MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Colonist, Volume LVIII, Issue 14483, 15 August 1917, Page 2

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

NELSON.—-TUESDAY, AUGUST 14,

(Before Messrs W. Lock an<T T. A". T.

Turnbull, Justices.)

AN UNNUMBERED MOTOR CAR,

llenry R. Beatson pleaded not; guilty to "a enfirgo of having driven, an. unliumberecl motor car at Tahuna on July iiDth.

Sergeant Barrett conducted the prosecution. . ■ ■ .-

The County Engineer (Mr G. S. AVhiteside), who is also Traffic Inspector for tho Waimea County Council, gave evidence that deiendant -was driving a car at I'ahuna on July 29th- which Lad no number on it. , Defendant stated that owing to shortage of labour there had been delay in getting the number painted. He registered the car on May 10th, and in the meantime had cnalked a number on the j car. He could not say whether the number could be seen on the day in question.1

Defendant was convicted, and a no|iuinal fine of 5s imposed, with 7s costs. ROCKS ROAD FOOTPATH. MOTORIST CHARGED. Harold R. Ruffell was charged under the Motor Regulations Act witn having on July 29th driven a motor car on thei footpath at Tahuna in a manner dan-!

gerous to the public; and, under the I e Police Offences Act. with driving a car ie ,'iJong the rootpath on the .Rocks road]; at lahuna in a manner dangerous to;^ persons using such footpath. ] c "Defendant pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr E. B. Moore. |* Tlio charge under the Motor Regula-!* tions-was withdrawn. '" j* George S. AVhiteside, County Bngi-!J neer and Traffic Inspector, stated that * on July 29th he and his son were com- Il mg from Tahuna towards the city, when he met defendant's car on'the footpath. Witness and his son had to spring aside, narrowly escaped an accident. The road was in good order compared with country roads. Tho footpath was maintained by the County Council as such. The defendant passed witness on,' the wrong side, and drove his car in a I manner that was dangerous to anyone1 on the path. j. By Mr Moore: It was the day after!j the flood, but the Rocks Road was not impassable. He saw cars use the road.;: Push bicycles used the footpath; but motor cycles and cars were not allowed to use it. The footway was asphalted, . and that denned it as a footpath. There were minutes on the Council's "books authorising him to maintain the .locality as a footpath; but he could not say "whether there was a minute defining it as a footpath. 1 The defendant stated that the road" was in a bad state, and he was off and on the footpath all the way. The road was not passable for a light car. Mr AVhiteside was walking on the edge of '< the road, and had plenty of room. Witness was driving slowly. Every car was taking tho path. By Sergeant Barrett: He recognised lie was not supposed to go on the footpath with a car. The road was impassable for his car. Mr AVhiteside was as much on the wrong side as witness was. Mr Moore submitted that the locality was not a footpath, as it was common knowledge that bicycles used it. It had not been proved that tho locality was a footway for pedestrians only. The Bench entered a conviction, and fined defendant os, with 7s costs.