The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1883-08-18 00:00:00

OLD HILL.

DRUNKENNESS.—At the Police Court on Wednes-
day, before W. Risiano, F. I). L. Smith, H. Smith,
and H. Walker, Esqrs., William Portman was
charged with being drunk, on the 3rd inst. P.C.
Leadbitter proved the CASe. Fined 2s 6d, and
costs.—Joseph Preece was cliarged with being
drunk on the 11th inst. P.C. Wickstead proved
the case. Fined 2s 6,1 and costs.—John Neil was
charged with being drunk on the 6th inst. P.C.
Leadbitter proved the case. Fined 2s 6cl and costs
in default 7 days.—James Poole and William
Stringer were charged with being drunk on the 6th
inst. P.C. Leadbitter proved the cases. Fined 5s
and costs; in default 7 days.
OBSCENE LANGUAGE.—Pticebe Mallin was charged
with using obscene language on the 6th inst. P.C.
Corbishleigh proved the case. Fined is and costs.

BREACH-0; THE PEAcc.—Joseph Hadley and
John Adams were charged with committing a
breach of the peace by fi,.;hting on the llth inst.
P.C. Leadbitter proved the case. Bound over to
keep the peace for six months, in one surety of £5
each.

AssAuLTs.—Thomas 3.lasefield was charged with
ass tubing Thomas Parkes on the 28th ult. Com-
plainant stated that on the above date the defend-
ant was coming from Blackheath, when he came
and struck him several severe blows on the head.
He was knocked insensible. Joseph Adams gave
eorrubutative evidence.--Thomas Jarvis was called
for the defence and said he was with the defendant
on the above date, but he did not see any blows
struck.—P.C. Styles said he saw some people pour-
ing water over the complainant because he had
fainted: Fined is and costs—Samuel Cramptou
was charged with assaultiog Mary Wright on the
lth inst.—Vir. Wright was for the complainant.—
Complainant stated that on the above date the de-
fendant came and grinned and struck her and gave
her a black eye,—Emma JAne Wright gave corro-
borative evidence.—Larnbert Breakwell was called
for the. defence and stated that the last two wit-
nesses set about the defendant first.—Ellen Weaver
gave corroborative evidence. Fined is and costs.
VIOLATION. OF TIIE MINES REGULATION ACT.—
David Parsons, certificated manager of the Cradley
Heath Colliery, Cradle)' Heath, belonging to Messrs.
Parsons an I Cooper, was charged with failing to
observe the first gen Tal rule of the Coal Mines
Regulation Act, 1872, to provide adequate ventila-
tion in the workings of the Cradley Heath Colliery,
on the 9th June. and also with neglecting to fence
a stall, as 'provided by the fourth general rule of the
same Act. Mr. Walker (instructed by Mr. W. B.
Scott, inspector of mines) alpeared to prosecute,
and Mr. Waldron, 13ricrley kill, defended.—Mr.
Walker explained that thre:3 men, named Thomas
Clayton, Richard Clayton, :in I William Pillow were
formerly employed by the defendant as miners.
When they went down te pit on the 9th June the
overman directed theta to g ) to work in another
part of the mine. Their tools had been left in No.
2 stall, and the man Thomas Clayton went with a
lighted candle to fetch their. When he had pro-
ceeded a considerable distance the candle came hate
contract with some inflammable gas, causing an
explo-ion, and the unfortunate man was burnt so
badly that he died in Juno 22nd. The prosecution
contended that the defendant, as certificated mana-
ger of the cAliery, should have sent along the
main road such a current of air as would have ren-
dered harmless any noxious gases which existed in
any part of the mine. The first general rule ex-
piessly stated that an adequate amount of ventila-
tion should be constantly provided, so as to dilute
and render:harmless all noxious gases. The place
where the explosion occured had not been worked
for a fortnight, and, according to the fourth gen-
eral rule, should have been fenced to prevent, the
men from entering it.—Richard Clayto:a miner,
stated that on the Bth of June he and Thomas Clay-
ton and Pillow were at work in No. 2 stall, and on
the following fuming they were told to go to work
in another stall His brother, Thomas Clayton,
went into N 0.2 stall to fetch the tools, when an ex-
plosion took place, and he was burnt very badly.
There was no fence around the entrance to No. 2
stall, neither was there a damp sheet provided to
intercept the air and force a current down that
stall. There was a damp sheet near No, 3 stall.—
William Pillow, who was at work with the last wit-
ness, ga‘ e corroborative evidence—Mr. W. B.:Scott
stated that he visited the eolliety on the 11th of
June, and examined the place where the explosion
occured. There were no means taken to divert a
current of air into No. 2 stall. There was no fence
round the entrance. There was a damp sheet placed
at No. 3 stall, but this would not have the effeet of
sending a current of air into No. 2 stall. Fissures
occasionally occured in 1112 coal seams, and gas
would exude therefrom, which on the application of
a neked light would explode, but if a current of air
were sent through it would dilute any gas which
might lurk there.—For the defence, Mr. Waldron
submitted that the prosecution had not established
the charge of neglecting to erect a fence reni No.