Evening star., 1895-08-23
STOP CARS ON THE NEAR SIDE.
MI. Frech Shows Advantages of Such
Rule.

To the Editor Of The Evening Star:
There is ore important item In connec-
ton with the stopping of street cars on
the near side of the street. and this is that
it affords reasonable, definite and ascer-
tainahle line at which the front of the car
can be required by law to stop, that is, a
line which it shall not overrun; viz, the
ear side building line. No such line is
ascertainable for the front Of the car If it
is made to stop on the far side. And. as
the rear of the car is not in view of the
notormar-the man who alone steps the
cart will be found that the car can be
dragged completely past waiting pas
sergers, and thus oblige them to ris. jump
ing or or get left. Under the near side
rule the car must stop on the side or
obstruct a crossing, and thus can be con-
tro!led by the police. If it stops the
lear side there is TO excuse for sweeping
Ey a waiting passenger Under the far side
rule the car may run a quarter of a square
beyond waiting passen ger and not run
afoul of a regulation preventing the OBJ
strUctiCn of crossings. Uader the far sde
rule the car, or train Of cars, must Eeces-
Sarily sweep by a waiting passenger IN
order to avoid obstructing the crG.5 ing
and from experience it is known that if
it is a man lie is forced to jump on get
left, as the car WIZ go beyond the far side
1t is also a factor whether the near SIDE
companies have collided with pedes TRANS
CT vehicles, and whether the far side COM
panies have not done SO during the time
that the two systems have been in vogue
together. 1t is my belief that the Column
lie company has the safer rule-the near
eide rule-talling all circumstances into
consideration And it is a rule that ena bies
tie Commissioners to define a lire all
occupied cross streets beyond which the
front OF the car shall not so, that the
gripman, the passengers and the police
man can have no doubt about. The grip
man will also have his car under better
control while crossing the two cross foot
ways and the cross roadway if he starts
from the near side than if he is rushing
across at fail speed. Hence the accidents
Cannot be so numerous nor so serious under
the near side rule. Changing from the far
side rule to the near side rule will, instead
of creating confusion. create possibility
Of defintteness never heretofore realized
One point made at the hearing and pub
in favor of the near side rule. Ii was said,
arguing against the rear SIDE rule. that if
it is adopted the great question in defend
ing suits against railroads will be: Did
the motorn1an start when an approaching g
vehicle was so near that an accident was
inevitable?" This should he the question
at a crossing; but, it is true, it cannot he
raised if the crossings are surrendered to
the street car comoanies under the far side
rule, for the fact will be that the motorman
was rushing across the street at the ra tie
of thirteen feet a second (nine miles an
hour and could not stop in time to pre-
vent an accident. Hence the other party
Will be claimed to he at fault This other
party may be a person who was trying
foarfully to watch an approaching bicycle
and wagon turning corner on him. and
hence could not look in a third and opposite
direction at the same time for the car COM
ing at full speed. If he heard its bell he
canfounded it with that of one coming in
the other direction behind the bicycle. The
rear side rule insures a safe speed over
street crossings. While the difference in
time is slight the difference in safety of