CLAIM FOR INJURIES.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17289, 3 October 1916, Page 11

CLAIM FOR INJURIES.

LAD LOSES FINGER. CASE ADJOURNED. Befovo Mr H. W. Bishop, S.M., at the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, Sydney Corner (Air L. Dougall) claimed £SO from Maddrsn Bros. (Mr Aclaml) for injuries received in manipulating a machine, whereby he had lost the right forefinger. Half wages had been paid by the defendants during tho plaintiff’s incapacitation, but negiigorvio was alleged, owing to the fact that tho handlo .of the machine was said to have been tied with string while it was running. Corner, a boy of sixteen, gave evidence that the machine on which lie worked could not be kept going unless the handle was tied up. One day lie snw a piece of string on the slialt. and tried to pull it off, but had his hand caught, and subsequently his index finger amputated. He could not stop the machine .because it was tied up. He was away nine weeks, during wlucli the firm paid him 7s lid a week. To -Mr A eland: When engaged he said that his age was fifteen. 'i'lie Magistrate road the evidence of J. W. L. Clark, clerk to tlio defendants, who said that the boy said ho was sixteen, and quite looked it. The Magistrate added that he could not understand anybody saying that the boy looked sixteen.

Further cross-examined, the boy said that the firm had finally asked for a certificate of age, and when lie got it ho had turned sixteen. The string did not affect the working of the machine. When his hand was caught he might still havo stepped the machine if it had not boon tied up. He bad never been warned not to touch the machine while it was running.

Horaoo Close, a youth, said that he had worked tlio same machine on the night shift. Ho had first lied the handle up with twine twelve months before to keep it from dipping out- of gear. Ho had mentioned it to tbo engineer, who had promised to see to it later on.

To Mr Aclnnd: The machine had since boon moved. E. G. Thompson, employed at Maddren’s, said that he was told to start Cornor, and instructed him in the use of tho machine. The handle was tied up. Ho had warned all the boys of tlie danger of touching the machines whilo they were in motion.

To Mr Aclnnd : The machine had not been tied up since the accident, and went all right. Twine on the shaft would not have affected the running. Ernest Wiltshire,, employed by Maddrea Bros., said that the two-ply machine had been tied up with string to keep the handlo in gear. The machine had since been shifted to make way for a bigger machine. Samuel Maddren, for the defence, said that tho boy was engaged on February 10. Witness was then away, but on coming back in March he demanded a certificate of ago, which the boy produced, showing that he was sixteen. All hoys were instructed not to touch or clean tho machinery while it was running. Personally lie had cautioned Corner. Occasionally if the belt was slack the boys put a bit of string on the handle, which was contrary to instructions. The machine could not be started with tho string on. The string would be put on by the boy after it was started.

Charles Maddren said that he engaged Corner, warning him not to do while a machine was in motion. At the time he said that he was sixteen. The machines had not been altered since the accident.

Tho case was adjourned sine die, to enable the Magistrate to view the machine. The Magistrate remarked that the case seemed to bo one for a. settlement.