Law, Noise, Busines And Outlaws
“Reason alone is sufficient to govern a rational creature.” (Jonathon Swift).
What sustains people through other aspects of life is the knowledge that play will eventually be resumed. Provided it is not so anti-social as to be criminal, banning leisure is impossible. This did not stop the persecution of motorcyclists, which went beyond an emotive or ethical disapproval. Through the courts, it became a pro-active determination to make life difficult for them, if not to eradicate the problem altogether. This oppression created defiance among the early Bikers, which grew beyond the individual into a group concept.
Whilst the motorcycle was becoming accepted to some degree, others compensated by over-reacting. Sharing the roads with horses wasn’t just a hazard for the animals. Irate horse owners often plied their whips on motorcyclists, whose machines were dubbed: Those damn motorbikes in the courts. Many rural people feared for their jobs because machines could do the work of several people or animals. They viewed the bike as yet another machine. These people were in the service of the Gentry, who often held positions within the judiciary. When complaints were made about motorcycles, biased attitudes meant that the rider was regarded as guilty until proven innocent.
In the UK, interference from the police was also geared by local business people who also served on the judiciary. They recognised an easy source of income for the courts through the fines imposed on riders and drivers of motor vehicles. They were doomed to break the inept laws; like that in the UK which restricted speed to 4 miles per hour. This attitude also spread through Europe, and in Switzerland, some Cantons (local authorities) banned motor vehicles altogether. France however, understood the need for vehicles and was more lenient, as motorcycles and cars were vital to its industry. For similar reasons, America also had a better attitude towards progress. A UK publication titled Wheel World, commented that the law had: “Cruelly and unnecessarily clipped the wings of many a lover of rapid motion.” Comparing this with the reference to ‘Damned motorbikes’, clearly shows the societal divide that had isolated and identified motorcyclists as an undesirable other.
It was around this time that the Automobile Association (AA) appeared in the UK. Users of various vehicles joined, and adopted the military salute to acknowledge each other on the road. When a member’s salute was not returned, it was not disrespectful, but a warning that a speed trap or other problem lay ahead. More than a salute, more than a convoluted message, it indicated that a camaraderie was growing out on the road.
Another UK law allowed the popularity of vehicles to be measured by census. In 1904, the Motor Car Act required the registration of all motor vehicles. It gave a barometric reading of the population’s over-all condition, with 22,126 motorcycles registered against 18,340 cars. At this early stage, public opinion might have put the motorcycle where the car is today. However, exposure to the elements and other practicalities determined that even motorcycle combinations weren’t enough for general transport. Motorcycles were to remain the premise of enthusiasts and those on lower incomes.
In the late 1800s, the Self-propelled Traffic Association enlisted support from the press and politicians. They brought a new bill known as The Locomotives on Highways Bill before parliament. The Locomotive Bill’s becoming an act coincided with the first Motor Show at Kensington, which might have further promoted biking. However, the motorcycle was poorly represented there. This was possibly due to negative public opinion and legislative squeezing, making the future outlook for bikes (and therefore prospective sales) rather bleak. Whatever the reasons, the manufacturers and riders of motorcycles have had to create their own events, further broadening the rift between themselves and the rest of society.
On New Year’s Day in 1931, the Road Traffic Act came into force in the UK. Replacing the Motor Car Act, it raised the speed limit to 20 mph (still too slow for bikes), and larger rear number plates helped the police to trace reckless rather than speeding motorists. This latter was partly because their attitudes toward speed and motorcycles had changed, having learnt the advantages of them for themselves.
The Traffic Act totally altered UK motoring because it included the publication of the Highway Code. This was intended to be a regulatory guideline for road user’s behaviour. Not the letter of the law, it did enforce some sensibility and clarified the muddle of unregulated traffic. However it embodied an imbalance within the Traffic Act regarding certain vehicles. Like the motorcycle, equestrian and cyclist use of the roads does not contribute so much to wear and tear. However horses and bicycles were not required to pay vehicle licence fees. Nor did their users have to pass a driving test in order to obtain a driver’s licence. Many of them were too young to hold one, which questions the sense if not the double values of allowing them onto the roads. Bicycles were also exempt from the Ministry of Transport’s road worthy testing and equine health never came into question. It is argued whether such requirements are viable in these cases. After all, pedestrians don’t need a licence to walk. But common sense alone requires some responsibility among all road users.
