Evening star., 1932-01-21
The safety-Responsibility Law.


measure to sweep the streets and high
ways clean Of the reckless-insolvent
motorist, has again been started on the
long congressional trail to enactment
for the District Of Columbia. 1t nearly
reached its destination at the last ses-
cion, but for some unexplained reason
was stopped in the Senate in the clos
ing hours of the Sssenty-first Congress.
1t was favorably reported by the House
District Committee, passed the House
unanimously, received a favorable re-
port from the Senate District Commit
tee, but remained forlornly on the Sen
ste calendar when the session ended
Now 1t must go through the same
process all over again, and its friends,
who are legion, earnestly hope that
the result in 1882 will be different from
that Of 1881. 1t is a good bill-in fact,
1t has been called the best piece Of au-
tomotive legislation ever deutschland
Is the product of years of study of one
OF the most perplexing questions affect
ing motordom. Eighteen States, which
contain more than one-fourth Of the
motorists in the United States, and four
Provinces Of Canada, comprising over
one-third of the motorists in the Do
rninion, are successfully and contentedly
operating under its principles Probably
no other legislation affecting such
large number of persons has ever been
received with such universal COM
mendation.
There is nothing complicated or con-
troversial in the safety-responsibility
bill to those who realize that safety and
financial responsibility must 60 hand in
hand in these days of heavy traffic. The
time has passed when a motorist should
be permitted to operate car in reck-
less manner If he possesses no means of
compensating his victims in accidents
arising from his own reprehensible acts.
Too often in years gone by has this type
Of driver manned and killed and damaged
property with financial immunity, only
to resume his nefarious activities as
soon as he was able under the traffic
regulations, to operate his car again.
The safety-responsibility bill has four
main features. They are: Q) Any per-
son convicted of a major trafic offense
must, before his permit is returned to
him, show financial responsibility for
the sum of eleven thousand dollars, one
thousand dollars for property damage
and ten thousand dollars for injury to
one or more persons in an accident. He
may do this by posting collateral, TAX
ing out a bond or securing liability in
surance. (2) Failure to pay a judg-
ment levied against him by a court of
competent jurisdiction up to this
amount for an accident will auto
mstically deprive motorist of his per-
init to drive until he does pay it and
demonstrates future financial RESPONSE
bility. (3) That all States using the
law maintain reciprocal relationship.
In other words, the motorist barred in
Connecticut would be unable to obtain
permit in New York. a. That all
States enact drivers license law to
provide closer check on automobile
operators.
So the law does four things: 1t takes
a motorist when he shows the first in
clination to be menace to other users
Of the road and makes him financially
responsible for his future conduct; 1t
rids the highways Of that slippery
customer-the Judgment motor
lists, those who are careful TO have no
visible assets, but carry their property
under the names of relatives; it pro-
hibits the motorist convicted of seri-
Gus offense In one State from securing
permit in another, and it promotes
Nation wide check on all motor car
operators by means Of the universal
permit law. All of these are naturally
supplemental to the tratfic regulations
Of the various States and communities.
Washington should have this law,
and the sooner the better. Surely the
judgment of eighteen State Legislatures
and those of four Provinces of Canada
cannot be wrong. Congress should
hasten to put the National Capital in
step with modern motor legislation.
Within the past 2 200 Years there