[Codee]

Some Cal. Veh. Stuff from T. Thornhill

Stats. 1957, ch. 482, sec. 1 originally created the driver's license and reads (in part).

Section 1. Section 69.1 is added to the Vehicle Code, to read:
69.1 "Driver's License." "Driver's license" includes both an operator's and a chauffeur's license.. . .
Stats. 1957, ch. 482, p. 1514.
The California Legislature repealed the pre-1959 Vehicle Code in its entirety and re-enacted it in 1959:

An act to repeal and re-enact the Vehicle Code and to add Chapter 6.5 (commencing at Section 3067) to Title 14, Part 4, Division 3 of the Civil Code and to amend Section 11004.5 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, relating to vehicles.
Section 1:
The Vehicle Code is repealed.
Section 2:
The Vehicle Code is enacted to read:
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. This act shall be known as the Vehicle Code.Stats. 1959, ch. 3, p. 1523.

The 1959 legislation re-adopted the definition of driver's license from the former Vehicle Code, sec. 69.1 as sec. 310:

310. "Driver's license" includes both an operator's and a chauffeur's license.
Stats. 1959, ch. 3, p. 1531.

COURT DECISION

The words "or other places" do not authorize such expansion because of the rule of ejusdem generis which has been defined as follows:
"... where, in a statute, general words follow a designation of particular subjects or classes of persons, the meaning of the general words will ordinarily be presumed to be, and construed as restricted by the particular designation and as including only things or persons of the same kind, class, character or nature as those specifically enumerated. The general words are deemed to have been used not to the wide extent which they might bear if standing alone, but as related to words of more definite and particular meaning with which they are associated." (50 Am.Jur., (1944) Statutes, sec. 249, pp. 244, 246.)
Market Basket v. Jacobsen (1955), 134 Cal.App.2d 73, 82.

My reasonable inference from the foregoing information is that a driver's license is a direct combination of ONLY the "Operator License" and the "Chauffeur License".

The statutory term "chauffeur" seems to have undergone fewer statutory amendments over the years than has the statutory term "operator", so I present my (T. Thornhill) research concerning it first.

The first statutory definition I found of the term "chauffeur" is in the motor vehicle act of 1905, sec. 1(5) (emphasis added):


(5) "chauffeur" shall mean any person operating a motor vehicle as mechanic, employe [sic] or for hire.Stats. 1905, ch. DCXII, p. 816.
5.c. The first change to the definition of "chauffeur" which I found is in the motor vehicle act, as amended (1913), sec. 1(8) (emphasis added):

(8) "chauffeur" shall mean any person who operates a motor vehicle, and who directly or indirectly receives pay or any compensation whatsoever for such operation, or for any work or service in connection with motor vehicles, excepting only manufacturers, agents, proprietors of garages, and dealers who do not operate for hire; provided however, that an employee of a manufacturer or of a dealer whose principal occupation is that of a salesman shall be exempted from this definition and shall be designated an operator; provided, further, that a person operating a motorcycle shall not be considered a chauffeur unless such motorcycle is of greater weight than four hundred pounds unladen;Stats. 1913, ch. 325, p. 640.

The Supreme Court of California case that dealt extensively with chauffeurs reads in part:

That the occupation of a chauffeur is of this character may not be questioned and has been decided. (State v. Swagerty, 203 Mo. 517, [120 Am. St. Rep. 671, 11 Ann. Cas. 725, 10 L. R. A. (N.S.) 601, 102 S. W. 483]; Christy v. Elliot, 216 Ill. 31, [108 Am. St. Rep. 196, 3 Ann. Cas. 487, 1 L. R. A. (N.S.) 215, 74 N. E. 1035].) There are unquestionable elements of similarity, even of identity, between the driving of an automobile by a professional chauffeur and the driving of a like vehicle by a private owner, designated in this act as an "operator." ... All these matters may be conceded, and yet there are others of equal significance where the differences between the two classes of drivers are radical. Of first importance in this is the fact that the chauffeur offers his services to the public and is frequently a carrier of the general public. These circumstances put professional chauffeurs in a class by themselves and entitle the public to receive the protection which the legislature may accord in making provision for the competency and carefulness of such drivers. The chauffeur, generally speaking, is not driving his own car. He is intrusted with the property of others. In the nature of things a different amount of care will be exercised by such a driver than will be exercised by the man driving his own car and risking his own property. ... The argument of the peril attending the public at the hands of the unlicensed operator driving his own car is not without force, but it can only successfully be presented to the legislative department and not to the courts.In the Matter of Application of Stork (1914), 167 Cal. 294, 295-296, 139 P. 684.
5.e. The next change to the definition of "chauffeur" which I found is in the Motor Vehicle Act of 1915, sec. 1(8) and reads (emphasis added):

(8) "chauffeur" shall mean any person who operates an automobile in the transportation of persons and who receives any compensation for such service in wages, commission or otherwise, paid directly or indirectly, or who as owner or employee operates an automobile carrying passengers for hire; provided, however, that this definition shall not include manufacturers' agents, proprietors of garages and dealers, salesmen, mechanics, or demonstrators of automobiles in the ordinary course of their business;Stats. 1915, ch. 188, p. 398.

The next change to the definition of "chauffeur" which I found is in the Vehicle Code of 1935, sec. 71 and reads (emphasis added):

71. "Chauffeur." "Chauffeur" is a person who is employed by another for the principal purpose of driving a motor vehicle on the highways and receives compensation therefor.Stats. 1935, ch. 27, p. 98.

The California court case which defines "chauffeur" reads:

Section 71 of the Vehicle Code provides as follows: " 'Chauffeur' is a person who is employed by another for the principal purpose of driving a motor vehicle on the highways and receives compensation therefor."
. . .
As an abstract proposition it may be that more skill is required in the operation of a heavy truck than in the management of a pleasure vehicle, but it does not follow that the question of possession of a chauffeur's license is material in a particular case irrespective of causal connection between the violation of a statute in failing to have such license and the damage complained of.Hunton v. Cal. Portland Cement Co. (1942), 50 Cal.App.2d 684, 691.
The next change to the definition of "chauffeur" which I found is in Stats. 1947, First Extra Session, ch. 11, sec. 35 (emphasis added):

SEC. 35. Section 381 of said code is amended to read:
381. Fee for Operator's or Chauffeur's License. Upon application for an operator's or chauffeur's license, or renewal thereof, there shall be paid to the department a fee of two dollars ($2). The surrender of a valid operator's license shall entitle a qualified person to receive a chauffeur's license upon application for the unexpired period of the operator's license without additional fee or cost. The payment of the fee for an operator's license or chauffeur's application shall entitle the applicant to three examinations within a period of six months.
The terms "operator's license" and "chauffeur's license" as used in this section include all licenses of every kind issued under Division 4 of this code.
Stats. 1947, First Ex. Sess., ch. 11, p. 3808.
I have not located a print copy of the California Vehicle Code of 1935, as amended to 1947, to determine what licenses were then included in Division 4.
The foregoing section required that I do further investigation, so I went back to the Vehicle Code of 1935, Stats. 1935, ch. 27, sec. 381, the original statute before the amendment thereof: