Untitled

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 1911, 17 February 1875, Page 2

At the inquest on the body of the man Darid McFarlane^ held this morning, sereral.of the jurymen put questions to witnesses regarding the visits of the Mining Inspector. In the case of the Dauntless mine, where Mr McFarlane met his death, it appeared that the Inspector of Mines had not visited it fcjrj four months ; but it^woaJ^-^ye" unfair to assunvSr-^aTlnis fact constitutes -^eifection on Captain Goldsmith, who, it must be remembered, has a large area to attend to, and a number of mines widely scattered. If it indicates or proves anything, it is that the field is too extensive to be included in the duties of one inspector. It might happen that a mine is inspected one day (in which blasting operations are carried on) and found perfectly safe, and the next shift might develope a chasm .which the workmen im their false security would not heed. If then an accident occurred, killing pi* maiming several workmen, no one would think of blaming the Mining Inspector. There is no doubt of one thing, that every precaution ought to be adopted for preserving life, and, if frequent and rigorous inspection conduces to this end, then ought there to be appointed additional inspectors, in order to guarantee to our miners the maximum of security procurable in their employment. The Mining Inspector has, we presume, been relieved of that portion of his duties .referring* .tp machinery, an officer having been appointed for the Province. It seems rather strange that the latter has not yet paid the Thames a visit, considering that it

possesses as much machinery as all the Province put together. In the meantime we suppose Thames machinery goes on without inspection.