March 16, 1917.

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN.

531

THE STATE AND COLLIERY FIREMEN.

At the annual meeting of the Ashton-in-Makerfield
(Wigan) branch of the Lancashire and Cheshire Colliery
Firemen’s Association, Mr. Thomas Eden, the branch
president, delivered an address on the question of “ The
State and Colliery Firemen,” in the course of which he
replied at some length to the remarks on the same 'sub-
ject by Mr. Mason, colliery manager, of Wigan, already
published in our columns/'1'' Mr. Eden pointed out that
Mr. Mason said if he were asked to describe the char-
acter of the inventor of the original proposal for State-
paid firemen, he would say that he was a most unreason-
able and illogical being, and absolutely ignorant of the
practical and economic life of present-day firemen, and
he further said that he would venture to express the
opinion that the present-day fireman would never think
of such a thing. The economic conditions of the
colliery firemen to-day, said Mr. Eden, were such that
they tended to make him go, or influence him, in the
wrong direction so far as safety w’as concerned. He con-
tended that colliery firemen throughout the country
were being dismissed, not on the plea of incompetence,
but for any trifling thing that occurred through the wide
field of their work, which ranged from skill as a mechani-
cal engineer to the work of a pony driver. It did not
matter what occurred, if there was something wrong,
it was the colliery fireman who was spoken to, and to a
very large extent it was the fireman who was held
responsible; the onus was upon him, and it was he who
was dismissed, and when such a case was brought up
they were invariably met with the cry that it was incom-
petence. No provision was made for the extra work
which had nothing to do with their statutory duties, but
which they were called upon to do. The fireman had to
be able to measure work done in his district, and he
must be capable to fire shots in his district, but neither
measuring work done nor firing shots must in any way
be allowed to interfere with carrying out his statutory
duties under' the Goal Mines Regulation Act. The
speaker said he had travelled Lancashire and Cheshire
as much as any colliery fireman in Lancashire, and, with
the exception of their general secretary, he was not pre-
pared to take a second position to any man outside or
inside their organisation so far as his knowledge of the
colliery fireman’s position went, or the practical work-
ing conditions of colliery firemen in the county, and
right through the county and the country. Owing to
the economic condition of the colliery firemen, he was
held responsible by the management to a very large
extent for the amount of coal coming out of his dis-
trict. If the “ gets ” went down, the fireman had to
explain. The “ get ” seemed to get on the mind of the
colliery managers and the under-managers, and the fire-
man was at the bottom of the whole thing. Yet as far
as his real duty was concerned, the “ get ” had abso-
lutely nothing to do with it. The fireman was held
responsible to a very large extent not only for the “ get,”
but for the mine work done by individual men in the
district over which he had supervision. He had known
men stopped at a minute’s notice because they had not
sufficient mechanical skill to report about the pump or
engine that had broken down in a shift over which they
had control; he had known them to be dismissed
because they had not known all the circumstances apper-
taining to a stoppage on the haulage, and also at a
moment’s notice because they had made a conscientious
report in the daily report book. In some instances, the
organisation had endeavoured to get the cases into the
law courts, but whenever they had taken that stand—
and they did not like to do it; they did not like to
quarrel with the management — and had put in for
damages for illegal dismissal, in less than three posts
they had had the demands and fees returned to the
organisation. So long as they knew such things were
taking place, they were bound to do something towards
stopping it, and they did honestly believe that if the
firemen were placed in an independent position, they
would be able to reduce the number of accidents which
were taking place in mines. They w7ere told by Mr.
Mason that they had the remedy in the rules, and that
they had the assistance of the manager and the under-
manager to help them to surmount any obstacles which
might occur. They were told they could get their
remedy through their association, or they could call in
the inspector to put things right. That was just where
the bother came in. Mr. Gill, who was a practical
colliery fireman, and had occupied that position for pro-
bably as many years as he (the speaker) was old, moved
the proposition they were now discussing at the last
Trades Union Congress, and stated cases to show what
they themselves all knew. It was necessary, however,
that those things should be spoken of in order that other
people might know as well as themselves. Mr. Mason
said that no practical fireman would think of supporting
such a proposition as was before them. Had he known
as much of the history of the movement as the speaker
(Mr. Eden), Mr. Mason would never have made such a
statement. Mr. Eden said he himself had sat round a
table where representatives had been present represent-
ing upwards of 20,000 colliery firemen in Great Britain,
and he had heard the question debated, and when the
vote came not one man of them all was opposed to the
idea. If Mr. Mason had known that the whole body of
colliery firemen had declared in favour of the proposition,
he certainly would never have made the statement that
no practical body of colliery firemen would have sup-
ported the movement. The proposition had had an
absolute unanimous support from every miners’ leader
in Great Britain, and some of those men had so far won
the respect of the nation that at the present time they
were in the British Cabinet. Had those men no prac-
tical knowledge of the economic condition of the colliery
firemen? He (the speaker) told them that there was
not one of them who was opposed to the proposition,

