SUPREME COURT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6647, 20 November 1899, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

— — O CIVIL SITTINGS. Monday, Nov. 20. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Denniston..) The civil sittings of the Supreme Court were opened at 11 sum. to-day before his Honor Mr Justice Denniston. # HARDING V. THE QUEEN. In these cases, claims made by a husband and wife and three children for damages for injuries arising out of the Rakaia railway accident, Mr Kippcnberger, for the plaintiffs, applied for special juries. Mr Stringer suggested that the cases of the husband and wife conjointly might be tried by a special jury, and the cases of the three minors dealt with by his Honor alone. Mr Kippenberger asked for at least two special juries, one for the conjoint cases of the husband and wife, W. R. Harding and_ E. J. Harding, and the other for the case of the son, E. R. B. Harding, which had been set down for hearing before a common jury. His Honor granted the application for a, special jury for the cases of the husband and wife, and 'fixed the hearing for Thursday, Nov. 30 ; the cases of C. E. L. Harding and A. N. Harding to be taken before himself alone, and the case of E- R. B. Harding before a special jury during the session. BI'INTYRE' V. CAMPION. In this case, a claim for £1500 damages for breach of promise, Mr Byrne, for the plaintiff, applied for an adjournment, in order that his client might have an opportunity of meeting an amended statement of defence which had been filed. Mr Fisher, for the defendant, objected to the adjournment. His Honor granted the sojournment, directing that the case should stand over till the next sittings. Costs, £2 2s were granted to the plaintiff. ROWLEY V. NEW ZEALAND LOAN AND MERCANTILE AGENCY COMPANY. In tliis case, a claim for £100 and an injunction, Mr Loughnan, for the plaintiff, applied for an adjournment, as it had beenfound impossible to secure the attendance of two necessary witnesses. Mr Fisher, for the defendants, consented, and the case was adjourned until the next sittings. AUSTIN V.' THE QUEEN. This was a claim by Florence Austin for £250 compensation for injuries arising out of the Rakada railway accident. Mr Russell appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Stringer for the Crown. Mr Russell, in opening the case for the plaintiff, who had been a machinist at the Islington Factory, said that the case differed from many of tbe others. There were no objective signs of injury, the case being one of those known to the medical profession as railway nervous shock. Ever since the rfecident the plaintiff's nervous system had been ih a very bad state, and she had been unable to perform her work. Florence Austin, the plaintiff, stated that her average wages at Islington had ibeen lOs per week. Since the accident she had suffered from pains in her back and head, and though she had tried to work, she found herself unable to do so. She felt as if she had no energy at all, and did not sleep well, her rest being disturbed by bad dreams, in which trains usually figured. She had once or twice since gone to dances, but she had felt no inclination for them, and had only gone because of the persuasion of her friends. To Mr Stringer : Before the accident, she had been in the hospital under treatment for ansemia. She had suffered from weakness and fainting fits, but hot to such an extent as she did how ; and she had not previously suffered from pains in her back. She had not complained to her employer, Mr Fisher, of the pains she was suffering from, though she had mentioned them to the other girls. She had first made a claim on the Government in August. At the " socials" She had attended, she had danced a good deal, though not every dance, as her back pained her. On the night of one " so-, cial " she attended at Templeton, it snowed, and she was laid up for one day afterwards. When she was admitted to the hospital after the accident, Dr Fox told her she was suffering from nervous shock. On leaving the box, the witness was overcome, apparently, by hysteria. Agnes Piper stated that the plaintiff, who was 'her sister, had lived with her for about twelve months. Witness had noticed a change in her condition since the accident ; she complained of pains in her back and head, and appeared unable to do her work. She had previously been in an anaemic condition, but immediately before the accident she had been in better health than for some time before. To Mr Stringer : Before the accident the plaintiff had suffered from fainting fits, but since then she had had hysterical fits. Ellen Brown, mother of the plaintiff, stated that her daughter's condition since the accident had been .worse than it was previously. To Mr Stringer : Since August her daughter had been living with her. To her knowledge she had not gone to a dance in Hobbs's Buildings. She had not asked Mr Fisher for any certificate. Frank Sutherland, brother-in-law of the plaintiff, also gave evidence as to the change in her condition since the accident. Walter Fox, medical practitioner, stated that he had known the plaintiff for between two and three years. She had been treated at the hospital for anaemia. When admitted to the hospital on April 11, the plaintiff was suffering both from anaemia and sprain in the back. Her condition now was quite different, and she was very hysterical. The girl had been placed in a private hospital for observation, and it was evident that her nervous system had been upset. He had not noticed any hysterical symptoms in her previous attacks of ansemia. There were some objective signs of injury to the back. A lump which was observable was, he thought, evidence of a rupture of some of the muscular fibres and membranes of the bone. He thought she might be troubled for some years by her back. To Mr Stringer : ■&■ fall, unless a violent 0n.3, would not produce the injury. William H. Symes, medical practitioner, stated that he had examined the girl several times, having attended her first in August, in consequence of hysterical convulsions, followed by prostration, inability to work, and more or less constant pain, in the head and back. He had had her placed under observation at the Fitzroy Home, and had satisfied himself that the hysterical symptoms were genuine. He agreed with most oi what Dr Fox had said. It was possible that a jerk caused by a railway accident would produce the sprain. To Mr Stringer : He was not surprised to learn that tie plaintiff had been out dancing during the months of June, July and August. That was not incompatible with the case. The tumour near the spine could be easily removed, but the plaintiff would not consent to its removal. _ To his Honor: The tumour was a contributing cause of the pain. Christina Thomson stated that the plaintiff had been in her charge, in the Fitzroy Nursing Home, for a week. She had been under close observation, and while there had had three very bad fits, which had been more like epileptic than hysterical fits. This closed the plaintiff's case. Mr Stringer opened the case for the Crown, and called William Diamond, medical practitioner, who stated that in June, 1897, he had attended the plaintiff, who was suffering from ansemia. Ansemia pre-supposed mal-nutri-tion of the body, and the nerves were naturally affected, sufferers from this complaint being more or less neurotic. He had seen nothing more of the girl until August last, when, in company with Dr Townend, he had investigated the case on behalf of the "Railway Department. Witness found no external indication of the pain in her back. Dr Symes, who was present at the first examination, pointed out nothing external, but at a second examination Dr Fox had drawn attention to this small lum,p on her back, though he had been unable to put liis fingers on it at once. The girl's condition was now more pronounced than it had been before the accident, but in her anaemic condition she had the potentiality to develop these

