Asked why he considered himself entitled to pass the motor cycle, defendant referred to paragraph 44 of the traffic regulations, and said his interpretation was that a motor cycle without a side-car did not come within the category of a passenger motor vehicle. Mr. Corke did not carry passenger.
His Worship—Do you suggest that you could pass a motor car-with nobody in it?
Defendant—I admit a motor cycle may be a "passenger vehicle," if it has a side-car.
Inspector Lynch—The police do not admit that. If a motor cycle with only its driver is not a passenger motor vehicle, the same argument might apply to motor car with only the delver in_it.
His Worship—Your own definition of a passenger is "any occupant of 'a vehicle other than the driver."
Defendant—I say that, to be a "passenger vehicle," a motor cycle must have a place for a passenger.
His Worship said the test would be whether the motor cycle could carry a passenger.
Defendant—I am prepared to swear if could not have done so as it was when I passed it.
The case was adjourned until Monday for the police to obtain evidence on this point.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.