Cortonwood Disaster Inquest – Fatal Seventh Shot

January 1933

South Yorkshire Times, January 13th, 1933

Cortonwood Disaster Inquest

Professor’s Theory of Cause

Fatal Seventh Shot

Inadequately Stemmed

Coroner on The Personal Element

Jury Divided On Rider

Inquiry Closed

Prior to the resumption on Wednesday of the inquest into the Cortonwood disaster the Coroner (Mr. J. Kenyon Parker) referred to the death of an eighth victim, John Wm. Eccles (22), 38, Stokewell Road, West Melton, on Saturday in Barnsley Beckett Hospital.

Another Death

The coroner expressed sympathy with the relatives and requested the jury to investigate Eccles’s death.  The following witnesses were to be called: Capt. C. H. Platt and Prof. R. V. Wheeler, Mines Department experts; the overman Mr. Walton (recalled) and the under-manager Mr. R. Swanwick and Mr. Fawcett, the manager (recalled).

There were present: Messrs. E. H. Frazer, T. Gawthrope and P. I. Collinson H. M. Inspectors; Mr. Herbert Smith, Mr. J. Jones, and Mr. T. Bird Y.M.A; Mr. A. S., Furniss (solicitor), Mr. R. Graham (agent) and Mr. H. Fawcett (manager), representing the Colliery company.

John. W. Eccles (father, 38 Stokewell Road, West Melton, said his son died in the Beckett Hospital on Saturday, “He was burned in the explosion and in the hospital he told me that he was going along the face when there was a sudden flash.  He crawled into the gate where he was found.

The Coroner: You have worked in this pit for six years.  Was this an accident or do you blame anyone for it? – I think it was an accident.

Dr. J. Tindale Chesterman, resident surgeon at the Beckett Hospital, said Eccles was admitted on December 9th suffering from extensive burns on the face and body.  Death was due to acute duodenal ulcers following the burns.

Mr. Herbert Smith: I should like to thank the doctor for everything he has done to try and bring this lad round.

The coroner: I am sure the doctor will appreciate that.

LAMPS IN ORDER

Capt. Platt, a Mines Department officer, Sheffield, gave evidence of receiving nine electric lamps and a safety lamp from Mr. Gawthrope, which he tested.  He gave the lamps many tests and found none was capable of igniting fire-damp. They were in good order when he received them.  Later he received a shot exploder brought form Cortonwood Colliery from Mr. Frazer which was in good condition, except for the ends of the cable which had been bared.  “That means that when it was used there may be an unintentional spark which would ignite fire-damp. It is a drawback to that particular type of exploder.”

A Question Of Lives

The Coroner: And your report says that it was of a type not certified or approved for the Mines Department? – Yes, it is under a new order.

Mr. Furniss: The order was received on December 16th 1932.

The Coroner (to witness): This exploder was legal and permissible on December 9th? – Yes,

Answering Mr. Smith, Witness said it was not possible to use the cable of the exploder with the terminals unbared. The type was now permissible from next November.

Mr. Smith: Who has withdrawn the order? – It is not my department.

Mr. Smith: It is question of the men’s lives to me.  Would the best thing be to stop firing shots until we get something better? – It takes time to change from one condition to another.

But you would not continue killing men in the changing, would you?

Witness made no answer.

To Mr. Furniss witness said the type of exploder was common.  If there had been gas previously where the exploder was used it would have ignited it.  “It needed 8 per cent of gas.”

The Cause Of The Disaster

Prof Wheeler, Sheffield University, a member of the Safety in Mines Research Board, said he had studied plans of the place where the explosion occurred, and positions taken by the H, M. inspectors. I think, from the evidence that it was an explosion of fire-damp.  Coal dust played little or no part in the propagation of the flames. The gas was ignited by shot firing operations and this was due to two causes

The spark from the exploder and 2) an over-charged shot.  If the seventh shot was similar to the eighth which was cut out then it was faulty in three ways.  1) the charge was too big for the work to be done. 2) inverse instead of direct initiation of the cartridge; 3) the “stemming” was so grossly inadequate as to almost amount to no “stemming”.  No real work would be done by the shot. The mouth of the hole would be broken in before the cartridge had stopped firing and ignite gas.

Inadequate Stemming

Answering Mr. Frazer, witness said that when he described the “stemming” as “grossly inadequate” he referred not only to the quantity of it but also the quality and placing of it, ten inches “stemming” of the proper kind and properly placed would be sufficient.  “There is a mixture of sand and clay which is perfectly satisfactory when shots are “stemmed” ten inches.  It was quite possible for the first six shots to have been fired in gas and not to have produced an explosion. “But it is more dangerous to fire shots in a thin seam than in a thick seam.  It is more dangerous to fire when in a narrow place like that where the explosion took place.”

