CHAPTER XX
SOME POINTS OF LAW AFFECTING THE OWNERS OF MOTOR VEHICLES
By Roger W. Wallace, K.C.
Chairman of the Automobile Club of Great Britain and Ireland
As every person interested in motor carriages knows, until the passing of the Locomotives on Highways Act of 1896, every mechanically driven carriage had to be preceded by a man on foot with a red flag, and proceed at a pace resembling that of an ox waggon. But now we may, if our vehicle be under a ton and a half, move at the pace of an average horse, that is to say at twelve miles an hour. Whether it be at all necessary in the open country to so limit the rate of progress is a matter on which opinions still differ, but owing to the efforts of the Automobile Club, public opinion is rapidly changing in favour of an alteration in the law.
This matter of speed, however, has from the first been a burning question between motor-owners and the general public as represented by the police and magistrates. In addition to the limit of twelve miles an hour the Local Government Board, under the authority conferred upon them by the Act of 1896, have made the following regulations:
The driver of a light locomotive —
1. Shall not drive at any speed greater than is reasonable and proper, having regard to the traffic on the highway, or so as to endanger the life or limb of any person or to the common danger of passengers.
2. If the weight unladen of the light locomotive be one ton and a half, and does not exceed two tons, he shall not drive the same at a greater speed than eight miles an hour, or if such weight exceed two tons, at a greater speed than five miles an hour.
The second of these regulations is clear to even one. As regards the first, every respectable driver would agree to the spirit of the regulation, but a certain surprise comes upon one when first learning what the decision of the court is as to its meaning. It has been laid down that both expressions 'having regard to the traffic on the highway' and 'to the common danger of passengers' have no reference to the fact of there being any traffic or passengers on the road in the vicinity of the car. In one case, the locus in quo was a street in Esher, where of course there might have been traffic, though the evidence seemed to point to none being there at the time. These decisions appear most unfortunate, for any driver would consider himself perfectly justified when in the open country, and seeing the road clear, in going at the limit of twelve miles an hour, but it would seem that any policeman noticing him could still summon him under this subsection. Although these decisions stand, yet I can hardly think that a conviction under this subsection if there were not also an offence against the twelve-mile limit could really be upheld in the case I have suggested. The Courts have recently intimated in the case of Gorham v. Brice, published in the 'Times ' of March 13, 1902, following other cases, that it is not much use appealing to the High Court of Justice, and that what appellants really want is a change in the law. In this case the Lord Chief Justice (Lord Alverstone) said he could not understand the motives with which such appeals were brought or what automobilists thought to gain by suggesting there was no evidence as to speed, when, as in practically every case, they did not like the findings of magistrates. He further stated that it was possible the magistrates might have come to a wrong decision, but the Court had no power to interfere with their findings of fact.
Any vehicle which draws another is not under any circumstances to go at more than six miles an hour. Owners of tricycles with trailers need not be afraid of this regulation, for the combination is held to constitute one five-wheeled vehicle, so that they come under the ordinary provisions.
Motor carriages have to carry by the regulations of this Act, in addition to a white light on the right side showing in the direction the carriage is going, a red light showing in the reverse direction.
There are several questions which naturally arise as to the law affecting owners and users of motor carriages on which there is some doubt. I have endeavoured in the following paragraphs to give an answer to some of the questions that are most frequently asked, and I hope these answers will be of some utility to fellow-automobilists.
The first question is one which applies to almost all owners, and is, whether it is necessary to pay a tax on motor mechanics as male servants or whether they can be classed as engineers and escape duty.
On the paper which is sent out by the Inland Revenue authorities every year will be found an extract from the Act 32 & 33 Vict. cap. 14, s. 19, which regulates the imposition of the duty payable on male servants. Apart from the end of the classification, which says that the master is liable to pay duty on all domestic servants, there is included specifically 'coachmen.' While we are not in the habit of calling our mechanics coachmen, yet there can be no doubt that a coachman is a man who drives a carriage, and although he may only be employed part of the day to drive the carriage, yet so is any other coachman who drives horses. It seems, therefore, quite clear that the duty must be paid. There is an idea prevalent amongst many people that it makes a difference whether the man wears livery or not; but this is a delusion; the only difference it could make would be to show more clearly that the man is a domestic servant.
Another question relating to taxes is what tax must be paid on various motor carriages?
