BY-LAWS FOR PUSH BICYCLES.

Auckland Star, Volume LXV, Issue 204, 29 August 1934, Page 6

BY-LAWS FOR PUSH BICYCLES.

With one exception, I see little to object to in the new 'by-laws proposed by Mr. Hogan, as outlined in your issue of the 24th inst. It is questionable, however, whether much good' will be done by requiring cyclists to carry bells, if the ringing of them is to be left to their discretion. A cyclist who needs a by-law to make him equip his machine with a bell is not likely to bother much about ringing it. There are a great many cyclists who have not reached years of discretion, and those of us who have are faced with the dilemma that if we do not ring we shall be asked,why.not, and if we do we shall be asked whether, wa want the whole road to ourselves. The sudden and silent approach of a bicycle is undoubtedly apt to be disconcerting to a pedestrian, and liable to be dangerous, and I suggest reverting to the type of hell used on the old "penny-farthings," which kept up a continuous tinkle, loud enough to give adequate warning, yet not loud enough to 'be a nuisance to anybody. The one innovation proposed to which I decidedly object is that we should be compelled to carry rear lights. The law of the land already makes rear reflectors compulsory, and surely these, if set in a white ground, should be sufficient. I have been told, though I cannot vouch for it, that at one time (I think during the war) rear lamps were compulsory in England, but that thie was abandoned owing to the strong protests of the cyclists. A motorist who ran into a cycli6t from behind could always say that his rear lamp was out, while the cyclist, if he survived, could not say for certain whether it was or not. I suggest that the cycling clubs should take this matter up. In any case, before making new regulations, would it not be as well to try enforcing the existing ones? At present they are a dead letter. PUSHER.