Railways Cannot Meet Holiday Traffic "I AM still not satisfied that the trains
Page 58
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I adequately cover their holiday trafac," said Mr. A. Henderson, chairman of the Southern Scotland Traffic Commissioners, recently, when hearing an application at Edinburgh from the Scottish Motor Traction Co., Ltd., for an increase in duplication from 10 buses to 16 on the Edinburgh-London trunk service during Edinburgh Trades Holiday week and in September.
His remark followed a protest by the railway's representative, who took exception to a statement by Mr. R. Beveridge, passenger transport manager of the S.M.T., that in peak periods the railways had difficulty in running to schedule and in affording accommodation to passengers.
For the applicant company, Mr. J. W. Loudon said his client had to refuse intending pasSengers. The restriction on vehicle duplication was fundamentally wrong.
For the L.N.E. Railway Co., it was pointed out that the matter of duplication had been settled on the basis that the maximum number of vehicles to be duplicated should not exceed three times the number used under ordinary conditions. If a duplication increase was desired, an application could be made for more vehicles to be used on the route in question. Mr. Loudon said that it meant that to ensure an adequate supply of buses in summer they must run half-empty vehicles in winter.
Mr. Beveridge said that with regard to increased licences, an -unsuccessful attempt had been made before the Metropolitan Commissioner. It was no exaggeration to say that each week in London and Edinburgh hundreds of intending passengers were refused roadtransport facilities.
Counsel for the railway claimed that efficient and adequate services were operated between Edinburgh and London. It was unfair that they should be subjected to competition which would prevent them reaching their standard revenue.
Decision was deferred.