4 g 1
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
ad old days'
BEFORE commencing our detailed and, perhaps, nostalgic journey through the now tarnished pages of 1934, some scene-setting will be appropriate.
Britain, in 1934, was between wars, having only recently emerged from a great recession. She still had a vast Empire, and ruled the waves with the world's largest and most powerful Royal and Merchant navies. King George V and Queen Mary were on the throne, and the then Prince of Wales (Edward) had endeared himself to the nation and the Empire, in much the same way as Prince Charles has today.
Germany — by far Europe's largest country — was well on the road to recovery after the Great War, courtesy of Chancellor Adolf Hitler, her transport activities being looked upon with envy by transport enthusiasts in the UK, as were her trans-Atlantic airships (the Zeppelins) which were considered to be something of a threat to the passenger shipping lines, since Britain's greatest luxury liner, the Queen Mary, was still under construction at Clydeside.
Those, then, were the good _old, bad old days (or the bad old, good old days, depending on which side of the social fence you were sitting); when friendly policemen on bicycles, of course, were respected by all; when it was considered to be risky for men to wear topless bathing costumes; when horse manure (collected by the bucketful from their droppings in the street) was the main source of garden fertilizer; and the "Pill" was something advertised by Beecham's or De Wits, for soothing dodgy tummies. In those days kids saved farthings, not 50p pieces, and the most important possession of the white-collared worker was his ,Ready Reckoner.
Advertising — an uncanny resemblance: In 1934 cigarettes were the equivalent of 21/2p for 20, and it cost less than a 1/2p, to stamp a letter which always arrived next morning, and sometimes on the day of posting. "The Commercial Motor" as it was then called (the "The" disappeared in 19661 cost a hefty 11/2p each week, or just under £1 for a full year's subscription, which was pretty good value bearing in mind that its average pagination was 80 pages. Some 52 pages carried advertisements, many of which bear an uncanny resemblance to the small ads that are carried in the journal today — except, that is, for the prices mentioned.
For example, 12-volt lorry batteries — £1.75; an 18x15ft canvas tarpaulin — £2.62p; pneumatic tyres — around £1.75p each and — wait for it — fuel costing just 71/2p per gallon. (Not that every reader was interested in petrol or oil, for that matter, since steam waggons were still in common use (at 31/2Ib of coal to the mile — provided they were fitted with pneumatic tyres) as were horse-drawn vehicles; while trams were beginning to give way to the more manoeuvrable trolleybuses).
While still discussing prices as advertised in CM in 1934, the up-and-coming haulier, wishing to renew his vehicle fleet, could purchase a brand new Dennis 31/2-ton sixwheeled chassis — complete with four-cylinder 31/2-litre capacity engine which developed 60hp — for £400 cash, or £40 down and deferred payments for the balance.
Guy Motors of Wolverhampton would sell him a Vixen three-tonner with four-cylinder, 50hp petrol engine for £295, or would charge £498 if he opted for the same vehicle with a Dorman Oil Engine; and I note that in August 1934 Commer dropped the price of its threetonner from £335 to £279 for the -petrol-powered version, while the same vehicle, powered with a compression ignition engine, was £499 — but the self-starter was an optional extra!
On the passenger side of the industry, a bus operator could purchase a new Bedford 20seater vehicle from Duple Bodies and Motors Ltd, complete with Pullman coach body, for just £285, and take immediate delivery — or so the advertisement stated.
Earnings were low: In presentday terms such prices appear almost ludicrous, but they should be viewed in the context of the salaries, wages and "earnings" of those days. A £10 weekly wage or salary in those days would put a person in the "well-off" bracket — a good risk for any discerning building society considering an application for a mortgage of £500 for a three-bedroomed semi. But haulage earnings were not too good, as evidenced by the advice given to a coal delivery concern in the regular weekly "Problem Column", when CM's nameless costing expert, having gone through his calculations based on figures supplied by the haulier questioner, concluded that he was making a gross profit of only 3d (in old pence) per ton which he doubted would cover his establishment costs! He concluded: "On the other hand, if you be carrying 15,000 tons (during the period of the contract) you are making 1s 3d per ton gross profit which, although not excessive, may be regarded as reasonable."
