COLLISION ON A BRIDGE.

Taranaki Daily News, 15 December 1919, Page 6

COLLISION ON A BRIDGE.

MOTOR CAR STRIKES HORSEMAN. CLAIM FOR £IOOO DAMAGES. WHOSE WAS THE CAR? In the Supreme Court on Saturday, before liis Honor the Chief Justice, Sir Robert Stout, and a jury of twelve, Ingramm A. C. Colson, farmer, Fitzroy, brought an action for £IOOO damages against E. Wooldvidge, motor garage proprietor, New Plymouth, for iujuries received through a collision between a motor car alleged to be driven by one of defendant'r drivers, and plaintiff, who was riding a horse at the time. Mr. A. H. Johnstone (with him, Mr. C. H. Croker) appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. A. A. Bennett represented defendThe following jury was empanelled:— Messrs A. McHarily, E. Francis, C. Sadler, R. E. Jackson, J. Robertson, P., H. Mace, H. Loonev, H. Standring, W. Scott, 1,. D. Callaghan, T. A. Marrett, and J. H. Gibson. Mr. McHardy was chosen foreman. At the request of defendant's counsel all witnesses were ordered out of court. THE CASE-OUTLINED. Mr. Johnstone, in opening the case for the plaintiff, said the occurrence which was the subject of the action took place on the night of March. 19 last. On that date the plaintiff left Bell Block about 9 p.m. a hale and strong man. He met with a very serious accident on the Waiwakaiho bridge, and did not reach his .home at Fitzroy till November 29, about a fortnight ago, a cripple for life. The issue was as to who was responsible for the accident, and what amount of damages (if any) the-plaintiff was entitled to. Detailing the facts (connected with the case, Mr. Johistone said' plaintiff rode his horse on to the bridge at a walking pace, and on the proper or loft-hand side of the roadway. When near the centre of the bridge he saw a motor ear dash on to the bridge from the New Plymouth end, with lights showing strongly, and on its wrong side of the road. 'Plaintiff lad his horse hard over to the parapet of the bridge, and he called out to the motorist, "Pull out!" No attempt was made by the driver of the car to pull away from the side, and as he passed the car struck plaintiff's right leg violently. He was tossed on to the parapet and fell on the decking of the bridge. He called for help, hut there was no one about at the time, and in agony he crawled to the New Plymouth entrance to the bridge. A young lad named Bartley in a house not far away heard plaintiff's cries, and came down with his father and found him lving on the side of the roadway. The father helped plaintiff, and also sent for Dr. Fookes, who arrived in a short time, and after rendering medical aid, had plai«tiff removed to the hospital. By this time there were a good number of people about, and Dr. Fookes offered to drive his car across the bridge while others looked to sec if they could find any trace of anything which would enable* them to identify the car which had caused the accident. When about the centre of the bridge a broken piece of the hood stay of a Hudson car was pieked up near the south or mountain side of the bridge. They also saw the hoof-marks of a horse in the centre of the bridge, at which spot there wtre signs that the horse had skidded. Mr. Johnstone said an examination of the horse had shown that it was bruised. on the left side, suegesting that it had been in collision with the parapet of the bridge. He then drew attention to the circumstances which many of those on the bridge at that time thought somewhat suspicious. A car came across the bridge from the direction of Waitara, and.contrary to custom, instead of stopping, when seeing another ear standing there, and a number of people searching about the Toad way, passed right on without stopping. Tn consequence of this Dr. Fookes went in pursuit in his car. and found that the car bore the registration number "Tool." It was also noticed that on the right-hand side of the car the hood stay was tied up with a piece of rope. Subsequently nlaintiff's father and a man named Harvey, who drove plaintiff to the hospital, went to defendant's garage, where they saw the car "T.i 51." It was a Hudson car, and still had the hooi stay tied up with a piece of cord. Harvey, who was a motor mechanic, was of opinion that the piece, of the stay pieked up was similar to the niece broken off the car. The driver of the car was in the garage at the time, but he would not admit or deny the collision, but said he had not felt anv vibration. It would be proved that Walsh had left town in the car at about 9 o'clock. Colson would sav that while he was riding in from Bell Block, no motor car passed him until the one which collided with him on the bridge, and that no other car came over the bridge after that time for the. space of an hour and a half. As showing the severity of the collision counsel stated that the stirrup iron belonging to the right-hand side of plaintiff's saddle had been found in the bed of the river a day or two after the accident. He also exhibited plaintiff's boot, which was torn open right along the right-hand side. * Mr. Johnstone then dealt with the question of negligence in regard to the manner of the driving bv the motorist. He also put in surveyors plans of the hrjdsre on which the accident happened and the immediate vicinity. LOCALITY PLANS. Evidence was then given by Edmund W. M. Lysons, licensed surveyor, New Plymouth, who certified to the plans. Cross-examined by Mr. Bennett, witness said there was a depression in the road just at- the New Plymouth entrance to the Waiwakaiho bridge. In reply to a question as to whether the effect of such a depression would not be to give a car coming on to the bridge a tendency to swing out on to its wrong side, he said it would depend entirely upon the speed it which it was travelling. A number of questions were also asked as to the effect of motor car lights on the bridge, and the exact distance a car would he from the entrance to the bridge before its lights would shine right down the roadway of the bridge; also in regard to the bridge lights. MEDICAL TESTIMONY.

