DAMAGES FOR INJURY

Northern Advocate, 22 May 1929, Page 7

DAMAGES FOR INJURY

CLAIM OF PATU RU

ONE DEFENDANT RELEASED

(Per Press Association.—Copyright.)

AUCKLAND, This Day

At the conclusion of Monday's healing at the Supreme Court in the action for £ISOO damages -brought against McPherson, storekeeper of Ruatahun.i, and his wife, counsel for the plaintiff, intimated that he would call five .more witnesses yesterday. However, the witnesses did not arrive, and counsel closed his case.

Counsel for the defendants, moved for a nonsuit on behalf of Mrs McPherson, contending there was no evidence of partnership between her and McPherson, nor that he was her servant, or that she was* the owner of the lorry.

His Honour agreed with counsel for the defendants and advised counsel to accept a nonsuit in respect to the claim against Mrs McPherson. • The amount of the damages claimed, £I3OO, was sums of £SOO each by Patu Ru, chief among the wives of the Maori prophet, Rua, and, two sons of Maoris who were killed when a lorry, driven by McPherson, overturned near To Whaiti, while returning to Ruataluma, with a party of Maoris who had attended a tangi.

On behalf of McPherson, counsel s/.id the lorry had undergone a. complete overhaul about three weeks prior to the accident. McPherson had no reason to think there was anything wrong with the lorry on the day of the accident.' On approaching the corner he attempted to change from top gear to second gear. He had accelerated to change and then put his foot on the pedal, but, 'instead of the lorry slowing up, to his consternation it shot forward. He slammed on the brakes, but the car diff not stop.

Constable Johnston, of Rotorua, said that on January 27 he visited the scene of the accident. The lorry was lying in a gully and the brakes were in good order, with the lights full on. Examination of the road showed that the lorry had been too far out on the right-hand side and the wheels had got into soft ground. Witness had subsequently interviewed passengers, including Patu Eu, and not one of them had complained of negligence on the part of McPherson, or that he had driven at an excessive speed. William Richards, storekeeper, and acting-coroner, ' said he visited the scene just after the accident occurred and he opened the inquest the following day. He had concluded there was no suggestion of negligence on the part of the driver, and it was unlikely, considering the rohgh road at the particular point, that there had been excessive speed. The brakes were on, but the accelerator had jammed, and from his investigations he concluded the driver had acted with very commendable promptitude. Charles Green, motor 'mechanic, Rotorua, said that after the accident the lorry was brought to him for overhaul and he made a complete examination. He did not then find that the accelerator was jammed, but when driving the lorry subsequently it had jammed on him.

Ray Aitken, motor mechanic, said he had made a complete overhaul of the lorry early in January, and it had run perfectly afterwards. It was unusual for the accelerator to jam, but it was always possible to happen. James Welliscroft, motor mechanic, of 20 years’ experience, said he had examined the lorry just after the accident and found the brakes hard on and the lights going. He had on only one occasion previously known of an accelerator jamming.

Hugh McPherson, the defendant, sai l he had been driving for six years, and knew the particular corner whore accident happened well. On the night in question he had been driving along at the usual steady speed and about a chain from the corner accelerated to throw the car into second gear. The car jumped forward, but did not slow down on going into second gear. Ho did everything possible to pull her up, applying both the hand and foot brakes, but the ear, after hesitating on the brink of the gully for a moment, toppled over. The whole thing happened instantaneously and ho was not prepared for it. He had tried to pull the car round the corner, but she would not respond, the wheels apparently having got into soft earth.

JUDGMENT FOR. DEFENDANT.

. NEGLIGENCE NOT PROVED. (•Special to “Northern Advocate. n ) AUCKLAND, This Day. In the elaim by Ena’s wife and two Maoris for damages arising out of a‘ motor lorry accident iu the Urewera country, the. jury returned with a finding that it had been proved that the defendant, McPherson, was not guilty of negligence, and judgment was entered for defendant.