Answering Mr. Smith witness said the safest method of shot firing was to charge stem and fire each shot separately, Mr. Smith was then putting questions to Prof. Wheeler regarding the time taken for shot firing when the Coroner ruled him out of order as the witness was not “a practical man.”

Mr. Smith: I want to get facts of this because of the lives of the men, if we are going to carry on like this, we shall have more serious accidents.  If this is an attempt to stop this inquiry, to stop us getting facts then the quicker we clear off the better.  I am determined to get to the bottom of this.”

Prof. Wheeler agreed with Mr. Furniss that the method of shot-firing was left to the discretion, gained by practice, of the shot-firer.

To Mr. Jones: Witness said it was not possible to ignite coal dust in the shot hole by the firing of the cartridge.

Coroner & Mr. Herbert Smith

The overman, Herbert Walton, was then re-called.  He reaffirmed that when he visited the place about 1 o’clock on December 8th he received no complaint of gas or against the ventilation.  He had been overman throughout the ten week’s “life” of the “explosion place.” During the period he had never received complaints on the way tests were made for gas on the preparation or stemming of shot holes.

The Coroner to Mr. Smith: I don’t think you can ask questions on that.  Of course, if you have any evidence to contradict what this man has said it will be accepted.  Please do not bring tales.

Mr. Smith: I’m sorry for that ruling.

The Coroner: you cannot expect us to take any notice of anonymous complaints.  If you have proof that this man has lied, then bring it.  That is only commonsense.  Anonymous letters would not be accepted in a court of law.

Mr. Smith: I cannot stop these letters coming to me. We will try somewhere else.

Manager Recalled

The Manager, Mr. Fawcett, recalled said the lamps sent to Capt. Platt were found at the scene of the explosion.  He himself going there between 4am and 5am on December 9th, found the exploder and key to it almost 30 yards along the face.

Questioned about the eighth shot-hole, he said he considered it not properly “stemmed.” The material (clay) appeared to be all right but the “stemming” was insufficient.  The regulations stated that “stemming” should be of clay or other non-flammable substance.

Regarding the cause of the explosion, witness said it was his opinion that the early shots brought down a fall in the loose-end, this stopping the ventilation.  Gas accumulated and was fired by the seventh shot. It would not be foreseen that the shots, which were meant to bring down coal would stop the ventilation.

The Coroner: was it possible to travel that airway?  Partly, I should estimate the portion that could not be travelled at ten yards.

Airway Partly Travelled

Answering questions by Mr. Frazer about the air current.  Mr. I Fawcett said on Nov 11, according to the record book there was a total current of (undecipherable) cubic feet per minute, of which about 1000 cubic feet passed down the airway where the explosion occurred. The latter figure had never been measured.  “The airway was not travelled. Each end was inspected and partly travelled and the rest was assumed to be the same. “Did you know that the regulations say every airway has to be travelled every week and a report made? – It says so.

Regarding explosives, Mr. Fawcett said originally, they used only four-ounce cartridges, but he had issued instructions that where the district was of a certain thickness only three-ounce cartridges should be used. He also gave orders that shot-holes should be only six feet apart and that all shots should be by direct initiation and that the holes be properly cleaned.  Immediately before each shot tests for fire damp should be made within a radius of twenty yards.  That would necessitate tests at the shot-hole at each end of ten yards away, and in the loose end, before and after the firing. “The shot firer would satisfy himself about stone-dust.”

Speed Of Firing

Mr. Frazer: How long do you think it reasonably requires to do all operations and fire a shot? – Eight to ten minutes.

Do you approve of eight shot holes being charged at one time? I do when they are six feet apart.

Is this a general policy at the pit, and with your approval? – It is.

Mr. Fawcett said after the explosion the airway was traversable for nearly five yards and then was blocked to about 2 ½ feet by 1 foot. “The current blew very hard, and it would have been uncomfortable to work in that place because the current was swirling the dust about.”

Mr. Frazer, did you not consider it was inadvisable to work a conveyor face with only one way in and out? – Did you not think of the risk of a fall? – Yes, it was impossible almost to get a fall because of the nearness on the packing.  There has been no “weight” there.

Keen Cross-Examination

Mr. Smith: Am I right in saying that this place was such that it caused you to make exhaustive investigations from time to time? – No.

Do you remember anything happening on the old face? – No.

Did not some colliers refuse to work there and come out of the pit? – I do not know.

Do you make your orders in writing? – No.

Do you not think it best to make them in black and white? – No.

Regarding the ventilation, I put it to you that the ventilation is “stood” nearly all Sunday and men go on at night? – No, not all day.

Do you consider it an examination of an airway just to look down at it, especially in face of what has happened? – It was the only one we could adopt at the time.

Would it not have been possible to rip out a road in 24 hours so that men could travel it? – Yes.

Are you satisfied that the ventilation method was the best. At the time and under the conditions.

