A BICYCLE COLLISION.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume LXIII, Issue 9895, 27 January 1911, Page 5

A BICYCLE COLLISION.

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES.

At the Masterton S.M. Court yesterday afternooo, before Mr L. G. Raid, S.M.. James Worth, labourer. of Masterton, claimed from Harold Willoughby. artisau, of Masterton, the sum of £86 for damages as the result of injuries received through a bicycle collision. Mr G. H. Culleu appeared for plaintiff aud Mr C. A. Pownall for defendant.

Dr Cowie stated that he attended the plaintiff, aud that the latter had two fractures of the left arm. It was a serious break, but the arm would be practically a 9 good as ever. It would still be six weeks before the limb was fit for use.

James Worth, plaintiff, stated that ■on December 19th last defendant, who was on a bicycle, was riding along the footpath in" Chapel-street from the Cole-street corner, plaintiff being ou a bicycle on the "road. Both were going in the same direction, aud were nearly abreast of each other. Opposite the main entrance to the Mastertou Club defendant rode into plaintiff's front wheel. Plaintiff applied the brake, but the affair occurred too quickly for him to avoid a collision. He was thrown to the ground and broke his left arm. a man named Bentley then assisted him to T)i Cowie's. Defendant subsequeutlv suggested payiug half the doctor's fee. Plaintiff declined to agree to this.

By Mr Pownall: He had never mentioned to anyoue that he would take half the doctor's fee, or would be satisfied with a small amonut for damages.

Edward Praguell, timber merchant, deposed to seeing the accident. One bicycle was being ridden in the centre of the road, and the other near or on the footpath. He did not see the accident actually occur, but saw Worth fall.

Robert Heury Bentley, labourer, said he was going to work, when he noticed Willoughby riding on the footpath and Worth on the road. He saw the accident, being about thirty yards from the sceue of it. Defendant seemed to have too much speed ou to get into the gates at the Masterton club aud went off on to the road, thereby catching plautiff's front Wheel aud bringing him down. The accident occurred iso quickly that plaintiff had no time to avoid a collision. No one else appeared on the scene. A man name Dickinson, cnstodiau of the Club, was not there. He was prepared to swear to tins. Defendant did not offer to assist plaintiff and witness took the latter to Dr Cowie's place.

Elizabeth Bentley, wife of previous Witness, gave corroborative evidence.

This closed the evidence for the plaintiff. Harold Willoughby, defendant, deposed that he rnde along the footpath in Chapel-street, and j turned off the path on to the road at the Essex-street intersection, because he desired to go in through the Club gates. He did not notice plaintiff, but as he reached the roadway he heard a sound, aud, turning round, saw plaintiff lying on the road. If there was a collision, plaintiff must have run into witness.

By Mr Culleu: Out of sheer curiosity he asked plaintiff what the doctor's fee would come to. He denied having ever offered to pay half the fees.

John B. Emmett. clerk, gave evidence that he saw plaintiff aud defendant riding together iv Ohaptd street. Both were on the road at the Essex-street intersection when he first saw them. Willoughby was slightly in the lead, and turned into the Club gate. Witness theu saw plaintiff fall off his machine.

By Mr Cullen :It was between five aud seven o'clock iv the evening wheu the accident occurred. He would swear positively that; he was riding his bicycle between Reuail-street aud the Club at the time.

Mr Cullen: But other witnesses state that it was 12 20 p.m. or 2.30 p.m, when the accident occurred. To his Worship: Mr Emmett must have seeu another accideut, your Worship

By Mr Pownall: Witness was positive he saw the accident in which plaintiff and defendant were concerned.

By his Worship: I am certain that it was| between 5 and 7 o'clock when the accident occurred.

William Charles Dickinson, custodian of the Masterton Club, testified that he was about 100 yards away at the time of the accident. Plaintiff and defendant were riding on the road. He saw Worth fall off his bicycle.

By Mr Cullen: For a distance of about 70 yards witness had not seen the two men. By Mr Pownall: It was between 2 aud 5 o'clock when the accident happened.

His Worship: Between 2 and 5 o'clock! but surely you can give the court something more definite that that in regard to tne time. Witness: No. His Worship repeated the question, but witness maintained that he could not fix on any time, only that it was between the hours he had stated. His Worship remarked on the peculiar fact that there was a great difference in the statements of the witnesses as to When the accident occurred.

This concluded the case, and in giving judgment, his Worship'said that there had been a good deal of conflicting evidence, but he had come to the conclusion that defendant had caused the accident. He did not agree with the theory that plaintiff iv riding along the road had tonched the back wheel of defendant's machine,and had thus been thrown to the ground. He would award plaintiff damages amounting to £36 10s. with costs totalling £6 18s.