TRANSPORT APPEALS

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 3, Issue 611, 16 August 1933, Page 6

TRANSPORT APPEALS

sitting continued HAMILTON -ROTORUA SERVICES PRESENT TRI-ANGULAR | CASE DECISION RESERVED i The Transport Appeal Board re- " sumed its sitting in Rotorua on Tuesday morning and the hearing of the Railway Department's objeetion to the issue of an amended license to "K" Motors, Ltd., was resumed. Mr. W. A. Carter, on hehalf of j New Zealand Newspapers, Ltd., urged that it was highly necessary in the early delivery of the Auckland Star that the ear service leaving Hamilton at 6.30 p.m. should continue. The train arriving in Rotorua at 11 p.m. I was useless%ias it came in too late. The proprietors gained nothing by sending the papers on by car because they could send them all the way by train for the same price as they paid for the carriage to Hamilton. It was necessary to get the papers into Rotorua so that they could he delivered the same evening. Mr. M. H. Hampson, on behalf of "K" Motors, pointed out that the train from Hamilton went through entirely different country to the road. From Hamilton to the Mamaku the road traversed closely settled country. This presented an entirely different position to that of the Hamilton- Auckland line — there the road ran parallel to the line, while at no place on the Rotorua route, except at Tirau did the road touch the railway. Progress of District It would he ungenerous not to admit the past and present service of the railways to Rotorua. Natural attractions hiad ntade Rotorua the playground of New Zealand, but Rotorua had done more than any other part of the Dominion to advertise New Zealand. The growth of Rotorua had been rapid. Twenty-five years ago the town had a population of 800; today it had a population of nearly 6000. They had the same attractions 25 years ago, and also the r'ailway, but these factors had not been solely responsible for bringing about the increase in population. He considered that the recent development of the pumice country had been respom sible for the growth, and the develop7 ment was in progress for 50 or 60 miles on either side of Rotorua. As time passed s-till furither development would take place and Rotorua would become the centre of a. very large agricultural district. Then, again, in no part of New Zealand had afforestation proceeded in such a rapid way as in Rotorua d-strict. The working of these forests would make a big difference t0 the growth aiid requirements of the eommunity. Then I it must also he remembered that the I main highways in all directions from Rotorua had been greatly improved and it was only reasonable that the surrounding districts should have rapid and easy access to the rail- i way junction at Hamilton. It was extraordinary to say that the train seri vices were menaced by the motor cars.Mr. Wilson had admitted that the • trains paid and were likely to continue to pay. He contended that an unanswerable case could be pi"esented for j the granting of the licenses tasked for, but he suggested some alteration in | the time tables which would improve transport facilities. He principally objected to the 6 p.m. train from Hamil-

ton in comparison with the car seivice. The train could not possibly he viewed as a passenger train with ord- | inary comfort. Jnst imagine a tourist getting in at Auckland at 3 o'clock and being told he could reach Rotorua the same evening. Imagine the I feelings of that tourist when spend- j ing the last five hours in misery. He submitted that it was a mistake for j the department to continue to urge . the use of this train. He then proceeded to eall evidence, Arthur Kusabs, managing director of "K" Motors, Ltd., being the first witness. Mr. Kusabs said his cars gave intermediate service ito Cambridge, Tirau and other plaees on the Hamilton route assisting in the provision of facilities for the districts traversed. The Mayor's Opinion Thomas Jackson, Mayor of Rotorua, said he had noticed considerable growth in the town. Up to five years ago growth was mostly due to tourist traffic, but now progress was mainly due to agricultural development. He did not consider the 10 £i.m. and 4.40 p.m. train were sufficient service. He was decidedly of opinion that motor services should operate pending further train . facilities in the interest of the district. Tri-Angular Contest This closed the case so far as the hearing of the department's ohjection to the issue of the license was concerned, and it was decided to hear the evidence and argument as to the position of "K" Motors, Newby and Sparks. Mr. Hampson in opening said that when the act came into operation "K" Motors had two services, Sparks had one and Lee one. Sparks had his license renewed because he was entitled

to a licens automatically. It was understood that it was the wish of the authority that Sparks should be ^ahsorhed. Lee was unable to continue and offered to retire if he received fair compensation. This was arranged by "K" Motors and Lee retired. Sparks caJried on for a time till ; Newby applied for a special license which was granted and cost "K" Motors a considerable siim. When it | came to the annual meeting Newby ! and "K" Motors hpposed Sparks and | thq license was refused, but the aui thority gave the license to Newby ! after practically calling upon "K" j Motors. to absorb Sparks. i j Sparks' Pogition ! On Sparks' hehalf Mr. Potter said it was undouhted that it was ha.d luck which placed Sparks in his position to-day. It was hard after pioneering | the service into Rotorua that he should be put off the road. Sparks financial position was by no means hopeless. The service hiad been carried on satisfactorily in the past and he should be given an opportunity fo carry on in the future. Mr. Justice Frazer pointed out that the board knew actually nothing about Sparks' position. His onjy as'set was that he knew the road. ;and was in a

position to hire a car from" Mr. Kusabs. Mr. Potter agreed that was so, but it was only fair to protect the pioneers from newcomers. Newby 's Claim Mr. Roe explained that Newby opposed the issue of a license to Sparks. The issue as h'e took it existed. be^ tween "K" Motors and Newby. He contended that his client was entitled to the license on several grounds: (1) That in view of the unsatisfactory manper in which "K" Motors had run Sparks' service since taking over the management that the license should not be granted to them. He agreed that the methods and management of a service did not count so much in the case of a renewal, but this was an entirely new license. During the short time Kusabs had run Sparks' business the management had not been satisfactory and there had been many complaints. The license asked for was brand. new and had never been held either by "K" Motors or Newby. (2) Newby was entitled to ask for the license on Mr. Kusab's own evidence, which went to show Sparks' service run by him was unprofrtable. He (Mr. Roe) could not say why it was unprofitable, but Mr. Kusabs had said it did not pay. It was not-right for any applicant to ask for a service which he admitted he could not make pay. If Newby could make the run pay he was in a far more favourable position in asking for the license. He thotight it was a good rule for an Appeal Court to support the finding of a lower court if the decision were correct and that would he an equally good rule to follow here; it would greatly simplify the position if that view was taken. Unless the decision of the lower authority were entirely wrong it should have support. (3) Newby 's were entitled to the license on equitable grounds. At one time their Auckland-Hamilton business had a turn over of £10,000. The first cut in the services brought his turnover down to £6000 a year and further restrictions might have the effect of cutting this in half again. Newby had, therefore, put in an application for an extension of his run to Rotorua. The operation of the Trans port Act had not had any serious effect on "K" Motors, but it had made a difference in the case of Newby who should get the license. "K" Motors would still have one, or perhaps, two on the route. When a really new license was in question he contended Newby should have preference. The examination of several witnesses, including the applicant Newby, followed and the board reserved its decision until later on in the sitting.