The Obserber.

Observer, Volume 7, Issue 226, 10 January 1885, Page 2

The Obserber.

Satubday, Janttaey 10, 1885,

OBSTRUCTIONS ON THE FOOTPATHS. The rapid growth of population in the cityand suburbs affords gratifying- evidence of the stability of Auckland's resources. Depression in the South and elsewhere has diverted the stream northwards ; but Auckland has shewn its ability to absorb the surplus population of other cities without any serious strain on its avenues of em^ ployment. To those who remember what Auckland was twenty years ago, the throngand bustle of the main street must be a matter not only of present gratification, but of promise for the future. But blessings are not always unalloyed. There is one source of discomfort and inconvenience in a thronged thoroughfare, especially where the growth of the population, as in manycolonial cities, increases faster than those methods of regulating the traffic which, from long usage and custom, have become habitual in the larger cities of Europe. On a busy^day in Queen-street, you may see groups of people obstructing the footpaths, pedestrians hurrying along, regardless of their proper side, elbowing women and cripples into the gutter, or against the walls : % sometimes four, or more, men walking abreast, and clearing- everything before them; larrikins dodging in and out, jostling all and sundry, and general pushing-, squeezing, and colliding, which are rather rough on peaceable pc destrians.

—o- _ I witnessed a scene in Queen-street tHe other day, near Vulcan Lano, of a type that" is becoming rather too common, and is not at all creditable. A young- lady was crossingnear Williamson's tobacconist" sli op when a '*" rough, bushnum, walking leasiueiy from the opposite direction, knocked rudely against

her, aud smashed the parasol. The lady was coming up the street, and was on the right side, the fellow, who was passing- down, took the left, though there was plenty of room, on the right. I may add that he appeared to be perfectly sober.

In London, and other large cities, these annoyances are avoided by a simple expedient. There is ample space on ordinary footpaths to carry all the traffic without inconvenience if people will only adopt the rule of keeping on the right side, whether going- up or down the street, and on whatever side of it, and if they, will abstain from, standing- in groups to gossip. In London and other large cities the stem "move on!" of the policeman regulates the traffic and removes impediments, while the " Keep to the light side !" conspicuously placarded at frequent intervals serves to remind the wayfarer of Ms duty.

I venture to suggest to our City Fathers that the time has come to pass a municipal bye-law on the subject. Ido not profess to be a lawyer, but taking a layman's commonsense View of the Municipal Corporations Act, I think the City Council is fully empowered to make a bye-law dealing with the matter. Part XII. of the Act empowers the Couucil to make bye-laws in respect to various matters ; and clause 4, sec. S, authorises it " Generally to prevent all nuisances, obstruction, or damage in public or private streets and in public places in the Borough, and all practices calculated to endanger the lives or to frighten or annoy the public, and to make any &uch provisions as in the opinion of the Council are needful to preserve public order, decency, health, comfort and convenience in relation to all such streets and places in the Borough." The italics are my own. In the interpretation clauses, "Footway means so much of any street laid out or constructed by the authority of the Council for foot passengers only, and includes the edge or kerb." Were the Council to pass such a bye-law, I am sure Mr Superintendent Thomson would be willing to lend the assistance of the police to enforce it.