March 24, 1916.

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN.

561

rather gave an erroneous idea of the amount of saving
that was likely to be obtained. In a great many mines
in that district, fully 75 per cent., and in some cases at
least 90 per cent., of the timber was used on the faces
alone, and was used at most three or four times before
it was broken up, so that its life was only a question of
a few weeks or months, and there was no chance of any
decay setting in before the timber was rendered useless.
He had had experience in the Midlands, in Lancashire,
and in Yorkshire, and he could only recall one case in
which timbers had to be renewed owing to decay. Of
course, Prof. Groom might be quite correct in saying
that the decay was there, but, at the same time', he
thought that the proof of whether the decay was causing
any harm was whether the timber had-to be renewed or
not. The case he had mentioned was a rather curious
one in -some ways. It was a question of larch bars,
which were in a return airway with a saturated atmo-
sphere of about 58degs., and after a couple of years
•they all started to go together, but the remarkable
thing was that the Norway pine props, on which the
bars were supported, were not attacked at all. From
the American figures which Prof. Groom had given, and
from what they had heard about the shallow mines, it
would appear on the face of it that it was in such pits as
those that a saving might really be made, and not in the
deeper ones. To take the return airways of some of
their Yorkshire mines, at a depth of 500 or 600 yds.,
where the (unsaturated air) temperature was 70, 72, or
73degs., he imagined that one could not have a better
condition for the preservation of timber—practically a
dry atmosphere, and, so far as was known, no- tendency
at all for decay to set in. Within the last year or two
he had seen oak pit props which had been underground
for over 50 years, and, when they were cut into sections,
there did not appear to be any decay in them. They
would be at a depth of about 230 yds., and practically
shut up in a more or less stagnant atmosphere for the
greater part of the time, but were still quite in a sound
condition, although the place was fairly moist.

Mr. John Gill (Noirmanton) said he was connected
with a colliery which was working a wettish seam—
occasionally wet and occasionally dry—at a depth of
about 300 yds. The. timbers were affected by fungi in
the returns and the intakes, but in very different ways.,
the bars being attacked in the returns, and the foot of
the props in the intakes. He should like to know the
reason for this difference. The mine was wet, and they
fired a great number of shots in it. They frequently
had to change the timber; in fact, at the present time
they were substituting iron for wood in the intake on
account of the props being attacked from the bottom.
The temperature of the return was fairly warm, and
there was a lot of smoke from -shotfiring at times. It was
also wet.

Mr. R. Nadin (Brierley) said he was connected with
a shallow pit, about 215 yds. in depth, where they were
troubled with fungi, particularly where the ventilation
was slack. In some districts, it even attacked props
in bords. The seam was worked on the pillar and bord
system, the bords being taken up a distance of 100 yds.;
and by the time the pillars were worked back, the timber
supporting the bords was in some cases attacked by the
fungi. Prof. Fearnsides had occasion to visit his colliery
a short time ago, and remarked on the condition of this
timber. Since then he (the speaker) had had a. few
datallers going round painting the large timber with a
mixture. He had not yet had time to see whether this
gave beneficial results, but he hoped it might save
money.

The Chairman said the discussion had been very
interesting, especially what Mr. Nadin had told them
about hits timber going throughout. Mr. Gill’s was going
at the foot in the intake. He wondered if there was
any moisture there. They had all noticed that when
timber did go, it generally went between wind and
water. If they charred the foot of a stake, or coated it
with tar or creosote, it would last much longer. He had
one case in mind where the whole place was covered
with cushions of fungi. ■ There was very little weight on
the timber. He must confess he had not gone to the
extent of pain ting it, but had let it alone. It would be
very interesting to know if Mr. Nadin’s experiment of
coating the timber was successful. ’ He proposed- a
hearty vote of thanks to Prof. Groom for his paper.

Mr. M. W. Waterhouse seconded the resolution,
which was carried, and briefly acknowledged by Prof.
Groom.

The paper entitled “ Notes on the Uses and Markets
for Goke Oven By-Products,” which was read at the
January meeting of the institute, was open for further
discussion, but no remarks were made upon it.