* See Colliery Guardian, December 8, 1916, p. 1110.

and there were a great number of men in the House of
Commons who, apart from the miners’ leaders and those
in sympathy with them, ’were in favour of the move-
ment. They were told by such an eminent man as Mr.
Walker that 50 per cent, of the accidents in mines were
avoidable; and if they were avoidable, who was the man
who could avoid them? The fireman. And he (the
speaker) said : Give the fireman an economic position to
enable him to do so. The fireman’s present economic
condition, impaired his judgment, and he might hesitate
to stop a road, because he would have to withdraw men.
Mr. Mason said they must not forget that they were
human. They were human, and that was why they
asked for better conditions. State pay would not make
firemen a set of slackers. He added that they suggested-
the establishment of a district authority, to which all
applications for appointments as firemen and inspectors
should be made; that they should be State servants, and
controlled by the district mining board; and that all
complaints, grievances, and appeals should be considered
and decided by the district mining safety board,
to be composed of an equal number of representatives
of the Colliery Firemen’s Association, the Miners’ Asso-
ciation, the coal owners, etc., and presided over by a
divisional inspector. He claimed that the system would
work successfully. All they asked really was that there
should be a change in the jurisdiction, which would put
them under the Government, and he believed that with
a little bit of tact, what they wanted could be accom-
plished. He asked all firemen to give the proposal their
whole-hearted support.

A resolution in the same terms as that passed at the
Trades Union Congress was unanimously adopted at the
close of the address.

SAMPLING DELIVERED COAL.*

By G. S. Pope,

^Continued from page 485.J
Sulphur and Clinker.

Sulphur is commonly present in coal in combination
with iron or other elements. For a long time it was
thought that the sulphur formed clinker, but recent
investigations point to the fact that there may be no
difficulty from clinker in burning coal containing as much
as 5 per cent, or more sulphur. The relative propor-
tions of iron, sulphur, lime, alumina, silica, etc., in the
ash affect its fusibility, whereas the method of firing and
the rate of combustion are important factors in the for-
mation of clinkers. The exact relation of clinkering
to the constituents of the ash is not known so well that
one can definitely predict from an analysis of the ash
whether a coal will or will not clinker. Contractors,
however, are required to specify the sulphur content,
so that standards for the coals to be delivered may be
established.

Both the sulphur and the volatile matter content
should be used to classify coals and to identify the coal
guaranteed. Variations indicating the substitution of
an unsatisfactory coal should be considered cause for
rejection of the coal or for cancellation of the contract.

Need of Care in Sampling.

Persons without experience generally select a sample
better than the average run of the coal delivered. Occa-
sionally, a lump unusually free from layers of slate and
impurities, and representing the best coal in the lot
rather than the average, is selected. After being broken
it is shipped to the laboratory in a cloth sack, so that it
loses moisture during transit. The analysis of such a
sample necessarily indicates a value higher than that of
the coal delivered. As a quantity of coal may vary greatly
in composition, containing not only what may be termed
coal proper with certain more or less constant impurities,
but also slate, pyrites, and bony coa], a lump may be
anything from almost pure coal to material without fuel
value. Hence the analysis and test of a single lump may
indicate a composition greatly different from that of the
coal at hand. It is well to remember'that, as the larger
lumps of coal roll down and collect near the bottom of a
pile or load, a sample taken entirely from near the floor
does not always fairly represent the whole.

In spite of every precaution taken to prevent loss of
moisture during the collection, preparation, and analysis
of samples, it .is certain that loss of moisture may occur;
also there may be too little or too much slate, bony coal,
or other foreign matter collected in what is otherwise a
truly representative gross sample, so that the- determi-
nation of the heating value or ash content does not
strictly agree with the actual value of these factors in
the coal delivered. However, an experienced collector,
by using good judgment and following the general direc-
tions given for collecting and preparing samples, can
obtain samples so fairly representative that the results
of the analyses are reasonably accurate. The sugges-
tions that follow are presented for the guidance of those
who wish to send representative samples to a laboratory
for analysis and heating value tests.

Directions for Sampling.

The number of pounds to be taken as a gross sample
to represent a given lot of coal varies with the character
and condition of the coal, and not with the amount of
coal to be sampled. The character and proportion of
the bony coal, slate, etc., and the size of the particles
of both coal and impurities are the governing factors. It
is therefore evident that sampling should not be left to
an inexperienced person, but should be done by one who
is thoroughly familiar with the significance of these
factors, and has some knowledge of the coal to be
sampled.

As a result of experiment, it has been established that
a gross sample of approximately 1,0001b. is sufficient to
give reliable results for coals comparatively easy to
sample; that is, coals relatively^ free from the

* From United States Bureau of Mines Bulletin 116.

” extraneous ” impurities. It may be necessary to
collect larger gross samples, even 1,5001b. or more, for
coals containing a considerable proportion of impurities
in large pieces, or large lumps of coal' with streaks of
bone, slate, or pyrites, or sulphur balls and lenses. For
convenience, however, and to avoid long storage of the
samples, the Bureau of Alines considers it advisable that
one sample of 1,0001b., or more, should be collected
weekly in the case of Government contracts calling for
more or less regular deliveries each week.

