TRAFFIC BY-LAWS.

Auckland Star, Volume LVI, Issue 135, 10 June 1925, Page 8

TRAFFIC BY-LAWS.

'BUS DRIVER CHARGED

BLOCK OUTSIDE OPERA HOUSE. PERSECUTION ALLEGED. "It is persecution. They have long been trying to get mc, because I was the firßt man to start in opposition to the trams, and was the first to reduce fares, declared John Lewis Gunning, a 'bus proprietor, at the Police Court to-day, when answering charges brought by Chief Traffic inspector Hogan. of bavin?; stopped within tho limits of a safety zone, and with having refused to obey the instructions of a traffic inspector. Evidence was given by Traffic Inspector Robertson that he .saw tho. : bus of the defendant (a Dominion Road 'bus) standing outside the Opera House at 10.40 one evening, it was drawn up in such a position, being three feet within the safely zone area, as to obstruct the whole of 'the traffic coming down Wclleslev Street. Tho blockade continued for about eight minutes. When requested to move on. be refused point blank to do so, and said to witness, "A man ought t.i take you round tho corner and give you something to think of." (Laughter.) A taxi driver declared that Gunning blocked the road so that nothing could move, driving iv ahead of the other 'buses so as to be first to get a load. The taxi-men were compelled by the bylaws to leave a "gap" in front of the Opera House, but the 'bus drivers ignored this "gap," and pulled up in it to collect passengers. Ho heard Gunning refuse to obey the inspector. This evidence was corroborated by another taxi-man, who s ;l iil tbe argument was "very heated." but who denied the insinuation of counsel that be was antagonistic to Gunning, and declared flint he would bo "Up against" any 'bus driver, or anyone else, who blocked thi: traffic in the way that Gunning had done. Alleged Illegal Command. Mr. Field, who appeared for the defendant, snid the defence was that Gunning hud moved to the stand he took on the instructions of a tramway inspector, and that if he had moved any further in response to the order of Robertson, he would have gone within the safety zone anil broken another bylaw. Further, if be bad pulled around into Queeeti Street, as Robertson had instructed, he would have broken still another by-law, as the 'buses were not allowed in that street. Counsel therefore contended that the inspectors' instruction, since obedience to it involved breaking another by-law, was not a legal command, and that the defendant was not bound to obey it.

Gunning denied that he was blocking tho traffic, and said he was 25ft away from the safety zone. Tt was another 'bus, which came across him which blocked the tram line. He moved to the stand complained of at the request of a tramway inspector, but would not move any further because he would have encroached on the safety zone, which he was not doing at the time. Robertson said to him, '"Get anywhere you like, as long as you get out of this." Mr. Field: I believe these inspectors are alwiys on to you? Defendant: It is persecution. They have long been trying to get mc, because I was the first man to start in opposition to the trams, and the first man to reduce the fares. A "Pinching" Matter. Mr. Hogan: You know Inspector Robertson?—Yes, I have good reason to know him —I do, too well. Why too well?— Because he is on to mc on every possible occasion to move on. Is it not your business to move on when requested by a traffic inspector?— If his request is reasonable; not if it is unreasonable. Mr. Field: There has been a lot of ill-feeling between Lister (one of the taxi-driver witnesses) nnd you?— Yes; he has gone to the police on several occasions and asked them to shift mc.

The Magistrate: Then the evidence he gave against you to-day is quite false?— Yes.

The Magistrate: Very well, it's for mc to decide between the two of yon. A young lady gave evidence on behalf of Gunning that she was in his "bus at the time of the alleged offence, and that she thought there was plently of room for traffic to pass between" the front of the vehicle and the safety zone. Gunning told the inspector he would not go nearer the safety zone, for they would "pinch" him, " and that he would not go into Queen Street, as they would "pinch" him for that also. This was confirmed by the 'bus conductor, who said that if Gunning had obeyed the inspector, he would have been "well pinched." The Magistrate convicted and imposed a fine of £"2 on each charge, with costs and witnesses expenses totalling £2 2/. Buses Run a Race. J. Hughes and H. Donaldson were both charged with dangerous driving, when the chief traffic inspector said the case arose from the drivers of two 'buses indulging in a dangerous sprint along a perilous part of the Richmond Road at 11 a.m. on May 5. A traffic insnector happened to be in the vicinity and saw the race. The men were doing 25 miles an hour on a very dangermis and bumpy road. Donaldson wa s on his wrong side of the road, within sixfeet of the curb. Defendants admitted the speed, but claimed that they had slowed down when rounding the turn. Hughes said he had to go out on to the middle of the road to pass the other 'bus—there was no other war. The Magistrate: No other way! Couldn't you follow behind the other 'bus?— How long have you been driving? —Ten years. Tiie Magistrate: Well, it is time you learned that it is a dangerous practice to act as you did. TiTe defendants were each fined £3, with It/ costs. Miscellaneous Breaches. For passing a stationary tramcar with his motor before passengers were clear. C. A. liurke was fined 20.'. with costs. For the same olTencc. D. Walkden, who did not appear, was fined £•">, with costs, it being stated that lie drove at a speed of 2."> miles an hour past a standing tram whilst a lady passenger was about to board, without sounding his horn, and turned round and laughed at tinconductor. For having driven a motor cycle along Manukau Road at a speed of 3.j miles an hour, P. Connolley was fined £2 and costs, and W. G. Bright was Pncd £". with costs, for driving a motor i:i'" at a similar speed, the same .penal!v being imposed in the case of T. !'. Meredith, who drove along the Manukau Head at a speed of 33 milps when returning from the races. For: having obstructed a tramcar by pulling] up in front of it. just ahead of a safety ) zone, for the purpose of picking up pas- j

sengers, a bus driver, A. Flynn, was fined £2, with £2 costs. E. Lye, a bus proprietor, was fined £1, with 7/ costs, for having failed to adhere to his timetable, and a fine of 10/, with 7/ costs, was imposed on T. 11. Xewton, "who had the excuse that his vehicle had been seized because he had failed to comply with the terms of his hire-purchase agreement. For driving motor vehicles in a manner dangerous to public safety, G. S. Wardell was fined £3 and costs,

V. D. Wright £2 and costs, while. A. P. Emanuel was convicted and ordered to pay costs. Charged with speeding down Symonds Street late at night at 40 miles per hour in a motor bus, Stanley Rule was fined £2. D. Finnigan was fined £2 and costs for passing a stationary tramcar. The following were each fined 10/ and costs for allowing vehicles to remain in the streets unattended for longer than the statutory period of 20 minutes:—W. P. J. Anderson, ('. Crowther. W. M. Howe, 11. Knight. E. C. Keed, 11. P. Carlson, William McArtliur, and L. C. Rathbone. For driving a motor car in a negligent manner, A. F. Hammond was fined £2 and costs, 30/. A motor cyclist. C. Camplin, who failed to sound his horn or hell, was mulcted £1 and costs. A large number of motorists who failed to exhibit lights on their motor vehicles were fined the usual amount, 10/ and cost*. A motor driver, C. Xewton, who pulled up opposite a safety zone, was fined £2 and costs. ~— a