MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, 18 January 1918, Page 6

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

YESTERDAY'S SITTING. (Before Mr. A. C'rookc, g.M.). ] BREACHES OF BY-LAWfe. i Edward Cooks, of Leach street, New ' Plymouth, was charged on the informa- : tiou of the police with, on the 4th of 1 Decembei, discharging a pea-rifle within the Borough of New Plymouth without obtaining the consent of the Council. I Accused pleaded guilty and was fined lCs, 1 costs 7 s. j Henry Andrew :llr<tker, Cfcnlrtenay 1 street, bricklayer, was charged with rid- 1 ing a motor cycle in Devon street on the 1 ">th November, lf>l7, at a speed greater miles per hour. Accused pleaded guilty. Sub-Inspector ITutton said it was a ' cafe in which defendant, had ridden furi- 1 ously along Devon street at a speed ad- 1 mitted to be about 1C miles per hour. He had collided with Mr. Ilerrick, who 1 liail sustained a broken leg, and was still an inmate of the hospital. 1 Mr. A. H. Johnstone, who appeared for ! defendant, said the offence was admitted. It took place in the early morning v.hen there was very little traffic in the street. Defendant collided with Mr.'Herrick, who was crossing Devon street at the ' Cmrio street, intersection Roth parties had attempted to avoid a collision but (he accident had unfortunately happened, Accused was fined £l, costs 9s, and cab hire 3s. ' • John Hart, of Devon strict. New Plymouth, fancy goods dealer. wHs charged with exposing on the 24th December, certain articles for snip in such a manner as to encroach on the footpath of T)evort street. Accused admitted the offence and was fined 10s, costs 7s. APPLICATION FOP MAINTENANCE. Ar application for maintenance for a child, of which he was adjudged the father. was made against Wm. Joseph Gilmer, formerly of Oaonui, but now of the New Zealand Expeditionary Forces. Mr. F. E. Wilson appeared for the applicant Ah order was made that accused enter into Id per week, back maintenance from Sep[ember 2<t. 1917, nnd'cxpenses incidental to the nirth of the child. . OH,SCENT LANGUAGE. A returned soldier, a first offender, who was charged with using obscene language, pleaded net guilty, and was unrepresented. .lames L. Baily, a railway shunter, «nid he was on duty at the New Plymouth station on Wednesday evening. Accused was there under the influence nf liquor nil made use of the latljL'uage complained of. Tlis behaviour ih'company another soldier. >.uiscd a crowd to gather about them. They left. I'ic station and went out on ti. the street. CorroboratiVc evidence was also given in- the arreting cpr,statin. I The Magistrate said he would take into account the fact that accused had only recently returned fron\ aieti v e «cr:ice and he would be convicted and ordered to come up for sentence ;f called I #l>on within six months. fir. EACH OF TIJF. PEACE. TTenry Crann, laborer, of New. Plyj mouth, was cahrged on the information r.f Mary Crann. with creatiicr a btfcach of the peace nu Januarv " in Devon street, Xew Plymouth, and applic'ntWi wns made j that accused enter into,recognisances to keep the peace. Mr. A. A. Bennett appeared for complainant, and Mr. .A. 11. Johnstone for defendant. P>v consent an order was made tlyit accused enter into his owt. recognisance of £'2o to. keep the peace for 12 months, apd he wa« ordered to pay civ-ts nmour.ting to £1 18.=. NEGLIGENT DRIVING. Oil the information of Inspector Day, Albert F. Magon was ehaigeu with driving a motor lfcry on Deeeinber 12, 1317, in .<t. Aubya street, £ew Plymouth, ill a negligent manner so a» to ijiijiede' other traffic. Inspector Day sud the ease was the first under the amended by-law which was framed with the idea of preventing poi sons driving vehicles in such a manner n, to impede the course of vehicle?. The facts of the case were that on the day stated defendant was driving. Jus lorry along St. Aubvli street in the direction of the breakwater A " tram car was standing on the loop at the Terminus Hotel, 'vaiting to cross a car coining from the Breakwater Defendant- passed the standing car on the right-hand side ana then passed the ine&mii# «*f. When the car going to the breakwater proceeded on its way Magon was driving along on the tram line. Although the gong was sounded, he made, no attempt to give way, and the conductor of the car had to run on ahead and tell Magon he was blocking the way. He. then pulled off to the right-hand side of the road, which was his Trong side. " M&gou ;aic; he did not deny blocking tht car, but said he moved off the track as soon »-s he knew the car was there. P J? Tozer rnotorman, driver of a car io it.(- breakwater at 1.10 p.m. on the date ji, ijuestion, said his car was waiting o,i, the loop at the Terminus Hotel to a car coming in from t!>r breakwater. Defendant's iorry passed hi-, .fef ar.d also the one coming from the breakwater. Defendant was driving aloii!; or; i'.ie tram track, and made no attempt uO move, although the gong was sounder!, i'ntil the conductor went forward vtni rarned him. There was plehtv of room on the left side of the load for the car to pass the lorry. -. At this stage Inspector Day said hj« had understood defendant intend6d to plead amity, and h* had not all his tvitnesse-4 present, and he askedj for an adjournment until '2.30 p.m., which was granted. When the ease was resumed defendant was represented by Mr. A. A. Bennett. Constable Blaikey said on the day in ntiestion he was on the car going in the direction of the breakwater. He was standing on the back of the car. fie saw another car coming from the breakwater. On the other tram car passing, the car witness was on proceeded- and overtook Magon's lorry near Dawson street. Magon was driving on the tram track and took no notice of the warning gong which was sounded. Finally the conductor of the car ran forward and warned Magon of the-car's coming. Magon then turned off to the right-hand side instead of the left. There was no traffic to prevent Magon keeping to his proper side until he reached the store at the corner of Weymouth street. Magon passed the car coming from the breakwater. and the car on which witness was !ravelling at almost the same spot. The one car was stationary at the loop, and flic other was just about to enter the loop. ITe was at the hack of the ear and Ma'.'Oii wa? travelling on ahead. He could not see Magon's actions all the time. He was i» tin cab of his motor. There was plenty of room between car and the kerbin? foi the oar to pas*" the lorrv. He could not swear there was J room at the loop for a vehicle to pass a t standing ear on the left eide. He :&oupfet Jhwa wm. '

