TRAFFIC INSPECTORS

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21707, 14 February 1936, Page 20

TRAFFIC INSPECTORS

TO THE EDITOm Of THE PBESS. Sir,-r-In a recent newspaper report it was stated that when a motorist approached an intersection where there was an inspector on duty, and the road was all clear, it was not necessary to signal the inspector, but to go on, and pass the inspector unless he signalled to stop. On Friday, about 9.15 a.m. I approached the Bank crossing with all the roads clear of motors or traffic, so remembering the report in the newspaper, I went on past the inspector, only to be pulled up for not signalling that I was going straight on. I consider that it is time the traffic department of the City Council made a definite statement as to what is required of motorists, and should any statements appear in the papers that are not correct, then they should be contradicted. It certainly seems useless to signal.an inspector when he is standingjit a crossing and there is no other traffic in sight. Motorists are only too pleased, like myself, to do all we can for these inspectors, who are worthy of every consideration, but motorists want to know what is expected of them so that they can act accordingly. I hope the Chief Traffic Inspector will make an official statement as to what is required on all occasions, and we will willingly act in accordance therewith.—Yours, etc.. F. February 7, 1936. . . ['" F." has misunderstood the report appearing.in the papers," said Mr H. Macintosh, Chief Traffic Inspector, to whom this letter was referred. "The report to the council definitely set out that 'motorists (as well as all other wheeled traffic) approaching intersections where traffic officers are controlling points, must give clear signals outside the car in such a manner that the officer can understand them.' The report further stated that if a motorist had given his signal and he had not been given the stop signal by the inspector he was entitled to proceed with the exercise oit due caution."]