The Sun.
London, England, 1862-01-31 00:00:00

London: 11. Bat Mere, 219, Regent-street.

TRULY EFFICACIOUS AND MILD.-
Dr. SCOTT'S BILIOUS and LIVER PILLS, pre-
pared without any mercurial ingredient, from the recipe of Dr.
''.cott, of Bromley, Kent, will be found invaluable to all who
suffer from bilious and liver complaints, indigestion, wind
spasms, giddiness, dizziness of the eyes, &c. For habitual
costiveness, as a family aperient medicine, and as a purifier
of the blood, they are truly excellent; mild in their opera-
tion and grateful to the stomach, they create appetite, pro-
mote digestion, and strengthen the whole nervous system.
Sold by W. Lambert, 20, Jermyn-street, Haymarket, London,
and by most druggists, in boxes, ls. lid., and three times
the quantity in one, 2s. 9d. Be sure to ask for Dr. Scott's
Bilious and Liver Pills. The genuine are a square green
package, with " William Lambert," engraved on the stamp.

THE DREADFUL COLL' PRI' 4 CCID.ENT
IN NORTHUMBERLAND.

NEWCASTLE-ON-TYNE, THURSDAY.

In the discussions which have taken place in this
neighbourhood on the causes of the recent accident
at Hartley, there has been a disposition shown in
some quarters to censure the Government inspector,
and in one of the local journals the responsibility of
the catastrophe has been ascribed almost exclu-
sively to his too easy acquiescence in the principles
on which the pit was worked. As I have already
said, the omission to connect the upper and middle
seam, which would have given an independent
means of egress from the pit, will require explana-
tion both from owners and inspector; but no one
acquainted with the real nature of the inspector's
powers can blame him for the prevalence of the
single-shaft system in his district. If the Mines'
Regulation Act is to be amended in the coming ses
sion, it may be a good opportunity to consider
whether some extension might not be given to the
system of Government inspection ; but, as the act
stands at present, to object to a pit simply because
there was only one door to it is a step which
probably not one of the inspectors ever dreamt of.
A Government inspection of mines seems to have
been first suggested by Sir H. de la Beche in 1845.
It was strongly recommended by the committee of

the House of Lords which inquired into the general
subject of coal mines in 1849, and in the following
year an act was passed appointing the first inspeo-

tors. As yet, therefore, it can scarcely be said to
have advanced beyond the stage of an experiment.
Its success has undoubtedly been considerable,
for by general admission it has induced owners and
viewers to pay a much closer attention to the safety
of their mines; but, though it has been gradually
and cautiously extended, it has perhaps not yet
been carried so far as to enable the inspectors to do
all the good of which they are capable. The sys-
tem as it stands at present seems far from satisfac-
tory to the men—speaking for this district at least.
They appear to make very light of the safeguard it
is supposed to afford them, and it is only on very
rare occasions that they take advantage of it. The
powers and duties of the inspectors, as defined by
the last act of 1860, are to visit collieries, to inquire
into their state and condition, their ventilation, the
mode of lighting, and into all matters and things
connected with the safety of the persons employed.
In the act are incorporated certain general rules
applicable to all collieries, equally relating to yen-

tilation, lights, shafts, and the like matters ; and, in
addition to these, section 11 requires each colliery
agent to draw up a set of special rules applicable to
the circumstances of his particular colliery, and
these, when approved by the inspector, are to have
the same force as the general rules. If the amend-
ment which has been suggested by this accident,
and on which all men's minds here are bent, is made
in the law, it will probably be by the insertion of
a general rule in the act to the effect that no mine
shall hereafter be worked until two shafts have
been sunk, or, at least, until a second communi-
cation has been effected with the workings. The
inspector is to watch over the observance of these
rules, and any infraction of them, either by mas-
ter or man, is punishable by penalties—on the
master, of a fine not exceeding £2O, with a fur-
ther penalty of £1 per day for every day the de-
fect continues unremedied after notice ; and On the
men of £2 fine, or three months' hard labour. Be-
yond this, if on any visit an inspector finds any
matter or practice connected with the colliery—
other than the points provided for by the rules—
dangerous or defective, so as in his opinion to tend
to the bodily injury of any person, he is to give
notice in writing to the owner or agent of the par-
ticular grounds on which he is of opinion that such
matter or practice is dangerous, and also report
the same to the Home-office. Should the owner
object to remedy the defect complained of, he may
state the grounds of his objection in writing, and
nominate five mining engineers, not interested in
the management of his colliery, from whom the
Home Secretary may select one as arbitrator. As
the bill originally stood when introduced into the
House of Commons, the Government and the col-

