May 29 1914. THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN. 1199 A PATENT SWIVEL NIB DRAWINC PEN. In the drawing pen shown in the accompanying cuts, the nibs can be instantly opened out for cleaning and afterwards replaced without interfering in any way with the original adjustment of the thickness of line. In construction the lower nib is swivelled upon a central screw, and when the pen is in use this is held in position by the ring A. To open for cleaning it is only necessary to slide back the ring and open out the nib as shown in -A the first illustration; after which the nib and ring are replaced, which automatically readjusts the pen to its original setting. The pens are made in two sizes in best steel, with extra stiff back nib, and square block on the ivory handle, or in best plain steel, with ivory handle. The sole manufacturers and patentees arc W. F. Stanley and Company Limited, of 286, High Holborn, London, W.C. LETTERS TO THE EDITORS. The Editors are not responsible either for the statements made, or the opinions expressed by correspondents. All communications must be authenticated by the name and address of the sender, whether for publication or not. No notice can be taken of anonymous communications. As replies to questions are only given by way of published answers to correspondents, and not by letter, stamped addressed envelopes are not required to be sent. ELECTRIC LAMPS IN MINES. Sir,—In your issue of May 22, there is a report of a speech by Mr. C. E. Charlesworth, in which he uses, as an illustration of the “ too-much legislation ” which had crippled the coal trade “ in many ways,” an instance of his having the other day given an order for £7,000 worth of electric lamps when at the same time he had many thousands of pounds worth of other safety lamps on hand, and he had to send down these lamps to see whether the others (electric) were safe or not; and that he doubted whether the colliers would find the electric lamps of advantage. In making these statements Mr. Charlesworth appears to be under some misapprehension; legislation insisting upon the use of electric lamps has not been passed. From information obtained by the writer from head- quarters, there does not seem to be the slightest likeli- hood of this taking place. It would, therefore, appear that the <£7,000 could have been put to some other far better use. E. May 25, 1914. SENGHENYDD REPORT. Sir,—It will be useful to those of your readers who have purchased the Blue Book recently published, con- taining the official reports on the Senghenydd Explosion, to know that there is a considerable error in the scale printed on the large plan of the workings. The Home Office have informed me that the actual scale of the plan is ” 234 ft. to an inch,” and not ” 284 ft. to an inch ” as printed on the plan. It will be seen that the error is considerable, being over 20 per cent., which, however, is not so glaring as to be self- evident. And, as most people would probably never suspect an error like this in a Government publication— an error in an important matter of detail and a detail so prominent and so easy (for those responsible for checking the proofs) to have discovered before publica- tion—persons using this plan to study the circumstances of this explosion will be glad to be notified of this mistake, for, otherwise, they would be considerably misled. For instance, amongst other matters, as to the extent of the workings and the size of the firemen’s districts which is a subject of considerable comment in the report. To anyone who takes the said plan as his guide, the incorrect scale makes them appear to be over 20 per cent, more extensive in linear measurement than they really were. T. A. Southern. Universal Mining School, Cardiff, May 25, 1914. THE SCHOELLER MINERS’ LAMP GAS DETECTOR. Sir,—I note a letter from Mr. W. Schmahl in the current issue of your journal referring to my letter of last week. His letter has the merit of being crisp and business- like, and like Mr. Schmahl, I have no time to spare for lengthy discussion. I think, however, it only just to say that contrary to his statement, my letter proves neither that I have failed or that, he has succeeded, and I think it would be reasonable and of general interest to very many engineers if Mr. Schmahl would state whether he would guarantee the Schoeller detector to give say five reliable consecutive measurements of methane if the firemen remained in, say, a 2 per cent, mixture for 15 minutes, without access for fresh air—a very ordinary condition of working in the pit. Favourable statistics and guarantees on this point would assist Mr. Schmahl in popularising his instrument. Fred J. Turquand. Albion House, 59-61, New Oxford-street, W.C., May 25, 1914. APPROVED SAFETY LAMPS FOR MINES. Sir,—With your permission I would like to trespass on your correspondence space to make a few observations on the last Order—as illustrated in your edition of April 17, 1914. We have on page 843 the sections of three safety lamps which have been “ approved,” but there is no indication of the tests to which presumably the bonneted lamps of the sections