TRAGIC DEATH.

Taranaki Daily News, 22 September 1924, Page 6

TRAGIC DEATH.

ENTANGLED IN A SHAFT. INSTANTANEOUSLY KILLED. THE OORON-ER’S INQUIRY. (From Our Own Reporter.) Eltiham, Sept. 20. The circumstances surrounding the death of William H. Hart at the Eltham Box Factory were recounted at the coroner’s inquiry at Eltham to-day before Mr. A. M. Mowlem, S.M., coroner A verdict of accidental death, with no blame attachable to any other party, was returned. Mr. T. B. Crump represented the deceased’s widow; Mr. R. L. Weir, the Box Company; Mr. A. A. Stewart, the South British insurance Company; Mr. W. J. Mount joy, the Labour Department; and Mr. H. McGregor, the Marine Inspection of Machinery Department. John Hart., father of the deceased, gave evidence of identification. The deceased, he said, was a mechanic and had been employed at the box factory for four or* five years. The deceased was a married man, aged about . .34 years, anil had three children. William C. Rigg, overseer at the factory, said that Hart. Taylor and himself were talking together about some work he, had been doing the previous night on the main shaft. Witness suggested to Taylor that they should go down to the main shaft to see if the work had been given sufficient clearance to put a new pulley on. He was taking the measurements when Hart came down behind them, remarking that they had given eight indies clearance. The three then went further along the shaft to attend to the disused drive of an old fan. Witness suggested that Hart should go up the fan-race to indicate to witness where he should cut through the roof. ALL CLOTHING*RIPPED OFF. Hart had to pass between witness and the shaft, and the next witness saw was that Hart liad his apron caught in the shaft and was trying to pull it off. Witness caught him by the shoulders to help him pull away. Hart was pulled away from witness’s luands and witness was knocked over. Taylor rushed upstairs to have the engine stopped, and witness had to lie under the shaft until the engine was stopped. When he got up he saw that Hart had his clothing ripped eff and was dead.

Witness had been in the factory for about 13 months and had had no other experience in mills. The shaft was in a roofed-over tunnel about 9 feet below the ground. The tunnel was about seven feet square, and a 34 inch shaft rail the whole length of the tunnel or drive. The shaft rotated at the rate of about 205 revolutions to the minute. From the shaft to the side of the drive there was a clearance of about four fret. The shaft, at the place where the accident happened, was free from bolts o' other fittings. The deceased had been in the drive hundreds of times. Nothing could have been done to prevent the accident. The deceased was wearing a sack apron, which was quite usual, and the apron was tied round with a piece of rope. The mill had been running for 26 years, and there had been no other fatal accident there. WARNING NOTICES ERECTED. To the inspector of machinery witness said warning notices were posted up, but he did not rotice that they had any effect. The wearing of sack aprons was not prohibited by any union or the factory controllers. The men had been warned not to go near the running shaft wearing aprons. To Mr. Mountjoy witness said there was a danger always in working amongst machinery. It might have !>een possible to make the survey while the machinery was stationary. It 'was not the usual thing to wait till the machinery was still. The men had been told not to go down the shaft, only the two foremen having the right. Hart was not ordered down the drive. It would have been much safer in this case if the deceased had been wearing dungarees instead of an apron. To Mr. Crump, witness said Hart was in charge of a planing machine operated from the main shaft. He was responsible for the lubrication of the whole of the main shaft.

To Mr. McGregor, witness said there were orders not to oil the shaft while it was in motion, repeated warnings having been given, but he knew the shaft was sometimes lubricated while in motion. APRONS NOT SAFE Allan Taylor, a Jellow employee, gave evidence corroborating that given by Rigg. He saw Hart’s apron get caught in the shaft and heard Hart say “Break it.” Witness then rushed upstairs to stop the engine, but it was probably a minute before the machinery was brought to a standstill. Witness never wore an apron near such machinery, and if he had been wearing one he certainly would have taken it off before going down the drive. Hart was usually very careful, and witness thought he went down on this oct!asion unthinkingly. Overalls were the safest garments in such a place. That was the first day he had seen anyone oiling the shaft while it was in motion. The 'drive was quite safe, but accidents would 'happen anywhere. To the inspector, witness said he 'thought the man lubricating the main shaft would have to pass through one particular belt to get from one bearing to another, there ‘being no provision made for passing round the belt. (It was subsequently ascertained that such provision had been made.) Mr. McGregor: It was lucky there were not two accidents. INJURIES DESCRIBED. Douglas R. Gyde, who was oiling the main shaft at the time of the accident, said the majority of the bearings were usually oiled while the machinery was in mention. There was no reason why they could not be lubricated while the machinery was idle. He did not think there was any particular danger in doing the oiling while the shaft was

rotating. WJitneas saw Hart’s apron get caught in the shaft. In a moment Hart was revolving round the shaft, and his head was struck against the wall. the engine stopped Hart was lying under the shaft with only his boots left on. While oiling the shaft witness himself was wearing an apron. To Mr. McGregor, Gyde said that Hart had allowed him to use his own discretion in oiling the shaft. He had never been told not to go down the drive when the shaft was in motion. Dr. H. A. Cooper, deaeribing the injuries to deceased, said the top of the skull, together with the brain matter were entirely removed. The body and limbs were also seriously injured. Death would be instantaneous. The clothing was found tightly wound around the shaft. NO FAULT OF MANAGEMENT. Delivering his finding, Mr. Mowlem said that the deceased, contrary to his instructions, had gone down the drive wearing what he told hie assistant not to wear. From the evidence he coum not see that anything more oould have been done by the management of the factory to protect human life. Having viewed the place, the coroner thought it was reasonable to ask a man not to do any tiring with the shaft itself, but to go down the drive for any other purpose. There was plenty of room for a reasonably caref.il person. Several precautionary measures might be suggested for greater safety, such as covering the shaft with a wooden tunnel. From the evMence he oould not see the faintest suggestion of negligence on the part of the management. The man met his death because he did the very thing he told his assistant not to do. Perhaps it was a matter for congratulation that there were not two accidents. If a man look the risk he had to pay the penalty.