The weekly Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1911-1922, 1911-10-19

That the recent Plymouth ordi-
nance against the unnecessary noise
of the autos and motor cycles is cor
rect legislation, is the opinion of
experts in the automobile world. The
cnly thing they would now object to
is the fact that the ordinance is not
being enforced at all.
"Since the motor car has come
into such general use and the early
antagonism against it has SO largely
disappeared. ii is most unfortunate
that the use of the muller cut-out
is net prohibited by law in every
city and heavy penalties provided
ior the violation Of the statute OF
ordinance governing the subject
This Is the view Of Sidney s. Cor
lam. OF Chicago, author OF the pres
ent Illinois automobile law. oreaniz-
n OF the Illinois State Automobile
Association. and recognized as the
leading expert in automobile law,
and he couples with this wide ex-
ieilence Is a practical motorist.
The muffler cut-out,' Mr. Cor
ham continued, sis in a great meas
IRE responsible for the existing an
tagonism OF the public against the
motorist. As a practical motorist Of
ten years experience, my opinion is
that tie muller cut-oUt is not a
necessary feature OF the equipment
OF the modern motor c. and that
rs use as warning signal SHOULD
aor be permitted.
''ln many sections of The country
the subject OF the regulation of
warning sienals is being considered
by tie various legislative bodies and
on this subject experience has left
10 room for experiment. The ade-
quate warning signal must have a
harsh, abrupt note, that gives the
impression of imminent danger. \
warning signal is not play-toy. 1t
has q serious mission. and | believe
ut unwise to use as a warning signal
ianv device which lacks the harshnes,
the abrapt note that is Immediately
recognized as a warning of danger.
Emergencies sometimes arise.
especially in cities, through nc fault
of the driver of the motor car.
which. to avoid serious injury. cali
Cor immediate action, not only by the
notorist but b the person or per
sons IN danger. The unnecessary use
cf the warning signal lessons its
effectiveness at just such times. as
is aptly illustrated by the fable of
the boy who cried Wolf! Wolff
when no wolf was near, end when
the wolf finally did come and he
called for help. no one responded.
and the wolf devoured him.
"Chicago has very properly taken
the position that it shall be UNI
lawful fer any motorist to make
or cause to be made any loud or
unnecessary noise with the bell,
horn or any other signal device with
which his car is equipped, or to
use the same except as warning OF
danger.
SIT is not so much the character of
the warning signal as its unneces-
sary use which is Objectionable. That
the use of an adequate warming sig
nal upon motor cars is necessity
is almost universally recognized
and. indeed, required by law in
Illinois and nearly all of the United
States. That this signal should be
capable of producing sufficient
volume of sound to be heard under
all circumstances is equally neces-
sarv. and that the bulb horn is both
indispensable and SO feeble in sound
that the rattle of surrounding traffic
frequently makes it impossible to
he heard, is mater of common
knowledge.
"The continuous use of any sort
Of warning signal is uncalled for
and highly objectionable and should
be prohibited by law. 1t is. how
ever. just as reasonable to prohibit
| the use Of a given warning signal,
admittedly adequate for the purpose
| for which it is used. merely because
its improper and unnecessary use
NAV amount to nuisance. as it
, would be to sever mans vocal
cords in order to prevent him from
being guilty of discrderly conduct
or breach of peace by shouting or
SINGING in public places.
1.-THE solution of both problems is
rot to deprive tile individual of the