1000. By the CHAIRMAN : But that was a matter in which you were specially interested at the time. You say you do not know that Mr Love said the machine was satisfactory, and yet the statement I have read to you appears in those minutes. If you have not read Mr Love's statement in regard to that matter, you cannot have read the minutes?—Yes, I can; excuse me. Whilst the information contained in those minutes would be embedded in my memory, the name of the man who made the state probably might not. 1001. You were so satisfied, that you committee took into consideration the advisability, or otherwise, of purchasing a sterilising plant?—Yes. But I do not think we decided what kind we were to purchase. I understand we deferred that matter until Mr Pearse, our engineering member, could go into the question and advise is which kind would be most suitable for our conditions. I have no doubt that these sterilising plants are effective, but the difficulty, as shown by the minutes, is not the efficiency of the machine, but the capacity of the machine. 1002. Your minutes, "the Board strongly urges that the erection of a sterilising plant should be expedited and arrangements made for Mr A. F. Pearse to make a special visit to Adelaide, and advise the Board, after inspection of the Adelaide machine, what class of plant should be installed at Fremantle. The Board requested that a wire be sent to the Minister to this effect, and also that if possible a portable machine procured"?—That was a long time ago. 1003. Before urging this you were satisfied that the sterilising plant was a success?—Yes. We had information from the Eastern States. But the information we had from Adelaide satisfied us. I was practically satisfied in January last, from inquiries and investigations I made in Adelaide, and from the experiments that were being conducted, and the results of which I saw. 1004. By Hon. R. G. ARDAGH : That was so far as efficiency was concerned?—Yes. But the kind of machine had to be decided. Mr Pearse had been to Sydney looking at various machines there, and we had learnt about this Adelaide machine which we were wanting him to see so that he could advise us which was the best machine. 1005. By the CHAIRMAN ; You had nothing to do with the conditioning plant now lying at Fremantle, which was after your time?—That is so. 1006. Can you tell us whether any claims have been paid to the acquiring agents in respect of 1915-16 or 1916-17 harvests for damages caused by mice or water, or any other damage outside neglect?—I cannot tell you, because that was a matter which was in debate just when I terminated my intimate connection with the Scheme. 1007. Do you know of any wheat ever being sold to Messrs. Padbury for 4s. 6d. which should have been paid for at 4s. 9d.?—I do not know. I have just explained to Mr Ardagh that there may have been some wheat sold to Messrs. Ockerby damaged. 1008. But this was f.a.q. wheat?—I do not think it is possible. 1009. What has been the result of the 1915-16 harvest, whether there has been any loss as far as the State is concerned, how it works out, and the amount of wheat required and the amount sold? Can you tell us that?—It has been sold. 1010. What I mean is this: you might have acquires 3,500,000 bushels and only sole two million bushels?—I see. 1011. If you seel Mr Hall you might tell him I asked you that question?—I will. You asked me about the case of Padbury. It flashed through my mind that I heard a rumour about it. Still I have no official knowledge; the facts can be ascertained. 1012. You went into the charges of storage at Fremantle when you were chairman of the committee?—In what way? 1013. The charges for storage by the Harbour Trust?—Yes, we got a rebate from them on one occasion. The usual rebate was £1,000 a month; we got it reduced to £500. 1014. You have no knowledge of it being increased; Mr Hammond said it was increased from £500 to £1,000?—I have a hazy recollection that it was reduced from £1,000 to£500. 1015. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN ; I find here (indicating file) a record of the conference by Messrs. Hammond, Pearse, and Sutton with Messrs. Metcalf & Co. Would that be the one referred to?—that would be it. I am pretty certain there was a report on the question. 1016. But that would be the conference you were referring to?—Yes, there were several days. I have a distinct recollection of working the figures out. 1017. By Mr BROWN : Were you in charge when Dalgety & Co. were appointed sole auctioneering agents for wheat other than f.a.q.?—I am not sure. 1018. When the first acquiring agents ceased did the Westralian Farmers take over the existing stacks or did the Scheme?—I think the Scheme took charge of them. I know the Scheme were caretakers of them. 1019. In view of the State guarantee of 4s. 4d. for this year being dissimilar to past years, what do you recommend for the storage of the incoming crop? The Government had no responsibility for the wheat?—They have had no responsibility from the beginning. 1020. Did the State in the past guarantee 3s. to the farmers?—No, they guaranteed the sale of the wheat. Then the next year the guarantee was increased to 4s., the State guaranteeing 3s., and the State and Commonwealth conjointly guaranteeing the extra shilling, the exact proportion of the guarantee can be ascertained from the records. 1021. This guarantee for the incoming crop is similar to the past?—It is on the same basis. it would not have been possible for this Scheme to be financed without the backing of the State and the Commonwealth. 1022. By Hon. R. G. ARDAGH ; With regard to wooden silos, would they be weevil proof?—No. That is another danger which I forgot for the moment. If there is weevilly wheat in them you can kill all the weevils but you cannot guarantee the wheat in wooden silos against infection. 1023. During the initiation of the Scheme were you making preparations for a lengthy period or for temporary?—For temporary. We understood the wheat would be shipped by September or October at latest, and the next year we had advice that the wheat would be shipped by August, and were told to make preparations in that connection. In consequence of that the plans as to the establishment of depots were abandoned. 1024. By Mr HARRISON : Do you think, with the abnormal condition of the price for building silos, either wood or reinforced concrete, and the abnormal conditions with regard to the handling of wheat, the jutes, and the number of times handling to the various depots, would that more than meet the abnormal conditions as to cost?—I think it would. Apart from that, the cost of erection in New South Wales has not proved to be very much abnormal. They are having the silos erected there at an average cost of 1s. per bushel. 1025. Was your attention called to an article in the newspapers in reference to the difference in the cost of material in Canada and the cost of construction in New South Wales?—No. 1026. Even with the abnormal cost at present existing as to material and construction, your opinion is that the abnormal conditions in the other States warrant immediate operations?—It was the realisation of that fact that caused the committee to make the recommendations they did; the danger and damage from weevils were serious and appalling, and it will be more serious because the suspicions of the buying Governments have been aroused, and from something which I have read. That is the reason why Dr Duval has been sent out, why Mr Love has been sent, and I notice that General Pau has been sent as a delegation from France. The obvious conclusion is that they are to see how the wheat they have purchased is stored. All these things render it necessary that we should take additional precautions to store, or we shall not be able to sell our wheat. 1027. By Hon. R. G. ARDAGH : Do you think there should be large country silos and large silos at the ports?—There will have to be both large silos at the ports and country silos to handle the wheat that comes from small sidings; there will have to be large silos at the ports and country silos to collect the wheat at certain centres. 1028. By Mr HARRISON : The cost of construction can be ascertained more easily that the approxi-