The Motor Omnibus World.
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Some Commercial Aspects of Motor Omnibuses.°
By A. A. Campbell-Swinton, MAnst.C.E., M.I.E.E.
In a great and overgrown city like that of London the problem of rapid transit from one place to another is one of the highest importance to the community, and that motor omnibuses have proved themselves of great service in meeting public requirements in this respect is, I think, clear from their recent rapid multiplication and the enormous numbers of passengers that they are now carrying daily. From evidence given before the Royal Commission on London Traffic, in May, 1905, it appears that, at that time, there were only about 30 motor omnibuses running in London ; at the present moment, the exact number, on Monday, November 26th, according to a census taken by Time CO)131ERCIAL IvloToe," was 789. Now, 800 passengers per day may be taken as a very reasonable average figure for a motor omnibus, whilst it is, also, reasonable to assume that omnibus companies keep about 80 per cent, of their motor vehicles on the road. On this basis it is easy to calculate that the motor omnibuses of London are now carrying at the rate of 184 millions of passengers per annum, or some 30 times the entire population of the metropolis, yearly. Furthermore, if we take the very moderate amount of only £4 as the daily gross earnings of a motor omnibus, upon the same figures we find that the motor omnibuses of London are at present taking very nearly £1,000,000 sterling per annum, the greater part of which is again distributed as wages to the large number of drivers, conductors, cleaners, and workmen that are employed in connection with the business.
Passengers and Earnings.
These really stupendous figures should carry some weight with the Home Office, the police, and other authorities which are being appealed to, to restrict motor omnibuses on account of allegations of undue noise, smell, and other defects, by persons who happen to live along omnibus routes, and who complain that they are inconvenienced. Furthermore, the figures are of interest in relation to the somewhat contemptuous manner in which the Progressive majority of the London County Council is disposed to regard motor omnibuses vis-a-vis of their much-belauded municipal tramways, for we find, what must be, I think, to most people, a very unexpected fact, that, at the present time, even in their partially-developed condition, the omnibus companies of London are actually, to-day, carrying on motorbuses more passengers than does the whole of the London County Council tramway system, which, according to a recent statement by Mr. McKinnon Wood, carried last year only 180 millions of passengers, or four millions less than the buses are carrying at their present rate.
Capital Outlay and Traffic.
In order, however, to understand the full significance of these figures it is also necessary to take into account the amount of capital expended in the two cases. As those who are acquainted with motorbus finance are aware, £1,000 per omnibus is an ample figure to allow for the cash capitalisation of motor omnibus companies working on a fair scale. Thus, if we allow a sum of one million pounds as the cost of the whole of the motor omnibuses now running on the London streets, together with their garages, workshops, and other appurtenances, we shall be allowing a very full amount. On the other hand, Mr. McKinnon Wood, on the same occasion that he gave 180 millions as the number of passengers carried by the London County Council tramways last year, stated that the expenditure upon the Council's tramways to date had been about five millions, and that they intended to spend five millions more. Thus, we have the remarkable result that the County Council have spent five millions of public money on tramways, and are, with these tramways, carrying only 180 million passengers per year, while the companies running motor omnibuses, with an expenditure of less than one-fifth of that amount, are carrying 184 millions, or four millions more than the tramways. It is, T fear, of no use deploring the past, though it should be pointed out that in rushing into their reckless expenditure on tramways the Progreisives of the London County Council acted as they did in the face of full warning from many quarters that they were probablv throwing away public money. As regards the future, however, and the further five millions that Mr. McKinnon Wood states that the County Council still further propose to spend on tramways, it is net too late to point out that, instead of spending five millions on tramways, if the London County Council
will leave it to the present omnibus companies to spend, say, another million on motorbuses, approximately similar results will be achieved, and there will be a balance of no less than four millions of money which might usefully be devoted to the repaving of the main thoroughfares of London, where necessary, and to other street improvements.
Of course, capital expenditure is not everything, though, in these days of dear money, it is a matter of great importance, but it is, undoubtedly, of interest to note that, while London County Council tramways, with five millions of capital, carry 180 million passengers yearly, or 56 passengers yearly per Li of capital, that, while the London United Tramways, with about three millions of capital, in 1904, carried 48 million passengers, or only about 16 passengers per SA of capital, and that, while the Central London Railway, with nearly four millions of capital, carried, in 1905, 45 million passengers, or only a little over 11 passengers per El of capital, at the same time, the London omnibus companies, with about one million capital, spent on motors and their appurtenances, are carrying 184 millions of passengers, or 184 passengers, yearly, for each £1 of capital spent.
This leads me to point out that, in motor omnibus business, the turnover is very large in respect to the amount of necessary capital. Indeed, a motorbus company, with, say, £100,000 capital, may easily have a gross income of £120,000 per annum. hence the importance in motorbus business of what appear, 2..t first sight, to be small economies, as these, though small in themselves, may, in the aggregate, amount to large sums, for, where the gross income exceeds the capital involved, a saving of, say, only 5 per cent. in the working expenses may mean an extra dividend of more than 5 per cent, on the capital.
Comparisons with Tramways.
Before the Royal Commission on London Traffic, and, also, before more than one Parliamentary Committee, 1 have gone
very thoroughly into the respective merits of motor omnibuses and tramways, both in respect to the space occupied on the roadway by the buses, and the tramcars, relatively to the number of passengers that they carry, and, also, as regards the question of *relative economy. As regards the relative space occupied, the difference is much
people less than most appear to think, this being due largely to the staircases with which tramcars are fitted at both ends. Sir John Berm continues, I notice, to make, again and again, the altogether inaccurate statement that, for the passengers that they carry, motorbuses occupy twice the space on the roadway that do tramcars, though this statement has been repeatedly and categorically contradicted in "The Times" and other papers. As a matter of fact, actual measurements show that, instead of being 2 to 1, the ratio is nearer equality than 6 is to 5.
London County Council Finance.
As regards the relative economies in London, taking the County Council's own figures for their tramways, and comparing these with the known costs of running motorbuses, it has, hitherto, been impossible to deny that the tramways appear to carry passengers slightly more cheaply than do the buses. The difference is not great, but it appears to exist. Since these comparisons were made, there has been the surprising discovery that many of the statements as to tramway costs, made officially on behalf of the County Council both before the Royal Commission and before several Parliamentary Committees, are in no ways to be relied upon. Indeed, in a number of cases, these official statements have been altogether misleading. For instance, in a memorandum of evidence put before the Royal Commission by Sir John( Berm on behalf of the County Council, it was definitely stated that the policy of the Council was to charge cue-third of the cost of street widenings made for tramway pin-poses to the tramway account. It is now admitted that no such amount is, or has been, charged ; indeed, the County Council have now approved a report in which it is recommended that, instead of one-third being so charged, the amount shall only be one-eighth, and, as a strong party on the Council even goes to the length of recommending that no portion of the street widenings necessitated by the tramways should be charged to the tramway account, it is possible that this may be the course followed in the future. Again, from an official report extracted out of the Council by the Moderate party, with the greatest difficulty, and only after many months of waiting, it is evident tha. the tramways are not charged with anything like their proper
proportion of the cost of the County Council central staff. .Indeed, the tramways appear to get their legal advice and clerical assistance almost free.
Furthermore, it is now found that nothing like sufficient is being charged to the tramway accounts for renewals and depreciation. In the Council's estimate for 1006-7, it is stated that a sufficient sum is set aside to provide for renewals on the basis of a penny per car mile on the estimated mileage run during the year.
In an interesting statement made to the Council, in May last, Lord Welby, the Chairman of the Finance Committee, after admitting that some £40,000 to £50,000 would be required to snake up the amounts allowed for renewals in the past two or three years, to the above-mentioned standard, of one penny pet car mile, went on further to admit that this sum of a penny is, in itself, too low a figure. Moreover, it is, in this connection, interesting to note that the Comptroller of the County Council, in evidence which he officially gave last year before a House of Lords Select Committee, based his estimates on an allowance not of a penny but of lid. per car mile for renewals. Thus, we see that the Council manage to show no loss on their tramways by the simple plan of allowing for renewals a sum which the Chairman of their Finance Committee admits is too small, and which is, in fact, 33* per cent, less than the figure put forward as a proper one by the Comptroller of the Council. But is even 14d. sufficient? We turn to Glasgow, the second city of the Empire, whose municipal enterprise is always held up to admiration by the votaries of municipal trading, and find something indeed startling, for Glasgow allows for renewals and depreciation a figure which approximates closely to 3d. per car mile, a figure which is double that suggested as suitable by the Comptroller of the County Council, is three times the amount actually proposed to be written off in London, and is about four times what has, up to now, actually been written off the annual London accounts. Allow this Glasgow figure of 3d. per car mile (which, after all, only means an allowance for depreciation at the rate of 4 per cent, per annum) in London, and we immediately turn the County Council's so-called profit balance of about £4,000 into a loss on the year's working which exceeds £120,000.