No wonder, then, that a lot of "play" was given to the cost of taxing new models 50 years ago — in particular, in manufacturer's advertisements — which then, as now, obviously irked the industry — £30 tax and 30mph for a three-ton Dodge; £65 tax for an ERF with an unladen weight of under 4 tons and a payload up to 73/4 tons. One consolation which should be mentioned — for operating a heavy goods vehicle with defective tyres in 1934, a driver was fined £1, while his corn pany was fined 25p.
Confusion of the Licensing Act: However, enough is enough when dealing with costs, and although CM, in those days, appeared to be ultra cost conscious (as indeed it is today), its pages in 1934 reflected the state of play of the road transport industry at the stage it had then reached. In 1934 it had passed through adolescence and was commencing its adulthood, with all that that implied by way of legislation, infrastructure (a word which had not been "invented" then), and technology.
The 1933 Road and Rail Traffic Act had only recently come off the presses and — or so it would appear — there was considerable confusion concerning various aspects of it, so much so that in January 1934, no less a personage than the Minister of Transport himself (one Leslie Hore Belisha, of Belisha Beacon fame) asked CM to submit written questions to him on certain points of the Act, and then called a meeting at which he gave his answers.
According to the report, he (the Minister) emphasised the differences between A, B and C licences because "a certain amount of confusion still exists in the minds of operators, many of whom fail to understand that, whilst no vehicle may appear on more than one of the new licences, a user may hold all three." (For the information of the uninitiated, the Class A public carrier's licence ran for two years and cost £1.50p. Class B — the limited carrier's licence — ran for a year and cost E1. Class C — the private carrier's licence — ran for three years and cost just 371/2p.) The Minister reminded hauliers of an important forthcoming date — April 1 (can you believe!) which was the last day on which carriers had the right to claim a licence for an unladen tonnage equivalent to that which he owned or operated at any time during the previous year.
Objections made easy: He went on to explain that applications for "discretionary tonnage" (ie tonnage above that which an existing haulier may claim and for any tonnage asked. for by a "newcomer" to the industry) presented a problem since, to quote the Minister verbatim "such cases cannot be disposed of by a stroke of the Licensing Authority's pen". So, other transport providers, whether road or rail, were given the right to object and
the beginnings of the road traffic court era were at hand.
The new Act also brought into law restrictions on drivers' hours, the keeping of journey records, and the employment of vehicle examiners who could prohibit the use of goods vehicles which were unfit for service and involved the risk of public safety. No wonder that time and again throughout 1934 and right through the years, apparently, so many statements have appeared in CM condemning the restrictions placed on the industry and lamenting those pre-1933 days.
With commendable speed CM, in a bid to assist drivers keep within the law so far as rest periods were concerned, offered to give space every week for the publication of lists of suitable places throughout the country where drivers could "rest", and requested the owners of such places, and • drivers and others, to submit names and addresses. They were asked to give details about the number of drivers who could be accommodated, the charges for rooms and meals, the number of vehicles which could be garaged or parked, and the phone numbers. The notice ended with the suggestion that drivers cut out and pasted the information into notebooks, since the lists would only be published once. (The mind boggles at the response — which was obviously so great that the idea was scotched from the very beginning. No lists ever appeared!) Inaugurating As and Ds: Throughout the year, letter after letter to the Editor was published seeking advice about various aspects of the Act — for example: "Sir, I am a little in doubt as to the exact meaning of the third clauseof Section 19, viz "Time during which the vehicle is at a place where no reasonable facilities exist for the driver to rest away from the vehicle." Does this apply to my own case, inasmuch as when my lunch hour is due I must stop outside an inn or refreshment house, park the lorry and go inside for a meal ...." and so on. (Again, the mind boggles!) And if the 1933 Act was causing problems, the publication of the Goods Vehicles (Licences and Prohibitions) Provisional Regulations, 1934 which the Transport Minister in his wisdom brought into effect in February, only added fuel to the fire.
