SECOND READING. (Hansard, 20 June 1871)

§ THE EARL OF DUNMORE
, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, said, that the object of the measure was to consolidate the law regulating the use of locomotives on roads. For this purpose it proposed to repeal and to reenact with modifications "The Locomotives Act, 1861" and "The Locomotives Act, 1865." The principal modifications were these. It substituted an entirely new scale of tolls to be taken after the passing of this Act; it established new regulations as to the weight and size of locomotives, the breadth of the wheels, and the weight to be placed on each pair; and it provided new rules for the manner of working locomotives on turnpike roads and highways. By the Act of 1865 it was provided that three persons should accompany every road steamer; that one of them should precede it by at least 60 yards, displaying a red flag; and that the speed should not exceed four miles an hour in the country, and two miles an hour in towns and villages. Those restrictions were very inconvenient—the man with the red flag was a positive nuisance, frightening horses which might otherwise pass the steamer quietly. This Bill enacted that two persons should be required to work each locomotive, and if more than two waggons were attached, an additional person should be employed. The man with the red flag was abolished. The usual pace of drays and vans was three or four miles an hour, and the Bill proposed that locomotives should be allowed the pace of four miles in towns and villages and eight miles in the country. The present crawling pace generated an excess of steam in the boilers, the discharge of which occasioned much noise. In towns the local authorities would be able to impose what restrictions they chose on locomotives running within their area, and he did not suppose that the actual speed on country roads would exceed five or six miles. Traction engines had been much improved since the existing Acts were passed, and great benefit would accrue to traders and the public from their becoming a substitute for horse labour, which was very expensive. 290 Coalmasters, moreover, were sometimes unable to undertake contracts on account of the insufficient supply of railway trucks. In one case a coalowner lost a contract for 30,000 tons of coals for want of the assistance afforded by steam traction engines. It had been proved that steam omnibuses were practicable, an experiment made in Paris last year being highly successful. The engines there run at the rate of 10 miles an hour without occasioning any inconvenience. They had also been recently tried at Edinburgh, and with success; and they would open up communications with places at some distance from a railway, in cases where a branch line would be too costly to be remunerative.

THE EARL OF MORLEY
said, he was unwilling to oppose the second reading; but considering the important questions it involved, he would suggest that it should be referred to a Select Committee. He agreed with the noble Earl that the man with the red flag was more likely to frighten horses than to act as a safeguard. Captain Tyler, of the Board of Trade, had drawn up a Report on the subject which was generally favourable to the Bill, while recommending certain safeguards. The increased speed now proposed would greatly increase the number of locomotives; but many points would require consideration, such as the tolls, for these steamers caused damage to roads, and turnpikes were likely to be abolished. He therefore hoped the noble Earl would assent to his proposal.

§ LORD KINNAIRD
urged the noble Earl to accept the suggestion. With regard to damage which steamers might do, his experience showed that their broad wheels rather tended to improve the roads over which they passed by acting as rollers; in fact, they did less damage than a horse.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY
said, his experience was exactly the reverse of that of the noble Lord. He had often heard grievous complaints of the utter ruin traction engines wrought on the roads, though he admitted that the wheels might possibly be so adapted as to prevent the damage complained of.

EARL GREY
supported the Bill, remarking that steam ploughs, which caused a much greater nuisance than 291 road steamers, were subject to no restrictions. He looked forward to ploughs as well as carts and waggons being drawn by these steamers; and if the Bill, after reference to a Select Committee, did not pass this Session, he hoped the House would refuse to renew the existing Act.

D. Northumberland.	L. Elphinstone.
E. Kellie.	L. Vernon.
E. Radnor.	L. Rossie.
E. Carnarvon.	L. Dunmore.
K. Grey.	L. Barrogill.
E. Morley.	L. Monck.