AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Oxford Ratepayers Reject Electric Traction.

18th January 1906
Page 7
Page 7, 18th January 1906 — Oxford Ratepayers Reject Electric Traction.
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Keywords : Light Rail, Tram

Sanction to proceed refused by an overwhelming majority.

Following the reports in our issues of October sth, 12th, 19th, and 26th, and of December 21st, we are happy to be able to report that *Oxford will be spared the incubus of electric tramcars. The City Council's Bill was rejected last week by about 1,700 votes to 90, at a town's meeting, and " The Oxford Times " has to be congratulated on contributing to this result. We report the speech of the evening, which completed the discomfiture of the pro-tram party :—

Alderman Hall said they had in Mr. Bacon a gentleman who was an admirable advocate, and an admirable town clerk, and he only regretted that he had thought it well that night to appear there in both capacities--(laughter). The greater part of his speech, ,running to at least half an hour, was the speech of an advocate for this particular object. The rest of the half-hour was devoted either to praise of Mr. Sellon or to an explanation —rather a long one—of the various meetings of the council before June 21st, when it was decided to purchase the present tramway undertaking, and to a recapitulation of Mr. Sellon's offer— which the town clerk made considerable use of, and which he was rather' surprised at he must confess—and to the assurance which he was still more surprised at, that no possible harm could come to the City of Oxford if this measure was passed and allowed to lie dormant for a certain number of years. It would be taking the power out of the ratepayers' hands and putting it into the hands of the corporation as to whether they would proceed—he thought that was a sufficient answer to that —(applause). What was this measure? It could be described pretty shortly. It was a Bill for electric trams of a particular kind in the City of Oxford at an enormous cost. The Provost of Queen's the other day at the council would seem to have declared the issue was not between electric trams on the one side and motorbuses on the other side, but that the Bill simply gave powers to the corporation to promote any measure of transit which it thought well. He wanted to disabuse their minds of that. If this Bill was passed

THE CHOICE WAS MADE

between electric trams on the one side and motorbuses on the other. They could not possibly go back on it, though they might supplement their electric traction system in the city along certain routes by motorbuses.

In the speech in which he seconded the resolution for the introduction of the Bill, he expressly guarded himself, and at the close of the speech he distinctly referred to the ratepayers' right to throw out the Bill—(applause). He cared nut for himself in the least if it was an inconsistent position, but it was not inconsistent, because he had always intended to do his very utmost to defeat the Bill, and he would have done it in the council had it been possible for him to have done so—(applause). He wanted to come to a little practical consideration— they had had precious little of it that night—about the Bill itself, and about the cost of the Bill. They had in Section 64 six sums which totted up altogether to a capital sum of £132,835— shouts of "Oh! Oh ! Oh ! '). Now, the success of this measure depended upon three or four things. It depended, in the first place, upon the capital expenditure, in the second place upon the takings, and in the third place it depended upon the working expenses. Ile was going to say a word or two upon those points ; they were practical points, and they would affect the success of the measure or its failure. They were told by Mr. Sellon himself that the capital expenditure would he 4132,835. Was that all?--(Cries of " No"). in the first place there was the comparatively small sum of the cost of promotion. He put that at £5,000; he mint be £1,000 too much—he did not know. In the second place there was the purchase of the old tramway ; hew much were they going to give for that?—(a voice, " £3,000 ; it's scrap iron," and laughter). He put that at £2&,000; he thought it was a cheap bargain—(shouts of "Oh !"). Yes, he had voted for the purchase of the old undertaking at £25,000, and he would vote for it again. In addition to that, they could not work all the routes without a service of motorbuses. He took it they could not go down St. Aldate's with electric trams; they would have to buy motorbuses, and if they did not buy motorbuses and they decided to run electric trams down St. Aldate's, then they would have to widen the street at a great cost. There was another thing. He was told that if they nut downi the surface-contact system they had got to go over the whole track and

