B.R.S. Moves World's Biggest Window
Page 41
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
BELlEVED to be the largest movement of its kind ever undertaken. the world's 'biggest window, a sheet of ;I-in, polished plate-glass, 50 ft. long by 8 ft. high and weighing I ton, made by Pilkington Bros., Ltd., St. Helens, for the Festival of Britain, South Bank Exhibition, was transported from the factory to London during October by Edward Box and Co., Ltd., an undertaking acquired by the Road Haulage Executive.
The overall length of the trailer and prime mover was 65 ft. and the height of the outfit was 13 ft. 6 ins., consequently a pilot tour was made to survey the route and, where necessary, the load was escorted by police.
Precautions had to be taken to maintam the rigidity of the trailer, which was specially 'adapted for the purpose. '1 he original length was 40 ft, but there was an extension of 5 ft., and the case overhung at the end. The case measured 51 ft. by 9 ft. and contained two sheets of glass, a spare being provided in case of any accident in glazing.
A special vacuum-operated " sucker" with 40 pads was used to lift the glass into its case and this device, which weighed J tons, travelled to London in order to move.the plate to the glazing pasition.
ILLEGAL USE OF FARMERS' VEHICLES
AFARMER who breeds and deals in cattle cannot legally use a " farmer's vehicle," licensed at a preferential rate, to bring back cattle from a sale and deliver them to the purchaser for a charge which includes the cost of carriage and commission, as well as the price of the animals. In such an event, the farmer is acting as a dealer and not in his capacity as "a person engaged in agriculture," in accordance with Section I (5) (c) of the Road and Rail Traffic Act, 1933, and the Vehicles (Excise) Ut, 1949.
This point is made clear by the Appeal Tribunal in its decision in the Holgate case (reported on page 273).
To be entitled to the preferential
duty, the farmer must use his vehicle to carry only produce or articles required for his farm, although he may also transport produce or farm goods for a neighbouring farmer, provided that this outside work is done only occasionally, that the goods carried for the neighbour form only a small part of the load and that no payment or reward is received.
The Tribunal discounts entirely the suggestion that a farmer-dealer using an " F "-licence vehicle could legally carry a customer's beasts for payment because the property in the cattle purchased at a sale did not r.ass to the customer until they had been delivered.