Briefly, the Regulations laid down how to obtain licences and stated that Licensing Authorities, as occasion required, would issue statements called Applications and Decisions, giving details of licences applied for and dates of public inquiries — making objections that much more probable. Also initiated for the first time under the Regulations was the carrying of identity discs for A and B licence holders "in a conspicuous place on the near side of the vehicle."
Intolerable psv restrictions: In those early days of legislation, the passenger industry was having its problems, too, so much so that they prompted a leader in CM entitled "Restrictions becoming intolerable," which forthrightly commenced as follows: "The road passenger transport industry is now waking up to the fact that, unless concerted action be taken to prevent the imposition of further restrictive legislation, its future will be one of considerable doubt."
Among the points made were the limitation of the duplication of coaches on certain longdistance routes for the benefit of the railways (note the plural since, at this time, there were four private railways companies in Britain), which had caused an outcry; limits placed on the issue of single and period-return tickets on seasonal services from the coast to London; and seasonal services being drastically curtained, thanks to railways opposition.
The leader referred to the "eternal conflict" regarding fares between road operators and the railways and recommended the introduction of a standard fare to operate throughout the year, which it reckoned would be undoubtedly more acceptable to the public than the system of raising charges at certain periods.
Hands off our coaches: The reduction of service and the absorption of small operators by the larger companies were reflected in official statistics and CM was quick to point out that in 1930 (the year of the passing of the Road Traffic Act) some 101,131 public passenger vehicles of all types were in operations, whereas in 1933 the figure had "dwindled" to 85,077. Thus, in editorials throughout the year. CM hit out at what it termed the unfair competition of the railways, even going as far as warning, in large headline capitals, "Hands off Coaches."
Throughout the year, too, there was continual reference to the rapid changeover taking place in urban transport with the conversion of tramway systems to trolleybuses. In a feature early in the year, the point was made that British models were showing remarkable advances in design, which had resulted in lower floor levels, convenient entrances, improved accessibility and increased seating capacity.
A measure of the feeling against the tram can be gauged from this introduction: "It is exceedingly doubtful whether any new tramway track will be laid to replace that which is becoming worn out in a large number of English towns, where tramways were constructed early in the present century, and 1934 has all the appearances of being a trolleybus year." Older readers will remember the stately AEC-English Electric 0type double-decker; the tough Guy, Sunbeam and Gloster trolleys, not forgetting the Karrier and Leyland GEC types.
Surprisingly, trolleybuses were more costly to run than trams (12.52d (old pence) for the former, against 1.88d for the latter) but — according to an article giving cost comparisons, which appeared early in 1934 — even the trolleybus was cheaper to run than the two kinds of motorbus then in operation — the petrol bus, at 14.25d and the oil-engined bus at 13.37d per mile.
And while on the subject of electric power, 50 years ago they were talking about the revival of the battery-electric vehicle, though a fast read through of the year's features on this subject failed to reveal when battery vehicles were first mooted.
Their quoted limitations then were the same as they are today, and similar arguments for and against applied — weight, range, speed, and so on. However, CM gave top marks to their use as refuse collection vehicles and delivery platforms; and it is interesting to note how many still fulfil this role today. A year of "firsts": The year 1934 was notable for a number of "firsts" — first mentions or first actualities — all of which were highlighted in the pages of CM at the time. Briefly, they read as follows: Vehicle recorders: These were in use in 1934 and evoked similar suspicion and criticism as they do today. A High Court judge is reported to have remarked that they were "unEnglish" when used in secret as a means for detecting delinquencies. CM said it was in close agreement with His Lordship's opinion and, for the first time, went on to praise the use of vehicle recorders as an effective means of promoting efficiency in vehicle operations. "They are bound to be more widely used as their usefulness becomes known, but they are properly employed only if they
be fitted to vehicles with the full knowledge of the drivers and, generally, with their cooperation, on the understanding that the object of their use is to improve the overall efficiency of the organisation — an objective which every rightminded employee will wish to attain." (Wow — no comment!) Drivers' Club: In August 1934 the Bedford Drivers' Club saw the light of day, with its headquarters at Vauxhall Motors Depot in Edgware Road, London. No subscription was asked for, and there was no obligation other than an adherence to a code of "decent road behaviour." The hope was to enrole as many of the 40,000 Bedford drivers in the country as possible.