which are figured, have been put through. Years ago the writer was a diligent student of the literature referring to safety lamp tests, and he has not yet forgotten the conclusions arrived at by the late M. Marsaut. One of these was that the more or less complete separation of the intake and return air currents within a safety lamp reduced its safety. In the No. 1 section the chimney appears to be supported by a perforated metal plate, which would permit the whole of the space outside of the chimney part to become filled with an explosive mixture of gas and air or of a larger percentage of gas. The latter as shown by M. Marsaut’s experiments in quiescent atmospheres would be the most dangerous test, especially if the wick flame were reduced as when testing for gas. The writer is certainly of opinion, based on his own experiments and those of M. Marsaut, that none of the three lamps, of which sections are shown, would survive such tests as M. Marsaut instituted and on which his conclusions were based, and we have now the added and recognised danger of fine coal dust. The writer would suggest that when the Home Secretary issues a new Order such as the one in question, such Order ought to say to what and to how many tests the lamps so approved have been subjected. The Home Secretarv takes no pecuniary liability when he approves an unsafe safety lamp. James Ashworth. 930, Drake-street, Vancouver, B.C., May 6, 1914. [The tests which the lamps presented for approval are required to pass are contained, of course, in the memor- andum issued by the Home Secretary. See Coal Mines Act, 1911, Regulations and Orders, 1913—Appendix IV.—Eds. C.G.] LAW INTELLIGENCE. SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE. COURT OF APPEAL.—May 26. Before the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Justice Phillimore, and Mr. Justice Lush. Claim for a Cargo : Costly Litigation. Dannatt v. Wright and Company.—This was an appeal by Mr. Dannatt, coal merchant, of Hull, from a judgment of Mr. Justice Rowlatt in favour of Messrs. Wright and Company, of Newcastle. The dispute related to 239 tons of coal consigned to the defendants, and over which the plaintiff alleged he had a right as the defendants" agent. The coal somehow or other got on board a vessel over which Messrs. Stevenson, of Hull, had control, and defen- dants were paid for it. Mr. Dannatt brought an action alleging that the defendants should hand over the money, as the coal was his property, and Mr. Justice Rowlatt found against him. For the respondents, it was contended that the plaintiff should have sued Stevenson for the coal. The Court dismissed the appeal, with costs. The Lord Chief Justice observed that the whole inner meaning of the litigation was to determine w’hich of four parties were to be entitled to the small sum of between .£5 and <£23, the difference in the rise of price about the time negotiations took place. It was a lamentable fact that there should have been all this confusion and trouble made about such a small matter which could easily have been put right by the parties themselves. The coal was Dannatt’s, and was put on the vessel by Messrs. Stevenson and Company in pursuance of remission given by Dannatt to the dock authorities. Therefore the Court would not interfere with the decision of Mr. Justice Rowlatt, who held that the plaintiff had no action against Wright and Company. Lord Justice Phillimore and Mr. Justice Lush concurred. HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. KING’S BENCH DIVISION.—May 16. Before Justices Avory, Rowlatt and Shearman. Unemployment Insurance : Bricklayer or Colliery Labourer ? Robinson v. Morewood.—This case raised a point under Part II. of the National Insurance Act as to whether certain occupations came within the schedule of insured trades. The appeal was by way of a special case stated by the Justices of Alfreton, Derbyshire. A workman whose nominal occupation was that of a bricklayer’s labourer had signed on with his employers as a general colliery labourer, and the point for decision was whether, having regard to the colliery proprietors’ failure to pay unemployment con- tributions in this case, the workman came within one of the insured trades, and whether the justices ought to have referred that question to an umpire. The justices dismissed the information laid against the colliery proprietors. The Solicitor-General stated, in the course of the arguments, that a colliery labourer did not come under one of the insured trades. He contended that the magistrates were wrong’ in declining to send the matter for determination by an umpire. The court held that the workman was employed in an insured trade,—?.e., the building trade, as interpreted by a decision of an umpire, and that he was, therefore, entitled to unemployment benefit. On the further point that where there had been no previous decision by an umpire, justices were bound to refer the question to an umpire for his decision, Mr. Justice Avory said he did not give any judg- ment. Serious consequences might be involved in holding that the jurisdiction of a judicial tribunal was relegated to