very low. A good deal of the land is below high-water mark. Of course, any land like that is extremely difficult to give complete drainage to. Potato crops were grown down there years ago, and in some cases big rises were made. The same result is not accruing today. Of course, to make a rise on potatoes, there must be big prices as well as heavy crops. Land which was formally cultivated, it is difficult to say with what success, is now very precarious to use. My opinion is that the change is due to the fact that a great deal more of the watershed of Torbay Inlet is now under cultivation. That means that there is a considerably larger summer flow in the different streams coming into the inlet. As one series of crops planted in the early part of the year is taken off just about this time, or a little later, the inlet is apt to rise through the inflow of fresh water, the bar being blocked, as it is always blocked at this time of year, with heavy blows. The rise in the inlet is apt to damage crops. This year, since Christmas, we have opened the bar three times. The first opening necessitated a fairly heavy cut. The other two openings were simply a question of taking away a small bar which had formed through a blow near the mouth in a main cut. That has been done in order to allow the settlers to get their crops off. The last opening is just about completed, and I think that will probably enable the crops to come off. Personally, in connection with Torbay and many other places along the extreme South-West, I think that people take too many risks in the way of attempting to grow potatoes on the swamps. They are, to some extent, encouraged to do it, because they receive assistance in the for of fertiliser and seed. Undoubtedly, a lot of the land which is cropped with potatoes represents practically a gamble. If that same money could be spent in putting that particular land into fodder land, I think the average result would be very much better, both to the settler and to the Government. I think that also applies to a considerable extent at Torbay, especially on the low lands, which, as I have pointed out, are either about high-water mark or, in many cases, lower. The upper part of the scheme, the part nearest Albany, of course, it above high-water mark, and is giving good results.

12311. That is the Six-Mile. Do you consider the scheme has been a success?—I think so, taking it all round; and undoubtedly in the Six-Mile. I think it has been successful on the lower part, although the present position might not lead one to that conclusion. There is very little land being cropped. In connection with the Robinson estate, which is adjacent, Mr Robinson informed me that, owing to the war, the area of land cropped, and the number of families on the property, have decreased very considerably indeed. There are not half as many families on the Robinson estate now as there was before the war. I think very much the same percentage will apply to Torbay. Consequently, I do not think that one can at the present time form an opinion by the crops. There is one portion of the scheme which requires attention, and I understand moneys are likely to be provided for it. That is in connection with the drainage of the Seven-Mile Swamp. When the scheme was put in hand, there was an opening from the Seven-Mile Swamp into Lake Grassmere. One of the owners on the Seven-Mile Swamp objected to this, and said that the water would flow back on to his land. He stipulated that it should be filled up, and this was agreed to on the understanding with him that he would clean cut a drain which is known as the Lands Department drain, and runs round the south side of Lake Grassmere. That drain was to be used for the drainage of the Seven-Mile Swamp. the opening to Lake Grassmere was blocked, but the man found that the cost of cleaning out the drain was more than he could stand. It was not done, and it never has been done. The Seven-Mile Swamp holds water in many cases four feet above the level of Lake Grassmere, which is only a chain or so away. The water could be got off if the Lands Department drain was cleaned out. Furthermore, since the scheme was inaugurated a difficulty has occurred through the appearance of salts. The presence of these was considered by the Assistant Government Geologist to be due to, if anything, over-drainage. He states that owing to the construction of the drainage works, portions of the soil which, before, were permanently under water, are now sometimes above water, and the oxidation of the soil is producing these salts. My opinion is that if the Lands Department drain were opened out and good drainage given, those salts would very soon be removed by letting a little water run from the main drain into the Seven-Mile Swamp, and out again through the Lands Department drain. In other words, with proper drainage established, the Seven-Mile Swamp would be washed once a year with fresh water, and I think it would all come back.

12312. By Mr PAYNTER: As regards the Lake Sadie drainage scheme, by whom was that scheme authorised?—By the Scaddan Government.

12313. Who was the engineer in charge?—I was.

12314. What was the total estimated cost?—£2,315; and the capital cost is the same amount.

12315. What has been the actual cost with interest and charges to date?—The Lake Sadie scheme was put in on the same lines as the Stirling Scheme. It is Crown lands loaded with an amount to cover drainage so that the Sadie scheme carries no rates, or carried no rates in the first case. The scheme ran for several years and quite recently on account of the fact that maintenance was not carried out by the settlers they got into trouble. An arrangement was then made with the Government to spend an amount of £100 to straighten things up. A board was formed and that board would either levy rates for maintenance or levy labour on the same lines as the Stirling.

12316. By the CHAIRMAN: The board is in existence now?—Yes, just recently formed.

12317. The settlers told us the outlet from Lake Sadie was insufficient to cope with the inlet and led to the flooding of the country?—there is some difficulty in the lower end where the land is just about awash with sea level, but the outlet drain was constructed large enough to carry all the water brought in by the other drains. The only difficulty now is due to a partial filling up by silting.

12318. Lack of maintenance?—yes. All the same on the lower portion of Lake Sadie it was pointed out when the scheme was put in it could be used and used satisfactorily for the growth of pasture, but not potatoes. The land is altogether too low for that.