JULY IjtH, 190g,

THE AUTOCAR B Journal publiabeb in tbe tntereats of tbe mecbantcnll\? propelleb roab carriage.

EDITED BY H. WALT ER STANEtt

No. 7r7. VoL. XXIII.J SATURDAY, JuLY r 7TH, r gog.

[PRICE 3D.

The Autocar.

(Publi,hed Weekly.)

Registered a s a New3paper for transmission in the United Kingdom

Entered as sec::md-class matter in the New York {N.Y.) Post Office.

Three Editions every Friday .

The THREEPENNY EDITION, printed on Art paper. The PENNY EDITION, printed upon thinner paper. The FOREIGN EDITION, price 3d.1 printed on thin paper for transmission abroad.

Editorial Office :

COVENTRY.

Publiahing Offices :

20, TUDOR STREET, LONDON, E .C. , England.

CONTENTS. N OTES THE R.A.C. i\lIDLAND 1\'IEET • • USEFUL HI:-.'TS Al\'D T1rs {ILLUSTRATl~D) TIIE I2•14 H.P. F OUR-CYLINDER ARG\'LL (ILLUSTRATE D) SMALL CAR TALK • • N OISELESS AND FRICTI ONLESS G EARING (ILL U';TRATED) • . ROUND ABOUT BAKEWELL (ILLUSTRATION) • . B ODY DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION (ILLUSTRATE D) M OTOR UNION N OTES • . A TYRE PROTECTOR TRIAL ON THE TRACK • • THE I NTERNATIONAi .. L EAGUE OF T OURING A SSOCIATIONS THE HALL S PARE \VH EEL AND N oN- < :;. KJD (ILLUSTRATED) T ESTING A 12-q H .P. ARGYLL . . THE ScorT1 s H TRIAL THE N EW 8 H .P. Two -CYLINDER H UMBER .. b 1PORTATION OF PETROL AT PORTISI-IEAD (ILLUSTRATED) P OLICE T ~APS IN N ORTH \r\'ALES DIFFICULTIES 0 1~ IDENTIFICATION-BROOKLANDS A .R.C. CORRE';PO~ DENCE .. TII E C.A.V. S YSTEM OF CAR LIGHTING (ILL USTRATED) . . FLASHES R OAD \\1ARNING • • C LUB DOlNGS

P AGE 79-80

Bo 81 82-84

85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92·9J

93 94-95

96 9 7-9

98 99 100

. . 110-111 . . 11 2-11 3

I14 .. 115-116

Subscription Rates :

British Isle:;- Home Edition, 163. ; penny (thin paper edition), 65 6d

Abroad (thin paper edition), 22s. 8d. per annum. Index t o Advertisements appears on page 40.

Notes. What Does Mr. Lloyd George Mean? The intentions of the Chancellor of the Exchequer 1rith regard to the revenue ll'hich he hopes to deri1·e from the motor car and petrol taxes become more obscure as time goes on. On the one hand he promises to the motorists enormous benefits from the central road authority, which he maintains cannot be established on an income of Je ss than ..£600,000 per annum, and on the other, \\'hen the municipalities complain of the burden he is placing upon them, he explains to them that they rea lly should not grumble, because they will ha,·e half the land tax and the ..£600,000 from the motor taxes. The e tlro statements ,rhich appear to be so contradictory were made within one week of each other, as on July 1st the Chancellor made the one to the motorists ' deputation, and on J uly 8th he made th e th er to the r-ep resentatives of the municipalities.

It is t rue that ~Ir. L loyd George, in reminding th e municipal representati1·es of the ..£600,000 11·hich 11·as to go towards the road s, sa id that it was not a diminut ion of the rates but a contribution toward the impro1· ment of the roads , 1rh ich 1rere a burden upon the rates at the present mo 1:ent. He said: " \Vhere local authorities were endea1·ouring to cope with the question of impro1·ements of the roads and adapting their roads to mechanical traction, undoubtedly money 1rould go to the reli ef of the rat s, because the kind of thing 11-hich he contemplated 1roi.ild be done by mean of the Central Fund 1rns that which 1ras already done by mam· local authorities. " ,.

The point 11·'.1ich must be borne i,n mind is that in making these remarks t-Ir. Lloyd George 1ras not talk ing to the county authorities hut to municipal authori tie -repre3entati1·es cf 295 boroughs in England, Jrcland, anrl \\'al es . Hitherto some motorists h:1 1·e been consoling themseh·es 11·ith the idea that, unjust and nnnecessary as ,rere the proposl:'d increased taxes on r'a r., and petrol, the money 1rould at any rate be spent upon th e improvement of the country roads, and 11011· Mr. Lloyd George promises the whole of it to th !:' rr.unicipalities ,rho 11·ill make their road. lit for motor traffi c. What does he really mean' The roads th rough towns to-da I' are as lit for motor traffic as for am· other traffic-ind~ed, they a re far litter for motor traffic than for horse traffic f,:om a sanitary point of 1·ie1r- and although it is concei,·ahle that he re and there an imprOl·ement might be made to urban roads ll'hich 1rnuld fairly come ll'ithin the scope of the c ntra l road authority- such, fo r instance, as the making of a boule1·arcl or a,·oiding a route around some great centrt· of popu I at ion- this 1rou I cl only be of interest to through traffic , as the great majority of local people ll'ho motor t01rnrcls a town ll'ish to go into it.

There are no to11·ns . o badly pl anned that there is any real nece .. ity for avoiding loops to be made. and therefore it is impossible to avoid thP natural conclusion that :-Ir. Lloyd George was holding out to the municipalities some new development of the central road scheme, of which those who are to supply the money-the motorists- know nothing, as they have been led to believe a ll along that their money 11·ould he dernted to the imprOl·ement of the great main countrr roads, and not wasted in towns. What will the countr councils sav \\'hen thev hear that :- Ir. T .lo,-d George is going to console the boroughs with the -mone1· they hoped to get fo r road impro1·ement? The onh· solution 1\'e can offer to the matter is that the C'hanceflor of the Exchequer was trying an experiment on the municipal deputationists to see if they had a good a ll-round knowledge of the Budget. As the municipal deputation did not protest, we can assume that Mr. T.,101-d George satislied himself that they had not mastered· the Budget as a 11·hol , otherwise they 11·ould surelv have reminded him that the ..£600,000 had been ai"ready promised elsewhere.