A BUSHMAN'S INJURY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20618, 17 July 1930, Page 14

A BUSHMAN'S INJURY.

THROWN FROM TRUCK.

"PERFECTLY FRANK STORY."

COMPENSATION GRANTED. A claim by a Maori bushman arising out of an accident that occurred to liim on October 17, 1923, was argued before the Arbitration Court yesterday. The case was brought by Welii Rahipere, of Wairoa, near Tauranga (Mr. Gould), against his employer, tho National Timber Company, Limited (Mr. Horc).

Plaintiff claimed that he had been struck on the right arm by a heavy block of timber and that as a result his right arm was totally permanently disabled. Tho defendant company gave compensation at tho rate of £3 12s a week up to January 23, 1929, and had tendered a further £2l 8s as compensation up to March 7, 1929. Tho plaintiff did not accept this, and claimed compensation at the rato of £3 12s a week for tho full period of 280 weeks, or in the alternative, £B3l, the present worth of such compensation.

The defence was that plaintiff had only bruised his left shoulder and ribs, that he was not disabled after March 7, 1929, and that his present condition was due to causes other than tho accident.

More Than the Usual Wage,

Mr. Gould said that at the time of

tho accident tho plaintiff was doing unusually heavy manual labour, putting down sleepers ou a, tramline of tho defendant company. Plaintiff was thrown heavily from a truck, when it ran off a tramline at high speed. For seven or eight months beforo the accident plaintiff was receiving a little more than tho usual wage because he was better than an ordinary worker. Welii was taken to Dr. S. Wallis at Rotorua on the evening of the accident, and the doctor gave a certificate that he found no evidence of fracture, and that Welii would probably be able to return to work after .10 days. When Wehi returned to Dr. Wallis on November 15 Dr. Wallis said ho would not bo üblo to return to work for another 14 days. Later, continued counsel, Dr. Stuart, of Tauranga, certified that there was a fracture, not of tho arm itself, but of an outgrowth of bone on the arm duo to arthritis.

Tho claim was based on the view that as a result of the severe accident there was an immediate " flaro up" of the arthritis, which had not previously caused trouble.

After the evidence of tlie plaintiff and others had been heard regarding tho accident Mr. Gould called medical evidence. Evidence By Doctors.

X-ray photographs showing considerable arthritic outgrowth of long standing on both right and left elbows were described by Dr. E. H. B. Milsom. He estimated that the right arm had suffered 20 to 25 per cent, permanent damage. Dr. K. MacCormick supported this evidence generally and estimated the permanent disability of the right arm at 20 per cent. 1" or tho defence, Mr. Kenneth Mackenzie and Dr. K. S. Macky were called. Mr. Mackenzie expressed the view that •if the " flaro up" of the arthritis had been caused by the accident it would have manifested itself clearly at the examination by Dr. YVallis a month after accident. He thought tho " flaro up" had occurred in the ordinary course of tho arthritis. Dr. Macky said ho did not think the joint swolling found by Dr. Stuart in December could be connected with the accident on October 17. Mr. Justice Frazer, president of the Court, said the plaintiff appeared to have given a perfectly frank, straightforward story. Looking at tho evidence as u whole, the Court was of opinion that the plaintiff had established his claim that tho accident of October 17 had had tho effect of aggravating tho osteoarthritis pre-existing in the right elbow. Ho would bo granted full compensation up to the present dato and for 13 weeks beyond, and for the remainder of the period of liability ho would be allowed 16 per cent, of full compensation. Costs, £l2 12s, and witnesses' expenses were allowed plaintiff.