E. S. WIGHT.]

151

C—l 4.

14:5. Mr. Brown.\ Have you had much experience in working high pillars ?- Only in the Huntly mines. 146.- Do you think that by reducing the lift of a pillar to 10 ft. it would tend to the safety of working the pillars ? --Not very materially. 147. Is it not going to add additional risk to the present method ? — In .some instances it may, where you have got to leave coal overhead. You might have to make a false roof at 10 ft., which might not be convenient. It would be safer to take the lift to 11 ft. or 12 ft. if a natural parting existed. 148. Assume a place 14 ft. high with soft fireclay on top between the coal and the main roof, do you think you could hold that extra coal safely on timber ?- -Not for any length of time. 149. You think it would be a dangerous practice in some cases ? —I think it would be a sheer waste of coal to no purpose. 150. As regards clause 8, subclause (I), paragraph A, which says that " No timber shall be withdrawn except by lever and chain, or by blasting," this appears to have a very broad application in that it applies to any part of a mine. Assume a place with props sticking up through the bars 6 ft. or 7 ft., how are, you going to take those props out with a lever and chain ?— It should not apply to instances like that; it should be confined to pillar-workings. 151. What would be the result of blowing it out ? You would bring down another fall. 152. Then it is not a practical proposition ?- It should only apply to pillar-workings. 153. This Bill, 1 understand, is framed for the purpose of providing additional safety in mines. (.'an you tell me whether blasting is permitted in intake airways such as haulage-roads in Great Britain ? —It is only done by special permission, when all the men are out of the mine, in a dusty mine. 154. Have not serious explosions taken place in the intake airways of some big mines of England ? -Yes, I think some of them are attributable to that. 155. Can you name one ?- Yes, the explosion at the Mardy Mine in South Wales was one, and that at Altofts was another. 156. Then blasting in a dry and dusty road, in an intake airway, is decidedly dangerous ?— Yes, in a dry and dusty mine. Fred Knapper, Miner, sworn and examined. (No. 20.) 1. Mr. Wilford.] You have been a miner for how long ?—For fifteen years. 2. You have had experience of deputies and check inspectors ?—I have never acted as one. 3. You have had experience of' them ?- Yes. 4. In your opinion would it be well if all check inspectors were first of all elected by the miners, paid by the Government, and put under the Public Service Commissioner ? —I think it would. 5. That would prevent check inspectors from being appointed by the management ?-■ Yes. 6. And being under their thumb all the while ? —Yes. 7. Mr. Napier.] Have you ever known check inspectors to be appointed by the management ?— No, I do not think so. 8. Why do you want the law changed for that purpose ?- -I believe that if the existing law were amended in that direction it would be beneficial both for the men and the employers. 9. Do you not know that under the present law the check inspectors are appointed by the men ?— [ do not know whether it is true or not. but I have heard that men have been appointed who are not experienced enough. 10. You really do not know anything about the method of appointment of check inspectors ? —Yes, I do. 11. But never by the management ?—No, I have never known them to be appointed by the management. 12. Then what is the idea of your present proposal % —lt would make them independent of the management. 13. Mr. Tunks.] Do you not think that the check inspectors should have some qualifications ? I do ; they should be efficient as regards testing for gas. 14. They should pass some examination to prove that they are capable of making a satisfactory examination. You are aware that any person can be appointed. You do not think my inspection, for instance, would be worth much ?—■ That is so. 15. The Chairman.] You think they should be appointed by the union ? —Yes, sir. 16. And become members of the Pubic Service under the Public Service Commissioner ? —Yes, and paid by the State, and, if necessary, trained by the State. 17. Who would dismiss them ? The people who paid them could dismiss them. John Campbell MaoDiaemid, Medical Practitioner, sworn and examined. (No. 21.) Witness read the evidence given by him before the Coroner, as follows : — " John Campbell MacDiarmid : I am a duly qualified medical practitioner, practising at Huntly. 1 have examined all the bodies that have been recovered from the Huntly Mine. I produce a statement showing the cause of death in each case [Exhibit Q]. In addition to those killed there were some severely injured. Three — Peckham, Mottram, and O'Brien-were severely injured. The bodies which were most severely injured were as follows : Nos. 22, 28, 29, 30, 31, and 32. These numbers are referred to on the plan [Exhibit A]. Nos. 36, 40, and 43 were also severely injured. The ones more injured than the others were Nos. 22, 30, 32, 31, 36, and 43. Nos. 30, 3-1, and 36 were probably the most injured of all. No. 43 was the last body found. By Mr. Tunks : 1 went down in the first rescue party. We had a narrow escape ourselves.