Indian Resources Commission.—The Times understands
that the Government propose to appoint a representative
Commission, including several Indian members, to survey-the
economic resources and industrial possibilities of India, with
a view to promoting business enterprise under the changed
conditions that will follow the restoration of peace. Sir
Thomas Holland, F.R.S., Professor of Geology and Minera-
logy at Manchester University, has been appointed chairman
of the Commission. He joined the Indian Geological Survey
in 1890, and became its director in 1903. The Commission
will include two distinguished Indian contributors to the
economic development of their country, one a Bengali business
man, and the other a Parsi manufacturer and capitalist.
There will also be a Mahommedan member well known for
his business capacity.

SOME RECENT DECISIONS UNDER THE
WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT.

[Specially Contributed.]

Nystagmus as a Recurring Disease.

A recent decision of the Court of Appeal in a claim against
Messrs. Guest, Keen and Nettlefolds Limited, is of no special
importance from a purely legal point of view, but is of some
interest in connection .with that scheduled industrial disease
on which so many colliery claims are based. Before his
incapacity the applicant was employed as a night repairer at
the company’s colliery, but on being certified to be suffering
from nystagmus, he received for a time full compensation,
that is to say, half wages. After a time he was employed as
a surface man, but as the wage was smaller than what he
had received as a night repairer, he was for a time paid half
the difference as partial compensation. Ultimately that was
stopped, and the workman applied to the county court judge
for its continuance, on the ground that, having had one
attack of the disease, he had been thereby rendered susceptible
to its recurrence. The county court judge held that the
applicant had failed to prove his case, and the Court of
Appeal decided that there was evidence-to support the finding.

The Loss of an Eye.

Applicants -and their advisers should by this time clearly
understand that the loss of an eye does not necessarily con-
stitute even partial disability. This has again been pointed
out quite recently in the Court of Appeal, in a claim against
Messrs. Cory Brothers Limited. Whilst working as a
screener in the company’s colliery, near Neath, he lost the
sight of his left eye as the result of an injury. On recovery
he applied for a continuation of compensation, but the
county court judge found that the applicant was not pre-
cluded from carrying on his former work, and made a
suspensory award with the nominal compensation of Id.
a week. The .applicant went to another colliery, but his
other eye became inflamed and he was put on surface work,
at which, however, he earned considerably less than he
formerly did when working underground. Accordingly he
applied to have the award reviewed with a view to an
increase, but the county court judge was satisfied that .the
condition in which the man was did not result from the
injury to his left eye, and the application wa-s refused. The
Court of Appeal affirmed the decision, the Master of the
Rolls saying that the judge was right both in declining to
review and in retaining the suspensory award. If further
trouble should arise by inflammation of the injured eye or
by the other eye being affected sympathetically, it would
still be open to the applicant to apply for review.

Cirrhosis of the Liver.

Certainly in workmen’s compensation cases we get many
and striking illustrations of the truth of the saying that
things are not always, what they seem. Take a recent case
at Liverpool. In July 1915, the county court judge held
that the consumption from which a workman was suffering
was attributable to an injury he received in October 1914,
when the1 first finger of his left hand was cut and badly
crushed. About a month after the judge came to the con-
clusion referred to, the man died, and naturally it was con-
, tended on behalf of his dependants that he died of consump-
tion. Unfortunately for that theory, the doctor who last
attended him certified that death was due to cirrhosis of the
liver in a very virulent form. This obviously threatened an
, acute conflict of medical evidence, so the employers preferred

■	the more generous course of offering a sum only T50 less
than the applicants claimed. They claimed the maximum
obtainable, but in the circumstances their advisers no doubt
did well to accept the proffered compromise.

Disobedience as a Cause of Accidents.