Dr. E. F. Fookes deposed that he had been plaintiff's medical adviser for some years. Prior to the accident he was a healthy man, except for an injury he had sustained to his knee, which gave him some trouble periodically. On the night of the accident he was called to the locality and rendered surgical aid !o plaintiff. He could not say exactly at what time. It was. after his evening surgery hours. The right leg was severely lacerated from just below the knee to just above the ankle, and about twe-Utirdi round the limb. It W»« a

deep laceration and laid bare the muscles of the leg. He was suffering from shock, and after doing necessary dressing he had him sent to the hospital. He operated on the leg the next morning, and replaced the flap to its normal position as far-as possible. Within 24 hours signs of gangrene became evident, arid the whole flap had to be removed. Consequently preparations had to be made for skin-grafting. This was subsequently done, and the process of healing had gone on satisfactorily. The time as to.when plaintiff would be able to use his leg again was very indefinite, and he did not think the limb would ever be quite normal again. He suggested the wound most have been caused by a "brush" or "tearing" blow rather tiian a direct hit. Witness then explained to the Court what had been done in regard to searching for some trace of tlie car which had collided with plaintiff. Cross-examined by Mr. Bennett, witness said he had not noticed any marks of blood or flesh on the broken pieco of hood stay which was picked up. He thought there might have been sufficient loss of blood to have left some marks on the road just where plaintiff fell, though it was well known that the bleeding from lacerated wounds was not s'o profuse as from other wounds. He could not swear that Colson had tord him a motor car ran into him. He would not swear that the effect of the collision and the shock received would not effect plaintiff's recollection of exactly what happened. That sort of thing depended upon, the temperament of a person somewhat.

Re-examined by Mr. Johnstone, witness said when he spoke to Colson on the night of the accident he judged he was quite in a condition of being able to give an acocunt of the accident. PLAINTIFF'S EVIDENCE. Plaintiff, who was examined by Mr. Croker, gave evidence which was 'in accord with the statement given by counsel in opening the case. He also gave evidence as to the amount of the claim for damages.

_ Cross-examined by Mr. Bennett, plaintiff said the car struck him within a second or two of the time he first saw it. When he saw the car was coming straight at him he pulled his left leg out of the stirrup iron, and pulled his horse hard over against the parapet. He could not say what the car wans like that passed him, or what part of the car struck him. His weak knee did not give him much trouble, though he was rejected from military service on account of _it. OTHER WITNESSES. George Bartley, freezing works employee, deposed that he was in bed on the night of the accident. He heard a motor car go by, and shortly after heard a crash, and then cries for help. He went for his father and they went down to the bridge and found Colson there with his leg injured. He was amongst those who searched across the bridge, and saw fresh hoof-marks on the' south side" of the roadway. There was a poo! of blood on the road nearer the New Plymouth end of the bridge than the hoof-marks, and beyond, them he saw the piece of broken hood stay picked by another boy. The hoof-marks looked as though recently made. The only car he saw go over the bridge was ■* b 'g grey Hudson, which came from the direction of Waitara.

Robert John Bartley, factory foreman, Fitzroy, was examined by Mr. Croker, and corroborated the evidence of the previous witness. In the course of some evidence as to the effect of lights on a car approaching the bridge, he stated that with bright lights it'would be possible to "pick up" anything on the bridge. In going across the bridge on a dull night in a car without lights, he said it was possible to see anvthing approaching from the opposite direction. The night of the accident was a bright moonlight night, and the lights at the approaches to the bridge were alight. To Mr. Bennett: He knew nothing of the actual details of the accident.

Arthur J. Harvey, taxi-driver, deposed to bringing Colson in to the hospital on the night of the accident. He also went to Wooldridge's garage with plaintiff's father and daughter. He saw a car numbered "T551." It was a sevenseater, super-six Hudson. It would weigh about 35cwt. The hood stav on the right side was tied up with'new rope. The bracket that held the hood down was broken, and there was a dent in the back mud-guard. He saw Walsh, who was employed by Mr. Wooldridge as a driver at the garage, and had "a conversation with him. He thought anyone with lights on a car and keeping a reasonable look-out could not fail to see anything on the bridge. In reply to Mr. Bennett, witness said the hood fasteners on nearly all American cars were of a pattern similar to thejiroken portion produced. Vivian Jensen, farmer, Fitzrov, who deposed to finding Colson's horse "on the night of the acicflent, said that the right-hand stirrup iron of the saddle wa= missing. He noticed the next morning that the horse appeared as if it had been brushed on the left-hand side, and he flinched if touched on that place. He identified the piece of hood clip produced as similar to a piece picked up by him on the bridge o n ffle night of the accident. CAR PASSENGER'S ACCOUNT.

