November 26, 1915.

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN.

1093

MINES INSPECTION IN THE
UNITED STATES.*

EIGHTH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE MINE
INSPECTORS’ INSTITUTE.

The eighth annual meeting of the Mine Inspectors’
Institute of the United States of America was held at
St. Louis, Missouri, under the chairmanship of the
retiring president, Mr. D. J. Roderick, who thanked
the delegates present for the co-operation extended to
him during his term of office, and bespoke the same
hearty support for his successor in office, President John
Dunlop, closing with a few brief remarks, commending
the work of the institute.

Presidential Address.

The new President stated that it afforded him great
pleasure to have the honour of bidding them welcome to
the meeting, and especially to the city of St. Louis.
Owing to some changes in the membership of the insti-
tute each year, it might not be amiss to state at that
time some of the reasons why there should be an organi-
sation of mine inspectors maintained, and meetings of
that kind held yearly. The work of mine inspectors was
the same everywhere, and it made no difference as to
the length of time one had been in the service. His
chief problem was : How was an inspector to bring about
a better protection of the lives and health of the men
employed in and about the mines? By reason of such
an organisation as theirs much could be done that could
not be accomplished by the individual. To attain
any good results required effective organisation. There-
fore the reason was all the greater why they, as mine
inspectors, should organise, having in view the adoption
of such remedial legislation in the various States as
should bring about the best results. The public
expected that mine inspectors should take the initiative
in the promulgating of measures that would be the
means of reducing the hazards in connection with the
mining industry, so that it would be as safe to follow
mining as any other line of industry.

Those meetings afforded an excellent opportunity to
bring about a closer relationship, or rather comradeship,
than could be gained in any other manner. The dis-
cussion of the numerous problems that arose in their
daily vocation gave them all inspiration and renewed
energy, so that they returned to their respective fields of
labour with renewed zeal and a determination to give
their best service for the good of those employed in and
around the mines in their charge. The mine inspector
might be less conspicuous than other forces, in the ser-
vice he rendered for the good of mine employees; but
his daily contact with the workmen gave him an
influence that, if properly and intelligently directed,
would be the means of bringing about better results for
their welfare than all other agencies.

Mine inspectors who had been identified with the
service during the last 20 years had reason to note the
wonderful development and the many improvements
made in the mining industry. With the larger number
of men employed, the responsibilities and dangers atten-
dant on mining had increased proportionately. Since
the last meeting one year ago there had occurred three
disastrous explosions, in which over 400 lives were lost,
namely : Hillcrest, Alberta, Canada (June 19); Royalton,
Illinois (October 27); and Layland, West Virginia
(March 2). None regretted these dreaded catastrophes
more than the members of that institute. Knowing full
well all the hazards and dangers connected with the
rescue work, especially where there were many lives
at stake, the sympathy of the members always extended
to those inspectors in whose districts these disasters
occurred.

It was to be regretted that when accidents of this kind
occurred the newspapers often gave incorrect reports,
some of these being very ridiculous and of such a nature
as to engender feeling between the officials of the
different departments engaged in the work of rescue.
The great work that devolved on all officials in their
efforts to make mines as secure as possible against acci-
dent was one of the gravest of responsibilities, and
necessitated eternal vigilance. In time of accident or
disaster those whose duty it was to render all possible
aid should bring all their experience and knowledge into
immediate service. Friction should, and must, be
avoided, and diversity of interest obliterated where all
were engaged in the noble work of saving those who
were suddenly menaced in their hazardous calling.

The occupation of the miner was considered hazardous
at the best, but many lives were often lost that could
have been saved. The accidents that occurred daily in
mines wTere not due so much to the lack of legislation as
to the lack of obedience and the closer observance of
mine laws and regulations. Much work waited to be
done by the institute, and he believed that no men were
better prepared than were the mine inspectors of that
country to bring about better conditions, and to advocate
legislation that would better safeguard life and reduce
the death rate and accidents in mines to a minimum.

It was gratifying to know that there had been a reduc-
tion in the number of fatal accidents in the coal mines of
the United States during the year 1914; and, with the
the exception of 1912, the death rate per thousand men
employed was lower than for any year since 1903. In
the year 1914 the number of fatalities in and about the
mines was 2,451, which was 3’30 deaths to every 1,000
persons employed, or 4’80 to every million tons of coal
produced, or one person killed for each 208,333 tons.
This was the largest production of coal per fatal accident
in that country, with the exception of that for 1912.
There was no doubt but that the gradual decrease shown

* From the Proceedings of the Mine Inspectors’ Institute
of the U.S.A.

in the last few years must be attributed to the work of
the many organisations having in view the prevention of
accidents; and this applied not only to mines, but to all
other industries as well. But that they might have a
reduction of accidents to a minimum required that the
work so well begun be carried forward, bearing in mind
that eternal vigilance on the part of all connected with
mining was necessary.

