TRANSPORT ACT.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVI, Issue 19141, 24 March 1932, Page 12

TRANSPORT ACT.

DISTRICT LICENSING AUTHORITY MEETS. SOUTH CANTERBURY LICENSES GRANTED. The first meeting of the District Licensing Authority, comprising Messrs C. P. Agar, of Christchurch (chairman). G. S. Cray, of Timaru. and M. Bethell, of Culverden, appointed under the Transport Licensing Act, of last session, was held in Timary yesterday. when applications for ten licenses were considered, all of which were approved subject to certain conditions. Orari- Geraldine. Counsel spoke in .support of C. W. McKenzie’s application for a license for a Geraldine-Orari service, stating that four return trips were run dailv between the two points in conjunction with the arrival of trains. Before the Timaru-Geraldine services started, the only means of travelling to Geraldine was for passengers to go to Orari by train and then by ’bus to Geraldine. The service carried only small parcels occasionally which did not compete with the Railway Department. The application was granted, the timetable to be on the basis of the arrival and departure of trains subject to alterations, in train services, and the submission of a schedule of parcels and goods and charges for approval. Timaru-Geraldine. C. W. McKenzie and Lister’s Motors made applications for licenses for-Timaru-Geraldine and GeraldineTimaru services. The chairman stated that timetables would have to be submitted showing the travelling time between the two points exclusive of stops, which would have to conform with the new schedule of speeds, which would be rigidly enforced by the Government. According to counsel. McKenzie was the pioneer of the Timaru-Geraldine service, which had been started ten years ago last January, and had been continued, except for two and a-half years, when Lister's, who now had the opposition service, conducted the service under a working arrangement with McKenzie. McKenzie ran a daily service to and from Geraldine, and also a service on the late shopping night. The fares had been 7/6 return at first, but the charges had been forced down 3/- return as a result of competition.

The district traffic manager of the Railway Department (Mr E. S. Brittenden), said that the fares were about the lowest the Department had experienced, and he suggested that ihe fares should be 3 - single and 5 - return from Geraldine to Timaru, and 2/6 single and 4/- return from Winchester to Timaru. He considered that McKenzie was entitled to automatic renewal of his license.

The applicant agreed to accept the suggested fares. Counsel for Lister’s Motors questioned whether McKenzie was automatically entitled to renewal of his license, as it was contended that he had been running unlawfuly under the Omn-.bus Traffic Act. Counsel pointed out that the applicant had charged a fare of 3/- return, and he submitted that if the fare was under 2/- one way, the service was not legal because it could not be run without a license in ihe omnibus traffic district.

Counsel for McKenzie pointed out that the opposition service was djing the same, but counsel for Lister's denied this statement. He pointed out that a Judge of the Supreme Court had held that even if a service started outside an omnibus traffic district, a service could not run through the area without having a license, otherwise the whole of the Act would be rendered invalid. In this case the omnibus traffic district extended from Pareora river to Temuka. Counsel contended that McKenzie had picked up passengers within this area. In reply to the chairman, McKenzie denied having done so.

Counsel for Lister’s Motors: “That is a deliberate mis-statement to the Board. He has been fined for it.”

Counsel for McKenzie said that on that occasion McKenzie had been trapped, a young woman having been sent out from Timaru. The driver, who had instructions not to pick up passengers in Temuka, had been under the impression that she was stranded, and had brought her to Timaru at a fare of 1/-. There had been some confusion over the boundary of the omnibus traffic district which ran along the centre of a Temuka street and McKenzie, as a result, had been ordered to pay costs for the offence. In replj' to counsel for Lister’s Motors, McKenzie said that when Lister, approached him in 1927 to cease or buy out his service, he refused, but allowed Lister the use of nis garage for two and a-half years. When he resumed the service he secured 80 per cent, of the passengers. Counsel supported Lister’s application for the Timaru-Geraldine service.

