10123. Do the Advisory Board make their first consideration the convenience of the Working Railways or the tax that is for all time put upon land situated on some of the loop lines?—We take both into consideration. So far as I have been able to gather the feeling of the present Board is what we object to the long loop. That does not apply to the short loop. A long loop is practically parallel to the main line to which it loops, but the shorter loop connected with it at its extremity, for instance a spur line, would leave a less workable scheme for railways. The general scheme adopted by the State for railways, more particularly in the agricultural area, provides for lines over a 12½ mile radius. Wherever I go I find this 12½ miles radius involves a further distance for carting than was actually intended. The idea in arranging that distance was, I think, that a team of horses could travel in and out in a day. All long the edge of these radii people claim that they have anything from 15 to 20 miles travelling to do to reach their siding, and this is actually the case. I should say that the average distance that these people on the edge have to travel to their sidings would be 16 miles. I looked upon a 12½ mile radius, as a final settlement of the question of railway service, as too far.

10124. What should be the maximum distance?—I should think about nine miles. That should bring the actual distance of haulage to about 12½ miles. I have the same complaint everywhere I go. The information sent in by these people for the guidance of the board, when they give the numbers of their locations, the amount of their produce, and the distance they are from the railway line, show that they have to cart from four to five miles farther than would actually appear from the 12½ mile radius allowed for.

(The witness retired.)

The Commission adjourned.

THURSDAY, 5TH JULY, 1917. (At Perth.)

Present:

B. L. Clarkson, Esq. (in the Chair.) H. H. Paynter, Esq., | F. E. Venn, Esq.

ALEXANDER J. MONGER, sworn and examined:

10125. By Mr. CLARKSON: How much land do you hold?—In the York district 6,550 acres, and in conjunction with Ernest Lee Steere, in the Mingenew district, approximately 35,000 acres of freehold country, and 10,000 acres of pastoral lease. Ultimately this will be cut up into farms. At the present time sheep are being run on most of it. We have been cropping a portion of the Mingenew land for about five years.

10126. Do you consider that cereal growing can be profitably carried on by itself?—I do not, that is, taking it year in and year out, with all the conditions we have to cope with to-day. In any case I think it is bad policy to talk about cereal growing only. So far as the agricultural wheat belt is concerned, there is only one proper method, and that is mixed farming. It would be impossible for me to produce wheat unless I had sheep to clean up the field. The weeds have been so prolific that it is problematical whether in the future I shall fallow more than one-half what I have fallowed in the past. If we get early rains the growth of weeds is phenomenal and the ground has to be re-ploughed before anything can be done with it.

10126A. By Mr. VENN: Do you say that a farmer doing all his own work can make wheat growing pay at 3s. 4d. a bushel?—Certain individuals might be able to do it; it all depends on what extent they concentrate their attention to their work. If they follow a proper system and use their brains and put in about 250 or 300 acres, with casual assistance during harvest time, they might do all right. But how many of them will do that?

10127. By Mr. CLARKSON: You have prepared a statement of cost which was published here some time back; can you let us have a copy of it?—Yes. Those costs go back for some time. Of recent years, however, I have not put my costs into proper form. The conditions have been more or less extraordinary, and they would have increased rather than decreased. Where the fields are only 50 to 100 acres or less area you cannot do the work as cheaply as larger fields. Where the fields are big and the land is level the costs must be less than mine. Half mine are uphill, and many people would not dream of tackling country like that. I sow those hills with peas and oats, and depasture stock on them.

10128. Have you come to the conclusion, then, that in the older districts, where the weeds are bad, fallow will have to become a thing of the past?—Not necessarily, but if early rains come along the weeds grow so quickly in the hot weather following that the land has to be re-ploughed. In the years without these early rains fallow is all right. I have had to replough 360 acres of fallowed land. Some of my fields this