Norwich bulletin., 1917-06-02
AUTO DRIVERS IN WESTERLY COURT
Loren c. Waite Defends Himself Against Charge of operat ing Car With Tail Lamp Dark-Case Continued Charles Ferraro Rebuked- ungFoster Wedding Board of Trade Votes to Omit Annual Banquet

Loren G. Waite. a gardener of Brad ford is highly educated. and before he became a farmer was interested in the study and practice of electrical work and general mechanics Of his thorough knowledge of electrical there IS no doubt. for he fully explained the mechanical construction and connec- tions of the automobile electric tail light before Judge Oliver H. Williams. in the Third District court Friday Mr.
 Waite was in court a week ago charg- ed with operating an automobile in vii olation of the law. in not having the tail lamp lighted as required by law. His request for continuance for one week was granted. and when his case was called on Friday he was fully prinled for action. He served as his privileges by the court, and at one stage of the proceedings, :n response to an interpretation and dispensing of the law, Judge Williams was evidently compelled to remind Mir Waite that he ought not to consider himself the court counsel and jury in his own case. and attempt to interpret the law so as to exempt his case from a violation of the law.
 MT Waite said he was in sympathy with this law, and he believed it to be a good one. and that f7e did not want to operate an autom cbiIe at night with out lighted tail light, as he con- si6ered it a matter of protection against collision and consequent dang CT. After Officer Chase and. George Champlin had testified that MT. Waite was operating his automobile in Rail- road avenue and not displaying a light ed tail lamp MT. Waite said that when first ha1ed into court. and without hear ing testimony he could not plead gull ty as he did not know whether the tail lamp was lighted. Mir Waite said out and he, believed their story He related that there was no ir/ent to vii plate law. that had he had made fre- quent inspections of his automobile and saw that the tail light connections had been disarranged caused by travel over rough roads and had made re- pairs four times. He said the tail light was faulty and that the law shCsld reach. cFt to the manufacturers of automobiles and not the operators as the fault is not with the latter. MT. Waite made long argument in his own behalf and submitted that the case be dismissed without cost to the defend ent, himself, as there was no intent 10 violate the law.
 JuGCG Williams expressed the belief that the case was continued from last week, because the defendant Warited to appear as counsel for himself and wanted time for preparation, to fix his own responsibility and he thereby brought additional expense upon him self. MT. Waite. however, had authori- ty to stand for his rights The judge the case upon payments of costs.
 Mir. Waite said the payment of costs would preclude him from taking an appeal should he so decide. He ask ed if he could have time to consider whether he would decide to take an appeal. The judge expressed a will ingness to let MT. Waite go as far as he liked in this matter. He was there fore found probably guilty and the case continued to next Friday.
 4 f nf the case against Samuel Livingstone, charged with beating his wife, was continued for one week, on account of the absence from the town or material witnesses.
 Charles Ferraro, charged with viola tion of the automobile law. in not hav- ing the tail lamp of his automobile lighted at night, pleaded guilty. and the case was suspended on payment of costs of s2.S0. He said he supposed his lamp was lighted and in good condi- tion. When the judge asked if the arresting officer had examined the noticed that the lamp was not lighted after the machine had passed along. and that arrest was made some time afterwards. He was of the opinion that the majority of those violating the law did not have proper lamps, as in the main the offenders are operators of the cheaper grade of cars.
 Young Ferraro. his age is 22. said he always tried to have the lamps clean end, trimmed and lighted at night but that the light at times failed. Chief Brown suggested that when lamp does not serve the purpose through some defect the matter ought to be re- ported to a police officer. and then there would be investigation ana per haps, arrest avoided.
 Christopher F'erraro a brother of was in court for a third time in a tail light case. He told the court that he owned three machines, and that he supposed the man in his em- ploy took proper care of the machines and the lights. and he regretted very much that he had evidently violated the law but that it surely was unin- tentional. In this last case. he said, when he arrived at the iithey stand his brother said the machine he op- erated did not work just right. He got into the auto to ascertain the trouble. He drove the au- ton1obile from the stand down High street and back. not over a thous- and feet. when an officer told him that the tail lamp was not lighted and or dered him to report in court and answ- CT a charge of violation of the law. Judge WilliSms gave him his liberty and warned him to be more careful in the future in regard to respect for the /;ws, and not to be brou gllt into court again on a. similar charge, as there were suspensions in two cases pending against him and they might be made effective
 The cases of Frank w. Coy and Mar garet We1cn, against. Charles J. But Ter and Orlando R. Smith. highway commissioners of the town of Westerly in connection with property laws on the Shore road were continued for one week.