A COLLISION

Press, Volume L, Issue 15022, 17 July 1914, Page 10

A COLLISION

.MOTORIST AND CYCLIST

GIRL OBTAINS £30 DAMAGES

A case of considerable interest to motorists and cjclist., arising out of a collision -which occurred between a motor-car and-a bicyclo at the corner o c Lower High street and Madras street on May 7tli. was hoard at the Magistrate's Court vpstcrdav, . before Mr H. W. Bi. hop, S.M. Iris Olivo Stewart, a girl of seventeen yca-s, for whom Mr Cat-sidy appeared, claimed from E. A. B rough ton, _beep-farni-r, of Souihbridge (Mr Beswick) the sum of £49 15s. being special damage... £-1 15s for medical and other expenses, and £4.5 general damages. The statement of claim alleged, that defendant so negligently iranaged and diove his motor-car that it .a. driven with great violence against the bicycle ridden by plaintiff, and that sho was thrown off and seriously injured, and had lost employment, and had been ill and unable to attend to her business. MEDICAL EVIDENCE. Dr. J. 11. Thomas stated on May 9rh he attended plain.ift, an.! found fii:r .suffering a good deal from shock. There were .mist, ou tv . left, arm and left thigh. Sue was now very much better, but was not in a fit state to work. She would require fully six mouths from tho time ot the accident to fully recover. AN EYE-WITNESS- j Leslie Hardy (City Council inspector) j stated that he saw tho accident. Ho saw „ girl coming up Madras street, across Lower High street. Defendant did not sound his motor-horn, and the ! car struck the bicycle. He looked over the side of the car, and then drovo off. Witness ran after the car, but defendant did not stop until he had run down a second individual. If defendant had done, his duty and stopped to look after the girl when ho kuocked her down, h. would not havo run down the second person. He came back at witness's request The girl was nearly across the street, and defendant afterwards admitted to witness'that tho accident was his fault. To Mr Beswick: The back wheciof the car went over the bicycle. Witness spoke to a police sergeant on the beat about the collision. Defendant admitted his fault, and said he would see the injured people righted. Witness was positive that defendant did not blow his horn. . A hostile crowd of about, 100 people collected round defendant. ANOTHER EYE-WITNESS. Thomas Edward Hammon said he saw tho accident take place. The girl was riding northwards along Madras street, and the car was travelling along Lower H'ch street. The girl was nearly over Lower High street when the motor-car knocked her down. \\nness neard no horn sounded. The defendant did not stop but merely looked, round, and then' knocked another person down. In witness's opinion defendant was <clean\ t.i. blame. ; To Mr Beswick- The motor-car was travelling about six mills an hour. Defendant did not deviate from las course to avoid the oollisiou. EVIDENCE OF PLAINTIFF. Olive Stewart stated tiiat she had been earn ma, ios per week in aj oi_.ee. tone was crossing jcugu street on her tucvcio, wiieii sue was struck by a motor-car. It d.d not sound any uorn. fene saw it 'when it was about tour lcet ironi iier. _>no had almost got across nigh street when the accident -happened. Two men picked Uor up. and defendant afterwards.said ho would drive her homo'.n his car. Mrs Broughton drov*} her home. . Witness had been in ill-health since, had not. boon able to work, and had not been able'to'eh ior her examination. To. Mr Beswick: Her iato employers had since closed down. She had been attending Gilby's College since the a:cidont. but not regularly. Witness did not _«o the car until it was close on her After tho accident, when witness wan iv the car, Mrs Brought™ said that Inspector Hardy was goi.g to bring a case against her husband, and told witness that all sho needed to say was that it was all hor o.vu fault. Mrs Broughton also said. "You aro not very much hurt?' .The front wheel of the car struck the front wheel of her bicycle, and bent it in two. i\lr Broughton said that he wo dd stand any expenses in 'connexion with the matt dr. STATEMENT BY THE MOTH 1_ fi Charlotte Stewart, mother of i-lain-tiff, said that her daughter's condition had been very bad since .ho accident, and sho required every attention. Witness wrote to Mr Brought.>n and received a reply, his solicitors stating that he was much surprised at receiving such a letter, as tho .ilamti'f had told both defendant and Mrs I .oi:ghton that the accident was c .itir _v her fault, as the was not looking where shs was going. THE DEFENCE. .Mr Beswick called, Edward Alfred iJroughtoti, farmer, said that ho. was chiving at a walking pace—about five nines aa hour —past Armstrong's store. There were many bicycles about, and he blew nis horn auout a ciiain fr__ the corner. He iirst saw tho girl about three yards from his car. He _a_ that be could uot avoid her, tint ho swerved to the left and -p x .iod his brakes. Tho girl struck the (rout wheel of his car. Witness drove on to get clear of the traffic, and his .. "o said that the girl was apparently :•. t hurt. When Hardy first spoke to him witness refused to give his r<n.me and address, and they had some words. Witness told him that it was an impertinence to ask for hi. name. Mr Bishop (sharply); Why should you think it impertinent for a man to osk your- name lind address in a caso like this. Witness- Tho number v,_s on ray car. When he produced his authority as a city inspector, witness gavo Hardy his name and address. Mr Cassidy: Weren't you trying to clear out in your car when he "stopped yon ? , Witness: Oh, no; not at all. Mr Cassidy: How long would it take you to stop tho car? Witness: I could stop it in its own length. Tlio Inspector might have run after mc. Mr Cassidy: Would you have stopped had he not gone after you? Witness: Certainly I would. I would never run away from an accident • Mr Cassidy: Did yon pay tho man you knocked over under a threat from his solicitors f .* Witness: I certainly offered to como i a settlement with him. Jean Elizabeth Broughton. wife of defendant, also gave evidence. She said that if plaintiff had jumped off her bicycle thero would have been no accident. Tho bicycle came fairly into .c car. Witness took the girf home - the car. She said she was not looking where she was going, and tho accilent was her own fault. Witness heard tho Inspector speaking to her husband, and thinking that he might bring a case, sho said to the girl, "Well, mind you say that." The girl seemed very grateful for what was done for ier. Mr Broughton was annoyed when the Inspector spoke to him without.letting him know who ho was. Mr Cassidy (to witness) : What was the girl very grateful for? Mr Bishop: For not being killed. (Laughter.) Mr Cassidy: The bicycle ran into tho car. you say? Witness: Yes. Mr Cassidy: Tho car never by any chance runs into the bicycle, does it. Tbe Magistrate: No, not in these Court actions. Frank Osborne, bicyclo mechanic,

said that the gin's bicyclo had one wheel buckled. He thought that was caused by the bicyclo running into the car. If tho car had run over the bicycle, the rim would have been flattened. You have no witnesses as to the facts.'' asked Mr Bishop of Mr Beswick. "No, your Worship," said Mr Beswick. "Not even those persons who congratulated defendant after the accident." commented Mr Bishop. "Fortunately," continued Mr Bishop, "tho Court has been materially assisted in coming to a decision by the very clear evidence of an entirely disinter•>.t od witness. Mr Hardy, who is one of the City Inspectors, and has had a lon£ experience of city traffic. Mr Hardy has quite satisfied mc from his account of what took place, whero the blame was. Judgment- will bo for the plaintiff for £'30 and costs."