CAR NOT ALLOWED TO PASS

Taranaki Daily News, 30 April 1931, Page 3

CAR NOT ALLOWED TO PASS

RIVALRY. BETWEEN SERVICE CARS AUCKLAND RUN INCIDENT. Rivalry between service-car drivers on the run between. Auckland and New Plymouth was responsible' for one of them, Arthur Wylie, being fined £1 and £1 16s costs in the Police Court at New Plymouth yesterday. His offence was that on March 29, betweeu Ha.milton and Rukuhere, he failed to move his car to the left .of the road. to allow another vehicle to pass from behind,Wylie, said Senior-Sergeant MeCrorie, was driving one of Campbell’s service cars when Carter, in a faster car belonging to the Aard service, sounded his horn to pass but failed to do so until he reached Awakino. “My client absolutely denies that this went on as far as: Awakino,” said' Mj. J. H.. Sheat. “Both of them stopped for lunch at Awakino and Wylie.left there a quarter of an hpiir before the other driver and arrived at Awakino before him. There is a whole history about : this matter, but I don’t propose to go into that, except to say there has been some feeling between the drivers-of the two services. Wylie admits he heard the horn and did not move over.”

Mr. Sheat pointed out, however, that Wylie’s car was timed to leave I‘Hamiltdn at 11.30 and Carter’s at 11.45. But when he reached Rukuhere, seven miles south of Hamilton, at 11.45 Carter came up behind him. As he was travelling at 35 miles an hour, he considered the other driver was totally unjustified in trying to pass him, because he knew the reason for his desiring to-do that. Counsel pointed out. that when, the day before, Carter had passed the other car. he had slowed down .and. “given Wylie'his dust” for as long as he-could. Wylie’- recognised he should " pot have done what he did and had given an assurance that such a’ thing would not occur again. In view of the circumstances, it was suggested it was not a case for: a heavy penalty. No harm was done anybody. Counsel said he understood the other driver was in court and he asked the magistrate to make it clear to both of them that this sort of thing could not be allowed. “These drivers have to understand that they have a duty to the community to carry the travelling public safely,” said Mr. Tate. “If the public decides it is not being carried safely it will not travel in the cars.’ . . /

“There is no justification whatever for, a breach of this regulation. It is not for the front driver to consider the reason another car wants to.pass. His duty is to the public, and to carry his passengers safely. I hope these two will compose their differences. This is not a case for a heavy penalty.”