an official, whose decision might render a person liable to conviction for a criminal offence, and who, under the regulations made by the Board of Trade on March 26, 1912, might, between the date of the employment and the proceedings, or after they had commenced, revise his decision. In remitting the case back to the magistrate to convict, his lordship said they should, of course, take all circumstances into consideration, including whether there might have been any bona/ide|mistake on the part of the employer. Justices Rowlatt and Shearman concurred. The appeal was accordingly allowed. Unemployment Insurance : Colliery Fitter a Mechanical Engineer. Nunnery Colliery Company v. Stanley. — This was an appeal by the company from a conviction by the Sheffield magistrates for failure to pay unemployment contribution in respect of a colliery fitter, who said he came within the insured trades as a mechanical engineer. Their lordships dismissed the appeal, with costs. MINING AND OTHER NOTES. In the House of Commons, Dr. Macnamara, in reply to a question by Lord Charles Beresford, said the final report of the Royal Commission on Oil Fuel had been received. Subject to Parliamentary sanction, the Government propose to take up ordinary shares of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company to the amount of .£2,000,000 and .£200,000 debenture shares. An agreement has been entered into between the Government and the company, the latter contracting to supply oil fuel. The company have conces- sions virtually throughout the whole of Persia. Their refinery is situated at Abadam, and the fields are connected by a “pipe-line,” and the oil is pumped into the refinery and is then refined into petroleum products. The result of the action of the Government will be that the Admiralty will largely have the control of a supply of oil fuel in Eastern waters. A Blue Book has been issued explaining the agreement entered into by the Government with the Anglo-Persian Oil Company Limited for the purchase of <£2,200,000 shares in the company. The Book also contains the report by a Commission of experts under the presidency of Sir Edmond J. W. Slade, giving the results of their local investigations of the resources of the oilfields comprised in the concession of the company, and also an explanatory memorandum by the Admiralty. The latter discusses the increasing use of oil fuel, and says that experiments are being carried out by numerous investigators to arrive at the most economical method of extracting oil from shale and coal. It is hoped, therefore, that when the use of oil in the navy shall be so extended that it will form the major part of the fuel used, the production and commercial utilisation of oil and other products of coal and shale will have reached such a position that the oil fuel so obtained will supplement natural petroleum to a greater extent than is at present the case. Emphasising the possibilities of natural or artificial restriction of supply, the memorandum says the policy of the Admiralty with regard to the provision of oil is to spread its contracts as much as possible over widely separated fields. It is announced that a system has been adopted of placing forward contracts with reliable com- panies (including the shale oil companies of Scotland) operating fields which are geographically widely separated. There will still remain a balance to be purchased according to the exigencies of the market, and in effecting such purchases all sources of supply will be kept in view. Supplies available from the United Kingdom and other parts of the British dominions will certainly receive due consideration. The directors of Merry and Cuninghame Limited have appointed Mr. Edward Macpherson secretary of the com- pany, in room of Mr. James G. Smith, who has retired. The Senate of London University have appointed Dr. Frank Horton, Sc.D.(Camb.), D.Sc.(Lond.), M. Sc. (Birin.), as from October 1 next to the University Chair of Physics, tenable at the Royal Holloway College. Presiding at the meeting of the shareholders of the Cape Town and District Gas Light and Coke Company Limited last week, Mr. J. C. Lilley said their chief anxiety had been that of coal supply. Their contract came to an end early in last year, and freights were at that time from 6s. to 7s. per ton higher than they had been paying. They had tested another kind of Colonial coal, and eventually became assured as to its suitability for their purposes. But supplies were stopped by a strike on the Natal coalfields. Then diffi- culties arose. Almost a general strike arose in South Africa, and there appeared to be very great difficulty in getting coal even by rail. They were, therefore, thrown back on to English coal again, and that was very expensive. The result was that the coal cost during that period 4s. 6Jd. per ton more than in the previous year. Towards the end of the year they got supplies of Colonial coal. It was of a fair quality, but not so good as the English coal they had been accustomed to use. It would compare with English coal at the normal price they paid a couple of years ago, which was about 30s. per ton.