Many previous blogs (‘A Tyranny of the Road‘, ‘Bicycles Against the Traffic‘ ) have explored the un-easy relationships which existed between cyclists and other road users in the early years of cycling. In 1896 Punch, in typical satirical vein, used these contrasting views of cyclists to outline the ‘new rules for cyclists’ that both the riding and non-riding public would like to see introduced. The question is, are the suggestions under ‘What All Cyclists Would Like’ all so ridiculous?
And, perhaps, would it be so difficult to produce a similar article today?
Punch cycling cartoon from 1882. Source: http://www.oldbike.eu/museum/magazines/humour/cycling-humour/
‘New Rules for Cyclists’.
I- What some other people would like.
Every cycle-rider to pay a tax of fifty percent of the total income that he would have if every mile ridden brought him in a sovereign, and every tinkle of his bell a ten pound note.
Nobody to cycle without a license, issued by the Governor of Newgate, after a fortnight’s strict examination (on bread and water) in elementary mechanics, advanced hydrostatics and riding on the head down an inclined plane.
Any person found riding without such a license to receive a minimum penalty of ten years’ penal servitude, followed by police supervision for the rest of his natural life.
If caught on, with, or under a cycle within fifty miles of any town of five thousand inhabitants, the culprit to be fined a hundred guineas and bound over his own recognisances to abandon cycling and take up golf instead
When a cyclist on any road sees, or has reason to believe that he might see if he chose to look, any horse, cart, carriage, gig or other vehicle, or any pedestrian approaching, he (or she) to instantly dismount, run the machine into the nearest ditch, and kneel in a humble and supplicating attitude till said horse, cart &C., has got at least a mile away.
Every cyclist to be presumed, in all legal proceedings, to be a reckless idiot and on the wrong side of the road, unless he can bring conclusive evidence to the contrary.
All tourists on wheels to report themselves at every police station they pass. If un-vaccinated, they may be taken to the nearest doctor and compulsory inoculated with any old lymph or ‘anti-cyclin serum’ he may have handy.
II- What all Cyclists would like
Cyclists to be given a special track on all roads, quite half the width of the thoroughfare, and well asphalted.
In case of any accident, coachmen and car-drivers to be bound over to keep the pieces, and supply a brand-new machine.
All vehicles of every description to at once skedaddle up side streets when a lady cyclist is descried in the offing on a main road.
No bells, horns, or lamps in future to be required. Pedestrians to keep to the sidewalks or take the consequences. Cyclists to have the right to use the sidewalks as much as they like, and at any pace.
The City streets to be cleared of traffic and left as practising grounds for new wheelmen and wheelwomen.
Rate-supported stations (with free meals) for blowing up burst tyres to be provided on all roads.
Cycles (and cyclists) to travel free by rail.
And, finally, any person reasonably suspected of not owning a cycle or being about to get one to pay a fine of five thousand pounds to the Exchequer, be handed over to the Lunacy Commissioners, and detained at Her Majesty’s pleasure.
Punch’s warning to all cyclists who hunched over their handlebars. Source: http://www.bicycle-and-bikes.com/bicycle-news.html
The Victorian Cyclist 
I suspect that “Punch” was able to come up with such outrageous suggestions on both sides because the editors/writers actually understood that the best approach lay somewhere in between. At least, I hope so!
LikeLike
I’m sure you’re right- cycling as an activity generally tends to draw quite strong opinions from those who are for and against it I think, and the gap between the two clearly makes for good satire! Finding a middle ground is difficult but hopefully can be managed
LikeLike