The Coroner and the Superstition of Colliers.
An inquest was held at the Reresby Arms, Denaby Main, yesterday, before Mr Wightman, coroner, and a jury, of whom Mr Longley was foreman, touching the death of John Wall, aged 14 years, until recently employed at the Denaby Main Colliery. Mr Gerrard, HM Inspector of mines, was present, and Mr Chambers, manager of the colliery, appeared to watch the case on behalf of the colliery company.
Benjamin Wall, a collier, employed at Denaby Main, said he was the deceased's father. His son would have been 14 years of age next birthday, and had been employed in the pit for one year and five months as a pony driver. Both himself and his son were employed on the night shift. Deceased worked in the drift; he was not subject to fits nor to attacks of giddiness. He did not hear of the accident until ten minutes to seven the next morning. His son was brought home dead at seven o'clock. From what he could learn respecting the accident he had no occasion to blame anyone concerning the matter. In answer to a question as to whether the deceased was kept in the pit for something like two or three hours before the doctor saw him, the witness said he heard that the accident took place somewhere about four in the morning.
John Wharmsley, contractor for driving a stone dritt, said he knew the deceased, who was a pony driver. He would have had to drive his pony perhaps 200 yards. The tubs drawn by the animal were laden with stone, not coal. He last saw the deceased alive about five o'clock on the morning of Friday. He was then starting away with one tub. Witness saw him start; he was walking; he did not ride, as he was not allowed to do so. Deceased generally used his iron lockers, but on that occasion he only had one iron and one wooden one. The incline gradient was 1 1/4 inch in a yard. When he next saw the deceased, the boy was lying dead.
James Holland corroborated the evidence given previously respecting the finding of the body. He did not know how the accident had happened. No stone had dropped from the corve, and it did not seem as if it had been off the rails. The boy had driven the pony for six months on the same road, and for the same men. There were 15 cwt. or 16cwt. of stone in the tub. He helped to carry the body a distance of 35 yards from the scene of the accident, and about 300 yards from the pit bottom. Deceased was dead when he was found.
In answer to a question from the Foreman respecting why the body had been kept to the pit until seven o'clock in the morning, witness said he had nothing to do with it.
The Coroner: If you had kept him in the pit for two hours alive when injured, it would have raised a very nasty question for some of you. The witness said he believed the body was not removed so quickly as otherwise it might have been out of due respect for the father's feelings. It was thought advisable to let the father get out of the pit, instead of taking the body straight to his son in the bottom. Mr Chambers said that was the object for which the body was kept. The Coroner said it was for the father of the deceased to complain if anyone did.
A Juror said a doctor should have been sent for, but that was not done, as the body was put on one side. The witness said the body was not put on one side. A Juror: The body was kept back on purpose to keep the pit from playing. The Witness: No man breathing can say that. The Coroner then inquired of the father of the deceased whether he found any fault with the way in which the body was treated after dead. - He said he did not know which boy was injured for some time [sic]. The Coroner said they had heard what the last witness had said.
One juryman thought that there had been very indecent delay in not getting the body of the deceased out of the pit. He (the deceased's father) had heard that there was an obstruction in the pit, which was full of empty corves, and that the body was not removed immediately out of respect for him. Mr Law said one man came to his house and said they could not make it convenient to get the body out until the full corves were removed. He had heard of the accident, but could not learn whowas the injured party, although something struck him that his boy was injured. He kept waiting to see his two boys coming.
The Coroner said he and the inspector were both satisfied that the affair was an accident. If the lad had been alive, had shown any symptom of life whatever, and had been kept in the pit for two hours, one hour, or even a half or a quarter of an hour, it would come with a very bad grace, and he would have felt bound to express a very strong opinion on the matter. If the lad was dead beyond all earthy doubt, it did not seem to him that there was any necessity for the urgency or haste that there would be if the lad was alive.
Holland's explanation was really a bit of fine feeling - that they did not like to go and plump the father in the face with his dead son. He did not know whether there was any superstition in the case. He was told that all the men in a pit insisted on throwing their tools down directly a man was killed, and would not work while a dead body was in the pit. It was merely superstition. He did not know why they all gave over working because there was a man killed. He did not see the necessity for closing a pit because a man was killed. He was quite of opinion with the inspector that it was an accident pure and simple. With regard to the circumstance of the case as to how the boy was killed, he said it must remain a mystery, as no one observed the accident or could give a clue as to how it was caused.
The Foreman: Why didn't they let the men know that there was a dead body in the pit? The Coroner: That's a bit of superstition, I suppose. Another Juror: I don't see how a man is capable of judging whether another one is dead or not if he is not a medical practitioner. The Coroner said if there had been any question as to the death, that subject would have arisen. A verdict of "Accidental death" was then returned.
Sheffield Independent, 24th July 1883.
No comments:
Post a Comment