Under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, serious and
wilful misconduct is a bar to a claim, but only when the
accident does not result in death or in serious and permanent
disablement. Therefore, where the accident does so result,
- there is only the initial test to which, under section 1, all
claims must be submitted—the question whether the accident
arose “ out of and in the course of employment.” The
question is generally regarded as one of fact, to be decided
by the county court judge on the evidence, the result being
. that compensation has often been awarded in respect of

■	accidents which seemed, to have been caused simply and '
solely by disobedience—the workman having either done
something which he ought, not to have done at all, or clone

: something in a way that was contrary to instructions.

Possibly the guidance afforded by the decisions of the Court
of Appeal and the House of Lords has not been so clear and
' definite as it might have been, but the recent decision in
Herbert v. Samuel Fox and Company Limited may be of
assistance in this respect.

A youth employed as a shunter on a private railway line
connected with the company’s works, was entrusted with the
duty of keeping a look-out by walking in’front of wagons
which were being shunted or moved. To assist in enforcing
the rule, the following notice was posted up :—“ Where
railway wagons are being moved by hand or by engine, a
look-out man must be in front of the wagons. Any person
not obeying this order will be instantly dismissed.” When
the accident happened, shunting had been going on, and an
engine, on its way to a shed distant about three-quarters of.-
a mile, was being employed to pick up and push before it'
any wagons on the track requiring to be moved forward. In'
this way four trucks had been picked up and were being
pushed forward, but instead of walking in front of them, as
he was expected to do, the youth sat on the front buffer of
the foremost truck, using his shunting pole to steady him-
self, when the pole slipped, he fell on the track, and the
wagons went over his legs, necessitating amputation. The
county court judge held that the accident arose out of and
in the course of the employment; in the Court of Appeal two
judges out of three reversed that decision ; and the Court of
Appeal judgment has now, also by a majority judgment,
been affirmed in the House of Lords.

Lord Loreburn, in a minority judgment, with which only
Lord Parmoor concurred, was of opinion that the case was
one in which a county court judge might reasonably say
that the accident arose out of the employment. The youth
was engaged in his work as ,a shunter, though admittedly
doing it in a wrong and forbidden way. Though involving
serious and wilful misconduct, the case might fairly be
regarded as coming within the terms of the Act. In his
lordship’s opinion, that was a conclusion of fact for the judge
alone, just as it was a conclusion of fact for a jury in an
action for negligence, when they were asked whether, on the
facts proved or admitted, there was or was not negligence;
To say that whenever facts were undisputed the proper con-

clusion to be drawn from them was necessarily a matter of
law would, his lordship thought, be a dangerous extension
of jurisdiction.

On the other hand, Lord Atkinson, in delivering a
majority judgment, with which Lord Shaw and Lord Wren-
bury concurred, thought that if ever there was a case in
which an act out of which an accident arose was outside the
sphere of employment, this was the case. The workman’s
own evidence showed conclusively that it was not his duty to
be on the buffer, but that, on the contrary, it was his duty
not to be on it. He was employed to do a particular work
away from the buffer, and was expressly forbidden, when
engaged on that work, to be anywhere but on the ground,
walking in front of -the foremost wagon, but he said he got
on the buffer of that wagon to keep a look-out. He admitted
that his proper duty was to walk in front of the wagons to
keep a look-out; that it was no part of his duty to get on
the wagon; that it was a dangerous thing to ride on the
buffer; that it was against the rules to do so; that he would
be dismissed if the manager saw him doing so; and that
notices to that effect were put up in the locomotive shed.
His lordship indicated that he considered the'determination
of the case to involve both a question of law and one of fact
—not merely the question of fact whether the accident arose
out of the employment, but the farther question whether it
so arose within the meaning of the statute. This further
question implied the interpretation of the statute, and was,
therefore, his lordship considered, a question of law. In the
course of the arguments, there was some discussion as to
whether the case was governed by the decisions of the House
of Lords in Barnes v. The Nunnery Colliery Company, and
Plumb v. Cobden Flour Mills Company, but Lord Atkinson
agreed with the majority of the Court of Appeal that the case
was so governed if the two decisions referred to were properly
understood.

Dismissal or Absenteeism.

