Rosewood History

The Normanton Colliery

Queensland Times (Ipswich, Qld), Monday, 5 February 1923, page 4

REGISTERED FIRM. The Normanton Colliery, Rosewood, coal merchants and miners, has been registered at Rosewood. The proprietors are John Boughen, William D. Butterfield, Sydney L. Trewick, Norman J. Boughen, and John Trewick.

__________________________________________________________

Queensland Times (Ipswich, Qld), Thursday, 2 August 1923, page 6

The Normanton Colliery applied for permission to lay a tramway line on the high side of Walloon-road from Marburg line to Mr. J. Boughen’s property. On Cr. Waters’ motion it was decided that the letter remain on the table for a month, the clerk to secure information as to the ordinary procedure.
__________________________________________________________

Queensland Times (Ipswich, Qld), Friday, 25 April 1924, page 7

Normanton Colliery, Rosewood. advised that they intended to make a siding on the down line. They asked for approval to lay a line across the road entering the property of  P. Adams. The request was granted, the work to be carried out under the supervision of the Works Committee.

__________________________________________________________

Brisbane Courier (Qld.), Monday, 5 May 1924, page 9

The Normanton Colliery Proprietary proposes to lay down a siding to connect their colliery with the main line at 34 miles 60 chains.

__________________________________________________________

Queensland Times (Ipswich, Qld), Wednesday, 20 May 1925, page 6

NORMANTON MINE. A new tunnel has been opened about a mile and a half north-east from the Rosewood railway station. It is styled the Normanton Colliery, and the proprietors are Messrs. J. Boughen, Norman J. Boughen, J. Trewick, and Syd. Trewick, the last named being manager. Good, solid coal is obtained, and it has found favour for gas and steaming purposes. In addition to the proprietors, four men are employed on day work. No explosives are used. The pit has been worked a little over two years, and the tunnel is about 100 yards in length. Some water has been struck, but the coal is being obtained on the high side of the dip, and little difficulty has so far been experienced in this connection. The skips are conveyed up and down by means of horse power, and coal is taken per motor lorry to the Rosewood railway station. At present, about 12 or 14 tons of coal daily are being produced. The coal is obtained from the best portions of a seam, interspersed with bands of stone, of a total thickness of about 30 feet. Attempts have been made by the proprietors to secure railway connection with the tunnel, but so far they have not been successful, owing to engineering difficulties, and the difficulty of securing rights of way through properties in the district.

__________________________________________________________

Brisbane Courier (Qld), Wednesday, 5 December 1928, page 17

A siding is being put down to connect Normanton Colliery with the main line. The line will cross the road into the golf paddock for a distance of 15 chains, where chutes will be erected. From there a tramway will extend through the paddock to the colliery.

__________________________________________________________

Courier-Mail (Brisbane, Qld), Tuesday, 1 June 1937, page 13

ANOTHER COLLIERY DISPUTE –
Trouble At Normanton IPSWICH, Monday.
The secretary of the Queensland Colliery Employees’ Union (Mr. A. E. Phillips) alleged to-night that a lockout of 12 men had occurred on Saturday at the Normanton colliery, which is in the Rosewood district. The mine management, he said, wanted the men to work on a pay Saturday on ordinary production of coal, and also to do brushing. The men were prepared to do brushing, but not to permit ordinary production of coal, which was claimed to be a breach of the award and against the decision of the delegate board and the members of the union. The committee of management had advised the men to resume work on the old conditions, pending the dispute being referred to a conciliation board, but, it was alleged, this proposal was rejected by the management, and the men were sent home. A meeting of the Normanton branch will be held at Rosewood tomorrow morning.

__________________________________________________________

Courier-Mail (Brisbane, Qld), Wednesday, 2 June 1937, page 11

NORMANTON COLLIERY DISPUTE
Conciliation Board to Consider ROSEWOOD. Tuesday.
The proprietors of the Normanton Colliery advised today that the mine would resume on Wednesday under the old conditions, and the points in dispute would be taken to the Conciliation Board. For the last 10 weeks, they said, no labour had been available in Rosewood from the preference list. Two men, non-unionists, were employed at Normanton. The union declined to give them membership. The parties had agreed to go to the board on this issue. Work was resumed at the Lanefield Colliery this morning, and double shifts are being worked.

