BUS REGULATIONS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20364, 19 September 1929, Page 14

BUS REGULATIONS.

OWNERS AND DRIVERS.

NUMEROUS PROSECUTIONS.

WIDE RANGE OF OFFENCES.

Numerous prosecutions for breaches of the regulations Vvero brought by the Auckland Transport Board against bus proprietors in the Magistrate s Court yesterday, before Mr. E. C. Cutten, S.M. Mr. Mackay appeared for tho board. The charges against the Auckland Bus Company (Mr. Hart) were that the emergency door of one bus was not in order, that two unlicensed buses were used, that three buses carried no jacks, that there was no fire extinguisher on one bus, that one bus did not have two independent brakes, and that thero was no sign on one bus.

In entering pleas of guilty, Mr. Hart said that the service had just been taken over by the company, and the regulations had now been complied with. Mr. Mackay said that the board was not pressing for a heavy penalty, as with the exception of that of running two buses without licences the charges were minor ones. If they recurred, however, they would be treated as serious.

Fines of 10s each were imposed on tho two charges of running unlicensed buses, and on the other charges tho company was ordored to pay costs. Driving Without Licences.

Fines of 10s each and costs were imposed on M. Butler and A. Ival, charged with driving buses without licences. "These men who do not take out licences are a source of trouble to the inspectors," said Mr. Maekay. In the case of R. Petersen, who was charged with driving without a licence, Mr. Mackay said that there was some misconception among drivers that if they had a licence from the City Council it gave them the right to drive a bus, but an entirely different licence was required under the Motor Omnibus Traffic Act. Petersen was ordered to pay costs.

Appearing for Suburban Buses, Limited, Mr. Hubble entered a plea of guilty on a chargo of failing to carry a jack and three charges of allowing passengers to stand in front of the driver's seat. Ho said that the offences had occurred at busy times. It was very difficult to persuade people to see an imaginary lino which was supposed to be drawn at right angles' through the back of tho driver's scat. At 8 a.m. and at 5 p.m., when tho offences occurred, drivers would have to be provided with defensive weapons to keep the space clear. Tho company was ordered to pay costs on all counts.

Unlicensed Services

Charges of carrying on unlicensed bus services were preferred against Stokes and Johnston, W. 11. Arnold, J. Collett, W. Ideson, M. W. Karew, M. McCarthy, 0. McFarland, A. J. Markey and F. J. Williamson.

For the defendants, Mr. Vialoux said that the case against Stokes and Johnston had been treated as a test case, and in view of the costs incurred in the Magistrate's Court and tho Supreme Court, which were substantial, he suggested that this would be sufficient penalty. The defendants were each ordered to pay costs. v t'or allowing passengers to stand in front of the driver's seat, F. Crawford was ordered to pay costs, Mr. stating that the bus was of an old type, in which persons Were not allowed to stand. For carrying no jacks on a bus L. W. G. Crifves was ordered to pay costs.