■ symptoms. She would, perhaps, have developed them without any train accident. Had there been a shock sufficient to tear the muscles or bone, she would have felt it immediately it happened. To Mr Russell : If the pain had come on immediately after the accident, he would have supposed it to have been the result of the accident. Nothing was more subject to relapse than anosmia. He thought it was decidedly a step in the wrong direction to induce a girl, in the plaintiff's condition, to go to dances. Mrs Thomson, had no means of knowing whether the fits the plaintiff had at her home were - epileptic or not. Joseph H. Townend, medical practitioner, stated that he had examined the plaintiff, and agreed generally with the evidence of Dr Diamond. The plaintiff seemed to him a pale, anaemic, neurotic kind of girl, such as one often saw in Christchurch. Charles Ernest Fisher, contractor at the Islington Factory, stated that the plaintiff had been in his employment. She had always been regarded as a delicate girl, and, though he had not had many opportunities of judging, he hid not noticed much difference in her since the accident. Witness had gone through most of the carriages of the first train after the accident, and in one carriage, about the fifth from the end, he found a number of people playing cards, quite ignorant of what had happened. Ada Brown, an employee at Islington, stated tliat when the plaintiff returned to work, she had never, to witness's knowledge, complained of having been hurt in the accident. To Mr Russell : She had complained of pains in. her head. (Left Sitting:) ..,._' ••'>.'''

[Per Press Association.] AUCKLAND, Nov. 20. At the Supreme Court criminal sittings, Mr Justice Conolly said it was a matter for congratulation that -the bills were considerably less than had been submitted for some time past. They contained no seiuous charges, or many eld offenders, and onethird were against Maoris and half-castes.