April 11, 1913.

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN.

751

In his evidence before the Royal Commission on Mines
(Notes of Evidence, 39802-5, 39984), Captain Desborough
attributed a disproportionate number of accidents from
explosives to the use of squibs; but, as stated above, he
appears to have based his conclusions chiefly upon the
figures relating to premature explosions. The tables
submitted to us by Major Crozier support these conclusions
to some extent, so far as accidents from premature explo-
sions are concerned; but the figures placed before us by him
and various other witnesses show that the proportion of
squib-fired shots is very much greater than appears to have
been realised by Captain Desborough.

In comparing the relative safety of the various methods
of firing shots, we are of opinion that consideration should
not be confined to premature explosions, as a very large
proportion, amounting practically to the whole of the
accidents due to squibs, almost necessarily fall under this
subhead (Major Crozier 106, 107, 108); while squib-firing
appears, from the evidence submitted to us, to be
practically immune from accidents to which other methods
of firing are liable, eg., those classified under subhead 4,
hang-fires, &c. We are of opinion that to obtain a fair
comparison it would be necessary to some extent to
group together the figures in Tables II. and III.
(Appendix I *) ; but we are unable to establish a definite
ratio as to the comparative safety of the various methods
of shot-firing, as owing to incompleteness in the informa-
tion given in the reports of accidents, and the shortness of
the period covered by the tables, the figures given in them
may be somewhat inaccurate or misleading. Thus the
number of shots fired has been compiled from returns
voluntarily made by the owners, and must be taken as an
estimate rather than an accurate record ; and as those fired
by squibs were practically invariably fired by the miners
themselves, whilst a considerable proportion of those fired
by fuse, and practically all of those fired by electricity, were
fired by officials, it is probable that the figures relating to
squib-fired shots are less accurate than the others. Tables
I. and II. (Appendix I.) show 63,341,238 shots fired by
squibs in the five years 1907-11, causing 40 accidents from
premature explosions, and 60,583,149 shots fired by fuse in
the same period, causing 33 accidents. It is to be
noted, however, in the foot-note to Table I. that 8 accidents
are classed under the heading “ Not stated,” and from an
examination of the reports of these eight accidents, Major
Crozier (36) was of opinion that they were more likely to
have been caused by fuse than by squibs. Again, Table III.
shows 14 accidents due to hang-fires (A) as having occurred
with squib-fired shots during the same period of five years,
against 7 due to fuse. Twelve accidents, however, appear in
the “ Not stated ’ column of this table, and Major Crozier
(77) was of opinion that a large proportion of these was due
to fuse, and (87) that the figures in the safety fuse column
were under-stated rather than over-stated. Further,
Table III. shows nine accidents due to returning too soon
(B) when squibs were used, and 45 similar accidents when
safety fuse was used. Taking the A and B accidents
together, as they are both more or less attributable to the
method of firing, the table shows an average of 46 accidents
per annum due to squib-firing, causing 0 2 deaths and
injuries to 5 4 persons ; and 10 4 accidents per annum due
to safety fuse, causing 1’4 deaths and injuries to 10 2
persons.

Major Crozier (112) was not sure that the combining of
Tables II. and III. would be satisfactory, but admitted
that “ certain things lent themselves to safety fuse more
than to squib-firing,” and (113) that he felt that prema-
tures were not enough absolutely.

Of the other 28 witnesses examined by us, only one (Mr.
Gilmour) deprecated the use of squibs. Dr. Atkinson
(1137) thought there would probably be a small increase
of safety by electrical or fuse firing, but did not think it
would be so great as to call for the prohibition of squibs.
All the other witnesses agreed that squib-firing was not
more dangerous, most of them urging that it was much less
dangerous, than other methods.

Conclusions.

After careful consideration of the evidence submitted to
us, we are of opinion that the use of squibs, properly
constructed and legitimately used, for the purpose of firing
shots in naked light mines is not attended with such special
danger as to make it desirable that this method of firing
shots should be prohibited; and we have the honour to
suggest that the following special conditions in regard to
their manufacture and use should be laid down. We fully
realise the difficulty of enforcing some of them, but we are
of opinion that their existence in the form of regulations
would have a tendency to prevent accidents.

Recommendations.

(1)	That squibs must be of a type or types approved by
the Secretary of State, and that it shall be an offence for
any person to use or have in his possession in a mine any
squib which is not of a type so approved.

(2)	That in addition to the inspection of the manufac-
tories and workshops in which squibs are made, H.M
inspectors of explosives should have power and be instructed

* The minutes of evidence and appendices have not been
published at the time of going to press.

to examine and to test samples of the squibs selected by
them in order to ensure that the conditions laid down are
complied with.

