The Motor Omnibus World.
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Chairman's Speech at the " Vanguard" First Annual Meeting.
The first annual meeting of the shareholders of the London Motor Omnibus Company, Limited, was held at the Wharncliffe Rooms, Hotel Great Central, on Monday last, when the Chairman of the company, Mr. A. T. Salisbury-Jones, presided over an interested and, at times, enthusiastic meeting. The accounts were dealt with, at some length, on pages t2o and 121 of our last issue, and the analysis then furnished has proved to be the only one undertaken by anybody. Our readers will probably have observed how closely our statements have been borne out in the course of the Chairman's speech.
Mr. Salisbury-Jones opened by expressing regret at the unavoidable delay in sending out the accounts, and by expressing the view that the shareholders would have no reason to complain of delay in the future. The company had purchased a large number of omnibuses of Continental manufacture because, at the time of their flotation, there could be no possible question as to the wisdom of the course. No manufacturer. in this country had, at the end of leo+ acquired the necessary experience :for turning out thoroughly efficient machines for the company's purpose, but it was gratifying to find that CHASSIS OF HOME MANUFACTURE
were now being constructed almost, if not quite, as reliable as the best machines from the Continent.
The directors had no reason to think that any blame whatever attached to the company or its officials in respect of the Handcross accident, and they were advised that they were under no legal liability for the consequences. Provided a reasonable spirit were shown by the claimants, and they were not misled by the advice of third parties with ulterior motives, an understanding would, no doubt, be arrived at. The directors would endeavour, from humane considerations, notwithstanding the legal position, to assist the sufferers in a practical way. Dealing with the fact that only is. per share had been received in respect of 39.993 ordinary shares, which, in
accordance with the terms of the company's original prospectus, were called by the Motor Omnibus Trust, Limited, half at par, and half at a premium 25. 6(1. per share, the Chairman pointed out that they had no use for the money, but that it would be called up, and paid, whenever it was wanted. The issue of the 200,000 Six per cent. preference shares had cost the total amount of £9,985 25., so that there was ..,.11,274 8s. 6d. standing as an asset in the balance-sheet on formation account. The addition to this account in respect of the preference issue was slightly less than 5 Per cent., which all would agree was extremely reasonable. He subsequently drew attention to the fact that the 25. 6d. premium per share on half these shares, amounting to 2S. 6d4.-had been deducted from the flotation expenses connected with the original., issue of 6o,000 ordinary shares.
Turning to the important matters of maintenance and depreciation, Mr. Salisbury-Jones expressed the confident view that the company's vehicles were in a more efficient state at the present time than they were when new, because certain weak spots and places in the original chassis had been replaced with new and improved parts. The whole of the expense involved, much of which might legitimately have been charged to capital account, had been debited against revenue. Although the directors were advised that the oldest machine in the company's possession might reasonably be expected to have a life of Jo years, they had decided to write off the total value, inclusive of omnibus body and all its equipment, in less than five years. (Applause.) The Chairman, in this connection,
RIDICULED CERTAIN JOURNAL'S CRITICISMS,
in which the value of the company's motorbuses was stated to be over Zr,too each, and explained that, although only 98 omnibuses were on the road at June 3oth last, a very large number, which had been delivered by the contractors shortly before the end of the financial year, and which were being equipped for the road, had, whilst not earning money for the company, been included in the ,4:115,o3o.
A.Vith reference to the future prospects of the company, Mr. SalisburyJones estimated that, when delivery of its full fleet of over 300 motorbuses had been given, the profits would amount to „4:75,000 a year. He congrati:lated the shareholders on the fact that the motorbus was only disliked by the few : it was appreciated by the million, who recognised it as a boon and as a comfortable, speedy and cheap means of travelling. (Applause.) They had carried 30,000,000 passengers, and not one single person had been killed through any fault of the company or its ofhcials in London. Economies in their method of lubricating the engines, and sayings in the tire bills, would give them a large margin in hand which, in the directors' opinion, would more than compensate them for any loss of earning power through competition hereafter. Every possible step would be taken to reduce noise, as less noise meant reduced wear and tear. It was a matter that received the constant and close attention of the company's engineers. (Applause.)
In conclusion, the Chairman acknowledged that the question of an
was under consideration, and that the directors might have something to say to the shareholders on the subject at a later date. He assured his hearers, however, that the directors would not overlook the strength of the " Vanguard " position, and that no scheme would be presented for approval exccOt on lines which would be acceptable to the general body of shareholders. (Applause.) He desired to acknowledge the energies of the company's managing director, Mr. Clarence Freeland; of the chief engineer, Mr. Robert Bell ;• of the traffic manager, Mr. George Dicks; and of the assistant engineers, Messrs. Pollard and Fenner.
The report was seconded by Sir Henry Seton Karr, C.M.G., and carried unanimously, including the dividend distributions, The Mayor of Stoke Newingtoi has ruled out of order a motion to assess all mechanically-driven vehicles, plying for hire, to the local rates, on the ground that the Council has no power to assess such vehicles.
An advertisement from The Financial Times--" To escape noise, dust and smell of motorbuses, seek repose and pure air at the Hotel. 'Half an hour from town, etc., etc." 'Tis an ill wind that blows nobody good.
The subject of " Mechanical [Torsopower; what it is, and how it is measured," was instructively dealt with by Mr. R. G. L. Markham, M.Inst.M.E., He R.N., Editor of " The Motor Boat," in a paper read last week before members of the British Motor Boat Club. We regret that extracts from the paper are unavoidably held over.
