RULES OF THE HIGHWAY

Taranaki Daily News, 3 October 1929, Page 2

RULES OF THE HIGHWAY

MOTORISTS APPEAR IN COURT CHARGES. OF DANGEROUS DRIVING. CASES ARISE OUT OF COLLISIONS. A collision between motoi/cars driven by Francis Tecofsky and Norman Alfred Arthur at the corner of Cameron and Pendarves Streets, New Plymouth,, resulted in- Tecofsky being with driving in a manner dangei lto the public and Arthur with failing, to give way when meeting traffic approaching from the right and with driving with 2 ' out a license, before Mr. R/W. Tate, S.M., at the New Plymouth Police Court yesterday. The charge .against •Tecofsky was dismissed and on' the' first) charge Arthur was fined £1 with costs amounting to £2, being convicted and ordered .to pay . costs amounting to 10s on the fiecoiid... . ) ; l - Tecofsky was driving along Cameron ' Street towards .'the. south and Arthur along Pendafves Street towards the west” explained Senior-.Sergeaht -M-cCro-. rie in outlining the facts of the case. George H. Davey estimated the speed of Tecofsky’s car as 25 miles per hour. The other seemed to be going much more slowly. Both arrived at the intersection simultaneously and both sounded their horns. Tecofsky went to the right ‘ of the road to endeavour to avoid the collision. : A passenger in Arthur's car, G. M. Bennett, said Arthur swerved to the left and Tecofsky to the right. If the latter had not swerved to the right and he had been travelling at tlie regulation speed of 15 niiles per hour there would have been no collision. When Arthur’s) car) Reached the -intersection Tecofsky’s car was about 30 to 40 feet from the line Arthur was travelling on. There was nothing to prevent Arthur pulling up, and allowing Tecofsky, who was approaching from the right, to pass. The car travelling along Pendarves Street was going faster than the one in Cameron Street, said Phoebe K. Ford, who witnessed the accident. Before Tecofsky had time to blow the horn Ar- ■ thur dashed into him. 1

EVIDENCE OF POLICE. Constable Antill took measurements at the intersection before the cars left. Arthur’s ear was facing east, lie said, and Tecofsky’s was- on the wrong side of the road facing the south, 36 feet from the centre of the intersection. There were skid marks from where the cars met about four feet on the south side of the intersection on Arthur’s correct side of the road. To the point of impact Tecofsky skidded 15 feet and Arthur 23 feet. Tecofsky had; been further on to the intersection than Arthur before the brakes of each were applied. Air. A. Coleman, counsel. for Tecofsky," submitted it was clear from the evidence that Tecofsky had sounded his horn and was travelling on the correct side of the road. The only other element in the. charge of dangerous driving was that of speed, and the police witnesses had not agreed upon Tecofsky’s speed. The defendant and three wit T nesses would , say he was not travelling at more than 15 miles per hour, that Arthur was travelling at from 25 to 30 miles per hour, that Arthur was on his wrong side of the road, that Tecofsky had reached, the intersection before Arthur, that Arthur’s car had struck Tecofsky’s on the left rear and had been travelling so much faster that it had run. past. alongside it and torn off the front left bumper. Evidence on the lines indicated by Air. Coleman was given by Tecofsky, Airs. Tecofsky and R. Haylock. Air. L. M. Moss, for Arthur, considered there was nd breach of the righthand rule and Arthur's car did not run into Tecofsky’s car as it was damaged on the side and not on the front. Arthur thought he could safely cross the intersection and that there was no possibility of a collision, but that possibility was created, by Tecofsky’s speed and his change of direction. He submitted that the police evidence showed Tecofsky had been travelling too fast and faster than Arthur. Tecofsky admitted to him he yvas travelling at from 25 to 28 miles pel’ hour, said Arthur, who gave evidence similar to that outlined by Mr. Moss. It was a police prosecution and not a civil action, said the magistrate, and the charges must be proved beyond all reasonable doubt. He would) have to have greater evidence than had been given to allow him to convict Tecofsky, but he thought Arthur could easily have stopped .and was undoubtedly guilty of a breach of the right-hand rule. THE RIGHT-HAND RULE. . Chafes of failing to give way to traffic approaching from the right, of driving in a manner dangerous to the public, and of failing to make a righthand turn correctly were preferred against George Harry Fletcher. The charges arose from a collision between defendant’s car and a motor-cycle ridden by Constable Small at the intersec-, tion of Devon and Watson Streets on August 1. The hearing was not concluded yesterday and was adjourned until October 16. Senior-Sergeant AlcCrorie said Small was riding his machine along Devon Street towards the post office and Fletcher was coining, down. Watson Street. Turning into Devon Street to the right Fletclmr cut,the. corner and cut' across , the street sharply''in front of a tramear. The front of Small’s bicycle had been struck and Small knocked off and injured. Fletcher should have given way to. Small, who was approaching from the right on his correct side of .the road. Evidence similar to the statements of the Senior-Sergeant was given by Small, who was unconsciqus after being struck, by N. F. Clark and G. White, motormen in two tramears approaching Watson Street at the time of. the accident, and Constables Antill and King, who took measurements of marks on the road after the • accident. ®