TRANSPORT LICENSING

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23058, 8 December 1936, Page 7

TRANSPORT LICENSING

No. 4 AUTHORITY SITTING AT BALCLUTHA A sitting of No. 4 Transport Licensing Authority was commenced yesterday at Balclutha, Mr V. C. Raines presiding. Mr H. L. Gibson watched proceedings on behalf of the Railways Department. APPLICATIONS FOR RENEWALS I. S. Smith (Kaltangata) applied for a renewal of his existing licence.— The applicant said that he had been operating since July, 1930. His licence was for three tons.—There were no objections.—The chairman intimated that decision would be reserved until all cases had been heard Messrs Browne Bros. (Lawrence) applied for renewal of their existing licence.—No objections. M. F. Mills (Glenore) applied for renewal of his present licence.—Mr D. J. Simpson appeared for the applicant and said there was no alteration asked for.—No objections. J W. O. Jones (Waitahuna) applied for'renewal of his existing licence, and for amendments to it by having one authority increased from two tons to four tons. Both his vehicles were used on road work. He would use the fourton truck for carriage of general goods —No objections J R Hughes (Milton) applied for renewal of his existing authority, and also to have amendments made regarding weight. He further asked for in additional authority for a third vehicle—Mr Simpson appeared for the applicant.—No objections. W Read and Sons (Milton) applied for renewal of their existing licences, and authority to carry increased weight.—Mr Sumpter appeared for the applicants, and suggested that where area licences were applied for by Milton carriers the area be Bruce County. —No objections. ... Mr J. H. Soper (Lawrence) applied for renewal of his existing licence. He had been operating for four years and a-half— No objections The Bruce Carrying Company (Milton) applied for a renewal of its existing licence, and also for permission to use a car for the carrying of mails. The company further sought two additional area licences.—Mr Sumpter appeared for the applicants, and spoke in support of the route licence. The service was? largely availed of, as was shown by a petition put in. The route

licence from Milton to Dunedin was of immense value to the district, and had been built up by service. A. large proportion of the goods carried could be more conveniently carried by this service than by the railway, and Mr Sumpter stressed the fact that cheese was carried cheaper than by rail. An amendment was also asked to allow the firm to carry furniture from any part of the area to Otago and Southland.—Mr Pringle. secretary of the company, gave evidence regarding the route service. The company had carried 848 tons for the period under review. This was general merchandise, and included a good deal of perishable goods. Under its authority it had the right to make extra trips, and last year made 23 outward and 19 inward trips, which showed the necessity for the service. The petition produced was signed by .practically all the business people of Milton. Under a temporary licence the company had carried a lot of furniture, making about two trips a month.—The chairman said that the route licence would have to be separated from the area licence and a special vehicle allotted to it.—To the chairman, Mr Pringle said the company's vehicles picked up a fair quantity of goods en route; it did not deviate a great deal.—The chairman said that deviations would, in future, be restricted to two miles, and not allowed for any distance as formerly.— Mr- Gibson said this was a case in which the applicant was running practically parallel with the railway for some 36 miles. It carried the cheese and woollen mill output to Dunedin. and got these contracts by under-cut-ting the railway. If the railway had all the traffic it would mean more work for the local carriers. Regarding furniture carting, he asked that if a licence was granted no back-loading be allowed, as it was through this that carrying firms could carry so cheaply. —Mr Sumpter said that there was no suggestion of back-loading.—The chairman said that in regard to furniture the policy of the licensing authority was to designate this as household removals and to eliminate back-loading. —Decision reserved.

A. Reid (Kaitangata) applied for renewal of his existing authority.—Mr W. H. Carson represented the applicant, and said that the application was being made for an additional, authority.—Mr Gibson said the Railways Department objected to the route licence, and also to the increased authority over this route.—Mr Carson said the Railways Department's objections were wide, but the matter was of grave importance to his client. The railway service was not satisfactory to Kaitangata. which was not on the main line like Balclutha and Milton, and the main service of the Stirling-Kaitangata line was to carry coal from the mine. Goods carried by rail to Kaitangata were delayed before delivery, and this

was detrimental. There was no foundation for the statement that his client's service was conducted at cutthroat prices. There was no doubt as to the value of the service to the Kaitangata district, and the Railways Department could never 'iope to give such an efficient service as the road operator. His client did a little work in Stirling and Lovfill's Flat, while he also had a Contract for carting for the Henley Hotel. He had provided for the cheese carting contract, and if it was taken from him he could carry coal at £1 a ton. The present licence gave his client the right to use two vehicles The applicant wished to use his 30cwt vehicle for the carriage of children and cream.—The chairman said that areas bigger than Mr Reid's were being served by one vehicle. He thought the area could very well be operated by one vehicle.—Mr Carson pointed out that the road service between Dunedin, Stirling and Kaitar.gata was not satisfactory.—The applicant said he had been carrying on his route licence for about 10 years. He used to carry coal to Dunedin at £1 a ton, but gave this up to" carry cheese. The railway rate was 10s a ton for coal. Most of the goods he carried were to and from Kaitangata. His vehicle was always loaded both ways, and he carried goods for most of the business people at Kaitangata. The latter scarcely patronised the railway.—To the chairman: He was asking to put a new three-ton lorry on the route and retain the other two he had before. He went to Dunedin on Tuesdays and Fridays. He collected cream for four different companies, and this was loaded on rail at Kaitangata. He also carried 20 school children.—Mr Gibson said that this was another case of an operator running parallel with the railway. He maintained that they had as good a rail service to Kaitangata as anywhere else in the Dominion. It was also wrong to say that goods had to be handled four or five times before arrival at Kaitangata. He was prepared to say that if there was no railway there would be no coal output, and if this was stopped there would be no business people. Mr Reid picked the eyes out of the traffic and left the unpayable commodities to the railway.—Mr Carson pointed out that the railway between Stirling and Kaitangata was run by the Kaitangata Coal Company, and this would still be carried on even if there were t.O goods service.—Decision was reserved.

R. Leckie (Milton) applied for a renewal of his licence and a transfer to Mr A. C. Stewart (Milton).—Mr Sumpter appeared for the applicants.—Mr Gibson entered an objection to the route licence. —Mr Sumpter explained that his client carried stock to Burnside, and thus provided a useful service in the district.—Mr Gibson submitted that the applicant could not attend to work on this route as well as in his area.—Decision was reserved.

E. A. Sinclair (Lovell's Flat) sought renewal of his existing licence. —Mr Sumpter represented the applicant.— On behalf of his department, Mr Gibson objected to the route licence.—The applicant said that the greater part of his work was done for farmers, although he also carried for one or two firms in Milton.—Mr Gibson admitted that the applicant was carrying out an essential service under his area licence, but he maintained that there was no necessity for the route licence. There were already too many services carrying goods on the route between Balclutha and Dunedin —a route, he contended, which was adequately served by the railways.—Decision was reserved.

The sitting will be continued at 9.30 this morning.