AUCKLAND TRAMWAYS

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1851, 28 August 1907, Page 21

AUCKLAND TRAMWAYS

NO "STRAP-HANGERS” ALLOWED. PASSENGERS PINED. ' AUCKLAND, August 22. Mr Kettle, S.M., delivered judgment to-day in the cases in which the Messrs Bagnall, Jamieson, and Spedding were* charged with a breach of the tramway by-laws in remaining in a car when the available seating accommodation was already occupied.. In' the course of his judgment Mr Kettle said that with regard to the case of the Messrs Bagnall, the evidence showed that when they entered the oar there wras seating' accommodation, but Before they could seat themselves the ©eats were taken by other persons. In Eis opinion, being there when the seats were all occupied, they had no right to remain. The by-law; was quite clear on, that point. No one must travel in or on a car except upon a ©eat, as provided by regulation 15. They could not get a seat, and though they entered lawfully, their remaining there was a breach of the by-law. it would lead to endless confusion to say, as was contended, that because a person entered a car when seats were available, and did not get a seat, that person was entitled to remain. Such a person was not entitled to stay in the car after beipg warned to leave.

Mr Prendergast: The case of Spodding is different. That occurred outside the city. Mr Kettle did not think that argument had been advanced seriously. It was contended that because Spedding was outside the city boundary he did not’ commit a breach of the by-law. To his (Mr Kettle's) mind that did not prevail. There was a well-known decision given by a learned Magistrate that the city licenses did operate within a radius of five miles of the Chief Post Office. That decision was given in July, 1904' Mr Blomfieid (who appeared for one of the defendants, and who, when on the bench, gave the judgment referred to) said? that when arguing during the case he had forgotten all about the decision. • Mr Kettle went on to say that Sped- < ding was liable, and’ that the license of las car extended to the’ place where the » was committed. These proseeuS would be a warning to the public until’ the'- by-laws- worn modified or

altered- nte person,- must; renmn-_ in ft oar without having a\ seat; If itr who considered that circumstances had arisen that justified alteration, the public must wait till the alteration was legally put into effect. Tn the' meantime, the bylaws must be observed, and if people deliberately broke them it would he tor the Court to assess' penalties; -that would prevent further breaches. In the circumstances", the present cases? would be met with a small, fin©; A' conviction would, be recorded in each case, with a Is fine and costs.