Busier roads led to an increase in motor accidents, creating a viable market for insurance companies. Eventually, ructions arising from un-insured accidents made the minimum third party insurance compulsory for all road users. Yet again, equestrians and cyclists were excepted from this ruling. Unfortunate motorists who had an accident caused by an equestrian or cyclist had to resort to the courts for any claims. All this shows the different attitudes and values between those merely using transport and the biking enthusiast.
*
It was in 1935 that Colonel T.E. Lawrence entered motorcycling history books, having died in mysterious circumstances. He allegedly swerved to avoid two boys on bicycles and crashed into a ditch. Another account states that he swerved to avoid a car and struck one of the cyclists, while other contentions suggest he was surreptitiously murdered, possibly in connection with his exploits in Arabia. Part of the reason for so much theorising is that no-one could accept how such an accomplished rider could simply loose control. This, however difficult to prove, is so often the get-out clause where deceased riders are unable to establish the truth. It has been revealed that a black car was seen leaving the scene of the accident, which might support the conspiracy theories. On examining the bike, George Brough found traces of black paint; yet strangely, he did not come forwards. Lawrence was allegedly about to assume the post as Head of British Intelligence. Under those circumstances, his being a gay Biker might not only have invoked his misfortune, but would certainly have meant that no-one was likely to investigate his apparent unlawful killing to a satisfactory conclusion.
Whatever the truth was, this was not the first, nor would it be the last time that a motorcycling accident would be shrouded in mystery. Much-maligned attitudes have held sway over the evidence of police and witnesses, if not the decisions of magistrates, ever since bikes first appeared. More unfortunately, assumptions about the dangerous motorcycle have allowed many biking deaths and injuries to be dismissed as misadventure, rather than apportioning any blame.
Throughout biking’s early years, a legislative pattern had emerged that has virtually blue-printed relations between Bikers, (bike) technology, the public, and the law. As bikes improved there was a public reaction that lead to legislation. Whilst this was aimed at regulating the dangerous or unacceptable driving of all vehicles, it often served to curtail development. Bikers have had to defend and modify their position accordingly.
The motorcycle’s comparative vulnerability has made self-regulation and sensible development a recurring theme throughout its history. This self regulation naturally spread into motorcycle competition, where rules and regulations had to be formulated. Any game can only be played fairly by such impositions. Even though such laws were written, participants willingly submitted to them. Their voluntary behaviour on the circuits upheld chivalry and courtesy, for example by one rider’s allowing another to cross the finish line before them. They would do this when they themselves had no chance of winning a championship, while the person they let pass needed those vital points to clinch their position. Similarly, tail-enders moved out of the way of oncoming leaders, despite perhaps being in a duel of their own. These and other examples of track behaviour arise from the code of the road - based on respect and trust for other like-types. Some might dismiss it as gung-ho, but it was tempered with a sharp sense of reality, garnered through the experiences that cultivated the knights of the road.
Despite the complex wranglings of sporting rules, most competitors still abide by the written codes. However, commerciality is making its mark. Prior to the start of Grands Prix and World Superbike races, riders are compelled to remove their crash helmets, so that television audiences can recognise them. At other times, prior to and after races, they are seen without helmets (which usually bear their name). During the races, their bikes are numbered, and their names and numbers are flashed up on the screen. Sensible legislation is desirable, therefore effective. Unnecessary impingements will be contested, because some businesses and legislators are too remote from the people whom they serve to be capable of grasping a clear concept of what is required.
There are many other examples, including that of Japanese ace Noriyuki Haga. He took medicine for a cold, not knowing it contained a stimulant prohibited by racing authorities. At first they took away vital points and banned him from meetings. Appeals and wrangling between his team and the authorities lasted the remainder of the season, effectively denying Haga the championship he richly deserved. Many purport that this is what persuaded him to move into GP racing. Certainly his WSB team echoed the sentiment by withdrawing from superbikes themselves. The law is the law, but an accident is an accident - other riders who have performed belligerently on the track have got away with no punishment. Flexibility and lenience are human, and while it is human to err, a legislative body has to transcend that, if it is to garner any respect. Notably, many people involved in these decisions are not riders themselves. Other disputes concerning technology and what is or isn’t permitted highlight the need for more knowledgeable people to govern their own activities.
