Opinions from Others.
Page 15
Page 16
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Registered Owners and Mechanical Transport for Army Purposes.
Tie Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
L1,21 Sir, !-Although rather late in the do), allow me as the owner of a steam tractor to conguatulate you upon the good service which you are doing in the interest et motor owners. I think the meeting which you are arranging, to enable owners of motor vehicles to meet 1.0 formulate their grievances, and to determine their policy in regard to the War Unice and registered wagons Rnd tractors, is aid of practical and opportune kind. In these days, everything turns upon co-operation and concerted action, which is fortunately rapidl■ taking the place of cut-throat competition, and, with a proper lead and loyal discipline among members, combined action can be made felt in a way it never could before. You, thro:igli your valuable columns, have ru used. public feeling and secured the attention which the movement required, and which good management and energy should now drive home and make secure.
1 hope that owners win apply themselves largely to obtaining better general terms of hiring, and not raise questions as to trilling complaints at this juncture, as, if well founded, these can easily be established, but my experience is that these matters are apt to be exaggerated. There must always he give and take, and, as there are often mistakes on both sides, it would be bad policy to allow such an important issue to be in any way discre(lited by raising trivial grievances. The points which seem to me most important are:—
Registration fee to he at least £11) per annum. (2) Hiring to be for not less than 12 days including journey to and fro.
(3) Notice when hiring will cease to be given when vehicle is requisitioned.
(4) Better rations for drivers and assistants. I wish, also, to suggest. that all owners who have registered vehicles .should enrol themselves and form an a &SO-. elation. which, with a small annual subscription, might hold meetings, appoint a committee of management, take up all matters of importance, and watch and assist by concerted action the general welfare of the owners of tins class of vehicle.—Yours faithfully, " OWNER NO. 21.'' rIO c.mx.A. will probably be asked to iorm a special con,frittee following upon Ike proeneilings on Monday afternoon next, wilfen wit begin ins !2.5i1
Motorbuses and Drivers Offered for Service at Home or in the Colonies.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
Li.,21131 Sir,—i have no hesitation in appealing to you, as I am fully aware of your earnest desire to assist the commercial-nlotor movement wherever possible. We are shertly expecting to have to find a new field for our fleet et passenger motor vehicles, which at present ply between Nottingham and Long Eaton. Now that we have thoroughly established a good service, the Nottingham Corporation has voted £15,000 towards road improvements on the. route over which we have been running, as a preliminary to the establishment of tramway laying. Such a service, if and when. it is constructed, would compete directly with us, of course to our serious loss, as we should have a mile-longer route at the same fare when they opened. 11 you should know of a country route where there is likely to be remuaerative work for two or three buses in regular service, we should be 'very much obliged for any assistance you could render to us, in ordi;r to enable us to get into touch with such a district. We should prefer the South of England, where the season is longer, but we would even take up a route for a manufacturer in Australia or some other Colony where the climate is favourable to enterprise. There are four of us in the family ; we are all drivers and motor mechanics. and du all our own work for the business. We have always been financially successful, so far, with regard to the vehicles we have run.
Thanking you in anticipation of any assistance which you could give us.—Yours faithfully, Beeston, Notts, AxeitEw BAttrox. BROS,
-The Basis of Goods Train Rates.
The Editor, THE COIHMERCIAL MOTOR,
L-1,247j Sir,—Your issues of 29th September and Oth Oc--tuber contained an article of real interest on the above ssubject. Of real interest'' because, although from the .pen of a railway official, it consists of, in the main, an unprejudiced account of the railway position.
