Evening star., 1922-10-07
ANNUAL PERMITS
FOR DRIVERS SEEN
Auto Owners May Soon Have
to Renew Their Cards Ev-
cry Year, Lawyers Say.
UP TO APPELLATE COURTS
Case of Federal Chauffeurs to De-
eide Status of All Auto Drivers
in Washington.

If decision handed down in the
Traffic Court yesterday by Judge John
p. Mcmahon is upheld by the District
of Columbia, Court of Appeals, to
which the case at issue will be taken
for final adjudication, 1t will be nec-
essary for every operator of an auto
mobile in Washington to secure an
nually an operators permit.
Under the law as at present admin
istered by the police department,
when a person is issued a permit to
operate a car in the District of Co
clumbia 1t is good for all time. unless
revoked for some grave violation of
the traffic laws.
The case in which this new en-
forcement OF the traffic laws came
up was that of the District of CO.
1umbia against Louis Crosson. a
chauffeur employed by the Depart
ment Of Agriculture. charged with
operating an automobile. the property
of the government. without first Sc
curing an operators permit.
The case dates back to April, 1922,
when Crosson was tried and convict
ed. The federal government, through
the solicitor of the Department OF
Agriculture, noted an appeal from
the decision Of Judge Mcmahon, and
by Maj. Peyton Gordon. United States
district attorney, and ]. 3. Horagan,
a solicitor for the Department of
Asricul ture. the court taking the
matter under advisement at that
time and today handing down its
opinion against the government. No
tice was given that the case will be
taken to the Court Of Appeals.
Law Does Not Comply.
The government contends that the
District of Columbia traffic regula-
tions that require all operators of
automobiles to have an operators per-
nit do not apply to chauffeurs en-
ployed by the federal government, for
the reason that such an application
employed chauffeurs would result in
the interruption of the acts of Con-
SresS that provide for the Civil Serv-
ice Commission. to examine all ap-
pllcants for positions as chaufeurS
for the government and determine
their qualifications as chauffeurs be-
fore they can be appointed to the po-
sitions. 1t was further contended by
the government that the traffic regu-
lation requiring federal or all chauf-
feurs to have operators permits, is
unconstitutional and void, in so far as
it applies to federal government
chauffeurs, for the reason that such
an Interpretation would give to the
District of Columbia Commissioners
general legislative powers. which. un-
der the Constitution. is fixed in Con-
gress
While 1t is conceded by the con-
tention made for the federal govern
ment that the Commissioners are
empowered to make traffic regula-
tons, it is not conceded that they,
Of Columbia government, have any
right to make regulations that affect
a federal government chauffeur.
Lawyers Express Fear.
In his opinion Judge Mcmahon de-
cided that the Commissioners are
vested with the right to make traf-
fic regulations to govern all oper
ators of automobiles and othe: We
hicles and that federal government
chauffeurs are no exception to the
regulations and must take out an op-
orators permit to operate an auto
mobile before they can lawfully op-
crate an automobile in the District
Of Columbia. The court quotes the
Court of Appeals to sustain this opinion.
The court went further and said:
Il must find that Congress intended
t..at the operators of motor vehicles,
owned and maintained in the District
of Columbia by the United States.
shall be annually licensed, without
cost. under rules and regulations es-
tabiished by the District of Columbia
Commissioners and that the defendant
herein is guilty of operating a motor
vehicle owned and maintained in the
District of Columbia by the United
States without first having procured
an annual license so to do
Attorneys familiar with the case
and who heard the opinion of Judge
Mcmahon in this case say that II
federal government chauffeurs must
be licensed annually then all other
chauffeurs will have to comply with
the same rule.
Gillispie Walsh and Frank W. Madi-
gan. assistant corporation counsels.
represented the District of Columbia
in the case.