Law within the road-going motorcycling fraternity had no cause for written formulation, because initially, there were none among them with any malicious intent. The outlook of the Biker psyche was positive, in individual and group ideals, creating an equilibrium that found its own natural balance. Civility and mutual respect told an individual not to interfere with a stranger’s machine without consent. If something was borrowed, it was returned, and mutuality suggested that a favour was due in the other direction - but not wholly necessary. Because respect was a predominant proviso, life among motorcyclists was as straightforwards and undemanding as it was unrestricted. Freedom had been made to work without the imposition of threat or warning from anyone elected to keep the peace.
However, the impositions made on biking created a need to establish organisations that spoke on behalf of motorcyclists. The UK’s Auto Cycle Union among others had to make incursions into the world of politics to protect the interests of the motorcycling public. Whilst it is true that there were elements associated with motorcyclists who infringed upon criminal and civil law, this did not give the authorities carte blanche to legislate against Bikers en masse. But that is precisely what some misinformed individuals are still practicing. Many Bikers wish that bike thieves were pursued with such enthusiasm.
*
As populations grew, and people were forced to live in closer proximity with one another, the excesses of enthusiastic activities became a nuisance to others. When an engine is tuned for performance, its breathing has to be free. This meant that tuned machines used straight-through exhausts, with no silencing baffles. While most riders were content with their machine’s state of tune, enthusiasts enjoy performance development, and the music of a tuned engine.
The noise debate had identified sectionalised groups within biking as early as 1909. An article by Alfred Hastch in Harper’s Weekly, titled The Rise of the Motorcycle, stated that: “They would ride in city or in open country with their mufflers cut out, or in some cases absolutely devoid of muffling attachment. In some cases it was the rider’s desire for noise, or to bring attention to the fact that he owned a motorcycle; in other instances it was the owner’s desire for more power; but whichever case, this offence in principle and in conjunction with that of unsuitable attire has done more to retard the advancement of motorcycling in general than all other arguments combined.”
While a silent running motorcycle has its own appeal, there is an optimum balance between excessive and productive noise emissions, that is satisfactory to the enthusiast. What Hastch differentiates between is those who enjoyed that noise, and those who were making excessive noises for all the wrong reasons, like attracting attention to themselves. Just what he meant by unsuitable attire is not clear. He could have alluded to those who neglected to wear any protective clothing, who would have included a number of respectable people who preferred contemporary fashions.
In America, an attempt to dissuade riders from meddling with stock systems occasioned Harley Davidson to dub those with open pipes as boobs. A letter from an enthusiast to the New York Times in 1912 stated: “As to noise, which is often the cause of ill-feeling, practically all motorcycles do run very silently, but the comparatively few ‘open muffler fiends’ put the whole fraternity of motorcycle riders in a bad light.” The noise nuisance is a valid factor, yet the motorcycle’s minority among other noise polluting vehicles might suggest that this was an excuse for biased thinkers to single them out for criticism.
The Times letter continued: “I am often asked: ‘But doesn’t the thing (!) shake you to death?’ Yet the same person thinks it very pleasant to be tossed about more violently on horseback....A little less prejudice and a wider recognition of the reliability of the motorcycle will be a means of extending to more people a very exhilarating recreation as well as an economical means of transportation, which is unfortunately considered by many to be beneath them.” These allusions to prejudice and inferior status are an early sign of class being dragged into the debate. That argument had no basis within biking, because the bike was already popular across the social divides.
