THE ACCIDENT AT PARNELL.

Auckland Star, Volume II, Issue 543, 6 October 1871, Page 2

THE ACCIDENT AT PARNELL.

>N the principle d audi alterant partem, .ye offer a word on the other aspect of the subject to wkk-h we referred in yesterday's issue. We do not defend the Parneli iiighwaj Board, nor any person, but while sincerely sympathising with the sufferers, who, at least are blameless, whoever may jo censurable; we think that we should llirow all the light we can on the subject. In the first place, the bus was we an informed, proceeding on the wr<-ng sideof the road, and on its proper suie sone twenty feet of roadway, without climbng over the heap of stones. In the next place, there has been some twenty-twi' similar heaps of stones on the same road, We are aware il may be said ths makes the offence twentytwo times/corse, but it should certainly have induced great caution on the part of drivers, tnd especially of those who, travelling ip and down the road every few hours in the day, must be acquainted with the stale of the streets, 'i he heap had beentlwre for a fortnight, and only about three yards in extent t>y about fifteen or sixteer inches in height remained, the whole of the metal, saving this, having been spread, and the spreading of this small portion being only preveated by nightfall. Again, the stones were about two iundred feet from a public lamp, the only one in the district, and was, we are infomed, sufficiently discernible by this ligbo, to say nothing of the lights ut' the bus, which, if they were not burning, should have been. As coisiderable feeling has been excited against the Parneli Board in connection roth this unfortunate accident, and as we hive helped ourselves in piling on the mony, we feel it right to say this much .br the Board: The members have put iheir hands in their pockets and advanced £80 to carry on the works for the public; and, if anyone had been Killed, the members would have been severally indicted for manslaughter, and as it is, are personally liable, we presume, for the legal consequences of the position of the unlucky heap of stones. Sue^i responsibility, must, of course, be the penalty for the acceptance of public position of trust, aud it is ruht that it should be so. But when we see the effect that these, and similar occurrences, may have in deterring the best of our people from accepting public trust, we should certainly feel disposed to moderate our condemnation. i