WARDEN'S COURT.

Thames Star, Volume X, Issue 3395, 8 November 1879, Page 2

WARDEN'S COURT.

Yestbeday. (Before 11. Kenrick, Esq., Warden.) INSPECTOR OF MIKEBS* BIGHTS V, BTEADMAN. On the application of the Inspector, His Worship agreed to the withdrawal of the plaint. Broach of Goldfields Rfgulations, MINING INSPECTOB V. THOME3 JAMES.

This wns an action brought by the Inspector for a breach of the Goldfieids Eegulalions by disobeying the instructions of the Inspector re the use of a certain rope at the Caledonian mine, of which the defendant is manager.

Mr Miller for plaintiff, and Mr Brasiey for de'endnnt.

James McLaren, Mining Inspector, sworn, deposed that defendant _yas the manager of the Caledonian miqCTlnd had full charge of that property. The shaft was, he believed, 480 feet deep, and was supplied with two cages, two pulleys, and two ropes. On the 26th of September he examined the property, and found that a portion of one of the ropes was unsafe. He found this after a close examination. The rope, he had' been informed, was seven years' old. _He first gave information, to the braceman respecting ita unsound* ness. Just after he did this, Mr James came up, and he repeated what he had said to the brnceman. Defendant asked him to step over to the office and write out the instructions, which he did. He then [produced a copy of them. James immediately placed some gum on the back of the paper, and called out to one of the men to paste it up somewhere. On the 22nd of October he received a letter from Mr James that he bad the ropes examined, and had found them in a sound condition. (Copies of correspondence between plantiff and defendant were here read.) He engaged to experts* Biggars and Poach, to thoroughly examine the ropes, and give a fair and impartial report, which they had done. He found that Mr James had disobeyed his instructions by lowering himself and son down the abaft, and in consequence witness took the present proceedings. In cross examination by Mr Brassey, lie said he had several years experience as a miner and considered himself com* petent to express an opinion on the state of tho rope. He bad been down the shaft several times. His instructions meant that the cages were not to be used at all—he thought they were explicit enough. He had no animus against defendant. Might have talked about the case in the Bo wen. If the engineer had been a jerky one, the consequences would have been serious. He had just learnt of the dismissal of the engineer—for what cause he did not know. A new rope should have been put on at once. Thomas James, sworn, deposed—That he was manager of the Caledonian. The Mining Inspector had condemned the ! rope, and given orders for no one to go ,up and down the shaft by it. He | had himself gone down the shaft [on the cage attached to the condemned rope, but it was for-the purpose of seeing that the guides were in proper order, and so put on boards to secure that part where the ladder way was. He produced a plan of shaft, and explained the position he was put in by having the rope condemned for men to go up and down on, and the necessity for his going down himself. After the rope was condemned he found that the engineer was allowing; men to go down in the cage attached to the rope in question, and in* stantly told him that if he did not stop doing so, that he must walk out of the engine-room. He also placed a man at the mouth of the shaft to see that no one went down on that rope. He held a firstclass certificate as underground manager from the Ballarat School of Mines. His Worship inflicted a nominal penalty of Is and costs. Court adjourned.