 1 A. Yes. I say the Manager is the best judge of the men ; there is no doubt of that; but, at the same time, if you have examinations, it will raise the men's self-respect; they will have some idea of their responsibilit ies. They are prond of having passed an examination; and it make:,; them better men, in one sense ; but, at the same time, I do think that the Manager himself would be the best judge of who is a competent man. 29240. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. That all depends on the competency of the Manager himself ~ A. Yes. 29241. Q. And he would either have to have a. lengthy experience of them, or put them through this examinat ion himself i A. Yes, seeing his responsibility, and what is required by the Act, he should have that sense. 29242. Q. I suppose you have found, as i)fanager, that you have had very good men who have come to your colliery, who may have been well qualified for the position of deputy, but of whom :you yourself had n o personal knowledge; and you could not, from your own personal experience of these persons, have appointed them as deputies or shot firers 1 A . I have h::i.d strangers, whom I have not known u.i all, whom I ha,·e found splendid men. 29243. Q. But a certificate of having passed this examinat ion would take the place of your personal experience in that case 1 A. I would not rely upon that for a moment. 29244. Q. Would you regard that as an additional security 1 A. I t is a security to a certain extent, if t he examination is carried out properly. I would not pass a candidate nnless he could prove to me t hat he had gone through th e mill and bad had experience. You must remember there a re a great many mines in the nor th where there are splendid men who have never seen gas, and have never handled a so.fety-lamp, and never fired shots. 29245. Q. Do you think that the examination might be held in two divisions, and certificates be issued for deputies to take charge of mines where gas is known to be given off ; and another ciass of certificate issued to those qualified to take charge of mines where gas is not known to be given off1 A. If you do not do somt1thing like that, you will then have to exclude the men who have never had an oppor tunity of getting experience of gas. 29246. Q. If that were done, would not t hat get over the difficulty 1 ,1. Y es. There would be some very good men who would be excluded by an examination. (The Commission then adjourned until 2 p.m.] AFTERNOON.

(On resuming at 2 p.m., Mr. W. R. Pratt attended to take shorthand notes of the evidence and proceedings.) THOMAS PARTON, previously sworn, was further examined, as under:E xamination by Mr. Bruce Smith (continued) :2924 7. Q. Y ou were going to say something before lunch that r equired a little consideration 1 A. That was about having two certificates. 29248. Q. Mr. Ritchie made a suggestion to you about two cla.s$es Qf certifica,tes for th{) deputies and the shot-tit ers? ,A, That would complicate matters. i9249;

'E64 Witne~ -T. Parton, 18 March, 1903.

29249. Q. What sort of an examination would you subject these men to 1 A. First, they should know something of the Special Rules which apply to the position, and also somethiug of the General R ules; and then it should be a condition that they should have bad experience iu gas to some extent. 29250. Q. Practical experience 1 A. Yes. And then, of course, the Examiners would put them through an oral examination as to that experience, and what they had done before. 29251. Q. Would you subject tbem to a written examination 1 A. No, to an oral examination. 29252. Q. As a matter of fact., bow often do the Examiners now examine the Under Managers. A. Twice a. year. 29253. Q. Would it be practicable for the Board to hold special meetings, if a Manager wanted on an emergency to test a particular man for the position of deputy nnd shot-firer 1 il. If the Board of Examiners decided that it should be done, they would call a n:eeting to do the work. 29254. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Regardless of the expense 1 A. That, would be a matter for them to consider. They would have to consider the expense. "vVe should respond to it, if possible. 29255 . .lfr. Brure 'mitlt.] There might not be a. nuruber of already certificated men in a mine from whom the Manager might .wish to choose a deputy. 1f a certificate were a condition, these men would have to wait until they got a certificate: or do I understand that t hey could pass in anticipation. Would it be practicable for the Manager to advise a number of men that they might, at some future timE', be selected, and that they should pass the necessary examination 1 A. I presume that there would be twel \'8 month!.' interval between the intimation that they desired to l1ave a.n examination a.nd the actual examination ta.king place; and they might be able to make arrangements to prepare in the interval. 29256. Q. e have been told by the Manager 0f tbe Metropolitan Mine that, whatever examination a miner passed through, if he had not had experience in th:1,t particular mine, it would be impossible to choose him as n. deputy 1 A. I would not go so far as that. You might get a deputy who bas. bad experience of gas and long experience of mining; and he would be quite competent to fill that appointment. Gas is gas wherever yoa find il. If a man has e\"er had experience with gas, you can bring that to bear in any mine. 29257. Q. You heard Mr. Jeffries give his evidence; and he was particular in showing the mode by .which their deputies were chosen from the miners. Do you think it likely that the Manager of the 1\letropolita.n Mine would take a man from outside 1 ...1. Many Managers would not do so. 29258. Q. Can you unde~tand why 1 A. Certainly. 29259. Q. Then l\fr. J effries' argument would recommend itself to you 1 A. They give preference to men who have hacl experience in their own mine, but it does not follow from that that there are not men outside. 29260. Q. He says that he would not bind himself to take a man from outside, simply because he had passed an examination and knew how to find gas 1 A. Not merely because be had pa!';sed an examination. 29261. iv.fr. Ritchie.] Q. Would not the same argument apply, with greater force, to the case of Managers and Under Managers 1 A. Yes. 29262. 1llr. Bruce Smitlt.] Q. You say that you think the Ma.nagE>r can test the capabilities of a miner j ust as well as the Examiners 1 A. I have said that .a competent Manager would be the best judge of drputics. 29263. Q. He would have to go through the criticism of the lHanaged A. Yes. 29264. Q. Do you think that it would restrict the chances of the miners themselves, where they might be practically competent., but might not be able to get through a stiff exam ination 1 A. I do not say that there would be a technical examination. 29265. Q. It is in one way. You would examine a man theoretically as to the finding of gas 1 A. That would be a. practical examination. He might be a good shot-firer, without knowing anything of the constituents of gas. 29266. Q. You would ex11.m ine him 1 A. We should have to ask him where he had had his experience, ancl whether he had seen gas, aed where he had seen it, and other details. 29267. Q. Under these circumstances, would not the certificate of a manager be quite as good 1 .A. I sai,l that I think that a. competent Ma.nager is the best judge of a deputy, but that I have no objection to the issuing of a certificate. ~9268. Jlfr. Ritchie.] Q. You said tLat a Manager ought to be competent to make a selection ; but if, after the disaster at Mount Kerobla, o. person was appointed who had no practical experience of gas, would that show competency on the part of the Manager 1 A. I should think be would be incompetent. 29269. Q. Would you regard an appointment like that, after what has happenE'd at Mount Kembla, as a. proper appointment 1 A. Certainly not. 29270. 1lb路. Bruce Smitlt.] Q. Would yon recommend that the check-inspecters be subrniltecl to a similar examination 1 A. They ought to be more competent to pass an examination than the deputies and firemen, because they have to judge as to the safe condition of the mine . . 29271. Q. Amongst other things, they have to test the a.id A. Yes. 29272. Q. Do you think it is as necess:,ry that they should pass a.n examination as t hn cand idates for deputies and fi remen's positions 1 A. I would not go so far as that. It is for the miners to select the check-inspectors; and, if they a.re satisfied, well and good. We have sufficient chrck outside ; we wish to sa.t.isfy the Department. Amongst the miner:1 are plenty of practical men who are quite competent. to j udge of the safe condition of a mine. 29273. Q. You think that the examination is made for the miners own safety, and that that is sufficient inducement to them to exercise care1 A. They probably think that they can get better men than Lhose who have certificates. 2927 4. Q. As to finding gas-should it be a purely voluntary matter with lhe miners whether they report gas 1 A. Tbey shoulJ report all cases of gas. 29275. Q. Do you think it should be made compulsory 1 A. Yes. 2927 6. Q. That is for the wen's own safety 1 A. Yes. 29277. Q. Do you think that the anxiety for their own safety is not sufficient- ':;hould there be a corupnlsory rueasu re - - [intP1路rupted]. 29278. ,l/r. Rite/tie.] Q. 'l'hat is so now 1 A. I know that many miners see gas and do uot report it. I would make it compulsory that miners should report all gas found. 292 79. Mr. Bruce Smitlt.l Q. H ow 1 A. Dy a special rule and a penalty. 29280. .llr. Ritcl,ie.] Q. I t is now ahsolatt-ly compulsory on miners to 1eport gus1 A. Tbe safoty 0f the ruen may depend on the reporting of gas l,y the miners. It is a matter which affects the management and the miners alike. 路 29281.

1路 I

I rt,

865

Witnesa-T. Parton, 18 March, 1903.

29281. Jl?·. Bruce S,11.ith.] Q. The question is, whether tbe safety of .the miners is sufficient to lead them to choose competent men as check,inspectot·s-do you think so 1 Jl. I tbink they will do so. 29282. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. The miners sa.y that there is great difficulty in getting competent men to take up the duties of check inspector. I want to ask you whether the miners should be restricted in their choice by the present Rule 39, which contains the words "Not being mining engineers," thus debarring them from appointing tho~e per.sons 7 A. I think that mining engineers who represent the mine owners should be distinct from the miners entirely. It may affect, as Mr. Rohertson said, the share list, if they aee the development in ~ertain ~1ines. Supposing .I was enga 5ed on a check report on a certain mine. would go there and see things which the ordinary mmer should not see-as regards faults. I would go rnto town; and I would be asked, "Do yon know anything about such and such a mine-is it all right. Have you not some difficulty there that would affect the shares." I should not divulge what I had seen in the performance of my duty ; but there are a great many who would do so. 29283. Q. In your profession 7 A. In my profession. I say it applies to every profession. 29284. Q. Is that your objection 7 11. That is the objection I ha.Ye. It is best left to the miners to have their own men. Engineers are employed by the owners, and might favour the interests of tl\e owners. 29285. Q. Do you not think that the miners might appoint a mining engineer to do the work regularly for them 1 .A. If they appointed a man to do that duty for them, and to do nothing else, it would be a. different matter. 29286. Q. Would they do it fearlessly and honestly 7 A. Some of them would. 29287. Q. Speak for yourself1 A . I would do it honestly; but there are mining engineers who are unscrupulous in these matters; and for pounds, shillings and pence they would do anything or say anything. 29288. Q. Ought not this work to be done by competent persons 1 .A. You have among the miners good, capable, men, of sound judgment, who are quite competent to go through a mine and see that operations are properly carried on. With mining er.gineers, some persons may consider one a good ·man and ten others may consider him a bad man. 29289. Q. There may be good men amongst the miners who are looking for under.manager's posi~ions 1 A. I think you can fall back on your own men. There should be plenty of good men who could do the work. 29290. Q. Should they be restricted by tLe words" working miners "1 Q. No, if they have a man who has had practical experience in mining, if he has bad a long experience and is a sound man, there is no objection to him. 29291. Q. They should not have that restriction 7 A. No. 29292. Mr. Robinson.] Q. As far as the safety of the roof and the sides and the presence of gas in a mine is concerned, do you think that an ordinarily intelligent miner, selected as a check,inspectot·, is competent to report on these matters to his fellow workmen 1 A. The man I have in my mind is quite capable of judging of the safety of the roads, the roof, the headings, and the ventilation of a mine. 292~3. Q. As far as the maoageruflnt is concerned, of course we have thP. Government Inspector, and the miners also have that protection 1 A. Certainly. 29294. Mr. Ritchie.] Do you think all miners are competent to handle the hydrogen flame 1 .A. No. 29295. Q. Is there anyt.hing to prevent the miners putting the hydrogen flame into the hands of a checkinspector 1 A. H e would have to be taught how to use it. 29296. Q. Is there any power to prevent a man going into a mine with it 1 A. There is no power; but a man might endanger the mine and get himself into mischief. There is no law to prevent a man taking the hydrogen lamp into a mine; but, before he did that, the Manager would have something to say, because he would be putting the mine in danger. 29297. Q. Could he do anything1 A. He could raise an objection, and send to the Department. If it was proved that a man took a lamp into a mine and endangered that mine something would be done-something would be !'lure to follow. 29298. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Do you think that a :Manager would have power to stop a check-inspector taking a hydrogen lamp into a mine, unless lhe check-inspector could show he knew bow to use it 7 A. H e has no power that I know of. 29299. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Ahhough the :Manager has no power legally, do you think that the reasons raised by a Manager would be given due weight to in any Court 1 A. Certainly they would. 29300. His Honor.] Q. A hydrogen lamp contains an explosive substance1 ..1. Yes. 29301. ))fr. Bruce Smit!t.] Q. Would it not be as dangerous as taking an open light into a mine 1 A. It would be very risky, if a person did not know how to use it. 29302. Q. What is your idea as to thn Recommendation (No. 2) that the Inspector should have power to order the nse of safety-lamps 1 ll. Yes; sul,ject to arbitration. 29303. Q. That is a counter proposal-that the Managers should have a right to require arbitration 1 A. Yes, they should have that right. 29304. Q. In the meantime the lamps would be used 1 A. Ye3; I quite agree with that sllggestion. 29305. Q. On the subject of ventilation, by furnace or by fan (No. 3). Do you agree that fumaces should be prnhibited in a mine, and tba.t all mines should be required to adopt fan!:, without limitation. This would apply to all mines excepting those which employ under twenty men 7 11. I do not, think that the present arrangement should be disturbed, where the furnaces are doing good work; but, when the furnaces fail to do that, the Inspectors sbou 1d have power to suggest improvement by the way of substituting fans; and if, the suggestion is not carried out, the matter might be the subject of arbitration. 29306 Q. With regard to fans, do you consider that they are so superior that you would require any new mine employing over twenty or thirty hands to hnse fans erected 1 A. Yes; I would go as far as that. 29307. Q. What is your expe1·ience as to furnace ventilation in existing mines-is it satisfactory 1 A. It is very unsatisfactory in many cases; and in many cases it is satisfactory. It depends on the condition of the mine, and the extent of the mine. 29308. Q. As the mine develops, it becomes a question for further consideration, as regards the means of ventilation A. Yes-a fan is far superior to furnace ventilation. 2930!). A. You heard the suggestion that waste workings should be absolutely sealed off (No. 4). Do you approve of that 1 A. No. 29310. Q. There is a counter proposal that the outlets should be into the return airways only-do you approYe of that 1 A. That is reasonable. 29311, 16825 29-5 R.

.....&,· f

860 Wit11e8s-T. Parton, 18 March, 1903 .

•

(

·'·

I '

•

29311. Q. There should not be any openings into the main airways 1 A. No, t here should not be. 29312. llis Ilon,r. j Q. Do you believe in ventilating a goaf, iE itis possib~/3 to do so 1 A .. Yes. 29313. Q. What about allowing air to scale into it 1 A. You can scale 1t, and let the air go throt1gh the r eturn airways. . . 29314. Q. The question is as to the supply of ai r, passing out to the return, from the w1ndwo.rd side of the goaf1 A . The opening from the goaf would lea<l t? the retu~n airway. ,. 29:315. Q. But bow would you p rovide for Lhe wmdward side, when ECa110g 1 A. You woulJ take the nir from the intake. 29316. Q. You would have special sca1ing1 A. It would depend on the conditions; but you could arrange so that yon could send some of the fresh air into the old workings. 29317. Q. That wou ld in a sense be a contact with the intake airway 1 A. It would take all the noxious gases to th~ return ail'way. 29318. Q. As long as there was no re,ersal through an a ccident 1 A. Y es. 293H). },fr. Robertson.] Q. I suppose you know that it h; a common practice for old goafs ahd workihge to be ventilat.ed by the return air from the working districts. Thete is nothing wrong about that 1 A.No. 29320. Q. I t is proper, if the return air can be utilised in that way 1 A. I believe in that. If becessaey, you might a lso send pure fresh air into a goaf. 29321. His Honor.] Q. Would you treat a goaf so as to allow the 1•eturn ai.r to ~irculate round all tbeopen sides, and yet so thr..t the air can pass straight a.cross, an<l go t hrough the goaf t A . Yes. 29322. 1lb·. Bruce Smith.] Q. What is there to prevent the air from the return coming into th~ intake 1 A. There is always a. draw to prevent that. 29323. Q. You would have openings on the intake and on the return 1 A. There a.re al ways opehings. 29324-. Q. What do you think of Mr. Goo<l win's system of double b unk h eadings 1 .A. In cases of fire sUnk that is very effective. 29325. Q. On the subject of cut-th roughs being limited to 30 yards (No. 5)1 A. That is objectionable. ,. 29326. Q. Why 1 A. Because the different conditions r egulate the different sizes of pillars. What would be safe in one mine would be dangerous in another. 29327. Q. Who is the best judge in the matter 1 A. The Manager. 29328. Q. Whose intere3ts are most concerned by giving proper consideration to the question 1 A. The miners and the owners--botb. 29 329. Q. You have seen gre.\t quantitie3 of coal Jost in Newcastle through having pillars too small t A. Yes. 29330. Q. I s it a. great ad va.nt:1ge to have these cut-th roughs at shor~ intervals 1 ·..1. I do not quite see what you mean. · 29331. Q. It has been urged that, by Laving cut-thl'Oughs at sh ort inter vals, there is a.n improvement ih the ventilation 1 A. Where you h ave good ventilation, there is no reason why you should not go 100 ya.tds without cut-throughs as well as 30. 29332. Q. D o yon think there is any great objection to having long lengths without cut-througbs 1 .A. No-not if the ventilation is up to the mark. _ 29333. Q. It is a matter of t he ventilation being good 1 A. Yes. 29334. Q. '£he Manager should choose what kind of pillars it is necessary to make, for the safety of the mine i A. Y es. B efore the last law was passed the miner had to go 30 yards without bratticing. One hundred yards, with good ventilation, now, is hetter than the shorter distance without bratticing. 29335. Q. What is yonr idea as to pillars 1 A. You can lay down no definite ru!e. 29336. Q. Name the largest which you ba\'e seen at h ome1 A. The mines in t he Mid land Counties work differently. T en yards by 80 all round the main roads would ba common working. 29337. Q. Do you know some pillars are 70 yards square 1 A. T hat is common. 29338. Q. D o you know what size they are in the M etropolitan min e at present 1 A. They are 100 by 50. 29339. Q. You say that the matter shouhl be lef t to the management; but the ventilation should be looked to carefully 1 A. Yes. 2934:0. Q. D o you think that it is desirable that deputies should be intrusted with the hydrogen lamp ior ordinary use 1 LI.. No. 29341. Q. Shouhl they be instructed in its use1 A. The men should be specially trained to the use of the hydrogen lamp. 29342. Q. You have heard it proposed that t h e minimum quantity of air allowed per minute should be increased to 500 feet for each horse, instead of 100 feet, as a t present [ No. 8] 1 A. I do not favour that. 29343. Q. D o you think that the present system is working ,'l"ell and giving enough air 1 A. I think that "adequate " ventilation should be provided. F or twenty years I have worked under that provision; and the Inspector was careful to see that it was adequate; and, if it was not so, he would complain. '.39344. What is your experience with regard to New South Wales1 Do the mines keep close to the minimum, or exceed it 1 A. In a. gt·eat many of tbe mines that I have seen they ~ave good ventilation. 293~5. D o they adhere to it 1 A. In tbe South - at the Metropolitan-they exceed i t. They have 430,000 cubic feet of air per minute for 300 or 400 men; in other mines in the N orth that I have gone through the ventilation has been good. 29346. lifr. Robertson.] Q. Do you not think that it is wrong in principle to ventilate according to the number of persons employed in the mine 1 A. Certainly. 29347. Q. On what princip le shou ld the ventila.tion be 1 A. On the amount of gas in, and on the generlll conditions of, the mine. 29348. Q. On. the.general conditions1 A. Yes. You may ha,·e sixty men in the mine, and 6,000 cubic feet of g.as being g1rnn off per minute. If you reduce your ail' allowance to the s tatutory limit, what about the gas accumulating in all you workings 1 29349. Q. Under that system of government by the number of persons employed, there is nothing to compel a Manager to keep the ventilation going at night when nobody is in th.e minfl 1 A. No. 29350. Q. I s not that a condition which might be taken advantage of '~ A. Yes, I have kuow it to be taken advantage of. 29351,

., . 1. < I

' '

I I.

..•

• 867

TVitnes-9-T, Parton, 18 March, 1903.

29351. M1•. Ritchie.] Q. I think the ventilation is 1·e1uirJd to be such as to dilute and render harmless the ijaB found in the mine; and if there is onJy one man in the mine, you have to krep up the ventilation 1 A. Yes. 29352. Mr. Robertson.] Q. If there are no men there, you do not want to provide anything 1 Q. No. 29353. Q. But, if there is one man, and he is going round the mine to look at anything, you have to keep the ventilation going for that one man 1 Yes. 29354. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. It has been sug~ested that all doors should be made so that they would close automatically [ No. 9]; and it has been stated that this would take away the responsibility of the miners with regard to the closing of doors, and that if they did not happen to close automatically thE'y would leave them open 1 A. It should not be allowe::l to interfere with the responsibility of the men. I t is a common practice now fo r these doors to clo:,e on their own motion, but they do not always cluse, because piece:, of coal get b etween them. I wQuld have both protections. 29355. Q. You would have both protections! A. Y es. 29356. Q. There is a penA.lty now for lel.ving a door open 7 A . Y es, under th'3 Special Rules. 29357. Q. You have never known it to he put into opern.tion 1 A. No. 29358. Q. W i th regard to the qucsLion of double doors (No. 10). Do you approve of that 1 A. Yes. 29359. Q. It has been suggested that there should Le a weekly mcasure01ent of air in each section, and Lhat a. report should be sent to the Inspector (No. 11) 1 A. I do not think it is necessary. T here is the Manager·, t he under-manager, and the fan engineer. If there is any alteration in the ventilation, it would soon be noticed . 29360. Q. You have heard about the safety·lawp question (No. 1:3) 1 A. Yes. 20361. A. You have b eard about the proportion of lamps to be kept on the surface 1 It is proposed that the extra supply should be equal to one-third of the number of persons employed below ground i A. I agree with that proposal, generally. 29362. Q. Mr. Atkinson has suggested that, where safety-lamps are used--on the assumption that some lamps would always be in the la.mp-room-the extra supply should be equal to one-tenth of the number of persons below g round; and, where safety-lamps are not in use, one-fifth would be sufficient 1 A. I t hink one tenth would be sufficient where la.mps are used. 29363. His Honor.] Someone bas suggested agn,in that there should be a minimum . 29364. Jlfr. Bruce Smith.] Q. T here was a suggestion that there should be a minimum by Mr. Bower. If you pad a mine in which only five men were employed, a tenth of the number would be required, and t q at would be half a lamp-say one lamp. Would that be enough 1 A. No. 29365. Q. What do you think would be a fair thing when ten or twenty men are employed 1 A. Say fo r ten men- five lamps. 29366. His Hono1·. l A good many rescuers might want to go in in case of accident. 29367. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. It might be a good thing to keep them out~ A. It would be a small colliery where only ten men were employed. 29 368. M1·. Ritchie.] Q. Take a case where a mine woulJ be opening, and only a few men were employed. They migh t be scattered about in ont-of-tbe-way parts of the mine 1 A. Tbat would be where a great many m en would be employed generally, but temporarily only a few would he employed. You would have the lamps of t he others who were not working. Still, I would have a minimum. 29369. Mr. Robe1·tson.l Q. Do you think that any colliery proprietor would object to spending £10 or so to t o provide the requ ired safety-lamps 1 A. I think tha.t all mine3 should have a supply of lamps. 29370. Q. D o you think that any mine would object 1 A. No. 29371. M1·. Rruce , 'mith.] There are plenty of cases in which two or t hree men a re making a living by getting coal ; and £10 would be a restriction on that class of men. 29372. 1l1r. Robertson.] I think that £10 is a ridiculously small amount to spend on such a matter. If the proprietor ca.nnot afford to spend £ 10 for lamps, he should not start keeping a mine. 29373. Mr. Bruce Smith.] There are something like forty mines employing under twenty man each. T here are several employing only one or two each. 29374. Mr. Rob1wt.~on.] It is just in those kind of mines that accidents occur. 29375. Mr. Ritchie.] Are these men getting coal for their own use 1 29376. J.l fr. Bruce Smith.] No they are not; they cannot live by coal alone. 29377. His Honor.] Q. I think Mr. Bower suggested twenty lamps as a minimum 1 A. I think there should be a min imum of twenty. Not considering the one man one mine business, that will be reasonable. 29378. Mr. Bruce Smillt.] Q. You would not suggest that they should be k ept trimmed 1 A. No. 29379. His Honor.] Q. You would ha,·e the wicks in position, bnt not the oil 1 LL Yes. 29380. lYir. Bruce Smitlt.] Q. Now, we C"IDC to the question of watering-and that is a bigger questiop. (No. 13). We ba\'e heard opinions both ways as to the watering of travelling and haulage roads 7 A. M y view is that, where it can be done at a reasonable cost an<l without affecting the safety of the mine, it is very desirable that it should be done; but I do not think it is d esirable to draw a bard-and-fast line. There are some mines where it is quite impr!lcticable to water. 29381. Q. That would not be a very effective rule, if you put it in that way1 A. No. 29382. Q. H ow do you think th is would work-that the matter should be left primarily to the judgment of th e Manager, and that the Inspector should have the power of ordering a more extensive system of watering if he thought it necessary; and, if the Manager objected, the matter should go to arbitration. A. That is a reasonable way out of the difficulty. 29383. Q. Can you think of any other way out of it 1 A. No. 29384. Q. You have to provide for the differing conditions of all mines? A. Yes; it is a reasonable solution of the clifficul ty. 29385. Q. It has been suggested in a yague way that Mana~ers should be compelled to give more personal time and attentiun to the maMgement of their collieries (No. 14). Do you think it is practicable to lay down any rule as to the number of time, a Manager should go into the mine, or the period within wh ich each one should visit the whole of the mine 1 A. N o, I do not think it would be wi"e to draw any bard-an d-fast line in regard t o that 1 Matters ditfer so much; and I think that every mine Manager would have sufficiant sense of his own responsibility to himself, to the men, and to the own,ers, to examine the mine ofte~ enough to kesp himself acquainted with all that is going on in it. ·

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.:...__

•

• • •'

~9386,

_:_

__J~___: t...~-

.......

E68 Jritne.!S-1'. Parton, 18 .March, 1903.

•

f, ,.

f' ,, { • I

29386. Q. Do you think it reasonal,le that a Manager should be compelled to exan1ine part of the ~ine once or twice a week 1 A. I would not lay down any rule. If any bad results occur from want of attention, it is known. There are the miners, the check-inspectors, the Government Inspectors, and the whole of the manaaement. The man hiwself would suffer : and t here are plenty of checks. 29387'. Q. ,vould you approve of a rule that ,~equired a man to make an inspecLion of the mine once .a. month 1 A. I would make no rule at all. 29388. J/r. Robertson.] Q. A Manager may lose bis certifica.te through neglect o~ the. mine 1 A. His responsibi!ities are !;O great and numerous that any ~fanager who has any sense of dorng bis duty would do it, and keep himself in touch with all parts of t he mme. 29389. Jlr . .Rite/ii,.] Q. I suppose it is necessary that t he :Manager should give much attention to the underground workings 1 A. I certainly think so. 29390. Jllr. .Robertson.] Q. D o you know of any Manager who has not enough to do. You do you know of anyone who has Lime to go fooling round 1 A. I have k~own excep~ions to the mle ; but as ~ rul~ they have plenty to <lo; a.nd they do it. But there are exceptions; and m the case of those exceptions 1t ha.s generally returned to the Manager himself, and he bas bad to leave his colliery. It has been a question of time. 29391. Q. Who is the man most likely to suffer from neglect 1 A. The Manager. 29392. )Ir. Rite/tie.] Q. It would be a dangerous thing to lea.Ye some mines wilhout the presence of a Manager 7 A. Yes. 22393. Q. You m:ty have an underground-manager who may not be a brilliant man, an<l who may hold a certiticate of service. In t ha.t case you depend on the Manager 7 .A. Yes. 29394. Q. If t he Manager went on tbe drink for three or four week$, ao<l did not attend to the mine at all, d anger might occur to the mine 7 A. Yes; and commercial dilnculties might arise too. I have known Managers who ba,·e been gu ilt.y of that kin<l of thing ; and they have had to suffer. 29395. Q. You have some men working in the northern di~trict now- they are working in collieries in consequence of what I have saic1 1 A. Yes. 29396. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. You would not interfere with the Manager at all 7 ..4. No. 29397. Q. What objection would you have to a rule that tbo .Manager should have to go over his colliery once a month and do the work as he liked 7 A. I object to the principle. The Manager has certain duties laid down by Act of Parliament. 29398. Q. Do they do them 7 A. If not, the inspectors look them up. 29399. Q. Such a rule would give confidence to the men that the Manager was doing bis work 7 A. Yes i but in my experience the majority of men do their duty ; and why should all the others suffer for the sake of the exceptions 7 29400. Q. W ould they suffed A. It is a bard-and-fast line. It is the principle I object to. 29401. Q. I s it not necessary to provide some law for tho minority of whom you speak- those men who do not do their duty 1 A. I do not think so. I do not know of its being done in any other part of the world. 29402. Q. Tbe criminal law is not applicable to a. large class of citizens ; yet you would not do away with it 7 A. In Great Brita.in, in America., and on the Continent, I do not know t hat such a law exists. In this State, with its small output as compared with other countries, I do not. think the system is necessary. They do not do n.nytbing of the kind in other countries, and I think that our managers are quite as attentive as • theirs are. 29403. Jl/r. Ritchie.] Q. What would you do in t he case of a. Manager who is known to bis workmen to be away drinking 1 , I. Re would not bold his position long. 29404. Q. S hould there not be power to make him show cause why he should not be displaced 1 A. You might write to the Inspector. ' 29405. Q. ould you g ive t hem power to do that 1 Q. Yes. 29406. J.l /r. Robertson.] Q. I s there anything to prevent their doing it now 1 A. No. 29407. lrlr. Ritchie.] Q. Has tbe Inspector power to take notice of it 7 A. I think so. The rule is that the Manager has to do his duty. 29408. Jfr. Bruce, 'mith.] Q. You know that, if the I nspector is not satisfied with the way in which a man is doing bis work, he can refer the matter to the Minister 7 A. Yes. 29409. Q. It is provided as follows :-

If at any time representation is made t o the Minister, by an Iospector, or otherwise, that any Manager or undermanager, holding a certificate under this Act or under any Imperial Act., is by reason of incompetency or gross negligence, unfit to discharge his duties, or has been convicted of an oO'coce against this Act, the Minister may cause inquiry to be made int;o the conduct of the Manager or under-manager.

2941 0. Q. You t hink that is sufficien t safeguard, and sufficient inducement, for the Manager to look after the property 1 A. Yes. 294-11. Jfr. .Robertson.] Q. I suppose, in the ordinary exer cise of a Manager's duty, assuming that he went unc1ergl'Ounc1 every da.y, it might be that some part or par ts of the mine might n ot be visited or inspect.ed once a month 7 That is so. 294 12. Q. Attention may be speci.,lly directed to some part of the mine requiring attent ion 1 A. Ye.3, that is so. 29413. Q. That woulu be more particularly applicable to a large mine 1 A. Y es. 29414. Q. Supposing such a suggestion were given effect to, i ~ would be impracticable for a l\Ia.nager to comply with it 1 A. H e would not be able to do so, in an extensi\-e mine, of the kind you are assuming. 29415. Jfr. Bruce. 'niitlt.] Q. Now, with regard to the size of th e manholes, which it is s uggested should be enlarged (No. 16). Do you think there is any necessity for enlarging them 1 A. I sec no necessity. 29416. (i, Diel you he.ir the evidence given in support of tliis proposal 1 No. 29417. <.!; Do you see any ohjection to whitewashing thern at the outlet. A. I would favour that. 29418. (.!. Woultl you require them to b e whitcwa,;hed i n the hau lage rvad, apart from the use of tho~e roads as tro.\'elling roads 1 .11. Yes: sometimes I wal k down the haula.oe roads· a.ncl someti mes men havo ' } 0 I to d o repairs to t 1ese. I t wou ld be a wise thing to have them whitewashed. 29-119. Q. ,vould you do so where the endless rope is in use 7 A. It n eed not be done when the endles~ rope is used. 29420.

869

Witneas-T. Parton, 18 March, 1903.

29420. Q. With regard to instructing employees on the means of escape (No 18). Do you approve of that 1 4.. I see no great objection to it. 29421. Q. You do not see any clanger of instructing them in a way out which may turn out to be a wrong one, in case of accident 1 A. I think such instruction would be a protection; and it would not cost much. 29422. Q. D id you ever hear of a black-list (No. 10)? A. No. 29423. Q. With regard to the use of gunpowded A. I think its use should be abolished. 29424. Q. And permitted explosives provided? A. Y es. 29425. Q. Would you apply that to all mines 1 A . Yes. 29426. A. I t bas been suggested, from the Newcastle District, that there should be some i mproveJ means of raising persons from a mine, in the event of accidents. What do you say to that 1 A. There a,:e means provided now, according to the Act. 29427. Q. It is proposed that this shall be at the second shaft i A. There are means provided now. 29428. Q. D o you think tbe existing provision is sufficient? A. I think so. 29129, Q. Do you t'1ink th'3.t is;;. m1.tter that miy b~ safely left to th1 I nspe::tor1 A. I think so. 29430. Q. It has been suggested that the machinery should be sufficient to lift the whole of the men out of the mine in an hour 1 A. You cs.nnot lay dowu that rule. 29431. Q. H ave you, in your experience, known of accidents in which better appliances for taking the m en out of the mine would have saved their lives7 .A. No. 29432. Q. D o you approve of altering the method of appointing I nspectors, so as to gi ve the miners a say in their appointment; that is, allowing the miners to nominate them 1 A. I do not think that either the miners or the owners should have anything to do with the appointment of I nspectors. T hat should be taken out of their hands altogether. 29433. Q. The Inspectors should l>e impar tial persons 1 A. Yes, their appointment should be fixed l,y the Cabinet. 29434. Q. Who would you regard as impartial persons-the Cabinet 7 A. P erhaps you could not go too close into that question. 29435. Q. If the miners had anything to do with the appointment, might there not be an idea on the part of the Inspectors to placate the people who nominate them, in order that they might b ) nominated for another period - - [I nterrupted]. 29436. His llonO'l·.J A mer ica is a sufficient illustration of the results of the elective syste :n, as applied to judicial officers. I think the whole world has seen enough of it there. 29437. Mr. Bruce Smith. ] Q. It has been proposed that the whole of the roads in mines should be bru ;be:l 6 feet higb 7 A. I do not see any good in i t. 29438. Q. What is your· idea of it, from a commercial point of view 1 A. I t would entail expense. 29439. Q. D o you know Brown's Minmi Mine-that has been brushed 1 A. They had to brush it to enable them to work it. 29440. Q. vVhy 7 A. To make room for the haulage. I t is not an extensive matter. T he roof comes down ~asily. 29441. His H onor.] Q. If you disturb some roofs, they might come down more than you want1 A. Yes, sometimes. If you start to take the bottJm part of the roof off: it may come right down for a h eight of 9, · 10, or 11 feet. 29442. Q. Y ou want to leave well alone7 A. Yei::. 29443. JJ.fr. Robert.son.] Q. At the Minmi Colliery it is a thin seam? A. Y es. 294H. Q. Has the roof been brushed for the convenience of the workmen 1 A. No; to facilitate the haulage ar range men ts. 29445. Q. I s not that a n ecessity 1 A. Yes, in consequence of the seam being a thin onP. 29446. Q. If it had been a 5 feet 6 inches seam, do you think they would have brushed 1 A. No. 29447. Mr. Rite/tie.] Q. ·what is the width of the seam? A. 4 feet 6 inches or 4 feet 7 inches. 29448. 1l1r. Robertson. l Q. If it bad been high enough to admit horses without brushing, do you think t hey would have brushed it to a stanuard )~eight of 6 feet for the comfort of the men ? A. No. 29449. Jfr. Ritchie.] Q. Would it be an expensive matter to brusb one road, for use as a travelling road, t o 6 feet high ? A. A s regar<ls the question of expense, you would have to tell me the nature and the condition of the roof. 29450. Q. You could make the roof G feet high by taking the road up from the bottom 1 A. Yes; but a.t the same time it is expensive work to lift up a road from the bottom. 29451. Q. In a traveiling road you would not require to have it wide-3 feet wide would do 1 .A. You would not be satisfied with that; you want to take horses down it too. 29452. Q. Do you not think that it is very uncomforta~le for the men to travel with 3 feet 6 inch seams 1 .A. There are not many mi:ies with 3 feet 6 inch seams only. 29453. Q. You will adroit that, if the seam is 4 feet thick, in course of time it becomes difficult for the men who have 2 miles to travel to do so with comfort 1 A. It is very heavy work for the men, no doubt; but these are exceptional cases. 29454-. Q. How much would it cost the mine to brush the t ravelling road to 6 feet high, saying that the seam is 4 feet 6 inch. Would the cost be at all felt 1 Would it really amount to 2s. per day 1 A. I could n ot tell, unless I saw the conditions of the road. In a case of that kind it would not be heavy to brush one road. I t would depend on the conditions of the roof, and whether the roof required a lot of timbering afterwards. 29455. Q. Would not the cost be so light that it would not be felt at all 1 A. It woulci. not be heavy for one road, but I do not see why you want legislation for it. I t is an experiment-it is not done anywhere elsc>. 29456. Q. There are many things wliicb people are pressed to do by law which previously were· ne,er done at all 1 .Ll. But you must a.How so1nething for the owners; and th is is a very exceptional matter. 291157. Q. Why exceptional 1 A. It applies to a few collieries only. In most of t he collieries the seam is 6 f Pet thick. 29458. Q. If you were a workir1g miner carrying tools, would you not think that you required more than 3 feet 6 inch in· height to carry them along 1 A. I should grnmble; but l do not thii;il; thait a matter of that kind should be subj ect to legislation. ~9469,

870 JVitness-T. Parton, 18 March, 1903.

29459. )fr. Robertson.] Q. Have you observed whether the strata in Now South Wales are of a more t reacherous character, when exposed to the air1 than the strata in the British coal-fields 1 A. Some of them are: very treacherous. 29!60. Q. Comparinrr them with yout· experience of the British coal-fields, do you say that they are more li!!.ule to be aOected the atmospheric in fl uences hero 1 A. In my experiences in the different counties in England, the strata. there are more likely to be affected by the moisture and the air than they a.re here; that is, taking the matter generally. 29 l(;l. Q. Do you approve of winding shafts being left unlined 1 A. 1 disapprove of it. I think that every shaft should be lined. 294:62. Q. No matter bow apparently secure1 A. It may look secure; but in time Lits chip offwilh the nir. I certainly approve of every shaft, no matter what the strata is1 being lined, even if it is only Hin. work. 2U4-63. Q. D.:> you think that there-shonld be any restricLion in respect to Managers' certiiicates. Should only Managers w_ho h:ivo obtained certificates in this St!l.te be allowed t o take charge of a mine 1 ·.A. Do you refer to Imperial certificates 1 29464. Q. It has been suggested to no Manager who has obtained a. certificate from the Imperial authoritie:J should be allowed to practise here 1 A. I think they should be allowed to practise1 for the reason that a. certificate of competency gained in the British coal-tields is1 generally speaking, worth more tba.n it is here1 because the experience is wider and more varied. 29465. Q. You do not think they should be regarded a.s "Undesirable " people,-and not allowed to come here 1 A. Certainly not1 or else [ had betLer go back myself1 and others with me. 29 !66. Q. Do you think that it is in the interesls of the miners themselves that the choice of Managers should be restricted to men who bavo obtained experience here 1 A. It would be a serious thing to carry that out. You ought to encourilge trained men from bomf'1 who Lave had varied experience. Here lhe experience is limited. Y ou might work here for twi nty years in one or two mines1 and see nothing except~ iog your own work. 29467. )fr. Ritchie. ] Q. Does that not also apply to Managers in Eugland 1 A. No. 29468. Q. Do they change 1 A. T hey interchange a great deal. 29469. Q. Have you not heard of Managers keeping to one colliery for a lifetime1 A. In England th~ Manager3 visit different mines, inspect them, prepara papers on them, and discm,s those papers . 29470. 111r. Robertson.] Q. You have five or six different seams in the British coal-fit,Jds1 whereas theru is only one seam here; and each seam at home varies very much in its condilions 1 A. Oh 1 yes; take the :Midland Counties in England, for instance. "'\Vithin a vertical distance of 200 yards, or 600 feet, you get seams below 2 feet thick1 and you get seams up to 30 feet, higher up. There are various kinds of coal ; and th ey will be interspersed with workable ironstone seams. This will all be worked on different systems1 such as the Longwall, rib and pillar1 square work, and pillar working in thick coal. 29471. Q. Is it a fact that the mines are more freely naturally watered than is t he case here 1 A. In mines that I have had to do with t here bas been a pump, from 12 to 15 inches, working; and T have known four of them in one colliery, with a view of coping with t he water. I scarcely know of a mine which does not have one large pump. H ot·e candidates come up for examination who ba...-e never seen a pump at work in a mine, and who have neYer seen L ong wall working. Smart young men some of them are, too. Some of them could write a paper as well as I could. 29472. Q. What is tbe knowledge here about sinking through w:i.ter 1 A. Some of the candidates have never seen a ny sinking at all. I have advised them to go to Balmain to see sinking work in actual progress ; and many have visited there. 29473. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Do you not know that the Manager of one of t he most important mines that we have has never been outside the State. W ould you think he is competent 1 A. He may be competent for the work he is doing now; but take him from that work to another wine, where the circumstances are different, and he would be incompetent. 29474. Q. Would not that also apply to men who come from England-supposing nn Englishman came to the Metropolitan Mine here1 tl. It would not apply in the same way. 29475. Q. Does no~ that observation r equire some qualification 1 A. Generally speaking, the experience gained in England is widc1· than it is here. I do not know any coal.field in t he world where the experience is so limited as it is here. The mining here is of the simplest character, excepting in one or two collieries. 29476. Q. D.J you know that some of the principal mines of the South Coast have men as Managers who have neve1· been outside the State 1 A. They are good enough for the work they a.re doing now-as good as anyone would be; but take them from their own work, a.nd t hey would be incompetent . 29477. l,fr. Robe·rtson.] Q. You would not obj ect to the miners reporting any difficulties t hey meet with to t he Manager 1 A. As far as I am concerned, I should encourage it. 294 78. Q. Do you not regard each miner who reports difiicnlties to the Ma nager as practically another deputy added to the mine 1 .A. H e is assisting the Manager in carrying out his dutiel', and is also adding to the safety of the mine. 29479. Q. H e ia adding to the safety of the mine 1 A. Yes. 29480. Q. He is rel ieving the Manager from anxiety 1 A. To a certain extent. 29481. Q. The Manager cannot be everywher e; and the deputies cannot be everywhe.re. If there was a feeling that the workmen could be depended on to report difficulties met with, it would give a greater sense of security 1 A. Decidedly. 29482. Q. Do you think that the average Manager objects to the miner reporting things 1 A. I do not think a Manager would. 29l83. Q. Would you make it compulsory for a miner to report 1 A. I certainly would. 2948-.1:. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Do you think that a miner might be subjected to a penalty because of reporting 1 A . I do not think a Manager would do that kind of thing. 29485. Q. You are speaking for yourself 1 A. It would be a wrong thing to do. 29!86. Q. Supposing a. man came out ahead of regulation-time, and stated to the Manager that he came out been.use t here was ga<i in his place-supposing he was immediately dis missed-what would you think of a Manager like that 1 A. I should want to investigate both sides of the question. 29 48 7. Q. Supposing those were the facts 'I A. It would be an indiscreet thing for t he ~anaaer to do that. 0 T-here must be another side to that question. i9488,

•

;

t I

• t

~71

Witness-T. P:i.rton, 18 March, l!l03.

Cross-examined Ly Mr. Wade:- , Miners tell falsehoods sometimes 1 A. Yes. 29489. Q. Do you remember a man named Biggers 1 .A. I think I do. 2\H90. Q. You put him through an examination, and gave him a ce:-tific:i.te 1 A. I cannot say; but I think so. 29491. Q. Did h e pass a satisfactory examination 1 A. He must h ave satisfied us. 29492. Q. Do you look upon him as a competent man who understands his work 1 A. 1f we di<l not, we should not have passed him. 29493. Q. He was fit for work as an under-managed A. Y es. 29494. Q. You examine candidates on the question of gas 1 A. We always do. They have to pro.,e that they have seen it; that they have ha I some experience of it; that they have found it; and that they knew what to do when they did find it. T hey also have to say which ;ire the most likely places to find gas; we nl:!ver forget that. vVe have put back candidates because they have not found gas. 29495. Mr. Ritchie. J Q. Do you know that Biggers stated that he had not found gas 1 A. No. 29496. Mt·. Robertson.] Before he was examined, he saw gas. 29497. M1·. Wade.] Q. Take this c'l.se. Stockton is a mine in which gas has never been found yet 1 A. I do not know. 29498. Q. Supposing a young man had qua1i6ed in Stockton, and you were assured he knew the way to detect gas, and to look for it, and, as far as you could find out, he would be thoroughly capal,le of being trusted with a safety-lamp, to look for gas? A. That would not be sufficient. 29499. A. Would you not give bim a certificate 1 A. No; he must say that he has been in a mine wl1ere t here is gas, and has used a safety-lamp to find it. 29500. Q. Yo~ would not give a certificate to a man who was absolutely competent on every other point, b ut who had not seen gas 1 A. That is a qualification which we require, they have e,·ery opportunity of .Meeing gas. How can you give a man a cerWicate of competency which would enable him to go into a m ine where there is gas, if he has never seen gas in his life 1 We insist on their seeing gas, and visi ting collieries where there is gas. Several candidates have done so. T hey have gone to the Metropolitan Colliery, and to the Dudley. That is a qualification whicli we require, no matter ht>w smart the cand idate ~ ay be in other ways. With regard to Biggers, be to~d us that he detected gas ; and he showed us how he went about it, and satisfied us. 29501. Mr. Ritchie. ] Q. Did he tell you where he ha.cl seen it 1 A. I cannot remember; but it is a quali6ca.tion which we never neglect. If he told us untruths, we coul~l not detect thew. 29502. Mr. Wade.] Q. Was th~re anything in any of his answers to show that he was not speaking the truth 1 A. No; and his work was thoroughly well done. .29503. Q. If he had been appointed just before he p1ssed at Kembla, woul<l it be incompetency on t he part of the manager to so appoint him? I should say he would know how to find gas and detect it. 29504. Q. Would it be an act of incompetency to appoint him 1 A. With my knowledge of his examination, I should say be was competent, if he told the truth. 29505. Mr. Ritckie.J Q. If you were the manager, and knew he had not seen gas, wou1d you regard him then as a. competent person. A. No. 29506. Mr. Wade.] Q. Opinions ma.y differ-after a11 the best test is the result 1 A. Yes. . 29507. Q. What position were you referring t-0 when you said you would not appoint him 1 A. I was referring to the position of under-ru,mager. 29.508. Q. T hen it would make some difference if you only had to appoint him as deputy 1 A. I would not appoint a deputy who had not seen gas. 2950~. Q. A lthough he showed you he understood thoroughly the way of testing for it 1 A. He could only under.stand i t by what h e read; but if you put a la.mp into his hands, and let him test for gas, it would he a different matter. I will give you an exllmple. One candidate-I am not giving any name-passed b. splendid written examination. It was like a text-book. In the oral examination, we asked him ho,v he wonld test for ga.a; and he said, " Ob, yes; I would go in with my Bame ; and if I saw gas I would sna.t<::h it back sharp aga.in ''; of cour5e the very worst thing he could do. 29510. Q. Do you know that Mr. Jonathan May t eaches that1 A. No. 2951 1. Q. That was the practice years ago, was it not 1 A. No; but they <lid worse tlian that. I remember the time when they used to test for gas with a light. 29512. Q. They used to go in with a long stick with a light at tho end of it, and put it up to the roof, whilst they were lying on the ground themselves 1 A. Well, I have examined for ga.s with a. c.:mdle. 29513. His Honor.] Q. V{hen you examine candidates, <lo yon also examine their cuffs 1 A. Oh, yes, we always look after that. I may say that we get good practical men, who can answer an oral examination very well, but who cannot answer a. written examination. 29514. Q. Then you use a certain amount of common-sense ela-,ticity with reference to the conduct of an examination 1 .A. Y es. 29515 . .Afr. Wade.] Did you sec the can vas spoken of in No. l rope road 1 A. I saw none of that. 29516. Q. You have been told that there were two doors, one across the 4th Right., and another across th e cross-cut 1 A. Yes. 29517. Q. They were founti in the rope road, one outbye and one in bye. What do you think displaced them-was it force from the fall 1 A.. Tbat [looking at plan Exhibit No . 29] looks like a division of the force. There may ha.ve been a di vbion of the force at that point. 29f.i18. Q. What do you think dro\·e those doors out 1 A. If there wete no lights inside the canvas doors, of course the force must have blown them out. 29519. Q. Would it want any force to do that1 A. No, not more than a fall would do. Falls blow doors out very often. 29520. Q. Many yards away i A. Not right away. 29520!. Q. A hundred yards away? A. Quite 100 yards away. Ca1was <loors a.re put up so alight that it would not take much force to do t hat. No donut there was force there. 2952 1. Q. Suppose the nearest light was at £he 4th L eft, 200 yards away, do you not th ink that th e displacement of the air would pu ~ it out before the gas got to it 1 A. It would d epend on the fall. T here may ha.ve been a big fall which would put out the light.

Mt88, Q.

29522.

872 Wit11ea1-T. Parton, 18 March, 1903.

29522. Q. The force that displaced the canvas doors would be the first force 1 A. I w_ould not go into that. 29523. Q. These would be the first things to go 1 A. I could not go into that question, unless I examined the place. 29524. Q. You cannot say how the gas would light? A. No. I prefer not to theorise, nnless I saw the place myself. 29525. Jfr. Ritchie.l Thi:i is the evidence given by Mr. Biggers:" Q. Do I take it then, Mr. Biggers, that you have had no practical experience of gas 1 A. Oh, yes. I have had some practical experience of gas. Q. Where did you get it 1 A. Well, I have only seen gas once in a safety-lamp. Q. Where did you get your practical experience of gas 1 A. At Kembla. Q. At Kembla 1 A. Yes. Q. When 1 A. W ell, I found gas there about a month ago: a small quantity of gas. Q. A month ago 1 A. No, it was not a month ago; it was about the 1st of last month. That is about the first gas I ha,e actually seen in the safety-lamp. Q. And is that your practical experience of gas 1 A. Oh, well, that is all you require, I think. Q. Well, is it1 A. That is all." Would you regard that person :.s a fit person to pass as a deputy 1 A. No. 29526. M1·. Wade.] He aJso says that he saw gas after the firing of a shot.

•' I

(t .

);

'II,

..;ri'

DUNCAN McGEAOHIE, previously sworn, was further examined, as under:Re-examined by Mr. Wade:29527. Q. Did you, at the 4th Right goaf edge, on the 4th August, find any signs of fire-damp in the presence of Mr. Humble 1 A. No. 29528. Q. Did you at any time, either in the presence of .Mr. Humble or in his absence, find any sign of fire-damp in that 4th Right goaf 1 A. None wbatever-noteven a trace of it. 29529. Q. Now, can you tell me this...:.when it was you did examine with a lamp for fire-damp; was it on the 4th 1 A. There was one exn.mination on the 4th, and another on the 5tb. On tbe Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday, I examined there. 29530. Q. That is the 4th, 5th, and 7th 1 A. Yes. 29531. Q. Were you with Mr. H umble 1 A. Mr. Humble was with us on the Monday night. I am not sure whether be was with us on the Thursday, or not. I know he was with us on Monday. I remember calling him back, both him and Mr. 'Atkinson . 29532. Q. Who was with you 1 A. Dr. Robet-tson and his party. The two parties met at this place. The Dr. stopped me, to speak to me. I said, " I will go after the party and ask them to come back." Mr. Humble and Mr. Atkinson were the two that came back. There was so::ne conversation about the direction of force. We attempted to go in ; and we lost our lights. 2953:3. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Who went in 1 A. Dr. Robertson, Mr. Humble,-and I am not sure whether Mr. Atkinson was one of the party. Dr. Robertson, Mr. Humble, and myself, I know of. I believe there was a fourth person. I am not sure whether it was Mr. Atkinson ; I do not remember. 29534. 11/.r. W ade.1 Q. You lost your lights and went back again. Did you make a test then 1 A. We lost our ordinary oil lights; and I turned on the hydrogen flame. I was able to keep that going in the presence of the carbonic acid gas. 29535. Q. Do you remember whether M1·. Atkinson was there after you came from the goaf cdge1 .A. Yes; I remember sP.eing him after I came back. It was at the corner of the travelling road. They were all sitting down. After a short conversation Mr. Humble and Mr. 'Atkinson went out; I stopped with Dr. Robertson's party. 29536. Q. You remember getting a telegram the other day 1 A. Yes, one day last week. 29537. Q. Did you ever hear, before that, that you were supposed to have found gas in the 4th Right1 A. No; that was the first I heard of it. It was a surprise to me to get the message. I could not understand it just at the time. · Examined by Mr. Bruce Smith:29538. Q. When did you first hear that Mr. H umble had said that he found gas 1 A. I never heard that Mr. H umble said so. 29539. Q. Did you get a telegram 1 A. Yes. 29540. Q. When did you hear that Mr. H umble had said that., but that now be says th11.t Mr. Atkinson was not there when he came out i A. I have heard nothing whatever but that Mr. Humble made a statement that be found gas. 29541. Q. At what time did you hear that he had withdrawn his statement 1 A. I do not quite understand you. 29542. Q. I want to know when yon first heard it 1 A. I did not hear that Mr. H umble had withdrawn nny statement. 29543. Q. Did you take any notes when you were on that trip 1 A. Do you mean on the Monday 1 29544-. Q. Yes 1 A. No. 29545. Q. Did you take any notes at all 1 A. Yes. 29546. Q. In a note-book 1 A . Yes. 29547. Q. Where is it 1 A. ln my pocket. 29548. Q. Give it to me1 A. I want to explain about Monday's notes. In going in, to get along quickly, the question was asked, will we all book. Mr. Atkinson said, "You call out; and we will take it down; and you will gP.t a copy." I handed my book to Mr. Atkinson; and my Monday's notes are in Mr. Atkinson's writing 29549. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Did Mr. Atkinson take notes 1 A. Ob, yes ; all the way through. 29550. . Q. Have you no notes at all beyond those Mr. Atkinson took i A. No. 29551. Q. Did Mr. Humble take notes 1 A. A few. 29552. }fr. Bruce Smith. J Q. You took no notes at all on the Monday 1 A. No notes on the Monday at all. 29553. Q. You were in-how many times 1 A. On the Monday 1 29554. Q. Yes? L.l. All day. 29555. Q. Mr. Humble went on the goaf edge i A. Not in my presence. 29557, 29556. Q. You do not know that he went up there 1 A. No.

1• \

873

,..

'S I

Witness-D. McGeachie, lR March, 1903.

29557. Q. Are you prepared to say that he did not go up the goaf and find 1 per cent. of gas 1 A. No. 29558. His Honor.] Q. Might it not have been on some other occasion 1 [ No answer.] 29559. M1·. Ritchie.] Q. Do you recollect whether you or Mr. Humble bad a hydrog,m flame 1 A. We both used it. I used it: I kno\v that. · 29560. Q. Where did you use it 1 A. I was standing on the floor close to the edge of fall. 29561. Q. You went up the stone 1 A. No. 29562. Q. Did you go up with Mr. Hum ble 1 A. No. 29563. Q. Did he go up 1 A. I cannot say. I did not see him go up. 29564. Q. What did you say about finding black-damp 1 A . I said it put our lamps out. 29565. Q. Did you afterwards try with the hydrogen lamp 1 A. We had to take the hydrog,m lamp. 29566. Q. D i<l you have any trouble with the black-damp 1 A. No more than putting our lights out. 29567. Q. After that, did it affect yonr hydrogen lamp 1 A. Not perceptibly. There was no effect on the hydrogen flame. That flame will live in a higher percentage of black-damp than an ordinary In.mp. 29568. His Honor.] Q. Is that the only occ:ision on which you went in with that lamp 1 A. I only got to the edge of the goaf wich the hydrogen In.mp. The only flame we could get near with was the hydrogen flame. 29569. Q. Was there not some other occasion on which Mr. Humble went to the goaf with you, and when he went up there as well as you ? A. I never went on to the fall; for the simple reason that you c?ul~ not do it. The hydrogen 1::i.mp is so weak in illuminating power that you could not go on top of fall with 1t. 29570. Q. Do you remember that Mr. Atkinson had the electric light 7 A. On the Monday. 29571. Q. Did he throw the light up to try and illuminate the fall for you? A. Yes. We did not try to get up at that time. 29572. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Did you go up at all? A. Yes, on the Thursday. 29573. Q. With Mr. Humble? A. I do not remember the composition of the party. I would .not say that he was there, or was not there. 20574. Mr. Briice Smith.] Q. You will not undertake to say that Mr. Humble did not go up on the goaf 1 A. He did not go up in my presence. I t must have been when I was not there. 29575. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Do you remember being in the mine on the 8th of August 1 A. Yes. 29576. Q. Do you recollect Mr. Humble going up there? A. Y es, that was when tbe conversation took place as to a prop. 22577. Q. Do yon recollect whether anylbiog was said about finding gas with a. hydrogen lamp 1 A. Not in my l1earing. 29578. Q. Were you with us then i A. No, not up at fall. 29579. Q. At all events you did not hear any remark made referring to the finding of gas 1 A. No; I never heard that such a thing was found there. 29580. M1·. Bruce Smith.] Q. You were there on the 4th 1 A. Yes. 29581. Q. You were there with Mr. Atkinson on the 7th 1 A. Yes. 29582. Q. And you were there again on the 8th? A. Yes ; every day excepting the Wednesday. 29583. Q. On the 4th those present were Messrs. Humble, McGeachie, Rogera, Barr, and Littlejohn 1 A. Yes. 29584. Q. I understand you to say that you will not undertake to swear that H nmbie did not go up on the goaf by himself, but that you did not go up 1 A. No, I wa:; not up there at all. I took the r eading against the roof. 29585. Q. Was he with you 1 A. Yes; on the Monday night. 29586. Q. He was with you on the Monday night when you wen:t to the gaof edge and held up the lamp 1 A. Yes. 29587. Q. You formed tba opinion that there was no gas 'l A. There was nothing to be seen with the hydrogen flame. 29588. Q. Did you ever use the hydrogen flame before then 1 .A. Yes. 29589. Q. B efore this time 1 A. Yes. 29590. Q. Often 1 A. Yes, almost every week for years. 29591. Q. You consider you found no gas 1 A. Not even a trace. 29592. Q. You took no notes on the Monday at all 1 A. I have explained the reason why. 29593. Q. You took them on other days 1 .A. Yes. 29594. Q. Are you sure that the whole of the party was with you when you went up to the edge of the goaf 1 A. There were not more than fou r-Mr. Humble, Mr. Robertson, and myself; and I believe the fourth was Mr. Atkinson. 29595. Q. Did the other members of the party remain back? A. We four went up to the goaf together. The other members of the party remained back. I remember Dr. Robertson being in front. He tried to s.crew his light up; and it went out; and I put my hydrogen flame on it. . 29596. Q. Did you and Mr. Humble remain together to observe the gas i A. I remember taking my lamp and reading it close against the roof; and I remeru ber that the atmosphere was heavy. 29597. Q. Did you call out anything; or did Mr. Humble make any remark about it 1 A. All I said was that there was nothing there-that there was no cap there. I thought at the time the others were behind me. 29598. Q. \Vas Mr. Humble obsen·ing the lamp at your back 1 A. No, I cannot say; but I know that he came back from the fall with me. 29599. Q. Yon have no recollection of Mr. Humble mentioning gas at all 1 A. No; and I believe my hydrogen lamp was the only one there. · · 29600. Q. If you held a lamp, and if Mr. Humble was observing it, it would be competent for him to read it 1 A. You must get the hydrogen lamp close to your eyes to rea.d it. Yon cannot read it if you hold it far away. I held it as close to my eye as I could. 29601. Q. It would be competent for him to see it a.s well a.s yourself 1 A. I think, if he bad seen it, there would hu.ve been some remal'k passec.l between us. If he was at my back, be could not see it. 29602. Q. If he said that you held up the lamp and he observed the reading, is that corrtct 1 A. H e might have been observing it at a distance; but be was not near enough to read it, at least so far as I know. 29603. Q. Would he not be able t,o look over your shoulder1 A. I do not think that be cottld tell from there whether there was 1 per cent. of gas or none. 29604. 16825 29~0 S

874 Witness-D. McGeachie, 18 March, 1903.

29604. Mr. Robert.ton.] Q. You have seen two observers look at a la.mp together 1 .A. Yes, but no man could observe it without my knowing that he was there. 29605. Q. This is what Mr. Humble stated in para.graph 27832 of the shorthand writer&' notes :-11 Q. Were you with Mr. McGeachie1 A. I was. I h~y alongside of him. We bad to lie on the stone. I lay alongside of him, and watched the lamp, and saw just a.swell as he would bf! able to see it.'' A. That was on the Menday niabt. The incident of lying down does not refer to me. 29Â°606. Q. He may have peen leaning against the stones 1 A. I remember testing on the _aide of the roof. I went down on my knees on the stones, and screwed on the hydrogen Bame, and took a. reading. I do not remember Mr. Humble reading it. 29607. His Honor.] Q. If black-damp was there, you would get up as high as you could 1 Ji. Yes, but it was not so strong as that. 29608. Q. Your object would be to get up as high as you could out of the black-damp. Did you not go up the stones 1 A. No; the light was so dull that we could not see the way to get up there. 29609. Mr. Robertson.] Q. I thought you said tba.t Mr. Atkinson was there 1 A. He wa.s, but went away. He had an electric la.mp. 29610. Q. There was an electric light there 1 A. Not when I was ta.king the reading; because, if it had been there then, I could not have taken the reading. 29611. Q. The two lights would have interfered with ea.ch other 1 A. It would have taken a.way the light from Lhe hydrogen Bame altogether. You can only read it in the dark. 29612. His Honor.] Q. Did not Mr. Atkinson leave you when you went to the roof 1 A. I never went above the roof. I remember touching the roof with my hydrogen lamp, and had to alter it because of that. (At 4Âˇ15 p.m. the Commission adjourned until 10 o'clock the following morning.]

THURSDAY, 19 MAReQH, 1903, 10 a.m. [ Tlte Commission met at tlte No. 2 District Gou.rt, King-atrut, Sydney. ] flttStttf :-.

D. A. W.

0. E. R. MURRAY, ESQ., D.C.J. (PBESIDENT). ROBERTSON, EsQ., ComussIONER. I D. RITCHIE, EsQ., Colll11ss10NER.

Mr. Bruce Smith, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by Mr. Wood, Crown Solicitor's Oflice, appeared on behalf of the Crown. Mr. A. A. Atkinson, Chief Inspector of Coal-mines, assisted Mr. Bruce Smith. Mr. C. G. Wade, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by Messrs. Curtiss & Barry, Solicitors, was present on behalf of the Mount Kembla. Coal and Oil Company (Proprietors of the Mount Kembla Mine). (Mr. J. Garlick, Secretary to the Commission, was present to take shorthand notes of the evidence and proceedings.) (His Honor mentioned that be had received from the Government Astronomer particulars of the Barometrica.l Readings at Wollongong daily from t he 1st of July to the 16th of August, 1902, also the mean Barometrical Pressure at Wollongong for the month of July for the twenty-two years prior to 1902. The letter was put in and marked Exhibit No. 62. For copy, see Appendix). Mr. P. J. BROWNLEE was sworn, and examined as under:(This witness was called at the request of Mr. Lysaght, and was examined in chief by Mr. Bruce Smith on his behn.lf, as Mr. Lysaght was absent). Examination-in-chief by Mr. Bruce Smith:29613- 5. Q. What is your name 7 A. Patrick James Brownlee. 29616. Q. And you a.re a check-weighman at Mount Kembla Colliery 1 A. Yes. 29617. Q Where were you on the day of the disasted A. I was iu the weigh-cabin. 206 18. Q. That is very close to the mouth of the tunnel, is it noU A. Yes, a.bout 20 or 25 yards from the mouth. 29619. Q. And there is an engine-house, I think, between you, where you sit, and the mouth of the tunnel 1 ..4. Yes. 29620. Q. A:n<l as you come out of the tunnel you tiee right ipto this engine-house, do you not 1 A . Yes. Well, I would not say. I have not been coming out of the tunnel. 29621. Q. Coming out of the tunnel, you would see right into the engine-house1 ..4.. Yes, you would. 29622. Q. And your office, where you sit 1 A. Yes ; just after you come to the engine-bed-the engine is above the road-you would come to the weigh-office. 29623. Q. You remember the day, I suppose, a.nd the hour. I do not mean to name it; but you remember the occasion 1 A. Yes. 29624. Q. What was the first intimation you had that anything had gone wrong 1 A. The first that I knew that anything was wrong was that I was on my face down on the floor. 20625. Q. Did you see anything before yon were thrown on your face 1 A. No. 29626. Q. What were you doing at the moment 7 A. I was half sitting and half standing, leaning on the desk, partly looking out of the window; but I was looking down towards the sea. That is the last I remember. 29627. Q. The back of your head would be towards the tunnel 7 ..4.. Yes. 29268. Q. The tunnel looked out a.cross the sea 7 A. Yes. 29629. Q. Had you any papers in your hand 1 A. No; nothing but the pencil. 29630. Q. What happened 1 .A. The first that I knew was that I was--[ Interrupted]. 29631. Q. You were thrown on tho floor: you did not see much there 1 .1. I was on the fl oor, and I heard just like some queer noiso. 29632.

875

WitneM-P. J. Brownlee, 19 March, 1903.

29632, Q. What do you mean by a queer noise-a whistle 1 A. No; it was just t he same as if you put something in my ea.rs. I could not say for a. certainty whother H was myself or the man with me that spoke first; but I remember either bis or my saying, "We had better get out of this," and "What is wrong1 " 29633. Q. Did you see anything 1 A. Yes, I saw fire. 29634. M,Âˇ. Robertson.] Q. I think you said a moment ago that you saw nothing 1 A. Before. This would be t he shock. The fi rst thing I knew was that I was on my face; but I did not either feel or bear anything from t he time I was standing at my desk like this (indicating}-tbe next I knew was that I w11,s on the floor. 29635. His Honor.] Q. You picked yourself up as quickly as you could 1 .d. Yes. I got up like on the desk. and got knocked down. 29636. M't. Bru,ce Smitli. J Q. W here did you see the fire 1 A. From the tunnel it ca.me through the window. The window of the weigh-ca.bin was just in front of us, and there is another one in the opposite corner. 29637. Q. As you sit at your desk the tunnel is in to your left ? A. Yes. 29638. Q. Anything coming out of the tunnel would come right across your face 1 A. Yes. ~9639. Q. Your window looks out on the skips coming to be weighed 1 A. Yes, on the weigh-bridge. 29640. Q. And then you got up ;-which way did you look 1 A. I looked to get out. 29641. Q. Which way did you look 1 A. I looked to the right. 296 42. Q. You looked to the sea 7 A. Yes. 29643. Q. Where did you see the flame 1 A. Say that was the window there (pointing to a window in tl1e C'ourt)-tbe weigh-cabin something resembles this Court-the flame came from this window to that window, and it came in to my left hand, and under the desk, and out over me, and over Wilson.. 29644. Q. Were you burnt at all 1 A. Yes, I was burnt. 29645. Q. Where were you burnt 1 A. I had all the hair burnt off this side (the left side) of my head j a.nd I got burnt here (indicating the lower part of the arm) and right up my arm past the elbow. 29646. Q. H ow did it burn you ;-what wag the effect upon the skin 1 A. The skin was peeled off my arm when I got out of the place. 29647. Q. And your hair was singed 7 A. Yes; and everything on the side of my head was all burnt off, and this (indicating hi s moustaclte) was burnt off. 29648. His Honor.l Q. By "this " you mean the left side of your moustache 1 A. Yes; and my eyebrows. 29649. Q. It missed your eyes 1 A. I got a few cuts on the face from the glass. 20650. Q. It missed your eyes ;-it did not hurt your eyes 7 A. No. 29651. Afr. Bruce Smitlt.] Q. Of course, you cannot tell us how long it was afterwards-how many seconds, or anything of that sort 7 A. No. 29652. Q. When you fell down, <lid you see any flame 1 A. No; when I started to get up again. 29653. Q. It was not till you got up and you were looking scawar<ls that you felt the flame and saw it, :,011 say 1 A. Yes, it bur nt the sheet I was working on. 29654. Q. What was the sheet made of 1 A. Paper. 29666. Q. And you were writing on this, were you 1 A. Yes. 29656. Q. And you say it burnt it 1 A. Yes. 29657. Q. What did it do to it 1 A. When I went back to look for it, there was only a little piece of it, not half as square as this book (the Cou1Âˇ& Bible), where the glass fell on it, that I could find. I could not fiild any date on it. 29658. Q. What part of it was burnt 7 A. All was burnt except this little square. 29659. Q. And the glass had fallen on it 1 A. Yes. 29660. Q. Was that the sheet you were entering the weights on 1 A. Yes. 29661. Q. Theti you lost a number of your entries 1 A. Yes; but I got them from the Company's sheet afterwards. 29662. Q. Where was the other man i A. Sitting to the right of me. 29663. Q. Who was hE: 1 A. Wilson. 29664. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. You were sitting at the desk next to the tunnel mouth 7 A. Yes. 29665. Mr. Bruce Smi&lt.] Q. And he was sitting alongside of you 1 A. Yes. 29666. Q. You were sitting here; tmd he was outbye of you 7 ..1. Yes. 29667. Q. What became of him when you fell <lown 7 Li. He was down too, the same as I was. 29668. Q. Then you fell this way, outbye, towards the oce!lo 1 A. I could not say that. We were both on the floor in front of the desk. 29669. Q. Were you knocked down; or did you duck 1 A. No, I did not duck, I do not think. I do not think I had time. 29670. Q. What did you do after that 1 A. Wilson got out before me. I got the door ha.If open ; a.nd when I forced the door open V/ilson got out. I was holding it open. The door was jambed at the bottom; and when I forced it open Wilson got out, and he went away. I got partly out; but I could not get this leg out (refe rring to !tis wooden leg.) I got partly out; and _I could not get OYer the debris, and had to get back a.gain. 29671. Q. Was that before you hurt your leg, or afted A. I hurt my leg a. long time ago. 29672. Q. What did you do 7 A. I got back again; and then I got out. When I got out, the tin and iron were faJling all over. 2967:l. Q. The building was tumbling about 7 A. Yes, all the sheets of iron. 29674. Q. Did you see anything of the engine-man, Purcell 1 A. He was the first man I saw when I cattle otit. 29675. Q. What did you do 1 A. I said " Is that you P addy"; and he said "Yes." I could not recognise h ~m ; I did not know him at first. 29676. Q. Why could not you recognise him 1 A. H e had no hair on his head or face. 29677. Q. Had he a. beard before that 1 A. H e had a moustache before that. 29678. Q. Dirl you get close to him 1 A. I went close up to him, and said "Is that you Padcty "; and he said "Yes." And just a few yards from him, on the top of the bank, a. few feet from the edge of the bank Clark was standing; and I went over to Clark ; and he was all shaking. ' 29679. Q. Where had be been 1 A, I could not ss.y. Ile was just 4own below ~e towards tho tip, from wh~re 1 wl\q,

876 Witness-P. J. Brownlee, 19 March, 1903.

,. 29680. Q. What was he 1 A. He generally calls tu.a numbers to the weighman; but l~e was not .ca.Uilig at the time. . 29681. Q. Purcell was afterwards in the Hospital 1 .A. Yes, he was in the H ospital. 29682. Q. For some time 7 A. Yes. 29.683. Q. Was he standing up when you saw him 7 .A: Yes. . . . . 29684. Jfr. Ritchie.] Q. How far was he then fro?1 his _reg?lar pos1t1on m the ~ngme-house ~ A : He was. half-~ay between the Company's office and tbe weigh cabm, Just where the old wmcb stands. 29685. Q. Tbat would be about 10 yards, probably 7 A. Ye!'!, 10 yards. 29686. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. He was protected, really, from the fire by the office? A. No, he was on the. inside of where I w,\s. ._ 29687. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Of whom are you speaking now 1 A. I said to Purcell " I s that you Paddy" ; and he said "Yes" ; and just a few yards from him Clark was standing, all of a shake, on the top of the bank: he was within a few feet of being O\'er the bank. . 29688. Q. Who was it that was between the office and the weigh-cabin 7 A. Pnrcell. . 29689. Mr. Rite/tie. J Q. Had be travelled down there 7 A. I do not know. 29690. Q. Would he have bad time to travel down there from the time that you were first knocked down 1 A. Yes because it took me a bit of time to get out of the place. I could not get out very well. _ 29691., Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. What <lo you say was the position and the conditio1} of Clark 7 A. I wen~ over to Clark as soon as I saw him; and I caught him by the arm, and said "Ho.w are you doing, Jack 1 ". or " I s this yon, Jack 1"; and be did uot answer; and I caught him by the arm; and where I caught him all the skin peeled uff. 29692. Q. Had he his arm naked 1 A. Yes. . 29693. Q. His sleeves turned up: and the skin peeled off when you got bold of him 7 A. Yes. . 29694. Q. Was he in the Hospital afterwards 1 A. No ; he was treated at home by a private nurse. 29695. Q. Tell me any other men that you saw that you considered were burnt 1 A: Inside, or outside, the mine1 . 29696. Q. Did you go in 1 A. No. 29697. Q. Then outside 1 A. I saw Percy Stone, young Richards, and young Nelson. ,, 29698. Q. Were they alive 1 A. Richards and Stone were alive. 29699. Q. Were they burnt 1 A. Yes. 29700. Q. What were the appearances of their burns 1 A. I do not think I could describe them to you. Stone's clothes were very: nearly off him ; and there was skin hanging off him 4 or 5 tnches long. 29701. Q. And what colour was the skin 7 A. It was black. 29702. Q. Just banging off in strips 1 A. Yes. 29703. Q. And what about his hair 1 A. His hair was pretty well all burnt off. 29704. Q. Had he had a beard 1 .A. No; he was only a boy. They were two boys. 29705. Q. Was Richards burnt1 A. Yes. . . 2!)706. Q. What did you see about him 1 A. I saw his hair was all burnt off him, and his clothes were pretty wen burnt. 29707. Q..The.se had all been at the tunnel mouth, outside 7 A. Yes. 29708. Q. And they were browned, discoloured 1 A. Oh yes ; they were as black as anything. 29709. Q. Have you ever had any experience of gas in that mine; have you evel' worked in that mine and got coal 1 A. Yes. 29710. Q. Before you were weighman 1 A. Yes. 2971 1. Q. How long ago is that 1 A . I have not worked now for the last two or three years. 29712. Q. How long ago is it since you were getting coal 1 A. It is about three years since I worked on the coal. 29 713. Q. What part of the mine were you in 7 A. In No. 1, when I last worked there. 29714. Q. I n No. 1 Right1 A. The 4th Right. 29715. Q. The 4th Right in the No. 1 7 A. Yes. 29716. Q. Âˇwhat experience did you have of gas there i A. I never saw gas in the 4th Right. 29717. Q. Where did you ha\'e had experience of gas j you said you had had some experience of gas in' the mine 1 A. I do not know that I did say it. 29718. Q. Then you haYe not seen gas in the mine 1 A. Yes, I saw gas in Moun.t Kembla. 29719. Q. H ow long ago 7 A. A good few years ago. There is any quantity of gas in Keinbla. 29720. Q. How long ago- was it 1 A. Ten or t welve years ago. 297 21. Q. In what part of the mine 7 A. In the shaft; in No. 4 in the shaft district. 29722. Q. In what way did it show itself 1 A. I lit it. I went into the place; and it lit before I got within 8 or 10 yards of the place. 29723. Q. Was that after you fired a shot, or when you went in in the morning 1 A. No; the first thing in the morning. 29724. Q. Where did you find it -up in the roof 1 11. No; I bad my light in my hand when it lit. There was some coal chucked. back; and I was goina over this coal. 29725. Q. Was it a large blast 7 A. Pretty 1:rge. 29726. Q. How far were you from the face 1 A. 8 or 10 yards. 29727. Q. Did it knock you over at all 1 A. Yes. 29728. Q. Upset you 1 A. Yes. 29729. Q. Did it burn you 7 A. It burnt pretty well all the hair off my head. I had a blue .flannel on ; and it made it pretty white. 29 730. Q. Who was the deputy of that district 1 Âˇ A. David Evans. 2973 l. Q. Did you tell him 7 A. Yes. I sent wol'<l, and he came and inspected the place before I went in to work. 29732. Q. Were you able to go on with your work i Yes. 29733. Q. You sent wor.d to him, and be came in 1 A. Yes. 29 734. Q. Did you describe it to him 1 A. Y es. 2973 5. Q. And did you show him the distance from the face? A. Yes, and showed him where I got my hair burnt, and the flannel burnt. 29736. Q. Have you any idea what year it was 7 A. Ten or twelve years a.go. 29737.

! (

Witiiess-P. J. Brownlee, 19 March, 1903.

29.737. Mr. Robe1·tson.] You say this is ten or twelve years ago. From your previous evidence I cannot s~e how it could have been more than three years ago. You said you were two or three years in the mine 1 A. No. I have not been in the mine since I got my leg off. 29738. Mr. Robertson.] I think you sairl you had been two or three years in the mine. 29739. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. I think it is a mistake. (By tbe request of Mr. Robertson, Mr. Garlick then read from the shorthand notes the witness' evidence upon this point.) 29740. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. How many years did yon work in the mine before you bec.l.me checkweighman 1 .A. About fourteen or fifteen years, off and on. I would go away for a time. 29741. Q. You a.re in the employ of the Company now 1 A. No, not now. 29742. Q. But you are check-weighman at the mine~l)W ? A. Yes. 297 43. Q. For the miners 1 A. Yes. 297'44. Q. And you are paid by them 1 A. Yes.

