THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. FRIDAY, APRIL 13, 1877.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2579, 13 April 1877, Page 2

THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. FRIDAY, APRIL 13, 1877.

■ « .— Two matters, in connection with the recent fatal accident in Karaka Road and the subsequent treatment of the body, call for remark. In the first place, it seems quite clear that deceased came to his death by falling over a cutting left in a dangerously unprotected state, without either fence or lamp. This, we imagine, discloses an offence against the municipal bye-laws, a simple matter to be disposed of by fine. But human life has been sacrificed, and although it be that of a "comparative stranger" the matter should be enquired into with the same care and scrutiny as it would have been had a valuable life been lost to the community. It is not for us to say that any one is responsible to the law for the death of Macdonald, but the Coroner's Jury seem to be of opinion that some person or persons are responsible, while the Coroner (who is also a lawyer) said otherwise. If the victim had been a person leaving behind him relatives or friends, these would no doubt take action in the matter at once. As deceased was a stranger, the proper authorities to move in the matter, we should think, are the Police, and we trust they will take measures to settle the question of responsibility. It appears that the cutting was left in such a state that persons who are well acquainted with tho cutting might just as easily have met with an accident as a stranger, unless they had been over the ground very recently; the cutting lately done having rendered the path more dangerous even than it was before.

The other matter we would wish to refer to is the state in which the unfortunate man's body was found on .the jury going to view it. We,, need hot go into particulars. A post mortem examination had been made, and the cause of death ascertained, but instead of the body having been decently and becomingly attired,, the jury were greeted with a spectacle which no doubt shocked their sense of decency. No attempt had been made to remove the traces of the operation which had been performed, and the jury very properly commented upon the fact. It appears to us that the Hospital Committee should take this matter in hand, as at present there is something like a disagreeable reflection upon that institution and its staff involved. On the other hand, if the operation had been performed in a public-house, as is the way in nine cases out of ten, who would have been to blame had such a scene occurred ? It is to be hoped that such a thing will not be allowed to happen again, and as far as the Hospital is concerned the Committee can take steps effectually to prevent it. In other cases it

will be for the operating surgeon and the police to make arrangements. We entirely endorse the jury's protest embodied in their verdict and rider.