At Dunfermline Sheriff Court, Sheriff Umpherston has
issued an interlocutor deciding an action which raises a
point of interest. A miner, of Lumphinnans, was injured
on March 30, 1914, in No. 1 Pit, Lumphinnans, of the
Fife Coal Company. Having been twice certified by the
medical referee as fit for light work, the amount of com-
pensation was’ reduced to 6s. 2d. He went back to work
as a pit-bottomer, and he maintained that as he was unfit
for the duties of a pit-bottomer he was dismissed. He
accordingly made application to the Court to be restored to
full compensation. Sheriff Umpherston, in dismissing the
application, with expenses to defenders, held that the man
was not dismissed, but absented himself from work without
informing the colliery officials. His lordship said the
length of absence from work, although reasonably excused,
that would terminate the contract of service was a question
of circumstances depending on the nature of the work. An
employer was not under any obligation to keep a place
open for a servant who was unable through illness to attend
to his work. The respondents waited some days before
engaging another man to do this work permanently, and
his lordship was of opinion that they were entitled to fill
the place by another man when they did. They did not
dismiss claimant; the contract of service came to an end
through claimant’s absence from work.

One-Eyed Miner and his Compensation.

Sheriff Umpherston has also issued an interlocutor* in
another interesting action in which the Fife Coal Company
Limited was concerned. The Sheriff said he formed the
opinion that the vision, of the man’s right eye was amply
sufficient for his duties as a drawer. If the amount of vision
possessed by the claimant were the only test of his capacity
for earning the wages he had earned before the accident
he (the Sheriff) should have no difficulty in now ending
his right to compensation. But the case was rendered
peculiarly difficult by the psychological element of personal
temperament. He had no hesitation in saying that the
claimant had not made a determined effort to regain his
former earning capacity, and he (the Sheriff) could not
say that if he had done so the endeavour would have been
successful. He reduced the compensation, but he did not
feel justified in ending it.

Research in Mining and Metals.—The Advisory Council
for Scientific and Industrial Research has appointed standing
committees of experts in mining and metallurgy to report on
proposed researches.- Sir William Garforth is chairman of
the mining committee and of its non-metals section, and
Mr. Edgar Taylor will preside over its metals section. Sir
Gerard Muntz has accepted the chairmanship of the metal-
lurgy committee and of its non-ferrous section, and Sir
Robert Hadfield, F.R.S., is chairman of its ferrous section.
A similar committee for engineering is contemplated. It is
also announced that a conference called by the Royal Society
has decided to form a board to advise the Government on any
branch of scientific enquiry that may be referred to it.

Tests of Blasting Gelatine and Gelignite.—The Journal of
the South African Institution of Engineers contains a paper
on “ The Relative Efficiencies of Blasting Gelatine and
Gelignite as used in Hand Drill Stopes in the Gold Mines of
the Rand.” It is. an account of experimental work carried
out on behalf of the Vogelstruis Estates and Gold Mines
Limited, by W. S. Simpson, M.A., B.Sc. To solve the
problem two .methods were used :—(1) Individual hole
method ; (2) prolonged trial method. Of the two methods
trie second is the more accurate, because, unless a large
number of measurements is made by the first method, the
variables are more completely eliminated by the second.
Moreover, in measuring the ground broken by any one hole,
it is impossible to say how much is due to this hole and how
much to the fissuring action of preceding holes near it. But,
as is shown in the sequel, the two methods give relative
results that agree reasonably well. The following is a
summary of the results obtained :—(1) In two stopes of
entirely different character it has been found that blasting
gelatine as ian ore breaker is 25 per cent, more efficient than
gelignite; (2) the relative blasting efficiencies of blasting
gelatine, reef gelatine and gelignite have been found to
agree closely with the comparative ballistic strengths
determined by the ballistic pendulum method in the labora-
tory of the manufacturers of these explosives ; (3) 40 per
cent, ligdyn as a primer has been found to reduce the
efficiency of blasting gelatine -and reef gelatine to a large
extent, and it probably reduces the efficiency of gelignite
also; (4) preliminary experiments indicate that blasting
gelatine gives a greater efficiency with No. 8 detonators than
with No. 6’s,