1898 - Coalmininghistorypa.org

446 REPORT OF THE BUREAU OP MINES. Off. Doc.granted. The act of 18!)3, which repealed that of 1885, provides thatpersons holding certificates of service granted under the act of 1885,may act as mine foreman at mines other Than those whereat theywere employed when said certificates were granted. The languageof the act of 1893, granting this privilege, would seem to imply thatthis provision is only ajjplicable in such cases where the person wasemploj'ed as mine foreman at the time the law was enacted, and alsoat the time of leaving the employ of one lirm to accept a similarposition at the mines of another person or firm. As stated in thedecision given to Mr. Fox, Mr. Warner has not obtained a certificateof competenc}^ But he did receive a certificate of servicegranted to him in the year 1885, and he continued to act as mineforeman for about one year after receiving said certificate, sincewhich time he has not acted in that capacity. The point in disputebetween the plaintitis and defendant is simply as to whether thelanguage of the act does or does not permit Mr. Fox to employ Mr.Warner to fill the position of mine foreman, seeing that he ceased toact in that capacity from about the year 1886, until employed by Mr.Fox in the month of November, 1898.The mine operated by Mr. Fox is a small operation, employing notmore than about thirty (30) men, and is remarkabh' free from dangersor diliiculties of an unusual character. There is no questionraised affecting Mr, Warner's ability to manage such a mine. Allwe ask is that the court i)ut a construction upon the language of theact, so as to remove all doubt on the point at issue.Copy of affidavit in No. 49 September Sessions, 1898.Mis, Docket.JAMES T. FOX & CHARLES "|WARNER,Ivs.INo.COMMONWEALTH EX REL TJAMES BLICK, MINE IN|49 Sept. 1898.Mis, Docket.SPECTOR.jThis case comes before us upon appeal by James T. Fox and CharlesWarner, from a decision of the Mine Inspccior of the I'ittsburgdistrict, under the act of Assembly relating to bituminous coal minesof May 15, 1893, 1'. L. 52, Pnid. Dig. 1370, l\\ 295.The facts as set forlli in I he decision of ilie Iiis|)ec(or and thestalement lih'd by him are admitted to be true. Fiom these it appearsthat James T. Fox is the owner of and is operating a mine in thePittsburg district, and has lately enii)l(>yed Charles NNurner iis forenuin.At the time of the passag