HUNTLY DISASTER

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 86, 8 October 1914, Page 4

HUNTLY DISASTER

INSPECTING-ENGINEER'S PREDICTION REMARKABLE EVIDENCE. CONCEALMENT OF GAS EXPLOSIONS. (BT TELEGRAPH.— PRESS ASSOCIATION.) AUCKLAND, 7th October. The most ' sensational evidence yet submitted to the Royal Commission now ' sitting at Huntly was heard when Mr. | Wilford called Frank Reed, Inspecting Engineer of Mines and Consulting Engineer for the State Collieries of New Zealand. The witness said that he had examined the Taupiri mines several times during the last eight years. It was not until last Christmas that he had had information suggesting that the mines were dangerous. During the Auckland Exhibition he was examining candidates for certificates in testing for firedamp, and his suspicions were aroused by the number of men who camo from the Taupiri district. He said to one of them : " Why are so many of you men coming from Taupiri '! You have no gas in the mines there." j The miner replied : " Haven't we!" Another told him that there had been several cases of burning. He wrote to Boyd Bonnie (District Inspector) asking him to ascertain from the Miners' Union whether cases of burning had occurred. Bennie replied that the union would give him no information. In reply to a letter from the inspector, the manager of Ralph's Mine, Fletcher, wrote, on 14th January, giving particulars of three instances where the miners had been burnt. Witness reported to the Under-Secretary of Mines. Here witness, after examining a file of his letters which had been called for by the Commission from the Department, stated that some of the most imporVtnt letters had not been sent. He had written six or seven during the early part of the year, and two since the explosion. Mr. Macassey (representing the Crown Law Office) asked for the dates, so that he could send for the missing letters. He desired to keep nothing back. Resuming, the "witness said that about the end of January he wrote to the Under-Secretary enclosing Benhie's letter, and stating that he regretted to report a breach of the law by the management 'of Ralph's Mine, inasmuch that gas explosions which had caused injuries to miners had been concealed by the management. That letter stated that the elements for a colliery disaster were all present. He received no reply to that letter, but when Parliament opened he was requested by the Undersecretary to give an opinion on the Mining Act Amendment Bill. Witness replied, and made' reference to the coit ditious in Ralph's Mine, and statod that if action were taken and disaster occurred as the result of the inadequate law, the inspecting branch of the Department could hot be held responsible. The witness asked that piefer« eiice be given to the Amending Bill. He wrote as follows :—"I: — "I fear holocaust at Ralph's Mine." He again wrote on 29th July, drawing attention to the burn ing accident to a miner named Kelly in Ralph's Mine. In that letter he stated: "This accident might have been a holocaust. The seriousness of these explosions at Huntly cannot be lightly passed over. Should another Kaitangata or Brunner disaster occur the public would condemn us. The manager should be mad^ to realise the seriousness of the position." WHY HE "HAMMERED IN." Witness stated that the reasons which actuated him in "hammering in" six or seven warnings to the Department were : (a) The large area of the high workings in Ralph's mine. (b) The difficulty of maintaining ventilation and preventing ignitions of gas, any one of which might have caused a. holocaust, and the amount of dust present. (c) Weakness of the Act. (d) Naked lights and flame, producing explosion, in use. (c) Inexperience of the men all round I resulting from the lack of facilities in j New Zealand for the instruction of colliers in regard to the dangers of gas. SAFETY LAMPS. Under examination by Mr. Wilford, the witness said that if naked lights had not been in use the disaster would not have occurred. Mr. Wilford : May I ask why you did not take steps to get legislation to deal with this matter? — "Well, I •was a member of the New Zealand Mines Commission in 1911, which strongly recommended the use of safety lamps. Those recommendations were on record." Does the Bill subsequently drafted to give effect to the Commission's recommendations contain changes providing for the use of safety lamps? — "Yes. It contains our recommendations verbatim." That is two years ago? — "Yes." After that Bill was drafted did a deputation visit Wellington to oppose it?— " Yes. I attended the deputation

at the request of the Under-Secretary and the Minister of Mines." Notwithstanding the opposition of the deputation clause by clause, the Minister stood by you and said that the Bill would go on?— " Yes." If that Bill enforcing the use of safety lamps had been passed could this disaster have happened?— "I decline to answer." The Chairman Of the Commission : No man could speak definitely as to that. Mr. Wilford : Did the want of safety lamps cause the explosion? — "Certainly. A naked light caused it." DANGEROUS PILLARS. Do you consider that the pillars in Ralph's mine are dangerous? — Yes; it is only a question of time when the coal frets away, and then down they come. As men have been burnt in better I ventilated places, is that not evidence ! that gas is being given off in the newer workings? — Yes. Are the boards unusually high? — Yes; some of them are the highest I hay* ever seen — probably the highest in the world. And that makes it difficult to test for gas ? — Yes ; any practical man would know that. Do you consider the mine a dusty mine? — I do not consider it very dusty, but I regard its dust as being enormously dangerous. I£ there had been a. proper inspection of No. 6 bore on the morning of the 12th by a competent man with a safety-lamp, do you think any lives would have been lost ?— 'No ; most decidedly not. Considering that on 14th January Mr. Fletcher wrote admitting the burning accidents in the Taupiri mines, should precautions haye been taken?— l think so. Do you consider Ralph's mine adequately ventilated? — I think the ventilating fans, while meeting requirements of the Act. are hardly adequate in pro' portion to the size of the mine. FACTS SUPPRESSED. Examined by Mr. W. J. Napier (representing Ralph's Estate, owners of the mine), witness said that he had no defined duties in connection with pri-vately-owned coal mines. He did as ho was directed to do by the UnderSecretary of Mines, and he had no official position. If asked to report as to whether the mining inspectors were doing their duty, he would do so. Have you reported to Parliament what you have reported to this Commission regarding the Taupiri mines? — I have not written my report for this year yet. I only heard of the condition ot Ralph's mine by accident, and not from your company, which suppressed facts. So you discovered the state of the mine by accident?— ' More by good fortune, I would say. ! Then but for this good fortune you might have gone on for ten years without discovering ths condition of the ■ mine? — Yes. Seeing that I was dealing with people of the character of this company for suppressing facts. You consider the people connected with the company have a special aptitude for concealing facts from the inspector?— Yes. They have done so very successfully. Is it a good system, do you think, under which an inspector can be dei ceived?— The inspector was dealing with deceitful people who had failed to report explosions that had occurred. It is possible, then, to deceive and keep in the dark the inspecting engineer. The enquiry was adjourned until tomorrow. There are still twelve witupases to be examined.