Of course, if you allow next to nothing for renewals, and charge large items, both of capital and revenue expenses, to other accounts, you may make tramway costs appear to be almost anything you like. It is, however, obvious that no useful purpose can be served by comparing the costs of motor omnibuses with tramway accounts in which these practices have been followed.
Noise and Vibration Due to Bad Road Surfaces
A question of the greatest importance in connection with the commercial running of the motor omnibus, and, indeed, all heavy motor vehicles, in a town. like London, is the question of the nature and proper maintenance of the surfaces of the roads. With vehicles, even as heavy as a fully-laden motor omnibus, but fitted with indiarubber tires, I think that I can safely affirm that all questions of nuisance from mechanical vibration communicated to adjoining houses must be entirely a matter of the road surface. • If the surface is rough and contains holes, such as one often sees in London streets, snore especially in those paved with wood or laid with macadam, however well the vehicles may be constructed, and however quietly their machinery may run, the mere fact of their great weight dropping suddenly through quite appreciable distances, into the cavities, is bound to communicate some amount of tremor to the earth. On the other hand, where the road surface is quite smooth and regular, with vehicles with rubber tires there will be no such vibration.
Again, on the question of noise, nine-tenths of this is due to the roads being rough. Not only will the best constructed motor omnibus, maintained in the best condition, inevitably cause a certain amount of noise as it jolts along over a rough surface, but such jolting is bound, in a very short time, to cause a rapid deterioration of the vehicle, so that, owing to various parts becoming loosened, they
jingle ingle and jangle more and more as the action continues.
The Side-slip Problem.
Again, to my mind, it is largely to improvement in road surfaces that we must look for the final solution of the problem of avoiding side-slip. Whatever mechanical devices ingenuity may devise to prevent side-slip, they must all, of necessity, he more or less make-shifts. The real causes of side-slip are : the unsuitable nature of the surfaces of our streets to the traffic that they have to carry ; the extent to which these surfaces are allowed to become covered with grease, and also, I may add, to the quite unnecessary and useless amount of camber that is usually given. As someone has expressed it, the pavements of London consist largely of samples, laid down at the sweet will of various authorities acting quite irrespectively of one another, and, as far as one can judge, not even tmen arty settled principle within their own boundaries. For instance,
why should Victoria Street be paved with asphalte, whilst Whitehall and Grosvenor Place—its two extremities—are paved in wood? The result of this is that, in wet weather; the detritus from the wood paving of the two extremities is brought on to the asphalte in the centre, so that the condition of Victoria Street is, frequently, such that, as one of the most important thoroughfares in the Metropolis, it is a positive disgrace. As a remedy to this state of affairs, what is obviously required is the appointment of a Traffic Board, as recommended by the Royal Commission, who should have supreme power over the whole of London, and who would direct that the paving of the steels should be carried out upon some rational plan.
Rational Paving.
And this brings me to the question of what are rational pavements. In the past, owing to the necessity of providing a foothold for the horse, and in order to protect the hoofs of that animal, the very unmechanical plan has been followed of shoeing the horses' hoofs with iron shoes, surrounding the wheels of vehicles with iron tires, and making the surface of the roadway relatively soft, so that all the wear takes place on the roadway surface and practically none upon the shoes of horses or the wheels of the vehicles. Now, in all mechanical design the right practice, in any machinery where wear must take place, is so to devise the parts that those portions of the machine that are liable to wear out are made easily replaceable. Apply this principle to the roads, and, obviously, we ought to have the reverse of the present practice, for not only are the roads, in themselves, very costly to repair but their reparation leads to interruption of traffic and an enormous amount of direct inconvenience and both direct and indirect expense. Up to the present, with horses, the course followed has been the only one practicable, but, as horses disappear from London, as I think they are bound to disappear in time, and as self-propelled vehicles with rubber tires multiply, the wear of the roads will become less and less, and, with suitable paving, may in time be eliminated almost altogether, particularly if suitable taxes are put upon all vehicles which are not fitted with tires of rubber or other similar resilient material.
Claims for Compensation.
