PASSENGER INJURED

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 73, 20 December 1918, Page 6

PASSENGER INJURED

BY SUDDEN STOPPING OF A TRAMCAR

CORPORATION SUED FOR £48 DAMAGES Injury to a woman as the result of the sudden'stoppage of a tramcar formed the subject of a claim for .£4B 10s. damages against (lie city corporation, heard by II r. W. G. Riddell, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesterday. The* plaintiff was Emily Jtarkom, widow, of Wellington, who 'was represented by Mr. K M; Beechcy. The city solicitor (Mr. J. O'Shea) appeared for the corporation. Plaintiff was a passenger on a Wallace Street■•- tramcar, No. 90, on tho evening of July 30. When near the Hankey Street "stop, at the corner of Hopper Street, the car was pulled up suddenly by the motorman, who slated in his evidence that he acted in response to the sounding of an emergency signal. Plaintiff, who was standing up at the time, preparing to alight, was thrown violently against a seat, ami she suffered an injury to one of her legs which laid her aside for a period of three weks. She alleged that the mishap was due to the negligence of the motorman, and her claim for X4B 10s. was made... up as follows:—Loss., of three weeks' wages. 10s.; medical expenses, Jsl; general damages, .£lO. In outlining the case for his client, Mr. Beechcy declared that the car, which was travelling froni the city, was stopped without warning of any kind by the application of the emergency brake. On the following day notice of the accident was given to the' corporation, which replied that tho sudden stoppage of the car was due to another passenger ringing the bi'li excitedly, thus causing the motorman to believe that the emergency signal had been given. The evidence he proposed to call would show that there was no emergency signal." That being so, there was no need for the car to stop. If it were shown that the car was stopped improperly by tho motorman, then the ploiutiff would be entitled to recover. Mr. O'Shea: The question for the Court is: Did the motormnu stop in accordmice with what he reasonably conceived to be an emergency tsi'gna.? We say he did. Mr. Beechcy: If the motorman believed that a signal had been given he must show that the belijf was a reasonable one. It is part of the corporation's duty to have., jts equipment thoroughly up to date. There is no question about the alarm bell being in order.' But there is nothing on unr cars indicating to pasi sengers how often the bell must be rung to warn the niotormen to stop, and there is no warning that they must ring the bell several times to give the emergency signal. I say that the failure, of the corporation to warn the public to give the bell several sharp rings as an emergency signal amounts to lack of completion of equipment, and that amounts to negligence. Plaintiff stated flint on July 30 she was travelling on a Vvullaco Street car, No. 90. When approaching the Hankey Street stop the car stopped with a terrific bump, and islie was thrown against a seat. She was standing at the time, as 6he was preparing -to alight. As a result of the mishap she had to bo assisted off the car because her leg was badly hurt. Neither the motorman nor the conductor made any inquiry as to how she was hurt, and they both remained on their platforms.' She' had to be assisted home, and was laid up for three weeks. The late Dr. Holmes stated that the bone was denied. Prior to standing up she did not ling the bell, but she heard it ring. She did not hear anyone'give iiv: sharp rings. If they had done so she would have heard the sound of the bell. To Mr. O'Shea-. She did not know why the motonmui stopped the car suddenly. Miss Vera Mason, who was a passenger on thes ame car as plaintiff, corroborated the evidence of the latter as to the sudden stoppage of the tramca* Witness did not hear the bell rins, but she saw somebody pull the cord once. Winifred Ilarkoni, daughter of plaintiff, and an eye-witness of the accident, slated that >ihe saw two people pull the bell cord, but.she did not see the cord pulled sharply several times in succession. Witness was sure that the motorman and the conductor remained on the car. Mrs. Emv Lecce. who was travelling on the same car as plaintiff, stated that when near the top of Hopper Street.the car stopped very suddenly. The, car was very crowded, and she did not see anyone! pull the coid. It was possible, that the emergency signal had been given. For the defence, Mr. O'Shea said.the case for the corporation was that the emergency bell had been rung. Alfred Daly, who was conductor of Car 90 at the time of the mishap, stated that when near the top of Hopper Street ho beard someone give the emergency signal of five 6harp rings. The car was then about twelve or fourteen yards from the- stopping-place. The motorman inquired from him if-anybody had been hurt and witness asked who had sounded the bell. On the following day lie obtained the name aud address of & man who was stated to have pulled the cord. The man's name -was Smith. ' Mr. O'Shea: He is one of the. many Smiths whom we cannot find, Your Worship. In reply to Mr. Beechcy, witness said he did not see anyone help Mrs. Harkom olf the tramcar. About nine passengers alighted. Apart from tho emergency signal, he did not see anyone ring the bell. To the Bench: Immediately prior to Hie stoppage of tho car he was at the back of the' car changing tho destination signal. As far as lie wns aware there was no one on the car who wns under the influence of liquor. William James Hart, motpnnan of the car in question, said he applied the emergency brake because lie heard someone sound the emergency si;jw.!. Prior to this, somebody had rung the bell as a warning for him to stop. He had been driving tramcats for twelve months. Mr. Beechcy: trow often in that twelve months have you received false emergency signals? I AYitness: A r ery seldom. The witness added that lie did not leave his nlatforni, but shouted an inquiry to the conductor as to whether anyone had been hurt. He thought he could recognise the man who sounded the emergency signal. Mr. Beechey (laughing): Is tint Smith—"Yes." AVho pointed him out to you?—"A sol- ' dier very kind'ij rioinUd him ont to me." AVhcro is the soldier?—"He is away on a boat now." At this stage the case was adjourned until 10.30 a.m. on Saturday, in order that Mr. O'Shea might be enabled to call another witness..