Minutes of evidence taken before the Royal Commission on metalliferous mines and quarries : volume 1.

  • Great Britain. Royal Commission on Metalliferous Mines and Quarries.
Date:
1912
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: Minutes of evidence taken before the Royal Commission on metalliferous mines and quarries : volume 1. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.

    49/406 page 41
    24 June 1910.] Mr. G. J. Williams. [Continued. 1138. It would entail the employment of more overseers or inspectors?—Yes. 1139. (Mr. Redmayne.) As in the case of coal mines ?—Yes. 1140. (Mr. Lovett.) It would he impracticable to inspect the quarries before the men started to work ?— Yes. They start at daybreak in winter. 1141. Before you can see the face of rock?—Yes. 1142. (Chairman.) You were telling us about the accidents in slate mines. There are a good many cut hands ?—Yes. 1143. Do you think that the wearing of gloves would he a good thing for these men ?—No. I should like to show you the nature of the things they have to handle, which will help you to get an idea. These are small specimens (’producing pieces of slate). 1144. Supposing you had a glove with small pieces of iron across it, it would wear an enormous time ?—If a man has to turn a stone several times before putting it on to a wagon, I do not see how he could use gloves, I do not see that gloves would he practicable for the kind of work. On a wet day there would he greater danger. 1145. (Mr. Redmayne.) They would be slippery? —Yes. 1146. (Mr. Jones.) You got that stone from a dressing mill ?—Yes. 1147. Not from inside ?—No. It is the same thing. 1148. (Chairman.) It does not appear that anything can be done to prevent the cuts on the hands if gloves are useless ?—I cannot suggest anything. I am afraid gloves are quite impracticable. The men who load dressed slates use pieces of leather on the fingers and a part of the palm. They put a hand like that, and load it but with rough blocks when they have the glove on the hand it is out of the question. 1149. How about eye accidents ? Do you use shields, to prevent those ?—Yes, I think so. Most of those happen when the men smash big pieces of slate up with sledge hammers. Under those circumstances a man might wear goggles to advantage, and also when gouging a slate. 1150. Would you have a goggle with glasses in front and gauze round it ?—I would not have glass at all, I would have gauze. 1151. Gauze over the whole front?—On both eyes, just as the stone-breakers have. 1152. Would you have the gauze only at the bottom and the shield open at the top, or enclosing it ?—Just the same shape as ordinary spectacles with wire gauze instead of glasses, open at the sides. 1153. Like a pair of spectacles, with gauze instead of glass?—Yes. I accompanied Mr. Mottram to Dinorwic the other day, and the manager there is prepared to try them. He selected a number of men to see if it was practicable. 1154. Why not have good thick glass, convex or concave, or flat? Such glasses are very cheap. Would not they be better than the gauze ?—A splinter would break the glass, and might injure the eye more. 1155. There is too much force?—It would break the glass. 1156. In shooting, they have glass to stand shot from a shot-gun?—Would not they be expensive ? 1157. No, they are very cheap. An ordinary convex glass costs about lid. in the market. I can produce you a number of plain glasses which are cheaper still ? —I would sooner see the gauze tried than the glass. 1158. It would be safer. Can they see through the gauze well ?—When a man perspires the glass would be cloudy. 1159. (Mr. Greaves.) You would use the goggles when using a mallet and when gouging ?—No, not when using the mallet. At Dinorwic quarries they do a good deal with the sledge-hammer. 1160. (Mr. Lovett.) Do some companies keep these in stock and sell them to the men ?—They are going to do so. 1161. I know one granite firm that sells them to the men at 6d. a pair ?—These can be got for about 4d. 1162. (Mr. Jones.) Is it the man who is actually gouging that gets injured, or the man working some distance away ?—I have a table of them at Dinorwic and Penrhyn. I have taken the gouging and the sledge-hammering. At Dinorwic they were nearly all using a sledge-hammer; at Penrhyn they were gouging. There is only one instance of a splinter flying from another man and striking one in the eye. 1163. How many have actually happened to the men gouging ? (Chairman.) Under the Track Act it would be illegal for the employer to charge more than the value of the spectacles. (Mr. Lovett.) I do not think they do in this case. (Chairman.) It is difficult to say who ought to pay for them, but if he charges more than the cost price to him it is illegal. (Mr. Lovett.) In this case they do it for the con- venience of the men. (Chairman.) They propose to provide them at Dinorwic. 1164. (Dr. Haldane.) They are used by stone- breakers on the roadside?—At Penrhyn in 1909 there were six accidents whilst using a sledge-hammer, eight whilst gouging, two while splitting. At Dinorwic there were 10 whilst using a sledge-hammer, five when splitting, four when driving a wedge, and five when dressing with a hand knife. I have not gone into the others, but they are various. 1165. In answer to Mr. Jones's question whether it was the man who is doing the work or someone in the neighbourhood, what do you say ?—The man who was doing the work, with the exception of one instance. There is one from another man's hammer. 1166. (Mr. Jones.) What proportion does the number of men actually gouging bear to the total number ?—At Penrhyn, 25. Eight were injured whilst gouging. That is just a third. At Dinorwic, 29. We had them as 30, but one was only disabled a week. Ten of those were injured whilst using sledge-hammers, and none while gouging. 1167. (Mr. Greaves.) Are all those injuries in the eye ? — All to the eye—29 at Dinorwic, and 25 at Penrhyn last year. 1168. (Mr. Lovett.) Can you give the proportion of accidents to the eye in granite quarries ? It strikes me as being larger than that ?—Twenty-four. 1169. It is larger in proportion?—In the granite quarries ? 1170. Yes ?—They are rather, because there are fewer employed. You would expect it, because the men dress so much with the hammer in making setts and breaking stones. 1171. (Chairman.) While we are speaking of Dinorwic, what is the reason of the very large number of accidents that happen ?—It is about one in three men who are off under the Workmen’s Compensation Act every year. They are off for an average of three weeks ?—They are off on an average from two to three weeks. 1172. That looks a formidable figure when put down on paper. Can you tell us how they can be minimised?—I cannot. I have gone through them carefully, all these cuts on hands and other slight injuries. There were 205 which disabled men for two weeks and less than three weeks out of the 491 accidents. 1173. Could we get some method of working which would get rid of those ?—I am afraid not. 1174. It is rather unsatisfactory for us to feel that there is a large figure of that sort and that you are unable to suggest anything that we can do ?—I hardly like to make the suggestion, but if it had not been for the Workmen’s Compensation Act a good many of those 205 would be working. (Mr. Jones.) How do you make that out ? 1175. (Chairman.) There is no reason not to say what you think. It is natural that a man who has got compensation should go off and take a rest when, perhaps, he would not if he had no compensation?— I will give one instance. There was a man who met with an accident. He had been disabled a month and a day. In making investigations as to the cause of the
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3