Meanwhile, it is worth while considering what is the exact legal position of motor omnibus proprietors in respectlo claims arising from accidents due to side-slip. I believe that the decisions of magistrates on the question, up to the present, are somewhat contradictory, and that the position is by no means clear. So far as the local authorities who are responsible for the upkeep of the roadways are concerned, I understand that, whilst they are liable for what the law calls "misfeasance," they are not liable for "nonfeasance." In other words, if an accident occurs owing to something the local authority have done, they are liable for the results of their acts, but, if the accident is due to failure on the part of the authority to do something that they ought to have done, they are under no liability whatever. If this is correct, then the local authorities cannot be held liable, at any rate, in civil law, for failing to keep the streets clean and free from grease.
This is, undoubtedly, unsatisfactory, for, motor omnibuses being duly licensed vehicles fitted with a class of tire that is imposed upon them under the Local Government Board Regulations, it seems to me that the local authorities should be bound to keep the streets in a condition suitable for their use, or should be liable for the consequences. I scarcely think that I can say anything further on this point except that it is one that I hope will be discussed by subsequent speakers. I would, however, point out that one of the complaints made against the motor omnibus is that it drops grease about the streets. From personal observation, I can say that, apart from stopping places, the amount of grease so dropped is so very small as, really, to be scarcely worth taking into account. At stopping places, however, I am bound to admit that there is some justification for the complaint, and I think that motorbus companies should take all possible steps to mitigate the nuisance. At the same time, it seems to me that the local authorities should take steps to clean up droppings of this description. At present, they do not appears to do anything in this direction, though, of course, in connection with ordinary traffic, they employ a vast army of men arid boys whose chief duty it is to deal with the horse refuse. Indeed, when one comes to think of it, it is somewhat grotesque that people should complain of a few ounces of oil and grease dropped by a motorbus, in the course of its daily work, whilst the refuse which the horses of the horse omnibus, doing the same amount of work in the day, would distribute over the streets is a vastly greater quantity, besides being much more offensive in its constitution.
Alleged Nuisance.
To return to the question of nuisance, I often wonder whether those people who, living along motor-omnibus routes, complain so bitterly of the noise and vibration created by these vehicles, realise what is the alternative. As motor omnibuses become im
proved, and as the pavements are made more smooth, I think there can be no question that all cause for complaint, on the score of vibration, will absolutely vanish, whilst the noise will diminish to an enormous extent ; but, in order to arrive at these results, time must be allowed. Now, along most ot these routes, people have to be carried in vehicles of some sort or other, and what those persons who complain do not seem to realise is that the alternative to motor omnibuses is tramways. I must confess I have some sympathy with people who, like the inhabitants of one end of Onslow Square, find that what was once a quiet place of residence has now become a main line of thorough fare, with consequently diminished amenities. But, if these people will only consent to wait, I am confident that they will find that the nuisance will very greatly lessen as the buses are improved. On the other hand, should they, and others, be successful in their efforts to oust the motorbus, the next thing will be that the County Council, or someone else, will lay tramways past their doors. In order that they may see that this would be veritably falling out of the frying-pan into the fire, I commend the complainants to go to Shepherd's Bush and listen to the fearful amount of noise occasioned by the tramways in that locality, and let them, at the same time, remember that electric tramways have now been at work for years, and that further improvement in their case is very unlikely.
A Standard of Noise.
It has recently been stated that the Chief Commissioner of Police is taking expert advice on the question of the production of a standard of noise with which motor omnibuses, when being licensed, may be compared, and either passed, or rejected, as the noise they make is less than, or exceeds, the stanuarm Though this is, perhaps, a question rather more scientific than is covered by the title of my paper, I may, perhaps, be allowed to point out the extreme difficulty, from the scientific point of view, of arriving at any such standard, or making any such comparison. As all of us who have had anything to do with the comparison of the degrees of illumination, afforded, say,. by the electric light on the one hand and gas on the other, are aware, even in the case of comparisons of this nature, where we already have a standard of light well understood and defined, and, where we have instruments known as photometers, which allow of comparisons being made with extreme degrees of accuracy, there is still the greatest possible difficulty in determining the value of different lights if these differ in colour by only small degrees. Now, colour, in regard to light, is exactly analogous to pitch, as regards sound, both being determined by the number of vibrations per second of the luminiferous ether on the one hand and of the air on the other. Thus, whilst there is found a great difficulty, in the case of light, even with the ingenious instruments that exist for the purpose of comparing the intensity of one coloured light with that of another, there is bound to be equal, if not greater, difficulty in comparing sound of one pitch with sound of another. Further, in the case of noise, we have to deal not with pure musical notes but with a vast jumble of discordant sounds 'Of varying pitch and intensity, which alter rapidly from moment to moment. Consequently, even had we, for sound, a standard as accurate as there exists for light, and had we an instrument for comparing different sounds as accurate as the modern photometer, the problem that the Chief Commissioner desires should be solved is as difficult as that of comparing, say, two lights differing from one another not only in colour but, also, varying, from moment to moment, in intensity, while each light itself was also altering, from moment to moment, in colour. I venture to affirm that the most experienced expert in photometry would give up such a problem in despair, and I, for one, would not look for any more likelihood of success as regards the production of a practical standard and comparison of noise.
