Fatal Accident at Cadeby Main

Man Killed by a Descending Cage

An Unheard Warning

On Wednesday afternoon, at the Montagu Cottage Hospital, Mr. Doxey Wightman (coroner), held an inquiry into the circumstances touching the death of Charlie Hanks, dataller, who met his end through a descending cage striking him in the Cadeby pit, early on Saturday morning, deceased succumbing to his injuries later in the day at the Montagu Cottage Hospital, whither he had been removed.

Mr. J. Bullock was elected foreman of the jury, and there were present Mr. Pickering, H.M. Inspector of Mines, and Mr. H. Barnard and Mr. Witty, representing the Colliery Company.

William Hanks, miner, of Denaby, father of deceased, said his son was 27 years of age last July, and was a dataller, employed at Cadeby. He had worked in the pit since the age of 13, chiefly in the bottom. He was a healthy man, and had only been married a month. His hearing was good, and eyesight perfect. Witness worked at Denaby and had been a miner 50 years. He had not heard how his son got killed, or the circumstances attending his death.

William Bamforth, hanger-on, at the Cadeby pit, where deceased was killed, said he did not set deceased on. It would be about 4.25 a.m. on Saturday last; deceased and John Henry Glasby were cleaning out the sump in the winding shaft. They were the only two at that work, which was generally done on Friday nights. Witness had been the hanger-on for about six months. That was the third time deceased had done the work of cleaning out the sump. Witness was in charge of the pit bottom.

When working the men would be standing on the planks over the sump. At the time of the accident deceased was standing on the planks, where he had no right to be, because witness had warned him off, because of the chair coming down at that time. Witness had warned the two men. Glasby heeded, and stood out of the way. The deceased did not. Glasby shouted “Hold him, hold him.” Witness had his hand on the button, and gave the signal. The cage was stopped as quickly as possible. Glasby then shouted to witness, “He (meaning deceased) is under the chair, Bill.” Witness gave the signal to raise the cage, and it was hoisted up. He then found the deceased had been injured. The cage was raised six or eight feet. He had been struck as the cage was descending. Deceased spoke, and first asked for a drink, and afterwards said: “I don’t think I shall live long.” He was removed to the Hospital at once, where he died the same day.

In reply to Mr. Pickering, witness said he had been out of the sump about 8 or 9 minutes when the accident happened. Before he came out he told the men he was going to signal for the cage. He shouted afterwards to keep out of the way of the drawing chair. The men knew the cage was coming down, because witness warned them. Witness could not understand why deceased should not stand out of the way. The cage would not be far above deceased’s head when Glasby shouted.

The Inspector remarked that it seemed an extraordinary thing that the men did not appear to know the cage was coming down. Witness, asked by the Coroner how he could account for the accident, said in his opinion it occurred through the men being anxious to get along with the work rapidly, as they were a little bit behindhand. If it was not finished they would be reported to the deputies.

Mr. Goulding asked if there was any special rule to prevent the men working in the sump when the cage was working? Witness replied that the men ought not to have been there at the time. Mr. Goulding was at a loss to know if instructions were given to the men to keep away, why the men were there at all. Witness was proceeding to explain what he wanted to know, when the Coroner intervened, saying that question had already been answered twice.

Another juryman asked if the men were working down the sump when witness left them? Witness said deceased came out, and Glasby, as witness had since learnt, went into the lever place. Deceased must have gone down to the sump again on the roller-chair in one of the tubs.

John Harry Glasby, clipper in the pit bottom, said he was working with the deceased at the time of the accident. He had heard the evidence of the previous witness, but did not agree with it. When Bamforth left them in the sump he said, “I’m going to sweep the Denaby decks out. You can keep clear of the near side chair coming down,” the chair that killed the deceased.

He then went out of the sump to clean the decks. He had filled one tub, and deceased had filled the other. Deceased went out of the sump to pull the tub. When deceased pulled the full tub off, he put the empty one in, and got into the chair to come down in the sump. Witness and deceased started to fill the empty tub, and witness told the deceased to watch the Denaby chair go away. Witness started throwing the dirt to deceased, and he started throwing it into the tub. Deceased was stood on the sump board, and witness to the right. Witness was working hard, and when he lifted his head to straighten his back he saw the descending cage almost on deceased. He saw it strike him. Witness got deceased out. Deceased had a right to stand there whilst filling the tub.

In reply to the Inspector, witness said he did not see the Denaby chair go away, and had no idea the other cage was coming down. He heard no second warning from Bamforth when he rapped the cage away. Bamforth told them, when in the sump, to watch the chair go away, and witness told deceased to keep a look out. He answered, “I will.” Witness expected a second warning from Bamforth, as was usual, but he never heard one. It was possible he might have given it, and not have been heard. There was no particular hurry, and neither witness or deceased need have run the risk of working under the descending cage. If the work had not been finished they would only have had to give an explanation. If they had not time to finish it, they would have had to leave it.

A juryman: Do you think there was any neglect on the part of the hanger-on? Witness: I can’t say, but I never heard the second warning. I am very good at hearing.

In reply to the Coroner, witness said the deceased was stood up when the cage hit him. Bamforth and Glasby disagreed as to the exact wording of the conversation between them when the former left the sump.

The Coroner asked both Bamforth and Glasby if the engineman had worked his signals properly, and was answered in the affirmative, this being the outcome of an earlier request by Mr. Casey, the engineman, to ask a question, a request the Coroner at first refused.

The Coroner said the question was whether proper warning to the men had been given. Glasby owned that it might have been given, whilst Bamforth on oath stated he gave the warning, a statement nobody really denied.

Mr. Casey said he only wanted to ask a question as to whether he had acted according to the signal. The Coroner: It is quite time to begin clearing yourself when someone says something against you. No one says you can help the accident, so you can afford to keep still.

Continuing, the Coroner said it was quite certain the poor fellow had been killed accidentally, but the question for the jury to consider was there any one to blame. They had heard the evidence, and it was for them to say.

A juryman asked whether there could not be better warning than a shout? The Coroner: That you may leave in the hands of the Inspector.

The juryman: It is quite evident that the shouting signal failed in this instance. You did not hear it, Glasby? The witness Glasby: I was working strong, with my head down.

The Coroner said Glasby had not said there was no warning given, but that he did not hear it.

The juryman: It is natural to assume, then, that both men did not hear the shouted warning, and the question he should like to ask was “Can there be a more improved method of giving signals?”

The Coroner: I can’t say what is my opinion. I dare not.

The juryman: It is a matter that needs consideration.

The Coroner: It is not for the jury to decide. It is a question that would be better left in the hands of the Inspector. If he thinks the system is wrong, he can get an authority to have it altered.

Inspector Pickering: I may say if the jury like to make a recommendation, I will go into it very thoroughly. The pit bottom there is very complicated, for there are six cages. I can’t for the moment devise any change, but any recommendation by the jury will be considered. It is not a signal, but a warning, and in this case the witness Bamforth left the two men, telling them to look out for the cage.

The Coroner: The men knew when Bamforth left them that they would be left by themselves to act on his instructions. He did not see the need of the jury making a recommendation at all. Anything they recommended would be accepted, only he did not want them laughed at.

A juryman thought the cages ought to stand whilst the sump was being cleaned out.

The witness Bamforth said the chair was not running when he left the two men. He gave them warning.

The Coroner said with regard to carrying the matter further, he thought the jury would be perfectly justified in leaving it to the Government Inspector, who knew infinitely more about it than either he or them.

A verdict of “Accidental death” was returned.