HEAVV TRAFFIC BY-LAW

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume LII, Issue 8629, 9 July 1924, Page 3

HEAVV TRAFFIC BY-LAW

WAITE.MATA COUNCIL UPHELD. Considered judgment, the effect ot which is to uphold the heavy traffic bylaws of the Waitemata County Council. has been delivered by Mr AA . It. McKean. B.AL, in the Magistrates Court at Auckland. Six informations were involved, brought 'by the county engineer, G. A. Jackson (Air McNab), against Norman McQuoid (Air Dickson).

The first three informations, each dealing with successive days, alleged that defendant drove a motor truck, conveying a heavy load, over the county roads during May. contrary to the heavy traffic by-laws of the council, which prohibit the passage of heavy traffic on the county roads from Afay to September, inclusive. It was contended by counsel for the defence that the truck was used principally on the Great North Road, which was the main road of the county, and that for that reason the bylaw was unreasonable and therefore bad.

In giving Ills decision the magistrate said power to make a by-law prohi biting heavy traffic during the winter months was given by the Public Works Act, and that tlie power was not limited to roads of any particular class. The* power was, in his opinion, quite sufficient to enable a local authority to require that heavy traffic should cease during the months in question on ail roads, .whether main roads or not. He considered the grounds upon which it was argued that the by-law was unreasonable were altogether 'inadequate. The evidence showed, Air McKean continued, that the effect of the bylaw would be to make it more expeu-

sive for two adjoining local authorities to o'M sun scoria daring the winter. The authorities however, had really little for complaint. If the "Waitoinata County Council imposed an annual tax on vehicles engaged in heavy trathe. and the amount of the tax was priced in. accordance with a scale widen had boon hold to be reasonable in Southland, the defendant's vehicle ivonld be called upon to nay an annual fee of £■/.“). He would thus probably have to charge more than lie now charged for canwing heavy loads.

Further, there Mas evidence that the council had permitted material to ho carried for its own use ii]K>n its roads. Tins, however, was not a reason for declaring the by-how to be bad. The hy-law must be judged by its terms and not by its administration. On each of the three informations defendant was fined £5 and costs. The remaining three informations charged defendant M'ith driving a motor lonw without having the weight of the vehicle marked thereon in a conspicuous position, as insisted upon in the bydaws. Here again the defence was that the hv-law was unreasonable.

The magistrate said it appeared unreasonable to require every vehicle entering the county to have its weight legibly marked upon it. Assuming, however, that the local authority had in this case exceeded its statutory power, he still considered there- was authority for holding that the by-law was not necessarily bad altogether, but uas bad only as to the excess. In its application to vehicles of the class to which defendant’s vehicle belonged, the by-law was a reasonable one and it must stand. Defendant was fined £1 and costs on each information.

At the- request of counsel, tho magistrate increased the amount of the fines by 1/ in order that appeals might he made.