MOTORISTS PROTEST

New Zealand Times, Volume L, Issue 11685, 24 November 1923, Page 5

MOTORISTS PROTEST

PILLION-RIDING QUESTION “BY-LAW RESTRICTIVE AND UNREASONABLE.” MODIFICATION PROBABLE. The hotly debated issue of pillion riding was before the legislation committee of the City Council yesterday, when a deputation of motorists aired their views upon the subject at length. In answer to a question, the chairman (Councillor M. F. Luckie), stated that he thought it was not the intention of the council tc- prohibit cyclists from carrying a single passenger in a side-car. ICO PER CENT. AGAINST. Mr L. A. Edwards stated that they had a petition signed by over 200 cyclists on the question, and came from a meeting at which over 150 motorists had been represented. There was 100 per cent, objection to the council’s proposals. The deputation represented a number of returned soldiers, all of whom objected to the restriction. Motor cycling was the poor man’s motoring and if his right to carry a passenger was ended it would handicap him severely. They, were amazed that such a bylaw should be passed by the council. If it was logical to say that pillionriding should be abolished becauso there were accidents, it was just as logical to say that motor-cars should be abolished for the same reason. As a matter of fact, the additional weight on the back was a consideration m pillion-riding, and was held by most people to be an advantage. Also the fact that he had someone else upon his cycle made for more careful riding, as it gave a man a sense of a double responsibility. BAD ROADS A CAUSE. The chairman : That doesn’t apply to most motorists when they have a load an. Mr Edwards: It all depends upon what you mean, sir, Ky ‘‘having a load on.” -..Laughter.) Continuing, Mr Edwards said that in a machine upon whioh he had to maintain equilibrium, a man who had his wife “on the back” was hardly likely to take ricks. ' As a matter of fact the direct cause of recent accidents had been the state of the roads and not reckless driving. They had investigated, and had examined eyewitnesses most carefully in order to obtain the facts and had been led to this conclusion. The chairman.: Yes, you heard one side of ins matter. A CONVERT. l*p to five years ago, said Mr Edwards, pillion-riding had been prohibited in New Plymouth. The borough engineer inquired into the matter, the by-law had been wiped out, and the engineer was now converted and one of the most enthusiastic pillion-riders in the country. They held that the by-law was unnecessary, and contrary to any evidence which might be produced. It was restrictive, unreason-able-and essentially against a healthful and exhilarating sport. Mr Massman stated that he hud had -lO years ‘riding both pillion-riding and with a side-car. He knew of no case in which an accident could be traced to the extra weight on the back, in fact lie had found it a help. LITTLE DANGER. He cited one trip he had made on the West Coast when ho had gone through a district where they had had over nine inches of rain in one and a quarter hours. Some of the grades there were three in one, and he had had no accident. They pleaded for permission in any case to permit riding outsiejo pf the main streets. If the by-law came into force it would be a hardship on many men who could scarcely leave their wives behind while they went out alone. The chairman asked if it would meet the wishes of the deputation if certain streets, main streets, were put out of bounds and pillion-riding permitted upon the others. A REASONABLE ATTITUDE. Mr Edwards: We don’t admit for a moment that a motor-cyclist is a menace at any time in any street, under any circumstances. But we are reasonable men and if the council thinks this is the correct thing to do we will fail into line. The chairman: The average speed of a motor-cyclist in the city is much greater than that permitted a motorcar. And also he does not have to pass any examination. In answer to Councillor B. G. H. Burn, Mr Edwards stated thaf in Auckland and Christchurch pillionriding was permitted with a side-car 3niy, in Dunedin and Palmerston it was prohibited, and in New Plymouth it was permitted. ■'GONE BY DEFAULT,” The chairman: There must have been some reason for this. You must remember that these places have much wider streets than ours. Mi Edwards: It was gone by default The chairman: Still the motorists, there must have known of it. Mr Edwatds: Yes, but here we are more progressive, and we,mean to oppose it The chairman: Rather remarkable that in all these places with less population than ours this action should have been taken. Mr Edwards: You are not going to do this simply because Dunedin has done it. You are going to act in a manner calculated to preserve safety. IN FRONT—OR BEHIND? Continuing, Mr Edwards stated that the committee had every motorist behind them when it stood opposed to high speeds. The chairman : I don’t know ; I think "that most of t-h©m are a long way front of us. In London, went on Mr Edwards he himself had done 30 miles an hour down Oxford street, however. In Chicago and in ’Frisco, in point of fact, the policemen swore at motorists if they did not get across the road quickly dnough. The chairman: And there are more deaths from motor accidents in those very cities which you mention than anywhere else. Finally the chairman expressed the opinion that the by-law would probably be modified in some manner. However, ho was speaking only for himself in this. In ar.y case though their views would receive the fullest consideration