The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1920-03-12
TRACTION ENGINES
CAN USE ROADS
CHIEF JUDGE THOMAS RULES ON CASE
OF THRASHERMAN AGAINST BAUGHMAA.


One Of the most important opinions
ever handed down, that Is OF import
ance to the farmers OF the State was
given by Chief Judge William II.
Thomas Saturday in the case Of Ar
thur Stevenson rs. e. Austin Baugh-
man, Commissioner Of Motor We
hicles. This case was tried before
Judge Thomas q few weeks ago in this
Court The opinion in part is as fol-
lows:
Those engaged in threshing, and
the farmers they serve, represent
some of the best citizens Of our State,
than whom no one could be more con-
cerned or interested in the preserve
ton of good roads, which have now
become a public necessity, and on the
other hand the State officials, charged
with the responsible duty of con-
structing and maintaining the public
highways, can have no other interest
in the matter than a desire to protect
them from unnecessary injury, and
there would seem to be no reason why,
with cooperation, a satisfactory so-
luton of the difference may not be
found
There was also great deal of evil
dence by the plaintiff and by the de-
fendant as to the amount of injury to
the road caused by the plaintiffs en-
gine prior to his arrest and trial be-
fore the Police Justice. Upon all the
evidence it is at least doubtful wheth-
er the injury described by some of
the witnesses could have been caused
wholly by the plaintiffs engine, but
in the view the Court takes of this
case that question is not involved or
now before it.
Chapter eighty-five of the Acts
cs 1918, vests the Commissioner of
Moor Vehicles with certain discretion
in the revocation Of registration and
markers, which discretion he has the
authority to exericse, but what the
Court decided in passing on the de-
murrer to the bill was that the Stat
ute recognized the right of persons
engaged in the threshing business to
operate their traction engines over the
State roads,, and under the State of
facts alleged in the bills the discre-
ton, vested in the Commissioner of
Motor Vehicles by the Statute did not
include the authority to revoke plain
tiff's certificate OF registration and
markers solely because the wheels OF
his engine had cleats on them or the
tires we're not smooth.
When the Act Of 1918, which
recognized the right Of persons
engaged in the threshing business to
operate their traction engines over the
State roads, was passed, the Legisla-
sure must have known that traction
engines used in their business, or at
least those used in large part of the
State, had cleats on their wheels, and
must also have known that they could
not be operated over the State roads
without causing some injury to them
When, therefore, section las of that
Act authorized the Commissioner OF
Motor Vehicles to revoke the markers
&c, when the motor vehicle is so
constructed or operated as to cause
unreasonable damage to the public
highways" the legislature could not
have referred to the universal or usual
and well known construction of such
traction engines with cleats on their
wheels. Al different construction OF
section 145 would require the Court to
assume that the Legislature intended
to authorize the Commissioner Of Mo-
tor Vehicles to take away the very
right that the Legislature had not
only expressly recognized and sane
toned, but also encouraged by reliev-
ing the owners of such engines of the
burden imposed upon the owners of
other motor vehicles.
The Court must not however, be un-
dersteod as meaning to restrict the
discretion and power Of the Commis-
s1oner of Motor Vehicles, beyond the
limit herein expressly stated. The Leg
islature has conferred upon him broad
powers and discretion deemed neces-
sary for the preservation of the pub
lie highways of the State, and the
safety of those using them, and the
Courts have no power to either quail
ify or enlarge them. There might be
traction engines, or other motor We
hicles, or cleats on them, of such un-
usual, extraordinary or peculiar con-
struction, or their condition might
be such, as to cause unreasonable
damage to- and warrant their exclu-
sion from the public highways, and
courts Of equity would have no power
to control or restrain the authority
of the Commissioners of Motor We
hicles in regard to them
1t follows from what has been said
that the conclusion of this Court is
that persons in the business that
plaintiff is engaged in, have the right,
in the conduct of such business, to OPP
crate their engines over the State
roads, and that certificates of regis
tTation and markers for their engines
50 used can not be revoked simply and
solely because the engines have cleats
on their wheels, and as counsel have
agreed that the decree of the Court
shall not be controlled or affected
by the fact that the plaintiffs license
or markers here in question expired
in December, 1919, the injunction
heretofore granted must be continued
It is ordered and decreed this 9Th
day OF March, 1920, by the Circuit
Court for Carroll County, sitting as
Court of Equity, that the injunction
heretofore granted in this case be,
and the same is hereby, made per-
petual and that the said defendant, E.
Austin Baughman, Commissioner of
Motor Vehicles, be and he is hereby,
perpetually enjoined from revoking
the complainant's certificate or reg
istration and markers, referred to in
this case, for his traction engine sole
1y because the wheels of said engine
have cleats on them, or have not a
smooth face. 1t is further ordered
and decreed that the costs in this
case be paid by the defendant.