UNREASONABLE. BYLAW

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 63, 8 December 1926, Page 5

UNREASONABLE. BYLAW

SPEED LIMIT AT JUNCTIONS MAGISTRATE DISMISSES CHARGES Written judgment was given by Mr. J. H. Salmon, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday in two by-law cases, in which Ernest Bolton and Stanley Acton Hunt were each charged with, on November 17, driving a motor-car at a greater speed than eight miles per hour when crossing the junction of Chilka Street and Adelaide Road. It was not denied by the defence that either defendant was exceeding the speed limit in the case in question, but it was contended that the by-law was unreasonable, and should therefore be held to be invalid.

In tlie course of evidence it was shown that Adelaide Road is the main arterial road to Island Bay and parts of other suburbs, that between the Basin Reserve and Duppa Street there are some 20 intersections and junctions, and that it would be very difficult for a motorist observing the limit of speed of 20 miles per hour to slow down to eight miles per hour at all these intersections and junctions. “The reasonableness or unreasonableness of a by-law,” said Mr. Salmon, “is a question of fact. What then, are the facts of the present case? lhe only evidence is that of the police who have to administer the by-law, and it is admitted that for practical purposes the bv-law is unworkable, or at least that it has to receive such a liberal

and forced construction at their hands as to be practically ignored. This is the strongest evidence that the by-law as framed is unreasonable. It is true that this ruling may possibly involve the council in some difficulty, since it may render it necessary for the council to provide different local restrictions in respect of different intersections or junctions. That, however, is a matter which must be faced sooner or later in connection with traffic problems. It is sufficient in the present case that those who have to administer the bylaw have found it unduly restrictive and impracticable in the ordinary traffic of this particular highway. ’Tor these reasons I must hold that the bylaw as framed is unreasonably sweeping in its effect, and therefore unreasonable and invalid. The charges will be dismissed.”