111 Wash. 254 | Wash. | 1920
This is an original application in this court for a writ of mandamus. The relator is the state mine inspector and the respondent the state auditor. This is a companion case to that of State ex rel. Younger v. Clausen, ante p. 241, 190 Pac. 324, which will herein be referred to as the case of the state labor commissioner. The two cases were covered in the same briefs and were argued together. In this case it will not be necessary to do more than examine the powers and duties of the mine inspector as they were defined by law prior to the act of 1919 (Laws of 1919, ch. 130, p. 309), and compare them with his powers and duties under that act.
For the purpose of determining whether the new duties imposed upon the state mine inspector fall within that class which is outside or extrinsic to his duties under the prior law, or whether they fall within the class of incidental, collateral or germane duties, attention will be first given to his duties under the law as they existed at the time of his appointment, and this will be followed by a review of the duties imposed upon him by the act of 1919. The office of inspector of coal mines was originally created in 1897 (Laws of 1897, ch. 45, p. 58), but the relator holds his present office under chapter 36, Laws of 1917, p. 109, known as the Coal Mining Code. This code is a comprehensive act and describes in detail the requirements to be observed in the operation of coal mines, various regulations being therein provided concerning safety, health, inspection, hours of labor, etc. Under § 7, p. 116, of the code it was made the duty of the mine inspector to enforce the provisions of the act and he was required to devote his entire time to the duties of the office. Under § 8, p. 117, it was his duty to “enter, inspect and examine
Reference will now be made to the duties imposed upon the mine inspector by the act of 1919. By § 7 of this act, the state mine inspector bears the same relation to the state safety board as does the commissioner of labor. Section 8 provides for the promulgation of the standards of safety as set out in the case of the state labor commissioner. Section 9 provides that the safe place standards and the safety device standards for coal mines of the state shall be those prescribed by the coal mining code: By § 10, the educational standards for coal mines are to be prescribed by the board created, to be known as the state mining board, .consisting of two members to be appointed by the state safety board. By section 18, any coal mine employer, or workman, or association of either, or any joint committee of such employers and workmen, or the state mine inspector, are authorized to make recommendations to the state mining board of educational standards. By § 28, it is provided that the state mine inspector shall have sole charge of the enforcements of
It thus appears that the additional salary is for his duties in enforcing (a) the use of safety standards, (b) inspecting, and (c) certifying the same. The safety standards which the mine inspector was required to enforce under this act were the same as those which he was required to enforce under the prior law. The act of 1919 (Laws of 1919, p. 309), § 9, expressly provides the safe place standards and the safety device standards for coal mines shall be those prescribed by the coal mining code. The mine inspector’s duty as to inspections under the act of 1919 are practically the same as those which he was required to perform under the prior law, and is still required .to perform. Substantially, the only new or additional duty which is imposed upon the mine inspector for which the additional salary is allowed is the requirement that he shall make a report annually to the state industrial insur
The writ will be denied.
Holcomb, C. J., Mitchell, Parker, and Mackintosh, JJ., concur.