In looking over the statistics giving the causes of mine
accidents, it would seem that, with all their efforts, they
had not been able to reduce the number of those due to
falls of roof, coal, and rock. The percentage of these
accidents remained practically the same in all the States.
Taking the United States as a whole, the proportion was
46 per cent., while in the State of Illinois, for the year
ending June 30, 1914, it was 52 per cent.

He desired to draw attention to what he considered
the most dangerous work connected with the operation
of mines, as shown by the number of fatalities due to
pit cars and locomotives. In the United States the
number of fatalities from this cause was 15 per cent.,
while in the State of Illinois, for the year ending June 30,
1914, it was 25 per cent. When they considered the
number of employees engaged in this work,‘which varied
from 6 to 8 per cent., these statistics showed about one
person killed for every 150 employed.

He mentioned these matters for their consideration,
and asked them to suggest what that institute should do
in regard to reducing the accidents from these two
sources. He thought that one-half of the accidents
could be prevented if mine employees would live up to
the legal requirements and carry out conscientiously the
various rules and regulations governing their work,
instead of taking chances by ignoring them.

He regretted that the industry with which they were
identified was passing through an era of depression such
as it had not known for many years. In the State of
Illinois alone, in which there were 80,000 mine
employees, not more than one-half had employment at
the present time. The same condition prevailed in
many of the other coal producing States, and meant that
many hardships to the wives and children dependent on
these men. There was no doubt in his mind but that
the present depression was a reflex of conditions pre-
vailing owing to the strife among European nations. He
wished to draw their attention to the fact that if that
institute was not accomplishing the results intended by
having an association of this kind, the fault was entirely
their own. He believed there was one object in parti-
cular that was preventing and proving a hindrance to
its success as an institute, namely, their failure to use
it as a medium to reach the people and the Governmental
powers. Therefore, he recommended that some steps
be taken at that meeting to change the constitution and
by-laws of the institute so that the subjects discussed,
and which appeared to be of sufficient interest to the
mining industry, might be given immediate publicity
through the periodicals that published matters relating
to mining.

He knew of no organisation of men whose aims and
ideals were more lofty than the men who made up the
membership of that institute. They had been selected
by their States as men in whom was placed the fullest
confidence, believing that they would devote their time
to the work of their office, and require that every pre-
caution be taken necessary to ensure the health and
safety of the men employed in the mines. There wras no
more laudable work than that in which they were
engaged, namely, the preservation of human life.

Discussion of Uniform Legislation.

The President then announced the discussion of the
need of more uniformity in the matter of State legisla-
tion, and asked Mr. Beard for remarks.

Mr. Beard (New York) said that, as they all knew,
there were a different set of laws in almost every State
mining coal, because laws had been drawn up in each
case to conform to the particular conditions existing in
that State. They all recognised that conditions varied
and what might do to meet the conditions in Penn-
sylvania might not answer in another State, and vice
versa. But there were, nevertheless, certain points in
regard to which they could accomplish a great deal by
seeking greater uniformity of legislation. The difficulty
confronting the legislatures most frequently was that
they received many suggestions and demands from the
labour union and others from the associations of coal
operators, and these demands were often antagonistic,
and considered only their individual purposes. In this
regard there was frequently as much blame attaching
to the operators as to the miners. It would be readily
admitted that there was danger in the practice of lobby-
ing, but it had been argued justly that it was necessary
to inform legislators, who were generally unacquainted
with mining conditions and must be instructed in regard
to what was necessary to secure the best interests of
those engaged in mining.

Now, in regard to uniform mine legislation, there were
numerous points common to the mining of coal in every
State that should be covered by the mining laws. For
example, mining laws should deal in specific terms when
describing conditions in^ mines and making certain
•requirements. There was a great lack of clearness in
the mining laws of some States. The term “ gaseous
mine ” was used in a very general way. Mining laws
should make such a classification as would clearly define
what was meant by a gaseous mine. There were con-
ditions when 1 or 2 per cent, of gas was not dangerous,
while under other conditions such a percentage of gas
would be highly dangerous, and the working of the mine
would require the taking of special precautions. For
this reason it was important that every mining law on
this question should clearly state what was meant by a
gaseous mine.