Cross-examination by Mr. Wade : 297 45. Q. Do you sa.y the side of your moustache was burnt right off 1 .A. Yes, it was burnt short, just

about like that (indicating). 29746. Q. It was mostly off1 A. Yes. 29747. Q. And do you say the hair was burnt off your head 1 A. Yes; on this side. 29748. Q. Which side 1 A. The left side. 29749. Q. Do you mean burnt right off, burnt up c1ose 1 A.. I will not say it was burnt altogether off; it was all shrivelled up. 29760. Q. D o you say the hair wa<, burnt off your heai on the left-hand side 1 A. I do not think anyone ta.~es it that I say it WM burnt completely olf; I say it was burnt. 29751. Q. You used the f'xpression before that it was" all burnt off"; I want to know whether you mean that 1 ..4. I did not mean to say it was burnt completely off my head ; it was all shl'ivelled up. 29752. His Honor.] Q. Had it been about the same length as it is now 1 A. Yes. I went and got it cut as soon as I got to a barber. 29753. Q. But, before it was burnt, was it about the same length as it is now i A. It mighL not have been quite so long. It is longer now than I generally wea.r it. 29754. Jfr. Wade.] Q. Do you say your skin was burnt 1 A. Yes. 29755. Q. Did it blister you 1 A. Yes. 29756. Q. Where 1 A. On my arm here. 29757. Q. Not on the face 1 A. No. 29758. Q. Do you remem ber walking down the incline within an hour of the occurrence 1 A. Yes. 29759. Q. And meeting several people1 A. Y es. 29760. Q. Do you remember seeing me amongst those people 1 A. No. I saw you when I was going uµ again ; I had been home. 29761. Q. Not going down the incline 1 A. No. I had been up, and bad a wash and a change; and I ca.me up. My missus came up the incline; and I came up after. You passed me near the foot of the ihcline, on the engine. 29762. Q. Can you tell me who these people were you met 1 A. I can tell you some of them; but I cannot tell you all. I met Halloran and 'Wilson. I do not know anybody else that I took particular notice of ; b'u t I know I was talking to those two. 29763. Q. Who is Halloran 1 A. John Halloran. 29764. Q. What is he 1 A. Publican at Mount Kembla. 29765. Q. What is Wilson 1 .A. H e is a farmer near K emhla They both bad sons in t he mine. That is how I came to be speaking to them, because. they stopped to ask me what, was wrong, and how things were. 29766. Q. Was Wilson, the weighman, burnt 1 A . Yes ; his hair was burnt. 29767. Q. The same as yours. Now, Jet us understand ; the first you k-new was that you were knocked down on the floor of the weigh-cabin 1 A. Y es ; the first I knew was that I was on the floor. 29768. Q. Is that the time the door got jambed 1 A. No; it was not jambed when I was on the floor. 29769. Q. You say the door got jambed, and you opened it 1 A. Yes. 29770. Q. Is not the time that you wel'e knocked down the time when the door was jambed 1 A. The lining boards inside the office must have got blown over our beads; and the big shelves above us were blown over us ; and they were against the bottom of the <loor. 29771. Q. Was not tb e weigh-cabin partly turned c,ved .A. A Lit. 29772. Q. And was not that the time when the door got jambed 1 A. Yes. 29773. Q. And you were some time getting up 1 A. lt would certainly take me some time to get up. 29774. Q. When was it the flam e bumt you; you say after you got up 1 A. No; when I was on t he floor. The flam e was coming over my head and under the dP.sk. 29775. His Ho1t01·. ] Q. Had the door been shut before this happene<l 1 A. No; I think the door was standing half 3:jo.r when it happened. We generally leave it standing half ajar for the air to come in. The window is straight opposite the machine; and the door is stl'oight opposite at the back; and we leave it open for th e sake of the air. 29776. Q. D oes it open inwards or outwards 7 A. It opens in. 29777. Mr.Robertson.] Q. I s the doornext to the tunnel mouth ? A. Yes, itswings io towards the tunnel mouth. 29778. Mr. Wade.] l t is on the opposite side of the cabin to the tunnel mouth. 29779. ]Jlf r. Robertson.] Q. l -; it nearest the tunnel mouth or the screen 1 A. No; it opens on to the back, next to the Company's otlice. 297 80. Q. It is facing to the back 1 A. Ye3, the door is at the back there. As you look out of the window of the Company's otlice, the door of the weigh.cabin is straight opposite, over the winch. 29781. Jlfr. Wade.] Q. Is the window from which you would see the skips opposite the door 1 A. Y es, I wonld like to explain that. 29782. llis Honor.] Q. Can you draw a sketch of it 1 A. Yes. 29783. [Witness t hen d rew a pencil sketch, to explain this part of his evidence.] 29784. llis llunor.] Q. \Vere both windows bl'Oken 1 A. Yes; there was not a pane left in ei thn window. 29785. Q. Were the windows blown right out, or right in 1 A. Blown right in. You will see any a,mount 2978U . of glass sticking in the boards, where it was blown into them over our he~s. 0

.I.

878 Witness-P. J. Brownlee, 19 March, 1903.

29786. M'I'. Wade.] Q. I suppose the window was shut just before you were knocked over 1 A: No; th~ window is three half windows; and the middle window slips backwards a.nd forwards. 29787. Q. Was it open 1 A. Yes; not right open. We open it, say, just according to how the wind UJ blowing. 29788. Q. Was it open that day at all 7 A. Yes, it was open. 29789. Q. Did you see any dust blown out just before you were knocked over 1 :d. No; I s~w nothing at a.IL 29790. Q. You saw nothing at all 1 A. No ; I did not know anything had happened, until, the first thing I knew, I was on the floor. · 29791. Q. Now, with regard t0 PuL·cell, do you say he had no hair on his head or on his face eitherf A. Well, it was burnt off, all like--[lnterrupted.] 29792. Q. Do you mean to say he had no hair on his head or face 1 A. No; it wa.s burnt off. It was jtlfi• a cap over his head like a lather over his head. It was like burnt on, sticking to his scalp. 29793. Q. You mean the hair bad all gone 7 A. There may have been a little sticking to the skull under; I did not see him after. 29794. Q. Was he wearing a cap when you saw him 1 A. No; he had nothing on his head at all. 29795. Q. Did you hear a hissing noise 1 A. Yes, I heard a hissing noise after I got up. 29796. His Honor..] Q. Did yon find out what caused it 7 A. Yes, I did. I ma.de it my business to go attd see. As far as I know, it was the steam, like, up on the engine sheds. 29797. Q. Blowing off from where 7 A. From the connection between the boiler and the engine. 29798. Q. Had the pipe been blown away? A. I do not know what had been blown away; but I know the steam was blowing up between where the engine was and where the boilers were ; and I asked som~bodf to go and see about it after I came out. Somebody came across to me, and said to me, "The boiler's busted"; and I said, "It's not the boiler busted." Tbat was the man that was firing t he boilers. He came back to me ; and he said, " It is not the boilers; it is the connection between Purcell and me." WelJ, between the time that he bad been spea.king to me first and the time that he catite ba.e~1 I bs.d been up t.o the travelling road tunnel; and, when I went to go up to the travelling road tunnel, after leaving Cl~rk; just after I came out of the cabin, I took Clark to where he was safe., and set him down; and when I went round a few yards, all the smoke and dust were coming out of the .travelling road, and blowing everyt hing1 papers, and leaves, to the bush down below; and he came to me and said, "It's not the boilers; it is tlie connection"; and I said, "Yes, I know the connection is busted." 29799. Q. Which way was the steam blowing? A. Partly towards the tunnel mouth. That was when I went back, after I came out of the cabin ; when I went back again the steam was blowing like thA:t, partt1y in towards the tunnel. 29800. M,,.. Wade.] Q. Then there seemed to be a current 01 air going towards the tunnel at t hat tim(?. 29801. His Honor.] Q. I do not mean the direction in which the air was blowing the steam; but whidh way was the spurt of the steam 1 A. lt; was not straight towards the tunnel mouth; but on an angle across the tunnel mouth. 29802. Q. Was the pipe pointing that way 7 A. I did not take notice. 29803. Q. It would be corning from some pipe 1 A . Yes. I said to the man that was :firing, when he cam ~ across to me after I was talking to him the second t ime, " You had better go and see to those boilers; thej' will burst"; and he said, "No, Wray is at the boilers." 29804. Mr. Robe1·tson.] Q. Did not that steam make very much noise 1 A. No ; it did not make very much noise. It may have made more noise than I think, because I was partly deaf for a week or two a:fterwards J but it was as if you put your fingers in my ears, like that; that is what it put me in mind of; like if yon a.re under water and come up, and everything seems to he buzzing in your ears. 29805. Q. Usually when steam is blowing off from a boiler you cam;1.ot hear much 1 A. N'o. 29806. Q. But still you wne talking to these people; do you say the noise was not so great as to prevent your talking to these people 7 A. But I was talking to those men out in front of the Company's office. 29807. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. ls that round the corned A. Yes, just in front of t he Company's office. 29808. Mr. Wade.] Q. Do not you know there was a big pipe; do you know how many boilers thel'e were 7 A. Three boilers. 29809. Q. And do they all feed the engine 1 A. Yes, I think they do. 29810. Q. Was not there a large pipe running from the boiler across to the eugine1 A. No doubt thera was ; I cou1d not say. 29811. Q. That would be, you might say, across the top of the tunnel mouth 1 A. Yes; well, it would go from the boilers across to the engine-room. 29812. Q. And it was about 6 or 7 feet high off the ground 1 A. I do not know what height it was; but I think it would be possibly more than that. 29813. Q. And the pipe was about nearly a foot in diameted A. I could not tell you. 29814. Q. Somewhere about that thickness, or diameter-getting on to a foot 1 A I could not tell you about the pipe. P ossibly I have seen it many a time; but I could not say. 29815. Q. Was not the whole of the roof of the structure and building t here smashed down at the same time as this pipe was fractured ; was not the whole thing a wreck when you saw it 1 A. Yes. 29816. Q. Now, was not the steam rushing out there, when you first saw it, at a tremendous rate 1 A. Na, there was not a great deal of steam coming out. I have seen as much coming out many a. time when she was blowing off as that I saw there. 2981 7. Q. And you say there was no extra noise, and no unusual amount of steam 1 A. I will not say exactly the quantity of steam or noise; for I could not hear very well. 29818. Q. Yon say there was no more than you have seen on an ordinary occasion blowing off from Cfflft boiled A. Not more than like when the steam escapes. 29819. Q. When did you first notice your sheet, your weigh-sheet, was burnt-after you got up 1 A. After I got out and went to the travelling road tunnel j when I came back again there was a lot of fire in the cabin. 29820. Q. What do you mean by fire in the cabin 1 A. The lining boardij w~re gn tire, 29821. Q. Burning1 A. Yes. 2!1822. Q. In several places 1 A. They were, ~n (_)!!e pl~ce, · i9S!H 29823. ({. ~ctually burni?g 1 J. Yes.

Witnus-P. J . Brownlee, 19 March, 1003.

29824:. Q. Where was that 1 A. It was in the corner at the desk, just under where my feet would be. 29825. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. That i~ the corner next the tunnel mouth 1 A. Yes. 29826. M,. Wade.] Q. Do you mean u_nderneath the desk 7 A. Yes, just under the deek. 29827. Q. I suppose Wilson had a weigh-sheet there, too 1 A. Yes. 29828. Q. Was his burnt 7 A. No. 29829. Q. IIis was lying side by side with yours 1 A. No, I do not know where he got his. 29830. Q. I do not want to know where he got it; but when the disaster occurred I.Jis woul<l be alongside yours 7 A. Yes, when sbe went out; not that Wilson, but another Wilson, went in and put the fi re out, and damped the place, the sheets G.nd all, after they put the fires out in the storeroom just out side the cabin. In the storet·oom there were boxes with shavings afld packing in them; they were all ·on fire ; and several men went and carried them out and turned them out on sheets of iron that were outside; and ·wilson forced iu and put t he fi re out. 29881. Q. W hat W ilson is that7 A. William Wilson, blacksmith at Kembla. 29832. His Honor.] Q. W as that before you came back to the cabin 7 ..tl. No, after I came back from the travelling road. 29833. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Where was this store 7 A. Just immediately behind the weigh-cabi._n. It goes back to i he Company's office like to the back there [indicating]. 29834. Mr. Wade.] Q. How far would it be away from the rails 1 A. A couple of feet, I suppose. 29835. Q. A couple of feet only 1 A. Yes. 29836. Q. Is it not a good deal nearer 4 yards 1 A. No. 29837. Q. It was behind your office, was not it 1 A . No, it came flush down with my office from the engineshed. I will show you on that sketch there. 29838. Q. Then it was nearer the engine than you were1 A. Yes. [ Witness explained thesi tuationon the sketch.] 29839. Witness.] The weigh-cabin and t he store had all the one wall on the tunnel side. There may have been just a little corner, a.bout t hat much [indicating] where the box with the weights stand on it. I do not think it is more t han about 2 feet from the rails, the wall of this store. 29840. Mr. Wade.] Q. What is that wall made of-galvanized iron 1 A. Yes. 2984:1. Q. W here was t he opening 1 A. At the back of the weigh-cabin. 29842. Q. That would be a door 1 A. Yes. 29843. Q. Was the door usually shut 1 A. Yes. 29844. Q. Was it knocked open, this door 1 A. All the iron was blown off; both t he top and the sides 0£ it blown all out. It was completely wrecked, and just some of the frames stood. 29845. Q. H ow long had you been working in the 4th Right before you were hurt 1 A. I was working in t he 4th R ight when I was hurt. 29846. Q. Before you were hurt, how long had you been working in that district 1 A. I might be t here for three mon ths now, and I might not be back again for two or three years. 29847. Q. I do not want "might"; I want to know how Jong you were there on a.od off1 A. I have no idea ; that is more than I can tell you. 29848. Q. Were you in there on more than one occasion 1 A. Yes, I drove some of the 4th Right in. 29849. Q. Dreve the beadings in the first instance 1 A. It was not driven as headings; it was d dveo as eut-th rooghs. · 29850. Q. That was when you fi rst opened the district 1 A. Yes. 29851. Q. You mean that they drove the bords first, and you helped to d rive the cut-th roughs of the bords 1 .d. Ye~; and, as far as I know, that formed the 4th Right in. 29852. Q. And that formed the heading 1 A. It is either the back or the front heading; I cannot say which it is. 211853. Q. But you were ,vorking in the 4th R ight; soon after they opened up that district 1 A. No, the 4th Right was about finished when I worked there. 29854. Q. Finished 1 A. The bords were about finished. 29855. Q. That is not finishing the 4th R ight 1 .A. What is not 1 29856. Q. You say when you left H was finished; it was not finished till last July. You say that when you got hurt they had just about finished the bords in the 4th Right 1 A. No. 29857. Q. What do you mean 1 A. I said when I was driving this 4th Right heading the bor<ls were all driven up t heir distance; and we drove cut-tbronghs from bord to bord that formed either the front or back heading of the 4th Right; I am not certain which. 29858. Q. When was that 1 A. It was a good while ago. 29859. Q. Give us some idea; was it twelve months before yon were hurt 1 A. It was more than t hat. 29860. Q. Now, you were actually hurt in October, 19001 A. Yes, I think that is the year. 29861. Q. And you were working on pillars at that time 1 A. Yes; just started on them. 29862. Q. Had you been working on pillars before in the 4th Right 1 .A. No. 29863. Q. You were never on pillars before 1 A. Not in the 4th Right. 29864. Q. And your experience before that in the 4th Right had been in cut-throughs or bords 1 A. Yes. 29865. Q. .t\nd who was your mate at the time you were hurt ;-was it not your brothed A. Yes. 29866. Q. Was he your mate when you worked in the 4th Right on other occn.sions 1 A. Yes, I believe be was. I am not certain; but I fancy he was. 29867. Q. Did you see any dust on this day of the disaster 1 A . I saw smoke and dust coming out of the t ravelling road. 29868. Q. But did you see any dust at the tunnel coming out 1 A. I saw nothir:g when the thing happened in the main tunnel. 29869. Q. You saw no dust in the main tunnel 7 A. No; not that I know. 29870. Mr. .Bruce Smitli.] Q. Where did you see dust and smoke 1 A. Coming out of the travelling road. That is when I came out of the cabin and came rouncl, aftel' I saw P urcell and got hold of Clark and took him to where he was safe and sat him down-the smoke and that were teeming out of the travelling road. 29871. Q. Tbat is smoke and dust1 A. Yes. 29872. Q. Do you mean to say there wore no dust and smoke coming out of the tunnel mouth then 1 .A.. No. As f11r as I know it was not coming out of the tunnel mouth; although the tunnel mouth had pretty well fallen in, o.s I saw afterwards. When I came out of my cabin, everything was quiet; but when I came to the travelling road it was t eeming right out t he1·e. 29878.

880 Witness-P. J. Brownlee, 19 March, 1903.

29873. His Honor.] Q. Puffing out or ooz~g out 1 A. No,. just oozing ~ut . Well,. it was blowing all the old paper and leaYes, and everything stra1ght away down rnto the busl~ 1~ front of it. 2987 4-. Q. Then it was puffing out 1 .tl.. Yes; as far as I could see of 1t, 1t would very nearly blow a man off his feet, what was coming out of there. 298i 5. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Did you se~ a lot of paper, and stuff, and dust, blow_n out 1 A. No ; ~hat wa<; picked up as it came out; and when 1t stopped there were a lot of leaves and thmgs sucked back mto t.be tunnel mouth acrain. Then I wenl up towards the tunnel (the travelling roa,cl tunnel); and I met Mr. Frost with two big boss' lamp,; I asked him where he was going; and he said he was going into the mine; and I took one of the lamps from him : then he ran back to the road to Johnny MG.fr, and he took the other one from him, and asked me "What has happened 1" ; and I said "The pit has blown off" ; and he said "If it bas, I will not let him go in with them"; ancl then I weut away. I would like to say this : the burn in the weigh-cabin is there yet; and the pine-boards are burnt half way round, on the left-hand side under the desk, where the fire came in that burnt me; and the boards are burnt half way through. 29876. ll~s Honor.] Q. I s uppose it comes to this, that you would have gone back, but you were not fit 1 A. No. I wanted to go in; and they would not allow me. I wanted to go in with Mr. Robertson.. I was one of the first to offer to go in ; and they would not let me. 29877. Q. And you have lost your leg, too 1 A. Yes. Examination by Mr. Ritchie:29878. Q. Diel you see the bodies that were brought out of the mine i .A. Yes; I identified a lot of the bodies that were brought out. 29879. Q. I suppose you knew tLem all i A. Yes ; I did know most of them. They could not identify them ; and Sergeant Banks came to me and said, "You have seen them going in c:lean and coming out dirty : and you ought to be the best able to identify them"; bnt some of them I could not identify. 29880. Q. Did you see any burnt 1 A. Y es. 29881. Q. Who wer e they1 A. I saw Walter Morris and his son. I identified them. 29882. Q. Any others 1 A. I saw Aitken and son. 29883. Q. Any others 1 A. I saw Claud Stafford. I think that is about all I remember. I ::;aw pretty well all the bodies that came out. 29884. Q. Did you see young Silcock 1 A. Yes, I saw young Silcock. 20885. Q. Was he burnt 1 A. Y es ; he seemed to be pretty badly burnt too. 29886. Q. And you say those thali you mentioned here, Morris and son, Aitken and son, and Claud Stafford, were, in your opinion, burnt i A. Yes; badly burnt too. Morris was my father-in-law; and I was there waiting for him to come out ; and I took particular notice. I helped to wash him, and helped to coffin him; and he was a man who wore side-levers and a big moustache. When he was brought out he no side-levers and no moustache, and was pretty well clean (of hair); and he was a man who wore his hair pretty long ; and it was not that long [indicating]. I could take it off in my hand ; it w:as all caked. 29887. Mr. Robe?Âˇtson.] Q. Did you see Purccll 1 A. No. 29888. Q. Or young Morrison 1 A. No. 29889. Q. Or Nixon 1 A. No. I may have seen them all. All that were in the ~ngine-house laid out I saw. Tlte sergeant.got me to come there to identify the bodies as they were brought out, or try to identify them. They could not identify them : in fact they had one in his coffin, and his name on it; and the sergeant asked me did I know this man of this name; and I said "Yes "; and when they opened the coffin it was not the man at all. They had A itken; and it was Best I saw when they opened the coffin. The sergeant asked me did I kno\v Best ; and I said "Yes," I knew Best, because four of the toes were off one foot. They opened the coffin ; and the toes were off one foot. 29890. Mr. Bruce Srnith.1 Miss Wood ward, who is in charge of the Wollongong Hospital as matron, attended to all the men on the day of the disaster ; and I would suggest to the Commission that she would be able to gi \'e some valuable evidence as to the burning. Examination by Mr. Robertson :29891. Q. When you went towards the entrance of the travelling r oad, was it smoke or dust that you saw 1 A. It was smoke: it was pretty white. 29892. Q. White 1 .A. It was n. mixture like. It was rolling out all in curls, and twisting right out. 29893. Q. And then you sa.y it stopped while you were there 1 A. Yes. 29894. Q. Did it stop very suddenly 1 A. Yes, pretty suddenly. Pretty well as soon as it stopped, it drew back j and the leaves and paper that it had blown down the bush went up to the tunnel mouth. 29895. Q. Did it go back with any force? .A. With enough force to draw these leaves and paper. 29896. Q. Was it something like the usual current 1 A. No ; it would go back with more than the usual current of air. 29897. Q. But not with any great force 1 A. Not enough to shift a man off his feet; but the leaves and paper that went down came back again. One lot of smoke went straight up in the air ; and the other part of the smoke went back into the tunnel mouth. I know that was considerably after, as far as I can think, after she stopped coming out of the main tunnel ; for, as far as I know, when I got out of the weigh-cabin, thel'e was no smoke or anything coming out of the main tunnel. 29898. Q. But how long was it from the time you were knocked over until you got to the travelling road 1 A. I could not tell th at. 29899. Q. Roughly 1 A. I had just t ime to get myself up and to get ont of the office ; when I did get out, I stopped, I suppose, perhaps, half a minute with Purcell and Clark, and I went straight to the travelling road. I was up to the travelling road before any of the men that were close handy to the mine were there. 29900. Q: That would not be more than a few minutes 1 A. It would not take me more than possibly a. minute when I got out of the office to when I got to the shop there. 29901. Q. It would take me a minute to walk there 1 A. Not from the cabin to Aleck's shop. 29902. Q. But then you had bad some conversation with those men 1 A. Yes, 1 spoke to Purcell as I passed him ; and I got hold of Clark and put him like where he was safe; and I went straight on. It is possible I might have been up there quicker; but I could not get there for the smoke and that coming out of the travelling road. It came right down past the pick shop, where they sharpen the picks. It was coming down right in the bush. . . 29903.

.• t

881

WitM88-P. J. Brownlee, 19 March, 1903.

29903. Mr. Ritcltie.1 Q. I suppose you could see rolls of smoke coo;_ing out past the pick rack from there 1 A . Yes. 29904:. His Hono,r.] Q. You did not go up the incline1 A. Yes, afterwards I went ri"ht up there from 0 the pick rack. It is only a few yards from the cabin. 29905. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. About ten yards 1 A. It may be a few more yards; but it is only just a. few steps round. 29906. Mr·. Wade,1 Q. Had the tunnel mouth fallen in then, at the time you were standing by the pick rack 1 A. I did not see the tunnel mouth till after. I did not wait to look at anything at the tunnel mouth when I got out : I went straight a.way. 29907. Q. Was it fallen when you .first saw it 1 A.. Yes. 29908. Q. H ow long after being at the pick rack was it1 A. It might have been ten minutes or a quarter of an hour after I was there. 29909. Q. D id you hear any sounds of a. fa)l in the interval 1 A. No. (Examination concluded.)

Mr. W. STAFFORD was sworn, and examined as under:29910. (This witness was called at the request of Mr. Lysa«ht, and was examined,in chief by Mr. Bruce 0 . Smit h on his behalf, as Mr. Lysaght was absent.) Examination-in-chief by Mr. Bruce Smith:-

; ;

t f t

r. i

;

299 11. Q. What is you r name 1 A. William Stafford. 299 12. Q. I think you had some boys in the Mount Kembla Mine on the day of the disasted A. Yes. 29~13. Q. You remember the 31st of July last, when this disaster took place 1 A. Yes, I rememl:icr that well. · 299 14. Q. Where were you 1 A. I was working just n.bo\·e i t, in a piece of ground, a little garden. 29915. Q. Up above the mouth of the pit7 A. Yes, just above the pit. 29916. Q. Your house is up there1 A. Yes. 29917. Q. And you ha~e a garden round it7 .A. Yes. 29918. Q. And you were working in the garden 7 A . I was working in the garden. . 29919. Q. What was the .first thing you saw or heard 1 A. I heard a great report; and after lhe report a. g reat flame of fire followed. · 29920. Q. From where 1 A. From the tunnel mouth. 29921. Q. You actually saw the flame come out 1 A. I actually saw i t-. 29922. Q. How fat· did it come out 1 A. I could not te11 you the distance. 29923. Q. Was it the length of this Cout·t now 1 A. Well, yes, it was fully that loug. (About 40 feet). 29924. Q. Was it a. mere glare, or--[interrupted] 1 A. No, it was a regular Llaui, as if something b~hi nd it forced it clea.n out. 29925. His lfonor.] Q. What colour was it 1 A. Red, a regular flame. 29926. Q. There is a great difference between a red, a ulue, and a yellow flame 1 A. Yes, this was a. regular flame, the same as you would light a fire. 29927. Q. A red or blue or yellow flame 7 A . A red flame. 22928. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. The sort you would get from a. bonfire? A. Yes. 29929. Q. A sort of tongue 1 A. Yes, that is it. 29930. Q. I mean you are quite sure you did not mistake a mere glare for a flame 1 A.No; it was a. regular flame. 29931. Q. You cannot say how far it came out1 A. No; of course I was confused at the time. 29932. Q. You were right over it 1 A. Y ~s. 29933. Q. And beyond tbis concussion, this noise, <lid you hear any other noise 1 A. Well, all the wood, and timber, and everything, were flying, and the sheets of iron; and it made a terrible noise. Tearing everything before it, of course it would make a terrible noise. · 29934. Q. Was anybody with you at the time 1 A. No. I was working in the garden myself. 29935. Q. Was not your daughter near you 1 A. My wife was going aw~iy for a bucket of water when she (the mine) blasted. 29936. Q. For you r garden 1 A. No. She was going for a bucket of water, and the pit exploded; an•l of cou1·se l do not know whether she saw the flame, or did not. I could not say : I would not swear. 29937. Q. You did not talk to her about it 1 A. Well, we ran down to the pit then, of course, to look after our own. 29938. Q. You went down and helped to pick up some bodies1 A. No; thc.y were not dead. We pickerl up Paddy Purcell. He was standing there ; and I could not make out what he was. 29939. Q. Could you recognise Purcell 7 A. You could recognise him after you had looked at him for a bit. 29940. Q. Wba.t had been done to him; describe it 1 Jl. H e was burnt. 29941. Q. Did you notice his hair 1 A. H is hair was singed. 29942. Q. Did you see your own son there 1 A. My own sons were all in the pit. 29943. Q. Did you see them afterwards 1 11. The one that came out dend 1 29944. Q. Ye!-i 1 A . Yes. 29945. Q. Had you two in the mine 1 A. l bad three. Two came out alive; and one got killed. 29946. Q. Wa.s the body of the dead one hurnU A. Yes, badly. 29947. flfr. Ritchie. ] Q. What was h is Christian name 1 A. Kem bla. 29948. 1lfr. Bruce omith.J Q. And was his hair singed and burnt off1 A. Y es. 29949. Q. And how was h is skin 7 A. The sk in, yon know, if you touched it like that, would come right off. You could peel it right off. 29950. Q. Are the two at work again now 1 A. Yes. 29951. Q. Were they burnt at all 1 A. No. They missed the fire, and got out. 29952. Q. A.re you a miner1 A . I have been one; but I have kuocked off. 16825 20-5 T Oro3s-examioaLion

882 Witness-W. Sbaff'ord, 19 March, 1903. Cross-exitmination by Mr. Wade:a,way 1s your house 1 A. Well, I could not tell you exactly; I never measured t1ill 29953. Q. How far distance. 29954. Q. What would you think 1 A. I would say about 150 yarc.ls, at the outside_. 29955. Q. Where is that ; on the top of the bill 1 A. That is from the top of the hill to the tunnel mouth; at leas~, from tho top of the hill, you know, right over o? top of the tunnel mo~1th, you s.ee. 29956. Q. Supposing you were coming out of the trave~lrng road, would you chwb the hill tb get to yo\Jt house1 A. Yes, there is a track t hat would lead you right up to my h ouse. 29957. Q. That is on top of t he hill i A. Yes, just on top of the hill. 29!J58. Q. Where is the garden you were working in 1 A. That is close to t he house. T he l'oaci d ivities t he house and the garden. The road goes past my house. 29959. ]Jfr. Ritcliie.l Q. Your garden is between the road and t.he tunnel 1 A. Yes. 29960. Mr. Wade.] Q. Where you were working, coulcl you see the meh working at th e screen 1 A. No; you could not see the men working at the screen from my place, of course. 29961. Q. I mean the men on top of the screens 1 A . If you just walked over on top of the hill. 29962. Q. I want you to stand whel'e you were in the garden 1 A. No; of course not. 29963. Q. Could you see any buildings at all 1 A. Not from where I was working in the garden. Of course the pit was there; and I was here like, on the hill. 29964. Q. And the bill shuts you off from seeing these buildings 1 A. There is no shutting off i n it; t here is a gentle slope down t he h ill. 29965. Q. ·whatever the reason is, from where you were working in the garden t h at day you could not see anv of the builclinrrs 1 11. No; but I could see it all flying away. 29966. Q. Did yo; look when you heard the report first- dicl you look up to see where it wa'31 A. Y es1 I. looked, of course. It would make anyone look, I think. · 29967. Q. .And was it after you had looked that you saw the flarne 1 A. Yes. 29968. Q. How lotig aft,er 1 A. Well, it could not ha.ve been-I do not suppose it was a second. It could not have been. 29969. Q. Where was this flame: was it out beyond the scl'eens that you ~aw it, or up, straight up in the a.ir 1 A. It c::une out of the tunnel mou th, straight out like that [indicating]. 29970. Q. But you could not see the tunnel mouth 1 A. I could see the Ba.me straight out. 29971. Q. Was it up in the air, or beyond the screens, or where1 A. It was above the hauling.shed. You see it blew the shed clean away; and the screeching blaze was out. . 29972. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Was it toward, the tip that you saw the blaze 1 A. Yes, right straight towards the tip. . . . 29973. Mr. Wade.] Q. But you could not see tho tip from where you were 1 A. No. 29974. Q. Then was the -flame beyond that., or above it, or where1 A. T he flame was right in the a ir like t hat [indicating] , going along. A flame like that will not last many seconds, you k now; it is only a fl.ash like that. It butnt what it had to burn ; and then, of course, and then it was all dark. It was dark then, of courrn. T here was no more flame there; but it was all rubbish flying. 29975. Hi~ llonor.] Q. Was it a bright clPar day, or a cloudy day 1 A. I cou ld not properly say. I have Jost memory of what it was. 29976. M1·. Wade.] Q. It was a bright sunlit day, was it not 1 A. I could not say; I would not swear that. 29977. Q. The snn was shining, was it not-do not you remembe!' thR.t 1 A. Yes, the sun might have been shining a bit. 29978. Q. Then, how far do you think the flame was from the tunnel mouth at the t ime you saw it; h ow many yards must it have been when you saw it 1 A. Which way do you mean 1 29979. Q. You say it went out strdigh t? A. T he tunnel mouth was here [indic12tin9 and the flame went straight ou t; I could not say tbe length of it . 29980. Q. You did not see the mouth; but you saw it at a certain distance from the month i A . It must have come out of the mouth. 29981. Q. Of course, but I want ti) know whore. you saw it ; at the point where yon saw it> h ow many yards was H then from the tunnel month 1 A. I could not say bow many yards; and I would not swear it. I will only swear what is the truth, and no more. 29982. Q. You say you do not know if your wife saw it or not 1 A. No; I could not say. 29983. Q. Have not you talked about it with her1 A. Well, we hR.ve had many a talk about i t. 29984. Q. And you do not know now whether she saw this flame or not 1 .A. I never put the question to her. 29985. Q. And she ne,er told you 1 A. No, she never told me. 29986. Q. Can you tell me this: Who was it you spoke to first about seeing this flame 1 A. Why, it is a. common report about there; e\'eryone is talking about it. 29987. Q. To whom did you speak 1 A. I have spoken to several. 29988. Q. Did you speak to Ml'. Lysaght1 A. Yes, I did. 29989. Q. When was that., and where 1 A. I could not tell you whm it was. 29990. Q. How long ago 1 A. It might ha\·e been five months ago, or four months ago. Mr. Lysaght would often meet me in the street; and we would have a talk aliout other business. 2~991. Q. And you have not spoken about it lately i A. Not to my knowledge; not that I know of. I might ba·ve, you know. 29992. Q. W ere you at bis office lately 1 A. Yes, I wa.s there one day. · 29993. Q: When 1 A. I do not k now how long it is now. I we.nt to him there on some business· but I may have spoken to him thn.t day about it., for all I know ; but I would not swca.r it. ' 2999~. Q. And you did not go down and see him about this 1 A. Purposely, you mean 1 2999b. Q. Yes 1 A. No, I did not. 29996 .. 1lfr. Bntee Smith, l Q. Do you know a man named Ramsay, Ii ving near you 1 A. Yes, we hase been old neighbours t hese years. 29997: Q. Did you have ahy eonversation with hin) !°:~edi~t~ll after thi§ 1 tf., Well, lleighbours, you kqowl will have a rarn when they meet. ...

883 \

f, ,•

f. ~

- - - - - -- - - - - - - Mr. H. RAMSAY was sworn, and examined as under : (This witness was called at t he request of Mr. Lysaght; but, in the absence of 1\1r. Lysaght-, was examined-in-chief by Mr. Bruce Smith on his behalf.)

•

~ '

I·

f. t

; r

•

I :.

•~

·'

29998, Q. Do you reroember speaking to Ramsay, senior, immediately after you saw this 1 A. Immediately after the explosion 1 29999. Q. Ye81 A. Certainly. 30000. Q. Did he come over to you 1 A. Yes, be ran a.cross to old Davy Griffiths' furnace; and he says, "She's blasted right enougli ; for I saw tho flame goin11 up tho chi mney." t'Mear.ing flame going up the 0 chimney of the old clisitsed ventilating famace.] (Witness retired.)

(

i t

· Witness-W. Stafford, 19 March, 1003.

Examination-in-chief by Mr. Bruce Smith:30002. Q. What is your name 1 A. Harry Ramsay. 30003. Q. There is a young Harry Ramsay 1 A. George. 30004. Q. Where is he 1 A. He is working at the breakwater. 30006. Q. What are you 1 A. I have been in the mine some long time ago; but not lately. 30006. Q. You have retired now 1 A. Yes, I am working on m;r own farm. 30007. Q. H ow far is your farm from the Mount Kembla MipcV A. Well, I aqjoin it. 30008. Q. Are you near Stafford 1 A. Pretty near hicp. 30009. Q. Then are you on a higher level than the mouth of the tunnel 1 A . Some of my proper ty is on the top of the ledge of the mountain above the pit. 30010. Q. And you and Stafford are neighbours 1 A. ·w ell, I am not far distant. 30011. Q. Do you remember the day of this disaster 1 A . Well, I remember what happened that day; but I took no dates of any of those things. 30012. Q. I do not want you to remember the date; but you remember the occasion 1 A. Yes, I do, well. 30013. Q. What were you doing 1 A. The first part of the day I was coiling up barbed wire to put a fen ce up. 30014. Q. What were you doing about a. quarter to 21 A. My old woman came up with rpy dinner between 1 and 2; and she said she would not stop long that day ; she would go along and look at a oow that was lying over, the times being so bard that we could not keep them alive; an<l she went across, she and I talking together. 30015. Q. Never mind about the cow. What happened 1 A. I am giving you the truth. I c~n live without Mount Kembl ... (Company) ; and I can live without the miners; and I tell you ,vhat I saw. 30016. Q. What did you see 1 A. I was standing looking above t he ledge of the cliff, just the same as I would be looking down on a low house from the top of a high rock, when a nasty red flame with a. cloud of black smoke shot up out of the No. 1 old furnace; and my old lady, she clasped her hands-of course our son was in, and our son-in-la.w was in- and she said, "Harry, the pit has exploded"; and I said, " I t has, right enough"; and I made for tpe tunnel mouth; and when I got there I saw the whole place unroofed, and I saw the fire coming out of the old furnace, where it has not been coming up for years. That is all I saw. 30017. Q. How far is that from the moulh of the tunnel 1 A. Just a liltle bit of a ridge bet.wee:i the t\\'O 30018. Q. A few yards 1 A. A lot more than a few yards. 30019. Q. I want you to tell me-I do not know. Was it out of the old tunnel mouth 1 A. The old dead old furnace that was waste, that was used in the early days. 30020. Q. And you saw the flame, and smoke, an<l dust, coming out of there 1 A. Yes, I did. I could see a few yards down the chimney from where I was standing. 30021. Q. And the old chimney is ther e 1 A. Yes, it is there right enough. 30022. Q. Did any fire come up the chimney 1 A. Ye~, certainly, there came a red flam e. There is no fire used in that, you know. 30023. Q. But you saw some flame come up 1 A. Yes. 30024. Q. And you saw it come out underneath too1 A. No, I did not. 30025. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Did you see anything but what carue up the chimney 1 A. No ; only what came up the chimney. 30026. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. From where you were can you see near the moulh of the present tunnel 1 A. Not from where I was; but of course, sheels of iron and beams of wood were sent a long way. I saw that tco; but not at the mouth of the tunnel, what happened there. I was not there. 30027. A. What did you do when you saw that 1 4. I ran to the tunnel. 30028. Q. Did you see Slafford senior 1 A. I did not see Stafford. I was too much upset about other things to be looking for anyone. 30029. Q. I did not ask you if you fookcd for him: you often see things you do not look for 1 A. Well, I did not. There were a great many running-all the place was there. 30030. Q. You ran down there 1 A. I could go there in a few minutes; but I could ,not see t he tunnel mouth. . 30031. Q. Ii any flame came out of the tunnel mouth, you woul<l not ho.Ye been able to see it from where you were 1 A. I saw nothing more than I told you. 30032. Q. If the flam e came out of the present tunnel mouth, you could not see it from where you were 1 A. No, I could noc;. Cross-examination by Mr. Wade:30033. Q. Do you know if there is another heading, by the chimn<:y of the old furnace, that opens into th e air 1 A. A lot of daylight headings a ll along the surface to where we carried the bodies ou t. 30034. Q. No, the old furnacz : is that a chimney or a shaft 1 A. There is no shaft near the one tha.t I speak of. 30035. Q. You see that chimney outside the window of the Court (the chimney of the furnace at th e Mint): was it a. big, high chimney like that., or simply a shaft, a hole in the ground 7 A. It is a big chimney built, 30030. from the floor of the coal.

884 n~itneaa-H. Ramsay, 19 March, 1903.

30036. Q. A chimney above the ground 1 A. Yes, a long way above the ground. It was built when old Mr. Green was manager. . 30037. Q. There is an opening apparently quite close t;o that chimney 1 A. No, I never saw anythrng, only bits of openings, as you follow it round the ledge to the mouth, .and they ~re al~ closed over. 30038. Q. Did you see any other flame besides the flame coming up this chimney that you speak of 1 ..1. No, I did not. . 30:)39. Q. Did not you sec old Mr. Stafford at all to speak to ~hat day 1 A. No, I did not see Stafford. 30040. Q. Did not you see him at the tunnel mouth 1 A. I dul not see Stafford at the tunnel mouth at all. They were lookin()' for the dead that night; and I was in his house then. 0 30041. Q. Have y ou been down in Mr. Lysaght's office in Wollongong lately 1 A. I have not seen Mr. Lysaght for years, to be in any conversation with. him. . 30042. Q. You did not call in last week 1 A. I did not. I had not seen Mr. Lysaght; and I was ~lkmg to no man till I came to Sydney. Th~ man I saw was Constable Roberts; and I could have done without him; for I was planting potatoes, and I did not want him. 30043: Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. You wish you had not come 1 A. I do not mind comin~ to speak the truth. (Witness retired.) Mr. A. A. ATKINSON, Chief Inspector of Coal-mines, was recalled, and further examined, as under:Re-examiootion by Mr. Bruce Smith : 30044. Q. I think you wish to begin with the recommendations. When you were in the ,vilness-box before, you had not heard the e\'idence that was to be given by a number of managers; and you said that you preferred to deal with these recommendations in a tentative way until you heard what could be said on the other side 1 A. Yes. 30045. Q. Now, you have heard all that evidence, and you have put your recommendations now into permanent form, as far as your own opinion is concerned 1 A. Yes. 30046. Q. With regard to No. 1, do you remember that it was originally suggested that managers, undermanagers, deputies, and shot-firers should hold certificates of competency by examination, and should ha.ve had five years' practical mining experience before being eligible for their respective positions ; wnat do you say about that now 1 A. Well, I might say that, with reforence to managers and under-managers, I think that the present state of the law is all that is required. 30047. Q. Have you heard any evidence to cause you to modify the opinion you ex-pressed in paragraphs 13152-3-4-5-6 with regard to deputies and shot firers 1 A. No, I have not. 30048. Q. Do you remember what Mr. Bowet路 said in paragraph 17773: "They ought to have some knowledge of the gases of a mine, and the gases likely to be met with in coal mines; aud they should have general experience in mining, as well as experience of actual coal getting-a matter of simply five yea.rs at the face would not be sufficient experience" 1 A. Y es, I t.b ink that that fairly expresses my views; with the addition that they should have a knowledge of the special rules and the general rules; and also be examined with reference to them. 30049. Q. What is your opinion as to the sort of examination they ought to un<lergo-whether it should be oral or written 1 A. I attach importance to the examination being oral, rather than written. 30050. Q. That is, having regard to the class of men 1 A. Having regard to the particular class of official. 30051. His Honvi路.] Q. Putting some of these men behind a pen would be nearly as bad as putting a draper's assistant behind a plough 7 A. Yes; many of those men could not do much with a pen. 30052. 1lfr. Bruce S mith.] Q. I think you recognise the importance of a manager being the primary chooser of the men; but you see no objection to an examination in those subjects which you ha,路e suggested i A. Certainly I think the manager is the most capable man for testing; but this examination does not preclnde him from having tbe final selection, after all. 30053. llfr. .Robtrtson.] Q. But then he may have to select men who have not sufficient practical knowledge; he is limited in his choice of men 1 A. I take it that, if a man tbinks he is capable of being a deputy, or a shot-fi rer, he will not be afraid to undergo an oral examination in order t'.> qualify him for the position. 30054. Q. Bnt I think you must admit that many suitable men might hesitate to submit themselves to any examination 1 ..1. Well, they might hesitate; but I do not think that they would allow that to be a bar. 30055. llis Honor.] Q. You think they ought to ha"e nerve enough to face an ordinary common-sense examination 7 A. I think so, as they have to undertake responsible duties as deputies and shot-firers. 30056. Mr. Bruce S n'tith,l Q. Rec:>mmcnclation No. 2-" Inspectors to be vested witb absolute powers to order the use of safety -lamps." When you w~re examined before, you said (paragraph 13167), " I would propose that the Chief Inspector should have power to enforce the use of safety-lamps, subject, however, to arbitraLion, as provided by the Coa.1 Mines Regulation Act, section 25." Have you heard any evidence to le::i.d .you to modify that opinion 1 A. No; I think that is the most reasonable solution of the question; and I th~n~, also, that the suggestion which the Commission made, with reference to the Department of Mines obtarnmg a supply of lamps, and letting them out on hire to any colliei,y that might require them, if necessary, is a good ~uggestion. 30057. Q. Th?'t is in a case in which they have to put b.mp3 in at once, with the possibility that the award may not require them to do so permanently 1 A. Quite so. 3~058. Q. Now, Recommendation No. 3 -" Yentilation by furnace prohibited, and fans substituted." You said (paragraph 13181 )-iii reply to the question, "Where a demand is made tha.t fans should be substituted for furnac !s, what would you propose should be done" ?- the following, "I would recommend that any such cases shoald be brought within the scope of section 25 of the Coal Mines Act." Now, on that subject have you heard any evidence since you expressed that opinion to cause you to modify that opinion 1 A. No, I have not. 30059. Q. You heard the evidence given by the delegates, did you not1 A. Yes. 30060.. Q. And you heard what they said about never having considered the expense of th is 7 A. Yes; they did not seem to have thought of it. 30061. Q. Nor of the case of small mines 1 A. No. They had not particularly thought of the number of small mines. 30062. Q. And you still think that that reference to arbitration in cases where the Inspecto1路 and the Manager differ, is a fair solution of that question 1 A. I tLink 20; yes. 30063.

885Witne8s-A. A. Atkinson, 19 Mo.rcb, 1903.

• I

! I

30063. Q. Now, it was pt'oposed originally (Recommendation No. 4) that the waste workings should be absolutely sealed off, and surrounded by return airways (for fear of em issions}, sncb return airways not to come in contact with the intake. Now, in your evidence before (paragraph 13223), you said, "There should always be a sealing off between the intake and the return llir; but there should not be a sealing off in such a. way as is, I understand, proposed by this recommendation" ; and I think yot1 heard Mr. Bower say (paragraphs 17809-1782 l) that it is a dangerous and impracticable proposal 1 11. Yes. 30064. Q. Well, you have not heard any evidence which causes you to modify your opinion in that respect, have you 1 A. No. 30065. Q. Recommendation No. 5 proposed that,-" All places, excep';iog prospecting drives, should ha,e cut-throughs not more than 30 yards apart/' Your original evidence on that ( paragraphs 3237 et seq.) ; and you hea.rd Mr. Bower say (pardgraph 18731 ) that the Manager should be the best judge as to the size of pillars that are safe in the case of his own mine 1. A. Yes. 30066. Q. I think you agree with that conclusion, do you not 1 A. I think so. There are so many conditions which have to be considered that it would be impossible to regulate the size of pillars to be left in mines. 30067. Q. And you have not altered the opinion you expressed in pH,rngraphs 13237 et seq.? A. No. . 30068. Q. Now, the sixth proposal was-" Inspection with locked safety-lamp in all cases." I see you said (paragraph 13245), " I think that is a. necessary precaution, and should be made universal, in view of the uncertainty as to "'hen inflammable gas may make its appearance." You have heard no evidence to ca.use you to chango your opinion on thaU .A. No. 30069. Q. But you wish to say something about an exception in the case of small mines 1 A. Well, in the case of small mines I think that that is a precaution which would involve such little cost that I do not think it would be necessary to make any exception, even in thE' case of small mines. 30070. Q. Then it would apply to all 1 A. It would apply to all. 30071. Q. The seventh proposal was-" Monthly examination and report by deputies and District Inspector with the hydrogen flame." Now, you said originally (para.graph 13254), "This r ecommendation is indefinite as to the scope of the examination. I do not approve of putting hydrogen lamps in t he hands of every deputy, as they require most careful manipulation; and in the hands of inexperienced persons they might become a positive danger"; and then you were asked this question, I think, by Mr. Lysaght (parc1graph 15227), "Would you approve of the monthly examination by the under-manager, instead o( the deputy 1" and you answere<l, " Well, provided he was sufficiently experienced, I do not see any objection to it." And then you were asked further (paragraph 1/1228), ",Veil, t hen, would you put it this way, that you would approve of a monthly examination and report by the Manager or under-manager1" and you said, "Yes, I do not see any objection to that." What do you say now a.bout that, Mr. Atkinson 1 A. W ell, I think that the inspection, if it were required to be made by law, should be by the under-manager, and should only refer, more particularly, to the return ai1·ways; as meutioned also by Mr. Sellers, and, I think by Mr. Bower. 30072. Q. Yes-._do you mean with th.e hydrogen Jamp 1 A. Yes. Then as to the Inspectors, they use them frequently now; and I t,hink it mi,ght well be left to their discretion as to whether they use them. 30073. Q. What would be the effect, do you think, of making that compulsory with the InspE>ctol's 1 A. Well, having regard to the character of the lamp, and the hydrogPn required, be might find himself in an out of the way pa.rt of Lhe district with his hydrogen lamp, when bis supply might run out j and, if it were compulsory that he should only inspect with the hydrogen flamE', he might either have to wait to get an additional supply, or have to return and get it hiruself. 30074. Mr. Robe1·tson.] Q. ·would not the same apply to the offi.ci.-ils of the mine 1 A. Well, it is only a monthly inspection which has been suggested for the officials of the minE'. 30075. Q. Quite so; but t.heil' supply might run out j there is no means of indicating when your cylinder is a.bout to be exhausted 1 A. No; but the inspection is only suggested so far as the return :tirways are concerned; and seeing that it is only once a month, I think they shou ld be able to so regulate the supply of hydrogPn for a few tests as to be able to do it. 30076. Mr. Bruce Smit!t.] If the under-manager sn<l<le1tly found himsP.lf without a supply of hydrogen, the provision that he should make the examination once a month could still be complied with, even if he had to send up to Sydney to get a further supply. 30077. 11fr. Robertson.] You cannot get it in Sydney; you cannot get it out of Great Britain. 30078. Witn~ss.] If it were ma.de com pulsory, it woulu be necessary for each colliery to keep a supply. 30079. Mr. Robertson.] Tbe difficulty is that tbe law will compel you to make a cert3in examination with a certain gas; and you might find yourself suddenly with your cylinder exhausted. 30080. Mr. B1·uce Smith.] But I suppose the derna.ncl will produce a suppl,. 30081. Mr. Robertson.] Well, I know that shipping companies are ohjectlng to take them; and I take it that every colliery woul<l require to have two large cylinders. 30082. Witness.] Well, J suppose that might be necessary. 30083. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Would it not be absolutely necess..u·y 1 A. It woulcl hP, unless the supply could be obtained in the State. 30084. Mr. Bruce Smit!i.l Q. You think it wouJ<l be an extra precaution 1 Yes, I think so. 30085. ilfr. Ritcliie.] Q. Does the Department find u.ny. difficulty at present in getting its supplies 1 A. WelJ, we have to get them from England; and I tbink the shipping people are very particular about carrying this gas at such a high pressure; but, by giving sufficient notice, of course, we can get a. supply ; three or four months are required. · 30086. Q. Now, Recommendation No. 8-" .Minimum of 500 cubic feet of air per minute to be provicle<l for every horse, instead of 100 cubic feet"; in your original evidence you said (par:1graph 13264)" Genera11y speaking, the actual supply is never confined to the statutory minimum; and, having referE>nce to the powers of the Inspectors under General Rule 1, section 47, I do not see any necessity to alter tho law in the direction suggested." Hn.ve you heard any evidence, since you expressed that opinion, to lead you to alter it 1 A. No, I have not. 30087. Q. Recommendation No. 9-" All doors erected so as to close and remain closed of own motion"; I think you approved of that at the time 1 A. Yes. 30088. Q. Have you heard any evidence to cause you to change that opiniou 1 A. No, I have not.

30089.

) I

886 Witness-A. A. Atkinson, 19 March, 1903. 30089. Q. You heard Mr. Robertson's objection that it might destroy, or, at _all ~ven.ts, impair, the senile ~f responsibility in the men· what do you think about that 1 A. I do not think 1t w\11 h11,v.e that etfeot; lll fact, I know that, where the same rule is in force in the Old Country, iu nine or ten district111 proseoutiona occasionally follow after a door has not been closed. 30090. Q. The responsibility will still exist, with the liability of a penalty 1 A. Yes, tl1e responsibility will still exist. 30091. Q. Although the doors will be automatic 1 A. Yes. 30092. His Honor.] Is it possible to provide a cloor with a sill, or must it be clear of any sill. 30093. Mr. Bruce Smith.] The trucks have to go through. . . . . 30094. His Hono1·.J Q. Where the trucks go through, you cannot provide anything in the n~tqre of a sill underneath the door i A. Oh, yes. 30095. Q. Then that sill is on the ordinary ground level, of course 1 A. Yes, there is a out; made fo, the rails to go through, of course. 30096. Q. Is the lower edge of the door made to come in contact with the sill 1 A. I think it overlaps generally. 30097. Q. It overlaps the sill 1 A. Yes, as well as overlapping the side jambs. 30098. Q. Then it stops on the outer side 1 A. Yes. 30099. Q. Then the danger of the doors being stopped is. by something on the ground 1 A. Y P.!!. 30100. Q. And the average level of the floor would be a little below the level of the sill, I suppoae 1 A. Yes, certainly. . 30101. Q. Has any provision ever been adopted to check that by bringing the bottom of the frame of the door, the lower piece of the door, what might be called the sill of the door itself, a,,bove the ground j and hingeing the lower part, or having it merely a trailing piece of can~as 1 A. Yes, thPy sometimes do put a trailing piece of canvas on. 30102. Q. That would prevept the door being blocked by a. piece of coal of ordinary size falling 1 A. I do not know that it would have that effect; but 1 know that they do occasionally put canvas on the bott,cm of the door to prevent leakage. · 30103. Q. The object, of course, is to keep the frame of the door up, is it not; if it is a wooden door, it would be boards nailed on to a braced frame 1 A. Y es. 30104. Q. Or, if it is canvas, it would be a. frame with canvas stretched on it 1 A. Yes. 30105. Q. And the ohject would be to keep lhe frame some distance above the floor to prevent its blocking 1 A. I think the object of putting the canvas on is to .avoid any great leakage. · 30106. Q. It would do that too j it would close the space without making the lower edge of the door rigid, so as to be blocked. A door like that could not be blocked by anything but a very large piece of coal, as it would drag over anything else i A. Yes. 30107. Q. A construction of that kind, then, would gP,t over the difficulty which is entailed by the fact that a self-acting door may be blocked accidentally; and that, if a man going through it trusts to its acting of itself, the door may still remain open ; that difficulty would be got over, would it not, by al ways constructing doors on that principle i A. Yes; of course if that were donP, it would require a very lal'ge piece of stone to get in the way to prevent the door closing. 30108. Mr. Robe1·t.ion.] Q. But would not it be a difficulty where there is a. heavy water-gauge; would it not pull the canvas right th1·ough 1 A. Yes; if it were close to the upcast. 30109. Q. There are dozens of doors in many mines where the pressure is very grea.t1 A. Yes; of course the pressure is very great near to the upcast bottom. · 30110. Q. And the canvas would be continually wearing, and would have to be renewed Yery frequently i. A. Yes, no doubt it would. · 30111. Q. If you were making your inspection and found a door standing open, or partly open, would you consider that a breach of the r ule ; would you ·prosecute the management 1 A. lf there was a special rn1e, as there gener ally is, specifying that persons must see that the door is closed, someone would evidently have neglecterl his duty, and should be prosecuted. 33112. Q. Then whom would you hold responsible if you found a door open, which, by the special rule, should be closed 1 A. The man who last went through the door. 30113. Q. Then you would have to find out who last. went through 1 A. Yes, that is the usual method. 30114. Q. Then you would not hold the Company responsible if you found a door whi~h should be selfclosing and was not closed 1 A. Well, if there were a piece of stone in the way, and if that door were open, there would evident.ly have been some neglect on t he part of some person who bad gone through that door ; and, although the door might Le so blocked open, it niigbt still be, in the usual acceptation of the word as .it has been interpreted in the Old Country, a self-closing door. I mean that the principle of having hanging doors is, as you will agree, that they shall be so hung that they will close of themselves. 30115. Q. l know the principle; but l do not approve of it1 A. W ell, it is strange that it should ue adopted in so many districts at Home, where both the Managers and the Inspectors have agreed to it. · 30116. Q. Supposing you had a door, which you found open, stiff on its hinges; which might be caused by some of the movements that are continually at work in a mine, squeezil!g or pushing the coal, or through the pressure of the roof ; how would you deal with that 1 A. Well, all these rulrs are ruodi6ed by the principle that it is only expected that they shall be attended to so fat· as is reasonably practicable j and if it were shown that there was unu~ual pressure, which explained the condition of the door, I think that reason would be accepted, and the sul?gestion would be ma.de that the door be attended to. 30117. Q. Will you admit that the Metropolitan Colliery is an exceedingly extensive one 1 A. Yes. 30118. Q. And it is also a very gassy one 1 Li. Yes. 30110. Q, And the ventilation is, at all events as compared with anything here, phenomenal 1 A. Ye2. 30120. Q. Will you admit that the number of doors throughout the mine for all these yea.rs has been Yery great ; out of all proportion to any other mine 1 A. Yes, I think the number of dooi;s is great. 30121. Q. Well, if the sy&tem of individual responsibility had worked all these yeat'.3 with the utmost satisfaction in that mine, do you think there is any good reason for legislation to change that 1 A. Well, with great deference to your opinion, I do not think that it removes the ind.ividual responsibility spoken of. 30122. Mr. Ritchie.[ Q. I t is really a double security 1 A. Yes. As a matter of fact, the doors at the Metropolitan are erected to be self-closing; it is only carrying out an old mining principle. 30123.

\ I "

lI J. l •

.......l· · 1

887

Tl'itneSB-A. A. Atkinson, 19 March, 1908.

30123: Mt·. Robertson. J Q. Well, I do not agree with you there 1 A. I£ you open a door a.t the Metropolitan, a.nd you leave it; it will olose of itself; that bas been my experience. 30124. Q. No, I do not think soi A. But I do not wish to suggest that it removes any individual responsibility; I would not suggest it with that object at all. 30125. Q. You will admit that, so far as expense is concerned, the difference between o. self-closing door and a door that must be closed by a workm':ln is nothing 1 A. Quite so. 30126. Q. So it is not a question of expense 1 A. No. 30127. Q. And, i£ the Managet· of a large and dangel'Ous mine, from years of experience was satisued that a particular system was the best, under those circumstance do you think that legislation should call upon him to alter a system that he bas confidence in 1 A. I really do not know; I think that is a matter for the Commission to decide. 30128. Q. I am asking you; I may ask the Commission afterwards 1 A. I should like to show the Commission the rules in the Old Country ; and to show that tbis rule is in force in nine out of twelve distriots; and it has worked well t.here. 30129. Q. H as it worked any better, Mr. Atkinson, than the system in force at the Metropolitan 1 A. No' I <lo not say it has; but I think that your doors, after all is said and done, are self-closing doors. 30130. His Honor.] Q. I suppose, Mr. Atkinson, there is a special rule in A.11 mines that a man leaving a door open shall be fin ed 1 A. Yes, there is a penalty attached to anyone who leaves a door open. 30131. Q. That is so, w hetber it is a self-acting door or a non-self-acting door 1 A. Yes, that is so. 30182. Q. The penalty is the same 1 A. Yes. 30132. Q. Then: I do not know whether it is specifically proYided; but, from the reading of the rule, it might be implied; and it might also be speci6cally providetl, to save all question, that, even though a door wiU not shut of itself because of some obstruction being in the way, still, if a man comes through and leaves it open, be shall not be protected by the fact of that obstruction being there; but it shall be his duty, unless it is physically impossible, to remove the obstruction himself 1 A. Yes s that would get over every difficulty. 30134. Q. I£ that were so, a man would be as careful a-; if the door was not se1f-closing, because he would know that be could not protect himse1f by suggesting that the door could not be shut 1 11. Yes, quite so; I think that might be included in the special rule. 30135. Q. And it would make tbe special rule clear on that poiut 1 A. Yes, showing the individual responsibility. 30136. Q. If he found the floor so open that it would be physically impossible for him to shut it again, he would have to report the fact on the earliest possible opportunity 1 A. I think that should meet the case. 30137. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. At presenL, if you have a door opened, you aro depending entirely on the person who has to close that door 7 A. Yes. :30138. Q. But, under yom· proposal, yon havo an additional security, by means of the doors b eing so constructed that they will automatically close themselves; but, at the same time, you keep the responsibility on each individual who goes through the door to see that it is closed 1 A. Yes, I think it is an additional security ; but I do not suggest removing the individual responsibility. 30139. Q. If a door does not close automatically, a man may, forgetfully, leave it open ; but, under your propc,sal, the door would close itself in that case? A. Yes. 30140. irfr. Bruce Smitli.] Q. The tenth t·ecommendation was that there should be double doors on drives between main intakes and relurn!', and between main headings 1 A. Yes ; this rule is in force now with regard to main intakes and returns ; and I see no ohjection to the rule being applied in the case of main headings. 30141. Q. I see you mid (paragraph 132'ii): " Having double doors between main intakes and rot.urns has been usual, so far as drafting tbe rule is concerned ; but it may bA necessary to carry it a little further In some cases"; how would you carry it further 7 A. By requiring the double doors in main headings as well. Of course, in the face, or in the last wo1:king cut.through near the face, it is not always necessary to have two wooden doors ; and some limitation should be put on the rule. . 30142. Q. When you and I went through Mount Kembla Mine, we saw a train of skips push through a door and stay there for some minutes 1 A. Yes. 30143. Q. During that time, if there bad not been double doors, there would have been a big escape of air over t,he tops of the skips and round the sides 1 A. It would interfere with the ventilation, of course. 30144. Q. The skips actually stopped there with the doors open 1 A. Yes. 30145. Q. Tbat would be obviaten by the double doors 1 A . Yes. 30146. Q. But the doors would have to be sufficiently far apart to prevent the possibility of the skips holding both doors open a.t the same time 1 A. Yes; in that connection the small pillars which are sometimes left; do not admit of sufficient space between the doors for a horse and its train to get in between them. 30147. llis Honor.] Q. I suppose, in the case of what yo.u call reasonably large pillars, there is always room 7 A. Yes ; for instance, iu an 8-yard pillar, there would not be room to get two doors-with sufficient space between for a horse and half·a-dozen tubs. 30148. lvfr. Robertson.] Q. Do you approve of doors on haulage roads1 A. No; I think . that, wherever ' practicabJe, they should be avoided on main haulage roads. 30149. LL Would you approve of some R egulation to prohibit doors, except under·exceptional circumslanoes (on haulage roads) 1 A. I may say that I have that as one of the suggestions which come later on for the Commission to consider 30150. J.fr. Br11,ce Smith.] Q. Recommendation No. 11 was that there should be a weekly measurement of air in each section, and that a report of the same should be sent to the Inspector. I see (paragraph 13282), you stated : "Having regard to what I have stated, and to t he fact that the proposal, if put into operation, would not, in ruy opinion, ensure increased safety to the workmen, whilst it would add largely and unnecessarily to the work of the management, and considerably increase the clerical work of the Inspectors, I cannot recommend a change in the manner indicated." Have you heard any evidence to ca.use you to alter your opinion in th:i.t respect 1 A. No, I have not. 30151. Q. Now, Recommendation No. 12 is-" Extra supply of safety-lamps anu their requisites, equal t.. one-third of number of persons employed bolow ground, to be kept constantly in good order and l'eady for use," Now, yoq qave 1/:\ii<l clown a pnposal that, it4 the cas{l of mines in which safety-lamps are used, an !'d~itiona,!

888 Wit11Ms-A. A. Atkinson, 19 March, 1903. additional supply should be provided, equal to one.ten t h of the number of men employed ; a.nd, i n the_case of mines in which lamps are not used, an extra supply equal to one.fifth of the number of men employed 1 A. Yes. 30152. Q. You have beard some evidence with regard to that; but has it affected your opinion 1 A. No, except in th e case of - - [ Interrupted]. 30153. Q. Apart from the exception-I will deal with that in a. moment: I want you to say now with regard to the principle1 A. 1n the large mine!l, I t hink that that is sufficient. 30154. Q. Now, with r egard to the minimum, I think you have given some furth er consideration to that; what do you propose should be the minimum 1 l t is rather a difficult question t o deal with 1 A. Yes, I admit that it is rnther a diffi cult question to deal with. 30155. Q. Y ou might just tell the Commission now, in evidence-because you have only told t hem from the table, through me, so far-bow many mines there arc in which less t han twenty men are employed 1 A. Abou t forty. . 30156. Q. And down to how many do they go; what is t he minimum number of men 1 A. ~ couple of men ; a single man, in some cases. 30157. Q. And that mine, with only one man in it, actually comes under the Coal Mines A.ct1 A. Yes. 30158. Q. It is a. coal-mine 1 A. Y es. 30159. Q. What do they do in those cases 1 A. There are a number of small places near Wa.ratah; and all the coal is carted away to the town. 30160. Q. Where do t hey get t he coal i 4. They get it hy means of small drives, or working out the old pillars left by a former company. 30161. Q. In old mines 7 A. Yes, working out the old pillars. 30162. Q. But in an old mine1 A. Yes. 30163. Q. Then Mr. Ritchie's suggestion yesterday is a feasible one, that there might Le a necessiLy, even where there are only. two or three men at work, to have a number of lamps, in case anythi ng happens 1 A. Yes. 30 164. Q. Whose property a re these mines; are they the property of the.cie men i A. In some cases· they are working Crown coal; in other cases they are working coal belonging to private owners. 30165. Q. Have they any machinery 7 A. They have a. tram.road into the tunnel ; and they usually push it out by themseh·es. They d o not have any mechanical haulage. 30166. Q. H aving r<'gard to all that, what. do you propose should be the minimum number of lamps where fifteen or more than ofteen mon are employed underground 1 A. Say ten safety.lamps. 30167. Q. And, below t hat, you have suggested a. minimum of five, I think 1 A. Yes. 30168. Q. That is, where less than fifteen men are employed 1 A. Yes. 30169. Q. And that would compel even the smallest mine to have five 1:i.mps 1 A. Yes. 30170. Q. And, even in this mine where tl1ere is one man, there would be five la mps i A. Yes. 30 171. .Jlfr. Ritchie.] Q. To make it possible for five men to go in search of one 7 A . Y es. 30172. Mr. B rnce Smith.] Q. That is what you suggest 7 A. Yes; and I admit it is very unsatisfactory, because io those cases they have no office; and there would be a difficulty in geLting these men to look after the lamps whcu t hey got them. 30173. illr. Robertson.] (J. Where d o they put their valuable pla.ns7 LL I suppose they would take them home every n ight. :::lome of t hem take the report book home every night. 30174. .Jllr. Ritchie.J Q. Has this man to report e\•ery day 1 A. Yes. 30175. Q. H e has to report to himself before he can start work; he has to act as deputy, Manager, and miner 1 A. Yes, and sometimes owner . 33176. ilfr. B1·uce Smttli.] R ecommendation No. 13 is- " '!'ravelling anJ l1aulage roads, and other places necessary, to be properly watered " 1 A. I am more than ever convinced that it is impossible to lay down a.ny hard.and.fast rules. 30177. Q. The evidence against yours has convinced you of the soundness of your own first advice 7 A. Y es. 30178. Q. Just repeat your conclusion now about watering ; you heard Mr. Goodwin, t he Ashfield engineer yosterday, sn,y that he would not water round the shots ; bnt that he would water the travelling roads 1 A. Yes, I heard that. 30179. Q. You hold a quite contrary opinion to that7 A. Yes. 30180. Q. What do you recommend should be done1 A. The most important part of the watering, of course, is in connection with the shots. 30181. Q. Do I sum up your final conclusion in this way, that you would leave the matter of watering primarily to the management 1 A. Yes. 30182. Q. But, if the Inspector considers that it is not sufficiently carried out, he should have the pow er to order fur ther watering 1 A. Yes. 30183. Q. And, if the management object to his opinion, they shou ld have the right to go lo arbitration 1 A. Y es, t hat is-my view. 30184. Q. I s it possible for anybody to la.y down a.ny rule wl,ich will apply to all mines and all conditions of working ~ A. No ; having regar<l to t he effect that water has on floors and roofs, ancl also to Lhe fact that the water supply is deficient in many cases, i t is impossible to lay down any r ule. 30185. Q. T he proposal tha t you make now would gi\'e a n opportu nity to the Inspector and t he m; nagement to discuss the matter and agree upon someLhing 1 A. Yes. 30186. illr. R obertson. l Q. There would be no discussion, I presume, as to the necessity for watering in the vicinity of shots 1 A. No. 30187 . .1/r. Ritchie.] Q. Y ou would mnke that iroperativP, as i t is now 1 A. Yes. 30188. ..llr. R obertson.] Q. As a. maUer of fact, you would have General Rule 12 ol,served 1 A. Yes; and I will go fur ther tLan General Rule 12, and say that, e,en if a. flameless explosive is used, tl11•y sh ou'd adopt the same precaul ions i n regard to watering. 30189. llis llonor.l (). I understand ) ou do not uelic"e there a re such things as alJSC,lut ely 0: me!ess explosh·es 1 A. No. 30190. Q. Wit Ii the exception of liquid air, I su ppose 1 A. Yo;, 30 191. ,._l b. Robertson.] Q. You would not make an addition to General Rule 12, p1·oviding for the omission of watering if other precautions are observed 1 A . No. 30192.

...

)..,

889

·Witne.~.s-A. A. Atkinson, 19 March, 1903.

30192. His Honor.] Q. Has liquid ail- ever been used a-S an explosive 7 A. I believe there are some experiments being made now; but J do not know whether it has been successfully applied or not.. 30193. Q. It would be a useful invention 7 A. Yes, no doubt . 30194. Q. There are two passages here that you want to qnote. This is a report by S. T. E vans, K.C., M.P., and J. S. Martin, one of His Majesty's Inspectors of Mines, upon the circumstances attenc.ling an explosion which occm·red at MacLaren Colliery (No. 1 Pit) Abertysswa, on the 3rd of September, 1902 :" The system of watering the colliery along the main west level by me:os of water-pipes, water-cocks, and hose, was good; and the work was well carried out; but for this, there is little doubt that the disaster would have been much more serious and widespread than it was." That is dated 20th October, 19021 A. Y es. 30195. Q. And again, at tb e conclusion of the report, " I desire again to emphasize the importance of watering the roads in fiery seams. I had the honor of pointing out in my last report, to your predecessor, how the cours~ of an explosion is extended where watering is not efticiently carried out; and this ca-Se shows how an explosion may be restricted by th e watering being efficiently done. I also pointed out, in the report just alluded to, that watering roads was not, at present, either under Act of Pil.rliament or under rules, of statutory obligation; but I atlhere to the opinion th!tt such an obligation shou ld be provided for " 1 A. Yes. 30196. Q. Now, R ecommendat ion No. 14 is that Managers shou ld ue compelled to give more personal time and attention to the management of the colliery ;-what do you say abo ut. that 1 A. I think that the Manager should be required to go into the mine twice a week, an<l to make a complete inspection of the mine once a month. I think also it is desirable that he should make a report of the general result of his inspections. 30197. Q. Is that in a special book kept for the purpose, do you mean 7 A. Y es. 30198. Mr. .Robertson.] Q. Would you make that imperative under all circumstances i A. W ell, "so far as is reasonably practicable," using the words of the General Rules. 30199. Q. But if his commercial or legal duties, say, call him away for a week or a fortn ight, what then 1 A. I think that the law could be so framed as to admit of bis attending to such business as you suggest, with a reasonable excuse. ~0200. Q. And do you think it is practicable now for a Managf!r·of a very large mine to visit e,·ery part of the workings once a month i A. 1 think so. 30200!. Q. Having regard to the fact that he is called upon, very frequt·ntly, to go to particular parts i A. I think so. J do not know of any mines where you could not go once a month. 30201. Q. I can tell you of one wher e you would be very tired when you finished it 1 A. I dare say. 30202. Mr. .Ritchie.] Q. What would you have in this report ;-shou ld it be a monthly report, or a report each day that he visits the mine 7 A. E ach day that he visits the mine. 30203. Q. Won Id you have him to enter up a report on. each occasion ~ A. Yes. 30204. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. Recommendation No. 15-" Instruments to be placed at bottom of upcasts to determine variations of heat and air pressure "-I do not thin k you would depart from the opinion you expressed (paragraph 13311) 1 A. No, so long as the water-gauge is proYided for a fan, I think that is all that is required, in addition to the barometer and thermometer now required by law. 30205. Ilis 1.IonO't'. ] Q. What doe3 the fan water-gauge i;how now? A. I t shows the inches of w:aterpressnre. 30206. Q. R ept·esented by the energy of the fan on the ai1· i A. Yes. The <.lilference of pressure b etween tbe intake and tbe upcast currents gets up to, well, in t.he 0~se of the Metropolitan, 4} inches; which would mean about 22 or 23 llis. to the square foot. 30207. Q. It is the energy of exhaust? A. Yes. 30208. Mr. .Robertson.] Q. I t represents the drag or fri ction created by the a id A. Yes. 30209. Mr. Bruce, 'mith.] Q. Now, Recommendation No. 16-" Size of manholes e~largeu. "-well, I do not think you have altered your opi nion on t hat, have you 1 A. No; I think that t he present size of the manholes is large enou~h . 30210. Q. The whitewashing, I think, was suggested after you gave your evideuce 1 A. Yes; I think that was a recommendation from Newcastle. 30211. Q. What do you think of that 1 A. In cases whe re men are required to travel on the haulage road, I think that the whitewashing should be done, or so~e indication-I would not say t hat you should whitewash the whole of the refuge place; uut an indication of whitewash round the front, or on a prop, is a. very good thing in those cases where t he men are compelled to travel on t he haulage roads ; but, where there is a. travelling road, I do not think it is necessary. 30212. Q. Would you limit it still further where the coal is being brought out by an endless rope? A. I t is not EO necessary there as with the other; but I think I would make it apply to any mechanical haulage road [The Commission then adjourned unt~l 2 p.m.J

AFTERNOON.

(On resuw ing at 2 p.m. Mr. W. R. Pratt attended to take shorthand notes of the evidence and proceedings.) ALFRED ASHLEY ATKINSON previously sworn, was further examined, as under:Examination by Mr. Bruce Smith,-(continued) : 302Ia. Q. There was a question suggested by Mr. Wade just before luncheon, as to whether the manholes on the haulage roads, when used by the men who were working t hel'e, bu~ not as tl'a.velling l'O!lch, required whitewn.shing 1 LL Do I understand you mean used by workmen who simply attend to the requirements ·of the hau ]age. 3021-t. Q. Ye::i, by men who are doing occasional work thorn 1 A. If th e genera.l body of men do not travel on the roads, it would not be necessary. 30215. Q. The men working there would know the whereabouts of ~he holes 1 A. Yes. 30216. Q. With regi~rd to instruction to employed;; on the me:ms of escape 1 A. I desire to say lhat, instead of every alternative road being shown to the men every three months, I would have them shown one alternative road in the three months. 30217.

16625

29~o V

890 Witness-A. A. Atkinson, 19 March, 1903.

30217. Q. Regal'ding the black-list, you do not offer any opinion on it 7 A. No; lhat is a ma~ter for th~ Commission to deal with. . 30218. Q. On the matter of safety-lamps not being unlocked for shot-firing 1 A. I have nothing to add on the matter. 302H.I. Q. There are some further recommendations; and I do not think yc,u have expressed an opinion at nil on these. Tbey were made by Mr. Bower in the witness-box, I think. One suggestion related to machinery for rd.isiog persons out of a mine at the second shaft 1 A. That matter is provided for undeF Section 43 of the Coal Mines Act, and it may be left to the Inspector to suggest such action as he may think necessary ; and the matter may be L·eferrcd to,arbitration if not ssttled. 30220. Q. You mean if the Manager and lhe Inspector fail to agree 1 A. Yes. 30221. Q. With regard to the appointment of Jnspectors. It was suggested that the ·miners should have the right of nomination 1 A. I think that would be a very improper proceeding, either to do it by the influence of tlie miners or the pl'Oprielers. I do not see any reason to alter the present mode of appointment.. 30222. Q. One witness mentioned the case of Mr. Watson, as being an nppointment made by political influence 1 A. I can say that Mr Watson was strongly recommended by practical men, and he h~ shown himself to be a useful, capable, and conscientious officer. He was recommended, not only by Managers, hut by Mr. Jonathan May; whom he succeeded in the Newcastle District. 30223. Q. And by the miners 1 A. By practical mining engineers. 30224. Q. Was he not recomm~nded by M r. Estell 1 A. Yes. 30225. Q. He is a miner 1 A. Yes. 30226. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. He is a member of Parliament 1 A. H e was a miner. 30227. Q. He has not heen a manager, a surveyor, or an engineer1 A. No, a. miner. 30228. Q. He was a member of Parliament at the time he made the recommendation 1 Ji. Yes. 30229. Q. Do you think the recommendation would have been taken as much notice of if Mr. Estell haq been a. miner and not a member of Parliament 1 [ No·answer.] 30230. .lfr. 13rnce Smitlt.] Q. Mr. Watson had been :Manager for some time at the Stockton and Gunnedah Collieries 1 A. Yes. 30231. Q. Do you 1egard him aci fitted for the position 1 A. So far, he has proved himsel ( to be a capable officer. 30232. Q. You put that case by way of illustration, and, apart from that., you think it would be undesirable to allow the miner;i or the proprietors to ha,·e anything to say on the matter of 1"!10 appointment of the Inspectors 1 A. Yes. 30233. Mr. RobP,rtson. ] Q. Do you know whether the labour unions in the North took any part in the appointment of Inspectors 1 A. I have not seen f-LDY correspondence from them. It has not reached my hands. 30234. Mr. Bruce Sniitli.] Q. In regard to the sani tary arrangements, you have formed the opinion that no rules which might be Jaicl down would be likely to be observed 1 A. I can not advise any schemes that would be of much use. There is su!'ficient deodorising material in the mine. 30235. Q. H ave you noticed that Professor Haldane has reported a. new disease in the Cornwall mines, as the result of neglect of sanitary arrangements; and that he bas discovered a. new microbe 1 A. Yes. 30236. Q. I s this disease contined to metalliferous mines 1 A. No, it has been found in coal-mines in Belgium and Frapce. 30237. Q. H11ve you read the report; and yo"u do not think any suggestio!l is practicable 1 A. No, I think the workmen ha.,·e the matter in tl11:ir own hands -all that is necessary is to observe ordinary sanitary requirements. 30238. Q. With regard to stowing rafuse in a mine1 A. You refet· to a suggestion made by Mr. B ower in his evidence, Lut I think that, S'l long as the ventilation requirements are carried out, there is not much need to interfere. Where part of lhe refuse is stowed in a. narrow place, bis objeclion is because there is little room left in tho place. 30239. llis Ilonor.J <J. That is one of the matters which the Inspectors would deal with in the ordinary way 1 A. Yes; or the :\Ianager woulJ deal with it himself-he wonld deal with that in the ordinary course of his duty. 30240. Mr. Robe1·lsun.] Q. The defect would not be by reason of the stowing of the dirt, but becanse of inadequate ventilation 1 A. The inadequn.te ventilation would be the defec~. 30241. Q. And the In!>pector ·would call the Manager's attention to it1 A. Yes. 30242. ;.lfr. Bruce Smith.] Q. You hea.n1 the proposal that travelling roa,Js should be brushed 6 feet high 1 A. Yes; in cases where they were much under 6 feet. 30243. Q. What is your opinion 1 A. Tn ca5es where the height is under 6 feet, it might involve very serious expenditure. In addition to that, it miglit be unfair in the matter of competition between owners; as one owner might have a thil-k seam anJ another one a thin seam. 30244. Q. It woulcl dou \,le the disa<l vantages of some owners 1 A. Yes; and make matters work unfairly 30245. Q. You known. minn in wLicb it is stated it ha.s been <lone. Has it been done by l\1r. Brown from philanthrc,pic motives 1 A. No; it has been done from a business point of ,·iew-to get the horses into the mine. 30246. Q. Tha.t mine cannot be quoted as a.n example to others 1 A. No. There is, however, one matter in which the owners cou l<l relieve the workmen ; aud that is by making some arrangement to carry their tools, and thus save tbem the tl'ouble of carrying them in themselves. 30247. Q. Could that be easily <lone1 A. Yes; it was always done in the old country. It is merely a. matter of arrangement between the miners and the l\1anagers. 30248. Q. Is this brushing, which is ad,·ocatecl here, ever done at home 1 A. Oh, yes. 30249. Q. For the purpose of conveniencing tbo miner.;; i A. It is done to increase the roadway for ventilation or haulage purposes. 30250. ,lfr. Robe,·l)on.] (J. I presume that you are aware that, in many of the collieries in the British coalfields, the height of the travelling roads does not excsed from 3 feet 6 inches to 4 feet 1 I h11ve travelled them tn yself. 30251. Q. lt is a D:1atter of oomfort 1 A. Yes. 30252,

891

jVitness-A. A. Atkinson, 19 March, 1903.

