746 THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN. April 11, 1913. 300 yards of the last working place at the working face which the air leaves,” it is held to be sufficient “ so long as the percentage of inflammable gas in the general body of the air in that place does not exceed 1J,” as provided for in section 60 (2) of the Act, in regard to the use of electricity generally. Character of Winding Apparatus, &c. The owners and managers here propose an amendment of section 40 of the Act, subsection (1) of which provides that every shaft or outlet for the time being in use for the purpose of lowering or raising persons shall be fully equipped with the winding apparatus described in that provision. It is claimed by the owners and managers that at shafts or outlets which are used solely as emergency exits or for ventilation or pumping pur- poses it is quite unnecessary that they should be so equipped, and, the amendment proposed is to exclude such from the operation of the section. Air Measurements. 67.—The Bristol colliery owners point out that in the non-fiery mines at some places 100 yards from the coal face the air-current, though ample for efficient ventilation, would not be sufficiently powerful to register on the instrument. 69.—To this regulation, which requires the employment of apparatus worked by mechanical power at all but “ small mines,” the South Staffs owners raise the objection that the number of small collieries not coming within the definition in that district is very large, and they would be unduly penalised by having to provide mechanically driven winding engines as reserves. It is proposed to insert the words: “ This rule shall not apply to auxiliary winding appliances installed for emergency purposes.” 72. —The owners ask that the provision in regard to the periodical annealing of cage chains shall only apply to those in regular and constant use for raising and lowering persons. Capping of Winding and Hauling Ropes. At present these regulations (73-78) are not to apply to ropes used for “ hauling mineral on self-acting inclines from the face.” The Mining Association and National Association of Colliery Managers would substitute for the words quoted “ haulage where such haulage is not used for conveying men to or from their work.” 73. —This regulation stands as follows : “ No mode or type of capping shall be used which fails to withstand a strain of at least 75 per cent, of the breaking strain of the rope.” The owners and managers ask for its deletion on the ground that such a test is impracticable. If a test is desirable it is suggested that it should be made with relation to the weight which the capping has to bear, and not the breaking strain of the rope. 75. —This regulation reads “ In no case shall the capel be attached to the rope by the use of rivets passing through the rope.” The owners and managers ask that the restriction shall apply only to round winding ropes. 76. —The owners and managers ask for the insertion of the words “ or the rope lapped with soft wire ” to provide for the. continuance of a practice which is believed to be perfectly safe. 77 and 78.—The owners and managers ask for the omission of both clauses, which refer to the use of white metal, namely, the composition of the latter and its mode of application. It is held that both provisions are impracticable and contrary to general practice. The Bristol owners point out that in locked-lamp pits it would be impossible to melt the white metal as required by the regulations. The Cleveland miners also ask for the deletion Regula- tions 73 and 75. Exemptions from the Provisions requiring Two Main Intake Airways. 79.—The regulation as it stands provides, briefly, that section 42 (1) of the Act shall not under certain circumstances, apply to, such seams as are liable to spontaneous combustion, or heavy pressure, limited mineral takings, ironstone mines, small collieries, and seams naturally wet throughout. The owners ask for several amendments, including the extension of the exemption to oil shale mines and to cases where the intake and return airways are, or either of them is, in stone measures. The Bristol owners ask that the collieries in that district should be placed, in the same category as ironstone mines, on the ground that most of the airways are cross-measure drifts, and a second intake could in most cases only be provided at a prohibitive cost. The managers refrain from any expression of approval of this and the next regulation. The Miners' Federation also propose that the whole rule should be deleted or re-drafted. 80.—In this regulation, which reads as follows ■.— “ The distance from the downcast shaft within which the two main intake airways shall not be required to be provided shall be the distance between the shaft and the edge of the shaft pillars ”—the owners ask for the insertion of words “ or the end of the main tunnel or stone drift, as the case may be,” provision thus being made for the case where there may not be a shaft pillar. Construction of Stoppings. The owners propose that subsection 3 of section 42 of the Act be omitted. A very strong opinion, they say, is held by many mining experts that it is distinctly pre- judicial to safety that all stoppings between main intake airways and main returns and all air crossings should be so constructed as not to be liable to be destroyed in the event of an explosion. In this, and the omission of the whole of Regulation 81, they are supported by the managers. The owners also propose to substitute the word “section” for “subsection” in the proviso to sub- section (3) of section 43 of the Act, on the ground that the proviso, which exempted from the operation of the subsection (relating to clear spaces at coupling stations) districts of mines nearing exhaustion should apply to the whole section. In section 44 (2) also it is proposed that “ fifty ” be substituted for “ twenty-five,” on the ground that it was intended that the interval between refuge holes should be fifty yards, the shorter distance having been inserted by mistake. Signalling. The owners propose the deletion ofsection 53 (1) of the Act, which predicates a general uniform code of signals ; they urge that the persons engaged in winding and haulage work are accustomed to the existing code, and that any alteration would be accompanied by very serious risks and danger. They also propose to leave out subsection (3) of the same section, which provides that signals shall be trans- mitted simultaneously to the enginemen and to the persons stationed at the top of the shaft. This is not done in all instances at present, and it is held that to alter the practice in such cases would be attended with risk. Consequent upon the above, the owners propose that the whole of Regulation 82, which prescribes a general code of signals for winding, should be withdrawn. In these propositions they have the support of the managers. The Cleveland owners and miners also ask for a special code adapted to the circumstances of the district, and somewhat similar representations are made by the northern under-managers. The Bristol owners complain that the signals are very complicated, that they would entail a complication of wires, that, owing to falls, interruptions would be frequent, that the existing code employed in the district is adequate, and that generally the output would suffer. The National Federation of Enginemen likewise offer objection to the code contained in the regulations, their idea being that “ the best can only come from the joint experience of managers and enginemen affected.” A conference on the subject is proposed. The Northumberland engine- men describe the signals as “incomplete” and “not understandable.” 