Photo From Northern Echo - Stanley Marks The Anniversary Of Pit Disaster

The inquest was opened by Mr. John Graham the coroner for the district but adjourned until 10th May after the evidence of the identification of the victims was heard. At the resumption it was resumed on the 25th, 26th and 27th May 1882.

It was said in the Inspectors Report that the management of the mine was defective and there were irregularities in the provisions laid down by the Mines Regulation Act. Gas had been reported during the four or five months before the explosion but the manager would not admit that the mine was a firey one with all the attendant regulations and less care appeared to have been taken in the Busty Seam.

There were two theories as to the where the gas was ignited. The first was put forward by the owner of the mine and supported by expert witnesses was that the explosion originated at the face where two men McCabe and Middlemass were working. At the head of this bord and not far from the face a large stone measuring five yards long and two feet broad and from ten inches to one foot in thickness had fallen. When this was examined after the explosion it was found that there was a large hole running several yards in the strata above the coal. It was suggested that the fallen stone released quantities of gas which was confined in this space and was later ignited by the lamps of the men who were working there. The position of the bodies of the men supported this theory. They looked as if they had been struck down when they were retreating from where they were when the gas escaped. Their cans and their food were lying some little way up the bords if the men had been eating at the moment of the accident. Two lamps were found in the place and they were both locked but there was a considerable amount of gas in the bord when it was examined.

The theory put forward by the men was that the explosion occurred in the South Cross-cut where a shot had been fired in the stone near the face, not many yards from where Hutchinson's body had been found. The shot had been fired and the stone brought down but there were inconsistencies in the evidence. The first man into the place said he found a cracket or stool and a pick on top of a heap of stone which must have been place there after the fall of stone and before the explosion took place. This testimony could not be shaken and Mr. Bowey, on behalf of the men, gave up the theory that the explosion had occurred in the South Cross-cut.

The question as to how the gas collected and how it was ignited. there was no doubt that there was gas in the coal and in McCabe's and Middlemass's place and hissing and bubbling noises had been heard in the place. The gas could have collected in the space in the roof left by the stone and this was what the Inspectors thought had happened.

The gas could only have fired at one of the lamps of the two men as no other source of ignition was in the area but it was possible that the flame could have passed through the gauze of the lamp when the men ran away against the current of air.

The lamps that were found after the explosion were thoroughly examined and tested. Two miners were appointed on behalf of the men, Mr. Berkley and Mr. Colquhoun for the owners and Mr. Atkinson for the Inspectors to conduct the investigation. The lamps were numbered and the men's names were attached to them. The number of revolutions that were required to open them was noted and the same number was to be given in screwing them up after they were cleaned so that they were tested in the same position as they were found. The lamps were the tested in a box into which gas was slowly admitted.

Report Of The Examination Of Lamps.

Lamp No.55 - John Westgarth.
Unlocked but screwed close. 2 poles over the glass had been taken out. Apparently uninjured. No washer. Takes two complete turns to unscrew the oilpan. 1st. Stood the test and went out. 2nd. Closed the windows and tested again. Went out.

Lamp No.67 - Riley.
Found locked. Two and a quarter turns to unscrew.  Leather washer both top and bottom of glass. Screwed full up.

Lamp No.12 - James McCabe.
Locked. Saturated with oil. One and one eighth turn to unscrew. Washer top and bottom. Cleaned and put together again. Screw was tight when unscrewed, but when put together again took about one eighth more turn to screw tight. Tested and found all right and went out. Screwed only with one and one eighth turn as found.

Lamp No.2 - W. Middlemas.
Locked. Screwed up very nearly tight. One and three quarters to unscrew. Washer  top and bottom. Lamp dusty and oily. Sent out to be boiled. Gauze had slight indentation but wires were all good. Took one and a quarter to screw on. Stood the test all right and went out, one pole slightly bent.

