doubtedly. There are advantages connected with bulk handling and there are disadvantages connected with the bag system, but the main thing is whether the financial results to the farmer under bulk handling would counterbalance the disadvantages of the bag system. There are a number of other ways in which farmers get an advantages where, from my limited knowledge of bulk handling, I can see there is a possibility of them losing considerably under that bulk handling.

8962. Can you name some of those possibilites?--They are rather undefinable at present time. There is the question of the charges connected with the working of elevators. In 1913-14 we handled a very big slice of the harvest and we get through the bulk of the shipping between the middle of December and the end of March. In other words, in three and a half to four months you can practically handle the bulk of your shipping. Under the bulk system, admittedly they would do quicker work, and handle the wheat that takes now about four months to deal with, in about two months, or half the time. That would mean that the bulk handling plant would have to lie idle nine or 10 months of the year.

8963. Then, could the railway handle the wheat at that pace?--That is another matter which has to be considered. There is really such a limited quantity of wheat to handle, relatively speaking, that the machinery would certainly be idle for the period I have stated.

8964. Many doubts have been expressed as to whether, with our small harvest, bulk handling would be successful. Where it is in vogue in Canada and the United States, they have mammoth harvests to deal with. Would you affirm or attack the doubts which have been expressed so far as we are concered?--It seems to be quite feasible that it would be possible to handle hundreds of millions of bushels of wheat with the elevator appliances a good deal cheaper than could be done with bags. In fact, the bag system would probably be most cumbersome under those conditions. Getting it freighted to Europe is another matter.

8965. By Mr VENN: Have you thought how the farmer could get his wheat to the silos?--I have not gone into that.

8966. By the CHAIRMAN: The Fremantle Chamber of Commerce took up the matter some time ago and discussed it with various authorities. Could you give us the result of those inquiries?--At that time i was a member of the Grain Committee because the West Australian Government were then seriously considering the matter of installing the bulk handling system, and so that members should be able to form a fairly clear judgment on the merits of the scheme, they decided to have it demonstrated, if possible, Whether bulk handling would benefit the farmers or otherwise. Therefore, to get all the best information they could, inquiries were made from the Chamber of Commerce in the Eastern States and Africa, the wheat importing ports in Africa, America, and England. The replies which were received were as follow:--- The Adelaide Chamber, on the 22nd December replied that they were decidedly against any alteration in present method of handling grain. Melbourne Chamber or Commerce, on the 4th November, 1914, replied they were very decidedly against any alteration in the present method of handling grain and special refence is made to this subject in the report for the year 1913-14, Appendix A, Page 66. East London Chamber of Commerce, on the 7th January, 1915 report that bulk handling would be unsuitable for the port of East London. Port Elizabeth Chamber of Commerce, on the 9th December, 1914, reported that importers of grains and firms interested were unanimously of the opinion that local millers would not entertain any proposal for importing wheat in bulk as opposed to the present system of bags. Capetown Chamber of Commerce, on the 28th December, 1914 reported that importers of grain were of opinion that no charge should be made in so far as the trade between Australia and South Africa was concerned.

8967. Was the South African opposition based on the fact that they had no facilities for bulk handling?--That is right. There are a few more opinions:--- The London Corn Trade Association, on the 8th December, 1914, reported that the traders and millers were against shipment in bulk, giving the following reasons:---(a) It would greatly hamper and disturb the distributing trade, and consequently limit the present wide market for Australian wheat. (b) Small traders have no facilities for dealing with wheat in bulk. Buyers would certainly pay more for wheat in bags, usually about 9d. per quarter. (e) it is further a great question whether the trade would accept Government certificates of weight and quality in which they have no recourse as final as to weight and quality. The chamber of commerce in the state of New York, on the 22nd December, 1914, reported that in some parts of Canada and America grain is handled in bulk, while in others, particularly on the North-West coast of the United States, while the traders there have been discussing the question of handling grain in bulk, no change in that direction has yet been made and the wheat is still handled in bags. The writer states that neither the railway companies nor the grain merchants have yet considered it sufficiently attractive to induce them to put their private capital into such enterprises. There is a concluding paragraph which I think is well worth taking notice of — We have no knowledge of the interior conditions of Australia, other than our member has visited there a number of times, and has witness your methods of handling grain in bags. It appears to him that, with the very thinly settled population in your agricultural districts, particularly in Western Australia, it would not warrant you in going to the large expense of providing elevators along the lines of the railroads, providing a new style of car for transferring in bulk to the sea port, and the building of large terminal elevators.