THE HUNTLY DISASTER.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume 7, Issue 215, 27 May 1915, Page 3

THE HUNTLY DISASTER.

A PAINFUL EEMINDEE. DISTBIBUTION OF COMPENSATION. AUCKLAND, May 25. A painful reminder of' the disaster which caused the death of over forty miners at Huntly was given, at the Supreme Court this morning, when more than a,score of widows and bereaved re latives appeared before Mr. Justice Cooper to hear his Honour's apportionment of the compensation as agreed upon with the Taupiri Coal Mines, Limited. Mr. T. M. Wilford appeared for the widows, *and Mr. E. L. Ziman for the orphans.

In the case of the children of the late William Patterson, the plaintiff was the Public Trustee, there being no mother living. Mr. Wilford said the ages cf the seven children ranged from two to l'> years. They had been sent to a home.

His Honour made an order for payment of £IOO to the Public Trustee as administrator of the estate, the Public Trustee to have liberty to apply to the court for direction as to the method of administration.

Alice Jane Jones deposed that by the death of her husband she 3iad been left a widow. She had no one dependent upon her. His Honour: The plaintiff is entitled to £775. What does she propose doing with the money? Mr. Wilford' replied' that on his advice the plaintiff had agreed to pay the amount to the Public Trustee. Tt. would go to a common fund, and would bear interest at the rate of four per cent. The principal could • be drawn upon from time to time.

His Honour commended this decision; remarking that a woman was nc* usually able to deal with large sums of. money. The judge made an order for the payment of £775 to the plaintiff:

.Janet Burt, for the loss of two sons, upon whom she was dependent; was allowed £775. Agnes Ransom, a widow, was allowed £775. Emma Mayland and William- Robert Mayland were jointly allowed £SOO for the loss of their son. Charles Allen and his wife were similarly treated in respect of the loss of their son. William Thompson was allotted' £2OO for himself and his wife ho'carase'of the death of their son. Ellen Boler, of Gisborne. was awarded £2OO for herself for the loss- of" her son. The plaintiff stated that her husband was a Harbour Board employee, earning her own living.

'Robert Izatt was allowed £2OO for himself and liis wife in respect' or: tlie loss of their son. When he came to the allotment of compensation to widows witß children. his Honour said thai he wo hi" follow the procedure which," he had'adopted'i'n other cases, namely, to allot a third- of the compensation to the ■widow and' the remaining two-thirds t > th'e Public Trustee for division amonjrsf the fihllcTren. , Mr. Wilford agreed that the app'ois

tionment was fair in a ease where there was more than one chill. Ho th-:i-ght, however, that where there was a family of one the child should not get so much mere than the mother. His Honour poi:::CMp <-,-.-* {hat the youth of the child Juutilled ih; allocation of a larger amount. Whore there was more than one child the Public Trustee would be asked to prepare; a scheme of distribution.

Orders for the payment of one-third of £775 (£2SS 6/S) to each widow., the remaining two-thirds (£578 To/4.) to the Public Trustee on behalf of the children in each case, were -made is follows: Hannah Taylor, Janet Slavin, Janet Jackson. Janet Patcrscn, Elizabeth Hoklen, Florence Eobinson, Sarah Euston, Sarah Greener, Fanny Burton, Bessie Kelly, Susannah Blenkinsop, Ethel Hopper, and Margaret • Brocklohurst. Mr. Wilford informed his Honour that the amount of compensation alloyed by the company approximated very closely to the claims originally made. He felt justified in stating that settlemens were in all respects generous.