CLAIM FOR LOSS OF WAGES

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 10273, 7 May 1919, Page 7

CLAIM FOR LOSS OF WAGES

ONE WATERSIDE WORKER INJURES ANOTHER. ,

. Mr F. V. Fiazer, S.M., was engaged yesterday afternoon hearing a civil ac« tion in which l-'rank. .Uonerty,. --; worker, sued Tom Daniels, who is also employed on the waterlront,. lor t,ne ■•.. sum of £l7 3s as loss of .wages and - < medical expenses incurred througa the. , ; . alleged : negligence of defendant. Mr E. K. Kirkcaldie, who, appeared „ ? 'for the plaintiff, said that. ou„Ji'ebruarv 24th, 'Doherty was-, engaged dis- .. 4 charging coal from the .steamer Ago- ~ ; kuta. " When coming' up the.JaddeP | from the hold the plaintiff was strucK ; by a large lump of coal-and. rendered. ~ unconscious. As the result of tne.; ■■. blow Doherty . was ; incapacitated from. ; a following --his , employment ,-ifor six , ;., weeks, during which .period he. receiv- ..:;* ed half-pay ln»n.:.the,,Blacj£baU Loai, ,: Company under the . Workers ■., Com-,,-. ;- pensatiou for Accidents Act.. His aver- , age earnings were £4 4s 4d per week, and he was. paid £2 2s 2d, as,.half-pay. Doherty said he. received, no. jntima- . ; tion that the coal was coming, down. ; Ho did not see who dropped, it, out when, he regained, his .senses he-heard. ;i -; the defendant say it was.lus-.iauh, and. . \ he .was very sorry for what, had occur-,-.-. red ■.' Harry Coe, foreman . for . the BlacU.- ' ; ball. Company? said he., was. in,. No. * , hold at.the time of the accident, ine ; •men had just come back from tea, and :* presently he saw something dark come': '■.■ down the hold. , Doherty . fell, hut 1 witness did-not see what struck him.. -.-, At first he-thought the plaintiff had . .. fallen in a fit, "but. afterward* he saw.., ■; a lump of coal',wrapped u.R,in>Jvliat he- i ~ took to be an pyercoat. : , ,Dauje]i;, «"ho 1,,.; was working in No. 1, hold, of .the ship, came down into N0.""2 hold-after the ) apcideut, .and.said he was responsible' ~ for it, and was sorry. The lump or ■ coal produced in court was the same. one "that was taken from' the ship's,;-; hold. The defendant, after, the acci*-. ; dent, said he. .would never touch coat ■ again. _.- .-. • , <H William H. Walker, a -coal -worker, . -.: said he saw the defendant - take tha ,; coal, away from the hold .after, the ac- ,; cident. -,;:.;,;;'.- ... -.';

James ,S. Smyths .-Andrew- Oum-miugs,-and Michael Liddy, -who were employed- working cargo on the vessel -at the time, deposed to Daniels saying ho was'sorry, but were unable definitely to say that the coal.was wrapped in an overcoat, although they were certain that some material was round tho lump. The defendant denied that, he dropped the lump of coal into the hold or . jvvas responsible for ,r,the a.Qci<3enfciu any ; way. He. did not -have lan:-overcoat with him. ■•>■ The- only way he could account for the accident was that ai [piece of coal might have fallen from a ■stringer in the hold on to the plaim tiff.

In answer to Mr Kirkcaldie tho do* tendant said that he was not carryingf a lump of coal up the ladder leading from tho hold, and accidentally dropv ped it, and was not in No. 2 hold till' after the accident.

The weight of evidence was. considered, to. be against the defendant, aw£ judgment was given for .£l2 lis 6d, , with £6 costs.

Mr P. J. O'Regan appeared for th*" defendant. ■ " ;