THE MINING ACTION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXIX, Issue 9011, 17 October 1892, Page 5

THE MINING ACTION.

■"— ■ - SECOND DAY'S PROCEEDINGS. [FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.] Thames, Saturday. The charge of negligence preferred by the Mining Inspector against Mr. T. B. Hicks, ; manager of the May Queen Gold Mining Company's mine, was resumed to-day at nine o'clock before Mr. Northcroft. The evidence for the prosecution was continued by the Mining Inspector recalling Mr. G. P. Hilton, one of yesterday's witnesses, who further deposed that he was acquainted with various kinds of safety cages. In safety cage testings two strong bearers are generally placed across the shaft, the cages lowered on them, and in some instances a double weight is placed in the cage. The winding rope is lowered until the top link adjoining the rope is attached to the shackle or link on the cage. The cage is then lifted above the distance that the drop is required, and the rope cub, and if the cage is in good condition and construction, the grips will catch almost instantaneously. The minimum catch of the gripper was 3 quarters of an inch, whilst the maximum was* fourteen inches. Had witnessed over 30 tests of this kind at Ballarat, the most of which were successful. He had seen similar tests made at other places. In his opinion he thought that not less than a full truck should be placed in a cage when testing it, but he should prefer a double working load Some of these cages can be operated upon both inside and outside. He considered a good test of a cage was when it dropped only about two inches, and a fair test when it dropped five or six inches, an seven or eight inches was a fairly good test. He had practical experience down South with safety cages, and had conducted similar tests with them as those conducted in Ballarat. He thought the cages he saw at Ballarat were superior to the one in use in this field, as the springs were visible and any defect in them could easily aud readily be detected. He thought it was necessary to examine all safety cages regularly every day. Had seen no tests made of the safety cages now at work on the Thames. If a safety cage was efficient it should grip even if a coil of rope slipped off the drum when the cage was down the shaft a depth of 150 feet. The reason for examining the cages regularly is caused by the fact that the springs are likely to become rusty and clogged with dirt. Cross-examined by Mr. Cooper : He considered the safety cage used here was not so good as the one in use at Ballarat. When he erected the winding machinery at the Moanataiii Extended shaft it was quite plumb. There was an original mistake in the erection of the machinery, but he erected a horizontal sheave with another one at the top to guide the rope on to the drum. Without this the rope would hare piled on the flange. To the Coart:lf there was any tension on the rope while the cage was falling, it would prevent the safety springs from acting. William Cooke deposed he was an engineer employed at the Big Pump works. He had had about 38 years' experience with machinery, and had driven the winding machinery at several of the Thames shafts, amongst which was the Trenton. The machinery that was at the Trenton is. now erected on the Queen of May shaft It worked satisfactorily with him. A bucket was first used at the Trenton, and then an ordinary iron cage. He never wound with a safety cage. In case of new machinery, he would send the bucket or cage down first, and it it did not act rightly, he would lower a man down very slowly to see where the obstruction was. He had never seen a man sent down in a cage the first time. It would be decidedly unsafe to do so. To Mr. Cooper; If a cage went down and came up all right for the first time, he would not hesitate in sending a man down the second time, bub would do so very slowly. If a shaft was newly repaired, and there was an obstruction, he would send a man down to remove it. He knew Mr. Hicks, and knew he was a very careful man. Re-examined by Mr. Wilson : If the obstruction was such that a man could not remove it from the cage, the cage would then be taken off, and the man lowered in a bucket instead.

