COLLISION SEQUEL

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 59, Issue 39, 25 November 1938, Page 6

COLLISION SEQUEL

TWO MOTORISTS CHARGED.

question of givjnc way.

FINES IMPOSED ON BOTH. A sequel to a collision in Ashburton was heard in the Ashburton Magistrate’s Court this morning, before Mr H. Morgan, S.M. Gordon Howard Oldham, aged 23, an employee of the Public Works Department, pleaded not guilty to u charge of failing to keep as close to the left side of the road as practicable when driving a motor vehicle. Sergeant Cleary said that defendant was travelling along Kermode Street, toward the intersection of William Street, his car. being across the centre line on the gravel road. The vehicle defendant was driving came into collision with another car, and was turned on its side.

Mr L. A. Charles (for defendant) said that Oldham was travelling down Kermode Street on. his correct side. As ho approached the intersection Jiq saw another car travelling along William Street.

Defendant said that he naturally thought the other car would give way to the right-hand rule and proceeded. "Wlhen he saw that the other car was not giving way he swerved well over to his right and into the centre of the road. It was too late to avoid a collision however, and the cars struck, his being overturned. “I couldn’t see where I was in the wrong in the slightest,” said defendant. He had taken no notice of the fact that the police were takirfg measurements.

“I am satisfied from the Sergeant’s report that the defendant did not comply with the regulations,” said the Magistrate. “The first rule of the road is to keep to the left,” he said. A fine of £2 was imposed.

Arising out of the same accident, Albert James Prattley, aged 22, a farm labourer, was charged with failing to give, way to traffic on his right, and failing to keep as close to the left as practicable. He pleaded not guilty on each charge. Sergeant Cleary said that defendant was driving along William Street toward Kermode Street, the outside wheels of his car being on the wrong side of the road. He was a good nine feet out from the grass .on the correct side of the road. In reply to Mr Bussell, Sergeant Cleary said that a high macrocarpa hedge on the corner would obscure the view of the motorist. The height of the hedge was at least ten. feet. Defendant said he was travelling south at about 7.45 p.m. along William Street, and applied his brakes as soon as he sarv a car coming down Kermode Stre.et. Defendant said he was on the correct side of the road, and was watching ,the corner. He was almost past the high fence before’ he saw the other car. He swerved, but the side of the other car hit him on the angle, causing the first vehicle to turn on its side. Visibility was good, and neither cars had their lights on. Defendant’s car was travelling at about 20 miles per hour, while the other was apparently going just a little faster. ‘The evidence shows that defendant was on the wrong side of the road,” said the Magistrate, imposing a fine of £2 on the first charge. The charge of failing to give w T av to a vehicle on his Viglit was dismissed. The hedge on the right was a serious obstruction to approaching traffic, and/ft was apparent that it w T as not the fault of defendant tha he did not give way. As soon as he saw the other vehicle he applied thq brakes, w’hich were in good order. “I cannot convict on this charge, as defendant did all he could to pull up,” said the Magistrate, who contended the regulation of giving way to 'vehicles on the right should have reasonable application.