Mexborough & Swinton Times – Friday 16 October 1931
Crushed Foot.
Conisbro’ Miner Gets Damages
Slipped From ‘Bus.
A Conisborough miner who slipped and whose thought was crushed when attempting to board a railless vehicle at Denaby, was awarded £68 damages and costs by His Honour Judge J. A. Green, C.B.E.. K.C., at Rotherham County Court, on Tuesday.
Plaintiff was James Pearson, 29, Daylands Avenue, Conisborough, and he claimed £80 10s. from the Mexboro’ and Swinton Traction Company.
Mr J. Peacock (solicitor), of March, Pearson and Green, Manchester, was for plaintiff, and Mr. P Bates (Solicitor), of Messrs. Jackson and Jackson. Rotherham. for respondents.
Mr. Peacock stated that on April 17th, plaintiff was waiting with several other men for a railless vehicle near the Labour Club, Denaby. When the ‘bus approached, the men signalled to the driver to stop. The ‘bus stopped a short distance in front of the men, and several of them entered. Plaintiff was waiting his turn to board the ‘bus. He had his hand on the centre rail, and his foot on the platform when the ‘bus started off without warning. Plaintiff slipped and was dragged about six or seven yards; one foot went under the ‘bus and was badly crushed, and be had a cut several inches long on the shin of the left leg.
Pearson gave evidence and stated that after the accident he was removed to hospital where he was detained for six weeks. He was now an out-patient, and was unable to work. Hope to the time of the accident be was working regularly as a filler. and his average wages were £3 3s. a week. Cross-examined, he denied that he tried to board the ‘bus while in motion, and that he caught hold of the side rail.
No Warning Signal.
John Thorpe, 51, Church Street. Conisboro’, said he mounted the ‘bus immediately in front of plaintiff. He had just got on the platform when the ‘bus started. The conductress did not signal the bus to start.
Charles Hitchen, 55, Ivanhoe Road, Conisboro’ said was immediately behind plaintiff and caught hold of him as he fell from the ‘bus. The wheel of the ‘bus passed over plaintiff’s foot. Witness did not pear a signal given.
Cross-examined, witness said he was certain plaintiff had hold of the centre rail and not the side one.
Dr.J. McArthur, of Denaby, said be examined plaintiff’s foot and immediately ordered him to hospital. The foot was badly crushed, but no bones were fractured. In his opinion, plaintiff would be able to return to work in a few weeks time.
Conductress’s Story.
Norah Wharton, 90, Hirst Gate, Mexborough, the ‘bus conductress, said the driver of the ‘bus pulled up without receiving a signal from her. One man got on and she signalled the ‘bus to proceed.
As the ‘bus started, a man came running up, and jumped on. Presumably, he was followed by another man, as witness saw a hand catch hold of the side rail, and a foot mount the platform.
Witness saw the man’s foot slip from the platform, and she gave the emergency signal for the ‘bus to stop. The bus pulled up immediately.
John Henry Ellis, 12, Old Road, Conisbrough, gave similar evidence, but said two women entered the bus before the man mentioned by the conductress.
Henry George Council, 26 Road, Mexborough, said he got to Bell’s to proceed, and then for bells, which was emergency signal. After the accident, he saw plaintiff, and told him that if he had shouted the conductress. The bus. Plaintiff did not blame anyone.
Doctor J.J.Huey, of Mexborough, said he examined plaintiff on August 27 and could find no object is sign of the alleged injury. He diagnosed that plenty was suffering from flat foot, that he was special boot he will be able to work. In his opinion, if the bus had gone over plaintiff’s foot, it would have been more seriously injured, and mind as had to be amputated.
Cross-examined, he agreed that the foot might have been struck by the bus.
Mr Bates submitted that plaintiff’s injury was not as serious as he made out, and that he jumped on the bus while it was in motion.
Greater Precaution Necessary
His Honour said that the evidence was overwhelming. Several men had given evidence for the plaintiff very well, and one said he caught hold of him as he fell from the moving bus. The one witness of vital importance for respondents contradicted the bus conductress. He believes that plaintiff did slip from the bus, and that he injured his foot in slipping.
Unless the conductress went to the bottom of the platform and looked out there would always be that kind of accident. When a bus was stopped there was an invitation for people to board or alight from it, and during the pause between the signal for the bus to proceed and the moving off of the bus, that invitation remained.
Sufficient precaution should be taken to see that no one was in the act of boarding the bus before it was signalled off. He was satisfied that the bus started off while plaintiff was properly boarding it.