Another, and more generally uniform question, was
one relating to the certification of mine officials. Many

of the coal mining States required no certification, while
other States required a rigid examination to obtain the
necessary certificate of competency issued by regularly
appointed examining boards. It was important to
understand, first, if certification of mine officials should
be required by the State; and, second, to set a standard
of qualifications that should be required in order to make
a candidate eligible to appointment to the positions of
mine foreman, fire boss, and hoisting engineer. It
would be well, also, to discuss the question of whether
the mine superintendent should be required to pass an
examination for a certificate of competency.

The question of an inter-State certificate also, was an
important one. At the present time the standards of
examination set in the different States varied so widely
that few State examining boards would accept a
certificate of another State in lieu of an examination of
a candidate for certificate in their own State. This
necessitated a competent man who had filled the office
of mine foreman, or fire boss, or other position in one
State and held the necessary certificate of competency
for that State, if he desired to apply for a similar position
in another State, to again go before the examining board
and pass another examination; whereas, if an agreed
standard of examination was fixed, determining the
necessary qualifications, in accordance with certain
specified conditions in the mine, this difficulty could be
overcome with a saving of time and expense to the
State.

In some States there had been a seeming attempt to
exclude applicants from other States by introducing
certain restrictions in the law, making them ineligible
for examination or appointment to the position of mine
foreman. For some time the Pennsylvania mining law
required the candidate to have worked five years as a
miner before he could take the examination for com-
petency and receive a certificate. He believed that this
law had been interpreted by the court recently, so that
it was no longer required that the candidate must dig
coal for that length of time before he was eligible for
certification as mine foreman. Much could be done
toward securing uniformity on many of these points and
establishing fixed standards that would be uniform in
this country. The institute had a great work to do
along that line. Let them seek, by discussion, to find
out the points and ascertain the conditions in regard to
which the mining laws should be uniform, and then let
this institute strive to bring these points to the atten-
tion of legislators and governors in the different States.

To this end he would suggest that it would be well
to consider the appointment of a committee that under-
stood the views of the institute, and who would confer
with the Bureau of Mines in reference to securing
greater uniformity of standards, in respect to the classi-
fication of mines in accordance with various conditions
and to consider what degrees of competency were
required to ensure the greatest safety in mining opera-
tions. He believed there were certain questions that
should be made the subject of Federal legislation,
through which the different coal producing States would
be brought to operate along similar lines without any
abridgment of their independence. In the interest of
safety in mining, it must be recognised that there were
certain conditions and requirements that should be made
universal. He hoped this matter would be taken up
further, and that they should be able to unite in taking
some definite action, as a body, that would eventually
prove of advantage to all.

Mr. Paul (Pennsylvania) said that at the Indianapolis
convention, on the organisation of the institute, in 1908,
one of the chief purposes of the organisation was stated
to be that of bringing about uniform mine legislation.
A committee was subsequently appointed, and made a
report upon certain features in which uniformity should
be sought, but these dealt principally with matters of
statistics. He felt that many regarded the institute as
a guide in matters of this kind, and it was their duty
to take up this question in a practical way. They
should discuss whether or not the institute considered it
advisable to go into a study of the conditions of mining,
as the result of which a Bill might be drafted and
recommended to the different coal producing States for
adoption. Until this question was decided, they were
not in a position to discuss these matters intelligently.
They should first consider what were the questions in
reference to which it would be desirable to adopt certain
uniform laws, and when that had been decided, this
institute would be in a position, through its various
officers and committees, to co-operate with State mining
departments and the Federal Bureau of Mines, and
through such co-operation it might be expected that
suitable and effective measures might be drafted for
presentation to state and national legislators.

Mr. Flynn (Alabama) regarded the question of uniform
legislation as one of the most difficult that they had to
handle under their form of government. All States
guarded zealously what they viewed as their State rights.
Considered from a mining standpoint, it was unfortunate
that States were not more willing to co-operate on these
general questions. It would probably be claimed, in
Alabama, for instance, that they had a right to enact
their own law’s without suggestions from Pennsylvania
or other States, and he supposed the same would be
claimed by other legislatures. While a great believer in
State rights, he saw no reason in the wray of uniform
legislation on many points and in securing eventually
inter-State mining certificates of competency, as w’as the
case wdth law* and medicine. So far as he knew, no
effort had ever been made to secure the adoption of an
inter-State certificate law in reference to coal mine
officials. The provision was made, how*ever, in Alabama
that a mine foreman holding a certificate from another
State w^as permitted to act as mine foreman in Alabama
until the meeting of the next examining board, which
took place within six months.