THE SIZE OF GRAIN SACKS.

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 13095, 21 April 1908, Page 3

THE SIZE OF GRAIN SACKS.

TO THE EDITOR OF "TUB I'KESS." Sir, —In your report of the proceedings of the> South Canterbury Chamber of Commerce hfJd at Timaru on Friday last, the terminivl paragraph states:—"lt was said in the course of the discussion that the agitation for a smaller sack originated' among workers on the Lyttelton •wharves, wln&re most of the lifting is done by cranes."

The Lyttelton lumpers have nothing whatever to do with any lifting process that may be employed; it is the* carrying part of the business that concerns them.

As tliis matter is causing no little controversy between grain nierclian-ts and tho farming community generally, perhaps yon will kindly allow mc to place a few facts before your uninitiated readers.

Tho weight of the prrsent sack when fined -with wheat is 2401b's, j>l;is 31bs weight of sack, totalling. 2431h5. A gang of" carriers in a ship's hold., wo will assume, is four men. It would be considered very poor work if one gang of men were not able to take in at least four trucks per hour, assuming that, each truck contained 60 sacks, or. roughly speaking, six tons.

It only requires a Second Standard schoolboy to ascertain that each of the four mion carrying must carry at least six tons of wheat per hour, or 48 tone for a day's work of eight hours. The magnitude of the task may be imagined when ive oonsid-cr how many horses it would require to draw a similar load on a level road for eight hours.

But one factor seems to be entirely overlooked by the advocates for thepresent size of cornsacks, and that js, that Ge carrying part of the work is the least arduous. It isrthe placing of sacks in their proper position that requires an exertion that the lumpers are complaining of. As a fair averago distance a man carries a sack from the stack about ten yards, but the ■worst part of his work comes ivhcn he has to "place" his bag. Tho tiers in which the bngs are stowed are generally Irom 7ft to Bft high, and it requires a considerable amount of muscular power to place the bag that height -without assistance. Another feature of this question has been entirely lost sight of. and that is the obstructions in a ship's hold, in the chape of stancliions, etc.. that the carrier has to contend -with in the course of his work.

Although there is not nearly so much gi*ain exported from Lyttelton as in past years, we may etill see the evil effects of the present corns.ic.ks in the general appearance of the "old hands," and, if necessary, I shall bo prepared to mention the names of men -who are now in their graves through carrying excessive weights.

Tt may be true that an alteration may dislocate trade for a certain period, but I submit that it -would be much better to dislocate trade than to dislocate men's necks.

In conclusion, I would ask the "other members of the Association" to start ■with mc at eight o'clock any morning at any ship he may choose, and carry bag for bag -until five at night, and 1 fancy (if he lasted the eight hours) ha would be a strenuous advocate for a much smaller sack than 2001b.— Yours, etc., • WILLIAM T. BARNES. Lyttelton, April 14th. ■■.■■■.,■■.--•.■,■.■.