SANDON FATALITY.

Manawatu Times, Volume XLIII, Issue 1584, 9 June 1920, Page 5

SANDON FATALITY.

THE CORONER'S FINDING.

NEWTH SHOWED NEGLIGENCE 1 .

The enquiry into the Sandon motor fatality was concluded at the Palmerston Courthouse yesterday before MiEd. Goodbehere. Coroner, of Feilding. Thos. Killick, taxi proprietor, Palmerston North, said he was returning from the Wanganui races with a load of passengers. He left the course about 4.50 p.m. His first stop on the road was at Hie Turakina Hotel. This was done for the purpose, of putting water in the radjatsr. Newth's car was the-re but left again two or three minutes before witness. Witness bad stopped five minutes. Witness next saw Newth's car at the scene of the accident. 'Witness* car was the third or fourth to arrive on the scene. The distance from Turakina to the scene would be about 15 to IS miles. Witness (ravelled at about 25 miles an hour from Turakina. Newth, he presumed, must have* travelled at about the same pace. TWO accident comd &6i have occulted more' Jhan five nunU*>s before he arrived. Mr Newth s caf was facing- the right side of the with the back wheels' * n the centre, Eglinton's car was on i ne Sa,ndon side of Mr Newth's and facing? Sandon. Eglinton's car would have been on the proper side of the road when travelling, according to the positions. Witness heard some talk at the scene about Eglinton's car having no

' lights. Thereupon he examined Eg'jjinton's switches and found they were U VI in except the engine switch. That v -ild mean that no lights would be ' inf? on tne car - -^ e not think an i^»b ac t would knock the switches off*. ". To uut tne headlights out the outside .switch should be pushed in and to" /jfflxt the dim lights on the second switch should be pulled out. It was ouite- possible that Eglinton had put out tl>.' yheadlights Dut neglected *o pull out t\ ° other switch to put the dims on- \ n &e headlights on the approaching ffW had made it impossible for Eglinton .to know if hi^ lights were on or not To the- U was not very likely, but quite that an ex ", perienced driver coti'M make such a mistake in dimming T&\ * j 1 The weather wais fine, and;, ea'". Dut it was a fairly dark night. To Mr Graham: If the* dash Ugnt was burning at the time ot the crash there must "have been om"\ pulled out. When he examined the switches they were all off except the engine switch. It was fjnaite possible thev could have been interfereA with. The crowd which had gathered were looking around the cars. Mr Sharp had said that all the switches were off when he examined them. Someone may have interfered with them between then and the time you examined them? —That is qmt*3 possible. Did you see anyone interfering with , the switches? —No.

Do you know Faircloth? —Yes. Did'you see him about? —Tea. What was he doing?—He was doing all he could helping. Did you see a lady in Mr Eglinton's car? —She was walking about when I £TOt ttlGT©. You did not say anything to her about the switches? —No. Did you hear some man say something about the switches7—No. Did Faircloth have a look at the switches? —Yes, he and'l had a look at them together.

Faircloth says he did* not examine the switches at all. —Then; he' is not telling the truth. He• went? with' me too see them, no matter what he said. Did Faircloth interfere with the switches? —T touched them and left them as I found them. Can you give the Court any reason why Faircloth should have come here and tell us that he did not examine the switches at all? —No. Do you know if Faircloth has any interests in this business? —No. Is he a friend of Mr Newtli? —I do not know if he is particular friend. To Mr Ongley: The car was likely to swerve to the side on which the wheel came off. The impact was sufficient to send the cars to the wrong sides of the road:

Mr Graham: Can you account for Eglinton's car being right ove»* on its proper side of the road? —Sainton's car was also swerved round a iittle. Serjeant Fitzpatrick: What was Faircloth's condition when you left? —He was a little bit excited and was bleeding a little. He was in a better condition to give evidence yesterday than he was at the time of the accident.

