DEATH OF A SADDLER

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 8681, 14 March 1914, Page 8

DEATH OF A SADDLER

THE WIDOW’S CLAIM COURT AWARDS £468 COMPENSATION. Judgment of the Arbitration Court was given yesterday afternoon in the case in which Antonia Nicholson, widower, of Martinborotigli, proceeded against Walter Francis Gundrie, saddler, of Martinborough, claiming £513 as compensation' in respect of the death of her husband, who was employed by the' defendant. The tion was that death was due to poison- ‘ ing of the hand about while the deceased was following his trade of saddler.. Evidence was given on behalf of the plaintiff to the effect that the deceased pricked his hand with an awl, with the result that bleed poisoning sot in, and he died in the Greytown Hospital while under an anaesthetic administered preparatory to a proposed operation. For the defence it was contended that the man was injured by other means than a prick from an awl, it being suggested that he hurt his hand while stacking wood in his yard. The case was heard before His Honour Mr Justice Stringer and .Messrs W. Scott (employers' representative) and J. A. McCullough (workers’ representative). Mr T. Jordan, of Masterton, appeared for tho plaintiff, and Mr A. \V r . Blair for the defendant. When the court sat to deliver judgment yesterday, Mr Jordan asked if he might refer to the question of tho average weekly earnings of the deceased. His Honour said it seemed that the man was earning £3 per week. In giving tho judgment of tho court. His Honour said they thought the plaintiff had made out her case. The evidence in some respects was not quite satisfactory, but on the whole the court thought they must accept the statements made by the plaintiff and' the boy Bristow Nicholson, who had given his evidence very well, although subjected to a somewhat searching cross-examination. Tiro boy had stated' that he saw- his father prick his hand with an awl on May 16th, and had described how it happened. His Honour thought it probable that the boy had made a mistake as to tho day and that ho was not quite accurate in describing- how the accident took place; but that he saw r his father prick his hand in some way on the Friday the court had no doubt. Mrs Nicholson had stated that she saw her husband washing his hand at the tap on arriving home, and that he said ho had pricked it with an awl. The evidence showed that tho hand became worse, and that on May 22nd bloodpoisoning had_ supervened and the doctor, on examining it, found a punctured, wound that had all the appearance of having been caused by a sharp instrument. Tiro only alternative to the plaintiff’s ease would be- to suppose that the whole thing was a deliberate plan on the nart of the plaintiff, and that the story told by herself and her witnesses was a mere concoction. The court could not adopt that view, and did not think the evidence was consistent with it. That view would suggest that the deceased had deliberately conveyed the idea that he had inflicted the wound with an awl when he had really hurt his hand in the course of stacking firewood. It was probable that, having injured his hand with the awl, he still further hurt it in handling wood. Judgment was entered for £486 compensation; the sum of £IXO to be paid to the plaintiff for her own use and benefit, and tho balance to be handed to the Public Trustee, to bo. invested for the benefit of the four children pt the deceased. Leave was reserved to the Public Trustee to apply to the court for directions. The defendant was also ordered to pay £lo 17s ocl medical and funeral expenses, £lO 10s costs, and witnesses’ expenses and disbursements, to be fixed by the Registrar.