Commercial Progress, To pass to quite another subject :—On the question of the reliability of motor omnibuses, not a few shareholders and directors in motor-omnibus companies have, to my knowledge, been much alarmed at the number of breakdowns which have occurred. These people, however, can have had no acquaintance with the early stages of other mechanical novelties. In all new developments of machinery, reliability is only reached after an enormous amount of worry and great expenditure of money in eliminating points of weakness. In the early days of electric lighting, as many will remember, it was quite a matter of everyday experience for the light to go out, usually at the most inopportune moment, when it was in most demand, and, consequently, the load was at its maximum. Many will further remember the original procession, some ten years ago, of motorcars to Brighton, when not 10 per cent. of the vehicles that started arrived at their destination, and the road from end to end, particularly towards the point of departure,. was strewn with vehicles 'broken down from various causes. lh'ersonally, I happen to have been connected with another great engineering development, namely, that of the steam turbine, almost from its inception, and, in the early days, here also, breakdowns were so numerous that any but men of the liveliest faith would have lx:en speeaily uisheartened. In all these cases, however, human ingenuity nos triumphed over the difficulties. It is the rarest Ming nowadays for the electric light to become extinguished accidentally. Motorcars still occasionally break down, but their tellabiiity has increased to an enormous extent, whilst the steam tunable has proved itself so reliable that all the new ships in the Brit..sh Navy are to be fitted with this invention. That the same thing will occur with motorbuses I have not the slightest doubt, ana, though present breakdowns may cause us annoyance, I have no concern as to the future, in this respect.
On the question of economy, however, these is still much to be learned. The chief item of expenditure where, in my opinion, there is great room for improvement is that of maintenance and repairs. Up to the present, I believe, this item has been far too high in the case of all companies and of all classes of omnibuses. Some have, no doubt, been more fortunate and successful than others, whilst some machines have proved themselves more durable. With the experience gained, however, I look confidently for gradual improvement, and I have little doubt that, within a year or two, the cost of maintenance and repairs will be less than half what it is at present. Another item where there is room for improvement is the matter of lubrication. I allude, elsewhere, to the oil and grease dropped on to the streets, all of which is waste which should be prevented ; but, apart from this, in many classes of vehicles the methods of lubrication are such that economy cannot be expected from them. Up to the present, motor-omnibus engineers have had so many difficulties to contend with that it is not surprising that they have not had much time to attend to mere economy. It has been difficult enough for them to keep their vehicles running regularly in the streets. In the future, however, economy is, undoubtedly, one of the matters to which they will have to turn their attention.
The Operating Engineers.
And, here, may I say a word in respect to motor omnibus engineers—I mean the men, both head and subordinate, who run the engineering part of the business. Under present circumstances, with motorbuses as they now exist, with the authorities worrying them about noise and vibration and grease, on the one side, and the directors and managers urging them to keep up the service and maintain the buses on the road, on the other, I fear that their lot is not always quite a happy one. Their position reminds me very much of that of electric central station engineers of some fifteen years ago, in the days, to which I have alluded, when the lights used so frequently to go out, and where. I fear, the engineer was very apt to be unjustly blamed for breakdowns for which he really should not have been considered responsible, as they were due to inherent defects in the plant that was given him to work. However this may be in any motorbus organisation, the engineer is bound to be one of the most important factors, and only those concerns will finally prosper which succeed in keeping together a good and well-organised engineering staff.
The Future.
