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.

    84/406 page 76
    8 July 1910.] Mr. J. B. Atkinson. [Continued. 2207. Another difference is that there are no powers of formal investigation ?—I do not see why there should not be power for formal investigation in the case of an accident at a metalliferous mine. 2208. As there is at present as regards coal mines ? —The same as in coal mines. In some cases there might be men lost in metalliferous mines, and no body forthcoming, and no inquest would be held. 2209. ( Dr. Haldane.) How do you mean there would be no inquest ?—The coroner can only hold an inquest on a body; I had a case in Cumberland where three men were lost in a coal mine, and the bodies are there yet, and there has been no inquest held. 2210. (Mr. Greaves.) The inspector would have power ?—There is power under the Coal Mines Act to have a formal investigation, and that was held. 2211. In metalliferous mines the inspector can examine the place as much as he likes ?—Yes. 2212-13. He has the most technical knowledge, and is most likely to know ?- Yes. but a formal investigation partakes somewhat of the nature of a coroner's inquiry. It is properly constituted, and I do not see why it should not apply in metalliferous mines as well as in coal mines. 2214. Do you find, generally speaking, that coroners’ inquests are satisfactory in your district ?—Yes. 2215. I am speaking of metalliferous mines ?— Yes. 2216. The provision that each of the jury must see the body is rather obsolete ?—Yes. 2217. Do you think it is unnecessary ?—Yes. If that was done away with it might give more time before the inquest is held. 2218. That is what Mr. Martin said ?—Both in metalliferous mines and coal mines and in quarries the inquests have to be held quickly, because of viewing the body. It must be held m two or three days, particularly in the warm weather. 2219. That takes you away from your work with no advantage ?—Occasionally, but it sometimes does not give time to examine the place before the inquest. 2220. To a certain extent it defeats the object of the inquest ?—Yes. 2221. Besides being an inconvenience ?-■ -That occurs very rarely. I think in 99 cases out of 100 we have time to examine the place before the inquest, but it is a rush. 2222. You have to have an adjournment after a mere formal assembly ?—As a rule we try to meet the coroners and prevent adjournment, and if they give us 24 hours’ notice, we are almost always able to make an investigation, and see the place before the inquest, which is very necessary. 2223. There is no provision as to check-weigh men ? —No. 2224. I do not know how far our reference touches that point. I do not think it deals with more than safety ?—I think under the Coal Mines Commission you were allowed to go into it. 2225. We did not go into that very much. This Commission deals more with safety. I think the question is a wider one. There is no power of work- men's inspection ?—I do not see why they should not have the power. 2226. It acts well in Durham ?—It is largely taken advantage of in the coal mines in Cumberland too. 2227. There is no provision as to ambulance in the Metalliferous Mines Act P—No. 2228. You are of opinion that the same correspond- ing provisions should exist in both Acts ?—Yes. 2229. You say in your statement that the special rules are optional P—Yes. 2230. Is there not the same power of the Secretary of State to bring them into force under the Metalliferous Mines Act?—Yes, it is optional, but under the Coal Mines Act the owner is compelled to prepare a code of special rules, but not imder the Metalliferous Mines Act. 2231. You are in favour of the same procedure for the two groups ?—I should be inclined to think that the necessity for special rules might be avoided by having all the rules general rules in the Act. 2232. Would not there be a necessity, as in coal mines to patch up the general rules ?—Probably there would. 2233. That would lead to your view being on the whole that the same procedure should apply in both cases ?—Still, if you have a special rule common to all metalliferous mines, there is no reason why it shoidd not be put into the general rules. 2234. You would keep the general rules in the Metalliferous Mines Act just as in the Coal Mines Act ? —Yes. 2235. Then there is no regulation as to boys and women on the surface ?—No. They come under the Factory Act. 2236. You would do away with that and make it all under one code ?—Yes. 2237. There is no provision as to fencing abandoned underground places. Fencing will be useful for the men ?—I do not think it is necessary. It is more necessary where you have inflammable gas. 2238. Why is that ?—To prevent a man inadvertently going among inflammable gas. 2239. In an adit ?—In coal mines they are required to fence and the fencing is necessary on account of the existence of inflammable gas. 2240. If there is an old shaft a man cannot get in ? -—From the surface ? 2241. Yes ?—This only refers to underground places. It does not refer to shafts. In the Coal Mines Act there is a general rule that every place that is abandoned or discontinued is to be fenced oft' to prevent anybody inadvertently entering. 2242. And to prevent gas coming out?—No. I hardly think that is necessary in metalliferous mines. 2243. What about timbering?—I do not know that there would be any harm in putting in a general rule. 2244. Uniform timbering would not be possible in metalliferous mines in the same way as in coal mines P -—Even in coal mines it has not proved a success. 2245. Is there a rule that men are to be provided with sufficient timber as in coal mines ?—No. 2246. Are there many accidents from want of proper timbering in metalliferous mines ?—I do not think you can say that any accidents occur from want of timber being on the premises or even at the place. Some accidents occur where you see afterwards that it would have been desirable to have had more timber set, but that may be an error of judgment on the part of the men. 2247. Is it a source of danger sometimes as well as of safety ? Does it sometimes keep up a place that ought to fall ?—Do you mean in metalliferous mines P 2248. Yes P—Sometimes they want the place to fall. 2249. That is what I mean ?—The method of working the iron ore in certain deposits in Lancashire and Cumberland is that after they take out a slice they want the roof to come down. 2250. It would be better to let it go down than to keep it up ?-—They take the timber out to let it collapse. 2251. That is against attempting to make a hard and fast rule as to timbering by statute ?—(Mr. Lewney.) That is when the place has been worked through once. 2252. (Chairman.) I was trying to ascertain whether it was possible to make any provision ?—There will be some regulations in the Special Rules. We are con- sidering more the Act now. 2253. (Mr. Lewney.) It will be as well to take the Special Rules ?—There is no doubt that the provision of the setting of timber is a very necessary thing as regards the safety of any class of mines. It may not do any harm to have a general rule in the Metalliferous Mines Act providing that a sufficient supply of timber lias to be available and has to be set. I cannot say, however, that I have known any case where had such a rule been in force I should have found it necessary to prosecute. 2254. (Chairman.) Through want of care in timber- ing in coal mines a good many accidents occur ?—The newspapers often say that, but I think there are not
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3