DRIVERS' LICENSES.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LI, Issue 16806, 12 August 1925, Page 3

DRIVERS' LICENSES.

QUESTION OF TEST

COMPLAINT TO COUNCIL.

The question as to whether it was.com* putsory for an applicant. for a driver s license to Undergo a driving test was brought up at the Borough Council meet, ing last evening, when a letter was received from the Invercargill Borough Council asking for the Connell’s support in a suggested amendment to tho existing traffic regulations. . ‘ The letter read as follows: A decision has recently been given by the Invercargill Magistrate which has drawn the attention of my Council to an anomaly in tho regulations under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1924, and I am instructed to solicit voile support in endeavoring to have them amended so a,s to oomph* applicants for the motor drivers’ Incenses, in .the interests of public safety, Uv undergo a test before being granted a license. The facts are as follows: A person applied . for. a motor driver s license on June 13, and when asked by our traffic inspector to go out for a test, refused to do so; -therefore, the license was not issued. On June 16 he applied to the Mataura Borough Council, and received a license to drive, notwithstanding that lie gave his address as Invercargill. Being' found driving in Invercargill, the inspector prosecuted, but the Magistrate dismissed the case on the following grounds: 1. That Jin applicant for a motor driver’s license cannot be compelled to go for a test, as there is no penality prescribed in the regulations if he refuses to go for that test. 2. That under clause 3 of the regulations an applicant under these circumstances could apply elsewhere until h« could find a local authority willing to grant him a license without a test. My Council s object in bringing this matter before you is to urge'that no licenses be granted without each applicant being tested, and to ask you to write to the member of Parliament for your district requesting him to assist in having the regulations amended in tho direction indicated. The deputy-Mayor said that any new driver had to face an examination, but a driver who had previously held a license did not have to undergo a test, Ho thought they might get an opinion from the solicitor for the Municipal Association. ... ~ , Cr. Blair thought there would be no harm in supporting it. He would move that the letter be forwarded to the member for the district, and that the Council support tho proposal. The motion was carried. Further reference to drivers’ licenses was made by Cl'. DeCosta, who asked whether the traffic inspector could refuse to issue a license to a driver why had iuid a liuense two years ago. The filial inspector had refused to grant a license to a man who two years ago ha’d laid a license, and who had never had an accident. Had Inspector Scott any right to refuse a. license like that? “'Can We give an instruction to our inspector on the matter?’,’ he asked. C‘r. Blair said they had heard only one side of tho case, anil would have to heai the traffic inspector. Cr. DeCosta moved that the matter he referred to tho Works Committee. They could get the complainant and the inspector before the committee. It was decided that this should be done.