height there was trouble. We also had to pay for our own dunnage. This year I saw a stack which had been built too low, and there was no dunnage there for it. There were about 1,000 bags on the bare ground.

1187. By Mr. HARRISON: Where was this?—At Badjolin, the worst site in the State. The wheat has been taken away since. The wheat was stacked in a very irregular manner in our own yard. Suddenly, it was broken down in about six different places before the rain came. It got a considerable amount of rain as well on top of that. In my time that would have been looked upon as culpable neglect on my part, and I would probably have lost my position. The country is now in charge of the Wheat Scheme, and the country has to suffer for these things. One hears a great deal of argument on bulk handling. I do not see how the country can possibly be ready for a thorough system of bulk handling. If storage sheds had been put at the sidings, it would not have been half as costly, and the wheat could have been looked after thoroughly and properly. If I were buying wheat, bulk handling would suit me down to the ground. I would not have the labour to attend to; I would simply have to buy the serip. But the country is not sufficiently advanced for bulk handling. If the change is to come back on the farmer, he simply cannot afford it. There is one other matter affecting the general public, to my mind, more than anything else. The question was asked to me about four months ago, by some leading business men, what responsibility I took in the country. I told them that under the agreement we took every responsibility except flood or plague. To-day the contract price for handling the wheat is considerably less than it was in my time; but do the public know where the charges will go to, and do the people who take delivery pay for everything or does the Pool pay for it? It is rather a big items, and it is a thing which of course we do not know, but there is a considerable amount of comment on it. If the people handling the wheat before had to take the full responsibility and supply timber and dunnage and everything, is the wheat for the Western Australian section of the Pool being handled any cheaper at the present contract price than it was before? I think not. I think figures will show that it will be dearer in the end. In 1915 the Pool was handled more quickly than I ever saw it handled since. At Christmas time, when I knocked the men off, I think I had 50,000 bags of wheat stacked on different places. We were ready on the 4th December. Since then it has gradually got later. In some places it would be suitable, and in some not, because people have early wheat and want to get it off, time being vital. The only other comment I wish to offer is that if, at the beginning of the Pool in this State any other method had been tried than which was adopted, it would in my opinion have been disastrous. But at the present time you have a competent manager and a competent staff at the office. Why do you want any intermediate man between the country man and the Pool? It is not only a question of the farmer having to pay for it, but the country which has to guarantee it. The staff that is there should, I presume, be quite sufficient to handle the Pool, and not only that, but the Pool would pick out throughout the whole State the most competent men, just as any other business would do. It means probably a big item to the Wheat Scheme.

1188. By the CHAIRMAN: I observe that you have had about seven years with Darling and two years with Dreyfus. In your opinion, was greater attention paid to the wheat when handled by agents during 1915-16 and 1916-17 than now?—I am absolutely certain of it.

1189. More care was taken then in sampling?—That would be too hard for me to say as to what it would be like all over the State. But those firms had to pick men who knew about the business. There might be one or two in the whole organisation who would not know the business, but the bulk of them would know it.

1190. According to your personal observation, is the same strict attention being paid as regards sampling and quality of wheat received by the Pool, as was paid during the time the work was under the usual wheat acquiring agents?—I have no doubt that they were just as careful in their sample as we were; no doubt at all.

1191. Have you ever heard or known of any case where preference was given because the person from whom the wheat was being taken was the employer?—No.

1192. Do you think there was a plague of mice in Western Australia?—I have never seen a plague of mice in the East, but I know that here the mice absolutely riddled the stacks right through. This was my only experience of mice, but from the damage I should certainly say it was a plague.

1193. Was sufficient care exercised by the agents previously handling the wheat to protect the stacks against mice?—I should say yes, because the plague did not originate for some considerable time after we had stacked the wheat. We took every care and precaution. The stacks were built the same as we would build them at a mill or anywhere else, and they were patched and attended to.

1194. When shifting a stack at a siding where there were two stacks, what precautions did you take to prevent mice from going on one stack to another?—Very little.

1195. None. Do you not think the agents would have taken precautions had they been handling their own wheat?—I could not say that. I had never seen a thing like that, although I have been so long here at the business.

1196. You referred to sites being set out wrongly, in low places. You gave one instance, but now take one or two places. Were you aware that there was any danger of water damaging the stacks when they were put there?—I cannot say that I was aware of it at the time, because we had never had such flood waters before. But undoubtedly with any sort of a rainy season at all, the two places I have referred to were unfit for wheat sidings. We have learnt that since.

1197. You will admit that in view of the unprecedented rains of last year any person was liable to make the mistake which was made?—Certainly; but I would point out, as regards Quairading, that we showed one particular portion of the yard, which was a solid dry place, always, no matter if it was the wettest winter.

1198. Taking the usual run of our seasons, and in view of the fact that for years there has been no water likely to cause damage to anything, do not you think a person would be justified in saying that he thought those sites would be all right for stacking?—The ground was not hard enough, for one thing. It was low lying.

1199. But I am dealing with water now?—I quite believe that when the commissioner placed the loop where he did place it, he did it for his own particular business methods. I do not think he was really considering altogether where the wheat should go, but rather where it suited him to build his yard at the time.

1200. Where it would be best for working?—Yes.

1201. You do not think the railway authorities, in fixing the site, chose what they considered the best site for the protection of the wheat, but merely the best site for working?—I am sure of it.

1202. Under such conditions as those, they would be to blame as regards the stacking sites, and the unprecedented rains are no excuse?—I suppose not.

1203. You referred to building sheds at the various sites. Do you mean silos, or sheds, similar to those now being built at Spencer's Brook?—The same as at Spencer's Brook.

1204. From your long experience of the wheat trade, do you think such sheds give ample protection for the wheat for 12 or 18 months?—Yes, if built on proper ground.

1205. The floor has been built sufficiently away from the damp?—Quite sufficiently.

1206. Do you think those sheds would meet all requirements?—I feel quite confident that with a decent floor they would. Of course they would have to be curtained. I do not think walls would be necessary, but the sheds would have to be curtained inside.

1207. The sheds would afford greater protection if they were walled?—Certainly.

1208. You think a walled shed of that description would meet all requirements for the present?—Yes.

1209. You referred to the dockage and you said you thought the person not being experienced in accepting the wheat who took the farmer's wheat in, and deducted 2d., and the next man coming along, so as to make up the difference, 4d. would be deducted?—I made the remark that it would look like that, because I heard men on different occasions stating that they had been caught,