TRAFFIC BY-LAWS BROKEN

Taranaki Daily News, 1 February 1933, Page 8

TRAFFIC BY-LAWS BROKEN

CARS IN PROHIBITED AREA ELTHAM COUNCILLOR CHARGED. NEW YEAR’S EVE REGULATION. Arising out of the driving of cars down Bridge Street, Eltham, on New Year’s Eve during a time when vehicles were prohibited in order to facilitate celebrations in the street, two residents were charged at the Police Court at Eltham yesterday with breaches of the traffic by-laws. ‘ , . Charles Cooper pleaded guilty to driving his car over portion of Bridge Street when such street was closed to traffic, and was convicted and ordered to pay costs. Two other charges, those of failing to comply with the directions of the borough traffic inspector concerning the bringing of his car to a standstfll and with stopping at a place established as a stand in a position other than that indicated by the borough council, were withdrawn. . , Mr. J. L.i Weir, for the borough council, said that defendant had expressed regret for the offence, and the council had no desire to penalise him. The magistrate: I suppose it was a New Year’s Eve frolic. Mr. Weir: That is so, sir. George William Peebles, a business man and a member of the Eltham Borough Council, was also charged with a similar breach. Defendant, represented by Mr. A. Chrystal, pleaded not guilty. Mr. Weir said that in accordance with a custom that had been adopted on New Year’s Eve for five years portion of Bridge Street was closed from 9 p.m. to midnight in order that the young people could dance. The band and the pipe band were present and a large crowd of people had assembled there. Counsel quoted authority for the borough council to close the streets for any reason considered, desirable., This power could be exercised by the Mayor. Traffic was diverted to other streets, and it should not have been a great hardship for defendant to have gone round by the other street. About 11 p.m. one of his employees had obtained permission from the traffic inspector to take the car round to the front of defendant’s premises to obtain benzine. About half an hour later defendant drove his car past the traffic officer -p to his shop and also right up through the rest of the street. The borough council had brought the prosecution to find out whether it could close the street on this occasion, and safeguard the people dancing. , Arthur Ernest Lethbridge, borough inspector, said he received instructions from the Mayor to close Bridge Street from High Street to York Street, and he engaged two assistants to help him, each wearing special printed badges. This had been done for five years. Earlier in the evening he gave defendant’s employee permission to drive round by York Street when he desired to obtain benzine. Ira James Bridger, Mayor of Eltham, said that as in former years he instructed the inspector to close the street and divert traffic .by way of . York Street, and also to appoint assistants to help him. - To Mr. Chrystal: He decided to close the street on the Friday before. On previous occasions he had received requests from business people to these street festivities, and although there had been no direct request this year it was decided to do so again. The decision to close the road was not placed before the council at its meeting before the holidays. The only step he took to notify the public was through the inspector. .. Mr. Chrystal: Do you know, Mr. Bridger, that this dancing in the street is a breach of your own by-laws, and you by the diversion of traffic assisted this breach? T Witness. You might say so, nut i don’t say so. , .' Witness stated that the inspector had discretionary powers, and defendant could have gained access to his shop if he had asked the inspector. Mr. Chrystal: I suggest that you had no power to stop the traffic. Witness: You can suggest what you like. I say it is sufficient that I closed the street - To Mr. Weir, witness said that defendant was a member of the borough council, and had always acquiesced in the closing of the street in previous years. Herbert John Mehrtens said that he was an assistant inspector directing traffic on New Year’s Eve. About 11.30 p.m. Mr. Peebles came straight at him, pulled up in front of him and asked him -to get out of the way. Witness refused to allow him to pass. Defendant then asked for Constable Townsend or Mr. Lethbridge, but witness declined to obtain these men and defendant then drove on past him. He said he was not going to wear out his gears. To Mr. Chrystal, witness said that defendant did not give any reason for wanting to go through. He would have offered no objection to him going to his shop provided he did not go right through the other end of the street where the crowd was thickest Mr. Chrystal said that there was a point of objection to having traffic stopped in this way at the will of the Mayor without even any formal notification in the newspapers. He challenged the claim of the Mayor to have authority to close portion of the traffic in such manner. If he stopped the traffic he must stop all the traffic, and not a portion of the traffic. He explained that defendant had told Mehrtens that he wanted to pick up some gear for the beach, and not that he was talking about the gears of his car. Mr. Weir in reply said that- defendant’s car was not debarred from going to the shop, but was taken previously to the shop by an employee and filled with benzine and driven back again as requested by the inspector. It was not a breach of the borough by-laws to hold dancing in the street if it were allowed by the borough authorities. The magistrate held that the council had power to stop traffic and that the Mayor did exercise that power. Mr. Chrystal, it appeared, was quite right in his contention regarding discriminating in stopping one class of traffic, but in this case the whole traffic was stopped. He thought that the Mayor had stopped the traffic in terms of the section of the by-laws, and that defendant had acted in a manner that was prohibited. He said he would convict as in the former case, and order payment of ebsts £1 Ils. “I daresay people get a little above themselves on New Year’s Eve,” added the magistrate.