As regards the future, as it seems to me, in London, the bum ness must lie with large concerns. With motor omnibuses, the circumstances are quite different from what they were in the case of horse omnibuses. With the latter the amount of capital required per omnibus is much smaller, and small concerns, Owning only a few buses, can be run almost as economically as can very much larger concerns. With motor omnibuses, on the other hand, it is quite different. For success, it is essential to have the highest engineering skill, whilst repair shops, equipped with very expensive machinery, are also necessary. The running of motor omnibuses, therefore, entails special expenses of a heavy nature, both capital and annual, which, though when spread over a large number of omnibuses owned by one concern, do not amount to much per omnibus, would in the case of small concerns owning very few omnibuses be so heavy as to be fatal. Under these circumstances, I look to the disappearance, in time either by absorption or otherwise, of the smaller proprietors, and, also, to probable combination between the companies of moderate size. Whether it is likely that any great amalgamation of the larger concerns will come about, I am not prepared to prophesy, but I will express the opinion that I doubt whether it is expedient that the whole of the omnibuses of London should be in one hand, as we should then have the London County Council complaining that there was a monopoly, and wanting to be allowed to come in and compete with the aid of the rates. On the other hand, I should welcome some working arrangement between the companies whereby fare-cutting would be done away with and prices regulated upon some fair and reasonable basis. En conclusion, may I say that I fear that my paper has not perhaps been quite as commercial as might have been expected from its title? My excuse must be that, in writing it, I have been confronted with the ancient difficulty that "though all things are lawful, to me all are not expedient."
[Pur retort of the discussion will appear next week.) The Maochester Cotporation motorbuses, which ran from the Palatine Road terminus of the tramways to Cheadle and Northenden, were withdrawn from service a fortnight ago.
The Harrogate Town Council, at its meeting last week, resolved that the establishment of either tramcar or motorbus services in the town could be met, satisfactorily, by private enterprise, and decided not to take any action itself.
Mr. Lloyd George, President of the Board of Trade, in opening the new tube line of the Great Northern, Piccadilly, and Brompton Railway, referred to the motorbus as a "noisy and noisome monstrosity." It is remarkable, none the less, how, in spite of such statements, these vehicles retain their hold upon public favour, in the face of severe competition.
Six Daimler buses will shortly be running in Kiel, between the railway station and the new marine station of Wik, not far from the North-East Sea Canal. Practically all the capital required for the enterprise has been subscribed. Kiel can, also, boast of a selfpropelled fire-engine, a front-drive steam-propelled vehicle from the works of Flader in Johstadt.
The Romford Urban District Council, at the instance of the Local Tradesmen's Association, has carefully considered the question of obtaining powers to provide and run motorbuses. It has been decided to leave such development to private enterprise, and, no doubt, the Great Eastern London Motor Omnibus Company, Limited, will take a note of Romford's further requirements.
Mr. W. Flexman French has been appointed London manager of the Ryk.nield Motor Company. Mr. French has had a wide experience in the motoromnibus world, at Worthing and elsewhere, and his services should be of much value to the Burton-on-Trent works, which are now producing a motor omnibus of high-class quality and good design, and one which has succeeded in passing the severe tests of .Scotland Yard, as a new type.
The Bournemouth Borough Council has refused to license motor omnibuses to ply within its bouedaries on Sundays. A poll of the ratepayers, taken some short time ago, resulted in an adverse vote on the question of the running of the Council's electric tramcars on Sundays, and Bournemouth, now, has only three-horsed omnibuses one day a week. The advocates of the licensing of motorbuses argued that it was better, on humane grounds, to use mechanical vehicles in place of horses.
The fears of the Central and Associated Chambers of Agriculture, that glanders will be spread into the country by the dispersal of horses from London, following the increase of motor traffic, led those bodies to apply to the Treasury for an extra grant of ,,4:25,000, in respect of compensation for losses by slaughtering, but this application has beert refused. It had been hoped to increase the grant from onefourth to one-half of the value of animals so destroyed. It was reported to the committee that, as had been anticipated, glanders had diminished in London, and increased in the country.
