1880 - Board of Trade Inquiry at Cardiff - Mr. Wales on the Ventilation of Coal Cargoes.

'The inquiry, by direction of the Board of Trade into the cause of the explosion on board the Horseguards at Penarth Dock, on the 13th of August, was resumed on Saturday at the Town Hall, before Mr R. O. Jones, stipendiary, and Alderman Alexander, assisted by Captain French and Captain Ward as nautical assessors. Mr Ravenhill appeared for the Board of Trade, and Mr Vachell again attended to represent the owners, the master, and the mate of the vessel.

The first witness examined was Mr T. Eccrington Wales, Government Inspector of Mines for the South Wales District. He had been so, he said, for 16 years. The Ocean Steam Coal Company had collieries in the Rhondda and Ogmore Valleys, but the coal put on board the Horseguards came from the Rhondda Collieries. This coal was, like all other steam coal, of a fiery character, and generally contained a considerable quantity of marsh, or explosive gas, which was only explosive when mixed with a certain quantity of atmospheric air. All the collieries belonging to the company were worked with locked lamps.

When the loading of the vessel was proceeding, the coal would be broken in falling into the hold, and in this way the gas would more readily escape from the small chambers in the lumps of coal. The consequence of this would be that if there was no ventilation in the holds while the loading was proceeding, the gas would accumulate, mix with atmospheric air, and then explode when a light was brought in contact with it.

From the evidence which had been given in the present case, he should consider that the explosion of gas took place in the No.3 or tank hold. When the man-hole in the tank hold had become filled with large blocks of coal, the gas which had accumulated in the lower part of it would rise between the blocks in the upper part, but not until the whole of the space unfilled with coal in the lower part had been filled with gas.

In his opinion the four-inch pipe placed in this hold was insufficient to ventilate the hold. The gas would not rise in the pipe until all the other places had been filled. The proper ventilation to this hold would be two ventilators, one at the forward and the other at the after part of the hold, and there should also be some inducement to cause a current a air on the top of the coal, otherwise there would be, probably, stagnant air, where gas would accumulate.

The action of a sailing or steam vessel passing through the water would not always produce of current. If his system of ventilation of coal cargoes was adopted cowls would not be necessary. In the present case the probability was that the coal gas ignited above the 'tween decks, and then by a train of gas exploded in the tank below. Of course, there must have been a light brought in some way in contact with the gas.

He should consider it a very dangerous practice for men when loading steam coal cargoes to use naked lights, when the hold was imperfectly ventilated. There would, however, be such a cloud of coal dust that if the coal trimmers worked with the safety lamp they would not see to do their work. Means should be taken to ventilate the hold so efficiently that the men could work with naked lights in safety. If locked lamps were used the probability would be that gas would be allowed to accumulate to such an extent, that after all it would be ignited even with a safety lamp.

He considered that vessels should have two pipes into each hold, and on one of them an exhaustive fun should be place, worked either by wind or power. An artificial system of ventilation was rendered necessary to insure a perfect regularity in the ventilation. If by the fan the coal gas was drawn from the hold the cold fresh air would rush down the other tube to supply the vacuum. Had such a system been adopted, the present accident would not have occurred. He, however, had not seen any ship fitted up with his suggested system of ventilation.