Federal Authorities and they advised they were prepared to put down a line for us if we could get sufficient guarantors. Unfortunately, there are not sufficient people to give this guarantee and we think for the advancement of the district that it would be of great advantage to the outlying people if something can be done to procure a line. We are still of course, endeavouring to obtain the guarantors.

(The witness retired.)

SAMUEL WILLIAM McKAIL, Orchardist and Farmer, Kalgan River, sworn and examined:

11624. To Mr. PAYNTER: I have been 15 years in the district. I was previously farming at the Porongorups. I had about 600 acres, but I have handed this over to my son, on whose behalf I am speaking. We have 290 acres freehold and the balance is C.P. at 10s. We have 30 acres cleared; it is all fenced; 430 acres is 19 miles from the railway and the balance 12 miles from the railway station.We have no stock with the exception of six horses, one cow, and 13 sheep. We have seven acres of orchard planted to apple and pears. So far as the district is concerned, and speaking on behalf of my neighbours also, I consider that the prospects in our district for closer settlement are particularly good. The Government should make a survey of the swamps and go in for a scheme of drainage, and lease the land to bona fide settlers, who should be charged with the cost of the drainage. For the first few years the settlers should be charged nothing at all. We have some of the finest swamps in the southern districts. Then, in regard to the roads, these should be put in good order. It is impossible for the roads board to do anything as our income is not sufficient; a £1 for £1 subsidy is not sufficient. Most of our roads go through Government land. The population is very scattered and the heavy rains in the swamp lands make travelling impossible. The Government should take over the main roads, or give us grants. In regard to fruit cases, I consider that market gardeners should be allowed to use secondhand cases after fumigation. I consider also that a tramway should be constructed to the cool store. This matter, I think, was introduced by the previous witness.

11625. Mr. VENN: Referring again to the roads, we have to maintain what we are generally known as tourist roads in our district. The money for these comes out of the pockets of the poor settlers for the maintenance, even, of the Perth-road.

(The witness retired.)

ERNEST HENRY PEMBER, Farmer, Grassmere, sworn and examined:

11626. To Mr. PAYNTER: I have held my land about 16 years. I have 154 acres freehold, 30 acres of swamp land cleared. It is all fenced and is 1 1/4 miles from the railway. I have the necessary house of five rooms, a shed, and four horses. I go in for potato growing principally.

11627. To Mr. VENN: My grievance is the drainage scheme. When I took up this land I took it up for potato growing. I had no money, but I have spent all my money I have earned for the past 16 or 17 years on it. The drainage scheme came in and I have practically had to go off the land altogether. I have lost three out of five crops planted. It has ruined me. Before the drainage scheme I had no trouble. I am in the Torbay-Grassmere drainage scheme. The flood gates at the inlet arc are a failure. What is known as the south drain is on my property. This wants deepening. Flood gates are erected 500 yards from the mouth of the river. The sand from the sea banks up at the mouth of the river and when the water comes down it is not sufficient to push the sand out and allow the water to reach the sea. The engineers say that cannoy put a flume in here as there would be too much force from the sea. (Position indicated on plan.) Before the flood gates were erected and we had to open the bar each year and this year never cost us more than £14. We use to open it in October and it would run then for three months. Since the scheme it has cost the Government £100 per annum. Mr Oldham claims that it is a successful scheme.

11628. By the CHAIRMAN: Has anyone been benefited by the scheme?—Yes, there are two or three people, but they are standing by us and refuse to pay any rates, as they realise that the scheme is of no benefit to the majority of the settlers there. When Mr. Mitchell came down here he admitted that the scheme was a failure and advised that the only thing to do was to get to work and make it satisfactory. Unfortunately, Mr.Mitchell went out of office before it was possible for him to do anything. Mr. Thomson, the Engineer-in-Chief, came down and I believe has since reported the whole scheme. It is no use representing these things to the departmental men. The Minister is, of course, guided by his departmental experts, and the settlers have no hope of putting the matter before him from their point of view. I am very glad that this Commission has been appointed, and trust it will be able to lay the position before the Government. The Government, after laying out the scheme, wanted us to sign a bond, under which certain rates would be imposed. The board refuses to sign this bond. Knowing that the scheme was not feasible and the board was disbanded. They want us now to take the scheme over in its present condition. There are about 472 acres within the drainage area that have been cleared and cultivated, and there are not now 70 acres under cultivation, due entirely to the scheme. A lot of these people have left their blocks and others are away earning money to keep their families alive. We did not expect the department to drain the swamps so that we could cultivate in the winter months, but we did expect that they would make them suitable for summer cultivation. I favour the removal of the flood gates to a point beyond the head of the inlet, and divert the Marbellup Creek to deliver the water below the present site of the flood gates. If the department could put a flume in that would answer the same purpose. I think this should be done.

(The witness retired.)