OPINIONS and
Page 37
Page 38
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• QUERIES
The Editor invites correspondence on all subjects connected with the use of commercial motors. Letters should be written On only one side of the paper. The right of abbreviation is reserved and no responsibility for views expressed is accepted.
DO NOT BE MISLED BY FIGURES OF VEHICLE GROWTH.
[4678] On perusing the report of speeches at the Show-opening luncheon in your issue dated November 15, I was indeed struck by the. amazing remarks made by Captain A. U. M. Hudson, Parliainentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport, sO much so, that I almost despair of the powers that )3e. • "Figures," he said, "had shown that the growth of the industry had by no means been checked. The number of commercial vehicle licences had grown steadily [the italics are ours—ED.3 from 458,000 in August, 1932, to 521,000 last year; the increase last year amounted to 15,000."
It is a trite saying that figures can prove anything, and evidently Captain Hudson feels, possibly quite sincerely, that they have established his case, but my experience teaches me that he i quite wrong.
It was a trifle comforting to note that Mr. N. A. Hardie promptly told Captain Hudson the true position in respect to public service vehicles, viz., that their number had actually decreased, but it is obviously very necessary further to disabuse the mind of Captain Hudson, or if that be a forlorn hope, at least to reveal the true position to the unbiased. I maintain, indeed I know, that the growth of the industry has been most severely checked, and the number of commercial vehicles licensed is no proof at all that the industry has not been checked, indeed it is the wrong criterion altogether.
As a matter of fact, the figures quoted by Captain Hudson actually prove that the industry has been checked, and, of course, to the disadvantage of all concerned with the trite interests of road transport. To a great extent this increase in the. number of vehicles simply means that two or more small vehicles are now operating where only one large type was formerly employed, and this is exactly what I predicted must happen when the iniquitous taxation, speed restrictions, etc., were levied on the heavier vehicles, Quite apart from my own personal experience, only a few days ago, when travelling by road to Birmingham, I witnessed a most glaring example of this, for between St. Albans and Stoney Stratford I met no fewer than 40 vehicles, all laden with bricks, travelling south and, on my return, late in the afternoon I repeatedly overtook similar loads. A few weeks previously I witnessed such traffic on the Great North Road, and this, mark you, in a matter of an hour or so. Multiply this hour by days, weeks, and possibly years, and one realizes the number of vehicles operating. Divide this by half, a very modest estimate (also ignoring trailers which could be employed), and one realizes that but for the iniquitous •taxation, restrictions, etc., described above, possibly 50 per cent. of these vehicles would be unnecessary. I reiterate that this sort of thing accounts for much of the increase in vehicles which Captain Hudson claims to be a' sign of prosperity, whereas it is just the reverse.
Here anent it is as well again to remind our railway die-hards that cheap commodities are conveyed by road, and that the traffic would increase by leaps and bounds were the railways to fulfil their ridiculous and spiteful threat to increase their charges for this traffic. Also to remind them that the prohibition of real road goliaths has temporarily saved the situation for them. Another factor which accounts for a good increase in commercial vehicles is the replacement of horsed vehicles.
Captain Hudson apparently is much elated by the increase of 15,000 commercial vehicles (of a sort) last year, although he admitted that the growth was "steady." Personally, I consider this numbez disgusting. It is an average of only 50 per day for 300 working days for all the makers combined, and mostly lighter vehicles necessitated by artificial restrictions. It would be interesting to know the precentage of heavy vehicles in this 15,000. • " Not checked," indeed I consider that the industry • is checked at every angle, and well-nigh prohibited in respect of its full capabilities. Even the roads it pays for are denied it. Just as the railways insist upon traders so arranging their affairs as to conform to railway expediency, so does the Government insist that the road • traffic must fit the roads, instead of supplying roads to fit the traffic.
Captain Hudson, while talking of vehicles, also said that "the user can find anything that he requires," but I submit that that is just what he cannot do, seeing that the larger units are practically prohibited by reason of iniquitous taxation, etc.
Obsolete methods of transport are being bolstered up to prohibit the development of more modern scientific methods.
WALTER GABLMONS, Managing Director, London, E.C.2. For Walter Gammons, Ltd.
THE TRANSPORT OF SAND AND BALLAST BY CLASS B OPERATORS.
[4679] As an operator under a B licence, may I suggest that your correspondents who wrote on the subject of the haulage of sand and ballast have overlooked the fact that this is purely local work—those of us with B licences have to confine our operations to definite areas. Furthermore, the B operator is in a position to supply his customers directly with the several classes of sand and ballast requited, and at the time he re, quires them, from perhaps three different pits.
Although reliable service may not count with pitowners, it does with the consumers, and this is the reason why the B operator in this particular trade will survive all criticism on the lines of the letters from Messrs. Green and Clifford, because the merchant or B operator is in direct touch with his customer, and this will always be the deciding factor.
I agree that pit-owners think more of low rates than service, but that is no reason for accepting them, and I suggest that your correspondents should approach " Tye Ballast, Sand and Allied Trades Association" as members, and obtain a ruling to the effect that the Association members who are pit-owners and hirers of transport shall hire only class A haulage contractors who are members of the Association.
I was one of the first members of The Ballast, Sand and Allied Trades Association, and I resigned rather than " run with the hare and hunt with the hounds "— which at that time most of them were doing. However, as a B-licence holder, I do object to the general criticism of these gentlemen, because it is not correct that in nine cases out of ten such an• operator will draw say 4 yds. at the pit, pay for three and deliver the load as 5 yds.
