REPORT OF EVIDENCE. THURSDAY, 12TH OCTOBER , 1916. (At Perth) Present: Charles Edward Dempster, Esq., Chairman, Matthew Thomas Padbury, Esq., Ranald McDonald, Esq. JOHN WAUGH PATERSON, Professor of Agriculture at the University of, sworn and examined: 1. By the CHAIRMAN : What degrees do you hold ? — Bachelor of science and Doctor of philosophy. 2. In what branch of agriculture have you specialized? — In agricultural chemistry and soils. 3. We understand you visited the Esperance district? — Yes. 4. Could you tell us when and with whom? — About the beginning of 1914; so far as I can recollect , about February. 5. What was the object of your visit? — It was really to see the country down there and also to give some lectures to the settlers. I had not been very long in Western Australia before that, having come from Victoria, and it seemed desirable that I should see the Esperance district. 6. Did you submit any report or make any notes while in the district? — I made no notes, but the West Australian newspaper interviewed me after I came back , and I gave them a short account of it. 7. Did you deliver any lectures , and if so , what was the subject?— Plant food and the manuring of crops were the subjects that i talked about. 8. Did you form any opinion of the land between Esperance and Norseman? — I had the idea that down towards Esperance it was pretty poor in the last 20 miles or so before getting to Esperance —we started from Norseman , and about the last 20 miles the land seemed to be pretty poor. Earlier in our journey the land seemed better—that is further north. 9. Have you read the report of the Government Analyst on the soils connected with the Esperance district ? —I have just obtained a copy of it from the secretary of the commission. 10. Had you read that report before you visited the district? — Not before. 11. You will have noticed the question of the salinity of the soil has been stressed? — I judge that from the report. 12-13. With your present knowledge would you venture an opinion as to whether this in itself is a serious factor against the development of the district in the direction of farming ? — Before answering that question it might be better to go some way into the reasons which are to prompt a reply to that question. The whole character of salt—its nature and distribution , methods of cultivation , and kind of crop and so forth ? — I do not think I should be justified in answering yes or no to that question. Possibly the commission would like to put questions to me about slat, and questions as to the salinity which are adopted by other people. 14. Do you think the Government Analyst's report sufficient conclusive to justify the district being condemned for growing cereals? — No. 15. Will you explain in what respect it is lacking and where you consider wrong methods have been adopted or wrong deductions made?— This question introduces a rather large subject. Under the name of salt you have three main separate substances found in soils , namely , sodium carbonate, which is like washing soda; secoundly,sodium chloride or common salt , and thirdly , sodium sulphate , sometimes known as Glauber's salts. In addition to those three principal salts you may have a mixture of other chlorides and sulphate , namely , those of calcium ,magnesium and potassium. We may leave those other salts and chlorides out and confine attention more particularly to the carbonate , chloride and sulphate of soda. These are important kinds in the soil. Those different kinds of salt , of which I will leave you samples , very very much indeed in their toxicity. The carbonate is much the worst one, it corrodes the root crowns of plants , which become brown and die. It also , if in appreciable amount , prevents nitrification , and makes the clay soil puddly. Common salt(the chloride) is less harmful , and indeed chlorides and sulphates are injurious chiefly because they interfere, if in excessive amount , with the osmatic action of the roots, thus preventing the in-take of water. It is only necessary , if the Commission wishes, to taste the salts in order to be convinced that the carbonate is a very different proposition from the chloride and sulphate; a little of the carbonate will burn the tongue, whereas chloride ( common salt) or sulphate (Glauber's salt) will not . It is not surprising,therefore , that the carbonate of soda is much more harm