MOTOR CAR COLLISION.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 849, 7 June 1910, Page 3

MOTOR CAR COLLISION.

CAMPBELL v. HENNESSY. A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES. At the Supreme Court Palmerston North, yesterday afternoon, before His Honor Mr Justice Cooper the hearing of the claim for damages made against Philip J. Hennessy by Elizabeth Jane Campbell and her husband Duncan H. Campbell, the result of a motor car collision was commenced. The following jury was empanelled :—R. A. Fuller (foreman), W. H. Cowper, C. F. Conlon, I). Speedy. Mr H. R. Cooper appeared for plaintiff and Mr J. P. Junes and Mr R. Moore for defendant. The statement of claim set out that on or about January 27th plaintiffs were driving along the Foxton-Shannon road from the Foxton cemetery to their home in Moutoa in atrap, which was run into and up-set by a motor car belonging to and under the control of defendant. It was alleged that at the time of the collision the car was being driven by a young child, who was absolutely inexperienced in the management of the vehicle ; that the collision was caused by the alleged unskilful and negligent handling of the car ; and as a result plaintiffs were thrown violently out of the trap and suffered considerable injuries. Since the day of the accident the plaintiffs have had to incur considerable medical and other expenses, and the female plaintiff, had been entirely unable to attend to household duties. Damages to the amount of were therefore claimed.

The defence admitted that plaintiffs were driving along the road on the day in question, but denied that their trap was upset through defendant’s motor car being driven unskilfully by an inexperienced child. It was admitted the trap collided with defendant’s motor car, and that plaintiffs were thrown out, but denied that the defendant was guilty of the alleged negligence, The defence further denied that the plaintiffs had incurred any expense as a result of such accident or suffered any damage. Further, it was contended that if plaintiffs were upset and injured, that injury was the result of plaintiffs driving without any lights attached to the trap, and by reason of the careless and unskilful driving of plaintiffs. Elizabeth Campbell, sworn, said that on the evening of January 27th, at about 7 o’clock on the Shannon-B'oxton road, she was driving with her husband, and met a motor car containing defendant, his two daughters, a son and two other boys. It was not dark at the time. Witness noticed just after leaving the Foxton cemetery that the sun was shining on the handles of a bicycle. That was about two minutes before seeing the motor car. Witness first saw the car about a quarter of a mile away. It was then on the metal in the centre of the road. When they got near the car it came off the metal and witness heard a crash. She knew no more till she found herself lying on the ground. Her husband was trying to sit up on the road. At first they thought their baby’s back was broken, but afterwards found out that was not so. Miss Hennessy remarked the little boy was very nervous and frightened, and her father had made him drive. Witness had been quite well up to the time of the accident, but since then she had only been able to do very light work. She was in bed and on the couch for a month after the accident.

To Mr Innes: The horse driven by plaintiffs was not a troublesome one. Since the accident it had been sold, and had backed into a brake. The motor car had its lamps alight when it came in sight. Witness thought it was extraordinary that the car should have had its lights going so early. She was not mistaken about the time. It was not eight o’clock. When witness first saw the car it was on its right side and the trap was also on its right side. Just before the car reached them witness noticed it was nearly across the metal.

Dr. Mandl said the previous witness had come to him on January 27th, obviously suffering from the results of an accident. Previously she had been a strong woman but after the accident had had nervous breakdowns and witness had had to attend her twice since the accident.

Duncan Henry Campbell, plaintiff, said be was a farmer living at Moutoa. On 27th January he had driven his wife and child to the Foxton cemetery, and was returning about 7 o’clock. He noticed a motor car about half a mile off. He saw the car before he saw its lights. There was a small boy driving. Both car and trap were on their proper sides ot the road with plenty of room between. When the car had got past the horse it suddenly swerved and came right into the trap. The front of the car’s front wheel splashboard was broken and the wheel of the trap was injured. Witness had never had any trouble with the horse previously. It was a quiet animal. The occupants of the trap were thrown out. Afterwards Hennessy said : “Never mind, Campbell, I’ll see to everything.” He drove them to Foxton in the motor car and showed them how the accident happened. He said : ‘‘The little chap must have lost his head, and must have taken his eyes off the road and kept them on the trap.” Jack Hennessy said the

boy must have taken the wrong turning. Later on Hennessy told witness to take his trap into Barber’s and get it mended. The horse was ruined as a trap horse, and was sold.

To Mr limes: Witness got equal to for the horse when he sold it. The horse was not a bad shyer, and did not shy at all on this occasion. There was plenty of room on the gravelled portion of the road for both the car and the trap. Witness first saw the car four or five chains off, and when it got near the trap he saw it was coming in too close. Witness said he did not tell Heunessy he was sorry and that he (witness) was to blame. He might have told Hennessy that he felt sorry for him. After the accident defendant said to witness, “ Don’t you bother, Campbell, I’ll see to everything.” Hennessy took all the blame for the accident, and did ail that was possible for the comfort of his wife immediately after the accident. Witness did not approach defendant in reternce to damages until towards the end of March, as he considered it was Hennessy’s place to come to him, and he thought that he would keep his word. Whenever defendant met witness he always asked how Mrs Campbell was. Witness said he remembered Mr Carter speaking to him in reference to the accident, but he denied telling Carter that Hennessy was not to blame. He told Carter he considered Hennessy was a man of his word and would do what he said he would. Carter replied, 11 Yes, that’ll be alright. He’ll do what he said he wohld.” Did not lead Carter to believe that it was purely an accident in which no one was to blame. Did not remember discussing the matter with Mr Perreau, and certainly did not tell him that it would be a dirty thing to try and recover damages as it was purely an accident. Witness said he had told several people that he had no idea of going for damages, as he expected Hennessy would fix it up. When Hennessy asked witness for the doctor’a bill witness said there were other things. Defendant asked what they were, and witness explained that he was not in a position to stand the loss. He also mentioned the effect of the accident on Mrs Campbell and his loss over the horse and other matters, and Hennessy said, “ Let it run on, Campbell, let it run on.” This occurred about the middle of March. On the night of the accident, witness said they finished milking about 5.40 o’clock, and left the house in the trap not more than half an hour later. Did not notice where Hennessy was sitting in the car, in fact did not know it was Hennessy’s car until after the accident.

