Magistrate's Court.

Ellesmere Guardian, Volume XXIII, Issue 3895, 18 August 1917, Page 2

Magistrate's Court.

SOUTHBRIDGE- YESTERDAY Before Messrs R. B. B. Willis and E. G. Hubbard, J.P'S. ALLEGED DAZZLING HEADLIGHTS. S. J. McEvedy pleaded not guilty to a charge of driving a motor car with headlights of dazzling brilliancy on the night of August 3rd. Charles Thompson, railway guard, stated that on the night of August 3, he was driving in his trap towards Lakeside. At about /o'clock, when a short distance out of Southbiidge, he observed a motor car coming from the opposite direction, apparently making for Southbridge, while another car was travelling some distance behind witness' trap, going in the same direction as witness. The three vehicles all reached about the same place at the one time. When the car from the opposite direction was a short distance away its headlights suddenly became very brilliant and witness pulled well over to his right side of the road so as [to allow the two cars to pass. A short time after the car from the rear crashed into witness' trap. The lights on the car driven by defendant were of such dazzling brilliancy as to make it impossible for either witness or the driver of the car behind him to get a proper view of the road. Witness had no lights on his trap, but it was a moonlight night. Witness had good eyesight. The lights on defendant's car were so brilliant that even if witness had had lights on his trap the accident would probably not have been avoided. Adam McPhersoa, farmer, stated that he was going towards Taumuiu on the night of August 3rd in his motor car. On going round the bend in the road near the railway crossing witness saw in the distance bright lights which ; suddenly disappeared. A little later brilliant lights appeared a short distance in front of his cir and completely 1

dazzled him. He did not sec any trap on the road until his car collided with a vehicle driven by the previous witness. Witness attributed the accident io the dazzling headlights on defendant's car. There -would have been less likelihood of an acci« dent if the trap had had lights, but he would not say that the accident would have been avoided. Anthony Bartholomew McEvedy stated that he was in the car with the defendant (his brother) on the aight in question, The headlights were shining from the time the car | left Blackwater, but they were not of dazzling brilliancy. The diffi-' culty had always been to get the lights to shine brightly enough to give a clear view of the road. The accident had not happened until witness and his brother were a chain past McPherson's car. Witness saw Thompson's trap when some dis« jtance away and when witness was passing the trap appeared to have pulled up on the sids of the road. He considered McPherson's car had more brilliant lights than those on the car defendant was driving. In reply to questions asked by the bench, witness stated that there was plenty of room for McPherson's car to pass between defendant's car and the trap. McPherson's car had the hood and curtains up, which would help to obscure the driver's view.. The car which witness was in had the hood up but no side curtains. He had never thought it necessary to have dimmers on car headlights in the country. The lights on the car his brother was'driving were the same as when, later in the evening, his Worship saw the car in front of a certain gate in Southbridge. Charles Victor Roi, motor garage proprietor, stated that he had never known McEvedy's car to have dazzling lights. The lights were very erratic.and the focus was upward instead of downward. If the focus was downward the lights! would appear more brilliant. He! had several times changed the elec-! trie lamps at the owner's request with a view to making the lights brighter, so that the driver could get a better view of the roadway. Most of the latest cars now had dimmers, but there were no dimmers on defendant's car. In his opinion good gas lamps would beat those on McEvedy's car for brilliancy. The case was dismissed. DRIVING WITHOUT LIGHTS. Charles Thompson pleaded guilty to a charge of driving a vehicle at night without lights. It was stated that through the collision referred to in the previous case defendant's trap had been damaged to the extent of about £6, while defendant had been laid up for several days and had lost a week's pay. In giving judgment, one of the justices said it seemed that the main cause of the accident was not so much the dazzling headlights as the fact that McPherson's car had the hood and curtains up. The curtains would obscure a free view of the road and cause the headlights on the approaching car to appear more brilliant than they really were, lie had seen McEvedy's car stands ing in the township on the night in question and was of opinion that the lights were not dazzling. As defendant had suffered a good deal, he would merely be convicted and dis> charged. Patrick Horan, who did not aps pear, was charged under the Southbridge Town Board's by-laws with driving a trap in the township at night without lights. After hearing a statement by the police the bench inflicted a fine of 53 and costs. DEFENCE CASES. David Tong, R. JM. Creswell, G, H Moorhead, P. Dugan, £. W, Chapman, J. P Boyd, G, J. Benny, H. R. Howatscn, G. H. Hampton, D. Wallis, Martin Dugan, F. A. Carroll, W. Constance, S, T- McEvedy, E. S. McGill and James Leicester Adams were charged with failing to attend parades called by the area sergeant-major. The bench decided to convict and discharge the boys, and in giving judgment stated that it was clear the majority of the defendants were in ignorance as to their obligations under the Defence Act mainly through their own fault. They should understand that they could not stay away from parades without leave and it was an easy matter to obtain leave either personally or by letter, In some of the cases there were extenuating circumstance?, notably those wha_had been em* ployed in food "production, but on this occasion they would all be treated alike. The boys must un-. derstand that they could not be allowed to disregard the notices sent to them. In future cases severe i fines would be imposed. '