It was determined by the Queen's Bench Division of the
High Court of Justice, on Tuesday, in an appeal against a con- viction by the magistrates at Highgate, that the Act punishing furious driving is as applicable to the driving of bicycles as to that of vehicles drawn by horses. Mr. Justice Mellor and Mr. Justice Lush agreed that though the bicycle was not invented at the time the Act was passed, the Legislature meant to use words large enough to embrace any kind of vehicle capable of doing the mischief contemplated in the Act which it was in the power of a prudent driver to avoid. This decision is fortunate, as it would certainly have been otherwise necessary to pass an Act extending the Furious Driving Act to bicycles, tricycles, and the rest. No kind of vehicle is so noiseless, and no kind is swifter or more dangerous. In going down-hill, too,—as the bicycle-rider convicted at Highgate was at the time of the acci- dent,—it may be almost impossible to control the career of the vehicle, which is another way of saying that in a busy thorough- fare no bicyle-rider should ride down-hill at all. And as, moreover, riding down-hill is one of the great attractions of bicycle-riding, from this he can only be restrained by the strict enforcement of legal penalties.
Previous page