liery owners were each to nominate an arbitrator ;
but the coal interest, it appearsovas strong enough
to get the arrangement altered to its present shape.
When the award is against the colliery owner—
though the odds are clearly very much in his favour
—he is liable to a fine of £1 per day for every day
that he neglects to remedy the defect. This is the
extent of the powers of the Home Secretary and the
inspector, and it will be seen that they are neither
very extensive nor summary. The coalowner has
every security against undue interference in his
mode of management ; nay, if he is obstinate, and
is luckly enough to get an arbitrator of his own
way of thinking—not very difficult when he has the
choosing—he may even set the inspector and the
Government at defiance. It will be seen, then,
what a slight chance Sir G. Grey or Mr. Dunn
would have had of shutting up single-shafted pits
without a special interference of Parliament. Still,
it is not a very easy matter to decide on the exact
amount of power which should be entrusted to the
inspectors. They themselves are understood to be
by no means eager for an addition to their autho-
rity, for increased power brings increased re-
sponsibility. The coalowners of course, ob-
ject, and on the very specious ground
that to put more power in the hands of
the inspector would shift the responsibility
of proper management from the shoulders of the
viewer to the inspector; in fact, the inspector, they

' say, would become the real manager of every mine
in his district. The last committee which sat on
the subject of coal mines, in 1854, also declined to
make any recommendation to this effect, preferring
to rely on the increased responsibility which is
thrown on the owner of a mine who either neglects
or refuses to carry out the suggestion of an inspec•
tor, and to have the names of those parties who
neglect their duties brought prominently before the
public by the publication of the inspector's reports.
The stringent powers of direction and supervision
with which the Government inspectors are clothed
in France and Belgium are scarcely applicable to
this country. There the Government is the pro-
prietor or lessor of all the mines ; it can make its
own conditions when it lets them, and from the
very first opening of a pit the system of working is
under the general control of its officers. The cir-
cumstances in this country are so different that the
foreign system of inspection an hardly be quoted
as an example. But, though our inspecteirs com-
pulsory powers are so very slight—in fact, scarcely
anything at all, yet the influence which they may
exercise by advice and recommendation mu4t be
si manager may differ alto-
gethercond leefrraobin. theA y
inspectorcellier as
19 the value of the
suggestions which he receives, filim him, but if an
*icoalki.bpshown,that
warned him of sitiel
tahcecidinetsipet weteorreitcatihattptpcann,pa-T-th:n
defect or mismanagement from which it occurred,
he knows that his responsibility would he terribly
increased, and that it might probably go hard with
him before a jury. As in this instance, if the
Government inspector can show that he has at any
time warned the owners of the Hartley pit that the
connexion of the upper and middle seam was neces-
sary to the complete safety of the men, the case
would wear a very much worse aspect against them.
There is no allegation that such is the fact; and
perhaps it ought to be mentioned, in fairness to the
owners, that the suggestion of the inspector for the
construction of the " staple" between the lower
and middle seam was at once compliol with. No

prudent manager would neglect the 7ecommenda-
tion of an inspector without good reason to show
for it. If he does, he must take the consequences.
Still there will always be self-conceited owners and
ointehd by a
their
rown ideas, and on whom no
simple process of reason-
changes agents, bigoted
can
be
forced
reason-
ing. For such men as these there ought undoubtedly
to be a real controlling power somewhere, so that
though they may be allowed to remain of the same
opinion, the lives of the colliers in their employ may
The want of
e present sys-
tem
the inspectors,
improbable that one
snuo
et
hb
ae spaocwr iefirc e
isd t thee
et hh
ei
fr
defectobstinacy,
o f t
h
otefrnthoef iwnos
knowing they must be worsted in the end, fre-
quently refrain from making debatealie suggestions
which might be of the greatest value in the saving
of life. The single shaft system is an instance of
this. Probably there are few of the inspectors who
would not recommend two or more shafts for every
colliery in their district; but under the machinery
of the present Act, if they were to attempt to en-
force any such suggestion, the coal-owners could
defeat them with the greatest ease. It has been
proposed at various times to put such a Con-
trolling power in the hands of a Central Board
of Mines, to be composed of practical and scientific
men, combining both kinds of knowledge, which
should act as a court of appeal between the inspec-
tors and owners. To such a Board, it is contended,
the direction of the whole system of inspection
might be very profitably transferred. It would de-
cide all disputes, frame general rules, and in case of
negligence leading to loss of life it might act as
public prosecutor. This aggestion has been ap-
proved by some of the mo 4 eTinent practical and
scientific men, and tlionglrW,s are, by no means
popular institutions email us, it must be vastly
more efficient as an ultimate tribunal than the pre-
sent one-sided and illusory arbitration scheme.
One of the chief complaints of the men with
regard to the inspectors is that there are not
enough of them. The complaint certainly appears
to be well founded, for the number of pits at pre-
sent under each inspector's charge is far too large
to allow of anything like regular visitation. The
theory appears to be that if there is anything
wrong the men will complain to the inspector, who
will then visit the mine, and desire the defect to be
set right. This appears at the outset to be placing
a little too much reliance on their knowledge and
ability to discover cases of mismanagement, but as
a matter of fact the men are generally altogether
averse from making complaints to the inspectors.
Most of the inspectors, and very properly, encou-
rage the men by all the means in their power to look
upon them as being on their side, but as a rule they
have not yet succeeded in obtaining their complete
confidence, and it is only in a few cases, compara-
tively speaking, that the inspectors hear of a mine
going wrong through the colliers. The pitman has
too much:reason to believe that he becomes a marked
man if he is found or even suspected of holding com-
munication with the inspector, and should he fancy
there is danger brewing he prefers to pack up and
betake himself to another pit before it explodes,
without saying a word. One would think that such
a policy on the part of the managers, whose interest
it must be to work the pit safely and to give timely
warning of every danger, was a very unwise one—
and no doubt there are numerous exceptions to it;
but I am told that in too many cases viewers and
overmen not only take the first opportunity of dis-
charging every man who complains to the inspector
but pass the word to their colleagues, so as to pre-
vent his getting employment elsewhere. In this
manner it is said that obnoxious men have been
altogether hunted out of the coal trade and have
had to betake themselves to some other means of
getting a living. Be this as it may, the inspectors
do not obtain much assistance from the men, and
without some assistance of the sort it is physically
impossible for them to keep themselves well in-
formed of the state of every mine in their district.
The workings of a colliery are perpetually chang-
ing, and, however assiduous an inspector may be in
visiting some particular pit which he has noted
down in his black-book, between one visit and
another its circumstances may have been entirely
altered, and for all practical purposes it may
be quite a new pit to him. There can be no
doubt that the inspectors are far too weak-
handed, and that without a liberal addition to the
staff the work of inspection can never be performed
with thorough efficiency. Anticipating financial
objections to such a proposition, the men at one
time, through their delegates, suggested the ap-
pointment of sub-inspectors, of a lower grade, to
act in each district under the chief inspector. To
each of them would be committed the charge of a
certain number of mines ; they would have equal
power with the inspector to descend them at any
time, and, probably, would be physically more com-
petent for a detailed examination. Keeping them-
selves thoroughly acquainted with what was going
on in each pit they would report to the inspector
and invoke his interference whenever it might be
necessary. Being always on the spot they would
be able to communicate much more unreservedly
with the men, and any threatened danger be pretty
certain to come to their ears, lam not aware
what are the opinions of the inspectors themselves
on this proposition, but it is strongly opposed by
the viewers, who contend that the discipline of a
mine would be seriously injured by the perpetual
loafing about of sub-agents of this description ;
and they object altogether—perhaps not unnatur-
ally—to having their management criticised by men
of a lower grade than themselves, and probably of
a lower standard of professional knowledge. The
committee of 1854—which contemplated an increase
in the actual number of inspectors—reported
against this proposition, but since it has been
shown by events that that increase has been insuf-
ficient it may be worth a reconsideration. The col-
liers appear to attach considerable value to it; and
it is not improbable that they would impart their
complaints and suspicions with more freedom and
confidence to men nearer to their own grade than
the present inspectors.