Middlesex County Council and Local Tolls.
Page 2
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
By the Editor.
The Middlesex County Council Bill, with the progress of which we have dealt on various dates, has this week been before a Select Committee of the House of Lords. We trust that the opposition to the Bill, with which the writer is particularly identified, will be successful. That opposition is based upon. two alternative views, and evidence in support of either will no doubt have been put forward in a committeeroom of the Lords by the time. this issue is in the hands of our readers. The Duke of Bedford is chairman of the Committee tu which the Bill is referred for report.
Grounds of Opposition.
The Bill a-ill c opposed, in the first place, on the grounds that it is contrary to the public interest te allow a series of local authorities to impose then' own local charges upon motorbuses, and that there is further no justification for picking out the motorbus for attentions of the kind. One can imagine the difficulties of travelling by motorbus and motor char-ii-banes if scores of different authorities arc able, in the course of the next. few years, to set up the equivalent of toll gates at various points in the network of highways which are to play an increasiugly-mmportant part in the commercial and social well-being of the community at large. The opposition on these points may be overruled, and the undermentioned additional matters will in that event. be advanced. It will fall to the writer's lot to put them forward. The Middlesex proposal is that all motorbuses should pay gd. per mile run for the use of the new western
11
approach road, between Kew Bridge and Hounslow. This charge is altogether a preposterous one, and ite insertion in the Bill has been so arranged that there is no guarantee that the proceeds of the tax, or of any substituted and smaller tax will be spent on the roads. As the Bill left the House of Commons, any such yield will be carried to the ordinary county fund. Furthermore. the Bill, in its present state, does not give any undertaking, in return for any such taxation, to the effect that the paymentof the tax will exempt the proprietor from other claims or charges at the hands of the county council for road maintenance or alleged extraordinary-traffic damage. The points. however, are merely incidental, and the attention of the parties who are opposing the Bill has already been called to them.
Does Middlesex Seek a Profit?
It is, in the foregoing. eh•einestances, a matter of importance to all who are concerned with road transport to support the Roads Improvement Association in its petition.
We are chiefly concerned with the a-bs-ard rate at which the Middlesex authorities are seeking to charge motorbuses for road maintenance, In the heavilytrafficked thoroughfares of London, such as Piccadilly, Regent Street, Oxford Street and the Strand, the whole cost. of maintenance of the wood -paving and the concrete foundations reckoned together would he more than covered by a tax at half the rate which Middlesex is proposing. There are upon these thoroughfares an average traffic of motorbuses alone of approximately 5100 vehicles per 24 hours, and the petrol tax, which works oat at .219d. per mile run (0.9 miles to the gallon on these routes) produces no less than 1'1700 per mile of roadway per annum. This ideld is more than enough,by several-hundred pounds per mile per annum, to pay for the whole of the highway maintenance, including concrete foundations, and to present the use of it to all the other traffic free of charge. These facts are not sufficiently realized,
B4
although we have dealt with them in THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR On earlier occasions. They must be repeated until they are appreciated. Half the rate which Middlesex asks is enough to pay the total maintenance of some of the busiest streets in London. The action of the Middlesex authorities is, therefore, nothing less than a piece of mischievous overcharging. The demand, in reference to a modern highway which is to be constructed of wood hiecks laid on Li ins, of concrete, is for the same Rd. which is considered ample in reference to ordinary macadam roads in the country. Derbyshire, as our first leading article shows, has only been able to get powers for a contingent id. from Sheffield, and this is to cease when the imperial funds pay 50 per cent, for road maintenance.
Is It To Aid Tramway Interests?
It has also to be remembered that the Middlesex County Council is a tramway-owning authority. This fact may possibly explain its eagerness to impose upon the motorbuses, on the pretence that it is merely recouping itself for road wear, a tax which will to sonic extent give its own electric tramcars a better chance. We know, of course, that the Middlesex County Council has leased it lines to a public company, but it is none the less itself a tramway-owning authority. What possible justification can there be for the asking by Middlesex of twice as much per mile run as is necessary for the total maintenance of the thoroughfares in London which we have cited? Does Middlesex seek to make a profit out of the motorbuses when they run along its proposed new highway, and. if so, why?
A Threatened Precedent.
We shall return to this most important matter in our next issue. We trust to be able to inform our readers that a dangerous precedent. has not been established, and that the first new highway to be constructed out of the proceeds of motor taxation will not be made a source of profit to a wealthy but greedy county council. Middlesex, at the most, deserves a contingent lit, The Government, since the Bill was deposited in November last, has announced its intention to contribute from the National Exchequer 50 per cent. of the cost of maintenance of all main roads, and the new highway will undoubtedly be classed as a main roadIf the Bill were to be given sanction as it stands, it is quite possible that Middlesex would not only have its roads maintained for it, at no cost to the county rates, but that. it might also be deriving from motorbus traffic a not inconsiderable sum for the. benefit of ite ather spending departments. This cannot be allowed. Middlesex already enjoys the advantage of having a lower road expense than any other county in England except Durham. This fortunate circumstance is due to its proximity to London. Its rateable value has hicreased from under £3,000,000 in 1899-1900 to well over £7,000,000 at the present time, and the proceeds of a id. rate now produce £30,000 compared with only £12,121 25 years ago. The main or road mileage remains low, and the gross rate charged to the county funds for main-road maintenance, is steadily failing, yet its officials have the temerity to comae forward, with wide-open mouths, and crying " poor man," to ask for a tax upon public-service vehicles which are providing the long-desired outlet and means of coinmunication for the working classes of London. Nobody-but : partisans. can .wish -.them • sueeess: in these reactionary attempts to make a profit where they have done nothing to contribute to it, They will be hotly 'fought. If they win, who can say when they will seek to tax lorries locally?