Description

Number 34 on the list occurred at East Hetton Colliery, on the 12th of June, about 1.1 o'clock a.m., causing the death of Thomas Kane, a coal hewer.

At the time the accident occurred men were being sent to bank from the Harvey Seam. There were two cages in the shaft, each with two decks or holes, and the means of signalling was by electric bells.

Three cage loads of men were sent safely to bank and the top hole of the fourth one was filled, and the onsetter says he signalled three rings for the cage to be raised until the lower deck was level, so that men could get into it, and this was done; two men got in, and deceased was in the act of doing so when the cage was taken away and he was caught between the framing, at the bottom of the shaft, and the cage.

The onsetter then signalled "hold," and the cage was stopped almost instantly, but deceased was quite dead when got out.

If the onsetter did signal three when the top hole of the cage was filled it would appear that the engineman was to blame for moving the cage again before he got a signal to do so; but the engineman says the signal he got was two, which meant " men on," and that the cage was to be taken straight to bank; there happened, however, to be a lad to go down the pit at the time — and it is a rule that when men are alone they are to be in the top hole — the cage at bank was lowered — when the top deck of the cage, at the bottom, was level with the Harvey Seam, the lower deck of the, other cage was level with the heapstead at bank — and when it was lowered the top deck at bank, and the low one at the bottom, came into position respectively; and the lad got into the top hole, and while he was doing so the men were getting into the bottom one of the other cage; the banksman then called to the engineman to take the cage away, and he did so without any signal from the bottom, with this fatal result.

What was the cause of this misunderstanding in the signals it is difficult to say; the onsetter, no doubt, intended to signal three for the cage to be raised from one deck to the other, but whether he only signalled two, or after the bell had rung two something. in connexion with it had gone wrong, and thus prevented the third ring from being given, will always be a mystery.

The code of signals was defective and responsible, to a certain extent, for this accident occurring. I think it should have been necessary, after the cage at bank was put opposite the top hole for the boy to get in, for a signal to be given, even if he had no men to get into the bottom hole of the cage, which he had opposite to his hanging-on, by the onsetter before the cage was moved. If this had been required at that time this accident would not have happened, because before the signal was given the cage would have been tilled and the men out of the way of danger.

I suggested to the management that this should be done in future, and it was readily agreed to.

The electric bells were done away with, except for coal work, and when the men are being sent up or down the old fashioned rappers are used. They are not so liable to go wrong, and I think with these two additional precautions being taken such an accident as this is not likely to occur again.

Mines Inspectors Report Entry

Sources

• 1894 Mines Inspectors Report (C 7667), Durham District (No. 4) by Thomas Bell, H.M. Inspector of Mines, Page: 18 Where to find this report
• 1894 Mines Inspectors Report (C 7667), Durham District (No. 4) by Thomas Bell, H.M. Inspector of Mines, Page: 40, Accident Number: 34 Where to find this report

Researchers

 Return    Return to Top