DIG TWO FEET DEEP,

End heaven only knew how many pipes—gas pipes and water pipes—they would meet with at two feet deep—(applause). They would have to pay compensation to the Gas Company, and if a company undertook the work it would have to pay for the town's broken water pipes ; there would be special compensation for damages for street-widening, and then there would be money for the purchase of motorbuses. He put the sum at £17,000, and he thought it was a very moderate sum indeed—(shouts of " Too low"). He was putting it at the lowest figure that he thought any sensible man could put it, and if they added that sum all together, they got a capital sum of £180,000, instead of the capital sum Mr. Sellon had given them. The point came in here that the interest and sinking funds on this £180,000, instead of being £7,809 as in Mr. Scion's scheme, worked out at £10,800, and that swallowed up the whole of the profits that Mr. Sellon had shown. He wanted to take the working expenses, which Mr. Sellon put at £16,544. Now, that was exactly 60 per cent, of the gross receipts, and, let him tell them, that, according to the tramway returns which had been issued within the last ten days showing the working expenses during the year 1904 to 1905, the average working expenses to gross receipts over the whole country in that tramways report was 66.19. Why in the world should Mr. Sellon suppose that Oxford was only going to cost 60 per cent, when the average all over the country was 66.19. If the municipality worked it they might be quite sure that it would be a great deal more than the average—(loud applause). But if a company worked it, at any rate, it would be the average of 66.19, and that would land them at least in a deficit. As regarded the increase of passengers, Mr. Sellon said they were going to jump up from 3,271,000 in round numbers to 5,294,000. That was to say, for everythree people who used the trams now, when they had electric trams five people would ride. If then £180,000 was wanted as capital, instead of £130,000, instead of 2,000,000 extra passengers, they would want at least 3,000,000 extra to save them from a deficit. For every man, woman and child who rode in the trams now, they would want two to ride to save them from a deficit. Would they get it ?(Shouts of "No," laughter and applause). Mr. Sellon gave them 25 cars, and he said every car would earn £1,100 of gross receipts in the course of the year. Here were some figures from the latest returns : —Coventry, which bad a population of 69,000, earned £530 for every car ; Preston, with a population of 102,000, earned £766 with every car ; Cheltenham, about the size of Oxford, earned £837; Northampton earned £845; Burton-onTrent £900 with every car; Derby—a good big place compared with Oxford—the full amount of £1,100; Liverpool, £1,140; and Leeds, with a population of 428,000, earned £1,105; and

WHAT OXFORD WAS GOING TO EARN

was £1,103—(loud laughter). He wanted them to consider the fact that the population of Oxford was not increasing with arty great rapidity—it increased, perhaps, 600 a year. Another point against the success of the trams was the position of the railway stations in reference to a great many parts of Oxford. People could not go comfortably by tram from the North of Oxford, from the South, or from the West, to the railway station, and so they got to the station in other ways. Considering the small population of the City of Oxford, and from the fact that the stations were badly situated for people to reach them comfortably by tram, he maintained that they were not likely to earn anything like the figures per car that were given them by Mr. Sellon. The danger was this, that a great number of the citizens, if they were foolish enough to ask foe such a Bill as this, would be foolish enough to put their money into the new tramlines. They had had a great many of the citizens of Oxford hit hard, he was afraid, over the old tramway company, and he did not want to see a great many more hit hard over the new tramway company. He had often heard the argument used that other places succeeded in running trams at a profit and why should not Oxford? He would tell them why. He thought it was impossible because every man, woman, and child in the City of Oxford would have to find the sum of £3 12s. in order to find this capital if required. Another reason why they could not succeed was because, owing to the peculiar conditions of the place it was absolutely necessary for them to have two systems at the same time—the overhead system and the surfacecontact system, and let them remember that the surface-contact system was expensive. He must strongly object to the dodge. of holding a pistol to the heads of the ratepayers, and telling them that unless they expended the sum of £180,000 they could do nothing with the present tramway system which they had. Their plan was either to work the system for a time, or let it for a short time, and in the meantime to press for such powers as Eastbourne had at the present time, for, under the Act of 16112, Eastbourne had got full powers to run motor omnibuses.

Tags

Organisations: City Council
People: Scion, Sellon

comments powered by Disqus