MAN ELECTROCUTED
INQUEST CONCLUDED
Regarding the death of Robert Bayliss, a married man, who was electrocuted while working on the electric lines in Gladstone road on December 24, the coroner (Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M.), held this morning that death was purely accidental, and that no blame was attachable either to the City Corporation or to the lack of care of anyone on the job with deceased.
The inquest was continued with Mr A. N. Haggitt representing the City Corporation, Mr A. C. Hanlon the relatives or deceased, and Sergeant Boulton the Police Department.
Dr William James Porteous said he was called to attend the deceased at Gladstone road, North-east Valley. His body had been placed in an ambulance. There was no sign of life; the man had been dead probably about fifteen minutes. The deceased had been found hanging from an electric pole. Death must have been instantaneous, and probably due to the passage through the body of an electric current. There had been two or three gasps as the body was coming down.
To Mr Hanlon: Death was due to electrocution. The post-mortem appearance was consistent with that. There were no gloves on his hands when witness saw him.
To Sergeant Boulton; Artificial respiration was being carried out when witness arrived.
Gilbert Smart, a linesman employed by the City Corporation, said he was working with deceased at the time of his death. Previously he had gone up to the wires with deceased, showing him what to do in putting bridges from one line to another. The old wire along Gladstone road was being cut and replaced by a new one. This bridging was only a temporary job. Witness had charge of the gang that morning. Deceased was wearing neither gloves nor goloshes, though they were available for use — that was, they were in the tool box some thirty yards away from the pole where deceased was working. There were four men in the gang. Deceased was the only man working on the live wires. It was not usual to wear gloves or goloshes during dry weather. On the morning in question the weather, commencing fine, had later turned to rain. There were no definite orders that gloves or goloshes must be used during work on low-tension wires such us deceased was working on, carrying 230 volts. Deceased was an experienced man. His health had always seemed good. Witness was called to the pole by a man named McSwain, so he ran to where deceased was hanging head downwards, held by one leg between the wires. Witness went up the ladder, but could not reach him, so he got another man to shift the ladder to get a rope round him and lower him to the ground. This took two or three minutes. Witness did not think deceased was alive then, but artificial respiration was tried immediately, and medical aid summoned. Death could only have been caused by an electric shock.
To Mr Hanlon; There were regulations for the guidance of men. They said nothing about a main being left by himself among the live wires. Men were often left like that. The regulations did not say they must wear gloves or goloshes. Though he was foreman that morning, he did not know that 230 volts would kill a man. He had seen men caught on such wires before. Men were not protected by any information other than what they learned out on the lines. A man was safe working on one wire so long as his body did not make contact with another. A stumble then might have serious consequences. The men did not want to wear gloves; they got through the work better without them. Tools were safer if they were insulated, but the ones they were using that morning were not insulated. Everything was ripe for a fatal accident that morning; there were no precautions at all.
To Mr Haggitt: Deceased seemed to be a competent man. It did not need much training to let a man know there was danger from live wires. Witness, on similar work, would not have worn gloves. Since the accident he had worked on that same pole without gloves. Ordinary clothing was not a conductor of electricity, so it was possible to sit on one wire and do work to another. There was a danger that a man might slip. Deceased had done this particular work before. He must have appreciated that there was danger of a shook. There had never been any instruction that the men should not use gloves so that the work could be carried out faster.
Angus McSwain, a linesman employed by the City Corporation, said he was sent by Smart to be in call of Bayliss if he wanted him. When witness got up to the pole Bayliss was working, and he crossed from one side of the pole to the other on the crossarms. They spoke to each other about insulating tape and a rope which deceased would soon require, and witness went to the box about thirty yards away. He was away two or three minutes, and, surprised that deceased had not called him, he went over, and seeing the man hanging by the feet he ran to Smart to give the alarm. Returning he got the rope up the pole to tie round his body. Witness corroborated from there on the evidence of Smart. He agreed with that evidence as to the use of gloves and goloshes. This was a safe pole, and witness would not have worn the things if he had been sent to do the job. Even in view of what happened to the deceased, witness would still not use gloves or goloshes.
Mr M. C. Henderson, city electrical engineer, was present. Replying to the coroner, he said that in matters of safety the Government regulations were followed, which laid down that goloshes rubber gloves, etc. must be provided where necessary. The low tension circuit was looked on as quite safe if reasonable care was taken. Bayliss must have put his foot on the neutral wire, and must have touched one of the others while he put the bridge in. It would not have happened if he had been wearing rubber gloves or goloshes or insulated instruments.
The Coroner said that the accident would not have happened if deceased had had gloves or goloshes on; but the evidence showed that these were worn only if the weather was wet, while the Government regulations merely provided that these things should be supplied where necessary. In view of that it was not necessary to say more. In dangerous occupations, familiarity bred contempt of the danger, and that was what happened here. He was quite unable to find that the men considered it necessary to wear gloves. The verdict would be one of accidental electrocution. -Evening Star, 22/1/1927.
No comments:
Post a Comment