Vincent Patrick Kelly, Roman Catholic curate, New Plymoutn, deposed to o- om .» to Waitara on the night of the acci° dent m a car belonging to Mr. Wooldridge, driven by Mr. Leo. Walsh He had a friend with him, and there was a lady friend of the driver's in the front seat with him. Thev left town at about 9 p.m., and called at a, private residence in Hobson Street. He noticed nothing unusual as they went across the Waiwakaiho bridge. .Later on one of the passengers drew his attention to the hood of the car rattling. When he left the car at Waitara he noticed the hood was being tied up with cord. He did not return to New Plvmouth in the car.

Cross-examined, witness said he did not feel any bump as from a collision while on the Waiwakaiho bridge. He felt a bump just as thev entered the bridge, but that was due to the difference in the grades of the road and the bridge. He was of opinion that the car was not on its wrong side of the road.

Re-examined by Mr. Johnstone, witness said he was lounging in the back seat of the car and was well covered up with rugs. He could not see ahead of the car. He would not say he was taking no notice of the position of the car as it was a portion of the road that he. was always anxious to get over, whether a passenger or driving a ear. He reached Waitara about half-past nine. His appointment was for hnlf-past nine, and it might have been a little before that when they arrived. George Alexander Poison, father of plaintiff, and Myrtle Bartlev also nave evidence, the latter as to'f!ndinn°the stirrup iron in the bed of the Waiwakaiho river, and plaintiff was recalled and identified the article as his property.

Ivy Colson, sister of slaintiff. denoted

to watching the Waiwakaiho bridge on a night recently and stated, at a distance, of 40 yards from the bridge, a horseman coujd easily he seen coming across the bridge, without any lights but the street lamps at either end of the bridge. She had aiso been across the bridge at night in a motor car, and by its lights could see small pieces of paper on the roadway at the opposite end of the bridge. This concluded the evidence for the plaintiff. LINES OF DEFENCE.

Mr. Bennett, in'opeuing his case, said defendant was a married man with four childreu. He was a young business man having a motor garage business, and was also a mail contractor. It was alleged tiiat Walsh, as a driver for defendant, had negligently driven his car against plaintiff and caused the damage alleged. The negligence was alleged in respect to excessive speed, that Walslil drove the car on the wrong side of the road, and that he failed to keep a proper look out while driving over the bridge on the night in question. These allegations were denied absolutely by the defendant. He then dealt with the law on negligence, and submitted that plaintiff had to show some specific act of negligence and not merely to allege such. THE DRIVER'S STORY. Leo. W. Walsh, the driver of the car on the night of the accident, stated he left the garage at about o minutes to nine. He picked up Father Kelly and Mr. Kelleher at a private residence in Hobson Street. He also had a young lady in the car with him. He drove a super-six Hudson. Approaching the Waiwakaiho bridge he was driving on the left-hand side of the road, and going at about 20 miles an hour. He entered the bridge more to the left-hand side on account of the bump in the road at the entrance. He drove straight along the centre of the bridge. He did not remember passing anybody on the bridge, and was not aware of .striking anyone on the bridge, rie reached Waitara about half-past nine, and returned to New Plymouth almost immediately. At Waitara he noticed a piece of the bracket of the hood was missing. One of the passengers had called attention to a rattling at the back of the car when they were going along by Eell Block. He tied it up with binder twine. He could not say that the bracket was missing when he left the garage. He remembered Mr Colson coming to the garage and accusing him of nearly killing his son, which he denied. As a result of what Mr. Colson had said he examined the ear, but he could not say that he noticed any fresh dents in the mudguards. They were practically ail dented and bent. He denied that he was driving at an excessive speed. He had never been fined for driving at an excessive speed. He had been driving for about six years.

Under cross-examination by Mr. Johnstone, witness said his headlights were good. They were burning brightly all the way out. He saw nothing on the bridge. He had a speedometer on, but did not notice it. He also had a collision before, when a man on a motor bike ran into him. He also remembered having injured a cow by running into it. A man ran into him on the bridge at Lcpperton. He denied ever saying he went over the bridge at 20 miles per hour. He did not remember sounding his horn when approaching the bridge. He could not be sure whether he had said, a few days after the accident, that as far as he could remember he was dbout the centre of the bridge. The rattling of the hood was noticed soon after the car left the asphalt road beyond the bridge. The piece of hood stay produced was similar to the piece broken Off his car. To (lie Court: He. had not found the piece missing from his ear. -He did not pee anyone on the bridge as he returned from Waitara. He noticed a ear on the other side of the bridge. There svere some people near the tram shelter, but. he did not suspect that anything was wrong. He denied that he told Mrs Colson the following morning that it must have been he who caused all the trouble.

Mr. Johnstone: If you thought von had nothing to do with the accident, why did you go out to Mr. Colson's place the. next morning?— Witness: JTo inquire how the boy was. I supose being charged with the thing the night before had something to do with my going. I. didn't know Colson personally before the accident. Re-examined by Mr. Bennett, witness said tlio accident with the motor bike was not his fault, neither was the collision on the Lepporton bridge. In regard to injuring a cow, he said it was sometimes very difficult to avoid cattle. It was his practice to "slow up*' when taking a bridge. At this stage the hearing was adjourned till 9.30 a.m. to-dav.