TE AWAMUTU COURIER. Printed on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. WEDNESDAY, 12th AUGUST, 1936. THE LAW OF THE ROADS.

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 53, Issue 3794, 12 August 1936, Page 4

TE AWAMUTU COURIER. Printed on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. WEDNESDAY, 12th AUGUST, 1936. THE LAW OF THE ROADS.

GOOD conduct on the roads is to be an enforced rule, and motorists generally will do well to heed the warning which came from the magistrate yesterday. “ I am going to grade up the fines until they reach £so,’’ said Mr Levien after mulcting several offenders in discretionary penalties. This is no idle warning. The Courts throughout New Zealand are paying increasing attention to the questions of traffic, and motorists are paying the fines ! This, no doubt, is in keeping with Government policy. Mr Semple, who is the Ministry’s spokesman on such matters, has been emlphatic on the point. His utterances leave little to the imagination; war has been declared on people who do not behave themselves and transgress the highways code. The theory is excellent; but in practice it can happen that Government decree can be a denial of public facility. Nobody has any sympathy with the wanton individual who runs riot on the roads, but there is a limit which reason directs. For example, it seems ridiculous that local authorities and public bodies should enjoy freedom to do what, in commercial life, becomes an illegal action. Yesterday it transpired that a two-yard capacity of river shingle is the standard loading for public works vehicles, but the same loading for the ordinary commercial needs of the community exceeds the road classification. Why ? The plea is that excess loading, in the words of the magistrate, “ thrashes the .road ” meaning, no doubt, that road damage is done. But if that is true with commercial loadings how can it be otherwise for public works loadings ? Are we to assume that the road surface is proof against injury according to the ownership of a vehicle or the destiny of its load ? The idea is ridiculous. It means that the lawmaker believes in the "do as I say and not do as I do ” theory, and people are not likely to hold laws so made in very high regard. Not so many months ago a carrier was fined in the local Court for non-observance of the weight classification when, at the very moment, a Government vehicle of still greater weight-carrying capacity was traversing the very road—and it traverses it every day. Laws of this nature are keenly suggestive of persecution the quality of justice is lacking. Laws which give the right to penalties must above all else repose in the principles of equality. It is nonsense to say that the king can do no wrong because the king happens most likely to be a civil servant sheltering behind the plea of public interest. But is public interest to be interpreted to mean official privilege ? A good law is one which is universal. In the case of the highways a code has to be drawn and enforced. That is true. But sauce for the goose i« sauce for the gander: the lawmaker is entitled to no exemption. All the relevant factors of speed and weight know no distinction between the types of carrier, and there is no warrant at all for any exemption in rides of road conduct which are designed for public safety. After all, transportation is a public service measurable in the costs the people must pay. A restriction or limitation of vehicle capacity can surely make private enterprise pay more dearly for service, and if Government bodies enjoy exemptions the costs of relative works will not be comparable. In licenses and fees commercial road vehicles already foot a heavy bill of costs for road upkeep, .and if they must conform to a standard of conduct then, obviously, the law-maker should set an example of conduct as a worthy guide.