OPINIONS
Page 55
Page 56
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
and
QUERIES
A CRITIC REPLIES TO CRITICISMS.
[5519] 1 have read the letter of Mr. Louis De Silva (No. 5511, December 2), in which he artlessly tells us that, whilst lots of operators are very ignorant men, including, as he cleverly infers, myself, he at least is "an fait" with the niceties of the English language, its grammar and something or other else—yes, here it is, "syntax."
I really was cross when I had finished reading this, but after mature reflection, and when the crushed feeling had worn off, I rushed around to a teacher friend of mine to see if he could parse, analyse and punctuate a real stinging rejoinder for me, and with, moreover, due regard to the syntax, which latter word I hoped he would elucidate. Before I had finished explaining my mission to him, before I had even admitted that I could not remember learning about syntax (although I still wear the old school tie and murmur " Floreat Etona " whenever a chance offers), he remarked: "Surely your own letter dealt with tyres, is not this all rather unnecessary, and, perhaps, just a bit cheap?" Really, you know, he was right, and so 1, left to my own resources, can only apologize to your very (I have no doubt) erudite correspondent for being so offended about my syntax, and do so hope that in the near future he will give us his views on the tyres he looks after—all of them.
L.V.E. was not so entertaining. I find that I can agree with much that he says, and, in view of the admission in the last paragraph of his letter, can sym pathize with much of the remainder. F.J. London, S.W.5.
FREEDOM SHOULD BE FOR ALL.
[5520] The present claims of the railway companies might have met with rather more sympathy if, in their statement, they could have made clear that what they ask for is a square deal for all forms of transport.
There have been frequent references in the Press and elsewhere to the fact that road transport legislation was designed, in large measure, to assist the railway companies, and the complaint, in effect, now is that the legislation imposed on the road interest has not been successful in this respect. To legislate against one group of interests in favour of another is grossly unfair.
The claims of the railway companies for repeal of existing statutory regulations for the charges for the conveyance of merchandise traffic by railway might gain greater sympathy if the railway companies could have given some indication that the object of their present claim is to put them in the position of being free to make an agreement with other forms of transport as regards rates for conveyance of merchandise.
The fact that they are making these claims at a time when they are aware that preparation is being made for legislation with regard to road rates, can be viewed with only the greatest misgiving. Are the railway managers and the stockholders satisfied that full advantage is being derived from existing railway sources of revenue or is it a possibility that many services which are, rendered by the' railwaycompanies at unremunerative rates are not as was hoped, being counter-balanced in revenue in other directions?
Many of these services, such as second-handling charges, free rent periods, uneconomic space rents, extended free demurrage periods, unproductive capital expended and proposed to be expended' (e.g., Euston), agreed charges, flat 'rates, collection and delivery services, town cartage collection and delivery services, are germane to the railway companies' own business, and they might find that, with benefit to themselves, some attention could be paid to these matters.
In the circumstances, it is not to be wondered at that road transport interests are pressing for some relief from the excessive burden of restriction, taxation and regulation which they now have to bear, with particular reference to licensing regulations, licence fees, taxation, speed limits and axle weights.
J. MARSHALL, M.Inst.,T., Director, For Lloyd's Packing Warehouses, Ltd. Manchester, 3.
SUGGESTION FOR TEMPORARY ROAD-RAIL RATES AGREEMENT.
155211 With reference to the case the railway companies are putting forward for further freedom in the quoting of rates with the object of increasing their net revenue, it is worth while to examine the trend of traffic receipts during the current railway year.
For the first 48 weeks the decline in merchandise receipts is 8.8 per cent. in its class and 75.7 per cent. of the total decline. The decline in the receipts from coal and coke is 4.1 per cent. in their class and 20.9 per cent. of the total decline.
The trend of the recent weekly figures, however, is rather different and is better illustrated by the last week's figures available, which show a decline of 17.2 per cent, in merchandise, equivalent to 66 per cent. of the whole, and a decline of 11.1 per cent. in coal and coke, equivalent to 27 per cent. of the whole.
It will be seen that the rate of decline in merchandise receipts has been somewhat arrested, whilst the rate of decline in the receipts from coal and coke is increasing rapidly.
The decline in the receipts from merchandise is comparable with general trade indices and in accordance with the general experience of road transport, and probably a good percentage of this must be attributable to C-licensed vehicles.
The traffic receipts, however, do not give a true picture of the actual situation, as presumably, as is normal in most concerns, the -total reduction in business handled has also been accompanied by a considerable reduction in working expenses, and we must await the
railway companies' final statement of net revenue before a true picture can be obtained.
As a solution, and in order to avoid unprofitable chaos pending the completion of the road-rates structure, would the railway companies agree, during the interim period, that the road-haulage industry should be bound to existing railways rates, less a differential to be agreed, in respect of lower fixed overhead capital costs?
Hale. J. MARSHALL, M.Inst.T.
TAXICAB SUSPENSION CRITICIZED.
[5522] Can any of your readers offer suggestions as to why the English taxicabs are so infernally worse in their springing than those of Paris? The jarring of the London taxi is commented upon by a large number of foreign visitors to England. A. M. Low. London, S.W.1. A RATE FOR 6-TON LOADS.
[5523] Can you inform me as to what would be a, fair charge for loads of heavy goods (6 tons per load) from Staines to Manchester.
I might mention that your journal has been of interest to me for many years. J.W.B. Staines.
[I assume that you will be able to make three return journeys per week in connection with the work about which you are inquiring. In that case, if you be unable to rely upon any return loads at all you must obtain st least £13 per trip, that is to say, £2 3s. 4d. per ton. If you anticipate that you will be able to obtain return loads from time to time, say, alternate journeys, and that you will receive fair rates for those return loads, then you can reduce your price to £10 per journey Cr £1 13s. 9d. per ton, but that is the absolute minimum at which you should operate.—S.T.R.]