i Reginald 'Day, borough inspector, said be had measured the road at tlia joint Where the car passed Magon's lorry, l'he width of a motoi lorry like Magon's was 7ft Gin, and the width of the ' road between the edge of the kerb and the step of a standing ear- ivfls I'ift. The rule of the road w-is that Magon should have kept to the left, and if he had done so there would have been ample | room lor the car to pass liini. He had , no need to be on the tram line at all. . To Mr. Bennett: The measurements ( were taken at the point where the ear . passed Magon's lorry. He- could not ] swear that there was room between the j edge oi the kerb and the line at the , loop for a motor lorrv to pass a standing . eai In reply to Mr. Bennett,, the wit- ' ness quoted the by-law, which stated , that no motor lorrv should bo driven on , the tram track, except when crossing at , right angles to the lines or under such ( circumstances as made it impossible to , avoid driving on the lines. Accused had . not been charged under that by-law but , with the more serious offence of negli- ■ gent driving. Norman F Clark, conductor of the , car in the case, whose evidence corroborated that, of the driver, said also he had had trouble with Magon blocking a car on the line on the same road , on a previous occasion. He could hear the gong being sound- , ®d. He would hear it. better than anyone driving a motor in front of the car. He could not see Magon because he was in the cab of his motor. He thought the gong should be heard by anyone driving in front of it at any rate 50 yards away The defendant, in evidence, said on the day in question lie passed the car standing at the loop at the Terminus Hotel on the right-hand side. Ther" was not room to pass on the left side He passed t'e ear coming from the breakwater on the left side. At Hill's store he saw two men loading a cart, and they Were looking evidently at something coming behind witness. On looking back witness, saw a car coming. Just, as he turoen his head hack the conductor of the car stepped on to the left side of his lorry and warned him the car was eoming Tie had not heard the gona. He turned on to the rifflvt side to avoid the cart standing at Hilf's store. His invariable nraetioo was to travel on the centre nf the rqad as the lorry was easier to sto?r than when on the slope of the rnnd. He nearly always met other lorriee travelling on the centre of the 1 road. To Mr. Dar: Did not fcnow which way the car standing at the loon at the Ter--1 minus was travelling Witness had no knowledge of having blocked traffic on • anv other occasion ■ His Worship convicted defendant of ' negligent driving and fined bim £l. and ' costs 15s. The Magistrate said defe.nd- • ant should have known when he parsed ■ the car at the loop that that car would • soon overtake him and he should have 1 taken reasonable precautions against obstructing 't.