a report in the Press, in which it was alleged that a witness stated—

"Lumpers at Fremantle had, through their Union, offered to load wheat at 2s. 3½d. a ton, against 2s. 8½d. charged by stevedores. This saving would amount to about £22,000 on this season's wheat."

Apparently some misunderstanding must have occurred as the figures quoted are quite incorrect. The rates of stevedoring paid at Fremantle by ships chartered by the Pool are— 2s. 2d. per ton with ship's gear. 1s. 6½d. with gantry.

THE SUPPLY OF CORNSACKS

requires consideration. Last season a number of growers, owing to their financial position, had great difficulty in obtaining supplies, and this led to some loss of wheat, due to late harvesting and consequent shedding of grain. The Trustees are reluctant to do anything likely to conflict with present interests unless it will help our wheatgrowers out of their present serious difficulties.

In the past, although they have been approached from time to time to assist in the purchase of cornsacks, after consultation with the Growers' Advisory Council they have refrained. The Trustees, however, have established certain connections overseas and created certain borrowing powers, and if these can be extended to the benefit of wheatgrowers, providing proper safeguards are forthcoming, the Trustees would be only too pleased to play their part, their only object being that the grower should be able to obtain his cornsacks when he wants them and at cash price. Provided legislation was introduced that gave the Trustees first call on proceeds for the value of the cornstacks, either one of two methods might be followed:—

1. The grower, as at present, could pass his order to any merchant who would supply the cornsacks at the cash price. The Trustees would pay the merchant, being secured by legislation giving them right to deduct from first proceeds.

2. The Trustees supply the cornsacks and recover the cost of the container in the handling charges, as in the previous case being protected by legislation.

Note.—If any scheme for a special price for locally consumed wheat is brought into force by Parliament, portion of the fund thus established could be set aside to furnish a guarantee fund in connection with cornsacks purchases.

In conclusion, I would like to point out that the various proposals submitted by the Trustees need not necessarily be considered as a whole, they could be adopted in part, but a single organisation for acquiring wheat would greatly facilitate handling, and would be of considerable benefit to such bodies as the Agricultural Bank.

For and on behalf of the Trustees of the Wheat Pool of Western Australia,

H.E. BRAINE, Secretary.

The Trustees of the Wheat Pool of Western Australia. 569 Wellington Street, Perth, 25th June, 1931.

The Secretary, Farmers' Disabilities Royal Commission, Lands Department, Perth.

Dear Sir, With reference to the figures mentioned by Mr. Hale, I enclose herewith a brief statement showing the difference in the wheat position between 1921-1930 and 1927-1930.

The figures mentioned by Mr. Hale were approximately correct, although you will notice that in a report that appeared in the "West Australian" this morning a mistake of 1,000 million bushels was made in the difference between the 1921 and 1930 harvest.

Yours faithfully,

(Sgd.) H.D. BRAINE, Secretary The Wheat Pool of Western Australia.

WORLD WHEAT POSITION.

Increase in Acreage.

1921-30—86.4 million acres. 1927-30—18.2 million acres.

Increase in Production.

1921-30—1,448 million bushels. 1927-30—475 million bushels.

Increase in Stocks.

Aug. 1st, 1921-31—388 million bushels. Aug. 1st, 1927-31—346 million bushels.

Decrease in Price.

1921-June, 1931—52s. per quarter. 1927-June, 1931—30s. per quarter.

APPENDIX No. 3.

PART 1.

Extract from Nationalist Party Proposal.

PLAN TO LIQUIDATE FARMERS' DEBTS AND CARRY ON FARMERS NEEDING ASSISTANCE.

The community as a whole, i.e. the State, is under an obligation to the farmer to help to reduce the burdens which compel him to-day to carry on his vital industry at a loss. It has always paid Australia to help her landholders through periods of drought and depression, and there is no reason why this policy should not be continued with the wheat-growing industry.

Statistics indicate that the world's surplus of wheat is not wholly due to over-production. Sir Daniel Hall (Chief Scientific Adviser to the British Ministry for Agriculture) stated on the 15th May, 1931—"Argus," 16th May, 1931—

"That he regarded it as dangerous to assume that too much wheat was being grown. A partial failure of crops in the two leading producing areas would produce a deficit as large as the excess of 1928. Most European importing countries met every fall of price by increased tariffs, until wheat which was 5s. 6d. a cwt. in London was now between 11s. and 12s. 6d. in Paris, Berlin and Milan. These fiscal barriers dammed the natural outlets, and caused a reduction of prices in the world's great free market of Liverpool, where the world price was made. It had been argued that there had been a change in the habits of the people because they could afford cake, meat, and vegetables. Personally, he saw no evidence to support such a view. Europe, in which there were 10,000,000 unemployed, was perhaps eating less bread, not from choice, but from the dire necessity of grinding poverty. People in Great Britain were apt to think that their interest ended in buying as cheaply as possible and in not considering the wheat-growers; but wheat-growers in England, Canada, Australia and the Argentine were buyers of manufactured goods. If the growers were down and out owing to the price of wheat, "added Sir Daniel Hall, "we would lose a lot of prospective customers, so we ought not to grudge a little increase in the price of bread. It will come back in many ways."

Recent authoritative figures show that, whilst wheat production has increased by 13½ per cent. over the past five years, the population of the wheat-consuming countries has increased over the same period by 13¼ per cent.