EXCESSIVE SPEEDS

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 926, 20 March 1930, Page 13

EXCESSIVE SPEEDS

IS OWNER AS WELL AS DRIVER INVOLVED? CASE AT PAPAKURA From Our Own Correspondent PAPAKURA, Wednesday. “This man, who was previously a proprietor of several service cars plying between Auckland and Hamilton, was very dilatory in answering notices requesting the names of the drivers of his c?.rs when they were required in regard to excessive speeds,” said the Highways traffic inspector, Mr. Barrett. at the Papakura Court today, before Mr. F. H. Levin. S.M., in proceeding against William Nicholson, of Hamilton. The charges were of operating two motor vehicles between Manurewa and Drury on January 3 at speeds greater than were permitted under the regulations. The inspector explained that as a result, Nicholson was charged himself, under the regulation which defined the word “operate” to mean “use or drive any motor vehicle on any street or road.” The inspector’s evidence was that he followed two of defendant’s cars from Manurewa to Drury and the speed was never below 38 miles an hour, whereas the heavier one was not permitted under the regulations to exceed 24 miles an hour, and tlio lighter one 30 miles an hour.

Defendant said that he instructed his drivers not to exceed 35 miles an hour, which the inspector agreed was all right provided there were no other circumstances to make such a speed dangerous. He claimed that he did not operate the vehicle within the meaning of the regulation and he said he saw the inspector personally about inquiries as to the names of drivers. The Inspector: Y'es, but only at the last minute. Also, since I said 35 miles an hour would be all right provided you have been notified in writing concerning the maximum speeds your vehicles, under regulations, were permitted to travel at, so you were aware that 3.5 miles an hour did not stand.

The magistrate said he would take time to consider whether the word “operate” could involve the owner as well as the driver.