Before mass motorisation - Transport Policy and Planning in Great Britain - page 68

geographical range of courtship as reflected in the increased distances between the
home parishes of rural couples getting married! Use of the bicycle by women was a
conspicuous feature at a time marked by their campaigning for political emancipation.
By contrast the development and marketing of the motor vehicle for many decades was
conceived as a male prerogative.
Until industrialised production methods became more widespread in the 1920s, the
number of commercial vehicles and indeed the number of motorcycles exceeded the
number of private cars. For private travel horse-drawn traps remained the dominant
mode until after World War I. In the early years of the 20th century, however, serious
conflicts began to emerge between motorists and other road users, despite the very small
number of vehicles by today's standards. One concern was the clouds of dust thrown
up by fast-moving motor cars. This in turn related to the state of the roads themselves,
an issue on which pedal cyclists through the Road Improvement Association had
campaigned unsuccessfully during the previous 20 years. But road improvement raised
the vexed question of funding.
The Royal Automobile Club put forward the proposal that motorists should pay an
annual tax on their vehicles, the proceeds of which should go into a national fund to be
distributed to local authorities for road maintenance and improvement. This seemingly
generous offer was made in order to head off the greater evil (from the motorists'
standpoint) of them being required to fund a new network of motor-roads altogether. The
proposal for a Road Improvement Fund was adopted by the Liberal Government in 1907
with vehicle taxation based on engine horsepower and supplemented by a duty on petrol.
As vehicle ownership grew, so did the money in the road fund. This proved too
tempting a revenue source for Chancellors of the Exchequer and the fund began to be
raided for general public expenditure after 1926 and was wound up altogether as an
earmarked source in 1937. Nevertheless the idea that the annual vehicle tax is or should
be linked directly to expenditure on roads has proved remarkably enduring and continues
to influence debates on motoring taxation and road pricing to the present day.
During the 1920s, public concern mounted at the rising toll of 'motor accidents'. Road
deaths reached the appallingly high figure of 6,100 a year in 1928 at a time when there
were fewer than two million vehicles on the road and the speed limit was still nominally
20 mph. Previous debates on a national speed limit had reached a stalemate between
campaigners arguing that it was necessary in order to reduce casualties, and motoring
organisations who saw this as a unacceptable limit on motorists' freedom and who
maintained that it was reckless or dangerous driving which needed to be targeted instead.
Although similar views can be seen expressed in the popular press today, it is important
to appreciate the very different social context in which debates over driving originally took
place. Whilst car ownership increased dramatically during the inter-war years it remained
almost exclusively within the province of the middle class - and at a time when this was a
much narrower and more privileged group than 'white collar' occupations today. The very
idea that leading members of local communities should be required to adapt their day-
to-day behaviour (as potentially irresponsible motorists) was regarded as an affront. Such
social niceties surrounding restrictions on driver behaviour persisted well into the era of
mass car ownership - the comment that a motorist is 'unlucky' to have been 'caught' for
speeding is still a familiar one; likewise the distinction that a traffic violation is not in the
same category as other criminal offences.
A Royal Commission appointed to consider the issue of speed limits recommended
that the general limit of 20 mph - long since ignored - should be abolished. This was
enacted in the Road Traffic Act of 1930. At the same time penalties for dangerous