3b252. Q. lt the miner does not like the discoqifort, he can go elsewberei ' A. Yes; but the discomi0tt .is accentua_ted where the men carry their tools. 30253. Mr . .Ritchie.] Q. Do you know the height of the travelling roads in the Soulh Clifton Mine 1 A. From 4 to 5 feet. 30254. Q. Are not some not above 3 feet1 A. No, I think not. 30255. Q. Now, as to blasting 1 A. I was asked by Mr. Ritchie to think over some alteration in General Rule 12, and I have done so. I have assumed that the Commission will make some recommendation with the view of introducing safety ~xplosi,·es under certain conditions. 302{>6. Q. What is the purport of your alterations in the existing rules 1 A. Gunpowder wou1d be abolished in all mines in which :fil'e-damp had been seen during the previous three months, or which are not naturally wet throughout. In addition to that, it provides that only clay or other non-inflammable substances shall be used for stemming, and shall be provi<led by the owner of the mine. ~0251. Q. H ave -you framed a draft section 1 A. Ob, yes; but I do not pretend to be a parliamentary draftsman. ·30~$8. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. You propose to abolish the present Rule 12 altogether~ A. Yes. 30259. Mr. B1·uce Smith.] Q. Amongst other things, yon propose that the Minister shall have the same power as tho home office has in England to promulgate a list of permitted explosives? A. Yes. '30260. Q. The Minister can, from time to time, alter the list by adding or taking away certain explosives 1 A. Yes. 30261. Q. That is the practice with the Home Office, which publishes a listi A. Yes; after making tests ~hey put additions to the list; or, in some cases, if the explosives prove ineffective, they remo,·e them. M262. Q. U oder the proposed proYision, yon could avail yourself of the tests made in England, and adopt tbe English standard from time to time 1 A.. Yes ; that would rnve the cost of making tests locally. $0263. (The proposed alterations by .M:r. Atkinson of General Rule 12 were then put in and marked Exhibit 63.) 30264. Q. That is the whole of the recommendations which have come in from the delegates from Illawarra and Newcastle 1 A. Yes. 30265. Q. You have some recommendations to make 1 A. Yes. The first is an amendment of General Rule 4, section 47, or by a special rule, so as to require inspection of all places in the ventilating district by deputies, including those temporarily idle. 30266. Q. What do you mean by a ventilating district 1 A. It is defined in the Act- " Such part of a seam as has an independent intake, commencing from a main intake air-course, and an independent return airway, terminating at a main return n.ir-course." 30267. Q. That is defined 1 A. Yes. 30268. Mr. Robe1·tson.J Q. H ow far would you go in your inspection 1 Would you inspect beyond the la.st '!orking place on the circuit of air 1 A good deal of interest has been centred during this Inquiry upon the inspection of standing places sandwiched between working places 1 A. I think that, so long as all places are inspected up to the la;;t working place, that would be reasonable. 30269. Q. There might be a number of places on the return side, distinct from old workings 1 A. By working place~, I take it that you mean all ordinary working places. 30270. .Mr. lJruce Smith. J Q. You propose something about doors, fot· the purpose of directing the ventilation 1 A. Yes. As far as practicable, doors for the purpose of directing the ventilation should be avoided in the haulage road, where mechanical haulage is adopted. 30271. Q. Now, with regard to the inspection of roads, where naked lights are used 1 A. I propose, having regard to the many recent fires caused by the use of naked lights, the inspection of all roads and workings in collieries where naked lights are used, on the cessation of the day's work. 30272. Q. By whom sliould the inspection be made 1 A. The inspection should be made by the officials, with a locked safety-lamp ; and a report should be made of the inc;pection. Several of the collieries <lo it now; and it would be better if it were made compulsory. 30273. Q. You have some recommendation to make regardin~ the cage, and the use of safety-hooks? A. Yes. Where ste:im is usecl for raising or lowering persons, I would recommend the use of safety-hooks, to preverit the cage from being over-wound, being made compu1sory. 30274. },fr. Robertson.] Q. On all shafts 1 A. I refer more particularly to the ordinary winding shafb. ·30275 . .Mr. Bmce Smith.] Q. Where are the hooks placed 1 A. In the headgear over the landing'. Most collieries have them. 30276 . .J,fr. Robertson.] Q. What is the present provision in the Act 1 A. The present Act requires either the use of safety-hooks or of reduced speed. 30277. J,fr. Brnce Smith.] Q. Y 011 have a proposal with reference to the finding of gas 1 A. In those mines wbere safety-lamps a,re not in use, I wou1d recommend that a book be kept for the purpose of reports as to the presence of gas seen by workmen ; such reports to be signed by the workman who makes the report. 30278. Q. Th ere is a suggestion about keeping a tracing showing the ventilation of the colliery1 A. At collieries employing more than twenty persons, a tracing of the workings should he kept, showing the direction of the air-currents, the positions of air-crossings, doors, stoppings, &c. This tracing should be poste<l up at least once in every twelve months. 30279. Q. Have you seen any plan yet showing the ventilation of the Mount Kembla Mine~ You rememl,er it was spoken of1 A. I have no perfect plan showing the ventilation in all its details. A tl'a.cing could be made of the ventila.Lion of a mine, without interfering with the working plan. That is all I suggest. 30280. Q. And that should be posted up for general information 1 A. Yes. 30281. Q. I now go away from your recommendations. You heard Dr·. Robertson give his evidence as to wind-blast theory 1 A. Yes. 30282. I think you have formulated n. number of reasons why you a.re unab}P, to agree with him 1 I a.m quite unable to reconcile such a cause with the evidence of force and flame which I saw. 30283. Q. You say you are unable 1 A. Yes. 30284. Q. You have summari11eJ your rcnsons 1 A. Yes. 30285. Q. You may state what they are 1 A. Thr.: first is :-Jf it is admitted that the outbye force increased as it approached the mouth of the tnnnel (where there was the greatest evidence of force and <lamaue done) that fact seems to me to completely upset the probability ot wind alone being the cause of the disast:r. The pressure

892 Witness-A. A. Atkinson, 19 March, 1903.

pressure of the air fr.:>m th~ 4th Right, <lue to a. fall, tra.~elliog towards the tunnel mouth, would encounter no~hiog but the atmospheric pressnre ; and unde1· such circumshnces the pre~sure or force exerted w~uld naturally decrease in that direction. As the tuonel mou~h is more th_an a. mile _away fro!11 the 4th Right, such a force would probably be expended before reachmg that pomt, especially havmg regard to the numerous openings on either side of the roadway. As n. ruatter of fact the force exerted, whatever may have been the cause, is n·enerally admitted to btwe been the greatest at and near to the tunnel mouth. The second reason has r~ference to the time factor, viz. - half a second ; ass1;1med for the fall in the 4th Ri"'bt to ha.,·e taken pla.ce, in order to produce a speed of the air of 700 miles an hour, with a pressttre of . per square inch and a temperature of 3:bout 290 d~grees Fahrenheit. This would be _quite unusual, 35 and is not likely to ha,·e occurred. The third reason 1s :-The pressure of compressed a.1r of 2f atmospheres, or 36·7 )us. per square inch, produces a temperature-due to compression-of 290 degrees Fahrenheit, with dry air. 30286. Q. You have an authority 7 A. Ye~. D. K. Clark's Manual of Rules, Tables, and Data, pa.ge 913. I may say that Mr. Sellers assnmt>d that ignition of coal.dust was possible with a temperature due to this pressure; and he was eYidently guided by the results of Professor Bedson's experiments. It may be pointt>d out however, that the igni t ion of coal-dust in these experiments, t he lowest of which took place at 291 degrees Fahrenheit was after the coal-dust hatl been subject to the gradual etlt!cts of oxidaUon by air pa,;sing over it for a period of from 60 to 80 minutes, with a gradually increasing temperature ; and this is very different from tho sudden results assumed to have taken place in consequence of the fall. 302 7. .;l fr. Robertson.] Q. It is only possible with continued pressure 1 A. Yes. The time limit has a. great deal to do with the results obtained by Professor Bedson. 30288. Jlfr. Bruce Smith. l Q. The condition was different. You do not think Professor Bedson's experiments apply 1 A. I do not think they do. 30289. Q. ·what bearing do you consider tba.t the burning of the men, as evide~ce in t his inquiry, has on t!le que,tion ? A. The burning of men, according t, medic9.l evidence, the fire in No. 87 bord, Mr. Mingaye's a nalyses of samples of coal-dust, and the presence of after-damp, with carbon monoxide, in the air after the accident, all prove the existence of combustion, attended with fl ame, in the colliery: and, whilst being consistent with an explosion of fire-damp and coal-dust, these phenomena. cannot be explained by a. wind-blast. Jt may be pointed out that carbon monoxide, CO, may resu lt from an incipient gob-fire, without actual fire, but there has n:it been any evidence of such a fire in the Mount Kembla Uolliery, either before or since the nccident 30290. Q. B earing in mind the numerous deaths which took place, what have you to say 1 A. In my opinion, it is impossible to beliiwe that the numerous deaths, resulting from carbon monoxide in the after-damp, could have been c.l.usecl in distimt parts, or in an,y part, of the mine by reason of a blast of wind and the m')re distillo.tion of co1I dust. The creation of so much after-do.mp could only occur from the presence of flame. 30291. Q. And, as to the evidences of force, ho,v do they appear to you to harmonise with the theory put forward 1 A. Ii a. wind blast, with a velocit.y of 700 miles per hour, came out of the 4th Right goaf, there would have been much gl'eater evidence of force in the travelling r oad than was the case; and it is probable thn.t the stoppings between the travelling r oad and the haulage road would have been blown towards the lattPr; but as a matter of fact they were blown towards the travelling road. 30292. Q. In the whole of your experience and re:1dini, ha,·e you come a.cross cases in which results similar to those produced at the Mount K.embla Colliery, Lave been produced by a. wind-blast 1 A. No. 30293. Q. Have you ma.de out a table showing the resnlt,s of explosions in Great Britain, involving the los1 of ti..-e 01· more lives, between the yea.rs 1881 and 19001 A. Yes. 30294-. Q. You have limited the list to cases in which five or more Ii ves ha.ve been lost 1 A. Yes. 30295. Q. I think there are fift.y-seven cases 1 A. Yes. 3029G. Q. Out of these, how many are there in which the cause of the accident has been attributed primarily to a wind-blast 1 A. None at all. 30297. Q. I say primarily: I do not S.l.Y ultimately 1 A. I do not ex:i.ctly understand what you mean. But there are three c.,ses which I think may be of some interest to t.he Commissioners, as t hey have been attriLuted to falls in one way or another; these falls having forced out the gas upon naked lights. 30298. Q. There are three cases, out of fifty-seven, of that description 1 A. Yes. 30299. ,lfr. Ritcliie.] Q. The falls forced out gas, not wind 1 A. No, not wind. 30300. ilb-. Bn,ce , 'niitlt.] Q. The fall was sa.id to be the ca.use 7 A. Yes. 30301. Q. In any one of these t hree cases, was there evidence of bu rning 1 .Ll. Yes. 30302. Q. Just describe the first one 1 A. I am afraid I cannot. :~0303. A. There was a heavy fall, wa.s there not 1 A. Yes; in the New Dufryn Colliel'y, Glamorganshire, South "\Vales. Naked lights were used. The remarks made concerning the accident are as follow:

lb,.

pnring the morning the place began to "work," and the men were withdrawn to the heading for safety; in a short hme a bea,·y fall or.curred, extending o,·er 30 yards along the face ; and almo~t immediately afterwards the explosion took place.

I may sa.y that t he fall took place on the 20th of June, 1882. 30304. Ilis llonor.] Q. That fa.II drove some gas out 1 A. Ye!,. 30305. Q. That gas ignited? A. Y cs. 30306. Q. Tbat gas had not been swept out before, l>ecause of its position in the roof 1 A. Yes. 30307. Jf1·. Bruce Smith.] Q. The fall dro,·e the gas out ; and an explosion followed 1 LL Yes. 30308. Q. What is the second case 1 A. There was an explosion at t he Clifton Hall Colliery, Lancanshire. They were using ope~ lights; and 178 Ii ves were lost. The cause of tbe explosion was fire,damp, suddenly and unexp.ectodly emttted from the goaf or old workings; it was lighted at a candle. 30309. Q. Was there no fall 7 A. The fire-darop was emitted from the 0aoaf · an..:1 presumably1 t11ere was a ' u., fall. 30310. Q. What was the thil'd case 1 A. The third case was on the 13th of March 1889 at the Brynroa.lly Col1iery, Denbighshir:. Safety.lamps were used; but no trouble seems to haYe bee'n tak;n by the Manager to .insure the exclusion of lamp keys and matches. Twenty persons were killed. 'l'he cause was the accidental fall of roof in a 9 inch seam, whicn caused a sudden outburst of gas which was i"nited where 0 three men and a boy was sitting with open lights. ' 30311.

.. !

893

Witness-A. A. Atkinson, 19 March, 1903:

30311. Mr. Robe·rtson. J Q. With one exception, th se accidents have occurred in naked-light collieries 1 A. Yes. 30312. His Honor.] Q. This list was carefully got t1p, under your own supervision 1 A. Yes. 30313. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. It has been suggested by Dr. Ro~ertson that the gas found in the No. 1 Right main he:i.ding, on the 4th of August, may ha.vc been the result of the distillation of co1I. A. I have heard that. 30314. Q. What have you to say on that point i A. It hM been suggested that this gas may ha\·e been either CH4 or 00 or both, and produced by the distillation of coal. It may be pointed out, however, that any OH4 produced by distillation, with a supply of oxygen, as in a colliery, undergoes chemical changes acc?rding to the following equation : CH4 + 202 =CO 2 + 2H20 This equation represents complete combustion, and the only difference is that, with incomplete combustion, some CO results. It must be remembered that any distillation tlrn.t took place in the colliery was not like that which takes place in a closed vessel during the production of ordinary gas, in which case the resultant gases from the distillation pass over unconsumed. If this gas was CO, it could only have resulted from combustion: a.nd the production of gas in this way is not consistent with a wind-blast. It may be pointed out, howeve,·, that CO may be formed hy an incipient gob fire; as to the existence of which no evidence has been given in regard to the Mount Kembla Colliery. 30315. Mr. Robertson.] Q. It may be as well to say that CO is sometimes produced naturally. It is given off at the Metropolitan Colliery 1 A. I believe there is a little in the bottom gas which occnrs a.t the Metropolitan · Colliery; but it is something unique in the way of gas. 30316. M1·. Bruce Smith.] Q. You have another note1 A. If 00 had been present in any appreciable quantity in the case of No. l main heading, the effects produced on those who tested the gas would have been apparent. At that time, however, no one was affected, or suggesled the probability of the gas being 00. 30317. Mr. Robertson.] Q. If the fire-damp was the produce of tl.te explosion, you wonlcl have expected to find CO there 1 A. And those people, myself included, would have felt the result. 30318. Mr. Bruce Smith.]. Q. You have a reference to [laldane? A. H aldane says on the top of page 9 : 0

As it requires the presence of from 5 to 6 per cent. of fil'e-damp to renrler the air inflammable, there will not be more than 10·5 of oxygen or 50 per cent. of pure air left in the residual gas. On the other hand, if the explosive mixture contained as much as 9 ·47 per cent. of fire·damp, there will be no oxygen left io the tra.ck of the explosion.

.,,

.,.

30319. Q. What bearing has this on the matted A. I may say that this latter event, however, was not the case at Mount Kembla; and this is pro"ecl by the presence of CO in the after-damp, which can only be the result of incomplete combu!ition. On the other hand, with a less explosive mixture and 50 per cent. of pure a.ir left, it is unreasonable to assume that there would not be a sufficient supply of oxygen to consume all the CH4 produced by the distillation of coal; especially Laving regard to the fact that it is admitteu by all that the :Mount Kembla was not a very gassy or very dusty colliery, and, therefore, an excessive amount of distillation could not go on : the absance of large quantities of coked <lust, as stated in the evidence of witnesses for the Company, also confirms this view. 30320. Q. Have you ever known a case where the presence of inflammable ga!', found in the higher parts of a minE', after an explosion, unassociated with after-damp, has been attributed to the distillation of the coal7 A.No. 33321. Q. How basjt been regardetl 1 A. It has always been r.,garded as lhe natural product of the seam; its presence being brought about by the ventilat.ing arrangements being out of order. 30322. Mr. Robertson.] Q. You woul<l ltave expected a.ny tire-damp which may have been produced after the explosion to have come in contact with the naked light s in the mine after the explosion 7 A. Yes. 30323. Q. And there might-, therefore, have been a second explosion 1 A. Y es. 30324. Q. In view of that., would you infer that, the naked lights having been in contact with the atmosphere after the explosion, there could be no fire damp 1 A. I think that is good evidence that there was no fire-damp. 30325. Q. You w,rnt to say something about the condition of the canvas a.t the site of the fire in the No. 87 bord 7 A.. The canvas was burned to ashes; and that was evidently produced by o. fire. That is in No. 87 bord. 30326. Q. About tha.t in the back heading 7 A. It was not so severely burned; but it would crumble in your hand if you took hold of a piece. 30327. Q. Have you any doubt that this canvas bad been the subject of flame 7 A. No, I have no doubt, I think they bad both been subjected to flame. 30328. Q. Do you see any reas.>n for changing the opinion which you expre5sed before, that the fire was the result of the explosion 1 A. I think that the tire was the result of the explosion . 30329. Q. You remember that Dr. Robertson said that it was impossible for an explosion of gas at Morrison's light to extend to the tunnel mouth? A. Yes. 30330. Q. Did you say that 1 A. I said that the explosion of that gas was tbe starting point, and that the explosion was carried by means of the coal-dust to the tunnel mouth. · 30331. Q. You have an extract here from a repol't by l\fr. A. H. Stokes, Inspector of Mines for the Midland District, for the year 1892 1 A. I might explain the object of that; it seemed to require some confirmation, that gas had occasionally come· out of the strata above the coal measures ; and there seemed to be doubt as to whether it was possible tba.t gas could exist 1-1,bove the ~earn in the southern district. My object was to get some confirmation of the fact that gas is to be found in the strata faL· removed from the coal. I have taken some extracts on the matter, and I will pass them io. 30332. Mr. Robertson.] Q. I do not think that any one doubted that gas would come from the strata of a co:11 measure. The question was whether gas carae out of the strata of the Kembla coal scams. [ No answer.] . 30333. M1·. Bruce Smitli.] Q. I see the report from Mr. Stokes says:The ias appears to be accumulated under great pressure in cavities or fissures in the strata, until the removal of the

coal or dim1niehed pressure allows it an opportunity for escape. A. Yes. 30334. Q. In addition to the extract from the report by Mr. Stokes, you have also an extract from the Royal Commission on Accidents in Mines in 1881; where Mr. T. W. Embleton gives evidE1noe of a similnr cbaract.er 1 A. Yes. 3033'!·

894 Witttes.s-A. A. Atkinson, 19 March, 1903.

30334A. Q. You have also an extract from Vol. 17 of the Federated Institute of Mining tng1neers, relating to fire~damp in the iron-ore mines of Cumberland and Furness 1 A. Yes. · 30335. Q. You ha\'e an extract from Vol. 14 of the Fe<let·ated I nstitute of Mining Engineers, relat.ing t1) an explosion of fire-damp in the Rock Salt mines a.t Aknaszlatina, Hungary 1 A. Yes. .. 30336. Q. You have likewise an extract from Vol. 12 of the Federated Institute of Mining Eagineers1 rela.tincr0 to the deposit at the Mill Close Lead Mines, Darley Dale, Matlock 1 30337. Q. You have also an-extract from the reports of the proceedings of the Flameless Explosives Committee, North of England Institute of Mining and Mechanical Engineers 1 A. Yes. The extracts were then pnt in and marked as follow : 30338. Exhibit 64.- Extract from Report of Mr. A. H. Stokei::, Inspector of Mines for t he Midland District, 1892, pages 7 and 8. 30339. Exhibit No. 65.-Extract from the Royal Commission on Accidents in Mines, 1881. 30340. Exhibit No. 66.-Extract from Vol. XVII of the Federated Institute of Mining Engineers, page 285. 30341. Exhibit No. 67. - Extract from Vol. XIV of the Federated Institute of Mining Engineers, page 616. 30342. Ex.bibit No. 68.-Ex.tract from Vol. XU of the Federated Institute of Mining En~irieers,fage 115. 30343. Exhibit No. 69.-Extract from Report of t.he Flameless E,tplosives Cou1mittee1 North cl England Institute of Mining and Mechanical Engineers, page 78. 30344. Mr. Bruce Smith.] Q. With regard to this report of the proceedings of the Flameless ExploSiYes Committee what is that 1 A. That is the result of a. Committee whieh was appointed for testing explosives under different conditions. I think that Committee re~lly assisted the Woolwich people ill making their experiments; and I thought the conclusions might be of some value to the Cotnmission. They are very aborL. 80345. Q. There is one paragraph in the report., No. 5, which says:In selecting a high explosive for use in a. mine, it should not be forgotten tha.t the risk of explosion is only lessened, a.nd not a.bolishe~, by its use.

A.. That means that the same precautions should be taken with a safety explosive as are required with blasting powder. Paragraph No. 4 of the same report says : -

•"

It is essential that similar examinations of the working places and precautions which are in force in mines where blasting powder is used, stiould be ridgidly observed where :i. high explo,sive is employed. .

Cross-examined by Mr. Wade :30346. Q. Your opinion means that the gas which came from the 4th Right was liberated by the fall 1 A. Yes. I was unable to find evidence that gns hacl ever b een seen in that district. 80347. Q. Then, supposing that gas had been give off from those two last pillars, would you not have expected to fiud indications of it in the conrse of the working 7 A. Yes ; 1 think you should. 30348. Q. I£ the gas had been lying in t,he roof after the pillars were taken out, ,vould you not expect the first fall to have driven it out 1 A. Yes, I should, if it were lying anywhere near where the fall took place. 30349. Q. The other alternative is that it might have escaped through the cracks of the stone t0 the higher part of the goaf 1 A. Yes. 33350. Q. You said just now, I uuderstand, that the initial point of the explosion in your mind was Morrison's light 1 A. I think so. 30351. Q. If there h!i.d been nrnch dust in the air at the moment of ignition-do you think there was, between the 4th Right and the 4th Left 1 A. I think there would be some dust. It is not a very dusty colliery; bnt I think there would be a certain amount of dust. 30352. Q. Even if it was not a dusty road between the 4th Right and the 4th Left, the gust of wind would stir up the dust so as to make the air pretty thick with it.1 A. Yes, I think it would. I do not know a.bout "pretty thick " ; but there would be dust in suspension. 30353. Q. Do you not think that the light itself might have caused the inflaming of the dust in the first instance 1 A. I do not think so. 30354. Q. Why not 1 A. I feel inclined to agree with the conclusions come to by the Coal-dust Commission on that matter. 30355. Q. There is no case put before the Commiasion- in fact, you say you know of no case-in which dust was forced against a naked light 7 A. I do not think I said that. 30356. Q. Do you know of any case 1 A. Oh, y('s; there are cases of that sort where falls have caused a stirring up of the dust. 30357. Q. Has not the fall put the light out 1 A. I think there is a case where the light was left, and the dust caught by it. 30358. Q. Can you tell me of any case at the present moment 1 A. I do not think I can at the present moment; but I could if I had time. 30359. Q. You have heard cases of falls 1 A. Yes. 30360. Q. I s it not said to be one of the characterist.ics of these falls that the lights are put out 1 A. Yes. 30361. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Do you remember an incident which occurred in the Metropolitan Colliery here, when some cages went to the bottom. No; I mean in relation to some skips 1 A. 1 have heard of it ; but I do not remember the effect on the lights. 30362. Q. Have you beard of the circumstances 1 A. No; I have not heard of all the circumstallces. 30363. Mr. Wade, l Q. What do you think the air came out of in the 4th Righti A. We have been over that before. I could not say what it came out of. I will not aLtcmpt it. 30364. Q. Have you no idea 1 A. I coulq not tell. 30365. Q. Would it come out at some velocity ; or would it pass out as an ordinary air current 1 A . I think at a rate a little over an ordinary air current; but I could not say. 30366. Q. You think that a pace at a rate of a little more than the ordinary air.current would jamb a. piece of canvas into a crack in the rib 1 A. It would take more than toe ordinary ai:r current to do that; if th..1,t was how it was caused. ,80367. Q. When do you think that canvas was forced into the rib 1 A. I did not see it; I have heard of it. 30368

,;f

•

895 Tritness-A. A. Atkinson, 19 March, 1903.

30368. Q. Wh~p. µo you think it was deposited there; at what stage? A. H might have been caused by the explosion itself; although I would not like to say. 30369. Q. The explosion coming from where-coming down the main ro1d 1 .A. The explosion after it got fairly started. 30370. Q. Whereabouts did it get fairly started 1 A. That is rather a difficult. thing to say. I must say that I was impressed with the idea of H is Honor in connecthn with that, whe!l he said that it was possible that the gas ignited at Morrison's light and travelled back towards the 4th Right, and radiated from somewhere near where the middle of the body of the gas would bo. You can also explain all the directions of force in that way. I t seems to me to have Leen a very likely thing to have taken place. 30371. Q. D o you not think that this long body of gas strP.tching from the 4th L eft to the 4th Right., in the presence of dust, would hwe ciused an explosion before it iot back to the 4th Right 1 A. Probably coal-dust bas been an agent between the 4th Right and the 5th Right. 30372. Q. No, I mean between the 4th L eft and the 4th Right. You said that tht}re was some dust in the air ther~, if the flame of Jl'Iorrison's light lit the flame near tho 4th Left, and the flame ran back to the 4t1 Right, would not the admixture of dust betwee:1 the 4th Lefb ani the 4th Right be sufficient to produce a dust explosion before the light got back to the 4th Right. D o you not think that under all the circumstances it would 1 il... T hat is, an explosion having started at the 4th Right. 303i3. Q, You ha.ve one long tongue of flame at high temperature. If you intermixed that flame ,vith co1l-dust suspende:i in the air, would not tha~ le.1.d to a co:1l-du3t explosio:i b8fore the fhme got b:1.ck to the 4th Right. A . It might j or it might not. . 30374. Q. Would you expect it to 1 A. If there is sufficient dust in the air ; but of course, if the gas was si mply burning quietly, it would not have the same effect of st.irring up the dust as a blown-oqt shot would. I t might only be travelling steadily along. 30375. Q. It would lick up the dust on the rooO A. Yes. 30376. Q. And the dust in suspense in its actual passage 1 A. Yes. 30377. Q. Would not that cause a dust explosion before the gas got back to the 4th Right 1 A. I would not like to say as to the probability of whether it would or would not. 30378. Q. Now, take the ordinary case of dust explosions in which fire-damp is the initial factor. Coal-dust explosions have been caused by a small inflamation of gas stirring the dust up 1 A. Yes. 30379. Q. The essenti:11 point is to get the dnst stirred up 1 A . Yes. 30380. Q. If you have a big body of flame, and the dust stirred up, ha,·e you not all the elements of a, coal-dust explosion 1 A. Yes. 30381. Q. D.:> you not think that yo:.i would have a coal-chut explosion, under the circum<ita.nces, before the flame got back to the 4th Right i A. It is possible; but it is difficult., if that has been the case, to account for a.11 the forces which would radiate from tho 4th Right. 30382. Q. Do you cc:>nce.ive one sheet of flame from the 4th L eft to the 4th Right; or was the flame rolled ba.ck 1 A. I think it would eat its way back. 30383. Q. There would not be one instantaneous sheet of flame? A. No; H would graclually travel back. 30384. Ilis Honou1.. ] Q. You sa.y gl'.i.dually-it would take pla.ce in less than a. second? A. Yes. 30385. Mr. Wad~.] Q. The flame would be instantaneous 1 .A. The difficulty is in the difference in the gas or explosive mixture which you are talking of. It may not have been a highly- explosive mixture until it got to the 4th Right. 30386. Q. Will not 1 per cent. of fire-damp, in the presence of dust in suspense in the air, produce an explosion i A. Y cs. 30387. Q. You mn.y get 4 or 5 pE'r cent. at the ignition point 1 .LI.. Yes. 30388. Mr . .Robertson.] Q. Would not 1 per cent. of fire-damp, in connection with the agitation of the coal-dust 7 A. There must be some violent agit9.tian of the coal dust. 30389. 1l1r. Wa de.] Q. For what purpose 7 A. To cattse ignition. 30390. Q. T o stir the coal,dust up? A. Yes. 30391. Q. Whether the flame rolled back, or whether it was in one continuous length, it would have the same effect in producing an increase of the temperature 1 A. Yes. 30392. Q. It would have the same effect on the coal-dust on the roof, 01· which was in suspeui;ion in the air 7 .A. I suppose it would get hold d any coal-dust next t0 t he roof; but it would not have the effect of raising the dust which would be on the sides and the floor. It would not have the same effect of raising that dust as a shot would. 30393. Q. I am taking it t hat the dust was raised through a dust of wind coming up from the 4th right to the 4th Left 7 A. Yes. 30394. Q. Even at that point of ignition-if t he ignition took place at the 4th Left a nd rolled back to the 4th Right- it would also expand in eYery direction-inbye and down the 4th Right-from the iuitial point of ignition. A. If it was in the nature of an explosion, there would be expansion ; but, if it were in the nature of inflammation only, there would be no expansion. 30395. Q. If thel'e were dust going up the 4th L eft, you admit that any dust would ignite? A. Where there is sufficient mixture of fire-damp, it would. 30396. Q. Take 5 per cent. of fire damp. Would you not expect that to light up; would you not have all the elements of a coal-dust explosion before the light got back to the 4th Right 1 A. It is diffict1lt to explain all the circumstances of the case. 30397. Q. I s that not the. theory-an ignition in the 4th Left, and an explosion of coal-dust coming outwards 1 A. The difficulty was to account for the forces from the 4th Right being all inbye. I said t hat the suggestion made by His Honor would remove that difficulty. It is hard to say what actually did occur. 30398. Mr. Robe1·tson.] Q. Did you say before that there had been an explosion in ihe 4th L eft 1 A. I think I did. 30399. Mr. Wade.] Q. Do you say you admit that there could not be an explosion of coal-dust 1 A. I do not say there could not ha,·e been an explosion of coal-dust: I think there could have been one. 30400. Q. Do you think that. Tako as a.n analogy the explosion which occurred in the Brancepetb H opper. That sho ·.vs that you may get an explosion from coal-dust only without gas 1 A. We have never lien.rd of a case of that kind underground j and, until we hear of something to the contrary, we must accept the conclusions of the Commission on explosions in mines. 30401.

896 Wil11e.ss-A. A. Atkinson, 19 March, 1903. 30401. Q. If you bad the same conditions as occurred at Brancepetb, could you not get an inflammation of the coal-dust at the 4th Left 1 A. I do not see how you can have the same conditions in a. road wa.y 6 fret hiah as would exist in a box where they were shovelling stuff down. I should prefer to stick to the de~isiou of the Coal-dust Commission until we get something to the contrary. 30402. Q. Did you see the building of a door in the back heading of No. 1, just inbye of the 4th Right 1 A. Yes. 30403. Q. Did there not seem to have been a force playing on that building stone 1 A. T here was a force, as far as I could observe, inbye towards the 5th Right. 30401. Q. Do you not think it came from the 4th Right 1 A. I could not say t hat. 30405. Q. Did you not notice that the stones on the western rib were more affected by the force than the stones on the eastern rib i A. It may have been so; I did not obser\'e i t. 30406. Q. Would that suggest that a force came out of the 4th Right and turned the corned A. If it did come out of the 4th Right, that is the effect it would have. 30407. Q. If yon found those facts proved, would not that justify you in faying the force came from the 4th Right l A. I do not think so. 30408. Q. If these are the facls, how do you account for them 1 A. The fact of one side being damaged more th an another. 30409. Q. Yes1 A. In the first place the sides may not have be1m built exactly the same, or built with exactly the same strength. You would require a great deal more evidence to convince you t hat the force which produced that effect originated from the 4th Right.. 30410. Q. Where do you say the force came from, if these are the facts A. I think it was probably produced by the entry of the explosion into the 4th Right. 30411. Q. Coming from wbere1 A. From No. l main level. 30412. Q. From what point 1 A. Inbye of the 4th Right rope road. 30413. Q. It came in the first cut-through inbyo. Why fix on the 4th Right rope road 1 A. There was a stopping between the 4th R ight and the 5th Right. 30414. Q. If the force came in the first cut-through, inbye of the 4th Right, the only effect would be to blow it outbye 1 .'1. The effect of t,he stopping would be to remove to some extent, or I may say d issipate, the force of the explosion. 30415. Q. You mean the back-lash 1 A. No, the original force. 30116. Q. D o you mean the air rnshing in to fill the vacuum caused by the first outrush of aid A. No; I am speaking of the ignition wherever it started coming back to the 4th Right agnin. There would be a fo rce radiating in all directions, one of which would be into the 4th Right itself. There are certain evidences of inbye force there which cannot be explained in a.ny other way. 30417. Q. You i:aw that dust at tho corner of the pillar, on the inbye E-icle of the p illar which is the boundary between the 4th Right.and No. 1 rope ro!l.d 1 A. t do not know that 1 noticed that in particular. 30418. Q. How do you think that dust got there, if there was no rush of air out of t he 4t,h Right 1 A. I th ink it might be procluced by the explosion itself on entering into the 4th Righ t. 30419. Q. How would you get an accumulation of dust and d ebris at a comer like that. Would you not think it had been carried there i A. I think that it h as been deposited there as a result of the explosion. 30420. Q. From where. It could not be from the outbye side i A. It has been deposi ted in bye of whatever point the explosion started at. 304-21. Q. You think it may have come from a direction inbye of the 4th Left 7 A. Yes. 30422. Q. Seeing the large amount of dust coming down there, would you not expect to have a coal-dust explosion before you got to the 4th Right 7 A. It is a difficult thing to explain. 30423. Q. Assuming that that, is true, assuming that the dust.-1 A. Are you right in calling it <lust; is it not all debris, or sin.ck. It is more likely to be slack and debris than fine dust. 304-24. Q. I arn taking the deposit marked on the plan ( Exhibit 26) 1 A. Yes. 30425. Mr. Robert~on.] Q. Do you remember an accumulation of dnst near the rollers 1 A. I remember an accumulation in front of the rollers between the 4th Right and the 4tn Left; but I did not notice t he radius of force. . 30426. Q. D.) you remem uer whether the drift of dust against the rollers was not so pronounced at the 4th Right as at some distance in bye 1 A. I did not notice that. 30427. Mr. Robertson.] Q. On this map, it does not show the drift ~gaiost the rollers until it gt:ts inbye i A. I see that. 30428. Mr. Wade.] Q. Mr. Cambage was asked, in para.graph 16233 oft.he shorthand-writers' notes: "Q. You have shown on the side of the 4th Right an accumulation of small coal, i ndicating a sweep of wind round the corner, like a wa,·e 1 A. Yes." Supposing that had come out of the 4th Right, would that indicate velocity 7 A. I think, if it had come out of the 4th Right, there would be an equal deposit on the other side. 30429. Q. I say, suppose it did 7 A. I do not think it is a fair assumption to say that it is frow the 4th Right, seeing that there is no deposit on the other tide. 30430. Q. Would not the broad angle make a. difference, and pre,·ent an accumulation on the other side 7 A. I do not think it would account for the entire absence of it on the other side. 30431. Q. Take the 5th Right. There is the same thing there. There is an accumulation of wind-swep t dust, or sruall coal, on one side, a.nd none on the othed A. Yes. 30432. Q. You see that it is possible 7 A. That is no argument that tho force came out of the 5th Righ t. 30433. r;. You said that you expected to find a deposit on both sides of the road 1 A. I said, if it came out of the 4th Right, I thought tbere would be a deposit on the other side. 30134-. - Q. Supposing No. 1 main road was the 4t,h Right and the cut through on the 5th Right is the main road 1 11. The two cases are not parallel. 304-35. Q. You admit that the force went inbye past the cut-through at the 5th Right1 .A. Yes. 30136. (J. Turned the cornel', 11.nd ca.used a deposit of dust at the cut·th r0ugli 1 A. Yes. 30437. Q. The oppo!>ite rib is free from dost 1 A. Y es. 30438. Q. Take the 4Lh Right 1 Suppose the dust lud bei>n l,lown out-would not exactly similar results have been produced there 1 A. No. 1n this case the d eposit is made at right angles; and in the other case it is made parallel. 30439.

....

•

897 Witnes~-A. A. Atkinson, 19 March, 1903.

3-0439. Q. Your objection was that you did not have deposits on both sides 1 A. Yes ; if the force came out of the 4th right, and t1'ere was a deposit on one sidt>, 1 think there would be a deposit on the other also. 30440. Mr. Robertson.] Q. I s it not possible that th·e deposit may have been there originally1 A. Y es. 304-41. Q. Protected by the lee of the corned A. It is possible; but I did not notice it particularly myst>lf. 304-42. Q. Relating to what Mr. Camb:1ge did observe. He shows a pal't. of the road was swept clean. He showed what is left. There may have been a quantity of small coal and dust on that road ; and pa.rt of that may have been swept clean, and the remainder of it be shown on the plan 1 · A. Yes, that is quite possible. J 30443. Q. I magine an explosion inbye. If the force of the explosion entered the 4th Right, any small coal lying at the corner would be protected 1 A.. Assuming that it commenced at some point inbye of the 4th Right. 30444. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Is the whole of it small coal 1 A. Mr. Cambage says it is small coal. 30445. His Honcn·.J Q. As suggested by Mr. Robertson, that coal is a survival probably, and not a deposit1 .4.. Yes. 30446. Mr. Wade.] Q. Do you think that the accumulation in the 5th Right cut-through is a deposit or a survival i Q. There would be more reason to believe that part of that was a deposit,. because that is a haulage road, on the 5Lh Right. 30447. Q. It is a cut.through I am talkiog about 1 A. Tbe same thing applies there: it may be either one or the other. 30448. Mr. Robe?·tson.] Q. That may be a survival of coal originally on that road 1 A. Quite so. 30449. Q. Would you not expect to find a similar deposit at the top corner of the travelling road if it came from the 4th Right 1 A. I think it would be there. 30450. Q. Is there any r eason why there should be a deposit n.t the bottom corner and not at the top corner 1 A. I do not think there is. 30451. M,r. Ritchie.] Q. I£ there was a heap of coal there before the disal:lter, would yon find it there a fterwards 1 A. If the force came ont with a speed of 700 miles an hour, most of it would be shifted. 30452. M1·. Wade.] Q. Now you said that these experiments, to ignite dust a.ta temperature of 291 degrees, were with dry air 1 A. I think so. 30453. Q. Is there anytbing like that in B eclson's account of the experiments 1 A. I am not sure whether it was dry ai1· or moist air. 30454. Q. Is there no distincLion drawn by him a't all 1 A. There may not be. 30455. Q. There is nothing in B edson's experiments as to pressure-whether it was continuou!'f1 A. I think it was under the ordinary atmospheric pressure. 30456. Q. There is nothing to say that his experiments were made by continuous pressure 1 A. I think thP-y were made by simply passing the air over the coal-dust at the ordinary pressure, but at an increase in the temperature, 30457. Mr. Robertson.] Q. At the ordinary pressure of the air-compressor1 A. No, not the air-compressor. It was simply a small apparatu~. 30458. Mr. Wade.] Q. You say it was not an air-compressor 1 A. It was not, in the case where he describes the ignition at 291 degrees. ;30459. Q. Are you sure 1 A. I will not swear to it, but I know that the chemical apparatus and the thermometer that I noticed were not connected with an air-compressing machine. It is simvly the ordinary pressure, I think. 30460. Q. We have been debating the experiments all th"rough under the idea that they were made by means of an air-compressod A. As I looked at a diagram of the apparatus with which he conducted the experiments, I noticed no air-compressor. ' (The Commission at 4·15 p.ro., adjourned until the following moming.J

FRIDAY, 20 MAROH, 1903.

[~me Commission met at the No. 2 District Court, King-street, Sydney.] Jr.e5.ent: -

C. E.

R,,

MURRAY,

D. A. W. ROBERTSON, Esq., ComnssIONER.

ESQ.,

D.C.J.

(PRESIDENT) .

D. RITCHIE, EsQ., COMMISSIONER.

Mr. Bruce Smith, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by Mr. Wood, Crown Solicitor's Office, appeared on behalf of the Crown. M.r. A. A. Atkinson, Chief Inspector of Coal Mines, assisted Mr. Bruce Smith. Mr. A. A. Lysaght, Solicitor, appeared on behalf of(a) the repre~entalives of deceased miners, wheelers, &c. (victims of the explosion); (b) the employees of the Mount Kembla Colliery (miners, wheelers, &c.); and (c) the Illa.warra Colliery Employees' Association (the Southern Miners' Union).

Mr. C. G. Wade, Barrister-at-Lu.w, instructed by Messrs. Curtiss and Barry, Solicitors, was present on behalf of the Mount K cmbla Coal and Oil Company (Proprietors of the Mount Kembla 1\'line). (Mr. W. R. Pratt, Assistant Shorthand-writer to the Comlllission, was present to take shorthand notes of the evidence and proceedings).

ALFREn ASHLEY ATKINSO~, previous1y sworn, was further examined, as under: 30461. Mr. Robertson.] I would like to mention an accident which occurred at the Metropolitan Mine, beating on the possibility of dust being ignited by a naked light. On a pay Saturday, when nearly everybody was out of the mine, there was some important work to do at the bottom of the downcast shaft; and on thi:tt particular day permission was granted to use three or four very large torchlights, and it happened that the men were engaged shovelling up dust from the road. Two skips were sent up on the cage; but · 16825 29- 5 X the

898 1Vit11m-A. A. Atkinson, 20 Morch, 1903.

the catches "ere not properly adjusted, and a ski p came out of the cage and deposited about 2 tone of dust into tbe downcast shaft. 1'bis made a dense clout. I met the cloud about three-quarters of a. mile away and it was so dense that I at once concl uded that there had been an explosion: but when I came up there' I found out what the real cause of the accident was. That dense cloud of dust came down on the three or four large torchlights, so that, iE dust was capable of being ignited by a naked light., you could not imarrine a more favourable event thao that for ignition. I will even go EO far as to my that the dust 0 may bave contained a small percentage of fire-damp, because on tl1e main roads it is possible to get from t tot per cent. of gas. I am quito willing to go int o the box and testify to that matter, as it is rather important. There is also some screening there; and, as Mr. Atkinson is aware, ther e is usually a thick cloud of dust around the screen, but we never knew anything to happan. 30!62. Mr. Wade.] ·w ould not the heavy dust get to the bottom first. 304G:3. Mr R obertson.] Yes; but it was a downcast shaft. 30!64. Mr. W ade.] At the time the dust came into contact with tbe light s, it would be thE> heavier dust. 30!-u5. Mr. Robertson.] The circumstances would be fair. You must remember thnt the shaft was l ,lCO feet deep, and practically discharges its contents of air in half a minute. It would not be more than bnlf a. minute beforo the lighter dust would r each the nnlced lights. · 301G6. Mr. Wade.] , Vere the men's lights put out by the fall of the trucks? 804:67. Mr. Robertson.] N o. :{0468. His Honor.] I t was a beautiful series of all the gradations of dust ihnt could possibly cause an explosion, right through. 30469. Mr R obertson.] There wns another accident some years after that. Two cages got iuto collision, whil st r unning on the wire guides. They ran into each other while travelling at a. rate of 00 or 80 miles nn hour, and tho consequences were rather serious. 1'he cages went down to the bottom-30 feet underand a curious t hing happened. There were two t unnels from tho bottom of the shaft running to two haulage engine-houses; and the dust ran along the tunnels, 13 or 6 inches thick. The men in the engineroom heard a. terrific noi.se, and a tongue of flame shot right through these tunnels into a. place where a. man WM standing. He concluded that there was an accident, but it was nothing but the friction and the Rparks generated by the two cages and the iron ropes strikin g together at the bottom of the shaft. The flame was nothing but the sparks created by that tremendou~ly heavy weight of iron falling down 000 feet ; but although there was very fine dust in the tunnel it did not ignite. Of course, the degree of sensibility of different kinds of dust depends upon its chemical composition to some extent, although, as Mr. Atkinson•is aware, the Metropolitan duet is particularly fine. 30470. His Honor.] T hese facts, as stated by Mr. R obertson, will appear upon the Minutes: and we shall treat them as having equal weight with the other evidence which has been given. Mr. Robertson baa offered, if anybody wishes, to make his statements evidence in the full sense by deposing to them ; but I do not suppose that anybody here wishes to suggest that. 30471. .Mr. Wade.] I do not think there would be any Court if there ,vere t wo Commissioners on the bench and one in the witness-box. 30472. llis Honor.] I may say that I have occasionalJy, in summing up t o the jury in various cases, with the consent of all concerned, mentioned certain facts which I have known in relation to placee. 30473. Mr. Bruce Smith.] The question is how for a. Judge's knowledge is to bo used as evidence; but , there is certainly no objection in this case. 80..174. .Mr. Wade.] Ob, n o. Further cross-examined by Mr. W a.de:30176. Q. There is some correction you wish to make? 11. In connection with the boards used at the Australian .A gricultural Company's Sea Pi t instead of brattice cloth I stated tbai tho boards were not tongued and ~rooved. Since then I have found that they are tongued and g rooved. 30:1:70. llis Honor.] Q. Are they -~-inch boards? A. I think they are l -inch boards. 30:177. Q. \Vith regard to Professor Bedson's experiments? A . I have brought the book with me. The qucsti_on was whether the experiments applied to air under pressure or not. I sec that the first two sets at which a t-emperaturo of 291 degrees was obtain<.'d were with a ir at the ordinary press ure, H e then says that it was next thought de~irable to make some experiments ,vith !lir under pressure; but in conseq uence of someth ing going wrong, the experiments were unsatisfactory, and permission was obta ined fr om Mr.. H. L:n~rencc>, of the Grange Iron Works, to make some trials with air supplied by an aircompressing engme. ?04:78. Mr. Wade.] Q. Look at Exhibit No. 39 (a plan) ;-do you remember the canvas found oo the rnbye aide of the 4th Right? A. I remember seeing it. 30:1:79. Q. You came to the conclusion that that ca.me from the 4th R ight? .A. I could not say; I believe it came from the 4t h Right. 30480. Q. Do you mean probably? A. It may probably have come from ther e. 30i81. Q. In this plan, there is dust against the rollers at 8S feet from the 4th Right? A. Yes. 80 !82. Q. Thai would tend to show that the split of force must have been at the 4th Right or else close 1o it? A. Yes ; I think it shows that. :30.l:S3. Q. I wa.nt ~o ask you about the examina.tion which you made on 4th Augu2t, with Mr. IT umble and Mr. M cGeaclne. Ia it correct that Mr. McGea.chie did the reading, and that you did the booking, on that <lay ? 11. I think so. 30484. Q. As he made the tests, I suppose, he would report to you, and you would put it down? A. Yes; of co?rse, I _would sometimes make a reading myself, or Mr. Humble would do so. 30!8.>. Q. Either you checked him yo urself, or Mr. Humble would be t here ? A. I think so. 30486. (J. Now, you have made no note of gas being found in the 4th R ight? A. No. 301-87. Q. You had no report made to you about it? A. N o. 30!88. Q. Either by Mr. McGeachie or .Mr. H umbla? A. No. 30489. Q. Do you remember Mr. Humble or Mr. McGeachie going up to the goa£ edge on the 4th? A. Yes. 30!90. Q. Where were you ? A. I was in the t ravelling road. 30491._ Q. That would be 30 yards away? A. Well, the goaf edge is a. little over 30 yards from the travelhng road. 30492.

'•

.,~ I. I

899

· Witness-A. A. .Atkinson, 20 March, 1303.

80492. Q. You knew they were going up to test, or that one of them was going to test? A. I thought that would be one of their objects, at least. 30493. Q. Did you make notes in the mine from time to time? A. Yes. 30494. Q. On the spot? A. Yes. 30495. Q. On 8th August you were with Mr. Humble, Mr. Daniel Robertson, and Mr. :M:cGeachie? .A. Yes. 80496. Some of your party examined for gas on that day ? A. Yes. 30497. Q. And you said before, when at the Inquest, that you found no fire-damp? A. I examir'led myself on that day. 30498. Q. Was nnybody else with you? A. I think Mr. Humble, Mr. McGeachie, and Dr. Robertson would be close by. 30499. Q. You were up close to the goa[ edge? A. So far as I remember. 30500. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. You say you tested on that day? A. I see by a note that I tested about G feet above the seam. 80501. Mr. Wade.] Q. Just tell us at what points you got those samples of coal-dust which were examined by Mr. Mingaye? A. Well, they are all indicated on the plan [Exltibit No. 29] by numbers, commencing with No. 1, at the junction of the main tunnel, and No. 1 R ight. Other samples were taken-twelve in all." 89502. Q. H ow far was the s~cond place from No. 1 junction? A. The second place was 200 yards bclo,v t-he junction of No. 1 Right and the m&.in level. 80503. His Honor.] It is hardly worth while to go into this matter of distances; they are shown on the plan in relation to points that are well known. '80504. Witness.] Samples Nos. 1 to 12 came from No. 1 main r ight r ope-road; with the exception of No. 11, which was taken on the 4th Right road, between the travelling road and the goaf edge; whilst No. 12 was taken on No. 1 main level, about 100 yards on tbe inbye side of the 4th Right. 80505. H is Honor.] Q. Did the samples of coal-dust come off the props, or from what places? A. They came off the timbers as near the roof as they could be obtained. 80506. Mr. Wade.] Q. That last sample was got from the 4th Left road? A. Yee; I collected them myself. 30507. Q. That wai:; reported as showing no eign of coking? A. Yes. 30508. Q. Was it the 4th Left rope road, or the travelling road? A.. The rope road. 30509. Q. How many samples were there from there? A. Only one sample, in that case. 30510. Q. Where was that from? A. Not far from No. 1 main road. 30511. Q. I want to ask you this question: you remember Mr. Jeffries gave evidence about l lb. of dust to 150 cubic feet of air being dangerous by itself? A. Yef:1'. . 80512. Q. Do you agree with him that that was actually dangerous in itself-that there is actually a danger of inflaming the dust by itself, without the presence of fire-damp? A. I think that the dust in quiescence does not constitute a dan~er by itself, if reeting on the roads; but it is only when certain conditions are existent. On page 21 of Galloway's " L ectures on Mining " he says:As the result of the experiments uescribed above, I came to the conclusion that a. small proportion of fire-damp in the air was necessary to produce an inflammable mixture with coal-dust. I did not then realise that the velocity with which the mixture was passing the flame, in making the experiments, might affect the question; and it was poly afterwuds, when considering the result,s of explosions which had passed through the intake airways of mines, and when making experiments on a larger scale, that I finally concluded that air and coal-dust a.lone could carry on an explosion without any admixture of ffre-damp. After giving my reasons for thinking that a small proportion of fire-damp was necessary, I continued thus in the same paper (p. :-169) :-" It is always possible, however, that coal-dust could be made fine enough, ii.nd, where thoroughly mixed with air, in the proportion of about l lb. of coal-dust to 150 cubic feet of air, the mixtttre might be inflammable at ordinary temperature: or, if not, it might be so nearly inflammable that an explosion begun in it in a. confined space might be propagated through."

80513. Q. It would appear from that that Galloway hnd in his mined the presence of 1ire-damp? A. Yes. I n 1875, be was just getting on the idea o-f coal-dust being an a,gent; but he afterwards came to the conclusion that coal-dust itself, without gas, might be dangerous in case of a shot. The last paragraph is the one that Mr. Jeffries quoted ; and you have read the previous paragraph. 305 l4. Q. w·ith regard to the inspection with the hydrogen lamp by under-managers. If tl1is were made a compulsory matter, you would also, 1 suppose, ask for a penalty to enforce it? A. There would be no use in making the inspection compulsory, unleRs there was a penalty for the breach. 80515. Q. Mio-ht there not be a difficulty in getting out the hydrogen? A. Y es; there a,re difficulties now. 30516. (J. Tb; objections on the part of shippers are increasing? A. Not to my knowledge. I know there are difficulties; but I do not see, if hygrogeu lamps are considered a necessity, why the gas should not be manufactured here. I think it would be if there was found that there was sufficient demand. 30517. Q. Although you want to make it a hard and fast rule, accompanied by a penalty, you admit that there may be a difficulty in getting a supply of hydrogen? A. I think that any penalty would be waived if it were shown that reasonable means had been taken to get hydrogen, and that the mine-owners had foiled to obtain it. 30518. M1·. Robertson.] Q. It is only a few years since that the hydrogen lamp was brought into u se? LL Yes. 80519. Q. I s the lamp not used now in a great many mines? A. Yes. 80520. Q. That shows that the Managers are quite alive to the importance of testing with hydrogen? A. Yes, it certainly does. 305~1. Q. Considering that it is only a few years ago, when you first came to the State, and there was only one lamp here? A. I brought the 6rst one out with me, as a matter of fact. 30522. Q. D o you not think that it would be bard to impose a duty, under a penalty, when, as far as you ran see, the mine owners are anxious to carry out the duty? A. Yes; perhaps it is so. 30523. Q. In addition, there may be a difficulty in obtaining hydrogen? A . There is a difficulty in that now. 30524. Mr. R itcltie.J Q. The desire is that the most modern appliances should he used in testing? A. Yes, so long as they are used with discretion; but, seeing that the hydrogen lamp is one that requires careful handling, it should not bl} all<?wed to go into the hands of all sorts 9f people. 30525.

900 Wit11ess-A A. .A.tUnson, 20 March, 1903.

30525. Q. You desire that the most modern appliances should be used, and that as small a percentage o~ gas as possible should be discovered? A. 1'.es. 30.326 M r. Robertson.] Q. You mean the most reliable appliances ? A. Yes, 30527. Mr . B ruce Smitl1.J Q. Wbat is the purport of the letter you received from Mr. Martin on the subject? A. He said that the hydrogen lamp was little used in the Old Country, an.d t hat aU the Inspectors looked for their guide to the ordinary safety-lamp. In fact, there are some remarks in the last report on the l\fcLaren Colliery explosion, in which he said that it could hardly be expected tbat the I nspectors should carry about with them a chemical laboratory. He considers that the indications of the ordinary lnmp, if used, are reliable. 30528. Mr . .Robertson.] Q. Do you think thitt any Manager would be so obtuse as to refuse to use a. Fpe\!ial safety-lamp for testiog if you requested him to do so ? A. I do not think so. I think they would generally do it, especially if i t came as a. request, with the strength of the Commission behind it, rather than making- it compulsory. I think they would fall in with the suggestion. 30529. Q. U nder the circumstances, do you think it necessary, considering the difficulties, that there should be any compulsory use of the lamp? 11.. Well , I think the compulsory part of'it should be waived for a year or two; and, if 1 found that the Managers were obstreperous, and would not make use of all modern appliances, I could report the matter to the Minister, who would probably have an opportunity of embracing 'it in any Mining Bill which may result from the suggestions of the Commissjon. 30530. M r. Wade. ] Q. With regard to watering, I understand that jf, in any particular mine, you found the haulage roads were not watered because water was not available, you would take that as an excuse, provided that the necessary precautions were taken in the neighbourhood of firing shots? A . .And with reference to the use of safety.]a.mps as well. F or instance, in a mine in which there is a small quantity of fire-damp known to be given oft at times, and it was known t o be dry and dusty in parts, I think that, in addition 1o the precaution of watering where a shot was fired, they should use safety-la.mps. 30531. Q. Then the introduction of safety-lamps, would be based now, I understand, on the occisional · findin g of gas? A. Yes; on the definition of a gassy mine. 30532. Q. Where a mine does not come within that definition, and they are using naked lights, if they take sufficient precautions to prevent explosions when firing a shot, would you be satisfied with that, if it was not the practice to water the whole of the roads, in addition? A. Yes, I would be satisfied. 30533. Q. The real element of safety is taking precautions when firing a Rhot? A. Yes. 30534. Q. The other matters are contingencies attendant upon some fai lure at the init ial point? A. The only other dangerous contingency is possibly a defective safety-lamp. · 30535. Q. You are thinking at the present moment of firing shots at the face? A. I mean firing shots in any dry and dusty place. 30536. Q. I£ necessary, the firing of a shot on the main haulage road could be done under the same conditions-would you be satisfied if the same conditions of safety were observed? A. There are other provisions necessary in connection with the firing of a shot on the haulage road. The withdrawal of the · ordinary workmen from t he mine would apply iQ that case. 30537. Q. What is required, so far as watering is concerned? 11.. Twenty yards' thorough watering is sufficient, I think, 30538. Q. So that the danger from dust arisP,S in different ways ;-if there is a. violation of the rule as to firi ng shots, or if the safety-lamps, if they a.re used, are defective? A. Yes. 30539. Q. I£ you are working in a naked light colliery, the clanger only arises if there is non-compliance with the conditions of firing a shot? A. Yes, that is so. 3051:0. Q. What you say is, if it is practicable, you would like to see the roads watered? .A. I think so. 30541. Q. In regard to Ma.na,g ers visiting the mine. You put down a limit of twice a week, iu which they are to visit the mine ; and they are t o go over every part of the mine once a month? · .A. Y es. 30542. Q. I suppose you realise that the Managers have many calls away from the mine? A. Yes. 30543. Q. They may be away sometimes a week or more at a stretch? A . Yes. 30544. Q. You know, during the arbitration case at W ollongong, some Managers were away for weeks? A . That should not prevent thefr visiting t he mine. 30545. Q. You are laying down a definite rule of twice a week? A. To be qualified by the wordE4, "so far as is reasonably practicable." · 30546. (d. T hat is the unwritten law now ;-so far as is practicable, the Manager should visit the mine as often as he can? A . The mine is under t he control of the Manager or under.manager. The undermanager goes in ever y day ; and the Manager at his discretion. 305!7. Q. Do you not think it would lead to difficulties to lay down a hard and fa.st rule of twice a week? .t:I.. I do not see why they should not. A reasonable and conscientious man would visit the mine at least that number of times each week; but there llre some men who do not. , 30548. M1· . .Robertson.] Q. Could you not deal with those men? L:I.. I do not see ho\v we can. We cou~d not, unless the Inspectors went about like detectives, to ascertain the movements of tbe Managers ; and we would not like to do that. 30549. Q. lf the workmen had reason to believe that a M anager is not doing his duty, they can complain to you? A. They can. 80550. M,· . .Ritchie. ] Q. It would be very unpleasant £or the workmen who are under the Ma,nagers to be detectives? .A. With regard to any information given to myself, any workman would be safe, so far as regarded bis name not getting to the management. 30551. Q. Suppose you were called upon to show- proof? A. Of course, if iL became a question of court p_roceedings, it might be necessary for the name to be shown; but I do not think that any manager, under circumstances of that sort, would dismiss a man . 30552. Q. That is a debateable question? A. Yes. 30553. Mr. Robe1·tson .] Q. There are some notori ous cases of Managers neglecting their mines? A. There are one or two. 30554. Q. D o you not think that representation from you to the owners might be effective? A. I cannot say. I do not think there is any difficulty in a Manager being compelled to visit bis mine twice a week, and t o go over the whole of the mine once a month. 8~~55. Q. You are asking for what I know to be an impossibility-that a man sh ould be tied down to VlBlt eve:y p'.ir~ of the ~ine once a month . I ~now it to be an impossibility ? A.. I do not think so; I clo not view 1t m that light. · · 30556.

,·

• I

901

·witness-A. A. A.tkins~n, 20 March, 1903.

30556. Mr. Bruce 81.nitli.J You have not made any distinction. You ha,e not made any difference between a working place and a waste? A. I do not expect a manager to go into the centre of a goaf. 30557. Mr. Robertson.] Q. What would be po:::sible in a small mine "·ould not be possible in a large one? .A. I refer to the generally accepted definition of the terms" visitiuu" a.nd "inspecting." I do not" imludo such places as the centres of goafs. 30558. Mr. Wade.] You mean accessible places; or where the works have been abandoned; or waste11, as far as they are acce!"sible? A. Yes. 30559. Mr. Robertson.] A colliery proprietor would have to employ a manager, not for bis ability and skill in minin~, but for his qualifications as a sprinter. 30560. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. If a. man was a sprinter, it might be an additional qualification ? A. I do not suggest any impossibility; and, if it were found that this practice could not be carried out, the suggestion might be altered in such a way as to bring it within the radius of being possible, but still requiring the attention of the manager twice a week. 30561. Q. And, unless he can show to the s::.tisfaction of the Chief Inspector, that it is impossible for him to do it? A. Yes, something like that. ~0562. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Inn. large mine it would take the Manager a monlh to do this work; and then how much time would he have left for the performance of his other duties? A. I ran only say tha.t I should be glad if the Commission would make some suggestion which would compel managers to make periodical inspections of the workings of their mines. 30563. Mr. Wade. ] Q. If the Commission adopted the suggestion that a manager should visit the mine twice a week, it would r eally mean nothing beyond the mere visiting of the mine? A. I think I would define it that a manager should visit part of the workings and returns twice a week. I would not be satisfied with a man going to the pit bottom a.od coming up again. , '30564. Q. As time goes on, and the mines increase in 1:tize, and 1be area to be ,rnrked becomes larger, would not that make the carrying out of the rule ii.npracticable? A . So far as the limits of time to get round the whole of the workings, it would ; but it would not affect the ability of a manager to inspect the workings twice a week. 30565. Q. You have nothing definite as to what part of the worl,ings could be visited. The Manager might look at one or two returns,· and one or two roads, and see nothing else? A. I do not draft the rule. That would be for the Parliamentary draftsman to do. 30566. Q. You suggest that the Manager should go down the mine twice a week-that he should be under a penalty to do it? A. Unless be can show a reasonable cause why he was not able to .d o so. 30567. Q. Do you suggest that, in visiting a mine, the inspection of one or two places would be sufficient? A. I have put it that the Manager should get through the whole 0f the mine in n. month. Mr. liobertson says that is impossible. I would come down to once in si:c ,,..eeks. 30568. Q. Would it not be better to be on the safo side for a start. J£ once you got an A<;t of Parlialnent passed, it might be impossible to modify it? LI. T would like to be on the safe side. 30569. Mr Ritchie J Q. I take it tha.t the desire is to make it compulsory to compel a manager to give ··services which might; be Yaluable in connection with the underground working of the mine? A. Yes, as far as it is reasonable to demand his services, having regard to his performance of other work. 30570. Q. At present he need not go underground a,t all? A. The mine is daily supervised by the Manager or the under-manager. 30571. Q. Suppose you had a complaint that the Manager had not been underground foui:c months, what would you do? A. I could take no legal action ; but I would make representations on the matter. 30572. Q. Is there no power uuder tbe Act? A. There is power under section l 0. I think suth a case might be dealt with in that way. 30573. Q. Is that section intended to deal with such cases? A. I think it n'l'ight be fairl.Y held that tl,at section applied to such cases. 30574. Q. Would not that section probably deal with cases in which th ere was some <li:rnster or loss of life or property, through the neglect of the Manager, rather than a case of any other kind? A . There are cases which have been dealt with under that section, although no a ccident has happened. I think a Manager's certificate has been questioned under that section. 30575. Q. In what case? A. In the Newr.astle Company's case. 30576. Q. There was an ac<:ident there? A. There was a man burneu with gas ; but it was not in ihe nature of a disaster. · ~0577. Q. It was, in a sense, an a<;cident? A. It was an accident, and ought to have been reported; and, so far as that goes, the Manager was to blame. 30578. Mr. Wade.] Q. I want to ask you about the surface right within the control of the water ancl sewerage area. You know the South Bulli Colliery, and the lay of the laud? A. Yes. 30579. Do you think it would be an advantage in the way of economy of power, in connection with the fan for ventilating purposes, if there was a shaft in the mountain? Yes. 30580 . Q. That would be better than bringing the air out of the tunnel mouth? A. I think it would be an advantage to have the shaft further back-near the centre of the working~. • .3058L. Q. It would be 'an economy, because you would wa.nt less hori;e-power? A. You would require lea~ l~mgth of airway; and consequently less pov.·er would be required to force the air· through the workings. 30582. Q. It would be against the miners? .11. Yes; it; would produce better results. 30583. Q. .As tbe mines become developed in the south, tbe difficulty of having shafts at the mouth will become more acut6 ? A. Yes. 30584. Q. At present you cannot place a shaft outside unless you outain leave from the Water and Sewerage Board, it being within their jurisdiction? A. No; you cannot sink a shaft without permission of the Board. • 30585. Q. _.\.re you in fa\'our, officially, of some application being made to the Board for them to grant permission to sink thesn shafts? A. Yes. ::3058G Q. Do you think it would be advisable in the interests of all parties? A. Yes. . 30587. Q. You say that, in your official capacity? A. Ye11, 30.:,S'3. (j. I may say tha~ [. have recei~rd a Jett er ~ro~ Mr. Sellers, explaing that ~e coul<l not put the mattel" before the Comm1ss10n, and ai.::krng me to brmg 1t forward. They are labour10g un<ler a difficulty 0

902

•

Witness-A.. A. Atkinson, 20 Mo.rch, 1903. at South Bulli. They are putting up a new fon ; but they are compelled to put it at the tunnel mouth, which involves expense which would be obviated if they were allowed to sink a shaft at the top of the mountain. 80589., His Honor.] Where there is a splendid elevation. 30590. Mr. W ade.] Q. 1\fr. Seller s asked the Commission to take some steps to induce the Water and Seweraae Board to allow the colliery to sink shafts from time to time? A. Yes; I am in favour of it. 0 30591. Q. As time goes on, and the collieries become developed under tbe face of the mountain, they will be compelled to have ventilation shafts in the centre of their property. South Bulli is an extensive colliery: and they are compelled to put up a ventilating fan at the entrance to the mine. 30592. His Hono1·. J The freehold of the mine is under the catchment area? 30593. },fr. Wade.] It may be so. 30594. Mr. Bruce Smith.] I think Mr. Atkinson said previously that the sinking of a shaft in t he mountain might inYolve tho carriage of coal up there, and the presence of one or iwo men to attend to the engine and the boiler; and the objection is to bringing a population on to the catchment area. Still Mr. Atkinson recommends it. 30595. Mr . .Robertson.] The catchment area. is some hundreds of miles in extent: and ar e our miner al resources for ever to be locked up and never to be developed, and this in a State where prosperity is supposed to be in somEc\ measure dependent upon our mineral industry? . 30596. Mr. Wade.] The kangaroos do more harm to the catchment area than tbE1 mining does. 30597. Mr. Robertson.] Q. Ia connection with these experiments, it is apparent that the results were brought about by putting the dust into a chamber which was freely heated? A. Yes. 30508. Q. And three-quarters of an hour elapsed before the coal-dust reached the temperature of the bath ? A. Yes. . 30599. Q. Now, even it some force of air came out of the 4th Right, suddenly, do you think, considering the temperature of the strata, which was not over 63 degrees, that it is conceivable that the temperature of air would be raised to 291 degrees-that is, by the a.ir coming out at a rate of 700 miles an hour, and in that short time? A. I think that the ~ides of the gallery would bave •a cooling effect, upon the current of air. I do not think it possible that such a temperature could be reached in anything like half z second. 30600. Q, Do you think it could be reached at all, considering that the temperature of the sides of the chamber would be something like 63 degrees. Supposing these experiments bad been ·carried on at the 4th Right, where that £all is supposed to have occurred, do you think, as the temperature of the sides would not be over 63 degrees, that it would be possible to obtain a. temperature 6£ 291 degrees Fah . ? A . I do not think you could. 30GO J. Mr. Ritcltie. ] (J. You say the experiment could not be carried out there in that way? A. ~ o.

l •

Examined by Mr. R obertson:30602. In regard to General R ule 4, have you any suggestion to make with a view of getting over the difficul ty of continually reporting gas issuing from a gassy mine? A. It is a difficult question ; but I t hin Ir, after further consideration, it is undesirable to alter General Rule 4. I£ the circumstances of a particular · colliery require it, it will be preferable to have the matter dealt with in the special rules. Which part of the rule do you suggest as showing a difficulty? 30603. Q. General Rule 4 would have to be altered, because you cannot make a special rule giving greater latitude than a general rule? A. No. 30604. Q. You have no suggestion to make ? A. I cannot see any other way out of the difficulty. I would like to know what part of the rule you find a difficulty in. 30605. Q. I£ you are to carry on certain collierie!c!, General Rule 4 cannot be observed ? A. Y ou can report gas in every place, if necessary . 30606. Q. You ca.n report gas; but tlie trouble is ho w to get the men to work there when you have reported? [No answer.] 30607. Q. As to firing a shot in the ventilating district. You cannot fh·e a shot if gas has been r eported? A. I do not read the rule in that way. . 30608. Mr . Robertson.] Q. If any inflammable gas is reported to be present, then, under R ule 12, no shot can be -fired unless a competent person has examined the place and bas found that the gas has been cleared away? A. So that ,vhen the gas has been cleared away a shot C'an be fired. 30609. Q. Suppose you have·a ventilating district 4 miles in lengt h, and a deputy has reported a capful of gas in one par ticular part-then you cannot fire a shot? A . .Not until the gas is remoYed. 306LO. Q. Suppose you cannot remove the gas? A . Then you cannot fire a shot.806 11. Q. It may bell miles away, on the intake side of where a little gas is reported? A. The rule seems to be a little drastic. 30612. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Supposing you strike out the words," And has found that such gas has been cleared away"? A. Vif ould that meet the difficulty ? 30613. Mr. Robertson. ] Q. I s that sufficient to meet the case? A. Well, I think that ,vould m~et the case, 30614. Q. D o you se~ any objection to stri king out the words just mentioned? A. I see 110 objection t o that. 306 15. Mr . .Ritchie.l Q. Subsection g of Rule 12 reads: If in any mine, at either of the inspections unrler Rule 4 recorded last before a shot is to be fired, inflammable giis has been reported to be present in the ventilating clistrict in which the shot is to be fired, the shot shall not be fired-(i) unless a. competent p erson, appc,inted as aforesaid, has examinecl the place ·where the gas 11as been so reported to be present, and has found that such gas has been cleared awa,y, and there is not at or near such place sufficient gas issuing or accumulated to rel)der it unsafe to fire the shot.

We propos<a to strike out of that subsection the words " And has found that such ga.s has been cleared away." The subsection wouid then rend, "Unless a competent person has e.nmined the place where the gas has been reported to be present, and has found that there is not at or near such place sufficient gas, &c."? A. I F.ee no objection to that. 3061G. Mr. Robertson. ] _(). If a shot is to be fired in a dry and dusty mine, it is required that all person~ must be removed exceptmg ten. The rule says : Not exceeding ten, as are necessarily employed in attending to the ventilating · furnaces 1 steam boilers, engines, machinery, winding apparatus, signals, or "horses, or in inspecting the mine.

903 •

Witne!l-~-.A. A . .Atkinson, 20 Moreb, 1903 .

Do you not think that it would be better if no vocations were stipulated. The idea., of course, is to limit the number of persons in the mine? 11. Quite so; that is the idea. So Jong as they do not exceed a certain number. Would you have any objection to keeping the restriction to ten? 306 L7. Q. I think that the particular duties of the ten men employed should not be specified? A. That would do, so long as there are not more tlrn.n .ten men left in the mine. 306L8. Q. Coming to the number teu. It is a d:.fficuH matter to comply with that. You must know that, in n large mine, excepting perhaps on a Sunday, there are always more than ten men engaged in ·necessary work-work that it is absolutely necessary to perform ? ..A. So far as I am concerned myself, I think that, in a large mine, where the removal of roof-stone would be mostly required, the difficulty is not insuperable. Shots are not regularly fired on the haulage roads in this State. I think it would be undesirable to remove the restriction. 30619. Q. If the precaution is taken of watering in the vicinity of a shot, and electricity is used to fire a sbot., what is the reason for limiting the number of persons present to ten? A. All those operations are dependent upon human agency; and, if something goes wrong, as has been shown in other collieries, there may be an accident involving the lires of men. 30620. Q. If' there were 200 or 300 men shovellinO' up dust, it would be different; but I think miners have a higher conception 0£ their duties now-a-days ? A. I would not fear such a thing taking place in tho Metropolitan Mine; but I think it would be unwise to remove the restriction allowing ten persons only to be present. Shooting in haulage roads has resulted in accidents ca.using deaths. 30621. Q. Y e.s. And I think that some of the things that have happened in some collieries are a reflection on the Inspectors? A. I do not see how the I nspectors can control 300 or 400; it is an absolute in:!possibility. , · 80622. Q. I know that shots are protected in the haulage roads in the colliery over which I have supervision; and I confess myself that I cannot see why the rule cannot be altered so as to provide for all p ersons ordinarily employed in the miue not being removed? A. Without specifying any number? 30623. Q. Yes ? A . It would be difficult to ag1·ee to that as far as I can see. 30621,. Q. You said something in your eridence about waste workings, and their relative importance to other parts of the mine. You considerthem to be equally important to the working places. Now, there are no persons employed in the w,iste workings ordinarily speaking? A. No; ordinarily speaking there are not. · 30625. Q. Therefore, the security of the roof and the sides of waste does not directly affect the men ordinarily e:nployed in a mine, as it would do in a working place? A. Ko. 30626. Q. .And, after all, the only importance of a waste working, as affecting the safety of persons employed in a mine, is the prcbability of finding gas? .A. Yes, I think that is the only danger. 30627. Q. Therefore, there is not the same necessity for an Inspector inspecting the waste workings, or supervising waste workings, in the same manner as there is for his inspecting the working places? A. I did not wi§.h to convey that the wastes should be examined every day. 30628. Q. The question asked was something to this effect- how often did the Inspectors visit the waste workings, and so ou? A. Yes, that was the question . 30629. Q. It seemed to suggest that the Inspector should visit., and I presume that the colliery officials should visit, the waste workings as often as they visit the working places? .A. I do not wish to convey that idea. 30630. Q. OE course that idea is ouo that would suggesi that a person bad no sense of proportion as to the relative importance of tho two places? A. I think a weekly examination of the waste workings should meet the case. [At this stage Mr. J. Garlick, Secretary to the Commission, attended to take shorthand notes of the evidence and proceedings.] 30G31. His Honor.] There is a letter which Mr. Garlick has 1·eceivecl from Mr. Mingaye, which reminds me of somethiug which did strike me before vaguely. I thought I had a recollection of some statement having been made by somebody to the effect that Mr. Mingaye calls attention to. He says:Mr. Wa.de drew my attention to a paragraph whioh, I understand, appears in the evidence taken at the inquest at Wollongong. It states that Mr. Mingaye, the Government Mineralogist, exaruined a sample of the coal-dust, which did not show sigus of coking. There is evidently some mistake here, as I have only examined twelve samples of the fine dust, which arc those referreu to iu my eviclonce given on the 11th March.

30632 . .Mr. Wade.] Mr. Atkinson explained that it was Mr. Card who actually made the previous analysi'3 of dust from the 4th Left. 30633. 1Yir. Robertson .] Q. The microscopical examination? A. Yes. 30634. II.is II.onor.] Some ~tatoment did appear on the depositions taken at the Coroner's inquest, I think. 30G35. Mr. Wade.J Yes; in the. depositions. I asked l\Ir. Mingaye, when he wa!l here, if he had made any examination of any dust besides those twelve samples, and he said " No"; and Mr. Atkinson then said it was Mr. Card. It is on page 56 of the Iuque11t. 30636. His Honor.] Would you kindly read it? 30637. Mr. Wa cle : I noticed t,he <lust pnrticularly on the outbye end of No. 4 Left rope road; there was some quantity of dust, on the floor more particulady; I think that part of the dust I saw had been blown thete; l>ut I ca.nnot say what proportion ; I took a sample of that dust, and had it examined microscopically, to see if it had been coked ; the Mineralogist of the Mines Department reported to me that there were no signs of coking ; I took that dust. from the floor.

30638. His llonor.] Whose evidence ie that? 30639. Mr. Wade.] It is Mr. Atkinson's. '.l'hen, later on, he spoke of sending these twelve samples to Mr. Miogaye, the Mineralogist; and I thought from that that it was the same person. 30640. His Honor.l We cau put a note to Lhat evidence, which will prevent any confusion ariRing. 30641. (Mr. Garlick explamed that it would not be possible now to put such a note in the depositions taken al; the inquest, as the printing was finished). 30642. Mr. Wade. ] It might be put into that question that Mr. Atkinson answered me half an hour ago that the person who made that examination was Mr. Card.

80643.

904. Witne,q.~-A. .A.. Atkinson, 20 Marl'.'b, 1903. 30643. Afr. L11saqlt!.J Y0nr Honor will remember my asking for an amendment of section 53, regarding

the Special Rule ·being amended on the suggestion of the miners. The Special Rule says :-

After spec:ial rules are established under this Act in any mine, the owner, agent, or manager, of the mine, may propose, in wriLing, to the Inspector of the district, for the approval of the Minister, any amendment of the rules or any new special rules. • •

and we ask that the miners should have the right to propose an amendment. Atkinson ·if he would approve of an amendment like this:-

I propose to ask Mr.

After special rules a.re established under this Act in any mfoe, the owner, agent, or ~fanager, or any employee or body of employees, of the mine may propose, in writing, to the Inspector of the district, for the approval of the Minister, any amendment of the rules or any new special ·rules.

Do you approve of that? 30644. Mr. Bruce Smitlt.] There is no need for "any body of employees." 30645. M1·. Robertson.] I think there is no need for "nny employee," any one employee, leave it to the 11

body of employees."

30646. Mr. Lysa_qlit.J I want it to cover the case of rules applying to wheelert1 1 who might not be members

of the Union, but who might wan t to make some suggestions; and I also want it to apply to the unions, who miaht want to send a.long recommendations. 30U-!<7. Rober/son.] It would never do to have the whole machinery of the Government and the colliery set in motion at the instance of one wheeler. 30648. Mr. Lysaql1t.] It would not be that: it would only be a. suggestion for the amendment of the rule, which could afterwards be discussed. 30G:l:O. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Would it uot be better to make the suggestion-in the same way as Rule 39to provide that a majority of the men employed iu the mine may make suggestions for the amendment of special rules ? A. Yes . 30650. Mr. Lysaght. ] But I can see that, in the case of the wheelers, they might not be able to get a. majority of the persons employed in the mine; and they would not belong to a. Union. 80651. Mr. Ritcltie.J But they cau combine. 30652. Mr. L_ysaght.] Even if they combined they would not be a majority of the workmen employed in the mine. 30653. M r. Ritchie.] But they could get the miners to assist them. 30654. Mr. Lysa,qht. ] But they might not be able to get the workmen to act with them, as they are not members of the Union. 30655. Mr Ritchie.] 1'hon they should join the Union at once. 30656. Mr. L.'lsaght.J This is merely asking for a power to suggest, not to enforce. 30657. Mr. Robertson.] But the power to suggest might mean a lot of work to the Government officers and to the colliery people. 30658. Afr. Bruce Smitlt.J The suggestions have to go to the I nspector, then to the management; and, if the managem ent object, t he suggestions ha.ve to go to arbitration; and, as Mr. Robertson saye., it would be ridiculous lo allow all t his machinery to be moved at any time by a single employee. 30659. Mr. Ritchie.] That would never do. 30660. Uiitness.J It should be "a majority of the workmen.'' 30G6l. His Honor.] If one employee wishes to ha\'e an alteration in the rules, there is aiways one piece of machinery to whi ch be can have recourse; and that is the local press. He can get the matter ventilated; and then it will get to the Union, and from the Union it will go on. 30662. Mt·. L_ysaglit.] But your Honor will see that a number of the employees are not members of the Union at all; wheelers and others may not be members of the Union; yet there may be a. rule which, I submit, m:ty operate t o shift the legal responsibility in case of accident from the Company- the legal liability oE the Company may be shifted by special rule. 30663. His Honor.] If it were something that really vitally touched the interests of the employees, some union ,vould probably take it up. 306G4. Mr. Ritchie. J That would be very unlikely, if the men did not come into tho U oion. 30665 M1·. Robertson. ] Do you think that if one, or a dozen, wheelers, who happened not to be in the Union, were to make certain representations to the Union, the Union would not take it up as a matter affecting the safety of the mine, and, therefore, affecting their interests. 30666. Mr. Ritchie.] I should advise them to join the Union. 30667. Mr . .Robertson.] Do you t hink the Union would refuse to consider a suggestion from a person who did nol happen to belong to the Union? 30668. M r. Rite/tie.] If they took my advice, they would consider it; but then they might not do that. 30669. His Hono1·.J But they would not cut t heir throats to spite their neighbonr because their neighbour happened to ban~ out a. different sign. . 30670. Mr. Ritcltie.J The probability is that, if a roan who was not a unionist brought up a matter, and nothing was done, a unionist might bring it forward. 30671. Mr. L•1s:i_qlit ] I think the matter is altogether magnified-moving machinery? Writing a fow letters is not " moving machiner.y." 30672. Mr. R itchie J But if you had one e,mployee empowered to move the whole machinery of the Act, you might bave arbitration every day. 30G73. Mr. L,ysaglit.] The Court is not contemplating something unreasonable; the Court is contemplating something reasonable. It is not reasonable to suppose that men would move the machinery every day ; and I think that they should have the right to m'.1ke suggestions with regard to rnles wh:ch may operate hardly and harshl .v upon them. 30674. l!{r. Robtwtson.] I£ a single employee thinks fit to make a suggestion, he can write to the Minister ; and , if the Minister thinks fit, he can move the machinery, as provided in the Act. 30675. Mr. Bruce S mitli.j Q. M:X. Atkinson , if any individual miner writes lo you, you give his communication careful consideration? A. Yes, certainly. 30676. H is .llonor.] Q. I£ it were something good, and you could not get it in in any other way, you would refer it to the Minister? .A. Yes. 301377. Mr. L _ysa_qllt.J Q. I ask Mr. Atkinson if he approves of that suggestion of mine? A . I could not approve of it in that form.

