Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

8 articles on this Page






SEQUEL TO MOTOR COLLISION. CONFLICTING EVIDENCE AT CONWAY COUNTY COURT. A motor car collision which occurred arli Sarn Mynach, occupiad the attention of his Honour Judge Moss at Conway County Coutrt on Monday. On June 18th a small motor-car maintained by Messrs Underwood and Brother, con- tractors, for the use of their engineering staff, was proceeding from Rhos, Colwyn Bay, to- wards Glanconwy, when, at Sarn Mynach, whete, the main road joins with that from Con- way and Llandudno, it collidted with a motor charabanc belonging to the Llandudno Motor and Garage Company, Limited. Messrs Under- wod and Brother claimed from the Motox and Garage Company P,23 18s. damages which re- sulted from the accident, and the Company c-ounterclaamed for R,9 8s. from the owners of the car. Dr. Atkinson, instructed by Messrs B-oote and Edgar, of Manchester, appeared fosr Messrs Underwood, and Mr Gordon Hewart, instructed by Messrs Bone and Lucas, of Col- wyn Bay and Llandudno, for the Motor Com- pany. Atkinson said that the parties had agreed as to the amount df the damages claim- ed by either side, and his Honour had only to decide the question of responsibility. The plaintiffs, at the time, were doing certain drainage works near Rhos, and were also lay- ing a water main in the Vale of Conway. The motor used by their engineers was an eight- horse power two-seater, and had a single ,cylinder. The engineers were going from Rhos to Talycafn, and at this dangerous corner the engine was cut off and the sharp curve was ap- proached at four or five miles an hour, and the motor kept very close- to the high wall on the left. Suddenly the charabanc appeared bearing down upon the small motor, and the collision occurred. One of the engineers took careful measurements, and a plhotographer was sent for from Conway to take photographs showing the position of the car before it was moved. This evidence showed that the can- was but a foot from the wall, and that the. rear wheel of the -charabanc was at the point of the .collision 5ft. from the wall. The case-, in fact, turned1 upon who was on the wrong or the right side of the road. The natural tendency of the small oar would be to keep to the left as the curve in the road was to the left, whilst he was afraid it was a natural thing for a driver approaching the curve from the ,other direction to try to cut the corner. On the motor charabanc were 17 persons, the Mayor and Corporation of Morley. On the small car were two engineers and the driver, and some measuring instruments. The witnesses for the plaintiffs were Mr J. R. Crisp and Mr Samuel Heap, the engineer and his assistant. Evidence was given by F. W. Smith, the driver. Mr Hewart then called evidence for the de- fence. Arthur Henry Fry, driver and mechanic, who said he was deriving the charabanc, was first called. He said that he had ten years' experience of driving and had never been summoned for any offenc.e.. On the day in question he was driving the Mayor and Cor- poration of Morley from Barmouth to Chester. He came round the curve- in the centre of the road, very slowly, and the ismall car approach- ed at about 14 miles an hour, too fast to negotiate the turn properly. It ran into the charabanc, collided with his front wheel re- bounded, and plunged forward towards the wall, where it (Stopped. As soon as he saw it he saw he could not altogether pull up, so he turned towards the road to Llandudno, and left plenty -of room for a careful driver to pass between him and the wall. In approaching the curve he kept to the middle of the road because, the vehicle being so heavy, the wheels would have sunk into the trench which had recently been made along the side of the road. The collision bent the spindle of the section of his steering column, which had to. be put right before he could go on. Evidence was given in support of Fry's statement by a member of the Morley Corpora- tion, who took independent measurements. His Honour commented upon the dangerous character of the corner, and in view of the conflicting evidence given by witnesses on both sides entitled toi credence he nonsuited the plaintiffs on the claim and the defendants on the counter-claim, each party to pay their own costs.