Licence Refused Without Submissions
Page 51
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I-1 A N application by the Tees-side Rail
less Traction Board to run a new bus service between Stockton and Saltburn had the support of "tens of thousands of people," yet was rejected "out of hand" by the Traffic Commissioners. This statement was made by Mr. I. Campbell Wardlaw, for the Board, who last week appealed against the refusal of a licence.
United Automobile Services, Ltd., Middlesbrough and Stockton Corporations, and British Railways. objected when the application was heard in May. Mr. Wardlaw said the Commissioners were,wrong in refusing the application in the manner in which they did. For no apparent reason they retired, and then refused the application without hearing the submissions by parties represented.
The proposed service would have run hourly and would have been 25 minutes quicker than one operated on a different route by U.A.S.
"We called 19 witnesses, representing a strong body of dpinion, at the hearing in May, and I am ficit exaggerating if I say they spoke for tens of thousands of people," went on Mr. Wardlaw. The application was rejected on the ground that there had been no spontaneous demand for the service.
Mr. Wardlaw commented that it was " incomprehensible " that local municipal undertakings should object. The service would bring more people to Stockton, and Middlesbrough Corporation would profit through their share in the Board.
Spokesmen for Stockton and Middlesbrough said they objected because parts of the proposed service would cover districts catered for by their own routes. They considered that existing routes served byU.A.S. were adequate.
For U.A.S., Mr. J. L. R. Croft said the Commissioners were justified in stopping proceedings after three days when no case had been made out by the Board. "I cannot remember in the history of public licensing anyone demolishing their own case so well," be said.