Publishing Group Criticized
Page 13
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
TW0 applications by F. W. Dawson and Co., Ltd., of London, for extra vehicles on A licence, primarily to carry periodicals for the Daily Mirror group, were heard in London last week. The Metropolitan Licensing Authority, IVIr. D. I. R. Muir, refused one application and reserved his decision on the second.
Opening the first application, which was for a new A licence in respect of six articulated vehicles with the user "periodicals and paper products to South Wales," Mr. M. H. Jackson-Lipkin, for Dawson's, told Mr. Muir that the group had acquired control over an enormous number of publications in the country. The group in the past consisted of independent companies, and, when control was obtained, it had looked at the transport situation and realizing there was.a great deal of double running because each company had operated its own transport, decided to co-ordinate the traffic on a nation-wide basis. This meant that some hauliers would lose work and some would gain, the idea being that the country should be divided into regions.
Various hauliers were asked to tender, including British Road Services (one of the objectors), and the successful tenclerers were asked to apply for licences.
Mr. Jackson-Lipkin, dealing with the evidence available in respect of the first application, said it Was unfortunate that he could not call evidence from the customer. The only message • that he could put before the Authority was a telegram which had been sent from a representative of the group, regretting that he was unable to attend the court and confirming that the. group's traffic to North West England and Wales would continue at maximum level by Dawson's. Mr. Jackson-Lipkin went on to refer to the adjournments of the hearing that had occurred in July and September.
At this stage, Mr. Muir said that it was quite clear that the importance of the case could not be determined without evidence from the customer. The whole matter was " extraordinarily unsatisfactory." He was satisfied that neither the solicitors nor the applicants were to blame, but the fact was that a great deal of time had been wasted. He thought the conduct of the customer was very much to be criticized.
Mr. J. M. Timmons, for the B.T.C. (objecting) said that the discussions that had taken place between the customer and the ENC. were of such a serious nature asto merit at least one person, on the part of B.R.S., devoting something like three months preparing a plan which involved the movement of the bulk of the group's periodicals throughout the country by B.R.S.. They were still awaiting a letter from the group about the matter. He had taken the trouble of bringing senior officials of the B.T.C. to the court.
The application was refused.
Objector Tells of Traffic Loss A T the commencement of the second PA application—to add two articulated vehicles to an existing A licence, and increase the normal scope to include general goods within 25 miles and the North West of England—Mr. J. R. C. Samuel-Gibbon, representing MacKay Transport, Ltd., of Watford, 'asked leave to have his clients treated as objectors. despite the fact that they had not lodged a statutory objection.
MacKay Transport, Mr. Samuel Gibbon said, had been carrying for certain companies in the Daily Mirrr» group since before the war. They had carried the South Wales traffic which was relevant to the previous application until the end of September when this, and traffic to the East Coast, had been taken away. MacKay's still carried to Preston Docks and Lancashire, but this traffic was clearly imperilled by the present
application. Mr. Muir said that he could not exercise discretion iv MacKay's favour.
Mr. Jackson-Lipkin, outlining the second application, said that the case depended on the difficulties of customers other than the Press, who sent traffic to the North West.
He asked the Authority, in the absence of evidence, to assume from the telegram that the Press traffic would continue at its present level, If there was any doubt, at the end of the case, he was sure Mr. Coward, the applicant's witness, would undertake to let the Authority know if at any time the Press traffic was taken away.
Mr. Coward confirmed this. Crossexamined by Mr. Timmons, he said that a similar application, made to the North Western Authority, would be pursued when the result of the Metropolitan application was known.
Witnesses from the applicant's customers gave evidence of difficulties in obtaining vehicles_ Mr. Timmons asked that the application be refused. The applicants, he submitted, had been disappointed that they had not had support from the customer. and they had sought to rely on other customers to make out a case. Mr. Muir reserved his decision.