MOTOR COLLISION.

Shannon News, 14 May 1926, Page 4

MOTOR COLLISION.

INFORMATION, DISMISS©). - At S.M. Court at Otaki last week M. W. Higginson was charged that he did drive a motor-car along the CountyRoad at a speed dangerous to the public. Mr. Atmore, . for defendant, pleaded not guilty.' Constable Satherley asked that all witnesses be ordered out of Court. This was granted. The constable stated that on February 14th defendant was'going towards! Wellington and when on the Waikanae I Road and travelling at 18 to 20 miles j per hour a collision with another car j occurred. William Henry Russell stated: I am a Hansard reporter, residing in Wellington. I remember February 14th last. I was driving with others to Wellington. It was a line afternoon. A mile and a half from iTc Horo I was liroeecdiug leisurely when my son called out "look out dad!" I looked over my shoulder and saw a big ear coming towards me, and a collision occurred. I tried to get out of the way but failed. I ran into a water table preferring to take the risk rather than get the bump. I junrped out and hailed the car. It stopped, and I said I would take further action, and Mr. Brandon, who Avas with Higginson, took down all names when I said further action would have to be taken. I said it was not a fairthing to drive like that, and Mr. Robinson, J.P., who was with mc said he would try and "put them up." I received no warning' sound from Higginson's car. My car was badly d.imaged. Mr. Brandon made the remark j that I was on my wrong side,, but I pointed out that I was on the correct side. There was about 16 ft of formation and there was plenty of room to pass. I have been driving for 12 years and have never had an accident. The bill for repairs totalled £3 ss. I told Higginson that he was driving recklessly and should be stopped. Higginson was cool and collected and seemed in | his usual manner. The collision occurred on a piece of straight road. ■To Mr. Atmore: I did iiot know defendant was behind me for a mile and wished to pass. I did not hear his horn. I would have been pleased to have let him.pass. I was near the water table at the tim'e of the. collision, and was not in the middle of the road when the accident occurred. It is my custom to keep to the correct side of the road, and I follow this rule invariably. I did not pull across the road when Higginson approached; I had no wish to block him. By swinging my car over I consider I saved a very serious blow. , To Constable Satherley. The speed Higginson was travelling at was dangerous. ' My speed was from 15 to 20 miles, while Higginson was travelling at about 30 to 35. Norman Henry Russell, son of previous witness, -gave similar evidence, stating that the car when abreast came acToss and struck their car. We called out and Higginson stopped, and we talked of the matter. Higginson would be travelling about 25 miles per hour when we were struck. He looked at our car, and said no damage had been done. I heard no warning when the ear was behind us. Higginson was perfectly sober. My father and Mr. Robertson threatened "to put him (Higginson) up." To Mr. Atmore: Our hood was up, but not the side curtains. My father, I regard as a very careful driver. Charles B. Robinson, retired farmer, residing at Lower Hutt, and a Justice of the Peace, gave corroborative evidence.. Tho first indication of an accident was an exclamation from the last witness, who said "look out, dad." Higginson 's speed at the time of the impact was about forty miles, and he had plenty of room to pass. I consider Higginson had had a liquor or two, but he was by no means drunk. To Mr. Atmore: I may be mistaken about Higginson having liquor; I said his conduct gave him the appearance of having had some.

John Hiseock, settler, residing at Wellington, gave similar evidence, he being with previous witnesses. He did not hear the conversation between the two parties. "He regarded Mr. Russell as a very careful driver. To Mr. Atmore: I had twice driven with Mr. Russell before the accident. The car struck us before I saw it. Mr. Atmore stated there was no traffic on the road at the time. Higginson had followed the car for about a mile, had sounded hiss horn, but had been unable to get past. Higginson stopped behind the other car till a straight stretch of road was reached Then the horn was sounded and Russell puljcd over to the side, giving indication to pass. Russell was well on the side tut later the car came directly across the road, and due to some gravel as well Higginson's ear skidded. If Russell heard the horn and did not give room he was responsible for the accident, if he did not then it was an unfortunate accident.

Higginson stated: I was driving a Hudson car on the day in question, and followed Russell's car for a mile. I tried to pass previously, but pulled back on account of a bridge. AVhen 1 came to a straight stretch of road I blew the horn, Russell pulled off, and 1 naturally accelerated to about 30 mile.?:. When I drew level Russell run into the middle of the road, and 0A 7 idently accelerated. I consider they hit my rear mud-guard. In passing I got on to some loorfe .gravel, and Russell himself must have been travelling at a much greater speed than he had stated. If Russell bad not increased his speed I would have had no difficulty in clearing. After the collision, which was slight, I suggested pulling up and I backed my car towards them to see what had happened. One of the occupants of Russell's car threatened to put m'e up; he seemed very excited. I saw Russell's ear was alright, and it was suggested that the parties, cry all square. I have driven for 14 years in England, Franse and New Zealand. Once I was fined J for exceeding the limit of 15 miles in the Gorge. There were then 20 cases, To Constable Salherley: For a time I followed the car, and after passing mine skidded, and Russell struck me.

Alfred dc Bath Brandon gave- evidence on similar lines, .ho being- j n the car with Mr. Higginson. Charles Higginson also gave evidence in support of defendant and considered the. fault, of the accident was due to Russell's driving. The latter gave no chance to Ids brother's carlo pass, if the Buiek had kept to its own side of the road the accident would not have happened. The accident was notdue to negligence on the part of \i< brother. The S.'M. considered Higginson pould have been more prudent, but still the trout of his car was slear. There was evidently a skid, therefore there was an element of doubt. He did no: consider Higginson drove in a ncg]iw-»ut manner therefore the .information would be dismissed.