Mr.

30678.

...

905

Witnese-A . A. A.t.kinson, 20 March, 1908.

30678. Q. Could you approve of it, in the words of Mr. Ritchie, if it were altered to provide tha~ a majority of the workmen employed in the mine could make suggestions for the amendment of special rules ? A. Yes. 30li79. Q. Then it would ho "After special rules are established under this Act in any mine, the ow1;er, agent, or Manager, of the mine, or a majority of the workmen employed in the mine for the time-berng, may propose in writing to the Inspector of the District, for the approval of the Minister, any amendment of the rules or any new special rules"? A. Yes. 30680. Mr. Lysagltt.] That is all, Your Honor. . 30681. M1·. Bruce Smith.] That will not be sufficient in itself; there will need to be a consequential amendment; because the Act afterwMds provides for ar bitration between the Inspector and the management, in which the men would have no say, unless further amendments :\re made. 30682. Mr. Ritchie.] I take it that, if the principle is admitted at all, the necessary amendments will be made. 30683. Mr. Bruce Smith.] There will have to be consequential amendments further on. 30684. Mr. Ritchie.] Yes. 30685. Q. Do you consider it absolutely necessary, where objectious are lodged again!>t any special r~les, that they should be printed? A. I do not think it requires that. It is only the notice that is required to be pr inted, 'nol: the actual matter detailiog the objections : that is not required in printing-never has been. . 306 6. Q. Under Rule 51, at the present time, "The proposed Special Rules, together with a pri.nted notice specifying that any objection to the rules on the ground of anything contained therein, or o~ml~ed therefrom, ma.y be sent by any of the persoos employed in the mine to the I nspector of the district, . . • shall . . . be posted up" ;-is ooL a printed notice required? A. The notice only refers to the postiog up of the rules. 30387. Q. Why should the workmon be compelled to go and get any matter prinled at all? A. I do not think it is necessary myself. 30688. Q. So you see no reason to object to eliminating the word" rrinted" at. all? A. No, I do not see any objection to that. [Examination concluded.] 30G89. Mr. Wade.] I would like to mention, in case we may have"occasion to use it at any future time, that I have an analysis of certain parcels of dust taken from this No. 1 road by Mr. Dixon; but, although his results are not as strong as Mr. Mingaye's, still the Commission have evidence of the loss of volatile .matter in Mr. Mingaye's evidence; and I do not propose lo call Mr. Dixon on that particular point, unless the Commission consider it necessary. · 30690. His Honor.] It is a. question for you, if Mr. Dixon's resultR are very different from Mr. Mingaye's. 30(;91. Mr. Wade.] I admit that Mr. Di1on's results sho\\· a slight loss of volatile matter. The lowest is something like 4 or 5 per cent. 30692. Mr. Bruce Smitll.] I see no objection, Your H onor, to M r. Wade's putting the resu1t~ before the Commission. 30693. Mr. Wade.] If the Commission care to hare thew, I "ill do that, alld hand the report in. 30094. His Honor.] If this evidence had been put in, you see, Mr. Dixon would ha.,·e been here, and he would have been subject to be askt'd questions and cross-examined; but it will only confuse malters to have thi~ analysis brought in in a vague sort of way. 30G95 Mr. Wade.] Of course I can qu:ite conceive, now, after the evidenre yesterday that certain witnesses saw flame coming out of the tunnel, that you can d raw certain conclusions from that; and I do not want to burden the case by putting in Mr. Dixon's evidence. :lUG96. Ab·. Bruce Smith.] Jf the evidence of Mr. Di xon completdy neutralised the e\'ideoce oE M r . l\1ingaye, it would Rtill lca,·e the cvi<leuce of flame given yesterd:\y. 30697. His Honor. ] I do not think it will help us to put that report. in; althou~b we arc quite rrady to accept any evidence that would tend to modify or affect Mr. Mingaye's evidence. 30698. Mr. Bruce Smitli.] I want to say, on behalf of Mr. Wade and myself and Mr. Lysaght, that we recognise the very great care and ~kill which Mr. Garlick has displayed in the taking and supervising of these notes; because we ha\'e had occasion to find no fault whate,•er, except some very minor typing ones, with the work so done. And we know that, in some cases, we ourselves have not been ornr careful or considerate, and the speed with ,vhich we have examined witoeFses has frequently been very great; and tbcrefore we would like to give this tribute of recognition of' the ability anti skill which he bas shown in the whole matter. :cJOG9!). Bis Honor. ] Thank you. The members of the Commission fully appreciate the absolute correctness of what you say. .Mr. Garlick'R work has been siugularly free from error in all cases. 30GG9l. We will adjourn now; but we will not fix any date for a further meeting. Jf anything stould crop up, of course e,·eryone will have full notice•. 1£ addresses are actually to be made, we will fix a day for hearing them. 30700. Mr. Bruce Smitlt.] I have no intention of making an address. 30701. .Mr. Wade.] I do not want to put myself in a position which may, perhaps, be unfair to the company, and I do not want to burden myself upon the Commission at all; but, if there is any particular point that the Commission think I ought to address them upon, I would take it as a favour if they would tell me that. I do not want to labour over all the e,,idenee given on this CommiRsion, on the mere chance that the Commission wish to hear sometbing. 3,J70:l. His Honor.] Mr. Lysaght, I understand you take the same Yiew as M.r. Wade. 3070:3. Mr. L.11sngl11.] Yes: I do not wnnt to inflict myself upon yo·1, Your lfonor. 30704. Ilis Ilonor. ] \\To "ill ~nly say that it i:1 not an infliction 30i0,3. JJir. Ly$nglit.] J f, after the perusal of the e\'i<lenee, there are any mallers that the Commission wii:; h to have nny assistance upon, I shall bo glad to follow I\lr. Wade's sugg<'stion, and to give any information I cao upon those particular points. [Tl1e Commission then adjourned sine die. ]

29- 5 Y

TU.ESDAF,

906 PUESJJA.Y, 24 MA.ROH, 1903. [The Oommis3ion met at Wollongong, at 8·80 a tn., and drot·e to Mount K e-mbla Mine. ]

C. E. R. D . A. W . ROBERTSON, EsQ,

t)ngmt:J.\.fURRAY, ESQ., D.C.J. (PRESIDENT). CoMM.IssIO~ER.

D. RITCHIE, EsQ.,

CoMMIBSIONEll.

(Mr. J. Garlick, Secretary t o the Com:.nission, attended to take shorthand notes of the evidence and proceedings.) 30706. The Commission ,vent to Mr. W. Stafford's house, an.d were taken by him to the spot in his garden on tho mountain, above the mouth of the main tunnel of the mine, from which Mr. Stafford sn.w the flame of the explosion, as related in bis evidence. 80707. They then proceeded to the Mine Office, where there were also present: Mr. W. Rogers, Manager, Mount Kembla Mine. Mr. D. H otchkis, Under -man!l,ger.

Mn. D. HOTCHKIS was sworn, and examined, as under:30708. His .llonor.] Q. What is your name? A. Daniel Hotchkis. 30709. Q. .And your position? A. Under-manager of Mount Kembla Mino. [The further examination of Mr. H otcbkis was postponed until the Commission should have arrived at Bord. No. 87.J 30710. The C0mmission then proceeded to the weigh-cabin, where they inspected the signs of fire on the lining-boards of the cabin, and saw what repairs bad been made to the cabio, as rendered necessary by the damage done by the accident. 30711. The Commission then entered the mine by the main tunnel, accompanied by Mr. Rogers and Mr. H otchkis; turned off up the No. 1 Right main level rope road, and turned through a cut-through into the No. 1 Right travelling road, up ,vhicb they proceeded. 30712 . .At a point in the No. 1 travelling road, just in bye of the dou blo doors o.n the inbye side of the 2nd Right, and opposite the air-crossing, Mr. Uobertson made a. test for ga.s with the hydrogen flame, n.nd found t per cent. ("25 per cent.) of fire-damp in the air. (Note.-Thus air was the return air from tho 2nd Right ancl 5th Right .. A current of about 18,000 feet was passing at the time, as roughly estimated by Mr. Rogers, and concurred in by the other members of the party.) 30713. The Com mission then proceeded along the No. l Right travelling road as far as the 4th Right, where they stopped and examined the stopping which has been put in this beading since the accident; examined the door-buildings just on the in bye side of the 4th Right in the travelling road; and examined the cut-tl1rough opposite the 4th Right, between the travelling road and the rope road. The rib of the inbye side of the 4th Right, on the east side of the travelling road, was found to come to what might be called a thin point. It is roughly sketched herewith:-

Po1NT f(E~{/11/FO

307H. In the cut-through betwef\n the No. l Right main headiug and the travelling road opposite the 4th Right, it was noted that there was one single door. Mr Rogers stated that this cut-through is not u~ed by the miners Eor t ravelling purposes. The c ut-through is fenced off at both ends. Previously to tho accident, Mr. Rogers stated, there were two canvas doors in this cut-through. W715. The Commission next proceeded to the top of the No. l Right tt·avelling road. On arriving opposite what was M orris' working-place at the time of the disaster, but is now a cut-through into bord No. 00, it was uoticed tba.t, although the party were standiog in an intake roadway, smoke wae leaking thrClugh the door in the cut-through from the bord (No. 90) into the intake air, instead of g-.>ing to the return airway (5th Right). This, Mr. R ogers pointed out, bears out a por tion of hie evidence, in which ~c ~tated that the air in the 5th R ight wol'kiogs was practically balanced, and migbt go either to the mtake or to the return. , · 30716.

·'

001

WitneM-D. Hotcbkis, 24 March, 1903,

30718. At the top of No. 1 Right back heading (about a foot from the roof, right at the eastern corner of the face), Mr, Robertson tested with the hydrogen flame, and found from t per cent. to f per cent. of fire-damp (from ·50 per cent. to ·75 per cent.). A second test was made in the western corner of the heading, at the face, about a foot from the roof, with the same result, viz, from per cent. to t per cent. of inflammable gas was found. • 30717. The party then went through the top cut-through into the face of the No. 1 Right front beading.; and M r. Robertson tested for gas in the western corner of the beading, about a foot from the r~of, and found ! per cent. "While making the test the hydrogen lamp went out, through the supply bemg accidentally turned off. On the way down the main heading, at the jig, Mr. J ohn Morrison, deputy, joined'"t:he party, and, by Mr. Rogers' instructions, took the lamp to the lamp-station to be relit. In the meanwhile the Comruission adjourned for lunch. 30718. On Morrison's return, with the hydrogen lamp relit, after lunch, the Commission proceeded, by way of the top line of cut-throughs, to what was Aitken and son's working-place at the time of t~e disaster [No. 8G on plan]; and, on trying .for gas with the hydrogen lamp at the edge of the fall in this working-place, Mr. Robertson found a. very slight trace of fire-damp. 30719. The Commist1ion then went into Annesley an<l James' bord [No. 85 on plan], and went over the top of a fall behiad Aitken's pillar. Here Mr. Robertson again tested with the hydrogen lamp, and found t per cent. (·25 per cent.) of fi re-damp. 30720. The Commission then proceeded to bord No. 87, where the pipe referred to by Dr. Robertson was deposed to having been found. 30721. At this point,-

Mn. D. HOTCHKIS, praviously sworn, was furth er examined, as under:30722. His Honor.] Q. Will you gi\'O us your account of how you came to lind the pipe: tell us what you did from the time you came to the place till the time you found the pipe; exactly where it was, and how it was lying? A. In company with Morrison, I visited this place-I think it ,ms on the 17th of November. I had been in several times previous io that, but had nev~r touched anything. This day I got somewhere here [indicating the. north side of a patcli of ashes lying on tlte ground, in a rouglily circular form, not more than 3 feet across]. I turned this bit of brattice off; it did not seem to have been disturbed. I looked dowu and gave that n kic:k, and the pipe was just there [pointing out the ,pot]. 30723. Q. That would be a.t the southern end of the -patch? A. Yes. 30724. Q. And over it what had there been ? A. I could not see tbe pipe until I kicked or moved my foot. 30725. Q. What did you move about? A. It seemed to be po.rtially-burned cam-as, and partia11y-burned paper near it, too. It was lying so that I could not see it until I moved that [partially-singed canvas] with my foot. 80726. Q. Was it out beyond the edge of where the ashes were lying? A. No. 30727. Q. How far did the ashes extend away beyond it from the main patch? A. There is the outside edge of the ashes [a1·1·01igin.</ tlie brat/ice as it was before he kicked i t asideJ and th~ pipe was Elomewhere here. 80728. Afr. Ritchie.] Q. Just on the outer edge of where the ashes were? A. Yes. 30729. His Honor.] Q. And the pipe showed no sigrni of burning on its outer side? A. No. 30730. Mr. Rite/lie.] Q. Did the brattice immediately covering the pipe show any signs of burning? A. That is the brattice there ; I cannot say. 30731. His Honor.] Q. D oes any of that show any sign ot burning? A. [Afte1· examining it] -Yes; some of it does. 30732. Mr. Robertson. ] Q. Did not it drop down when it was burnt? A. Yes. 30733. 11.is Honor.] Q. as there :my brattice fixed up here shortly before that? A. I could not say. 80784. Mr. Robe1·tson.] Was there a brattice hanging across here? 80735. M1·. Morrison.] No. 3073G. Mr. Pobertson.] l\Iy impression is that there was. 30737. Mr. Ritcliie.l What would you want brattice cloth ha.aging here for? B0788. N.r . Rogers.] This is the t op end of tho bord, you see; and there is bratt.ice at the top ends of other bords. W e are not very far now from the 4th left; and there might be a canvas here to atop the air from going down this way. . 30739. Mr. Robertson.] If there was n canvas right across, where is the remainder of it? This may be a. bit of it here (on top of the ashes); and I have an impression that there was a bit left here (on a prop). 80740. Mr. Morrison.] There was nothing like that. 307-J:l. Mr. Ritchie.] Q. Who would be the persons working nearest to here? 30742. Mr. Rogers.] Thomas and J ones. 80743. M r. Ritcl,ie.] Q. And how far from here were they found? 3074 .t Mr. Roge1·s.] About 100 or 150 yards. This is the cut-through where the coal went out, and where the wheeler would pass [indicating the cul-tl,rough immediately to tl,e nortlt of the a8hes]. 30745. Mr. Rite/lie.] Who was the wheeler at the time? 30746. Mr. Mo1·rison.] Nixon. 30747. M1·. Ritcliie.] Where was he found? 30748. Mr. Morrison.] Down on the 4th Left.

30749. Mr. Ritchie.] 'rhel'e is nothing that would lead J'OU to believe that Ni.ron would be here wiLh the pipe? [Tliere was no answer to this question. ] ~W750. Mr. Rite/tie.] H ow far is the 4th Left from here? 80751. Mr. R ogen] About 150 yards. 30752. (As there was a doubt about this the secretary produced o. plan of the mine; and, on referriug t o it, it was found that the distance was about 160 yards.) (Examination of Mr. Hotchkis concluded.)

908 Witnea.11-D. Hotchkis, 24 March, 1903.·

80753. As the party were leaving the bord, Mr. Robertson called His Honor's attention to some deposits of dust partly coked, rather larger than bad hitherto been found, which had lodged on the projecting ends ·a nd sides of the logs composing a chock or pigsty in the easte~n side of the bord almost immediately opposite the first ~ut-through to the north of the fallen end of this bord. The dust was on the southern · side of the chock. The following sketch shows the position of the chock in the bord.

cur

-ft/NO VGH

-tt- +t . - - - - r,/(}(K CHot.K

o T-;,o ~

t:>

HEIi P OF /IS'HES

3075 J.. The following sketch shows the position of the dust on the chock : -

RooF -

I..

our-,. ovs-r- ·

Jl SooTREitN

ELEVATION

OF CnoCK oN

EASTERN SIDE OF

flOO/(

BoRn No. 87.

30755. Mr. Robertson and Mr. Ritchie then went on top of a fall in an old bord between the 3rd Left and the 4th Left opposite the first shunt on the 4th Left road, and, on testing with the hydrogen lamp, found t per cent. ('25 per cent.) of fi re-damp. 3075G. The Commission then went through the 4th Left road in the No. 1 Right district, up Staffol'd's going bord, and turned up Stafford's heading; and at the face, which is 67 yards in from the going bord, Mr. Robertson tested with the hydrogen lamp, which showed that there was t per cent. (·:, per cent.) of fire-damp present in the atmosphere. 30757. The party next went into a beading which is being driven from Stafford's going bord towards the No. l Right main le,el, which will, when completed, be the 5th Left rope road off the No. 1. This heading is now dr.ven a distance of 20 yards from the turn. At the face a test was made with the hydrogen lamp, and a trace of fire-damp was found. 30753. The next place visited was bord No. 80 on the plan, between the pillars on the east of Stafford's going bord. Mr. Robertson here climbed on top of a fall at the south-western corner of the ! -acre goaf; and at a height of about !) feet above the top of the seam. t per cent. (· .3 per cent.) of fire-damp was detected with the hydrogen flame. 3075!>. The Commis!"ion then went to the face of bord No. 43 ( on the plan) ; and a test was made in the centre of the fa.c·e up against the roof, which resulted int per cent. of fire-damp being found with the hydrogen ffamC'. 30760. The party 1hen proceeded to tho upcast shaft; and, when tryina to test for inflammable gas in the return air, the hydrogen flame went out through the supply of hydro~e~ being accidentally turned off. 307(.il. The Commission then came back to daylight by the shaft tra.elling road, and returned to ,Vollongong, proceedin~ by train the same night to Helensburgh. 307G2. NoTr:.-At·each of the tests made by Mr. Robertson, and racorded above, both Mr. Rogers and Mr. Hotchkis were present, and either one or both of them, in addition to the members of the Commission, persou:ilJy witnessed the making of the test.

"If EDNES DAY,

909 WEDNESDAY, 25 MA.ROH, 1903. [The Oommission met at the Metropolitan Colliery Oom'J}any's Mine, at Helensb11,r9h, at 10 a.m.]

jttstnt:D. A. W.

C. E. R. MURRAy' ESQ., D.C.J. (PRESIDENT). ROBERTSON, EsQ., CoMMISSIONER. I D. RITCHIE, EsQ., CoMMISSIONF.n

Mr. J. Jeffries, Manager, Metropolitan Mine. (Mr. J. Garlick, Secretary to ' the Commission, was present to take notes of the evidence and proceedings.) 30763. The Commission inspected the surface works, winding shaft, screens, winding engines, hauling engines, boiler installation, ventilation fan, and the mine plant. 30764. After lunch the party proceeded underground, and inspected various workings, under the guidance of · Mr. Robertson and Mr. Jeffries. Special notice was taken of the large amount of '\'entilation, the quantity of dust on the roads :i.nd in the atmosphere, the high temperature in various portions of the mine, the occurrence of gas, the indications of creep in the pillars, and the thickness and number of the props af! compared with those seen at Mount Kembla, rendered necessary by the greater depth of the workings. It was also remarked that the mere walking of long distances in the dust-laden atmosphere of high temperature over roads thick with dust caused noticeable bodily fatigue to some members of the party. _ 30765. The Commis~ion returned to the surface about 5 p.m., and adjourn¢ for dinner. 30766. Tbe Commission met again at the mine at 7 p.m., when there were present, in addition to those already named, a. number of officials connected with the mine. A number of tests were made of explosives fired in an atmosphere free from dust, in an atmosphere containing Mount Kembla dust in suspension, and in an atmosphere containing Metropolitan dust in suspension. The apparatus used was a cast-iron pipe, 1 foot in diameter and about 9 feet lc,ng, supported in a horizontal position about 2 feet from the ground. Each charge was placed 3 feet inside the pipe. When tests were to be made with the dust in suspension, a shovelful of dust was first laid iu the -pipe; the charge of explosive was then laid on this dust; and two shovelsful of dust were laid over and surrounding the explosive. A pair of bellows had been placed in position about 30 feet away, round an angle of brickwork, and from this a 3-inch pipe was laid, extending a distance of 3 feet into the pipe in which the charge was to be fired. The 3 feet of this small pipe which was inside wLat may be called the explosion chamber had a number of perforations all round it, through which the air could escape, and so lift the dust in a cloud inside the explosion chamber. The bellows were blown for a sufficient time before each shot to thoroughly lift the dust and suspend it in the atmospl1ere. Charges of roburite and carbonite were fired by means of a magneto exploder. Chargr:s of gunpowde1' were fired by means of best fuse. The spectators stood about 25 yards away in such a positiou that they could get a good view of the mouth of the pipe without standing right in front of it. Tbe night was very dark, light rain falling nll the time. The following are particulars of the tests that were made and the results obtainerl : 30767. ~'irst Series- with dean pipe (no coal-dust)(a) One shot (2 oz.) roburite. Result- Short, sharp flash of light seen reflected on inside of pipe. (b) One shot (2 oz.) cru·bonite. Result- Distinctly yellow flame and sparks thrown out about 9 feet from end of pipe. (c) One shot (8 oz.) gunpowder. Result-Strong yellowish-red flame and shower of sparks extending to aboi;it 20 feet from end of piFe; material found burning for two or three minutes after explosion, a bout 20 feet from end of pipe (cartridge paper, fuse, &c.). . 30768. Second Series- with Mount Kembla dust in suspension; dust obtained at end of January from No. 1 Right roadway in Mount Kembla by Inspector Watson(d) One shot (2 oz.) roburite. Res ult-No flame, no light, no sparks, nothmg but the sound of the explosion. (e) One shot (2 oz.) carbo'nite. Result-Very sho rt, sharp, faint scintillation of light: no sign of ignition of dust. (f) Three separate shots of gunpowder (8 oz. each), n,s follow:(JI) Result-A fa,rge , yellowish-red, flame blew out of the pipe for a distance of about 20 feet and rose in the air, accompanied by a large cloud of sparks of ignited coal-dust. u·z) A large yellowish-red flame blew about 24 feet out of the pipe, accompanied by a large cloud of sparks of ignited coal-dust . A piece of dry newspaper, which had been tied to the bellows-pipe about 2 feet in front of the explosion pipe, and was exposed to the rain for about three minutes before the firing of the charge, was blackened by the discharge, and was seen to be burning with a red smoulder in places without actual flame, after the cloud of smoke and sparks had cleared away. (/3) A large yellowish-red flame blew about 17 feet out of the pipe, accompanied by a shower of sparks of ignited coal-dust. The portion of the new~paper which remained unburned after the firing of /2, as referred to above, and had remained exposed to a light rain in the interval between the firing of f2 and.fS, was lit by the discharge of/3, and continued burning with fiame after the explosion had pa~sed. N oTE. -The flame~ frotn these three ignitions of dust extended a.bout Li feet high in the air. 80769. Third Series-with Metropolitan coal-dust in suspension(g) One shot (2 oz.) roburite. Result- Very faint, almost inappreciable scintillation of light seen reflected on inside of pi pc by Mr. Jeffries and Mr. Garlick, not seen by other members of party : no ignition of dust. (h) One Phot (2 oz.) of carbonite. Result-No light, no ignition of dust. (i) Two shots (8 oz. each) of gunpowder(il) A large yellowish-red flame, extending 17 feet from the mouth of the pipe; dust ignited ; large shower of sparks; flame and sparks rose about 12 feet in the air: glow of heat from explosion distinctly felt by spectators 25 yards away. (i2) A large yellowish -red flame, extending about 16 feet from mouth of pipe; dust.ignited; large yellowish-red flame and sparks ·went up quite 15 feet in the air; glow of heat from explosion distinctly felt by spectators 25 yards away. (The Commissi0n then adjourned.)

APPENDIX.

...

....

910

ROYAL COMMISSION OF -INQUIRY RESPECTING THE MOUNT KEMBLA COLLIERY DISASTER.

APPENDIX.

Exhibit No. t. Plan showing the workings, ventilation, &c., in the maih or Bu1li seam, Mount Kembl11i Colliery, used during the evidence of T. R. Morgan, and marked by him.

Exhibit No. 2, Plan showing the workinge, ventilation, &c., in the tna.in or Bulli eenm, Mount Kembla Collieryj by which W. Broadhend's evidence was illustrated at the Coroner's Inquest, I

Eahibit No. 3. Plan showing the workings, venlilation1 &c., in the main or Bulli seam, Mount Kembla Collier;t, by which Matthew Frost's evidence was illustrated at the Coroner's Iuqu~t.

Exhibit No. 4. Plan showing the workiflg11, ventilation, &c., in the main or Buili seam, Mount Kembla Colliery, by which John Morrison's evidence was illustrated at the Coronet's Inquest. (Put in 21 /8/02).

Exhibit No. 5. Plan showing the workings, ~entilation, &o., in the main or ..Bulli seo.m, Mounb Kembla. Colliery, by which John Morriaon's evidence wes illustrated at the Coroner's 'Inquest. ( Put in 28 /8 /02).

Exhibit No. 6, Pllan showing the workings, ventilation, &c., in the main or Bulli seam, Mount Kernbla Colliery, by which David Evans' evidence was illustrated at Coroner's Inquest.

â€˘

Exhibit No. 7. Plan showing the workings, ventilation, &c., in the main or Bulli seam, Mount Kembla Colliery, by which Adam Frost, junior's, evidence was illustrated at Coroner's Inquest. Exhibit No. 8. Plan showing the workings, ventilation, &c., in the me.in or Bulli seam, Mount Kembla. Colliery, by which Mr. Rogers' evidence was illustrated at Coroner's Inquest.

Exhibit No. 9. Plan showing the workings, ventilation, &c., in the main or Bulli seam, Mount Kembla Colliery, by which Mr. Johnathan May's evidence was illustrated at Coroner's Inquest.

Exhibit No. 10, Plan &bowing the workings, ventilation, &c., of the main or Bulli seam, Mount Kembla CoJliery, by which David Ritchie's evidence was illQstrated at Coroner's Inquest.

Exhibit No. 10a. Plan showing the workings, ventilation, &c., in the main or Bulli seam, Mount Kembla Colliery, by which Adam St..1,fford's evidence was illustrated at Coroner's Inquest. Exhibit No.11.

911 Exhibit No.11. Plan showing the workings, ventilation, &c., in the main o.r Bulli sen,m, Mount Kemble. Colliery, by which the evidence of George Ramsay was illustrated at Coroner's In'luest. Exhibit No.12. :[>Ian showing the workings, ventilation, &c., in the main or Bulli seam, Mount Kembla Colliery, by which the evidence of Ernest Stafford was illustrated at Coroner's Inquest. Exhibit No. 13. Plan showing the workings, ventilation, &o., in the ma.in or Bulli seam, Mount Kembla Colliery, by which tho evidence of Mr. A. A. Atkinson was illustrated at Coroner's Inquest. Exhibit No. 14:. Letter from Mr. J ohn S,veeney, of Woonona, to Mr. Lysaght, e~plaining mistake in his evidence. Mr. A. Lysaght, Solicitor, ·wollongoog,Woonooa, 15 January, 190?. Dear Sir, I find, after careful consideratioo, that I made a mistake in my evidenee before the Royal Oommiasion in regard to the date on which I did not see the deputy in my working place in South Bulli Colliery. . · It was Monday night, 12th January, that I did not see the deputy, not Friday, a.s I stated in my eviuence to-day. Trusting this will enable you to give a satisfactory explanation to the Commissionerfl, if necessa,ry. I remain, &e,, JOHN SWEENEY, Woonona..

Exhibit No. 15. Report on examinations of Mount Kembla Colliery on 29th and 30th of April an<l 1st of May, 1902. We the undersigned have examined the air-courses and workings, &c., at the Mount Kembla. Colliery OJl th~ and 80th April and 1st May, 1902. The following are the results of the main intakes and returns :Intakes.

Maio Day Hole .................................... Main Tunnel ........ ··························· .. Travelling Road ........... ... ..... .. .... .. ..... .... No. 1 Day Hole ···································

Total

................................

Returns.

Cubic feet

per min. 9,600 30,420 16,500 62,720

Cubic feet.

per min. 86,800

North side of furnace ........................... South side of furnace

119,240

ijl)t,h

······················· ...

24,72-0

111,520

The following are the results of the splits :•~

Splits.

.................................

lth Left ············· ... 5th Riiht ............................ .. .................... No. 6 ifiht .... .. ......................................... No. 6 Let ................................................ Ma.in Tunnel ·············································

Horsee,

Volume of air.

No. me.n.

No. boys.

24,000 10,800 18,480 9,600 25,420

3 4

4 4

88,300

32 36 35

- - - -~ - - --· 201

Avera~for man, boy, rse, per minute.

300 284 410 223

r,77

.. ......

We find that all the engine planes, mach.inery, manholes, &c., are io oompliance with the Coal Mines Regula.ti.on Act, an<l that the travelling roads are in good order, with the exception of No. 5 troveUing road, which we con.sider needs more attention as to the renewal of timber and removal of water. The under-manager informed us that only a few men travel this road, and that it could be done away with in view of this; and that as it is difficult to get timber in there and the water remo,•ed, we recommend t he management to a.bond (abandon?) it as a travelling road. C. JOSLAND. l CL k. to C. H. BIGGERS. i u.ec -m.spec rs.

Exhibit No. 16. CORRESPONDENCE re BURNING OF MICHAEL GALLAGHER. (Department of Mines, 9,277.)

Telegram from Inspector Rowan, Wollongong, to J. E. Herring, for Mines.

Esq., Assistant Under Secretary

Electric Telegr:i.ph Department, l June, 1892. A miner named Micha.el Gall.a.gher hae been severely burnt by fire-damp at Mount Kembl.a. Colliery yesterday. I have received word this morning from the M.an3.ger. Shall investigate to-day. -

JAS. ROWAN,

Inspector Collieries. Submitted, 1/6/92.-J.E.H. Seen by H. W, (Department

9i2 (Department of Mines, 09,623.) James Rowan, Esq., Inspector of Mines,Mount Kembla, 3 Ma.y, 1892. Dear Sir, Since you were here yesterday it has occurred to me that there has been a slight misapprehension (probably in the way it was e:Kplained to you) 1·egarding the instructions given by Mr. Rogers to the men working in the headings where the accident to M. Gallagher occurred. I have taken careful measurements in the place, and have inquired regarding the instructions actually given by Mr. Rogers, and I find that the "stamp" which he put on the side is 33 yards from the "cut-through," and that his orders to the man int.he place were that he and his mates should drive 3 feet further and then begin a. cut~through. So far as I can discover there is no evidence to show that he sanctioned their driving beyond that distance. It is evident that the men, on encountering a small roll on the floor, aft.er getting these instructions, and noticing that it was decrt.nsing, took on themselves to drive a few feet further in order t o avoid this obstruction. At the present moment the pillar, as partially formed, measures 35 yards and I foot ; b ut, as the· gE>neral rule at , this colliery has been to turn pillars at about 32 yards and l foot, Mr. Rogers made an error in bis measurement, and put in the stamp into the coal a yard further than he supposed it was. I have invariably found him extremely particular on this point; and, indeed, I would not permit any other practice to be pursued . Mr. Rogers is an able and experienced man, cautious, reliable, aucl conscientious in the tlischarge of his duties; and his instrucLiooi:s lo these men to drive 3 feet in advance of the stamp, which he believed would have made them up to 33 yards, were gi \·en in presence of Alexander Stewart, chief deputy and formerly overruan at Greta. Colliery, a man of experience and of the utmost integrity, whose word may be thorou~hly relied on. Mr. Stewart is posith-e on the point, and confirms the statement made by Mr. Rogers. In commencJDg the cut-through where they did, the men have undoubtedly disobeyed the order given to them; but, as I will show, tbis had really no bearing on the result. They were probably induced to do so by the good ventilation that existed. You will perceive that no one could have anticipated tht1 p resence of gas iu a. position that until recently was filled with water, and that the holing through into the "waste" or "goaf," while forming the cut-through, did really not alter the result; as, ha<l the coal that divided the "cut-throuih" from the waste been only, say, a foot thicker, it would ha,·e been holed into when the heading itself was recommencect with consequences probably more serious. I wa.s well aware that no water existed in the workings towards which we were driving. at such a level as to nece~sita.te any precautions bein" ta.ken to guard against dang~r. I had taken careful levellings mysell, which t he colliery surveyor subsequently checked, by which it wa.s shown that the water was at a. lol\-er level than the face of the heading in question; and the accuracy of this has been proved by no water being found in the workings that we have holed into. From tho circumstance that & strong current of air p·asses over the top of the water we are now pumping out, the presence of gas was ne,·er suspected; and from the fact that this water is lying in the return I fully anticipated that, when holed into, the current of air would naturally pass inwards. I am not as yet in a posit.ion to state a sufficient reason why this did not occur. Yours faithfully, J. H . RON ALDSON , - - - - -Manager. (Department of Mines, N.S. W ., 9,623.) . Accident Report., Wollongong, 4 June, 1892. John Mackenzie, Esq., Examiner of Coal-fields, Mines Department, Sydney,. Sir, I regret to report an accident which happened a miner named Michael Gallagher, who had his back and hand badly burnt by an explosion of fire-damp at Mount Kembla Colliery on the 31st ultimo. I examined the cause of the accident, and the injured mau at the hospital on the 1st :lnd 2nd instant. The place where the accident happened is in t.be front heading, off No. 6, which is being driven for the !?arpose of opening out No. 4 Right district, which has been standing for several years, and a portion of the district is filled wit h water. There were three men working in the front narrow heading, viz., Peter Johnstone, David Howie, and Hugh Johnstone. Howie, while working at the face, holed th rough into the waste of No. 4, an<l after pricking through, he went round to the next narrow heacling and told Micha.el Gallagher to come round, as be had holed into the waste. Gallagher came round to see, and, while be was sitting near the face, Hc.wie took the handle of his pick and began to widen out the hole, and while doing so he heard a sound in the. hole he made; h e shouted out to Gallagher, "Look out ! " At t his call Gallagher jumped on to a skip of slack that was standing ahout 6 feet from the face. The gas ignited on Howie's lamp, and spread about 4 yards along the roof; Gallagher being on the top of the skip, and his shirt off, got the force of the flash, whereas Howie esc:iped without injury. I ma.de my investigation, in company with the overman, deputy, and the three men who worked in the heading. I took a measurement from the last cut-through to where the new cut-through was formed off, and found it measured :l5 yards l foot, and about 1,000 cuhic feet of a.ir passing through the last cut-through. From where the new cut-through was formctl it measurlld about 6 feet to the face of the heading. I made inquiry as to the driving of this 6 feet. Tbe ovcrman ('.\fr. Rogers) showctl me a m:u·k a.bout. 33 yards from the lt\St ent-thro11gh which ho l:ad put in for the men to start t_h e cut-through. Shortly after putting in t.hc mark, tile men sent out wor<l that they had strnck a "roll," au<l he (the ovem1ao) went back and said I.hey could drive 3 feet further titan tne mark, and then to start the cut-through. Peter J ohnstone received the instructions a.bout this additional distance; but Johnstone, on being questioned, said he understood the Overman to sa.y he could go 6 feet further than the matk, and tha.t he had told his mates the same. Peter Johnstone started the cut-through at 35 yards and l foot, and said he intended his mates who started the following shift t o take the wideness of the cut-through off the pillar end, but, through some misunderstanding, or to avoid a small "roll, " they took the additional wideness from the face of the heading. Howie was the second to follow Johnstone (they were working single shifts), and it was while he was squaring llF the fl\-ce of the heading t hat he went through. I examined the No. 4 waste with a safety-lamp anrl the Liveings gas indicator, but nowhere did I see the presence of fire-damp with the S:lfety-lamp. I went on the top of fa.Us with the indica.tor, and, o.s far as I could judge from reflection, there was about half per cent. of gas. I also found that a strong current of air was in circulation through the No. 4 waste. In conclusion, I beg to state, in my opinion, there is no blame to the owner or a.gent in connection with this accident. I am also of opinion that the men never meant a breach or act of disobedience to the management, as they seemed honest, hardworking men The injured man's statement to mo was the so.me as what has been explained: "That he went round to see the hole, and that the ga.s ignited ou HO\vie's la.mp ; he was on the top of a. skip of slack when the flame passed over his back." I h1we 1 &:c., JAME ROWAN, Inspector o~ Collicrie3.

t J~·..

Is the sketch I have made at page 2 correct? If so, it appears to me that ownc1· or a.gent is to blame for d riving the heading 6 feet past t he cut-through which was not put through.- J.M ., 11 /6/ 92. Your sk etch is correct, with the exception of the pillar not being formed off next the heading face (see sketch of headings enclosed). - J .R., 1516/92. B.C., Examiner of Coal-fields --J. R., 15/6 '92. Although the owner or agent may not be to blame for the accid'Cnt, be is for the place being driven more than 35 yards before the current of air, which is io contravention of section 12 subsection 4 of" Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1876."-J.M., )ti 6/92. Under Secretary for Mines, B. C., 16/6/92. Submitted - Proceedings should he taken ag:dnst the owners for driving in contravention of theAct. - H.W., 17, 6/92. Submitted . Approved.- T.M .S., 18/6/92. From a conversation I have had with Inspector Rowan to-day, I 6ml that his report has been misunderstood, and that it wa~ the cut-through, aud not tbe heading, which " as being drh·en ; and, as the pillar was only l foot O\"er ~utthrough u·stance, I now recommend that proceedings be not taken. - J.M., 21 /o/S2. Under Secretary for ~l ines, B.C., 21/6/92. Under these circumstances, the proceedings need not be ta.ken.-H. W ., 2 1/3/92. Subrr.it.ted. Appro,·ed.T.M.S. , 21 ,6/92. Put a.way. - H . W., 24/6/92. The Examiner of Coa.1-fields.-T.M.S., B.U., 2'1/6/92. Seen and notd. -J. )I., 2316/92. · E xhibit No. 17. .,\

nl3 Exhibit No. 17. Letter to Government Analyst re: sa.mples of coal-dust from Mount Kcrubla Mi11e, and his report thereon. R OYAL Co:.nnssro:s OF 1::-Qontv The Govornment Analyst, Sydney,-

RF.SPECTING TnE

1lon,T MEMBLA COLLIERY DISASTER. 50, Young-street, SydnP.y, 19 December, 1902.

Sir,

I have the honor, by direction of the Royal Commi~sion of Inquiry respecting the 'Monnt Kembla. disaster, to hand you with this letter two samples of con.I-dust from Mount Kembla Coal-mine, one tn,ke::i from a prop in first line of cut-throughs off bord No. 87, iiod the other from No. 1 Right back heading. I am directed to ask that yon will lie so good as t o make microscopical and analytical tests of each of these specimens, and report fully as to the results of such t ests. The Commission spccinlly rlesire to know- (l ) whether, in youi· opinion, the coo.I.dust bas been sul,jected to heat ; (Z) if so, to wba.t lempe-raturc do you consider the dust has been exposed; and (3) how much of the volatile constituents of the coal-dust h:we b:ien driven off by the action of hea.t. I ha.,·e, &c., J. GARLICK, Secretary to the Commission. Department of Public Health, New South \Yales, Chemical Laboratory, Sydney, 14 J anuary, 1903. Coal-clastfrom !i101111t Kl'mUa. The Chief Medical Officer of the Gorcrnmcnt,Sir, In reply to the accompanying le•.tei-, datetl the 19th ultimo, I have the honot· to report tha.t I have made a. careful chemical analysis and microscopical examination of the samples of coal-dust snbmilt,ed hy the Secre~ary of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the canse of the Mount Kembla disaster. The quantities of coal-dust are much too small for an exhaustive chemical aualysis; but, so far as my investigation can now be carried, I am able to give the following answer., to the questions raised :-

I. I am of opinion that both specimens of coa~-dust have beon subjected to the action of heat, and probably to th8 direct action of flame.

I am unable to say with any approach to accuraey the degree of terupern.ture, but I believe that at least 400 de~ees Fahrenheit would be necessary to produce a similar effect. JIT. The volatile constituents in the sample of coal-dust taken from the side wa:J of Drive No. I .hack heading was found to contain less than 24 per cent. Ily proximate analysis the coal-dust was fvund to have the following percentage composition:H ygroscopic moislure ............ .. ....... , ..... ... . .. ...... . ....... .. . . I ·30 Volatile hyclroca.rbons ... ...... ..... ... ...... ...... . ... .. .... .... ......... . 23·54 Fixed carbon ........ .... ..... .... .. ................ . ................ ... ... . 62·83 Ash ....... . .... ...... ....... .... ... ... ... ... ..... . .. .. ............. ... ..... . 12·1:l Some previons analyses of coal taken from the neighbourhood of this mine shows 25 per ceut. of volatile hydro• carbons; but I am unable to give any deduction from these figures unless I knew the amount of t-he volatile hydrocarbons in the coal of the particular heading from whence the dust was derived. If a sample of cleanly-fractured coal from t.he X&ct spot be sent to me, I could make a comparison on estimation of the amount found in the new sample. I haYe, &c, vVILLIAM M. HAMLET, Government Analyst .

Exhibit No. 18. STATUTORY RULES A1'J) ORDERS, 1899. - No. 569.

M ines-Coal Mines. Tin: ExPLOSI\"F.'l lN' COAL M1~Es Ono1-;R OF THE 24TH Jut..Y, 189:>. Order mitde by the Secretary of State for the H ome Department. under Section 6 of ihc Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1$91\ Whereas by Sect.ion 6 of the Coal Mines Regula.lion Act, 1896, it is enacted that a Secretary of State, on being satisfied that any explosi,·e is, or is likely to hecome, dangerous, may liy Onlc,r prohibit U1e use thereof in any mine or in any class of mines, either absolutely or suhject to conrlit.ions. I hereby, in pursuance of the power conferred on me by the aforesaid section, make the following Order :Ahso:utc prohihi~ion of c;crL:1fo explosives in 11ns:i.fc 111i11c1.

1. -(1) In all coal-mines in which infla.mmal,lc gas has hccn found wit.hin the prc"ious thrc:i monlhs in such quantity as to be indicative of llanger, the ll" .! o[ any cxplosi,·c, ot!i~r than a pen111tt.~d cxplo$ive as hercin:i.fter defined, is absolutely prohibited in the seam or sea.ms in which the g i.s h11,s been found. (2) In all coal-mines which are not naturally wet thron~hout, the use of any cxµ ll)sive, other tlrnn a permittell explosive as hereinafter dcffoed, is ab:::o:utely prohibited in a.11 roads, ar.tl in c,·e,-y dry and dusty rart of the mine. Conditionnl prohibition of other 1:xplosh·cs in uus:ife mines.

2. In all such coal-mines or parts thereof :is aforewi<l, the usc of permitletl explosives is prohibited unless tho following conditions are observed :(a) Every charge of the explosive shall be placecl in a properly drilled shnt h11b a:icl sln'l have sufficient stemming. (li) Every charge shall be fired by an efficient electrical apparat..ui, or J,y some other means equally secure against the ignition of iullamma.ble gas or coal-dust. (c) Every charge shall be fired by a com relent person appoince,l in writing for this duty by the owner, agent, or manager 1>f the mine, and not being a perso11 whose wages depend on the a.mount of mineral to bo gotten. (d) Each explosive shnll be used in the manner an<l subject to the conditions preseriue<l in the flche<lu le hereto: Provided that nothing in this Order shall prohibit the use of a safety fuse in any mine in which infb.mmable gas hns not been found within the previous three months in such quantity as to be i11dieative of ti.anger. Condition:Ll prohibition or all cxplosircs in main roa<ls.

3. In every coal-mine the use of any explosh·c is prohibited in the main haulage roads a.ncl in the intakes uuless all workmen have been removed from the seam in which the shot is to be fired, and from all seams communi-:ating with the abaft on t he same level, except the men 1:ngage<l in firing the shot, and in atluition such other persons, not exceeding ten in number, as are necessarily employed in attending to the ventilating furnaces, steam boilers, engines, machinery, windinl( apparatus, signals, or horses, or in inspecting the mine; M unle3s a. permitted explosive is used, and every part of the roof, floor, antl sides oft.he main haulage roa.d 01· int.ake, within a distance of 20 yards from \.he place where it is used, i~, at the time of firing, ~horoughly wet, either naturally or from the applicn.tion of w1itcr thereto. This section shall not apply to such portions of tho main haulage roads and intakes ns are wit,hin 100 yards of the coal face. This secti~n shall not authorise the usc of any explosive in any case where the use of such cxplosivo is prohibited by Ficction 1 or 2 of this Orclcr. Conditic.nnl

29-- 5 Z

r 914 Conllitionnl prohibition of dctonntors.

4. On and after t.hc 1st <ln.y of October, 1699, no detonator shall be used in any mine unless the' following conditiopa arc ohs~n·ed :(a.) Detonators slmll be under the control of the owner, agent, or manager of the min.e, or some person specially appointed in writing by the owner, agent., or manager for the purpose, and shall be issued only to shot-6rers or other persons specially authorised by I.he owner, agent., or manager, in writing. (b) Shot-firers and other :rnthorised persons shall keep all detonators issued to them until about to be used in a Eecurely Jocked case or bt>x separate from any other explosi,,e. · Applicntion of Order.

5. This Order shall not. apply to mines of clay, or stratified or nodular ironstone, nor shall it apply to shafts in course of being snnk from the surface., or deepened, or .to drifts and other outlets being driven from the surface, if such shafts, drift.s 0 1· outlets arc not venl1latad by return air. ' Where a 1~ine contains seYeral separate seams this Order shall apply to each seam as if it were a separate mine. Definitions.

G. Jn this Order the term "permitted explosi,;es" means such explosives as are named and defined in the Schedule hereto: 'Provided that where the composition, quality or character of any explosi\·e is defined in such Schedule, any article alle"'ed to be such explosive which differs therefrom in composition, quality or character, whether by reason of deteriora.ti;n or otherwise, shall not be deeme,l to be the explosives so defined ; provided further that an owner, a~ent, or maoa.,er shall not, be responsible for the composition, quality, or character of an explosive, if he shows th at he has 10 good faith ~bta.ined a written certificate from t.hc maker of the explosive that it complies with the terms of the Schedule, and that he has taken all reasouahle means to preYent deterioration of the explosive while stored. The term "road " includes all roads of any description extending from the aha.ft or outlet to within 10 yards of the coal face. The term "main haulage rend" means a road which ha.s been, or for the time being is, in use for moving trams by gravi~y or by steam or other mechnnical power. Ilevocation ol lormer Orders. 7. This Order shall come into forco on the Jst day of August, 1809, from which date the Explosives in Coal Mines Orders of the l lth July, 189~, nnd 23rd December, 1898, are i>evoked. Citntion.

8. This Order may be cited as t.he Explosirns in Coal Mines Order of the 24th J uly, 1899.

M. W. RIDLEY, Home Office, Whitehall, 24th July, 1899.

One of Her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State. SCHEDULE.

List of Permitted Expfo.,ives. • Anvnonite, consisting in e,·ery 100 pa.rts by weight of the .finished explosive of not more than 89 parts and not less thnn Bi parts of nitrate of ammonium, with not more than 13 parts and not le!s than l l pnrts of thoroughly purified t.li-nilro-nnpbtaline, and wi~h no other ingredient ; the whole being uniformly incorporated : Provided()) That the explosi\·e shall be used only when contained in a. case of lead and tin alloy thoroughly waterproofed with pure paraffin wax; (2) That the explosive shall be used only with a detonator or electric detonator fose of not less strength tb1m t hat known a-s No. 6! (i.e., the detonator or elt!ctric detonator fuse to be used shnll possess an effecti\'e detonative strength as great as, or great.er than, that of one containing 19 grains of a. composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 80 µarts of fulminate of mercury and 20 p,~rts of chlorate of potassium); and (3) '!'hat iu addition to the marking on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, IS75, :i.n1l in force for the time being, such outer package shall bE>ar the words" As defined in the List of Permitted Expl,1sh·es "; and, further, that earh inner package shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosive, to be used only with not less than No. 6! detonator," and also with the name of the cxplosfre, tho name of the m:mufacturer, the date of manutacture, ann the nature and proportion of the ing1 edients. A m11is, consisting in eYery 100 parts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 92 parts and not less than 89 parts of nitrate of ammonium, with not more than G parts and n<>t less than 4 parts of wood-meal, and with hot more than G parts and not less than 4 parts of thoroughly purified di-nitro-benzol and cblorinated naphthalene, and with no other ingredient., prO\'ided that the chlorine does not exceed l per cent. by weight of the finished explosive : Prodded()) That the explosive shall be used only when contained in a case of stout pa.per thoroughly 1rnterproofecl with ceresine; (2) That the explosil•e shall be used only with a special detonator or electric deLouator fuse containing uot less than 15 grains of a composition consisting in e\'cry JOO parts by weight of 95 parts of fulminn.t.e of mercury and 5 parts of cbloride of potas~ium; aml (:l) That in additiou to lhe marking on the outer packa.!?e required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosi\·cs Act, 1875, aod in force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words "As detined in the List of Permitted Explosh·es''; and, further, that each inner r,nckage shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosh·e, to l,e use,l ouly with a special detonator '; and also with the name of the explosi\·e, the name oft.he manufacturer, the date of manufactu:e, and the nature and proportion oft.be ingredientl!.

B,1/itc 1\"o. 1, com,isl'ng in e\'ery 100 pa.rts by weight of I.he finished explosive of not more than 85 parts and not less thnn 82 parts of n;trate of a111111oniun1, \1 ith not, more than 18 parts and not less than 15 parts of thoroughJy purified lli-nit.ro-benzol, acd wit.h no other ingred1c11t; the whole being uniformly incorporated : Pl'ovidcd(1) That the expl<>si,·e shall l,e use1l only when contained in n. case of linen paper thoroughly waterproofed with a mixture of carn:i.uba and paraffin waxes; (2) That the explosi\·e shall l,e used only with a detonator or electric detonator fuse of not Jess strength than that known as No. 7 (i.,., the dt:tonator or electric detouat.or fuse to be used shall possess an effectiYe detonative sLren~~h as great as, or greater than, that. of one containing 23 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts oy weight of SO parts of fulminate of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of potassium); aud (:!) That, in addiDion to the marking on the outer package require,! by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, I 875, nn<l in force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words, "As defined in the List of Permittecl Explosivps" ; an<l, further, t.hat each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words " Permitted Explosh·e, to he nsetl ,,·ith not less than No. 7 det,onator," and also with the na.rue of the explosi\·e, tho name of the m:rn11facturer, the \late of manufacture, aud the nature and propo,tion of ihe ingredients. Bellite

•

• This list is subject to re1·i,i, n in :\ccorJnnce with the results of exporiments 11\.'\de from time to time in the Oovernment Testing Station nt Woolwich. ·

1 ~

,.f ~

,,. }

r ~

1, .l ~

f ...•

..t

t *} )

!•· ·f t J

i: -r

t... ..f t

915 Bellite No. 3, c~nsisting in every 100 P:'1-rts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 95 parts and not l~ss .than 92 parts of n~trate of am~oniu~, with not more ~han 8 parts and uot less than 5 parts of thoroughly pur'ified d1.mtro·benzol) and with no other mg1·ed1ent; the whole bemg uniformly incorporated : Provided(1) Th:'1-t the explosi\·e shall be used only when containetl in a case of linen paper thoroughly waterproofed with a nnxture of carnauba and paraffin waxes ; (2) That the explosive shall be used only with a detonator or electric detonator fus~ of not less strength than that known as No. 6 (i.e., the detonator or electric detonator fuse to be used sh1.ll possess an effecth·e detonative strength as ~rent as, or greater tha~, that of oue containing 15 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts _by we!~ht of 80 parts O! fulmrnate of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of pota.ssium); and (3) That, 10 add1t1on to the markmg on the outer package required by a.11 Order of the Secretary of State, made under ~he Exp~osives Act,. 187:i, and i? for.~c for the time being, such Olltcr package shall bear the words, "As defined 1n the ~1st of ?erm1tte<l F.~plosffes ; and, furt~cr, that each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words' Permitted Explos1ve, to be used only with not less than No. 6 detonator," and also with the name of ~be explosi\·e, the name of the manufacturer, the date of manufo.ciure, aud t,he nature and proportion of the mgred1ents. . Benedite, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than OJ parts and not less th.in 9'2 parts of neutral nitrate of ammonium, with uot moro than 7 pal'ts and uot less thau 5 parts of colophony, which does not melt below 200 degrees Fahrenheit, and with no oi,her ingredient: Provided...:... (l ) That the explosive shall be used only when contained in a paper case thorour,h)y waterproofed with ceres:ne, linseed oil and resin, and with or without the addition of cMbonate or bi-cn,rb:Hfate of sodium or alum; (2) That the exploshre shall be nsed only with a detonator or electric det011ltor fuse of not less' strength than that known as No. 8 (i.e., the detonator or electric detonator fuse to be used shall possess an effective detonativP. stren~tb as great as, or gre1ter than, that of one containing 30·9 <•rains of a composition consistinoin every 100 0 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and 20 parts ~f chlora.Le of pot ,ssium); and (3) Tbat, in addition to the marking 011 the outer p:1.ckage requircrl by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, 1875, and in force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words, "As defined in 1,be List of Permitted El(plosi\·es"; and, further, that each inner packao-e shall be clearly marked with the words, "Permitted Explosive, to be used only with not less than No. 8 cfetonator, and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and proportion to the ingredients.

B1·itish Gelignite, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the fiuished explosi,·e of not more than 62 parts and not less than 58 parts of 1,horoughly purified nitro-glycel'ino, with not more than 5 pal'ts and not less than 3 parts of nitro~ot.ton, carefully washed and purified, and not more than 31 parts a.ad not le~s than 26 parts of nitrate of potassium, and hot more than 9 parts and not less than 6 parts of wood-meal, and with no other ingredient ; the whole being uniformly incorporated and of such a character and consistency as not to be liable to exudation ; Provided(1 ) That the explosiv.? shall be used only when contained in a uon.watcrpl'Oofed wrapper of parchment paper. ( ;) TI.Jat the explosive shall be used only with a, detonator 01· electric detonator fuse of not less strength th:m that known as No. 6 (i.e., the detonator or electric detonatot· fuse to be use(l shall possess an effective detonati \'e sti-eogth as great as, or greater than, that of 011e cont:1ining 15 grains of a composition consisting in e,·ery 100 narts by weight of 80 pa.rts of fulminate of me1;c11ry an<l 20 parts of chlorate of pot.assium). (3) Toat in addition to the marking on the outer packa.ge required by .~n Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, 18i5, and in force for the time being, such outer package slmll bear the words "As defined in the List of Permitted Explosives"; and, further, that each inner package sha.11 be clearly marked ,vith the words "Permitted Explosi\•e, to be used only with not less than No. 6 detonator," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of mlnufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients; an<l (4) That the explosiYe, if in a frozen condition, shall be thoroughly thawed in a safe a.ncl suitable manner before use.

Bulldog Brnnd G1mpowder, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the 61•isbe1l explosive of not less than 83·5 parts and not more thn.n 86·5 parts of pure saltpetre, with not less than l3 parts or more than 14 parts of charcoal, a.nd not less than l part and not more than 2 pads of purP distilled sulphur, and with not less than I part and 2·5 part~ of moisture, and with no other in~rcdient, the whale being thoroughly well incorporated, and to be of such strength that 5 parts, when exploded in a. lead cylinder as used at th:) H:>me Office Testing Station, will give a result not inferior to that obtained by 4 parts of R.F.G. 2 gunpowder, and to be in the form of grains of a. size to pass through a sieve of 10 meshes to the linear inch, and to be rebined on a sieve of 40 meshes to the linear inch : Provided(}) That the explosiYe may, if so r<:<Juired, be compressed into a pt!llet of density not exceeding l ·4. (2) That the explosive, whether in grain or pellet form, shall not he ta.ken into or used in a mine except when contained in a spark proof brown paper case or cartri,lge. (31 That when the saltpetre is washctl out, the residue of charcoal, after heing dried at 230' Fahrenheit, must lose uot less than 22 per cent. of volatile matter other than sulphur when he:ited to redness in a current of coal gu.s, and that when the said charcoal is burned in air, the residue of mineral matter shall be not more than 5 per cent. (4) That the explosive when in grain shall be in all other respects similar to the sample submitted for test on the 14th March, 1899, and when in pellet form, to that submitted on the 23rd March, 1899. (5) That in addition to the marking on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, 18i5, and in force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words '' As detinet.l in the List of Permitted Explosives·•; and, farther, that each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosive," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the iugredicnts. Cal'bo·gPlatilie, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the finishecl explosive of not more than 40 parts ancl no t less than 37 parts of a mixture of carefully washed nitro-cotton and thol'Onghly purifie,l nitro-glycerine, with not more than 51 parts and 110t less than 43 parts of nitrate of potassium, and with not more than 12 parts and not less tban 9 parts of a mixture of woo<l,me:il and charcoal, proviclerl that the charcoal shall not exceed 3 parts hy weight in every 100 parts by weight of the finished explosive, ancl not more than 2 parts of carbonate of magnesium and with no other iugredicnt; the whole to be i,horoughly mixt>rl or incorporated so as not to be liable to liquefaction or exudation : Providerl-

(1) '!'hat the explosi,·e shall he asetl only when contained in

a, non-waterproof.ill p:i.rchment paper wrapper. (2) That the explosive shall be used only wilh a detonator 01· electric tletonator fuse of not less strength than that known as No. 6 (i.e., the detonator or electric detonator fuse to be usc<l shall possess au effective detonative strength as great as, nr greater than, that of one containing 15 grains of a composition consisting in eYrt.ry 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury aml 20 pa.rts of chlorate of potassium); (3) That in addition to the marking on the outer packa"e required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the J~xplosivcs Act, 1875, a.ncl in force for tho time being, snch outer p1ckage shall bear the words "As defined in tile Lisl nf Pcrmittc1l Explosh·cs"; nn<l, further, thn.t enr·h i1111C'r rn<'knge slin!l he clenrly nrnrkcrl wit~ the words" Pcrmi~tcd Explrisive, to be used ouly with not less than No. G<lcton::.tor," and marked with the name of the explosive, the name of t,hc mo.nufa.cturer, the date of 111anuiact11rc, ancl the miture nnd proportion of the ingrctlic11t1:1; (4) That the explosi,·e, if in a frozen condition, shall be t,horoughly thawed iu a sa.fc and suiLable mu.nucr before ~se..

Caibo11ite

916 Curbo1lite, consistina in every 100 parts by weight of tho fini11hed explosive of not more than 27 p11.rts and.not l~ than 25 pa.rts of thoroughly purified nitro-glycerine, with not more than 36 pares and not. less than 30 parts of mtrate of · barium and nitrate of potassium or either of them, an1l with not more . than 43 parts and not less than 40 parts of woodmeal with or without not more than half a part of sulphnretted benzol and not more than half a part of carbonate of sorlit;m and carbonate of calcium or either of them, and with no other ingredient; the whole being uniformly incorporated a.ad of su.:h character and consistency as not to be lia.ble to exudation : Provided( 1) That that explosive sh:111 be used only when contained in a non-waterproofed wrapper of parchment paper; (:!) Tbat the explosive shall be useJ only with a d~tonator or electric detonator fuse of not less stren~th than t~at known as .No. 6 (i.e., the detonator or eleot-r1c detonator fuse to be used shall possess an effective detonative streooth a.s great as, or greater than, that of one containing 15 grains of a composition con.s isting in every 100 0 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury n.nd 20 parts of chlorate of potassium); (3) T bat in addition to the markiug on the outer package required by 1111 Order of the Secretary of State, ma.de und~r tbe Explosives Act, 1&75, arnl in force for the time bring, such outer package shall bear the words ''As defined m the List of Permitted Explosives"; n.n<l, further, that each inner package shall be clearly marked witb the wortls "Permitted Explosi,·e, to bo used 011ly wilh not less than No. 6 detonator," nnd also with the name of the explosive, th~ name of the manufacturer, the Jato of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients; and (4) That the cxplosirn, if in a fr.>zen condition, s'.iall be thoroughly thawed in a safe and suitable manner before use.

D 1hmenite A, oonsi,ting in every 100 parts hy weight of the finished explosive of not more than 93·5 parts and not less than 91 parts of nitrate of ammonium, with not more tha.n Ci ·5 parts and not less than 4 parts of naphthalene, and with not more than 2·.3 part3 and not lcs3 t.ha.o I pa.rt of bichromate of potassium, and with n~ other ingredient: Prodded(}) That the explosiv.: sh·ill Le used only when contained in pa.per wr,;i.ppers, waterproofed with paraffin wax and re-iin; (2) That tl:ie explosive shall b:? use,l on! y with a dewnator ·Jr electric detonator fuse of not less strength than that known as Nu. 7 (i.e., the detonator or electric detonn.tor fuse to be used shall possess an effective detonative strength as great as, or greater than, that of one containing 23 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulmiua.te of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of potassium); and (3) That in addition to the marking on the outer paokaie required by an Or,ler of the Secretary of State, made under the Kxploi;ives Act, 1875, and in force for the time heiog, such outer package shall bear the words "As defined in the List of Permitted Explosi ,·es"; a.11<1, further, that each inner p:1.okage shall be clearly marked with the worrls "Permitted Explosive, to he used only with not less than No. 7 1leton11tor," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature a.nd proportion of the • i ngredi en ti!. Earthquake P ou:<ler, consisting in every 100 parts of the finished explosive of not more tha.n 81 parts and not less than 78 parts of pure saltpetre, with not more than 2-2 parts and not less than 19 parts of charcoal, and with or without the addition of lth per cent. of pure sulphur, a.ud with no other ingredient, the whole being thoroughly well incorporated, and to be of such strength as when exploded in a lead cylinder as u ;ed at the Home Office Testing Station, will give a result not inferior to that obtainerl with an equal weight of R.F.O. 2 gunpowder, and to be in the form of grains of a size to pass through a sieve of 11 meshes to the linear inch, and to be retained by a sieve of 40 meshes to the linear inch : , Provided( l ) That the gunpowder shall not be taken into or used in a miue except when contained in a parchment pa.per case or wrapper. (:?) That when the saltpetre is washed out of the resi1lue of charcoal dried at 230° Fa.hr. must lose not less t han 56 per cent. by weight of volatile matter when heated to redness in a current of coal gas, and tbat when the said charcoal is bu med in air the residue of mineral matter or ash shall not exoeerl l ·5 per cent. by weight. (3) That the explosive shall be in all other respects similar to the sample snbmitte<l fo r test on t-he 15th August, 1898. (4) Tbat, in addition to the marking on the onter package required by an Order of the Reoretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, 18i.3, and in force for the time being, such outer package sball bear the words "As defined in the List of Permitted E,-.plosil·es" ; and, further, that each inner package shall be clearly marked wit h the words "Permitted E xplosi\·es," and alsJ with t,he name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the cla.te of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients. E'lerlronite No. 9, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the finished explosirn of not more than 96 parts and not less than 94 parts of neutral nitrat.e of ammonium, with not more than 6 parts and not less than 4 parts of wood meal aud starch, and with no other ingredient : Provided( I) That the explosi vc shall be used only when contained in a waterproof m~tal case marle of an alloy of lead and tin or in I\ paper wrapper ,,·ate1·prr.ofed with oeresine; (2) That the explosive shall be used only with a detonator or electric detonator fuse of not foss strength than that known a.s No. G (i.e., the detonn.tor or electric detonator fuse to be usc<l shall possess au effe~ti ,·e detonative strength as great as, or greater than, t.ltat of one containing 15 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts uy weight of 80 pa.rts of fulminate of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of potassium); and (3) That in addition to the marking on the outer package required by a.n Order of the Secretary of State made under the Explosives Ad, 18i5, and in force for the time beiug, such outer package shall bear the words "As defined in the List of Permitted Explosives•· ; an,!, further, that each inner package shall be clearly markP..i with the words " Permitted Explosiw!," to be used only with not less than No. G detonator," and also with the name of the explosive, the n(l.me nf the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and the proportion of the ingredient!'. Elerti-onite Ko. 3, c.>nsisting in every 100 pm·ls uy weight of the fini~hed explosive or not more than 75 per cent. and not less than iO parts of neatra.l nit.rate of ammonium ; with not more than 21 parts a.nrl not less ihan 16 parts of nitrate of hari11m ; and with not more than 9 parts and uot less l.han 6 p::irts of a mixture of wood-meal, slightly charred, starch, and pure pine resin which does not melt below 200° Faltr., and with no other ingredient, and t o be in the form of grains of a size to pas3 througl1 a sio,·c of 12 meshes to t,he linear iuc:h : l'rovi1le,l( I) That the explosh·c s.hall be usell only when oontuine<l in a paper wrapper wa.tcrproofe:1 with ceresine, or in a case or lea,! lhoro11ghly w,iterproofccl ; {'.?) That the cxplosi,·c sl1all he used 011ly witli a detonator or dcctrio detonator fuse of not less st1·engt.h t han that kn,,wn as ~o. 7 (i.e., the 1lct.onato1· or clc:ctrio dcton:~t,or fuse to be used shall possess an effective detonath·e stren~th as gl'•'at :J.!'t, or greater than, that of one containing 23 grains of a composition consisting in e\·ery 100 parts by weight of SO p,irts of fulminate of mcronry and 20 parts of chlora.tc of potas.;ium); (:l) l.'hat the cxplosiYc sha ll be in all other respects similar to the sample submitted for test ou the 8th June, 18S9; and (4) That in a<lclition to the ma.1·king 011 the outer package reqnire,l by n.n Order of the ~eeretary of State, made under the 1£xpl'1si,·c3 Act, 1S7,>, anti in furcc for the time being, such outer package sha.11 bea.r the words "As defined in the List of Permitte<l ExplosiYes"; and, further, that. each iuner package shall be clearly marked with the worrls "Permitted Explosi,·o, to he uscJ only with not less than No. 7 ,lt:tona.tor," (l.111l also with the nn.me of the cxµlnsirn, thti na.111c of the manufacturer, th~ date of 11rn.uufa.ctu~e, and tl,e mture an~l proportion of the ingretlient'S. }!;!,,zJlwnt Brcind G111111owd1r, cousist,ing in every 100 p,\rts hy weight of the fi11i:1hc1l explosil•e of not more than 76 pa.rt-sand not. less than 74 parts of pu1e s;1Jtpetre, with not more than 15~ parts ar<l not less t.han 14l parts of charcoal, and not more th:in I I p:\rts and no~ less tluu Oparts of pure distilleJ sul1•lrnr, anJ with no other ingredient, the whole being · thoroughly

917 thoroughly well incorporated, and to be of such strength as, when exploded in a lead cylinder as used at the Home Office Testing Station, will give a result not inferior to that obtained with an equal weight of IL F. G. 2 gunpowder,and to be in the form of grains of a size to pass through a sieve of 11 meshes to the linear inch : Provided— (1) That the gunpowder shall not be taken into or used in a mine except when contained, together with neutral oxalate of ammonium in the proportion of 1 part by weight of oxalate of ammonium to 2 parts by weight of gunpowder, in a spark-proof brown paper case or cartridge (Elephant Brand) in which there shall intervene between the gunpowder and the oxalate of ammonium a diaphragm of such strength and character as will effectually prevent any admixture of the two ; (2) That there shall not be taken into or used in a mine any case or cartridge containing more than 9 oz. of the said gunpowder ;• that every case or cartridge shall be inserted intact in the hole, and that nor more than one case or cartridge at time shall be inserted ; (3) That no shot with the said gunpowder shall be fired unless properly stemmed with an amount of stemming not less than would be sufficient for a charge of 9 oz. of ordinary gunpowder ; (4) That the cases or cartridges shall be packed in thoroughly waterproofed wrappers, 'bags, or other receptacles, each containing not more than 5 lb. of gunpowder ; and (5) That in addition to the marking on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State, male under the Explosives Act, 1875, and in force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words " As defined in the List of Permitted Explosives "; and, further, that each cartridge shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosive," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients. Elephant Brand Gunpowder No. 2, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 76 parts and not less than 74 parts of pure saltpetre, with not more than 15i parts and not less than 14 parts of charcoal, and not mare than II parts and not less than 9 parts of pure distilled sulphur, and with no other ingredient, the whole to be thoroughly well incorporated, and to be of such strength as when exploded in a lead cylinder, as used at the Home Office Testing Station, will give a result not inferior to that obtained with an equal weight of R. F. G. 2 gunpowder, and to be in the form of grains of a size to pass through a sieve of 11 meshes to the linear inch : Provided— (1) That the gunpowder shall not be taken into or used in a mine except when contained, together with pure bi-carbonate of sodium in the proportion of one part by weight of bi-carbonate of sodium to two parts by weight of gunpowder, in a spark-proof brown paper case or cartridge (Elephant Brand) in which there shall intervene between the gunpowder and the bi-carbonate of sodium a diaphragm of such strength and character as will effectually prevent any admixture of the two. (2) That there shall not be taken into or used in a mine any case or cartridge containing more than 9 oz. of the said gunpowder ; that every case or cartridge shall be inserted intact in the hole, and that not more than one case or cartridge at a time shall be inserted. (3) That no shot with the said gunpowder shall be fired unless properly stemmed with an amount of stemming not less than would be sufficient for a charge of 9 oz. of ordinary gunpowder. (4) That the cases or cartridges shall be packed in thoroughly waterproofed wrappers, bags, or other receptacles, each containing not more than 5 lb. of gunpowder ; and (5) That in addition to the marking on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of. State, made under the Explosives Act, 1875, and in force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words " As defined in the List of Permitted Explosives " ; and, further, that each cartridge shall be clearly marked with the words " Permitted Explosive," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients. Faversham Powder, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 87 parts and not less than 83 parts of nitrate of ammonium, with not more than 14 parts and not less than 9 parts of thoroughly purified di-nitro-benzol, with not more than 2 parts and not less that 1 part of chloride of ammonium and not more than 3 parts and not less than 2 parts of chloride of sodium, and with no other ingredient ; the whole being uniformly incorporated ; Provided— (1) That the explosive shall be used only when contained in a case of paper thoroughly waterproofed with paraffin wax, and with or without a lead nozzle ; (2) That the explosive shall be used only with a detonator or electric detonator fuse of not less strength than that known as 6i (i e., the detonator or electric detonator fuse to be used shall possess an effective detonative strength as great as, or greater than, that of one containing 19 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of potassium) ' • (3) That in addition to the marking on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, 1875, and in force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words As defined in the List of Permitted Explosives" ; and, further, that each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosive, to be used only with not less than 6i detonator," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients. Kynite, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 27 parts and not less than oughly purified nitro-glycerine, with not more than 36 parts and not less than 30 parts of nitrate of barium, 2.5 parts of thor and not more than 43 parts and not less than 40 parts of wood-meal, and with not more than half a part of carbonate of sodium, and with no other ingredient ; the whole being uniformly incorporated and of such character and consistency as not to be liable to exudation : Provided— (1) That the explosive shall be used only when contained in a non-waterproofed wrapper of vegetable parchment ; (2) That the explosive shall be used only with a detonator or electric detonator fuse of not less strength than that known as No. 6 (i.e., the detonator or electric detonator fuse to be used shall possess an effective detonative strength as great as, or greater than, that of one containing 15 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of potassium) ; (3) That in addition to the marking on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State made under the Explosives Act, 1875, and in force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words " As defined in the List of Permitted Explosives" ; and, further, that each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words " Permitted Explosive, to be used only with not less than No. 6 detonator," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients ; and (4) That the explosive, if in a frozen condition, shall be thoroughly thawed in a safe and suitable manner before use. ►ynoch Gelignite, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 63 parts and not less than 54 parts of thoroughly purified nitro-glycerine, with not more than 5 parts and not less than 3 parts of nitrocotton, carefully washed and purified, and not more than 34 parts a"d not less than 26 parts of nitrate of potassium, and not more than 9 parts and not less than 6 parts of wood-meal, and with or without not more than 1 part of chalk, and with no other ingredient ; the whole being uniformly incorporated and of such character and consistency as not to be liable to exudation : Provided— (1) That the explosive shall be used only when contained in a non-waterproofed wrapper of parchment paper ; (2) That the explosive shall be used only with a detonator or electric detonator fuse of not less strength than that known as No. 6 (i.e., the detonator or electric detonator fuse to be used shall possess an effective detonative strength as great as, or greater than, that of one containing 15 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of potassium) ; (3)

918 (3) That in addition to the markiug on the outer package requirc,d by an Order of the ·secretary of State, made under the Explosive':! Act, 1875, and in force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words "Ae defined in the List of Permitted Explosives"; and, further, that each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosh•e, to be used only with not less than No. 6 detonator, " and also with the name of the explosive, the name of th~ manufacturer, the date of m:mufaoture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients ; and (4) That the explosive, if in a frozen condition, shall be thoroughly thawed in a safe and suitable manner before use. Nrth,uen'.~ Gelignite, comisting in every lOJ parts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 63 parts and not less than 54 parts or thoroughlyjurifiod nitro-gtycerine, with not more than 5 parts and not less than 3 parts of nitrocotton carefully washed and purifie , not more than 34 parts and not less than 26 parts of nitrate of potassium, and not more than 10 parts and not less than 6 pnrts of wood-meal, and with or without not more than half a part of chalk, and with no other ingred:ent; the whole being uniformly incorporated and of such character and consistency as not to be liable to exudation ; Provided(}) 'rha.t the explosive shall be used only when contained iu a non-waterproofed wrapper of parchment paper; (2) That the explosive shall Le used only with a.<letonat.or or electric deton:i,tor fuse of not less strength than that known aa No. 6 (i.e, the detonator or electric detonator fuse to be used shall possc-ss an effective d etonative strength as great as, or grea.ter th,rn, thit of one containing 15 grains of a co:npusition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and 20. parts of chlorate of pot.assium); (3) That, in addition to the markini on the outer p~ckage_reqmred Ly an Orcler of the Secretary of State, mll{ie under the Rxplosi\·es Act, 1875, a.net m force for the tune bemg, such outer package shall bear the words, " As defined in the List of Permitted Explosives " ; and, further, thnt each inner package shal~ be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosive, to be nsed only wi1,h not less than No. 6 detonator," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the no.lure and proportion of the ingredients ; and · {4) That the explosive, if in a frozen con lition, shall b'! thoroughly tliawed in a safe and suitable manner before use.

l I

Nat ional r:eliftnite, consisting in every 10:> parts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 64 parts and not less than 56 parts of thoroughly purified nitro-glycerine, with not more than 6 parts and not less than 4 parts of nitrocotton carefully washed and purified, and not 1no1·e than 3Z parts and not less than 21 pa.rt! of nitrate of potassium and not m~re than 9 parts and not less than 5 pnrts of wood-meal, and with or without not more than half a part of chalk, and with no other ingredient ; the whole being uniformly incorporated and of such character and consistency a.s not to be liable to exudation ; Provided(!) That the explosive shall ba used only when contained in a non-waterproofed wrapper of parchment paper; (2) That the explosive shall be used only with a special detonator or electric d ~tonator fuse containing not less than 15 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 95 parts of fulminate of mercury and 5 parts of chlorate of potassium ; _ (3) That in addit ion to the markin~ on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of ~ta.te, made under the Explosives Act, 1875, and 10 force for the time being, snch outer package shall bear the words, "As defined in the List of P ermjtted Explosives " ; and, further, that each inner package shall b.'l clearly marked with the words, " P ermitted Exvlosive, to be used only with a special detonator," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the elate of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients ; o.nd (4) That the explosive, if in a frozen condition, shn.11 be thoroughly thawed in a F.afe and suitable manner before use. N1Jbel Arde,ir Powde,-, consisting in every 100 po.rte by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 34 parts and not less than 31 1;>arts of thoroughly purified nitro-glycerine, with not more than 14 parts and not less than 11 parts of kieselguhr, with not more than 51 parts and not less than 47 parts of sulphate of magnesium, and with not more than 6 parts and not less than 4 p:irts of nitrat e of potassium, with or without the addition of not more than half a part of carbonate of ammonium and not more than half o. pa.rt of carbon1te of cnlcium, and with no other ingredient; the whole being uniformly inco1·porated and of such character and consistency as not to be liable to exudation ; Provided(!) That the explosive shall be used only when contained in a non-waterproofed wrapper of parchment pit.per. (2) That the explosive shall be used only with a detonator or electric detonator fuse of not less strength than that known as No. 3 (i .e., the rletonator or electric detonator fuse to be used shall possess an effective detonative strength as great as, or greater than, that of one containing 8 grains of a composition consistiug in every 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of potassium) ; (3) That in addition to the marking on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, 1875, and iu force for the time being, such outer pa.cka~e shall bear the words, "As defined in the List of Permitted Explosives"; and, further, that each inner pac1t1,ge shall be clearly marked by the words, "Permitted Explosive, to be used only with not less than No. 3 detonator," and also wiU1 the name of the explosh·c, the _name of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the no.Lure antl proportion of the ingredients; and (4) That the explosive, if in a frozen condition, shall be thorot1ghly thawed in a safe and suitable manner before use. Nobel Carbonite, con~isting in eYery 100 parts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 27 parts and not less than 25 parts of thoroughly puri6eri nitro-glycerine, and not more than 36 parts and not less than 30 parts of nitrate of potassium, and nitrate of barium or either of them, and with not more than 43 parts and not less than 40 pa.rte of woodmeal, with or without not more than half a part of snlphuretted b enzol, and not more than half a part of carbonate of sodium and carbonate of calcium or either of them, and with no other ingredient; ·the whole being uniformly incorporated and of such character and consist.ency as not to be liable to exudation. Pl'ovided(1) That the explosive shall be used only ,,-hen contained in a non-wn.terpr.oofed wrapper of parchment paper; (2) That the explosive sha.11 be nscd only with a detonator or electric detonator fuse of not less strength than that known as No. 6 (i.e.., the detonator or electric detonator fuse to be used shall possess o.n effective detonative skength as great as, or greater than, that of one containing 15 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of potassium); (3) That in addition to the markiug on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, 1875, and in force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words ".A.s defined in the List of P ermitted Explosives" ; and, farther, that each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosive, to be used only with uot le~s than No. 6 d etonator," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients; and (4) That the explosh·e, if in a frozen condition, shall be thoroughly thawed in a safe and suitable manner before use. Nobel Gelignite, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the finished explosive, or not more than 63 parts and not less than 54 parts of thoroughly purified nitro-glycerine, with not more than 5 parts and not less than 3 parts of nitrocotton, cal'efully ~-ashed and purified, not more than 34 parts and not less than 26 parts of nitrate of potassium, and nnt more than 9 parts and not less than 6 pat·ts of woorl-meal and with or without not more than half a pa.rt of chalk, and with no other ingredient; 1,hc whole being uniformly incorpornt,cd, and of such character and consistency as not to be liable to exuclu,t,ion ; :P.ro,·icled ( l ) That the explosive shall be used only when contained in a uon-waterproofetl wrapper of parchment paper; (2) That the cxplosi ve shall be nsed only with a detonat,or or electric d etonator fuse of not less strength than that known as No. 6 (i. e., the detonator or electric detonator fu se to be used shall possess an effective detonati ve strength as great as, 01· greater t,han, that of one containing 15 grains of a composition consisting in evory 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fqlmim1,te of mercury :incl 20 partf' of chlorate of potassium) ; (3)

, I

919

(3) Tha.t in add_ition to the marking on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under ~be Exp~os1ves A ct, _ld75, a.nd in. force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words "As ~efioed rn the List of Permitted Explosn•es" ; and, furth er, that each inner package shall be clearly marked WJth the words "Permitted Explosi,e, to bo used only with not less than No. 6 detonator,'' an<.l also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, Urn dato of manufacture, and t.lw nature and proportion of the ingredients ; a.nd • (4) That the explosive, if in a frozen condition, shall be thoroughly thawed in a safe and suitable manner before use.

