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
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164 
Rivalry for Atomic-plant Traffic
Page 58
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
OPERATORS of heavy-haulage vehicles in Sheffield and Rotherham objected strongly to an application by A T. Marriott, Ltd., Sheffield, for, an addition to their A licence of a vehicle of 7+ tons unladen weight before the Yorkshire Licensing Authority last week.
Mr. J. Neilson, for Marriott, said that they had three vehicles on A licence, and were asking for additional tonnage • for specialized traffic for Robert Jenkins and Co., Ltd., Rotherham. Eighty per cent, of the work was the carriage of atomic-energy plant to stations in various parts of the country. The vehicles were fully employed and averaged up to 50.000 miles each annually.
Jenkins' traffic was increasing and because of the bulk and shape of many of the loads, specified routes had to be followed involving journeys of up to 600 miles. The work required special supervision, equipment and trained drivers, Marriotts had been paid as much as £240 for a journey to Scotland.
Mr. M. H. Taylor, for Leonard Green (Haulage). Ltd., Rotherham, and J. E. Parker, Ltd., Sheffield, said that in 1955, 75 per cent. or Marriott's work was for Jenkins: this year it was 94 per cent. Only 6 per cent. of Marriott's
c16 outward traffic was for other customers. In July, 1956, there was only one return load out of 43 journeys.
Cross-examined by Mr. Taylor,Mr. G. Durn, Jenkins' traffic manager, said that it was not , the policy of the company to employ contract-A vehicles. Other hauliers had not been asked to carry the traffic. .
Mr. Taylor pointed out that Jenkins had at their disposal a "formidable" fleet belonging to the seven hauliers employed, but had made no attempt to find out if any of the others could carry the traffic. Mr. Durn had agreed that as far as. non-specialized loads were concerned, Jenkins were adequately served. If the objectors had vehicles available there was no reason why they should not carry some of the traffic.
Mr. L, Green, in evidence, said that Leonard Green (Haulage), Ltd., had 20 vehicles on A licence, nine of which were comparable with Marriotts. He had worked for Jenkins before nationalization, and still employed some of the drivers used then on carrying heavy loads. In 1954, he saw Mr. Durn and asked to come back, but had never been approached since.
There was also an objection from British Railways. The bearing was adjourned. •