Mr. Frederick Harrison, the general manager of the London and NorthWestern Railway 'Company, in reply to a letter from the Watford Urban District Council, in which complaint was made as to the noise caused by the company's niotorbuses in Watford, stated that this nuisance appeared to have been caused by a mistaken view that the wheels of the cars were interchangeable. Spare wheels intended for one had, erroneously, been put upon another car, thus producing an unusual noise, but the matter had, since the trouble was noted, been put right. We are advised that the Peter Union Tyre Company, amongst its more itnportant items of business recently concluded, has secured large contracts from the London General Omnibus Company, Birch Brothers, the Associated Omnibus Company, the Great Eastern London Motor Omnibus Coinpany, and the Brighton, Hove, and Preston United Omnibus Company. The London Road Car Company's contract has, also, been renewed for a further term of two years.
Another L.C.C. Report.
The report of the Highways Committee of the London County Council, which was considered on Tuesday last, contains statements, in relation to motorbuses, which cannot be substantiated. We refer, more particularly, to the allegations that these rubber-tired vehicles damage the roadways, and that vehicles other than the County Council's own electric tramcars use the tramway tracks. Both these statements are contrary to fact. As well might it be said that one's boots wear out the side walks, as that rubber tires wear telt street-paving materials ; in fact, as the companies know to their cost, the tires have to be renewed with alarming frequency. As to the use of the track, we have pointed out, more than once, that the tramcars drive the ordinary wheeled traffic to the sides of the road, which are maintainable by the Borough Councils, whilst the great benefit of the lesser friction of a metal wheel upon a metal track is, exclusively, enjoyed by the County Council, whose tramway undertaking, not unfairly, is called upon to pay certain charges for this monopoly. Although the Moderate Party in the London County Council is not opposed to electric traction, within limits, and under businekslike control, we look for a much more honest and straightforward handling of the County Council case, which must, indeed, be bad when it has to be bolstered up by a series of statements which are varied to suit the exigencies of motorbus competition, after the forthcoming elections. It is overlooked, too, that the depreciation of certain properties is more than balanced by appreciations elsewhere. The Lancashire Steam Motor Company, Limited, of Leyland, has been taking special pains, during the past few months, to eliminate all noise from the gears of its motorbuses, and its chassis are now remarkable for their quietness of running, even Manchester critics agreeing upon this point.
We are pleased to observe that Fleet Street has, recently, been brought under the tender care of an army of boys with squeegees, whose attentions have greatly improved the condition of the wood paving, with resulting benefit to rubber-tired omnibuses, and to all other traffic, equine and pedestrian. We hope to see this practice extended into other London boroughs, at no distant date, in which event there will be fewer and fewer cases of side-slip.
"Emergency" Drivers.
Before Mr. Curtis Bennett, at the Westminster Police Court, on December i3th, an employee of the London General Omnibus Company, named Benjamin I3urford, was summoned by the police for driving a motorbus without a license. Mr. Kingham, Secretary of the Company, was summoned for employing Burford in the manner described.
Mr. E. B. Knight, for the Commissioner of Police, said that the offence, which it was alleged had been committed, arose out of the recent strike of the London General Omnibus Company's drivers, on November loth. Owing to the shortage of drivers, Burford was put on to drive a bus, on November t3th. He was stopped by the Police, acting on instructions received, and, when questioned, admitted that he had not been licensed, by the Police authorities, though he held an L.C.C. certificate. He asked Mr. Bennett to rule that, in the event of another strike, the defendants would not be entitled to replace their drivers by unlicensed men. The defence was that the law provided that " in case of emergency" an unlicensed driver could take charge of a vehicle for a period not exceeding 24 hours, and it was urged that, as the company would have suffered a loss if the buses had stopped running, this was clearly a case of emergency. Mr. Knight said that everything would turn on the construction to be placed on the words in the Act of 1843, allowing the employment of unlicensed drivers for 24 hours in case " of unavoidable necessity." This was the first case of the kind, and the Police considered that it was never contemplated that a labour dispute, over the hours and wages of employees, could be" an unavoidable necessity," giving employers the power to obtain unlicensed drivers.
Mr. Hamilton Bell, assistant secretary of the bus company, said that they had endeavoured to keep faith with the public.
Mr. Bennett said he could not accept the view that, because the company was likely to lose, the occasion could be called an emergency. The law referred to a state of affairs which it was impossible to foresee, and provide
against. If the car broke down in transit, for instance, or the driver became ill suddenly, that would be an emergency, and an uncertificated man could be employed if necessary to take it back to headquarters.
Defendants suggested that the 24 hours' provision would not be needed in the cases instanced.
