sign-in
Home
/
Wheat (1) - Part 2
/
Image 171
Wheat (1) - Part 2
Image 171
image 72 of 100
If you need a symbol, fraction or a wider dash please highlight, copy (Ctrl C) and paste (Ctrl V): £ — ¼ ½ ¾ ⅓ ⅔ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞ ⊚ 🡹 /|\
found to be the best suited for this State. That meant a certain amount of sketch drawing. 3636. By Hon J. F. ALLEN: You mean that a certain size bin would be the bin for this State?—Yes. We would have sets of forty thousand bushel capacity. 3637. That would simplify designing enormously, and reduce Metcalf's labour in the preparation of plans?—Yes, so far as the storage bins were not concerned. Then the question of how much cement was required had to be gone into, and also the quantity of steel. There was also the question of the gallery over the bins to carry the conveyors. I have a drawing here. The cement specification was different from ours. Ours was not stringent enough for this class of work. We eventually decided to use the British Standard Committee's specification; and then with regard to the manufacture of steel Broken Hill and New South Wales, and they asked us to alter them. 3638. So no order has been placed at all in regard to this work?—No. I wired over and the answer I received was a negative one. It all depended on the matter being passed by Parliament. 3639. Were you on the Board when they passed a resolution expressing regret that the Government did not go on with the work after Parliament had turned down the agreement?—I did not influence them in any way on the matter. I was present at that meeting. I would not say they were annoyed at Parliament having turned the matter down. 3440. It shows what action the Board would have taken if they had executive powers. Parliament will have to be very careful in dealing with a question of this kind, because the Board might override the decisions of Parliament?—I think you are putting an extreme case. They did not carry that resolution with the idea of overriding the decision of Parliament. They felt that something ought to be done, and all they could do was to protest to the Minister. After that the thing was settled. 3641. Are you aware that the attention of the Solicitor General was drawn to the fact of the clause being in the agreement subject to the approval of Parliament, and that he pointed out there was no necessity to put that in, as the agreement was never entered into?—I do not remember that, but I have no doubt it is the position if Mr. Sayer says so. 3642. the members of the Committee must have had some doubt in their minds as to whether Parliament would agree to an agreement of that kind?—We were all empathetic that it had to receive the sanction of Parliament. 3643. by hon. j. F. ALLEN: On whose behalf did you go to the Eastern States, the Public Works Department, or the Wheat Scheme?—The Wheat Scheme. 3644. And was all you did on their behalf?—Yes, practically. 3645. By the CHAIRMAN: When the Engineer-in-Chief returned from Canada he was very emphatic that plans and specifications should be prepared of the sites, giving particulars of foundations, etc., and that those engineers who erected buildings such as these should be given an opportunity of submitting prices for the erection and completion of such buildings and submitting their own plans for approval. 3646. Two years later Mr. Thompson was again empathetic?—Yes. 3647. What is your opinion in regard to that point; do you not think it would be beneficial?—I think we should get a man who is thoroughly experienced in the lay-out and the relationship of the arrangements. 3648. The Engineer-in-Chief was chairman of the Bulk Handling Committee when it was agreed, at the instigation of Mr. Cox, of Melbourne, that they should take up the matter with Metcalf. Did not Mr. Cox come here first with Nevanas?—I believe he was here with Nevanas. 3649. Mr. Thompson no doubt at the time was of opinion that it was the policy of the Government of the day to engage an engineer?—Perhaps so. 3650. Since then he has again emphasised that view?—If I held his views on the point I should not have hesitated to say something further. 3651. That letter from Mr. Milne was referred to mr. Thompson on the 14th November, 1916, and in his reply Mr. Thompson said the following:— I am quite in agreement with Mr. Milne's communication. It is in accord with the views expressed in my report on bulk wheat handling, wherein I suggested that schemes for the bulk handling of wheat, together with estimated cost, should be publicly advertised for. This would, I consider, be much the more satisfactory way and would provide competition among those experienced in the design and erection of bulk wheat handling plant. That was addressed to the Secretary, State Wheat Marketing Scheme. It shows that he was then still of opinion as to which was the best method?—It is a pity that he did not try to block the other thing. 3652. By Mr. BROWN: The storage of the 1918-19 crop is being provided by for the depots?—Yes. 3653. So none of that harvest can be affected by these concrete bins?—If Parliament agreed to start next month, I daresay we could have about one million by the end of March. That would be the most. 3654. That would be provisionally on getting the cement and the steel?—Yes. 3655. So all future storage is really for the 1919-20 and subsequent crops?—Yes. 3656. So if, in regard to the 1920-21 harvest, shipping is normal and the market good there night be little or no necessity for the storage?—You have the weevil trouble. 3657. But it is not to be expected that weevil will stay for all time?—There is only one way to handle it. 3658. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: How do you think the weevil came here in the first place?—The Rhizo pertha dominica was brought in with the shipment of rice from India which was put into the Fremantle sheds on the south side. When later, wheat was put in there, the weevil went clean through it. 3659. Do not our bags come from the very place that sent us the weevils?—Some of them, yes. 3660. Is there no chance of the weevil coming in them?—The weevil will come in anything. 3661. And the bags are the only link between the affected places and the farms?—Yes. 3662. No investigations have been made to see whether they come in the bags?—I do not know of any. 3663. By Mr. HARRISON: Was that shipment of rice prior to the shipment of maize in 1914?—I do not know. 3664. You know that the maize was badly affected by weevil?—Yes. (The witness retired.) The Commission adjourned.
Save edits
prev
|
next
|
all images
|
history