A-Licensee Fettered by Conditions
Page 22
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
" HAVE you ever considered the 1 1 possibility of getting the railway company to carry these goods down to South Wales for you?" and "Do you see any serious objection to their doing it?" were questions put by Mr. P. Kershaw at a road case in Manchester last week, to Mr, L. F. Thwaites, a carrier who appeared to support a regrant to one of his sub-contractors, Mr. James Eckersley, Hindley, Lancs. The questions were objected to, not as railway toutings, but as cutting across the foundations of the business being done.
In the course of the case, the information was conveyed to Mr. Joseph Farndale, North-Western Deputy Licensing Authority, that fruit and provisions were now being bought by the merchants of South Wales at Manchester and Liverpool, instead of at London, and that the change had become pronounced in November last, because they could not get a nextmorning delivery, by road, of goods bought in the afternoon. Mr. Kershaw, who had opposed the application on the score of change of user, said that there had been no indication., on the form of application, that fruit was being carried to South Wales, and he asked for an adjournment in order that he might bring witnesses to state the railway facilities between Liverpool and Manchester to South Wales. Adjournment was granted.
In his opening of the case, Mr. Henry Backhouse had pointed out that he was proving need for the present operation of Mr. Eckersley. The A licensee, to-day, was just as much bound by con_ ditions as the B licensee, and whilst a B-licensed carrier could come at any time for a variation of his conditions, the A-licensed carrier was in the worse position of having to prove the need for any alteration at the end of the currency period. It was certainly not intended, by the Act, that what was called a description of normal user should put a common carrier in a worse position than a limited carrier.