A RECENT INQUEST.

Shannon News, 13 April 1926, Page 3

A RECENT INQUEST.

UNDUE HASTE COMPLAINED OF,

PROTEST TO JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. The recent fatal accident at Waikanae in which a Wellington lady lost her life !by the overtuirning iotf a motor was the subject of reference at Saturday’s meeting of the Horowhenua County Council. The Coroner’s verdict at the inquest drew attention to the absence of lighting at the part of the road where the accident occurred. •The chairman (Mr G. A. Monk) said he wished to make a statement regarding this very unfortunate accident. He did not wish to discuss the details or cause of the accident, but he drew the Council’s attention to the undue haste with which the inquest was held, and asked whether they should not make some representations on the subject. He learnt of the accident between 9.30 and 10 o’clock on Saturday morning when a friend rang him up. He immediately rang up the Engineer’s house, but he was not at home, and the speaker left a message for him to come immediately to Waikanae. Mr Anderson did so and discussed the matter with .the speaker, who instructed the Engineer to return to Levin and get in touch with the Council’s solicitors. No intimation was received, however, from the Coroner or the Police, who really conducted the inquest, that the enquiry was to take place. Yet evidence was given by witnesses brought ■by the Police that was absolutely condemnatory of the Council’s position,, and the Council had no opportunity of being represented or of cross-exam-ining the. witnesses. The first official indication they received was When the inquest was over and a verdict returned that was condemnatory of the Council. He did not know exactly what position they should take up, but he certainly thought that representations should be made to the Jus-. tice Department on the subject. He did not think it wise at this juncture to discuss the why and the wherefore of the accident. He felt very much upset when he heard of it and deeply regretted the unfortunate. occurrence. But it wag a most unjust action that was taken, .whether by the Coroner or by the Police Department. It was very wrong on the part of the responsible people that the County Council was not notified and given an opportunity of being present at the inquest. As a local body they had done 'everything that they could be called upon to do for the protection of life, and in fairness to them, when the police knew the class of evidence that was to be called, notice of the inquest should have been given. Or. Ryder said, Cr. Satherley told him that the County Engineer , had been informed and had not attended:

The Engineer said he was notified at 6 o’clock on Saturday, when he wag rung up and told that' a verdict had been returned against the Council and that the road was very dangerous. He went to Otaki at once and when he got there he was handed the evidence and veTdict. There was someone at his house all day who knew where to find him if wanted. Cr. Harkness said the Council had not been given a chance and should certainly have had its point of view on the evidence put forward. The Chairman: And put forward our own evidence. Cr. Harkness: We must remember that the Coroner does not call the evidence. He is called to the inquest to hear the evidence. Tile Chairman: I understand he fixes the time of the inquest. Gr. Harkness said he would not like it to go forth that the Coroner was to blame. The police were responsible for the discourtesy to the Council. The Chairman:, Absolute discourtesy. I do not say who is responsible for it. The Council then went into Committee to further consider the matter. Cr Harkness moved and it "was seconded by Cr. Broadbelt, “That the Justice Department be written to, stating that this Council emphatically protests against the discourtesy and' negligence of the officials responsible in omitting to give this Gonncil an opportunity to give evidence at the inquest held at Otaki, in 'which this Council was vitally interested.’ This resolution was carried.