May 14, 1915. THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN 1019 LAW INTELLIGENCE. HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. KING’S BENCH DIVISION.—May 6. Before the Lord Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Avory, and: Mr. Justice Low. Coal Mines Act: Provisions as to Coal Dust. Atkinson v. Shaw.—The appellant, William Atkinson, one of H.M. inspectors of mines, laid an information against the respondent, the manager of the Universal Colliery, Senghenydd, Glamorgan, for an offence under section 62 (3) of the Coal Mines Act of 1911, on the ground that, the mine not being one where the floor; roof, and sides of the roads were naturally wet, he had not caused such floor, roof, and sides to be systematically cleared, so as to prevent as far as practicable the accumulation of coal dust. Evidence was given before the justices who heard the infor- mation that the respondent had caused the floor of the roads to be cleared and watered systematically, and that he had endeavoured, by means of brushing and compressed air blow- ing and watering, to clear the roof and sides of the roads, but that he had ceased doing so in 1913, as these methods were found to be unsatisfactory. It was admitted by the appellant, as a practical man, that the adoption in the colliery of brushing and compressed air blowing, though effective to carry out what he understood to be the meaning of the Act, would not have been effective in preventing the accumulation of coal dust, and might conceivably have been dangerous in certain circumstances. The justices thought that it was not practicable to carry out the provisions of section 62 (3) of the Act in this mine, and that the respon- dent had done all that was reasonably practicable to prevent coal dust accumulating. The information was accordingly dismissed. The inspector appealed against this decision. Mr. Ivor Bowen, K.C., for the appellant, said that section 62 (3) imposed a duty on the manager of a mine which must be carried out, although the prescribed steps might prove to be dangerous and impracticable in a parti- cular mine. The Lord Ghief Justice, in giving judgment, said that the justices had found as a fact that the adoption in the Universal Colliery of brushing or compressed air blowing would not be effective against an accumulation of coal dust, and might even in certain circumstances prove to be a source of danger. It had been said that the Coal Mines Act, 1911, required these steps to be taken, however impracticable or dangerous they might appear. If to carry out these requirements would be more dangerous than to neglect to do so, a peculiar position would result, inasmuch as provisions in an Act intended for the protection of men working in mines would be made use of to increase their danger. In section 102 it was provided that nothing in the Act should render an owner or manager of a mine liable to a penalty in respect of any non-compliance with the pro- visions of the Act if he could prove that such non-compliance was due to causes against the happening of which it was impracticable for him to make provision. That showed that the Legislature had appreciated that what was safe in one mine might be dangerous in another. In this case the respondent had done all that was reasonably practicable to prevent an accumulation of coal dust, and the magistrates had found as a fact that it was not practicable to carry out the provisions of section 62 (3) in this mine. Section 102, therefore, applied, and the magistrates were right in coming to the conclusion they did. The appeal would be dis- missed. His lordship added that he did not know whether any means could be devised to prevent accumulation of coal dust in a mine such as this, but if provisions were required which were not in the Act of 1911 it was a matter for the Legislature. Mr. Justice Avory and Mr. Justice Low agreed, Mr. Justice Avory saying that section 87 of the Act might, apply to this case'. That section provided for the forming of special regulations in the case of certain mines, and such regulations might be required here to prevent the danger that would be caused if the provisions of section 62 (3) were carried out. Coal Mines Act : Adequate Ventilation. Atkinson v. Morgan.—This appeal from a decision of the justices of the peace for the county of Monmouth resulted in an important decision with regard to the extent of the liability imposed on managers of mines by section 29 of the Coal Mines Act, 1911, to cause an adequate amount of venti- lation to be produced in mines. , The appellant, William Atkinson, was an inspector of mines, and the respondent, Howell Morgan, was the manager of the No. 3 Griffin Pit, Blaina, Monmouth. In this mine there was a double part- ing called Austen’s parting, which owing to the soft and friable nature of the roof, was heavily timbered. A large quantity of rubbish had from time to time fallen on the timbering, and about May 8, 1914, some of the timber got broken through the pressure. The manager thereupon gave instructions for new timber to be put in place of the broken timber. On Friday, May 22, during the progress of this work, a large fall of rubbish took place, which broke down some of the roof timbers, and left a cavity in the roof. This rubbish was cleared away by noon on the, following day (Saturday), and the roadway was temporarily repaired by being timbered and lagged at the normal height of the roof timber to prevent any rubbish falling on, the floor. By this action the ventilating current was partially shut off from the cavity above. There was no work at the,pit between noon on the Saturday and 6 a.m. on the following Monday, and no further steps were taken, to ventilate the cavity between these times, as the repairing shift was not due at work until the evening of the Monday. At 5.30 a.m. on the Monday the fireman in charge examined the roadway, but did not examine the cavity above, as he thought it was dangerous to do so, owing to the falling rubbish., The men were permitted to go to work at six o clock without any warning that the cavity had not been examined. Two of the men’s examiners made an inspection at 6.40, found gas present, and caused the men to be withdrawn. The respondent was subsequently summoned by the appellant for a breach of section 29 of the Act of 1911. The justices thought that he had done all in his power to enforce the provisions of the Act, and dismissed the summons. The appellant now appealed from that decision. Mr. Disturnal, K.C., on behalf of the respondent, said that the respondent was excused by section 75 of the Act of 1911 from his liability under section 29. He had taken all reasonable means to publish and enforce the provisions of the Act, which was what section 75 required. A copy of the prescribed abstract of the Coal Mines Act and a copy of the Regulations of Mines were posted up at the mine. It was impossible for the respondent to visit every part of the mine in person continually, and he had therefore appointed a competent fireman to make all necessary exami- nations and to see that everything was right. That fireman had not informed him as to, and therefore he had no know- ledge of, the fact that there had been a partial shutting off of the ventilating current from the cavity. The Lord Chief Justice, in giving judgment, said that it was not disputed that the manager knew on Friday, May 22, that there had been a fall of rubbish, and that a cavity had resulted. It was clear that an offence had been committed under section 29 of the Act by the shutting off of ventila- tion from the cavity. But it was said that the manager was protected from liability by the provisions of section 75 of the Act, in that he had taken all reasonable mean£ to enforce the requirements of the Act. The justices had found that the respondent had done so, and also that an adequate amount of ventilation to dilute and render harm- less inflammable and noxious gases was produced in the mine, though not disseminated in the cavity, and had thereupon dismissed the information. The court had to be satisfied that there was evidence before the justices to support those findings, and his lordship was not satisfied that there was. No step was taken in respect of the cavity after the time that the respondent, knew of the exist- ence of the cavity, and no step was apparently intended to be taken until the afternoon of the Monday, when the repair- ing gang would go back to do the work. He had looked in vain through the case stated by the justices to find what steps the respondent took which were “ all the reasonable steps he could take ” to enforce the provisions of the Act. It had been said that he had appointed a competent fireman and that no notice had been given to him by the fireman that the ventilation had been shut off in the cavity. If the true effect of section 75 was to excuse the manager in such circumstances as those, it would be saying that a manager came within that section whenever he had appointed a competent person to see that the requirements of the Act were carried out, and had then left the whole matter to that person, and had not troubled himself any more about it until information was brought to him that something was wrong. His lordship could not take that view. The Coal Mines Act, 1911, was passed to protect persons employed in mines. With that view a duty was imposed on the manager by section 29 to see that there was proper ventilation in the mine. In that section the Legislature imposed upon those responsible for the construction of the mine an obligation to provide proper apparatus and machinery, and to carry out an adequate system of ventilation. If there was any failure to fulfil this obligation those persons would be liable. His lordship could not bring himself to the conclusion that the evidence showed that the manager of the mine had fulfilled the requirements of section 29. The justices had taken too restricted a view of the duty imposed by section 29, and the case would be sent back to them with a direction to convict. Mr. Justice Avory and Mr. Justice Low agreed. Atkinson v. Lancaster and Company and Jefferys.