WHEN CAR STRIKES CAR

Shannon News, 11 June 1926, Page 3

WHEN CAR STRIKES CAR

the tale as told in court.

COLLISION ON MANGAONE

BRIDGE,

On March 11 last, two cars collided on a bridge over the Mangaone creek on the northern boundary of Shannon. The driver of the one was Edmond J. S. Spencer, building contractor, of Shannon, and the other was a service car, owned by the Highways Transport Company.

. As a sequel, Spencer sued the company for £149 4s, itemised as cost of repairs £B4 4s; depreciation, £3O; loss of use of car, £lO, and general dam ages £25. Mr. E .T. Moody appeared for plaintiff, Mr. F. S. Cooke for de fendaht company and Mr. J. L. Stout, S.M., was on the bench. Defendant company entered a coun ter-claim, alleging negligence by plain tiff, that the company’s car was sta tionary when plaintiff hit it. There-" fore ,it claimed £ll2 15s damages to the car, for loss of business and costs of hiring another vehicle.' Plaintiff, in the box, deposed that on the date under review, he \yas driving from Palmerston North to Shannon in a light car, with his wife and brother-in-law. When yet about HOO yards north of the bridge, witness noticed a service car approaching at great speed. He had no doubt about being able to get across the bridge and when 16 yards from the actual decking, naturally thought that the other man would; give him time to get over. He. had the other car in sight all the way, except for a couple of seconds during which, owing to the contour of the road and relative position of the bridge, he lost sight of it. Thd service . car was at that time several chains distant/ The bridge’ was 11 feet wide, and the width of his vehicle waa sft„ sins. When half-way across the bridge, he saw the vehicle apr proaching at great . speed, and his thought was to clear it if possible. However, although he drew over as far as possible to the left, the heaviervehicle struck his and stripped tb* right-hand side of his car. Witness had actually cleared, the bridge at tht moment of impact. The other driver apparently -attempted to slacken speed, but vtoo late and witness estimated its speed at the moment at 15 miles an hour.

To Mr. Cooke, witness said he took the correct course in attempting to clear the bridge, otherwise he would have been smashed up in the middle of the - structure. The application ot he brakes and the impact of the collision pulled the car up. The Magistrate: If he hadn’t applied the brakes he would have landed in the creek! .

Ante-accident photographs of the scene were produced, which plaintiff challenged as not giving a true position of the situation. , John Wallace Newton, farmer, of Shannon, a passenger in plaintiff’s car, deposed that he first noticed the service car 450 yards away, just ascending a rise, and he had a clear view of it all the way. He estimated that as they took the bridge, the other was 53 ; yards distant. The other driver must have had a clear view also.. Witness was injured' in the smash. The car in which witness' whs riding was two feet clear of the decking at tht moment of the impact, but the force of the 'blow pushed it back slightly. Evidence was given by James Allen, commercial traveller, of Palmerstei North, who was a passenger in the service car, declared that speed was not slackened until they were at the bridge approach. The driver applied his brakes not more than 30 feet from the spot of the collision, and plain-, "tiff’s wheels were clear of the bridge. In witness’ opinion, the service cai could easily have passed the other clearly and thus got on to the bridge. ’The driver declared later in an hotel at Shannon that he had been out ot work for some time and that now he supposed, his services would be dispensed with. (Jross-exanfined by Mr. Cooke, witness said the car was going at S’? miles an hour when 100 yards from the place. The driver could have been further on his left side, but it had not “almost stopped’’ when the accident happened. He considered the ordinary courtesies of the road demanded that the service car should have stopped. At this stage, a witness for the defence, Corhelius McKenna, a linesman employed by the Government, Was put in the box. The service car, in which he was travelling, was v r ell over on the left-hand side and was going at a fair rate of speed, which -was not reduced until the car got on to .the approach. Just as the larger cat i stopped, the collision occurred. Questioned further, witness declared that there might have been a silght movement at the time.

Thomas King, carrier, of Shannon, was an eye-witness of the acciderf from the roadside. The light car wati pushed to’ the side of the road, the other more towards the centre, he declared. He assisted to disengage the service car from the other’s embrace.

Robert Christie, motor mechanic, of Shannon, submitted the estimates of his repairs to plaintiff’s car. but ii was not even now in the condition it was before the accident. Counsel for defendant company put forward the plea of contributory negligence and called Roy Hosking. th* driver of the service car'. Witness deposed that he thought he could clear the bridge before the other man, but on realising that that was impossible as he reached the approach, he turned his car as far to the left as was possible. Witness stopped about 18 inches from the decking of tht bridge. He swore plaintiff’s car drove into his and pulled the steering wheel out of his hands. Spencer couid have avoided the accident if he had stopped, and could have passed had he gone slowly.* In Constable Blaikie’s presence, plaintiff had said he had the

right of way. Witness’ timetable was a four hours’ run from Wellington to Palmerston North. He judged he was nearer the bridge than- the other man when he caught- sight of him on the ■ other side. He swore he applied his brakes and had already stopped when plaintiff, began to cross the bridge from the other side. Witness had been 18 days on his job when the accident occurred, but he had had a fair experience as a driver and had never been in an accident before. Constable Blaikie, of Shannon, who was at once brought to the. scene, where, in reply to a question by Hosking. plaintiff said he had no intention of stopping. Defendant’s driver pointed out the position of his wheels and asked him to take notice where the car had skidded on the application of the brakes, but witness could diseerr no such skid-marks. Had the Service car stopped three or four feet further back, Spencer would h,ave been able to squeeze through. Under cross-examination, witness said there was only IS inches between the service car and the bank. David Pringle, employed the defendant company as a motor mechanic, deposed that his estimate of necessary repairs to plaintiff’s car was £25, or according to the specifications submitted by plaintiff, about £4O. Wit ness described the damage to the ser vice car, which he judged'at £25. The car was in dock for a week. The Magistrate said the whole question was one of fact, and he would look into it, and reserved his decision.