TROUBLE ON THE LINKS

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 7077, 15 March 1910, Page 9

TROUBLE ON THE LINKS

LADY INJURED BY GOLF CLUB

WELLINGTON MEDICAL MAN SUED FOR DAMAGES

SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT CLAIMED

Last. King's Birthday, while Mrs Irono Myra L'Estollo Leelrio was walking alonig a pathway upon the Wellington golf links flit Heretaunga, sho was struck by a golf club swung by Ernest Baiwson, medical practitioner in tho ,oity. It was alleged that the oliib had boon negligently swung and that ,fcho user liad ■taken no precaution to ascertain whether any person was lawfully using tho pathway whereon Mrs Leckie was standing, and that lio took no precaution to prevent Jris club from striking any person. Mrs Lcckio was struck in; tho (face, sustaining severe injuries. The boue of lira- nose was broken, the frontal 'baso of her skull fractured and her olfactory nerve severed, besides other physical and nervous injuries. Sho lias lost all senso of smell, heir sense of taste was alleged to bo in the main,. destroyed, part of her scalp rendered insensible, besides whioh she is partially disfigured in appearance and has suffered permanent physical injury. Frank Maxwell Lockie, her husband, a civil servant, claimed from Dr Rawson tho sum of £36 19s 9d incurred for ■medical, surgical nursing and other attendance on his wife, also for other further relief as to tho 'Court should seem fit. Mrs Leckio claimed from Dr Rawson £750 as damages, together with such further or other relief as to tho Court should seem fit. Tho caso camo on for hearing at the Supremo Court yesterday before his Honor tho Chief Justice, Sir Robert Stout, and tho following special jury: —Messrs G. H. Scales (foreman), E. W. J. Coleridge, B. Anderson, Hugh Hamilton, W. A. .Allen, M. A. Phillips, F. J. Dorset,' A. W. Hurstwick, F. W. Rowe. F. Moadowcroft, \V. H. Fulton and TJ. McCabe. Tho ladies* gallery was well filled by ■a. number of fashionable lady golfing enthusiasts, who took keen interest in tho proceedings. Mr E. F. Hadfield appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr A. L. Herdman for tho defendant. NEGLIGENCE .DENTED. Defendant in his statement of defence said that he swung his golf club in a manner customary amongst players of golf and with proper regard for tho safety of others. Ho denied that there was any path or right-of-way upon tho links and that Mrs Lcckio or anyone else had at any time a right to walk there; also 1 that there was any portion of ■ the links commonly used to approa'cfh tho golf house. Ho denied having, negligently swung his .dub, that he took no precaution when* Bwimging the club to prevent it from (Striking any person using the pathway, track, or golf links, and that tho. female plaintiff received such injuries Os she had alleged through being struck by tho club. Defendant pleaded that Mrs Leckie was alone to hlame for the injury which she sustained and was guilty of contributory negligence; also that the injuries were pa-used by an inevitable accident inasmuch as it was not caused intentionally by the defendant and could not have been avoided 1 by reasonable care on the part of the defendant. "With three, other ' players he was about bo commence & gam© and after having carefully ascertained that no one was near at , hand he swung his club "for tho purpose of practice," exorcising all due care and regard for the.. Safety of. others. While 60 engaged Mrs Leckie, he alleged, negligently approached and attempted to pass the green or tee upon which ho was practising and received a Wow ■upon the face. He alleged that Sirs Lockie was alone to blame for the injury which she sustained and that she was guilty of contributory negligence. COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF. ■ Mr Hadfield, in outlining his case, Baid they must remember that when the accident happened no game was in progress. They had not, therefore, )to consider what risks might occur in ,any,game to tho person who participated in such a game. It was while Mrs Leckie was approaching the golf house by the customary path that she received the blow from the club, which sank some 2| inches into her face, driving her nose almost completely in. She was, it would be contended, in a place which she had. every right to use, and that the defendant had acted negligently in not seeing if anybody was within striking distance. Mrs Leckie had suffer.ed from nervous shock to such a; marked degree that it was almost impossible for her to write and quite impossible for her to sew, which was a serious handicap for a mother of a family. There was nothing vindictive about the action, the object of which was to restore damage as far as it could be restored. Mrs Leckie had finished playing a game, with Mrs , Young, and was returning to the ■clubhouse by the only way which apparently did not offer danger, when she was struck on the face by R.awson's club. Four men, including defendant/ were going to play a match, but,' not being sure of the conditions, one of them went away to ascertain them. It was while the players were waiting for his return that defendant swung his club. Mrs Leckie, without ,ony indication, was following Mrs Young, who had safely passed, when the club struck her. The accident was,, it was submitted, of such a kind as to imply negligence. Afterwards Mrs Leckie received medical attendance, and . application was made by Mr Lcckio to the defendant for payment of tho medical fees involved, amounting to some £33 odd. Defendant had refused to' pay, considering himself in •.no way pecuniarily liable. In a letter he said: " Such a display of bad taste, to put it mildly, I never expected from a gentleman occupying his (Mr Leckie's) position, and I was exceedingly annoyed when I received his letter." Counsel said Mr Leckie had been driven to take iction through the refusal of Mr Rawson to admit responsibility. THE EVIDENCE. Everard William Seaton, surveyor. ;

