TRAMWAY ACCIDENT.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16433, 29 January 1919, Page 5

TRAMWAY ACCIDENT.

ENQUIRY RESUMED,

The enquiry into the tramway accident at Now Brighton on June 19th last, wliereby Conductor Owcrs met with his death, was continued before Mr S. E. McCarthy, S.M., yesterday. Mr A. H. Kimbell appeared for the Public Works Department, Mr J. J. Dougall for the Tramway Boajd, Mr F. W. Johnston for* Motorman Tilleyshort, and Mr O. S. Thomas for ex-Conductor Winter. Vrn.nk Thompson, general manager cf the tramway system, stated that some time prior to the accident instructions had been given not to use the loop at New Brighton. This was due to the proprietor of the cafe adjoining lying almost at death's door. As a substitute the pier triangle was ordered to be used. Witness gave details of the new light and buzzer system, which he claimed was an improvement upon the old buzzer installation. Tho new system had 'seen passed by the Publio Works Department.

To. Mr Thomas: There was no provision for lighting the cars when the trolley poles ivere off the wire. There was always a time when, a single electric car was left unlighted. To Mr Johnston: Tilleyshort possessed a good record as a motorman. He did not consider that q motrman's work involved a severe strain. His impression was that the principal trouble in connexion with the old system was duo to caxelessnees upon the part oi the men. On some lines there was not much time to spare between the running times; on other lines, however, thero was considerable time to spare. It was true that since the accident three of the stops of tho first express to New Brighton had been cut out, which gave the driver of the first car extra, time. The accident hud nothing whatever to do with the alteration. Mr Johnston: So it is a mere coincidence? Witness: Yes. And I could ehow you information which, proves l that the Board was considering' the alteration before the accident. ... In the course of further cross-examination by Mr Johmston, witness said he could not say from rrVemory whether tho "change-over had been eut out on this particular trip after the siccident. A motorman was expected to fcvko a car over as it stood; too was not required to look for defects. The cutting out otf the "change-over" was also a coincidence. To Mr Douijall: In the case of a serious offence it was the practice to dismiss or disrate a roan. It had been decided to disrate Tilleyshort, but before that could be dono the disorganisation caused by the go-slow policy had arisen, followed by the epidemic. Before that disorganisation had been straightened up tho Public Works Department had applied for the enquiry. Hence it was decided to a-ivait the result of the enquiry. If the jt3gulations had been observed Tilleyshort',s car would have been alight'from end to end, trailer as well as electric car. Ho hJ'.d not come across any bettor system of flignals than the buzzer system employed in Christchurch. To Mr Johnston: The Board would not Aave retained Tillej-short for four months after the accident aa motorman if they had not considered he was a fit and proper pereon to remain ss a Edgar P. Turner, engineer to the Christchurch Tramway Boird, gave evidence regarding the old and the new systems of buzzer signals. The new system was eatisfactory. Ho put in the reports of all the motormen who had been in charge of the car on June 18th, 19ih, and 00th, and there was no complaint regarding the buzzer. He had searched the reports six months bacJc from tho accident, from February Ist to August Ist, 1916, to be accurate, and th«r« weTe only four buzzevr troubles reported. Those troubles wove small ones. To Mr Dougall: Tho leporte indicated no inefficiency in tho system'. The buzzer system was infinitely more satisfactory than, the bell system. The buzzer method was i<ne most satisfactory he had hoard of or seen anywhere. The Court then adjourned until 10 am. to-day.