"STRATFORD EVENING POST" FRIDAY, JANUARY 24, 1930. MOTORISTS AND PEDESTRIANS.

Stratford Evening Post, Issue 77, 24 January 1930, Page 4

"STRATFORD EVENING POST" FRIDAY, JANUARY 24, 1930. MOTORISTS AND PEDESTRIANS.

-L'S England recently there occurred an event iinniue in the history of motoring. It was a, case of a motorist recovering damages from a pedestrian. The judgment of course means that in the eyes of the law a pedestrian is required to keep a good look out as well as a motorist, This is as it should he. In many accidents the motorist is to blame and some people in motor vehicles behave as though trey had the exclusive right to the road, their actions constituting a menace not only to pedestrians but to other motorists as well. But there have been cases, and many of them, Th which most careful drivers have been involved in accidents with pedestrians. The latter sometimes do the most absurd things and even in our own town they are to he observed crossing streets at angles, walking in the middle of the road, and so forth without paying the slightest attention to oncoming traffic. When an accident occurs under such circumstances the driver of the motor vehicle is usually unjustly blamed. According to an English motor magazine, “The Morris Owner” in the case referred to, a pedestrian walk<m into n motor cyclist who was travelling at a slow speed, and who, as a result, was thrown from "ms machine sustaining some considerable injury. The motor cyclist knew that he was in the right, and, having the courage of his convictions, brought a Case against the jay walker, with the result that Judge Lias, in the Sheffield County Court, awarded him thirty pounds damages and costs. In referring to the matter the journal in question, says: ‘‘One-sided as motor legislation has always been, it could never transfer tbe entire onus of responsibility to one section of the community; at common law every user of the highway is bound to exercise due care, although administrators of the law have upon occasions failed to take this into consideration.” Since then another case has come before the British Courts and Lord lie wart held that both the motorist and the pedestrian must take care to avoid an accident. The judge pointed out that a plaintiff could not say in effect, *’i have been knocked down; let the defendant get out of it it he can. it was, he said, the duty _ o each, to endeavour, by using care, to avoid the consequences of any negligence on the part o the other. Damages couit 11(1 be awarded to one parly when an accient was due to tu 1 simultaneous neglil cnee ot but i These judgments will upset some of' the preconceived notions regarding the rights o motorists and pedestrians, but ibey are undeniably rigid Loin a moral viewpoint to sa\ nothing of the legal aspect. t would be :, n intolerable stale of affairs if » < v .l A° damages from another for , 'bl u ) ies be received bi'eanse o 11S own conduct.