BICYCLE. A two-wheeled vehicle propel led by the rider.
To ride a bicycle in the ordinary manner -on a public highway for convenience, pleas ure, or business is lawful. A person driving a horse thereon has no rights superior to a person riding a bicycle; Thompson v. Dodge, 58 Minn. 555. 60 N. W. 545, 28 L. R. A. 608, 49 Am. St. Rep. 503.
It has been held that an ordinance which _attempts to forbid bicyclists to use that part of the street which is devoted to the use of vehicles is void as against common right; Swift v. City of Topeka, 43 Kan. 671, 23 Pac. 1075, 8 L. R. A. 772; City of Emporia v. Wagoner, 6 Kan. App. 659, 49 Pac. 701; but see Twilley v. Perkins, 77 Md. 252, 26 Atl. 286, 19 L. R. A. 632, 39 Am. St. Rep. 408.
Their proper place is the roadway rather than the sidewalk; State v. Collins, 16 R. I. 371, 17 All. 131, 3 L. R. A. 394 ; and stat utes and ordinances in some states declare tneir use upon sidewalks unlawful; Com. v.' Forrest, 170 Pa. 40, 32 Atl. 652, 29 L. R. A. 365; Mercer v. Corbin, 117 Ind. 450, 20 N. E. 132, 3 L. R. A. 221, 10 Am. St. Rep. 76. It has been held that, even in the absence of an ordinance prohibiting it, one riding a bi cycle upon a sidewalk takes the risk of any injury he may thereby cause to pedestrians; Fielder v. Tipton, 149 Ala. 608, 42 South. 985, 8 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1268, 123 Am. St. Rep. 69, 13 Ann. Cas. 1012; and that per mission under municipal ordinance is not justification for violating a statute prohibit ing riding a bicycle on a sidewalk ; Millett v. City of Princet6n, 167 Ind. 582, 79 N. E. 909, 10 L. R. A. (N.. S.) 785. A municipal corporation, however, is not liable for in jury to a person struck by a bicycle ridden by another on a sidewalk because of failure to enact or enforce an ordinance prohibiting the riding of bicycles on sidewalks; Jones v. City of Williamsburg: 97 Va. 722, 34 S. E. 883, 47 L. R. A. 294. Where a rider was in jured by a defective sidewalk, it was held that the use of a bicycle thereon was not unlawful and that he could recover ; Lee v. City of Port Huron, 12S Mich. 533, 87 N. W. 637, 55 L. R. A. 308.
Bicycles may be left standing in the street while the owner is calling at a residence or place of business, as any other vehicle may ; Lacey v. Winn, 3 D. R. (Pa.) 811; Lacy v. Winn, 4 id. 409. Whether a bicyclist who leaves his wheel standing against the curb stone in front of a horse and wagon is neg ligent in failing, to ascertain whether the horse was unattended and unfastened is a question of fact for the jury ; Wagner v. Milk Co., 21 Misc. 62, 46 N. Y. Supp. 939.
An innkeeper is liable for damages where a bicycle belonging to a guest is stolen from the yard of the inn; 28 Ir. L. T. & S. J. 297. A municipality has power to require bicyclists to carry lights when using the streets after dark ; City of Des• Moines v.
Keller, 116 Ia. 648, 88 N. W. 827, 57 L. R. A. 243, 93 Am. St. Rep. 268. A person who rides a bicycle without a light or signal of warning in a public thormighfare at a time when objects can be discerned readily at a distance of but a few feet is, as a matter of law, guilty of negligence; Cook v. Fogarty, 103 Ia. 500, 72 N. W. 677, 39 L. Ix. A. 488.
Where a statute declares that bicycles are entitled to the same rights and subject to the Same restrictions as are prescribed in the case of persons using carriages, the rider of a bicycle must turn out for a heavy ve hicle ; • Taylor v. Traction Co., 184 Pa. 465, 40 AtI. 159, 47 L. R. A. 289, following the rule of the road established in earlier de cisions; Beach v. Parmeter, 23 Pa. 196 ; Grier v. Sampson, 27 Pa. 183 ; but see contra, Foote v. Produce Co., 195 Pa. 190, 45 Atl. 934, 49 L. R. 78 Am. St Rep. 806. A bicyclist has a right to insist that the highway shall be maintained in a reasonably safe condition of repair ; if not so maintain ed the is answerable for injury to him or his vehicle; Geiger v. Turnpike Road, 167 Pa. 582, 31 Atl. 918, 28 L. R. A. 458. Though, on an ordinary country road, he is exposed to greater danger than a per son in a vehicle drawn by horses, the com missioners of highways are not bound to any higher obligation to him, but only to main tain such road in reasonably safe condition; Sutphen v. Town of North Hempstead, 80 Hun 409, 30 N. Y. Supp. 128 ; Fox v. Clarke, 25 R. I. 515, 57 Atl. 305, 65 L. R. A. 234, 1 Ann. Cas. 548.
Bicycles are carriages under the tariff act ; Adams, Tariff 99; so for the purpose of collecting tolls; Geiger v. Turnpike Road, 167 Pa. 582, 31 Atl. 918, 28 L. EL A. 458; and under an act forbidding furiously driving a carriage; L. R. 4 Q. B. Div. 228; and an act requiring carriages to turn to the right; State v. Collins, 16 R. I. 371, 17 AU. 131, 3 L. R. A. 394. But in Glouchester & Salem Turnpike Co. v. Leppe, 62 N. J. L. 92, 40 AU. 681, 41 L. R. A.. 457, they were held not liable to tolls as "carriages of burthen or pleasure." They were held not to be within an act of 1786, requiring highways to be kept reasonably safe for carriages ; Rich ardson v. Danvers, 176 Mass. 413, 57 N. E. 688, 50 L. R. A. 127, 79 Am. St. Rep. 320; to the same effect under an early act in Fox v. Clarke, 25 R. I. 515, 57 AU. 305, 65 L. R. A. 234, 1 Ann. Cas. 548.
As to bicycles as see BAGGAGE.
BID. An offer to pay a specified price for an article about to be sold at auction.
An offer to perform a contract for work and labor or supplying materials at a speci fied price.