KILLED BY A SAW.

Wairarapa Age, 8 March 1927, Page 5

KILLED BY A SAW.

WEST COAST COMPENSATION • CASE.

NONSUIT POINT RAISED.

GREYMOUTH, March 7. At the Supreme Court, Mr. Justice Adams and a jury were engaged all day hearing a claim by the Public Trustee for £4OOO compensation from Peter John Higgins, George William Fawcett and Charles Fawcett, sawmiilers. The claim was made on behalf of the children of Peter Carmody, who, on October 5 last was killed at defendants’ mill at Inangahua. Claimant alleged that owing to negligence on the defendants’ part, deceased was killed through being struck by a fiddling saw, which was not under proper control, not provided with a skid of sufficient length, and improperly constructed, the saw being defective and not properly protected. The defence in general denied the allegations, claiming that deceased left his proper duties as "slabby” and operated the saw without instructions. The District Public Trustee stated in evidence that the Timber Workers’ Union had suggested £4OOO as the .amount of the claim, but said he could give no reason why more than £5OO should be claimed.

John Thompson detailed the circumstances of the accident, saying that when he was working at the saw deceased camo and lifted the winch rope from the saw, which witness then set in motion, and deceased began to saw a log through. When about cut through the log overbalanced, knocking the saw frame into the air, and deceased, hanging to the saw handle, was thrown against the saw and killed.

Edward Brown, Inspector of Machinery, stated that the saw, in his opinion was not safe to use as it was on the day of the accident. The shortening of the skids caused the accident.

No evidence was called for the defence, counsel asking for a nob-suit in view of Thompson’s evidence, showing that decaesed went beyond his duties. This motion His Honour held over till the jury’s verdict was given. He pointed out to the jury that damages in such a case wore to be only pecuniary, though the jury was not necessarily limited to £4OO, as counsel had worked them out.

The jury, after three hours’ retireinent, found for the .plaintiff for £lOOO. The nonsuit point is to be argued tomorrow.—(P.A.)