AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Traders May Not Choose, Say Railways

28th May 1937, Page 38
28th May 1937
Page 38
Page 38, 28th May 1937 — Traders May Not Choose, Say Railways
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?

TRADERS should not be allowed to chOoSe their own Means for transport, said a railway solicitor, at Liverpool,: last Friday. The North-Western Deputy Licensing Authority, . Sir William Hart, was hearing an application by W. Lewis, Ltd:, Liverpool; for permission to add two 5-ton vehicles and two 21-ton trailers to an A licence.

Evidence by a wain/per of Liveipool timber merchants, who were custothers of the applicant, showed the superiority of road over rail transport.

Mr, G. H. P. Beames, for the railways, expressed the view that it was neither reasonable nor desirable that a trader should have discrgtion to. 'deal with his goods as he liked, because, otherwise, the Licensing Authority's powers would be usurped. If traders wished to have their goods hauled by road they could either take out C licences or give a contract to a haulier.

• In reply, Mr. V. R.: Shepherd, for the applicant,, emphasized that hiring

had become abnormal. During the past year the company had had to emOciy 60 sub-contractors, against 26 a year earlier, He held that the Licensing Authority could not take into account the question whether road-transport facilities were in excess of requirements, because there had been DO evidence on this 'point.

It seemed to Mr. Shepherd, reading between the lines of the second BoutsTillotson appeal decision, that the Tribunal reeognized that; whilst rail transport was • suitahle at one time, modern conditions demanded a higher. standard in some respects, and that, in the Tribunal's opinion, the railways would not be able to deal with commercial conditions of the future.

One of the factors provoking Mr. BOaines'S submission was that W. • Lewis; Ltd., had been asked by a customer, of some 18 years' standing, to carry timber to a motor works in the Midlands. Previously, that traffic had gone by rail, but Mr. L. W. Lewis, managing director of W. Lewis, Ltd., understood that the motor manufacturer had informed the timber merchant that, in future, all wood must be sent by road.

Mr. Shepherd, commenting on this point, emphasized that the haulier was in no way concerned with the transference of traffic ; he was merely carrying out the instructions of a customer.

Decision was reserved.


comments powered by Disqus