—Very great credit for the development of traffic regulation in the United States during the past two decades is due to the persistent and unselfish efforts of William Phelps Eno,[208] who in the latter part of the last century began an agitation to reform the traffic situation in New York City. In December, 1899,[209] he published an article on “Reform in Our Street Traffic Most Urgently Needed,” followed by many others, with personal letters and visits to the city officers, and with the publication of circulars and pamphlets. At first he was not received very favorably by city officers who seemed more interested in “what personal benefit” Eno expected to get out of it, than to the good that would come to the public through such regulation. He later received favorable consideration by Maj. Gen. Francis V. Greene, Police Commissioner, and by Capt. A. R. Piper, U. S. A. Retired, who had been placed in charge of traffic. In a letter dated October 14, 1909, General Greene gives due credit to Eno, thus,[210]
The plan for street traffic regulation owed its inception to you, and you have followed it up consistently and persistently to its present almost perfect development; and in so doing you have conferred a benefit upon New Yorkers and the dwellers in other large cities, of very large proportions.
As a result of the combined work of the city officers and Mr. Eno, a code was compiled which later furnished the basis for the code adopted by the Highway Transport Committee of the Council of National Defense, U. S. A., May 8, 1919. Most of the larger cities in the United States, together with Paris and other European cities, have adopted this or similar codes. A universal standardization of the National Defense Code is being sought now by a national organization—The Eno Foundation for Highway Traffic Regulation, Inc.[211] This code has been revised once or twice since first adopted by New York. The Foundation will be glad to receive suggestions for its betterment from any persons interested.
Campaigns like the “Safety First” and the “Cross Crossings Cautiously” and other “No Accident” campaigns have marked effects. If the necessity of care could be instilled into the mind of every person, if each could be made to realize that the next accident might be his, that accidents are not only painful and disagreeable but always result in the destruction of property, in personal injury or the loss of life, the sum total of savings in money and humanity would be tremendous. All the devices of human ingenuity, all the laws of the sages, and the education of all agencies will not bring absolute safety. The human race is too ignorant, too indolent, too self-complacent, too near, in short, the outskirts of civilization, and the person who suggests the utmost care, who would curtail the thrills of chance and danger is a “joy killer” and a “crèpe hanger.” Perhaps so. Infinite care might result in “innocuous desuetude.” It is said that there was introduced into a western legislature a bill providing that two trains on different tracks approaching their crossing point “should both stop and neither proceed until the other had passed.” The other extreme is fatalism: “on with the dance, let joy be unconfined”; “eat, drink and be merry.” Is there not a golden mean?
SELECTED REFERENCES
Accidents, Symposium on Automobile Hazards, by Ralph Stickle, James L. Roche, Joseph H. Handlon, and William G. Fitzpatrick. Electric Railway Journal, Vol. LVI, pp. 913-921.
American Railway Association, Bulletin issued as a part of the “Cross Crossings Cautiously,” campaign, 1922.
Darrow, F. T., Asst. Chief Engr., C. B. & Q. R. R., “Grade Crossing Elimination,” Nebraska Blue Print, May, 1920. Lincoln.
Eno, William Phelps, “The Science of Highway Traffic Regulation,” published by himself and distributed by Brentano’s, New York.
“Facts and Figures of the Automobile Industry,” 1922, National Automobile Chamber of Commerce, New York.