THE USERS OF *ROADS [To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.]
SIR,--In your notes in the Spectator this week you comment with apparent satisfaction on the fact that we are now within measurable distance of every vehicle being compelled to carry a rear light at night, and appear to think that the safety of the cyclist is the main consideration. Is it so ?
Besides cyclists and horse vehicles there are a great number of other persons who have a full moral and legal right to the proper use of the metalled portion of road. What is to happen to them if this law comes into operation ? Their danger if unlighted seems to be quite equal to that of the cyclist. For instance—a man with a truck or wheelbarrow, a woman with perambulator, any one driving cattle or sheep, or foot passengers in company in conversation ; you would scarcely suggest that in these cases a light should be carried on every occasion after dark, yet in all these cases the danger will be increased if this becomes the law.
It has been argued that pedestrians should keep to the footpath. This is out of the question. In the rural district in which I live (not more than one-fifteenth of the county) there is something near 200 miles of road without any footpath, the metalled portion being from 9 to 12 ft. wide, and I believe this is largely the case all over the county ; at any rate, as regards large portions of it.
The main object of the alteration is to allow the overtaking vehicle to proceed at a greater pace, and if by chance any kind of accident occurs to relieve the driver of a certain amount of responsibility for injury or damage which may occur. There appears to be only one sure way of preventing accidents, which is for every fast vehicle to be provided with sufficient light to cover a greater distance forward than that which ho requires to come to a standstill.
MIDLANDER.
Previous page
