Part 8

Page 550
image 15 of 100

This transcription is complete

better for the settlers to take the Goldfields water Scheme and have an absolutely permanent supply at a charge of £20 per 1,000 acres?--Yes.

8859. By Mr VENN: Do you say that there is not much more country which can be served by these extensions?--Yes.

8860. Any country beyond the present extensions would have to find its own supply: otherwise it would be too closly?--I think so. The Coolgardie water at the point of off-take for the settlers' reticulation is a fairly high priced water on account of the cost of pumping. That limits the extensions. In any case we should strike a limit somewhere. It would be quite out of question to reticulate the whole of the wheat belt by means of this scheme. We have to develop portions of the State without the scheme water, and that is being done in some way or another.

8861. By Mr PAYNTER: Do you think the water supply should be nationalised in this State, as is done in South Australia?--I think it would be a good thing. The farmers, I think have a good claim upon the water. They say, "you are partially subsidizing goldfields people with their water supply; give us the same consideration." I think a bonus of that type would be better than smaller types of bonuses which are given, and which never act quite squarely.

(The witness retired.)

HENRY EVERARD CARDEN STANISTREET, Secretary Farmers' and Settlers' Association of W.A., sworn and examined:

8862. By the CHAIRMAN: We understand that you have made a special study of bulk handling of wheat, and we will be glad if you will make a statement to us telling us what you think would be the advantages of the scheme and illustrating the practicableness of it if applied to the conditions prevailing in this state?--Your understanding is not quite correct. I have, of course, followed the idea of bulk handling carefully, but I cannot give you anything that does not appear in the report which was issued by Mr. Sutton, Mr Pearse, and the other member of the board which dealt with the question. From the farmers' point of view I think bulk handling will assist us materially in decreasing the cost of our production, or really our distribution, more especially when we come to look at the amount of wheat we are handling at Fremantle and the other ports. At the present time it will not do away with the bag system, not until the farmers themselves find some means of handling their wheat in bulk on their farms. That, I understand, has not yet been worked out.

8863. Have any suggestions been made which you consider practicable for handling wheat on the farms, or from the farms to the railway stations?--I have heard a lot of them. I think it was the Melbourne Agricultural society which gave a prize of £50 about three years ago, and that was won by a farmer's son. Even then the farmers did not like the idea. I cannot go into that matter here this morning. Where bulk handling is in vogue in places like Canada and in parts of the Argentine, they use machinery which is different from that we use here. They head all their stuff, stack it and thresh it, an it is then much easier to handle it. But i think we can get over that difficulty.

8864. We understood that you had a mass of detail connected with this matter and were au fait with it?-- We have all the New South Wales progress reports and the reports of what is done in Canada. All this has been boiled down in the report given by our special committee to deal with the subject.

8865. We noticed that the commission which sat here recommended a capital expenditure of £261,000 for the erection of terminal elevators and sidings calculated to handle five million bushels, that quantity being, say, one-third of this year's harvest, one-fourth of last year's harvest,and perhaps one-fifth of the next year's harvest. That would mean that the elevators constructed in accordance with that scheme would not be able to handle all our wheat at once?--That never is done in any part of the world. We only move wheat from November until March or April and that until that was used there as the size of the elevator at the port was used with the knowledge that we shipped so much wheat, and that we would not have to hold the whole of the wheat in the one elevator in order to use the bulk handling system. It would simply be going in and out.

8866. Then the adoption of that system all over Australia would presuppose that the whole of the Australian harvest would be lifted in about four months?--As has done in previous years when shipping did not bother us as it is doing now. You can remove it much quicker when it is bulk handled. In Canada they load in one day the quanitity which takes us two or three weeks to load. They do it by a section apparatus.

8867. Do you think it would be practicable for the Australian harvest to be lifted overseas in four months?-- I think further, that if we are going up to 150 or 200 million bushels in Australia. We shall not be able to lift it with bags. The Canadian trucks are not like ours. There the trucks are 40, 50 and 60 tons. The point that we like best is that wheat can be handled in Canada and taken 3,000 miles for the same amount of money that we can take it 300 miles.

8868. Do you not think that is due to better transport facilities and a better system?--The charges are pretty nearly the same. It is the handling charges that are cut clean out. With the 60-ton trucks you just turn a handle and the wheat runs in from the elevators, and to unload those trucks a suction pump is put in and the wheat is sucked out in 10 minutes, whereas by hand it would take hours.

8869. The loading and unloading of trucks would be a separate matter as here?--Certainly, but we take the whole thing into consideration.

8870. Are you sure all handling charges are included?--Yes.

8871. Can you quote specific cases giving us the actual freight?--I have the Canadian railway freights and I can let you have them. I can also give you the handling charges there.

8872. Do you know whether any Australian State has installed the bulk handing system?--We have information that New South Wales has done so, and I think the amount that State has guaranteed is over three million pounds.