Oxalate Blo.,tin;J Powde!·, consisting in_every ~00 parts by weight of the fioi~hed explosive of not more than 73 pii:ts and not less than 69 parts of nitrate of pot11.ss1mn, with not more than 15i parts and not less than 12 part.s of charcoal, with not more than 16! parts and not less than 13~ parts of oxalate of ammonium, and with or without not more than two parts of sulphur, and with no other ingn,dieot; the whole being thoroughly incorporated. Provided(}) That the explosive shall be used only when contained in_ooo-wat<-rproofed wrappers of {a) an alloy of lead and tin or {b) asbestos pape1·. ' (:?) That in addition to the marking on t.be outer package, required by an Ot·der of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, 1876, and in force for the t11ne beina, such outer package shall bear the words "As defined in the List of Permitted Explosives " ; and, further, that "'each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosive," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of maoufactur~, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients. P embrite, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 96 parts and not less than 93 pa.rts of neutral nitrate of ammonium, with not more than 6 parts and not less than 3 parts of vegetable oil of a character approved by the Secretary of State, and with -not more than 2 parts and not less than l part of sulphur, and with or without not more than 1 part of nitrate of b~rinm, and with no other ingredient ; the whole being uniformly incorporated. Provided()) That the explosive shnll be used only when contained in non-waterproofed wrappers of metal-coated paper; (2) That the explosfre shall be used only with a detonator or electric detonator fuse of not less strength than that known as No. 8 (i.e., the detonator or electric detona.tor fuse to be used shall possess an effective detonative strength as great as, or greater than, that of one containing 30·9 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and ?.O parts of chlorate of potassium) ; and (3) That in addition to the marking on the outer package required in the case of this explosh·e by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, 1S75, and in force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words '' As defined in the List of Permitted Explosives"; and, further, that each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosive, to be used only with not less than No. 8 detonator," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients.

Rhanish Gelignite, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 59 parts and not less than 57 par ts of thoroughly purified nitro-glycel'ine, with not more than 3 parts and not less than 2 parts of nitrocotton, carefully washed and purified, not more than 3 l parts and uot less than 28 pa.rts of nitrate of potassium, and not more than 10! parts and not less than 9 parts of woo<l-meal, and with no ot.her ingredient; the whole being uniformly incorporated and of such character and consistency as not to be liable to exudation ; Provided(l ) That the explosive shall be used only when contained in a non-waterproofed wrapper of parchment paper ; (2) That the explosive shall be used only with a detonator or electric detonator fuse of not less strength than that known as No. 6 (i.e, the detonator or electric detonator fuse to be used shall possess an effective detonative strength as great as, or grFater than, that of one cont:lining 15 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts by wei~ht of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and 2J pa.rti of chlorate of potassium); (3) That in addition to the markin~ on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, 1875, and m force for the time being, such outet· package shall bear the words "As defined in the List of Permitted Explosives"; and, further, that ea.ch inner package shall be clearly marked with t he words "Permitted Explosive, to be used only with not less than No. 6 detonator," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and p roportion of the ingredients; and (4) That the explosive, if in a frozen condition, shall be thoroughly thawed in a safe and suitable manner before use.

Robm·ite Xo. 3, consisting in every 100 parts by weight of the finished explosive of not more than 89 parts and not less than 86 part.s of nitrate of ammonium, with not more than 13 parts and not less than 9 parts of thoroughly purified di-nitro-benzol, with or without not more than two parts of chloro-naphthalene containing of chlorine not more than one part, and with no other ingredient; the wbole being uniformly incorporated; P rovided(}) That the explosive shall be used only when contained in a case of paper thot'oughly wa.terproofed with ceresiue ; (2) That the exrlosi,·e shall be usecl only with a special detonator or electric detonator fuse containing not less than 15 grains o a composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 95 parts of fulminate of mercury and 5 parts of chlorate of potassium; and (3) That in addition to the markin~ on the outer package required by an Ordet· of the Secretary of State, mo.de under the Explosives Act, 187:'i, and 111 force for the time being, such out.er package shall bear the words "As defined in the List of P ermitted Explosives"; and, furth er, that each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosive, to l,e used only with a special detonator," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, <late of manufactnre, and ~he nature and proportion of the ingredients.

Smi Gelignite, consisting in e,·ery 100 parts hy weight of the finished explosive of not more than 59 parts and not less than 57 parts of thoroughly purified nitro·glycerin"e, with not more than 3 parts and not less than 2 parts of oitrocotton, carefully washed a.nu purified, not more than 31 parts and not le,s t.han 25 parts of nitrate of potassium, and not morn than JO parts and not less than 8 parts of wood-meal, and with no other ingredient; the whole being uuifonnly incorporated and of such oharacter and consistency as not to be liable to exudation ; Provided(}) That the explosive shnll be used only when contained in a uon-waterproofed wrapper of parchment paper; (2) That the explosive sbo.ll be used only "ith a. detonator or electric detonator fuse of n ot less strength than that known as No 6 (,. e., the detonator or electric <letonatot· fuse to be used shall possess an effective detonative strength as great as, or greater than, that, of one containing 15 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of potassium) ; (3) That in addition to the marking on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, 1 if'>, and in force for the time being, such outer package shall benr the words "As d efined in the List of Permitted Explosi,·cs;" and, furth er, that each inner package shall be clearly marked with the word s •• Permitte1l Explosiv<', to ho u$ed only with not less than No. 6 detonato1·," and also with the name of tbe explosive, the name of the man11facturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients ; and (4) That the explosive, if in a frozen condition, shall be thoroughly thawed in a safe and suitable manner before use. W e,ifalite

920 JVe.~tfalite No. J, consisting in every 100 pa.rts hy weight of the finished explosi\'e of not more than 96 parts and not less than 9! pa.rts of ~eutral nitrate of amm~mium, with not more than 6 parts a.nd not l~ss Wan 4 pa~ts of ~esin, consisting of pure pine resin wluch does not melt below a temperature of 2l0 clegrnes fahr., and with no other mgred1ent ; the whola being uniformly incorporated ; P rovided• (1) That the explosi"c shall be userl only when contninc1l in a non,wat.erproofed wrapper of paper; (2) That the explosi ,·e shn.ll be nsed only with a detonator or electric detonator fuse of uot less strength than that known as No. 8 (i.e., the detonator or electric detonator fuse to be used shall possess an effecth·e detonath·e strength as great as, or greater than, that of one containing 30·9 gr.1ins of a composition consisting in every LOO parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of potassium); and (3) That in addition t o the marking on t!ie outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosh·es Act, 1875, nnd in force for t he time being, r,uch outer package shall bear the words "As ,it-fined in the List of Permitte<l Explosives "; and, further, that each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words " P ermitted Explosive, to be used only with not les'I than No. 8 detonator," and also with tho name of the explosh·e, the nnmc of tlie manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingt·edients. Wtsifalite No. 2, consisting in every 100 parls by weigLt of the finished explosi,·e of not more than 92 parts and not less than 90 parts of neutral nitrate of ammonium, with not more than 5 parts and not less than 3 parts of nitrate of potassium, and with not more than 6 pa1·t'l; and not less than 4 pa.rt,s of resin, consisting of pur,i pine resin which does not melt b(l}ow a temperature of 200 degrees Fain·., and witli no other ingredient; the whole being uniformly incorporated; Provided(!) That the explosive shall be used only when coutainrd in a non-waterproofed wrapper of paper; (2) That the explosive :shall be used only with a detonator OL' electric detonator fuse of not less strength than that known as No. 8 (i.e., the <l1:tonator or electric detonator fuse to be used shall pOS$eSs an effective detonative strength as great as, or greater than that of one containing 30·9 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and 2) parts of chlorate of potassium) ; and (3) That in addition to the markin~ 011 the outer package required by an Orrler of the Secreta1·y of State. made under t he Explosivt:s Act, 1875, and m force for the time being, such outer packet shall heal' the words "As defined in the List of Permitted Explosi\'es"; and, furth er, t hat each inner packet shall be clearly marked with t he word.a "Permit.ted Explosive, to be used only with not less than Ko. 8 detonator," and also with the name of the explosive, the nnme of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingt·edients.

Exhibit No. 19. (NoTE.- The following is a complete list of thenames of permitted explosives (Explosh·cs in Coal Mines Or<lers of the 1st October, 1901, of I.he 17th December, 1901, and the ~ th March, 1902) :-Albionite, Ammonite, Amvis, Aphosite, Arkite, Bellite No. 1, Bellit.e No. 3, Cambrite, Carbonite, Clydite, Dahmenite A, Electrooite (second definition}, Faversham Powder, Haylite No. I, Kynite, Nobel Ardeer Powder, Nobel Ca.rbonite, P it-ite, Roburite No. 3, Sa.xonite, Special Bulldog, Stow-ite, Thunderite, Viotorite, Virito, Westfalite No. 1, Westfolite No. 2.) STATUTORY RULES AND ORDERS, 1902.-No. 277.

Mines.-Coal Mine~. l!:XPLOSIVES IN CoAL M INES 0RDEH OF THE 24TH M,rnca:, 1902. WHEREAS by section 6 of the Coal Mines Regulation Act , 1896, it is en..'\cted that a Secretary of State, on being 1atisfied that any explosive is, or is likely to become, dangerous, may by order prohibit the use thereof in any mine or in any class of mines, either absolutely or subject to conditions ; and whereas in pursuance of this power an order has been made by me entitled "The Explosives in Coal Mines Order, of the 1st October, 1901 ," I hereby, in pursuance of the power conferred on me by the said sectiou, make the following order amending the order aforesaid :(I) 'l'he Explosives in Coal Mines Order of the let October, 1901, shall lie amended, and shall take effect as if the explosives named and defined in the Schedule to this Ord et· were named and defined iu the Schedule to that Order, and in all respects as if t be Schedule to this Order formE>d part of the Schedule to that Order; (2) This Order may be cited as the Rxplosivcs in Coal ~ ines Order of the 24th March, 1902. CHAS. 'C. RITC HIE, H ome Office, Whitehall, 24Lh l\farch, 1902. One of His 1fajesty's Principal Secrct.:i.ries of State. THE

ScHEDCLE. Li~t of P1-rmilted Erplosives •

Albionite, consisting in c,·ery J00 parts by weigh t of the finished explvsiYc of not mo1 o than 16 parts and not less than 14 parts of oxalate of ammonium, with not more than 86 parts and not, less than 84 parts of a mixture consisting in e,·ery 100 parts by weight of not more t han 83 parts and not less than EO! rarts c,f thc,roughly purifie<l nitre-glycerine, with not more than 7 parts nml not less than 5 parts of nitro-cotton, carefully washed and purified, with not m,.,re than lOi parts and not less than 8! parts of nitrate of potassium, with not more thaf1 3 parti:1 anJ nut less than 2 parts of woorlmeal, provided that snch wood-meal shall contain not more than 15 par cent. anJ· not less tba.n 5 per cent,. by weight of moisture, anrl with not more than half a part. of chalk, anll with 110 other i11grcdi~nt, the who!e being uniformly incorporated and of such characte1· and consistency as not t..> be liable to oxuda~ion. Provided-(!) That the explosive shall be usocl only when contained in o. 11011-\\·aterproof wra.pper of parchment paper: (2) That the explosive shall be used only with a detonator or electric detonator of not less strength than that known as No. 6 (i.e., the detonator or electric detonator to be used shall possess an effective detonative strength as great as, or greater than, that of one containing 15 grains of a composition conJist.ing in e,·ery 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulmi nate of mercm y an<l 20 parts of chlorate of pot.assium); (:l) That the explosi\'ts has been made at l he works of Nobel's Exp)l)~ives Company (Limited), at Ar<leer, in t he county of Ayr; ( I) That the explosil·e is in a!l respects similar to the sample submitted to test on the 23rd day of January, 1902 ; (5) That in addition to t he ma.rking on the outer package required by an Order of the·Secretary of State, made under the Explosives Act, 1875, and in force for the time being, such outer par:kage shall beat· the words "As defined in the list of P e1·mitted Ex\llosives"; and, further, that. each inner packa,ge shall he clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explos1\'e, to be used only with not less than No. 6 detonator," and also with the name of the explosive, the name of the manufacturer, the date and place of manufacture, and the nature aud proportion of the ingredients; and (6) That t.he explosive, if in a fro!en condition, shall be thoroughly thawed in a safe and suitable manner before use. A rkite, consisting in e,·ery 100 parts by weight of the finished explosfre of not more t han 54 parts and not less than 51 parts of thoroughly purified nitro-glycerine, with not more 1han 4 parts and not less than 3 parts of nitro-cotton; Cl\refully washed and purified, with not more t.han 23 parts and not less than 21 parts of nitrate of potassium, with not more than 8 parts and not less than 6 parts of wood-meal, provided that such wood -meal shall contain not more than

15 . · ~This list is subject .to re\'isi~n in accordance with l'esult, of official tests mnde from time to time in the Government Testing Station at \\ oohnch. All the cxplosffes now in th~ Schedule hal'c pMsltl the test ns laid tlown in the Home Office Memc rand um of the 18th OctoLer, 1899.

.,. I

i." .

~• l!

921 15 per cent. and ~ot less tha~ 5 per c~nt. by weight of moisture, with not more than 16 parts and not less t~an 14 parts of ox?-late o_f nm~o~mm, and with or without not more than half a part of chalk, and with no other ingredient, the whole being uruformly incorporated, and of such cbar.i.ter and consistency as not to be liable to exudation. Provided(!) That the explosi~e shall be used only wuen contained in a non-waterproo[ed wrapper of vegetable parchment; (2) That the explqs1ve shall be used ouly with a detonator or electric detonator of not less strength than that known a'3 No. 6 (i. e., the detonator or electric detonator to be used shall possess an effective detonative strength a~ great as, or greater than, that of one containina 15 grains of a composition consistina in every 100 parts by weight of 0 • 80 parts of fulm~nate of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of potassium); (3) That the explosive has been made at the works of Kynoch, Limited, at Kynochtown, near Stanford-le-Hope, m the County of ~sse.x,.or at Ferrybank, Arklow, in the County of Wicklow; (4) That ~he ext>l?s1ve 1~ 10 all re_spects similar to the sample submitted to test on the 29th day of January, 1902 ; (5) That 10 ad~1t10n to .he~1:1ark10$ on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made und~r the Explosives Act, 18,a, and 10 force for the time beinO' such outer package shall bear the words "As defined m the List of Permitted Explosives"; and, further, that ;~ch inner package shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosive, to be used only with not less than No. 6 detonator," and also with the name of the !xplos~ve, the name of the manufacturer, the date and place of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the mgred1ents ; and (6) That the explosive, if in a frozen condition, shall be thoroughly thawed in a safe and suitable manner before use.

Exhibit No. 20. STATUTORY RULES AND ORDERS, 1902. - No. 783.

Mine.-Coal Mines. TuE En>Losrvxs rn CoAL MtNEs ORDER OF THE 10TH OCTOBER, 1902. Wlierea.s by section 6 of the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1896, it is enacted that a Secretary of State, on being satisfied that any_ explosive is, or is likely to become, dangerous, may by Order prohibit the use thereof in any mine or any class of mioes, either absolutely or subject to conditions; and whereas in pursuance of this power an Order has been made, entitled" The Explosives in Coal Mines Order oft.he 1st October, 19.01," · I hereby, in pursuance of the power conferred on me by the said section, m;i.ke the following Order amending the Order aforesaid : ( l) The Explosives in Coal Mines Order of the 1st October, 1901, shall be amended, and shall take effect as if the explosives named and defined in the Schedule to this Order were named and defined in the Schedule to that Order, and in all respects as if the Schedule to this Order formed part oft-he Schedule to that Order. (2) This Order may be cited as the Explosives in Coal Mines Orrler of the 10th October, 1902. A. AKERS-DOUGLAS, Home Office, Whitehall, 10th Octobe!', 1902. One of His Majesty's Pt·incipal Secretaries of State. SCHEDULE, Fractm·ite, consisting of the following mixture:Not mor!a(;!nby wei~;t less than Nitro-glycerine ..... .... ... ... ... . . ...... .... .. .... .. .. .. .... .... .. ... 53! 51! Nitro-cotton . . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. .. . .. .. . 4 3 P otassium nitrate ....... .. .............. , . .. . . . . ... . .. . ... ... . .. .. . .. . 25 21 W oodmeal .. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. . . .. . . .. . .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 7 5 Ammonium oxalate ....... ... ... .... .. ... . .. .. .... .. ... .... ...... . . 16 14 the woodmeal to contain not more than 17 per cent. and not less than 5 per cent. by weight of moisture. Provided(!) That the explosive shall be used only when contained in a non-waterproofed wrapper of parchment paper; (2) That the explosive shall be used only with a detonator or electric detonator of not less strength than that known as No. 6 (i.e., the detonator or electric detonator to be used shall possess an effective detonative strength as great a.s, or greater than, that of one containing 15 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulminate of mercury and 20 parts of chlorate of potassium); (3) That the ex plosive bas been made at the works of the British Explosives Syndicate, Limited, at Pitsea, in the county of Bssex ; (4) That the explosive is in all respects similar to the sample submitted to test on the 31st July, 1902; (5) That in addition to the marking on the outer package required by an Order of the Secretary of State, made under the Explosires Act, 1875, and in force for the time being, snob outer package shall bear the words "As defined in the List of PerQ'litted Explosives"; and, further, that each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosh•e, to be used only with not less than No. 6 detonator," and also with the name of the explosi,·e, the uame of the manufactiirer, the date and place of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients ; and (6) That the explosive, if in a frozen condition, shall be thoroughly thawed in a safe and suitable manner before use,

Normanite, consisting of the following mixture:-

•

Parts by weight. Not more than Not Jess than

Nitro-glycerine ....................... , ....................... . 34! 32! 2 ] Nitro-cotton...... .. .. ..... . ................................ .. ....... . P otassium nitrate ........ ........................ .. .............. .. 46! 42\ W oodmeal ............................... .... :............. . ....... .. 9 7 2 l Charcoal .. . .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . .. . . .. .. .. . .. . .......... . 12 10 Ammonium oxalate ........ .. ................ ... . ........ ........ . the woodmeal anJ. charcoal together to contain not more than 20 per cent. and not less than 10 per cent. by weight of moisture. Provided(!) That the explosive shall be used only when contained in a non-waterproofed wrapper of parchment paper; (2) That the explosive shall be used only with a detonator or electric detonator of not less strength than that known as No. 6 (i.e., the detonator or electric detonator to be used shall possess an effective detonative strength as great as, or greater than, that of one containing 15 grains of a composition consisting in every 100 parts by weight of 80 parts of fulmin:i.te of mercury and 20 pa1·ts of chlorate of potassium) ; (3) That the explosive bas been made at the works of the Cotton Powder Company (Limited), at Uplees Marshes, near Faversham , in the county of Kent, 0 1· at their works near Melling, in the county of Lancashire; (-!) That the explo3ive is iu all rtlspects simibr to the 1:ample submitted to test on the 11th August, 1902; (5) That in a<ldition to the marking on the onter packaoe required by an Order of the Secretary of State made under the Explosives Act, 187/i, and iu force for the time being, such outer package shall bear the words "As defined in the List of Permitted Explosives "; and, fu1·ther, that each inner package shall be clearly marked with the words "Permitted Explosive, to lie used only with not less than No. 6 detonator," and also with the name of t.he explosive, and name of the manufacturc?r, the dat e aud place of manufacture, and the nature and proportion of the ingredients ; a.ad (6) The explosive, if in a frozen condition, shall bo thoroughly thawed in a safe and suitable manner before use. Exhibit No. 21.

10825

29-A

Exhibit No. 21, FIRES IN THE SOUTHERN AND SOUTH-WESTERN DISTRICT COLLIERIES DURING 1902. Name of Colliery.

Date of Fire.

Cause of Fire and Remarks.

South Clifton ............. ..... 17 May ......... .. Brattice cloth in heading on fire, and accumulation of fire-clamp resulting therefrom. Do ................ . 4 June .......... . Caused by naked light. Brattice burnt. South Bulli ............ .. ..... .. 7 , , ········ .. . Fire in manhole near tunnel mouth. South Clifton ................ .. 15 August Naked light, brattice cloth burnt, and accumulation of gas. .......... ....... . 18 ,, Do Naked light. First Left bratticc cloth, 8 and 9 bords, burnt. ...... .. ..... .. .. 19 ,, Do Naked light. No. 8 Left brattice sheet burnt. ................ .. 26 ,, Do Naked light. Brattice sheet burnt, No. 2 Left, 15 and 16 bords. .............. .. 15 September ... Naked light. Bra.ttice burnt. Do Corrimal ............... ........ . 19 ,, Fire in goA.f ca.used by ignition of bottom fire-damp.

Exhibit No. 22. FIIlES IN NORTHERN DISTRIOT COLLIERIE3 DURING 1002. Nnme of Mine.

Date of Fire.

Cause of Fire and Remarks.

1902. Greta .... .............. .. ....... 25 February ..... . Gob fires in ol<l workings which had been abandone·d many ylmrs to the side of south level. Oause.-Spontaneous combustion, accelerated \3y the heat produced from a. fire.that had started in the previous ~ar, and through which the mine had to be sealed down. Bnrwood .. . .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . 11 April Naked light igniting some inflammable material through openings in the brick arched roof of a. stenton, in which a tension t rolley was placed. Brown's No. 2 Colliery .. 3 July.......... .. Some loose timber by side of engine-plane found on fire during the eyening. Cause unknown, but probably a naked light. Stockton . . . . .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .. 19 September .. . UpseLting of a kerosene lamp in pump-room at downcast shaft bottom. Extinguished by water from pump column._ Trifling damage. Men withdrawn for the day. Kayuga ......... ........ ...... 23 ,, Spontaneous combustion. A fall of roof coal and stone had occurred at the face of a bord, and lying on heap of fine slack had induced heat which finally broke out into acth·e combustion. Newcastle Coal Mining 25 Presumably a nakeu light, which set fire to a dirt stopping on the side of " Company's B Pit. engine-plane. Occurred between 7 and 8 a.m. Men withdrawn for the day. Fire put out by water. T rifling damage. Seaham ························ 25 ,, Ignition of gas by naked light which set fire to a dirt stopping. Men withdrawn Fire put out by water same day. Two small explosions of gas (which happily did no damage) when fire was being subdued. Stockton ... . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. 23 October Gob fire in old No. 3 district indicated hy smoke on engine-plane and by the heating of two brick stoppings. Mine stopped on 29th October, , stoppings broached, and the fire dealt with. Mine resumed work. Brown's No. 4 .............. 27 ,, Cause unknown, but spontaneous combustion unlikely. CanYas brattice and small coal on fire in a working bore!. Found by deputy on A. Monday morning. Fire subdued in about two honrs when men of t hat district were admitted. Heated material subsequently sent out of mine.

Exhibit No. 23. ROYAL Co11tMISSION OF I NQUIRY RESPJW'l'lNO THE Mou.NT KEMBLA COLLIERY DISARTER •

•

The Unde1· Secretary, Department of Mines and .Agriculture,Court-house, Wollongong, 9th January, 1903. Sir, I have the honor, by d irection of the above Commission, to ask that you will be so good as to forward for their information, if it can be obtained, a copy of the report on an accidont which occurred through a fall of the roof of a colliery in South Wales. The Commission are not able to give the date of the report. I have, &o., J. GARLICK, Secretary to the Commission. (M. 1903-537. ) Dapartment of Mines and Agriculture, · Sydney, New South Wales, 16th January, 1903. J. Garlick, Esq., Secretary to the Royal Commission on the Mount Kembla Colliery Disaster, Court-house, Wollongong,Sir, With forther reference to your letter of t he 9th instant, asking for a copy of the II report of an accident which occurred through a fall of the roof of a colliery in South Wales," I am directed to inform you that search has been made for the report desired, and I enclose herewith a copy of a memorandum by Mr. Winchester, of the Coal Fields Office at Newcastle, together with copies of the accounts of two explosions which may perhaps have some bearing on the question under consideration by the Mount Kembla Commission. I have. &c., EDWARD F. PITTMAN, Under Secretary (Per A. F.). M.EMORANDU!\f,

· Coal Fields Office, Dep11.rtment of Mines, Newcastle, 14th January, 1903. To A .. A. Atkinson, Esq., Chief Inspector of Coal Mines, "Royal Hotel," Wollongong,S1r, In reply to your memorandum to hand t his morning I have caused a thorough search to be made in the Imperial .Reports for the South Wales Districts during the last fifteen yea.rs, but have failed to find any mention of explosion that happened when no one was in pit and was thought to have been due to a fall of stone. I enclose, however, account:, of two explosions which occurrod in this District and which may have been caused Yours, &c., solely t.hrough fa.Us of stone. HERBERT WINCHESTER.

Taken

"'f

..1

928 Ta.ken from pages 9 and 10 of Inspecto r J . T . .Robson's Report on the South Walos District for the year 1892. FER~DALE COLLIERY, Ou.&10RoANsnmE.

On 6th December, at Ferndale Colliery, an explosion occurred in the 4-foot seam, by which four repairers were more or less burned. At a point, a.bout :260 yards from the downcast shaft a main heading bad been under repair for four days, and although only two pairs of the old timbers had been removed, the roof had continued to fall through the openingabout 12 feet wide and 6 feet long-to such nn extent that by Monday night 200 trams of rubbish, mostly small stuff, hacl fallen from it. About 1 a. m. on Tuesday four repairers were working at it. They bad jnst got in new arms, aml were about to fix a collar, when, feadng another fall was about to take place, they had to retreat from the place. As it was meal-time, they decided to take their meal. Two of lhem sat down, or were on the point of sitting down, 15 or 20 yards on the outbye side of the opening, and the other two were walking back on the same side to get their food, when an explosion occurred. They were all burned, one of them rather seriously. The night o,•erman and two firemen were io a cabin near the downcast; they heard the explosion, and saw a cloud of dust driven out, filling the roadway and entering the cabin, a.nd for a few minutes they could not see the electric lights with which the shaft sidings and cabin were lighted. They went a.t once towards the workings, and met the four rep11.ircra coming out in the dark. There was a good deal of after-damp on the heading, an<l they could not a t once reach the place where the repairers had been at work. Shortly afterwards the after-damp cleared away sufficiently to enable the officials to examine the place and the workings generally. It was found that another large fall had taken place at the same spot. 1. made a careful examination of the place and roadways affected on the following day, and failed to come to a satisfactory conclusion as to how this explosion has been causerl. I was satisfied, however, that it had originated at the fall; that a blast came outwuds to the shaft, and another went inwards some hundreds of yards. On the iobye aide two wooden doors oo the main headiog-o,•er 100 yards distant-were blown down and inwards. Another ,voo<len door on a heading 420 yards away by the nearest route was blown partly open. The safety-lamps belon~g to the injured men were .found, two of them about 50 yards, and the others 20 and 14 yards on the outbye side of the fall. Theae lamps were locked, in their ordinary condition, and did not appear to have been in fire. The men strenuously denied that a naked light of &ll-Y kind had been used. One of them, whose la.mp was found 20 yards from the fall declared that he saw Bame come from the fall when it took place. The Agent (Mr. Hannah) and the ~Ianagt:r (Mr. Evans) appeared to favour this Yiew, ·aod in sopport of it some pieces of stone of a hard, flinty nature were pointed out to me among the debrisat the place, and which they supposed might have produc~d sparks of sufficient intensity, by friction in falling, as to ignite gas which had ~itber come off with the fall or had accumulated in lhe large cavity previously. If the men's statements are accurate, this in'ust have been the cause of ignition. There is no difficulty in accounting ior the prrsence of gas in the cavity formed by the fall before the explosion. 'I'he heading was not a main intake, and only the air-about 2,500 rub:c feet per minute-which leaked through the twn doors referred to, passed through it. It was about 7 Jeet high under the timbers, and 12 feet wide a\ the place, being on a. double parting. No gas had, it seems, been discovered at any of the examinations made during the clearing away of the debris from the fall; but as it was both extremely difficult and dangerous to get up into such~ place to examine the highest point, the probability is that the examination for gRs only extended as far as the· firemen could reach above the timbers, which would be several feet below the apex of the cavity. I think a quantity of fire-damp gradually accumulated above the point influenced by the small current of air passing along the heading, nod that it was forced down by the last fall. One of the safety-lamps found near the fall was shielded by an ordinary loose-fitting tin shield, with rather large holes in it; and as there can be no doubt lamps of this description will not stand very high velocities, such as might be produced by a heavy fall from a height of 30 feet, it appears to me th:.t this lamp was the m;>st probable means of ignition.

Exhibit No. 24,

Taken from page 11 of Inspector J . T. R-obsQn's report for the South W ales District for the year 1897. DEEP N,H"IGATIO::-r CoLLIER\", GLAMORGANSIIIRE,

Date and hour: 23rd No,·ember, 1897, 5 a.m. Person injured: Repairer. R emarks : Burned while extin$uisbing some brattice cloth on fire, caused by an explosion of gas, either the result of sparks from a fall of roof or a. defective lamp in proximity to the fall; 4-foot seam ; safety-lamps exclusively used. " With reference to the injury at Deep Navigation, entered as a non-fatal explosion, it seems necessary to make some further remarks. There can be no doubt that a slight explosion occurred almost, if not exactly, at the moment of the fall of roof near where t.he injured man and his assistant were dressing timbers on the roacl. Their safety-lamps (Ackroyd and Best's type), when examined soon afterwards, were found in proper condition, with no sign of Ba.me having passed the gauzes. Still, it is possible that flame did so pass, and that the explosion may be accounted for by gas being forced from the cavity by the fallin& roof upon the lamp. The men, however, declared that they heard the fall, turned and saw flame, and then approachea the burning brattice cloth under the cavity, and that it was in putting out this fire tha.t one bf them was burned. If their ,·ersion is correct, then the explosion must have been caused by sparks from the rock roof igniting g:i.s when the roof fell, and points to another source of clange1· to which fiery mines are li~ble."

Exhibit No. 25. AUTHORITIES ON MINING PARTICULARLY IN REFERENCE TO COLLIERY EX PLOSIONS. Coal-dust Commission, first and second reports. Galloway, Lectures on Explosions in Coal-mines. Donald Stuart, "Coal-dnst as an a.gent in Explosions." . . , H ughes, Text Book of Coal-mining. . Atkinson, W. N., and J.B., "Explosions m Coal-mines.' Imperial Inspector's Reports. . . . . . . . Ahel, Sir F. A., Paper on "Accidents 10 Coal-mines," C1v1l Eng1oeers' Transactions. Scottish Mining Institute. Pa.per by J. B. Atkinson.

R eferences and ,:J..uthorities. Coal-dust TheoryRoyal Commission, of which Mr. Chamberlain was Chairman. Theory of, on page 1. Godfrey, Lushington, second report of Commission. ,, ,, 8 of above. ,, Refereoce3 to Explosions of Flour-dust, &r., attached hereto. Opinions re 1caterin[J Coal-dust , Coal-dust CommissionH. \V . .Martin, pages 23, q. 5403, &c. Hood, q. 5985-5989. Bell, List of Examples, pages 157 and 15S. Hall, q. 303-306, 457--4&'2. Atkinson, J. B., 6i9-688.

924 QUANTITY WATER REQUIRED FOR WATERING COAL•DUST.

•

Coal-dust Commission, q. 5406. . . . Colliery Manager, ;t gallon per square yard = 3 gallons per hoeal yard m roadway 12 ft. x 6 ft . =5,280 gallons per mile. Fed. Inst. Mining Transactions, T. A. Southern, page 367, Yol. VIII. Advantages of watering Coal-dust. Reduction of Temperature. Hughes on Coal-mining, page 402, near bottom. Cooling the Air and laying the Dust. Fed. Inst. Transactions, vol. XVI , page 479. Damp places arresting Explosion-s. Coal-dust Commission·Ashworth, q. 4644. Foreman, q. 5071, 5066. Wilkinson, q. 5581. Atkinson, J. B., q. 741. Hall, q. 304-325-326. Fed. Inst. Mining Transactions• Vol. VIII, page 51, last four lines of Mr. Hall's remarks. Vol. XII. page 380 (Mr. D. Stewart says :). Vol. XIX, bot-tom page 75: "The effectiveness of wet lengths of road in stopping the propagation of an explosion is a fact of observation." Fed. Inst. Transactions, vol. XVIII, p. 115. See Mr. A. L. Steavenson's remarks. Quantitv of Dust dangerous. Galloway, on page 22 of" Colliery Explosion," says:-" It is always possible, however, t hat if coal-dust could be made floe enough, and were thoroughly mixed with the air in the proportion of about l lb. of coal-dust to 160 cubic feet of air, the mixture might be intlammable at ordinary temperature; or, if not, it might at least be so ne!l-rly inflammable that an explosion begun in it in a confined space might be propagated through it. " Weight of Ooal-dust. Coal-dust weighs 26 lb. per cubic foot; l lb. for 160 feet in airway 5 ft. x 8 ft. equals l ·228 inch thick only. paper by J. B. Atkinson in Scot tish Mining Institute.)

(See

Papers Refe rring to " Ooal-dU$t in the Federated Institute of Mining Engineer8' Transactions. Coal-dust rendered harmless, p. 546. Ex:plosions in Briquette Fuel Works, p. 1006. Combustion of Oxygen and Coal-dust in Mines, p. 54. Gases enclosed in Coal and Coal-dust, p. 307. Contribution to knowledge of Coal-dust, p. 32. ,, VI. Coal-dust in Mines and its relation to Explosions, p. 372. ,, X . Observations on Temperature and Humidity of Air at Ma.yba-0h Colliery, p. 585. ,, IX. Description of Arrangements at Mayback Colliery for Watering Coal-dust, p. 90. ,, II. Coal-dust, p. 415. ,, IV. New Method of Laying Coal-dust, p. 494. ,, X. Removal of Coal-dust by water spraying a.t WestphaJian Mines, &c., p. 546. ,, X. Prevention of Fire-da.mp and Coal-dust Explosions, p. 552. ,, IX. Watering Underground Roadways at New Oakes Collieries, p. 292. ,, III. Phenomena of Coal-dust Explosions, p. 68. ,, XI. Pa.per by Geo. Fowler, p. 128. ,, XII. Damping Coal-dust, pp. 411, 413, 417, 418, and 419. ,, XIII. Home Office Testing Station, p. 613. ,, XIV. Methods used for Diminishing the Danger of Coal-dust io Governmental Coal-mines of the Saar District, p. 620; also p. 619. ,, XX. Coal-dust-Official Regulations as to Damping- Dortmund, p. 516. ,, XXIII. Automatic Sprayer for Preventing Accumulations of Dust in Mines, p. 113. ,, XIX. Arresting Coal-dust Explosions-bottom p. 75. ,, XVI. Meacham, p. 497. Manchester Geological Society's transactions contain several papers on watering coal-dust.

Volume X. ,, III. VII. ,, ,, III. ,, VII.

Referenc~ fi·om "Explosions in Ooal Mines," by W. N. and J. B. Atl,,-inson, Flame, passage of, wanting over Jong lengths-bottom p. 25 and top 26. Suffocation by dust, p. 27, 6th paragraph. Gas issue, ca.uses, "singing," p. 11. Dust ignited from "snot" of lamp, p. 22. Force of fa]], 9 "Stoppings " blo\Vn down, p. 24, near bottom. Dust deposit on side opposite to the directions of blast, p. 25 ; also in Galloway, pages 25, 26, and 35. Burning of persons-examples are noticed of persons near origin of face limit of an explosion, who have escaped burning, but succumbed from effects of after-damp, p. 26. Bituminous Miuing Laws of Pennsylvania. General Rule 60. "In mines where coal-dust has accumulated to a dangerous extent care shall be exercised to prevent said dust from floating in t he atmosphere, by sprinkling it with water, or otherwise, as far as practicable." Coal-dust-Watering ofOpinions of Inspectors Robson, H all, and Martin after the Albion Explosion in 1894-See the Timsbury Colliery Explosion Report. " With regard to dealing with coal-dust in mines, we are of opinion that all main roads should be systematically watered, a.nd that the dust thus damped should be frequently removed from t he roads, and sent out of the mine."

Exhibit No. 26. Map showing results of explosion in part of No. 1 Main Level Rope Road, Mount Kembla Colliery, used during the examination of Mr. A. A. Atkinson, on 10th February, 1903.

Exhibit No. 27, Section showing results of explosion in part of No. 1 Main Level R ope Road, Mount Kembla Colliery, used · during the examination of Mr. A. A. Atkinson, on 10th February, 1903. Exhibit No. 28.

925

Exhibit No. 28. Section showing results of explosion in part of No. 1 Main Level Rope Road, Mount Kembla Colliery, used during the examination of Mr. A. A. Atkinson, on 10th February, 1903.

Exhibit No. 29. A lithograph plan of Mount Kembla Mine on which the positions of the working places, and the. positions of the men who perished in the disaster, a.re shown. Put in during Mr. Atkinson's ev idence on · 10th February, 1003. Exhibit No. 30. REPORT ON MOUNT KEMBLA COLLIERY. Wollongong, 23rd February, 1901. A. A. Atkinson, Esq., Chief Inspector of Coal-mines,Sir, For your information I have the honor to inform you that I inspected Mount Kembla Colliery on the 6th and 22nd, and paid attention to the following matters, viz.-·Ventilation, State of Workings, Weighing and Report Books:-----------------,-------Name of Splits.

Cubic feet of air per minute.

Number of men and horses.

No. 4 Right ..... ... ..... ....................... . No. 4 Left ........... . ........... ..... .......... . No. 6Right ................................... .. . No. 6 Left ... _ .. .............................. . Ma.in Tunuel ................. ................. .

11,950 11,878 13,860 10,600 13,200

50 68 43 35 48

Cuhic feet of air per minute £or each wnn and horse.

235 l'i 4.

322 292 291

I found the above currents well distributed through the workings with a fair current passing the end of each I travelled a large portion of the intake and return airways, :i.nd found the same in good travelling order.

brattice.

State of Workings. I examined No. l District, where a large number of pillars are being taken out, and consider that every care was taken by the management and the miners to ensure safety. I also found the other bords to be well timbered. R ep&rt Book.

I examined the same and found that the colliery was examined in :i.ccordance with the requirements of the Coal Mines Act. I have, &c., JAMES ROWAN, Inspector of Collieries.

Noted.-A.A.A., 1/3/1901. 5!3/1901.

For the information of the Minister.-H.B.S. (for U.S.), 4/3/01.

Appd.-J.L.F.,

REPORT ON MOUNT KEMBLA COLLIERY. Wollongong, 11th May, 1901. A. A. Atkinson, Esq., Chief Inspector of Coal-mines,Sir, For your information I have the honor to inform you that I inspected Mount Kembla Colliery, and paid attention to the following matters, viz. -State of Workings, and Report Books, on the 23rd April, and 9th instanL. Ventilation. Name of Splits.

Cubic feet of air per minute.

Number or men and horses.

11,314 ]2,600 18,480 11,360 12,600

69 47 42 33 47

No. 4 Split ........ ··· ·· ················ ...... No. 4Right ..... ····························· ... No. 6 .Right .. ............................. ...... No. 6 Left .......................... ············ Main Tunnel ···············. ··················

Cubic feet or air per minute £or each man and horse.

168 268 440 344 246

I found the above currents well conducted round tbe workings and the brattice kept up to a reasonable distance from the face of the bords. State of Workings. The roof and sides of the working places were well secured with props and other suitable timbers. I examined a portion of the workings where pillars. where being extracted, and found a good supply of props at hand ready for use when required.

Report Books. I examined the report books, and found that the colliery was examined in accordance with the Coal Mines Regulation Act. Weighing. All the coal that comes out of the mine is weighed, and the miners are pa.id by the weight of each skip. l have, &c., J!\.MES ROWAN, Jnspector of Collieries. Noted A.A.A , 13/5/01. Seen. - H B.$. (for U.S.), 17,5,0 1.

JtEPORT

926 REPORT ON .MOUNT KEMBLA COLLIERY. A. A. Atkinson, Esq., Obief Inspector of Coal-mines,-

WolloQgong, Hh S11ptember, 1001,

For your information, I hnve the honor to inform you that I inspected Mount Kem1?Ia Colliery on the 29th Angust last, and 4th inst:i.nt, and pa.id attention to the following mat ters, viz. :-State of Workmgs, Report Books, and Ventilation. Name of Splits.

Cubic feet or air per minute.

Number of men and horses.

No 4 Split................ ......... . .... ......... .. No. 4 Right ............. .. .................... ... . No. 6 Right ...... .. ........................ .... ... No. 6 Left ... ....... ...... ..... .. ............ Main tunnel. ........ ...... ........ ....... ........

11,680 10,790 16,800 12,350 13,760

63 64 48 30 35

Cubic feet of air per minute for each maD and horse.

185 lt:i8

350 411 390

I found the above currents in fair circulation throughout the colliery, and the bmttice, as .. rule, kept up to reasonable distance from the face of the workings. State of Workings.

I found the roof and sides of the working places well secured with timbers, and a good supply of props convenient . . . to the working bords. I also examined a nnmber of places where pillars were bemg extracted, and found that all the ordinary care was beina taken in propping the r oof and sides, and where it was considered necessary "Chocks" were put in, in order t o prev~nt any heavy fall of roof behind where the men were ,vorking. The miners informed me that they were always provided with timber when required. . . . . I examined the whole of the travelhng road, and found the same to b3 m a. go0d state for travelling therem. I examined the report books aud found that the colliery was examined in aq:orclanc~ with the Coal Mines Regulation Act . I ha.ye, &c., . JAMES ROW AN, Inspector of Collieries. Noted.-A A.A., 16'9/1901.

S1,bmit.~ed.-C.A.S., 19/9/ 19Jl.

Seen.-H.B.S. (for U.S.), 2Q/9/190l.

Exhibit No. 31. REPORT ON MOUNT KEMBLA COLLIERY. Wollongong, 4 April, 1902.

A. A. Atkinson, Esq., Chief Inspector of Coal Mines, Sydney,Mount Kembla Colliery Inspection. Sir,

I have the honor to report having inspected the abo;.e colliery on 6th March and 2nd April.

Ventilation. This mine is ventilated by means of a furnace, the intakes being the main tunnel and travelling road.

Main T unnel District. There are 39 men, 5 boys, and 5 horses, employed- total 49, and supplied with 12,000 cubic feet of air per minute, giving each an average of 244 cubic feet. No. 4 Riyht (4th Right). There are 45 men, 5 boys, ancl 5 horse3-total, 55, a.nd supplied with 10,080 feet of cubic air per minute, gh·ing ea.eh an average of 183 cubic feet. No. 4 Left. There are 55 men, 5 boys, ancl 5 horses, employed- total, 65; ancl supplied with 28,560 cubic [eet of air per minut(;, giving each an average of 439 cubic feet. No. 6 Right. There are 40 men, 5 boys, and 5 horses, employed-total, 50; and supplied with 9,240 cubic feet of air per minute, giving each an average of 184 cubic feet. No. 6 L eft. There are 17 men, 3 boys, and 3 horses, employed-total, 23; and supplied witb 8,000 cubic feet of air per minute, giving each an average of 347 cubic feet. The working places were in good condition, ancl a plentiful supply of timber on the various flats. Daily reports are made on the state of the working places previous to the men commencing work, and also on the machinery, &c. The deputies make their first examination with locked safety-lamps, but use naked lights for the other inspections, no gas having been observed for over twelve months. The station under General Rule 4 is about 100 ya.rds inside the travelling tunnel. I have, &c. THOS. L. BATES, Inspector of Collieries. Noted.- A.A. A.., 7/4/02.

Submittecl. -C.A.S., 7/(0-2.

Seen.-H.B. S. (f<?r U.S.), 8/4/02.

Exhibit No. 32.

New So_u th Wales. ! To wit;. i INQUISITION held at the Court-house, Broken Hill, in the Colony of New South Wales, this 19th day of July, one thousand eight hundred and ninety-five, b3fore me, Arthur N.Barnett, one of the Coroners of our Sovereign Lady, the Queen, for the Colony aforesaid, on view of the bodies of Frank P earce, George Holmes, Charles Helson, William Arthur, John Lee, William ~IcLeish, Benjamin Snell, a11d Arthur Trembath, then and there lying dead. Upon the oaths of George Eaton, George Jolm Miller, Stuart-John Pearce, J oseph H enry Smallacombe, William James Wise, John H enderrnn, William Henry Mitchell, J oseph Barron, David Armstrong, George Alfred Mills, Henry Ed ward Bright, Lewis Francis Gilles Oswald, good and lawfw. men of BrokenRillaforesaid; who, having been sworn and charged to inquire (on the part of our said Lady the Queen) when, where, how, and by what means, the abovenamed deceased came to their deaths, do, upon their oaths, say that the deceased Frank P earce, George Holmes, John Lee, Charles Helson, William McLeish, William Arthur, Benjamin Snell, a~<\ -4fthur Trembath, at Broken Hill, in the Colony aforesaid, on the 18th July, 1895, died from injuries accidently · receiyed

I•

re?ei~ed by a rush of air on Lhe 400 foot level of the Broken II ill South Mine (caused by a fall of earth) in which they w~re workrng on t.he same day; and that, the accident being of an unprecedentie<l nature, no one could have been nware of its advent, and consequently no one was to blame. In wit~ess whereof, as well the said Coroner as the jurors aforesaid, have to this inquisition set their hands and seal~, this day and year aforesaid. (Sea.I.) Henry Edward Bright, Juror. (Real.) A. N. Barnett, Coroner. George Eaton, Foreman. ,, Lewis Francis Gilles Oswald, ,, " Stuart J ohn Pearce, Juror. ,, George John Miller, ,. ,, William James Wisc, ,, ,, Joseph Henry Smallacombe, ,, ,, William Henry hlitcbell ,, ,, John Henderson, ,, " David Armstrong, ' ,, ,, Joseph Barron. ,, ,, George Alfred Mills, ,, ,, l NFORMATI'ON and depositions of witnesses, taken on on.th before me Arthur N. R~rnett, one of the Coroners of our Sover~ign Lady, the Queen, for the Colony of New S~uth Wales, this 19th day of July, one thousand eight hundred and ninety-five, at the Court-house at Broken Hill; in the said Colony, on view of the bodies of Frank Pearce, George Holmes, John Lee, Charles Helson, William McLeish, William Arthur, Benjamin Snell, and Arthui" Trembath, then ant1 there lying <lead. · . Alexan~er Macki_e, ha.dng been sworn, states :-I am a constable of police at South Broken Bill; yesterday, at 5 p.m., from information I received, I went to the Broken Hill South Mine· saw three dead bodies in the carpenter's shop ; an<l I sa.w five dead bodies brought up from the main shaft; I recognised ~ne as Benjamin Snell; Dr. Groves examined· each of them ; I also saw a man called Coles, who appeared to b:i injttred; I did nothing more. ALEXANDER MACKIE. Sworn before me, at Broken Hill } this 19th July, 1895,' A. N. BARNI!.'l"r, roroner. This depone~t, James Hebbard, on his oath, saith as follows :-I am a Government Inspector of Mines, and reside at Brok.e n Hill; I produce a plan drawn by myself of the scene of the fatality; I inspected it this morning, and I have known 1t before, having visited it frequently in my capacity as Inspector of Mines. JAMES HEBBARD. Sworn before me at Broken Hill, } this 19th J uly, 1895,A. N. BARNETT, Coroner.

r i

This deponent, Albert Joyce Morris, on his oath, saith as follows :-lam a miner and reside at Broken Hill; I was working on the north stopes on Broken Hill South Mine yesterday ; the stopes are at the 400-foot level, and are reached from the main shaft by traversing a cross-cut400 feet east from the shaft and then along the level abont 600 feet north. The deceased (eight of them} were aH working there; I don't know them by name but by sight; I was working about 70 feet up from the level and in sulphide ore; we were all ordered out of the stopc at about 3 p.m. by Samuel lfaync, the under-around manager ; he said, "All of you come out, '\t"it.h your tools, and get into a place of safety" ; we all got our tools an~ came out into the main drive for about 300 feet-perhaps ten of us- Helson was one; some of us went out a.long the level ; I just got to the corner when I heard a sound like a peal of thunder and a rushing sounrl of wind ; I immediately fell down flat to avoid danger. After the clust and wind had passed I went back along the level a short way and I found two dead men ; oue was Helson ; we then went to t.he shaft and asked for assistance; I came back and found a man called Cole in the level, and 1 helped to bring him to sm·face ; I was excited and upset ; the warning to come out had been given about one hour before this; it took me about ten minutes to get out of the stope, but I was talking in t he level 300 ya.rds away for some time; about l ·30 p. m. Mr. Mayne came into the stope and said, looking at the ground, "Be careful lads"; I have worked on the line of lode fol' some years-I thought there was no danger in the work we were doing; I do not know the exact cause of the accident, but by the rush of air I knew there must have been a fall of earth ; I was standing on 10 x 2 laths, with the ore iu front and overhead where I was working. To Mr. Hebbard, Mining Inspector :-1 did not observe any unusual movement of the ground yesterday; two floors below me there is a. drive running north-west for ,·entilation purposes; I was working about four sets west of this at the time; I have only worked about a week or so in the South Mine. To Mr. Edwards (for, outh Company) : The stope was properly timbered as for as I know, and it was sufficiently secure for working purposes; Mayne was in t.he stope about four times yesterday, and the shift boss was there at least t wice; we could have got to the surface before the accident if we had chosen, and if we had gone into the cross-cut we should have been safe; the management take every precaution for the workmen's safety; no one complained that I know of. To the Jury : I cannot say why we did not come out of the stope sooner-I saw no danger at the time; the stope would average about three sets wide and about seven or eight sets long; I did not care to come up until knock off t ime at 4 p. m. ; our warning was to get into a place of safety ; the work is done by contract, and a man called Heaonel is the contractor, but; we aU share with him in it. A. J . MORRI S. Sworn before me, at Broken Hill, } this 19th July, 1895,A. N. BARNETT, Coroner. This deponent, Charles Masters, on bis oath, saith as follows :-I am a miner and reside a.t Broken Hill ; yesterday, at about 3 p.m., I was ,vorking in the north stopes a.t the South Mine; the deceased, whom I knew by sight, were all engaged at the same workings; Mr. Mayne, under-grounrl manager, said to me, "Be cautious and come out if you hear anything unusual"; shortly after this he said, "Clear out boys au<l bring your tools"; at this time I was working on the 9th floor, standing on laths 10 x 2, and takiug the ore off the bottoms; after the warning I and my mate and t.wo others on top picked up our tools and went down to the ma.in level about 50 or 60 feet; we stayed there half an hour ; it took us from ten to twenty minutes ; I was the last man to get down on to the level. I saw all the deceased in the level 20 feet from the stope talking to each other; they seemed to be the nearest to the stope, but came gradually away from it; the last time t saw the deceased they were 50 or 60 feet from the stope ; shortly aftP-rwat·ds I heard a rumbling noise and saw a cloud of dust; I was then about 300 feet from the stope along the level; I became unconscious, and when I came to my senses I was leaning up against an iron ladder in the level beyond the cross-cut; some one helped me to the shaft, and I went to the snrface; I had a. severe shock ; I saw two meq put into the cage and sent up ; I have ,rnrked on this mine for nine weeks a.nd 011 the Proprietary for five years. The work did not appear dangerous; I noticed nothing in the shape of a shifting of the timber or of the ground; I cannot account for the accident. To Mr. E<lw~rds: I am working on contract; Mayne was in the stopes three times yest,erday ; I cannot say whether we should be allowed to go to the surface before 4 p.m. ; if we bad got into the cross-cut we should have been safe, but it is very cold, and men do not care to come out of a. warm stope into it until the cage is ready ; the mine is properly timbered antl secured for ordinary working purposes; I thought I wa.s perfectly safe in the level, but I did not go into the cross-cut, because it was too cold. his To the J nry : There are some angle-stays in the sets in this stope. CHARLES X MASTERS. mark. Witness-ALEXR. MACKIE, Const. Sworn before me, at Broken Hill, l this 19th July, 1895. i A. N. BARNETT, Coroner. This

928 This deponent, Thomas Pratt, on his oa.th, saith as follows :-I am a trucker, and reside at Broken Hill ; yesterday at 3 p. m. I was on the 8th floor of the stopes at the South Mine, trucking ore into tho shoots; I know all the deceased- Benjamin Snell Arthur Trembath, Charle3 Helson, John Lee, William McLeieh, William Arthur, George Holmes, and Frank Pea.roe; they 'were a.11 at work in the stope, or were there; I saw a.II their dcnd bodies this morning with jury ; I was working with three other men; at about l ·~O p.m., Mr. Mayne, the Underground Mannger, said to us, "Be careful and keep your e'll's open " : this meant thnt if we heard timber creaking we were to leM'e; about 3 p. m. he said, "Get a.way with your tools to a place of safety, the ground does not look very good"; he helped us to get our tools away, and we went down to the level · all but two of the deceased were down then ; I saw them all in the level soon after, about 30 to 40 feet away from the ia<lder.wa.y; we stopped there about half-an-hour in changing our clothes and sitting down and smoking; nt 10 minutes to 4 we started for the shaft; I re?.ched the cross-cut and went in 20 or 30 feet, where I heard a. great rumbling and a rush of air ; it sent us rouncl a bit ; when the wind cca.sed we went to the level, a.nu about 50 or 60 feet along it we found the eiaht deceased quite dead within 20 feet of ea,ch other , and about 150 feet from the ladder way ; I helped to get them out to the shaft, and nlso two men on the other side of the deceased who were badly hurt ; l have been mining Ior about two years on the Broken Hill line of lode; there must have been a fall of earth to cause. thti rush of air, but I cannot account for the acci<lent; I saw no danger in the place where I was working, except that the ground was crumbling in the top floor a.t the back ; we coulu hear this ; I thought we were perfectly safe in staying in the level ; I work for the Company on wages. 'l'o Mr. Edwards: I did not think it was necessary to go np the shaft, because I thought I was safe in the cross-cut ; I do not think there was any neglect on the part of the Company, they have always looked after our safety ; Mayne was there four or five times yesterday. To the Jury: The cage is always ready for use at any ti'lle. T. PRATT. Sworn before me at Broken Hill, } this 19th July, 1895,A. N. BARNETT, Corone1·.

l I

This deponent, Samuel Mayne, on his oath, saith as followe :-1 am Underground Foreman at the Broken Hill South Mine, and reside at Broken Hill; I knew all the deceased; they were working on contract at or near the 400-feet level stopes; yesterday I visited them £our time$; at l ·30 p.m. I uoticed a little of the ground on the 9th floor on the west side ea.sing on the timber, and I said, " Keep your eau open, and if you hear anything get a.way from the stopes " ; I went through all the stopes, and told the men the same thing, including t,he deceased; some of them said, "Oh, it is all right, there is nothing wrong" ; I returned at 3 p. m., and went to the top floor (10th) : I looked round and saw the timber was squeezing a bit and Crdcking in places, but I did not think it unsafe; this was the only floor where I found it squeezing, but I ordered all the men (twenty-one) out of the stopes ; they all picked up their tools ancl went down to the level, taking about ten minutes in all; when I left to go up the shaft, some of the men were about 10 feet away from the ladder, and others at greater distances away ; I told them not to go to the stope again ; some were sitting down, others changing their clothes and smoking; I thought they were quite safe. I then went to the surface at about 3·40; ten minutes later a man came up the shaft and told me that two men were dead ; just then two men were brought up hurt ; I then went to the 400 level, and I saw two dead men 50 feet from t he cross-cut; further on I saw two more corpses, and a little further on three more, and then another ; I had them bound and sent up to the surface; I then recognised them as Charles Helson, Frank Pearce, John Lee, Benjamin Snell, William Arthur, Arthur Trembath, William McLeish, and George Holmes, aml I sa,v their deacl bodies again to-day with the jury; I ha.Ye worked as a miner for twenty-nine years-abou~ nine years in Broken Hill, four years at the south, and a few weeks as Underground Mana.ger. I think the accident was occasioned by a fall of earth on the north-west side, perhaps on the 9th floor, as the pressure seemed to be greater on that and the 10th floors; I had no idea of any clanger in the stopes at l ·30, but i~ is usual t.o caution men on this kind of work. I think the ground on the west side of the stope fell over towards the stopes and through the timber until it reached the sets that have been filled with mullock ; I have never seen the ground come away as it did in this case. To Mr. Hebbard : Prior to this I b-id not noticed any undue pressure on the timber; I remember your last visit when yC1u pointed out some broken ground at the back of the 9th floor; we took that off; it was only a local break; it is about 30 feet from the place I speak of. On the west side on 9th floor and all the other floors from tho sill the ground has been washed clean to the hanging wall which underlies about 1 in 6; there has always been some weight to counteract there; we have done this by angle stays on different floors ; about two.thirds of the stope is mullocked up to the 7th floor; I do not think. the pressure has increased since we connected with the old workings on the north:east side ; the etope on 10th fll.lor is three sets wide by seven sets long ; on the 9th floor it is eight or nine sets long and six wide ; the cross-cut is about 450 feet from the entrance to the stope ; the bodies found nearest to the stope must have been 300 feet from it. To Afr. Edwards: I have been shift.boss on the mine for about three yea.rs; no one could have foreseen this accident; when I ordered them out of the st.ope they had finished for the day, having brought down their tools, and they could have gone up to the surface without loss or blame to themselves. I have known some of the deceased...:.Arthu1·, Holmes, McLeish, Lee, and Trembath-for twenty years, a.nu they were practical miners. No complaint of any consequence was ever made to me by the men ; I ordered them out of my own ac('Ord ; the timber used in the same as is usually adopted for the purpose; on the 9th floor at 1.30 p.m. yesterday one of t,he men working there said, "There's a little dirt crumbHng, but I suppose it is all right"; I passed on and said nothing. To the Jury: There has not been any pressure of ground to any extent before; not enough to cause any danger, in my opinion. SAMUEL MAYNE. Sworn before me, at Broken Hill,} this 19th July, 1895,A. N. BAR::-ETT, Coroner. This deponent, James Hebba1·d, on his oath, saith as follows :--I am a Government mining inspector, and reside a.t Broken Rill; I visited the scene of the fatality this morning with Mayne and two constables. In the 400-feet level, about 50 feet from the cross-cut, I was shown the place where the first body was found, and the rest of the bodies were discoverod within 50 feet of this spot, as I was informed; I did not think it safe to go further, as if there was still any communication between the level and the stope, a further fall of ground would leave us in the same predicament as the deceased, my experience being that these falls occur for two or three days, 2nd I advised no one to go there. My opinion is that a fall of ground took place, which caused a strong rush of air through the level, that being the only vent for it coming from the stopes. My experience of other creeps induces me to think that. the position the deceased occupied in the level after death would have been safe under ordinary circumstances; I went there on 3rd instant officially, and could only complain of the ventilation, about which I had given written notice- I considered the stope safe ; I pointed out some broken ground on 9th floor on east side, where the timbers were crushing and breaking, and they (the men) had startecl to rise a set so as to relieve the pressure; on 3rd the work was being carried out properly and safely; as a. rule the authorities on the South Mine use proper means for the safety of their workmen ; the fall of earth I speak of is bound to happen in mines containing big and heavy bodies of ore, but I am surprised that the men should have been killed, seein~ where they were; I think the rush of air must have been tremendous; I have been connected acti"ely with mining affairs for sixteen or seventeen years past; there is always a. small amount of crumbling away with soft friable ore such as this was, and I should not have taken this as an indication of approaching danger. The real sign of danger of pressure is where the timber is being squeezed. 'Io ~Ir. Edwards: The Chief )lining Inspector, Mr. Slee, inspected the mine with me a few wc::l:s ago; I think Mr. Mayne, whom I have known for nine years, is au able and practical man at his work. To the Jury: When I recommcnde<l further ventilation of the stope, I did so, not on the ground of a"·crting an accident such as this, but to ensure better ,·entilation for the men working there, and for their comfort anti health ; I do not think any practical Manager or miner could have taken steps to avert or ha,ve foreseen thi~ accident. . JAMES HEBBARD. Sworn before me, at Broken Hill, 1 this 19th July, 1895,i A. N. BAR~"ETT, Coroner.

·c....

This

929 Thie deponent, Henry Joseph Firth Groves, on his oath, 1111.ith as follows :-I am a Government. medical offi~r, and reside at Broken Hill; to·day, at about 4 p. m., I went to the 8out.h Mine; two injured men were being brought to the surface; after this eight dead bodiea were brought up; I examine<l Helson-his cause of death was cru9hing in of tbe 1 bead; John Lee died from a tearing of tbe back part of the skull; George Holmes also dietl from a similar ca.nee, also Frank Pearce, also William Mcleish o.nd William Arthur, Benjamin 8neU and Arthur Trembath; injnrics to the bead ~ was the cause of death in each case, and it must have been instantaneous ; the inju1 ies might have been cause,! by a tremendous rush of air in an underground pa.ssagc; I have ne,•er h.:ard of such an acci<lent before. Sworn before me, at Broken Hill, t HENRY J. F. GROVE.',. this 19th July, 1895,\ A. N. BAR~£TT, Coroner.

, r

Exhibit No. 33.

•

i \

•

(Private.) . The Snlphide Corporation (~imite<I), Central Mine, A. A. Atkinson, Esq., Sydney,Broken .l:1111, N.S. W., 14 January, 1903. My dear Sir, In reply to your letter of the 10th instant re the SouLh Disastcl" of 1895, there was no evidence of explosion-in fact, there was no hint of explosion except amongst men who were not co1n-ersant with the conditions. All the deatbs were caused by the rush of air through a comparat.ively narrow pasllage. A good illustration of the case is a bellows and its no1,Zle, the bellows being the stope which collapsed an<l the nozzle the dri\"e in which the men were standing or wa~iag; of course, there was no such thiag as buruiog. e • • •

•

I daresay Milne or Godfrey could let you haYe copi~s of my reports of tliis matter.

Best wishes, yours, &c., JAMES HEBBAR.D.

The Sulphide Corporation (Limiterl), Central Mine, .Broken Hill, N.S. W., 29 Jinuary, 1903.

A. A. Atkinson, Esq., Chief Inspector of Collieries, Sydney, -Dear Sir, Yours of 25th instant to hand. I did not think it necessary to reply to your wire, o.s I took it for granted that you would accept no reply as approval. I hope, with you, that 1,be inquiry you are now engaged in will bavc nothing but go01l as its outcome. Many thanks for your kind invitation to visit you, which 1 shall be glad to arn.il myself of when iu Sydney. Kind regards. Yours, &c .• JahlES BEBBARD. R egister and return.-A. A. A., 4/2/3. The Broken Hill South Sihret·-mining Company (No Liability). The Mine, Broken Hill, 4 February, 1903. W. H. J . Slee, Esq., Chief Inspector of Mines, Sydney,Dear Sil', I beg to acknowledge receipt of yo\\r favour of 30th ultimo in which you inquire if any of the bodies of the unfortunate men who lost their lives in the accident in this mine in 189.3 were found to be burnt through the action of the compressed air rushing through the drive. Inasmuch as it was supposed by some people that there had been an explosion of gas, I carefully examined the I am, &c., bodies, but found no trace of burning or singeing. S. MAYNE, Underground ManagP.r.

Exhibit No. 34. ROYAL CoMM1SSIO~ OF I NQUIRY R£SP.ECT1NG Tm; )loONT KEMBLA COLLIERY D1sAST.ER.

Court-house, Wollongong, 20 January, 1903. The Chief Medical Officer, Health Dcpartment,Sir' - I have the honor, by direction of the ab),·e Commis~ion, to acknowledge with thanks th, receipt of the report by Mr . W. M. Hamlet, Government Analyst, forwarded by you, on two specimens of coal-dust taken from Mount Kemble. Coal Mine. In compliance with Mr. Hamlet's suggestion, I am forwarding to-day by train, addressed to him, a quantity of cleanly fractured coal from the face of the No. l R~ght back heading, the exact spot from which one of the samples of dust was obtained. The other sample of dust was obt:unerl from a prop. I have, &c., J. GARLICK, -----Secretary to the Commissfon. Department o[ Pnblic Health, New South Wales, Sydney, 16 February, 1903. Cert{/icate of Analy.si-~.

The President, Board of Healtb,The sample of Mount Kembla Coal (scaled, marked, or labelled) from the face of No. 1 Right back heading rccei\""ed, 2/2/3. Mount Kembla Colliery DisMtcr, from the Sc.,;rctary of the Royal Commission of Inquiry, has been examined with the following results : Per cent. Hygroscopic moisture . ........... ... ............. . ... .. ... ..... .. .. .. .... ... ... ... .. 0 64 Volatile hydrocarbons........ ...... ............ ....... . ... .. ..................... . ... 24·30 Fixed carbon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 ·50 (Percentage of coke= 74·4:!) Ash ..................... .. ..... . ........ . ... ............... .. ... ... .............. .. ... l l ·56

IO:> 00 Specific gravity, l ·4[.Q. Wei,7ht of 1 cubic foot, CO lb. Nm;ber of cub:c feet to the loo, ::4. I n,m afraid my analyses will throw litt le, if a!ly, light as to the cause of the explosion. WILLIA)f M. HA~LET, Government Analyst. Exl ibit No. 35.

16825

29-6 B

930

Exhibit No. 3.? Is a large file of Mines Department's papers-correspondence and reports-regarding the C:ree:p occurred in the Hamilton Mine, on Saturday, the 22nd of June, 1889.

.I j

w4lc4 · ·

;

.r I

Exhibit No. 36. Report of the Committee appointed to inquire into the Explosion of an Air Receiver at Ry hope Colliery, and consisting of Mr. W. F. Hall, Professor Bedson, Messrs. J. Daglish, J. T. Dunn, G. B. Forster, H. La~rcnce, W. Lishman, L. Wood, and M. Walton Brown (Secretary) .

{

..'

[Drawn up by M. Wal~on Brown, with an appendix by Professor Bedson.) \ General, Arrangements. The compressing engines, and No. 1 air receiver, a.re situated on the surface. The two steam cylinders are~ inches, and the two air compressing cylinders are 33 inches diameter, and 5 feet stroke. The air compressing cylinders µave water jackets; the water being admitted at the sides, and, passing upwards, escapes by an overflow pipe. It is supplied from a small reservoir, which furnishes a flow of water th.rough the jacket. The e11ds are also water jacl,teted in the· same way as the sides of the cylinders, the water being admitted on the lower side, and rises to the top, wliere jt overflows. r ' I There are ·two inlet and one outlet valves, 8 inches diameter, at each end of the air,cylindera. ' I The lubrication of the air-cylinders was at first efi'ectei by screw inlet valves l ! inches diameter at eacp epd, I connected by pipes wit,h the bottom of the receiver, whence sufficient of the lubricant was drawn in ~t each stro\te fo ' lubricate the piston, valves, &c., any excess being returned to the receiver along with the air. The lubricant used at that time was-soft soa.p, 2 pounds, colza oil,! gallon, water, ! gallon. This means of lubricating was discarded during the year 1881, when about 1 gallon of fluid was poured into the auction valves of the two cylinders every two hours, consisting of-soft soap, 2 pounds, mineral oil, ! gallon, water,

galloThe compressed air is delivered by the engine into pipes 10 inches diameter (formerly 8 inches), through which it passes into the No. 1 air receiver, consisting of an egg-ended boiler 6 feet in diameter and 29 feet long (the contents being a.bout 770 cubic feet), and built of i·incb iron plates arranged in rings with hemispherical ends. There were t wd safet,yvalves, each 4 inches diameter, and loaded to 50 lbs. per square inch. The two delivery pipes passed into the tQp of the No. 1 air receiver, and thence one cast-iron delivery pipe 10 inches diameter led the air to the top of the shaft. The air is taken down the shaft, a distance of about 250 fathoms, by means of malleable iron pipes ll inche11 internal diameter, i·inch thick, in twelve-feet lengths. The flanges are f inch thick, welded on and fastened together by eight i-inch bolts. They have plain joints made with cement and packing. There is a stand.pipe, provided with stuffing-box to act as an expansion joint, p laced in the shaft at 127 fathoms from the surface. 'l'he pipe from the shaft is connected with the No. 2 air receiver, which is placed near the bottom of the shaft ; it is 4 feet diameter by 12 feet long, and made of ! -inch iron plate. The air is taken from No. 2 receiver in meta.l pipes, decreasing from 8 inches to 6 inches diameter, to three hauling engines placed at various distances from the shaft. These hauling engines have each two cylinders 14 inches diameter and 18 inches stroke. They are situated a.t 660 yards, 990 yards, and 1,950 yards from the receiver a.t the bottom of the shaft. They run a.bout 120 revolutions per minute, the air being cut off at three-quarter stroke. Tlte Explosion. The engineman at the air compressor said that the t hree air engines had all been running, two were stopped, and he had just finished oiling the air-compressing engines. He had lubricated the air cylinders, ancl when near the door of the house he was knocked down by the violence of a.n explosion. The third engine was easing up when this explosion occurred , at 10·40 p.m. on 1st March, 1883. · The pressure of air which he had observed wJ1en lubricating the air-cylinders was 57 lbs. per square inch. The compressing engine had been running at twenty-1,hree or twenty-four revolutions per minute, and had slowed down, when the two under-ground engines stopped, and the air was blowing off at the receiver. He further stated that he was rendered unconscious, having been struck on the head with some flying debris. As soon as he recovered (he could not say how long he ha.d been unconscious) he found the engine racing a.way, and stopped it. He then observed a fierce fire burning in the No. 1 air receh'er, like a furnace, owing to the blast of air playing upon it. The evidence of other persons showed that the explosion of the No. l air receiver was accompanied with bright flames from 20 to 30 feet high, which immediately subsided, lea,ving a fierce fire burning brightly within the receiYer. Other persons arrived on the sit,e of the explosion within ten minutes of the occurrence, and means were at one adopted for tbe extinction of the fire, which was easily accomplished by the a.id of water. The engines usual1y make from twenty-three or twenty-four revolutions per minute; and as the air engines are stopped the speed slackens-steam of 35 lb. per square inch not being sufficient to overcome a vressure of more than 58 lbs. in the No. 1 air receiver. The No. 1 air receiver is arranged so that the air blows off at 50 lbs.; but should none of the air-engines be running, the pressure actually rises to 58 lbs., and the speed of the eugine is reduced to fifteen or sixteen revolutions. At t-his speed the air blows off at the valves as quickly as it is pumped into the air receiver. None of the attached thermometers were in use at the time of the explosion. They are stated to have usually indicated about 180° F., ~lthough it was said that the temperature of the ail- occasionally rose as high as 230° F. The second engineman said the temperat,ure of the air had been as high as 300° 1( The water was up in the jacket, and the engineman had seen that there was water in the cistern. Both the cylinders were as bright as glass, and, as wel1 as the valves, showed no signs of O\·er-heating. The packing of the piston was not singed, nor did it show eigus of abnormal heating.

...

The Deposit. The pipes leading from the air cylinders to the No. l air receiver used to be cleaned every three or four months whe11 the old lubricant was used in the air cylinders, but with the use of the new lubricant the deposit had not taken place so rapidly. On one occasion, when the pipes from the air cylinders were 8 inches diameter, they were found almost completely closed, there not being room to push in the hand. This led to 10-inch pipes being put in instead of the smaller ones. The new lubricant had been used for a.bout twelve months before the explosion, during which time the pipes had not been cleaned. They were ta.ken off after the·accident and examined, when the deposit was found not to exceeJ l i inches in thickness, laying on the lower side, and thinning out towards the vertical edges. The Mposit had been found in the gauge-pipe which is attached to these pipes, au~l the gauge, on more than one occasion, when taken off was found to be choked up. The gauge which was in use at the time of the accident was E:xamined, and the pipe was found to be coated internally with a slight deposit about one-sixteenth inch thick. The deposit extended into the No. 1 air receiver, where it was found all over the bottom ; on the last occasion when the No. 1 air receiver was cleaned out, the deposit was found to be 9 inches thick at the bottom, thinning out towards the vert ica.l sides. ·The use of the new lubricant was introduced after this cleaning, and at the time of the explosion, judging from the remains then found, it is considered that the deposit may have been 2 inches thick. T he deposit extended down the pipes into the pit, and "'as fonnd iu No. 2 aud No. 3 air receivers; but it was not so abundant as in the pipes and air receiver at; bank, and wa.s of a different nature, being somewhat oily, a.nd of a rusty red colour. . 'l'he deposit found in the pipes and the No. 1 air receiver was evidently a mixture of coal,dust and the _lubrica.nt carried over from the air cylintlers. I t may, therefore, be sa.id to consist of coal-dust, mineral oil, soft soap, and water. Damages

1. f

I . I~

..I

931

·'

•..•

;,.

• '

{ j

Damages. . Toe receiver was f~und blown into four pieces, nearly detached from each other, a cylindrical rip passed thro.ugh one mlet and the outlet pipe, anti almost completely round the boiler; another rip extended along the top of the boiler, through the manho~e doors, s~fe~y-valve seats, and other old holes, as far as the spherical end. This end was almost blown off, and recel\'ed two d1stmct fractures, which lai<l it flat out. There is abundant evidence to show that after the explosion the receiver was, in part, at a white beat. This tends to.prove that some he~t mu.st have accumulated in the plates previous to its bursting. The plates themselves clearly e~1dence hl1e fa7t of their hav1°:g been very hot ; the heating was, however, local, and appea1·s to have been greatest at the side next the, pit, below the pornt where the air entered, and thence extended along the side of the unfractured end. The lract~re? end of the receiver did not appear to hiwe been subjected to any great temperature. The met.al pipes leading to the pit,'Yex·e not damaged. . Two of the cast-i~on pillars, for~ing a part of the supports of the h eapstead, were broken in several places, a~d the pi~ces t~rown to some distance. A cabm upon the heapstead was considerably damaged, and the windows of houses 10 the ne1ghbourliood were more or less shaken. A pulley wheel standing near ha<l the rim broken, and four spokes were bent by the side of the boiler, being blown forcibly against it. · The air-pipes aL·e placed in the ·pit, which is bratticed, one side being used as an upcast; the other side was intended to _be a do~cast, but the tra~smissi?n of heat is so great that it is simply used as a dumb pit. The br~ttice is built of br_icks se~ wiih cement, upon iron girders or bun tons. These gi1·dtlrs are formed of two side-plates 6 mches deep and i-mch tb1ck1 and 19~ feet long, bolted together, and studded at intervals. Th~ slide buntons and sli<;Ies are attached at one end to the buntons carrying the brattice. S_enous damage occurred m the shaft. At 127 fathoms one segment of the cast-iron tubing wa4> found blown about half an rnch outwards from the pit, and showed the sheeting ; a stuffing joint and stand-pipe were also found damaged. At a depth of 180 fathoms several pipes were partia.lly split open. From 200 to 212 fathoms the pipes, brick brattice, side buntons, &c., had all fallen down the pit. At 215 fathoms a piece was blown out the side of one of the pipes. From 220 to 231 fathoms about 11 fathoms of brick brattice were damaged, and the buntons and brick brattice blown into the upcast side of the pit. One of the pipes at 225 fa.thorns was burst open into an almost flat sheet of iron. The air-receh·er, pipes, guides, &c., at a depth of about 250 fathoms, were displaced, and had fallen to the bottom of the pit ; there was no brattice at this point, and the pipes were found damaged 39 yards inbye. One of the workmen at the bottom of the shaft saw a flash of flame in the shaft at the t ime of the explosion, and was thrown about '20 yards. A tub which he was pushing was O'lerturned and thrown about 15 yards. The effects of the explosion were felt at considerable distances from the shafts; thus an air crossing was "lifted" about 1,000 yards from the shaft, and waste doors were "moved" at a distance of 3,500 yards inbye. There was a great similarity in the bends and fractures of the buntons carrying the brattice at the two points where the damage was most serious. The fracturing forces appear to have acted at about the same point upon all the beams, with the difference that some were only bent at the points where others were broken. Probable Causes of the Explosion. I t appears improbable for the No. 1 air-receiver to have been exploded by the normal pressure of the air, as the engine would have stopped before the pressure became too high, in addition to which a pressure of about220 lbs. per square inch would have been required to burst the air-recei\'er, and to burst the air-pipes a very much greater pressure would have been necessary. The bursting of the N'o. l air-receiver must, therefore, have been produced by the explosion of some substance inside. The temperature in the No. 1 air-receiver must have been somewhat high, and must have heated the plates to a high temperature before the explosion, otherwise they could not have been raised to a white heat in the short time that the fire was allowed to burn after the explosion. The bursting of the air-pipes in the shaft, and the damage done in the shaft itself, appear to show that an explosion occurred in them, and that it took place subsequent to the explosion which (it is supposed) took place in the No. 1 airreceiver. This opinion is supported by the fact that the metal pipes near the receiver leading into the engine-house and to the pit were unbroken. If an explosion had only occurred in tbe air-receiver, it is very improbable that the bursting of the pipes in the shaft, and the serious damage in the shaft itself, could have resulted from the compressive wave or "momentum " given to the air in the pipes by an explosion in the No. 1 air-receiver. It would not explain the consider· able effects found for some distance inbye, where the pipes themselves were not damaged. This second explosion would probably ensue from the explosive gases, generated in the air-receiYer and passed to a certain distance down the pipes in the shaft, being ignited by a flame produced by the explosion in the air-receiver. It is possible that the flashing point of the mineral oil, forming part of the lubricant used in the air-compressing cylinders, might have been lo,rer than the temperature of the compressed air, in which case the receiver might have been charged with an explosi,·e mixture of air and oil ,,apour, which would be readily ignited by flame or heat. The oil was tested, and it was found at 230° F. that about 1 p er cent. was volatilised daily, :i.nd at 500° F. a.bout 9 per cent. was evaporated daily, ancl the flaslting point was 365° F. It is difficult to understand, therefore, how an explosh·e mixture of air and oil vapour could be formed in the air-receiver, owing to the considerable excess of air which would be present, or how it could become ignited. It has been suggested by otheni that the gas given off by the oil at 300° F. might be ignited by the sponta.neoqs ignition of a piece of cotton waste left in the receiver; but this appears to be incapable of producing the effects observed. Profes.s or Bedson, of the Durham College of Science, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, has made a valuable series of experiments to ascertain the temperatures at which coal-dust alone and the deposit found in the No. l air-receiver were ignited, when heated in a current of air at ordinary and higher pressures. It was found impossible to produce combustion of the deposit, although the temperature of the air at atmospheric pressure was raised to 450° F. ; but with coa.l-dust alone ignition took place at a temperature of 291 ° l<'., and the mass finally glowed with a dull red beat. Further experiments were made with air at a pressure of 60 lbs. per square inch, the results of which showed that the temperature of ignition of coal-rlust was the same as with air at ordinary pressure1:1, but when ignition occurred a more intense heat was produced, as shown by the coking of the dust. It appears to be highly probable that under a pressure of 60 lbs. per square inch the deposit, consisting of a mixture of coal-d~st, mineral oil, soft soap, and moisture, might have been ignited in the same m:i.nner as in the experiments with the coal-dust, although no such phenomenon was produced in the experiments. This supposition receives some support from the evidence of heating in the various parts of No. 1 air-receiver. It seems possible, therefore, assuming that the deposit was in a state of ignition, for clestructi ve distillation of a portion of the depo3it to take place, forming considerable volumes of combustible gases, which would be exploded as soon as the mixture consisting of the proper proportions of air and ga.s (from the distillation of the oil and coal-<lust contained in the receiver) was ignited by the l)Urning deposit. Cond1£Sions. The cause of the explosiou of the air-receive1· cannot, unfortunately, be exactly d1::termined. It would, however, appear desirable thatThe air used for compressing purposes should he taken as pure as possible, caro being taken in selecting the site for the machinery to avoid the \'ioinity of gas works, burning heaps of waste materia.l, or any wot'ks such as lime-kilos producing stythe or smoke, or any other gases (inflammable or otherwise) which might be injurious or dangerous to life, if carried into the mine. The use of illuminating gas in the engine-house should be avoided, as a careless workma.u might lea.,·o a tap open, and the escaping gas might he <lra.wn into the compressing cylinders. It would also be advisable to keep the machinery at some distance from the screens so as to arnid the drawing of the fine coal-<lust into the cy lin<lers and delivery pipes. Atteution should be clirec·ted to the necessjty of a constant o.ncl sufficient supply of water to the jackets of the aii-cylindc1·s, so as to prevent the danger of spontaneous combustion of deposits formed in the pipes or vessels. The danger of using mineral oils of a low flashing point, for lubricating air-compl'cssiug cylintlcrs, is sufficienily obvious · M. WALTON RROWN. APPENDIX.

