Before proceeding further with the account of the building we will place on record the first collective action taken by the young Association. This was in relation to the inundation which happened at Wheatley Hill on Thursday, the 19th of January 1871. The colliery had been in operation about six months; there were thirteen hewers, five putters, and three helpers up, with the necessary deputies and others, at the time it occurred. There were five lives lost, and others had a very narrow escape. There is no need to describe in detail the whole circumstances. It will be sufficient to say that a man named Roberts was in a place which was being driven in the main coal at Thornley for the purpose of tapping some water which was lying on the Thornley side in order that it might be run to the other colliery which lies to the "dip." In addition to those who lost their lives, other two were rescued after being in the mine fifty-four hours.
The Miners' Association was not slow in taking part in the subsequent proceedings, and at the inquest which opened on the 25th at the Colliery Office, Wheatley Hill, by Mr Crofton Maynard (whose able services are still given to inquiries into the sad accidents in the Easington Ward), the Association was represented by Mr W. Crawford. On his application that witnesses should be summoned on behalf of the workmen the Coroner readily consented to an adjournment until Wednesday, the 8th of February. The adjourned inquest was held at Wingate Grange, when Mr A. Cairns, Secretary, and Mr W. Crawford, Agent, were present on behalf of the Association, with Mr Kewney, Solicitor, of North Shields, to watch the proceedings. After a very long and exhaustive inquiry the verdict was "that the deceased were killed on the 19th of January by a burst of water in the Wheatley Hill pit, through the gross negligence of W. Spencer, head viewer, W. Hay, resident viewer, and Thomas Watson, overman; and that the said W. Spencer, W. Hay, and T. Watson did kill and slay the five deceased previously mentioned by neglecting to put in proper bore holes for the safe working of the mine." On that verdict the Coroner committed the accused for trial at the Assizes on a charge of manslaughter.
The trial took place at the March Assizes before Baron Martin. The counsel for the Association were Mr Herschell (afterwards Lord Chancellor) and Mr J. Edge. The writer of this history was in court, and heard the trial, and the able speech made by Mr Herschell, whose object was to show that there had been a violation of the Mines Act of 1860, the fifteenth rule of which was to the effect "that bore holes should be kept in advance, and if necessary on both sides, on approaching places likely to contain a large quantity of water." The Grand Jury had thrown out the Bill, but the case was still proceeded with. It was clear the judge was against the proceedings after the throwing out of the Bill; and eventually the workmen's counsel withdrew the case, because the judge was of the opinion that Roberts (the hewer in whose place the water broke away) should have known as well as the manager how near the water was to them, and because, on the technical point, it was quite clear how the judge would direct the jury. The accused were therefore acquitted. One little piece of funny puzzling of the judge is very vividly remembered. Roberts was not a native of the county, but was doing his best to train himself in the peculiarities of a dialect which, when spoken by a Durham man, is to a stranger difficult to understand, but more so when it comes from a Welsh tongue. At one part of the proceedings the judge asked Roberts what he was doing when the water broke in. The reply was: "Aw hed getten me jud korved, and the hole marked off, and was gannen back for the drills." With surprise the judge repeated the question, and received the same answer. Perplexed, but not enlightened, a second query was put: "What did you do then?" "Aw run doon the board and up the stenton." Innocently the judge put a supplementary question: "Was it a wide plank you ran along?" thinking the word board meant a piece of timber laid for Roberts to walk on. Upon an explanation being given he confessed that, in the whole of his experience, he had never been so much puzzled before.
In our review of the building of the Association it will not be necessary to mention the work in the county except so far as it relates to the object we are dealing with: the raising and strengthening of the organisation and the changes in policy and procedure. The first Council in 1871 was held on March 25th. The attendance of delegates was moderate, and Mr Crawford, the President of the Association, was called to the chair.
At this meeting we have the first mention of the Yearly Demonstration. It was moved "that the Council take into consideration the desirability of holding a general meeting of miners in the central district, the expenses of such to be paid from the Central Fund." The time named was shortly after Easter. It was likewise arranged for the agents to live in Durham. Mr Crawford at that time was residing in Sunderland, and Mr Patterson in Bishop Auckland. This, it was felt, interfered very much with the necessary consultation and arranging of work. A series of resolutions was brought forward by Mr Crawford. First, that "minerals be weighed only, seeing that measuring and gauging are sources of endless losses to the hewers." Second, "that miners ought to be allowed to place on the pit bank as checkweighman a man of their own choice, whether such person be one of the workmen or not." Third, the appointment of an additional number of inspectors or sub-inspectors is required—the number of pits in 1869 in the whole country being 3206, and only 12 inspectors, which gave an average of 267 pits each. The following resolution was carried:—
"We believe that to make inspection thoroughly effective, mines ought to be inspected at intervals not exceeding three months."
The fourth resolution was "that no boy should be allowed to work more than ten hours a day." The Murton delegate seconded the resolution, and said: "Miners were often referred to as an ignorant set of men, but if they received more attention than they did in the seed-time of life perhaps better fruit would be received. At present their boys went to work at half-past four in the morning, and did not leave the mine till half-past five in the evening. By the time they got home, washed themselves, and had a little refreshment it was seven o'clock. Certainly night schools were provided for the boys, but he could not see the utility of them, as the minds of the lads after being so many hours in the pit were incapable of receiving instruction. Providing schools under these circumstances for pit lads was like preparing food for persons who had no appetite." That speech is worth quoting and remembering, because it gives us so clearly the condition in that year and shows so graphically the change since then. The young men at least will do well to ponder the lesson. To them it means much, and tells them the benefit they have (in this alone) received from the labours of those men who so unselfishly toiled in the early days.
At this time a question arose which evoked great feeling in the Thornley district in particular, and throughout the county in general. This was the refusal by Mr Cooper, the manager at Thornley, to bind Mr A. Cairns, the Secretary of the Association, who was checkweighman, and Mr J. Jackson, one of the Executive Committee. At that time, it should be remembered, a man to be a checkweighman must be, and remain, a workman on the colliery, and therefore be "bound" as all other men were. The situation is interesting for two points—first, because it was productive of some very strong letter writing by Mr Crawford in defence of the two men; and second, because it is the first recorded instance of an offer from the men to apply arbitration as a means of settling disputes between employers and workmen under this Association. The offer was contained in a resolution passed at a special Council held in the Market Hotel, Durham, on 8th April. The following is a portion of the resolution:—
"This meeting strongly urges on the Thornley workmen the propriety of offering to submit the whole case to arbitration, the members of the Board chosen to be composed of an equal number from both sides; the arbitrators to elect an umpire whose decision shall be final."
I quote two sentences from one of Mr Crawford's letters: