OPINIONS FROM OTHERS.
Page 29
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Editor invites correspondence on all subjects connected with the use of commercial motors. Letters should be on one of the paper only and typewritten by preference. The right of abbreviation is reserved, and no responsibility for views expressed is accepted.
The side
Steamer v. Petrol Wagons.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1839] Sir,—I have been reading the arguments in your journal on the subject of " Steamer v. Petrol Wagon," and, having had. dealings with Sentinel steamers and with petrol lorries, I cannot help but think that the petrol lorry referred to in the original comparison must .have e been some old, "pro-war," worn-out vehicle, pitted against that high-flying Sentinel express! How long did the steamer spend picking up water, and where was the petrol lorry while she was doing this? Surely the petrol driver must have been asleep Working in a district where there are a great many Sentinels, I say that if they can get along so well I shall be glad if the driver of the Sentinel wagon will inform me why they all have to give us " pass " about here. Then there is the question in " 1835's " letters asking why the steamer did not finish its run from Barton to Aston that same night. Might I ask if it was the clinkering of her fire that prevented it or was the driver tired? The lorry I ara driving is a five ton Coventry make, and. is eight years. old and has not been overhauled; still, I should only recently like the chance to go over any given distance against that Sentinel, for I am sure the steamer would not beat me.—Yours A DISGUSTED PETROL DRIVER. Warwick.
Would Private Enterprise be Killed in Durham ?
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
(1840] Sir,—Mr. Thos. Russell, who writes under this heading in your isue of April 5th, is surely the Last of the optimists. In spite of alisthe experience which the country has gained in the effects of municipal and State enterprise, he actually believes that the granting of a motor omnibus monopoly to the Durham County Council would lead to a larger "demand for vehicles than if the field were left open to private enterprise! I would be very much surprised to find that many experienced men in the motor industry endorse the policy of handing over motor omnibus .enterprise to the tender mercies of county councils. For one thing, these councils have already reached, if not exceeded, -the limits of reasonable taxation, and it would be extremely difficult for them to raise-large sums of money for the development of speculative motor enterprise.
The motor transport world is making a strong stand against the attempt of the railway companies to extend their operations over the road transport field. If the Durham County Council gets the powers it is asking for, a precedent will be established which will have an even worse effect on passengers-transport by road than the railway companies' proposals will have upon the carriage of goods. For this and other reasons, the various motor organizations shouldtake immediate steps to oppose the Durham County
Council Bill.—Yours faithfully, A.G.W.
A Local Council and a New Bus Service. The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1841] Sir,—Can you tell us where we stand in the matter of our rights to run a bus service, our local council giving us a great deal of trouble and compelling us for the time being either to-,cease running or to run the service without their permission. They granted us licences to run and made no comment until we were actually on the road, and then seem to have found a reason to make all the present trouble. It seems to us that, under the new conditions for licensing and registration, the local council have no longer the power to carry out-their threats, but until we can get some sort of official support it looks as if we are likely to be turned off the roads. Was not the power to stop a, new bus service only a war-time measure 7—Yours faithfully. L.T.W. AND Co.
Pneumatic Tyres and Running Costs.
The Editor, THF. COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1842] Sir,—Mr. F. A. Sessions representing the Giant pneumatic interests, states in his letter to you of March 29th, that his_reason for not replying to the charge we made against him and the Giants of bad faith, and of practising deception on the public in connection with the impa,ot table published during the recent controversy arising out of the Palladium double cantilever vehicle challenge, was because our "letters appeared to be getting nearer to abuse than, argument." Mr. Sessions, nevertheless, takes the opportunity at, this late date, when everyone has forgotten the facts, of explaining matters apparently very much to his own satisfaction on the "I have said what I have said" principle. Whilst not wishing to encroach too much on your valuable space, we shall be obliged by your allowing us briefly to quote from our letter, wherein we make the charge, which, briefly stated, amounted to one of deliberately distorting and " cooking " a certain table prepared"under the auspices of the Bureau of Public ' Roads, United States Department of Agriculture to suit the exigencies of their case in connection with the Palladium challenge. Incidentally, we also charged them with plagiarism of the said table. " If. ha (Mr: F. A. Sessions) denies our charge, will he inform us where, when, and under whose auspices the test was carried out from which the said table was compiled, and will you, Sir, please make a careful note of his reply, if any?" No reply ever came, as was to be expected, and this belated explanation, together with the quaint reason for not replying, is just about as satisfactory as anything ever to be expected from the Giant elements when proof is demanded from them, If making a charge which we believe to be wholly warranted and which, moreover, we maintain, is to constitute abuse, then we are offenders.
It is very evident, however, that Mr. F. A. Sessions is attempting to confuse questions of good taste with his own bad faith. It ill becomes the Giants, with so much on their consciences, to set up as a criterion in matters of taste or ethics, and we are sure, Sir, that you and your readers would be 'far more interested in anhonest, straightforward reply to the charge made against them than in hearing ridiculous allusions to abuse in argument. We may remark that it is a very old trick in dialectics to divert attention from the main question by prominently raising side issues.
We may remind you that the main question calling for a reply in the terms requested by us is—foit what reason the impact table plagiarized from the Department of Agriculture of the UnitedStates was distorted and misquoted—and if this, perchance', is denied, then will Mr. Sessions inform us where, when, and under whose auspices the test was carried out from which the table was made.--Yours faithfully,
For PALLADIUM AUTOCARS, LTD., S. Ross MACMARON, Managing Director. n33