ONE MONTH’S GAOL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17350, 15 May 1924, Page 7

ONE MONTH’S GAOL.

PENALTY ON TAXI-DRIVER CARRIED INTO CELLS. At the Magistrate's Court this morning, Thomas John Anderson, a licensed taxi driver, appeared before Mr H. Y. Widdowson, S.M., in answer to charges of being drunk while in charge of a motor-car and with driving a motorcar along Colombo Street in a manner dangerous to the public. Mr Milliken appeared for accused and pleaded guilty to the first charge and not guilty to the second. Sergeant Roach conducted the case for the police. Thomas Pitcairn Penman, a grocer employed by Frank A. Cook, said that shortly before six o'clock last evening he jumped on his bicycle outside the premises where ho was employed, but had not gone more than a few' yards when a motor-car came up behind him and ran over him. He was not more than a yard from the footpath. The driver of the car did not sound his horn, and he seemed to be asleep when he struck witness. Witness luckily was not hurt, though his cycle was badly damaged. He got up and went for a policeman, who got another driver to take accused’s car to the police station. This driver had to assist the policeman to carry accused into tho station. To Mr Milliken : He had ridden only five yards before being struck. He did not know the manner in which accused was driving, and he could only infer that it was in a dangerous manner. There was no other traffic about at; the time.

Horace Cornish, a licensed taxi driver, said that at about two minutes to six last evening he was called by a policeman to drive accused’s car to the police station. On arrival there he assisted the constable to carry accused into the station. Mr Milliken said there was no doubt that accused was fairly drunk. There was no evidence, however, as to the mauner in which he was driving his car. Penman had come off the footpath all of a sudden and might have been run over even if the driver had been sober. Accused bad been driving for 20 years and during the whole of that, time he had had only two small charges against him of overloading his car. He was very susceptible to liquor, and three whiskies were sufficient to knock him over. Accused was

desirous of taking a prohibition order out against himself. He had a wife and two children. The Magistrate: He should think of them before he takes the three whiskies. The trouble in these cases is that the wife and family have to suffer. The Magistrate suggested that the second charge should be withdrawn, as it was really an alternative one. Sergeant Roach agreed. He said it was a hard thing to know when a man was drunk if he was sitting in a motorcar. It was not so hard to find out when he was on his feet. The Magistrate said the accident was undoubtedly caused by the drunkenness of the man in charge of the car. Being drunk whilst in charge of a motor-car was one of the most serious offences that could be committed under Section 30 of the Police- Offences Act. The penalties which could be imposed were a fine of £lO or imprisonment not exceeding three montns. A more dangerous set of circumstances than those in the present case he could hardly imagine and he did not intend to cieal ligiitlv with the matter. He hoped accused’s license would he taken away from him. in spite of the fact that ho had a fairly good record over 20 years. A man addicted to drink was not fit to drive motorcar lie was endangering life and limb. Accused would be sentenced to one month’s imprisonment with hard labour.