MATAMATA MOTOR COLLISION

Matamata Record, Volume XIX, Issue 1735, 1 June 1936, Page 5

MATAMATA MOTOR COLLISION

DUTIES OF DRIVERS

Three Parties Blameworthy

A collision between two cleam Lorries on a bridge on (Station road, Matamata, on March 5 last, resulted in the police preferring charges in the Matamata Court on Thursday against Leonard Joseph Park and Cyril George IF'oster, the drivers concerned, for negligent driving. Foster ,vas also charged with operating a orry the brakes of which did not :onply with the motor regulations. C. Kandell, owner of the truck which Park drove, Was also charged under ;he same heading. Mr. A. L. Tomans (Hamilton) appeared for Park. Constable T. Cotter (Putaruru) letailed what he saw at the scene of he accident and read statements aken from the drivers. Leonard Joseph Park said that he mew Foster had to pick up cream it a stand within two chains of the >ridge and had to go through his rear changes to start-his lorry beore crossing the bridge. In addition vitness said he also gave a signal to Foster. ' ’ - ; The Magistrate. Show me how ?PU i .jV A : : r Witness held' up his right hand, idth elbovTbent, and moved his hand upward . slightly., »* . ; ■■ . • The magistrate said the signal riven was the stop signal, and Foser. would have been justified—if he tad seen ;the signal, - which in his itatement he said he . did not—in hinking Park was going, to" stop. A.. A. Potts and C. Landells, farmrs, w ; ho arrived at the scene shortly ifter the accident,. corroborated park’s evidence ; . in regard to the lositions of. the lorries. • • In summing,, up,,, the • magistrate aid Foster had admitted his-, brakes /ere not >in order, and there was * an' mus on the driver and the owner* of ... motor .vehicle,to see that- ‘the •rakes ..complied, with .the; regulaions. The fact that, an owner .reliedn the driver—as in Kendairs case—o report any weakness,jn the brakes lid Wt> rel^ase>the';bwner v i.i , om ffepensibility. ~Nor did the-f act that a bhicie/yvas comparatively new, or ecently" serviced, absolve anyone, as Me. length of life of brake bands deeded /Tialgely on the- manner/'lh. (rlpeSfv'a vehicle was handled. The leg'rep ;,of negligence on Kendall’s jart was perhaps slight, and justice vould be met if he were convicted ind ordered to pay costs; Foster had idmitted that his brakes were riot n good order, and he would, be fined •2 with costs -10 son this charge..

Regarding the charges of negligent driving, after;-inspecting the road "the* magistf ate said “it was apparent that each’ driver should have seen the other when he was equidistant from the bridge, Park’s speed of 23 miles per hour was too fast foT the locality. He did hot “have his lorry under that-control which would have enabled him to avoid an accident. The magistrate said there .Were certain recognised signals laid down, and if anyone gave another'' •ijig did so at his own risk. To give ah unrecognised signal constituted a danger in itself. The evidence showed that both drivers approached what they knew was a one-way bridge, and ..they - failed to be prudent in their approach. Park had elected to go on, and Fester, in admitting that he did not see the other vehicle till just before the accident, had shown that he was also negligent. The fact that the sun was in his eyes and his brakes were poor was all the more reason for extra care. Each driver would therefore be convicted on the charge of negligent driving. Park was, fined £1 with costs 12s, and Foster was fined £2 with costs 10s.