Mr. Bennett : It might take 24 hours to take the car home. Such things have happened. (Laughter.) Mr. Knight said, if the defence was accepted, an absurd state of affairs would arise in the case of a general strike.
Mr. Bennett : Yes, perhaps none of the drivers would have licenses then.
Before the first Police witness was called, counsel for the defence stated that the defendants in doing what they had done believed they were correctly relying upon the emergency clause, but, if the magistrate could not admit their argument, they were prepared at once to submit to his ruling. Mr. Bennett said he had decided to rule in favour of the prosecution. The defendants then withdrew their defence.
Mr. Bennett entered a conviction in both cases, but said that, under the circumstances, if an undertaking were given that the offence would not be repeated, he would impose no penalty. The required pledge having been given, Mr. Bennett made an order for the payment of 23s. costs against the defendants in each case.
Proposed Amalgamation.
The various reports to the effect that four of London's motor-omnibus companies intended to amalgamate have, at last, taken definite shape. It is proposed that a new company, to be called the " Vanguard" Motor Omnibus Company, Limited, or by some such other appropriate name, be formed, with an authorised capital of i,000,000, divided into soo,000 seven per cent. non-cumulative preference shares of Li each, and soo,000 ordinary shares of Zi each : power to issue Z5oo,000 in six per cent. debentures or debenture stock is included in the scheme. We find, in the first line of benefit, the holders of 360,000 deferred shares of is. each, and for which no cash has been paid. These gentlemen, who have been the active promoters of the several companies, will receive no less than Z186,000 of ordinary shares in the new company, which is, unquestionably, a very good profit in respect of services which date back for a maeimum period of two years, and which have, already, been remunerated, in addition, by various cash payments.
The four companies concerned, and their issued capitals, are: The London Motor Omnibus Company, Limited, " Vanguard " services (Z200,000 in preference shares of Zs each, Zioo,ixio in ordinary shares of Z*1 each,* and 6o,000 deferred shares of is. each); The London and District Motorbus Corn eany, Limited, " Arrow " services (Z7o,000 in ordinary shares of Li each, and loo,000 deferred shares of is. each); The Motorbus Company, Limited, " Pilat " services (Ziso,000 in ordinary shares of Z1 each, and 100,000 deferred shares of is. each); The London and Provincial Motorbus and Traction Company, Limited, " Arrow " services (A, loo,000 in ordinary shares of Li each, and imam deferred shares of is. each). The combined paid-up capital of these undertakings is, therefore, £638,000, of which £113,000 is in 36o,cxxi deferred shares, and only one of them, the London Motor Omnibus Company, Limited, has issued its accounts, other than for the purpose of the statutory meetings. This undue haste to make money is not a good feature, and any conversion must, in view of that fact, be regarded as of a highly speculative character, especially when it is borne in mind that the capital is now to be " watered" to the extent of no less than £352,500 This may add to the immediate financial attractiveness of the scheme, so far as the promoters and shareholders are concerned, but it will be unrepresented by live plant, and cannot fail to be a considerable drag upon the enterprise. It represents the value of no less than 350 earning units, for which there will be no motorbuses at work to bring in revenue.
The interests of shareholders in the London Motor Omnibus Company, Limited, which company is in the best position of the four, appear to have been protected adequately, as their preferred shares are to be exchanged for debentures. Further, for each Li of ordinary capital they will receive 29s. in new preference shares, and about 12S, in new ordinary shares, compared with an exchange, in respect of the other three companies, of only Li in new preference capital, for each Li of ordinary capital, with a bonus of only 5s. in ordinary shares. As many of these ordinary shares, other than in the I..M.O. Company, stand at only ten shillings, or less, in the market, their holders are unlikely to raise any objections. We must emphasise, however, that the preference shares are not cumulative, and that there is a reserve of Z300,000 debenture stock, which may, at any time, be brought in front of the other classifications.
Whilst the scheme, which has, obviously, been drawn up with the greatest care, and in consultation with two leading members of the Institute of -Chartered Accountants, should strengthen the position of the companies, the wholely unnecessary extent to which mere paper capital has been introduced is not encouraging. Apart from the unissued debentures named above, there will be, available for immediate or later issue, 174,500 ordinary shares, and 35,000 preference shares, and we are unable to attach much importance to the ambiguous statement that the issued capital of the new company " should not exceed Z7eo,soo." The directors might, at any date, be forced to offer whatever capital remains unissued, and we regard this reference to a limit as misleading.