8953. That is one of the most extraordinary ideas I have ever listened to?- I have the evidence of the Victorian commission; it is very voluminous and I will send it to the commission. I do not think any large grain merchants gave an opinion. There has been an idea that the grain merchants are against bulk handling. I do not think the grain merchants are, but they have never been satisfied that it is beneficial.

8954. Can you give us any criticism as to what you consider the demerits or weak spots of the scheme?- The weak spot is the very high interest charge that is put on. It's efficiency there is no question about. The main factor that I want to emphasise is that the interest charge is going to be heavy. If the turnover is sufficient, then it is a good proposition and I am quite satisfied with the efficiency of it.

(The witness retired.)

The Commission adjourned.

FRIDAY, 4th MAY, 1917. (At Perth). Present: J.O. Giles, Esq. (Chairman). H.H. Paynter, Esq. F.E. VENN, Esq.

HENRY ROBINSON, Western Australia representative of John Darling & Sons, sworn and examined :

8955. By the CHAIRMAN : How long have you been connected with the wheat trade?- About 37 years.

8956. What do you consider is the main issue to be faced in connection with bulk handling?- The main issue is as to whether farmers can market their wheat in Europe under the bulk handling scheme at a less cost than under the present system and in equally good condition, so that they will get a better net return for their produce.

8957. Have you any reason to believe that wheat could not be delivered in such good order and condition under the bulk handling system as under the bag system?- There are conflicting reports from different sources. I have seen it stated in the paper that some people are under the impression that weevil is more likely to germinate in loose bulk wheat than in bagged wheat, especially through the tropics.

8958. Do you, as a merchant, regard the bulk handling system with disfavour?- No, I cannot say I do. I do not regard it with disfavour or with approval, and am approaching the matter with an open mind. There are many people who are strong advocates of the system, but who are not in possession of any proper data to guide them in their decision. At different times I have seen letters in the Press from farmers, claiming that under the bulk handling system they would get anything from 3d. up to 5d. and even up to 6d. a bushel more for their wheat under the bulk handling system than under the bag system. They have no data as to how they arrive at that conclusion, and I have never seen it clearly demonstrated by figures as to what the relative net result would be to the farmer, say, from shipping a certain quantity of wheat under the bag system and the same quantity under the bulk handling system.

To put down an expensive plant, such as would be necessary under the bulk handling system, very considerable charges would be involved, and the matter would require to be gone into carefully to show whether, with all the disadvantages of the bag system, the handling would be as cheaply done under the bulk system. In the absence of a clear demonstration proving this, my opinion is that the charges involved under the bulk handling system would be more than those involved under the bag system. There is not merely the question of bags to be considered, but there are many side issues involved in the matter.

There is a grave misunderstanding among farmers even in respect to bags, and the position is frequently misrepresented in the Press. Many farmers seem to be under the impression that, while they have to pay 7d. or 8d. for a sack, they are only getting paid for the weight of the wheat as if it was not in a bag at all, whereas the contrary is the case. A sack weighs about 2¼ lbs. Importers in Europe we know, pay a higher price for bag cargoes than they do for bulk cargoes, so that our Australian wheat in bags realises a higher price than it would if it was in bulk. We have statements to that effect from traders in England.

8959. By Mr PAYNTER :Could you put in a statement to that effect?- I will show it to you in print. Here is a copy of the British Trade Review, dated at London 1st July, 1914. On pages 17 and 18 will be found a report of a conference of British