repay something for the land, but to hit up a man at the rate of 20s and 25s per acre, and because he cannot pay up in his second year he has to go to the Industries Assistance Board and be charged interest on the advances is most detrimental. Then again these men get reminders every month that their land will be forfeited if their rents are not paid and all the time the Government has no intention whatever of forfeiting the land, but the reminder hurts their feelings very much indeed. I had experience of dozens of such cases and I have been told by the recipients "I will walk out and give it up to them altogether."

6729. By Mr. Clarkson: Do you think the system in the past has been scientific?—I think it has been stupid.

6730. The Chairman: South Australia has had very much the same experience in the early stages as this country. The land was settled originally in a good season, but it was over-priced to the extent of 300 per cent. The land was all sold. It was taken up in boom times, but when droughts came along all parties realised that a gigantic mistake had been made, and finally the Government reconstructed the whole position and wrote off the whole of the arrears of rent, cancelled all the agreements and offered the land back to the men on various forms of lease, particularly perpetual leasehold. Some in perpetuity, others for revaluation every 25 or 50 years. The men went back and took up these perpetual leases which formerly cost them 20s per acre. They got the land back for 1d, 2d or 3d per acre rental, according to the situation. The whole scheme was arranged by the Lands Department and today the settlement of those districts is consolidated and assured.

6731. Would you prefer such a system of perpetual lease as I have indicated or a 10 years exemption from rent as you suggest?—The land would be revaluated, of course.

6732. Take the Latham-Mullewa country?—I think there that leasehold perhaps would be better.

6733. What do you think of the housing accommodation as a whole?—As a rule it is very bad.

6734. Do you think that as the whole position is in the hands of the State-both housing and other problems-that settlers should be encouraged by having more comfortable conditions provided to bring their wives and children on to the land?—Very often a lot depends upon the man. You can see men with the means to live differently who have no desire to live differently. There are brave women on the land living under shameful conditions and it is most heart-breaking to witness. Numbers of women have approached us and asked us to use our influence in the way of better accommodation for them.

6734a. Do you think the State could with advantage encourage the women in this direction? Do you think Mrs. farmer is as important to the State as Mr. farmer?—"Going on the land" has a very bad name indeed and many girls will not marry farmers. The hard conditions of life under which the women in the bush live are responsible for this.

6735. By Mr. Venn: At Perinjori the only two young unmarried girls in the locality whom we met were both going to marry and have since married farmers? -Perhaps they were country girls in the first instance.

6736. By Mr Paynter: One of them is distinctly a town girl?—Well she will soon drag him away from the land.

6737. By Mr Clarkson: What is the largest amount that you could approve of by way of an advance to a man with a thousand acres of land? —There is practically no limit. There is the quality of the land to be considered and the man himself.

6738. Supposing a farmer puts in an application for a house to be built, what is the largest amount that you could approve of?—I merely make a recommendation which goes on to the bank, but very few instances have come before me and very few houses have been built by the bank and in no case has the amount exceeded £150.

6739. Supposing a man applied for £150 to build a house, would you send the recommendation along?—It would depend upon the man and also upon the property. In some cases I do not recommend. If a man who was in the Industries Assistance Board was heavily involved, to expect him to continue to keep his wife and family under conditions which were unfair and unfavourable would be very unjust.

6740. But if a man's wife was discontented by reason of the unsuitable surroundings, would it be conducive to the best efforts of her husband being put forth?—If a man was allowed to erect his home straight away, he might place it in the wrong position. The operation of roads and railways must always be taken into consideration.

6741. By The Chairman: A man would naturally put up some kind of shelter temporarily to give him an opportunity of ascertaining what would be the best position for his permanent homestead?—Yes.

6742. By Mr. Clarkson: I should think the policy of the Agricultural Department, if finances permitted it, should be to encourage settlers or provide suitable accommodation?—I quite agree with you so long as the settler is suited and provided the situation is suitable from the point of view of water and so on. He should have a good home, but you hardly know at the present time whom you are dealing with. Some of them are merely biding their time to get away. So far as the price of land is concerned the minimum should be 3s 9d per acre, no matter how poor it is. If you were to go through the land list of rents you would find very few cases in which land is ever sold at that minimum. If a man has 1,000 acres, and pays 12s or 15s for it, sometimes it is twice its value, and he wants to add to it to get sheep, so he asks for 1,000 adjoining acres of sand plain. Some of this sand plain is good for grazing and some of it no good at all. If he applies for it, it will be classified and offered at 6s 3d an acre, but it is only for grazing purposes. What they should do is to work out how many acres it would take to run 1,000 sheep. Now if an ordinary merino sheep running in sandplain cuts 5lbs or 6lbs of wool, that man would be very lucky. The question is how many acres at 6s 3d an acre will it take to feed that sheep. Suppose it takes an average of 10 acres to keep one sheep? Where a man has a decent holding the adjacent sandplain is no use whatever to the State, and they could well apportion a certain quantity of it to each man for a number of years for stock purposes. It is impossible for the settler to pay rent and 6 per cent on top of that. He has road board taxes to