DEATHS ON THE ROAD

Taranaki Daily News, 10 February 1934, Page 15 (Supplement)

DEATHS ON THE ROAD

BRITISH MOTOR TOLL SOME FEASIBLE REFORMS. SPEED THE CHIEF ENEMY. The report of the British Ministry of Transport on the fatal road accidents for the first six months of the year has beer, hailed by the speed maniacs as confirmation of their constantly reiterated view that it is not the pace of a motor-car that makes it dangerous, writes Viscount Cecil in the Manchester Guardian. As a matter of fact, the report warrants no such conclusion. Excessive speed is declared to have been the cause of no fewer than 265 deaths—by far the largest number attributed to any single fault of motor drivers. The compilers further point out that the estimate of the miles per hour at which a motor is travelling is quite untrustworthy, and that in reference to cases in which pedestrians have been thought to be partly or mainly to blame the "speed of the vehicle concerned has a material bearing on the accident.” It is said in the tables attached to the report that in some 50 per cent, of the accidents the car was going at 20 miles an hour or less 1 The Ministry of Transport intimates that this is a statement which cannot be relied on.

Indeed, if this statement is founded on more than the excited guesses of the drivers of the cars, it can only be true of the actual moment of collision, by which time even the most reckless motorist would have applied his brakes and materially reduced speed. The critical moment is when the accident first appears probable, some yards before it occurs. If the car is then going at 40 or 50 miles an hour, as many if not most cars habitually do nowadays, it is obvious that both the motorist and the pedestrian will have less time to decide what to do, and it will be less possible to stop the car in time than- if it were travelling more slowly. No amount of sophistry can alter that plain, inescapable fact. It is at the very centre of the problem. If road accidents have increased by leaps and bounds since the motor replaced the horse, as they have, the chief reason is that the momentum of the car is far greater than that of the horse-drawn carriage.

TWO SIGNIFICANT POINTS. There are two interesting sidelights on this question to be derived from the report. One is that accidents are not at all common in mist or fog. Why ? Simply and solely because in those conditions it is impossible to go fast. The . other point is even more striking. Generally speaking, the number of collisions on the road varies directly with the amount of traffic of all kinds which it carries. Thus on Bank Holidays and Good Friday they are very numerous. On ordinary days they are commonest during the rush hours, and so on. This is no doubt the reason why there .are more of them on built-up roads than in the open country. The most deadly of all spots are those parts of towns where, though there are a considerable number of road-users, there are not so many as to prevent fast driving. We all know at what a terrific speed some motors go in the suburbs and in the opener parts of the towns. But in the City of London even Jehu could not have driven furiously; the traffic moves slowly, and in consequence, though the streets are crowded with pedestrians and vehicles, only six people were killed in the six months, and of those only one was killed in the middle of the day, when the streets are full. A SPEED DIAL. | Speed, then, is the enemy. How can it be controlled ? The best plan would be to have two classes of roads, one which would be treated like railways, fenced off from casual passers-by and subject to special regulations permitting motor-cars to drive as fast as they wished. On the other class, available for general users, the speed would be strictly limited to twenty or at the most to thirty miles an hour, according to the character of the, road. That' reform is, however, a long way off. In the meantime those cars and lorries which are subject to a speed-limit must be made to keep the law. I do not think that can be done unless some means can be devised to make it easier to detect breaches of the law. The old plan of police traps in a few spots was ineffective and in some cases oppressive. What is wanted is some easy method by which apy I policeman or other observer can see at a glance what is the pace of any car. There is no real difficulty about it. It would be quite easy, as an engineering matter, to fix an indicator at the back of the car of such a size and design as could be clearly read and would show at what speed the car was travelling. The dial would naturally be lighted up at night and would be much more simple to read than the number of the car. Where the car or lorry was subject to a speed-limit or where a general limit was fixed for special towns or districts a law-breaker would be thus detected with facility. Nor does this plan require further legislation. Under the existing Act the Minister of Transport can require such indicators to be fixed by administrative order. FOOTPATHS. Again, special speed-limits ought to be much more common. At present they can only come into being if asked for by the local authority and approved by the Minister. In fact, I believe only one such speed-limit has been allowed, the practice being to refuse it unless there is some special reason why it should be granted. The rule should be the other way. If a local authority desires to restrict speed in its district it should be permitted to do so unless there is strong reason to the contrary. One other immediate reform I would press for, and that is the provision of footpaths by the side of the principal country roads. At present the hardships and danger are very great, especial-

ly for children who have to go to school along a road where motors dash along at fifty or sixty miles per hour. Here, too, the Ministry could act by declining to make any grant from the Road Fund for road reconstruction or repair unless footpaths were provided. There are many other reforms which would help, such as the imposition of teste for drivers, the conversion of the Highway Code from ■an advisory to a compulsory- document, strengthening the law for dealing with negligent homicide, provision for compensation without proof .of negligence, and the like. But most, if not all, of these last proposals require legislation, which takes time. The other remedies I have suggested could be at least begun without delay. For prompt action is really essential. We cannot go on allowing this horrible slaughter and mutilation by thousands to continue. It is a disgrace to our civilisation and, indeed, to our Christianity.