This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1899 Excerpt: . the pit is a fiery one, and that there had been previous explosions in it, and on the morning of the explosion the section where the accident happened was LtsaRsaHiai. very gaseous and very dusty, and that none of the four miners IKiniiei?%a-iei' carried matches for creating a naked light, and that after the a'co-i0Cong accident their lamps were found securely locked. JuiylTisw.

The pursuers endeavour to fasten liability on the defenders sheriffBaiFoni. on various grounds. (1) That the fireman was unfit for his duties, and, on the morning of the accident, did not inspect the pit, and that he failed to report discoveries of gas; (2) that the manager and oversman (Walker and M'Donald) failed to provide adequate ventilation for the pit, and allowed gas to accumulate; (3) that the air screens and other ventilating apparatus were defective in construction; and (4) that the defenders took no precautions by improving the ventilation, or by watering, to secure the safety of the miners. Among other defences, the defenders plead contributory negligence, and it appears to me that this plea is well founded. By the 12th rule of the 49th section of the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1887, it is provided that, in any place in which the use of a locked safety lamp is required, or which is dry or dusty, no shot shall be fired except by or under the direction of a competent person appointed by the owner, agent, or manager of the mine, and such person shall not fire the shot or allow it to be fired until he has examined both the place itself and all contiguous accessible places within a radius of twenty yards, and has found such place safe for firing. From the pursuers' own averments, it is evident that the miners were working in a place in which the use of a locked sa.