MOTOR HURDLES.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1917, 27 November 1913, Page 10

MOTOR HURDLES.

CAR DAMAGED ON MUTT ROAD, OWNKH'S CLAIM VAILS. A case of some iiitercst to motorists and others was heard before Air. L. G. Held, K.M., at Hit- I'elonc Alagistratc's Court yesterday. The case was ono in which Frederick George Butler, taxicab driver, of Wellington, proceeded against t'iie I'etonc Borough' Council to recover .(,'ll 2s. fid. as damages incurred on Juno 13 i>y tho plitintitf's ear through contaet with one of tho raised crossings on tho Hurt Road. Mr. C. ii. Izard appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. R. C. kirk for the i'etonc Council. The Hiitt Road "hurdles," as they hint l been termed,, wore prominently before the public when they were, laid down by the. I'etonc Borough Council some, mouths ago, with the < bject of regulating motor traffic Motorists were loud in their outcry agjie-st the hurdles, and the council afterwards modified and ri-modilied them. The damage, alleged to have Leon sustained by plaintiff in the case hoard at IVtoiie yesterday was at the crossing on the, Unit .Road, opposite. Cudhy's store. Frederick George, Butler, plaintiff, gave evidence to the effect that as ho was passing over one of the obstructions he I'clt n. very severe hump and heard something give way. The ear was unable to proceed, end ho found on examination that the universal joint wis broken. To Air. Kirk: Tho car was in good order at the time. As ho had approached the crossing ho had slowed down, and had thrown out the clutch. It was true that it v.as not an unheard of thing for a universal joint to give away or su ordinary road—that was if itwas not properly looked after.

Georgo Bradley, motor engineer, of Lr.wer Mutt, stated that he had repaired plaintiff's car, and had taken tho occupants on to the train in a car of his own. The tail end of the universal joint had been broken. Witness had had several cars of his injured throimh the crossings. Ho himself had met with misfortune oft three occasions. Oh the crossing to which the present case related ono of his ears had mot with an accident. Witness had been ijoiug at. a speed of 15 or 18 miles an hour at the time. In cross-examination the witness admitted that the universal joint .was the last thing that he would expect to give way at a crossing. Air. Sladdon, surveyor, stated that he had examined the crossings some time ago, and was of the opinion that they Here dangerous to motor-cars. In every crossing, the width was tho factor determining safety. A short, high crossing would make a ear driving over it plunge. The first thing to give way would be tho springs. Witness had never hoard of an accident happening to the universal joint on the Hutt Road.'

This concluded tho evidence for plaintiff. Prior to calling evidence for this I'etono Council, Air. Kirk stated that he did not propose to arguo that if a council put down crossings that were dangerous on a. road would bo absolved from damages in the case of accident. A. council, however, always had power to put down crossings, and a motor-driver who drove through a populous borough whe.'e crossings were required must take his chance of accident. Hundreds and thousands of ears had passed over these crossings, and, in no single case, had a universal joint given way. The universal joint was specially designed for going over bumps, and it"was the last part of a motor that one would expect to encounter mishap, Thomas Shiel, of Lower Hutt, stated that ho had had several -years' experience iii motors. He had passed over ■ these crossings twonty times a week, and ho was of the opinion that lli-ey were quite safe at any speed up to ton or fifteen miles an hour. Ho had nevw heard*of the universal joint of any. car giving way through a bump. Air. W. G. Lodder also gave evidence. He stated that he was a member of the council when tho crossings were put down, and it was on his notico of iiw' tion that Iho matter was first brought up. He stated that ho would rather go over the. crossings at fifteen miles an hour in a motor than go along Fcatherstoii Street. Questioned bvAlr. Izard, witness stated that the object of the council in putting down the crossings had been to regulate tho motor traffic.

Similar evidence was given hy (wo motor engineers. They stated tJiat if a universal joint gave through a bump at a crossing there must bo something faulty in its construction. "This is a very simple matter to decide," said the Magistrate, in giving judgment. "It is whether the accident was due to the rondition of tile road or due to the faulty construction of the car. I have carefully listened to the evidence c f .both sides, and I am not satisfied that the accident took place owing to the crossings. It seotus very strange that thousands of ears have, gone over these crossings and that this is the only universal joint that has been broken. The evidence does not satisfy mo tlerS-defendants are liable. Plaintiff will, be nonsuited." Costs amounting io £3 -is. 6d. were allowed against plain-' tiff.

OTHER PETONE CASES. For failing t<s render personal service in compliance with the Defence Act, A. N. It. Pickering was fined 10s., in default throe days' military detention. W. Laming, for disobeying n maintenance order, was lined 405., with tho option of fourteen days' imprisonment. In the judgment summons case W. P. Porter" v. Bert Lowe, a claim for £(i £s. Gd., the debtor was ordered to ■imv tho amount within two months. 1 - ■