THE ROAD ROLLER.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXII, Issue 65, 12 March 1912, Page 4

THE ROAD ROLLER.

FURTHER BOROUGH COUNCIL ■DISCUSSION.' ■ PURCHASE FINALLY DECIDED. With 'the hands of the clock, not the Borough Council Chambers one, for that has never moved for months, pointing to the vicinity of eleven, the Borough Council vent on last > night to discuss the road roller. At first it was decided that the Council should adjourn, but.as a settlement seemed in' . sight the Council considered that it would be better to get'it over. The following report made by Crs. Paget, Boon, Ward, and Healy was ■ submitted:— “On Friday, March Ist, we inspected the road rollers and traction engine belonging to the Eltham County Council, which were working on t’ne Eltham-Kaponga Roads, and the combined road roller and traction engine at Manaia. We have to thank botli bodies and their foremen and -en-gine-drivers for their courtesy in affording us the fullest possible information on the subject. The foreman and driver of the Eltham County ei gino—one of which is an Aveling and Porter road roller, and the other a Fouler convertible roller and tion engine—were emphatic in their opinion that for road worD—i.ev, rolling and scarifying, there is no advantage in a convertible engine. The Aveling and Porter engine, with Morrison scarifier, they state is easily turned, and can in short lengths be used both backwards and forwards. The Fouler convertible they only use as a roller, and are of opinion thatthe time taken up in converting, probably a' day for .each conversion, would be entirely wasted. The foreman and engine-driver of the Manaia County engine—a McLaren—volunteered the opinion without any leading question that it would ho a waste of time to convert for Borough road use. He stated that the reason they required a roller convertible to a traction engine is that they have to take it long distances to use for hauling a grader, and the roller is unsuitable for crossing unbridged rivers, it having been already once broken in doing so. The engine-driver stated that it was a little quicker to scarify with the engine as a fraction engine, but that the time taken up in converting, viz., four hours, would not lie worth while spending for the time saved in scarifying. The time for full conversion, i.e., removing hind driving rollers and front steering roller and replacing with traction driving wheels, front steering wheels and scarifier we gathered would take more than a full day’s work for two or three men. It therefore becomes evident that unless it is established that the extra cost of getting a roller convertible to a traction engine is worth while for quite other purposes than scarifying and rolling that the extra cost, about £lls, would lie wasted. It is difficult for us to express an opinion upon the merits of different engines, but the solid appearance and excellent reports of the Aveling an-1 Porter leads us to consider that the Council can not do hotter than select this make unless cost is materially more. The Eltham County foreman and Mr Basham, chief engineer, ar ■ both of opinion that it is in every wav satisfactory, hut recommend a full canopy with canvas curtains as a protection against the weather, the cost of which we understand would he between £ls and £20.” Councillor Paget was brief and to tlm point. He moved in favour of the A- cling ami Porter machine, with a Morrison scarifier. Other councillors, however, were still anxious to discuss scarifiers and various makes 1 of engines—what they could do and what they could not do. An amendment was moved in favour cf a McLaren engine with the Morri- ! sou scarified attached. It was put to the meeting and carried on a division, Councillors Paget, Ward, Lawson. and Hoalv voting against it.

It was then decided that the Council procure a McLaren road roller, fitted with a Morrison scarifier, the price to be £72.i, in the event of the machine, as slated, not being procurable at that price, an Aveling and Porter, r ith a similar scarifier, to be procured at a cost of £BO7.