Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

“Haze In Mine Was Not Gas”

(From Our Own Reporter) GREYMOUTH, May 28. A haze which he noticed near the ceiling of a workplace in Green’s No. 2 section the night before the explosion had the smell of powder smoke and was definitely not gas, a deputy, Ronald James Gibb, told the Commission of Inquiry into the Strongman mine disaster, on Saturday morning.

He was the second witness to appear on behalf of the Deputies and Underviewers’ Union.

The commission comprises Mr J. K. Patterson, S.M., chairman, and Messrs W. Elliott, S. R. Eyeington, A. V. Prendiville and T. H. McGhie. Counsel are Mr R. C. Savage, of Wellington, for the Mines Department; Mr D. J. Tucker, of Greymouth, for the New Zealand State Coalmines; Mr R. A. Young, of Christchurch, for the Grey Valley Deputies’ and Underviewers’ Union; and Mr W. D. Taylor, of Greymouth, for the United Mineworkers of New Zealand and relatives of the men who were killed. The first witness for the union, Richard Francis Thomas, a section underviewer, was in the box for almost 10 hours.

On Saturday morning, Mr Thomas told Mr McGhie that up to a point there had been a lack of knowledge of mining practice and safety research by the management, of which he was part. More advantage could have been taken of overseas knowledge, and there was now a greater sense of responsibility, h e said. Mr Savage objected to some of Mr McGhie’s questions. Mr Patterson said the submission would be noted. To Mr Patterson, Mr Thomas said that a drill was available to bore 10ft or 12ft but he had not seen a drill larger than 4ft 6in for some time in Green’s No. 2 section because of the nature of the coal. He agreed that a larger drill would have given greater safety. He could give no reason why a 10ft or 12ft drill was not readily available as part of the miner’s equipment. With his personal knowledge of the men in the section, any suggestion of matches or smoking materials being in their possession could be totally discarded, said the witness. There had been no recent incidents of such “contraband” being found on any Strongman miner.

He could not recall any one in the section complaining to him about the ventilation.

Mr Young submitted that a piece of paper from an underviewer’s book, shown the previous day by Mr Taylor, should not have been allowed as Mr Thomas could not identity the author of it or the handwriting. Mr Young said he assumed that someone had torn the page out of the underviewer’s book: this should be the person to give evidence about it. The report purported to refer to an incident in 1965, and he submitted that did not come within the scope of the inquiry. The chairman deferred the matter.

Mr Gibb, the back-shift deputy the night before the explosion, said he was shotfirer for three pairs of miners in Green’s Mo. 2 section. He had tested for gas in each place and the test was negative. Haze Tested In one place (Houston’s) which was worked on the day shift by Moore, he had told the miners that he would not fire any shots for them. “I said, ‘there’s gas here’ and pointed to a haze on the ceiling.”

He had not seen a haze like that before, and he had immediately tested it, said the witness. “I was very surprised to find it was not gas.” There were no signs of heating, and he had inspected the goaf at three different points, including near O’Donnell’s day-shift place, and there was no sign of gas. The haze could have been a residue from firing on day-shift, or from adjoining work places, he said. He did not fire any shots in Houston’s place and left to get the shift-men to direct the braittice up the heading to clear the haze. The men were busy on other repair work.

Later in the evening he returned to Houston’s place, found the haze had disappeared, and fired shots. The haze appeared to have the smell of powder smoke, said the witness.

Another deputy, Eggleton, had told him that he had fired shots for Honey and Rooney in their place (O’Donnell’s and Watson’s, on day-shift). The inquiry will continue on Monday.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19670529.2.33

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31381, 29 May 1967, Page 3

Word Count
722

“Haze In Mine Was Not Gas” Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31381, 29 May 1967, Page 3

“Haze In Mine Was Not Gas” Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31381, 29 May 1967, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert