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 
Urgent Deliveries Favour Road Transport H OW day - to - day buying had greatly influenced
Page 65
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
the use of road transport, in preference to the railways, was referred to by a witness when Mr. E. Prescott, 11, Rosedale Avenue, Great Crosby, applied before the NorthWestern Deputy Licensing Authority for an additional A licence for a 3-ton vehicle.
Mr. Ian Macaulay said that the applicant had been carrying on business with a 3-ton vehicle since April, 1932. He was working for two firms at present—a timber merchant and a forage merchant. Timber was carried mainly within 50 miles of Liverpool and the forage into Cheshire and Wales. He had had a considerable increase lately in his timber work and, so far as the forage was concerned, some of the farms which he served were 10 miles from any station.
The secretary of Messrs. Caldwell's, timber merchants, said that they wished to confine their transport within certain channels and did not want it to fall into the hands of operators working for other timber merchants. Regarding the method of transport, this was always to the choice of customers. A factor greatly influencing the use of road transport was that customers did not now buy well in advance, but ordered their supplies largely from day to day and stipulated early delivery " on site."
Replying to Mr. H. I. Nelson, for
the railways, he said he would not be prepared to give the applicant a contract, as it would not be fair to Mr. Prescott to do so, as he could give him a guarantee of work for only nine months of the year. Customers demanded chiefly road delivery nowadays, he added.
Railway counsel submitted that the applicant was primarily applying for the licence because Messrs. Caldwell's found it more suitable for their business to have their own private hauliers working for them and had, in one case, given a contract to a haulier. The firm wanted more transport and had appointed Mr. Prescott as a second string. This might be very satisfactory from the firm's point of view—but it as not in accordance with the Road and Rail Traffic Act.
Mr. Macaulay said that a one-vehicle operator always met with-tremendous difficulty in reaching the two-vehicle class, because, if he were to satisfy to the full the stringent requirements of objectors, he had, broadly speaking, to do the work of two vehicles. He must, at the same time, fulfil the statutory requirements regarding vehicle main
tenance. • In counsel's submission, the, applicant was entitled to a licence, because he had not gone beyond the field of his general haulage in order to obtain an increase in his figures.
Decision was reserved.