ARBITRATION COURT

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 134, 1 March 1919, Page 10

ARBITRATION COURT

CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION

UNUSUAL FACTS

The Arbitration Court sat yesterday to lieiir a claim ■ for compensation. _ His Honour "Mr. Justice Stringer presided, and associated with him, were Messrs. W. Scott (employers' representative), and j. A.- MCullough (workers' representative). \ Matilda May "Walker, the plaintift, is the widow of Frank Walker, linotype operator at, Otaki, who was in this employ of the defendant, Frank I'eim, proprietor of the "Otaki Mail." It was set out in the statement of claim that on | July 16, 1918, Frank Walker .sustained (in'injury by accident arising out of the course of his employment in that wnlie at work he tripped or stumbled and fell, his head ■coming into contact with the wall of the premises wherein he was employed, in consequent whereof he suffered injury to the briiin and cerebrael haemorrhage. As a result he became mentally deranged, and on or about July 19, 1918, he committed suicide. Ihe plaintiff claimed under Section 21 (2) of the Workers' Compensation Act, on behalf of herself and her son compensation in the si|iu of .£SOO. 'Mr. P. J. O'Regan appeared for the plaintiff,-, and Mr. T. Neave for the iefendant. . . : Mr. *P. J. O'Regan, in opening said that on the' day of fth« alleged accident, Frank Walker went to the rear of the building to attend, to a gas engine. What happened there might be in erred from the fact that Walker suddenly staggered into the composing room groaning and holding both hands on the top of his head. When questioned by "nomas Collins, a fellow-worker, Walker stated 'that he had slipped v and had fallen against the brick wall. Collins 6aw that the injury was 6evere, and he assisted 'Walker to his home, where he-was put to bed, and Dr. Houthwait? sent for. On Friday, after lunch, he intimated to his wife that ho thought a walk would do him good, and he * left the house.-He was last seen by a farmer walking along Convent Road\ in a northerly direction. He never returned' honie v , and & 6earcli was made, without success. Some three weeks afterwards the ,body/ was " c 7 cl . t ) e ? ally discovered floating in the Waitohu Stream not far from the sea beach. At ■the inquest the jury returned a verdict that the cause of death was mental aberration, following on the accident, and that verdict could only be interpreted as one :of suicide. The.Court would be asked /to infer first, that Walker became mentally derahged. in consequence of the injury to the brain, and secondly that he committed euioide, and assuming that the Court woul<l draw these inferences, then the case was well within established authority that death was the result of the condition of the injury and the widow was entitled to compensation and funeral expenses. Evidence in support was given bj Thomas Collins, jobbing compositor, the. plaintiff, and others. , . Dr W H. J; Ho.uthwaite, of Otaki, said' the condition of Walker when seen by witness on the day of the accident was consistent with the account of the accident. After thexrecovery ot the body witness performed a partial post-mortem examination,' and ;found two clots_ ot blood on the left side of the brain. This haemorrhage on the brain would have affected Walker's-feeneral intellect, and would have affected his menta capacity detrimentally. Had Walker not gone out for the walk ho would probably have recovered from &e concussion, but there would, have been the possibility o .the Clots/of blood causing trouble later. From the evidence he had heard and the history of the case, witness would say that at the time .of Walker going for the walk his mind was unhinged. To Mr. Neave: Walker's condition was not such as to , necessitate' his being placed under special control. , Dr. W. K. Fyffo said from the evidence he had not hesitation in saying that .Walker /had .been suffering from se\ ero concession and irritation of the brain. That wild undoubtedly affect his men-, tal capacity. People affected with irritation of, the brain, would do most extraordinary . things. They would talk most rationally audi perform most unusual things. From, the evidenco he had heard ho had formed the opinion that Walker's mindi was affected. . Mr. Neave: Is there not generally observable from a man's conversation the intention on his. part to commit suicidq? Dr. 'Fvffe: I should say not. Mr. Neave: At the time he went out for a walk the man expressed the intention of doing certaiit things going and coming.. Are not these circumstances entirely' consistent vytli his being a fully rational individual at that time? Dr. Fyffe: No doubt about that.' Mr...Neav.e: Was it possible for him to lie seized with suicidal tendency an hour later, after he "had gone for the walk? Dr. Fyffe:-Quite possible, i This closed the cose for the'plaintiff. Mr. Ne«ve said that he did not propose .to call evidence, because the facts were not in dispute. He was prepared to admit that a' blow such as -had been, described would affect the mental condition of the deceased. Admitting these facts, the plaintiff was sfiill a long way from proving all the points that it was necessary to prove that Walker's death resulted from the injury he received days before. -It had to be established that the effect of the blow was to make the man insane. Suicide without predisposing insanity would leave the plaintiff hopelessly out of the scope, of the Workers' Compeiisation Act. His point was that no evidence had been produced that Walker met his' death through suicide, and every presumption both at law and on the facts in the case rebutted tho theory of suicide. There was every presumption against suicide. Would anyono say that Wnlker deliberate^,- committed suicide? 1 His Honour: He got into tho water. Supposing he had a sudden, attack of giddiness—and he suffered from giddiness—and fell into the water, that would not be suicide, but it would be the* result of the aocident. Mr; Neave: Even in that case tho chain of causation would »ot be complete. Tho accident arose out of his employment.'but the accident that'caused his death did not. He left homo with tho expressed intention- of going to the beach to gather pipis for his wife, and tney had no evidence to show that he did not reach the beach. It would be unreasonable of the Court to infer that ho did not r'eacli the beaelh, but that Jio went deliberately to the river and drowned himsell. Sir. Neave then quoted at length authorities in support of his contention, which was that proof of suicide had not been established. The Court reserved its decision.