The Superintendent of Police has received advice that James Ryan, a single man, 30 years of age, watf thrown from a truck on the railway extension works at Miller’s Flat yesterday morning and killed. He was a native of Ireland, and had only been a year in the dominion. -Otago Daily Times, 14/2/1925.
FATALITY AT MILLERS FLAT.
WORKMAN KILLED ON RAILWAY WORKS.
On Friday morning a fatal accident occurred on the railway line two miles from Millers Flat, when a single man named James Ryan, about thirty years of age, was killed through being thrown from a railway truck. The accident occurred when an empty ballast train was proceeding from Millers Flat to Beaumont. Deceased was riding on one of the trucks which after passing over the points at the siding somehow left the line and tipping up threw the deceased and the other occupants out. The deceased was a native of Ireland and had only been about a year in New Zealand.
INQUEST.
An inquest was held at Millers Flat on Saturday morning at 11 a.m. before Mr L. Faigan, Acting-Coroner, and jury of which Mr J. Riach was chosen foreman. Constable McMahon represented the police while Messrs Kay and Hurle watched proceedings on behalf of the Public Works Department. Mr A. S. Newland, agent for the Public Trust, watched the proceedings on behalf of the relatives of the deceased.
After being sworn the jury and Coroner adjourned to the scene of the accident, after which the following evidence was taken: —
Martin Kean, engine driver, employed by the Public Works Department, deposed that he was the driver of the train on which the accident occurred. He had had thirteen years’ experience engine driving but had only had one week’s experience driving a railway engine. On the day in question he was driving an empty ballast train back to Beaumont. The train consisted of four empty trucks which were being pushed back by the engine. There were several men riding on trucks, including deceased. At the time of the accident was travelling about eight miles an hour. Had to pass the scene of accident about six times per day and always at about same speed. He had had no previous mishaps at the scene of the accident. On approaching the points he noticed they were clear for him to go ahead. He took instructions as to line being clear from the guard of train who was on the engine with him. The first warning he had of anything being wrong was one of the trucks bumping after they had passed over the points. Concluding the truck was off the line he reversed the engine and applied the brakes, pulling up in about the length of the train. On inquiring if anyone was hurt he was informed that the deceased was. He found that the first two trucks were off the line, the other two still being on the line with the engine. Noticed the deceased was lying at the edge of sleepers free of the trucks. Had later looked at the points and found nothing wrong with them, he could not say whether the trucks came off before or after coming to the frog, it was a mystery to him how the trucks came off the line. The deceased was taken back on the train to Millers Flat, but could not say whether he was dead or not at that time. He had a traction engine and locomotive drivers’ certificate (produced).
In reply to a question witness said he had noticed side play and wobbling with the truck in question when being pushed.
William Francis Dempster, employed by the Public Works Department, stated he was riding in the same truck as deceased. The accident happened at about 10 a.m. He was sitting at one side of the front end of the first truck and deceased was opposite him. They had gone over the same spot three times every day without previous mishap. The engine always pushed the empties back to Beaumont. He had noticed several of the trucks very wobbly, especially the one in which they were riding on this occasion, but could not say if he had ridden in the same truck before, although this truck had been used on the line before. On passing the points the first thing he was aware of was the truck bumping off the line. This occurred after the trucks had passed the points. Could not say if they were past the frog or not. The train was going about seven or eight miles an hour. He thought the train travelled about 12 yards after the trucks left the rails. He was thrown off the truck, but not hurt. When he got up he saw the deceased lying at the side of the sleepers, about three yards from where he (witness) was thrown off. Thought deceased was alive as he heard a moan. Had examined the line later in the day but could not give an opinion as to what caused the trucks to go off. Had traveled to Millers Flat after the accident to get the doctor. There was no lookout at the front of the train.
Dr J. R. Gilmour, medical practitioner, Roxburgh, stated that he had received a telephone call re accident between 10.30 and 11 a.m. on the 13th. On arrival he found the body of deceased in a hut adjoining Sheehy’s Hotel, life was extinct. The clothing was badly torn and covered with gravel and dust. There were large bruises on the left thigh. The left upper arm was fractured and the left shoulder dislocated. There was a wound on the left check bone about 1 1/2 inches long and a contusion on the right forehead. Blood was issuing freely from the nostrils and right ear. Was of the opinion that death was due to fracture of the base of the skull causing hemorrhage and laceration of the brain caused by deceased falling on his head on some hard object.