85.—The Northumberland engine men suggest that it should be provided that while a banksman and onsetter are in attendance no person whatever shall give or accept any signal other than those given by the banksman and onsetter, the manager to be held responsible for signals given by other persons. 86 and 87.—The owners ask also for the deletion of the haulage code and the signal for the conveyance of persons inbye or outbye, as do the Cleveland owners and miners, the South Staffordshire owners, the Bristol owners, and the National Association of Colliery Managers. The Northumberland enginemen suggest that a signal should be provided for speeding-up or slowing-down the hauling engine. 88.—The owners and managers propose the omission of the words “ additional” and “ other,” thereby leaving it to the management to prescribe all the signals used in haulage. The Northumberland enginemen, on the other hand, suggest that all signals, or any additional signals proposed by the manager and put into opera- tion, should be registered by the inspector of mines for the district. 90. —This regulation reads, “ A notice shall be posted in the hauling engine house and at each signalling station, containing the system of haulage in use at the mine.” The owners point out that there are cases in which the system of haulage signals varies in different parts of the mine. Telephones. 91. —The owners propose that the compulsory telephone system shall apply only in cases where the distance of the main haulage from the shaft exceeds 1,50'0 yards, and that it shall be maintained between the end of the main haulage and the pit bottom. At present the prescribed distance is 1,000 yards measured from the shaft to the workings, and the communication has to be maintained between the place where the trains are made up and the pit bottom and the surface. They also ask that, in addition to the Cleveland mines, other mines working under analogous conditions shall likewise be exempted. The Bristol owners ask that their colleries should be included in this category. On the other hand, the Northumberland enginemen would reduce the distance to 500 yards, and the Miners’ Federation would not exempt “ small mines,” as is done in the regulation at present. Hours of Winding Enginemen. These regulations (92 to 100) have formed the subject of a separate enquiry. Barometer and Hygrometer. 101. —The owners maintain that no possible purpose can be served by requiring the barometer to be read by the responsible person “ after coming out of the mine.” They also ask for an extension similar to that asked for in the case of Regulation 91. 102. —It is urged by the owners and managers that the duty of reading the hygrometer may be discharged by a responsible official other than the manager; also that “ once a week ” is amply sufficient. Sanitary Conveniences. 103. —The owners object to the detail in this regula- tion, and suggest that if the conveniences are provided at suitable places, convenient for the persons employed, it is sufficient. As regards the provision of facilities below ground, it is held by both owners and managers that it is sufficient to provide conveniences at or near the pit bottom. The South Staffs owners consider that the whole of these regulations (103 to 109) should be “ observed as far as is reasonably practicable,” and that, as the co-operation of the workmen is necessary, they should not be given penal effect. 108.—The owners and managers propose the omission of this regulation, which compels the workmen to use the conveniences provided, on the ground that it is impossible to secure compliance with it. PART III.—Electricity. These regulations [114 to 134] have already been settled. The Miners’ Federation, however, ask that under Regulation 117 it should be obligatory to post on the top of the pit a sketch plan of the main roads, the escape roads, and the telephone station. PART IY.—Rescue and Ambulance 139.—In subsection (5), which deals with the keeping of tracings, the Miners’ Federation ask that the tele- phone system shall be indicated thereon. 144. —The exemption as to the maintenance of ambu- lance appliances, the owners and managers suggest, should be extended to any “ mine, seam, or ” district which is naturally wet, or rather “ damp,” another amendment proposed. They also ask that the duty of inspecting the appliances may be imposed upon a qualified official other than the manager. The Cleveland owners and miners, in addition to the amendment last mentioned, are agreed that it is unnecessary to have appliances in each fireman’s district. The National Association of Colliery Managers would delete the detailed provisions as to the nature of the appliances to be provided and prescribe that there shall be kept “ at convenient spots both underground and on the surface, stretchers and boxes containing a sufficient supply of suitable first-aid material, which shall include antiseptic dressings.” The Miners’ Federation would add at tl e end of the rule: “ In case of dispute between the manager and workmen as to the possibility of keeping appliances in good condition, the matter shall be referred to the principal inspector of the district, who shall have power to decide after hearing evidence from both sides to the dispute.” 145. —The owners propose several amendments to this regulation, which refers to the employment of a certain number of certificated men, and ask that it shall not come into force until July 1, instead of April 1, 1914. The colliery managers say that “ whilst sympathising with the provisions of this paragraph, it is a fact that in many of the districts it is quite impossible to get the men who would be required for the purpose. ” 146. —In subsection (a) the owners would increase the cases of exemption to mines situated within three miles (instead of one mile) of a hospital, and in sub- section (6) to mines employing less than 200 (instead of 100) workmen. The Miners’ Federation, however, would delete the hospital exemption, and in subsection (d) reduce the