Tweet

23. In the face of this evidence I am unable to say that either the Coal Mines Regulation Act of 1887, and the General Rule 12 of that Act have been contravened, or that the Special Rules of the colliery have been disregarded. I have very great doubt whether the full force and requirements of those rules had been appreciated by the management. If the agent (Weeks) or manager (Grieves) had sanctioned the firing of a shot in the Cross-cut Way under the circumstances of this particular case, with such little precaution or care taken to ascertain whether the several conditions of General Rule 12, sub-rules "E.," "F.," "H.," and particularly sub-rule "I.," (as to the removal of workmen from the seam and from all seams communicating with the shaft), had been complied with, and with such loose evidence as was given as to watering the haulage ways prior to firing a shot by gunpowder, then very serious questions might have arisen, both as to the responsibility of persons, and to acts or omissions of duty. But in the face of the strong evidence that whether "Staple Curve" or "Cross-cut Way" were or were not "dry and dusty places," there was an express reservation of the manager's authority, and discretion on each particular occasion to judge before shot-firing took place, and as I believe Mr. Grieves, who gave his evidence with singular fairness and candour, confirmed by Mr. Dowson (without any conflicting evidence, which, indeed, could never, in the unhappy circumstances of the case, have been obtained as to the truth of what did in fact occur on the night in question), and supported, as he was, by the evidence of Mr. Greener, that a turning point had been arrived at as to the risk of firing shots in haulage ways without express authority, I feel bound to accept this version of the facts as true, and if true, then it follows that whatever absence of precaution was involved in the conduct of the men who did fire the shot, the responsibility must, along with the breach of authority, be taken together as resting on some one. not a living person, and certainly not a responsible person having authority from the owners, within the rules and regulations and within the law.

At the same time, I do not think that the general discipline of the mine was, as regards the regulation of these main haulage roads, such as it might have been, and there was too much faith placed by the management in. the absolute safety of the mine, both because it was reputed as "non-fiery," and not" dry and dusty." This over-faith in the security led, in my judgment, to some degree of laxity in both matters, viz., precautions for removal periodically of dust, and the damping of haulage ways, and particularly in the face of the growing evidence contained in reports of explosions, both in the county of Durham and elsewhere, the result of dust ignition, such as Elemore (1886), Seaham (1880), Trimdon Grange (1882), Camerton (1894), and Timsbury (1895), and chiefly so when the managers admit their familiarity with the facts of these explosions, and the conclusions forcing themselves on the mining world, as to the risk attending dust in connexion with the modern systems of increased ventilation, and the danger attending the use of gunpowder for shot-firing. I think also that, inasmuch as special attention was directed to this very question by the Derbyshire explosion referred to by Mr. Greener, in December 1895, it is undoubtedly strange that the only result of the consensus of opinion arrived at by the agent (Mr. Weeks) and Mr. Greener, was the mere verbal limitation of Rogerson's and Dowson's authority to fire shots in main haulage roads.

I think more should have been done. Some recorded regulations should have been kept, and handed to the responsible persons, which could have been produced, and would have been more satisfactory. I further think that the use should have been discontinued of compressed gunpowder, admittedly the most dangerous explosive for firing shots, at least in airways and in main haulage roads, having regard to the well known tendency of such an explosive to be improperly tamped (as, indeed, it was suggested in the case, it had been), and remembering that Mr. Greener, as party to the proposed new regulations, had recorded at Peases' Colliery adjoining his intention to discontinue such use of gunpowder as one of the new regulations of this colliery.

I am of opinion that, in the absence of any standard of what was to be deemed "a dry and dusty place" within the rules laid down by Act of Parliament or Special Rule, some care should be taken to have a system and a standard to which the several officials can appeal. It seems to have been left pretty well all round to any person to determine what was a "dry and dusty place," when the necessity for additional watering should arise, or when the dust itself should be removed. In short, if the use of compressed gunpowder was continued, as the management did so continue it, I think additional precautions in respect of the conditions of the air-ways, and the regular and systematic removal of dust, should have been taken. I further think that the excessive inflammability of the Brancepeth dust must have been clearly brought home to the minds of those concerned after Mr. Hall's Report of 1893, and the explosion in the hopper in 1891, which rendered such precautions and care all the more desirable.

I further am of opinion that, as regards the distribution of powder to the men for use in the pit, although the limit per man is said to be 5 lbs., yet it was evident that there was a certain amount of laxity as regards the distribution of it amongst the men, or of its proper use under the supervision of a responsible person. But despite the foregoing criticisms, I do not find that there has been anything like criminal negligence on the part of any responsible person.

I am confirmed in this view by the fact that the men's representatives who had from time to time inspected the mine, had themselves made no complaint or representation to the owners.

May	12th,	1st	day	David Grieves, manager.
"	13th,	2nd	"	Joseph Dowson, overman and under-manager.
"	14th,	3rd	"	Wm. Cuthbert Blackett, mining engineer.
"	"	"	"	(Dowson re-called.)
"	"	"	"	Robert Emmerson Brown, surgeon.
"	"	"	"	Thomas Laws, back overman.
"	"	"	"	Thomas Greener, mining engineer.
"	"	"	"	Thomas Elliot, waggon-way man.
"	15th,	4th	"	Simon Tate, mining engineer.
"	"	"	"	George Wilson, rapper man.
"	"	"	"	John Plummer, Assistant Inspector of Mines.

(Signed) J. EDMONDSON JOEL

Inner Temple, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne,