Tired of seeing ads? Click here to upgrade to Elite Membership!

Author

Message / Information

Jennypeg
Researcher

1914 Mine Accident
replied on: 3/16/2005 10:11:52 PM

Hi Robert,
I will be going to the library, I could have a look for you.
I found this report for the same year
Eastwood & Kimberley Advertiser
13th March 1914
Protracted Enquiry
Fighting for Compensation
Remarkable Evidence
An enquiry which was held in the Institute at New Brinsley on Monday afternoon, touching the death of a miner of that village named Thomas Swann, lasted two and a half hours, and was characterised by some remarkable evidence. The jury were called upon to determine whether death was due to natural causes or from the result of an accident received in December last whilst working at the Underwood Colliery. The inquest was conducted by Mr. D. Whittingham, and was attended by Doctors Gauld (Nottingham) Neilson (Selston) F. Dixon and H.M.Gillespie (
Eastwood) Mr W Carter on behalf of Notts Miners Association, and Mr L.C.Hodges representing Messrs Barber Walker and Co.
THE WIDOW ALLEGATIONS
Mary Swann of Brinsley Hobsick, said deceased was her husband aged 60, He was a collier, in the employ of Messrs Barber, Walker and Co at Underwood Colliery, and
was well and at work up to December 19th last, On that day he went to work as usual, and on returning said he had got a pick run in between his fingers of the right hand.
The wound had been bleeding. Next morning he complained that it pained him, but he went to work, and continued to do so up to the Christmas holidays. He saw no doctor
In the mean time, and went to work after the holidays, but the hand was still painful, and he continued at work for a further fortnight, another place came on the back of his hand a little way from where the injury was, and that kept bad also. His hand was swollen every night on returning home. He said the injury pained him whilst at work.
Dr Gillespie saw her husband first. He was then suffering from a place on his right buttock, and the place on the hand had not healed. Dr Dixon visited her husband afterwards, but neither doctor dressed or saw the hand. Deceased was confined to his bed, and the wound was opened by Dr Dixon a Few days later. The place got worse, and her husband died on Saturday. The hand healed up whilst deceased was confined to his bed. Her husband had not suffered from swelling before. She knew of no injury he had received to the buttock.
By Mr Carter; witness said her husband had worked for the Company 30 to 40 years, and had never been attended by a doctor for illness during that period. He
Complained of pain during the Christmas holidays, and although witness asked him not to return to work, he said he was anxious to do so. There was another place half way up the right arm, similar to the one on the hand. He went to work in pain up to the 17th of January, when he said he could go no more, and would have to go to bed.
Witness said she asked Dr Dixon whether the place on the buttock had anything to do with the hand, and he replied “ Yes, it had flown from the hand; it would be all alike”
Dr Dixon continued attending him and certified that he was unfit for work. The company paid two compensation contributions.
Mr Hodges explained that the under manager was under the impression that deceased was suffering from injury when he granted the certificates, but said payments were not made on those certificates.
DR. DIXON PRESENCE REQUIRED
Mr Carter said in view of the foregoing evidence, he thought the attendance of Dr Dixon was necessary, and the Coroner agreed.
Dr Gillespie said his partner was indisposed, but as the result of a telephonic communication Dr Dixon put in an appearance at a later stage of the enquiry.
WIDOW’S STATEMENT CORROBORATED
Joseph Wilson a collier, of Brinsley Hobick, and son in law of deceased, said that he was in the bedroom when deceased was first operated upon by Dr Dixon, witness passed the remark that it looked a rum place, and the doctor in reply said, “Yes it has all come from the hand”.
Dr Gillespie said he was called in on January 23rd to see deceased, whom he found to be suffering from a carbuncle on the right buttock. There was a swelling and
Some inflammation, and he prescribed for the patient, who was subsequently attended by Dr Dixon. No injury to the hand was mentioned either by deceased or his wife.
Dr DIXON’S VERSION
Dr Dixon spoke to visiting Swann on January 24th, when he was suffering from a carbuncle on the right buttock, and there was a good deal of inflammation. On the third or fourth day he had to make an incision. The wife was doing nothing at all for the patient, and he got a Mrs Hewes from next door to carry out his instructions, and he was personally in attendance every morning. The patient appeared to be going on well but cellulitis set in, and gradually spread down the limb and eventually the parts became quite gangrenous. When first called in he was never shown a spot on the hand or upper arm.
The evidence of witnesses Swann and Wilson having been read over to Dr Dixon, he emphatically denied having made any statement associating the accident with the cause of the carbuncle, adding that no such thing had ever entered his head, and that he had never examined the hand. Continuing, Dr Dixon said he before any mention was made of the injury to his hand. Mrs Swann then referred to it in his waiting room at Brinsley, when witness informed her he did not think any accident had caused her husbands illness, and he could not give her a paper for accident
Benefit, but did so for sickness on the approved society, and she received two or three payments. The doctor added that he had to threaten the woman if she persisted in demanding an accident certificate he would cease to give any certificate at all and discontinue his visits. He could not connect the slightest injury with the complaint, but remarked that his personal habits had a good deal to do with his condition. Until the man was seriously ill, and it was thought he could not get better no mention was made to him of any accident. Had there been any blood poisoning from the wound on the
Hand, there must have been some swelling. There was no doubt in his mind as to the cause of death, and so far as he was concerned no need for any enquiry.
Asked by the Coroner whether, after hearing the evidence relating to the injury and the fact that the man continued working in pain, he was now of opinion the one
Was part and parcel of the other, Dr Dixon replied, “ No, I certainly do not. I could not connect the two. It is a mere coincidence”. asked further whether inflammation might
Have set up in quite another part of the body, the doctor replied it was within the bounds of possibility.
A NEIGHBOUR’S STORY
Emma Hewes (whose evidence was requested by the jury) having been sent for, said she was asked by Dr Dixon to assist in nursing deceased. She lived next door
to Swann’s. She had heard of no injury to deceased’s hand until after he had been in bed a week, when Mrs Swann showed her healed scars on the right hand. The arm was not referred to, and there was no swelling. She never heard Dr Dixon make any reference to the injury being part and parcel of the other complaint neither did deceased in her hearing ever complain of an injury to his hand. Witness admitted that Mrs Swann passed the remark to her that she thought they would have put the compensation allowance in again, and also that on several occasions she heard Mrs
Swann remark that Dr Dixon said it was from the injury to he hand.
THE POST-MORTEM
Dr G R Gauld spoke to making a post-mortem examination in the presence of Drs, Northwood, Gillespie, Neilson and Dimun, representing interested parties, as a
Result of which all agreed that the cause of death was due to cellulitus of the right leg following a carbuncle on the right buttock
Questioned by the Coroner as to whether he did not think it possible the injury may have brought about the carbuncle, the doctor replied that in his opinion it could
Not directly produce the carbuncle there would have been distinct traces of blood poisoning had such existed.
As to the possibility of the injury accelerating the doctor said there was no evidence, to show any direct or indirect proof of the accident causing death, but he admitted there was a possibly of such.
Mr Carter: you were all perfectly agreed on the certificate you have given? Dr Gauld: Yes
The Coroner intimated that he had been commissioned by Dr Northwood, who attended the post-mortem on behalf of the Notts Miners association, and who was prevented from being present at the inquest, to state that he was entirely in agreement with the finding.
Verdict After a short deliberation in private the jury returned a verdict in accordance with the medical evidence but added that in their opinion death was
Accelerated by the injury.

Tired of seeing ads? Click here to upgrade to Elite Membership!

ChatArea.com Help & News Forums | Terms of Use | Contact ChatArea.com | Advertising