(3)	That the slow match or “ touch ” of the squib should
be standardised on the lines laid down in the Third
Schedule of the Explosives Order of May 21, 1912, with
regard to safety fuse. We are of opinion that the standard
time of burning of the touch should be 75 seconds, and that
it should not vary more than 10 seconds above or below this
standard.

(4)	That squibs should only be taken into the mine, and
should be kept until required for use in a metal case,
separate from other explosives.

(5)	That nipping, shortening, bending or untwisting of
the touch, or lighting it otherwise than at the extreme
outer end, or in any other way to expedite its burning
should be prohibited.

6. That the relighting of a touch which has died out or
been extinguished should be prohibited.

OBITUARY.

We much regret to announce the death of Mr. James
Tangye, which occurred on Friday, the 5th inst. at hi8
residence, Illogan, near Redruth. Mr. James Tangye was
born in the little village of Illogan, near Redruth, Cornwall,
on October 6,1825—the eldest of the nine children, three
girls and six boys, born to his parents Joseph and Ann
Tangye. Long before James left school his genius kept
breaking out, and while but a boy he made a 3 in. telescope,
purchasing the lenses in the rough and polishing them on
his arms in the night as he lay in bed. After leaving school
in 1837, he went to the Copperhouse Foundry, Hayle, where
he began at the very bottom as “molliwig.” Leaving
Copperhouse, he went for a short while to a neighbouring
wheelwright at Pool. His wages at this time were 4d. a day,
although he could match in speed and quality of work any
of the skilled wheelwrights whose wages were 18s. per
week. Then he was engaged with one Edward Wilkins in
filing and setting to work an improved method of“ dressing
tin in the min?s. It was a patent of William Brunton,
senior, who had been one of Brunei's engineering assistants.
Mr. Brunton was the inventor of a locomotive specially
designed for climbing steep gradients. It had a pair of legs
fixed behind, which touched the ground, and were arranged
to " walk ” like those of a human being, and so to push the
engine uphill, and at the same time keep it from running
back. James also constructed and put to work a water-
wheel, 18ft. in diameter by 20in. “breast,” for driving a
stamping mill. After a variety of such tasks, in which his
experience was greatly widened, he was employed by William
Brunton, senior, at Pool, to make some hydraulic pumps.
Then for a year he was at the Redruth Foundry, during
which time a locomotive was built by the firm for the West
Cornway Railway, and called the “ Redruth.” In 1848 he
went to Devonport, and was engaged by Distin and Chafe,
who subsequently asked him to become manager of their
works, but, preferring to return home, he joined his brother
Joseph, who was then employed by William Brunton, jun.,
in scheming machinery for the more expeditious manufac-
ture of blasting fuse. Up to this time it could not be made
in greater lengths than from 20 to 30 ft. The united skill
of the three enabled them to manufacture it in any length
required, and the speed of making was limited only by the
velocity with which gunpowder could fall vertically. From
this time James was closely associated with his brother
Joseph. James’s forte was to: initiate, but Joseph was the
workman par excellence. Among other things, while quite
lads, they made a beautiful little beam steam-engine with
parallel motion and reversing gear, and a Cornish boiler all
complete. Both remained with William Brunton for some
years, until indeed the fuse works had been thoroughly
established. They made the whole of the machinery, and,
the number of workpeople having greatly increased, the
two brothers became working managers, and purchased a
small interest in the business. The younger brother,
Richard (b. 1833), and subsequently George (b. 1835),
had meanwhile obtained situations in Birmingham, and,
realising that the genius of James, and the mechanical
skill of Joseph, would there find a greatly extended field of
action, occasionally wrote urging them to leave Cornwall,
and take up their life-work in the Midlands. After much
hesitation, the two elder brothers decided to do so. Richard
and George were then with Thomas Worsdell, who had a
small works at which certain railway requirements were
manufactured, Richard being at the head of the office. The
business grew under the zealous care of the two young
fellows, and presently it became necessary to have a works
manager. In 1855 James accepted this post, and, Joseph
having previously come to Birmingham, was soon after-
wards engaged with the object of introducing a better class
of workmanship. In introducing some new article of manu-
facture, James required some special work done, which he
felt he could trust only to Joseph, and he knew of but one
lathe in Birmingham sufficiently accurate to do it, namely
that made by them in their spare time in Cornwall. The
brothers thought it would be better for Joseph to leave
Worsdell’s, and to hire on his own account a workshop,
with machine power, where, undisturbed, he could do
what was required, and any other work which might

also come to him. The first turn of the lathe here was
the beginning of the Cornwall Works. It was not long
before James decided to join Joseph in the little workshop,
and James left Worsdell’s in January 1858, after satisfac-
tory notice, and with hearty goddwill on both sides.
Richard now left his desk in town, and, setting one up
beside his brothers, began to canvass for orders for the busy
little concern, George subsequently leaving his other
engagements and joining too. The brothers took a much
larger workshop, and bought an engine and boiler of their
own. They sent for Edward, who was in America, and he
came to them (John had died in 1848) and so was formed
the little firm consisting of all five brothers, under the name
and style of James Tangye and Brothers, machinists,
40, Mount-street, Birmingham; to afterwards become
Tangye Brothers, and then Tangyes Limited. Quickly the
firm became known to an ever-widening circle of customers,
and an increasing amount of work poured in. The secret
of much of the success of this period was Mr. James
Tangye’s swift application to a great variety of
appliances of a few simple but clearly-grasped principles.
An instance of his power of coming to a rapid and right
decision was that of the “ Special ” steam pump. An
American inventor came to E a gland to find a manufacturer
for making a direct-acting steam pump of an extremely
simple type, but so far from meeting with encouragement
from any of the engineers on whom he called, was dis-
heartened by the uniform refusal he met with everywhere
to give the matter serious consideration. By mere chance,
he saw the name Tangye in passing their works, went in,
saw James, and after a quite short interview, was able to
complete an arrangement 'constituting the firm the sole
makers of the pump. It turned out an extraordinary
success from every point of view, and the pump has been
sent out in thousands to all parts of the world. James
could never let his passion for invention, for improvement,
for simplification, sleep. His brother George suggested to
him that if he could design a steam engine of such a type
as could be manufactured in numbers, and possessing
certain characteristics which he set out, it would be a useful
addition to the list of their manfactures, particularly when
the coming new works should be built and equipped—for
this step was being forced upon the consideration of the
brothers. The result was the widely-known “ Tangye ”
engine — the first of its immensely useful class.
The overhanging cylinder was a daring innovation and
much criticised at the time, but eventually adopted almost
everywhere. The bed, with its surprisingly graceful lines
was in a single casting, forming the crosshead guides and
crankshaft bearing. The crankplate was also an innovation
of great merit, conferring a remarkable attractiveness upon
the engine. The connecting rod, too, was new, and James
himself thought highly of it. James had early realised that,
to make a success of a “ commercially designed ” engine, he
must find >a substitute for the huge, heavy, slow-running
governor which was universal at the time, and which indeed
cost as much as a not very small steam engine. The solution
of this point was achieved simultaneously with the com-
pletion of the design of the engine, and constituted another
remarkable innovation. He produced his beautiful high-
speed governor, a highly sensitive arrangement, weighing
from one-fifth to one-tenth of the older form. In 1872,
James and Joseph determined to retire; Edward had done
so some years before. Joseph went to Bewdley, in the vale
of the Severn, while James took up his residence in the
beautiful Aviary Cottage, near to the place of his birth,
and there spent all his subsequent life. Richard and
George, who had no such misgivings—who, indeed, were
just in their element in the spreading growth of the concern
—remained at Cornwall Works, and the business continued
to progress by leaps and bounds.

On Wednesday last, the death occurred of Mr. Abey
Harrison, Spire Hollin, Glossop, one of the leading coal
merchants in the north. Deceased was well known in the
Manchester and Barnsley markets. He was 73 years of
age, and leaves a grown-up family.

While excavation was going on at an old colliery tip near
Dafen Tinworks, Llanelly, on the 31st ult., the side of the
tip gave way. About 20 tons of refuse fell on Mr. Richard
John, colliery proprietor, who was superintending the work,
and killed him. He was 25 years of age, and was connected
with several industries in South Wales.

The funeral of the late Mr. James Gregory, of Craglands,
Deepcar, who died following an operation for an internal
complaint, took place recently at Bolsterstone. The late
Mr. Gregory occupied the position of colliery manager at
Messrs. John Grayson Lowood and Co. Limited, Deepcar.

The death has occurred at Cannes of Mr. William
Beveridge. He was one of the shareholders of the original
Cowdenbeath Coal Company, and also held office as a
director of the Fife Coal Company. He was a director in
other public companies, including those associated with
property investment in Scotland. Mr. Beveridge was
unmarried, and latterly he lived a county gentleman’s life
on Torrie estate, between Dunfermline and Culross.

Mr. Robert Lowe Grant Vassall, chairman of the Taff Vale
Railway Company, has died at Bristol in his eighty-fourth
year. For many years he was a director of the company,
and he was elected deputy-chairman in 1892 and chairman
seven years later.