The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1885-09-26 00:00:00

PROSECUrioNs UNDER THE COAL
MINES REGULATION ACT.

At the Old Hill Police Court on 'Wednesday, be-
fore Mes-.r-. Henry Smith and H. A. Wi,,,crgin. Wm.
‘Valkr Homer, the r. sponsible owner of the Ridding
Colliery, Old Hill,-was suannonded at the instance
of Mr. W. B. Sc,itt, Her Majesty's Inspector cf
Coal Mines for the South Staffordshire District, for
committing ten offences under the Coal Mines Re-
gulatiina Act on the 6th and 7th of July.
Mr. T. Walker appea-ed to prosecute on behalf
of the 'Pt el;sury, and Mr. Waldron defer dad.
Mr. Walker stated that the defendant was the
responsiie owner of tl.e Ridding Colliery, and On
tii;-2 6th of July, shortly before eleven o'clock at
a man ;named Nayler and a boy named
Zachariah Harris deseemled one of the shafts for
the purpose of wo:king in a main road. 11i in-
tructiolls were that about Llvtlf-past two o'clock in
the morning there was a-fall of coal from the root.
Nayler N as buried, and the whole of the lights were
extinguished. Harris being in the darkness, pro.
ceeded to the bottom of the shaft, but was unable
to co.nmunicate with the banksman in consequence
of there being no signals. He shouted up the shaft,
but ceqld not succeed in maiiin,g anylperson hear,
the result being that he was confined in the dark-
ness until seven o clock, when the day "shift "
descended into the workings, The boy then told
the men what had occurred, and Naylor was after
wards found to have been crushed to death. Had
the hey then in any way nervous, he must through
being left in the pit for a.!)out five hours, have lost
his reason. In consequmce of the accident Mr
Scott, the inspector, made an inquiry, which
showed that there had bt.en no supervision at the
colLery, and a total disregard of the law. Mr,
th certificaLd manager of the colliery,
was a respectable man, and he could not help think-
ing that he was simply a no:ninttl manager in
to comply with the requirements of the Act. The
defendant was char,,ea with ten offences, and the
that effence was for neglectiog to comply wi h the
requirements of the 19th General Rule, which pro-
vided that signals should be provided as a means of
communication.

ZaJhariah Harris was called, and Co7i.obi.rateu
Mr. Walker's stetnent, and uddcd that he ccat.-
' sidred ihere wa., no banksmen, as he shouted up
the shaft but ccr.dd not make any pen.o.l hear.
By Mr. 'Waldron. It was a tall of coal, and the
whole of the lights went out when the fall took
place.
Mr. Waldron submitted thgt there wa3 no case,
af3 the coliiery was not a wine within the meaning
of the Act, but was simply a shaft. The colliery had
been ciosed for three years, and on July 3i.d it was
d,cidcd to re open the coilit2ry, and on the 6th steps
we ..e being taken to prepare the workings for tl e
colliers. An accident unfortunately took place
through a " slip thing," and in confequence Mr.
Scott visited the colliery. Sufficient time had not
elapsed to enable the defendant to littve everything
put in proper order. et the workings,

Mr. Jeremiah Skidmore, the certificated manager
said there were guidcs in the shaft, rat.l also a wire,
but no bet was attached to the wire.
Mi.. Smith : Cons,;:quently it would be no food.
. _ _ _ _ _ _ .

Mr. Walker: And the firs-t
thing that should have
been done wee to wake the ootnmunication perfect:

The 13nch decided to inflict a fine cf .ilO and
costs for the offence on the Ctn of July, and 103 and
costs for. the cffAice on the folloxing day.
Defendant was further charged on the same dlys
with in-frinp;ing,r the 18th general rule, whici pro-
vides that the, engineer shall not lea-ze his engine
vihitA persons are emP.oyed in the mines.
The offences were admitted, and tae Bench in-
dicted penalties of 103 and coats in each case.
Thfendant IV,IS also ordered to pay the costs in
six (It:or cases.

Skidmore was afterwards chat ged, as certißcited
m li;ager, with four oftnees under the 18th and
191 sections, and fines ()f 103 .and costs were in•
flirted in each case. Defendant was also ordered
to pay the costs in six other cases. The fines and
cos's amounted altogether to £27 is 6d.
Thomas Priest, the overman, was fined 103 and
costs in three cases for neglect of duty. A fourth
ease was dismissed.