MOTOR COLLISION.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXV, Issue 73, 27 March 1915, Page 7

MOTOR COLLISION.

CAR v. CYCLE. At tho Magistrate's Court, Stratford, yesterday, beforo Mr W. G. Kenrick, S.M., evidence was heard ui the case Walter Otto Bredow v. Agnew McCluggage, a claim for £3l 12s, for account of damage alleged to have been sustained in a collision be'tween defendant's motor car and a motor cycle driven by plaintiff. Doli'endant filed a counter claim for £3O lis 9d; Mr R. Spence appeared for the plaintiff, ami Mr A. H. Johnstone ■ New Plymouth) acting uuder instructions from Mr W. G Malone, for the defendant. I Walter Otto Bredow, plaintiff, said ■'he was an auctioneer's assistant, living in Stn;tford,'but generally spending the week-ends at Douglas. He was using a motor bike the property 'of the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Co.. on September 30, his brother riding on the carrier at the back of the bicycle. They were proceeding to Strathmore, and the defendant was going in the opposite direction. Witness had just got off the flat and was beginning a little rise past the Strathmore saddle, going at a very moderate pace, and keeping to his left-hand side of the road, when he saw defendant at a distance of about four chains. Witness was just making a bend and defendant could see him. Defendant's car was on the motal road slightly to the right-hand side, the right wheel being slightly off the metal. Defendant had come round a slight bend. Witness continued along on his left.hand side, and defendant got right over to his right-hand side. They both continued in this manner in full view of one another for four chains. When about twelve yards from the ! car, witness called out to the defendant to look out. Defendant did not move in any way, so plaintiff put on his brakes. Plaintiff was running right off tho road in the sand. Tho bicycle had practically stopped when the collision took place. Witness could not say what the speed of the car was, but the cyclo and himself .were pushed back badly. The motor 1 cycle was a 3} horse power one. When trie impact took place he was stunned, but not. rendered unconscious. Witness was taken home in the car. Wit- ' /less heard his brother say to defendant "i'ou re oil the wrong side of the road." Shortly after; the accident, Messrs Speck and Calvert came on the scene, and these two with plaintiff's brother and Mi; McCluggage, inspected 'the wheel marks. When defendant 1 returned, witness asked his about 'the cycle, as it was badly smashed. 'Defendant replied that they could I easily buy a new bike, but not a new Iman. After sighting defendant, witness travelled a chain and 16ft., while I defendant travelled 2 chains 16ft.' .Witness had measured the distances with a tiape a week ago. He was actually three feet off the bank when the collision occurred, the car was right against the bank on the righthand side of the defendant. Witness jsaid he was laid up for two weeks, being unable to walk.

j By Mr Johnstone: He did not know tlio width of the metal. There a\ as no horn on the motor cycle. Ho had had two accidents with the motor [cycle, which was the property of the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile 'Agency. Witness had a good deal of i experience with motor cycles. The machine would go up the hill at about ten miles, and it was not a fact htat it would have to go at a greater rate to go up the hill at all. There was plenty of room to pass had he (witness) taken the wrong side after he got round the bend. Witness made an [effort to get out of the way of defendant before getting within twelve yards r.of him. He told defendant that the car was on the wrong side. Witness and his father bad spoken to defendant about a month ago. and defendant seemed quite willing to pay for the damage, admiitting that he was on the wrong side of the road. Re-examined ■': Defendant's righthand front wheel was right up to the bank on his right-band side, the distance between the left-hand wheel and the left-hand bank being fourteen feet. i

i Curte Albert Bredow, farmor, of Douglas, said he was riding on the carrier behind his brother,' the plaintiff. At the time of the accident, the motor-cycle was going at a rate of about ten miles an hour. The cycle was on the left-hand side. When plaintiff saw the car he pulled off the metal to his left-hand side, while defendant came still further on to his right-hand side. Plaintiff sang out, and a few moments afterwards the accident occurred. Witness dragged the motor cycle from under the car, and also his brother, Speck appearing at that time. Witness told defendant that the car was on the wrong side of the road. Defendant said he knew that, but had steered it so to avoid an accident. When the tracks of the car and cycle were examined, it was found that the evelo had been

trarelli}l£,oO the left-hand wheel-mark on the road lor uoout a eliarn, and about the same distance on the sand. Witness had taken measurements since the date of tlie accident.

liy Mr Johnstone: He could see over plaintiff's shoulder. He made the measurements await a iveeii ago. The veu.eles did not striKu iviUi great

force. He went to ~eo Mr Calvert aooul signing a statement, and lie did

not need niucit persuau.ng

Re-examined: Ho did not hear the motor horu being sounded by deiend-

Harold Speck, an employee of the Electric Supply Co., said that on the 30th September he was riding a push bicycle, coming from Strathmore. About a quarter of a mile before reaching the scene of the accident, defendant passed him, driving a motor car. Witness did not see the actual collision, but on reaching the scene of the accident, he saw the cycle and plaintiff being pulled from under the car. The mot ir car was on the right-hand side of the road, that is, the wrong side, on the sandy part of the road, about a foot or more from the bank. 'There was plenty of room between the left-hand wheel and the left bank for a vehicle to pass. Witness also gave corroborative evidence as to the motor cycle tracks. By Mr Johnstone: He did not see anv other cycle tracks.

Alfred Rcspinger, sheep-farmer of Douglas, said that plaintiff's brother asked him to look at the scene of the accident. The marks of the cycle and .mi- were still there, being .plainly jean. He went back about two chains •uid traced the cycle tracks 'which rt-ere on the left-hand side. Witness ilso examined the car tracks for about the same distance. These were in the middle of the road, and going rradually on to the defendant's righthand side.

By Mr Johnstone: He was mustering sheep in an adjoining paddock on the day of the accident. Curte Bredow pointed out the tracks to witness. The motor car's two wheels were in the smd for five or six yards only. By Mr Spence: There were no other tracks intd-rfering with the motor car tracks.

The further hearing of the case was adjourned till April 16th.