932 APPF.NDIX.

In seeking for an explanation of the explosion of the Rybopo air-receiver, there are two things to be borne in •,. mind:1. The particular conditions which would produce a temperature sufficiently high to iguite an explosive mixture of air and a combustible gas. 2. The production of the explosi,·e mixtul"e. These are two necessary cond itions, as the existence of one without the other would not lead to results such as those detailed in the report on the explosion. At the outset, attention was directed to the disco,·ery of some means of obtaining a. temperature sufficiently high to ignite an explosi,·e mixture of air aml combustible gas. These were sought in the conditions under which the aircompressor w:is working before the explosion took plac(', and of thrse the follo,\'ing appeared to be the most worthy of attention : 1. The temperature of the compressed air, brought 11.bout by the heat generated in the compression of air to 58-lb. pressure. From the report itself, noel the evidenct? of those examined hy the Committee. no knowledge of a very definite or satis· factory character is t.o be obtained, and one must look to the theoretical possibilities and make them the basis of any conclusions. The heat produced by compression is estimated to be sufficient to raise the temperature of the air from 60° to 369·4° F. This is, of course, a much higher temperature than would be obtained in practice, as a considerable proportion of the heat would be lost. Still, thero is sufficient indication of a high temperature having been reached to leave a very considerable margin. 2. The accumulation of coal-dust and lubricant in the pipes leading from the cylinder to the air-receiver, as also in the air-receiver. The existence of this accumulation shows that in working OYer a considerable period a large a.mount of dust must have betn drawn with the air into tbe cylinder. In the constituents of this accumulation it would appear most probable that the heat-producer necessary for an explanation of the explosion is to be found. The constituents were : J. A paraffin oil, soap, and water, forming together the lubricant; and 2. The coal-dust, which, when mixed "ith the lubricant, formed the pitch-like lining of the receiver. There is nothing in these materials themselves which r.ould in any way give rise to a production of heat; but this is rather to be sought for in the chemical changes which might possibly be produced in them by the constant passage over and through tbem of air at a temperature such as that to which the air would be raised by compressing it. In considering the possible changes which might take place, t he oil, which is describe<l as a mineral or paraffin oil (as it consists of a. mixture of compounds of carbon and hydrogen, which are chemically inert), did not appear likely to act as a large contributor to any heat production. Under the conditions named soap may also be neglected, and the influence of water at low temperatures may be disregarded ; whilst in the carbonaceous material (representing the coal-dust) is to be found a substance capable of being rapidly oxidised by the action of heated air, and of haYing its temperature speedily raised to a point sufficiently high to start ignition. At this point it would be well to brieOy recapitnla.te the main phenomena of combustion. Combustion is the term used to describe those cases of chemical union taking place between the constituents of a. combustible body and the oxygen of the a.ir, resulting in the formation or new bodies-the products of combustion-l\nd also in the evolution of heat and sometimes light. Such a tlefinition would embrace all phenomena of burning, but, in addition to such, there must be considered those closely-allied, and on ly separated from them by differences a.rising from the absence of any visible effect, namely, the phenomena. of oxidntion or slow combustion. The essentials of the two classes of phenomena are well illustrated in the differences observed between the burning of a piece of iron in the air and in the slow rusting of iron, and also in the burning of combustible liquid like alcohol and its slow oxidation. In the one case you have heat produced s:1fficient to be evident to the most casual observation, in the other it is only on closer examination th:it heat production is ma.de evident. The difference is essentially one of deg ree and intensity or rapidity. Io order that a combustible body may burn, its temperature must be raised to a given point, which is specific for each suhstance, and is known as the temperature of ignition . Io the temperatures of ignition of combustible bodies there are wide differences, some substances taking fire when brought into contact with the air, whilst others again require to be heated beyond a red heat before combustion takes place. Easily oxidisable substances, such as phosphorus, iron, alcohol, &c., can and do unite with the oxygen of the air at temperatures much below their temperatures of ignition, aod in so doing heat is produced which, if not dissipated, ma.y 11crve to gradually raise them to that tempera.tu rent which combustion, as ordinarily understood, takes place. Facts such as these enable one to give a satisfactory explanation of the spontaneous ignition of coal cargoes, of heaps of oily waste, &c. All conrlitions which bring about an intimate contact between an easily oxidisable substance and the air will, in promoting the oxidation of thn.t substance, le:,.d to a production of heat, which, if allowed to accumulate, may in course of time cause the infla.mmat.ion or ignition of the substance or its rapid combustion. The physical state of the C()mbustible has a powerful influence in such cases, as shown by the simple experiment of pouring a solution of phosphorus in carbon disulphide over filter pa.per; the sol vent evaporating leaves finely-divi<lecl particles of phosphorus disseminated throughout the pores of the paper, and so exposed to the air that in a few moments the phosphorus is ignited. The same fact is demonstrated by the spontaneous ignition of pyrophoric iron or lead, i.e., the finely-divided iron or lead resulting from the decomposition of iron oxl\late or lead tartrate when brought into contact with the air. It would, therefore, appear that for the spm1taneous ignition of a combustible body there is required, primarily, its slow oxidation. The hca.t thus produced must not be allowed to be dissipated or conducted away; and, further, all conditions fM•ourable to incre:i~ing the rapidity of this oxidation, such as fine state of division or the application of heat to either the combustible l,ody or the heating of the air, will teu<l to shorten the time in which its temperature of ignition will be reached. The application of these facts to the Ry hope explosion would appear to be justifie<l, if by their means it would be 1,ossible in any way to expbin the production of the two sets of conditions which ha,•e been stated as necessary to account for the phenomena detailed in the report. Ju the condi1ions of working, attention has been fastened on the coal-dust <lrawn into the air-receiver, and for this reason that it, of all the constituents of the mud found in the receiver and elsewhere, constit.utes not only t.he greater proportion, but is /\)so the most easily oxidisable of these constituents. The spflntaneous ignition of coal heaps, of co:il cargoes, &c., the weathering of coal, all show with what readiness and ease co.:il undergoes ch11.nge wheu in contact with air. The explanation of these phenomena has from time to time l,een made the subject of investigation, an<l it is to the experiments o[ Richters (Ding!. Poly. Journ., 190, 193, and 195) an<l others, that one must look for the facts upon which to base a satisfactory explanation. Richters has shown that when coal is heatetl at temperatures from 356° to 3i4° F. an increase in weight is observed. This increase in weight continues until a maximum is rl!ache,1, when farther continued exposure to this heat brings about a slight loss of weight. The analysis of the coal afte1· heating sho\\"s that the increase of weight is due to an absorption of oxygen. This oxygen is not mechanict\lly abs01·betl, but rat.her acts chemically upon constituents of the coal, part of the hydrogen being converted into water, anti a. portion of the carbon into carbon dioxide, and a coal is produced altered in some of its physical properties, and containing a larger proportion of oxygen than docs the original coal. Inasmuch as this absorption of the oxygen of the air by coal takes p1ace at ordinary temperature~, and when special precautions are taken against a loss of heat, the action or the oxygen has been demonstrated to be attencle<l by a considerable heating of the coal, it is evident that this phenomenon accounts not only for the weathering of the coal, hut also its spontaneous ignition. \\"ith a view of testing the application of these facts to the case under consideration, a series of experiments were instituted, in which it was sought to demonstrate the oxi<lation of coal-dust by Fassing air over it at various temperatures under the ordinary pressure. In this seric!! of experiments the co..1-rlust was heated in a ghS3 tube, through which a current of air, dried and freed from carbon diuxirle, was forc:e<l. After going over the coal the a :r was passed through a wash bottle containing limewater, so that the temperature at which oxidation fir~t began wt ul J be indicated by the milkiness of the lime-water. The tube w:is placed in an air-bath, and outside the bath a thermo:nete: was fitted into it.

• -; ~

J ;

··

The

•

933 The following are the results of the experiments with this form of apparatus:(a).

I. 11.

III. IV. V. VI.

··········· . ..... ··········· ········ ····················· ..... ··········· ... .................. ..

··············· VII. ······ ·····················

VIII.

....................

35 min. ········ ······ 30 ··············· " ............... 30 ,, 30 ............... 30 " ... ·· ········· " N_o t~rbidity ..... . 25 mm .. ... .......... 70 .. ............

(b).

(c).

(d).

Deg. F. J38 329 336 379 351

Deg. F. 392 396 396 478 457 243 401 351

Mio. 95 75 100 63 00 450 40 81

354 302

(e).

No ignit,ion .

" ,," ,, ,. Ignition .

(a) Time in minutes from the moment when the heating bepn to the time a~ which the first tu1 bi:lity of the lime-water ,\as noticed. (b) Temperature of the bath when th e Jime•wo.t.er first begun to be turbid. (c) Me.ximum temperature to which the bath was ultimately mised. (d> Time the experiment occupied. (e) Result.

In experiment V, the mixture of coal and oil from the Ryhope air-receiver was substituted for the coal-<lust. It will be seen from these experiments that oxidation commences at as low a. temperat.ure as 30'2° F., as shown by the production of carbon dioxide. Further, in two instances the ignition of the coal-dust took place when the temperature of the bl\th had been raised to 351° F. in one case and 401 ° F. in the second. Under the conditions of these first experiments but a very small mass of coal-dust (~ ounce) co11ld be used, and exposing very limited surface to the action of the air. With a dew of incr·easing the mass of coal-dust experimented on, and also enlarging the surface, further experiments were conducted. In these the coal-dust was (instead of placing it in a tube) spread iu layers about half an inch deep over a small sheet of asbestos, supported in the air.bath on two glass rods, and a current of air was made to play over the surface of the con.I. Ignition took place a.t the following temperatures :1.-4370 to 446° F. VI.-410° F. IL-446° F. VII. -39'2° F. III.-419° F. VIII.-392° F. IV.-417° F. I X.-3i4° F. V.-410° F. X. - 356° F. Io the case of ten experiments the coal fired at temperatures rnrying from 356° F. to 446° F., these being the extremes. These experiments showed that ignition of the coal-dust could be more easily produced when working under these conditions than when tubes were used, ns in the fonner experiments; and it was thought that by a further increase of the quantity of coal·dnst opet·ated on, and also of the surface of the dust exposed to the air, a. still further reduction of the temperature might Le effected. To test t his a second seric:J of experiments were made with a larger air-bath, the coal-dust being placed on a sheet of asbestos about 9 inches square. Underneath it was a similar sheet to distribute the heat evenly, and above it a tube bent in the form of a Oat spiral and piercetl with fine holes, air being forced through this tu be by means of a watct· blower. The temperature of the bath was carefully regulated by a thermostat. The following are the results of the experiments with this apparatus : -

I. II.

... ································ ................................... .

.................................... IV. ....................... :...... ·····1 V. ................. ................. III.

VI. VII. VIII. I X.

:::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::·, .................................. ····································

...... . ..... .... ..... ... ......... . .. 1

(a.).

(b).

(c).

Deg. F.

Deg. F. 275 2i4 2 9 302 302 3:20 316 293 293 29L

Min. 330 2,700 615 300 405 80 70 75

266

266 271 293 293 302 302 280 203 266

60 75

(d).

No ignition.

" H

Ignition.

,, ,, ,, ,,

(a.) Ternpemture to which the h3tb was heated before uie co:i.l w:,.s put in. (b) Highest temperature of bath. (c) Time the experiment occupied. (d) Rci;ult.

In expe1 iml'nt!'l n· and V half of the asbestos was c:>vered with tho mixture of coal and oil from the receiver, the other half with coal-dust. In fh-e out of ten rxperiments the coal ignited, wit.h tho temperature of the bath varying from 291° F. to 320" F. In none of these cases did the time from which the dust wns placed in the bath to the moment of ignition exceed one hour. In making these experiments it was observed that in every co.se in which the ignition of the dust took place, that immediately after the thermometer immersed in the dust began to rise, a peculiar odour was noted, soon followed by a rapid rise of tempP.ru.ture as shown by tho thermometer, and a. commencement of the burning of the coa,J a.s ol.,sen·ecl by the experimenter. This remarkable odour in time became of great value, ser ving as a more va.luahlo indication of the progress of oxidation tbao the thermometer itself. Tho burning of the dust always commenced in different parts and appeart!d to have commenced below the surface, ancl when ouce started it would continue to glow until the coal was apparently burnt away. A section through the coal shows that the central portion was alone completely burnt, the upper and lower surfaces still retaining a coal-like aspect. In the experiments in which the ignition of the coal took place the thermometer immersed in the coal, after reaching the same point as that of the bath, for example, 28-1° F ., would rise slowly to 356° F. and then rapidly shoot up beyond temperatures registered by a mercurial thermometer. An experiment was made with an air thermometer, the bulb of which was immersed in the coal.dust; and starting with the bath at the ordinary temperature an<l gradually raising it to 298" F., the indications of the thermometer in the coa.1-dust showed that the dust took about half an hour to reacn the temperature of the bath, then the temperature of the coal rose I apidly uutil, with the bath at 298° F., tho coal-dust ignited. The readings of the a ir thermometer show satisfactorily that a.ft.or the co:i.l-dm1t reached the temperature of 3550 F., the oxidation is then greatly accelerated ar.d the thermometer rapidly rises to 392° F., after which it was no longet· able to keep pace wi th the riRe in temperature in the coal, now proceeding with such rapidity that in a few minutes-some two or three- the coal took fire. It was next thought desirable to make some experiments with a.ir under pressure. With this object a strong iron tube A, with a collar Al, was made, provided with three smaller tubes B, with brass collars Cat the end of ~a.ch . the ends of the tube were closed by thick glass plates D, kept in position by screw caps E fitting on to asbestos washers and screwed on t.o the collars. The interior of the tube was illuminated by a gas burner F placed opposite one of the en ds the light from which reflected by a. mirror G opposite the other end, thus enabling the experimenter to observe the changes ta.king pl.ace in tho interior of tho tube. Coal-dust was spread over the lower half of the tube ;:a tliermometer H with bulb immersed in the dust was fixed in the central aperture. Of the two remaining apertures one was coonected with the airruceiver containing air under 60 lb. pressure, the other provided with a small safety-valve furnished with a atop-cock pnrtiully

934 partially closed, so ~ to allow for a circulation of the. ai; through t~e tube. The tube _was heated to the d~.ired temperature by placing it in an air-bath c~ref~lly l~cated. A prel_immary ~xper1ment was. ~ade m the ~boratory with a cylinder of compressed air, but the workmg m this manner pronng unsatisfactory, perm1ss10n was obtained from 111r. H. Lawrence, of the Grange Iron " 'ork11, to make some trials with air supplied by one of their air-compressing engines. Two experiments were made with the result that ignition of the dust was obsened to take place when the coal-dust had been heated to a temperatu;e of 293° F. It was further noted that in both cases the combustion was vivid at the part at which the air entered from the compressor, antl that a higher temperature much have been reached tlian when experimenting with air under ordinary pressure was shown by the fact that particles of coked dust were found amongst the coal after each experiment, a result never obtained in experiments made at ordinary pressures. The bearing of these observations on the question under discussion would appear to be-(1) It is shown that with an easily oxidisable material, such as coal-dust, it is only necessary to accelerate the oxidation by heating the dust in contact with air to a temperature within the limits of those likely to be reached in compressing air to 58 lbs., in order to bring about in the course of time the ignition of the dust. (~) These results have been possible even when experimenting with a. comparatively i;mall amount of the material ; an influence of importance, as is shown by tho results obtained in the two different series of exp eriments made, the conditions of which differed essentially only in the amount of coal operated upon. In the second series, with I oz. a temperature of 356° F. was required for ignition; whilst in the third series, with 10 oz., the temperature requirecl was reduced to 291° F. Despite the fact that the one or two experiments made with the deposit found in the Ryhope air-receiver, made under conditions similar to those in which the con.I-dust was successfully ignited, were not in a like manner successful ; still, as there ca.n b2 no doubt that t his material is of a nature somewhat akin to the coal-dust entering so largely into its composition, and, like it, capable of being oxidised by the oxygen of tbo air, the constant exposure of this substance to the action of air heated by compression must result in the acceleration of the oxldation, and, as with the coal-dust, in a rise in temperature until in some portion of the mass local ignition commences. Combustion once begu1:1 at any poin~ in the ma~s, the conditions are most fav ourable to its rapid extension. Further, the heat generated by a combustion or a portion of the mass migbt serve to destructively distil neighbouring poi liens, and thus give rise to the formation oi combustible gases, which, mixing with the air, would form an cxplosi\·e mixture. An explosive mixture formed under these conditions would be readily ignited by contact with the already burning material. . In conclusion, I ha\·e to express my indebtedness to Mr. Saville Shaw, of the Durham College of Science, for the valuable assistance given in conducting these experiments. P. PRILUPS BEl>SdN.

Exhibit No. 37.

Plan of No. 1 Right Road, between 4th Right and 5th Right, prepared by Mr. ,varburton, Sun·eyor, Mount Kembla Colliery, put in during evidence of Mr. A. E. 0. Sellers, 23rd February, 1903.

Exhibit No. 38. Plan of 5th Right Rope Road showing No. 1. H eadin~ and ~djoin~g W orkings, prepared by :Mr. Warburton, Surveyor, Mount K embla. Colliery, put m d uring evidence of Mr. A. E. 0. Sellers, 23rd February, 1903. Exhibit No. 39. Plan of No. 1 ]\fain Level outbye from 4th Right Rope Road, prepared by Mr. Warburton, Sun·eyor, 1\1011nt KcmLln. ColliPry, put in during the evidence of Mr. A. E. 0. Sellers, 23rd February, 1903.

Exhibit No. 40.

•

MOUNT KEMBLA COLLIEltY EXPL0.3ION. S hort J/i,slory of Colliery. On the 31st July, 1902, a.bout l ·-15 p.m., an explosion orcurred n.t the Mount Keml,la Colliery, which has resulted in the den.th of ninety.five persons, besides injuries to many others. Situation of Colliery.-The colliery is situated about 7 miles in a westerly direction from Wollongong, or about 50 miles south from Sydney, aud is the most southerly of the collinies in the Southern or lllawarra. District . I t is about 9 miles south·\\ est of the Bulli Colliery, "here an explosion causing the deaths of eighty-one persons took place in the workings of the same seam on 21st March, 1887. Urowth of Colliery.- Accor<liug to the Annnal Reporls of the Department, during the year 1882, sixty men were employed in preliminal'y works, bnt no coal was obtained. The next year shows that 110 persons were employed at the colliery, anrl of these eighty.three were engaged underground, whilst the output of coal for that year was 21,522 tons. Since that date the output has steadily increased, the output for 1901 being 261,350 tons, whilst there were eighty-seven persons employ£:d above, and 253 below ground. Officers of Colliery.-The company is known as the Mount Kembla Coal and Oil Company (Limited), whose Sydney office is at 38, Pitt-street, and London office at 30, Moorgate·street. The principal local officials in connection with the colliery at the time of t he explosion were as follows :-Consulting Engineer to the Company-Dr. J. R . M. Hobertson ; Resident Manager-Mi·. Wm. Rogers; Under-manager-Mr. Wm. Nelson; Mechanical En~ineer- i Jr. ,John Rae; two night-shift firem en-Wm. Mc.M:urray (who die<l from the effects of inhaling carbon monoxide when rescuing after the explosion) and J ohn Morrison; two day-shift deputies- David E\·ans and Frank Dungey (who was killed by the explosion on No. 1 main level); Mr. E. Weyland was the Secretary to the Company. [It may be noted that the fireman, Mt·. William olc1lurra.y, refe1reJ to above, held a certificate of competency as a Colliery ~Janager, granted in Scotland in 1876.) Seam.-The seam of coal worked is known as the Main, or Bulli, and is the uppermost of the series, and is, in fact. the only seam extensively worked in the Southern Di!>trict. The seam as at present worked varies from 2 feet 8 inches up to 8 fee~ 6 inches in thickness, with an avernge possibly of a.bout 4 feet 3 inches. Dip. - The dip of the seam for nearly three-quarters of a mile is about l in 19, in the direction of S. 47 n-., where the main tunnel crosses an I l feet upthrow fault, and beyond this there is a dip of about 5 feet in 40 chains, with a cer tain length of le\·el ground beyond. All the workings at the time of the explosion going to the north in the No. 1 Right district, in which the explosion occuned, were risiog in that direction. The seam ~vorked crops out on the hillside of the range of hills which skirts the coastline at a distance of a few miles from the Pacific Ocean, varyiug from half a mile at Clifton to 5 miles a.t Mount Kembla. The position of the seam at the latter colliery is about 840 feet above sea-level; the highest point of Mount Kembla is about I, 750 feet above sea.level. Oo account of the features just described, it has heen found most convenient to work this colliery, as well as all the others in the lllawarra District (excep t the Metropolitan aud South Clifton), by meanll of adits or tunnels driven into the coal seam from the outcrop. Roof. -The roof generally consists of a dark arenaceous shale to a grey sandstone. In some cases I understand that there is a. conglo:nerate roof o\·er the seam where the coal seam is very thin. Floor.- The floor of the seam consists of u. dark shale to a. sandy schist for 5 feet; then eanclstone. Rolls in the floor are rare or are absent where the seam is thinnest in the workings to the south of the main tunnel. To the north they are fairly numerous, but arc not so high as at some of the southern collieries, and therefore t.heil- occurrence does not interfere wit h the direction of roads, or the shape or size of pillars. Faulb.

r I

935 :faults. -In addition to rolls, and two basalt dykes near to the outcrop, only two faults of any magnitude a.i:e crossed -one an 11 feet upthrow about 60 chains down the tunnel. The throw of this reduces towards the north, or ts split up by a number of small displacements. The other is about! a mile from the tunnel mouth, and is a thrust fault displacing the seam 7 feet down, hut reduces to the south and to the north. Towards the latter it formed a. fissure fu\l of small coal, the opposing faces showing '' slickeosides." Distance between Seams.-The distance between the Bulli seam and the 4-feet seam at Kembla is about 32 feet. A water level driven in the latter for half a mile showed it was destro) ed t o a great extent by intet·bedded basalt, while 'iOO yards to the south of the ma.in tunnels a winze sunk to the 4 feet coal proved its structure destroyed by injected basalt. In neith~r of these cases did basalt show in the upper se~m. . Furnaces: Venti1ation.-The first furnace was erected near the outcrop of the upper seam above the main tunnel This serve~ for about four years, when a second furnace was built at a daylight opening 200 yards or so north of the present mam tunnel. The present furnace shaft, which is 12 feet iu diameter and 405 feet deep, according to the Annual R eports, was being sunk during tl1e yea.r 1887; but it does not appear that the furnace in this aha.ft came into operation unt il about the year 189 1. Ventilation (continuecl).-The vent.ilation of the colliery is effectecl by means of a furnace with a fire grate ?f 11~ feet by 6 feet, placed near the bottom of the upcast shaft This is distant a.bout a mile from the entrance to the mam tunnels. Air Measurements.-The quantity of air produced by this furnace varies from 80,000 to 100,000 cubic feet per minute. After its adoption, the original ones were removed, and the then returns made into intakes, which are now the travelling roads for men and horses. The quantity of air, as shown in the Annual Return for 1902, is 86,000 cubic feet per minute. . Tunnels or Adits.-At present the air enters the mine by four tunnels, by all of which it is possible to travel and r e,ch the workings of any part of the mine. The positions of these adits or tunnels as mediums for supplying fresh air to the workings, and as travelling roads for the workmen to the surfacP, had an important bearing in saving the lives of many persons employed in the coll·ery aftet· the exp!osion, and in these respects were of great advanta6e. Area of \Vor kings.- The total at·ea of the workings at th~ time of the explosion amounted to about 760 aet·es, and of this area the coal had bt::en entirely remove,l from about 270 acres, either by the longwall, or bord and pillar system. The methoJ of working the seam of Cl'al at the time of the explosion was entirely on the bord ancl. pillar system. Longwall ha_d been extensivdy worked a few years ago on the south side of the main tunnel, and to a small extent more recently, butth1s also hart lieen staudiug some little time. Per.;ons in Mine at time of Explosion. -On the 31st July, l 9J2, the following persons (approximately) were in the mine at the time of the ei..-plosion, viz. :- Under-manager, 1 ; deputies, 2; miners, 208; wheelers, 27; shiftmen, &c., 15; c;li ppers, 7 ; total 260. S)lifts. -The front shift of miners commences work at 7 o'clock and is due out about 3, o'clock. '.l'he back shift commences at 9 a.. m. and is due out about 5 p m. Coa.l drawing commences at 7 a. m. and ceases at 5 p. m. Haulage. - H aul:Jge is effected by means of the endless rope system, modng at a speed of from 2 to 3 miles an hour, whilst the coal is hauled from the face np to tpo point wµe re the endless haulage receives it by means of horses. A. A. ATKINSON, Chief Inspector of Coal Mines.

Emibit No. 41. 13th May, l 898. Wm. Rogers, Esq., ~Ianager, Monut Kembla Colliery, Wollongong,Sir. R eferring to my visit t:> the Mount Kembla Colliery on t he 11th instant, and to our conversation on several matters, amongst which were :1. Old Dav.v lamps now used by deputies being considered as out of date, and illegal under General Rule 9, should be replaced by anothet· type of safety-lamps. · · · 2. General Rule 4. As to reports being made at the " station " and before each shift commences, whether day or nigbt. 3. General Rule 12. Blasting on haulage roa<ls in presence of <lust, and necessity for strict observance of the apove rule. I have, &c., I shall be pleased to hear from you on these matters. A. A. ATKINSON, Chief Inspector of Coal Mines. Wm. Rogers, Es11., Manager, Mount Kembla Colliery, Wollongong,10th April, 1899. Sir. Will you be goo<l enon,gh to re-report the accident to J. Brunn on the enclosed form. I trust that you will have the necessary forms for reporting future accidents as soon as practicable. l have, &c., A. A. ATKINSON, Chief L.ispector of Coal Mines. Wm. Rogers, Esq., Manager, Mount. Kembla Colliery, 'Wollongong,27th August, 1900,. Sir. I have the honor to fot·ward to you, under separate cover, the plan of the workings of your colliery, and shall be obliged if, in addition to noting thereon the workings up to date, you will have the surface boundaries shown. ' l have, &c., A. A. ATKINSON, Chief Inspect.or of Coal Mines. 27th 8eptember, 1900. Wm. Rogers, Esq., Manager, Mount Kembla Colliery,Sir, With a. view to ha.ving a sample of coal-dust collected and sent to Eogland for testing, from your colliery, I am· ·sending a letter addressed to you at the colliery, and shall be pleased if you will be good enough to keep it until I have an opportunity of discussing the matter with you at the colliery. · Yours, &c., A. A. ATKINSON, Chief Inspector of Coal Mines.

5th November, 1900. Wm. Rogers, Esq., Manager, Mount Kembla Colliery, Mount K~mbla,Sir, With reference to the accident which lutppencd to P. Brownlee at your colliery Oil the 18th ultimo, I am directed to invite your attention to General Rule3 ?:2 and 23, section 47 of the Coal Mines Regulation Act, and to request that you will be good enough to see that a good supply of timber is kept always on hand us required by the last-mentioned rule. I am at the same time to point out to you the advisableness, when the workings are at a d istance from the iunnel mouth, of having a stretcher and other ambulance appliances kept near the working faces. I have, &c., A. A. ATKINSON, Chief Inspector of Coal Mines. Wm .

936 W m. Rogers, Esq., Manager, Mount Kembla Colliery,4th March, 1901. Dear Sir, With further reference to the tin of coal-dust. After soldcrin~ the lid, will you kindly cause to be painted on ,, Sample of coal-dust from Mount Kembla. Colliery," and consign it to •• Messrs. J. R. Reid and Sons, 412, Kent-street, Sydney," who have kindly consented to pack it for tho Department Enclosed a.re address labels for above. Yours, &c., A. A. ATKINSON. Wm. Rogers, Esq., Manager, Mount K embla Colliery,14th December, 1901. Sir, With reference to the recent accident to the brothers H. and J. B iggers, on the 26th of last month, when they were unfort unately loft three or four hours in the mine after their injuries had been received ; and the conversalion which Mr. Bates has had with you in regard to some system being adoptecl in order to ascertain when all persons are out of the mine, I will be pleased to hear what you have decided to do in this matter. I have, &c., A. A. ATKINSON, Chief Inspector of Coal Mines. Wm. Rogers, Esq., Manager, l\lount Kembla Colliery,15th January, 1002. Sir ' I have the honor to direct yom· atlention to my letter of the 14th ultimo inquiring what procedure you intend to adopt to avoid in fnture the possibitit,y of any snch unfortunate occurrence as that connected witli the accident to the brothers Biggers, in the MounL Kembla. Colliery : and to request that you will be good enough to let me know, at you r early convenience, what arrangements you have made, or propose to make. I haYe, &c., A. A. ATKINSON, Chief Inspector of Coal Mines.

Wm. Rogers, Esq., Manager, Mount Kembla Colliery,-

25th February, 1902. · ' I regret to learn t hat as yet nothing has been done a.t your colliery for establishing some system of knowing whether a.II the workmen have left the mine. The matter, as you know, was first. mentioned to you by Mr. Rowan in the month of May last, and liaving regard to t he accident which took place to the brothers Biggers on the 27th November last, when they were unfortunately left in an injured condition in the mine for some hours, unknown to the management, it appears to me that the necessity for such a regulation ongbt to appeal strongly to you. I also regret I.he atLitude which you ha,·e taken up by neglecting to answer any letters addressed to you on thi• subject; and I shall therefore be compelled to seek an early interview with you in regard to it. I have, &c., A. A. ATKINSON, Chief Inspector of Coal Mines. Sir

Wm. Rogers, Esq. , Manager, Mount Kembla Colliery, Mount Kembla,-

ffi~

10th March, 1902

With reference to the inspection of your colliery by Mr. Bates and myself on the 6th inst.ant, as promi€ed, I beg to enclose herewith copy of form of report ur.der General Rule 7, section 47, which I would suggest you should ha.,·e in book form, say, of 50 or 100 pages. I made an examination of your petroleum oil engine, which is near to the main intake, but placed in the return, a nd regret to sa.y that close to it there was a quantity of old and oily waste, to which I directed the attention of the fitter, and he promised to have it removed. I beg to point out to you that uothing inflammable should be left near an engine of this description. There are also a number of wooden planks surrounding this engine which I would suggest should be removed. You may not be aware that one or two accidents have ba.ppenecl in Grea~ Brita.in in connection with the use of these engines, and for your information I have pleasure to enclose parLicula.rs, and trust that you will adopt similar precautions as suggested in the Special Rule:1 given. I ha.Ye, &c., A. A. ATKINSON, Chief Inspector of Coal Mines.

Exhibit No. 42. CORRIMAL COLLIERY. \Ye, the undersigned, certify that the following is a fair and true report of au examination of the above mine, made on the ll th and 12th September, l!lOO. We inspecte<l the travelling roads, !'et.urn ainvays, working 1,1lace, and engine-planes, and fou nd them i.afe and free from explosive or noxiou; gases. There is a portion of the travelling road where the steam-pump is located t bat is very hot, and we recommended tha.t tho men be allowed to t,nwel the engine-road to the slant, and re-enter the travelling road at that point. The Balgowrie intake air amounted to 18,000 cubic feet; the Corrimal intake registered 10,440; tot.al, 28,540 feet. At the furnace the tot:i.1 return air was 35,580 cubic feet, showing a difference of 7,OtO cubic feet unaccounted for. The intake air is split into three parLs- 10,088 cubic feet registered in the Main South District, 7,200 cubic feet in the Slant District, an<l 5,260 cubic feet in the Main Dip. Thermometer registered 70. There are thirty-three men, six horses, and four hoys supplied in the ma.in south with an average of 234 cubic feet each. There are fifty men and boys and seven horses in the Slan t District getting an a,·erage of 126 cubic feet. 1'hAre are fifty-six men and boys and five horses in the Ma.in Dip. The registered quantity of air for Maio Dip and Slant Districts was 17,873 cubic feet, ; out of that 7,200 cubic feet supplies the Slant, and near the working places in Main Dip we only got a register of 5,260 cubic feet of air per minute for sixty-one men, boys, and horses, giving an average of 86t cubic feet for ea.ch. In the Main Dip return airway there was 5, 100 cubic feet, per minute. It should be mentioned that the anemometer is not in perfect or<ler, but the pa.rt of the instrument in fault is the sa.nd glass or stop, hence we h:Lve no reason to doubt the correctness of this register. T he management are actively preparing a new ventilating fan at great cost to increase the Yentilation. There was a good supply of timber, and in other respects the mine is in a sati&factory condition. JOHN WYNN, } 13th September, 1900. ROBERT VARDY, Check lns~ectors. Certified copy. D. RITCHlE, District Secretary, Illawarra District Council of Australasian Labour F ederation. Illa·varra District Council, A.L.F., N.S.W. Pro,·incial Council, Bnlli , James Rowan, E sq., Mines Inspector, Keiraville,15th September, 1900. Dear Sir, · I hereby enclose a. copy of Check Ini-pector's report of the Corrimal Colliery, and I respectfully direct your attention to the same. You will observe that the Check I nspector's report on the ventilation shows the Maio Dip as being supplied with less than the min imum quantity allowed by the Coal Mines Regulation Act. I a.m, &c. , D. RITCHIE, . District Secretary, Bulli. On behalf of the Co1·rimal miners. Illawo.rra

llla.wana. District Council, A.L. F., N.S. W. Provincial Council, Bulli, 15th Sept£"mber, 1900. The H on. J_. L . Fegan, Minister for Mines, Sydney,Dear S1r, On behalf of the Corrimal miners, I have the honor to submit for the information of your Dep artment, the attached copy of Check-inspector's report, which shows the ventilation' supplied to be below tbe minimum quantity allowed by the Coal :'vlines Regulation Act. I have also forwarded a copy to Inspector Rowan of this District. I am, &c., D. RITCHIE, District Secretary. Let a wire be sent to Inspector Rowan.-J.L.F., 17/9/1900. Wire sent to Inspector R owan, 17/9/1900.

Telegram from Sydney addressed to James Row:m, Esq., Inspector Coal Mines. New South Wales Post and Telegraph Colonial and Intercolonial Lines, . 17th September, 1900. PLEASE farmsh report at once on complaint rn ventilation at Corrimal Colliery. A. A. ATKINSON, - - - -·- Chief Inspector Mines, Sydney. REPORT ON COMPLAINT

•re

VENTILATION BY CUECK• INSPECTORS AT CoRRIMAL COLLIERY.

A. AS. .Atkinson, Esq., Chief Inspector of Coal Mines,-

Wollongong, 19th September, 1900.

ir,

In accordance with your instructions of the 17th instant, v iz., to furnish r eport at once on complaint re ventilation at Corrimal Colliery. I have the hon?r t_o in.form you th~t I made a careful inspection of the complaint, and have much pleasure in stating that I found the vent1lat1on ma very satisfactory state throughout the colliery. B efore co~me.n cing. my inspection I sent for Robert Vardy, one of the check-iuspectors who ma.de the at~ched report and ~xa.mwat1on with John Wynn, and requested him to accompany me while I took the measurements and registers of .t?e ve~t1lation ; he came with me, and in each case observed the reading of the air meter and cubical conteuts of the vano.us a.1r currents. I may here explain after I took the first measurement I found that the veins of my air meter were not runn10g freely, so I sent for t he Manager's instrument and took the undermentioned currents.

The Slant ....... .................. ................. • The Main Dip ............ .................... Ma.iu South ...... .......................... ... ...

Cubic feet of air per minute.

7,125 7,020 9,000

Number of men and horses.

Cubic feet of a ir per minute for eacb man a.nd horse.

57 61

125 115 208

• This is the portion complained of in the Check,in~pectors' report.

I took the above registers at a point about 5 chains from the centre of the working places, and fouDd t he same fairly well conducted, and the brattice kept up to a reasonable distance from the face of the bords. Robert Vardy, check-inspector, informed me that he was now satisfied that the instrument they had (taking the air) was at fault, and did not give a true measurement, and he would inform John Wynn, the other check-inspector, of the same. Travelling Roacl Complaint. In regard to the request that the miners be allowed to travel the engine road to the" Slant. " In my opinion this is an unwarrantable request, as the miners ,vould have to diverge off the t ravelling road a distance of 10 chains-where the traffic is so great-there being forty skips on each set and running at a rate of 10 miles per hour, and about 800 tons of coal passing the ahove junction daily. Description of the road objected to. A small pumping engine is placed at I.he side of the travelling road. The road is 6 ft. high x 12 ft. wide. There are two doors placed 16 yards apart, one protecting the intake and the return air from mixing. I took a register of t,he temperature at the above portion of the travelling road, and the thermometer stood at 82°, I at about the same time took the temperature outside the tunnel and got a register of 78°. The new fan, which has been in course of constrnction for some time, is now about completed, and will be in working order in about two weeks from date. The total cost of the new ventilating fan, with all its connections, is about £3,500. I have, &c., JAMES ROWAN, - - - - -Inspector of Collieries. CHECK-INSPECTORS' REPORT RE V.ENTILATION AT THE CoRRlMAL COLLIERY WITH L~SPECTOR RoWAN's REPORT THEREON.

Under Secretary, Department of Mines,21st September, 1900. It appears that on the 11th or 12th instant, the check-inspectors measured 86,i cubic feet of air per man in the main dip district, and on the 18th instant, Inspector Rowan measured ll 5 per man in the same district. Some time ago in consequeuce of representations, both written and ,·erbal, made to the Manager of this colliery by Mr. Rowan and myself, after the company had just ac<].uired an extension of coal land, and would in consequence require more power for ventilating purposes, be pursuaded his directors to purchase a fan, which is now in course of erection, and will commence work in about two weeks (see Mr. Rowan's report). Having regard, however, to t.he fact that the ventilation, in one district at least, is so near to the statutory limit, I beg to suggest that a letter may be addressed to the Manager, asking if he will be good enough to have the fan started with as little delay as possible. A. A. ATKINSON. For the information of the Minister. The Manager may be written to as suggested by Mr. Atkinson, and Mr. Ritchie informed of the action taken. - H.B.S., for U.S., 22/9/1£00. Approved.-J.L.F., 22/9/ 1900. Manager Corrimal Colliery asked, and D. Ritchie informed.-24/9/ 1900. In a month.-A.A.A ., 26/9/1900. Mr. Wood, 25/10/1900. Mr. Inspector Rowan informs me that the fan is now at work, and the ventilation much improved. The Under Secretary, For .Minister's information.-D.C.McL. Seen, 26/10/1000.-J.L.F., 26/10/1900. A.A.A., 25/ 10/1900 Department of Mines o.nd Agriculture, Sydney, 24 September, 1900. R eference No. 1900-19760 M. D. Ritchie, Esq., District Secretary, Illawarra District Council, IlulliDate of letter under reply- 15th September, 1900. Subject :-Forwarding, on behalf of the Corrima.l miners, a. copy of the check-inspectors' report, which shows the ventilation supplied to be below tbe minimum quantity ttllowed by the Coa.l Mines Regulation Act. Reply :-The Manager of the Corrimal Colliery has been written Lo, asking that the fa.n which is now in course of erection be started with as little delay as possible. D. C. McLACHLAN, Undel' Secretar y (Per A. 'F.). Exhibit No. 43.

1G825

29-60

038 Exhibit No. 43. A. A. Atkinson, Esq., Chief Inspector of Colleries,8 Ma.y, 1902. Sir ' In my capacity of check-inspector! I visited the South .Wnllsen<l Colliery yest~rday, and, in company with !UY co.appointee, Mr. J. Brown, saw a large subsidence of the surface m the b~d of a creek, which to me seems to be a standmg menace to the lives of the workmen employed underground at. that colliery. Although the course of the creek has been sli<rhtly <livcrtcd, and flumed for a short distance, the fluming iR of such a temporary character, and on so insecure a. foi~ndation, besides taking the extensive area watershed into conshleration, it seems.to ~e far too small, .the sectional 11.~ea beina only about 30 square feet, to carry the current of water that must come down 10 times of heavy ra10. My attention was 'arawn to the fact that only very lately the men were withdrawn after only about forty-five minutes heavy rain, and it took a. week to pump the water out again. And although some attempt has been made to fill in, and make the hole watertight, it seems to be only of a temporary character, as there was a large funnel.shaped hole, about 18 inches in diameter, seemingly right through to the old workings, caused by the passage of water, although the late rains have been very light. I offer no apology for drawing your 11.ttention to this matter, for I have a sincere conviction that a serious calamity may take place at any time du ring wet weather. Yours, &c. , WM. BOWER. Acknowledged, 9/5/02. Please register and return. Mr. Inspector Dixon.-A.A.A. (per C.A.S.), B.C., 9/5/02. Noted.-J.D., l'l/5/02. New Soutll Wales, Coal Fields Office, Department of Mines and Agrioulture, Sydney, 26 May, 1902. Mr. W. Bower, District Check-inspector, Colliery Employees' Association, Newcastle,South, Wal/send Colliery. Sir, '\Yith further reference to your letter of the 8th instant, addressed to me, and which I received on my return to the Department, I may mention that the subject-matter of your letter hacl a lready engaged tho attent ion of the Inspector of the colliery, Mr. Dixon, prior to your inspection of the mine. The last paragraph of your letter is as follows:-" I offer no apology for drawing your attention to this matter, for I have a sincere convicLion that a serious calamity m&y take place at any time during wet weather" ; a nd on reading over the joint. report of yourself and Mr. Brown of the check inspection of the South Wallsend Colliery, dated the 7th insta.ot, I do not find that any reference is made to any existing or apprehended danger J and in consequence of.this, it was not incumbent on the part of the Manager to send a copy of such report to the Inspector of the district. It is evident, there· fore, that there is a. considerable difference between the letter addressed to me and your report with reference to any existing or apprehended <langer, and I beg to suggest that in future you will, as required by the rule, enter in the book, kept at the colliery for that purpose, a true report of t he result of the inspection, so that prompt action can be taken by the Manager, as is requirE:d of him by the terms of General Rule 39, in tho event of any existing or apprehended danger being reported. I do not desire in o.ny way to find fault with the contents of your letter, and trust that by directing your attention to a matter which has apparently escaped your observation, it will be in t he future attended to. ·. I have, &c., A. A. ATKINSON, Chief Inspector of Coal Mines.

E_xhibit No. 44. Seaham Oolliery Oheck-i11spectoi·',~ Report. \Ve examined this mine on the 25th, 26th, and 27th instant, and found it well ventilated and the air currents wollconducted. On the 25th, the routine of inspection was interrupted by a fire in No. 4 distl'ict, which originated in an old bord on the right of No. 4 narrow bord, caused, so far as we could learn, by a small accumulation of gas coming in contact with the naked light of a workman who was examining the refuse stopping a.t the bord end. Steps were at once take11 to comLat the fire, and it was finally subdued the same evening. We examined it again on the 26th, and found it all right, though still a little warm, the temperature being 79°. We have the Manager's word that, as soon as he can get a water supply, he will deal with the dust nuisance cffect.ually. 'l'he travelling on the main roo.ds is bad, owing to the large quantities of loose coal lying about; and a. more effective method could be used in dealing with this matter. We also examined the seat of the old fire on the east side, and found the temperature normal, and a good current of air travelling o,·er the broken ground. A good supply of timber was available, and in all other respects the mine seemed to be well found. The following are the details of the inspection :-

West Side. No. l split intake, 9,500 cubic feet per minute, for 26 men, 2 boys, and 2 horses, giving each 316 cubic feet per minute. T emperature, 66° to 70°. No. 2 eplit, 13,720 cubic feet per 01inute, for 46 men, 4 boys, and 4 horses, giving each 253 cubic feet per minute.

Temperature, 68° to 74°. No. 3 split intake, 11 ,500 cubic feet per minute, for 46 moo, 3 boys, and :l horses, giving each 221 cubic feet per minute. Temperature, 68° to 74°. No. 4 split intake, 13,050 cubic feet per minute, for 40 men, 3 boys, and 3 horses, giving each 283 cubic feet per minute. Tem\>crature 68° to 74°. No. 5 split intake, 8,800 cubic feet per minute, for 18 men, 2 boys, and 1 horse, giving each 419 cubic feet per minute. Temperature, 66° to 70°. No. 6 split intake, 17,820 cubic feet per minute, for 60 men, G boys, nml 6 horses, giving eaeh 247 cubic feet per minute. Temperature, 66° to 74°. East Side. No. 7 split intake, 17,010 cubic feet per minute, for 42 men, 4 boys, and 4 horses, giving each 340 cubic feet per minute. 1'empera.ture, 66° to 70°. No. 8 split intake, 12, 180 cubic feet per minute, fo1· 36 men, 3 boys, and 3 horses, giving ench 290 cubic feet per minute. Temperature, 66° to 70°. WM. ROWER 1c k. Jc)HN STENIIOUSE) hec -rnspectors.

Exhibit No. 45. Lithogl'aph Plan of Mount Kembla Mine, showing the ventilation of the mine at the time of the disaster, . prepared by Mr. Warburton, Surveyor, Mount K emlila Mine, put in during Mr. Warburton's evidence, 26th Fcbruo.ry, 1903.

Exhibit No. 46, Rough Sketch clrawn b~ Ml'. L eitch of Fourth Right Pillars in Mount Kombla Colliery at the time he lefL the Mme, June, 190'.?, put in during his examination, 3rd March, 1903. :Hxhibit No. 47.

t t

939 Exhibit No. 47, R eport of Check Inspection, made on the 5th and 6th of June, H>OO, in connection with the OsborneWallsend Colliery, Mount Keira. . . W_e ~om~enced our ~xamination in Pratt's tunnel, and found an intake of 17,280 feet of air travelling per mi nute. This 1s d1v1ded into two splits, and supplied 63 men, 13 boys, and 11 horses, giving an average of 198 feet each. In No. l _Left h:i,ncl st;aight down (which is on the right side of the present. working flat), we found an intake of G, 120 feet per mmute circulatmg for the supply of 26 miners, 5 horses, aud 5 boys, being an a\'erage supply of 170 feet. In No. 2 and No. 4 intake air combined we found 7,550: this supplied 27 men, 4 horses, 4 boys, giving an average of. 216 to each. The above records give a total intake of 30,950 cubic feet for the supply of 149 men, boys, and horses, b~mg an a\"erag~ of 207 cubic feet of air to each man, hoy, or horse. The lowest register of thermometer was 60°, the highest was 71°, 10 McGoldrick's heading straight down, and i0° each in Davis', and Bell's, and Stoker's, in No. 4. We found a return of air registered at the furnace of 47,600 cubic feet, showing a difference of the intake carried to the men on the working places of 16,650 cubic feet, part of which, however, is allowed to scale into No. l straight-down flat. We are of opinion that there is a loakao-e th rough tho canvas doors, whereby tbc air gets into the return airways 0 without e\"er reachi ng the working places. We found a plentiful supply of timber in e,·ery working place, and a reserve supply on every flat. There were some complaints of a deficient supply of rails. We travelled the return airways, and found them in good order, except one place (viz., in return from No. 2 cross-cut), where a fa.11 of stone had recently occurred, and partly blo_ck_ed ~he pa~so.ge. We fou nd a. small quantity of ~lack-do.mp in Ronson's bo~d, where th~ air was stagnant. ~r. Ph1lhps 1mmed1ately remo\'ed the men to another workmg placo on his attention be1og called to 1t. Some of the working places in No. 2 and No. 4 would not j$iYc a register at all, and some were ddven in excess of the distance for cut-throughs; but Mr. Phillips promised to have this amenderl where the faults would allow of it being done. . We recommend that a larger area be provided behind the brattice-cloth, for the better circulation of the ai r- notably 10 Bell's, Payne's, and McGoldrick's henrlings ; also, where the current of air is not circulating at the face end of the cam·as, a larger sheet of canvas be hung at the mouth o~ such bore or heading. JOHN WYNN, J .P., AND JAMES EMERY. P. S.-We desire to acknowledge the courtesy of Mr. P hillips in accompanying and assisting ns in our tour of examination.-Jou~ \Vun,, J .P., and JAMES EMERY.

Report of Check Inspection made on tbe 4th and 5th of J une, 1901, at the Osbornc-W allrnnd Colliery, :Monut K eira, by John ·wy nn and J amee Emery. We commenced our examination at. No. 2 cross-cut, o.nd found 2,496 cubic feet of air per minute travelling for the supply of seven men, one boy, and oue horse, being an average of 277 cubic feet each. \Ve then visited No. 4 cross-cut, and found 5,920 cubic feet of air travelling for the supply of thirty-seven men, seven boys, and seven horses; being an average of 116 cubic feet for each. This measurement is made on the outside of t he flat, and we are of the opinion that while the total gi,•es tho required amount at place of measurement, it is not conducted up to the working face, notably in John McGoldrick's place, and others in the immediate vicinity. We then visited straight down and found 18,900 cubic feet of air on the engine bank before the air for the supply of No. I Left was taken off. '!'his air is for the supply of ~n men, two boys, and two horses. But the measurement was made too far from the face to be of much use, but we are of opinion that a good supply of air was kept up to the men. We commenced No. l Left-hand on the 5th of June, and found 4-,560 cubic feet for the supply of twenty-eight men, five boys, and fh-e horses, being an average of 120 cubic feet of air each. We then visited Pratt's tunnel, and found 24,400 cubic feet of air for the supply of thirty-eight men, six boys, and six horses, being an average of 480 cubic feet of air each. We travelled t.he whole of the returns and found them in fairly good order, and we visited the furnace and found the larj:?e amount of 73,920 cubic feet travelling per minute, heing 6,720 cubic feet in exces'J of any predous records taken. \Ye also visited both trnvelliog roads, and found Pratt's tunnel in good order, but we recommend that some repairs be made to McGoldrick's tunnel and one or two falls be removed, and the entrance to tunnel be also repaired. We also visited e,·ery working place, and found a good s11pply of timber, with the exception of lids for props. A large amount of brick stopping!i have rcccutly bee11 erected, and others arc in course of crect,iou, which will greatly improve the ventilation when completed. \Ye also inspected all machinery, autl found it all safely fenced, hu t we wish to call attent.ion to General Rule 15 of the Conl Mines Act, which provides for two entrances to all engine houses. JAMES EMERY, A..l\D

JOHN WYNN. Non:.-This rule now complied with 15/6/01. -J.S.J.

Exhibit No. 48, LOST CREEK, IOWA, MINE EXPLOSION.

Report in .Mines and .Minerals fo r March, 1902, of an explosion of gunpowder gas in Lost Crook Mi no, Iowa, U.S.A. A letter received from Mr. John Verner, State Mine Inspector, second district, Oakalooea, Iowa, gives a brief statement of some of the fa.eta rell\ting to the mine explosion o( 24th J a.nuary, 1902, at Lost Creek Coal Mine, N o. 2. This . mine is owned and operated by the Lost Creek Fuel Company, the principal owners being Chas. E. Lofland, Frank C. Lofland, and Jap Timbrell. The Mine is located upon the Chicago and North-western Railroad, about 10 miles south and 1 milo east of Oskaloosa, Iowa. iline No. l , Ofneratetl. by the same company, was opened seven years ago, but mine No. 2 has b"'cn in operation less than two years. Ihe mine is what is known as a dry mine, there being little or no water in it, and as a consequence there is considerable dry dust accumulating in tho workings and upon the roadways. The mi ne bas been well kept, the roadways being clean and in good condition. There were employed in the mine, at the time of the explosion, 11 0 miners and company men. The explosion O<'cnrred on the morning of Friday, 24th January, at tive minutes of 12, and was the direct result of the firing of what proved to be a shot that the miners termed a " squealer." This is a shot that, instead of breaki11g the coal, finds \'ent into the mine workings through some crack or crevice in the conl. It was t he custom in the Lost Creek Mine to fire twice a clay, before quitti ng at noon and at night. Some of the men had already fired their shots, ascended the shaft, nnd gone to t heir homes fov dinner; others wero making their wo.y through entries ~ t~e !oot of the shaft, ao~ s~ill other, hat! no~ fired their ~orning shots. _T he _mine is divided with respect to its \'ent1lat1on mto two separate d1stncts, each having its separate air current. It 18 this fact alone that WtlB the means of arresting the progress of the explosion, and savi ng the lives of more than half of the men remaining in the pit at t.he time tbe accident occurred. Tnc unfortunate shot was located in one of the rooms npon entry No. 2, about 600 feet north-ea.st of the shaft bottom. The mine was well ventilated, the quantity of air in circulation being 46,000 cubic feet. TlJP force of the explosion was such as to hurl the du~t and debria of the mine many feet into the air at the mouth of the shaft. The co11c11s.i1on was terrific, shaking the earth, and communicating the knowledge o{ the awful catastrophe to thoso npon I.he surface, o.nd causing crowds Lo hurry in wild dismay to the top of the shaft tl> a$certain the fate of their lo,·ed ones. Twenty miners were killed, the large majol'it.y of whom were marrieu, and others were burned or injured by tho force of the explosion, some of them fatally. In spite of the tlnnger at.tending the work of rescue, a brave party of volunteers engaged 11,t once in the work, and matle thei r descent into the mine through the si:noke and ~ases ascending the shaf~. Man~ were found l_ying helpless and stunned at the hot.tom of the shaft and near hy in the entries, and were rescued while yet aln·e. As previously mentioned the air current was divided near the foot, of the shaft into two separate splits, forming the east and west districts of th~ mine. The explosion took place in the ea11t district, and was not transmitted to the west sine of tp.e mine.

Mino

.. ,

9.LO Mine Inspector Verner has very kindly sent us a sketch, which we reproduce, showing the position of the drill bole in which the shot was located that caused the catastrophe. The sketch also shows the relative position of this hole with respect to another 2-foot hole previovsly drilled. The positions of t~ese holes are s~ch that the end of the 2-foot hole was only 7! iochrs from the hole ~r~d.. Mr. Vemer .s~ys the shot causmg the explo~1on (5-foot hole) ha~ been charged the second time 1 and states that 1t 1s his present opm1on that the old 2-foot hole was the means of aJlowrng the force of the exploded po wder and gases t0 be thrown Ollt upon the air of the mine workings wfth their vigour almost unimpaired. Mr. Verner draws attention, as he has often done before, to the fact that holes fired the second time always contain a factor or element of uncertainty, and are dangerous. The reason for this is t hat the first shot may very possibly have creviced or fissured the coal. In any eYent the first shot would, as we sn.y, "spring" the hole, or increase its diameter in the region c,f the charge. The springing of the hole in blasting coal may prove a serious element of danger, even if no fissure or crevice is produced in the coal. A considerable amount of fine dust, or powdered coal, will be produced in t he hole by the first shot. This may remain !n the hole whe!l the second sho.t is fired, but the enlarged dia!lleter of the hole is apt iu many cases to lead to an overcharging of the hole JU the second firmg. Mr. Verner draws a.ttent1on to the fact that the gases carbon monoxide (CO), and to some extent sulphuretted hydrogen (H2S), p1·oduced in the firing of the first • charge, n~ay be d_ri ven by the force ~f the explosion into the fissures. and ci:acks of the coal at the back of the hole, and there remain until expelled by the firmg of the second charge, thereby mcreasmg the danger of the second shot. These remarks in reierence to firing a second shot in the same hole are by no means premature, drawing attention as they do to positive elements of danger which cannot be alluded to too often, and which are often neglected entirely by the miner. In accordance with a resolution passed by th~ Le~islature, Governor Summins, of Iowa, bas appointed the following Commission to investigate the causes of explosions m Iowa. coal mines. The Commission consists of two operators, two miners, and three State iospecL()rs, and is as follows :- J. E. Stout, Des Moines, T. J. Phillips, Ottumwa, operators; John P. Reece, President Dist. 13, U.M. W. of A., Albia, and John P. White, Oskaloosa, miners; J. A. Campbell, Ottumma, Inspector 1st ])ist., John Verner, Oskaloosa, Inspector 2ad Dist., J. W . Miller, Des Moines, Inspector 3rd District. \Ye cannot. but hope that this Commission will take up the work before them and investigate carefully the several explosions t hat have taken place in Iowa within the past ten years, in order to discover, if possible, some possible means of avoiding these dread l!appenings, for which there seems to be so little actual need. There being no gas in the Iowa coal-fields, it seems only fair to conclude th~t, w!th the e~ercise of proper care in the kreping of mine workings, and the observance of a. proper system and regulations m the firmg of shots, there should exi:it little need for these occurrences. Is it not the greed or the ignorance of the individual miner, manifested in the blasting, charging, and firing of bis shots, that forms the greatest element of danger in these mines.

LosT CREEK, lowA, MrnE

EXPLOSION.

. I·

Showing po&ition of-Drill hole which caused Di'.-saste?·.

Exhibit No. 49. EXPLOSIONS IN IOWA COAL MINES.

Report in Mines and Miner.als for April, 1902, of the find ing of the Commission of Inquiry on t he explosion in Lost Creek Mine, Iowa, U.S.A. The last issue of Mines and Minerals contained an account of the explosion at the Lost Creek Mine, Iowa, 24th January, 1902. '!'bis description also contained an announcement of the appointment of a Commission by the Legislature of Iowa to investigate the general subject of the explosions which have occurred in the coal mines of Iowa during several years past. Through the courtesy of the Secretary to this Commission, Mr. John Verner, we have recei,·ed a copy of the report, of which the following is an abstract :The Commission organised 17th F ebruary, 1902, by electing Hon. T. J. Phillips, Chairman, and Mine Inspector John Verner, Secretary. The first work done was to visit the Lost Creek Mine, in :Mahaska County, where a detailed study of the explosion was made, and the facts about this explosion, as given in the report of the Cvmmission, are essentially as given in the account contained in the last issue of .bfines a11<l Minf'ral.~, the cause of this explosion being traceable to gases which escaped from a re-fired drill hole through an old drill bole. Attention is called to the similarity between the Lost Creek explosion and one which occurred at Como, Colo., 9th January, 1893, when twenty-four miners w~re killed. The Commission's conclusions regarding the so-called dust explosions in Iowa and elsewhere are briefly as follows : The explosion of blasting powder produces not only a great amount of flame, but of the gases resulting from such explosion a.bout 49 per cent. are combustible and explosive, hence there is danger in allowing these gases to escape into an atmosphere which is heavily charged with dust. The report gives, as necessary factors entering into the development of an explosion, the following:First. -The intense heat generated by the flame and rx ploding gases from a shot or shots projected into the mine air with great force. Second.- The presence of coal-dust in the immediate vicinity of such shot or shots. Third.-A fair supply of pure air in the part of the mine where such shot or shots are fired. Under the heading, "The Influence of Coal-dust," the report states : Dust will not only aid in the easier ignition and explosion of the combustible gases produced by the explosion of powder, but it will add by its own combustion more heat and more fire, supplying thereby considerable a<iditional force that may make it possible to develop an explosion of considerable extent and severity.

The

•

041 The Commission's conclusions regarding the influence of pure air on the formation and propaga.tion of an explosion are given in the following paragraph:" Next to the explosion of the powder itself, the most influential factor in these so-called 'dust' explosions is pure air near its place of origin. It is the energizing element, and without it disastrous explosions in Iowa mines would become an impossibility. Shots rnay hlow the tamping, and dust may be present in abundance, 1.,ut both will remain comparatively harmless if the mine air is impure. " The conditions having a tendency to increase the severity of an explosion are given as, (1) brisk ventilation or high mine pressure ; (Z) low mine temperature; (3) congested or narrow openings. Under the head of brisk \·entilation or high mine pressure the Commission states that after studying the accounts of explosions in Io\\ a and other western states during the past. fifteen years the deduction is easily established that a str~ug current of air passing through a. mine at the time of an explosion aids materially in developing its initial force, and aids its progress through the mine passages. The effect of a low mine temp1:rature in increasing the extent and force of an explosion is s~irl to be <lue to three causes ( 1) by means of natural ventilation, the air in the mine is rendered purer; (2) the mine is more dry and dusty; (3) the colder the mine air the greater its expansive force. The conditions tending to decrease the severity of explosions o.re gh•en in the report as(]) sprinkling the roadways; (2) ample opeuiogs; (3) redllCtion of air volume io the mine al, firing time. Nothing new is brought out under the fi.rst two headings, bnt consider·able stress is laid upon the third heading; ancl the point is made that, while ample ventilation is required in mines generating fire-damp in order to prevent explosions, exactly the reverse is necessary in mines where fire-damp is absent, particularly in dry mines where coal-clust enters as one of the elements of an explosion. The Commission claims that, not only is the explosion more deadly when brisk ventilation is kept up, hut it also claims that the after deadly effects are much greater with brisk ventilation than where the \·entilation is insufficient. In proof of this contention it cites several instancrs in which the fan was running briskly when the explosion took place, aod when the effects of the explosion were much more clisastrous than in other explosions where the fan bad been slowed down or stopped at the time the explosion took place. In concluding this section of the report, the Commission says, howe\·er, "The foregoing, true as it appears to be, is not lo be comidered an argument for poor or insufficient ventilation. I mpure air may prevent an explosion, but it is impracticable as well as dangerous to life to resort to it as a remedy. " The report states that dust explosions generally occur in the colder months, ancl that there is no record of such an explosion during June, July, or August. 'Ihe reason for this being given that the entries and working places are drier and more perfectly Yentilated in colder months. The report states that fully 70 per cent. of the disastrous and extensive explosions in Iowa. mines have been caused by shots charged and fired the second time, or hy shots whose explosive force was thro,n1 into the mine air in their immediate vicinity t,hrough the remaining parts of an old hole which had failed to do effective work. The reason for this is stated to be that the gases generated by the first explosion not only remain in the hole, but they penetrate the crevices and cracks in the surrounding coal, a.ud then when the second charge is fired these gases act first to increase the force of the second explosion, while they also serve as a buffer from which the gases of the second explosion rebound, causing them to be projeckd outward more violently. The Commission states that i5 per cent. of the explosions in Iowa have been caused by shots ignited by fuse, the danger frotn this cause being not so much in the fuse itself as in the use of improper material for tamping, and au improper method of tamping. The Commission decidedly inclines to the use of squibs instead of fuse in firing, and would also substitute other explosfres for hlack powder provided suitable substitutes could be obtained for it. The Commission recommends (l) that. the opera.tors and miners at ea.ch mine adopt rules for the placing of shots, &c., and that the Legislature enact laws providing that competent persons be employed to examine all shots hefore they are charged, with power to prohibit charging and firing if found to be unsafe ; (2) that the miner shall keep his working place and the operator the entries as free from dust as practicable, and that eµtries be sprinkled as often as is necessary to keep them damp; (3) that only sand, soil, or clay shall be used for tamping, and holes shall be tamped solidly from the powder to the mouth of the hole, whether squib or fuse is used; (4) blown-out shots shall not be recharged and fired a second time. This portion of the report is signed by all members of the Commission, which is composed of 1.iessrs. T. J. Phillips and J. E. Stout, operators; John Verner and J. W. Miller, mine inspectors; John P. \Yhite and John P. Reese, miners. The two last members of the Commission, Messrs. White and R eese, further recommended very strongly that all shots shall be fired by men employed for the purpose, and that shots shall be fired only wbeo all employees except the shot-firers are out of Lhe mine.

Exhibit No. 50. .Rough Sketch-Plan showing main ventilation of Mount Keira Mine, drawn by Mr. J. C. Jones, Manager. Exhibit No. 51. Article in Colliery Guardian for 21st Febrttary, 1902, entitled, "Notes on Talk-o'-th' -Hill Explosion." NOTES ON TALK-0'-TH'-HILL EXPLOSION. (From a Correspondent.) At this Colliery, on 27th May, 1901, an explosion occurred in the 8-feet Banbury seam about 7 p.m., causing the deaths of four persons and twenty-seven horses and ponies, the origin of which remains a mystery, although the Coroner's jury attributed it to gob-fire. At the time of the explosion the ventilating fan, which ordinarily circulated 80,000 cubic feet of air per minute with a water-gauge of 3 in., barl been standing .r~r repairs since !.I a. m., and two men ,~ere engaged near the bottom of th~ main east crut of the 8-feet Baubury seam repamug a pump, and two other men were m the downcast shaft also engaged on pump repairs, o.nd other workmen and t.he General Manager were on the pit bank. At 6 a.. m. an official (one of whom is always in the underground working at week-ends and holiday times) descended the mine, and wi th six firemen made a thorough examination of all the dist.ricts, and reported all safe underground before the fan was stopped a.I, 9 a.m., and thls official was relie,·ed at 2 p.m. by another, who was killed. Between 3 and 4 o'clQck, howe \·er, the men working at. the pumps in the shaft perceiverl a sudden revcrsn,l of the vcntila.t.ing air current, which lasted from five to six minutes, but they did not report the occurrence at once, and it did not become. known. to the ofiic_ials until t~o ~ays afterwards ; neither did the official who w:i..'! in the p~t come out to report any alteration or d1sturhance m the ventilation, and as l~c w~s killed t.he cause con~d not be nsce1·tamed. Moreover, it does not seem probable that he and the man who was w.th him were k11le1l at this t1me (:3 to 4 p.m.), as the indication~ fOltod by the explorers poioted to their dea.1,hs having b een ca.used later on by the explosion at 7·30 p.m. About the time of the explosion water was being, or had been just.previously, wouncl out of the upcast shaft, and a pump rod was beina raised by a capstan. ro~e in the downcast from ~ pornt ahou.t 100 y~rds below ~he surface. The shaftsmen were standing on t.he top of the wmdmg c~ge and a !11an wa.~ 10 the fan ctr.Lft wor~tng by the h~ht _of a safety-la~np, ~ut not~ing occurred to indicate tbe presence of fire-damp m the air-current, which contmued travelling m the usual d1rect1on durmg his stay. The first indication of disaster was a loud rnmblinf" noise increasing in force, lu,:arcl by the neoeral Manager and the work-people on the surf~ce1 fol_lowed ~y the ejection o ~ust a.nu rlebris from. the downcast shaft ancl then by smoke, the time occupied hy these m,1,ca.tions being about half a minute. For some nnnut_es more no one coulcl go close up t() the top of either of the shafts on account .of the ~fter-dnmp o.nd smoke. The cage with the t,~o shaftmen \Ins found to be jammed in the shaft, a~,1 coulc! not be ra.1serl until about two hours afterwards, when the bodies were recovered, showing no signs of burni~g. lhe hoches of the 1,wo m en who hatl been .at work. uud~rground w~re ~ountl.on 29th May near the hottom of _the rnau~ east crut, and I.hey appeared to have been k11lcd whilst s1tt·ng o~· lyrng III a s1<le road lea.cling np to some gob-lire stoppmgs, where there wa<:1 also a pump. Both men were burnt, and i,be1r Mar8'1.Ut ra.fety-lo.mps stoo,l uear them uuinjured. The safety-lamps were afterwards tested, .and proved to be safe an<l sound, anti the gob-tire stoppin.,s were also founrl to be in ~he same st~t~ as before the ex plosion. A ,:er)'. careful ~n~ cletaiJed inspection of tho pit \\ ~s made by Mr. W. N. Atkinson, the Chief Inspector of. Mmes for the d1stnct, and hts rnteresttn~ account of the in,lications of fire and force is greatly increased by the reproduction of several photographs, vividly descriptive of the force of the blast and of the cleposition of coal-dust hy the blast.

942 An aggregate length of roadway exce~ding 8,000 yards w~s traversed by the explosiC1n, nnd the presence of carbon monoxide was demonstrated both by analysis and the use of mice, as recommended by Dr. Haldane. Charred coal-duat was found most plentifully near the working faces and on the roadways, and it was nearly always deposited on the aide of the props not facing the blast, but in one place the deposit was on one side of the props on the higher side of the level, and on the opposite side on the lower side. No indic1tioos were found which would clearly point out the means of the ignition or origin of the explosion, but the aigos of the blast. distinctly converged on Millington's level. A peculiar smell was perceiv~d in the reti:ro air aft.er the explosion, and it was thought that it originated from an active goL-fire, and the suspicion was later on thought to be confirmed by the detection of carbon monoxide gas comiug out of the gob on the ea.st side of the level down Oater's dip. This place was consequently closed off with strong stoppings and allowoJ to 611 wHh gas, and the gob-fire smell disappeared at once. The existeuce of any active gob-fire was never proved, neither did any exist in the 8 feet before the explosion, and the conclusions arrh·ed at were really based on Mr. Atkinson's fifth conclusion, viz., "the absence of any other probable cause to account for the explosion." When considc1ing nny other •!probable" cause, it must be borne in mind that at the time of the explosion the ventilation of the mine was reduced to its minimum quantity, and therefore, as it was a fiery mine gas would be present in larger volume than usual, and highly inflammable coal-dust would a lso be present floating in tbe air and accumulated on all parts of the roadways. Thus when the origin of the gases which formecl the after-damp and gave it the peculiar smell of gob stink is looked for, it must be remtimbered-( 1) that the int11.keair roads were highly heated bytheexplosions, and (2) that there was no mechanical force to overcome this heated state of the air; (3) that the upcast bad been cooled by water winding, and had therefore little or no suction power, and therefore the air of the mine was stagnant until (4) the time when the fan was restarted and the stoppings and doors were restored. It is doubt!ess a fact, therefore, that the residual heat was sufficiently high and continuous to have a carbonising effect on the fine coal.-dust, and to produce that peculiar smell as of gob-fire, which was so distinctly in evidence, particularly when it is noted, as proved by Professor Bedson, that coal-dust will ignite at a heat of 291 degs. Fahr. if the heat is continuous for a time, as it should be in this case. Seeing, then, that the mine (Eight-feet "Banbury) dici not possess a gob-fire before the explosion, some other reason for the initiation of the explosion must he looked for, and it must be one which wiU agree with the indications of force and effect so rcalisticlllly described by Mr. Atkinson. Firstly, then, it is to be ob3erved that the roof of the J~ight-feet Banbury is one of the best in the world-viz. , a thick rock which will hang for a. long t.ime over a very large area of gob before it breaks down, and it is to the fall of a large mass of this roof to which we must look for the origin of the explosion. The dangers arising from heavy falls of rock roof have ofteu been a matter of serious discussion amongst practical mining people-for instance, as to whether or not there is any real danger attachable to such falls-and some aver that one mass of rock sliriking against another may produce sparks of sufficient heat to ignite fire-damp. However, it is not this direct means to which the writer would attach the ca.use of the explosion, because the gob in the immediate neighbourhood of such a fall would be filled with fire-damp so little diluted with air as to be uninfia.mmable, but rather to the su<lden percussive action and force exerted by the falling masses of rock on mixtures of fire-damp, dust, and air, at a distance. The reversal of the air-current in tho afternoon, which was noticed by the men working iu the downcast shaft, was prob.~bly caused by a first breaking-down of the roof in one of the gobs, aud as this would probably be examined by the official in the pit, and, if he found on examination that the movement had ceased, hie not coming out of the pit to report is accounted for, whereas -had it been an explosion of gas he certainly would have come out to report. But supposing that this reversal of the ventilation was actually caused by a gas explosion ignited by a gob-fire, and l.he official did not report it, then we can only assume that be and bis ma.to were killed by an explosion so caused. 'l'ba.t the men were thus killed does not appear to be supported by the facts disclosed by the exa.miuation of the pit after the explosion. Explosions have in a few instances occurred whilRt there have been no men in the pit, but there are others of a more similar character which may be cited to better exemplify the effect of air percussion, such as Udston in Scotland, Llanerch in South Wales, the South .Mine of the Broken Hill Company in South Australia., nnd the firing of shots in districts far removed from the point of origin, as at Tylorstown. At Udston Colliery, on 28th May, 1887, an explosion wrecked every rustrict of the mine, and it was clear from the indications of force and flame that the explosion, which originated on the rise side of the pit, did not pa.ss down into the dook section by either tho intake or return air roads, which were the only connections with the rest of the pit, and though every man was killed and some very badly mutilated in the dook section, the chainman, who was about midway down t.he dook, was neither burned nor mutilated. All the evidences of force were towards the shaft, and not inbye, and the hE'.at and force effects were paractically simultaneous with those in the rise section. Coking effects were observable in many headings, and particularly in one at the foot of the <look where the floor was co,·ered with water. At the Llanerch Colliery, on 6th February, 1890, an ei:plosion occurred in the dip workings of the Meadow Vein. Open lights alone were used throughout the workings, and yet, through the a,ccidental ignition of a small pocket of gas in a hole in the roof above some timber, which had only just been erected, and closed up before the fireman ma.clc bis morning inspection, every man in the mine was killed. The extraordinary part of this explosion was that those in the narrow headiugs on the lower side of the levels, and in the ends of the levels, were killed instantaneously, and burned by the great and sudden air pressure, whilst those in the stalls on the higher side, being protected by a larger cushion of air, were able to make an a.ttempt at escape, and would have escaped, had it not been for the strong a.ft.er-damp created by the ignition of coal-dust. Doubtless, the large volume of after-damp was largely due to the partial combustion of coaldust set up by the sudden a.nd great air pressure and the residual heat of the eX'plosion. · • But probably the most convincing proof of the gt·eat beat effects which may be caused by a heavy fall of rock in an underground working was the fatal accident which occurred at the South Mine of the Broken Hill Mining Company, in South Australia. In this case there were, on 18th July, 1895, evident signs of an impending fall of roof in the north stopes of No. 4 level, and the Manager ordered the foreman to warn the men to cease working; and this was done, but the men, not expecting that anything very serious would occur, did not hurry to lea.ve the mine, and at the time of the fall were about 200 feet away from it. The effect of the fa.11 was to force the air along t.he level with terrible force, and the men gathered there were killed, and many others in the mine were greatly injured and singed by the heat of the sudden air• compression. This effect may be tested by anyone with an instrument made by Mr. Dancer, of Manchester, in which, by suddenly compressing air, tinder can be ignited. Some years ago Dr. Angus Smith contributed a. paper to the Manchester Gcnlogical Society, in which be described an apparat.us by which be thought that mixtures of small volumes of of fire-da.mp with air might be detected by percussion. · Mr. Dickenson, in his report on the Udston explosion, remarked that it was in the "rooms" which were not cut through, and least dusty, that there wore the greatest. signs of coking, extending not quite up to the face, and not in the main roads, some of the principal coking effects being in rooms which were not at work . Udston and Talk-o'-th'-Hill ha\'e much in common as to the mode Qf working, viz., by piUar-and-stall, and afterwards the removal of the pillars; and the narrow beadings to the south of Millington'!! level wcre,.as in the dook section at UdstoD, apparently traversed by fire (the effect of the sudden air-compression). It is worth notice that the old south return air-road in the 8-foot Banbury, which was naturally wet, and though used for haulage purposeE, was Dot traversed hy the explosion. In conclusion, the suagestion that the Ta.Jk-o'-t.h '-Hill explosion was originated by the percussive effects of a heavy and sudden fall of roof, pro~ably in a. large mass, acting on air charged with fire-damp and a normal quantity of coal-dust, is almost confirmed with absolute certainty by the int.lications of force which Mr. Atkinson bas so carefully recorded aa found in Millington's level, particularly the apparently contradictory inrucations of the direction of force a.t points 35 a.ml 37, because the efftcts would be exerted clown all the openings between ~Jillington's level and the gob practically s1 in ultaneously.

Exhibit No. 52. Duplicate of Exhibit No. 57.

(See post.)

Exhibit No. 53. Pi~ce <?~ Brattice Cloth off the canvas on the entrance to Back Heading, Mount Kembla Mine,-put Dr. Robertson, 9th March, 1903.

E;hibit. No. 54,

•

043 Exhibit No. 54. Pipe handed in by Mr. W. Rogers, Ma.nag,:r of Mount Kemble. Colliery, 10th March, 1903, who staled he had received same from Mr. D. Hotchkis. This statement was confirmed by Mr. Hotchkis in his evic.lence taken on 24th March, 1903, who then said he had found the pipe in Bord No. 87. Exhibit No. 55. Dcp:irlment or Mines nnd .Agriculture, Geological Branch, Chemical Laboratory, Clyde, 3 September, l!:02. The Chief Inspector of Coal Minel',Sir, . ActJng ~n instructions recei,·e<l from the Department, I ha,·e the honor to furnish you_ with a microscopic and chemical examination of samples of coal-dust, Kos. I to 12, outained from the Mount Kembla Colliery, South Coast, New South Wales. The samples were handed to me by :i\Ir. Inspector Watson, on Thursday, 25th August. Samples marked Nos. l to 4, on being examined under the micro~cope, using a I-inch objective power, distinctly show the fine coal-dust has been submitted to a partial coking, the surface edges showin~ the coarse, porous structure of the coke ; but from the appearance of the coke particles, and the percentage of volat 1le matter left, the duet does not appear to have been submit.led to a se,·ere heat. No. 5 consists largely of coked residue, the hard, coarse, porous structure of the coke being readily visible, also pellets or globules of fine coke, somewhat resembling small shot. The chemical examination pro,•es that the coal-dust has parted. with a large proportion of its volatile mattc1·. No. 6.-:-This sa!llple. s~ows a m~re marked coking appearance than in the former ~ample, t~e hard, porous _structnre o~ the _coke being r~adily ~·1s1ble, and tne _coke particles being attached to one another by ~e action of the meltmg of ~he b1tu~rno1;1s matter m cokmg; also contains pellets or globules of coke, rt:Jsembling shot m appearances. The chemical examination shows that the coal-dust has parted with a large proportion of its bituminous matter. No. 7.-This sample, on micrnscopic examination, showed tho.t the fine dust had been submitted to a partial coking, the surface edges, showing the coarse, porous structure of the coke; also pellets or globules of coke, resembling shot in appearance. Mixed with the coal-dust were a number of splinters of wood, se,,eral of which, examined, showed decided evidences of having been charred by flame. Nos. 8, 9, 10, 11 , and 12.-All these samples distinctly show that lhe fine coal-dust has been submitted to a partial coking, the surface edges showing the coarse, porous structure of coke. From the appearance of the coke particles, and the percentage of volatile matter left, the samples do not appear to hM·e been submitted to a. severe beat. N os. 5 and 6.-From the appearance of the coke, and the low percentnge of volatile matter found by analysit1, these samples appear to ba,·e ueen submitted to a much more se,·ere heat than any of the other samples examined. I have, &c., JOHN C. H. MING.A.YE, F.I.C., F.C.S. Analyst and Assayer. PnoxIMATE ANALYSI.:.~

•

Volatile Matter.

No.

Coke.

1 2 3 5

79·50 80·73 81 ·67 79·23 S6·0!