Lamp No.28 - R. Hutchinson.
Not locked but screwed up. One and three quarter turns to unscrew. Small coal
dust slightly coked on gauze and saturated with oil, one and three quarters turns to unscrew. Washer both top and bottom. Lamp gauze boiled. Took a little more than one and three quarters to screw on. Tested all right. Lamp went out.

Lamp No.124 - John Douglas.
Not locked but screwed up. One and three quarter turns to unscrew. Small coal dust coked and saturated with oil. One washer at bottom of glass, none at the top. A little fine dust on the cap of gauze. One and three quarters turns to screw tight. Tested and found all right. Lamp went out.”

The Inspector was critical of the condition at the colliery before the explosion.

1). No certified copy of the rules could be found and some doubt appeared at first to be entertained as to which of two sets of special rules were in force in the Busty Seam but afterwards it was stated that the Lamp Pit special rules were in force, they being the rules applicable to firey mines. Mr. Johnson, the manager, admitted that he had never seen any certified copy of the rules since he became manager five years before and no certified copy was produced.

2). One of the deputies, John Mossom, who gave evidence stated that he was unable to read and that he had never had the special rules applicable to his particular duties, as deputy, read over to him. He admitted that Mr. Johnson had told him to enter gas in his book whenever he saw it, but he stated that as a fact he never did so in cases where he was able to remove the gas by altering the position of the brattice or by other means. This appeared to be the usual practice in the mine, and although it was certainly not approved that it was done with the sanction or even the knowledge of the manager, Mossom himself gave as his reason for not having reported on one of the occasions on which he found gas, that the overmen William Anderson, had told him that it was not necessary. In other instances the officials had a very imperfect knowledge of the rules and did not appear to appreciate the responsibility of their positions in the mine.

3). By the general and special rules in use at the colliery, the reports made by the overman and deputies should have entered in separate books kept for the purpose, but this was not done, and all the deputies, the fore-overman and the back overman, made their reports in the same book, which was kept in the colliery office, in the manager’s house, at some little distance from the pit mouth. It was provided by the special rules that the master wasteman should report upon the ventilation in a book kept and signed by him and that a copy should be sent daily to the manager or the under viewer. The master wasteman's duties were however  performed by William Anderson, in addition to his duties of overman but no suck book was kept by him. No copies were sent to the manager and any reports which he made as master wasteman were entered together with the overman’s and deputies reports in the book already mentioned.

4). General rule No.30 provides for the inspection of the mine on behalf of the persons employed, and that a book shall be kept at the mine, in which the reports shall be recorded and signed. No suck book was kept at the mine, and the reports of the inspections made and signed in the overman’s pocket book.

5). No register of the thermometer was kept, as provided by the special rules and the readings of the barometer at bank only were registered and this was done on a sheet almanac hung up in the office. No register was kept of the barometer underground and no such barometer appears to have been in use.

6). No record was kept of the names of men who were authorised to carry keys or to fire shots and no written licences were given in accordance with special rule No.3 under the head of 'Safety Lamps'. The manager stated that the number was so small that he could remember the names without any list, but admitted that it might be better if a list was kept. Two of the four lamps found at the South Crosscuts, where four men were working at the time of the explosion were unlocked and only one of the four men was stated to have been authorise to carry a key, so either the lamp had been passed by the lamp man in an unlocked condition or the men themselves had transgressed the special rules with reference to the use of safety lamps.”

The jury returned a verdict in the form of answers to questions submitted for the coroner to consider-

Question 1.
What was the case of death?
Answer - As stated in each case by Dr. Benson.

Question 2.
Was the Busty Seam in safe working order when the deceased men were allowed to go down on the 18th. April?
Answer - We consider it was in perfect working order.

Question 3.
In what place did the explosion take place?
Answer - In McCabe's place.

Question 4.
How was the explosion caused?
Answer - By quick movement of lamp.

Question 5.
Who, if any one, is or are, and in what respect culpable?
Answer - No one.

Question 6.
(If necessary) was the explosion the result of causes beyond human control?”
The Inspector commented that greater care should be taken to carry out strictly the provisions of the Mines Regulation Act and the special rules that were in force at the time.