Railways Fight for Racehorse Traffic
Page 23
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Decision Reserved on Hotly Contested Applications by 10 Yorkshire Trainers for 13 Licences for Horseboxes AFTER a hearinrlasting -five days. consideration of the" applications by 10 Yorkshire racehorse trainers for B licences for the horseboxes which they have been running under C licences, was eacluded last week at York. The Yorkshire Licensing Authority reserved his decision.
The case was opened originally on
February 15, and after a two-day hearing was adjourned to enable the Railway Executive to prepare answers to specific allegations made by the applicants of the inefficiency and unsuitability of the railway service. The only witness called by the railways at the resumed hearing on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of last week was Mr. F. T. Gray, cartage manager for the North Eastern Area of British Railways.
Mr. Gray told Mr. W. A. Goss, for the Railway Executive, that he would take the strongest exception to any suggestion that doping had taken place in railway horseboves. "No such suggestion has ever been made to me," he added. He claimed that the railway fleet of horseboxes VidS adequate to carry all Yorkshire-trained horses this year. There were 19 railway horseboxes, with one in reserve, in Yorkshire. They had a total of 57 stalls and had carried 1,047 horses in a year.
The drivers of railway horseboxes had strict instructions not to pick up unauthorized persons, and he said he had never received a complaint about undesirable passengers in horseboxes from any of the applicants. Railway horseboxes were thoroughly cleaned and disinfected after every round trip.
Asked whether undesirablehorses were carried, Mr. Gray said: "By far the greatest part of our business is bloodstock in connection with raving. Very few show horses and junipers are carried."
Cross-examined, he agreed with Mr.
W. R. Hargrave. for the applicants, that the attitude he was adopting was to invite the Licensing Authority • to pronounce a decision whereby the trainers would be forced on to. the rails" or other transport of which the railways were substantial holders.
He agreed that the whole System
by which trainers had conducted
their businesses would be destroyed at one fell swoop.
He added that the railway service was as efficient and suitable as any that could be provided.
Risk of Infection , Mr. Gray did not agree that the most efficient. way in which trainers could prevent doping was to operate' their own boxes. He would not admit (hit the risk of infection was much less if horses were carried in trainers' • own boxes. He said he was satisfied that the disinfecting of railway boxes had been
properly carried out. j.. , . •
Mr. Gray 'considered that -the railways were in a better position to deal with late entries than x trainer oyvning one box, provided that the,velaicle were used in the ordinary'Way%off business.
Referring to the .Easter ,peal€Atraffic, the witness said that, :assuming •There were 90 runners frean'Yorkshire-slIt
on Easter Monday, the railways-wo cl transport by reiad-ronkthe Sunclay.48 horses to 'places such as .Wethergy, Newcastle, Carlisle, Manchester and Epsom. These horses would run on Tuesday.. In addition, 62 would be taken to Wetherby. Newcastle, etc.. on the -Monday.
illegal Running Alleged
Mr. Goss alleged that the applicants had all been running illegally, and discounted the notion, which was being spread abroad, that the railways were giving the trainers "a raw deal." The applicants were diverting traffic from established road hauliers, of which the railways were the largest.
Mr. R. Renton, of Ripon, who was not represented, claimed that trainers needed the railway boxes as well as their own. At Ripon the railways had _only one two-stall box to serve the requirements of seven trainers in the Ripon and Harrogate area.
[The original hearing was reported in the jAsue of "The Commercial Motor" dated February 25..1