I.—4a.

12

[henry BETTS.

Miner has to satisfy himself about his safety-lamp even after the fireman or lamp-trimmer has handed him the lamp,- and what we are asking for is that he shall be supplied with the means of satisfying himself —that is, a gas-tester —so that these rules can be carried out. I must corroborate the evidence given by the previous witnesses to the effect that fans are best for the purpose of artificial ventilation, and think they should be used in preference to any other method. With reference to the proposed examination of a shift-boss, fireman, or deputy in a mine by the Inspector of Mines on gases before he is allowed to carry a closed lamp to detect gas, and in ventilation and timbering, I might point out that with regard to carrying these lamps the ordinary miner is not referred to in this clause. It is only the fireman who has to go round and examine a mine each shift before miners are allowed to go in. This is the man who should have the experience, and we are not referring to the ordinary miner at all in connection with this matter. I can corroborate the evidence with regard to payment for Sunday work and overtime, and in addition might state that it is provided for in different awards made in the Arbitration Court outside of mining altogether, and therefore I think it should be a recognised thing so far as miners are concerned. Special legislation has been passed dealing with Sunday labour in mines and it has been carried on unduly in past years, although special legislation was passed to prevent it. We say that if it is absolutely necessary that a man should be compelled to lose his opportunity for recreation on Sunday he should be paid for it —that if he is denied the pleasures of his home on Sundays he should be compensated for it. If it is to the advantage of his employer that he should work on Sunday, the miner should receive some consideration for the work. There is no need for me to dwell on this, because it is recognised as a general principle the world over. I will not say anything as to item 12. With regard to clause 13, that check inspectors be paid by the Mines Department whilst employed inspecting the mine, I think that is only right and proper. There is no doubt that the fact of the Miners' Unions appointing competent persons to go through the mines and inspect the different workings relieves the Inspector of Mines of a large amount of responsibility, for they really do the work that the Government ought to do, and which would require to be done if the Miners' Unions did not appoint persons to do it. As regards the West Coast, I may say this, that, even with the inspection carried on by the Miners' Unions, the Inspectors do not visit the mines often enough. I know some mines in the Reefton district that have not been visited for three months at a time, and I do not think that is right. I think the Government Inspectors should, be compelled to visit the mines at shorter periods. The workers' inspectors should be empowered to inspect because it takes a certain amount of responsibility off the Department, which should pay these men for doing the work. Then as regards clause 14,1 may say that we consider that a provision of this kind is absolutely necessary. At the present time we have no power to tell a manager that he will have to discontinue doing a certain thing which we know to be wrong —all we can do is to report it. The report is put into the mine-book and the Inspector comes along, perhaps, a month after, and I do not think he always looks into the book to see what the check inspectors' reports are. There are many things that have been reported upon by the check inspector that the Inspector of Mines has not paid sufficient attention to —in fact, the Inspectors have ignored the recommendations of check inspectors and practices have gone on which ought to have been stopped. I know I have had occasion, as workmen's inspector in the Reefton district 3. Mr. Hemes.] Are you speaking of coal-mines % —No, of gold-mines. I have had to call the attention of the Inspector of Mines to different practices, and even after drawing his attention to them no notice has been taken of them. I have gone so far as to approach the Mines Department, and could not get them to move in the matter, and then I have had to go to the Health Department. It is necessary if these check inspectors are to be of any account at all, that they should have some power given to them. Then as to the hours of labour—that they should not be more than eight hours from surface to surface in any one shift. Ido not know that I can add anything to what has been stated, except to say that it is only a fair and proper suggestion that miners should be allowed to come out of the mine after having been there eight hours. Of course, necessity may arise when they would have to stop longer than eight hours in a mine, but the provision in " The Coal-mines Act Amendment Act, 1901," clause 6, reads in this way : " Subject to the provisions of the Act a miner shall not be employed underground for a longer period in any day than eight hours, exclusive of meal-times." The only objection we had to that clause when it was passed was inclusion of those words in it, ■' exclusive of meal-times." All we asked Pariliament to do was to strike those words out. Section 2of the same clause says, " Such period of eight hours shall be deemed to commence from the time the miner enters the mine, and to finish when he leaves the mine." Section 3of the clause goes on to say, " The prescribed number of workinghours may from time to time be exceeded, but on every such occasion wages shall be paid for such extended hours at not less than one-fourth as much again as the ordinary rate." Now that clause suited us admirably, with the exception of those words " exclusive of meal-times." The same thing applies to the Mining Act. 4. Right Hon. R. J. Seddon.] What would be the working-hours ?—Bight hours from surface to surface. 5. But if you exclude the meal-times, what would be the hours ?—The meal-time usually allowed is half an hour. These words have been struck out in the later amendment, but this provision has not been struck out, " The prescribed number of working-hours may from time to time be exceeded, but on every such occasion wages shall be paid for such extended hours at not less than one-fourth as much again as the ordinary rate." That is repealed, and the same provision in the Mining Act is repealed. 6. Mr. J. Allen.] Do you want them put back again ? —Yes, with the exception of section 1 of clause 6, which says " exclusive of meal-times." We want the whole of clause 6 re-enacted with the exception of those words " exclusive of meal-times." I might point out that the legislation at present is that we are entitled to the eight hours' labour from surface to surface, subject to the provisions of any award of the Arbitration Court now in force. Well, the Arbitration Court has deprived us as miners