Most of the motors with which we have to deal are carriages with four wheels, and these must pay the ordinary carriage tax, which is for a carriage with four or more wheels, to be drawn or propelled by mechanical power, the sum of 2l. 2s. 0d. There is also to be paid, under the Locomotives on Highways Act 1896, an additional duty if the weight of the locomotive (i.e. the motor carriage) exceed one ton unladen, but do not exceed two tons unladen, 2l. 2s., or if the weight of the locomotive exceed two tons unladen, 3l. 3s. od. It should be noted that unladen in this Act means without including the weight of any water, fuel, or accumulators used for the purpose of propulsion. As a matter of detail it may perhaps be mentioned that the latter licences have to be obtained from a collector of Inland Revenue or a Supervisor of Inland Revenue. The lighter vehicles pay as follows:—A quad is a four-wheeled carriage, and, therefore, pays as above, and so also does a tricycle used with a trailer, being classed as a five-wheeled carriage. For tricycles and bicycles the licence costs 15s., they being classed as light private carriages, the definition of which includes 'any carriage propelled upon a road by steam or electricity or any other mechanical power.' Those whom it interests will find a report of a case tried on the question of whether a carriage licence should be taken out for a motor tricycle, the decision being in the affirmative, in the 'Autocar' of May 26, 1900.
There is a doubt current as to whether a master is liable to his driver under the Workmen's Compensation Acts. This is not so, the first Act, that of 1897, referring to servants in a factory and certain other employments; although some places which to the lay mind would scarcely seem to be included in the word 'factory' have been held by the judges to be so classed, there seems no possibility of a motor-car being held to be a factory. The Act of 1900 only extended the application of the former Act to the case of agricultural labourers. While on the subject of accidents it may be mentioned that insurances are procurable which will indemnify both the owner and anyone who may be driving him against injury or death.
There are other liabilities to which motor owners are subject in the same way as are all users of the highway. For instance, a child may be run over and injured. The law applicable to such accidents in the case of motor carriages is no different from that which applies to all other carnages that is to say, the owner is liable both when driving himself and in any case in which his servant is driving on his master's service, but only when the accident is caused by an improper or negligent use of the highway, and when the injured party is not himself guilty of negligence which causes the accident. Against the above and other liabilities it would be well for owners to insure; a list of the best offices can be obtained by communicating with the Secretary of the Automobile Club.
Passing another vehicle on the wrong side is always a dangerous proceeding, as if an accident occur the fact may weigh heavily against the motorist. It is better to use patience and insist on the driver of the other vehicle pulling in to his proper side.
It is perhaps poor comfort to the tourist to know that hecan if he like to wait long enough in the neighbourhood, summon any person who wilfully obstructs the highway, but a threat of issuing a summons might have some effect upon a carter in a country road who refuses to allow room for a car to pass.
As the writer stated at the beginning of this chapter, efforts are being made by the Automobile Club to secure an alteration of the law, and it may be as well to state some of the proposed changes. It is first of all suggested that there should be no limit of speed mentioned in the principal act, and that the reference thereto should be deleted. All rules as to rates of speed, it is proposed, should be left in the hands of the Local Government Board.
For the statutory rules and orders it is proposed to substitute the following:—
(1) He shall not drive a light locomotive at any speed greater than is reasonable and proper, having regard to the traffic at the time on the highway or so as to endanger the life and limb of any person at the time on such highway.
The words 'or to the common danger of passengers' are proposed to be omitted owing to the decisions above referred to.
(2) If the weight unladen of a light locomotive does not exceed two tons, then the limit of speed of 14 miles an hour provided by Section Four of the Act shall not apply to such light locomotive provided that it is fitted with efficient brake-power, except under the following circumstances, when Section Four of the Act shall apply.
(a) When a light locomotive is passing through towns, villages, or crowded places.
(b) When the light locomotive is meeting any horse or cattle driven upon the highway.
(c) When the driver is not able to see that the highway, or any road or other highway joining therewith, is unobstructed for a distance of fifty yards.
In return for these concessions the Club suggest that a regulation should be imposed requiring the proper identification of all cars which are constructed to travel at a greater speed on the flat than 1812 miles per hour.
With regard to the administration of the Act it is also proposed that there should be an appeal on questions of fact from the decisions of Justices of the Peace similar to that which is allowed under the Married Women's Summary Jurisdiction Act, which has been found to work very satisfactorily. Other alterations have been proposed with reference to the tare limit, width of tyres, &c., with which it is unnecessary to deal with here in detail.
In conclusion the reader should carefully peruse the Act and regulations which are printed in the Appendix, and which require no further explanation.