ference, that if it comes from Canada we are paying the money into the revenue of the country, but if it comes from Melbourne we know we are paying the whole of the duty into the pockets of the manufacturers of the East.

8881-8888. Is that a fair assumption?-- It is the correct assumption.

8889. Can you demonstrate it?-- I can demonstrate it in this way: No matter what article is made here, if the article is made inside our fence the price is put up very nearly to the price of the article that is made without our fence.

8890. You said the duty was paid into the manufacturer's pocket or to the work people of Australia?-- It is paid for the machine. It is brought under the new style which was inaugurated by Mr. Deakin some years ago as the new protection. part went into the firm's pockets and part into the working man's pockets, but it does not matter to use where it went, none went into the revenue.

8891. Is that proved definitely?-- Yes, half a dozen times.

8892. When and by whom?-- You can get half a dozen cases, you can read it in many books.

8893. Can you give us any specific instances where it has been proved?-- I have heard it proved on public platforms many times.

8894. Platform proof is not very convincing proof, it is more spectacular?-- These men set out to prove all kinds of things, and they have proved this particular point.

8895. I make the suggestion in the interest of light on the subject?-- I will look up the books which I have on this matter, and let you have notes showing it has been proved. I do not know that it has ever been disproved.

8896. I may tell you that during the course of an alleged picnic which this commission had in the Eastern States, I took the trouble during some weary hours of endeavouring to digest the Tariff Commission's evidence into the harvester case in 1909, and what profits the manufacturers of the harvesters were making, and after reading the evidence I did not see that it was definitely proved that the manufacturers were making the profits that it was alleged they were making. I may tell you I am very much in the dark still, and that commission went as deeply into the matter as any body in Australia has?-- There are proofs of a kind of which we have evidence. Take Mckay, who started as a blacksmith in South Australia, and who then went to Ballarat. To-day he is a man worth almost any amount of money; he sells machines all over the world, in Russia, in the Argentine, and it is said that he sells them cheaper in the Argentine than he sells them here.

8897. That has been specifically denied, and the commission after cabling to the Argentine was enabled to say that they did not get a better price in the Argentine than here?-- They would want to get a better price.

8898. I anticipated you on a point which you brought forward, and on which the proofs seemed to be somewhat nebulous?-- That was the manufacturer in Australia putting his price up to the price of the outside article. I do not think we have got further to go than any manufacturer you may like to get anywhere. If you like to go into boots or hats or any article of clothing you will find that at one time there was a certain duty on it, perhaps 10 per cent or 15 per cent. It has gone from that up to 40 or 50 per cent on the outside article, but the inside article has risen in proportion. The working man comes along and says, "I want more wages." Right, if you want better wages we want a better price for our article. A higher tariff is put on, and the price of the article goes up.

8899. That seems to be the mischievous incidence of our protective policy?-- Yes, we farmers to-day say that we must safeguard our industry. What are our main industries? They are the primary industries, gold, tin, silver, lead, wheat, sheep, cattle, dairying, fruit and so on. Your secondary industries you do not export. The primary industries are not protected, but every increase is passed on to them.

8900. The best reply made to us on the tariff question was by Mr. Redmond of Trayning, and he said "I believe in free trade, but the war has taught us that we should be self-contained"?-- You do not mind me saying that that is no reply. I do not think it a good reply at all. We should be self-contained but if you are going to be self-contained with the ultimate result of death of the primary industries, where are you?

8901. You presuppose that the primary industries are a delicate plant which is easily killed?-- No, we know that they flourish like a green bay tree. When you get one set of people wiped out another set comes along to continue the work, but to-day the primary industries are not getting what they should be getting. Let us be self-contained as far as we possibly can, but not altogether as a direct hurt to our primary industries. I have had men coming into my office for the past four of five weeks; I have advertised on several occasions for labour for men for farms. Four men came to my office and wanted £4 a week and tucker for work on a farm. I do not know if that can be done or not, but we know that it cannot.

8902. Going back to the question of the harvester, has your association anything to suggest to the commission, any practical suggestion as to what might be done to meet the case?-- To reduce the cost?

8903. Yes?-- To take half the freight and all the duty off.

8904. By Mr. VENN: On an ordinary farm what amount of duty would a man be paying annually to the Government if he had 1,000 acre farm?-- What machinery would have he have?

8905. Five hundred pounds worth of machinery?-- One fifth of that in duty to the Government, about 20 per cent.

8906. The life of that machine would be say 10 years?-- Would it?

8907. Say six years?-- Would it?

8908. If he deserves any help at all it would?-- We know that there are many farmers who do not treat their machinery as they should, but we also find that machinery has been sold that has no six year's life in front of it.

8909. Say it would amount to £20 a year, do you think that is the difference between profit and loss?-- Not in the one item, but there are a lot of other items. I worked for 14 years as a manager for a sheep station run by a Yorkshire man. He looked after the pennies, and I managed the farm. The man who looks after the pennies to-day is going to be the good farmer.

8910. By the CHAIRMAN: Do you not think the man who pays £20 a year, if we accept your figures, if by the superior cultivation grew a bushel more wheat, would overcome that drawback?-- Certainly.