TUAKAU.

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 5, Issue 184, 20 June 1916, Page 1

TUAKAU.

MISS TAYLOR'S ACCIDENT. TOWN BOAKD MULCTED IN DAMAGES. As briefly announced in our issue of Friday last, the hearing of Miss Eleanor Mary Taylor's claim of £2OO against the Tuakau Town Board tor damages, in respect of an sccident she sustained one night in December last by her horse falling over a heap of metal whilst she was riding home from a dance, was concluded on Friday at the Pukekolie Magistrate's Court. Mr H. U. K. Mason again appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr W. P. Endean represented the Town Board.

Constable Taylor depose 1 that o'j the morning after the accident he interviewed the witness Lindner in connection with the occurrence. Lindner told him that the cause of the accident was that Miss Taylor could not ride as she was like "a sack of coals." He also told him that the horse galloped away with Miss Taylor when she left Cole's paddock. Lindner lurther mentioned to him that he did not know which heap of metal the accident happened. Witness examined what was pointed out to him as the scene of the accident, namely, near Thome's, ar.diconsidered the metal was sale, as although it was nine inches high near the fence it tapered off to nothing. A cart could easily have passed between the heap of metal and the metalled road. He also saw signs of a horse having fallen down on the soft road—some distance away from the metal.—By Mr Mason: There was no indications of an accident at the spot where the metal was. The reason he interviewed Linduer was that if he had found the metal to be dangerous to traffic he would have reported it to the authjrities.—By the Magistrate: Ha cid not consider the metal extended beyond nne foot on the properly defined "eott" road track.—Constable Taylor added that Lindner, reterring to Miea Taylor, also said, "It that fool had only held her tonuge she would have got something out of the Board, but ebe bad blabbered about the horse clearing out with her." (Laughter). K. Dynes Fulton, chairman of the I'owti Board, gave evidence as to having spoken to the witness Lindner in the presence of Mr Storey, Mr Endean's clerk, when Lindner admitted that,he only heard a noise and did not know how the accident occurred, viz., whether the horse shied and fell or fell on the metal.

Miss Taylor, the plaintiff, recalled, said she had been riding horses since she was thirteen years ot age, but mostly when visiting on farms. She had ridden different horses at various times. She denied that (he horse ran away with her just prior to the accident.—By the Magistrate: She had turned to look backwards and thus did not observe the heap of metal.—By Mr Endean: She distinctly saw the witnesses Miss Clark and Lindner following her, and she knew that Lindner had said that he could not see her. Miss Taylor added that probably, however, Lindner was not looking for "her"— (laughter)— meaning that he was paying more attention to his companion.

Addressing the Magistrate, Mr Endean ?uggested that the horse stumbled or shied when leaving the metalled road for the soft track. He also submitted that no negligence on the part ol the Town Board had been established, but if His Worship considered such was established he claimed that there was contributary negligence by ordinary care not having been taken by the plaintiff to avoid an accident by keeping a look-out. Ht contended that de-

cisions of liability of local authorities in England should not be ht!d applicable to New Zealand as conditions were different since in the development of country in the Dominion heaps of metal were a necessity, and he urged that it was satisfying all reasonable requirements if the metal was placed by the aide of a road away from the beaten tracks, especially if, as in that cajc, the metal was only nine inches in height and was rounded olf. In conclusion, he referred to the variance in the opinions of witnesses as to at which heap of metal the accident actually occurred. On behalf of the plaintiff Mr Mason submitted that the actual scene of the accident was near Dweu's, where the second heap of metal was deposited and the discrepancy in evidence of some of the witnesses describing it as the first heap was due to it being the only heap they saw. Constable Taylor, Mr Mason said, had had the wrong heap of metal pointed cut to him, ard thus hH evidence should have no weight. He contended that although it was conceivable that in a country district a heap of metal required to be put on the road side yet in that case it was a Town Boad's district that was concerned. Further, the law provided lor dangerous obstacles to he lighted. The Town Board he claimed, was accordingly guilty of negligence in not having lamps placed round the heap. Miss Taylor, he maintaiueci, had been in do way negligent and it was somewhat preposterous for it to be suggested that she should not have looked back to sec it her l'riends were fallowing her.

