Discussions - Of Mr. Stow's paper on Pressure-Fans vs. Exhaust-Fans (see p. 398)

R. V. Norris, Wilkes-Barre, Pa. (communication to the Secretary*):—Mr. Stow's paper presents a series of arguments, numbered from 1 to 18, concerning the relative merits of four systems of colliery-ventilation, designated by the author as " plain pressure-ventilation," " plain exhaust-ventilation," " obstructed pressure-ventilation," and " obstructed exhaust-ventilation." These arguments are subsequently compared by means of tables, in which an arbitrary numerical value is assigned to each, and which consequently serve no other purpose than that of showing his opinions and predilections, as indicated by his assignment of the said numerical values. In addition to this general summary, Mr. Stow intimates his preference for a fifth method of colliery-ventilation—namely, what he calls " alternating pressure-ventilation," which consists in the running of the fan at "pressure " during working-hours, and as an " exhaust" between shifts—a system which he proposes as, perhaps, new, yet which he thinks deserves recognition " as a standard form." This proposed " standard form " is not to be found in practice ; and I think it would be impracticable in gaseous mines of large extent, for the following reasons: 1. It takes considerable time to reverse the air-current in a large mine; and the reversal would involve a period of complete stoppage of ventilation, long enough to permit serious accumulations of gas. 2. In shaft- and slope-mines, at least, it is hardly practicable to have " every man out of the mine" during the night, and certainly impracticable to avoid keeping mules and horses inside. 3. The doors necessary to divide and direct the air-current are properly hung to open against the air-pressure; and, unless