151 
the circumstances attendant on any of these sad catastrophes, 
I mean no unkind or unhandsome reflection on any of the 
parties concerned. Those circumstances are as much matter 
of history as the explosions themselves, and as such are open 
to fair and candid remark. The “ scaling off” of a portion 
of fresh air to feed the furnace, recommended by Mr. 
Warington Smyth,* and conducting the return air into the 
upcast shaft at a safe height above the fire, occurs as being 
practised in none of these reports. For want of this the fire 
in the furnace at Risca, and that at Darley, had to be put 
out just when a powerful current of fresh air was most 
wanted. And time, any moment of which might make the 
difference of life or death to some perishing sufferer, was 
spent in giving the needful directions, or waiting for their 
fulfilment. Double doors, allowing a corve or tub to enter 
the space between, and the first to be shut before the second 
is opened, prevent even the momentary interruption of the 
proper ventilation, and lessen the danger of a disarrangement 
of longer continuance from accident to, or neglect of, a single 
door. They are referred to by Sir H. De la Beche, but in 
the other cases the doors seem to be single. I believe they 
are very commonly so. 
Oldbury appears to be the only mine where the upcast 
shaft was unprovided with a furnace. The catastrophe at 
this place produced a pamphlet, or rather a book, from a 
gentleman of that neighbourhood, which consisted almost 
entirely of the advice to build a tower over the mouth of the 
upcast shaft, thus increasing its length, and not to use fur- 
nace or fan, or any other artificial means of producing a 
current. I do not agree with him. Mr. Smyth recommends 
a tower or stack at Darley, where the up shaft is much 
shorter than the down, but would retain the furnace. 
Darley Report, p. 16. 
