December 10, 1915.

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN.

1189

SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE AND WAR-

WICKSHIRE INSTITUTE OF MINING
ENGINEERS.

A meeting of the above institute was held at the
University, Edmund-street, Birmingham, on Tuesday,
7th inst., the President (Mr. G. M. Cockin) in the
chair.

The President then called upon Dr. E. A. Newell
Arber to read his papers. (See pp. 1185 and 1199.)

DISCUSSION.

The President said the Oxford coal field, although
possessing scientific interest, did not afford much scope
for commercial speculation as far as they could see at
present. In the Kent coal field, on the other hand, the
mineral wealth was very striking. He was struck by
the extraordinary absence in Kent of the ironstone bands
with which they were so familiar in their own coal
measures. He remarked also on the great preponder-
ance of the sandy rocks which they did not get in their
own coal fields. There were districts in the latter in
which .they passed through nothing at all but fire clay
beds and ironstone bands, and no doubt the large pro-
portion of sandstone rocks in Kent was one reason why
the borings there had gone so quickly. The great
number of coal seams which Dr. Arber had described
as being present at the Stonehall borings, could only be
explained by Dr. Arber, as faults. He believed it was
Prof. Louis who thought that it was owing to the
presence of very flat overthrust faults that made it
possible for these coal seams to repeat each other.
Another reason might be that in some parts of the Kent
coal field there was a current bedding in the coal seams,
which would make the seams thick in one place and
thin in another, and which, of course, would cause a very
great uncertainty in colliery working. The fact that
a coal field might look very rich at one borehole there-
fore presented a large field for speculation. With regard
to fossil evidence, Dr. Arber had confined himself mainly
to a study of the plant remains. In their own district,
more attention was paid to the fauna of the coal
measures, and a great deal of very useful correlation had
been done by that means. Probably the reason was
that they did not have such a large flora in their coal
measures as in Kent, though they had a very large and
varied assortment of fossil shells in all their coal
measures. These formed a very useful means for
correlation, and they had been used for that reason.

Prof. Boulton said that Dr. Arber’s paper on the
Oxfordshire coal field kept to the front a problem which
was bound to become more and more insistent. He
meant, of course, the winning of workable coals beyond
the limits of our present coal fields. But he was afraid
that he must suggest that he himself would have exer-
cised a little more caution than Dr. Arber had done in
making that the Oxfordshire “ coal field.” His idea of
a coal field was an assemblage of coal measures con-
taining workable coal, and it seemed to him that they
had no evidence so far of that in the Oxfordshire coal
area. He would not be inclined to term the measures
in Devonshire a workable coal field, although there were
considerable measures there. Dr. Arber had referred to
the correlation of coal measures at Batsford, and the
sinkings 15 miles to the south at Burford, and, if the
speaker understood him aright, Dr. Arber definitely ruled
out the possibility of middle and lower coal measures in,
for example, the measures through which the Burford
borings were sunk. Now, it seemed to the speaker, that
although those middle and lower coal measures might be
absent in what Dr. Arber termed the Oxfordshire coal
field, the evidence so far available by no means neces-
sarily pointed to that conclusion. The 500 ft. of coal
measures at Batsford and the 200 and odd ft. of coal
measures in the other borings might be the seam over-
lapping, as Dr. Arber suggested, the transition series,
or what the Survey called the upper coal measures. But
it seemed to the speaker that those transitional measures
at Batsford might be what he would call the marginal
phase of a possible unconformity, so that those tran-
sitional measures might rise uncomformably upon middle
productive coal measures, and, for all they knew, those
middle coal measures might be present underneath the
boring at Burford. It seemed to him that Dr. Arber
had not sufficient evidence to rule out altogether those
middle coal measures, and in that connection it was
interesting to note that Dr. Arber considered that the
coal field — or no coal field — which was most nearly
related to the Oxfordshire coal field was that of the
Forest of Wyre. Now, it was well known that in the
Forest of Wyre and the neighbourhood they had two
sets of measures. They had, for example, in the Forest
of Wyre sulphur coal measures, which rested uncon -
formably on the sweet coal measures which were
worked around Highley, and if a boring were sunk in
the margin of that coal, that was to say, from the upper
sulphur coal measures to the beds at Batsford, it would
miss altogether the sweet coal measures. That was
possibly the condition of things at Batsford. But the
boring in the northern part, or towards the central part,
of the coal would pass through those upper coal and
down into the sweet coal measures, and that con-
ceivably was the state of things at Burford. He merely
wanted to insist upon the possibility of such a structure
existing in the Oxfordshire coal field, and if that was
correct, then the prospect of further exploration would
be very much brighter than even Dr. Arber imagined.
He, personally, was very much interested in the addi-
tional borings in the Kent coal field described by Dr.
Arber, and it struck him that the extreme disturbance
which Dr. Arber suggested in the neighbourhood of those
southern borings might be somewhat similar to the big
disturbances which they got in the Somersetshire coal
field along the northern bank of the Mendip, where the
coal measures were so intensely folded and compressed

that they were in cases inverted. Seeing the state of
things in the Kent coal field, it appeared to him that
they had a repetition there of the sort of structure
observed in Somersetshire.