The Magistrate, Mr F. V. Frazer, in giving judgment, observed that on the question of "idence the Town Board were in „je unhappy position of none of their witnesses being present at the time of the accident ana therefore their subsequent measurements aDd observations were only made on sec.nd-hutid testimony. The arguments for the defence concerned how Mi°s lay lor came to be thrown from her boree, where the metal was, disputed liability of the Town Board and the question of contributory negligence on Miss Taylor's part. As to how the horse fellhe did nut think the horse fell by going from the metalled road on to the soft track aa suggested by the defence. The evidence was that Miss Taylor rode on the soft track all the way. There was no evidence of the horse shieicg, and he held that the horse fell by stumbling on the heap of metal. He did not worry much as to on which particular heap of metal it was, although it seemed to him that the evidence pointed to it being the one nearer Dwen's than Thome's. The evidence varied as to the distance of the heap from the metalled road, but the Greater part of the evidence went to show that the heap was partly across the soft track, which was naturally the most regular used part of the road in the summer-time. Everjthing pointed to the heap being anything from 9in to ]5 inches in height, and such was likeiy to bring any torse down that came unexpectedly on it, irrespective of the ability of the rider to control it. He did not intend to discuss the question of conditions in New Zealand as against those in England and ne would only remark that where a local body left a heap of metal in a position where it was likely to be a danger to anyone using the road such body was guilty of negligence. In regard to the suggestion of contributory negligence, a person had a perfect right to expect a highway to be clear ut obstructions of the nature of the one in that case, and a momentary turn of Miss Taylor's head when she looked back for her companions was not an act of negligence, especially as the evidence went to show that she bad pui led up her horse to a walking pace, lie was therefore ot

opinion that there was no contributory negligence and also that the competency of Miss Taylor as a rider was outside the question at issue. On the question of damages, he would allow the £8 12s claimed in the £2UO for the special expenses which Miss Taylor had incurred. The more ssrious part ul' the claim concerned Miss Taylor's less of hearing, but it was admitted that she had suffered from ear trouble prior to the accident, but rot for the previous two years, during which time one of the ears was normal and the other not normal. Since the accident, however, the previous normal ear had btcome the worse of the two and there was no reason to douDt that such was brought about by the accident. The Doctors, however, that had been called, gave it as their opinion that the ear conditions would improve under treatment and judging by her appearance in the witness box it did not seem that the deafness was so extensive as to incapacitate her from carrying on a continuous conversation. He therefore thought that under the circumstances a claim ol £2UO as damages was excessive. Other than the deafness, the only permanent results of the accident were two slight scars on the lace and pains in tbe head, the latter suggesting a certain amount of concussion. He would allow a sum of £75 as general damages in addition to the £8 12s for special damages and would leave Counsel for the Town Board to agree with Miss Taylor's Counsel as to costs, failing which he would assess the costs.

A public meeting oi' ralepaycis has been convened by the Town Board for Monday evening uext lor the purpose of arriving at some decision relative to the proposal to erect an overhead head bridge ou the existing railway crossing on liarrisville road. A deputation recently waited un the District Engineer in Auckland in connection with the matter and the scheme is to be submitted to the ratepayers for approval or rejection. An improvement to the approach to the railway Btation from Liverpool road is to be carried out by the Town Board, the Kailway Department having agreed to give a small part of their vacant suction at the lower end of thej road to enable the present sharp corner to be rounded off.

A compromise in regard to the dispute re the dedication of the road on Henderson's Estate has been effected between Mr Henderson and the l'uakau Town Board, by which Mr Henderson has arranged to pay for the metalling of a portion of the road in dispute, the Town Board on their part agreeing to accept dedication.