764 ARTICLE 56.

such vehicles shall carry a red flag at or near the end of the pole or other
object so projecting.

All pedestrians shall have the right of way at street crossings in the
towns and cities of this State, except where traffic is controlled at such
crossings by traffic officers. Between street crossings in such towns and
cities, vehicles shall have the right of way.

Any person operating any vehicle in a manner contrary to any of the
provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and,
upon conviction, subject to a fine of not less than five dollars ($5. 00) nor
more than fifty dollars ($50. 00) for the first offense.

Pedestrians.

Contributory negligence of pedestrian at intersection, for jury. Right of way.
Merrifield v. Hoffberger, 147 Md. 140; Webb-Pepploe v. Cooper, 159 Md. 430;
Weitzel v. List, 161 Md. 28; Sheriff Motor Co. v. State, Daily Record, June 21,
1935.

Plaintiff's, in personal injury case, being between crossings, is to be considered
on question of contributory negligence, but alone is not sufficient to establish
such negligence. Nelson v. Seller, 154 Md. 76.

Right of way of pedestrian at intersection not duly respected if motor vehicle
is driven too rapidly to stop in time to avoid accident. See notes to sec. 194.
Deford v. Lohmeyer, 147 Md. 476.

Relative rights of pedestrians and motor vehicles at street crossings; at cross-
ings controlled by traffic officers, rights at common law remain unchanged.
Panitz v. Webb, 149 Md.. 84.

Right of way of pedestrians at street crossings where several streets meet;
objectionable prayers; burden of proof of contributory negligence. Meaning of
"regular crossing" and "at a point between crossings. " Cons. Gas, etc., Co. v.
Rudiger, 151 Md. 235.

It is the duty of motorist to observe movements of pedestrian while crossing
street and to have car under such control as to avoid injury to him if reason-
ably possible, and to warn him by proper signals. Negligent acts of defendant.
Prayers. Parr v. Peters, 159 Md. 106.

Child struck by automobile while playing in street between intersections not
entitled to damages in absence of evidence to show negligence on part of driver.
Slaysman v. Gerst, 159 Md. 292.

Person crossing highway when struck by automobile on wrong side of road
is not guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law and is entitled to
nave question submitted to jury. Fisher v. Finan, 163 Md. 418.

Question of contributory negligence is question of fact for jury when person
crossing the street between intersections is struck by automobile driven on
wrong side of street. Lusk v. Lambert. 163 Md. 335.

Where two streets joined at wide angle, with street car tracks on both
streets, and street cars stopping near junction of streets as at street crossing,
held that whether pedestrian, struck by automobile while standing by street
car, was on street crossing, was question for jury. Legum v. State, 167 Md. 339.

Pedestrian cannot recover for injuries when his own negligence was a con-
tributing cause thereto; crossing street between intersections. Barker v.
Whitter, 166 Md. 39.

The right of way of pedestrians at street crossings applies where a street
intersects one side of another street, without crossing it. York Ice Machinery
Corp v. Sachs, 167 Md. 121.

In General.

Error to instruct jury that if truck in collision was to right of center of high-
way at time of accident, plaintiff not entitled to recover regardless of other facts
and circumstances; contributory negligence; negligence, proximate and remote.
Kelly v. Huber Baking Co., 145 Md. 334.