RAILWAY CROSSING TOLL.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume I, Issue 28, 16 January 1911, Page 11

RAILWAY CROSSING TOLL.

THE WALLACETOWN JUGGERNAUT.

INQUEST ON THE VICTIMS.

Invercargill, Jan. 12.

Before taking any evidence at the inquest today on the bodies of the victims of Wednesday’s motorcar accident, the Coroner suggest ed that the jury should visit the scene of the collision, so that they should be thoroughly conversant with the situation. It might be, he said, that suggestions could be made for an improvement of the line of sight.

The jury were driven out to Wallacetown, and critically examined the surroundings of the crossing. A railway engine was also brought into service by the Railway Department, and the preliminaries to the accident were rehearsed by the engine making a journey along the line, whilst the jury watched its progress from the road in order to judge whether it was hidden from view by the railway bank and trees to the north of the crossing.

Police Inspector Mitchell, addressing the jury, said that the position seemed to be that Guard Jones was signalling Dr. Fullarton on the left, and a man named Connell was signalling him immediately in front, whilst from about 20 paces from the line. Dr. Fullarton would have had an unobstructed view to the right. In that particular instance it would seem that the motor car party could not have been better war nett, but at the same time he left it to the jury to say whether it was possible that additional precautions should be provided at the crossing. Thomas Jones, guard of the outgoing train to Orepuki, stated that at the time of the accident he was at Wallacetown junction, standing at the points near the crossing, about 22 yards from the middle of the road. When he saw the motor car it was about 20 yards from the railway line, and hr estimated its speed at 25 miles an hour. At the time he saw the car the engine of the incoming train was about 20 yards from the cattle stop. He put up his hands and called out to the occupants of the car, but the crash occurred almost momentarily afterwards. The car was travelling in the middle of the road. He believed that Dr. Fullarton, who was driving the car, was looking ahead. He thought the doctor must have seen the man Connell waving his hands, and the impression he (witness) formed was that the doctor saw the train and attempted to get across the line in front of it. He was an eye-witness of the collision of the motor-car with the engine. The car was smashed to pieces, and its occupants were all thrown out into the cattle pit and by the side of the line.

The foreman of the jury remarked that Dr. Fullarton could hardly have been aware of the train if he was looking aheal as stated by the witness, because it would only be reasonable that if he knew of the train he would have been looking in its direction.

Adin Cockrift, engine-driver of the colliding train, said that as he approached the Wallacetown crossing he sounded the whistle of his engine twice. His train was running at from 15 to 20 miles an hour as he approached the crossing. He saw nothing of the motor car until just after the accident, as he was on the opposite side of the engine to the direction from whi h the motor car had come. His fireman, however, saw it. and called to him to pul! up. Witness put or. the emergency brake, and pulled the train up in its own length, the guard’s van stopping about opposite where the wrecked motor car was lying. On making an examination of his engine he found that it had been struck near the cylinders,

about 10ft from the cow-catcher. ’ The bank in the railway cutting hid »the view of the road. The spot was somewhat dangerous, but people were inclined.to take risks. He had been engaged on the line for 26 years, and had not known of a I serious accident there before. M itness added that traffic had consid- | erably increased on the road of re-

cent years. John Connell, a farmer, said he was riding a horse and leading another along the Wallacetown road at the time of the accident, and aproached the crossing from the opposite side to that of the motor car. Noticing the advent of the train, he stood up in his saddle and by waving his cap signalled to the motor car. The motor car party did not appear to take any notice of his signals. If the driver of the car had been looking in his direction, and his sight was good, he must have seen witness. It was his opinion that the motor car. which had come round the corner of the road near the store at a zreat pace, harl been slackened in speed, when near the hotel. The up train was standing in the siding, and it was possible that the doctor would take his signals as calling attention to that train. The doctor could not from his position have seen the moving train until he had slackened down. The fireman of the train told the jury that the crossing was considered a dangerous approach amongst railway men. Coming from the north the road could not be seen owing to the cutting and trees. The car seemed to come on to the train without swerving. Evidence was given as to Dr. Fullarton’s more than average skill as a motor car driver. The Coroner, in summing up. mentioned that it was equally as incumbent on the public as on the railway people to exercise care on coining to a crossing. The evidence to his mind show'ed that Dr Fuliarton did not see the approach of the train, and it was reasonable to think that if he saw the witness Connell waving that he was signalling about his horses. The jury returned a verdict that the deaths had been caused by the collision of the motor car with the train, no blame being attachable to anyone. They added a rider that owing to the approach to the railway line from the east being abscured. and to minimise the risk of accidents in the future, the Railway Department should be asked to remove the high bank on the east side of the line north of the road.