"avo evidence as to" the configuration of tho links, and described the route taken by Mrs Lockie as the. natural approach to the golf-house. Tho track was at least two club-lengths back from the disc on the No. 1 tee. Robert Graham, an employee at the Kolf jinks, said ho liad located tho positions of tho discs on No. 1 tee. To Mr Uordman: The discs wore further back on November 9th than was usually the ease. He had seen people going along the path at the ■back of the No. 1 tee towards the bridge en route to the club-house.

Gilbert Martin, professional at the Heretaunga links, described the position in which Mrs Leckie.was lying after the accident, but preferred not to say whether the route she had taken was a customary one.

His Honor said plaintiffs had to show a want of care. It was not for the witness to say what proper care was, or for members of the Golf Club to decide what negligence was. They could only say what the usual method was, or that persons crossing knew that the clubs were going to be swung.

To Mr Herdman: When a man had " teed " his ball he was in possession of the tee and no other person, in witness's opinion, had any right there. It was an unwritten rule of golf that no person should stand behind a player when ho was making a stroke. When making a practice swing or playing it was customary to keep the eyes intently on a particular spot of the ground. As a golf-player he would not take the risk of going behind four men if they were standing on a tee preparing to play. " YOU'VE KILLED ME." Charles Gore, a memher of the Wellington Golf Club, was at the links on November 9th, and was going to play. While waiting to ascertain the exact conditions of the competition he saw Mrs Leckie and Mrs Young approaching tho first tee. The first he knew of the accident was Mrs Leckie's exclamation when she was struck. A heavy wind was blowing. Mrs Leckie called out "You've killed me." He thought tho route taken by Mrs Leckie and Mrs Young was tho proper one to take to go to the golf-house from where they were.

To Mr Herdman: Prior to November 9th an alteration had been made in tho course. Everybody playing to the end of the old course would have to cross the bridgo which Mrs Leckie was proceeding to. Defendant, ho understood, had made a trial swing. It was the invariable habit of players to do so when commencing play from tiie first tee. ,

Iu connection with golf generally, people who play the game take a certain amount of risk?—l suppose they do. Would you not think it dangerous to walk behind tho No. 1 tee when a person was playing there?—No, I do not, if you are out of range of tho clubs. He liad seen dozens of people going past the first tee whon players were preparing to commence. It was their duty, however, to keep their eyes open. Mrs Leckie had a goodsized hat on, and was apparently holding her head sideways., He did not think ho would have excluded Dr Rawson's view.

THE POINT AT ISSUE. His Honor here made some comment that the reason cases were sometimes so protracted was that counsel went into side-issues. The question in this case was one of negligence or non-negligence, not, as Mr Herdman had desired to know, what Dr Rawson's conduct was after the accident. Mr Herdman said he had no desire to prolong the ca.se. His Honor: I am not paying you have. I never suggested that. U hat I do say is this: Counsel often go into side-issues and make cases in this Court longer thaji they ought to be. That is the reason I stopped you previously. Mr Herdman : I cannot see that I havo gone beyond my duties so far. I submit I have a right to protect myself and my client. His Honor: Do you say it is relative to your case how Dr Rawson acted after the accident? Mr Herdman: If the jury think Dr Rawson did not act properly it might affect the question' of damages. His Honor: Then the jury would do wrong in awarding damages for that. There is no ■ suggestion of anything improper in Dr Rawson's conduct after the accident. NO WARNING. Reginald Wynn Kirkby, share-

