7690. By Mr. CLARKSON: Would bulk handling decrease the farmers cost?—Yes. If you charge for jute goods you get so much less for your chaff. Supply and demand are the factors as far as the farmer is concerned, and in any case the purchaser would not buy fodder unless he was compelled to do so; and if it is a matter of supply and demand, why not lift from that law the jute business, which has nothing to do with it, and the import of which amounts to £140,000 a year. That would regulate the market to a very large extent, and the jute business is one that is confined to India exclusively.

7691. By Mr. PAYNTER: You mean that the bags should be charged separately from the fodder?—Yes, the purchaser would know the value of the jute as against the value of the fodder.

7692. By Mr. CLARKSON: If I sent my produce to a buyer and asked for my bags back, the price of my chaffs falls. The price of the chaff is based on the chaff in the bags? —Take £4 5s. as a fair average price for the State. The charge for the bags is £1 per ton, chaff cutting is 10s., sewing 1s. 6d., carting three miles is 5s., railage is 13s. 6d., incidentals 9d., and commission 4s. 3d. The whole of these charges must be met to enable a man to put his fodder on the market. That charge for £1 per ton for bags would relieve £140,000 from the law of supply and demand.

7693. By the CHAIRMAN: In South Australia bags are paid for or returned?—As a rule they are returned.

7694. By Mr. CLARKSON: Supposing chaff is £4 5s. and I send down from Toodyay and sell it at that price. Mr Harrison sends down a ton and sends it with a stipulation with regard to bags. What difference in the return would we get?—The chances are I would suffer.

7695.Then it follows that the whole farming industry would be in a worse position. There is a set value of chaff in the stacks?—I believe if we could alter our present marketing conditions that in six months we would get more for our fodder than we do to-day, and we would only lose on our fodder value and not on our jute value.

7696. By the CHAIRMAN: Would you like us to recommend that all produce should be sold bags extra?—Yes, I would.

7697. By Mr. CLARKSON: Do you consider the farmer should be assisted by cheap freights on fertilisers?—Certainly, anything that will develop the industry is good for him, and every reduction is our salvation.

7698. By Mr. PAYNTER: Would a system of rebates answer?—You would only encourage larger men, and the smaller man would think at once that he was handicapped.

7699. Would you encourage the smaller man to go in for more stock?—I would prefer the zone system.

7700. By the CHAIRMAN: Do you approve of the recent action of the railways in abolishing cheap freights for stallions, bulls and breeding stock?—No, but the Government should certainly encourage higher quality of stock.

7701. By Mr CLARKSON: How would you encourage the breeding of better stock?—The Agricultural Societies have been helping in this direction all along.

7702. Do you think that one way in which it could be encouraged would be to stock the State farms with pure stock for the use of the farmers?—Yes. Nangeenan is the only State farm I have seen, and there is not stock there I think, and a Government is always in a better position to buy the best than the individual, and it is always best to get the best you can. It is not the individual cost, say, of a sire. If he is in his service a few years he has added value to every one of his progeny. The auctioneers in England sell this class of stock with a sand-glass and everyone can see when the glass has run out. In cattle, no bid starts under 25 guineas, then guinea bids to 50 guineas. After 100 guineas there are five-guinea bids, and after that it is 100 guineas bid. The bidding is graduated. When you are purchasing pedigree stock £5, £10 or £20 is neither here nor there, and if the State took the matter up seriously they would be able to buy where the individual would not care to speculate on the value of a single life.

7703. By Mr. VENN: You think the salvation of the farmer is water and stock in the Eastern districts? Can you give any views as to rabbits or dingeos?—I do not see how you can stop the rabbits as they are now between the fences and netting fencing is too dear to buy; but there are very large areas of Government land where they are breeding.

7704. By the CHAIRMAN: We urged upon the Government to fence in the water and distribute poison freely. That was in November last, but nothing has yet been done?—I would certainly be in favour of increasing the subsidy on dingoes.

7705. By Mr. CLARKSON: The whole danger is centred in the unsettled country.

(The Witness Retired.) ——————————

GEORGE CECIL HAYWOOD, Assistant under Secretary Water Supply, sworn and examined:

7706. By the CHAIRMAN: How long have you been connected with the department?—Since the amalgamation, in 1912.

7707. Are you conversant with the working of the system for the supply of water to farmers along the various extensions?—The Under Secretary himself initiated the schemes prior to the passing of the Act, and so, when the Act was passed, there was very little remaining to be done except what is know as the comprehensive scheme. I cannot say how many schemes were initiated prior to the passing of the Act for I was not then in the department.

7708. But several schemes were laid down under the guarantee system?—Yes. The principal feature of those systems was a guarantee of the annual expenses based on 4 per cent. interest, 2 per cent. sinking fund, 3 per cent. additional depreciation, plus operating charges and pumping.

7709. What was the life of the guarantees?—Ten years. The guarantee was for a period of ten years, the assumption being that sooner or later some other system would come into force.

7710. By Mr. CLARKSON: Mr O'Brien told us yesterday that the charge was on a 10 per cent. basis. You say it is 9 per cent. plus pumping. Would Mr O'Brien's 10 per cent. cover that pumping?—I cannot say. Mr O'Brien may have had that in his mind. The charge is 9 per cent plus pumping.