A BOY'S DEATH

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 69, 18 September 1936, Page 14

A BOY'S DEATH

NEGLIGENCE ALLEGED DIFFERENCE OF OPINION REPORT ON PETITION Canterbury members on the Government side clashed in the House o£ Representatives yesterday afternoon when a report was presented by the Public Petition M to Z Committee on a petition from W. J. and V. E. McFaul, of Christchurch, praying for an inquiry and compensation on account of the death of their son allegedly owing to the negligence of the Lyttelton Harbour Board. The son of the petitioners, James' Herbert McFaul, aged 14 years, fell off the old jetty v at Governor's Bay on November 23, 1935, and was drowned. The Rev. C. L. Carr (Government. Timaru), chairman of the Committee. reported that the Committee had no recommendation to make, but suggested that the Lyttelton Harbour Board might reasonably undertake to pay the funeral expenses of the deceased lad, and that as the jetty at Governor's Bay was not in use for shipping more [ adequate protection for human life might be provided. Mr. E. J. Howard (Gbvernment, Christchurch South), who is a member of the Lyttelton Harbour Board and was the chairman at the time of the accident, voiced strong resentment at the "tag" to the Committee's report. After discussion the chairman of the Committee agreed- to withdraw the report and to take the petition back to. the Committee to enable the. Lyttelton Harbour Board to give evidence. Mr. T. H. McCombs (Government, Lyttelton), who was-in charge of the petition, thanked the Committee for the consideration it had given to the petition. The conclusion it had reached was in his opinion the only one it could come to in the circumstances. Pie suggested that the Lyttelton Harbour Board be informed through the House of the Committee's decision. Speaking with some vehemence Mr. Howard said that the board consisted of fourteen decent, sympathetic, and able men. (Laughter.) "UNFAIR AND UNJUST." "The Lyttelton Harbour Board," said Mr. Howard, "was no more legally or morally responsible for the accident than the City Council is responsible for an accident in the public streets. The tag to the report is unfair and unjust, and is not in accordance with fact. The accident was investigated by a Coroner, and no hint or suggestion was given by him that the Harbour Board was in any way responsej ble." To judge a local body in that way when that local body had not an oppor-j tunity of being heard was unfair and unjust, Mr. Howard continued, and on ] behalf of the board he resented the tag attached to the report. "The Minister of Marine (the Hon. P. Fraser) asked if the Lyttelton Harbour Board had been heard by the Committee. Mr Howard: It was not heard. Mr; McCbriibs: It sent in extensive documentary evidence. The.Minister said that if there was any doubt about the matter it was obvious that the House should see that the Harbour Board was given an opportunity of stating its side of the case. Mr. Carr said that the Harbour Board was given every opportunity of presenting its case, and the chairman of the board had been invited to attend and give evidence. AH the documentary evidence on' behalf ■of the board was before the Committee. Mr Carr said that Mr. Howard had said that'the board had been dealt with. It certainly had been harshly dealt with by its own secretary when he put up its case to the Committee. ■ In the first place the father of the boy had placed his case before the board, but unfortunately, before nnality was reached, threatened to take legal action. The board then said it would , contest; any ;. charges made against it, and the father petitioned the House. The petitioner did make representations to the board for some monetary compensation for the loss of his son. He had just previously lost another child in tragic circumstances, and he said to the board that, it would soften the blow if the board met him in some way.

SECRETARY'S REPRESENTATIONS. "The secretary of the board, in making representations to the Committee,' said Mr. Carr, "made great capital of the fact that the father had said to the board that any monetary payment would soften the blow. I think the secretary laboured the point, and often-1 sively so, and that is the view of the Committee. The secretary almost indulged in sarcasm in his letter on that point." The board, he continued, had had every opportunity of combating the evidence if it wanted to. The secretary of the board had made great play of the statement that the boy was not drowned, but the verdict of the Coroner was that the child was drowned. The attitude taken up by the secretary was anything but a credit to himself and to the board he represented. The railing on the pier was inadequate and the life-saving equipment was not in proper order. Mr Carr said that to save the time of the House, and with the consent of the member in charge of the petitxon, he would ask leave to withdraw the rePermission was granted for this to be done.