Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1898-01-13
RAMS HORN HANDLES
Test of the New Police Regulations
Governing Bicycles.
Mr.. FRED ". MOORE THE DEFENDANT
The Witnesses All Disapprove of
the Ordinance.
THE HEARING ADJOURNED

large number of bicycle riders uare q,
the Police Court today to hear the case Of
M r-eu, W. Moore, an employe of the
hchpse Bicycle Company, who was ar
rested Saturday last on the charge Of I'D
ing & bicyle which not made to complv
| with the police regulations
TIE facts as admitted at the partial hoar-
| ing Monday by the counsel for Mr. Mora
We're that January S, ISIS. the defendant
was riding bicycle on one of the streets
Oh the city of Washington: that the lower
| era OF inc handle bars of the bicycle was
Oh d plane lower than four inches nelov
'iie 'op OF the saddle at its center: that the
iidef was ir all other respects complyine
with the police regulations.
before the Introduction of any testimony
MI. ID. G. Mackall. counsel for Mr.. Moore.
asked the court to rule, las a matter OF
law. That section 30 of the Police Regllls
tlons, at least that portion thereof on which
the prosecution in this case is based is nm
constitutional and void" Judge Scott over
ruled the motion, and counsel noted an ex-
ception. "a
Mr. Mackall then requested the rourt 70
rule as matter of law that the Commits
sicners OF the District of Columbia have no
power to enact any such regulation an an.
and even If they have such power, that
that portion of said regulation for Tho 81
legged violation of which the defendant is
prosecuted Is unusual. unreasonable unjust
and oppressive. and deprives the defendant
| OF the use and enjoyment Of his private
property.
Judge Scott refused this request also. and
counsel again noted an exception
Counsel then requested tine court IN ruIe
as matter of law. that even il said section
be valid. usual and reasonable the de-
PENDANT. under the evidence introduced by
g nnf
thereof
The last request of Mr. Mackal was like
wise refused by the court and counsel
again noted an exception.
Defendant the First Witness.
Mr.. Moore, the defendant was then call
ed to the stand. and in reply to questions
from Mr.. Mackall Mr.. Moore stated that
he is ar expert rider on bicycle; has been
| riding bicycles for ten years
Mr.. Pugh objected TO the statement OF
Mr.. Moore that he is expert. This was,
he said. matter to he settled by the court.
He maintained that any man might say he
was an expert rider. when as a matter OF
fact, he might not know anything about a
bicycle.
A colloquy. lasting some minutes follow
| ed between Mr.. Aackall and Mr.. Pueh. at
the conclusion of which Mr.. Moore was
permitted TO resume his direct testimony
ne Claimed mat with pair of rams horn
handles he could ride much more easily
through a crowd and could see farther
ahead than with handle bars made so as
to comply with the regulation on the SUBJ
Ject recently promulgated by the District
Commissioners. Mr.. Moore said that at
present his bicycle. owing to the regula-
ton. was useless. and would continue to
be unless he got a new pair of handle bars.
The Wheel I'm Court.
At the request of Judge Scott Mr. Moore
brought his wheel into court and demons
strated 20 the court how, in Mr. Moore's
judgment, it was safer to ride a drop bar
bicycle than one of an upright character,
Mr.. Moore gave as his opinion that two.
| thirds of the best riders in the District use
the drop bar, which had been in use for
some seven or eight years, and had found
| that they gave entire satisfaction 1t was
also, he said, much easier to climb hills
With drop bar wheel than with the other
On cross-examination Mr.. Moore said
that bicycle riders do not object to the usa
Of lamps or bells. and he did not think
that there were any riders who would pre-.
FER TO have wheels without handle bars.
Mr.. +. j. Marble, the next witness gave
testimony corroborating that of Mr.. Moore
in reference to the safety both TO public
and riders of wheels having drop handle
bars. He also stated that in his opinion
| the height Of the handle bars had no effect
on the distance which a rider could see
ahead of him.
Mr.. Marble was croSs-examincd by Mr.
Pugh, but his testimony was unchanged
Mr. John NJ. Manning said he had been a
hlcycle rider for twelve years and pre-
ferred rams horn handle bars to any other
kind.
MIR. P,Igh asked the witness if he die not
think that bicyclers were able to regulate
themselves; that they did not need any
regulations made by the Commissioners
The witness responded that he thought
there could be nothing better for the riders
themselves than wise regulations made by
the Commissioners.
Mr.. W. j. Prince, who said he was a
clerk, corroborated what the preceding wit
nesses had said on the subject of the safes
ty of rams norm bars.
Rams Horn the Best.
M. Z. 4. Ernst went on the stand AMI
said he considered himself an expert rider
and felt sure that a wheel was more easily
controlled by the use of rams horn bars
than by any other sort. He did not see any
necessity for the new regulation.
Mr.. Frank c. Potts said he had been a
bicycle rider for fourteen years, and re-
garded the rams horn bar as absolutely
safe.
Mr.. Pugh asked Mr.. Potts If he could not
regulate his wheel without handle as
well with one.
To this Mr.. Potts answered: NO 7
don't think / could: 1 do not think | would
Ike to ride wheel without a handle bar
but l would have my handle bars shorter
than they now are
At this point the further hearing OF the