The Birkenhead News and Wirral General Advertiser. — 1919-04-12 (Birkenhead, Merseyside, England)

PLAINTIFF OAINS THE VERDICT. On Thursday afternoon Judge Parsons, KC.. had before him at the Birkenhead County Court an action of Dobie v. the Mayor, aldermen and burgesses of the borough of Birkenhead. The plaintiff was John Dobie, a painter, of 89, Conwaystreet and he sought to obtain from the Corporation a sum of .815 4e., of which amount £lO was for general damages. The basis of his claim was that he was pirated off the platform of an electric tramcar 'Owned by the Corporation in consequence of the negligence of the Corporation servants to halt at a compulsory "shoji" through the negligent manner in which' the car was being driven by the defendants or their servants on October 3rd, 1918, in Conway-street. Mr. A. Jr. Cotton represented the plaintiff, and Mr. Stewart Brown, barrister (instructed by Messrs. Gradvrell and Co.) represented the Corporation. Mr. Cotten, having detailed the grounds which led to the claim, read a quantity of correepcmdence which had passed betweth . the eoncitors concerned prior to the claim being entered, in one of which the plaintiff suggested overcrowding of the cars, though this was repudiated by the defendants tramways manager. The plaintiff said he along with his daughter and eon-in-law entered a car at Woodside Ferry. At the corner of Argyle-etreet and Conway-Street the car became overcrowded. When he got an the car he said he wanted to get off at Camden-street, and consequently "worked his way" through the people in the car to get MI at the point named, but the car did not stop. It was going at such a speed that he Was knocked off the platform into the road, rendered unconscious, and had to be taken to the Borough Hospital. He went to see Mr. .Cyril Clarke, the tramways manager, on the Saturday week following the accident, and Mr. Clarke totlid him the matter had not been reported to him, and observed that he supjeased he wanted to receive some codpalmation. Witness said be never tried to jump off the oar at this stopping-place. It was not likely he would dose when he was i6l years of age last August He had been lan. sheenier for 40 years, and, further, he would consider a man trying to jump aff a oar going at full speed was attemptto commit suicide. . _  1.4%0ae-examiped  by—iir. Stewart Brown, witneag &aid he was "thrown off" the car. Couneel : Who threw you off? Plaintiff : The swing of the car. What else could it be?  'By 'Mr. Cotton: He did not see the conductress atter the time they left Argylestreet; he believed she was upstairs. Mra. M. A. Warburton, daughter of the plaintiff, bore out her father's statement Henry Warburton, husband of the last witness, end a railway foreman, who thought he knew a little about speed corroborated as to the conditions in the car, and said he was quite sure the car (lid nut atop ale Oausden-street, and it was going at a good speed. This witness closing the plaintiff's Nue, Mr. Stewart Brown called . .  Mr. Oarke, the tramways manager, who said that when the plaintiff called on him on Oct. 12th in reference to the occurrence, he made a statement which witness took down in shorthand, in the course of which he raid he was either pushed off or fell off the tramcar. He did not know which. The next thing he knew was that he was in the Borough Hospital. Before The war people were not allowed to ride an the platform, but since then on account of the difficulties they had to contend with ..rigers had travelled on the platforms. It was considered a serious matter for 'drivers to go past an appointed stoppingplace without pulling up for passengers to Alight or board the car.—By Mr. Cotton : This case should have been reported to him directly after it pocurred, but he had no report about it until the plaintiff called upon him. Me did ma suggest there had sot -been any accident at all: Camdenstreet was a "stopping place." Edwin Davies, a tram-driver, in the. service of the Corporation° for 17 yearn-AIM he drove the ear in question and knew nothing about any accident having 0r..curved: to a passenger upon it unlil Mr. Clerks- ressi him a letter he had received is regard to it. It was not true he did -not-putt-op at the Camden-ay:vet compulsory stop on that night. Margaret Mum-ford said she had been about two years on Davies' oar, anti knew nothing about an accident until she went before Mr. Clarke with the driver. She was expected to start the car by signal to the driver at the compulsory .stops. She never saw plaintiff fall off the car, nor did anyone tell her he had done so.—By Mr. Cotton: She was always on the platform at Conway-street, and did not remember' ceeing plaintiff or his daughter on or near the platform then,  _ Stewart Brown, acklresaing his Honour for the defence. thought it was clear that the car did slacken speed approaching Cainden-atreet, and that gence had not been brought home to :he driver of the ear. The plaintiff, he urged, ' eid not fall of the car at the "stop." The accident was consistent with negligence on the part of the plaintiff hinisfflf in and making up his mind to alight at a certain "stop and by some means faulting off the car when atandling on the platform. His Honour did not thank the car Mopped at Camden-street. He gave judgment for the plaintiff for the amount claimed, with costa.