Maurice Cyril Boyer, labourer, stated he was riding on train and was in same truck as deceased. The train slowed down at the points, which he noticed were quite clear, as he took particular notice of them. The truck in which he was left the rails after having passed the points. He was of opinion that the truck left the line before passing the frog. He felt a sudden bump and the truck started bumping over the sleepers. Witness then found himself thrown to the ground, but was not injured. Deceased was found lying alongside the rails facing Millers Flat. Witness turned deceased over and he appeared to be dead. Examined the truck and the rails but could form no idea as to how the accident happened. Noticed that truck wobbled considerably just before the accident. Had not seen any previous mishap. Had not heard of any dissatisfaction among the men on account of the trucks being unsafe. Was of opinion that any truck would sway in the same position.
James Turnbull, gauger, deposed that he had been working on ballast trains for 15 months, and had ridden on train daily during that period. Made an examination of the line and also truck from which deceased was thrown, but could find nothing to account for accident. Tested the gauge of the line and found it laid to a tight gauge as was usual in all new lines. The flanges on leading wheels of the truck wore slightly worn, but not unduly. There was nothing suggestive of danger that would explain the accident. If a stone of class used for ballasting got on line it would be crushed by the weight of the truck which was about 31 tons empty. Method of pushing trucks was quite usual and quite safe providing a reasonable speed was maintained, say 10 to 12 miles an hour. When a three man crew was on train it was usual for guard to be on leading truck. When there was no fireman there was no definite instructions as to where guard should be. In the case of a short train with a two man crew it was better for guard to be on engine. Could not express any opinion as to whether the amount of play in the wheels would cause the truck to jump up.
John Hurrell, assistant-engineer P.W. Department, stated that he examined the line and truck after accident, and was unable to assign any cause for the derailment. Wheels and axles of truck he found in good order, and the gauge of line was correct. Was of opinion that truck left the line between the points and the frog. The line was straight at scene of accident. Had not heard it mentioned about the truck being out of order. The guard of train is in complete charge. Was on the train at time of accident. Was on third truck. Train slowed down at points which he did not notice if clear. The truck reared up in the air. This was after the truck passed the points. The truck witness was in did not leave the rails, train travelled about 15 yards after the accident. Witness jumped off train and saw deceased lying on the ground. He did not appear to be dead then, but only lived a few minutes. Did not notice anything wrong with the truck before the accident. Front truck would be liable to wobble more than the others. Examined line and truck after the accident but could form no idea as to what caused the accident. The usual practice when engine was pushing trucks was for guard to be on look-out on the first truck. The Barday locomotive is a one man engine. The driver has to do his own firing. If guard was on front truck and the driver was firing would be no one on engine to take a signal if one was given. The guard, if on engine would be able to see any obstruction on the line. Was of opinion that guard should be on lookout on first truck when trucks were being pushed.
Robert Leslie Kaye, assistant engineer P.W. Department, said he received word of accident when at Beaumont, and immediately proceeded to scene of accident. Guard in this case would be best employed if on the engine.
Edward John Weatherall stated he was guard on train and had been so for four weeks. Had been continually up and down the line. First noticed a bumping of the trucks when passing points. The driver immediately pulled up. Noticed a cloud of dust. When train stopped got off and found deceased lying on the ground. He appeared to be dead. He uncoupled the two disabled trucks and placed deceased in one of the others, taking him back to Millers Flat. Had no previous experience as guard. Saw points when coming to them and they were locked. Had himself locked them on evening of 12th and examined them at 5.30 on morning of accident, they being skill locked. No trucks passed into siding between this and accident. The front truck was not too steady but did not consider it unsafe. Did not always ride on the engine. If train was empty and being pushed with no men on trucks he rode on first truck to get a better view of line in case of danger. There were no instructions as to where guard should be when train is reversed. Could form no opinion as to how the trucks left the line but it may have been caused by a stone on the line. It could not have been caused by anything being wrong with points or the frog. The men riding on the train were carrying out instructions. He was nineteen years old.
In reply to question, the engineers stated that it was usual to appoint old railwaymcn as guards, but in this case no such man was available. The guard in this case was considered to be quite competent.
Constable McMahon stated he had known deceased for over six months. He was a steady man of temperate habits. Saw body on the 13th and identified it as that of James Ryan.
The jury returned a verdict as follows: — “That the deceased, James Ryan, met his death through the derailment of an empty railway truck whilst returning from ballasting operation on February 13, 1925, there being nothing in the evidence to show the cause as to why the truck left the rails, and we also find that there is no blame attachable to anyone.” -Mt Benger Mail, 18/2/1925.
No comments:
Post a Comment