Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-03-10
A Strange Decision.


For as strange a set of reasons as
have probably ever been given in a de-
cision on an important matter affecting
the National Capital, the Commissioners
have summary disapproved the Nc
Leod bill, which seeks to correct the in
justice of permitting the deadly COM
bination of reckless and insolvent motor
lists to menace the residents of this city.
The Mcleod measure is the safety
responsibility bill of the American Auto
mobile Association, drawn up after
study of two years by the outstanding
traffic experts of the country. Since its
introduction less than year ago it has
been adopted completely or in part by
twelve States, including New York and
New Jersey, and Canada has only re-
Gently sent commission to the United
States to study it and other measures
of similar kind.
The law is simple in the extreme and
requires no elaborate machinery for its
operation. 1t affects none but the reck-
less and insolvent. The law-abidlng
careful driver is immune from Its pro-
visions. It provides merely that a
n1otorist must show financial RESPONSE
bility after he is convicted of major
traffic offense or lose his privilege to
operate an automobile, and that any
motorist who fails to satisfy limited
Judgment rendered against him for
motor mishap involving personal in
iuries or property damages viii lose his
permit to operate a car until he does
satisfy it. Financial responsibility can
be shown in three ways, an insurance
policy, a liability bond or cash deposit
with the proper authorities. Thus by
one law can the Judgment proof
motorist be effectually disposed Of and
the streets cleared of those who menace
the lives of citizens with no possibility
of redress on the part of their hapless
victims.
Yet these are the reasons given by the
Commissioners in a letter to Repre-
sentative Zihlman for disappearing the
measure: ......,
Under this proposed law failure to
satisfy a Judgment based upon injuries
to person or properly from the opera
ton of an automobile, requires The sus-
pension Of the permit OF the judgment
debtor to operate motor venice, ana
in addition, the suspension OF the regis
tratIon OF all cars owned by him. Sucn
a Judgment does not necessarily result
from any wrongful act or conouct on
the part of the owner OF the venice,
but may result from the negligence OF
one Tor whose acts the owner is re.
snonsible. The Commissioners do not
believe that the penalties provided IN
the act should be imposed upon one Tor
failure to nay debt. OF course, IT may
be argued that one may protect hinseH
by obtaining insurance, put IL frequently
happens that one who has taken out
insurance is unable to realize upon IT
due to the insolvency of the company
or the unintentional breach OF some
condition set forth in the policy.
By this unique method of reasoning
the Commissioners leave the District
with no possible manner in which
the innocent victim of an insolyent
motorists recklessness can be compen.-
stated. The victim may lie in agony IN
a hospital for months or the bread
winner of a family may be taken by
death as the result of being hit by a
machine, driven by drunken driver. Yet
nothing can be done about 1t, according
to the Commissioners, and the reckless
operator can proceed blithely on his way.
Still, by the same reasoning, it is unfair
to ask an owner of several cars to be
responsible for their careful operation.
OF course, there are no laws on the
statute books to compel the payment Of
debt and it is illogical to ask motorists to
paw debts incurred through their own
recklessness. And even if motorist did
take out insurance, post a bond, or
put UP cash, the insurance company
might be insolvent-the companies will
undoubtedly delight in this naive spec
ulation-the bond might prove to be
worthless or the cash might be taken
by an absconding clerk. So there is no
protection anywhere, it seems.
Surely the Commissioners cannot
have given the careful consideration
that it merits either to the bill or to
their reasons for disapproval. They
should not be content to stand on their
action in this matter. A recall of their
letter and reconsideration of the bill
would seem to be Immediately indicated.