__________________________________________________________

Queensland Times (Ipswich, Qld), Tuesday, 15 June 1937, page 6

NORMANTON COLLIERY DISPUTE.
In an attempt to find a way out of the dispute which arose between the company and the employees at the Normanton Colliery, in the Rosewood district, three weeks ago, the Conciliation Board will hear the parties in Brisbane on Thursday. Though one of the issues over which the trouble began was a disagreement as to whether work the company sought to be performed on pay Saturdays was extraordinary or only ordinary, the main point which probably will be placed before the board for its mediation is the fact that several of the miners employed at Normanton are not members of the Queensland Colliery Employees’ Union. These, it is believed, have applied for admission, but the organisation has found it impossible to admit them because of its policy of first providing work for members on its unemployed register.

__________________________________________________________

Queensland Times (Ipswich, Qld), Wednesday, 23 June 1937, page 6

CALL FOR MINERS.
The calling of applications yesterday for two mine workers at the Normanton Colliery, Rosewood, is a result of a ruling by the Conciliation Board which last week considered a dispute which had arisen between the management and the Queensland Colliery Employees’ Union. The union’s grievance was that two employees at the pit were non-unionists; and against that it was shown that these men had applied for admission to the organisation, but had been denied it, because members still were listed on the unemployed register. The company in consequence of the board’s ruling, it is understood, is calling for applications: and in event of the absence of a response the union will be bound to admit the two men at present engaged in the positions involved.

__________________________________________________________

Queensland Times (Ipswich, Qld), Wednesday, 7 July 1937, page 4

In the Courts. COLLIERY ARGUMENT. Alleged Breach of Rules.
Sequel to a dispute between two miners in the Normanton Colliery on May 28 was the appearance in the Rosewood Police Court yesterday of one of the men, who was charged by the Manager of the colliery with having committed a breach of the special rules by allegedly using threatening words to another employee. After the case for the complainant had been presented, an application by counsel for the defence for dismissal of the complaint on a technical point was granted. 

The case was one in which Sydney Lyle Trewick, of Rosewood, Manager of Normanton Colliery, proceeded against Paul Purnell, a worker to whom the special rules relating to collieries apply, for having used threatening language to Frederick Domrow, a person employed at the colliery, thereby committing a breach of the special rules. The words complained of were: “You squareheaded German, I’ll knock your — brains out.” 

Mr. J. F. McCaffrey (instructed by Messrs. Dale and Fallu, solicitors, Ipswich) appeared for defendant, and the complainant conducted his own case. 

The first witness was Leonard George F. Boughen, a miner living in Rosewood. He said he was working on Friday, May 28. When he came out on to the table about 2.45p.m. there he heard an argument between Purnell and Domrow. Purnell, said witness, was refusing to allow Domrow to turn his slip on the table. Witness got between them, and asked Purnell to let Domrow turn the table. Witness and the two others continued up the road to the position where there was another terminus. Purnell threw his billycan away and rushed at Domrow. He said: “You are a German squarehead. I have a good mind to hit you”. He drew his right arm back to hit Domrow, and witness caught his arm. Witness and Purnell fell against the side of the rib. They then walked on to the pit bottom. Purnell was in front, witness followed, and Domrow followed with his waggon. Purnell and Domrow were still arguing on the lie. Domrow said to Purnell: “You have called me a German squarehead, why don’t you hit me?” With that Purnell made a run at Domrow with his billycan in his right hand, raising it in the air as if to hit Domrow. Mr. Gunthorpe, the deputy, ordered Purnell to the top. They all went to the top, and Purnell made another run at Domrow and threatened him again. Witness complained about the matter to Mr. Trewick. 