The Highways Committee of the L.C.C. has for some time past had under consideration the question of seeking Parliamentary powers for the purpose of running motor omnibuses as feeders to its tramways, and also for " cross-country " purposes. The Committee has now decided not to recommend the Council to seek such powers.
Frederick C. Mancer, a motor-omnibus driver in the employ of the Associated Omnibus Company, Limited, was summoned, on Saturday last, at Westminster Police Court, by the Westminster City Council, for an amount of some 27s., the cost of making good damage done to a street lamp through his vehicle's skidding. The solicitor for the City Council stated that every effort had been made to get the money from the omnibus company, but it would not pay, whilst the defendant asked for an adjournment in order that the question of liability might be settled : the adjournment was granted. It will be interesting to learn the derision in due course. A master is thatally held liable for his servants' torts, so long as the servant is acting within the scope of his authority, A carrier is held liable for the negligence of a driver of one of his vans who runs over a child, and an omnibus company has been held liable for the wrongful acts of one of its drivers who, through racing another omnibus, caused personal injury to the claimant, though the company had expressly forbidden its drivers to race. [Limpus versus General Omnibus Company (1862), 32 L.J. Ex. 34.] There is an exemption in regard to traction engines, contained in Section 13 of the 1898 Locomotives Act, which reads : " Where an offence under any Act or by-law relating to locomotives on highways, for which the owner of a locomotive or wagon is liable to a penalty, has, in fact, been committed by some servant, workman, or other person, that servant, workman, or other person shall be liable to the same penalty as if he were the owner." The case under notice, however, is one of civil liability for damage to property, and we fear that the exemption quoted, even were it to be applied to heavy motor vehicles, could not be held to exempt the proprietors. It is not unlikely, however, that a test case will be fought out on this question of damage to lamp-posts, and sight must not be lost of the fact that each case requires to be taken on its merits. It is interesting to note that, as reported on page 158 of this issue, the Motor Van, Wagon, and Omnibus Users' Association has authorised the search for a certain clause, known to exist in the old Act, and which requires all lamp-posts to be set back at least 18 inches from the edge of the kerb. 'We made reference to this Act in our issue of May 31st last (Vol. 3, No. 64, page 268). Editorial reference is made to the increasingly important bearing of improved streetcleansing methods in to-day's issue.
The Brush Electrical Engineering Company, Limited, of King Edward's Mansions, Shaftesbury Avenue, W., has delivered several of the nine 4oh...). omnibuses for use in Birmingham
The Hon, Ferdinand Charles Stanley, a younger son of Lord Derby, and brother to the Chairman of the A.C.G.B.I., has been elected Chairman of the London Power Omnibus Company, ',prated, by, his co-director, in sueeeSsion to CfiPtain.H. H. P. Deasy.
The Lord Provost of Glasgow, in opening a bazaar in the Clyde city on the i9th inst., is reported to have delivered himself to the following effect : "Glasgow should be devoutly thankful that it had no experience of the dreadful motorbus that had made such a disagreeable invasion of London. The terrible noise, the emissions of smoke, and the smell were simply horrible, and those who had not seen what was going on in London could not appreciate how thankful they should be that the invasion had not come to Glasgow." it looks as though the Lord Provost were also without experience.
Less than one-tepth of the London County Council's debt incurred in street improvements, consequent upon the extension of its electric tramway scheme, has been charged against the tramway account, the amount so debited being 4:377,260, out of a total of £4,044 ,844: Although a certain proportion of the improvements are unquestionably beneficial to the general traffic of the Metropolis, it is clear that the tramway account would show an enormous deficit did it bear anything like a fair share of this expenditure.
Sir Thomas Hewitt, a motorcar
owner, recovered the sum of and costs from the London Road Car Company, Limited, at the Brampton County Court, on the iSth instant, when the case was decided by Judge Selfe. The plaintiff's motorcar was damaged by one of the company's omnibuses, which skidded in the Fulham Road. Editorial reference is made to this case, and we must point out that the finding of his Honour Judge Setfe is in direct opposition to that of his Honour Judge Russell, at the Wandsworth County Court, on April 9th last, to which we referred in our issue of April i9th,
Motor omnibus managers who re quire good terms for waterproofs, coats and other rubbered material should not fail to address the Dunlop Rubber Company, Manor Mills, Aston, Birmingham, for a copy of its motor cloth.
ing catalogue. It is not only owners of private cars who will be interested in this publication, for it contains particulars of many useful garinents,for strictly business wear, for drivers and others. Mr. Herbert Austin, of Northfield, near Birmingham, has invented and patented a wheel which is designed to admit of the quick removal and leplacement of a pneumatic tire. The felloe is of ordinary design, but made in two halves, which are bolted together, the bolts passing through the
ends of the spokes. Ordinary rim valves and security bolts are used, nothing special being required in respect of the inner tube or its attachments. A defective tire is removed bodily, with its rim, after the necessary nuts have been loosened by the use of a brace. and the spare rim, with its inflated tire in position, is then substituted, and the bolts replaced. Simplicity of manipulation appears to be provided here, and, apart from its wide adoption on touring cars, the invention opens up possibilities for the pneumatic tire in connection with utility motors of lighter types, and for single-deck omnibuses of comparatively light weight. Should it be necessary, the usual method of detachment and repair can be undertaken, exactly as in ordinary practice. The general appearance of the wheel does not differ from the usual standard, and the cost of adaptation is small. This device will be exhibited on several stands at the next Olympia Show.