69

H.—2.

my business to get the best appliances known. With that end in view I am in frequent communication with all parts of the world on the subject of fire-appliances. In the same way other parts of the world communicate with me for my experience. We interchange ideas; and I think it would be stated in Australia and in India that the appliances we have in New Zealand are the best known. 43. Does the department try experiments with any new methods?— Unfortunately, or fortunately, patentees come along with all sorts of ridiculous ideas, and in every case we try them. We tell them to begin with that it is folly, but they go on. 44. And the department is continuing to try in the same direction ?—Yes, and so far as I am aware we shall continue to do so. 45. There is a natural antagonism between spark-arresters and locomotive efficiency?— Distinctly. 46. Is it a fact that the ash-pan is used only in New Zealand ?—The ash-pan perforated damper is used only in New Zealand and New South Wales. Of course, it may more recently have been introduced in other places, because they have been in communication with me. 47. You say that it is not controlled by the driver ?—The driver cannot touch it from the footplate. 48. In your opinion, is that sufficient to drown all sparks ?—ln my opinion, it it is ample to stop all sparks from getting out from the ash-pan. 49. You do not attribute any of the recent fires in New Zealand to sparks from the ash-pan ? —No. 50. How long is it since this particular appliance was adopted in New Zealand ?—Fourteen or fifteen years ago. 51. Are all the locomotives in New Zealand fitted with that ash-pan?— Yes. 52. As to the spark-arrester, you have the deflector and the perforated plate ?—We have the deflector for soft coal, and the perforated plate for hard coal. 53. What are the objections to using the perforated plate for the soft coal ?—-The intention of the deflector for soft coal is this : that the coal is so very light and full of water that immediately it is subjected to heat it disintegrates into very small particles. The object then is to drive it with a great velocity against the deflector, and break these already small particles of carbon into smaller particles, and so destroy them. 54. Could they not be sent through a perforated plate ?—No ; because it would be a constant stream of fire, as they are so small. 55. The hard coal can be prevented from sparking by means of the plate ?—Yes ; hard coal does not disintegrate into such small particles as soft coal. 56. And therefore in going through a perforated plate it is sufficiently reduced to be consumed ?—Yes, anything that will go through there has very little vitality. 57. And being reduced it is oxidized by the air?— Yes. • 58. If coal is impure and red-hot particles of fireclay are sent through by the draught they are, of course, more dangerous than particles of carbon ?—ln going through the perforated plate they would be, and also in going against the deflector they would be, because although they would be broken up by the deflector, and partially by the perforated plate, yet a particle such as fireclay would retain its vitality. 59. It would not be oxidized?—lt would not be so easily killed by exposure to the air and to the hot steam as pure coal. 60. And it would not be reduced by oxidization ? —No. 61. Therefore, it is important to have coal pure?— Yes. 62. Do you find that the coal supplied to the railways in New Zealand is comparatively free from impurities?—lt is fairly good coal. It is as good as we can get within the colony. Of course, it is largely impregnated with sulphur. 63. The sulphur does not add to the sparking ?—No. 64. On the railways of Europe, and India, and the United States, what are the spark-arrest-ers ? Some of them, I believe, use no spark-arresters ? —ln some places in the States they use none, but where they burn wood or inferior kinds of coal they sometimes use the deflector, but principally what they call the wire-mesh. 65. Have you had any experience of fires being caused by sparks from engines ?—-Yes; they were said to have been caused by sparks, but of course I denied it. 66. You admit, of course, the possibility of sparks causing fires ?—Oh, yes, no one denies it. 67. On the Auckland Section, which appears to be more subject to fires than other sections, and which some people attribute to the soft coal, what would it cost to alter for the summer months the locomotives used there from the deflector to the perforated plate, so that hard coal could be used for three or four months ? What would it cost to change each locomotive, and to afterwards return it to its original condition of the deflector-plate? Can you form an idea?— Yes, I think I can give you a fair idea. I will give you an estimate, always presuming, of course, that the chimneys and exhaust-pipes were there in the first instance, and that we were simply changing. It would be quite a nominal expenditure. 68. Mr. Macdonald, of Auckland, has said it would be £3 or £4 for each engine ?—Yes; it would be quite a nominal outlay. 69. The greater cost would be in the price of the coal ?—Yes. 70. It might be tried for a year to see if the fires diminished, because people think that many of the fires are due to the coal? —We tried it this year, and I had a telegram on Friday : " House burnt down, said to be from sparks from engine; burning hard coal." 71. It seems to be the opinion of many of those who gave evidence in Auckland and other places that the coal was at fault. If an experiment could be made in a dry year, and the whole section burned hard coal for four or five months, and the fires did not diminish, it would show that

10— H. 2.