SPEEDING MOTORISTS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21247, 29 July 1932, Page 10

SPEEDING MOTORISTS

PROSECUTIONS FOR REVENUE CONDEMNATION OF TACTICS TRAPS BY LOCAL BODIES What was described as "the practice of certain local bodies in using the Motor Vehicles Act to raise revenue rather than to reduce motoring risks," received the condemnation of a number of motorists yesterday. Under the Act all- fines recovered for motorists' offences are paid into the general funds of the local authorities whose officers lay the informations. One Auckland local body, the Waitemata County Council, has received a windfall of between £l5O and £2OO as a result of convictions obtained by its officers against motorists in the last six months. The president of the Auckland Automobile Association, Mr. A. Gi'ayson, protested strongly against the spirit in which certain local bodies were interpreting the Act. "For some considerable timo local bodies in general have been dealing with traffic problems in a reasonable and efficient way, but in tho case of at least ono local body tho same cannot be said. It is not acting' in the interests of road safety at all, but in tho interests of revenue.

Duty of Traffic Officer "The Auckland Automobile Association does not hold wilh the practice of some motorists in crossing street intersections at speeds likely to constitute a danger. On the contrary, by educational means and by warnings, we do all we can to prevent it. But the practice adopted by the Waitemata County Council is to allow traffic to pass at any speed it likes over the intersections and lay informations some days later. That is not rerralating the speed of traffic, nor obtaining the co-operation, of the motoring public. If on intersection presents dangers to motorists it is the duty of the traffic officer to prevent accidents at that intersection and not permit traffic to pass over it at fast rates of speed and then prosecute for the sake of getting revenue. That is not the way to win tho respect and response of motorists." Mr. Grayson's views met with the approval of many other motorists who wero consulted yesterday. It was hardly ever intended, they said, tha» tho Act should be regarded as a revenue-producing medium for the benefit of local bodies. On the contrary, its clear intention was to impose limits upon methods of driving that might jeopardise road safety, and the question was whether that end would not more effectively be secured by warnings and advice offered by unilormed officers rather than by fines imposed as a result of traps laid by concealed officials. Practice in England

In England for> many years past it has been the custom to set speed traps in which three officials participate. Two are concealed by hedges at opposite ends of a measured strip of road and gauge the motorist's speed by stop watches, allowing an extra 20yds. to account for human error. In the event of a motorist's speed being; excessive, a signal is transmitted to a uniformed official standing further down the road. He steps out into the road, signals the motorist to stop and either issues a warning, in a venial case, or takes the motouist's number, name and address for purposes of prosecution, in a flagrant case. Among Auckland local bodies the favourite procedure is a trap carried out by two officials, sometimes concealed and sometimes not. In such cases the number of the car is written down and the offender receives notice of intention to prosecute days and often weeks later, when the motorist has probably forgotten he over travelled over the stretch of road in question. Moreover, it is not an easy matter to take the number of a car travelling at a high speed. Two motorists who were consulted yesterday alleged that the methods adopted by one traffic official were calculated to encourage high speeds. Travelling on the Great South Road, they had heard the honking of a motor-cycle's horn behind them, repeated at regular intervals. Annoyed by the repetition of the noise they had put on an extra burst of speed to outdistance the machine, whereupon the motor-cyclist overtook them and ordered them to stop. Prosecutions followed. The motorists in question contended that they had been deliberately incited to put* on speed so that a conviction might be obtained.