GOODS SERVICES

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLVIII, Issue 21556, 19 January 1940, Page 5

GOODS SERVICES

Sitting Of Licensing Authority Licences Issued A sitting of the No. 3 Transport Licensing Authority to deal with the issue of licences to town carriers and taxi-drivers, who have passed under the control of the Authority, was held in the Automobile Association Rooms yesterday. Mr T. H. Langford presided Mr v. Raines, No. 4 Transport Licensing Authority was also present at the morning session. Goods-Service Licences T. N. Scott, Temuka. One vehicle for mail and parcels from Temuka: rail to Post Office and within radius of one and a half miles of Post Office. —Granted. F. R. Deans, Timaru, one vehicle for Timaru borough.—Granted. N.Z. Express Co. Ltd., Timaru. Eight i vehicles for general goods within a sixmile radius.—Granted. Price Schedules Before consideration of the town | licences Mr Cook requested on behalf of the Town Carriers’ Association, that a condition of issue be adherence to the price schedule. At present, he said, the carriers were operating under a schedule which had been incorpor- I ated into Council by-laws. Mr Langford replied that adherence to price schedules was a condition on which licences were Issued. At the moment the Department was making an investigation throughout New Zealand with a view to securing uniformity and new schedules would be introduced when the number of licences had been brought down to the minimum necessary in the public interest. The applications were:— T. Taylor, Timaru. One vehicle tor fish and general goods within Timaru borough.—Granted. J. McKnight, Timaru. Three vehicles, mails and general goods in the borough.—Reserved. J. F. Butler. Timaru One vehicle, for general goods in borough.— Granted. W. H. Cowles, Timaru. One vehicle for general goods in borough j Granted. Desmond Unwin, Lto., Timaru. Three vehicles for coal, shingle and sand within borough.—Granted. J. G. Breen, Timaru. One vehicle for general goods in borough.— Granted. W. H. Pettigrew, Timaru. One vehicle for general goods within sixmile radius.—Granted. M. W. J. Adams. Timaru. One vehicle for general goods in borough with permission to go to Seadown.— Granted. G. G. Nutsford, Timaru. Amendment to include right to carry general goods in borough.—Granted. W. Davison. Timaru. Additional authority for general goods in borough. —Granted. R. Oliphant, Timaru, amendment to include general goods within borough. —Reserved. F. R. Cross. Timaru, amendment to include general goods within borough for four vehicles.—Reserved. C. Humphris. Christchurch, amendment for two additional authorities for general goods within borough of Timaru.—Declined. F. G. Sheed, Timaru. amendment for additional authority for general goods within a six-mile radius of Timaru.— Granted licence for Timaru for sand shingle, spoil and removal of old buildings; additional vehicle authority declined. Applications Opposed The applications of area carriers for amendments to their licences permitting their operating in the borough area were opposed by the Town Carriers' Association. An area carrier, claimed Mr G. J. Walker, was in a position to cut rates in the town to the detriment of the town carriers. The association claimed that the principle of separate spheres of operation should be applied. Mr Langford maintained that the man who had undertaken a special type of town business over many years had prior rights to those who had taken up business comparatively recently. Allowing area officers to operate in town was a thing going to put a stop to co-operation, said Mr Walker. Mr Langford: That is not to say that efficient units should be displaced by less efficient.

Units equally efficient were available in the town, said Mr Walker. Mr Langford said he was not going to filch business from a man who had had it for years. Mr J. p. Stevens, for Oliphant, said that the application was not for something new but for business which he had carried on for many years. He detailed the type of work done and called evidence to show that Oliphant had done work such as wool carting for 13 to 16 years. Similar considerations applied to Cross. Mr H. Gould contended in evidence that before licensing was introduced area carriers built up a town practice through price-cutting. The town carriers would not agree to co-ordina-tion so long as area carriers were allowed to operate in the town. The town carriers had lost considerable business when restricted in area by

their licences and now hoped to get some compensation. Mr P. B. Foote said that the application of Sheed was based on similar grounds to tnose of Oliphant and Cross. Compromise Suggested After the afternoon adjournment Mr Stephens informed the Authority that Cross and Oliphant would be prepared to give up their town licences if the town carriers with an area licence would give up that licence. Such an arrangement, he said, would meet all the objections that had been raised. Mr Langford said that as there were too many licences there was need for compromise, but for that reason alone he was not going to take licences from men who had had the work for many years. Decision in the applications from Oliphant and Cross was reserved. E. C. Tregenza, Timaru, amendment for three additional vehicle authorities for general building materials, within five miles of Timaru boundary. —Granted for materials, etc., the property of the New Zealand Refrigerating Co. N. L. G. Baker, Pareora, amendment for additional authority for general goods within a 14 mile radius of Pareora.—Refused.