]8 ·59 )6·93 }6·]5 18 ·55 l 1·46

2·34 2·18 2·22 2·50

30·68 37·89 26 98 22 61 35·61

87·67

I O 04

2·29

39·8

78·42

19·09

2·19

36·42

8 9

80·75 76·97

2·68 2·00

10 11 12

77·49 75·02

16·57 21 ·03 :.?0·46 20·29 22·06

25·22 18 31 20·42 17·78 I7·i0

OF SAMPLES oF COAL-DOST COLLECTED FROM Moo NT KEMBLA CotLTERY, SouTn COAST, NEw SouTn WALE.'>.

Moistur~

l ·91

Ash.

The fine dust, when heated in :i covered platinum crucible, g,we off a fair flame, and left a coked residue. Ash-Grey to buff coloured, with white particles, due to clay and sandstone. Tho fine dust, heated as above, yielded a ve1·y poor flame, n. loose powder being left. Ash- Buff coloured, with white particles, due to fine clay and sandstone. Very little flame obsen·ed on heating in a covered platinum crucible, the residue bing left as a. loose powder. Ash-Buff coloured, with white particles of clay, &c. This sample contained a number of pieces of splinters of wood, which were separated from the fine coal-dust before submitting same for analysis. Formed a cake on heating. Yielded a fair flame when heated in a covered plo.tinum crucible, leaving a caked residue. Ashes-Buff coloured, with white particles of fine clay and sandstone. Yielded a. fair flame fol' this class of coal, and a r esidue which had all the appearance of a. fair description of coke. Ash-Buff coloured, with white particles of fine clay and sandstone.

77·38

2·16

2·22 2·02

Remarks.

JOHN C. H. MINGAYE, F .I.C., F.C.S., Analyst and Assayer, TAKING

Table I. the avero.gc volatile mat.tor in the Mount Kombla coal at 23 ·0 per cent., it is found that on examino.tion of the fine coal-dust that the following amount of volatile matter bas been removed : Percentage of

volatile matter in coal -dll.6t.

No.

17·60

5•39

16·15

5 6

7 8 9 10 ll 12

Mea.11

---·

Remrirks.

C03l, 23 0 per cent. V.ll.

]8·55 11 ·46 10·04 19·09 16·57 21 ·03 20·46 20·29 22·06

3 4

Percentage of vol11.~ile mo.tter removed.

4·41 6·07 6·85 4·45 11·54} 12·96 3·91 6·43 1·9; 2·54 2·71 ·94

]8·59 16·93

II { These "mples yielded no coke, n loooe powde, being left oo ooking te,t b,in g applied, shows that o,·er 50·0 per cent. of its volatile constituents have been removed by hea.t. This may also show by the poor flame given o(f on ignition of the coal.

30·60 per cent.

944 TABLE

Table II. giving the percentage of molstu1·e found in the fine coal-dust examined, and showing the gain in moisture, taking the average moisture in the Mount Kembla. coal as l ·2 per cent. Gain in moisture, Aloisture in coal- takini the moisture dust examined. m coal at 1 ·2 per cent.

No.

2 3 4 5 6

7 8 9 10 11 12

Mean

0·71

I ·91 2·34 2·18 2·22 2·50 2·29 2·49 2·68 2·00 2·16 2·22 2·02

1'14 ·98 1 ·02 l ·30 l ·09 I ·29 I ·48 ·80 ·96 1 ·02 ·82

2·25

1·05

Remarks.

Moisture in the southern coals, South Coast Collieries :-Maximum, 1 ·4 per cent. ; rofoimum, ·72 per cent. ; mean, ·97 per cent.

Exhibit No. 56.

Extracts from Second Report of the Royal Commission on Explosions from Coal-dust in Minell, (Eng.). That there is practically no danger in the use of naked lights in mines, so far as dust is concerned, if the entire absence of fire-damp could be guaranteed, is the opinion o[ most of the witnesses who have been examined on the point. It is pointed out by several witnesses that accidents have ta.ken place on the surface owing to coal-dust coming into contact with a naked light, but it is generally admitted that it would be "very improbable," and only by a "remote possibility, " that coal-dust, eYen when raised in the shape of a dense cloud, would explode at a naked light. The flame or fire must go with considerable force in amongst the fine dust to cause an explosion, and this condition is not present when a naked light is the only source of ignition. ·

It is, however, the opinion of several witnesses that the danger is not confined to blown-out shots, but that a.n overcharged shot which does not blow out, or one which partially does the ,vork for which it wa.s intended, may exhibit flame and therefore ignite the dust. In the opinion of Mr. W. N. Atkinson, the explosions at Seaham in 18 71 and 1880, at Elemore, at Usworth, and at Altofts were caused by shots which did not blow out. The opponents of the coal-dust theory, however, do not regard either the Prussian or the English experiments as conclusive. They assert that neither represent the practical conditions existing in the working of an ordinary mine. Thus they contend that the qnantity of dust used is excessive, and that the atmosphere has been so thickly laden with dust that no living being could breathe in it. In the Prussian experiments it is said that "the dust had to be perfectly black, so that they could not see through 2 feet of it before it became inflammable or explosive." Another point deservil1g the most serious consideration is that, in cases where a high explosive (ammonite or roburitc) was fired entirely without result, .the introduction of gunpowder was followed by violent explosions. In this connection it may here be stated that the length of flame issuing from ::t blown-out shot of _gunpowder has been estimated by various witnesses at from 4 to 15 feet. Mr. H. Hall states that lhe utmost limit of flame with 2 lb. of gnnpowder would be 4 or 5 yards. . Mr. Longdon points out that the Chesterfield "experiments demonstrated that there was a considerable difference i!l the inflammability of different kinds of dust." Both he and Mr. Robson think it extremely important to distinguish between them. 1\fr. Longrlen believes that a serious danger exists with certain inflammable dusts produceu by a highly bituminous coal. On the other hand, he is convinced that the dust from a non-bituminous coal is entirely harmless. He considers that there is no danger what.ever attachin!{ to the dust in the Midland district, unless a large percentage of gas were mixed with it. In support of this contention he adduces a case at Manners' Colliery. In this instance there was an explosion of fire-damp, and although there was au abundance of dry a,nd tine dust which became ignited, the inflanu11ation, as shown by the coked dust, only extended for about 20 yards. It is remarked that the Prussian experimenters came to the conclusion that all dusts, except the Pluto dust, were "more or less harmless. " Mr. Galloway's opinion is that the Prussian experimenters made a mistake in attempting to set up such distinctions, and stateit that shortly after their report an explosion, killing 200 men, occurred at the Camphausen Colliery, whieh had been regarded as entirely free from fire-damp, and the dust of which they had pronounced to be a 1 ' safe dust." "In attempting to say from experiments on a small scale that one kind of coal-dust is explosive and another is not explosive, one attempts to prove too much; for you must take it for granted that, there are conditions in a mine after an explosion has heen begun which will carry 011 that explosion with dusts which, iu an ordinary experimental appara.tus, would not give any results at all." . . . Mr. Hall, however, has not succeeded in obtaining any explosion when what are called flameless explosives have been used by him in his experiments. Dust-tight tubs have been suggested in order to prevent the accumulation of dust in the haulage roads. In cases where the condition of the strata makes watering a. difficult and dangerous operation, such waggons would, it is said, alleviate the evil, and tend greatly to keep these roads free from dust. To introduce them into collieries already being worked would, it is admitted, very much limit tbe output. Dust from the Screens.-A large quantity of dust is carried down by the ventilation from the screens into the intake air courses. This does not, however, appear to be a matter which can be easily remedied, and neither Mr. H. Hall nor Mr. J. B. Atkinson is able to make any suggestion. The removal of the dust has also been ad\'Ocated by various witnesses, and no doubt in many cases the tlanger may be lessened by this means. In some instances the dust might be got rid of, but there are many collieries where removal is entirely out oft.he question. 'l'he witnesses a.re almost unanimous in agreeing with l\Ir. Hall that removal is not an effectual remecly, although it has been urged that, as far as possible, it should be resorted to even when further precautions are taken. This opinion is confirmed by the report of the Austrian Commissioners, who say that sweeping out the dust where shots are fired is troublesome, and will rarely be properly carried out. It is maintained by Mr. H. Hall, Mr. Stokes, and Mr. Ashworth that it is a very difficult matter .to saturate the dust. "The water runs about on the dust, and it does not get into it at all. If you just rake it up a bit you find the dust quite dry under where they put the water; it is difficult to saturate it."

Mr.

0..15 Mr. Stokes think~ that. watering in the roadways would slightly a[ect the intensity of an explosion, but possibly tho v.:hole of the dust m1ght r1~e up and ignite in spite of the film of dampness on the top. Watering, he considers is not a sufficient r~medy. The remedial ~easures must be looked for in the initial start of the explosion . Stop the explosions, stop the shot-firmg, stop the gas explosions, and you need not take any notice of dust so far as colliery explosions go. The Austrian Uommissioners reported that watering was undoubtedly useful, hut would not guarantee thorough safety unless all r~adways a~d wo1·kin~ places, including the roofs and sides, were watereu. Such a watering, however, could not be effectively carrie~ out without .ery great, and, in some cases, insurmountable difficulties. We ha,e carefully considered the evidence on this question from all sides, and while we are Qf opinion that the ,mly sufficien~ precaution hitherto suggested against the rlange1·s of cnal-dust in fiery mines is a complete and satisfactory system of w~termg, we also feel that the same reasons 'I\ hich hM·e prevented us from recommending an uni versa! and stereotyped rule 1~ regard to the use of g~11powder, ap1,ly with equal or e..-eu greater force to the pmvision of cxpensivd and probably complicated systems of watering. We are, therefore, of opinion that in any case in which the Inspectors thiok it desiral,Je, in order to ensure the safety of life, they shonld use the powers given by section 42 of the Act of l88i to declare that the provisions for watering the d~st in a. mine is insufficient, and to require such further arrangements to be made for this purpose as they may prescribe.

Exhibit No. 57. Extract from Report to the Secretar y of State for the H ome Department by J . D ickinson, E:sq., H .M. Inspector of Mines, and C. C. Maconochie, Esq., A.d\'ocate. EXl'LOS IO~S AT THE UDSTO~ COLLIERY.

The preceding details show that the explosion commenced in the Splint seam, and that, in whate,·er section, panel, or district the explosion originated, it extended throughout the workings iu the whole seam without any apparent interval being observed in the outburst at the top of the shaft. The first evidence of the blast observed abo,•e ground was smoke and dust rushing out of the down-ca.st shaft, blue flame (as wa.s proved by the oversman who was in the cage) coming more than half way up. This was followecl in a second by a flame coming out of the up-cast shaft, which continued suffici<:ntly long to set the wooden shed at the pit mouth on fire. The duration of the outburst, according to the evidence, was not many seconns; but it seems to haxe been put at nearly two minutes by some persons, which wonld probably mean at the upcast shaft. The explosion was found to h:ive extended into every part of the Splint seam, killing altogether 73 person; being 69 of the Splint men, aod 4 in the Main coal, who were suffocated. The ventilation of the Splint seam was divided into three sections. These sections were the dook, the west, and t-he east, the latter being divided into the rise and the horse road divisions. The general force in the dook, where it was violent, came chiefly from the working faces towards the shafts. In the west section, where it had been less violent anrl not so well defined, it came ma.inly from the stoopings, where stoops or pillars were being worked. In the east section, in the rise division, it swept violently outwards and downwards from the far end workings, towards the shaft and to the west section; and in the horse road division, at the further part it went to some extent towards the stoopings, but from the most eastern cutting through the 4-foot dyke it went towards the shafts. · The commencement of the explosion, according to the witnesses examined by us, is placed in var ious parts of the Splint seam; some place it in the west section, and some in the east, but none thought it originated in the dook. In the ea.st section the places pointed out as the probable place of origin were: In the rise division, at Dennison's place, and in the horse road division, either at the stoopings or at Harkness' place. Harkness' and Dennison's were the only two places where blasting was allowed. Both were hratticed places, and both ventilated "';th air which had already a.ired several other places, as described in the details. ~lost of the witnesses considered that the shots in both places had been fired some little time prior to the explosion. The coal which would be brought down by the shot in Dennison's place had been nearly all filled and sent away, an<l of that in Harkness' place some had either been filled off the top or it ha.cl become disarranged by the explosion or trodden down before being carefully observed. The principal ground on which the supposition was based, that the explosion originated at the horse road stoopings, seems to hM·e been that such a place was a likely one for gas to accumulate in. In the west, or Blantyre section, the place of origin was attributed to the upper stoopinis, known as Quin's stoopings. This was near the mn.in !:!00-fathom dyke. It was the only part of the mine where, prior to the explosion, fire-damp is recorded as having been found by the fireman during the present year. It was also where stooping operations h:id been begun in the Blantyre Colliery, immcdin.t.ely adjoining, at the opposite side of the barrier. Although tl1erc was not any direct communication between the two collieries, yet these operations may have shaken the ground and caused fresh gas to issue, as the noise of the explosion was heard and dust raised at the stooping in the Blantyre Colliery, which the miners who were working there attributed to a fall in their stoopings. Fire-damp was found after the explosion, with the ventilation disarranged, in all the t.hree sections of the mine. It docs not appear Lo have been tho practice for an examination to be made for gas on the top of the falls which occur in the stoopings; gas may, therefol'e, h:wo been accumulated thcl'e before the explosion, and ha,·e been driven out 'by a fall, as some of the witnesses supposed wa.s the case. The witnesses all attributed the explosion, in the first instance, to the firing of fire damp, and that it was extended through the mine by means of tho dust. In reviewing these opinions of the witnesses as to t,he place of origin of the explosion, it appears to us that some had not given sufficient consideration to certain of the evidences of force which h:wo been laid before us. For example, the air crossing, where tho return air from the west, or J3lantyre section, passed over the intake air to the dook section, was torn up by the blast, and the bricks of which it was made were driven right up to the down-cast shaft. T his could scarcely ha\'e occurred had not the first great force come out of the return airways from the Blantyre section, or out of either the dook, or out of the part of the horse road, or low side stooping, which was fed with return air from the dook. In addition to the opinions ~iven hy the witnesses- (a) That the explosion commenced by the ignition of a small quantity of fire-damp and became extended through the workings by dust -we may add for consideration these alternative views :-(b) That the air throughout the workings was sufficiently impregnated with fire.damp to spread the explosion when once commencecl; and (cl that, with the ventilation not generally impregnated with gas, an ignition of gas at one place sucked out sufficient gn.s from the coal and from stoopings elsewhere to carry the explosion round. (a) Jf the explosion commcncecl by the ignition of a small quantity of fire-damp and became extended thronghout the workingll by clust, at\\ hn.t pince rlid it hegin? If it began in the 1look, or nt the horse road, or low-sido stoopings, it must hl\\·e been from gas of which there was 110 evidence, and luwc been ignite1l by name paf>sing thro11gh one of the Rcotch gauze lamps, or by ignition at an open lamp, or at a match, of the possession of which there is abundant c,•i,lence. If it begiin at one of the two shots, tho sucking out of gas for a commencement and the lightmg would bo accounted for. 1f it began n.t the west, or Blan tyro stoopings, the gas may hn.vc come from the sioopings where it had been last found, and ha,·e Leen lighted and extended as abo,•c mentioned. (//) If the air throughout the workings was sufficicolly impregnated to spread the explosion, how, with the ventilatina fan running regularly, could the n.ir have got into such a state? The entry in the fireman's daily report, made a few hour~ pre\'i,rnsly, denoted that r.11 was clrar, and the ovcrsman (who sm·,·ives) had made the round of the whole of the workings in the P.ast and west sections, with the exception of the part at Lhe west end of the low-side stoopiogs which was ail'ecl by return air fl'()m U:e <look, only a ,·ery short time before the explosion, and found all going on as usual. The only cont.ributing causes that we could discover were that atmospheric pressure was decreased, and that an examination of the clown-cast shaft was being made, which would, to some extent, check the ventilation. There is also the possibility Llmt there mn.y have heen n. derangement of a regulator (especially the one in the east horse le,·el, by which t.oo rnuch air might hn\'C c:;capccl "ithr,ul, cutei·ing the rise division), or of one of the numerous sioppings, or o[ the hratl i,·ing, c11· I,.v t.lw Iea,·ing op1m of air.cl'>ors. Any of t.h ·sc ll1ings may ha.,·c occurred. cspet·i,dly a!I the work wall being carriccl on w,th,,ut the assixlance of the assistant fireman or roadsman, who had lcfl on the prc\'iom1 \Vcdnesllay, and\\ hose place

16825

j I

~9- 6 D

946 placo had not been filled up, one of t,ho roadsmiln having left because he would not come to reside at the colliery, and h is successor, partly because he said he had to enter the daily report for roads which he hatl not seen, and par tly on account of his thinking the wage too little. Tho barometer as !'ecortled nt the colliery had been falling slowly, namely, from 29·9 inches two days before the explosion, to 29·8 on the previous day, and to 29·6 on the mcrning in question.. This de~rease of pressnre would cause an increased issue of fire-damp, but not to a dangerous extent, unless the vent1lat1on was Bemg run too fine. As to the examination of the down-cast shaft which was being made at the time of the explosion, the area of that shaft, as shown by the dimensions given, was about 108 square feet, but at the buntoos 103 square feet. With one cage in the shaft there was a clear ai r space of 78 square feet, which was reduced at the buntons to 73 square feet. When two cages met in the shaft, if the meeting was at the buntons, which would be the case at, times if there were a slight Yariation in the ropes, there was only a ciear space of 44 square feet. This space would be further contracted during the examination of the sho.ft by the men's bodies projecting over the sides whilst examining. 'l'bfl oversman computed the time dui,in~ which he had been in the shaft at not more than five to ten minutes. The banksman put it at three minutes. Iu aoy case some interruption must have been thus caused to the ventilating current of the mine. It must be remembered, however, that the shafts ,vcre carefully examined three times a week, and partially on the other days. Therefore, some v.d<litiooal coutributing cau~c would seem to be required. Additional contributing ca.uses may have been occasioned by derangements as described, especially in the absence of an assist.ant fi rcm:m. (c) That, wit.h the ventilation not ~enera.lly impregnated wit,h gas, an ignition of gas at one place sucked out sufficient gas from the coal, and from stoopmgs elsewhere, to carry the explosion round. Io a mine like this, there must always have been some quantity of fire-damp in the return air, and it is therefore a question of degree how much there would be at any particular time. This may have been to such an extent as only to require a commencement, which might be afforded by an ignition at the stoopings; and the suction and pressure consequent thereon might suffice to spread the explosion, even without dust. It has been stated that it was not the practice to examine on the top of the fa.Us at t he stoopinos; so that gas may have been accumulated at stoopings and driven out by a. fall, and the waft hwe passed flame through the gauze lamp, without supposing an open light or a match. The mine being dry and dusty, and the coal a splint coal of a highly inflammable kind, gives plausibility to the supposition that the explosion was aggravate,l by dust. The evidence, however, showed that the main roads wer~ t he most dusty part of the mine, and not the rooms. It was, however, in the rooms not cut-through and least dusty that there wer~ the greatest signs of coking, extending not quite up to the face, and not in the main roads; some of the p rincipal coking being in rooms which were not at work. It was the practice in the mine to remove some dust almost daily, and to waler the roads to some extent; but neither of these operations was ca.rrieu on as regularly as wou ld have been desirable in a dry mine. The dryness and dust woulu, therefore, undoubtedly ag~ra.va.te tho explosion to EOme extent. . As regards the air being 1mpreinatcd with fire-damp, and an oxplosion being spread over a wide area by pre.ssure, we woulcl refer lo a. paper rl'a.d before the Manchester Geological Society by Dr. Angus Sroilh, late Chief I nspector of Alkali Works, in which ho described an apparatus (which he also exhibited to the Society) by which he then thought that the mixture of small quantities of fire-damp in atmospheric air might be detected by percussion. Soon afterwards, however, a.n impro\·ed instrument of the sa.me na.tur~, made by Mr. Dancer, optician, proved that the same result could be arl'ive<l at by the pressure of ordinary air without gas, on the principle of lighting timber bj percussion. This would afford a more likely solution of the widespread na.tu1·e of the present explosion, with the force coming towards the shafts from different extremities, than that afforded hy the supposition that it was tho <lust alone that carried the flame throughout the workings, e3pecially into the dook, which it would have to enter quietly first, and then return, leaving the indications of force outwards. Tbe pressure of air, both in the dook anrl Blantyre sections, had been so strong as to draw c\-ery shred of clothing off some of the bodies, and to tear up tram-roads there and elsewhere. Tl:c explosion having extended into almost e\·ery part of the mine, and as flame and force came from all the three sections, it must be matter of conjecture in which of t he sections it first began. F lame 1:1-nd blast had been violent in all the sections, namely :- lo the dook, at the west end of the low-side stooping, which wa.s fed with return air from the dook. In the east section: firstly, in the rise division, where suspicion attaches to Dennison's place, from the use of powder being allowed, its long bratticiog, the bodies being found at the face and the lamps some distance away, together with tbt: chance that too much air may ha\•e escaped along tht: short cut without going into the r iRe section at all; and, secondly, in the horse-road diYision, at Ha1·kness' place (with the suspicion attaching to the use of powder), at the ho1'8oroad or far-end stoopiogs, and in the enclosed area. of stoops above the horse road. In the west or Blantyre section, with the previous discoveries of gn.s, the drawing of props on the Weuoesday and Thursday evenings prior to the explosion, and the commencement, of stoopiug near the place in the adjoining colliery. The likeliest of these surmised places seem to us to be at the west or 'Blantyre stoopings, or at either the west end of the low-side stooping or at Harkness' shot. Judging by all the circumstances, the probability is that the beginning was either at the Blantyre stoopings or at Harkness' shot; most likely at the Blantyre stooping!. The veotilu.tion at the horse-road stoopings and at the Bbntyre stoopings was descensional, which is undesirable, and is forbidden in Belgium; but which, according to the evidence, could not have bc:ln avoi<led in this instance. It was nscensional at the west encl of the low-side stoopin11. No sinking of the surface of the ground had been observed over any of the stoopings in the splint seam, nor was it known that the rock between the splint se:i.m and the main coal had got broken. The floor generally heaved about two stoop lengths in advance of the stoopings. If a breakage of the roof had occurred, or with the beavo.ge of the floor, it would be likely that, if gas were prt'sent, it would issue, irrespective of what may have been accumulated above the falls. The miners never aYailed themselves of the power of inspection on their own behalf which is conferred on them by the Principal Act. ( 187:2); and, fro:n wh:i.t appeared in evidence, no complaint as to the ventilation of the mine was e,·er made by them to the Manager. The Scotch gauze safety-lamp, as dcscribeJ in the details. is largely used in many Scotch mines; and many employers of labour in mines, and many miners, notwithstanding the teaching of ei.perimcnts ranging over many years since the Blantyre explosion, and more recently of those carried through by the Minm1 Institute of Scotland, apparently still place implicit faith in it a.1 a safe lamp for experienced colliers in mines of the same class, and ventilated in the same way, as the Udston Colliery. We strongly desire to express our opinion that t,his lamp does not saUafy the conditions met with in such a mine as the Udston, where Yelocilies ir. could not. safely withstand were met with at certain points. The system of examinatiou of the lamps, which only allowed on an M·erage one minute for t he examination and locking of each lamp, was unsatisfactory, and such examination must necessarily ha,·e been perfunctory. The possession of lamp keys, matches, and materials for smoking, all of which were found in the clothing of some of the deceased, who were not authorised to have such articles in the mine, cannot be too strongly condemned. The Act of 1872 does not give i\oy power of &.earch to the officials of a mine; and here it was not provided by the Special Rules. Search seems, however, to ha,·e been made at times (even though the men sometimes objected), but not· sufficiently regularly or often. We a.re of opinion that in all cases such power of search should be given. The conduct of some of the miners in this instance shows certainly that it is necess:iry. In connection with this explosion, we would call attention to the fact that this colliery wa.s being worked on the stoop ancl room system; which, whatever its advantages may be in other respects, necessitates a great number of stoppings and of bratticed places, the number of which arc given in the details. It is sufficient to say here that they were very numerous. In the special report ma.de by Messrs. Robert Maclean and Joseph Dickinson on the causes of the Blantyre Colliery explosion in 1877, which was in the same seam as this at Udstoo, the following paragraph occurs, with which we desire here to intimate our entire concurrence:" The most alarming part of the evidence is that which shows that within a radius of 2 miles of Hamilton West station (in which Blantyre Colliery is situated), fourteen new collieries, with thirty-two pit.a, varying from 120 to 180 fathoms in depth, are either being sunk or the coal being worked under the same system of atoop and room as at Bl&ntyre, I\Dd that all of them ~ve off fire-dam\>. One of ~hese copieries, situate<;! at Cad.zow, has opened tb4) ea.me aeam aa tb~t in

whioh

. \1 t

~,.·

947

. ~

which the explosion took place at Blantyre ; and the issue of gas has at present caused the working to be discontinued. Unless wo.rning be taken from wha.t has happened at Blantyre, and such sea.ms be opened out slower, with fewer places and much Jess bratticing until the gas has been drained, and proper attention be given with respect to discipline and the use of lights and po,vder, the present explosion may, it is feared, be only the first of a series of similar cn.tastrophies such as have run throu~h several other districts. At Blant yre there was plenty of known fire-damp, without supposinu that what caused the explosion came from some unknown source in the waste amongst the formed stoops, where go.s ho.d o;ly on one previous occa.sion been found. But, i£ there be reo.lly still reo.son to suppose that such an issue ca.iM out of this waste, it affords another strong reason why such a system of working as was here pursued should not be followed. The systerr. is fit only where the issues of gas are not large, and there is ample surplus ventilation, and those acting in the management, and the miners, are thoroughly trained to the requirements it entails. As rega.rds any contravention of the Act being proved to have been committed, it is clear that some of the miners were acting illegally in having lamp keys in their possession, and in opening the lamps themselves when in the mine. As regards the conduct of the officials, 1t is a question for coositleration whether the firing of shots, as was oc~sionally done with their sanction in the east section of the mine, wa.s legal or not. The matter is ruled by the 8th General Rule of the Act, 1872, which provides that "';thin three months after any inflammable gas has been found in a mine no shot shall be fired unless a "competent _person" sho.11, after examination of the place and places contiguous thereto, find it "safe to do so," and if the gas was within the panel in which the shot has to be fired, the ordinary work-persons must be out of that panel. In this instance gas is not recorded as having been found in the panel within three months ; therefore, the ordinary work-persons were not required to be out of it. There is no evidence that shots were ever fired by the "competent persons" unless after all the required precautions had been taken ; and on this occasion, if the shot at H arkness' place or at Dennison's place caused the explosion, it must have been fired by a wo1·kman, as all tho "competent persons" were at the shaft when the explosion occurred. Under these circumstances, we cannot report that the officials in that particular contravened the Act ; and no other apparent contravention has been pro,·ed . It is requisite, however, to state that, besides the shot-firing, there bas, in our opinion, been 1:1.xness on the part of the management :(I) Io regard to the safety-lamps, both as to nsin.!{ lamps incapable of withstanding some of the currents met with, and as to th'! perfunctory examination, and the fact that as the lamp required trimming, and some men did cot come, it might have been inferred that men opened and trimmed the lamps themselves. (II) In respect that a new assistant fireman was not at once appointed when the former one left. (111) In regar<l to the stoopings in the hor!.e-road division of the east section, which, from their position in the midst of the workings a.nu not at an extremity, ·were a source of danger. (TV) As to many roo:ns not at work having been commenced and left uncompleted, with bratticing in them contracting the air; instead of Lhe stoops being completed before the rooms were left, and air allowed to circulate freely. On these grounds we are of opinion :(a) Tba.t the explosion originated either at the stoopings in the west or Blantyre section, or at Harkness' shot in the east section; the former place being most likely. (b) That it was primarily caused by the ignition of some quantity of fire-damp at an open light, or at a ma.tch, or by beinC7 drawn through the gauze of a Scotch safety-lamp. (c) That being thus commenced it was reinforced by gas with which the ventilation was impre~ated, and by dust, together with gas drawn out from the solid coal and from cavities at the stooping, and elsewhere by the suck and pressure set up by the explosion, and that some of the issues of gas were ignited separately by the pressure, or through the gauze of the lamps, or at open lights. (d) That some of the miners wel'e clearly guilty of contraventions of the Principal Act, in having lamp keys and ma.tches in their possession, and in opening their lamps. (e) That no apparent contra.veotion of the Act is proYed against the officials of the mine. We transmit herewith the copy of the shorthand notes, and we desire to express our acknowledgments to the authorities for the arra.ngemeuts provided at H amilton £or holding the im·estigation, and also to many of the explorers who \Ve are, &c., gave their services gratuitously. JOSEPH DICKI NSON, CHARLES C. MACONOCHIE. The Right Honorable H enry Matthews, Esq., M.P., Q.C., one of Her Majesty's Principal Secrew.rics of State.

Exhibit No. 58. Report to the Right H 01:orab]e tbe Sccreta~ of Stat~ for the H ome Department, on the circumstances attendina an Explosion at Udston Colliery, Hamilton, on the 28th Ma.y, 1887 ; by Ralph Moore, Esq., H.M. In~pector of Mines.

rn, Clairmont Gardens, Olasgow, 13 July, 1887. The Right Hoo. H. Matthews, Q.C., M.P., Principal Secretary of State, Home Department, Whitehall, London,&~ . I ha.ve tho honor to enclose you my roport, with accompanying plans, on tho explosion which occurred at Udston Colliery on the 28th Mav last. I han,, &c., ' • RALPH MOORE, H.M. Inspector of Mines. REPORT BY RALPll MOORE,

H. M.

lNSI'EC'fOR OF MlNES, ON EXPLOSION wmcn OCCURRED A'l' UDSTON UoLLlRRY, HA!ltlLTO~, ON THE 28TH MAY, 1887.

Udston Colliery belong3 to the Udston Coal Company (Limited), and is situated within 3 miles of Haminon. It was commenced about twelve years ago. The leasehold extends to about 150 acres. There are two pits, 47 yards a.part, each ]50 fathoms cleep. At 118 fathoms they reach the Ell coal, 6 feet thick; at 133 fathoms tho Main coal, 4 feet thick; and at 150 fathoms the Splint coal, 6 feet thick. The Ell coal has been worke<l over the whole area.; the Main coal over the greater portion ; and the Splint coal over an area of 60 acres. No. 1 pit, the upcast ~ork~ the Mo.in coal; ~o. 2 pit, the downcast ,~orks the ~11 and. Splint. The mode of ventilation is by a fan 20 feet m diameter and 6 feet wide. It drew 16,500 cubic feet of air per mmute from the Ell coal, 12,017 cubio feet from the Main coal, and 24,383 cubic fe~t from the Splin~ coo.I; in all, 6~,500 cubic feet per m~nute .. On Saturday morning, the 28th May, about five mmutes past 9, a d1sa.strous explosion took place at this colliery, causing the death of seventy-three persons. 184: men had descended the pit that morning, and when the explosion o:curred they were all there except two who bad ascended. Measures were at once taken for the relief of those underground; and before 3 o'clock, p.m., all the men in tho Ell and Ma.in coals were got out, n.od it was found that the workings in these seams were not <la.maged, but that the explosion had occurred in the Splint coal. Five of the men in the Main coal were killed by choke-da.mp, which came up from the Splint coal, and it was feared that the 71 persons who were in that seam were all dead. Preparations were at once made for veotilatiog and exploring these Spliut coal workings ; and in about forty-fivo hours after the explosion had occurrerl they hatl all been explored, and all the bodies removed, with the exception of seven which were under falls of roof. The last of theso was recovered on tho 14th of Jone. Two men were found alive within 30 yards of the bottom of No. 2 pit, and are now recovering. All of the others were dea.d. Dr. Robei:tson, of H amilton, who examined_ the bodies, certifies that fifty-three were burned and 20 ,v!re suffocated. The position where each body was found 1s marked on th~ accompanying sketch, the numbe1·s on which correspond with the list on page 8. The

948 The Splint coal workings were commenced three years ago, and covet· an are~ of 60 acres: · Tlre seam- is ·6 feet t~ick; . and the workings have been made by the "stoop and room " method ; the rooms being 8 feet wide, and the stoops or pillars 22 yards square. . . Five districts or sections were at work-the 'Blantyre section, the Rise section, the Horse-road section, the Horseroad stoops, and the Dook section. These are all ~ho~ on t~e plans. . . Blantyre Section.-Four~een men worked m this section. They were all engaged m stoopmg, and the output was 60 tons daily. The face was 260 yards in length. It was reached ~y the west level, which was a horse-road, and by two "cousies," or self-acting planes, 1iO and 112 yards in length, which branched from the west level at points 50 and 103 yards respecth'ely from No. 2 shaft. . . . . . Rise 8ection.-Ten men worke<l in this sectwn. They were all engaged m sohd places, and the output was 30 tons a day. The face was 170 yards in length. The road to this section was by a self-acting plane, 167 yMds long, which branched off the east level at a point 31 yards from No. 2 sbaft, and by a horse-road which passed eastward from the top of the incline for 230 yards; thence by branch roads from 126 to 103 yards to the faces. Horse-road Section.-Fiftecn men worked in this section. They were all engaged in stooping except three, who worked in solid places in tile extreme south, and the output was 60 tons a day. The face was 200 yards in length. It was reached by the east level, which is a horse-road 352 yard:3 in length, by a self-acting incline 103 yards long, which branched off at tba.t point ; and by branch roa-ds at the end ?f th~ h(lrs~-road from 90 to 100 yards i~ length: 'I'he Horse-road Stoops.-Four men worked m this section. They were all engaged 1!l stoopmg, and the output was . 20 tons a day. The face was 50 yards in length. The road was by the east level, along which it passed 60 yards ; it then · . passed northwards for 135 yards. These sections, which occupied an area of 38 acres, were all connected with each other by various openings. The Dook Section.-Twenty men were in this sec;tion. They were all engaged in solid ,elaces, and the output was 70 tons a day. The face was 300 yards in l~ngth. The road to these wor~ngs was by an engme-plane proceeding northwat·d from No. 2 pit for 32-! yal'ds. From this there was a h<_:>rse-ro~d pass~ng eastw~rd for 215 yards, and then brallchroads into the faces, varymg from J36 to 230 yards. This section, which occupied an area of 20 acres, was entirely separated from the other sections, and was connected to the Nos. 1 and 2 shafts only by the engine-road and the companion · drift 17 yards to the east of it. 24 383 cubic feet of air per minute passed down No. 2 shaft to the Splint coal workings. Near the bottom of the shaft it ~plit into two portions. One portion, 9,5,0 cubic feet, was sent direct to the "dook section," and passed round all the workings, returning by the companion drift round the "horse road stoops," and from thence into the upcast shaft (No. I). The other portion, lv.498 feet, passed into the east level for 31 yards, then up the inclined plane for 240 yards, and split there into two divisions, one passing westward to the II Blantyre section," and thence to the upcast, the other passing into the" rise section," from thence into the " horse roa,d section," and ~eturning direct to the upcastshaft. 1,487 cubic feet of air per minute were sent through the east level waste. 2,828 cubic feet were allowed to escape through the doors to keep the levels clear. The main stoppings were of 9-inch brickwork. There were fifty in the " dook," and seventy-six in the "rise workings." The temporary stoppings were of woo:l. The main doors, which were of wood, were mostly double. The temporary doors were of canvas. The places were bratticed with wood bratticing. The workings were lighted with Scotch gauze lamps, the o::ily naked lights being those a.~ the pit bottoms in the downcast (No. 2). All the roa.ds were dry and dusty. The firemen examined the pits o'"'ery morning, in terms of General Rule 2; they examined all the roads anrl faces, those not working as well as those in operation. The waste was regularly examined. Shot-firing was permitted to a limited extent in the solid places only, a.n.d then it was the duty of the fi remen to light the shots Gas had been reported in the splint coal on five occasions during 1886, and three during 1887; but there had ne,·er been an explosion in that seam, and there was no shot-firing in the district where it had been seen. Udston being one of the collieries in the Hamilton District, where the seams are more fi ery than in other places, and especially being next to Blantyre, where the explosion occurred in 1877, it was frequently inspected. Annexed are extracts from the repr,rts of Mr. Robson, who was then my assistant. The ventilation, modes of working, and lighting were well-known to me, and I considered them perfectly sufficient for the purpose. There was less gas given off from the Splint coal at Udston than there was at Blantyre ten years ago, as tr.e workings in the upper seams, the Ell and the Main, J1a.ve di'ained the gas to :i. large extent from the Splint. • This being the state of matter:3 at 9·7 a.m., just when the breakfast hour had commenced, and there was no work , gviog on, the explosion happened. Traces of the extreme Yiolence of the explosion were visil,le through all the Splint coal workings. Every stopping was blown out, e,·cry door blown clown, and all the hrattice blown out. 'l'here was a heavy fall, resulting from the explosion, near the bottom of No. 2 pit (it was 30 yards in length); a fall in the east level, 300 yards from the shaft ; two falls in tbe "Blantyre section," which buried two men for nine days; a fall in the "horse road stoops," which buried ooe man , \vhose body was not recovered for seventeen days. With the exception of these falls, the faces and roads were a.11 clear, and could be easily travelled. Tubs were knockerl a:1out, and rails were displaced largelv over the whole pit. The wheel of a "cousie," weighing a.bout 7 cwt., was blown westward fora.Lout 5 yards. A train of loaded tubs in the "rise section" was broken up, and some of the tubs blown for about 20 yarJs away. The blast appear:; to have travelled over the whole area. of the workings. The shock was felt in · the workings of Creeufield Colliery, through a. ba.rrier of solid coal 45 yards thick. It raised a cloud of dust in the workinfas of .13la.ntyrc Colliery, through the rent strata. overhead, although there was a solid barrier of 20 yards of coal. have note<t on the accompanying sketch the points where the direction of the force of the explosion is indicated. They are most marked in the "rise section," and it looks as if the explosion had tl'avelled westward from these workings along the horse road. On reaching a. point HO yards from the face, it split; one portion went northwards, and out to the east level workings, and out"'ards and down the various openings to the " horse road stoops. " The other portion passed outwards on to the Blantyre stoops, and out on to the engine plane, passing through the <look workings, and finally returning from these workings up beth passages to the two shafts. The question arises, how did the explosion originate ? The quantity of air was sufficient for the requirements of the Splint coal seam, which was not a fiery seam, although it gave off tire-damp; acd subsequent examination has not brought out anything abnormal in the state of the workings or the ventilation on the morning of the explosion. I t may have originatetl. through the use of unsafe lamps, or through the exposure of a naked light, or through shotfiring . · The mine was lighted throughout with Scotch gauze lamps. The Scotch gauze lamp has been in use in Scotch mines ever since the iO\·entifln of the Davy lamp. It is very simple, easily examined, gives a better light thau any other sa.fetylamp, and distributes it in all directions. It is, however, well known (and the Royal Commission note it), that, like the Davy and Clanny lamps, it is only safe in explosive currents travelling at a velocity of less than 5 feet a second. I am satisfied, however, that no• such current existed in these workings, and that the explosion did not ol'iginate at a locked sa.fety.J:i.mp. The examination of the dead hodies showed that many of the men had been in possession of matches, keys, and otber contriva.nc2s for opening lamp3, in contravention of the Spo::ial Rules. This showed very bad discipline; but there was nothing to indicate that the explosion originated at an open light, or even ~it a lighted match. ~hot-tirin 6 was permitted in the "rise section," where I suppose the explosion to have originated. The fireman of the district was found dead in the shaft. lf, therefore, any shot was fired, it must have been done surreptitiously by some miner ; a.nd this. I think. may have been done. There are marks of a shot in two places, oue at Dennison's place, in the "rise section" (2:3 and 24 on plan), a.nd one at Harkness' place, iu the topmost place of the "horse road section" (33 on plan). In the latter place there are distinct marks of a shot-hole; hut I think this shot was fired before the explosion, and that it did not originate there. In Dennison's place there is no shot-hole visible, bnt there are marks of powder seen at the face; and I think a shot has been fired there at the time of the explosion. In addition to marks of powder, there are the following circumstances, which would indicate that a shot had been fired, and that the explosion may have originated in this place:There • NOT&. - This is evidently ao error. The meaning intended to be co.nl'eyed is, no doubt, th:i.t no current attaining 5 feet per second we.s to be found in the workings.

949 There was a bent pricker 7 yards from the face; it was bright, and h:i.d apparently been recently used. Beside it was found a la.mp with the gauze on, but unlocked. Another lamp, which was locked, was found 34 yards a.way from the face. A drill was found witbiu 4 yards of the face. The ordinary stoops are ~2 yards square, but in this place the stoop is about 50 yards, at a. rise of 1 in 5 ; and if the usual system of bratticing for e3rrying the air 22 yards was adopted, it may not have been so tight as to prevent a little gas being there. The Dennison's bodies were found close to the face; apparently they had both been blown ha.ck to the face. It is possible that one of the Denoisons had taken the gauze off his lamp, lighted a shot, and retired out of harm's way, putting the gauze on a.gain with the intention of locking his lamp at leisure, but the explosion took place before he had time to do it. Upon full consideration of the whole matter, I am of opinion tha.t this was a dust explosion, a.nd that it originated in some place in the Rise Section (probably Dennison's), where some gas was present; that a shot was fired in the place surreptitiously and without an examination for gas; that when the shot was fired it ignited the gas which was in the place, and a cloud of coal-dust was raised. The ignited gas produced sufficient heat to kindle the dust into a flame, which traversed the whole workings, raising in its progress sufficient dust to ma.iota.in the combustion. This explosion is, in my opinion, another argument in favour of the abolition of tbe use of explosives in all fiery and dusty mines. I o the new Mines Bill it is proposed to permit shot-firing in dry and dusty mines under certain conditions. I fear tbe3e conditions will be neglected, and loss of life from shot-firing will still occur. The accident at Inishfr seems to bear this out. There they professed to use the water cartridge, a.ud, as a.n additional precaution, an electric exph>der; but an explosion occurred which was attributed to a. shot where these conditions were found to ha"e been neglected. Since this explosion I have issued a. circular calling attention to the necessity for watering dry and dusty roads, and also calling attention to the circular issued by your instructions as to improved safety-lamps. Copy is annexed, also extracts from the r,otes sent me by )Ir. Robson, the Llspector of Mines for South Wales, who was my assistant up to January last. RALPH MOORE, H.M. Inspector of Mines. The Right Hon. the Secretary of State, Home Department, London. Glasgow, 13 July, 18 7.

Exhibit No. 59. Extract from the Proceedings nfthe American Institute of Mining Engineers. Coal-dust as an explosive n.gent. (In further discuss:on of the paper of Mr. Glenn, on "An Explosion of Grahamite- Dust," read at the Virginia Beach Meeting, l!'ebruary, l S9! .) [Briclgeport Meeting, October, 1894.]

R. W. Raymond, New York City : Io connection with this subject, I would call attention to a book just published, • the author of which, Mr. Donald M. D. Stuart, is a mining engineer of 'Bristol, England. It contains a thorough discussion of the explosion which occurred in November, 1893, at the Camerton collieries in Somersetshire, a.nd possesses special interest and value, not only by reason of its exhausti l'e character, but also because the explosion referred to occurred in a mine free from fire-damp, aod is presumed t:> have been due to coal-dust alone. The accident afforded, therefore, a peculiarly fa,·ourable opportunity for studying the phenomena of coal-dust explosion. I shall not undertakP. here to describe or discnss in detail the circumstances of this case, or Mr. Stuart's elaborate and ingenious argument in support of the theory he proposes; but I believe a brief summary of his method and conclusions will be interesting to members of the Institute, a.nd will induce many to procure the book itself for more careful study. The two Camerton collieries are situated about 7 miles from Bath, and have been worked extensively, on six separate coal-sea.ms, for a hundred yea.rs. The faulted geological structure of the field, the subsidence of large areas of roof, and the extensive goa,·es resulting from the operations of a century, combine to fumish the most favourable conditions for the collection of fire-damp, if it were ever generated in the coal or rocks; but this gas has never been discovered, either before or since tho explosion of last No,·ember. Tho Camerton collieries, like all the others of the Radstock district, have been, and still a.re, operated with naked lights exclusively. These facts seem to preclude the hypothesis that the explosio:i was due to fire-damp ; and this conclu3ion is confirmed by the fact that no carbonic acid was d etected in the ga.s proJuced by the explosion. Certain phenomena, observed in the working3 afterwards, P?inted also in the same rl.irection. By a. thorough analysis of all the observed facts, Mr. Stuart re1ches the conclusion, that there was a series of ten snccessive explosions, which originated in a shot fired with gunpowder, and were propagated 279 yards with the air-current and 1,278 yards against it. F or the initiation and propagation of these phenomena, he proposes the explanation, that the he.lt cleveloped by the explosion of the gunpowder was r.ufficient to distil the coal-dust in the immediate neighbourhood, and even to dissociate the hydrocarbons thus set free, leaving free hydrogen as a.n explosive gas, and depositing carbondust; and that the hydrogen, coming inlo contact with oxygen io the air-current, suffered an explosive combustion, which generated fresh heat sufficient to distil and dissociate a. new body of gas-this reaction occurring again and again, until so rnuch heat ha.d b.!en lost en route that the process could not repeat itself. The theory is supported by detailed chemical evidence and heat-calculations, based upon the researcheil of Sir Frederick Abel and Sir Andrew Nobel, into the temperatures aml products of fired gunpowder, a.ad the experimental in,·cstigations of Professor Victor Meyer, of Heidelberg University, and Professor Vivian Lewes, of the Royal Na.val College, Greenwich, into the temperatures of ignition of ,·arious hydrocarbons, nnd the results of subjectin~ these bodies to exaltt!d temperatures. Concerning this argument, I will not express an opinion here. The conclusion 1s certainly novel and startling. Free hydrogen has not been concei 1·od hitherto, so far as I know, to be present in tho cxplosi vo gases of coal-mines; and the proposition that it may be produced by the simple heat of an ordinary shot, and may become the agent of an aggregate elfect for exceeding the mechanical energy of the shot itself, challenges close and sceptical criticism. Apart from the theoretical difficulties of the problem, the practical question n.t once arises : If Mr. Stuart's theory of this case is correct, how are we to explain the fact that no previous shot, in these collieries or in any others, is known to have initiated such a. coal-dust explosi11n? Io its final report (1886), the first British Royal Commission on this subject says very i;onsibly : " If co:i.1-dust were the principal agent in coal-mine explosions, e,·e1·y blow-out shot, occurring in a very dry ancl dnsty mine, should actually be atteocled by a more or less disastrous explosion or conflagration; and looking, therefore, to the enormous a.mount of powder expended in shot-firing in this and other countries, aud to the not inconsiderable proportion which blown-out shots must constitute in many localities of the total number of shots fired, disastrous coal-mine explosions should be of more than daily occurrence if this ,·iew were correct." Mr. Stuart observes that this conclusion now requires to be revised; an,l thero is no clouht that he has made out a strong case. But it is evidently an exceptionnl one ; and the determination of its exceptional conditions is of.the highest importance. This point is emphasised by the remarkable fact lhat the coal-dust from this district was tested, not long before the Camerton explosion, by Mr. H. H all, whose report (1893) to tho Royal Commission, shows that eight experiments failed to prouuce explosive ignition. In these experimeut.3, coal-dust was scattered into an old shaft, free from fire-damp, and a cannon, charged with I ~ lbs. of gunpowder and lightly tamped with an e11ua.l volome of coal-dust, was fil'cd up then.xis of the shaft into the dnst-ladcn air. The only explanation which Mr. Stuart has to offr.r concerning the different behadour of the coal-dust in the Camerton collieries, at the time of the accident, is the followin~ :" Probably, the two important chan;;es at these collienos iu recent years have been in the veutilation and the production of coal. LargP.r currents of air now pass through the ordinary roads at much higher velocities than heretofore. The output of coal has al-!O been considerably increased; therefore, the larger number of loaded trams, in their p rogress from the coal-faces to the down-ca.st shaft, are swept by tho opposing ancl a.ceelerated c:urronts of air. Coal-dnst is, consequently, disengaged and deposited io the roads, and the air in passing o,·or it evaporates tho moisture and raises it to a dry and sensitive condition. The deposits of dust have, therefore, become greater in quantity a.ad more sensitive in character in recent years, a.ad these conditions have been set up without any features to attract notice. The failure of the dras tic tests to obtain t!Xplosive phenomena with the coal-dust of the <listric~, only a few months before the explosion, would also naturally divert attention from the subject." The • Coal-dust a;i an Jfrpli>fli~ A9ent, as slwum by an E~minatio,i of the Camerl111t Explosio11. Oivil Engineer. New York, Spou and Ch:>.mberlaia, 189~. SroaU 4to., 103 pp. ; 7 ltU"ge plntes.

Dy Donald M. D. Stuart, F.O.S., Mining and

;

950 The analysis of the Camerton coal shows 33·55 per c~nt. of volatile products, and the coal yields, per ton, 11, 134 cubic feet purified illuminating gas of 1S-candle power, when burned in the "London Arga.nd," at the rate of 6 oubio feet per hour. The large volume and high illuminating-power of the gas indicates, as Mr. Stuart says, that "the ooal-duat was a favmtrable material for yielding a gaseous mixture, and contained a good proportion of the higher hydrocarbons in the ascending scale of explosive combustion." But the material does not appear to be exceptional in these respects. Thorough watering_ of the coal-dust in the vicini~y, before firing a. shot, is pronounced by ~r. Stuart to be probably the most effective precaution known at the present tnne. But he adds, that a mere dampenmg of the surfa::e w,uli probably not be sufficient. Whether Mr. Stuart's chemical t.heory be correct or not, the fact remaius, that a serious coal-dust explosion has taken place in a. colliery suppos.erl to be entirely exempt fro~ such n. peril ; and, I heartily agree with the following passage which I quote from a private letter of the author of this book : •: There is still a weight of opinion, that coal-dust itself is not dangerous, especially in non-gaseous mines, which derives strength from the fact that explosions in such mines are rare. But one has occurred, and we know not how soon others may follow; and with such ca.lamaties as the recent Albion explosion, with its death-roll of 290 victims, hanging over well-equipped and well-managed collieries, I beg your ~upport in drawin~ a~tention to the investigations and tho~ghts adYaucetl in my volume, so that they may be read and oons1dored, to asccrtam tf, haply, they may be found to elucidate t he condition, and thereby suggest the remedies, for this grave danger to colliery enterprises everywhere."

• Extra.ct No. 60. Extract from the Proct:edin9s of tlte American Institute of Mining En_qineers. Coal-dust as an explosive agent (in fur ther discussion of the paper of Mr. Glenn on "An explosion of Gra.hamite-Dust," read at the Virginia. Beach Meeting, l!~ebruary, l 894). (Bridgeport Meeting, October, 1894.) David T. Day, v\"'ashington, D.C.: The book of Mr. DonaldM. D. Stuart on "Coal-dustasanExplosiveAgent," is most admirable for the detailed record of the eccentric effects of the explosion with which it deals. 1'his occurred in a bituminous coa.l-mine st Co.merton, Engla.nd, where tire-d.alI!p bu been proved absent dnriog the many years since the colliery was opened. Pa~t of the mine was dry and very at)sty; ~art _was dn:mp. _The explosion. too~ place in a dry portion. There was nothmg but coal-dnst to cause the explosion. :Che mterestmg pomt to be explamed 1s why a certain gunpowder-blast produced an explosion of tho dust, and why countless previous blasts had never cs.used an explosion. It is evident thn.t the particular blast which effected the disaster differed from others (1) in hein~ a partfally "blown-out" shot, and (Z) in having its axis so directed that the blown-out shot was discharged into dry, fine coal-dust at very short range. The studies of Mr. Stuart de~onstrate.this clearly, and thus add val.uable data to this perplexing subject. The writer goes much farther, however, 10 developmg an elaborate theory a.<i to Just how the coal-dust behaYed during the explosion. This portion of the book adds to the general interest by its ingenuity ; but I cannot see that the data bear any proportion to the theory. No one who reads the book will doubt that Mr. Stuart considers the distillation of the volatile matter of the coal by the explosion of the gunpowder to be the principal condition of the explosion, and, further, thltt the distilled hydrocarbons were essentially dissociated into hydrogen and soot. He considers that this hydrogen travelled more than 100 yards and then exploded. There, its explosion distilled more coal and furnished gases for more explosions. This theory is devoloped from (I) the fact that the explosion was very violent at particular points and of comparati\lely alight violence at others; (2) the observation that a cotton bag which contained food, and which was left in a refuge-hole, w~ not so much burnt as to destroy its texture; and (3) the statement that carbonic acid was not found. Mr. Stuart argues that if the bag was not completely burned, there could not have been any flame; and that, carbonic acid not being found, the only product of combustion must have been water; therefore, hydrogen must have been the explosive gas, which is traced to the coal-dust by the hypothesis of distillation. But, as a matter of fact, carbonic acid may have been present in considerable quantity, escaping notice because it was not carefully looked for. The only evidence of its absence is the fact that there was not enough to extingttish the lights of the exploring party, several hours after the explosion. The statement as to the absence of carbonic acid is, therefore, not well founded, and this is disappointing after the laborious citations of authorities on heat phenomena, gunpowder explosions, &c. A simpler explanation of the explosion would seem to me to be that the flame from the gunpowder set fire to the coal-clust in the presence of a considerable amount of air in the well-ventilated tunnel. This burning kept up along the tunnel, and was not very violent, because the combustion was incomplete, and the air and dust were not well mixed. Where the mixing was more complete, the explosions were more violent. Such a theory would do something toward e"Xplaining why this shot produced the explosion when all the othersespecially a heavier shot earlier in the same night-had not done so. The a.xis of this earlier shot wns directed more nearly in the line of the tunnel, and it did not blow ont, so that its contents were cooled before it struck the mass of dust. The observation that the food-bag, 35 yards away, was only carbonised, does not seem to me t.o prove that flame was absent. In the first place, it was out of the direct line of the explosion, in a. "refuge-hole" in one side of the tunnel, and its condition is of no great significance, especially if we suppose the combustion to have been incomplete. From such incomplete combustion, carbon monoxide would be expected as the main prod.uct. Mr. Stuart ventures ths statement that carbon dioxide is an essential product of the explosion of hydrocn.rbon gases, although it is well known thut these products may vary from water and carbon dioxide, as products of complete combustion, to mixtures in various proportions of hydrogen, solid hydrocarbons mixed with free carbon (soot), unburnt gaseous hydrocarbons, carbon in the Jorm of coke, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, water, &c., according to the stage of incompleteness of the combustion. We recognise it as imfra.cticable to produce even experimentally any single product such as hydrogen (which Mr. Stuart claims) as the result o distillation, except by heating for a consi<lerable length of time at the highest temperature attainable. It is not necessary to use such a complicated distillation theory to explain the presence of soot, the commou indicator of incomplete combustion, i.e., a smoky flame. As the explosion proceeded, its heat must, of course, have distilled some of the coal-dust; but it should be noted that, after long heat-calculations, Mr. Stuart admits that the slight amount of heat in the gunpowder would only account for a trifling percentage of the energy necessary to carry the gases to the place where he supposes th~ first explosion to have taken place. He admits that some combustion must have taken place, but he prefers to lea.vein the background this source of nearly the whole effect. It appears to me that Mr. Stuart's theory is unnecessary, and by suggesting a simpler though certainly less interesting explanation of the method of the explosion, I hope t-ha.t the render will be less diverted from the valuo.ble lesson of the disaster, which seems to be that a. blown-out shot, discharged at short range into a mass of dry dust, may produce an explosion. The violence of this depends upon the completeness of the combustion. I t is most violent when the partially burned gn,seous products become more thoroughly mixed by diffiusion, eddying, &c., and from gaseous detonating mixtures with the usual violent results. This explanation would not necessarily exclude anthracite coal-dust, as Mr. Stuart's theory does. · W. F. Durfee, ,vest New Brighton, Staten Island: I fully agree with Dr. Day's general conclusions in this matter, and aprOJ)o8 of the whole subject, I am reminded of the explosion of flour-dust in the great Washburn mill in Minneapolis, which occurred 2nd May, 1878. This mill was one of the largest in the country. 'fhe "alls were of stone, 7 feet thick at the bottom ; yet instantly that enormous fabric was a wreck. The proprietor of the mill employed Prof. L. W. Peck to make a careful study of the disaster; and bis conclusion was that it resulted from the ignition and explosive combustion of the flour-dust with which the atmosphere of the mill was surcharged. He tried a number of experiments which fully justified that conclusion, He used carbonaceous dust of various kinds, sugar-dust, charcoal-dust, and flour-d\lst, which he placed in a strong box a.nd fastened down the lid of the box. In every instance, when flame was used for ignition, the lid was blown off with a violence of explosion in proportion to the amount of dust p resent in the atmosphere of the box. In a lecture delivered by Professor Peck he gives the following illustration :" If a large log of wood were ignited it miaht be a week before it would be entirely consumed. Split it up into cord wood and pile it up loosely it would burn iu two hours. Split it up into kindling wood, pile it up loosely and, -perhaps, it would burn in less than a.n hour. Cut it into shavings and allow a strong wind to throw them in the air, or in any way keep the chips comparatively well separated from ea.ch other, a.od the log would, perhaps, be colll!umed in two or three minutes. Or, finally, grind it. up into a fine dust, as powder, blow it in such a manner that each particle is surrounded with air, and it will burn in less than a. second." In

951 I

I n the matter of the explosion at t.he Pocahontas mine some years ago {13th March, 1884), Messrs. J. H. Bramwell, Stuart M. Buck, and Edward H. Williams, junr. (a committee appointed by the President of the Institute, see Tram., xiii., pp. 2S7 to 249), reported : "We have obtained no direct proof of any past occurrence of fire-damp sufficient of itself to account for even a slight explosion and a.re forced to believe that Lhe explosion was due either to dust alone or to duet quickened by an admixture of tire-damp too slight for detection by any ordinary means." 'T'he statement of this committee (page 2t8) that in two instances "a body of flame has been described as flashing back 60 t.o 100 feet from the head of an entry, following the firing of a shot, without injury to the men," calls to mind an explosion which occurred in a confectionary establishment iu Barclay-street, New York, a few yea.rs previous to that in t he Washburn mill. The investigation by the coroner did not result in any satisfactory conclusion; but it was in evidence that several times, during a period of a. year or more before the explosion, there had been flashes of Ila.me observed to shoot a.cross tho floor, but no explosion followed. In the particular inst.'\nce under in,•estigation it was shown that the atmosphere was very much filled with sugar-dust, and the whole front of the building was blown out. Until they had got down to the bottom of the dt!brv;, it was supposed that the wrt'ck was the result of a boiler explosion; but that was found not to be the case. T hore is no doubt in my mind that Lhe explosion was that of starch and sugar-dust mixed with air. I n 1881 there was an explosion, or, rather, a series of explosions, in the Albion mine, which was investigated by Mr. Gilpin, the Inspector of Mines for No,·a. Scotia. The mine wns thoroughly ventilated, and an hour before the explosions began was reported to be pmctjcally free from gas; yet Mr. Gilpin says;" T he explosions once begun were continued at intervals, until the mine was all aflame, and had to bo flooded. , • On examining the gallery shortly after the original explosion, dead bodies of men and horses were found 600 y:mls from t he shafts, a nd the woodwork was splintered; but nothing bore any mark of fire, and t he conclusion was plainly justified that the flame of the explosion ha.d not extended thus far. 'l'he walls of the galleries ban been swept olear of timber, and had the appearance of having been brushed with a broom. Volumes of coal-dust had been driven along by the force of tho hlast, and lay in waves and drifts on tbo floor of the levels. . . . . It was found that clouds of the finer particles had been .carried to ~he shaft and beyond it into the main north level, where a secondary explosion had taken place." This second explosion "was half a mile from the first, with an intervening space of at least a quarter of a mile, known to have been free from flame." The conclusion is drawn "that the fine dry particlea were driven on by t he force of the first explosion across the shaft into the 'lamp-cabin,' where they were ignited by the lamp, which was kept burning openly, and thus caused the second explosion; and it is probable that the same agency was efficient in producing, or, a t least, augmenting, the subsequent explosio::s that made it necessary to flood tho mine." The illustration of Professor Peck, above quoted, suggests t he burning of ground or dust-coal in "the dust.-fuel furnace," into which coal-dust is blown and consumed so rapidly as to furnish abundance of heat for melting steel in its open hearth. Any one who has studied one of these furnaces in operation would have no difficulty in believing that a mixture of coal-dust and air, if iu sufficient volume, would explode d ieastrously when ignited. After all, what we call explosion is but exr.eedingly rapid combustion; and gunpowder owes its efficiency as an explosive to the fa.ct t hat every particle of charcoal-dust has, in the nitre surrounding it, the oxygen to cause its excessively rapid or explosh·e combustion. William Kent, Passaic, N.J. : Suppose we admit the possibility of the truth of the theory of Mr. Stuart that t he hydro-carbon gas could be dissociated iol,o hydrogen and solid carbon, and that the hydrogen went on until it met n. body of air and exploded with it. It is re3sonable to suppose that that body of hydrogen, when it exploded, would generate heat which would distil anothPr body of gas from the surrounding coal and woul<I tlistil it as hydro-carbon gas. St1ppose t he heat were sufficie:1t t o dissociate t.his gas into hydrogen and solid carbon, y~t around the margin where this heated gas must hav~ b:ien cooled by the comparatively cold body of the mine the temperature coulcl not at all r ise to that of dis!'ociation. At this point, if the gases were burned at all, ca.rb:>nic oxide or carbonic ar.id would have been formed. It is perfectly inconceivable that there could be an explosion creating such n.n intensely high temperature everywhere u.p to t he margin of the walls, which would absolutely deposit a ll of the carbon in t hat hydrocarbon gas and leave none of it t o be burned as hydrocarbon. I think it a sufficient theory to suppose that the solid coal was d istilled into hydrocarbon gas, which may be done at quite a low temperature (some hydrocarbon gases are ~eneratcd at a low degree of heat), that these hydrocarbons were burned in the ordinary way into ca.rbooicoxide or carbomc acid, and that one or the other of these gases must have been there, although it was not found. It seems reasonable to suppose that a fter the explosion there would be great currents of air rushing in and sweeping out the gases of oombustioo, and that the parties who went to get samples of the gas afterwards did not find carbonic oxide or carbonic acid, and that t hey may hM·e been t here immediately after the explosion. But, I think that the successive explosions may be accounted for without the hypothesis of the dissociation of CHc, as follows :'fhe first explosion would take place at a point where there existed an explosive mixture of CHt and air, and would extend no further than the point, at which the air did not contain enough gas to be explosive. The resulting gases of combnstioo would form a hot Wll\'e of CO 2 and nitrogen, which would drive ahead of it the mass of cold air. This intensely hot wave, in passing o,·er broken coal and dust, would distil out a fresh supply of UH~. which, bowev~r, would not immediately burn because surrounded by incombustible g1tses, but would be swept along with the wave. Fina.Uy, by the rolling, tumultuous motion of lhe wave, a body of CH 1 might become mixed with the air in, front, and ultimately fiud by contact with a still hot portion of tho gases of combustion. T he explosion which would hnmediately result would gener ate another body of hot 002 and N, which would proceed as before. (Later communication to the Secretary.) Having had an opportunity to read carefully Mr. Stu.art's book, I offer a. few additional comments upon it. On page 44 he says : " T hese activities would leave the atmosphere in their rear in an attenuated condition, and when No. l gaseous explosion occuned, there would be an instantaneous r ush into this attenuated atmosphere, driving t he intumesccnt d ust that had not subsided against the thin opposing faces of the timber." The atmosphere was probably not" attenuated," but rather a pfeon1m, due to increased pressure caused by combustion of the gases. T he dust would be as likely to be deposited on the off-sides of timbers, through eddies in the currents, as through being driven against them by the current. . Again, on page 53, the author says: "If it be remembered that the temperature of tho exploded gun powder largely exceeded t he highcst/oint touched in Prof. Lewes' experiments, the character oft.he gateous body produced from the coal-dust becomes reve:i,le ." The argument is that hydrogen was formed. Prof. Lewes's experiments showed that, at 1500° C. Methane is decomposed into 78.66 H , 19.22 hydrocarbons. Ethane is decomposed into 73.35 H, 20.62 hydrocarbons. Ethylene is decomposed into 62.68 H, 27.80 hydrocarbons. 'l'he argument depends upon a calculation oft.he temper:i.ture of exploding gunpowder (p. 76), about 223 1° C. Mr. St~art does. not seem to lak~ into account ~he dilution of _th~ pr?ducts of explosion of gunpowder by the surrounding air, and their ~onsequent c?ohn~, ~or the cooling due to th~ d1st1llat1on ?f th_e ~yrlrocarbons of the coal, to say nothing of the further coolmg by the d1ssoc1at1on of the hydrocarbons, 1£ any such dissoc1at1on there was. The distil~ation of. hydrocarbons. from coal, and ~h<:ir ~issociatio~ in~ _H a_nd C in a; chamber . kept at a high temperature, which supplies the heat-umts absorbed by d~stillat1on and d1ssoc1a.t1on, ,s a very different t.h1ng from what is likely to take place in a. large open chamber, full of cool air and surrounded by cool walls. On page 38 it is stated that the quantity of heat generated by the explosive combustion of t he charge of gun powder in No. 2 shot was 354.~75 x 516.8 or 183, 141 units of heat. This looks large, being expressed in grammo,centigra.de heat. units, but translated into British thermal units (1 gc-.i.mme-calorie = .0039i British thermal units), it amounts to only 727 British thermal units, or less than enough to boil l pounJ. of water. The temperature of the prorlucts of combustion of this No 2 shot II is found to be 2896° C" {p. 37). This is the result of o. theoretical calculation, dividing the heat-units due to the combustion by the heat-units re<111ired to raise the temperature of the products of combustion 1° C. But the products of combustion are not all that is hea.ted by the heat generated in the explosion: As soon as formed, they are qischar~ed iqto the surrounding air, which is heated by them, while they are correspondrngly cooled.

•

052 The argument ·of the book, tending to show that the explosions were the result of the burning of hydrogen dissociated from the hydrocarbo~ gases of the coal, and not of the direct burning of these gases themselves, rests (1) Upon a theory or calculations showing a tem.perature following the explosion of the guupowder sufficient to cause dissociation. This theory, I think, the author fails to prove. (2) Upon the noo-discoYery of CO2 after the explosion. The attempt to discover CO2 does not appear to have been made until eight hours after the explosion (p. 62), the full force of the intake-current having been directed into the body of stagnant gases. The g~seous mixture that filled tbe roads was suff~ting, p~ngent, a~d irritating. How would burning H produce such a mixture? It was probably CO, COz, and S02, with pyrohgneous acid, or some such substance produced by partial distillation of the timbers. ~he failure to discover CO 2• by the.appearance of the lights eight hours after the explosion, and after the full forces of the intake-current had been directed mto the stagnant gases, does not proYe that CO2 did not exist immediately after the explosion. While it is difficult to accept the theory of the author that free hydrogen was formed du ring the progress of the series of explo!!ions, and it is probable that distillation of the hydrocarbons and their burning is a. sufficient theory, this work is of great importance in calli_ng attention to ~he dan~er o~ coal-dust, even in :i. mine supposed to b~ free from gas A. R. Ledoux, New York City: It may be 1oterestmg, srnce the well-known fact of the explosions of flour-mills has been mentioned, to state an explosion, which occurred at Chicago some years ago, in the Chicago Sugar Refinery, where starch exi,loded. lo one of their departments they were making dextrine, by heating starch to a nigh t-empera.ture. The room was full of starch and the dui<t settled upon the cylinders. It was the duty of one of the men to watch fo r fire, because when the mixture reached a certain temperature there would be a glow; but no danger was ever anticipated from it. Just before this explosion took place the superintendent noticed in behind one of the rollers tha.t the starch which had fallen upon it was glowing, and he took a. fire-extinguisher and turned a. stream of water upon it. The stream made a. small spark, and instantly an explosion followed, and the whole building went up and a number of men were killed. Fortunately for himself and for science, the superintendent was not killed and was able to report this fact. Charles Kirchhoff, New York City: In the manufacture of lignite briquettes, which is an important indu&try in Germany, and, I believe in .Austria also, dust explosions ha,·c proved practicall.v troublesome. A note t>o the subject will be found on page 11n of the curt'ent volume of the Zeit.schrift d"JJ Vereins Deut.scher bigenieurc. Edward H. Williams, jr., Bethlebam, Pa.. : The point, made by Mr. Stewart is not new. After coming home from the investigation of the Pocahontas explosion, I bad one of my seniors collect a lot of dusts of col\ls, with varying percentages of volatile matter, ancl see how much of tha.t matter was givl!n off at low temperatures. I had formed the idea that the heat generated by a blown-out shot was sufficient to disengage so great an amount of gas as to extend the flame to the dust-deposits on the walls of the chamber and to retain sufficient heat to discharge from those dusts sufficient gas to carry on the work, as in the Pocahontas affair there were distinct separate explosion!! in the chambers near the origin, although those chambers were closed aud bad no connection with one another. To be brief, we found that the greater part of the volatile matter was given off below a r ed heat. This was checked about five years a.go by another set of experiments; so that I am sure that certain coals are dangerous, from the fact that they give up their gas readily and at once. 1lve flashed the dust on the walls at I>ocahontas with a naked lamp, and one of the miners said that he thought for some time that he would try to make gunpowder with snch explosive dust, as it would explode in the cold, almost. There is another fact about dust explosions that has not been much discussed, and that is that 20 per cent. of the aftergas from exploding gunpowdet· is explosive, and, in a tight heading, this alone may prolong the £la.me of a blown-out shot. 'fhis was the case at Pocahontas, at a point where there was no dust ; yet the flame ran ba<:k 120 feet through a headinc: with no cross-cuts, where t he ventilation was by diffusion only. and set fire to a keg of powder and killei a ma.o. In some of my experiments the greater part of the volatile matter went off at hea ts so low that th 0 y coul<l be called " black." We do not need to suppose any separation into elements. The heat neces~a.ry to such a change would show its presence in the neighbourhood by the coking of the solid coal on.the surface of the rib; and, in fact, if such were to be the case, we would be on the track of perpetual motion, for such changes would go on for e,·er.

Exhibit No. 61. E:rtract f1·om the Proceeding.~ of !lie American Institute of Mining En_qinrers. Coal-dust as an Explosive A_gent; by Donald M. D. Stuart, F.G.S., R edland, Bristol, England. (Pittsburgh Meeting, F ebruary, 1896.)

It gives me great pleasure to accept the invitation I bad the honor of receiving, through the Secretary of the Institute, to reply to the criticisms ma.de in discussion of the theory advanced in my work entitled Coal-dust an Explosive Agent; and to lay before the Institute a. further statement of the views which investigations have led me to form upon the subject, published in my second book, entitled The Origin ancl Rationale of Col.liery Explosions. I. -REPLY TO CRITICISMS. From the report of the discussion upon my first book•, I find that Dr. David T. Day and Messrs. W. F. Durfee and William K ent felt some difficulty in accepting my statement that there was not an appreciable quantity of carbon dioxide in the products of the explosions a.t the Camcrtoo Collieries. Dr. Day said (p. 909) : "But, as a matter of fact, carbon dioxide may haYe been present in considerable quantity, escaping notice because it w:i.s not carefully looked for. The only evi1lence of its absence is the fact, that t,herc was not enough to extinguish the lights of the exploring party several hours after the explosio11. The statement as to the absence of carbonic acid is, therefore, not well founded : and this is <lisappoioting, after the laborious citations of authorities upon be:\t phenomena, gunpowder explosions, &.c." Mr. Durfee agreed with Dr. Day's general conclusions ; and Mr. Kent remarked (p. 914) : "I think it a sufficient theory to suppose that the soliJ coal was distilled into hydro~rbon ga.s, . · that these hydrocarbons were burned in the ordinary way into carbonic oxide and carbonic acid, and that one or the other of these gases must have been there, although it was not found." Again (p. 916): "The attempt to discover C0 1 <loes not appear to have been made until eight hours after the explosion (p. 62), the full force of the intake current having been directed into the body of stagnant gases. The gaseous mixture that filled the roads was suffocating, pungent, and irritating. How could burning hydrogen produce such i\ mixture? It was probably CO, COt, anrl S02 , with pyroligneous acid, or some such sul,st:mce, produced by partial distillation of the timbers. The failurf' to discover C.:O.) by the appearance of the light,s eight hour~ after the explosion, and after the full force of the intake current had been direcle<l intn the stagnant gases, docs noL prO\'C that COi did not exist immediately nJte1· the explosion." These remarks were made under a misapprehension. It. will be found at µage 62 of my book, that four men in tbe New branch escaped, and, in doing so, at.tempted to pass through o,·er 150 yards of road in which exp!osions Kos. 8, 9, anrl 10 had occurred, and where the products of the explosions were imprisoned by the falls. They were in the stagnn.nt atmosphere almost immediately after the disaster, and their candles ))urned brightly in it. Upon the same page is recorded that: " toppings were put. in . . . . and the full force of the intake current directed into the body of stagnant gases in the horse road, with the result that Mr. Garthwaite rca~hed the bodies about eight hours after the explosion." In doing so, he had to ad\'ancc frequently into the slag1~ant atmosphere, and described it as "suffocating, pungent, and irritating." 'l'he record proceeds ; "i\Iany times Mr. Gartlnrnite a1h·:rnccd more rapiJly than the fresh air, getting into the st3gnant gasei, 110d iuvnria.bly experienced the sensations named, n ecessitating immediate retrC'at to the air-current. On one oc.:asirn, encour-c1.gecl by his naked light burnit,g clearly, he p1 csscd furn arJ in front of the current, and suffered loss 1,f muscu'a.r powe r • Tra11,<.

xxH•, 905.