Mr. H. P. W. Giffard said he would like to ask Dr.
Arber whether he did not think it might be possible to
find a site for a borehole which would reach the coal
measures at a less depth from the surface than at
Burford or Batsford. Thus at Charlbury, though the
surface of the ground was formed of grit, Mr. Buckman
had shown that all the lower zones of the upper lias had
been removed by what he termed pene-contemporaneous
erosion of an anticline. Under Oxford, both the upper
and middle lias had gone, so that explorers might find
themselves near the axis of the anticlinal. The upper
and middle coal measures had been reduced from 350 ft.
in Gloucestershire to 150 ft. at Charlbury, and under
Oxford both the upper and middle lias had gone, as was
shown in a boring put down for a brewery there. There-
fore, at Oxford, the coal might be nearer to the sand-
stone. If this anticlinal was initiated after the coal
measures were laid down, they might be very near the
surface.

Mr. S. L. Thacker said he would like to ask Dr.
Arber whether he came to the conclusion of faulting
either wholly or partly as an hypothesis to account for
the very great divergence and difference between the
seams proved in the northern portion, and those proved
at those two boreholes, or whether he came to that con-
clusion by evidence from the cores of the boreholes
themselves. Personally, 'he (Mr. Thacker) attached
more importance to the evidence of the boreholes.
Apparatus had been perfected for ascertaining the actual
depth and direction, and dip, from the core of a single
borehole. He would like to know whether such an
apparatus was in use in the boreholes dealt with by
Dr. Arber, and whether the German and the Belgian
engineers had similar facilities. He suggested that the
evidence available so far of the character of the deposits
of the coal fields in Kent led one to infer that they
represented an effect of water currents and possibly a
disturbance of ground at the same time.

Mr. F. Raw said he would like to ask Dr. Arber
whether he had prepared careful surveys of those borings
corrected for the depths.

Dr. Arber, replying on the discussion, said that they
had no coal measure ironstones worthy of the name in
Kent. "With regard to the diameters of the cores in the
four borings he had described, he believed they ran from
about 6 in. to about 4 in. He understood that in the
ordinary boring, when they got near the bottom, the core
diameter was about the size of one’s finger nail.
It was difficult to find a horizon from that. When they
got a fixed diameter, as in the Belgian system, it was
simply splendid. The reason for recording those
southern borings was purely as a record. Where they
had a 6 ft. seam, and then an 8 ft. seam following one
another at very short intervals, the obvious possibility,
he did not say certainty, was that the ground was
faulty. . With regard to measuring the dips of the cores
in those borings, nothing of that sort had ever been
possible in Kent. The borings were put down one day,
and all destroyed and buried as fast as possible after-
wards in order that information should not leak out.
The owners of those borings would not embark in any
unremunerative operation. As far as his knowledge
extended, it was, perhaps, a matter more for the mining
engineer or the geologist. There was no scientific instru-
ment which had been properly and fully tested, as far
as he knew, which was available for that purpose, and
he did not believe that in any case they could obtain
any reliable information as to dip from the class of cores
which were obtainable. If .they examined those long
borings, 2,000 or 3,000 ft. in length, they would be
struck with the enormous variations in the dips as they
appeared in the cores. When they sank at the same
place, instead of finding the dips which they found in
the core they found something very different. The
boring might prophesy a dip of 2 degs., and the sinking
might prove one of 18degs., and vice versa. There w’as
generally an enormous difference between the two
figures. He would deal in his written reply more fully
with the question of the borings at Stonehall. With
regard to fossil plants, after many years’ experience of
both types of evidence, the plants and the animals, he
considered the plant evidence the most valuable, but
he was not going to attempt to substantiate that belief
on that occasion. Prof. Boulton, as usual, put his
finger on the spot at once when he -took him (Dr. Arber)
to task for calling the Oxfordshire area a coal field. But
he believed that in the future it would be a coal field;
he believed that some day seams of coal of some com-
mercial importance would be found in that area, and
then, at least, he would be at liberty to call it a coal
field. With regard to the conclusion that there were
no middle and lower measures in the Oxfordshire coal
field, the matter was quite open for discussion. All
he could say was that on the printed evidence, it did not
look likely, because it must be remembered that wffiat
they had there were transition coal measures down on
silurian, and unless that wras purely local, or there was
something missing that was purely local, then .the pro-
bability was that the lower measures were absent. He
thought the only explanation of the inconstant horizons
in the Kent coal field was the effect of rapid up and
down alternations affecting the laying down of the coal
under water. In fact, he believed all coals, as far as
the British coals were concerned, were laid down under
water. The questions connected with the splitting of
the seams were still not very well understood. There
was a great deal of work required which might be done
in South Staffordshire in the more exact detailed study
of what took place in the way of splitting the big coals.

The President proposed a vote of thanks to Dr. Arber,
who had placed before them two very interesting papers
that afternoon. He noticed that Dr. Arber headed his

paper on the Kent coal field, “ Part 1,” so that they
might quite hope to have the pleasure of listening to
him again. (Applause.)