James Muir, taxi proprietor, Palmerston North, said he left the Wanganui racecourse on the day in question at 4.45 p.m. Witness saw Newth leave the course at the same time. Witness pulled up at the Turakina Hotel for water. He travelled about 25 miles an hour. At Wanganui it took him ten minutes to get benzine and two or three minutes at Turakina for the water. After the accident he examined the switches on Eglinton's car. The three light switches were off. To the Coroner: Witness did not touch the switches; he struck a match and had a look. It was freely stated Eglinton had no lights. To Mr Graham: Witness did not remember any conversation with Faircloth about the switches. He did not know Killick and Faircloth had examined the switches. He had not conversed with Faircloth since the accident. Witness admitted he had a conversation with Faircloth alter the latter had given his evidence the previous day, but the accident was not mentioned to his knowledge.

Ernest Uhrbom. motor mechanic.

Palmerston North, said the impact would not have any effect whatever on the switch keys of a Buick car. If the switch keys had been out before the accident they would have remained out. To Mr Graham: With an impact such as was suggested anyone sitting in the front seat would be thrown forward towards the dash board on which the switches were arranged. If their arm or any part of their body knocked against the switches they would easily be pushed in. This would apply to anyone sitting by the driver. If a car was standing on the road it would be an easy thing for some unauthorised person to pull the switches in or out. Police Constable James Wilson, Bulls, described the position of the ears shortly after the accident. Eglinton's car was nearest to Sandon. The back part of it was touching the grass and the near front wheel was on the crown of tl-ie road. Newth's car was about 15 feet further along the road towards Mt. Stewart. The front of the car was on the grass on the left hand side of the road going towards Sandon and the back wheels on the crown of the road. Both ears were very badly damaged, especially Newth's. Both sides of the road seemed to be equally used. To Mr Graham: It was about an hour and a-half alter the accident that Sharp, at witness' request, examined the switches on Eglinton's car. To the Coroner: There had been great complaints about the excessive speed of cars going and coming to j race meetings. Coming home from the races several cars went t hrough Bulls at a great speed, but it was iraI possible to get their numbers. He had j no knowledge in this respect. Tn witI ness' opinion Eglinton had been a I careful and capable driver and was a ! temperate man. He would not be a

man w'i: witness -would imagine would ai■■•■ the risk of driving at night without lights. Witness had had personal cxpciience as to his capability as a dr r.

A.L the request of Mr Graham Mrs A'Court -as recalled. Mr Cs ham: You told the Court yesterdf . that immediately before the crash the lights were proing. Was the little da ' light going?— Yes. I thi) at one stage some persons came d interfered with the switche What was said and what was don-; '-—I was standing on the step hold \g Mr figlinton when a man came to >e opposite side of the car. He asked no to turn on the lights and I told. li r 1 I did not know anything about their mechanism. He appeared very exceed and argumentative. I told my husband not to argue with him. A few minutes later someone got on the step again and touched the switches while I was still holding Mr Egiin.ton. I fancy he said the lights were not working at all. I know someone touched the switches, but they did not burn. The battery mus* have gone.

Your husband was present at th 6 ai.le of the car? —Yes. Could you identify the man who interfered with the lights?— No. You were sitting on the left hand aide of the oar in the front seat when if was travelling?— Yes. When the crash came I Was thrown out of the , scat—forward —and then back again. Mr Ongley: I take it from youi* evidence that you don't know what lights were burning?— The dimmed lights were burning immediately before the accident. Witness could not swear to having seen the reflection of Eglinlights on the road. Mr A'Court, also recalled, said he was present by the car when Mr 3 A'Court was holding Mr Eglinton. A young fellow came round there and seemed to be excited and jumping about. This fellow alleged that there were no lights on the car and Wanted somebody to examine them. Witness started arguing with him, but Mrs A'Court told him to take no notice of him and they proceeded in their work of helping "the injured. Since then he had ascertained that the man was Fairclotn and had recognised him in Court the previous day. Faircloth would not touch the switches himself but got someone else to do so. That someone had pushed the buttons in and out.

