COMPENSATION CLAIM.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 20090, 20 November 1930, Page 3

COMPENSATION CLAIM.

additional relief SOUGHT. WATERSIDER LOSES CASE. A waterside worker's claim for additional compensation under the Compensation Act, 1924, was heard in the Arbitration Court yesterday. Mr Justice Frazer presided, with him on the bench being Mr W. Cecil Prime (employers' representative) and Mr A. L. Monteith (employees' representative). The claimant was Arthur Henry Mills (Mr M. J. Gresson), a waterside worker, of Lytteltou. He set out in his claim that in February, 1929, he was employed by the Railway Department, and that, when engaged in working on a railway truck strained his heart so that he became partly incapacitated. He had already received £221 Ids 8d in compensation at the rat© of £ij 8s 5d a week and sought such further compensation as the Court might think tit to grant. In defence the Crown (Mr A. W« Brown) denied that Mills had strained his heart while working on a railway truck, that lie was partly incapacitated, and, finally, that he was entitled to any compensation whatsoever. Mr Brown said that tne denial of the accident was, in view of the fact that compensation had already been paid, purely formal. Mr Gresson said that plaintiff, while handling corn sacks at Lyttelton, had suddenly been taken ill. Hie had rested that day, but actually had not bad to give up work altogether until a fortnight later. He had received compensation from the Railway Department until May of this year. Arthur Henry Mil's said he had worked at Lyttelton for eight years before his accident and had nad good health during that time. While trying to move a heaw sack he had felt dizzy and, on reporting this to tho foreman, had been advised to rest for a while. For the rest of that day and the next he had been at work again and had worked for a fortnight. Then he had felt so ill that he had had to give up and was told by two doctors that his heart was diseased. During that fortnight he had not done any heavy work, but his health had steadily become worse. He told Mr Brown that, though he had felt no actual pain at the first moment, he had suffered from pains during the following fortnight. The work of loading sacks was one to which he had been accustomed. Dr. R. H. Baxter said he had examined Mills in July, more than a year after the accident. Mills complained to him of pains in his chest and he found that the heart was;enlarged. The heart rate was a little rapid, but regular, and there was some thickening of the arterial system. Tn his opinion Mills had suffered from degeneration of the arteries for some time and, from some cause or other, was suffering from dilatation of the heart. His pains were symptomatic of angina pectoris. He definitely thought that what Mills was doing at the time of the accident could bring on a dilatation of the heart, especially of a heart in such a condition as Mills's must have been. To Mr Brown witness said that ttifc fact that Mills had been able to work for the rest of the day did not show that the strain must have been very slight. From what he had seen of work on the wharves men could, in certain cases, carry on for several days with strained hearts. However, taking into consideration the condition of the man's heart before the accident, the strain was probably not an acute one. Also, judging from what the condition of the heart must have been, it was probable that Mills would have developed angina pectoris not long after he actually did, even it there had been no accident. ,Dr. Malcolm Gray, of the. Public Hospital, entirely agreed wtih Dr. Baxter's findings. He thought that, whatever strain Mills might have suffered, he must have reached his sent condition simply because of the condition of his heart A>cfore the accident. It was a generous estimate to say that the progress of his illness had been accelerated bv twelve months by the strain, if, of course, it had taken place. He thought it was fair to say that Mills's working life had been cut short bv twelve months. His Hcnour said Mills had already received compensation for a longer period than that estimated as tue acceleration of bis disease by the medical witnesses and judgment would therefore be given for tho respondent, the Crown.