September 3, 1915. THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN 471 Accidents causing loss Class Nature of life or bodily injury. explosive. explosive. No. of persons dents. Killed. Injured. 1. Gunpowder Gunpowder 171 ... 12 ... 185 2. Nit rate-mixture Bobbinite 3. Nitro-compound:— 4 ... 1 ... 5 "Ardeer gelignite.. 1 — 1 Arkite 2 .7’ 1 ... 1 Ajax powder 5 — ... 7 Blasting gelatine 2 7: i ... 2 Cambrite 1 — ... 1 Carbonite 1 — ... 1 Cornish powder... 1 — .. 2 Dynamite 4 i ... 5 Dynobel 8 ... i ... 7. Excellite Gelatine dynamite 1 ... — ... 1 or gelignite 69 ... 12 ... 72 Monarkite 2 — ... 2 Div. 1 « „ No. 1... Mcnobel powder. 2 1 ... — ... 2 ... 1 Neonal 1 77. i — „ No. 1 1 — — Nobel polarite ... 5 7’. 2 7’ 5 Permon powder.. 2 — ... 2 Rippite 2 — ... 2 Samsonite 6 .7 3 ... 4 Stomonal 1 ... 1 ... 1 Stow-ite 2 — ... 2 Super-Excellite .. 1 — ... 1 Super-Kolax 2 — ... 2 Swale powder ... 1 — ... 1 Swalite 2 1 ^Syndite 1 — ... 1 "Ammonal 1 i ‘ — Ammonite 2 ... i . 2 „ No. 2.. 1 — .. 1 „ No. 4.. 1 — 1 Bellite 6 — 7 ,, No. 2 1 — 1 „ No. 4 1 — 1 Div. 2 « Biastine 3 .7 1 .' .. 3 Ergite 2 ... 1 . .. 1 Fa ver sham pwdr. Faversham pwdr. 1 ... — . 1 No. 2 1 ... 1 . — Kentite 4 — .7 5 Roburite No. 4 ... 1 — 1 LWestfalite No. 3.. 4. Chlorate-mixture:— 1 ... — . .. 1 Div. 2 Cheddite 3 — .. 3 5. Fulminate — — — — 6. Ammunition: - Div. 1 Safety fuse 2 — .. 2 Div. 2 — — — — 'Igniter fuse 1 — 7’ i Div. 3 j Detonator s&elec- . trie detonators 13 77. 2 ’. .. 17 7. Firework :— Div. 1 — — — — (Socket distress | signal 1 ... — . 7 5 Div. 2 Socket sound signal 1 ... — . .. 3 LThrowdowns 1 1 Totals................. 350 ... 44 ... 375 In the foregoing table are included all accidents which occurred in the use of explosives and immediately con- nected therewith; also accidents in thawing dynamite, and others arising from miscellaneous causes not within the prohibitions of the Act. In short, this group com- prises all accidents occurring under circumstances not immediately controlled by the Act. The number of accidents grouped under the heading of “Use and miscellaneous ” is less than in 1913, being 350 against 403. By far the larger number of these accidents are connected with blasting. The number of persons killed by these accidents is less than last year, viz., 44, as compared with 48, and the number of persons injured is also less, 375 against 427 in 1913. The following table classifies these accidents under the head- ings of the cause :— No. of No. of persons Cause.* acci- lents. Killed. Injured. Shot-firing— Prematures and failing to get away from shot-hole (21) 19 . 5 . .. 17 Firing by electricity when persons are at the shot-hole (10) 5 . 2 5 Not taking proper cover (77) 112 .. 7 14 ’ .. 102 Projected debris (13) 2 . — 2 Hang-fires and returning too soon to the shot-hole (42) 38 .. 6 . .. 33 Tampering with miss - fired shots (19) 14 .. 1 . .. 16 Ramming or stemming the charge (32) 22 .. 6 . .. 25 Sparks, flame, &c. (79) 81 .. 3 . .. 95 Boring into unexploded charges (15) 15 .. 1 . .. 19 Striking unexploded charges in removing debris (16) 10 .. 2 . .. 14 Preparing charges (4) 2 .. 1 . I Lighting fuse before inserting charge (1) — Fumes (1) i 7' i : 7 i Hot or unexploded residue left in borehole after “socketing” (8) 4 .. 5 Various (8) 9 .. — 10 Miscellaneous:— Playing with detonators 6 .. 12 Playing with other explosives ... 2 .. i ’. 3 Destroying explosive 2 .. — 2 Illegal manufacture 1 .. 1 Putting explosive in a fire 1 .. — 1 Thawing 1 .. — 3 Socket distress signal 1 .. — 5 Socket sound signal 1 .. — 3 Suicide (?) 1 .. 1 .’ Totals ............. 350 ... 44 ... 375 * The figures in parentheses denote the average number of similar accidents during the previous five years. Prematures and Failing to Get Away from the Shot- Hole. — Of these accidents, three were due to men attempting to fire two or more shots together, and being delayed in lighting the fuse. Ten of the accidents were due to shots fired by means of squibs, and in two of these it is known that the squib had been shortened by tearing off some of the touch paper. This practice is now prohibited by the Explosives in Coal Mines Order of September 1, 1913. Firing by Electricity when Persons are at the Shot- Hole.—In three cases the accident was due to the shot- firer allowing another man to couple up the leads to the detonator wires while he himself remained at the battery. The remaining two accidents occurred while testing the cable leads. Not Taking Proper Cover.—Four of these accidents arose from “ blow-throughs.” Hang-Fires and Returning Too Soon to Shot-Holes.— Among these are many cases where two or more shots were prepared, and the miner returned, under the impression that all the shots had exploded, or that the fuses of some of them were not lighted. Three acci- dents were due to men returning, having mistaken the explosions of adjacent shots for their own. In several cases the men returned after a most inadequate interval, but in one case the shot is said to have exploded after an interval of 40 minutes, and in another after an interval of 2| hours. In the latter a pick shaft was used as a rammer, and it is probable that the fuse was damaged by it. In one case a second shot was fired by the flame from the first. Two cases occurred with squibs. Two accidents occurred when firing by electricity. In one case a deputy had two cables attached to two separate shots. No. 1 shot was fired, but No. 2 hung fire. A hewer then went to See if the cable had become detached, and as he was returning the shot exploded. The battery was not connected at the time, and it is supposed that a defective electric fuse was the cause of the accident. In the other case, a shot-firer returned, thinking that his shot had missed fire. He was in the act of with- drawing the wires connected to the fuse when the charge exploded. Ramming or Stemming the Charge.