Sergeant Fitzpatrick: Mr Killick said Tie did that.

Walter William Andrews, motor expert, Feildingr, said he had visited the scene of the collision and at the request of Mr Eglinton's representatives, had taken Mr Eglinton's car to Feilding. The battery box had been smashed off by the impact. When he got the car to Feilding witness made an experiment with the lights. He get another battery, to which he connected the existing wires, and the lights went all right. All the lights were acting perfectly. If Newth had taken the corner properly the lights of hi 3 car would not have flashed on to Eglinton's gate. The tendency of the impact would be to throw the light away from the gate. In his opinion Newth's car would be off the metal and on the grass in order for the light to be on the gate. It would be possible for a man coming in Newth's direction (without getting off the metalled road) if he twisted suddenly to his left for his light to shine on Eglinton's gate.

Coroner: The evidence given Is that Eglinton's car was not seen by Mr Newth. There was nothing- seen tintil the crash occurred. The question is whether you think it feasible that an experienced driver, taking every precaution, could see the car before the -collision-—T think he should have seen it, even assuming Eglihton had no lights.

Can you account for Newth not seeing- it?— No. I can't. The Coroner, after a retirement of a few minutes, returned with his verdict. He said he had listened very carefully to the evidence. It was his duty to decide from the evidence as to what blame was attachable to any person or persons concerned. .He complimented the police on the very full evidence produced concerning what had occurred. It was a most lamentable affair that three lives should have been hurled into eternity so suddenly—and if this was brought about by carelessness it was quite right that the person or persons responsible should suffer in consequence. In most accidents of this kind it was difficult to obtain exact or truthful versions. The evidence given in this case was very conflicting indeed on certain points. The witnesses from Eglinton's car were most emphatic that the lights were burning on that car and also that the vehicle was travelling on its correct side of the road!" The evidence given by five occupants of Newth's car was just as unanimous that there were no lights and that it was on its wrong side. If the lights were on, they said, they would have seen the car. "It seems to me a most miraculous thing that one car should be coming along and should crash into another one, even if there were no lights, without anyone seeing it until the crash occurred. If a man was looking out he could not fail to see it unless it was a very thick foggy night. The evidence as regards the position of Eglinton's car elearlv showed that it was on its correct side. Several witnesses (including Mr Mitchell, an absolute outsider, and an unbiassed witness) had said it was on its correct side. "I must find, on the evidence, that that was so." There was clear evidence that immediately before the crash Mr Eglinton's car lights were burning. As to speed of the cars it was a very difficult matter to come to a satisfactory conclusion, as the evidence given varied very much. 'The Coroner said he assumed that Mr Eglinton's car was not travelling fast, because it had been at a standstill only 300 yards further back The other car was going between 25 and 27 miles an hour. There was no actual evidence respecting times either at the hotel or the time they left the races. He did not, however, consider Newth's speed, as stated, excessively fast. "I do think, though, that there was a failure on the part, of Newth to keep a proper look-out, because I must say that, in any circumstances, it is quite clear to my mind that Mr Eglinton's lights were burning at the time he left his gate. With ordinary care, Newth must have seen the lights and should have been prepared for anything that was coming. Therefore there was some negligence shown on the part of Mr Newth in failing to keep a proper lookout. Unfortunately, he could do nothing else but bring in an open verdict: That the deceased met their cleatns consequent upon a motor collision at Sandon on May 20th. The Coroner specified the dates and actual causes of the death of each deceased. The Coroner said that he would like

to remark upon the number of fatal motor accidents occurring throughout f !io country. To his mind these accidents were the result of recklessness or carelessness. It -was very necessary that some action should be taken and it was pleasing to note that some of the local authorities were taking- precautions to have them stopped. If the authorities took action to stop reckless driving I —as they had power to do —these fatal accidents would be greatly minimised.