VIEWS DIFFER

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19601, 5 April 1938, Page 2

VIEWS DIFFER

SPOIL IN STREAM CAMP DISASTER ECHOES CLOUDBURST THEORY EVIDENCE AT INQUEST FIRST DAY CONCLUDED (Per Pross Association.) WAffiOA, last night. The inquest on the victims of the Kopuawhara camp tragedy, whose bodies were recovered, which opened] to-day, took, a sensational turn in the afternoon, when a former employee of the Public Works Department at Kopuawhara gave evidence, during "which he stated that the tragedy, which resulted in 20 men and one young woman losing their lives, was the result of the action of the department in clumping spoil from a tunnel into the river, the effect of which was to dam up the water, which broke away as a result of torrential rain.

Other witnesses called also gave evidence regarding the dumping of soil. but expressed opinions that this was not the cause of the tragedy. The coroner is Mr. V. E. ' Winter, and Sergeant J. Mcintosh is conducting at the inquest. Mr. L. W. Willis, of Napier, is watching the proceedings on behalf of the Public Works Department.

Stanley Gordon Hutchinson, a clerk, residing at Waikokopu, said he volunteered to give evidence, as he considered he could throw some light on the tragedy. He knew the stream which ran past No. 4 camp well, as he worked at No. 5 camp with the Public Works Department for about 10 months. He knew that the department had been dumping all the spoil taken from No. 6 tunnel into the stream about two miles above the No. 4 camp site. In December, 1936, there was a small flood in the stream, and the tip head was washed away. That was where the spoil was dumped into the stream, rails and sleepers being carried away and left in the bed of the stream.

Stream Confined

He considered that there must have been a considerable amount of spoil in the stream as there had not been a flood since then. He visited this place about four and a-half months ago. The spoil was consolidating, but he could not say how far it went out into the stream.

In the event of a flood, he considered that the water would be dammed up, and he considered that to be the cause of the disaster. He thought the fact that spoil was going into the bed confined the stream considerably. The stream, he thought, would have room to expand to a certain extent. Replying to the coroner, the witness said the spoil was actually dumped into the stream.

Questioned by Mr. Willis, the witness said it ,would be about eight months since he worked for the Public Works Department. He was put off because there was no light work for him. He did not pretend to be an expert on the question; he was only a layman. He was in the locality about three months before the disasterThere had been some discussion at Waikokopu about the disaster for some time, and his reason for giving the statement was that he had been asked to 'by the police. He would say the spoil was not dumped into the disused bed, but into the river—actually into the water. He denied that there was an unused corner on the riverbend where the spoil was dumped. The witness said he had worked at that particular site at various times, and said he saw some hundreds of truck loads of spoil dumped into the water. The spoil would be about 10 of 12ft. high. Some of the water went round the end of the dump, and some of it seeped through. Denial of Guesswork

Mr. Willis- So far as you are con cerned, it is all guesswork.

It is not guesswork. It is what 1 saw. If you put spoil into any stream, it will block it to a certain extent. Frederick Gordon Yeo, who was foreman in charge of No. 4 camp, was the next witness called. He said he occupied a hut at the camp and had been living there for about 15 months. It commenced to rain about 10 a.m. on February 18, and continued until about 4 p.m. It started to rain again about 7 p.m., and continued raining heavily all the evening. He looked at the stream when he was going to his hut from the Y.M.C.A. about 9.30 p.m. The water in the stream had risen, but he did not think it was dangerous. It did not cause him any concern.

He went to bed about 11.30 o'clock, and it was then raining heavily. He was awakened between 3 and 3.15 o'clock the following morning by a man named Tracey. He went into the hut and told the witness that the strear» was rising at the back of it. The witness gcrt up straight away and went outside. It was then raining very heavily, and the water was rising. He tried to switch on the lights, but they would not function. He went to the top of the camp with Tracey, who had gone to wake the others. He met some men coming from the cookhouse, who told him there was no hope of getting out that way. He then told them to get on top of the whares.

Collapse of Hut

The water was then up to his knees. He climbed to the top of one of the huts, where there were four or five others, and while there an electric light pole fell on to the chimney of the hut. He bound the pole to the chimney with the wires, and then the hut collapsed and left him clinging to the pole. The others went down with the hut. The water was still rising, and about 20 minutes after the pole was rooted out, and lie went along with it and was swept to the cookhouse and stayed there until the Hood iiad subsided.

lie considered the camp site was a .••;i['e one. lie would say it was 100 per cent sale uncle,- normal conditions. Answering the coroner, the witness said he could not say whether the dumping of spoil had anything to do with the disaster.

Pera Te Ngaio, a survivor, said he thought the camp was quite safe. He had seen the stream higher than it was when he went to bed. He saw a number of heavy logs lying on the banks of the stream after the flood, and he did not think the rain that was falling when he went to bed would be sufficient to bring the logs down.

The witness said he had worked at

No. 6 tunnel and had seen the spoil dumped in the river bed. The last time he saw the tunnel was round about the end of August, and he did not think the spoil dumped in the river at that time would cause any damming. Water Not Obstructed

George Annesley, a concrete inspector, said he had been employed at No. 6 tunnel since December 1, 1937, and worked during the afternoon of February 18 from 4 o'clock until midnight. He knew that the Public Works Department had been dumping spoil moved from the tunnel into the stream, and on February 18 there was a fair amount of spoil in it. The river was not narrowed by more than 2ft. to 3ft. during the time he was there, as the spoil was dumped along the bank of the stream and not out towards the centre. He considered there would be a channel of at least 50ft. to allow the water to flow past. The witness added that in his opinion there would be no possibility of the stream banking up as a result of the spoil. He passed the tip at about 12.10 a.m. on February 19, and it was then raining very hard. He examined the tip and found the stream had risen 2ft. or 3ft. He was quite definite that the water was not obstructed in any way at that time. Michael Kelly said he had been working at No. 6 tunnel for about 15 months, and was employed dumping spoil into the stream. He started work at 4 p.m. on February 18. It was raining hard. He thought there would be about a chain of spoil from the side of the river dot toward the middle. There would be about another chain for the rive r to expand, if nee. essary. He took particular notice of the tip when he knocked off at midnight, and saw parts of it falling away. He did not think there was any ! likelihood of it being washed away He saw the tip washed away about seven or eight months ago. The rain then was much heavier. There was no chance of that class of spoil banking the water up. The tip was gone at 3.30 o'clock in the morning. His opinion was that the disaster was caused by a cloudburst between midnight and 3.30 a.m.

The inquest was adjourned until to-morrow.