THE PERIL OF THE BYKE.

Evening Post, Volume LXXI, Issue 47, 24 February 1906, Page 14

THE PERIL OF THE BYKE.

, ' TO Ttttt EDlTOtt, ' Sir,— A» the pen of exoision removed tho main point of my lottor of (ho 16th last.,, would It bo asking 100 much to scolc space for ft brief summary of an English Judgo'e remans on the occasion of awarding JDIOO damages, togelhor with 26 guineas eostfi, a few months back, as compensation to a pedestrian for being knocked over by a motor-ear? The defence (said the Judge) is the worst that could lmv«s been put forward, nnd shows utter ignoratico of the law. The podoßtrinn hnd a norfoet right to use tho road in tho way no was doing, nnd -any ono creating risk ,or danger in such use of the road wns linble for any diimngo onsuing from his action. Tho defence that. a sufficient .warning wns given with a "hooter" would not hold, as the motorist held no legal authority to order tho movements of tho pedestrian, nor .pi'cforonoo claim to oust tho podostrian from the legal use of tho part of tho road ho was walking upon nt tho tlmo of tho nccident. In fnot, the "hooting," bolng In .this case lriorc- n command thnii a warning, wns an addition of Insult to injury, nnd full compensation would bo (iw/tr'dod. Tho surest way to emancipate pedestiiotis from peril by tho byUe in to teach vchiclo users, whether driven by horse, mechanical, or pedal power, that they liaVo no legal superiority over pedestrian*, nnd that dnngern thoy create on tho road bring responsibilities for injulio* resulting from thrir notion.— > I nm, TfENIIY HODLEY. .Wellington, 21st Fobruuvy, 1006.