SIX MILES PER HOUR UNREASONABLE

Manawatu Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 3494, 2 November 1926, Page 3

SIX MILES PER HOUR UNREASONABLE

SPEED LIMIT BY-LAW UPSET. It was hold by Air. R. M. Watson S.Al_, at the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, that the Eeildlng Borougn by-law fixing the speed limit of motor vehicles round corners of street intersections, is unreasonable, and prosecutions under this head, brougnt by the police, were dismissed. The first case taken was that against Z. MeLood, electrician, who pleaded not guilty. Defendant was represented by Air. D. C. Cullinane, and Sergeant Cahill prosecuted. James K. Hourigan stated that whilst cycling up Denbigh Street one morning, the defendant drove his car from Sandilands Street into Denbigh Street at a speed between IS and 20 miles per hour, and to avoid a collision witness had to turn sharply to the left and get off his cycle. The defendant gave no warning of his approach, and his action caused witness to practically fall off his bicycle. It was a dangerous corner, as a Crt. hedge rather concealed traffic from both directions. The speed at whlcn defendant turned the corner gave no chance for anything to get out of tne was’.

Constable McCall, who interviewed defendant, said that defendant admitted turning from Sandilands Street into Denbigh Street at a speed or about 15 mile per hour.

To Mr. Cullinanc: There have been previous prosecutions for breaches of this by-law, and convictions recorded. He could not recall particular cases, but was certain that prosecutions had taken place. Hu had noticed motor vehicles turning corners at a greater speed than that allowed by the by-law, hut it was not the practice to prosecute in all cases. The circumstances were always taken into considcrat.ioib l.aiitudc up lo J-, 14 or 15 miles per hour, was allowed, but ibis was dependent entirely upon (he circumstances.

In calling the d"IV-ndanl (o give i vidence counsel said that the facts wore substantially admitted, but the defence was that the by-law was unreasonable and therefore invalid. The defendant in evidence denied that the corner was a dangerous one. and considered that Ira (lie had a clear view of anything coming from Denbigh Street. He claimed that lie had better control of his car at the speed he was travelling at than if ho had slowed down to the by-law limit. Ho could not have turned the corner on top gear at the by-law speed, and would have to have got down into low gear to so. This would have been unreasonable. The street was u chain wide .and practically a level surface. The by-law was infringed daily. There were thirty four miles of streets in Fcilding. and it was unreasonable, to enforce a. speed of 6 miles per hour round ail street corners.

To Sergeant Cahill: Witness admitted that the Denbigh Hotel corner and that at Well's store opposite to the Railway station, were cxcepionnl A slower speed at these points was desirable, and in mills pm- hour would Ik- unite safe. \'. Cliff. manager of W. 11. Ha in and Co., gave evident*'* that -a, slow speed was likely to lead to confusion to traffic. To comply with the by-law would mean that a motorist would be continually changing gears in the town, and tills would tend to lake his [attention oft the traffic. H. I*l. Durrani, motor garage proprietor, said it was unreasonable to lix a general limit throughout the (own In many cases a speed of 20 miles per hour would bo considered reasonable.

Counsel then proceeded to address His Worship on the grounds support-

ing his contention that the by-law was unreasonable. He submitted that the by-law was unreasonable on the following grounds: (I) That it applied to every street in the Borough at all times; (2) That the by-law did not apply to motor-cycles, and therefore showed unreasonable discrimination: (3) That the. by-law had not been enforced because on the evidence of Constable McCall it was admittedly unreasonable; (4) That the by-law did not discriminate between light and heavy motor vehicles, and (5) That the enforcement of the by-law would load to confusion amongst t rattle, and result in a danger to the public. Counsel further quoted the result of the case, Nelson Borough Council v. Nelson Automobile Association. The circumstances in this case were almost indentical with those in the present action, A motorist had been prosecuted for exceeding: the by-law speed limit of (> miles per hour, and the Automobile Association had decided to make a lest case. 'Phn Court held that the by-law was unreasonable, and the action was dismissed. Counsel also quoted recent, Supreme Court decisions in support of his contention that the Feuding by-law was' unreasonable in the absence anv discrimination_ In dismissing the action, the Magistrate remarked that Constable McCall had rightly admitted that prosecutions did not always follow breaches of the by-law. The witness Currant also said that 09 out of every too motorists broke the by-law. In tne opinion of the Magistrate the by-law was unreasonable.