The labor argus. [volume] (Charleston, W. Va.) 1906-1915, 1910-05-19
Rv Damage Suit Which was Tried at F,x-
vile Last Weel<---The Coal Company
Secures Verdict by Order Court
Plaintiff Administrator of Ten Year oil,
Child who was Slaughtered in the
Death TraP-Facts Established
that Mine was Operated
Contrary to Law.

Tb, inst ui the Stuart mine disaster
i,.lorc the circuit court at Fayetteville
u.. taken from the jury and Il verdict
,ur IN. defendants was ordered by the
court.
The siyIr OF the case was X. IL. Dick
son. Sheriff OF Fayette county, and as
such Adnirllst rator of Dallas T.. Love,
deceased, defendant, VS.. the Stuart Col
ncrs Co., The attorneys for the plaintiff
wcrr Adam Il. Littlcpage, c. w. Osenton
and C. t. Summcrtield and G. w. Dillon,
". &. Matthews and f. l.. Nichols Tor
the defense.
Counsel for the plaintiff believe they
have strong ease and will fight to Il
finish and will carry it to the Supreme
court They base their claims on the
taris IN the case as proven which in the
Substance, AS appeared in the Fayette
sun, are as follows:
Thc plaintiff proved that the Stuart
mine was mine that generated gas and
dust IN dangerous quantities and that
tie explosion was u gas explosion aggra-
waited and intensified by the accumula
ton OF dust, and the initial point of the
that il w.s not caused by Il blown out
shot IS the plaintiff proved that the three
tocS bored in the place where the ex-
llosiom took place had not been charged
ur fired: and that between S5 and 90
lrg>or> We're killed in this explosion and
that Dallas l.. Love. the plaintiff s intes
ta'r> death was caused by sufrocation
aud not 10y the force of the explosion.
II was ais" proved that the plaintiff {.
nrcsta'c. DALLAS r. LOVE. WAS
DAYS OLD At THE TIME HE WAS
KILLED. AND TIE STATUTES PRO
NDE> THAT 40 BOY SHALL BE
EMPLOYED IN \ MINE. IN WEST
VIRGINIA. UNDER TIE AGE OF
T. YEARS. "hich shows that the boy was
rmlI"H"d hv tn" mine boss in violation of
'A" Era. The evidence further showed
MAJ tire father of the boy, Leslie c..
Love. and his wife. had both been sick
for som" months prior to the boy s death,
aud 'ttt III" mine foreman had wanted
:" k'o~ ot Love Just before the boy
"aN "url"y"j whv they did not put the
"}> p" work IN the mine, including his
N"a a"-.a> a"d hat the father of the
'"H inquired ot the mine foreman how
"d boy lad to hc under the laws of
West Fgfu0H before he was allowed to
""iN III. ~" mine. that he WAS Il new
'"o" 'r"" tire state of Ohio and not fa-
ml0ar with the laws Of West Virginia.
'1H 'h"t iAr min" foreman replied: ~ BY
''I'. " SOON AS HE, is BIG
'N'' "i' 10 THROW \ TRAP DOOR
hh Is HlE ENOUGH TO WORK IN
\ NINE ~ THE STATE OF WEST
'I''t\i\. ana under those circum-
''#h"s ih' father permitted the boy to
20 >" work H. The mine. The boy was
'''.'lh- ]" per day as trapper. 1t
> >.''r 'ha' the Stuart mine was
>."''' '",'". h".ug $50 feet from the sur
." ''' bottom OF the shaft, and that
.' h."" had only one opening. and the
'".'.'S that such mine shall have
..' 't'-S aud that any shaft mine
."' ."'.' n"' nav" more than one opening
.". ''' ''" permitted to work more than
i'HintltT also proved that the
.' ""."t~ had failed to provide a
S.""SsnL tube from the top of the
''' y. ''" hnttum in order to commu-
Ln1 ~.
.'Nr m.3nu. II was shown that they
.@'Er''t q metal tube for this pur.
'"' tad no. maintained it as the
provides. as it had never worked.
III FIG" 'inc of the explosion there
''F Of communicating to the peo-
.'."" l. was shown that there wa,
load bodies found at the bot
" ~" shaft. about 1000 feet from
'. '"int Of the explosion. It wa.
tr tn" plaintiff s evidence
- Guides in the shaft. that the
."'"a brought mp persons and coal