the litigation- He did not think itliero was any possibility of the olfactory nerve joining. MRS LECKIE'S VERSION. Mrs Leckie, who was heavily veiled, was accommodated with a seat in the body of the Court when giving her evidence. Sho deposed that she and Mrs Young had finished at tho 18th hole and , then started for the rpM house. They saw four men on the first tee. \\ hen jjioar tho too Mrs Younji took the loi'.d, being two or three yards ahead. The I first intimation of danger witness liad was' the spasmodic movement of defendant's arms and she then saw the club and felt the blow almost simultaneously. She could not smell anythinp and "her sense of taste was interfered with. Sho had suffered great pain ,and her hands were so shaky that she could not make a'nv attempt to sew. To Mr Herdman: She had played goilf for six months prior to the accident. Mrs Young liad not distinctly given witness to understand that it was dangerous to s° tne route they had. She know it was dangerous to stand behind a tee on which men wero playintj. She did not think there was danger in tho way which she liad gone, otherwise she would not havo gone. A QUESTION OF DUTY. Knowing there was an element of risk was it not your duty to havo

broker, said the usual method of going to the golf-house after finishing .was to go over No. 1 tee or round the back to it.

Mr Herdman: ¥ou would take precautions if you saw people on the No. 1 tee?—Yes, I should. Did Mrs Leckie or Mrs Young give any warning of their approach?—l don't think so.

Cyril Herbert Blundell (dentist), William Whitehead (professional employed by the Hutt Club), and Dr Martin also gave evidence. THE HUSBAND'S EVIDENCE.

Frank Maxwell Leckie, one of the plaintiffs, said his ■ claim was for expenses that had been incurred. To Mr Herdman: He had heard a confused garble at the links as to how the accident happened. Did you say, " What business had she near the tee when the players were on it" ?—I cannot recollect it. Have you any recollection of telling Mr Pearson that your wife was entirely responsible for the accident? —I haven't the slightest recollection of it. His Honor: It would not prevent his wife suing even if he had said so. THE INJURIES. Dr MoGavin, who attended Mrs Leckie, described her injuries, which were those outlined in tho plaintiff's claim. The effects of the shook would probably disappear in six months. To Mr Herdman: Mrs Lockie was of very nervous temperament and profa ably this had 'been accentuated by

icalled out to the men, to let you go by?—l do not think bo. Did Dt Rawson see you coming?—l do not think so, not to my knowledge. Did you have your head down?; —If I did I Saiw everything that went on. . That's extraordinary. . Did you, see ■Dr Rawson swinging his club?—Not until he hit me. It was his first swing that hit mo. Dr Rawson was standing absolutely still and gave no indication of having a trial swing, like most men did. She knew thero was a rule that persons must not stand behind players when they were .pi-oparong to play. It was your duty to ask the gentlemen for permission to go by?—No, because it was the only way to go to the golf house. I have seen men swing their club on the verandah of the golf house. Why where you there P—l had a perfect right to be there. Do you mean to.tell me you had a perfect right to go behind the tee when men were in occupation of it?— Yes. Can you bring me one_member of tho Heretaunga Club who would say you liad a perfect right to b© there?— fclan the members of the Heretaunga iClub say where it was I should have gone? As one of the men had left the tee we might have been kept there an hour. You do not suggest Dr Rawson hit you on the face intentionally?—l have never insinuated that for a moment. Do you admit it was a pure accident ? —lt must have been an accident Mr Herdman: Or a violent assault.

Witness: Either an accident or something infinitely worse. She had never told Dr Rawson that sho considered the affair a pure accident. This closed defendant's case. THE DEFENCE. Mr Herdman said defendant's case wtts an exceed ingly simple one. The i defence was that defendant had not i been guilty of negligence; that the I injurv was the result of an inevitable accident and that, neither party was to blame : also that if the jury came to the conclusion that Dr Rawson was negligent then Mrs Leckie was also negligent and contributed to the accident. Nobodv had been more astonished with'the result of the swing than defendant, who should in the circumstances be completely exonerated. "AN ANGEL OF HEAVEN." Dr Rawson, the defendant, said he saw the women when he was on the first tee. but taking it for granted that they were going to the plank bridge he had practically put them out of his reckoning. He had teed his ball, v;as just about to strike, when tho others who were with him raised a noint as to how the game should be played. Witness made a swing away from the ball and felt his club strike some object. He turned round and to his horror saw that he had struck a woman. "Had she been an angel

of Heaven," said the witness, I could not have been more surprised to see anybody there.'' Before he struck with the club he -had looked round. Nobody was in sight. The other players with him would have been between witness and the ladies. The route taken by Mrs Leckie was not that usually taken when there were people on the first tee. It was bad form to go before ot behind a player when playing. , . . . " After hearing further evidence the case was adjourned until this morning.