Rail Onslaught on B Licences
Page 51
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
COMMENT on the attitude of the railway companies in objecting to the renewal of a B licence without modification was made before Sir William Hart, North-Western Deputy Licensing. Authority, by Mr, A. Clarke Storey, at a sitting in Manchester, on Monday. lhe applicant was a building contractor who had originally been granted a licence with a `10-mile radius for the transport of building materials, appliances and rubbish for contractors engaged on the same work. Mr. Storey suggested that the railway companies were wasting time by objecting.
For the London, Midland and Scottish and London and North-Eastern Railway Companies, Mr. H. Orange said they took exception to the vagueness of the licence. Mr. Storey said there was no change in the circumstances since the original application had been heard fully by the Authority. Mr. Orange confined his objection to requiring the specification of the persons for whom work was done. The applicant explained that it was impossible to spkify The renewal was granted.
At this inquiry, the railway representative opposed all the B licence renewals, irrespective of whether they were with or without modifications, and many further restrictions were secured. The applicants were asked by Mr. Orange, net only were they operating to the limits of their licences, but also whether they were doing all that they did in the basic year.
Mr. M. Harper, of Tyldesley, despite his protest, had his distance for furniture removals reduced to 25 miles, with occasional concessierns for Blackpool and Morecambe, on the plea that longdistance transport of furniture was rightly railway work, notwithstanding the •fact that the Tyldesley railWay depot had no vehicles.