The Price of Good Roads
Page 84
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
T HAVE read Lord Stonham's letter with interest, but
really all that it boils down to is another plea that the railways should be given first prize for being a failure. It must be remembered that the bulk of the railways were built in the 19th century, before the development of the pneumatic rubber tyre and the internal combustion engine.
Also in the railways' favour were many foolish Acts of Parliament such as the Highways Act, of 1831, which empowered the turnpike trusts to kill the road steamer by colossal tolls. In 1861 a uniform scale of tolls was imposed, and so was a 10 m.p.h. speed limit. However, the most disastrous blow came in .1865 when the speed limit was reduced to 4 m.p.h. and a man with a red flag had to walk 60 yd. in front of any steam road vehicle.
Behind this great barrage of protection the railways were able to advance all over the country and, during the 1840s, it was quite common to open 500 miles of railway in a year, and in 1848 they opened 1,182 miles. This was certainly a remarkable achievement and, what is more, railway construction at the rate of 200-300 miles a year went on right into the 1880s.
At present we only have 150 miles of motorway in use, but I maintain that with the modern plant at our disposal, we could quite easily convert 2,000 miles of railways into roads each year. So that in 10 years we would haVe a 20,000-mile system of motorways.
About 18,000 miles of the system would he undivided roadway, which could be classified as class II motorways. but the 1,500 miles of multi-line track would provide class 1 motorways with divided roadways with four, six, eight and 1150 more lanes. There will be the existing motorways, those not yet completed plus more than 190,000 miles of all-purpose roads.
This would provide Britain with the finest road system in the world and, thanks to the energy of our forefathers. we could get it at bargain price.
In conclusion, I would remind Lord Stonham that we pay for good roads, whether we build them or not; in practice we pay far more dearly in traffic delays, accideni.s and lack of industrial expansion if we do not build them.
Harrogate, Yorks. A. L WATKINSON.
Why They Voted
IN Time Commercial Motor of August 18 I read Mr. W. D. I Mitchell's letter mentioning that possibly the main reason why some M.P.s oppose the new 40 m.p.h. limit for public service vehicles is because they have neglected to provide proper roads for Britain.
I certainly must agree with this point, but I do not altogether think that it is the main reason. My theory is that M.P.s who are opposed to the 40 m.p.h. limit have practically no confidence in experienced drivers, who have had to undergo training in dense and light traffic.
The more optimistic M.P.s that have voted for the higher speed limit have realized the driving skill of p.s.v. drivers and have no doubt experienced their courtesy. I believe that this courtesy encouraged the M.P.s to reward the public transport systems with a speedier service (where an open road permits), but with continuous safety for everybody.
Shortlands, Kent. STEPHEN S. FERRADA.