To Mr Cooper: Witness was talking to Mrs Easton and others at the cemetery prior to the accident. The reason he did not approach Hennessy in the first place was because he expected he would come to him and state what he was prepared to do in the matter. He was subjected to considerable loss on account of being unable to do necessary work on his farm, such as ploughing, fencing, draining, etc. His Honour said that in reference to the farm work undone, plaintiff would not be entitled to recover damages on this score, but only for expenses put to in connection with the housework, etc., on account of the injuries to Mrs Campbell. Annie Easton, wife of William Easton, of Foxton, said that on January 27th she remembered Campbell driving away from the cemetery between 6.30 and 7 p.m. It was daylight at the time. Saw Mr Hennessy the same evening, when he told her of the accident. He said his little boy was driving, and he took the wrong turn and ran into Mr Campbell’s trap.

To Mr Inness: Witness met Campbells coming out of the cemetery gate. When they drove away they went in the direction of their home. Mr Hennessy called at witness’ house at about dusk. It was before nine o’clock. He did not say anything about controlling the car himself. He said he wanted the boy to learn to drive.

Edward Rushton, farmer, residing on the Foxton-Shannon road, sworn, said that on the evening of the accident he was ploughing, and saw the car go along the road, and shortly afterwards heard a smash. It was quite light at the time as it was not seven o’clock. Immediately he heard the smash he ran across to the road, and the first thing he saw was Campbell’s trap on the side of the road. It was some little distance from the car. Went down to the car and saw Mrs Campbell lying on the ground. Both the car and the trap were on the same side of the road —the trap was on its right side and the car on the wrong side. The car was facing Foxton. Witness spoke to Jack Hennessy. He said it was their fault, the boy turned the wheel the wrong way and the car ran into the trap. Witness did not notice any lights, and he did not think there was the least necessity for them. Witness produced a drawing showing the position of the car and trap on the road.

Selina Anne Rushton, wife of the previous witness, said that on the evening in question she was sitting on the verandah of their house, which faced the road. She heard the smash, and ran down to the road and saw the motor car on the wrong side, facing towards Foxton. Mrs Campbell was sitting on the side of the road. The time was between 6.30 and 6.45 o’clock. Witness was positive that it was not later, as she and her daughter were sewing at

the time, and they could see quite well. She could see the road from their house quite clearly. There was not the least necessity for lights on any vehicle at the time. When witness got to the scene of the accident she spoke to the younger Miss Hennessy, who made a statement as to the cause of the accident. To Mr Inness: Witness was positive as to the time. Miss Wright and Miss Hudson came up a long time after the accident. It was about half an hour after the accident before the car left for Foxton. There was a light on the car.

Elsie Rushton, daughter of the previous witness corroborated the evidence as to it being quite light at the time. She heard the crash and also a scream. When she got to the scene she saw the Misses Hennessy talking to Mrs Campbell.

Richard H. Barber, engineer and wheelwright, Foxton, in evidence stated that he repaired a trap belonging to Mr Campbell somewhere about the end of January. Hennessy instructed him to repair it. He came to him and said that if Campbell brought a trap in witness was to repair it and charge the cost to him (Henuessy). He said the trap ran into the motor car. He said he had his son driving and he must have swerved in passing. Witness said the damage to the trap was on the off-side. To Mr Junes : Witness said that Campbell told him the car ran into the trap. This was caused he said by the car swerving rather much coming up the road. Campbell did not mention what time it was.

John Rankin, farmer, employed by Mr W. S. Carter, ot Moutoa, said that on the evening in question he was driving into Foxton, He arrived on the scene after the accident. The car passed him about ten minutes before the accident and did not have lights at the time. Witness caught up to the car again shortly afterwards and they were just lighting up. The car again passed him after lighting the lights. At the time there was no necessity for lights. When he got to the scene of the accident he saw the trap capsized on the side of the road, and the car a little further along. Witness spoke to Hennessy who said the accident was the fault of his boy’s driving. The time was about seven o’clock.

To Mr Innes : The scene of the accident was about six miles from Carter’s residence. He left there almost immediately after he knocked off work which he did at six o’clock. He \yas certain he did not work.until half past six.

To Mr Cooper : He got into Foxtou at about eight o’clock that night. He stayed at the scene of the accident about 20 miuutes. To His Honour: It was just getting dark at the time. This closed the case for the plaintiffs. Mr Innes in opening the case for the defence referred to the largeness of the claim, which he contended was extraordinary on the evidence of the plaintiffs themselves. He considered it was a case for the Magistrate's Court. The evidence for the defence would be directed to firstly, the time of the collision, secondly, amount of damages, and thirdly through whose fault the accident occurred. The evidence he proposed to call would, he said, show that the accident occurred a. great deal later than that stated by the witnesses for plaintiffs—that it was nearer eight o’clock and almost dark. He said it was an extraordinary position that plaintiff should have said nothing until months after the accident occurred. If, he said, the jury found that the plaintiffs were to blame or that plaintiffs and defendants were equally to blame, then plaintiffs were not entitled to any damages. At this stage the Court was adjourned and the hearing will be continued at 12 o'clock to-morrow.