Application Rejected Twice
Page 7
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
ALTHOUGH Mr. Henry . Riches, Northern Scotland Licensing Authority, had refused in September an application by. Messrs. Elrick and flutcheon, Aberdeen haulage contractors, and an appeal against his refusal is pending, he consented to hear a similar application by the firm, last week. The application, for a licence for a vehicle to operate on their trunk service from Aberdeen to Glasgow, was opposed by the L.M.S. and L.N.E. Railway companies.
For the applicants, Mr. W. D. Connochie said that the Licensing Authority must have regard to the fact that the main business carried on by the applicants was a trunk service from Aberdeen to Glasgow. They had a certain amount of local work, but it was infinitesimal.
He thought that, in deciding the application, Mr. Riches had to take into account only the vehicles that were available for, the trunk service. Evidence which had been led showed that the local tonnage carded by the applicants was purely collection and delivery.
The firm now required an additional vehicle on their trunk service. The railways argued that the applicants had sufficient vehicles. If this argument were sound, why bad Messrs. Elrick and Hutcheon, in the past three years, paid over £3,000 to other contractors?
Mr. W. Weir, for the L.M.S,, said that the application should not have been brought at the present time.
Mr. Riches said that it had been with reluctance he had consented to hear the application while the appeal against his previous refusal was pending. Mr. Connochie had, however, pressed that he had fresh evidence to bring forward. He was satisfied, however, that no material evidence had been produced which would justify him acceding to the present application, which he refused.