Regarding shot firing will you agree that one shot damages another nearby? – No.

Do you believe a shot can be fired and all tests take place in five minutes? – No, I do not.

Will you agree that there has been a fair amount of gas in that all the time? – No none at all.

But it has been on “weight”? – No.

Yet, remember there was a fall? – Yes.

Shall you carry on this practice of “stemming” a number of shots at once? – Yes, as long as it is face and tests are made before and after.

Supposing shots were “stemmed” and after one had been fired you found gas; you would be in an awkward position? – We should remove the gas.

I suggest gas has been continuous in the …… – No evidence of it.

Did you see Eccles in hospital? – Yes

Is it a fact that you got a statement from him? – No.

Answering Mr. Furness witness said before a shot firer was appointed, he had to pass an examination set by himself “verbal and in writing.” He had never had a complaint from the branch Y.M.A. secretary about men leaving the pit owing to the face being unfit.  The pit was inspected by the men’s officials from July 11th to August 4th.

The Coroner: This place was not started at the time. What did they say of the ventilation?

Mr. Furniss: Ventilation is good.

The Coroner asked Mr. Smith if he wanted the undermanager (Mr. R. Swanwick) calling.

Mr. Smith: – I do not.  I understand he does not pass much time in this seam.

Hospital Depositions

P.s. Humphrey (Wath) submitted a statement taken from James Edward Moore, the last surviving victim, in the Beckett Hospital on December 30th.  The statement was unsigned owing to Moore’s injured hands. It reads:

About 10-30pm on Thursday Dec 8th. I arrived at the loader end and was going to take the rope off when there was a bang and a flash.  I was thrown against some empty tubs.  As I got up, I caught hold of Scargill, who was close by me and crying in pain.  I got him on my shoulders and carried him up the dip.  On getting to the top of the dip I had to stop as Scargill’s shirt was on fire.  He was then able to walk with my assistance.  At the west side I saw Edward Myers, a fitter, and gave the alarm.  I have never noticed any gas in that place and ever heard anyone say there was gas about.”

The Coroner read a statement taken from the dead man, Eccles, on the same day as the last statement:

“I arrived about 10-15pm on Dec 8th, at the loader gates and changed my clothes and got my tools out.  Then I assisted Moore, Scargill and Humphries to fix the ropes.  I went back to the gates and saw Landles who said he was ready to start.  He turned and had got about twelve yards up the coal face.  I was following, when suddenly there was a flash and I felt a pain in the side.  The place was full of fumes. I managed to get out and to my clothes, where I got a drink and then went to the box-hole closed the door and waited for assistance.”

Coroner’s Comments

“Great Bravery and Unselfishness”

That concluded the evidence and the Coroner, summing up, which followed, lasted over 30 minutes.  The jury, he said, had been excellent. “You have not asked too many questions and wisely left that in the right hands.”  Several members had occasionally appeared rather bored, and he was not surprised.  “There had been a good many questions put which, in his opinion, were not material for the purpose of a Coroner’s court.  With scarcely any exception he had allowed those questions, because he realised there were other persons present who had duties unconnected with himself and the jury. “I wanted everyone go away feeling there had been a thorough investigation. You and I and everybody have expressed our deep sympathy with the relatives, and I do not think further expressions are necessary. I do, however, wish to express my appreciation to a number of people who have given me every assistance.  Mr. Howarth, the Barnsley District Coroner, quite on his own initiative, fell in with the new procedure and requested me to take the inquests on the unfortunate men who died in his district.  I thank Mr. Frazer for the great help he has given me in supplying material and the West Riding Police deserve a word for the very good statements they took from witnesses.  I think the arrangements for this inquiry have been splendid.”

The Coroner then referred to the work done after the explosion.  He said:

No doubt the efforts of rescue men should be recognised, but so far as the evidence goes there are only two names I can mention, those are Mr. Fawcett and the deputy Swanwick.  It is rather difficult to picture what these rescue operations involved in a working place of this size, where the seam is only two and a half feet thick and the space taken up by pans and other machinery, and in which the atmosphere was at one period dangerous.  We do know how Mr. Fawcett and Swanwick pushed on by electric light over the machinery, to investigate what they thought was a further fire, and to see if they could assist any workmen.  It is an example of very great bravery and unselfishness.  It is one of the slightly alleviating features of these great disaster inquests.

Causes and Factors

The Coroner’s Views

Regarding the verdict, he was going to hand the foreman a paper on which there were several questions he wished the jury to answer. “I have taken it that you are satisfied these men died by burns and shock, carbon monoxide poisoning or the effects of burns.  You must come to the conclusion that those burns were caused by an explosion of gas, and I think you can express an opinion as to whether number seven shot blew out or something else happened.  You might add, if you think the seventh shot was the cause, what made it blow out.”

