PRIVATE RAILWAY CROSSING.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume LXII, Issue LXII, 22 January 1912, Page 8

PRIVATE RAILWAY CROSSING.

AN IMPORTANT JUDGMENT.

BY TELEGRAPH—PRESS ASSOCIATION

AUCKLAND, Jan. 21. A judgment of importance to property owners who have access to their lands by ■means of private railway crossings was given by Mr F. V. Fraser, S.M.. in the case • Railway . Department v. Edward Rylands.

The defendant is a carter employed by a man who has a property about threequarters of a mile to the south of Helensville South railway station, and in order to reach the property it is necessary to cross the. i ailway line at a private crossing. On October 31 the defendant was driving to the property, and on approaching the private ■crossing looked at his watch, and ascertained that the regular 3.30 p.m. train was notdue. Hearing no whistle, he deemed it safe to cross the .line, and opened the near gate, drove over the line, leaving a leading horse on the line while he went back to close the gate. While he was thus engagedj a. ballast-train came along, and owing to the configuration of the country, the engine-driver was unable to' see the horse in time to prevent a collision with the animal, which was destroyed. The authorities prosecuted defendant under a section of the regulations, which provides that a person must ascertain that no train is approaching within half a mile before crossing a line.

In giving judgment, the Magistrate said that defendant did not take reasonable steps to ascertain if there was a train approaching within half a mile, ajid that his excuse that the engine did not whistle was not a valid excuse, inasmuch as he (the Magistrate) was unable to find any definite authority' Eer the statement that the engine-driver should have whistled. The employer had suffered considerable loss through the destruction of a valuable horse, and the ends of justice would be met by an nominal fine of ss, the defendant being ordered to pay costs, amounting to £8 18s.