TRAFFIC OFFENCES.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXX, Issue 5500, 13 November 1929, Page 2

TRAFFIC OFFENCES.

PROSECUTIONS BY BOROUGH.

INFRINGEMENTS TOO COMMON.

In the Paeroa Police Court on Monday, before Mr F. W. Platts, S.M., several cases of traffic infringement in the Borough of Paeroa were heard.

Mr C. N. O’Neill, for the Borough Council, speaking on the parking cases, said they were not very serious singly, but in a town like Paeroa, with the main street thronged with cars, any vehicles standing out from the kerb were a menace to traffic. The prosecutions were being brought more in the nature of a warning, to bring the borough by-laws more forcibly to the notice of the public. No fine was asked for, merely costs and solicitor’s fees. The first case dealt with was that of G. Carew, who was charged with leaving a motor-car in Belmont Road at a greater distance than two feet from the kerb.

Defendant stated that he had parked his car in the Civic Square, where there was plenty of room. Other cars were parked there in a haphazard manner. His car had been clear of all traffic. It was when another car had pulled out that his appeared so prominent. He valued his car, and would not leave it in a position where there was any likelihood of it being struck. The magistrate, describing the case as trivial, fined Carew 10s costs. Next on the list came G. Crow, who did not appear, charged with a similar breach. The borough traffic inspector stated that he had seen defendant’s car at 7.15 p.m. parked opposite the Paeroa Hotel, 9ft frojn the kerb, with the off wheels nearly on the crown of the road. Not being able to find the owner, he had to shift the car himself. Sli —Mulcted to the tune of 10s costs and 10s 6d solicitor’s fees. J. E. Thompson, also absent, was also on the book with a similar charge. Evidence was given that he expressed regret for the infringement and for his being unable to appear in person. In this case the inspector said defendant’s car had been parked outside another one. The Magistrate : Ten shillings costs and'los 6d solicitor’s fees. RIDING WITHOUT LIGHT. H. Walker was charged with riding a bicycle without a light after sundown. Defendant’s employer wrote stating that Walker could not put in a personal appearance at the Court as he was busy on the farm. He pleaded guilty, however. Speaking on this case, Mr O’Neill said the practice was becoming altogether too frequent. This was riot the first prosecution taken, but the infringements still continued. It 'was dangerous to the ridei’ and to pedestrians. He asked the Court to deal with the case in that light. Walker’s pocket was made lighter by £1 0s 6d—los costs and 10s 6d solicitor’s fees.