The Coroner briefly summed up the features of the chief of the case: the absence of gas prior to the explosion, on which all witnesses agreed.  There were seven or eight separate tests made on the day of the explosion by separate workmen and officials, all witnesses were of the opinion that the ventilation was satisfactory and there was nothing to suggest it was not so up to the firing of the shots that night.   The evidence of the boring and charging of the shots depended on two men, Lee and Firth, the number of faults of the eight shot which had been unfired.  It had been almost proved that six shots were fired prior the explosion, and the seventh and eighth shots were charged, stemmed, and fired by the dead deputy, Allen, and that the seventh blew out.

His own personal views were: –

  • TESTING FOR GAS|: The evidence brought up strongly the question whether such tests by flame lamp were entirely satisfactory. The system seemed to depend too much on the personal element.  It was obvious to anyone that the work could be hurried and become casual.  There had been no evidence of anything in the nature of scamping in that case.
  • VENTILATION: – The explosion had thrown a different light on the evidence that there was good ventilation. “It has been shown that it was liable to be impeded or entirely stopped by coal coming from the face after the firing of shots. That is a point to which further consideration may be given by the inspectors, management, and men’s leaders. It does seem that if the duties of the shot-firer, Allen, had been carried out, and tests made after the firing of each shot, gas would have been detected and the explosion would not have occurred.”
  • BREACHES OF RULE: – “It seems unfortunate to me that blame from the evidence should fall on a dead man. It does not fall on him entirely but mostly my view, for what it is worth, is that the Mines Act regulations regarding the travelling of airways has not from the evidence been fully carried out. I cannot see how Allen could have satisfied himself that the regulations had been fulfilled before firing the shots; and I think Lee was wrong in accepting Allen’s suggestion to leave the last two shots to him. though I know it would have been rather awkward for him to have disregarded the instructions of the deputy to leave the pit after his full day’s work.  He thought everyone concerned would thank Mr. Frazer for his initiative in having the eighth shot cut out, so that it could be examined.
  • It seemed very doubtful whether anyone spread stone-dust according to regulations. Lee said he did not, but was going to do so on his return from the box-hole.  He never returned to the place because Allen instructed him to leave.  Firth, the borer, admitted having bored holes five feet apart to satisfy the colliers.  “His orders were to bore six feet apart and it seems to me he had a poor reason for boring five feet apart.  Lee’s reason for putting the shots in the wrong way, because he had heard an inspector say it was the best, is also a poor reason.”

The Verdict

Disagreement On Ventilation

The jury retired for 40 minutes.  Mr. Mottram, the foreman, then returned and said the jury were agreed on all points except one, the ventilation.

The Coroner immediately ordered the jury to be brought back and remarked “Your foreman tells me you are agreed except for one point.  You are agreed that the gas was ignited by the seventh shot blowing out, that it was badly stemmed, and the cartridge, having consideration of the nature of the seam, was too large.  You are disagreed on the question of ventilation, why?”

Mr. Mottram: There is a division as to whether the ventilation was generally good before the explosion.

The Coroner: That is not a point I advised you to consider.  If you want to make an expression on it, I cannot stop you.  I told you, however that it was good before the explosion.  I cannot take personal opinions, remember.

Mr. Mottram: It is not my person opinion; it is a division of the jury.

The Coroner: some of the jury then want to add something which I thought was not material to the verdict.  I do not think you gentlemen know your duties.  Do you agree on this:

That the men’s deaths were caused eithe by carbon monoxide poisoning, extensive burns, or the result of those burns and shock by an explosion: that the explosion was caused by gas being ignited by the blown-out number seven shot, and that the shot was badly stemmed; and, having regard to its position and those of the other shot-holes and the nature of the face, it was overcharged.

Do you agree? – Yes.

Coroner and Jury

The coroner: then do you want me to adjourn and keep you together till you have agreed on something that does concern the verdict?

The foreman: The jury says it does matter.

The Coroner: I can soon settle this; we shall not stand adjourned further.

Mr. Mottram: that does it then.

A verdict s indicated above was recorded and Mr. Mottram then asked leave for the jury to retire to consider a rider.

The Coroner granted the request but after a short retirement the jury returned and Mr. Mottram announced “The jury leave the question of ventilation, and therefore cannot add a rider.”

The Coroner: The verdict amounts to the finding that the men lost their lives unfortunately through an accident.

Mr. Mottram: asked the Coroner if he would grant the jurymen exemption from similar duties for the next three years.

The Coroner: This is a Coroner’s court, not the assizes. I have no doubt the police will bear the request in mind.

Mr. Frazer expressed thanks to the Coroner for the facilities he had allowed, and the excellent way in which the inquiry had been conducted.  Mr. Furniss added thanks on behalf of the Colliery Company and Mr. Fawcett thanked the Coroner for his tribute.