YOUNG MAN’S DEATH AT MANGAHAO WORKS.

Shannon News, 23 December 1924, Page 4

YOUNG MAN’S DEATH AT MANGAHAO WORKS.

DUE TO OVERSIGHT.

FATAL OMISSION IN ARRANGE MENT OF SWITCHES.

The death of a young man of 23, named William Russell Matthews, of Palmerston'North, which took place at the Palmerston *North hospital on December 10, as a / result of his receiving an electric shock and a severe fall at Mangaore power-house, that morning, was recalled last week When an inquest was held before the Coroner, Mr A. J. Graham. It Was revealed that the switch gear had not been properly set. The deceased young man,', together with his workmate, also failed to ascertain whether the swiiches were in a safe position. In consequence, an 11,000 volt cui> rent had been in the wire when the deceased connected to it through a bar., The Coroner found that death was due to an oversight 6n the part of the man in charge of the testing. Mr F. H. Cooke appeared for the Public Works Department,, while the interests of deceased’s parents were watched by Mr Innes. Senior-Sergt.

O’Grady appeared for the police. Medical evidence was given by Dr. < Bett, who stated that when he examined the deceased, he was suffering extensive burns on the arms, legs, the thigh and the upper portion of the chest. He was unconscious, and was bleeding from the ear and nose, and was also suffering from head injuries. Shortly after five . o’clock he died. Death had, in witness’s opinion, been caused through a fracture of the base of the skull, and would be consistent with his receiving a shock and falling to a (concrete floor. The father of the deceased, J. ,S. Matthews, of Cuba Street, Palmerston North, related having seen his son. unconscious in the Hospital, just prior to his death. He was just over 23 years of age. To Mr Innes, witness said the home was dependent to a large extent , upon the. earnings 'of deceased, as witness was unable to work. Mr Cooke: How much did ho give you?—About £3 a month; sometimes more. v Preparing, for Tests.

'Chas. Edward Broad, a representative 1 of a contracting firm at Mangaore, stated that on the morning of December 10, it had been arranged to carry, out certain tests on an alternator; the work commenced at 7.30 a.m. It was witness’s duty to prepare for the tests, tfyfe deceased, together with Arthur Hoskihg, assisting, as on previous occasions. Shortly after 7.15 a.m. witness examined the apparatus under which they were to work, ’ and ascertained that all switches were clear inside. He then instructed Matthews andiHosking to procure a shbrt-circuiting bar to be placed l on the isolating switch of the alternator. This was done. As he had some doubt that the'bar could be placed on these particular isolating switches, he.informed the young men present that, in all probability they would have -to. take the bar to pieces on account of its mounting. Connected live Wire.

Matthews stepped on to a ladder and asked if the bushbars were dead, receiving from witness an; affirmative reply. Immediately the deceased received the bar, he placed it across the cubicle. Then followed a brilliant; flash of light, which temporarily blinded witness, who, for a second or two could see nothing of-Matthews. (After recovering himself he endeavoured to grasp Matthews’ garments, but failed) and then saw deceased falling. It appeared as if he had half turned and jumped. He fell heavily a distance of about eight feet, striking his shoulder and his. head. . Current s from Unexpected Source. Witness was quite satisfied that the wires were dead, it being his duty to see the switches : were all clear. The switch which had caused the damage was separated from the others, and witness was quite satisfied that it was impossible for the current to affect the spot at which they were working. Working the Switches.

To the Coronei” It had not occurred to witness till after the accident that there was a possibility of a connection being established through the other, switch. Te Coroner: Was this an oversight on your part not to examine it before?—The possibility of it did not enter my mind. It was not a wilful oversight. In reply to Mr Innes, witness said that his .employment was the outcome of some arrangement with the Public Works Department, though he could

not detail this. The switch by which » Matthews had met his death had been examined and found open—rightly so, inasmuch as witness believed that there was ( no possibility of • connection. The cutting off of one switch, however, had allowed the other to establish connection. This he discovered later. Both switches could not 'be cut off at the same time. Mr Innes: Then what is there to prevent the same thing happening again ?—Nothing. Witness explained .however, that • this test had been of an extraordinary character. Witness was - diffident upon the point whether the parts upon which . he was working had been taken over by the Public Works • Department. They were protective devices upon apparatus' that had done work for

add had been taken over by the Public Works Department. The switch upon which they were working could have been connected with . an idle machine, and it was the belief of witness that only by starting this machine could electrical energy | reach them. « , Mr Cooke: Dp you not think you j should have traced the wires right { back to the generators?—Yes. | To the Coroner;: The tracing back I to the generator would mean going ( through, work with which we had nothing to do. Failed to Book at Switches.

Chas, Arthur Hosking, electrical litter ;at Mangaore, who was working with the deceased, related'the details of the accident as told by the previous witness. It was his practice, and- also that, of Matthews, ,to assure himself that the switch was all right, but on this occasion both had failed to do so. They had received instruc- •• tions from Broad that'evep if he told them everything was safe, they should ascertain for themselves, Broad had informed Matthews- that the; bars were dead. ' Extensive precautions

were always taken by Broad in the matter of safety.

Robert Yule Baillie, a student of Canterbury College, who'was securing experience at Mangaore, also gave corroborative evidence as to how the accident occurred, he being present at the time. The Coroner did not comment at length upon the evidence. There was no doubt, he observed, that death had been due to the oversight on the part of the witness Broad in failing to examine the wires right hack to the generator. There also' appeared to have ’’been a regrettable oversight on the part of Matthews and Hosking to carry out the general instructions of Broad to the effect that they were to ascertain for themselves that everything was safe. The verdict was that the deceased had died as a result of a fracture of the base of the skull caused through coming into contact with a live elec • trical apparatus, and falling to a concrete floor.