The daily morning journal and courier., 1898-06-01
BICYCLE GOSSIP.

Cycle Path Between New Britain and
 Hartford-Wheelmen in the Way of
 Horsemen at Charter Oak Park-Ju-
 dicial Decision on Low Handlebars-
 Intercollegiate Championship-Wa-
 terbury's Diamond Tournament.
 The building of cycle paths in Con- necticut is not progressing so fast as in some other states, but some new paths are built each year. More has been done in this line in the eastern section and alc lg the Sound than anywhere else. In the central part of the state comparatively little has been done. Between New Britain and Hartford the roadway is pretty good most of the way, and this route has been used for road races. There is one bad stretch of road, however, of about three-quarters of a mile in length, which lies in the towns of New Britain and Pennington, and not kept in repair. New Britain wheelmen have started the project to build a cycle path upon this bad stretch of road, which makes wheeling un- pleasant and even dangerous. They have obtained an estimate of the cost of construction, which is three hundred
 
 feet wide. The New Britain Gentle mems Driving club is soliciting contri- buttons. It is expected that Hartford cyclists will assist in raising the money, and it is hoped the path may be built early this season.
 A Judge on Handlebars.
 Wheelmen all over the country are discussing the decision handed down by Judge Ave in Washington, D. C., which makes it unlawful for bicycle rider to ride wheel with the lower end of the handlebars more than four inches below the center of the saddle. The case was that of Frederick w. Moore, appellee, against the District of Columbia. The appeal was brought to the appellate court on writ of error from the police court, and presented the question as to the right to ride cicycles of certain construction in violation of police laws. MT. Justice Alvey's decision reverses that of the police court, and orders that new trial be held.
 Justice Alvey states that the com missioners of the District have the right to make and to enforce just and reasonable regulations for the District, and that they may regulate the move ments of vehicles, among other things, and the justice holds that there is no ground for objection in constitutionali- ty, but that the question whether this ''handlebar regulation is unreasonable and oppressive to the citizens, is one of fact, more or less. The bicycle is held to be vehicle of comparatively recent 1p Its safe use may depend greatly upon the expertness of the rider, as we'll as upon the construction of the vehicle. If vehicle, such as that of which the de- fendant is accused of riding, is ordina- rily safe to persons travelling when used by persons of ordinary care and skill in riding, then there would seem to be no necessity for excluding the use of such vehicle, and the regulation by which they are excluded may be said t be unreasonable, and to operate to de- prive the defendant of the lawful use of his propedty.'
 The court holds that it was "compe- tent for the defendant to show that, as applied to his vehicle" the regulation was unusual and unreasonable, and consequently unnecessary. The police court did not consider evidence for this purpose, presented by the defendant, and this was an error on the part of the lower court. The justice concludes his decision: ''In this case the court er- roneously rules upon the construction and application of the regulation in question, and without regard to the facts shown in proof, there is such er- TOT in law as requires this court to re- verse the judgment and remand the cause that a new trial be had.''