65 
the rule recommended, and I am pleased to he able to report that this has been done 
at a great majority of the mines. 
A most melancholy accident which marred the close of the year 1883, and 
by which four men were instantly killed, had its origin in the neglect of the pre¬ 
caution here recommended. In that case the engine-driver (John Jones) at the Duke 
Company’s Mine, Maryborough, instead of lowering the men down the shaft, wound 
them to the poppet-heads. Jones was tried for manslaughter, on the 15tli February, 
1884, and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment. A petition in favour of a 
mitigation of the sentence was presented to the Government, and in supporting it 
the local press made the following remarks:— 
From the evidence adduced at the trial, no jury could have conscientiously varied the verdict 
recorded, since it was clearly proved that the momentary negligence of the accused hurried four men into 
eternity. The sentence passed was an extraordinarily light one for the olfenco of manslaughter, but in 
recording it the judge tempered justice with mercy, which will, we think, be generally approved of by all 
who consider the awful position in which the prisoner stood. A man of unblemished reputation, one who 
for many years had performed his duties with the utmost care, and was regarded as a trusted person for 
the position he occupied, has his reputation, position, and means of livelihood shattered by a momentary 
forgetfulness of his responsibility. The result was terrible, and must have been so felt by the most 
callous; but to a man of Jones’ temperament the effect of his own negligence must have been, and will 
probably continue to he, well nigh agonizing. It is easy to believe that the remorse felt by the unfortunate 
man, the awful recollection that ho had, although unintentionally, been the cause of terminating the lives 
of four of his fellow creatures, would be a punishment heavier than could be ordained by man, and probably, 
whilst awaiting trial, his sufferings were as keen as those now experienced whilst, expiating his negligence. 
It is sad lo know that any expiation, however severe, cannot undo the result of such a calamity; it cannot 
restore to life and prime manhood those who were the victims, or fill the void which their awful deaths 
made in the hearts of their friends and relatives. But the punishment justice demands for such offences 
as a deterrent to others, has, in the sad case under notice, been meted out, and where those who have 
known the unfortunate cause of the catastrophe the best—those who, as it were, hold every circumstance in 
their mind—petition for his release, we trust that an extension of the mercy which tempered the sentence 
inflicted will not be withheld by the Executive. 
The petition was duly considered, with the result that His Excellency the 
Governor, acting on tlie advice of the Executive Council, refused to remit any portion 
of the sentence. 
In connexion with this accident, a suggestion was made by tlie Maryborough 
Mining Board to the effect that it should he made compulsory that two engine-drivers 
should he present in the engine-house while men were being raised and lowered in any 
shaft. I referred the suggestion for the opinion of Inspector Stewart, who replied as 
follows:— 
Iii my opinion, the adoption of the suggestion would be of little value. At first the engine-drivers 
would ho dissatisfied, and would not he likely to give any extra attention if compelled to remain an hour 
later. They would, after a time, become reconciled, and during the process of changing men would most 
likely he talking together, and thus increase the liability to accident rather than decrease it. It appears to 
me, also, that the adoption of the suggestion would ho a violation of section 6 of the Act. I may observe 
that during my long experience I have known many accidents to occur through people talking to the engine- 
drivers, and, as a rule, the driver prefers to be alone. 
Iu connexion with engine-drivers at mines, I have for years suggested that they should not 
change shifts or relievo each other at the same hour as the minors, hut should do so either one hour heforo 
or after, for the reason that, as any practical engine-driver knows, there are many things that can be done 
about an engine during his absence which will make it at first a little different in handling. Even the process 
of packing a gland or stuffing-box will make a very material difference in the handling. Tlie height of 
steam or water and other things also make a difference; but if a man had been at the engino for (say) an 
hour or more, he would have the handling perfect, and would not, in my opinion, be so liable to start the 
wrong way. It often happens that just when an engine-driver relieves his mate the cage is at the surface 
and miners ready to got into it, and it is then that accidents such as that under notice frequently occur. 
Even in case of sudden illness or death, I question whether, if this suggestion were acted upon, the 
second man would he near enough to. prevent accidents; for the drivers, although compelled to be there, 
would have such confidence in each other that they would not stand close by, hut would likely be doing 
something about the place away from the engine. On the whole, I do not believe it would be of any 
practical use or value. 
Tlie Senior Inspector considers that the suggestion would have been a valuable 
one prior to the passing of Act No. 783, hut that it is now unnecessary, because the 
provisions contained in general rule 25 of section 8 of that Act, which are designed to 
prevent overwinding, are generally adopted. Cases of overwinding by engine-drivers 
will still occur, hut the Senior Inspector believes they will not he attended by loss of life. 
Mr. Inspector Grainger (Sandhurst) writes :— 
I do not consider the suggestion a practical one, as many of the mines work only one shift, and, 
therefore, only one driver is employed. Even in mines whore two or three drivers are employed, that is 
where two or three shifts are worked, the drivers would be obliged to work more than oight hours, which 
is not allowed by the Act. The suggestion, in my opinion, is not a reasonable ono, and would be harassing 
alike to tho mine owners and to the engine-drivers. If the special appliances provided for by the Act are 
in use, the accidents caused by tho drivers will he reduced to a minimum. 
I 
