1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156 
rrow Doubts Principle of Fares Parity on Common Routes
Page 63
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
IE Northern General Transport Co., Ltd., and South Shields Transport Department were described as "strange bedfellows" when ewcastle upon Tyne last week the company applied to increase n fares—to bring them into line with those charged by the department common routes.
presenting the applicants, Mr. I. Robey told the Northern Traffic .nissioners that the application was made consequent upon increases ed to South Shields Corporation in June. They had, in fact, been ;ed by the company, under dispensation, since June 15.
J. H. Richardson, Northern 's transport manager, said that the ion concerned an increase of mately id. on services which were m-ordination with South Shields. vas no question of any financial -ations entering into the matter, lication was made solely for the of the parity of fares between operators.
-examined by Mr. M. L. Rothfield,
clerk of Jarrow, who was object'. Richardson said that it was an principle that when an increase inted to one company, thc fares T companies operating over the attes should be brought into line.thfield said that he was not conwith accepted principles—he was ineerned with the welfare of the ig public. Mr. Richardson ml that when Northern General )lied for an increase in fares they include the fares authorized in hields as they had always regarded s being the prerogative of the ihields Corporation.
Sponsored Application Richardson agreed that the appliwas sponsored by South Shields Won. In other words," said Mr. Id, "they are supporting your Lion." "Rather strange bed," he added, "since in my experiis quite a common thing for the be at 'loggerheads."
Richardson said that he was conwith maintaining the principle res on common routes should be me, to which, countered Mr. Id, "In other words, a complete n of competition."
South Shields Corporation, Mr. R. Christmas said that when the fares were granted in June, the an, Mr. J. A. T. Hanlon, had said e Commissioners had wondered they were asking for enough. ying, Mr. Robey said that this was th time the procedure had been 1—an application made by South followed by one from his clients his was the first time that Jarrow Tie forward with a representation. surprised at the reluctance of Mr. Id to accept the principle of parity vas provided for in section 72(4)(b) 1930 Act, Aing the application, the Deputy an of the Commissioners, Mr. Duncan, said that the principle m so well established that it would ng to depart from it now.