953 power that ca.used him to stagger and reel, and he had to be assisted back into the fresh air. 'l'he candles of the exploring party a.re stated to have burned as brightly in the stagnant gases, as in the fresh air; and they could only discover in which atmosphere they stood from the sensations they experienced in them." The records, therefore, show that the exploring party were frequently standing in the act.ual gaseous products of the explosions, and this is not difficult to understand if the condition of the mine be recalled. The circulation of air was suspended, because I.he doors and crossings were destroyed, and the intake current escaped directly into the return airway, without entering the field of the explosions. Tho roads within the field were therefore filled with a still atmosphere, which comprised the products of I.he explosions and of the chemical actions in the antecedent spaces, with residual gases and normal exhalations of the strat.a. This still atmosphere contd only be displaced by diffusion, becanse the roacls were filled up by large falls at many points (described at pp. 21- 24) which stopped the circulation. The exploring party ent.erecl into this atmosphere to m11.ke apert.ures through the falls, so that the intake-air, with the motive column of the ventilation, could be made effective to force the stagnant gases along the roads to the upcast-shaft. They commenced this :>peration within two hours of the disaster, and were engaged for six hours, constantly pressing forward more rapidly than diffusion was effected, and were often standing in the sta.~nant gases ; until, warned by physiological sensations or by some member falling into unconsciousness, they were compelled to retreat to a point in the intake-air where the sensations disappeared. The atmosphere resulting from the chemical changes in the field of disaster was, therefore, under constant test by the exploring party for a period of six hours, at numerous points where the intake-air ha.cl not penetrated. The usual method of testing the atmosphere of a mine for the presence of carbon dioxide is to observe t.he effect. upon the flame of a lamp or candle; and where the flame burns clearly, it is known that carbon dioxide is not appreciably present. It was known many year3 ago that an atmosphere containing about 2 per cent. of carbon dioxide extin~uished flam t. . Dr. John Haldane and Mr. W. N. Atkinson (Inspector of Mines) recently investigated atmospheres in mines 1U which their lamps and candles were extinguished. They noted the physiological sensations experienced, and Cl)llected samples of the gaseous mixture for analysis. The results of their investigations are published in vol. ,·iii, pp. 549-502, of the Tran,sactioM of the Federated I n~ 1it11lej of Jiini11!1 Enf1ineer.~, where it will be found that the atmospheres in which the lamps and candJes were extinguished contained from 2·21 to 2·58 pCl' cent. of carbon dioxide; huL that the first physiological sensation \\as experienced when I.he carbon dioxide rose to 3·26 to 3·38 per cent., and violent panting was felt when it formed 7·32 per cent. of the atmosphere. The burning candles a.t tho Camerton collieries show that the stagnant gases did not contain 2·21 per cent. of carbon dioxide ; n,•l the physiological scnsa.t.ions suffered by the exploring party were distinct in character from the sensations experienced by Dr. Haldane and :blr. Atkinson in atmospheres containing carbon dioxide. The evidence that there was not an appreciable quantity of carbon di..:,xide in the stagnant gases, is consequently indisputable. Dr. Day furt.her remarks (p. 910) : " A simpler expla.uation of the explosion wonld seem to me to be that the flame from the gunpowder set fire to t he coal-dust in the presence of a considerable amount of air in the well-,·entilated tunnel. This burning kept up along the tunnel, and was not very violent because the combustion was incomplete, and the air and the dust were not well mixed. Where the mixing was more complete, the explosions were more violent." In such a mixture of coal-dust with "a considerable amount of air," the distilled gases must ha,·e been consumed as they were evolved, at the expense of the atmospheric oxygen surrounding each particle of coal; and no distilled gas could, in this excess of air, have been left, to make an explosive mixture, as explaiued at p. 94 of my book. Dr. Day's hypothesis consequently fails to account for the principal phenomenon, nameiy, the exhibition of explosive violence. Dr. Day proceeds to say that "from such incomplete combustion carbon monoxide would be expected as the main product." Large volumes of carbon monoxide must, upon such a supposition, have been produced in the pa.th of the coal-dust (about 1 mile long), and formed a consiclerable constituent of the imprisoned atmosphere. The survivors were in that atmosphere, immediately after the disaster, and the exploring party worked in it for six hours. They suffered the sensations recorded, but no fatal effects were produced. An atmosphere that contains only 0·5 per cent. of carbon monoxide is immediately fatal to human life; therefore, even that small quantity was not present, and Vr. Day's hypot.hesis fails in the positive absence of the proof he suggested as necessary for its acceptance. Dr. Day continues (p. 910) : "Mr. Stuart ventures the statement that carbo11 dioxide is an essential product of the explosion of hyd1·ocarbon gases, although it is well known that these products may vary from water and carbon dioxide as products of complete combustion, to mixtures in various proportions of hydrogen, solid hydi·ocarbons mixed with free carbon (soot), unburnt gaseous hydrocarbons, carbon in the form of coke, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, water, &c., accol'ding t.o the stage of incompleteness of the combustion." The phrase "explosion of gases," which I a(loptcd to describe the cause producing the effects obser,·ed in wL·eckcd a11t! shattered structures, is perfectly understood :i.s distinct from the incxplosi vc combustion seen in an ordinary iUuminating-gas jet,. Disruptive elfocts, like those recorded at the loci of the explosions, could only be produced by the explosion or pract.ica.lly complflte combustion of the gas ; and chemistry teaches t,hat carbon dioxide is an essential product of that combu~tion: If a gaseo11~ hydroc"'.rbon be mixed. wit,h its oxidising equivnl.ent of air and ignited, an explosion results, c.ausmg v10lent destruct.10!1; bu.t if these propor~1ons of gas and atmOsJ>hei·1c ox.yg~n. be dep.arted [rem, then, as their rat.to for complete combust.1on disappears, the violent effects of the mixtures d11mmsh until a pomt of incomplete combustion .is rca.checl in which no disrnpt.~ve force .is produced; and ~n ~his desce1;1ding g.ra.~e. fr?m complete to incomplete comb~t1on, the products .:u·e necessarily changing, and carbon d1ox1de bec_o,~1.ng a dim101sh!ng p1:oduct. This suggestion of mcomplete combustion, consequently, leaves the phenomenon of exh1b1t1ons of explosive \'IOlence unaccounted fer. Again Dr. Day observes (p. 910) : """e recognise it as impracticable to produce even experimentally any single product such as hydrogen (which )Ir. , 'tu:irt claims) as the result of distillation, except by heating for a considerable time 11.t the highest temperature atta.i ua.ble." At pp. 46, 47 of my book, bydro~cn is shown to be one of the educts of the distillation of coal in ·association wit.h other gases nnd this result is obtained m ordinary chemical analysis. At p. 53 the educts are described as a mixture of gases, and the processe~ are discussed in which tbe hydrogen constituent. of hyd~ocarbo!ls be~ame n free product in the gaseous mixture; that 1s to say, there was hydrogen present. no longer m chemical umon with cnrbon, and therefore at disposal for expl~sive effects,. w!iere adequ~te oxyge~ could I.le obtain~d. This hypothesis is in accordance with the teachings or chem1~Lry, and w1tl11n the prn.ct1cal cxpcr1cnce of the gas-engineer. Dr. Day farther remMks : "It is not necessary to use such :i complicated distillation theory to explain the presence of soot, the common indicator· of incomplete combustion-i.e., a smoky flame." The presence of the finely divided carbon wo~ld not be ~ifficult of.explanation, if it 'Yere an isolate~ phenomenon; but it was not. And eYery phenomenon must find its place 10 the n1tionale of the explosion. The chemical changes by which this carbon was produced, did not yield an appreciable quantity of carbon monoxide or cal'bon dioxide ; consequently it conld not have ~een the.product of a smoky flame, which nece~sari!y produces those gases. Combustible bodies in the path of the P.xplos1ons, which must .hl:1-ve been co~~umed ~r burnt 1£ this hydrocarbon flame bad been present, wer·e found neither consumed nor burnt, and exh1b1ted a. condition which was proof that there was not such a Harne. It has already been shown that this suggestion of incomplet.e combustion leM·es the disruptive phenomena unexplained. Finally, Dr. Day observes (p. 910) : " As the explnsion proceeded, its heat must, of co11rse, hase distilled some of I.he coal-1lust; but it should be noted that after long heat-calculations ~Ir. Stuart al1mit.s that the slighl amount of heat in the guopowde,· would only account for a tnfling µcrcc11tage of the enl'rgy necessary to ca1ry the ga,-,es to the place where he supposes the tfrst explosion to have takeu place. He admits that some combustion must have t:l.ken place, but he prefers to leave in the background this source uf neo rly the whole (•ffect. ·• The la.st clause of thb statement is entirely incon·ect. It is shown, at p. 85 of my book, th.it t.hc surplu!; heat. in lhe products of the mining powder wn.<1 absolutely incapable of producing exploswns a.t the points where clisrnptions were observed;

:W- 6E

•

954 observed , but in the succeedina paaes the sourc(of supplementary hea.t is worked out, a.nd at pp, 89 and 00 t hll quantity 0 of heat is 1computed and the fia~res are given, viz. : 44,104-,476 gramme-units obtained in the oxidation of the h.ydrogen 0 derived from the co~l, and the hydrogen constituent of evolved hydrocarbons. The problem was grappled in the book, and an effort made to solve it,. The important ?riticisms of the theory advanced in my first book, have now been dealt with ~nd sho~ t~ be largely due to a misapprehension of the fact,, and therefo1·a unten!!.ble ; and the hypotheses advanced m substitution of that theory are found to be iMonsistent. with the phenomem, of the disMter. H will now be an advantage to state briefly t he observed phenomena and the explanation adv~.nced in the book. There were extensive residues of coked coal in the immediate vicinity of the shot (pp. 40 and 41); therefore the small quantity of heat at disposal from the charge of mining-powder, to which Mr. Kent draws attention (Tran8. 1 xxiv 915) was, as a fact, adequate to initiate distillatory action in the coal-dust. ' Th~ atmosphere of the roads for over l mile in length was laden with finely-divided carbon, and the enclosing walls were more or less covered with the same substance. The products of the chemical changes in the field of the disaster did not contain any appreciable quantity of carbon monoxide or carbon dioxide. The first exhibitions of explosive violence were distant 136 and 140 yards respectively upon either side of the originating shot, and num(!rous disruptions were found a.t intervals beyond those points. The explosions were local, the road b :!ing wrecked and the contained materials shattered to fragments in the immediate vicinity only. In the spaces between the explosions, similar materfals were neither damaged nor moved; and the road was uninjured except by the effects due to the immense changes of temperature to which the strata had been subjected during the chemical · changes that occurred in them (pp. 77 and 78). The explosions were in large sectional areas of ro:i.d, or where the normal supply of air was greatly increased. The·explosive phenomena abruptly terminated in roads that were dry and dusty, but _ventilated with feeble or " return " air-currents ; and in wet roads. These phenomena demand for their explo.nation the establishment of a series of chemical actions, in which beat was produced for its constant reprodnctiou in the coal-dust in the path of the cunent, up to the first explosions at the d istant points named, without the appreciable production of carbon monoxide or carbon dioxide, and in which an explosive gas was accumulated for explosire combustion, which did not yield carbon monoxide or carbon dioxid~ as produ<'ts. The theory advanced in my book is, that the products of the mining powder were projected through the plaoes of ruptured strata to the floor, in fan-like sheets, setting up destructh•e distillation in the coal-dust; and the evolved gases flowed into the atmosphere of the mi.ne, but could not undergo explosive combustion, although there was an ignitiontemperature at command, because the atmospheric oxygen at that place was inadequate, or was not within reach, for complete combustion. With the limited supply of oxygen, a selective action took place, the free hydrogen yielded by the coal, and the hydrogen constituent of a portion of the hydrocarbons seizing the oxygen for its oxidation, liberating carbon in solid form and in a fine st~te of division. The temperature reached by the oxidation of hydrogen being about 2000° C. , :i,ud there being a large quantity of heat generated in that action, t.he rem~ining hydrocarbons that had not previously undergone change would at that temperature and in the absence of atmospheric oxygen, undergo dissociation, placing free hydrogen at disposal for disruptive action where oxygen could be obtained, and leaving more of the finely-divided carbon in atmospheric suspension. A series of chemical actions of constant ~eqnence was, therefore, established in the immediate vicinity of the shot in which there was the partial combustion of hydrogen referred to, generating heat, which produced a series of chemical changes identical with those which the heat supplied by the products of the mining powder had originated; and these regenerated activities were of constant and similar reproduction a.long the path of the coal-dust; the free hydrogen undergoing constaut accumulation, until a place was reached in the workings of large sectional area, where the normal supply Qf air was greatly increased, and there being an ignition temperature in the po.rtial combustion taking place, the accumulated hydrogen was oxidised with explosive violence, causing the disruptive effects observed at the loci of the initial gaseous explosions. The quantities of heat generated in these explosions were · mnch greater than the beat in the products of th e miniog powder ; and it will be readily understood that an ad vanciug series of similar changes to those described, was again established, producing explosions at points beyond, where the conditions for the oxidation of the accumulated hydrogen were fulfilled: consequently the explosions would be propagate<l along every path of the coal-dust so long as oxygen was available, and there were no wet spaces to bring down the temperature. This theory satisfies the demands of chemical changes, ca.using a constant regeneration of heat, and placing hyd rogen at disposal for disru ptive action, without the production of ca,rhon monoxide or carbon dioxide, and accounts for the absence of these gases from the atmosphere in the field of the disaster, with the fact that the carbon constituent of the hydrocarbons was not oxidised, but disseminated in that atmosphere, where it was found in copious suspension, and from which it had been deposited upon the verticll fa.cea of the enclosing walls in dilated layers, and in stria giving the faces of stone and timber a ,·eincd appe3.rance. The chemical clrn.nges referred to as antecedent t ·1 the explosions, required time; ancl eviJence may be asked as t o the velocity of the gaseous movement between the loci of the explosions. The food-bag found still hanging by its tape from tho roof (p. 55), 13 yards from the shot, shows that there was very little velocity in the gaseous body at that point, though the evidences of chemical actions abounded there. The tram near the bottom of the south-east incline (Plate VII), between explosions No. 5 and No. 6, wa.s not <lispbced; but there were coked residues anu copious deposits of fine carbon, the evidence of energetic chemical action (pp. 68, 69, 71, 72). About 60 lbs. of lumps of coal, weighing from a quarter of a pound to 4 or 5 lbs. each, h ad disappeared from the opeu end of the tram (Figs. 34, 3.5, Plate VII). If the coal had been remo,Ted by mechanical force, t he lumps or their fragments must have been present somewhere ; but they could not be found ; and all that remained of t hem were the heavy deposits of coke<, coal distributed along the opposing faces of the two overhanging timber collars (Figs. 33, 35), showing that the lumps had been reduced to globules of coke. If there had been a high velocity in the horizontal movement of the gaseous body that attacked the coal, the particles of coke must have been swept away as they were produced; hut they ascended almost vertically to the faces of the overhanging timber, indi,:ating a slow onwar1l .movement in the activities. This phenomenon wa, between two propagated explosions, and over 300 yards from the originating shot. These evidences show as a fact that the gaseous movement along the path of the coal-dust was at a velocity that allowed time for tho distillation of the coal and the remaining chemical changes in the series of actions. The actfrities in the spaces antecedent to the explosions were, therefore, simple distillatory action, with chemical changes in the etlucts without the de,·elopment of mechanical energy. · A phenomenon bearing upon this question was the local mechanical effect only upon the air-current (p. 96). During the occurrence of the explosions, a man was standing at the bottom of the downcast shaft, 946 yards from P.xplosion No. 10 (the intervening r~a<l approximated to a straight tunnel), and he obsen•ed the momentary reversal of the flame of his open light once only, but it did not excite a suspicion that anything unusual had occurred. Another man was standing in the road at an intermediate point, 616 yards from explosion No. 10, and he observed nothing hut one puff of wind that extinguished his light; but he attached no importance to it, as it was not an unusual occurrence, the iotake air-current travelling at a l1igh velocity. · The absence of mechanical effect upon the ventilating power of the mine again shows that the explosions were simply local, Lhe disrupfo·e forces dying out in all directions in their immediate Yicinity ; and that there was no appre.ciable mechanical force in the gaseous movement in the intervening spaces. This phenomenon is not difficult to understand when it is remembered that the gaseous hydrocarbons that were being constantly added to the atmosphere were almost immediately eliminated by the oxidation of the hydrogen constituent ; that the volume of the incoming air was being constantly diminished by the removal of the oxygen, formiug one-fifth of that volume, for the oxidation of the hydrogen in the explosions and antecedent actions, in successiYe product.ions of steam undergoing event ual liquefa.:ition by surrender of heat; and that, by mean;, of this exhaustion, the mechanical equilibrium of the air-current was maintained. The abrupt terminations of the explosive phenomena in the po.ths of the coal-dust require explanation (p. 75). The f~ndamental difference between the path of propagation an<l the pa.th in which propagation failed w1111 the condition of the air-currents. The former contain2d " intake" air; the latter, with the exception of a. trifling split, were suppl ied with "return" air, impoveri~hed of its oxygen and lade11 with oxidised products. ·

The

J l,

1·

•

956 The exytoaive lJbeoomenn. were also arrested in wet spaces, which presents no difficulty when iL is remembered that; the product o the oxidation of hydrogen woulcl, by its coot.act with wet surfaces, uodergo a change corresponding to what tnkea place in the condenser of a steam-engine. The external stratum of the product coming in contact with the cold wet surfaces would be instantly condensed, leaving a vacuous space, into which another stratum would fall nnd be condensed ; and the process would be repeated so rapi11ly during the slow gaseous mo,·ement, as to make con<ll'nsation practically instantaneous. The product being l:qucfie<l by surrender of heat, the temperature would fall below t,he distilling-point, and tho chemical actions would come to nn end. The arrest of propagation is consequently brought about. by atmospheric conditions, in which heat cannot be generated for the reproduction of the chemical actions because there is inadequate oxygen to sustain the chemical changes in which the heat is produced; also by wot surfaces, which demand the surrender of the heat for the evaporation of their moisture. All the observed phenomena. from the origin to the termination of the disaster, therefore, find their interpretation in the theory advanced in my book, Coal-Dust an l!,'i:plosive Age11t, to whic:h I must refer for the full records and thei r investigation. The theory, shortly stated, is : "A colliery-explosion in which coal-dust is the principal agent, comprises numerous local explosions, separate in time and in space, at irregular intervals, where the normal supplies of atmospheric oxygen a.re greatly increased, and caused by the explosive combustion of accumulations of hydrogen gas, derived from the coal-dust in tbe antecedent spaces, by a series of chemical actions of constant seqllence, which produce hea.t for regeneration without auxiliary intervention, and arc constantly reproduced along the path of the coal-dust under the conditions named. This theory accO\lnta for the coked residues of coal and the positions in which they were found (pp- 40, 41, 42, 69, 94, 95) ; explains the presence of amorphous carbon in atmospheric suspension, and its characteristic deposition upon the ioclosiug walls throughout the field of disaster; accounts for tho practical absence of carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide in the gaseous products ; supplies the heat fot· the distillatory action, for raising the air of the gaseous mixture to ignition-temperature, and for supplementing the losses due to the contact of the products of combustion with the cold surfaces; allows time for the distill_ation of coal and the chemical changes in the series of actions ; provides the explosfre gas for pr(,ducing the disruptions; explains the cccurrence of the disruptions at intervals, the absence of mechanical effects in the int,ervening spa.ces, t he conditions under which propagation proceeds 01· is arrested, the maintenance of the mechaoion.l equilibrium of the ventilating current, and excludes no coal except thatwbieh yields no combustible gases when subjected to the temperature of destrnctive distillation.

II.

THE ORIGIN AND RATIONALE OF CoLLIEkY EXPLOSIONS. •

The views in the first part of this paper were founded upon the pheuomena of the explosion at the Camcrton Collieries, which provided a practical demonstration of disaster caused by gas derived from coal-dust; but it was reasonable to snppose that evidence beyond a. solitary explosion of that character, would be demanded for the establishment of a new hypothesis. Supplementary evidence is now provided by the explosion of 9th February, 1895, at the Timsbury Collieries, Somersetshire, which had been worked for the pr~<6us seventy years with candles (which is the mode of lighting still employed). There has never been a trace of fire-damp ovservable in the collieries. Facilities wore afforded me. for investigating this disaster, and I found its phenomena to be identical with those of the explosion at the Camertoo Collieries, and the two disa!.lters to provide an important body of evidence for investigating tho subject of colliery ex:plosioos. The result of the investigations is given in my second book, in which the views just considered are found to be confirmed. The first sixty-nine pages are devoted to the elucidation of the explosion at the Timsbury Collieries. Tbe conditions are riescribed upon pp. 4- 10, where the ahsence of firn-damp is considered, the method of working and ventilation explo.ined, and dry coal-dust shown to prevail in tho workings generally. The phenomena. of the explosions are recorded on pp. 11-36. At Lower Conygre shaft, Plate I, the roads were found in their normal condition after the explosion (p. 12), but 230 yards distant. some debris was lying upon the floor from a shot that had been very recently fired. The double timber in the vicinity oft.he shot ,,as undisturbed (p. 13). A food-bag, 34 yards distant, was still hanging from the roof by its tape in a carbonised condition; empty trams in the siding near were uninjured and undisturbed; more trams a.t the foot of Peter's incline, beyond, were in the same condition; and the man who charged the hole with mining powder and lighted it, was found there, burnt, but not mutilated. At the top of this incline, however, the empty trams were destroyed; one wheel, of 12 inches diamet.er and 2 inches tread, was broken in two, and the parts were lying in opposite directions; the iron drum was broken, and its timber staging shattered; the ventilating doors were reduced to small bits, an<l the brick and stone arching was wrecked (pp. 14, 15). A violent local explosion had occurred here, and the field of disaster contained many similar local exhiliitions of explosi,•e violence at \"arious intervals. At Peter's incline the road divided (Plate I) : one branch to Wyatt's incline reached several districts of workings; the other branch proceeded to Upper Conygre shafts; and roads from othe1· districts joined in at intermediate points. The initial explosion was propagated mto each district, and oo Jess than eighteen disruptions were observed at widely distant points, described in pp. l5-2S. A summary of these disruptions is given at p. 30, as follow11 : Yarde.

From ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,,

the shot. to N~. 1 explosion wit.h t.)1e air <:urrent ·:······· ······ ............ .................... . No. 1 explosion to No. 2 explosion agamst the all" cmrent ... ····-·············· · ······ ·· · No. 2 ,, No. 3 ,, ,, ,, ............ ···-· ······---····· NO- 2 ,. No. 4 ,, diffusion alone exerting a current . _............. _.. No. 4 ,, No. 5 ,. with the air current ........ ... ...................... .. . No. 5 ,, No. 6 ,, ,, ,, ...... ... .. .................. -···· · No. 4 ,, No. 7 ,, diffusion alone exerting a current ........ .. ....... . No. 1 ,, No. 8 ,, with t.he air current ... ................... .. ........... . No. 8 ,, No. 9 ,, ,, ....................... . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 No. 9 ,, No. 10 ,, against ,. ·······-··················· ........ . No. 10 ,, No. 11 ,, ,, ,, . ................................. . No.I I ,, No.12 JI ,, ,, ... . ... .. .......................... . No. 9 ,, No. 13 ,, with ,, ...... .. . .......................... . No. 13 ,, No. 14 ,, ,, ,, ... ·-··· ...... ·············-· ..... . No. 14 ,, No. 15 ,, against ,, -··-··· ···-- ·· · ········ ·-··· ······· No. 15 ,, No. 16 ,, JI ,, •• • ••• · · ··-·· ······-· · ····-··· ···· No_ 15 ,, No. 17 ,, ,, ,, .............. .. ...... . ........ .. . No. 17 No. 18 ,, ,, ,, ................... . .............. . 11

191 123 117

66 230 45

266 165

263

61 88

70 187 38 100

62 77 170

All the disruptions were in large places or where the quantity of air was abnormally large. \yhere the ]?r_opagat!on of the explosions failed in the path of the dry coal-dust, the roads were supplied with impoverished and v1t1at-cd an· currents (PP- 65-67). Coked residues of coal were found in the vicinity of the shot and at numerous places in the working11. In the spaces between the explosions, the residues were near tbe Ooor, and fcaLheted off into small patches at heights not exceeding 2 feet above the ro.ils, where they were deposited upon obstructions (e.!J., trams) standing in the path of the coal-dust. There were two exceptions : coal-dust, resting upon a plank 4 feet above the floor, was found coked in situ, and some timber at the end of a. level was generally covered on one side (pp. 31- 33). The mode of deposition is considered at pp. 51, 62. Where the coked residues were within the influence of the disruptive forces, they extended to the roof. 'The stagnant atmosphere of the l'Oads in the field of disaster was so charged with amorphous ca.rbon, that it, was compared by two membero of the rescue party, who first entered the roads, to the condition that is produced "by turning a. bed-tick inside out and shaking it in the air. " This carbon was universally deposited upon the walls of tbe roads (pp. 3.J, 35). The candles burned clearly everywhere in tho stngnant atmosphere, but. the rescue parties suffered smarting of the eyes and nose, and loss of power, and were frequently compelled to retreat Lo the pure air (p. 35). Tbe • Tiu Ori{Jin crnd Ratirmalt of Collury Ezpto,ioni, founrte I upon a.n C\'lmination or

tl1,;i

explosion, o.t the Timijbury, Albion, Malago \'ale,

and Llanerch Collieries. and upon the principal phenomena of lhe disasltrs at the Al>ercamc, AlltoCts, Allham, Apedale, Dlant~·re, Bryn, Clifton

Hall, l>inas, Elemoro, Hyde, Lian, Mardy, Morfa, Mossllelds, :fational, l'enygroig, Risca, Seaharu, Tri1111.lon Orn.nge, Tudboe, Udstone, and West Stllnley Collieries; by l>onnld M. I)_ Stunrt, F.0.1:i., 11linin~ a.ml Civil Engineer, authot· of Coal-Dust an B2:p_lorive .A9c11t. Bristol: John W1ight a,nd Co. London : &itopkin, Marehall, UQ.IWlton, Kcut o.od Oo., Limit.ed. New York ; llirschfcld Bros., 05, .Fifth Avcnuo,

...

956 The origin of the disaster i~ ~nvestigat.ed at pp. 37-40, and traced to the .shot referred to ; and the circumstances of the shot-firing, the quautity of mm1!1g pow~e~ employed! t he heat e~ergy at d1sposa.~ after the strata were rup~~ed, the e\•idence of watering the road, and its condition at the time of the disaster, are considered at pP· 40-47 ; where !t 1s Rhown that the charge of explosive wn.s not less than 12! ounces; that there was a surplus of about 137,356 gramme-units of heat for distillation and that. the coal-dust at toe shot was in favourable condition for that action. The linl~s of evidence of distillation at the shot, the food bag, and the bottom of Peter's incline, and the unbroken deposition of amorphous carhon betw~en the shot and the explosion at the top of that incline, show the constancy of the chemical chanacs between the two pomts. Conside~·ing the large quantity of heat, at disposal from this initial explosion, its propagation along each path of the coal-dust so long as aJequa~e atmospheric oxygen could be obtained, presents no difficulty, ~s. ~t simply ~emands a reproduction of the chemical actions that arc 1,cen to have had a place between the shot and the 101t1al explosion. , The condit ions preYailing from the shot in the contrary direction towards Lower Conygre, were unfavourable to the reproduction of the chemical changes in that direction (pp. 48, 49). The floor was wet, and t he firat door formed a cul-de-sac, in which t he still a tmosphere was saturated with ,vater vapor. The heat was consequently exhausted for vaporisation ; :i-nd dist.ill~tory action failed. . . . The unaisturbed timber, the undamaged a1,d m1m0Ye<l trams, the hanging food bag, the absence of mutilation of Carter's (the shot-firer) body or disturbance of his clothes, in tha space between the shot and the initial explosion, indicate not only the absence of disrupti\'e forces, but show aim that the gaseous moveme.n t was of low Yelocity. T he same conditions were observed between the other local explos101 s. A tram of coal had been left at the end of the level beyond explosion No. 6 before the disaster occurred. The tram was found neither damaged nor moved, nor was the coal disturbed (p. 20). I t stood 2 feet 6 inches above the r ails, and the blocks of coal were 15 to 18 inches higher than the woodwork; the top surface of the coal reaching a height of 4 feet. The hard faces of these blocks had been attacked by gases at a high temperature, causing them to burst out into globules of bituminous matter·, which underwent further destructive distillation, lea\•ing residues of comminuted coke. Some globules remained attached to the faces of the coal in different stages of production; but every ledge of coal, the edges of the woodwork of the tram, and the buffers, were loaded to overflow with accumulations of coke, resembling small shot or coarse sand (p. 55). This comminuted coke bad gravitated down to the r1:sting places where it was found, showing thnt there was an inadequa.te horizontal moveme?t in the gas~oos body to carry the particles beyond the trams; and admitting the element of time, necessa.t·y for t,he chemical changes m the theory already advanced. . At the loci of the local explosions, the trams were broken up and the coal was scattered. In explosion No. 2 a tram of coal weighing about lG cwt., and standing about 8 yards from n door, was projected through the door as through a target and fra=ents of t ram, coal, and door, were found in :i. sbap less mass, some yards beyond (p. 16). Timber was broke;1 down a~d splintered, arches were wrecked ; a man who happened to be at the locus of one explosion was shockingly mutilated; and other men, a short distance from another explosion, were hurled a\\·ay, a nd the clothes partly torn off their bodies pp. 19- 2.5). The condition of the roads, the materials, and the victims at the loci of the explosions, demand for their explann.ti?n forces moving at the velocity of an explosive wave. In the spaces between the explosions, the roads were not damaged; the timber was not broken; the trams were uninjured and their contents undisturbed ; the victims were not mut.ilated, and their clothes were undamaged. The phenomena in the explosions, ant.I ~he phenomena. in the inten·ening or antecedent spaces, therefore exhibited distinct modes of energy. -. The rationale of these energies bas already been suggested, but the phenomena at the Timsbury collieries throw further light upon the subject. When coal-dust distributed over the floor of a mine is subjected to hat, it is raised to a condition of intumescence, and the evolution of volatile m1ttter is commenced; but if the temperature be inadequate, and tl1e supplies of heat be not persistent, the distilla.tion will be incomplete, leaving concrete residues containing unvolatilized tarry matter. If the coal-dust he subjected to a higher temperature in the same conditions of freedom and distribution, the volatile matter will be wholly extracted, and cohesion will he destroyed , leaving a residue of coke in the condition of granular powder. Both of these residues were found in the field of disaster, the former were produced from the flcor to a f1eight not exceeding 2 feet, the latter at a height of 3 feet to 4 feet above the floor. The shot-like partic:les of coke at the tram exhibited perfect distillation, while the concrete residues disclosed only partial distillation of the coal. 130th classes of coke were found in the same air-current within a few yards of each other; consequently there could not, have been an appreciable variation in the periods of the distilling actions. Therefore, the, perfect distillation at the top of the tram indicated a higher temperature than the imperfect distillation near the floor. The distillation at the top of the tram was necessarily affected by the heat in the cducts from the coal-dust on the floor. \Vhen the eilucts rose from the floor they were at the temperature due to that stnge of distillation which produced only partial vofatilizatbn ; but when they reached the top of the tram they cffecten complete exhaustion of the volatile constituents, indicating the higher temperature due to the perfect stage of distillation. The e<lucts had, therefore, gained an elern.tion of temperature at tho height of 3 to 4 feet, and must themselves have been subjected to chemical changes. The nature of these changes has already been suggested, but the question may be furth er considered. The coke, with its hard, coarse structure, anrl the amorphous carbon fine and soft like flour, represent different states of the srune substance, and must ha,•e been deri,·ed from different bodies. The coke is recognised as the residue of the destruct.ive clistillat ion of coal. The amorphous carbon ii1 distinguished as the solid constituent of hydrocarbons, which in this case were the educts ,>f the coal. The coke and the carbon were, therefore, produced from the coal and the educts respectively by distinct chemical actions following each other. The origin of the coke is perfectly well known; but the amorphous carbon may be produced by incomplete combustion of the educts, or by the oxidation of the hydrogen constituent, and dissociation. In the former case there would be a hydrocarbon flame, and having regard to the copious ch ara('. ter and immense area of the deposited carbon, that flame must have been of great magnitude ; and under its action the wooden materials and the bodies of the men and horses forming obstructions in the path of the flame, must ha,·e been burned and cindered. The surfaces of the wood were neither burned nor discoloured; the men were burned and blackened with coaldnst, but the skin and flesh was peeled, not consumed, and their hair and the hair of the horses was simply singed; therefore, they had not been attacked with a hydrocarbon flame. This flame must have yielded ca.t·bon monoxide and carbon dioxide as products, and the la.tter especially must hM·e formed a considerable element in the atmosphere that filled the workings. Two survivors in the workings at the t,ime of the disaster entered the stagnant a(,mosphere almost imme<liately after the occurrence, ond rescue parties descended the shaft within an hour of the e\'ent. The circulation of the air was suspended by the destruction of the doors and collapse of the roads : the products of the chemical changes were, therefore, trapped and locked in between the intermittent falls, and coukl only be removed hy tliffusion. The rescue pnrties constantly advanced beyond the space in which d:ffusion was taking place, and entered the stagnant atmosphere to make apertures thMugh the obstructions, with the object of rescuing t.he men either alive or dead. Favourable opportunities, therefore, occurred for testing for the presence of carbou dioxide, and its absence wns shown by the candles burning brightly everywhere in the sta.gnant atmo~phere; and by the parties suffering physiological sensations not known in an atmosphere containing carbon dioxide, and which were utterly inader:1uate for the effects that must ha1·e resulted had there been the quantity of carbon monoxide present that would ba.ve been produced by the combustion under notice. Gaseous hydrocarbons undergoing incomplete combu~tion at the locus and at the moment of their e,·olution and eepal'ating out their carbon, could not bring about disrupth·e effects, and the numerous exhibitions of violence through the field or disaster are as inexplicable upon this hypothesis or combustion :is they are inconsistent with it. The rositive absence of the effects of flame, and of carbon monoxide a.nd carbon dioxide, with the exhibitions of explosive ,·iolencc, prove that the amorphous carbon was not obtained by the iucomplete combustion of nascent hydrocarbons. 'l'he remaining sou1·ce of this carbon wa-S in the c.xidation of lbe hydrogen constituent of the hydrocarbons, and by their dissociation. The hydrocarbons were present, and an ignition-temperature. The absence of combustion, even incomplete, shows that there was inadequate atmospheric oxygen for th1., purpose. In these circumstances the Umited supply of oxygen would be seized by the hydrogen in the educts, and the hydrogen constituent of hydrocarbons, bringing about other changes already described, yielding the phenomena above referred to, and resulting in lhe separation of the carbon. The origin of the amorphous carbon is now traced to the gases of which it was a constituent and which the coal-dust bad yielded by d istillation.

I I

·'

. J!

'·

\.( I

957 '

An illustration of this o.ction is reported in the Ohio petroleum regions, where gaseous hydrocarbons are yielded. by the bore-holes, and some portion is dealt with for the purpose of obtaining the carbon constituent which forms the subJect under notice. These hydrocarbons are treated in limited supplies of air, and the hydrogen constituent only is oxidized, the carbon being separated in solid form, producing the article of commerce known as " Diamond Blad , ." Returning to the two classes or coke at the tram, with the remits of this inquiry into the origin of thP, coke ancl the amorphous carbon, the observed ele,·ation of temperature in the cducts between the floor and tho top of t he tram, is found Lo have its explan:\tion and confirmation in the p1·escnce of the amorphous carbon, which was produced by chemical changes in the educts with a great generation of heat. The temperature of these changes reaches a point exceeding 2,000° C. ; therefore the distillation of the faces of blocks of coal and the perfect exhaustion of the volatile con!ltituents will now be understood. . The suggestion ad vancecl in Coal-dwst an Exµlosfre A gent of chemical changes in the educ ts of the coal is now see~ to derive further confirmation from the phenomena of the disasler at the Timsbury collieries, which verify the chcm1cal actions that were propounded ; and the theory recited upon pages 8 and!) of this paper in ex planation of the explosion at the Camcrton collieries, is confirmed by the phenomena. obsel'ved at the Timsbury collieries. The identity of the phenomena of these two disasters is a fact, the importance of which cannot be o,·erestimated; as they provide the origin and rationale of two explosions, not complicated by the presence of fire-damp, and which are found to have been brought about by gases derived from Lbe coal. Wit,h this body of evidence, attention will now be directed to explosions in mines which normally yield fire-damp, and an effort will be made to discover whether they were caused by that gas, which was supposed to hM·c sud<lenly appeared in large volumes, or by the coal-dust always and everywhere present. The Albion colliery disaster in June, 1894-, when 290 lives were lost, is examined on pp. 72-88. The records made of the calamity were of a general character, and were equally urged in support of opposing theories of its origin. The conflict of opinion was founded upon I.be fact, that materials in the same road had been violent.ly displc1.ced in opposite directions. The phenomenon was described by the respective advocates as "complex," and their explanation was that the "blast had passed over the ground twice " (p. 74). This hypothesis is examined at pp. 75, 76, and 77, and shown to be untenable; and the positions in which the materials were found, are proved to demand the exertion of the explosive violE>nce in the vicinity, with disruptive forces moving in all directions from a common centre. The disturbances were founcl at internls throughout the field of the disaster, and the terrible contrasts between the condition of the victims at these loci, and their condition in the inten·enina spaces made it absolutely certain that there had been developments of explosive violence at intervals. The records, therefore, p:esented the phenomenon of intermittent local explosions. • The disaster had its origin in shot-firing, where timber was boing rcmo,·ed by charges of gelatine dynamite (pp. 83-85), and the surplus he:i.t for distillatory action is estimated at, about 250,000 gramme units (p. 86). The coal yielded J5·l9 per cent. o[ ,·olatile matter (p. 81). In the immediate vicinity of this shot-firing there were extensive residues of coked coal (p. 86), which is the evidence of the fa1.:t that a large quantity of heat was suddenly thrown into the coal-dust at this place, and that a series of regenerating chemical actions was established, identical with those originated at the shots iu the Camerton and Timsbury Collieries. 'l'he roacl was heavily timbered; but with the exception of the frames displaced by the charges of gelatine-dynamite, there was no disturbance of the timber or strata for !)0 yards upon either side of the shots; thou~h neither timber nor strata could have offered an effecti,•e resistance to disruptive forces (p. 87). At the end of the unclLsturbed space in each direction, disruptive effects upon the timber and strata were exhibited, indicating the loci of the initial gaseous explosions. This phenomenon of local disruptions, with antecedent lengths of roads in wflich there bad been no disruptive force, was exhibited throughout thE' field of the disaster. The disruptions occurred in large sectional areas, or where abnormal supplies of oxyi;ren were available, and the activities terminated where the air was practically exhausted, and where a wet space oppo~ed the progress. Coke residues" ere extensively founcl in the workings (p. 81). At many points the blocks of coal upon the trams were in process of reduction ioto coke (p. 88), and amorphous carbon wacS suspended in the atmosphere, and in the eflluent gases that rushed out of the shafts (p. 82) It will be observed that there are fundamental identities io the phenomena of the disasters at t.he Albion, Camerton, and Timsbury Collierie:1. They are each distinguished at their origin by gas.generating spaces, in which n o disruptive energy was exerted, and are led by correspotJding modes of de,·elopment. to exhibitions of explosive violence ; so that each field exbibited numerous intermittent an<l local explosions. R esidues of cohereot coke, comminuted coke from the faces of blo::ks of coal, o.nd amorphou~ carbon, disclose the correspondence of the chemical changes throughout the field of disaster, and indica.t-e their identical regenerating action; and their terminations were brought about under the same conditions. These fundamental idP11titiP.s invoke the important cooclusion, lbat these disasters in gaseous and in nongaseous mines were brought about by identical sc, ies of chemical actions in the coal-dust. At the :Mala.go Vale Colliery, Bristol, explosions occnrrecl 31st August, 1891, originated by the heat produced in the incxplosivo ignition of a small quantity of fire-clamp; ancl 15th ;\larch, I 95, originated by the surplus heat of a charge of mining-powder. These are <lealt wi th at pp. 88- 92. They exhibited the principal phenomena under notice, and the important observation was made on both occasions of men lying either d ea.il or unconscious in the atmosphere termed "after-damp,'' produced by the explosions, with a lamp still burning beside them (pp. 89, 92). The physiological sensations experienced in the after.clamp, both by I.he rescuers and the rescued, WE:re identical with the sensations observed in the stagnant ai r between the falls at the Camerton and Timsb11ry Collieries (pp. 89, 92, 93). At t he Llanerch Colliery, :\lonmouthshire, an explosion occurred in F ebruary, 1890, killing 176 men, which was ori~inaterl by the beat geneml.ed in the inexplosivo ignition of a. small quantity of fire-damp (p. 93), which set up chemical actions in the coal-dust; and its phenomena were identical in every 1·espect with the phenomena of the Albion and Mala.go Vale <lisa.st.ers. The phenomena of the f,,m explosions in mines normally yielding fire·damp were, therefore, identical with the phenomena of the explosions in the Camerton and Timsbury Collieries, which yielrlecl no fire-damp. The investigation is pursued by selecting great explosions in various districts throughout Great Britain, and examining their phenomena. J<~ videuce oft.he nature o! the" after-dam p" is given at pp. 98- 101 , showing that the atmosphere that filled the gaseous mines after the great explosions procluced effects identical with those observed in the non-gaseous mines (Camert.on and Timsbury), i. e., the lnmps burned brightly, and the same physiological sensations were expet·ienced. The gases that brought about the explosions in gaseous and in non-gaseous mines must, therefore, ha\'e beeu identical, as I.he products of the chemical chtioges produced identical effecls. Attention is drawn to the fact t,hat the cxhibititms of violence required for their explanation, the maximum explosive mixture of fire-damp, i.e., an atmosphere containing about 10 per cent. of mcth11,ne. One volume of methane yields in this explosive combustion, one volume of carbon dioxide, consequently carbon dioxide must form IO per cent. of the atmosphere produc~;e most recent re3earches into the constitution of the atmosphere fournl in collieries and containing carbon dioxide (referred to at p. 3 of this paper) are given nt J>!> 96- 9 . It is shown t.hat cancUP.s are C'<tinguishecl in a.n atmosphere in which carbon dioxide is prcaent to the extent of 2·21 per cent., but that no los3 of power is produced; and the first physiological sensation is felt when the quantity rises to 3 3S per ~ent.., an rl that 7·33 per cent. produces violent respira.tory distress. His, therefore, obvious that the after-clamp which supported the flame of lamp and candle, did not contain one-fourth of the volume of carb:>n <lioxidc that is procl1;1ced in the explosive combustion of fire-damp, consequently the explosions that proclucc<l th iii after-damp were not cxplos1ons of fire- lamp. If confirmation were asked of this scientific induction, it could be affor1lc<l in the fact, that the phy~iolo;hil scn,al.ions cxp~rienced in the after-damp are fun<lnm entally cl ifferent from the sens itions felt in atmosphere; c Jntaining carbon dioxide. ' Other phenomena. of the numerous calamities in ga~eous mincg are the presence of cokccl residues and amorphous cR.rbon (pp. 103, 106). Their origins are character-i-,ed by undislurb!ld lengths of roarl (p. 107), at the ends of which the initial gaseous explosions occurred. The propagated explosions we1·e at varying intervals, violent in their energy, local in their effects, exerting force in all directions (pp 108 111) ; while the iute1·vening spaces bad known no violent energy. "Things that could easily hnvo been moved were not dist,:1 bed" (p. 112). These locnl explosions were found in large sectional areas, or where the vcntiln.tion was concentrated by doors nnc.l obstructions (p. ll3). The terminations of tho explosive phenomena were in wet places or in impoverished r.ir.

958

•

Tne phenomena oI explosions in gaseous and in non-gaseous mines, therefore, ha,·e fundamental identities in aubsidia.ry loco.I explosions, separat.e in time and in space, with an identical Aeries of chemical clianges and producte, tba.t demand for their explanation an identical explosive a.gent; and the preceding remarks prove that agent to be coal-dust. The mystery that has surrounded so many calamities in gaseous mines, must disappear with the knowledge that it is no longer necessary to invoke the hy.pothesis that~ " blower," or an u~known acCl)mulation of fi~e-damp wa.s suddenly launched into the atmosphere of the mme, adequate 10 ,·olnmo to form a highly explosive gaseous m1xture m thousands of 't'ards of road ; as there was already at hand, in tho coal-dust lying upon the roads, a practically uulimit.ed supply of gaseous cdncts, capable of giving rise to explosion. These educts were made to flow into the atmosphere of the mine by processes whi~h n~eded only the heat from an .o~d~nary charge of .explosive, or the co~buation of a s~all quantity of fire-da~ p for their origination; and when once the act1nt1es were established at any local point, they carried dee.th and deatrnot1on through the mine. The t11eory advanced is, that the solution of the calamities that darken the history of coal-mining demands no assumption of the sudden and incredible accumulation of au explosive agent, but that the presence of coal-dust must give rise to the observed phenomena. The conclusion of the Royal Commission upon Accidents in Mines, 1879, that coal-dust was not an explosive a.gent, which was founded upon the supposition that the great explosions iu gaseous mines were ca.used by fire-damp, ia now shown to be untenable (p. 120). The objection raised iu the historical freedom of non-gaseous mines from explosions up to 1893, disappears with a knowledge of the conditions necessary to the chemical changes which produce an explosion, and which are shown to be only of recent completion {pp. 120, 121, 122). The close relation between shot.firing 11nd many colliery explosions suggested the following remarks upon explosive11 : The search for what. has been termed a "flameless explosive," with the supposition that it would be n ecessarily used without danger of igniting gas 01: coal-~ust, can ~nly end in disappointment, as ~be dang~r in the u~e of explosh•ea la seen to be the heat-energy developed 1n their combustion (pp. 123-125). Some experiments vr1th explosives were made in 1893 by Mr. H. Hall (Inspector of Mines) for the "Royal Commission upon Explosions from Coal-Dust," and Mr. Hall's conclusions were given by Mr. E. E. Russell Tratman in tho discussion upon Mr. Glenn's pa.per upon explosions, at the Institute meeting, in F ebruary, 1894. • The Royal Commission adopted Mr. Hall's experiments, and reported that they belie,·ed some of the so-called flameless explosives were practically safe for all purposes, but that power should be given to prohibit the use of mining-powder, except under stringent regulations (2nd Report, pp. xxvii, xxviii). .Mr. Hall's experiments are examined on pp. 125- 123 of my book, and his conclusions that tho use of mining-powder should be abolished in mines, and that ammonite and roburite should be substituted, are found to be untenable. Mr. Hall'a conclusion that roburite and 1unmonite "are incapable of igniting or exploding coal-dust," is also shown to be insecure. He founds bis conclusions upon the visible effects at the top of the shafts, and neglects the conditions of the cannon at the bottom of tho shaft, where the heat was produced, and the phenomena. originated. The charges of explosive varied, and the following quantities were used :-24 oz. of mining powder, 10 oz. of ammonite, snd 8 oz. of roburite; but no attempt was ma.de to determine the quantities of beat generated by these cbo.rges respectively, or the velocities of projection of the prod uots of combustion from tho cannon, 01· their spheres of action in the dust-cloud. The element of danger in explosives was, therefore, not investigated or con><idered. The different behaviour of t he explosives in thR experiments; is examined upon tho pages named, where it is shown that Mr. Hall's conclusions rest upon a very partial basis of phenomena., and are not secure. Mining-powder is shown to h:i.,·e an element of safety not possessed by the "high explosives" (p. 125) ; and the precautions adopted in its employment are equally necessary when the other explosives are used (p. 128). It is beyond question that if ch:i.rges of mining-powder, roburite and ammonite Le fired, as in ordinary mining operations, in corresponding positions, ao that the products of combustion are thrown into coal-dust in the vicinity, Md these products contain equal qmi.ntities of heat:, identi::al effects in the coo.I-dust must follow. The disquieting fact that the heat energy in a charge of explosh·e can originate I\ devo.stating explosion in a mine, is divested of some of its terror by the knowledge that a simple application of water, thoroughly made, can easily effect the hnrmless surreudor of that energy, n.nd, consequently, the danger arising from coal-dust in the presence of shot-firing admits of o. simple remedy (pp. 129, 130). In mines yielding fire-damp, precautions of an extensive character are necessnry, as tile combusion of a small quantity of fire-damp is found to produce sufficient heat to originate a. disaster from coal-dust. In addition to adequate and effective ventilation, diluting and removing all emissions of gas, all open lights must be excluded, and the approved safety-lamps adopted; the coal-dust be remo,·ed a-s far as practicable, and an extensive and gone!al system of watering kept in constant operation. It is not possible, wi~hin the limits of a single paper, to offer more than a small portion of the evidence for the views I have here advanced ; but I trust that the foregoing observations will be accepted as lldequate to lead to a further study of the theory worked out in my books; and, in conclusion, I venture to hope that the rationale of a colliery explosion, advanced in Coal-dttst an Explosit-e A gent, and de,·eloped in 'l'he Origin cmd Rationale of CollieriJ Explosions, will help to give such a. grasp of the nature of t he do.ager to be guarded against ns will strengthen the hands of all engaged in colliery operations in contencling with it, so that, in future, coal supplies may be obtained without the terrible sacrifice of life which explosions have entailed. • Trans. , xxil'., 900.

J. Garlick, Esq., 54 Young-street,-

Exhibit No. 62.

Sydney Observatory, 16 March, 1903. Dear Sir, Hereunder please find Wollongong barometrical readings for July-August, 1902. Yours, &c.,

H. C, RUSSELL, Government Astronotner. Date. 1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14

15 16

............ ............ ............ ............ ··········· ············ ............ ..... ...... ...... ...... ............ ............ ............

............ ............ .. .... ... ............

Mean, 30·290.

July.

Date.

30·658 30·676 30·646 30·664 30·438 30·284 30·324 30·138 29·930 29·708 30·044 30·202 30·152 30·200 30·'2,8 30·38i

............ ············ .. ......... ... . .... ...

18 19 20 2l 22 23 24

············ ............ .············ ...........

............

25 ............

27 . ........... 28 ............

29 . ........... 30 ... 31 ············

········

July,

30 426 30·344 30·2,0 30·308 30·420 30 ·310 30·20! 30 ·270 30·200 30·384 30·348 30·332 30·246 29·996 30 288

Date. 1 2 3

4 5 6

7 8 9 10 11

12 13

1415 16

Correctioa :- index, - ·005; temperature, - ·080; altitude,+ ·059.

August.

............ ........... ..... ...... ........... ............ ............ ............ ············ ........ .... ············ . ........... . ..... ......

············ ............ ············ ············

30 ·230 30·090 30·058 30·296 30 ·224 30·276 30·364 30·484 30·494 30·324 30·218 30·418 30·44l 30·400 30·506 30·460

Corrected mean, 30 ·264.

NoTE.- These readings have.been taken at 9 a.m., at. the local Tcle~raph Office, Wollongong. or Jnly , f r the twenty-two years prior to 1902, with a\l corrections applied, is 30·145.

The mean barometer

Exhibit No. 63.

. 'I I

950 Exhibit No. GS. Proposed alteration of General Rulo 12, section 47, which is baeed on the assumption that the use of gunpowder for blasting will be prohibited in all mines where sn.fety lumps are used, of which are not naturally wet throughout, and that in such cases only certificated shot-firers will be permitted to fire shots. (Drafted by Mr. A. A. Atkinson, Chief ln!ipector of Coal MioeR.)

5 lbs.

Rule 12.-Any explosi\"e substance shall only be used in the mine below ground, ns follows :(a) It shall not be slorerl in the mine. (b) I t shall not be taken into the mine except in cartridges, in a secure case or canister, containing not rnore tho.n {c) A workman shall not have iu use a.tone time in any one place more tha.n ono 0£s11cb cases or canisters. (d) A workman shall not take into any mine :rny iron or steel pricker, charger, ta.roping rod or stemmer; nor shall

any workman use an iron m· steel scraper in the process of charaing or stemming for blasting; and only clay or other noninflammable substances shall be used for stemming, and shall b: pro,;ded by the owner of the mine. (e) No explosi,·e shall be forcibly pressed into a hole of insufficient size, aud when a hole has been charged, the explosive shall not be unrammcd, and no hole shall be bored for a charge at a cfo•tance of less than 12 inches from any hole where the charge hns missed fire, and shall, as far as practicalile, be parallel with it, provided that in case where a. fuse is used no persou sba.11 return to a place where such charge has missed fire until a period of eight hours has elo.psed from the light.ing of the fuse attached to such charge. (/) In any mine in which the use of a locked safety-lamp is for the time bein" required (by the Coal Mines Amendment .Act, 1903), or which is not naturally wet throughout, only permitted explosives, according to the most recent I mperial Coal Mines Order, shall be used; and in such case tho following precautions shall be observed :1. No ~h?t shall be charged or fired except by a certificated shot-firer appointed by the Manager of the mine in wntrng. 2. No shot shall be fired except by means of an electric battery Qr apparatus; and the certificated shot-firer shall himself couple up the cable to the charge, and whilst doing so shall have the battery with him. H e shall also himself couple the cable to the battery. 3. No shot sball be fired uutil the certificated shot-firer has examined the place itself where the shot is to be fired, and all the contiguous accessible places, ancl founrl that there is no accumulation of inflammable gas, however small, within a radius of 30 yards; or if inflammable gas is being gi\•en off in dangerous quantities. No shot shall be fired whilst an accumulation of inflammable gas is being remove<l in the same ventilating district. 4. No shot shall be fired unless the roof, sides, and floor of the place or places have been t horoughly watered for a radius of 30 yards. ' 5. No shot shall be fired on a haulage road worked by steam or other mechanical power (including inclines worked by gravitation), or on main intakes 01· main return roads, without special permission in writing from the certificated Manager, and unless all workmen have been remo,ed from the seam in which the shot is to be fired, except tha men engaged in firing tbe shQt, and such other persons not exceeding ten as are necessarily employed in attending to the ventilating furnaces, steam boilers, engines, machinery, wincling apparatus signals, or horses, or in inspecting the mine. 6. No shot shall be fired if from any cause whate\"er the certificated shot-firer apprehends danger, and that thereby life or property would be in peril. i . Only one shot shall be fired at a time in any one place (sinking shafts excepted); and after each shot has been fired the certificated shot-firer shall return to the place, and carefully examine it for iuflammablo gas, and as to the security of the roof and sides, and shall not permit any person to enter therein (except for repairs) until he has reported the place to be safe. 8. T he certificated shot-firer shall have in his possession all detonators intended for use, and shall take care that in ca$eS where men charge theit· own shots that only the requisite number be handed out; and those not used (if any) shall be deposited and kept under lock and key in some suitable place to be provided for that purpose. 9. No missed shots shall be unrammed ; but in all cases a. fresh hole shall be drilled, which shall not be wit hin 12 inches of any hole which has missed fire, and shall, as far as practicable, be parallel with it. Should the missed shot contain a detonator, the certificated shot-firer shall, before firing the fresh hole, attach a. string to t he fuse of the missed shot, a.ml secure it to the prop or to the cable. I mmediately after the firing, the certificated shot;. firer shall, with his hands only, nnd with the greatest care, search the coal or stone ; and, if he fails to find the detonator, or is uot satisfied that it ha.s been exploded by the second shot, he shall cause tha coal or stone to be loaded with the grcatei:;t care, and scot to t,he surface for further examination. Should the missed shot not be dislodged, further holes must be drilled and firetl until this is effected. H e shall report the circumstances to the under-manager without delay, and hand tbe detona.tot· to him \\ hen found. (g) In this Act, "Ventilating district" means such part of a seam as has an independent intake commencing from a main intake air-course and an independent return airway, terminating at a. main return aircourse ; and "Ma.in haulage road " means a road which has been or for the time being is in use fol' moYing trams by steam or other mechanical power. (k) Where a seam of a mine is not <fo·ided into separate ventilating districts, the provision in tbis Act relating to ventilating district shall be read as though the word "Seam" were substituted for the words "Ventilating district."

Exhibit No. 64. E xt,ract from the R eport; of A. H . 'tokes, Esq., Inspector of Minos for tho Midland D istrict (Eng.), for the year 1892, pages 7 and 8. Fire-damp had not h~en found in t.h!s distr.ict ?f t~c mi_ne, alt.bough probably a certain :imount of ~re-damp is disengaged from the coal, as m most co:ds, daily, wl11ch 1s chssem1oa.ted 10 the atmosphere of the mme and carried away by t..he ventilation, but no correct idea of the fire-damp produced concu rrent..ly wilh the working of the con.I could be formed unless by an analysis of the return air from the working stalls. The disengagement of inflammable gas from either the working face or the oYer or underlying strata is a Ycry "a.luable phenomenon; in some cases the gas may have a uniform exudation from the who'.e surface exposed, and in such cases there is a general easement of gas pressure ; in other cases the gas appears to be accumulated under great p1·essure in cavities or fissures in the strata., until the removal of the coal or diminished pressure allO\VS it an opening for escn.pe, when it suddenly bursts out in a. large 01· small quantity, with a. speed depending upon its initial pressure, and the number and extent of fissure communicating with the root or outlet in the strata.. H ence, ~heren.s the normal dai~y ~isengagement of fire-damp fr?m the .ex~osed ~oal face and strata may be consiclerablo, yet 1ls effect upon the vent1lat1on ma.y be unseen by the .offic1als, as it 1s earned harmlessly a.w:i.y by the ventilating ail',current. Sudden issltes or ot1tbursts of inOammable go.s are of considerable importance, because of the immediate effect upon the safety of the mine and the difficulty in adopting precautionary measures to counteract the irregular and erratic nature of their appearance. It 1s, I think, important to place upon record the outbursts of inflammable gas which occur in a district, when the details of exudation and effects upon the safety anrl working of tho mine have been ascertained, and found to be such as might assist Lo explain the cause of disastrous explosions in mines, wher~ the extent of flame and damage have baffled all t..hcories of explanation ; anti, fut ther, to show that such outbursts constitute one of the natural phenomena met with in mines, again:;t which it is impossible to aoticipa.le its time of appearance or take sure measures 0£ precaution.

Exhibit No. 65,

_---.,

960 Exhibit No. 65. Exract from the evidence given before the Royal Commission on Accidents in Mines, 1881 (Eng.) Mr. T . W. Embleton, :Mauager of rnrious mines in South and West Yorkshirfl :::..... 9808. Observing the statements that have been made in your pamphlet on the subject Qf the section of the strata below these two seams, have you come to the conclusion that the gas is given off from certain beds of coaly matter, coal pipes, and so on beneath a certain thickness of strong rock? A. I think 1 have no positive evidence to show where the gas does come fr~m. A large out?urst of gas took place at the Oak~ Collier)'.. The Midland Institute ~ot ~Prmissiom fr~m the owners t6 sink a small shaft 10 the fissure. It went down, as shown m that pamphlet, a certain distance, and it was stopperl in consequence of the quantity of gas. On account of the hardness of the rock, you could not blast the stone; but the shaft never arrived at the bottom of the fissure. 9809. And yon could scarcely say from what particular bed the gas arose? A . No. 9810. But was it not shown pretty conclusively in the case of the bore-hole, which was put down below the silkst.une seam,. that at the depth of about ~O or iO f~et, Y?U had a quantity of carbonaceo~s matter which wa.~ giving off gas? A. Yes, it was so; but that was not m connection w1th any fissure produced by eruption of gas. It was 1n the strata itself. 9811. But it was below and near to where there was a n eruption of gas? A . It was. 9812. I observe in one of the ~arliest accounts ?f one of these .o~tbursts, when Mr. H edley was Government Inspector, that he stated that these acc~mulations wer~ ~o~nd m ba~s or cav1t1es, l1a.ve you. s~n anytbmg of such a ba.g or cavity? A. No, I have not seen a cavity; but I am mclmed to thmk that the gas does eX1St m s~parate patches. I cannot describe how it lies there; but I may tell you this, that in some instances the roof cannot be kept up unless holes are bored up to let out the gas. One hole will let the gas out, and another hole will be bored which will not touch the gas at all. And in the first instance the roof will be good, and in the next the roof will come down. While upon this subject, I may mention also another very peculiar outbur,t of gas at H igham Colliery; bnt I may say that there are some observatic,ns in the pamphlet, and, if_ the Commission simply refer _to i~, it would bette: tbn.1~ getting _a mere verbal desc~iption from me, 9813. Cltairma.n.J. You had better des~mbe 1t? A. ~twas Just simply this : we were workmg a stone drift to go into the shaft so as t.> brmg thP. two returu a1rs separately mto the shaft. The place had been completed, or nearly SQ ; and I may say the shaft was sunk through the old workings a.l~o, and they.are all old workings around this place too. The men fired two shots, an<l they thought the whole place was gomg to close 10 . I was sent for, and got there next mornin~, and the roof was quite sound. There was a wall built on one side of the drift, a brick wall, and the bricks were all crushed, antl the props which were supporting the roof were all thrown down, having been previously thrust into the f}Qor, and there was no appearance of any fissure whatever. The roof bad been pressed down by the pressure of the gas, and the last shot evidently removed sufficient pressure to allmv the gas to come away ; and after the gas crunc away the roof resum£d its normal condition. There was n nt a. single fissure to be observed in the whole place. 9814. You h!i've systematically bored holes upwards into the roof? A. Oh, certainly, and into the floor too.

Exhibit No. 66. .Fire-damp in the Iron-ore Mines of Cumberland and ]'urness. Extract from Vol. XVII of the Proceedings of the Federated Institution of Mining Engineers, page 285. T he only other iron-ore mine in Cumberland where fire-damp bas been reported is at H odbarrow, by far the largest and the most important metalliferous mi_ne at t~e district. I t Wf1S not t~nti~ August, 1~98: that the J?resence of gas was there discovered, a.nd then a small quantity, which had collected 10 a cavity m the roof, igmted at a mmer's candle. The injuries inflicted were ,·ery slight, and the ma.n went on with his w.ork . Most of the Furness iron-ore mines have had some expe1·ience of fire-damp, but not in large qua.nlities. Although the accumulations of fire-damp in these iron-ore mines have never reached such an extent as to create the dreadful havoc and destrnction too often experienced in coal-mines, yet the records show t hat fire-damp is a factor which must be reckoned with in winning iron-ort: in this part of the district. During the last seven years ten accidents from explosions of fire-dam p in iron-ore mines have been reported, whereby twelve persons were more or less seriously injured. The only fatal accident from this cause which bas occurred in the district took place at Mougell l\Jinc, near Dalton, in 188'3, when a man was so severely burned that he succumbed to the injuries received.

•·

t '.

, I

;

Exhibit No. 67. Explosion of fire-damp in tbe R ock-Salt Mines at Aknaszlatina, Hungary. Exlra,ct from Vol . X l V of the Proceedi_ngs of t_be Federated Institution of Mining Engineers, page 616. At Aknaszlatioa, a deposit of rock-salt 2,200 metres (7,2l8 feet) in length, 1,700 metres (5,577 feet) in width, and of still unknown depth, has been worked from a very remote period. The mine is greatly troubled wit h water, which makes its way in, undrr considerable pressure, from subterranean reservoirs. An attempt had been made to tap these by means of levels, one of which had for some time past penetrated into the zone of solution by this water. The cavities thus formed were filled, to a depth of 6 to 8 inches, by a layer of bituminous mud. As fans were kept continuously at work, no oue suspected that this would prove a source of danger, so that naked lights were everywhere used. On 28th August, 1896, however, an explosion took place in this part of t he mine, by which two miners were hurt severely and one slightly, followed a couple of hours later by a second explosion that killed two miners, who were examining. hy means of naked lights, the workings where the first explosion had taken place. It is snpposed that gas was forced into the mine by the sudden collapse of cavities, cijssoh·ed out as before mentioned.

H.L.

Exhibit No. 68.

The deposit at tht'- Mill Close Lend Mine, Darley D ale, Matlock. B y C. E. Par~ous. Extract from Vol. XII of the Proceedings of the Federaten Institution of Mining Engineers, page 115. Fire-damp. Many years ago, before the mine was so efficiently worked, fire-damp gave rise to a great deal of trouble. The overlying black Yoredale shales are very bituminous, and emit a great deal of gas. The far end of the 42-fathoms Ie,·el is in this shale, and blowers of gas are common : it may be heard coming out, resembling a singing kettle. Long ago the blowers were ignited, and used to give light tn the men at their work. In working, the miners consider the smell of gas indicative of ore, probably bccau!:.e the vein is richest where it is full of cavities, so that gas can accumulate. The miners have many other indications of ore, but these are mainly erroneons ; for instance, the "old meu" firmly believed that ,vhistling underground would frighten ore away. The mine ii1 now so well ventilated t hat any clanger t.l1at might arise from fire-damp is removed, and naked lights can be used with perfect safety, except in a few places that arc marked a nd carefully fenced. Io such places safety-lamps only are used.

Exhibit No. 69.

1/ I

•

·1

901 Exhibit No. 89. Eitrac:t tram lleporf; of the Proee~dio~s of the Flnmelel!s Ex plosi\'cs CommiUcC', Ne,rlh ot :Englund Institute of Mining and Mecbo.nieal Engineers . (See pa.go 78 of the l<cport.) Co:s-cw sro~s. 'The conclusions deduced from t he experiments nre ns follows:l. All the high explosives (ammonite, ardeer powder, bellite, carbonite, roLuiitP, seem ite, :md wcstfalit) arc 1~ lio.?le than blasting powder to ignite inflammable mixtures of nir t.nd fire-damp. Tl:ci:e explosives, howcYet, cannot be relied upon as ensurrng absolute safety when used at plac.:<'s "here wflammable mixtmes of air 11Dcl fire-dam (> may he present. 2. The variable results follow ing upon the detonntion of I igl1 cxplosi\·es npptar to Le clne in some measure to d~fective admixture of, or rnriation in, the proportions of the iugrcdienls used in the rn:umfoctmc of the ex~losivc. In view of the changes from time to time made in the proportions and constituents of high exl'losi.es, it secme<.l'desirablc that this information should be afforded by the manufacturers to the users of the explosive. 3. In the storage of high explosives, it is desirable that eve1 y care should be taken to ensure llcir being maintaiLcd in proper oonditioo. It is also certain that these explosh·es alter in character with age. 4. It is essential that similar examinations of the working places and precauLions which are in force in mines where blasting-powder is used, should be rigidly observed where a high explosive is employed. 5. In selecting a high explosiYe for use in a mine it should not be forgotten that the risk of explosion is only lessened and not abolished by its use. 6. All of the high explosives, on detonation, produce ed<lent flame. 7. The possil.ile ignition of an inflammable mixture of air and coal-dust by a blown-out shot of a detonated high explosjve is not lessened by an increased quantity of stemming being used. 8. In the case ot a charge of a nitro-glycerine explosive which bas missed 6re, if a short length o·f stemming (proved np to 8 inches} has been employed, the charge c.1n he detonated hy another cartridge of the exp~osivc, and additional stemming beinli!: pla.ceLl in the hole in front of the n·i-rica1 stemmin ... 27th April, IS95. " c

fJcbib:t Nr . 7(',

t>n.

ROBERTSOl\'.:3 NOTES.

Monday, 4th August, HJO:?.

M emorandum of visit of ios pecli,m of the disll id in No. l Right, Mount Kembla ColHcry, by the following inspectio:1 pnrty, viz. :-George Cater, John Johnstone, Thomas Cook, Ernest SeHers, J .C. Jonca, J. R. AL lt.>bertson, under the guidance of J uhn l\10rrisoo, night depoty of said district. Eutered mine about l l ·20 a. m. Proceeded down main trM·elling road to No. 5 Right, and traversed this road to its intersection with No. 2 rope roarl. The air, ,·entilation, and condition of this road we found excellent. Proceeded by Powell's Flat to Stafford's F lat, and from thence along the straight in le,·el to the face, where we fonn<l no gas by the ordinary safety-lamp 1. At the far.e of St-afford's working place no gas was found, nor was th& brattice cloth clisphtcecl. Two (2) skips of coal had just been fi lled at face, and a bol'ing machine was set for work. NoTE. - Mr. McGeachie, with a hydrogen lamp, reported less than! per cent. of gas in this pla.ce on Saturday night; to.day it was quite s,1ect. As it was evident that this locality was is 110 way connected with the origin of this disaster we proceeded to No. 1 Right. Proceeded up the travelling road called No. 4 Left towards No. J. Ventilation excellent. Turned intp Gill's Ga.noon bord sel'ving No. 5, 83-84 and 85 pillars, and which had been stopped by a fall prior to the accident. There no gas was discoverable. On entering No. 1 Right haulage ro::i<l we at once fonnd indications of a. blast proceeding in bye. The ventil:l.tron door betw-een No. l ma.in si,d return roads "'&s forced open and smashed, the force going towar,ls the return. Prooeeding towards the face of the main return road t he ,loor fonnd intact; but the stone builtlings on either side blown outwards on the ma.in road towards th~ return-evidentlv the force of the blast had expended itself as we proceeded in bye. At the second (2nd) cut:tbrough from the face in No. 89 the bra.ttice was found wa.rpM (wrapi,ecl ?} round the foot ot props by a force coming from the ma.in road, some of which had gone in towards Morris and son's face and some weot inbye towal'ds face of b::ick heading. :Morrison here explained that this heading inbye front Morris' place was stopped by "Danger signal" 1Yhleh ha.cl been blown down. The bodies of Morris and his son were foun<l in bye, about 20 yards froni the position of lih?$ datlget signal. We wtre informed by Moni$on these bodies were very sligjitly singed bnt not kinoc.ked &hoot. '.!'here were n<> evidences on th~ prop3 of firo. Or. the main heading we met the pa.rty who accompanietl the Government Inspectors, who rcportefl that gas existed' for ro ytmis from the face Lo the first cnt-throngh. N o·rn.-On Satunlay night Messr.s. McGeachie and Humble found untler 1 per cent. of gas at the µlace, a circumstance that. we do not consider remarkaLle, seeing the doors and brattice regulators had all been l,Jown out, while it wae el"ident lo us that this wa.s not the origin of the ea~trophe. On this part of the road some of the props apparently showed very slight traces of heat, b~it it was not at all prominent. The two parties here separated-the Inspectors' party turning iobye the back heading, the 1.md'e-rsianctl 0 proceeding down the main road outuye with the object of tracing the seat of the blast. Near to the bottom of a new "jig," which is almost. finh!hed, all of which was forced off (no men heiarr werkm!F at face); the deputy, Dungey, was found on his back, his bead being Llown off, and his tody much torn was found in,b ye ni?:rly 20 yards. This \\-'.\S prob'\uly caused by a flying piece of timber striking him as he was pNceeding outbyo. As we proceeded we found unmistakable appearances of the blast increasing in intensity outbye, props Mid bunoo,r being all blown up the "jig," a.nil the roadway partially torn up by the force. The blast had e1·idently expended itself a<Tainst· 0 !itce by entering wt>rkings on eibher side as it proceeded along. Proccccliog ouUiyo we entered a road leading to the working places of Aitken antl son, Jones, and Thomas. Near working places 85 and 86 we found l'he remaillS of the flre seen by two of the expforing parties· on tl\e night of t:1're explosion. nnd reported by D. A. \~. Robertson a!td Mr. Johnstoutl. 'l'. his fir~ had consumed some braterce cl'Oth amt p:ilper, aiod1, fortunately, haJ hurnetl itself ont. " c sc:i.ttereLl t.hc remams. U1ts of newspa•per were scattered a.bout tihe vicinity untouched by fire. • At a "Hhunt," cl, ge bv, two (2) skips were forced ou the top of ea~h. other. At No. 86 Aitken and son were found slightly burned, although clry brattice doth o,·er which the blast tra.vellecf showed no signs of burning. At &7 J ones anrl 1'1:ompson had died of after-damp. At 85 a ful1 skip of coal was found, Lut uo edJencce of nay force-it. hnJ evidently expend'ed itself in thfa direction, ProceecUng foi>ther ou,tl>ye on the main• roa.rT every pnr~ showed fre.3h cvi<lencc3 of increas·1:1g force. Opposite .N°o. 4 Left fr.'!le empty skii;s Wel,'C found tossed and t.wi&lferl Oil tihe emi,t.y roa·l; the IJody of one skip was found fttlly 30 yanh; from its wheels; the a.xles had Leen hroken by the force< f impact. Roller!! were found torn from their sen.tings and blowu inhyc- the road was covered with loose coal swept: from the ski~s oYc,· which the l.,last h::id passetl. t:'n

:zg.. · 6 F

16825

962 On coming to the cut-through leadina to No. 4 Right pillars which had bee!l extrncted about ten days ~fore accident, we were attracted by tbe hea,·y props and brattice cloth, which, before the accident, were placed across this cut-through near the return, being blown towards the main road. We proceeded up this towards the waste, which smelt of after-damp, but no gas was discoverable. Mr. Sellers here repo1·ted tha;t when .in this locality lo?kiog for bodies the ~empera~ure was high. Towards the "Waste," from th~ back tu nnel, ev1d7nce ot gre~t fot·co com111g towards the . ~am headwgs '!as apparent. This force crossed the tr:wellmg rnad, and entering the main tunnel appH1,:s to ba,·e d1v1ded-one:1 portion going inbye with the result described-the other portion goiog outbye, which we determined to follow. Proceeding outbye along the main road which was dt·y and dusty, t.he blast seemed to have gained force as we proceeded. On the side "f 1st cut-through from No. 4 Right l'oad a portion of the blast had reached the main road, and rn!1hing outbyc overtook four full skips and upended one and swept the heading coal off first outbyc. Opposite No. 3 Left , we found a cousiclcrnble heap of coal on the main road, some of which, with rollers :.nd seatings, had been blown down that ro:ui. A large pile of timber had been blown outbye. In a. few ya.r<ls the blast had torn the iron girders that supported the roof a11d bc:r I, them outbye. The rollers on the roacl were also found to be blown outbye. As we proceeded we found an inci·easing numhcr of the iron girders swept from thei r support3 and bent outbye. No evidences of fire could be discovered. At a cut-through some s ki ps were found tlri\·en in to each oLher. Doors separating intake and return were all blown outwards from main road. As the evidences were so abundant that the blast was de\'eloping in inte:,sity as it p roceeded ouLbye, and feeling convinced that we bad discovered the focus from whence the force proceeded, we thought it imuhisable to further continue the inquiry, and proceeded to the surface by No. 1 tra\'elling road. This we founcl in pretty gootl condition, although there were some falls, especially about 500 yards from No. 1 junction. 'J'he roatl was comparatively free from falls as it approached that junction. 1 The "Overhead Bridge" that led the travelling across the main tunnel was destroyed. Strong currents of air were entering the mine by the main tunnel and by No. 1 main and travelling roads. The mine throughout was perfectly cool and of normal temperature. \Ye reached the surface about 5·30 p.m., convinced that from No. 4 pillar road as a centre, a severe blast swept into the main tunnel by No. 4 road and next out.bye cut-through, and from tha.t divided-one portion sweeping inbye,. gaining in force as far as No. 4 L eft, where a portion shot ,town and disturbed empty skips at the foot at Stafford's Flat, tbe rest proceeding in bye :ind dissip:\t ing its force right anu left, especially the latter. The other portion rushed outbye in greater volume and escaped at tunnel n1outh with disastrous effects. While some flame must have accompanied the blasts, this must ha,·e been rnconsidcrable in amount.

JOHN JOHNSTONE, GEORGE CATER, E. 0 . SELLERS, JAMES .R. M. ROBERTSON, THOMAS COOK,

J . C. JONES. Mount Kembla, 5th August, 1902. We undersigned, ha\'in~ specially examined No. 4 pillar road with the object of ascertaining the accuracy of the abo,·e circumstances, are con\1111ced that the facts described are accurate in deta.il, and we subscribe to the opinion that No. 4 pillar road cmitte<l the bln.c;t that proYcd so disastrous inbye and ontbyo from it to life and property. D. M()GEACHIE, JAMES BARR, S. W. WARBURTON.

Dr. J. R. M. Robertson, Messrs. J. C. Jones, E. Sellers, and Wm. Hay.

•

27th August, 1902. To collect clust from various points and additional evidence of force and fire. Box !.-Contains dust collected inside of No. 1 Right turn clear of fall . 2. -On and from sides No. 1 R. main road about 8 chains from turn in a manhole. 3.- From a rail inbye from No. 2 R. rope rand on main heading. Falls of roof here consisL of very large flags of bedded sandstone. Boy Walker found on top of a skip and under a large stone just outbye No. 2 R. Force clearly showing in Ko. 2R. going up from mn.in road and on main tunnel outbyc to tnnnel mouth. Water-tub and other skips thrown into 2nd R. This road is disturbecl for 100 yards up from No. 1 Right. No. 4 Box -On main No. I rnad below ornrcast. Indication in 3rd Left clear that blast split here, a small part going into 3rd L., sweeping a stone stopping inwards. At mouth of 3rd Left a pile of coal on road, evidently from capsized skips that have been blown outbye, while a large wood chock has been blown outbye against lower rib of main heading. Careful exa.mination of timber and dust on ledges and sides failed to give any evidence of coking or great heat. Opposite 2nd cut-through ontbye from No. 4 Right rope roacl a piece of canvas lying on main No. 1 R. ,•ery much torn and frayed showerl no sign of fire passing OYer it. Four skips much jumbled, showi ng great. force inbye. At 1st cut-through-outbye No. 4 R. more canvas found-no signs of fire on it-torn but perfectly fresh. In cut-through opposite 4th R. a p1·op with a piece of bro.Hice on top indicates grea.t force out of coal to main No. 1 R. No. 5-taken from ledges on sides of N,,. 1 main heading opposite 4th R. A few yards inbye 4th R. a piece of bra.Uice on main heading indicating force in bye. This 1,rattice was across entrance of No. 4 R. before <lisaster. A piece of brattice between rope and roller shows the strength of in bye force. A skip which found on No. 1 main road-axle and other wheels 12 yards further inbye and skip smashed up 10 yards further. About 20 yards further inbyc four skips jumbled up t ogether forced inbye, and 8 yards fort.her two skips damaged' . No. 6.- Dust from main No. 1 heading inbye No. 4 Left rope road . A p\ece of bark blown from a prop outbye 5th R. rope road showed that the blast went from No. 1 main road into back heading-a door here also showed this. All the way up main road to Monis and son's bord force of blast inbye. In No. 1 heading Sellers tested for gas at face and founcl none. There was none. No one was working in these headings for some weeks prior to accident. No. 7 Box. - From sides of coal ledges on top of a prop in cut-through going into No. 85 face. The force undoubtedly came from main road and spent iLsclf in a few workings beyond. No t race of flame or coked dust on props adjacent. . Two_skips being 61\ed by Aitken, on it their token, pitched on top of each ot her, and stone and coal piled up oi:r ma111 roadside of them, being blowu in by force of blast. Paper and Lr1rn bratti<:c on floor a nd workmen's apparel \yith paper hanging out of po1:kets untouched b-y flame. Inspection

·,.

963 Inspection Mount Kembla Colliery by Dr. J. R. M. Robertson, Messrs. E. Sellers, Wm. Rogers, Wm. Hay, ·warburton and J. Morrison. 19th September, 1902.

\York of ridding No. l R. proceeding Yigorously. Already road where cleared damp wilh water in places. This road ha.d no dust before acciJent. At fault-No sign of flame whatever. No coked <lust. One of falls near wheels-flap of stone 12 yards x 5! yards in size. Canvas having been paid up to fall in No. 4 R. proceeded in full, ,·cry high force came out, anc.l from siJcs, props, and chocks blown from sides towards entrance, which is wet. No gas-but C01 • Examined Hotcbkis' reports. His party all o,·er workings. Can find no tr;ce of gas anywhere. Proceeding inbye- main road appearances as before. Ro:id wet in place~. The skips jumbled up and broken beyond No. 4 Left-ha,·e b~cn empty proceeding thither, and have been blown past that road. In one, upwards of 70 feet of telephone wire caught. on corner of one and carried beyoncl No. 4 Left road. Beyond the dead horse o. skip ie a.Uached to tail chain, and has been blown over on its side and small rubbish piled against it from outbye. A ~trong force proceedfog iobye. Door at cut.through below 5th Right blown inwards. Proceeding up back heading to face. A blast coming through a cut-through against a. solid pillar coal split,, one going down and tbe other portion upwards back heading. Morris' beading. l\'lioute examination ~hows that force came inwards without a doubt. Props coloured black on bea.c1ing side. No dust anywhere or slightest, trace of flam e. Canvas int.act-untouched by flame. No dust adherentperfectly clean. The pressure from main road would compress pure air against face, and rebound out again without disturbing anything, and would give Oto excite distillation. The force, however, going up back beading to cut-through was considerable. It is an absolute impossibility that this was a centre. No dust, no gas, no shot-no appearances of fire. Morris and son were found up back beading. One shirt fouurl blown on to a prop 20 feet up from his place untouched hy fire. A water bottle-some yards further strop caught. on end of fallen prop, and by it arrested a.s it flew upwards towards face. Absolutdy no evidence of fire or coked dust beyond last cut-through t.o face-where there is 110 dust and no gas, but on a few props near cut-through, aud on corner of rib a lit.tic distilled or coked dust, but very ti·ifling in amount-a few yards of brattice slightly heated but not disturb:?d. On main heading. Canvas damp, no sign of fire-baning at cut-through a few grains of gritty dust presumably coked. Ti-tree bark-blackened only, edges slightly crisp, no bnroing, sample. Force all towards face. • Read these appearances as follows :Force going inbye compressed air against. face, increasing pressure nnd getting O at cut-through was distilled P.Yolving gas. No gas at face. No dust on sides or on props-dampness on props and of roof and of canvas. No signs of disturbance or of fire. No men working here. The idea of Morris and son going here for tools or rails absnrJ. In that case only one would go. No tools there, and rails up to Morris' face, and plenty in pit fot· distribution. • a.tisfied this was no centre of disturbance. Went into working bords t,o west or left of main heading with results as before, with exception of one prop. No coked dust or signs of flame. Evidently a ll died of C.0. distilled at concussion. Knife forced into prop shows force going in from Ko. 1 heading. From <lust on main roa<l or nearest bortls possibly n o flame, only heat sufficient to distil dust or from direct concussion. Dust came from coal in skip and blown out stoppings or ground up coal. Not on roads prior to acciuent.

Exhibit No. 71. ROTAL COM1!lSS10!ol OF 1NQl'IRY RES1'ECTl~O TITE ~foUNT h.EMDLA COLLI ERY DISASTER.

\V. Rogers, Esq., Manager, MouutKembla Mine,54, Young-street, Sydney, 27.1'Iarch, 1903. , ir, I hnve the honor to inform you that the abc,,·e Commission desire to know exactly how the 4th Right rope road in No. 1 Right District, of Mount Kembla Mine was ventilated immediately prior Lo the disaster (31st July, 1902); that is, ( 1) which roads did the air from outsitle the mine trM·el through in order to reach the 4th Right; (2) which roads dicl the nir leaving the 4th Right travel through to reach the furnace; and (3) was there any brattice in the 4th Right to conduct the ni1· to the face? If you, or any official of the mine who h:i.s been called as a witness befol'e the Commission, can answer these questions, or any of them, dist.inctl.v, I am direct.eel to ask that yon will be so good as to forward me a. written statement of the facts signed and wit.nes3ecl, together wilh n skct~h showing how tho brattico in the 4th Rioht (if there was any 0 there) was arranged. Such written statement will be incorporated with the witness' evidence. I hnve, &c.,

-----

J. GARLICK, ecret.ary to the Commission.

J. Garlick, Esq,Mount Kembla Colliery, Central Office, 31 March, 1903. Dcar Sir, In reply to yours of 2ith instant, I ttndcrsta.nd your qnestion to refer to the day oft.he disaster, 31st July, 1002, and have obtained the evi<lence accordingly. F.nc:losed please find tracing and statement from ,John Morrison. Yours, &c., \YM. ROOERS, Manager (per S.H. \V.) STATKME~T

•

964 STATEME~T FROM J oBN MORRISON.

No. 1 Questioo.-The air from the outside, in order to reo.ch 4tL Right, came from the Adit daylight headin~ I thence a.long same to bord to right up s:i.mo ~o b1ck hea,ling 2nd Right; theoo~ through out-through into 2nd Right mam hcadio11, back along same to cr.:>3S·Ont heldtng rop~ ro:id, along s:une to 5th Right rope; thence a.round bord faces; and 0 thence past 4th Right outlot. No. 2 Question.-Therc was no air travelling through the 4th Right, but passing S'Ame. This woul<l go alon~ trtwolling r:>ad of No. 1 district; thence across air-crossing on to 2nd Lelt rope t06d; thence n.long bord to furnace he:\ctiog, and along same to upcn.st shaft No. 3 Question.-There was no brattice in the 4th Right, as this was taken away along with all mo.teriaJ when pillars were finished. NoTE.-The abo,·e remarks apply to the 31st July only.

JOHN MORRISON.

In the presence of Silvester Henry "'arbnrton.-31 /3/03. WM. RooERs, Manager.

Exhibit No. 72. Tracing n.ccompa.nying Mr. Roger's letter of 31st. March, 1903, ancl Mr. Morrison's sti1tP.ment of saroa

dale.

Exhibit No. 73.

Telegram :-Roger~, Mount Kemb]a. Your Jetter rccei\'C<l. PlMse send n.lso rough hand sketch and signed statement showing ventilation of F ourth Right Pillars up to and n.t time pf finishing pillar woi kings, about six weeks before disaster.

GARLIOK • .

1st April, 1903.

----

54, Young-street.

Sketch "A" showing ventilation of Fourth Right Pillars about six weeks before <lisaster, recoived in reply to abqve telegram.

Exhibit No. 74. Sketch "B showing ventilation of Fourth Right Pillars about three weeks before disaster, received in reply to above telegram. 11

Exhibit No. 75. Sketch "C " showing ventilation of Fourth Right P illars; final extraction of ssune1 receiv<'<l in reply to above telegram.

[Two1vc Plans, &c,J

• Sydney: William J\pplr.gate Oullick, Government Prlo,cr.-1003.

. ...·. ,,,,~