advantage should be taken of any opportunity which may be presented of revising this country’s obligation in this respect, but no such opportunity has yet arisen.
We have been reluctant to recommend alteration of signs the use of which has been standard practice in this country since 1933, and to which we are bound by an International Convention, but we agree with the recommendation of the 1933 Committee that as early as possible this country’s obligations under the Paris 1926 Convention should be modified to enable use to be made of the signs shown in diagrams 9, 10, 12 and 13 in place of those shown in diagrams 7 and 11. These signs have the great advantage not only of giving warning of the proximity of a bend, but of showing at a glance whether the bend is single or double, and whether it is to the left or right.
The Geneva 1931 Convention binds its signatories to adopt a number of traffic signs additional to those covered by the Paris 1926 Convention. The British Government did not subscribe to the Geneva 1931 Convention, but intimated that the possibility of adopting for use in Great Britain the signs adopted by the Conference and not already covered by the Paris 1926 Convention would be borne in mind.
Certain of the signs now in use in this country (“30 m.p.h. speed limit” sign (diagram 53), “No Waiting”. sign (diagram 60), and “Parking Place” sign (diagram 74)) conform closely to signs agreed by the Geneva 1931 Conference. We have considered whether we would recommend that any other of the latter signs should be adopted but in only one case (the “No Entry ” sign (diagram 48)) has this been considered desirable. In our view symbols without explanatory lettering are not generally satisfactory, particularly where they are of a prohibitory or mandatory character, and we share the opinion of the 1933 Committee that the majority of the signs adopted by the Geneva 1931 Conference are not suitable for use in this country.
A sign consisting of a triangle with the apex downwards was adopted by the Geneva 1931 Conference to indicate the approach to a more important road. We recommend that the triangle within the ring surmounting the “Slow” and “Halt” signs (diagrams 3 and 70) should be inverted.
Although many of the signs recommended for use in this country do not comply in detail with those adopted by the Geneva 1931 Conference, the following comparative statement shows that normal British practice does not conflict with the general principles agreed by that Conference.
| Class of Sign | General Principles agreed by Geneva 1931 Conference | Normal British Practice |
| Signs giving warning of danger. | Must be triangular in shape. | Red triangle (surmounting rectangular plate on which specific danger is indicated). |
| Prohibitory signs. | Must be circular in shape and the colour red must predominate. | Red disc (surmounting rec tangular plate), or red ring (surrounding circular plate). |
| Mandatory signs. | Must be circular in shape. | Red ring (surmounting rectangular plate). |
| Informative signs. | Must be rectangular in shape and the colour red must not predominate. | Rectangular plate (with no red colour). |
We consider it important that these principles should be observed, so that road users, including visitors from overseas, will become familiar with the meaning to be attached to the shape and colour of traffic signs.
11
