Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

3 articles on this Page

Advertising

Notes and Comments.

News
Cite
Share

Notes and Comments. DANGERS OF THE LEVEL CROSSING. WE have on several occasions called attention to the dangers of the crossing over the railway line from Windsor-road to the West Cottages district, and dating the past week incidents have arisen which, if they do not arouse to action the parties who are re- sponsible, will almost compel us to say they are alto- gether devoid of human feeling, and more, that if they are not courting some terrible disaster, they are not sufficiently eager to prevant it. Originally, two men were kept by the railway authorities to guard this crossing, but some time ago a "aviug policy was adopted; a bridge was erected, the gates were fastened, and the men were removed. The ratepayers were indignant at this proceeding, principally because the bridge was of such a character as to become a nuisance, and it was also not safe for children, two or three accidents of a minor character occurring. Later, at the request of the Railway Company, and in consequence of the action of the Local Board, a Commissioner visited Penarth, and evidence was placed before him with the result that he declared the bridge was not a sufficient substitute for the crossing. Since that inquiry the gates have been thrown open as hefore, bat no one has been placed in charge, and there have been several very narrow escapes of life being saclificed in consequence. Wel noted one instance in our last issue, and at the Dis- trict Council meeting on Monday night Mr VV. L. Morris called the attention of the Council to an in- cident which took place last Friday. It appears that on that day the 9 a m. train was coming up the hill to Penarth, when the driver, seeing a child on the line, stopped the train and got down from the engine and cariied it away, Had it happened that the driver had not for the moment been on the look-out, that his attention bad been attracted by some other object, or had the train been going down the incline from Penarth, nothing could have saved the child, and its life would have been lost because of the neglect to have the crossing properly protected. We know not, as we said last week, where lies the blame, or who is responsible, but blame there is somewhere, for surely there is a law which can compel the proper protection of all crossings similar to the one in question. Mr Beasley's attention is to be called to the incident above referred to, and he is to be asked to place a man there once more but the matter must not rest. here. The question is—-Who is responsible? If the T.V.R. Company, then why play with the question in such a iranner ? Why not lesort at ouce to extreme measures to compel the Company to provide the protection, and if they re- fuse, tiien let the Railway Commissioners be appealed to. It is all very well for Air Thomas, who is a servant of the T.V.R. Company, to suggest at the Council meeting that a simple way to get over the 0 z ■■ difhculty would be to get an order to close the crossing but if the Company are anxious to pursue a coarse of this kind, why do they not consent to pay a share of the cost of another bridge, which could also be used for vehicular traffic, from Hickman-road across the line ? Were this done, the closing of the crossing would not be a hardship, but without it the closing is out of the question, as on the other side a number of new roads have been made, and this is the only means by which they can be reached by vehicles of any sort without going nearly a mile out of the way. Now that Mr Morris has again taken up the question, we hope he will not let it rest until the evil has been redressed, and that the Council will not leave a stone unturned or let any opportunity pass which might be used to insure the safety of those (children especially) who have to use the crossing.

Penarth District Goiliicil.