Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

"ACCIDENTAL" MURDER.

Can murder be held to be accidental ? At first sight it would seem not, for deliberation enters into murder, and what is clone by design cannot, one would think, be accidental. However, the highest court in Great Britain is of the contrary opinion. This was the way of it. A master in an Irish school detected one of his pupils in a theft and prevented other from playing in a certain shed. The aggrieved boys, to "get even" with him, arranged to attack him, and two of them assaulted him so violently that his skull was fractured, and he died the same day. The 'question then arose: Did he meet his death by "accident," "arising out of and in the course of his employment?" If the answer was "Yes," his mother was entitled to compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act of 1906. The County Court Judge said "Yes," and so did the Irish Court of Appeal, but the case went up to the House of Lords. That tribunal upheld the findings of the lower Courts, but only by the narrowest of margins. The four ayes were the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Loreburn (ex-Lord Chancellor), and Lord' Shaw, and the three noes were Lord Dunedin, Lord Atkinson, and Lord Parker —also great lawyers. Lord Dunedin contended that "accident" . was the very antithesis of design, and that as the schoolmaster was murdered he could not be considered to have met with an accident, but the majority regarded as an accident for the purposes of the statute any injury not expected or designed by the employees. Lord Loreburn put the case for the ayes in a way that will appeal to many laymen. "Suppose some ruffian laid a log on the rails and wrecked a train, was the guard who had been injured excluded from the Act ? Was a gamekeeper who was shot by poachers excluded from the Act ? There was design enough to either case, and of the worst kind. In either case he would have thought, if the nature of the man's employment was looked at, it might be said he was injured by what Avas accident in that employment." And do riot many teachers take the risk—infinitesimal though it may be—of injury from a criminally-minded pupil?

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TC19140604.2.13

Bibliographic details

Colonist, Volume LVI, Issue 13486, 4 June 1914, Page 3

Word Count
381

"ACCIDENTAL" MURDER. Colonist, Volume LVI, Issue 13486, 4 June 1914, Page 3

"ACCIDENTAL" MURDER. Colonist, Volume LVI, Issue 13486, 4 June 1914, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert