ACCIDENTS

Grey River Argus, 3 December 1938, Page 8

ACCIDENTS

Child’s Death FALL FROM SCHOOL BUS. BLENHEIM, December 2. . Returning a verdict, at an Inquest, that John William Barr, aged seven vears, died as a result of head Injuries, received in "a fall from a moving school bus, near Seddon, on November 21, the Coroner (Mr E. J. Hill) added a rider, condemning the fatal vehicle as unsuitable for the purpose of conveyance of young children. The Coroner added that he could not see that the. driver of the bus was blameworthy. Jf there was blame, it was the method of transport of tils children, and there was much need for improvement. He undertook to forward a recommendation to .the Transport Department, that vehicles of such a type should not be licensed for the purpose for which this bus was used. The evidence disclosed that the bus was a light delivery van, with a canvas hood, but open at the back, except for a 17- inch tailboard. Alexander Carlyle Reilly, "the driver, son of the contractor, J. lAnderson Reilly, of Seddon, said that' the bus was occupied by ten children, between the ages of'five and thirteen years. There was no adult with them, and he was seated in the cab, Entirely separated from the children, who could communicate with him only by tapping on the cab window, which was a fixture. If he needed to communicate with them, he had to stop and get out. On the occasion of the accident, he inadvertently dreve past deceased’s gate. On pulling up, forty yards beyond, he went to tell the children to sit still, while he backed t the gate, but found that Barr bad Jmped out. The vehicle was licensed by the Transport Department on October 6

A schoolgirl, aged twelve years, said that, when the bus did not stop at Barr’s gate, he threw something out, then put his foot on the tailboard and jumped out. Nobody suggested that he should do it. He was not pushed. The bus was travelling at an ordinary speed. The Coroner added a rider to the verdict, drawing the attention of the responsibile Department to the fact that, in his opinion, the vehicle involved, although licensed, was quite unsuited as a conveyance for young children. The absence of control bv the driver,, and an open back guarded only by a low tailboard, should disqualify such a vehicle from receiving a certificate of fitness for the purpose for* which it was used. He submitted that the matter was one meriting immediate attention, by the revision of the system or regulation which permitted such vehicles to be employed, not only at Seddon, but in other ditsricts in New Zealand.