CARRIER'S RIGHTS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22320, 18 January 1936, Page 17

CARRIER'S RIGHTS

UNLICENSED SERVICE PURCHASE OF GOODS SCHEME HELD ILLEGAL A reserved judgment of interest to motor-lorry owners, merchants and shopkeepers was delivered by Mr. F. H. Levien, S.M., in the Pnpakurn Magistrate's Court yesterday. The case was one in which Thomas Hugo Moss (Mr. S. D. Mice) was charged by Ihomas Charles Clissold, traffic inspector for the Main Highways Board, with carrying on an unlicensed goods service between Auckland and Cambridge on October 18. The question at issue was whether Moss was entitled to carry the goods he had on his lorry without a service licence in that he had purchased them and they were thus his own property. The magistrate held that ho was not, and imposed a line of £2O and costs, 10s. Security for appeal was lixed at the amount of the fine and costs, plus £lO 10s. Application lor Licence "The evidence discloses that defendant is a carrier at Cambridge and is interested somewhat indefinitely in a provision store at Cambridge managed by Mr. Cubis," the magistrate said. "Within the last year defendant has

made two unsuccessful applications to the transport licensing authorities for a goods service licence. However, for some time past, he has been carrying on his goods service to Auckland, and on October 11 last was convicted and fined for running an unlicensed service. "Just prior to that conviction he conferred with an Auckland firm, and together they devised a scheme which would work to their mutual financial advantage and protect defendant from further prosecution," continued Mr. Levien. "The scheme covered the sale and cartage of sugar to grocers between Hamilton and Cambridge, so that wheu the inspector held up defendant's motor-lorry near Ramarama on October IS ho found the main portion of the goods carried to be SI bags of sugar loaded at Auckland. "Defendant told the inspector that the sugar belonged to him and produced five delivery dockets, four of which covered the 81 bags of sugar. Lacli docket showed defendant's name and also, in detail, each the name and address of one of four grocers, one at Claudelands and three at Cambridge, to whom the quantity of sugar specified on the docket was to be delivered." Procedure Described

Describing tho procedure adopted the magistrate said that, in effect, the Auckland merchants, their travellers, or the defendant, said to the Cambridge and the Claudelands grocers: "If you will placo your orders for sugar with any of us, it will bo charged in our books to the account of Mr. Moss, carrier, who will receive ail tho usual discounts, etc. Ho will collect tho price of the sugar, less all usual discounts, from you on the same dates that you would pay us if you dealt with us direct and he will pay the price to us. Mr. Moss will add to the price of the sugar a freight charge of 25s a ten. That is the only recompense he will receive, but in view of the fact that 25s a ton is approximately 10s a ton less than the freight charged by the railway or licensed goods service carriers, the arrangement will appeal to you." Incidentally, the arrangement set the merchants in train to obtain a temporary monopoly of the sugar trade in part of the W'aikato. The only question for the Court to determine was whether, under all the circumstances, the defendant was carrying goods for hire or reward. Authorities on the subject were quoted by Mr. Levien, in support of his decision.