THE RULE OF THE ROAD.

Press, Volume LVI, Issue 16961, 9 October 1920, Page 10

THE RULE OF THE ROAD.

TO THE EDITOR 01 "THE P 8135." Sir,- —Your . correspondents on _ this subject appear to* neglect the origin of the "rale of the roaa." Of course tit arose from the necessity of facilitating traffic. In what we may term early i days all men carried arms, and as no •: 3n3 n knew !his potential enemies, ho, for liis own protection, passed an oncoming stranger on the left, his guarding side, isind kept his right arm free for offence, or defence, if required. This habit crystallised into sl nil© of the road for pedestrians. The reason governed horse or vehfele traffic, t(he man s. .'guarding or left arm was occupied with the reins, and he passed another -with, his free right arm ready for offence I ,*>r defence. For a similar season, when. ] driving ho Bat on tihe right side of his aeat, where hd could see the clearance between passing , vehicles, and again j had his right arm free to us© whip or weapon. Hence the "rules" for pedestrian and.other traffic are essentially ... As to tiho rights of pedestrians m the »roadway and footpath. I have not seen ' in your correspondence any suggestion ■- or statement that" appeals to me. The «I early history of : our roadways tells us • that when formed they were simply the spaces between the buildings, with the > drainage if any, in the middle, '» as they are in Chinese citieß to this day. V They were used almost entirely , by. f- pedestrians; as animal and vehicular ■; traffic increased,. the necessity for a '• demarcation "became recognised, and foot-passengers, for # their own safety,! kept to the side which later was mark- | od off as sacred to-the foot-passengers, i \ whilst not forbidding the use of the > centre, always provided he * did not "interfere "unduly with the other . traffic." It seems to me from my ob- | V serration in Ohristchurch tihat the I quoted words "govern the whole ques-1 i tion, and it id the selfish or careless use i of the roadway by foot-passengers and , \ drivers both that is the cause of tftta . present oxrtcrv. Pedestrians have just) . as much right on the roadway as other r traffic, provided they do not obstruct ! other traffic but tihat is the essence, f and vehicular traffic must not intor- ! fere with other traffic.

The whole question is on& of the self fish or unselfish Use of the roadway, , and in the present temper of tlho users roqnirea much more careful supervision by th© police, or other appointed author

rity, and it requires that all persons should be taught the rules of the Toad when young. Loitering in t'he streets and holding meetings, whether for business or pleasure, especially at crossings, should ho rigorously stopped. They como under what I nave called the selfish uso of' the roadway, inasmudh as they take no Jieed of the convenienco of other users of the roadway.—Yours, etc.,' A VISITOR.