REAR REFLECTORS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3899, 4 December 1928, Page 68

REAR REFLECTORS.

A case of more than local interest, in that_ it dealt with the regulations requiring motorists to affix rear red reflectors to their cars, a question which has received" a considerable amount of prominence since the passing of the regulations on August 1, was commenced in the City Police Court before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M., when James Horatio Nelson was proceeded against on a charge of having no rear red reflector on his car At the request of the Otago Motor Club, Mr W. G. Hay appeared for the defendant

Sub-inspector Fahey said that defendant was seen in High street at night, and though he had a rear light he had no reflector as required under the regulations.

Mr Hay said that this was a test case brought up at the instigation of the Otago Motor Club and other motor clubs throughout New Zealand to ascertain if

the regulation dealing with ' the red reflectors was a reasonable one and to see if it were not ultra vires. The motor clubs and other associations had in the past assisted the Public Works Department in drawing up regulations, but in this particular case a difference of opinion had arisen and the department had gone further than the associations considered proper and right. The regulation appeared to be unique for New Zealand, for as j r as be found no other country had a similar regulation. In plain words, the regulation was a farce, as it required that besides complete lighting equipment, a red rear reflector was to be placed on every car. The matter was of great importance to motoris+s in New Zealand, for as there were 170,000 cars in the Dominion, and each reflector cost about ss, motorists would be compelled to pay a total of £40.000. Motorists, however, had still another complaint. When the regulation was passed in August last motorists obtained reflectors which complied with tne conditions then set out, but since then an amended regulation had been passed in beptember, and as a consequence all the reflectors purchased were absolutely useless and would have to be scrapped. ■ In the first place, continued Mr Hay, it was contended that the regulation was ultra vires in that it was unreasonable al ?, oppressive, while it was also impossible to comply with the conditions set out therein. . Furthermore, the regulation exceeded the statutory power which was given by the Motor Vehicles Act on the true construction of the Act, and counsel then quoted a number of authorities to prove his contention. He contended that the rear reflectors were quite unnecessary as the tail light gave ample protection in that it was extremely unusual for one to go out; also before the rear reflector was at all necessary the head lamps of the car behind must be out, which was a breach of the law in itself. -The magistrate said that all regulations should be as simple as possible, but it was impossible to say that the regulations under consideration were simple. Evidence was then given by Mr A. E. Ansell (president of the Otago Motor Club), who stated that the Motor Club had arranged the test case with the approval of all the other motor associations in New Zealand. He had been driving for 20 or 30 years, and found that it was very uncommon for a tail light to go out, while it was even rarer that both tail and head lights should be put out of action.

Dr Jack, professor of phvsics at the Otago University, stated that he was present when the tests had been made, and he confirmed Mr Ansell’s statements. The magistrate then adjourned the case for a week in order to give the police an opportunity to consider what course they would take with regard to the case for the prosecution.