3511. Would you be surprised if Mr. Connolly said that Metcalf deals largely in machinery?—I have made inquiries, and I am told that they have nothing to do with the manufacture of machinery.

3512. But have not they, in many instances, carried out the work as contractors?—Yes, upon a percentage basis. It was not their own machinery.

3513. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: What is the objection to employing a manufacturing firm?—Because in goes its own machinery. We want competition in the machinery.

3514. And what guarantee have you that a firm who does not manufacture machinery would not design to suit certain types of machinery?—The Board has put in a special clause against it.

3515. But how could you prevent it, or even know it?—By specifying certain cleaning or weighing machines. It can be easily checked.

3516. But if you have not made up your mind as to the machine you want, how can design your building to accommodate it?—We should have to see that the specification was drawn in such a way as not to hamper the British manufacturers in the construction.

3517. Have you the necessary knowledge to see whether the specifications and design would provide for it?—We would make sure. All these representatives are here and they can be relied upon to let you know.

3518. Would you consult them in the matter before accepting Metcalf's plan?—Yes.

3519. Then practically Metcalf's plan would have to be submitted to those firms for approval?—We would just ask "Do these plans interfere with competition?"

3520. But none of the machines which they put into elevators are of the same shape or size?—No.

3521. Therefore, to erect the building without first selecting the type of machine, would mean an unnecessarily large building?—I do not think there is that much difference between the machines.

3522. If there is any difference whatever in the machinery it must be allowed for in your design?—We would make sure that the British manufacturers got a fair deal.

3523. You would have to rely on the submission of the plans to the agents of the different firms?—That is not unusual.

3524. How many of the English manufacturing firms are permanently represented in Australia?—I think Mr. Porter has a representative. Messrs. Strachan, Murray, and Shannon, a Melbourne firm, have a young Englishman out from Home and he is looking after all that business for them.

3525. What part of an elevator requires the most expert knowledge, the construction of the bins or the mechanical part?—The handling house portion.

3526. With your training and knowledge, do you see any great difficulty in economically designing the bin portion?—Not so much the bin portion as its relation to future bulk handling.

3527. So if you had a plan of the elevators, and were instructed to design the bins, there would be no difficulty about it?—Not in the bins, it is making the thing fit in with the ultimate scheme; that is where you want the knowledge of a man who has built up big schemes.

3528. How many firms in the world designing and constructing elevators are not manufacturers of machinery; are there more than Metcalf & Co.?—Yes, Stewarts in Chicago, and one or two others.

3529. They have not done work of any great consequence?—Stewarts have.

3530. They are not manufacturers of machinery?—Not to my knowledge.

3531. Was it on a percentage basis that Metcalf did the work on the Manchester Ship Canal?—I cannot say offhand.

3532. By the CHAIRMAN: Then that is the only reason why you object to manufacturers of machinery?—Yes.

3533. Would it not be possible for a manufacturing firm to do the work cheaper than a firm that did not manufacture machinery?—You have to pay them somehow, either in kind or in cash. If they have to design, it will cost them so much money and it will be put either into the machinery or into the building.

3534. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: But if Metcalf designs an elevator, and it is ultimately decided to put in Spencer's machinery, who would design that machinery, Spencer or Metcalf?—They would specify a cleaner of a certain type.

3535. But you would have to pay Metcalf & Co. their commission on the other work?—A commission on the total expenditure.

3536. And then Spencer & Co. would have to pay their men to design the work to suit the elevator?—Yes, if you like to put it that way. Their machine is a trade machine, they would not make a special one for us.

3537. That is in regard to cleaning, weighing, and grading machines, but I am speaking of actual handling machines?—They are all specified to give a certain speed and output.

3538. But they have to be designed independently for each elevator?—They are in different sizes.

3539. And Spencer would have to design them?—No; these things would be designed by Metcalf.

3540. Although not specialists, whereas the others are?—That is so, but these people have done so many of these things.

3541. But they are not manufacturers, and consequently could not be expected to have such expert knowledge of construction of them as the manufacturer?—Take the construction work; Porter told me that the Australian manufacturers knocked him out of sight in the construction of the New South Wales elevators.

3542. Who designed them for New South Wales?—They were built to Metcalf's design.

3543. And they proved cheaper than others in the Old Country. Was that on account of war conditions?—Probably so. Mr. Porter said the only thing in which he thought he would have a chance would be in respect of the bulk handling machinery.

3544. Would that be owing to the fact that their works have been commandeered by the Government?—Yes; still he was out here for the purpose. I do not think he could handle any machinery at present.

3545. By the CHAIRMAN: Is it not a fact that Simons & Co., Spencer & Co., and other firms, are penalised for having handed over their works for munition making?—There is no competition for them to enter into just now. It will only be when bulk handling comes into vogue that their competition will have any effect.

3546. You know they were prepared not only to tender for the work but to finance it in this State?—I asked Mr. Porter that question and he told me that his firm was prepared to design the work and carry it out. I asked, "How are you going to make it up; you are not philanthropists?" and he said. "On our machinery, of course."

3547. Mr Milne, of the British Board of Trade, has been sent out here as a representative of the British Government to look after the British trade?—Yes.

3548. He would have a good deal of experience as far as actions which have been taken previously in regard to the drawing of plans and specifications are concerned, and which necessitate machinery being used as part of the plans connected with the building?—I would not like to say that. I have met Mr. McGregor, his successor, and would not like to say that he knows everything about these engineering works.

3549. Mr. Milne would have a good experience in the methods adopted?—I suppose he would have a good deal of information at his disposal.

3550. He says in the course of his report that he has had occasion to observe that if plans and specifications for public works are drawn up by foreign engineers, it usually follows as a matter of course that such parts of the plans as cannot be manufactured locally are imported from the country of which the foreign engineer is a citizen. That is generally the practice, is it not?—I would not say so. A man might put it in and he might not. It all depends on what suits the conditions.

3551. You would not say that is incorrect?—I would not say that.

3552. Have you ever heard of plans for works in some of the Eastern States being drawn, and of the most minute pieces connected with the work having had to be imported from America? —It was as a result of