OTHER MATTERS RAISED AT THE INQUIRY.

After the completion of the hearing of evidence, Mr. Straker and Mr. Robson desired to be heard in regard to several recommendations which they wished to put forward. Mr. Straker's recommendations, put shortly, were

Mr. Robson endorsed Numbers (3), (4), and (6) of Mr. Straker's recommendations and added the following —

Mr. Kirkup said that he welcomed the suggestions made by Mr. Straker and Mr. Robson, for the Consett Iron Company were most anxious at all times to do anything which would preserve the lives and limbs of their employees. He pointed out that it had been given in evidence that the officials responsible for ordering and buying the material necessary for carrying on the colliery were in no way restricted either as to quality or price, and that those cage shoes ordered from Messrs. Hadfields, Limited, had been delivered as "Hadfields' best toughened cast steel shoes and guides." He agreed that the daily and weekly reports should be fuller, and considered that the prescribed forms for reports were "nothing like as full as they ought to be." He thought that everything that could be done to show clearly the exact condition of affairs on any certain date and, if any defects were found, the steps taken to remedy such defects ought to be done.

In regard to gates instead of bars at the ends of the cages, Mr. Kirkup said that the question had received considerable attention by himself and his officials. Their difficulty was that the cages being so small, there was not sufficient height to have a telescopic gate, while detachable gates, on account of the rough handling to which they were subjected, were put out of order in a day or two. The question, however, had and would continue to have his careful consideration. The question of safety catches had not been lost sight of, but in regard to having rope guides as well as rail guides, he had always understood that a rail guide with a shoe was the most reliable and safe type of guide, and he was not quite able to see how rail and rope guides together could be applied in the same shaft.

In regard to the wearing of the shoes, Mr. Kirkup said that it was only in this particular Busty shaft, and on this particular guide that serious wear had taken place. With an identical guide and identical shoes in a comparatively new colliery, the shoes were lasting from 12 to 18 months, and even then there was not as much wear as there was on any of the shoes produced during the Inquiry.

He agreed that the inspection of the cages could not be too thorough, and said that he would be glad to have two platforms erected as recommended by Mr. Robson if such a course were suggested.

In regard to the recommendations of Mr. Straker and of Mr. Robson, I beg to report as follows :—

Taking numbers (1), (3), (4), (5), and (11), together, I agree that more time should be taken for examining the machinery of the shaft, and in particular the cage shoes. I think the careful use of a graduated wedge or of calipers of suitable capacity for examining the cage shoes would give exact results, the interpretation of which could not be mistaken or misunderstood. With such conditions as were present careful inspection was, in my opinion, the chief safeguard.

In reference to the quality of material to be used, I agree that the best possible material, having regard to the purposes of its use, should be obtained, but however good the material, examination must be precise to secure safety.

It would be more satisfactory to have a specification in respect of the composition of the steel of which the cage shoes are to be cast ; nevertheless, I can quite appreciate the faith put in such a firm as Messrs. Hadfields Limited. In the future however, I think the cage shoes should be ordered to a specification, and steps should be taken to test by sample, mechanically and chemically the shoes received.

There is much material in use about mines for which standard specifications could with advantage be laid down, and I think co-operation between the Mine Owners of the country and the British Engineering Standards Association to that end is very desirable.

I agree with the recommendation that the reports should be more complete. Section 66 of the Coal Mines Act, 1911, requires that "the state" of certain things shall be "examined thoroughly" at certain periods and that the person or persons making the examinations "shall make a full and accurate report of the result of the examination." This requirement is fulfilled literally and when defects are found in "the state" of apparatus, the fact is recorded in the prescribed report book, but no mention is made of the steps taken to remedy such defects. That a remedy has been applied at all can only be inferred from finding in a subsequent report such words as : "All in working order."

I think a true record should be kept of all defects found and how and when remedied. Further, records should be required to be kept of the dates when new cages are fitted; when cage chains are annealed; when cage chains are changed; when new winding ropes are put to work and when their capels or sockets are changed; and when detaching hooks are cleaned and refitted. I have no doubt that at the majority of collieries such records are kept, but, whilst under some of the codes of Special Rules made under the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1887, records in regard to certain of these matters were required to be kept, such is not now the case.

Whilst I admit that even a single bar at the open end of a cage is better than nothing at all, I think that Sub-section 7 of Section 40 of the Coal Mines Act, 1911, should be amended by deleting the words "or other rigid fences." That subsection requires cages to be "provided with suitable gates or other rigid fences." It is, however, right to record that I do not suggest that the provision of gates closing completely the ends of the cage would in this accident have saved a single life, for I am firmly of opinion that the whole of the occupants of the cage were killed outright by the sudden and violent collision between the ascending cage and the cast-iron girder.

Numerous appliances for preventing the fall of a cage in the event of the winding rope breaking have been invented, but in very few shafts in the United Kingdom have they been or are they in use. A committee — the Mechanical Appliances Committee of the Safety in Mines Research Board — is considering and reporting upon all such appliances, but as yet, so far as I am aware, no appliance which could be recommended for every day use has been discovered. I have no faith in such of these apparatus as I am acquainted with and no apparatus of the kind would have saved life on this occasion.

I am not aware of an instance of rail guides and rope guides being used in the same shaft, that is, the two cages being held by the rail guides and ropes hung between the cages to act as "rubbing" or "buffer" ropes. I do not think such an arrangement would be difficult to apply, but it appears to me to be an added complication, and I should prefer to omit it.

I have no fault to find with rail guides as such; in fact, I think they will be extensively used in the future as shafts become deeper, unless some alloy be discovered from which wire rope guides of great strength but of comparatively little weight can be manufactured.

In regard to the recommendation that there should be two bolts in each end of each cage shoe, I do not think more than two bolts altogether are necessary. I would prefer to see adopted the suggestion which was made by Professor Louis when giving evidence, namely, to deepen the back flanges of the shoes to the full depth of the cage hoops.

There can be no doubt that the inspection of the cage shoes at the Busty Shaft would be much facilitated by the erection of platforms on the North and South sides of the shaft between the surface level (horse hole) and the banking-out level. I am doubtful, however, whether a special platform is really needed on the South side, as there is no such obstruction on that side at the surface level as exists on the North side in the shape of the hauling rope pulleys, and the inspection could be made from the surface level itself.

The last recommendation deals with the shape of the guide rails in section. Mr. Robson considered they should be oval in section I would not go so far as that, but I agree that all the rubbing surfaces should be curved and not angular.

It is a very pleasing duty to put on record that the proceedings during the Inquiry were carried on in an atmosphere of good-will, all parties being equally anxious to arrive at the facts and to discover the cause of the accident with a view to finding a remedy. I wish to express my thanks for the help given to this end by all those concerned.

I have the honour to be, Sir,

Your obedient Servant,

HENRY WALKER,

His Majesty's Deputy Chief Inspector of Mines.