MOTORMAN'S APPEAL

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 23, 27 July 1914, Page 8

MOTORMAN'S APPEAL

AGAINST REDUCTION IN GRADE. The Tramway Appeal Board heard the appeal to-day of William Wilkie Bennett against his reduction in status for six months, as the outcome of a col- ■ lision with Coutts's express in Hopperstreet on 18th March last. The appeal Board comprised Mr. W. G. Riddel], S.M., Mr. J. R. Palmer (Town Clerk), and Mr. M. J. Whelan, representing the men. Mr. A. W. Blair appeared for the motorman, and Mr. J. O'Shea for ' the City Council. , The accident was outlined by Mr. Blair. It occurred in the centre of Hopper-street, At the top of the street is a. rise, down which speed has to be reduced to seven miles. Having observed this regulation, Bennett had increased to twelve miles an hour, which was absolutely necessary to enable the time-tablo to be made up. Two expresses were ahead of him. Ho slowed down and sounded his gong; the first express pulled out and the second also followed suit. The car had passed the latter about fourteen feet, when apparently a projection on the' side-step caught the vehicle, which must have pulled into it, and capsized both express and horse. The emergency brake had been applied, but apparently • not in time to avoid an accident. Counsel said that, though the accident occurred on 18th March,it was not until the'2sth June that he received any intimation of a charge against him-. He had been asked to attend an enquiry on the 26th June, but. there had not been any enquiry in the accepted meaning of the term. Bennett had not heard a .single witness, and was only asked to say whether he had anything fresh ,to say, as the evidence was all against him. It was two and a-half months before the, decision was made knoNvn. A direction in the agreement between the City Council and the men set out that , an employee should be notified within . twenty-four hours of the report, and that an enquiry should be held within four days of the report. Mr. Blair held that the decision had been) made on I erroneous information, and asked what had transpired in the two and a-half months' interim to.induce the decision. The ' appellant, m evidence, said he had been motorman for two years, and had now been reduced from the second to the fourth grade. The accident had been duo to the expTessman pulling in and bringing his back wheel into the car. _ Witness had applied his emergency brake, and had reduced to about five miles an hour, and as soon as he was passed had requickened speed. It was then that the express had been pulled into the centre of the car. Ho had.put in a report on the night of the accident.

T. H. Hebberd, conductor of the car. gave evidence supporting the statement of the appellant. Mr. o'Shea, submitted that the regulation regarding the time limits for Teporte. quoted by Mr. Blair, applied to reports upon ordinary departmental matters and not in such case& as this. The view of the management was. that the appellant had driven down the Hopper-street incline at too great a speed, and had thus caused the accident.. The City Council had had to pay the cost of the damages to the' express and ite driver.

Evidence was given by Edward L. Levy that the car had come down the incline at about 14 miles to 17 miles an hour.. He believed that had the speed been less the accident could have been avoided. Hopper-street residente, said witness, had been complaining about the speed some cam came down the incline. . .'•

'Albert B. Shelburne, driver of tho vehicle, said he was half way down Hopper-street when ho heard the;fcjr,ft)i|. gong and next moment was struck.*"jße; had no timo to do much. He had not J been sitting on the seat of the express,, but on the footboard.

. Mxc. Wt ,Ht ;:Moj^gn.?alßj>vgavo[formal •■„ evidence. The council had paid damages amounting to £34. After a brief retirement, Mr. Riddell announced that the appeal mU6t be dis- i mksed, but the Appeal Board also would like the Tramway Board, if the motorman'e conduct were satisfactory,; to make a reduction of two months from the penalty imposed upon* the appellant.