In reply to Mr. McCaffrey, witness said Purnell did not use the words: “You — German squarehead, I ought to knock your — brains out:” 

Mr. McCaffrey: “Did Purnell say, ‘You German squarehead, I will knock your — brains out?” “He could have said that, but I did not hear it”. 

In answer to further questions, witness said there was a copy of the special rules at the pit-mouth. A copy was given to him when he started work, and he had had several copies since.

DEPUTY’S EVIDENCE.
James Gunthorpe, North Rosewood, a deputy employed at Normanton Colliery, said he was at the pit bottom between 2.45 p.m. and 2.50 p.m. on May 28. After he had sent the rake away he heard voices at the back end of the line. When he came closer he heard Domrow say: “The meeting is illegal.” Witness then saw Purnell rush at Domrow, at the same time saying, “Don’t you tell me the meeting is illegal.” Purnell had his hand uplifted and in it was a billycan. No blow was struck. Purnell then sat down. Witness said to him., “Cut it out, Paul, and get on top.” Purnell replied: “I won’t cut it out”. He got up then and walked up the tunnel. When witness reached the surface he reported the matter to the Manager. The reason why witness told Purnell to “cut it out” was because the rake might have come back, and if the men had got into holts there might have been a serious accident.

“MEETING WAS ILLEGAL”
Frederick William Domrow, a miner, living at Mt. Marrow, said he was working in the colliery on May 28. He left the face, where he was working, about 2.45 p.m., and went to the table with his skip. When he reached the table he saw Paul Purnell, who said, “There is a meeting to-night” Witness said, “That’s rotten, because I have to go to Cochrane’s pit for my pay.” He said: “Oh, it’s a committee meeting.” Witness said: “That’s quite all right.” Purnell then said, “You worked yesterday.” Witness replied, “You did not see me.” Purnell said, “Call me a liar.” Witness answered, “‘No, I won’t do that, but if the cap fits, you wear it.” Purnell, said witness, then jumped up and came towards witness, who said, “Look, Paul, I am not going to fight again with anybody. I have done enough fighting for your lad and mine, and mine was left in the muck. That meeting that you held yesterday morning, in my opinion, was illegal, because all the men were not notified.” Purnell again came at witness and said, “I will give you illegal.” Witness wheeled his waggon away and said, “I will not be ruled by you.” 

Purnell followed witness to the next table and made a rush at him to hit him. Boughen then got between them, and stopped Purnell. Purnell then went out to the lie, and witness followed, wheeling his waggon. Purnell then came back to witness and said, “You — German squarehead. I’ll knock your — head off.” He motioned as if he were going to strike witness, but Len Boughen got between them. Purnell said, “I will take the pair of you on.” Witness replied: “I am quite capable of looking after myself,” and Purnell answered: “You are a — scab.” Gunthorpe, the deputy, then told him to get up on top. Later all the men went to the top, and while witness was waiting there he saw Purnell talking to the Manager in the shed. Purnell called out to witness to come up to the shed, but witness declined. Pur nell then came down to where witness was standing, and said: “Come over here and I will fight you again.” Witness said: “No, I am not going to fight.” Purnell then replied: “You — German, I will get you for it.” 

In cross-examination, witness said the first witness was wrong when he said Purnell remarked: “You are a — German squarehead, I have a good mind to hit you.” Neither did Purnell say: “I ought to knock your head off.” Witness added that he did not call Purnell a — liar. Purnell was Chairman of the Normanton branch of the union. On the Wednesday before May 28 there was a meetiing at the pit-head, and a show of hands was called for to ascertain who would work on Thursday. Seven of the 12 men present voted. Two voted for work, and five against. Witness voted for work. Mr. Trewick asked for the complaint to be amended to substitute the words “I will knock your head off” for the words in the complaint, “I will knock your brains out.” The amendment was allowed. 

