75

C—6

581. Mr. Joyce.] On 21st February Morris reports: " I have examined all working-places; found gas in No. 5 incline; ventilation good"; and on the same day Roberts reports: " I have examined all roads and workings, and found them frSe from gas"?— That is explained by the fact that, before any one proceeded to work, the gas would be removed ; and that Roberts went round after the men started work, and that there was then gas. Roberts goes round two hours after the men start work. 582. On the 24th February Roberts reports : " I have examined all the working-places in the mine, and found them free from gas, and in working condition. Fireman reports gas in top of No. 5 incline; these men work with safety-lamps." He evidently did not find gas that day? —No doubt it had been cleared by ventilation. Roberts's instructions were imperative that the men were not to be allowed to go to work with naked lamps unless the gas could be shifted. Roberts would make his inspection probably between the hours of 8 and 10 in the morning. 584. On this day Morris reports that he had inspected at 8 a.m. ?—That means the 8 o'clock shift. I think you will find several entries in the books for 8 a.m. and 2 p.m., just as the shifts change. 585. Do you know, as a matter of fact, whether there was gas in the mine, or whether gas had been found in the mine a few times within three months previous to the accident ? —I am certain it was found. 586. To show how an accumulation of gas may take place : On the 27th of February, Roberts reports : "I have visited all working-places and found them to be free from gas, except showing a little gas in No. 1 bord on sump-side—a little feeder in the cutting; place cleared with ventilation." While Morris, on the same day, reports :"I have examined the working-places; found them free from gas ; ventilation good." 587. In that case probably the gas would have been cleared between the time that Roberts went round and Morris came on? —I think that bord was all right. There was no accumulation there. I think he says the ventilation cleared it. 588. What gas would have accumulated between the time those men went round ? —I am not quite certain if that was a working-bord. Probably Roberts may not have examined that particular place, not being a working-bord ; otherwise I could not account for it. 589. According to this, Morris only examines the working-places and roads ; therefore, it must have been a working-place ?—lt was apparently a very small quantity according to Morris. 590. How many accidents have you had in the mine from gas since you have been there ?— Maddox and King. There was another case, many years ago in the upper levels, of two men being very slightly burnt. Then we have Robinson's case. 591. Did you ever know of an overman being burnt? —Yes; I am very glad you have mentioned that case. It was Noble. 592. An overman ?—No. 593. And Hodgins ? —He was a certificated manager at the time, and I had nothing to do with the underground working. He burnt himself by accident, through going into a place where the brattice had been removed. He was burnt in 1893 or 1894. 594. Was that his own fault, or how did it happen ? —I am inclined to think it was in consequence of an error. He made an error in allowing the brattice to be removed before the place had been ventilated. The case of Noble, though it was not a case of gas, was as follows: In consequence of a bump in the roof and an earthshake, some coal was thrown up at the end of the pillar and stirred up the dust, which was ignited by an open light, and burnt the man very severely. It occurred in the Coalpit Heath. 595. Sir J. Hector.] It did not travel through the mine?—-No. 596. Mr. Joyce.] Then on the 14th March there is a difference of report between Morris and Roberts. Roberts reports at 4 a.m., and Roberts fills in the report at 8 a.m.? — You will notice from the two reports —he has not signed the upper one—that 4 a.m. was an early start, and in consequence Mr. Roberts went on. 597. Morris says on this date: " Examined all working places ; found them free from gas." And, on the same date, Roberts says: "Have examined all working-places, except No. 1 bord, sump - side a small ' blower' in cutting, and a little fgas showing on high side. Place standing; ventilation good." No. 1 bord on the sump-side is the bottom bord, which has been filled with water since, is that so ?—Not the bottom bord, but the bord next the sump-level. 598. How far below the bord where the blown-out shot was ? —Two bords, about 14 yards ; but it is several chains distance from the level. 599. If the gas had been in that bord on 14th March, would it have been allowed to continue there until 26th March ? —No; there is no reasonable prospect of its being allowed to continue there. Besides Roberts's report shows that it was not allowed to continue. 600. There is nothing in these reports as to precautions having been taken by either of these two men to free it from gas? —I think you will find that Roberts said in one case, " Gas cleared by ventilation." 601. He said, " Fireman reports gas in top of No. 5 incline; these men work with safetylamps ; ventilation good." There is nothing there about clearing. Would he have reported it ? —I am quite sure that he would mention it. He may not have mentioned all the precautions he took. 602. You understand thoroughly what is in the report?— Yes. 603. Then, I do not see any report at all where gas has been found?— That is the last report showing gas. 604. Assuming that the gas had not been cleared out by ventilation, would it have remained in No. 1 bord until the 26th March?— Unless it could have been removed it would have remained. 605. From personal knowledge, you cannot say? —I can say it was not there on the 18th March.