In sampling cargo deliveries of 5,000 and more tons,
the Bureau of Alines collects from 3,0001b. to 4,0001b.
of coal as a gross sample. In order that the preparation
of the samples may proceed while the cargo is being
loaded, after approximately 500 1b. has been collected, it
is reduced to a quantity convenient for mailing to the
laboratory, and each succeeding 5001b. is likewise
reduced. The samples may, however, be mixed in the
laboratory, and only one analysis made to represent the
cargo.

The best opportunities for procuring representative
samples are afforded while the coal is being loaded into
or unloaded from railroad cars, ships, and barges,
or while it is being dumped from wagons. Once the coal
is stored in piles or bins, or loaded on cars or vessels, the
procuring of representative samples is practically impos-
sible, unless the whole quantity of coal is immediately
handled again, and the conditions for sampling become
favourable.

When coal is being loaded . into or unloaded from
wagons, railroad cars, ships, or barges, a shovel or a
specially-designed tool may be used for taking portions or
increments of 10 to 30 lb. to make up the gross sample
of coal. As the size of the increments should be
governed by the size and weight of the largest pieces of
coal and impurities, increments of more than 301b. may
be required for coals containing large pieces of coal and
impurities.

If one chute or conveyor is used for delivering a con-
siderable quantity of coal to or from wagons, cars, or
ships, it may prove expeditious and economical to devise
a mechanical means for collecting portions from frac-,
tional parts of the discharged coal, or continuously
deflecting a portion of the coal as it falls down the chute,
or diverting from the conveyor definite portions of coal,
and thus mechanically and automatically collecting the
gross sample. Excellent opportunity is afforded for pro-
curing representative samples if the entire consignment
of coal is crushed immediately after it is weighed and
delivered, for then the samples can be collected from the
crushed coal. If the coal is conveyed from the crusher
by a conveyor, means can be devised for mechanically
and automatically diverting from the conveyor definite
portions of coal to make up the gross sample.

The portions should be regularly and systematically
collected, so that the entire quantity sampled will be
represented proportionately in the gross sample, which
should contain the same proportion of lump coal, fine
coal, and impurities as the coal delivered. As soon as
the portions are collected, they should be deposited in a
receptacle having a tight-fitting lid provided with a lock.

A gross sample taken by hand from coal delivered by
wagon should consist of shovelfuls of coal taken from
the first, second, or third wagonload as it is being dis-
charged, the number of shovelfuls taken and the loads
sampled being dependent on the number of loads which
the gross sample is to represent. If the coal is discharged
immediately into a crusher, it is preferable to collect
shovelfuls of the crushed coal.

Samples taken from railroad cars should not be limited
to a few shovelfuls of coal procured from the top of a
car, for the size of the coal and the proportion of foreign
matter may vary from the top to the bottom of the car.
The only way to obtain a representative sample is to
take a number of shovelfuls or portions of coal from
different points in a car, from top to bottom and from
end to end, while the coal is being loaded or unloaded.

When a shipment of coal is sampled at the mine,
shovelfuls or portions of coal should be taken systematic-
ally as the coal is loaded into the railroad car, and with
such regularity that the sample will represent the entire
carload. The samples should be taken after the coal has
been prepared for market; that is, if the coal is passed
over picking tables, or pickers are employed on the car
to remove the impurities from the coal, the samples
should be taken only after the coal has had its final
preparation.

When coal is being sampled from dump cars, shovel-
fuls should be taken from the stream of coal being dis-
charged to the bins or ship. If the discharged coal is
immediately crushed, the gross sample should prefer-
ably be collected after the coal leaves the crusher.

In sampling cargoes, as in sampling carloads, por-
tions of coal should be takqn in equal quantities and at
frequent and regular intervals, so as to represent pro-
portionate parts of the consignment as a whole, either
while the coal is being loaded or unloaded.

The Bureau of Mines has charge of the sampling of
cargo shipments of coal to the Isthmus of Panama for
the Panama Railroad Company. The coal, which is
loaded from piers at Hampton Roads, Norfolk, and
Newport News, Virginia, is dumped directly from rail-
road cars into ships carrying from 4,000 to 12,000 tons of
coal. The method followed is to collect portions of coal
from every railroad car dumped. From 30 to 601b. are
taken from each car sampled, the quantity taken depend-
ing on the size of the cargo. From 3,000 to 4,0001b.
are usually collected as a gross sample to represent a
cargo.

The portions making up the gross samples are taken
from the coal as it is discharged from the bottom dump
cars by the use of a shovel or a specially constructed
ladle. The ladle has a handle about 5 ft. long and a
bowl 1ft. in diameter at the top, 9in. at the bottom,
with depth of 9-1 in., and holds from 25 to 301b. of coal.
To collect samples with the ladle, it is rested on the rails
of the brack or on the chains that support the gates of