PLYING FOR HIRE

Evening Post, Volume CXX, Issue 112, 7 November 1935, Page 10

PLYING FOR HIRE

IMPORTANT CASE

TAXI-DRIVERS CHARGED

JUDGMENT RESERVED

Whether taxi-drivers are plying for hire when they wait in their vehicles behind those already occupying a licensed stand, was the main point at issue in an important case heard by Mr. E. D. Mosley, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court today. Six taxi-drivers—Rupert Arthur Allen, William East, Allen Goodacre, Robert Murray, Arthur King, and Frederick George Street—pleaded not i guilty to charges of plying for hire on lan unauthorised stand. On their bej half, Mr. P. H. *'utnam ' contended that they 'were not' plying for hire, but waiting to get on the stand. After hearing evidence from a traffic inspector of the Wellington City Corporation, and two of the taxi-drivers, the Magistrate reserved his decision, counsel to submit their legal contentions in writing. ' , Mr. Putnam said there was a substantial question for the Court's decision in the present'case, which affected not only the • present offenders, * Black and White Cabs, Limited, but also all co-operative concerns. The 1 element in the reading of the charge ' was that it was the practice of some ! taxi-cab companies to practise what 1 was called overloading. The question ■ would arise as to whether two cars in 1 excess of,the allocation for a particu- > lair stand were plying for hire. p Mr. A. R. Cooper, who appeared for the Wellington City Corporation, said that both in Boulcott Street and Vivian Street Black and White Cabs; Limited, " had a stand which authorised them for ' two vehicles. In Boulcott Street there " were altogether six vehicles. It was ; alleged that two cars were on the 3 stand, and four were behind waiting 7 to move on. In Vivian Street .two " extra vehicles • were in position in 1 front of two on the stand, there being 1 no room behind owing to a corner. 5 These stands were two of a number ' which Black and White Cabs, Limited, ' owned in the city. The firm had applied for further licences on these r stands, but the City Corporation had been unable to grant them. ~r INSPECTOR'S EVIDENCE. ; i Evidence was given by .a traffic in- ? spector of having visited the two s stands last month and seen the extra - vehicles. He said that there was acs commodation for' 37 cars on the city :- stands, and" for two on a private i stand. The company was now operat- '• ing 38 cars. * Cross-examined by Mr. Putnam, the * witness said that for a considerable '• time there had been complaints of 0 overloading on, the stands. THe drivers • had always moved when he had gone up there. His purpose in visiting the stands, was not under instructions —it f was a periodical visit. •■ ■ ■: g "Are you aware that the excess cars 1 are waiting to get on to the stand, and S," also that these men never take a fare '' if there is a man on the stand?" asked . counsel. ,~ Witness: I should say it was the .. other way, sir. j Witness said he was not aware that it was a strict rule in the Black and ' White concern that no one except the n person on the stand should take a fare. "If any of these men had been waiting on the other side of the road would )t you have asked them to move?" asked ■ c counsel. c Witness: Yes. ■ ; ... ' r Counsel: Because they were an obstruction,, or because.they were plying n for hire? r Witness: Because they were plying 3 j for hire. . . j. The traffic inspector agreed that v even if the taxi-drivers were on the c . other side of the road, and did not n have the vacant sign showing, he t. would consider that they were plying v for hire. . t 0 Mr. Putnam said the purpose of the , c stands was to provide a convenience' D f for the public and keep traffic from c . being increased by cruising cars. "If there was: no room for the four defendants on the Boulcott Street stand, you would expect them to travel a the streets until they, found a stand?" n- he asked the inspector, le "Yes, sir," replied the witness. ut Counsel asked that the proceedings )e against King should be withdrawn on as the grounds that he was on the stand ie for a special purpose. ■ He was there m to complete a contract, and was wait■ls ing for a telephone call, having already in got a job. A letter from King to this c- effect was produced and read by counn- sel. The Magistrate said he would have ig to satisfy himself on that question. [£ WHAT THE MEN WERE TOLD. tie Mr. Putnam stated that when all the rs defendants joined the Black and ill White Company (a combination of *n owner-drivers) they were told that the as leading man on the stand took the fare, )O- and. no one off the stand was allowed he to take it. The penalty for a breach es of the regulations was suspension or nd expulsion from the organisation. There iot had been only one case in three years a where a man not on the stand had or cribbed a fare. He was told he would al- be expelled if the offence was repeatnd cd. in Mr. Putnam contended that the defendants were not plying for hire by waiting at the back of the stand. Evidence was given by two,'of the ™ defendants, who said they were wait--srs ing to get on the stand, and would ith refuse a fare if approached, and also [ that they had each received instrucity tions when they joined the organisaif tion that the leading car took the fare.

Cross-examined by Mr. Cooper, one witness said he was not aware of the bylaw forbidding a driver to refuse a fare, and that even if he was second in the rank on" the stand, he would refuse on account of the company's regulations.