Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1905-1919, 1917-01-14
WOULD REGULATE
THE PEDESTRIAN
Declares That Such Element
of Traffic Should Be Kept
in Proper Place.

'Tf each Of the clements Of traffic
could be kept in its proper place at
the right time the big problem of
regulation would bc solved" is the
opinion of II. NJ. Rowe. president of
the American Automobile association,
whose recent utterances at the safety
first convention caused considerable
comment thrUout the country because
the doctrine was put forward that the
pedestrian must also he regulated as
well as the vehicle in bringing about
improved traffic movement.
The sidewalks are for pedestrians
and the streets primarily for We
hicles" continues Mr. Rowe The
pedestrian should he and is safeguard
ed in his use of the sidewalks and
designated crossings, where he should
at all times have the right Of way
When he attempts to Use the streets
at points other tnan at crossings,
then he should do so at his own peril.
Furthermore, when he occupies the
street at any other than at designated
crossings it should be prima facio
evidence Of gross carelessness ON his
part and he should he made TO as
sumo the responsibility for his con-
duct. on the other hand, drivers Of
vehicles should have precedence be
tween crossings. They should have
a right to expect that they have to
look out only for other vehicles.
AFTER ALL there are Just these two
important clements in traffic-vo.-
hicles and pedcstrians-and both con-
tribute to accidents. Undisputed rec
crds, however. show that i'm over so
Per cent Of all accidents the fault is
that of the pedestrian, and in less
. than 90 per cent the blame attaches
" the vehicles. This includes street
~ motor busses and all forms Of
street carriers. Limiting the report
to accidents between automobiles and
pedestrians, it is stated 90 to 90 per
cent are the fault of the pedestrian.
What lessons are we to learn from
these facts? Nehicles-particular
motor Vehlcles-are now so regulated
by law that any further attempt in
that direction wiuld not help mat
ters. Personally. | am convinced that
we have 50 much law for the motor
ist that. to make him as safo as he
can be made as an element of street
traffic, we must get rid of much OF
INV present law and simplify that
(which remains.
"On the other hand, the pedestrian
as the other important element in
traffic. We have not regulated az all
As a rule, he is not willing 20 con-
tribute his share to eliminating the
causes of accidents. lie is tenacious
Of mis- right to conduct himself rs he
pleases on streets or highways u
cross where he ploases TO stand where
he rleases, to 60 in any direction he
pleases, at any time he pleases, And,
strange to say, he Is supported In his
view Ivy public opinion; and the old
comm IN law. which recognizes the
superior rights OF the individual on
the public highways. is quoted in his
defense. Courts and iuries have up
held him, and wardod him heavy
damages even when he was guilty Of
gross negligence. His attitude Is Hit
me If YOU darer Whereas tho great
majority of motorists do everything in
their power to avoid accidents, the
great majority Of pedestrians do not.
TN all fairness, what right has tho
pcdcstrian to jcopardize with his own
life the life and the liberty OF those
operating vehicles under conditions
ot modern necessity that have COM
pletely changed the whole question Of
the relative rights of those engaged
In traffic? It must not nc inferred
that in attempting to regulate and
control the pedestrian it is to give ad-
ditional license to the motorist. Just
the opposite is the purpose. which
first and last is to avoid accidents.
II am fully aware that any attempt
In the past to regulate the pedestrian
has promptly called forth sharp criti-
cism from various sources. But I'm no
other way can the number If acct
dents resulting In serious injury and
death te reduced to any apm eciablc
extent "--Dallas News