26S 



NA TURE 



January 17, 1895 



of epigenesis. A theory which has a formal answer 

 for every question, which regards everything that we can 

 see and lay hold of as predetermined and unalterable, 

 which relegates the causes of phenomena to the unseen 

 and unknowable — such a theory, if accepted as true, does 

 not stimulate, but stifles inquir>'. Fortunately it has had 

 the opposite result. It has not been accepted, and it has 

 developed an attack of a brilliant and overwhelming 

 character. All the best arguments which Dr. Hertwig 

 can bring against the theory of predetermination are 

 derived, not from simple observation, but from experi- 

 ment. A few simply conceived interferences with the 

 normal course of the segmentation of the ovum have 

 sufficed to strike down the doctrine of determinants. May 

 we not hope that an extension of these methods may 

 illuminate the regions which are still hidden from us .' 

 After all his attempts to supply an acceptable alternative 

 to Weismann's scheme. Dr. O. Hertwig makes a partial 

 confession of failure. To many his failure will seem 

 complete, and it must be so since the evidence derived 

 from experiment is as yet wholly inadequate. But his 

 attempts indicate the paths along which research may be 

 conducted, and he is very right when he claims, in con- 

 clusion, that it is the great merit of his conception of the 

 developmental processes, that it opens the gates once 

 more to research, with some brighter hope of results than 

 the formal theory of predetermination afforded us. 



G. C. BotJRNE. 



COAL-DUST AND COLLIERY EXPLOSIONS. 



Coal- Dust an Explosive Agent, as shown by an Examina- 

 tion of the Camerton Explosion. By Donald M. D. 

 Stuart. (London : Office of the Colliery Manager, and 

 E. and F. N. Spon.) 



IT is significant of the conservatism — not always 

 wholly disinterested- that surrounds an old-estab- 

 lished industry that, in spite of all that has been written 

 and said on the action of coal-dust as an explosive agent 

 during the last twenty years, we should still find people 

 persistently clinging to the belief thit the only possible 

 cause of a colliery explosion inustht fire-damp. It would 

 be amusmg, were the matter less serious, to note the ex- 

 traordinary hypotheses and absurd surmises to which the 

 believers in this time-honoured doctrine are occasionally 

 driven in order to account for the existence of fire-damp 

 in places where the common testimony of unbiassed 

 people affords no proof of its presence. The hard logic 

 of facts is, however, surely, even if slowly, undermining 

 the mass of prejulicc with which this question has been 

 surroun led, and we may hope that before the close of 

 the century the action of the Legislature will conipel 

 these people, whose obstinate unbelief Jeopardises men's 

 lives, to give practical heed, even more directly than at 

 present, to the teachings of intelligent observation and 

 inspection. The causes and conditions which le.id to 

 a colliery explosion are now so well understoo I that such 

 a cata^iriphe ought to be no longer possible If it does 

 occur, we must lay the blame on the m.inagement and 

 discipline of the mine, and it should not be difficult, 

 under these circumstances, to fix the responsibility. 

 V' . 1316, VOL. S I 1 



The master of a vessel who carelessly navigates his 

 ship, is liable to have his certificate dealt with in a very 

 summary fashion. It does not avail him to plead that 

 his crew are picked from a class that is proverbially reck- 

 less and foolhardy, and that his " look-out," therefore, 

 was probably in fault. The Assessors take it for granted 

 that he has a proper knowledge of his business, and they 

 hold him responsible for the discipline on his vessel. 

 Public opinion demands that a mine-manager should be 

 treated in a similar manner. How difficult it is for the 

 the law, in spite of the length of its arm, to get at a 

 manager who has been guilty of culpable carelessness, 

 has been shown in more than one inquiry that could be 

 named. 



As an illustration of the mental attitude to which we 

 allude, we may refer to a recent report on the cause of 

 the explosion at the .Mbion Colliery, South Wales, in 

 June last. All the circumstances connected with that 

 explosion seemed to indicate that it was due to the same 

 cause as that which accounted for the explosions at the 

 Park -Slip, Apedale, and Malago Collieries, viz. the 

 presence of coal-dust, and this conclusion was confirmed 

 by the report of the inspectors appointed by the Home 

 Office to inspect the colliery. 



In a report prepared for the colliery proprietors by six j 

 engineers, we finJ that these gentlemen are unanimously I | 

 of opinion that the disaster was caused by an outburst of 

 fire-damp, and they have great satisfaction in stating that 

 no blame in the matter can be attributed to any of the 1 1 

 officials or employes. There is no wonder, in view of ' 

 this conflict of testimony, that the men of the Rhondda 

 district should have demanded a fresh inquiry by the 

 Government into the cause of the disaster. 



The changes of opinion among " practical ' men on this 

 question of coal-dust are very suggestive, and strikingly 

 e.xemplify the course through which a new truth has to run 

 when it is in conflict with the settled conviction of interested 

 persons. Like the course of true love, it does not run at all 

 smooth under these circumstances. The idea that coal- 

 dust could be the cause of a colliery explosion was, in the 

 outset, scouted as absurd. Then, as facts multiplied, the 

 dust was allowed to have a share in the catastrophe ; it I 

 aggravated the violence of a fire-damp explosion. Next, 

 the proportion of the fire-damp became smaller by 

 degrees, until it reached the vanishing-point. Now we 

 have reached the stage that all dusts are not explosive, 

 and the colliery manager is satisfied that his dust is not 

 as other men's dust, liven in the case of those who were 

 more receptive of the teaching of experiment and of 

 trained observation, the recognition of the real facts has 

 had to run the conventional course. First they were not 

 true, then they were not new, and we knew of them 

 before; for did not Faraday and Lyell tell us all about 

 the matter in the Haswell report.' In a question of this 

 kind, colliery management ought to be in advance of 

 public opinion. That it has not always been so in tlie 

 past, the history of coal-mining shows only too plainly. It 

 was the shock to public sentiment, caused by a succession 

 of disastrous explosions, which occurred in the early 

 part of this century, that indirectly brought about a 

 revolution in the art of coal-getting. People in the 

 colliery districts, who were witnesses of the terrible loss 



