The Washington herald., 1922-01-29
MOTOR CARLAWS
FOR PROTECTIVE
PURPOSES URGED
Says Regulatory Laws
Are Restrictive and :,
Bear Watching.
; tThe Maryland Msters..,.

enactment should be carefully
watched. Their sponsors always
support them under the banner of
the public good" and to many
minds the eighteenth amendment,
the Volstead and Sunday laws may
be so justified: nevertheless, in
many Instances they, amount to the
imposition of the views or preju-
dices OF one class of society upon
the other classes. In fact, the re-
striction or abridgement of our per-
sonal liberties has progressed to
such an extent that the thought
has become current that all regula-
tory laws are Of that character.
This is an unfortunate condition Of
AFFAIRS, for while II has some foun-
dation of fact, II Is an exaRHera-
ton. To permit such Impressions to
60 unchallenged and to gain cur
rency Is to endanger the passage OF
legislation deserving of universal
support.
The transition of the motor We
hicle from the toyeof the rich to
the necessary adjunct of our COM
merce has brought about conditions
necessitating much needfui reguIa-
tion. For instance, there is such
legislation as
a. Limiting their operation to
those holding operators licenses.
b. Requiring certificates of title
and registration.
c. Prescribing rules Of the road.
d. Prescribing maximum loads
and width of tire.
e. Providing for road construc-
ton and maintenance.
r. Providing ways and means for
such construction and maintenance.
g. And others Of lesser impor-
lance too numerous to mention.
Where the use OF such vehicles
conflicts with the rights of the
public, the former must give way.
but In all other instances motor
vehicle laws should be In the in
terest of that large body of the
public represented by the automo-
bile owner or user.
REWRITING to the subjects above
mentioned, we will find the laws
concerning them In each instance
onering protection to the owner or
user. Would not the denial to the
inexperienced. irresponsible or reck :
less Of the right to operate protect
the public. the owner and the user.
Does not the denial OF the right to
operate unless the vehicle Is titled
and registered in part protect the
public by providing means of
Identification. and In toto protect
the owner both as q means OF iden-
tincation and also in reducing
theft? The common object of theft
Is money: therefore, to make din
cult the conversion of personal
property into money Is to make
theft OF such property unattractive
to the thief. The title law not only
does this. but also does It aid de-
lection of theft and the recovery of
the vehicle. What matters II, then.
that 1t imposes a trivial cost and
slight Inconvenience upon the
owner?
Would not everyone be protected
by the enforcement Of sane rules
OF the road? Many years ago 1t
was found necessary to promul gate
universal rules of navigation for
vessels upon waters, both inland
and seas. One rule for the steam,
another for the sail: what to do
upon meeting head-on and what at
various angles of meeting. Would
not. that be the reasona BILE thing to
do for the motor vehicle which to-
day is In one State and tomorrow
in another, or which on, the same
day may operate in two or three
states. How much better II would
be IL We had a uniform act pre-
scribing sane rules of the road. ap-
plicable everywhere, which might
be known and understood by all.
Do not the laws which make pos
sible the construction and mainten-
ance of Improved highways protect
the interests OF public, owner, and
user? Do they not make possible
the further development of the au-
tomobile in the commerce of the
country? II so, all laws which aid
in the construction of such hign-
ways, protect them against abu-
sive use and provide for their
maintenance are beneficial. As
drawn. they may be too restrictive
or not restrictive enough, wise or
unwise: IL so, they should be
amended. not discarded. The roads
should be constructed to carry the
burden for which they were de-
signed. II they are not properly
constructed, they should be recon
structed as rapidly as possible,
otherwise they will become a liabii-
ity and not an asset to the State.
IL they are properly constructed,
then the use of those roads should
be restricted so that in carrying
the burden for which they are de-
signed they will not be abused, for
otherwise, again, they will become
liabilities and not assets. The su-
tomobile owner should constantly
bear in mind that improved high
ways always in the best service
able condition assures him of the
most economical use of his vehicle,
and that 1t Is not an economy for
him to overload his vehicle. He
should understand that a three-ton
LOAF on vehicle designed to carry
two tons will do more damage to a
road bed than will a five-ton load
on vehicle designed to carry FIVE
tons, and that a law which forbids
the former is not an unreasonable
restriction, but Is a protective law
which operates in the interest Of all
users alike.
Adequate revenues must be raised
to build and maintain the system OF
roads. These revenues should be
raised fairly and in proportion to
the use Of the road and not arbi-
trarily. They should be raised in
the least burdensonie manner con-
sistent with the object sought. The
proposed gasoline tax as dis
tinguished from the rated horse
power tax. II properly applied and
enforced, will do this, and in so
doing will be protective of the
interests of the owned and user.
Legislation. and particularly that
pertaining to motor vehicles, should
not be condemned merely because