Prof. Cadman said that he would like the pleasure of
seconding the vote of thanks to Dr. Arber for his very
interesting papers. With regard to the so-called Oxford-
shire coal field, the subject divided itself into two phases
from the engineering point of view, the first being as to
whether the coal measures existed there or not, and,
secondly, whether, if they existed, they were of a pro-
ductive character. The problems were entirely separate
from a boring point of view. Perhaps Dr. Arber and
Prof. Boulton would not agree with him on that parti-
cular phase, but he w’as looking at it now from the
economic point of view. With regard to the question
of making use of boreholes, even for evidence of such a
valuable nature as Dr. Arber had brought before them,
it seemed to him that these boreholes, unless they had
been surveyed, could only be taken into account in a
very irregular manner. He knew a case, though he did
not think it had actually been recorded, in a British
colony, where it was his lot to work for a time, a certain
bore was put down into a certain deposit, and there
appeared to be an enormous thickness of that deposit,
until one day a native came along and told them the
drill was coming out of the ground a little distance
away. (Laughter.) They knew that when a boring tool got
down to a depth of 500 or 600 ft. it began to corkscrew
in all sorts of ways, and was liable even to turn upwards.
In fact, the information given by Dr. Arber about No. 1
borehole might be equally true of No. 3. No doubt
Dr. Arber had taken that into consideration in giving
them that very interesting and valuable paper.

The vote of thanks was carried by acclamation.

Dr. Arber thanked the members for the way in which
they had received his papers, and said that with regard
to the heading, “ Part 1,” it would probably be some
time before he could give them a Part 2. He hoped that
one of the next points he would have to deal with would
be a correlation of some of those northern borings, but
the great difficulty at the present moment was that he
could not get three or four borings released, which were
absolutely essential to that correlation. He did publish
some figures a short time ago which brought upon him
a savage attack from land owners and other persons
interested, and he was in much the same position now
with regard to the western boundary; he would incur
similar liability if he now ventured to deal with the
northern borings. In a rash moment last year he said
that there was a big boundary fault, and everybody dis-
puted that, and maintained that the coal field went on
to Radstock or somewhere else in the West. However,
he had information that the fault did exist, although it
might not be proved at the present time.

TRIPLE TRADE UNION COMBINE.

An important conference of the three executives of the
Miners’ Federation of Great Britain, the National Union of
Railwaymen, and the National Transport Workers’ Federa-
tion was held yesterday, to consider and ratify the proposed
scheme of alliance. Mr. Robert Smillie, president of the
Miners’ Federation, presided. The draft scheme was pre-
sented to the joint conference for discussion, and, with a
slight rearrangement of the rules, the following scheme was
unanimously adopted :—

(1)	That matters submitted to this joint body, and upon
which action may be taken, should be those of a national
character, or vitally affecting a principle which, in the
opinion of the executive making the request, necessitates
combined action.

(2)	The co-operation of the joint organisation shall not
be called upon, nor expected, unless and until the matter
in dispute has been considered by and received the endorse-
ment of the national executive of the organisation
primarily concerned, and each organisation instituting a
movement which is likely to involve the other affiliated
organisations shall, before any definite steps are taken,
submit the whole matter to the joint body for consideration.

(3)	For the purpose of increasing the efficiency of the
movement for combined action, periodical meetings of the
three full executives shall be held at least half-yearly.

(4)	There shall be appointed a consultative committee
of six, composed of two members chosen from the executive
committee of each of the three bodies, whose duty it shall
be to meet from time to time, and who shall be empowered
to call at any time a special conference of the executives
of the three bodies, if, in their opinion, such conference
be necessary. That a meeting be called on application
made by any one of the three bodies.

(5)	With a view to meeting all management expenses
incurred, each affiliated body shall contribute a sum of
10s. per thousand members per annum, or such sum as
may be decided upon from time to time.

(6)	Simultaneously with these arrangements for united
action between the three organisations in question, every
effort shall proceed among the three sections to create
effective and complete control of their respective bodies.

(7)	Complete autonomy shall be reserved to any one of
the three bodies affiliated to take action on their own
behalf.

(8)	That joint action can only be taken when the
question at issue has been before the members of the three
organisations, and decided by such methods as the con-
stitution of each organisation provides, and the conference
shall then be called without delay to consider and decide
the question of taking action.

(9)	No obligation shall devolve upon any one of the
three bodies to take joint action unless the foregoing
conditions have been complied with.

It was decided that the president and secretary of each' of
the three organisations shall form the sub-committee provided
for in the constitution.

The conference then proceeded to elect officers for the new
alliance, and the following were chosen :—Robt. Smillie
(Miners), president: H. Gosling (Transport Workers), vice-
president; T. Ashton (Miners), secretary; and J. H. Thomas,
M.P. (Railwaymen), treasurer.

It was agreed that a joint conference of the three organisa-
tions should be called, but the date of convening the general
meeting of representatives was left with the sub-committee.