—This was an appeal against a decision of the Abertillery justices dismissing an information against Messrs. Lancaster and Company, colliery owners, of Blaina, and Mr. Jabez Jefferys, their .agent. For the appellant it was stated that the magistrates had dismissed summonses under the Act, which provided that no workman should pass in certain parts of the mine until those parts had been . properly inspected and reported to be safe. It also provided that there should be a fireman examiner, who should look for the presence of gas in the mine within two hours of the com- mencement of work. It appeared that John Newall, the fireman examiner of No. 3 Pit, was summoned for not thoroughly inspecting the pit. He was convicted. Then Messrs. Lancaster and Company and Mr. Jefferys were proceeded against for failing to enforce the provisions of the Act, but these proceedings ended in favour of the defendants. Mr. Howell Morgan, the manager of the mine, was said by the appellant to have failed to provide adequate means of ventilating the mine, and the magistrates also dismissed that information. It was contended that the magistrates were wrong. t ' The appeal was dismissed, with costs. The Lord Chief Justice said he thought the respondents had proved that they had fulfilled the requirements of the Act, and that they took no part in the management of the mine. With regard to Lancaster and Company, his lordship thought that it was clear that they had no part in the management of the mine itself, but with regard to Mr. Jefferys, the agent, it was contended that, as he was required to supervise and occasionally went down the mine, he did take part in the management. The justices had all the facts before them, and decided that what Mr. Jefferys did was not any part of the management. Having regard to that fact, the magistrates’ decision was correct. They were also, right when they found that the act of Newall was done without their consent, knowledge, and connivance. Justices Avory and Low agreed. May 5. Atkinson v. Lewis Merthyr Colliery Company Limited — In this case, Messrs, the Lewis Merthyr Company had been summoned for failing to provide the means for main- taining an adequate air current, and this summons the Caerphilly magistrates had dismissed. Mr. Ivor Bowen, K.C., contended that the owners did as to air currents, &c., take part in the management of the mine ; but Mr. Disturnall argued in defence that the owners having appointed .a manager, it would be an offence for them to take, part in the management. The owners must necessarily interfere with the management as to financial arrangements, to enable the manager to carry out his duty; but the particular point as to the air reversal apparatus was one for which the manager alone was responsible. The Lord Chief Justice said their lordships were impressed with the ambiguity of the case as stated. There were certain points of doubt which should be cleared up by the magis- trates. They proposed to ask the magistrates to offer further statement as to when the scheme was adopted, when the work was, in fact, commenced; when Mr. Rees, the managing director, was consulted, and when he was last consulted; whether Mr. Rees exercised any discretion as. to the particular scheme to be adopted, or whether the discretion exercised by him was only as to the cost or financial provision to be made; and whether the findings of the Court below apply only to the period after September 30, 1913; and upon what evidence the justices came to their conclusion. # INDIAN AND COLONIAL NOTES. India. following table, given by Commerce, by the Indian colliery con- Colliery Profits.—The shows the dividends declared cerns during 1914 :— Per No. of cent. companies. 100 1 90 1 55 3 50 1 374 ............ 1 274 ............ 1 25 2 20 3 16 1 15 3 124 4 Per No. of cent. companies. H| ............. 1 10 2 9 1 8| 2 8 1 74 ............ 4 6| 2 6 1 5 7 3| 1 24 4 The above show very varying results. In addition to these collieries, there are no less than 32 that have paid no divi- dend at all for the year. The latter, however, include some new mines. The scarcity of tonnage is being severely felt in the coal trade, preventing advantage being taken of the enquiry from outports, where fuel is badly wanted. Africa. Coal Production.