James Jordan, assistant clerk in the K.M. Court, deposed that he visited the mine the day after the safety cages were tested, when certain measurements were made. These were detailed by the witness at some length. Mr. flicks was present at the time. Whilst in the engine room he stood in front of the drum, and observed the rope being wound on. He no'iced that the rope had a tendency to pile up near the flange on the side nearest the engine, but it was not 60 with the opposite side, the rope coming readily from that side. He tried to ascertain the cause of this, and looked at the rope leading from the poppet heads on to the drum, and he observed that the rope had a slight angle and did not come straight on to the drum. Witness afterwards observed that the blocks on the safety cages had been cut away for nearly an inch, and stated this to those present, and Mr. Hicks replied " Yes; they were a bit stiff." Witness afterwards observed to Mr. Hicks that he ought to have seen that the clips were in proper working order before sending men down, and showed him the clause in the Mining Act making it compulsory on mine managers to see that the cages and appliances were in good order, and the penalty to which he was liable in case of non-ob3ervance. He did not know last night that he was to be called as a witness. Heard Mr. Hicks promise in the Warden's office that he would see that nothing was touched until the Mining Inspector had examined the mine. Having this in his mind, he said to Mr. flicks, "You should not have had these alterations made until Mr. Wilson had inspected the appliances." The manager replied, "I did not give instructions to have them altered. I told Mr. Price they wanted altering, and he sent a man to do it." Mr. Hicks seemed to be very desirous to make them understand that he had not given the instructions to have the cages altered. While they were on the brace looking at the cages, they were talking about the tests of the safety appliances that Mr. Hicks had made. The latter described his mode of testing, saying that they hoisted a cage a little bit up, had driven a wedge underneath the shoes, knocked it out, the cage dropped, and the clips had caught. Mr. Wilson said that this was no test at all. Mr. Hicks agreed that it was no test of the safety appliances, remarking, " No, I don't consider it is a proper test at all. I did not consider it a fair test." He repeated this three or four time 3. Witnes said, "J. don't think it was a fair test either." They were all having a conversation together, and this was the gist of it. Cross-examined by Mr. Cooper : Had not taken, neither was he present at the taking of, any of the statements made by witnesses to Mr. Wilson. The latter wanted some one to go with him and help to make the measurements and witness consented. Had been down a good many mines at the Thames and knew a good deal about them, being pretty observant. He did not think the pulley was straight or plumb with the drum, no matter who said to the contrary. Had not seen the cage in question previous to his visit. William Coad, mining reporter for the New Zealand Herald at Thames, deposed he was present at the May Queen mine on the 23rd August, when a series of testa were made with the safety cage. He wrote the report of the same that appeared in the Herald on August 24th and would vouch for its correctness. (A copy of the Hkkald of that date which contained the report, was then put in as evidence). To Mr. Cooper: Knew Mr. Hicks very well, and also knew that he was a very careful mine manager. Was present at the mine when the accident occurred, and noticed that Air. Hicks was particularly careful on that date. Did not see the men descend the shaft the first time, but saw them raised to the surface and go below the second time. Reexamined by Mr. Wilson : I was standing in front of the blacksmith shop when the accident occurred. One of the carpenters (W. Reardon) had gone on the roof to attach one of the stay ropes belonging to the chimney stack. This rope was dangling over the edge of th-a roof, and when Reardon tried to draw it up towards him a. knot in the ropo caught under the edge of the corrugated iron. Reardon tried to free it by slamming it on the roof, but was not successful. Ibis made a great noise. After several unsuccessful attempts ; Reardon started to come off tho roof, and

when he got so far as where the winding rope came up through the roof the latter rope surged upwards and struck the roof ( a very heavy blow, and causing a similar noise to that which Roardon had previously been making. Mr. Hieks then came out of the door and wished to know who was interfering with the rope, and ordered Reardon off the roof. Witness and another person sang out that there was something wrong in the shaft, and Hicks at once went into the engineroom, and ordered the engine to be stopped, which was promptly done. Several seconds elapsed between the first surge of the rope against the roof and the stopping of the engine. Witness then detailed the steps taken for raising the men out of the shaft. This closed the case for the prosecution. < Mr. Cooper then said he had communicated with Dr. Williams, surgeon at the Hospital, as to whether Thomas Johns, the man who was injured at the time of the accident, could attend as a witness. The doctor had replied that Johns was not so well that day, and positively declined to allow him to leave the Hospital at the present time. It was essential to have Mr. Johns present, as he was an important witness of the accident,and he (Mr. Cooper) desired to apply for an adjournment for one month. The prosecution, he thought, ought to have called Johns as a witness, but not having done so they would like to do so for the defence. Mr. Wilson replied that he would have done so but for the fact that it was impossible for Johns to attend. As no witnesses for the defence were to be examined that day he would have no objection to the adjournment. His Worship then adjourned the case until the 24th November next.