THE PETONE FATALITY.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 470, 31 March 1909, Page 6

THE PETONE FATALITY.

EVIDENCE AT THE INQUEST. THE MAN IN CHARGE CALLED. Tho adjourned inquiry into tlio circumstances attending the death of Samuel Wilson, labourer, of Pctonc, who diod from injuries caused by the collapse of a roof at tho Gear Company's Works, l'ctono, on March 23, was continued at the Magistrate's Court yesterday, before Dr. M'Arthur, coroner, aud a jury of six, of whom Mr. A. Atkinson was tho foreman.

Mr. Wilford appeared for the widow of the deceased, Mr. T. F. Martin for the Gear Company, Mr. Young for Mr. Samuel Brown, Mr. Gray for Mr. Duncan, Mr. F. Brown (secretary) for tho Building Trades' Labourers' Union, and Mr. 11. A. Holland, scaffolding inspector, for the Labour Department. When tho inquiry was resumed, Mr. T. F. Martin produced the receipt winch had boon given by Mrs. Wilson for tho £10 which had been handed .to her by Mr. Lodder, engineer for the Gear Company. Iho wording of tlio receipt was; "Received from tlio Gear Company the sum of £10 as part compensation lor tho death of Samuel Wilson." Mr. Martin asked if Mr. Wilford had any fault to find with it. Mr. Wilford: I don't think this is tho proper timo to find fault. Mr. Martin stated that this receipt was merely a formal one to account for tho money. Tho wording was, as had been mentioned by Mr. Lodder, "part compensation." , , , , , Mr. Wilford: Will my friend hand over tho receipt as ho stated ho would? •Mr. Martin intimated that ho was willins to exchange tho receipt for one which would satisfy' Mr. Wilford's requirements. Tho first witness called was SamUol Brown, carpenter, who was engaged on the works at the timo of tho accident. Ho stated that ho had been working for tho Gear Company for eight years and a half as a carpenter. On tho morning of the day of tho accident ho was engaged in erecting a scaffolding for tho bricklayers. In tho, afternoon ho was engaged in placing in position principals Nos. 1 and 2on tho north end. They had boon placed in position boforo, but were some few Indies out of their correct position. To do this he had to remove tho braces. Tho braces woro supporting only two of tho principals, tho rest of them being supported by the purlins and braces on tho south end. At 12.45 tho braces at tlio south end wcro in position, And witness did not know that thoy had been removed later. Had ho boon aware that thoy had been removed, ho would not have removed tho braces at tho north end. At tho timo of tho accident ho was on tho north-east corner of tho building, and ho rushed to tho north end of tho wall, There ho found tho roof coming over, so ho rushed back. Witness could not Bay whero deceased was working at tho timo of tho accident. , To Mr. Wilford! Witness was in charges, in tho absence of Mr. Duncan. Nino of tho principals, Nos, 3 to 11, wcro in position boforo tho work of putting on purlins was commenced. Nos. 1 and 2 had to bo removed before tho purlins wero put in. There were no diagonal braces on, smco all tho permanent purlins wcro not in position. It might havo hoen a safer method to havo nut in temporary purlins and diagonal braces before tho permanent purlins. Had this been done, it would havo to havo been dono at his order. It was about 3 o'clock when ho removed tho braces from tho north end. They wero fastened to the'principals. Ho did not ascertain that tho braces at tho south end had been shifted, because ho commenced work at 12.45, when they wcro in position. Witness could not say whether the braces, though in position, wore bolted at that timo. Two men named Buck and Wilholtn had boon put on to bolt them on March 22'. It was just as safe to boro the purlins on tho roof as on the ground.'"' To Mr. F. Blown: It would havo boen safer if the building had been diagonally braced.' ' To Mr. Bolland witness stated that ho did not order deceased to go on the roof. To Mr. Young:-Tho plans of tho building, with which witness had nothing to do, showed what bracing was to bo done. Witness also received instructions in regard to temporary bracing, but diagonal braces wero not mentioned. Ho gavo none any authority to interfere with tlio south braces. Tho man Mudgc, who, it was stated had dono so, had not had instructions from witness. William Grecnbank, labourer, stated that ho was employed at the Gear Company's works. At tlio timo of tho accident ho, Cross, and deceased wero engaged in taking purlins up to the top of tho roof. . Tnoy had just placed a purlin in position when somcono called out "Look out chaps, she-'B all on tho move." Witness got over tho purlin and was shaken off tho wall by tho falling roof. Deceased stopped on tho purlin, and fell with the roof. To Mr.' Wilford: Sinco the accident ho had seen two of tho braces sticking up in the air, and this had led him to form a theorv as to tho cause. Ho had not received any warning that any of tho braces wero going to bo shifted. Thomas Aitchesoii, building trades labourer, gave similar evidence. Walter Goodwin Glover, pattern-maker and general carpenter, stated that when ho was on the building just before tho accident lie noticed ono of the principals out of plumb. Ho looked to see if it was connected with the others, and when ho found that it was ho knew that all of them woro out of plumb. Tho second brafcn was unfastened just past the knee. He noticed tlio principal jerk about two or three inches, and so he called out to thoso on the building that the structure was moving. After this tho principal gave ono or two more jerks and then collapsed. At this stage tho inquiry was adjourned until to-morrow at 2.15 p.m.