LEVEL CROSSINGS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3756, 9 March 1926, Page 30

LEVEL CROSSINGS.

ELIMINATION OF DANGERS WELLINGTON, llavcli j. At a meeting of the North Island Motor Association the railway crossing peril was discussed, when tho following Wellington remit came up for discussion: — That this conference views with alarm the recent fatal railway crossing accidents at Porirua and beyond Paekakariki, and asks that the Railway Department be again appealed to with the view' that further protection be provided for users of the road. Mr Hubert Filmer, in moving the remit, stressed the fact that the whole community had been shocked by the frequency of these accidents of late, and the very strongest representations should be made to the Government in this connection. He urged that the following words should be added to the resolution: — That this conference pledges itself to support to the utmost the action of the Highways Board in methodically attacking the problem. Mr Claude M. Bqnks moved an amendment as foj.ow's:— That this conference views with alarm the increasing number of fatal crossing accidents, and again urges the Railway Department, or the Government, to provide separate grades at busy level crossings, and where obstructions cannot be removed to give a clear view’ of the line, and that a tax of 5s be imposed on motorists as their charge towards the cost. The speaker pointed out that the estimated cost of doing away with the whole of the 3500 level crossings would be between £3 ,000,000 and £4,000,000. The only reasonable solution of the difficulty was grades, subways, or overhead bridges. If people were willing to pay for them the Government would provide these, but the Railway Department at present was in the position of not being able, because of the increased bus competition, to bear the cost of doing the work from its own funds, if this public utility were not to be run at a big loss. There were places where visibility was bad; there were crossings where, even if a motorist got out of his car and looked up the line, he still could see so short a distance that he might be caught as soon as he started again, though he thought the line was clear. The sum of 5s per motorist, which lie had suggested, would provide a total of £37,00 per year. This would indicate to the Government that motor owners were serious in their demands. Mr A. J. Toogood said he would like to support the motion in as far as it related to the provision of a substitute for level crossings. Mr I. V. Wilson also spoke in the same strain. Mr V. Duff protested against motorists agreeing to pay a further tax. They were at present on an average the highest-taxed portion of the community, and to ask deliberately the Government to tax them further was ridiculous. Mr Stott, secretary of the association, said it was not right for a small meeting such as the present to commit the whole of the 80,000 motorists of the North Island to a tax. Mr Banks agreed to the withdrawal of this clause, and the remainder of his amendment being added to the original remit, it was carried. “ CAREFUL CROSSING ” CAMPAIGN. STATEMENT BY PRIME MINISTER. CHRISTCHURCH, March 6. The Rfc. Hon. J. G. Coates, as Minister of Railways, made a statement on Saturday regarding level crossings and announced that the department is launching a “careful crossing” campaign. “Reports appearing in the press recently regarding level crossing fatalities and comments made thereon at meetings of chambers of commerce, and by the newspapers give ground for a restatement of the position in which the railways and read users stand in relation to the use of level crossings,” said Mr Coates. “It is obvious to all reasonable people that all trains cannot run always to time and that, even if they could, scheduling to pass all level crossings at certain fixed times would be out of the question. It is also clear that a proportion of the non-time table trains must run—such as service trains, and those run to meet emergencies or for special purposes of any kind. That being so it follows that to assume at any time that because a certain regular train should have passed a particular point there is no further need for exercising care at railway crossings is to take grave and unwarranted risks. The number of accidents through vehicles, particularly motor vehicles, colliding with trains indicates that the drivers ol vehicles have been neglecting the duty they owe, both to themselves and to the fram-using public. The legal position was clearly stated in a New Zealand Supreme Court case, the judgment (in part) being as follows:

Prima facie, however, and, in the absence of special circumstances of justification, a man who enters on a level crossing in front of an approaching train and is there run down by it, must himself have been guilty of failure to use due care for his own safety. To look and listen is in all ordinary cases an effective precaution against such an accident, and it it the duty of all persons before entering on a railway crossing to look and listen accordingly, and by re ducin~ speed or otherwise to place themselves in such a situation that they can look and listen effectively.

“The responsibility is definitely fixed by the law and reason bears‘ it out thar: the cause’of humanity requires of every person, before proceeding to negotiate a level crossing, that he shall assure himself as to the safety of so doing. On the ground of the very large expenditure involved, not less than £2,000,000, the complete elimination of level crossings is not within the bounds of practical consideration at the present time. Railway crossing arms are displayed at a reasonable distance from all level crossings and the usual ‘stop, look cut for the engine,’ notice at the crossing itself.

“In our own main cities by-laws have recently been passed requiring vehicles to stop behind traincars when the latter are slowing down for a stop in order that passengers from and to the tramcars may cross the road in safety. The observance of this precaution has had a most valuable effect in reducing the number of street accidents, but in complying with it a motorist has frequently to stop many times in travelling a mile through the streets, yet out on country roads in spite 0»‘ all warning signs and the knowledge of frequent fatal results from neglect, drivers of vehicles whose very lives may depend on taking this precaution frequently recKlessly ignore the necessity for care at what is perhaps the.only level crossing in many miles. “The toll of accidents of this kind is too heavy and serious for the matter to be left entirely to the good sense and care of the drivers of vehicles, and on the roads, public welfare demands that stringent measures be taken to ensure that the law is complied with. The department for its part has provided for approximately 10 level crossings in one year and ha 6 in mind completing a further quota at an early date. It has also installed bells and other warning appliances (which are not infrequently ignored) at a large number of level crossings and is continuing to erect these devices in the order of their urgency, besides co-operating with local bodies in the provision of overbridges or subways where such are called for, but care on the part of road users and the adoption of such measures as will impress on their minds the dangers and penalties attaching to the neglect of due precautions at level crossings are the only means by which the problem can be ultimately solved. In the meantime, however, the cfepartment is launching a ‘careful crossing’ campaign by means of the wide distribution and display of coloured posters and stickers drawing attention to the need for the practice of ‘safety first’ principles, and it is hoped that with the active support and co-opera-tion of local bodies, automobile associations and other interested societies the force of public opinion may also be brought heavily t • bear in the universal condemnation of negligence at level crossings on the part of drivers of vehicles on the roads.”