DISAPPOINTED WITNESSES.

Timaru Herald, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 12871, 5 January 1906, Page 6

DISAPPOINTED WITNESSES.

PAYMENT FOE, -EXPENSES. There 1 , has frequently bee complaint makes''-'no provision for-the payment .'of. f -Witnesses' (save medical excalled to give evidences at Coroners' inquests.' The enquiry held yesterday at Studholme;. Junction exemplified .this. Two witnesses were summoned from Temuka, and, one. from. Timaru, besides a .porter stationed «£■ Studholme. Of these, only one, a: Temuka. man, ■ was-Tequined to give evidence. Tie Timaru man, ,named Macdonald, it. 1-was.r.^understood, ; had., evidence corroborating some that : was given by the Temuka. resident; Mr Collins; Mrs Blyth knew,- the deceased- as a resident of Temuka, .and the; local porter had much to do with the. discovery and removal of the bodies from 'the: £ scene of the accident. These persons, not having- been called to give evidence,: received: no payment in refund of the expense'to which they were put in. attending; As a matter of fact, no given-at the inquest as to the exact scene'; of the occurrence, as to who found;the remains, 'who. removed them to th.ejviWiUowbridge. r station '(the place wirereithe police took-them in charge) ©r bow *hey/?came. to Studholme.

A " Herald-*' reporter called last night on Sergeant Warring,who told him that the failure of the : law to provide for payments'; to : witnesses was frequently of. It made no'provision.;at' "all for .paymentseven, to, .witnesses, who : gave , .but mSithesel •bases the Coroner often exercised" nis discretion,. and allowed thent>their expenses. ' On his re- j commendation to the of / justice the payments were generally "allowed. In the cases of witnesses who weite' asked who "were not after all. required to give evidence, if they were put to expense,;-:and their;.cases involved hardship,- the Coroner sometimes made arecommendation to tie rail refund, arid- the jecqnimendatipn> was generally complied!with; ?• -V ■• : --'- ■• - v '