In 1921, ordinary people made an impression on motorcycle development. The British Motor Cycle Racing Club’s 500 race at Brooklands in that year started at 7 AM. The Motorcycle magazine said: “The sharp crack of so many well tuned exhausts, the clouds of Castrol mingling with the mists of early morning, the semi-comic aspect of so many running and leaping men, formed a spectacle which repaid the company for its early rising.” This points to the enjoyment sought in biking, rather than any deliberate intrusion. However the noise of well tuned exhausts at this and other events at Brooklands lead to complaints from the locals, causing noise restrictions to be introduced. Bike developers reacted by trying to create a quieter engine with no loss of power. Research into engine characteristics showed that some back-pressure in the exhaust system helps to develop more power, so this criticism actually helped the motorcycle’s progress.
*
On the business side of things, it was the arrival of cheap motorcars like Henry Ford’s Model T, that contributed to difficulties among all bike manufacturers. Also, their previous success had encouraged them to build various models. The vast ranges were too great to sustain in a competitive market. As the market declined, the US manufacturers played a dangerous game of inflated sales figures. They also made wild claims about the abilities of motorcycles. Harley-Davidson historian, Dr. Harry V. Sucher, stated that bike advertising took on: “The literary stature of a vaudeville handbill.” He added that the advertising of Indian bikes: “Paralleled Biblical prophesies.” Harley-Davidson published an in-house magazine in this vein called The Dealer, that was later destroyed in shame because of its far-fetched claims.
Eventually, the US publication, Motorcycle and Bicycle Illustrated spoke out. Editor H. W. Parsons commented that the motorcycle was no longer used as transport, and had become the plaything of wealthy people. The assertion that biking was a gentleman’s pastime began inquiries into the sales and marketing of vehicles, by the US trade paper, Automotive Industries. They suggested that the answer was in market analysis (which became the forerunner of marketing sciences used in current business practice). Part of that research concluded that the large capacity engines, size and weight of motorcycles being built in the US had narrowed its own market, becoming only suitable for those who could manhandle such machines. Such conditions caused the American motorcycle industry to assess its own position and product, and also to look at the touring, youth and female markets - a realism that has helped sustain motorcycling popularity by meeting public demand.
*
Alongside propositions about biking being for the wealthy gentry, Parsons also noted that motorcyclists had become an ever-shrinking minority, and expressed concerns over the antisocial behaviour of a minority within that minority. Motorcycling histories indicate that this group consisted of people who were indulging in impromptu sport, in much the same way as their counterparts in the UK. Due to the depression in the 1920’s, professional racing was much reduced. The American Motorcycle Association (AMA) didn’t have the resources to fund all racing, and were unable to bring to the people what they wanted. People began to organise their own scrambles, and dirt or flat tracking became popular at fairs and shows. In the UK and Europe, locally organised races were simply regarded as a means for riders to entertain themselves. But the AMA took a different view. Parsons noted after a meeting with them that rule-bending and gamesmanship in this sector were spoiling their good reputation.
The AMA then set themselves up as an authority over an area which they had previously allowed to slip from their jurisdiction. Rather than do something positive - or even nothing, they outlawed impromptu racing activities. So the concept of motorcycle outlaws arose in 1920s America, (allegedly) in the name of sport. Contrary to what the AMA expected, this enlivened and sustained that which they wished to quell. The humour and attitudes of some riders caused them to adopt the Outlaw image and ideal, tongue-in-cheek. In the US, characters like Josey Wales, who held out against imperialist oppression, were admired by many. The biking Outlaws were seeing themselves in much the same way. With the emergence of the Outlaw[1], and the wranglings concerning law, noise and appearance, the earliest arguments about genuine Biker identity had begun. They were the disgruntled result of an apparent hour-glass through which biking was passing - along with other activities that were similarly restrained by economics and other public affairs of those times.
It should not be forgotten, however, that an Outlaw is one who lives by their own rules. They make break others’ rules in the process, but only with the best intentions. If a championship could be decided in a courtroom rather than on the track, what kind of victory (or defeat) is that? And just because you can’t afford a chequered flag, doesn’t mean your racing is any less intense if you use a handkerchief instead. Take this philosophical attitude and apply it to life - a life outside of economic or other repression, and that is the outlawry of Robin Hood, Hereward The Wake, Geronimo, and Bikers.
[1] To avoid confusion with specific organisations, unless otherwise stated, the use of the word Outlaw hereafter refers to the Bikers whose ideals are rooted in that original, post AMA collective.