—In February, 648,547 tons of coal were mined at collieries in the Union of South Africa; whilst 534,926 tons were sold, the value thereof being £139,156. This is the lowest total yet recorded, comparing with 606,207 tons in January. In February the sales in the various districts were as follow :—Transvaal, 319,670 tons (4s. 5-31d.); Cape, 3,291 tons (11s. 2-77d.); Orange Free State, 58,546 tons (5s. 2-44d.); Natal, 153,419 tons (6s. 7-89d.). Australia. An Electric Mining Plant.—The Mount Pleasant Colliery, says the Australian Mining Standard, is having a costly new electric plant installed. The power house, now complete, is a building 103 ft. long, 40 ft. in height, and 58 ft. in width. It is built to carry a 10-ton overhead travelling crane. The foundations for the machinery are of solid concrete blocks, 94 ft. below the surface and 7 ft. 2 in. above; 1,500 tons of concrete were used in the foundations. The plant will con- sist of three super-heated jet condensing steam engines, of the locomobile type, capable of developing 530-brake horse powder. The boilers, each of which will weigh 22 tons, will be automatically stoked. The refuse of the mine will, by means of the forced draught system, be used as fuel. The electric plant will consist of three alternators, direct-coupled to the steam engines, each capable of developing 440 k.v.a.’s at 6,500 volts. These are made by the Lancashire Dynamo and Motor Company, of Manchester. The current generated will operate new screens now being erected, a 27- horse power brake creeper set, for bringing the wagons from the pit head to the screens and returning them full; also an endless rope haulage line, now being installed and stated to be one of the largest in Australia. This machinery is capable of hauling out 1,200 tons per day, or almost double the present capacity. Two branch haulage sets, each capable of bringing 700 tons a day to the main rope, are also being installed in the mine. It is also intended to sink a ventila- tion shaft at the back, which will be fitted with a fan of modern type, direct-coupled to an electric motor. The mine workshop will be served with current also. It is estimated that at night there will be a surplus of 700-horse power, which would be available for supplying current outside. The plant .is estimated to cost, when complete, £35,000. Canada. 'Nova Scotia Coal Trade.—Our Sydney correspondent writes as foll6ws :—There are indications of a distinct revival in the coal trade in Nova Scotia. The coal mines have not worked anything like full time since the autumn of 1913, and during the winter just past have not worked better than from.half to three-quarter time. It is likely, however, that during the coming summer the mines will work practically full time. Stocks of coal are unusually low at the opening of navigation, as some of the companies did not bank coal during the winter. Some scarcity in freighting capacity is anticipated, as charterers are slow in delivering, because of the attractive freight rates prevalent, and some of the best freighters have been reouisitioned by the Admiralty. The peculiar conditions attendant on the St. Lawrence coal trade, which requires vessels only during the summer months, has evolved a system of chartering not generally adopted. The Dominion Coal Company, for example, charter vessels at agreed-upon rates for terms reaching up to 10 years. These vessels are specially designed for the St. Lawrence trade, and the rate of hire, because of the long term involved, is low, particularly when compared with the unprecedented rates now being paid for steamers. It is understandable, therefore, that owners are inclined to be reluctant to relin- quish profitable charters by delivering vessels on these long- term charters at the present time. Unless lack of freighting vessels hinders transportation, shipments of coal to St. Law- rence points should be as large as in 1914, in which year a record figure was reached. The production of the Dominion Coal Company from the Glace Bay and Springhill mines was, for the first four months of the year, 1,329,000 ton. compared with 1,529,000 tons in the corresponding period of 1914. Recovery Work at the Acadia Colliery.—Towards the end of 1914 there occurred an explosion in the Allan shaft of the Acadia Coal Company, which necessitated the sealing of the shafts. The mine is an extremely gassy one, and the seam is steeply inclined and faulted, and abnormally thick— reaching 40 ft. in places. Operations for recovery of the mine were undertaken, which have been completely success- ful, and the mine will shortly resume operations. The recovery operations were preceded by unusually careful planning, nothing being left to chance. Breathing apparatus were used in advance of the working parties, and proved of considerable assistance in erecting stoppings and doors. In view of the fiery nature of the mine, and the past record of the mines in this district, the successful result of the recovery operations has given very general satisfaction,