The most-valuable parts of the article, from the trader's slaoint of view, are the Suggested alterations in classiti:cation," the " Suggested rates for quantities," and the -" Simplification of railway rates." These three points -need bracketing together, and, in my opinion, if the railway companies were well advised, they would not establish, -as your writer suggests, a " Railway Companies' Board of ..Experts," but a Combined Board of companies and traders. To strike a note of moderation, is it not time, after -nearly 80 years of continuous strife on both sides, culminating in a state of chaos bewildering even to the trained .mind of the railway man, for each party to be prepared to _sink all differences and to endeavour to arrive at a more:reasonable modus operandi in dealing with this problem? Unless some such arrangement can be arrived at, I do not believe for one moment that any self-constitoted Board of Experts," consisting of railway officials only, --could do more than touch the fringe of the problem. Let Lane recite, briefly, the position as it exists to-day, We have the Acts of 1873-1888 and 1894, so-called '" Traders' Acts," conferring powers on the traders in :regard to the analysis of rates, and limiting the railway ...companies' powers of increase of rates : in between, we :have the Order Confirmation Acts of 1891-2, again limiting sthe railway companies' powers by reason of their ordering -what they may charge. Afterwards, owing to the wholesale increase of the rates (or bulk of them), in 1893, -by the associated railway companies, of 5 per cent., conies the verdict in the Smith and Forrest v. L. and N.W. Illy. -Co. case in WOO, virtually limiting any such increase to a maximum of 3 per cent. Add to these the nearly 400 s-pages of classification, bristling with barriers and useless -generic terms, and even an old official of the railway rates -.department may well exclaim, in sympathy with the -Cockney ballad, " 'E dunno where 'e are :" Disputes and litigation follow each other in rapid succession ; every • -trader's hand is (apparently) against the railway corn_panies—and vice versa. " What the Traffic Will Bear " is, ets your contributor rightly remarks, wholly fallacious. -.IIere is an actual example, and thousaeds more could be quoted. A package, weight 4 cwt., per rail for 20 miles : :rail rate 10s. per ton, charge 2s. for carriage; profit on -the package, Is. Sd. Here is another fallacy, not quoted -in any vindictive spirit, hut simply named as showing the ..hotbe'ti of chaos in which the railway companies are moving -to-day. Ordered by the Acts of 1873 and 1888, and by -.the Railway and Canal Commissioners' Court, to dissect or analyse thoroughly certain rates compiled prior to 18111. -the railway companies frankly aaid—and they were probably right—that the rates had not been arrived at on any . fixed basis, but that they were computed figures having
regard to the particular services included in such rates. Yet, to-day, we have these railway companies gravely stating, in correspondence, that certain rebates in respect of certain services not rendered by them cannot be allowed, as, when the rates were made up (prior to 1891), no charge was included for such service, notwithstanding this fact having been fully taken into consideratioe by them when making up the rates!
The moral of the whole subject seems to my mind to be this, that, if some fairy wand would cause the whole of the present classification and rates to disappear for ever, and at the same time would substitute a uniform system throughout the country on a generally-reduced scale, both sides would benefit—the railway companies by the impetus to trade and consequent increase of traffic, and the traders by the increased facilities and lower charges.—
Yours faithfully, PHILIP KERSHAW. a nchester.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
Sir,—In giving prominence to Mr. E. B. Creasey's excellent paper on the above subject, THE COMMERCIAL MoTOR has rendered a signal service to the motor-carrying industry. There can be no question that railway rates are accepted as the standard in comparison with which all others forms of transport must regulate their charges.
Mr. Creasey points out, however, that the present classification of goods is by no means perfect, partly due to the fact that traffic is always changing its form, and also no doubt due in some measure to the influence of competition; this fact gives weight to the suggestion that a Board of Experts is required. Unfortunately, Mr. Creasey has to admit that rather more than half the staple business of the railway companies is done under " exceptional rates," which cannot be withdrawn without considerable expense and trouble, and, as " exceptional rates " are only granted by railway companies because there are certain circumstances connected with the traffic which are exceptionally favourable to the railway company, it follows that any change in those conditions may leave the carrier at a grave disadvantage which he cannot easily overcome. Mr. Creasey points out several eases which are fairly common. These " exceptional rates "—or bribes—require abolishing. The subject of extra-service charges is one which is badly in need of attention at present. The public is aware that these are to a great extent a matter for personal adjustment, and uses this knowledge as .a lever in negotiating with the railway companies. The result is that a great deal of warehousing and carting service is undercharged, or not charged at all, and allied traders, whose livelihood is obtained by selling such accommodation to the public at a fair price, are prevented from making a living.
Now that road transport is offering serious competition to the railways, and the suggestion to open up canals is being mooted, the question arises whether it would not be advisable for the Board of Trade to exercise more control over the rates charged by all forms of transport. —Yours faithfully, " PERSPECTIVE."