Abstracts of Current Decisions on Mines and Mining: May to August, 1917 Page: 30
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
DECISIONS O' MINES AND MINING.
DUTY AS TO FURNISHING PROPS--COMPLIANCE.
The statute of Kentucky (sec. 2726, subdiv. 5), makes it the duty
of a mine operator to furnish the necessary props on the request of
a miner. In the instant case a miner notified the mine foreman
that he needed props of a designated length. At the time of this
request there was in the mine and in the room where the miner was
at work and before and at the time of the injury complained of a
carload of timber that had been selected by fellow workmen under
the direction of the miner for the purpose of being used as props.
This timber was the same kind that the miner had theretofore used
for props but which he believed on mere observation was too short,
and that they were intended to be used as crossties for the mine
track. The evidence sufficiently shows that the timbers supplied
were of proper and suitable length and of the same kind that the
miner had previously used and that had been selected by fellow
miners at his request and were placed in a proper and convenient
position for use. Under such circumstances the mine operator can
not be charged with negligence in failing to furnish props and be
held liable for an injury resulting to the miner who failed to use
and failed to make any effort to use the props to prevent the roof
Carter Coal Co. v. Reynolds (Kentucky), 1.94 Southwestern 311, p. 312.
DUTY TO FURNISH PROPS WITHOUT REQUEST.
Under the statute of Kansas, it is the duty of a coal-mine operator
to furnish sufficient props although not demanded by the miner.
Church v. Central Coal & Coke Co. (Missouri App.), 195 Southwestern 573, p. 574.
RULES AND REGULATIONS-NOTICE.
The statute of Kentucky (sec. 2738b), provides that the rules of
a mining company shall not become effective until posted as pro-
vided in the statute. Under this rule a mining company can not in
an action against it for damages for injuries resulting from the fall-
ing of an entry roof after blasting, show that it was the duty of the
miner to examine the roof after a blast, where it was not shown that
such rule had been posted as required by statute.
Stearns Coal & Lumber Co. v. Spradling (Kentucky), 195 Southwestern 781, p.
DUTY IMPOSED ON MINER.
INSPECTION-MINER'S WORKING PLACE.
The statute of iowa imposes upon a miner the duty of inspecting
and timbering his working place. But this statute does not apply
where an ordinary workman is sent to an entry to shovel up and
load an accumulation of dirt. The entry was not his working place
Here’s what’s next.
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Thompson, Joseph Wesley. Abstracts of Current Decisions on Mines and Mining: May to August, 1917, report, December 1917; Washington D.C.. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc38745/m1/44/: accessed January 23, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.