—There can be but little doubt that in all these cases undue force was applied. Striking Unexploded Charges in Removing Debris.— Five accidents were caused by explosives containing a considerable proportion of nitro-glycerine. Three of the accidents occurred with detonators. During the past 14 years 417 accidents have occurred during the winter months December to May, whilst during the remaining six months the number was only 157. Various.—Nine accidents connected with shot-firing could not be classified. The first of these occurred when a miner was in the act of firing a shot by means of a fuse igniter, and had just nipped the igniter with the pliers when there was a flash, and he was slightly burned. In the second case, the injured man was about to fire the first of several shots, using high-tension elec- tric detonators, and was at the face wdth the battery gathering up the explosive cases when from some unex- pected cause the shot exploded. In the third case, the injured man had fired a charge, and was examining the place when a second explosion occurred. In the fourth case, the injured man had charged a hole with some cartridges of gelignite, and had sent his brother away to fetch some more explosive. While waiting he was rest- ing on the wooden rammer, which was in the hole, when there was a slight explosion which jerked his rammer, but did not project it from the hole. The only apparent cause for the ignition was the pressure on the rammer. In the fifth case, five shot holes were charged, and two of them fired simultaneously by electricity. After dis- connecting the cable and removing the handle from the battery, the shot-firer and two men returned to the face, when two of the other charges exploded, injuring the two men who were in advance of the shot-firer. A fissure was found extending from those holes which were first fired to the bottom of the fourth hole. In the sixth case, the accident was supposed to have been due to a primed cartridge being dropped, the shock firing the detonator. In the seventh, sparks from a fuse ignited a man’s cotton shirt. In the eighth, a miner had a fuse, to which a detonator was attached, wrapped round his waist. He stopped to pick some stone from a bogie, when the detonator was struck by a piece of ore thrown from the bogie. In the last case, a stallman was injured while firing a shot. He was pulling the wire attached to the fuse igniter, when the latter either exploded or was blown off, and some sparks burned him. Five .Orders, made under section 61 of the Coal Mines Act, 1911, have been issued during the year, viz., Orders of February 10, April 7, May 13, eTune 22, and August 29, 1914. The effect of these Orders is to add 26 new explosives to the Permitted List, to remove four explosives from that list, and to amend the definitions for tutol No. 2 and the Brock squib. At the Rotherham testing station 31 explosives were submitted for test, of which 27 passed the prescribed test, and four failed. Of the 27 which passed, 20 were included in the Orders issued during the year, and six—one of which has alter- nate definitions for the cartridge wrapper—are awaiting the issue of an Order in 1915. Only one non-detonating explosive was submitted for the old test at the Woolwich testing station. It passed the test, but arrangements have not yet been made for its manufacture. The official return published by the Board of Trade respect- ing the railways of the United Kingdom during last year shows that the mileage open in 1914 was 55,663, an increase of 258 miles; the authorised capital was £1,447,557,000, an increase of £35,005,000 (which, however, includes nominal additions of £29,315,000 excluded from the 1913 total); and paid up capital £1,341,222.000. an increase of £7,211,000. The engine mileage was 621.239.000, a decrease of 7,085,000 miles; while total receipts were £139,098,000 (including the estimated amount receivable from the Government in respect of the control of British railways from August 5 to December 31), a decrease of £353,000, the net income being £50,925,000, a decrease of £1,206,000. COAL MINING ORGANISATION COMMITTEE. DIGEST OF THE EVIDENCE. (Continued from page 421.J Sir T. R. Ratcliffe-Ellis (continued). Witness was next questioned as to the possibility and advisability of the curtailment of exports with a view to letting loose larger supplies of coal for home consumption. He said he should prefer that should be dealt with by some representatives from the exporting counties. Taking his own counties, Lancashire and Cheshire, if the effect of the prohibition of exporting coal in some neighbouring county was to send that coal that was not to be exported into Lancashire and Cheshire it might cause a tremendous dislocation of trade there, and it might also cause a stoppage altogether. If the supply of coal is equal to the demand that regulates the price in the same satisfactory way all round. Your suggestion is that if we maintain the equilibrium between supply and demand by curtailing the export of coal we should in that way regulate the price. It is a proposition which is indisputable that, if you in any way make the supply equal to the demand, you reduce the price that would be available if the demand exceeded the supply. Whether you do other things which would cause probably greater mischief is another question. If you have got the means, as I respectfully submit to the committee the men have, of providing this supply without causing the dislocation which must unquestionably result from stopping a particular part of the trade of the country, why not adopt that means? Supposing the result of prohibiting the export in Yorkshire, for instance, was to send into the county of Lancashire a very large quantity of coal quite beyond our requirements, and that our pits, instead of being able to work six days a week, worked three, the consequence would be then that the owners and the men would suffer. If Lancashire is flooded with a lot of coal from Yorkshire we should have no market for our coal. If you could distribute it and say : “ We want a certain amount here, let Yorkshire send it there and there,” wherever it may be, you would have to make a very comprehensive scheme to prevent very serious mischief being caused in some places. It would necessitate, if the Government curtailed the export, that the Government should also control the distribution of coal internally. Again, we either get money or produce of some sort from every place where we send our coal to. But I suppose that unless we establish the principle of confiscation, if you close a pit that would be associated with compensa- tion, that the owner would be relieved from all his obligations under leases, that he would be relieved from all his contracts and that the shareholders ought not to suffer and ought to be compensated by the general public for loss of profits. If the effect of prohibiting the export of coal was to close a colliery, and that mine was shut up, it ought to be accompanied by regulations of that sort, or it is pure confiscation. In Lancashire we have nothing except bunker consumers that go abroad. We send some coal coastwise and some to Ireland, but our great trade is in our own county. We are sufficiently pressed by competition as things are now from other counties coming in. There are easier railway rates and facilities of that sort, and if you say to these competing counties, “Now you must not send your coal abroad,” to that extent you increase the com- petition in Lancashire. A great deal more Yorkshire coal comes into Lancashire now than we like, but, of course, that is competition. Mr. Smillie : There is no claim for compensation by the owners in any of the non-exporting counties at the present time, because the Government will not allow them to export to Germany and to Austria. Witness : That is war, and for that we have to suffer. I want to answer everything that I can, but there are some questions put to me that I cannot answer except under the conditions I have already mentioned. In answer to further questions, Sir Thomas thought they could not cut off the export from a particular part of the country for a particular period of time, and then expect to restore it again within a comparatively short time. He did not think they could assume that at some short period it was going to be resumed again; the trade was gone, and they had lost their customers. If it were possible to restrict exports in relation to collieries situated in proximity to indus- trial centres, it would be very difficult to determine what the effect would be on collieries in such districts. One thing was certain, that it would mean a very serious dislocation of trade, and the Committee ought to have very clearly before them all that it involved. A very small percentage of differ- ence between supply and demand might make a difference in the condition of prices. A very old friend of his, Mr. Hewlett, used to say that a snuff-box full would make a difference. In order to say how far the prevention of export to Germany had affected the market, they must see also what the increase in the consumption had been. Up to the present they had not yet felt any additional difficulty by Yorkshire having free that which it used to send to Austria and Germany, if it did send any to those countries. June would show whether or not, when the contracts came to be made afresh, Yorkshire was competing more in Lancashire. In answer to Mr. Nimmo, witness said there were dis- tricts where suspension of the Eight Hours Act would bring about chaos almost, but they need not adopt the suspension; they could please themselves. Before there was any sus- pension of the Act it ought to be by agreement between the workmen and the employers, because it did not seem to be of any use suspending the Act, and then having disputes and disturbances as to whether it should be put into opera- tion or not. Unless the men considered they would be will- ing to avail themselves of the opportunity of working longer hours, and would work regularly, it was of no use giving them an opportunity of doing so. Supposing, for instance, the Miners’ Union had said, “ Very well, now, we dis- approve of this,” but some of the men were induced to work notwithstanding that, then he could see that difficulties might arise. If, on the other hand, the workmen said, “ We recog- nise the state of things at the present time, and we will put in all that we can and more than we do now,” he thought they would be bound to suspend the Act; it would be refusing labour that was volunteered to the country if they did not; but if they understood from the miners’ representatives that they certainly should discourage anybody working the extended time, then to give the men the opportunity of working, know- ing that they would not avail themselves of it, might result in difficulties. The Miners’ Federation had a very great responsibility in this matter. Sir Thomas was asked if he had formed any views as to the reasons for absenteeism in his district. He said : The