DISMISSAL SOUGHT.
Mr. McCaffrey asked for a dismissal of the complaint on a technical point that the special rules relating to a mine, if any, for a breach of which defendant was charged, had not been proved or put in evidence as specially required by the Coal Mining Act. He amplified his reasons and quoted a parallel case. 

The case was dismissed. 

Mr. McCaffrey asked for costs, which were not allowed. The Magistrate remarked that the case had been dismissed on a mere technicality, and he would rather it had gone on to its end.

__________________________________________________________

Queensland Times (Ipswich, Qld), Friday 22 June 1951, page 4

APPLICATIONS FOR MINING LEASES RECOMMENDED
In the Warden’s Court yesterday several applications for coal mining leases were recommended for approval by Mr. Chas. Innes, Acting Warden.

APPLICATION AMENDED
Mr. Palmer appeared for the applicant company, applying for Coal-mining lease No. 325. He asked that the application be amended by substituting in lieu of the names of the applicants, “Sidney Lyle Trewick and Leonard John Boughen,” the names, “Sidney Lyle Trewick, Leonard John Boughen, and Leslie Arthur Boughen, partners in equal shares.”

He also requested that the name of one of the occupants of the land be amended to read, “E. Z. Hooper,” and “not E. J. Hooper.” He asked also that the area of surface ap plied for be amended to read “3 acres” and not “10 acres.”

Mr. Palmer stated that the applicant company held registered leases over the whole of the private lands applied for and registered leases were tendered.

Sidney Lyle Trewick, Mat thew-street, Rosewood, stated that the land at present was being worked from the applicants’ No. 2 Colliery, situated on the area of surface applied for on Por. 421. The seam in this area varied in depth below the surface from 60ft. to 200ft. He requested that a lease be granted to the three applicants allowing them to mine at a depth of not less than 60ft. from the lowest part of the surface.

“I consider that there will be adequate protection of the surface by mining at that depth.” witness stated. The seam under the road separating Portion 421, witness estimated to be 120ft. from the surface, and the applicants agreed to abide by any conditions as to mining under that road as might be laid down by the Mines Department.

“We are agreeable to leaving 60 per cent of the coal under that road,” witness said.

Mr. Palmer stated that agree ment had been made with the owner of the surface relating to compensation for the surface area applied for and the agree ment would be lodged at the Warden’s office as soon as possible.

The application was recommended for approval subject to survey and the provisions of Section 17 of “The Mining on Private Land Act” being com plied with; underground mining operations to be carried out at a depth of not less than 60ft. below the surface in respect of private land applied for, and not less than 120ft. below the surface in respect of the roads applied for.

NO OBJECTIONS
Mr. Palmer also appeared for the applicants, Sidney Lyle Trewick, Leslie George Boughen, and Leslie Arthur Boughen, for Coal Mining Lease No. 326. for private land situated at Walloon. There were no objections.

Mr. Palmer asked that the area of surface applied for be amended to read 5 acres. Mr. Palmer stated that the applicants held registered leases over Portions 669, 670, and 629. He stated that a lease was at present in the Real Property Office. The applicants had no rights over Portions 630 and 672.

Sidney Lyle Trewick said the applicants were working the land applied for from Portion 669. The seam in this locality would vary in depth from the surface from 70ft. to 300ft. Wit ness considered that adequate protection would be given to the surface if mining operations were allowed to be carried out at not less than 70ft. from the surface. There would be 300ft. of cover on the internal road applied for. “We agree to the terms and conditions as laid down by the Moreton Shire Council. By verbal agreement with the owner of Portion 672 we undertake to protect the buildings on Portion 672,” witness stated.

Mr. Palmer stated that agreement had been reached with the owner of the surface area applied for and that the agreement would be lodged at the Warden’s Office as soon as possible.

The application was recommended for approval subject to survey and the provisions of Section 17 of the “Mining on Private Lands Act” as to compensation for the surface area being complied with. Under ground mining operations were to be carried out at not less than 70ft. from the lowest part of the surface in respect of the private land applied for and not less than 150ft. from the lowest part of the surface of the road applied for.