THE WHITE ISLAND DISASTER

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2488, 15 June 1915, Page 7

THE WHITE ISLAND DISASTER

9 COMPENSATION CLAIMS ! SOME UNIQUE FEATURES l By Tclograph.—Press Association. i Auckland, Jmic 11. I Compensation claims arising out of rhe disaster which took placc at "White Island in September last, came before the Arbitration ' Court to-day. The ' paiticular case bolore tho Court was that of Florence Maud Williams, of ! lonsonby, who claimed compensation in i respect of the death of hoi' husband, who was employed on the island by tho i row Zealand Sulphur Company, Ltd., defendants in tho ease. , The legal argument which took place in regard to this case is applicable to the cases generally. ,¥ r ;. A. IS. Skelton appeared for the plamtift, and Mr. H. P. Richmond for the defendant company. Mr. Skelton submitted a statement regarding the circumstances of the disaster, which he placed before the Court. Tho main points to be considered. he. said, were (1) was death due to an accident within the meaning of the Acti 1 (2) did it ariso out of the deceased's employment? and (3) did it occur in the course of employment? r - Richmond, in contending that the three questions be answered in the negative, said that in the case of the White Island disaster there wore certain features of quite a unique character which had not hitherto, so far as was known, been dealt with under compensation law. The whole of the small community on the island, consisting of eleven persons, had been anmhilated, and tbero was an extraordinary difficulty in determining tho nature of the disturbance. There was nothing, however, to show that the men working on the island were taking any risk other than that which was run daily by all residents of a large portion of the North Island, where everybody was oxposed to the risk of thermal action. Tho President would not say that a gardener employed in the Sanatorium Grounds at Rotorua, where there is always thermal activity in evidence, is exposed to special risk? The President: He is always exposed to danger. Mr. Richmond: And so is a bank manager or otlier professional man at Rotorua. The President: Yes, but in ono case the man is only a few yards away from something which may be sufficient to cause his death. For instance, a surveyor was working on tho slopes of Vesuvius would he not be incurring'a special risk? Mr. Richmond: If he were actually working about tho top of the crater lie would be, but in tho White Island case there is nothing to show the distance that the men wore from the scene of thermal action. The usual scene of such activity was a considerable distance from the sulphur works. Even if it were known that the disturbance took place at a particular time there was no proof that the men wero then at work. In further elaboration of his argument Mr. Richmond said that tho case was analogous to that of an extensive flood or forest tire which destroyed a sawmilling settlement. Mr. Skelton said that the sulphur workings were known to be on the summit of an old volcano and that it was known to be a scene of constant thermal action. The time that New Zealand has been colonised was a mere fraction of time, and what took place at White Island last September was something which was bound to happen sooner or later. The men wero compelled to live on the island and wero actually engaged in moving a substance produced by thermal action. It was a dangerous occupation and tho men were standing when working, on a thin portion of earth's crust. The President: Suppose there were an eruption of one of the boiling pools in the Rotorua grounds—how would you distinguish between the man who was working in the grounds and one of the ordinary inhabitants? Mr. Skelton: The man working on the ground is required to work in close proximity to the danger. He would admit that it seemed reasonable to assume that the disturbance at White Island occurred at night, and not during working hours. • Mr. Richmond argued that if the-de-fendants were held to be liable for the payment of compensation in the Wliite Island caso every employer of labour of any kind at Rotorua would be similarly liable in the case of an eruption there. The President: Does this island belong to the defendant company ? Mr. Richmond: It is leased to the company. The President: Then tho accident happened on the company's premises? Mr. H. Willoughby, attorney for the New Zealand Sulphur Company who gave evidence as to the method of employing the men on the island said that immediately after the accident the company received a large number of applications from men for employment. The piesident said that as the points involved were purely legal the assessors had agreed to leave them lo his decision. He intimated that as the points were of such importance it would be advisable to have the opinion of the Full Court. Mr. Richmond said that in the event of the company being successful it did not propose to ask for any costs. Judgment was reserved.