Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE LAW'S DISTINCTIONS.

* (Mercantile and Bankruptcy Gazette.) '"We shall have to pay £300 over this little job," said the senior partner of Malcolm and Co. "Nothing of the kind," returned his junior, "he cannot recover anything; it is not our fault that he was hurt, aud he has no one to blame but himself. I'll tell you how it happened ; he was working at, his machine, when he dropped one of his tools over the table, and instead of walking round the end of the belt, he leaned over, thinking he could reach the floor, his foot slipped, the belt caught, and carried him over the shafting, and he fell from there, breaking his leg and otherwise injuring himself." "But," said Mr Malcolm, "we shall have to pay, the Act makes us liable." " That I cannot see at all," said his partner, "we are not liable for an injury sustained by our men which has been caused by their own serious aud wilful misconduct. Only two months ago this same fellow was seen leaning over the belting, in exactly the same way, and Cotton, who was then in charge of that shop, cautioned him, and forbade him to do such a thing again ; so, if he chooses, knowing the danger as he did, to run such risks, I don't see how we can be made to pay for M 3 foolhardiness." The Judge of the Arbitration Court said this reasoning was defective, and did not impress him in the least ; he could see nothing approach ing to misconduct The boy had thoughtlessly committed a negligent act, and probably acting on the impulse of the moment, had mechanically placed himself in a dangerous position and been injured in consequence. He should award £250 and costs. When the total bill came in, with the coats payable to their own solicitors, for conducting the defence, the Arm had to pay just upon £400. "Now," Raid Mr Malcolm to the junior, as he signed tho cheque, " You. shouldn't be so beastly positive about everything ; we could have settled this for a couple of hundred at the start." Some three years later, a journoyman carpenter working at a building placed a ladder alongside ono of the walls, put some tools in his bag and proceeded to ascend. He negotiated fourteen or fifteen feet successfully, when one of the rungs broke in tho middle, and the carpenter's twelve stone ten, descending in an unexpected manner upon tho rung beneath, caused that also to give way, with the result that tho centre of gravity being disturbed, the ladder toppled over, the result being a leg and arm broken. This case came before the same Judge who tried the other case, and it was urged that his Honor could not give a different verdict, as the facts were practically the same. " How do you make that out," said the Judge ; " the evidence in this case shows that this man had been warned not to use the ladder, as the master had pointed out to him that it was unfit for use, and more than that it had been put away, so that it might be returned to the owner's shop, there to be repaired. It was withdrawn from the job and another ladder, sound and safe in all respects, had been Bent, but the claimant, rather than go to the trouble of carrying this ladder a distance of three chains, preferred to tun the risk of breaking his nsck, by using it, although he had been specially told to leave it alone. His was no thoughtless act, no iuptance of the mind suggesting and the

phys'cal faoulties responding mcchanioa'ly, but the case of a man endeavouring to save himself rome trouble by wilfully disobeying his mac-ter J s instruct jns m a matter r-f serious importance. It would be prostituting tb.3 Aofc if I were to hold that this claimant is entitled to compensation." The Trades and Labor Council, according to our non-official reporter, who was present at their next meeting, di-cussed this judgment at length. Pome, delegates were of opinion that if the judgment was a correct exposition of the law, the sooner the Act was amended the belter. The chairman, however, wa3 understood to dissent from this view, and thought that the decision was sound ; he was move inclined to think that, a3 the men were all doing wel 1 , they might assi-t their unfortunate brother, and he proposed that a levy should be made on ali the un'ons represented at the meeting — a suggestion that was not r».ceived with enthusiasm.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HNS19020114.2.36

Bibliographic details

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLII, Issue 7362, 14 January 1902, Page 4

Word Count
765

THE LAW'S DISTINCTIONS. Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLII, Issue 7362, 14 January 1902, Page 4

THE LAW'S DISTINCTIONS. Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLII, Issue 7362, 14 January 1902, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert