COMMUNICATIONS. "May their Tribe Increase."

West Chester, Pa., Feb. 11.

Editor Horseless Age:

I wish to commend the honorable position you have taken

in icgard to the numerous frauds that are being placed before

the public, which, if successful, would greatly cripple the

automobile industry. Your aggressive editorial policy will in

a great measure offset this danger, the last number of your

excellent journal being particularly deserving of the careful

perusal of every prospective purchaser of an automobile.

Wishing you continued success, I am, yours truly,

J. MAX MEYERS.

COMMUNICATIONS. "The Insolence of Office."

Philadelphia, Nov. 20.

Editor Horseless Age:

In the test of the regulation of the Fairmount Park Commission

much more is involved than the mere question of

whether or not the park or certain roads of the park shall be

closed to automobiles. The case before us is not one created

intentionally. It was quite accidental and the result of

inadvertence and insufficient knowledge of a rather vague regulation

on one part and on the other part undue, heedless,

indiscreet severity.

The real issue is to restrain the "insolence of office."

Our guards are vested with power necessarily, and by reason

of the very rare appeal from their actions, little by little

they lose the sense of fitness in the enforcement of rules.

More than this, there is involved a resistance to high-handed,

unauthorized, unlawful police violence against the public.

And still deeper there is a laying bare of the ill-considered,

crude legislation from which we suffer so much. The laws

drafted ordinarily, when thev are under fire, are shown up to be

vague, ambiguous and really unenforceable.

Respectfullv yours.

JULES JUNKER.

COMMUNICATIONS. "How Many Wheels?"

Albany, N. Y., Oct. 25.

Editor Horseless Age:

I have read with interest the several articles published in

your valuable journal in regard to three-wheeled vehicles. In

last week's issue I noted the comments of Messrs. Duryea and

Bramwell. The only advantage of the three-wheeled vehicles

is that one wheel is easier to steer than two wheels. The

single drive wheel, I think, is more of a disadvantage than an

advantage. For instance, if the rear drive wheel were in a

ditch and could not work its way out, the operator would be

stalled, but with two drive wheels one would not be in the

ditch, and would thus help to propel the vehicle.

As Mr. Bramwell says, a four-wheeler properly built has

its frame swiveled in the center of the front axle, and he

does not see any difference whether a wheel or a swivel is

employed at that point so far as stability is concerned.

Now this may all be true in going straight ahead, but if we

turn a sharp curve at a high speed the three-wheeler is

certainly more liable to upset than the four-wheeler, as the

extra wheel on the outside of the arc (which is formed when

the vehicle turns a curve) decreases the danger of upsetting,

and this is truer of a vehicle of a long wheel-base.

I believe a single steering wheel is superior for turning out

of ruts and car tracks, but on a country road the front wheel

does not track, but must run over all obstructions such as

snow, mud and stones that chance to be in the center of the

road. But with a four-wheeler when going straight ahead the

rear wheels follow the track of the steerers.

In my estimation a motor carriage should have four

wheels, the front wheels serving as steerers and all four wheels

as drivers. By this arrangement, if one pair of wheels are

ditched the other may not be. As. Mr. Bramwell says, custom

proves nothing to the designer of vehicles, but common sense

does.

Yours truly,

F. J. MILLER.

VOLUME X

of the HORSELESS AGE, bound with

or without advertisements, $3.

The Horseless Age,

Times Building, New York