In conclusion, I might add that it is not a profitable business hauling sand and ballast by road beyond a 20-mile radius, therefore -an A licence is unnecessary, because the B operator is the ideal one for the job.
JOSEPH HUXLEY,
Staines. For Joseph Huxley and Sons.
THE UNHEALTHY LIMITING OF BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES.
[4680] We read with keen interest the letter front,Mr. J. A. Pratt in The Uortirrtercial Motor. dated November 15. It seems to us that Should our business grow and we want another lorry to cope with our hard-earned work, we must go before the Licensing Authority. He is supposed to be fair to both. rail and road, but if the railway tonnage has dropped after a haulier has started, this operator is refused any opportunity of making progress. Thus, if a man. has worked hard and risked his savings; he is to be defeated by the railways, which have lost their work through lack of initiative and
service. • It seems to us, then, that we are in a rut and we are being forced to stay there. If we try to build up our business the railways can object, and we lose the opportunity. It is not fairplay. Why do they call it a Rail and Road. Traffic Act? Would not " Railway Do's and Don'ts" be better? . A. E. SANSOME, Hinckley For Sansome and Wilson.
PARTICULARS REQUIRED OF GOOD REST PLACES FOR DRIVERS.
[4681] Would some of your readers be good enough to let me have the addresses of satisfactory places in London, preferably north of the Thames, where it is possible for •drivers to sleep and get in their periods of rest?
In this case it is not necessary for there to be facilities for the garaging of vehicles, as I should arrange for drivers to change-over, one to stop and rest and the other to carry on with the vehicle.
Sutton Bridge. ACCOMMODATION.
ARE THE ASSOCIATIONS DOING ENOUGH?
[4682j MY attention has been drawn to an article under the above heading in your issue dated October 25. I would first of all point out that the one organization which represents only the haulier (as distinct from the ancillary user) is omitted from the list of associations. given at the head of the article.
Without entering into the pros and cons of the subject under discussion, I would like to correct two misstatements. They are .— 1. "The associations admit ancillary users, as well as hauliers, and thus fall between two stools." .
2. "ii they (the associations) insist upon C licensees .being brought within the conciliation agreement, they will lose the support of the ancillary Users . . so they seem to be taking the line of least resistance and doing nothing."
B28
This Federation, which has been in existence since 1921, represents the interests of the haulage contractor solely, and the ancillary user neverhas been and, in fact, in view of its constitution, never can be admitted. This Federation is, therefore, never confronted with the difficult situations which must inevitably be faced by those associations which attempt to cater for both classes.
Further, when the 1933 Bill was introduced into Parliament, the Federation fought strenuously; for reasons which are now obvious to all, for the inclusion. of the ancillary user within the scope of Section 32 (relating to wages). No opportunity is lost of impressing all concerned with the vital importance of thus bringing. the C licence holder into line.
R. P. BAILEY, Secretary, The National Road Transport Employers' Federation. London, E.C.3.
WHEN IS A TANK UNLADEN WEIGHT?
[4683] Can you give us any information re the following? We have a .2-ton drop-sided lorry, the un laden weight of which is under two tons, but we often carry a 500-gallon paraffin tank in it, this tank being in no way fixed to the vehicle, as it has a cradle.
We have now been ordered to have the vehicle reweighed, the tank and all the fittings to be included.
We have been given to understand that a big oil company has had the same bother, and the case went before a High Court. Can you tell us the result or the
details of this case? TANKER. Poole.: [We have no information with regard to any case in which an oil company was concerned regarding the unladen weight of vehicles carrying fuel tanks, but the position is as follows : —The legal point at issue is whether the tank be part of the vehicle, or part of the load. In the former case it must be upon the vehicle when it is weighed for the purpose of ascertaining the unladen weight, but in the latter case it need not be included.
This question is a question of fact, and not a question of law, and it depends, therefore, upon the facts of each particular case, and is a question for the determination of the magistrates before whom the question is raised upon a summons taken out by the Revenue Authorities for the purpose of ascertaining whether the correct duty has been paid. An appeal to the High Court can be made from a decision of the magistrates where the point is a point of law, but where the point is one of fact the appeal must be to Quarter Sessions. An important distinction is that a decision of the High Court is binding upon all magistrates, but a decision of Quarter Sessions cannot he relied upon in any subsequent case., In our opinion the correct method of approaching the question is to consider whether the vehicle be capable of being used, and is in fact sometimes used, without the tank.
In such a case we consider that the tank forms part of the load, in the same way as a packing-case in which goods are packed for transport in a vehicle. If, how ever, the 'vehicle cannot be used as a vehicle when the tank has been detached, without the addition of another body, we consider that the tank should be regarded as an alternative body, the weight of which should be included in the unladen weight. The position of the tank is much the same as that of the packing-case to which we have referred. If the case can be removed and the vehicle used without alteration, it is clear that the case need not be included in the unladen weight, but if, when the packing-case has been removed, alteration is necessary before the vehicle can be used for carrying other goods, then the packing-case--forms part of the vehicle and must be inclitded in the -unladen weight. As you will realise, the question isan extremely difficult one to determine, as everything depends upon the way in which the magistrates view the particular vehicle and tank.—En.]