Prohibition Order prosecution: The prosecution under the 1933 Act, empowering Licensing Authorities to prohibit the use of a goods vehicle until defects discovered by a vehicle examiner were rectified, was heard at Knutsford in September. It concerned the use of a lorry in respect of which a prohibition order was in force. The defence was that the owner (who was not named) was not aware that, after the repairs had been completed, it was necessary for the vehicle to be re-examined and the order cancelled. Found guilty, he was fined E5.
Goods transport Appeals: The first appeals under the 1933 Act were heard on September 11 before the newly constituted Appeal Tribunal, under the chairmanship of Mr Rowland Harker, KC. It was brought by Messrs a and H. Ridgewell against the refusal of the Metropolitan Licensing Authority to grant an A licence. The Southern Railway Corn pany was the objector, Judgment was reserved, and the appeal was later dismissed.
Commenting on the hearing, an unidentified CM reporter suggested that the importance of the occasion was belied by the lack of interest taken in the proceedings by members of the industry only a handful of whom had bothered to turn up. This, he wrote, contrasted with the first sitting of the Metropolitan Licensing Autharity when some persons were unable to gain admission to the court. He went on: "This apathy is the more surprising in view of the fact that the Tribunal is the final authority in an appeal, and upon its decision may rest the livelihood of an operator." (Nothing has changed, it seems).
Driving tests, licence endorsements and speed limits: Cer
tain sections of the Road Traffic Act, 1934 (yes, 1 93 4) were brought into force on October 1, including driving tests for motor drivers who had not held licences before April 1, 1934; the endorsements of driving licences for speeding convic tions; and a new schedule of speed limits, the principal change affecting articulated vehicles which would enable them to operate at 20mph, instead of 16mph.
National Conference of Coach and Bus Owners: Blackpool was the venue for the first National Conference of independent psv owners in October.
It attracted some 400 delegates.
Organised by the Motor Hirers and Coach Services Associa tion, subjects covered by the two-day function included: intolerable railway interference; road development and safety; the maladministration of the 1930 Act; and a demand for an Appeal Tribunal.
That 30mph speed limit: Following requests from several MPs in the House of Commons, the Transport Minister said that he was formally asking local authorities to consider what roads, in built-up areas, should be exempted from the proposed 30mph speed limit.
Pedestrian crossings: July 9 saw the first uncontrolled crossing places "laid down" by the authorities, and CM reported that in early November there were some 5,000 crossing places in existence in the City and Metropolitan Police area. Many of them had been provided with Belisha beacons, at a cost for each beacon and its erection, of £1.50p.
National Road Transport Conference: In early December, delegates from "all the important road transport associations" met for the first in conference to discuss immediate and vital problems facing the industry. Organised by the Commercial Motor Users Association (no connection with CM, by the way) among the bodies attending was the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders. Subjects under discussion included operators' licensing difficulties; wages, hours and conditions; and taxation and re gulation of the industry. The best quote of the meeting, as reported by CM, was by a Mr E. J. Pulleyn, who told delegates that no haulier, who complied rigidly with the 1930 and 1933 Acts and adhered to the new wage recommendations, would be able to make a profit.
Epilogue: Lack of space precludes mention of a dozen or more items of interest from those early days of the industry as recorded by CM half-a-century ago. However, it would be
remiss of me, in an article such as this, not to mention the Road Haulage Association which — in 1934 — had a membership by close on 5,000 members.
CM, it seems, played an important role in its formation, as disclosed in an editorial dated April 27: "The seeds of the RHA were sown at a luncheon and conference arranged by The Commercial Motor on April 29, 1930, when we brought together many previously conflicting interests which have since formed the backbone of this Association." The editorial went on to disclose that the first step was the appointment of a committee on longdistance haulage, which gave evidence before the Royal Commission on Transport; later, an Association was formed and linked up with short-distance haulage interests, to which CM had also lent its aid.
(The author thanks the Transport Press Library for making available its files for his perusal and wishes all involved in this ever-changing industry the compliments of the Season).