• TRANSPORT TIPS FOR TRADESMEN.
Page 20
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Particularly Addressed to Those Who are Replacing Horsed Vehicles by Motors, or Contemplating So Doing.
E LEGAL position of the commercial traveller's seems to have been considerably modi
fied by the new legislation. For one thing, it is now provided that a vehicle classified as a commercial goods vehicle may carry its owner's employees in the course of their employment.
Legal Position of Commercial Travellers' Vehicles.
In the old days, it was not infrequently maintained that a commercial traveller's sample car had to be licensed as a private motorcar, no rebate being allowed in respect of the petrol duty. The argument was that ib was not used solely for the carriage of goods, because it carried the commercial traveller as a passenger. It is clear that now the position is altered. The traveller's ear, if construoted or adapted for the carriage of goods—i.e., samples—is not dmqualified from being classified as'a commercial goods vehicle, because the traveller also is accommodated in it. Of course, if the vehicle is merely a private motorcar in which a few cases of samples are carried, it cannot be maintained that it is constructed or adapted solely for the carriage of goods, and it must, therefore, be licensed on the horse-power basis. The question of which basis is preferable to the owner of the vehicle depends upon its horse-power and its ' weight. If the horse-power is fairly low, it will be cheaper to licence on the horse-power basis. This can be done in respect of a commercial traveller's sample vehicle, provided that the vehicle is sometimesused other than for strictly trade purposes. For instance, the traveller may be given permission to take prospective clients for loans over the weekends or after business hours. He may also use the car for his private purposes as well as for business purposes. There is, therefore, justification for licensing on the horsepower basis if this is found to be the cheaper process.
The Pessimistic Point of View. _
I recently heard a pessimist defined as a man who has lived for a couple of years with an optimist. Accepting this definition, and admitting that most of us have dual personalities, it is only to be anticipated that one who is, in general, an optimist, will, at times, suffer from periods of pessimism generated by his own optimism.
As a matter of fact, the habitual pessimist is a miserable person, and seldom cuts much ice. But it may be good for us all to suffer from the malady occasionally. Unbridled optimism may lead to very rash speculations. So far as motor transport is concerned, optimism not infrequently takes the form of generalizing to an unjustifiable extent on the strength of specific instances. Thus, for example, I noticed recently a statement to the effect that a ,certain firm found it cheaper to operate motor vehicles over distances of 150 miles from its headquarters than to utilize the railways. Examples were quoted which showed that a motor haulage concern might, in some circumstances, be able to quote lower terms than the railway for the conveyance, let us say, of tea or meat between London and Birmingham, or of bacon and butter between London and Southampton..
It seems to me wise to remember that such cases may form the exception rather than the rule. Railway rates are queer things, and may presently become even queerer. The one fact of which I am sure is that such examples should not be taken to C20 prove that it is always cheaper for a trader who wants to conduct transport between London and Southampton, or London and Birmingham, to use motorvans than to employ the railways.
Motor haulage has immense contingent advantages. The load can be despatched when the vehicle owner pleases, and can be carried straight from point to point with no intermediate -delays or handlings. It may well be worth while to pay extra for these advantages. That depends entirely on the character of the business, the possible depreciation of goods if delays in transport occur, and various other factors. For the moment, however, we are considering cost, and 'cost alone, and the time has not come, if it will ever come, at which it will pay to conduct the whole of the long-distance goods transport of the country up to a radius of 150 miles by road rather than by rail. There are comparativelyfew cases in which it will pay the trader to use motor transport by means of his own vehicles for such long distances. His alternative is more often between employing the railways and employing a motor carrier whose business is so well organized that he is assured of regular return loads. The quotations obtainable from a motor carrier may sometimes be remarkably low, because he has already got a very well-paid load in one direction and would rather carry a return load cheaply than not carry it at alL The fact that he is being very well paid for the out journey may be due to the urgency -of the business of the firm that is then providing his loads. These loads may be of a kind that -depreciate. very rapidly in transit, or are specially liable to injury if subjected to intermediate handlings. If sent by rail, they may require very careful and expensive packing. If rent by road this may not be necessary. It may be wise for some firms to pay, say, 25 a. ton for the conveyance of Particular goods between London and Bristol, even though the same goods might be taken by the railway for, say, 23 a ton.
It is quite conceivable that either the saving of time or the saving of packing costs and breakages would mean more than the difference between these two figures. Supposing that the motor carrier has got a regular job of this kind between London and Bristol, it may be worth his while to bring back a full load from Bristol at a cost of, say, 22 a ton when the railway rates for the same load would be, say, 23. Thus, one trader may benefit by the nature of the business of another, but this state of affairs is hardly likely to be permanent. The man who is paying the high rates will presently find a carrier who has already fixed up loads from Bristol to London and is willing to accept a return load on quite moderate terms. Thus, the carrier who takes on a job at terms which are not truly commercial is very likelyto find himself let down, by presently losing his more paying business and being left with the unremunerative work only.
It will be gathered from these remarks that it is frequently the inexperienced carrier, whose business is not really a sound one, who is prepared to offer extraordinarily low terms. My point is, however, to warn the reader that, so far as the use of his own vehicles is concerned, he will be far safer to regard the maximum radius of the motor as against the railway at something like forty or fifty miles. If he expects direct financial profit as a result of giving up the railway and using motors over a radius of 150 miles, he will, in most instances, be grievously disappointed.