COMPENSATION FOR ACCIDENTS

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LI, Issue 295, 8 December 1908, Page 3

COMPENSATION FOR ACCIDENTS

A PECULIAR POINT. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Auckland, Last Night. The Arbitration Court has given, its decision in the compensation case brought by John Puhi Matthews against Gibson and FyfieM. The respondents nave a sawmill near Taumarunui On the 22nd June last Harry Puhi Matthews, a son of the claimant, while working at the mill, was accidentally killed. The claimant alleges that he and the other members of hi 3 family were partially dependent on the earnings of the deceased, and claims £2OO as compensation. Respondents dispute their liability to pay compensation, on the ground that the claimant was not the father of the deceased within the meaning of the Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act. The claimant is a Maori. Ita or about the year 1889 he took as a wife one Orewa, who is a Maori, and a member of the Ngatihuri tribe. The union was arranged in accordance with Maori custom, but there .was nothing in the nature of a marriage ceremony. Claimant and Orewa have lived together since as husband and wife, and have had issue nine children. The deceased, Harry Puhi Matthews, was the eldest of these children, and was born on the 4th of November, 1890. In November, 1890, a ceremony of marriage between claimant and Orewa was performed without any license under the Marriage Acts by the Rev. Taimona Hapimana, a duly ordained clergyman of the Church of England. The application for arbitration was filed in the present case on the 29th of September last. On the 23rd of October the ease was partly beard, and then adjourned. On the 27th of October, and before the hearing was resumed, the claimant registered the birth of his deceased son, Harry l'uhi Matthews, under the provisions of the Legitimation Act, 1894, and on the game day registered tire births of three of the other children who had been born to lum and Orewa. The question that arose on these facts was whether the claimant was the father of the deceased Harry Puhi Matthews for the purposes'of the Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act. The Court held that he was, and ordered the payment to him of £l3O compensation.