PARKING PLACES.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18371, 2 May 1925, Page 5

PARKING PLACES.

"TOTALLY 1 INADEQUATE." OF INTEREST TO MOTORISTS. Before Mr W. Mcldrum, S.M., in the Magistrate '8 Court yesterday, a business man named Christopher Atkinson,residing on Cashmere Hills, pleaded not guilty to a charge of having left a motor-car in Lichfield street without reasonable excuse. The Police Offences Act of 1908 states that: "Every person is liable to a fine not exceeding £lO who, in or upon any public place, leaves any plough, harrow, cart, or other vehicle without. reasonable excuse.'' Mr F. W. Johnston defended Atkinson, and also appeared in the interests of the Canterbury Automobile Association. Acting-Senior-Sergeant C. E. Roach prosecuted. Formal evidence was given as to the finding of the car by a constable. "The parking places and garages are totally and absolutely inadequate to cover the requirements of the city," said Mr Johnston, in opening the defence. Atkinson, he continued, was a business man, and sometimes he used his car all day. There was no parking place near his business, and he had therefore left it outside or on the opposite side of the street. The prosecution as a rule was brought under the by-law, which allowed a little latitude, but this prosecution was brought under the Statute. Someone in the police office had apparently cast his eye over the Police Offences Act, and prosecuted under the section quoted above. His idea was that, taking iu all the Act, the particular section under which the prosecution was brought did not mean to include a motor-car. Counsel contended that the' word "other" after the word "cart" limited the range of vehicles. He believed that "cart oi other vehicle" included dray, waggon, and waggonette, and so on and .such like, but all those were horse-drawn vehicles. There was no question that a motor-car was a vehicle, but although it was a vehicle, counsel submitted that it was not such a class of vehicle as included in that section.

The owner of the car, Christopher Atkinson, an inrlont agent, whose place of business is situate in Lichfield street, admitted that ho had frequently left his car outside his place of business, and sometimes on the other side of the street. Ho often used his car in a day, and ho knew a number of other men who did the samo thing. There was not sufficient space in the parking places and in the garages to park the cars owned by business men in the city. Ono of tho troubles the city business man had to contend with was the way in which the people from the country districts monopolised the parking areas.

John' S. Hawkes, secretary to the Canterbury Automobile Association, also gave evidence for the defenco. Personal!}-, he thought the parking area in the city—especially in the business part—was inadequate. The nearest parking place to Lichfield street was Tuam street cast and Hereford street. In a great many cases cars were placed so close together in the parking places that owners had to shift a number of ears before they could get space for their own.

Evidence as.to the parking of cars in the city, especially ,in and . about Lichfield street was given by Herbert Macintosh, Chief City Motor Inspector, who was called by Sergeant Roach to give evidence. The inspector said there .was room for the parking of 1000 cars in the city, "but' the difficulty is," he explained, "that peoplo use the parking places as garages?" Some of tho country people came jnto town in the morning and parked their cars on the public parking places, and simply' left them there, and nothing could be done because there was no time limit, tfhat, he said, was the trouble in the city. Once there was a parking place in Lichfield street, but it was always so full of cars that, as the result of warehousemen complaining, it had been elim inated. There was a parking place east of High street, in Tuam street, but that was monopolised by the garagv people. Under cross-examination by Mr Johnston, the inspector said that the number of cars registered within a radius of 40 miles of the city was 8000, and about half of that 8000 was registered in the city. From the user's point of view, he supposed the parking places were eminently unsatisfactory. '' The object of the by-law is to provent cars from stopping for an unlimited time on the streets, isn't it?" asked Sergeant Roach. —"Yes," was the reply. His Worship said that.he would deliver his decision on Tuesday. To a similar charge a land agent named Daniel O'Connell, whose business premises are in Lichfield street, also pleaded not guilty. He told his Worship that his grounds for denying the charge were similar to those stated by Mr Atkinson.

The Magistrate reserved his decision in this case also.