TROUBLES OF CONTRACTORS.

Manawatu Standard, Issue XLI, 17 December 1908, Page 2

TROUBLES OF CONTRACTORS.

A COSTLY, BRICK.

The hearing was continued in "Wellington Supreme" Court of the case, Henry Smith, contractor, v. Frederick Gould Sanders and Henry Sanders, trading as' Sanders Bros., building contractors, Ingestro street —a claim for damages in respect of injuries received "by tiff through a brick falling on his head, owing to the alleged negligence of defendants, 4heir servants or agents. Mr T. M. Wilford appeared for plaintiff, and. Mr ,C. P. Skerrett, K.C. wuh him Mr W. 11. D. Bell, for defendants. Emily Jane Smith, wife of the plaintiff,- stated that her husband had not been able to work" since the accident. Sanders Bros, had called at her house, and expressed regret for the unfortunate occurrcnce, and had made an oner to pay £60. Plaintiff had been in regular work prior to the accident. This closed the case for the plaintilt. Dr. Francis Wallace Mackenzie said lie had examined plaintiff in July l as VIt was stated that plaintiff had been hit on the head with a brick. Witness found that plaintiff had a cut on the head. He could not find that the wound penetrated deeper than the scalp. He gave plaintiff something -to relieve his pain. Witness kept plaintiff under observation right up to" November 22. The symptoms were all subjective, and pointed to nothing that witness knew of. II"* could not quite make out the case. Dr. Philip James stated that ho had eye mined the plaintiff, and found no indication of spinal disease..or loss of muscular sense,. and there -was no los 3. of muscular power in the eyes. He found no indication of fiacture of the skull, and so far as his tests went they showed no organic injury. Witness desired to make an ophthalmic examination of the plaintiff, but he declined to allow linn to do so. Counsel having addressed the Court', his Honor proceeded to deliver judgment. and intimated that it was. not a case in which there was any necessity to take time to consider his decision. At the same time, the case was one that should have bee.i tried by a jury, for the assessment of damages in such a case was essentially one which" should be left to such a tribunal. But the parties had expressly desired that the matter shouid be heard before a judge sitting without the aid of' a jury. From the evidence, it seemed clear that the brick _ which caused the injury to the plaintiff fell from the building which defendants were constructing. In this regard plaintiff .had made out his case, and his Honor was satisfied the accident - was caused through negligence on the part of defendant's servants. As to the medical evidence, his Honor said he could not see that there was any really serious difference between the doctors who had given testimony in the matter. No doubt the plaintiff would recover in time, but sitting both as judge and jury he had to consider what damages a jury would give in such a case. 'He thought it was eminently a case for damages, and he awarded £250, with costs as per , scale and witnesses' expenses to be assessed by file Registrar.