Henry Walter Lister stated that he commenced running the service under an arrangement with McKenzie in 1926, until the former resumed operations two and a half years later. At that time the practice of fare cutting was going on, though he did not know who was responsible for bringing down the fares. Questioned by counsel for McKenzie, witness denied that he had a monopoly on the Timaru-Temuka service, for which he had a license . under the Omnibus Traffic Act. He had not been protected against unfair competition. Counsel for McKenzie suggested that if Lister’s Motors were granted, a license for the Timaru-Christchurch service they would have a monopoly of transport from Geraldine. because ’buses cn the former service passed through Geraldine. Mr Lister stated that the Christ-church-Timaru 'buses were the only means by which people could travel to Geraldine in the mornings. Mr Brittenden: “You forget an excellent train service.” The Board granted both applications subject to conformity with the schedule of fares and parcels charges. Mr Agar said he was of opinion that there should be some satisfactory coordination of transport on this route. While both applicants were entitled to automatic renewal of their licenses for the ensuing twelve months, the whole object of the Transport Act was the co-ordination of services, and while he knew that it was difficult for opposition services to come together on these issues, it should be possible for an agreement that would provide service to the public, and be more profitable to both, to be reached. The present state of affairs was undesirable and should not be continued, and he hoped that both applicants would be able to reach some satisfactory settlement. Timaru-Temuka. Speaking in regard to the application of Lister’s Motors for a license for the Timaru-Temuka service, Mr Brittenden asked that the service be restricted to the present units of the applicant’s fleet, and that he should not be permitted to increase it for this service. He did not mean that if any of the vehicles usually employed in this

service were destroyed or broken down, J they could not be replaced. ) The application was granted, subject to the submission of a time-table conforming to the new schedule of speeds. Timaru-Waimate. In support of a license for Listers’ Motors for the Timaru -Waimate service, counsel said that the service had been operating since 1928. Counsel for A. F. Shanks, who also sought a similar license, stated that Shanks had purchased the service on May 4th, 1931. f, Mr Brittenden stated that it could not be suggested that Lister’s Motors and the Railway Department’s service were unable to cope with the traffic offering in this district. On resuming after lunch, the chairman intimated that both licenses would be granted, subject to the legal speeds and timetables being observed. He pointed out that it was necessary for the applicants to observe the desire for co-ordination as much as possible. As far as Shanks was concerned, the classification of his vehicle would necessitate the strict observance of the regulation time-table. Timaru-Fairlie. Applications for licenses for the Ti-maru-Fairlie and return services were made by Colling’s Parlour Cars Company, and Lister’s Motors. The cases for both applicants were stated by counsel, there being some argument as to the necessity for both services and the railway. A point raised was the connection of the present Fairlie ’buses with the White Star and Aard services, it being stated t that if one company were refused a license a monopoly would no doubt result. A petition signed by residents cf Mackenzie County was presented in support of Colling’s application. Gray Russell Hunter, proprietor of Hunter’s Motors, said that Collings’s service was an essential link with witness’s Timaru-Invercargill run, a license for which had already been granted. Both licenses were approved, subject to the required conditions in regard to time-tables and speeds. Collings’s license. the chairman said, had been granted by a majority opinion of the Authority, which had been of opinion that the establishment of the service had been almost on the borderline as far as the requirements of the Act were concerned. This, however, should not be taken as a precedent. Timaru-Hermit age. The application of the Mount Cook Tourist Company for a license for a tri-weekly service between Timaru and the Hermitage, was granted. R. L. Wigley, on behalf of the company, said that in view of the fluctuations in tourist traffic they would like the right to revert to a daily service from October Ist to April 30th. and a tri-weekly service from May Ist to September 30th. The chairman said that the Authority would grant the license in terms of the application. No doubt permission for a daily service could, if desired, be obtained later. Timaru-St. Andrews. I. A. McDuff applied for a license for his service from Timaru to St. Andrews, which he said had been started in 1926. Counsel for McDuff presented petitions from Pareora and St. Andrews in support of the application. In reply to Mr Brittenden, McDuff said he would be prepared to amend his fares to 1/9 single and 3/- return from Timaru to St. Andrews. Subject to the regulation timetable and speeds being observed, the license was granted. The chairman thanked the applicants and counsel for the manner in which the business of the sitting had been expedited.