A GRIM RECORD.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20625, 28 May 1935, Page 5

A GRIM RECORD.

Road Accidents in New South Wales. STARTLING STATISTICS. (Special to the “Star.” SYDNEY, May 20. Our Commissioner for Road Transport has just published an official | statement detailing the road accidents that occurred in this State during 1934: and it is certainly a most disquieting record. During last year 356 persons met their deaths in road accidents in New South Wales—nearly at the rate of one a day. In addition 6069 were injured or maimed—at the rate of approximated 16 a day. Naturally there were more killed or injured in the metropolitan area, the figures being 229 killed—about four or five a week—and 4822 injured for Sydney and suburbs. Even in Newcastle there were 26 persons killed —one a fortnight—and 259 —five or six a w*eek —were injured. Deaths of Children. One of the most pathetic features of this tragic list is that 156 children, between the ages of one and four, and 535 between the ages of five and ten Startling as all this may appear, the figures already published for the first four months of the current year are even more alarming. For in the past four months there have been 129 fatal road accidents in this State—more than one a day—as against 123 for the corresponding period of 1934. In March there were 37 deaths from these causes and in 'April 38, which means that, in spite of all warnings and precautions and penalties, the average man is likely to be still more decisively worsted this year than last in his “ struggle for existence ” against the lorry and the motor-car. Comparison With Other States. Of course the authorities have done what they can to reassure the general public and to persuade us that things are really much worse elsewhere. The Commissioner actually claims that our

ecord “ compares favourably with that J of other countries.” because, out of every 100,000 of the population about | 14 were killed last year in motor acci- | dents in New South Wales, while 16 per 100,0p0 were killed in Great Britain and about 29 per 100,000 were killed in the United States. But this inference js wholly unjustified, because it leaves out of account the important | factor of density of population. In England and America there are many large cities with densely congested traffic, and it is under such conditions j that motor accidents most frequently j . occur. In New South Wales itself this prin- j ciple is exemplified; for in 1934 throughout the whole of the country districts there were only 101 fatal accidents out of the State total of 356. and 960 out of 6069 cases of maiming and injury. A much fairer estimate of the position and one much more depressing to us can be derived from the figures showing the average number of deaths in various countries per 1000 registered vehicles. In the United States the average is 1.4 deaths per 1000 vehicles; and in New South Wales, where the conditions are fairly analogous, the average is 1.5 deaths per 100. It was true that in Great Britain the death roll is far higher—3 per 1000 vehicles. But the number of large and densely peopled centres within a small area of course explains Britain’s unfortunate pre-em-inence in the list, and in any case the figures that I have quoted leave us very little room for satisfaction. Distribution of Responsibility. The figures prepared by Mr Maddocks throw much interesting light on the situation and it should be observed that 40 per cent of the fatalities and 35 per cent of the minor casualties were pedestrians. So to the distribution of responsibility—4o per cent of the total deaths or injuries were due to cars, 20 per cent to lorries, and roughly 14 per cent to motor-cycles, and 12 per cent to bicycles. As to the precise causes of accidents, excessive speed is put down as responsible for 37 killed and 318 injured, careless or negligent driving as responsible for 25 deaths and 316 injuries, carelessness at

intersections—the familiar case of the motor-car plunging at high speed out from the side street into the main highway—was responsible for 16 deaths and 543 injuries; and overtaking and cutting in was responsible for 17 deaths and 262 injuries. This last offence is particularly common here, especially along the great high-roads that radiate from Sydney into the country. Walking along Pacific Highway or Prince's Highway any weekend one can see on an afternoon countless instances of cars driven at high speed—overtaking and passing on steep grades or near sharp comers where it is utterly impossible to see far ahead, and though Mr C. Watsdn (once Prime Minister of Australia and now president of the N.R.M.A.) has done his best to discourage these excesses, they are still rampant to the grievous danger of the general public, driver and foot passengers alike. Of course it must be admitted that some pedestrians are careless, and that some proportion of these disasters could fairly be attributed to the drivers. But the plea that “ the pedestrian was to blame ” is usually based Qn the assumption that the roads are really the property of the motorist and that the pedestrian has no right upon them. This piece ,of information was conveyed to me quite frankly by a motorist with whom I remonstrated the other night; and I have gathered, from careful reading of a large number of inquiries into motor accidents, that quite a considerable proportion of drivers here share this view. Of course, the disastrous state of things indicated by these figures will work its own cure here, as it is doing at Home. But, in the meantime?