599. By the CHAIRMAN: Did you make any inquiries in the district whether any of the cops were suffering from red rust?—At Grass Patch they said there was a little septoria. We never saw a crop which was really big enough to get rusty.

600. Can you detect rust in hay?—Not in a hay crop.

601. It is evident though if you look at it through a glass?—I quite believe that.

602. Would you put your son on any of that land without a railway?—I do not think anyone could go on it safely even with a railway, until more proof was forthcoming in regard to results. Experiments should have been made there years ago. I have not seen this season's crop in the district.

(The witness retired.)

ARTHUR GEORGE HEWBRY, Chief Inspector, Agricultural Bank, sworn and examined:

603. By the CHAIRMAN: When did you last visit the Esperance district?—In February of this year.

604. Have you submitted reports on all your visits?—Yes.

605. Generally, what opinions have you expressed concerning the land?—My original report was to the Railway Advisory Board in 1910. My impression of the country then was that it was fair, and would probably grow wheat. At the same time I did not consider it up to the average of lands then being subdivided for settlement in other parts of the State. I thought it was good second class country, with better patches in places.

606. Mr May was with you when you first visited the district, and you submitted a joint report?—Yes.

607. Mr May considered the mallee similar to that of Pinnaroo?—Mr May had been in Pinnaroo and he thought the Esperance mallee would turn out to be of a similar nature. The scrub is not quite the same in the two districts, and I do not know whether the Pinnaroo country has so many little salt-pans in it.

608. In one of your reports you said the mallee lands proposition was the worst the Agricultural Bank had attempted?—Looking at the proposal as one for the bank to take over in its present condition as a business concern, and having regard to the results obtained and certified to by Mr White, I certainly regard it as the worst proposal the bank has undertaken knowingly.

609. Are you prepared to say the land cannot be made payable for wheat growing?—That is a very big question. I was much disappointed at the results obtained. I am unable to offer any reason for it.

610. Have you considered the results obtained from mallee land in the Eastern States under the early conditions of settlement?—No.

611. The present indications show that early impressions were wrong as to the water supply being unsatisfactory?—That is so.

612. Is it your opinion that the salinity of the soil will be a serious obstruction to successful wheat growing?—I do not think salt in the ordinary acceptance of the word is present in the soil to any great degree. Moreover, wheat is being successfully grown in other places where salt is quite as prevalent as in the Esperance district.

613. To what do you attribute the poor wheat yields in the district?—I cannot say. I have made inquiries. The majority of the settlers attribute it to the rain falling in a patch way at periods that do not suit them.

614. Have you studied the meteorological reports and the rainfall?—Yes, I procured them from Melbourne in 1910 and again recently. I could not very well see that the certified reports bore out the settlers' statement.

615. Will you be surprised to learn that the crops this season are very much better than in previous years?—No, it would depend upon where those crops were.

616. There is a fair crop at Jackson's on the Dalyup, at Baker's, Shepherd's, and other places?—Baker, had a fair crop last year. Machen, Henchman, and Ottrey are all pretty close to the timber forest.

617. Willis at Swan Lagoon?—He is in the mallee. However, until you get the stuff in the bags it is hard to say what the result will be this year.

618. By Mr PADBURY : You say you do not know the cause of the small crops and the poor yields?—Certainly not.

619. Is it light seeding or light super?—I am comparing it with parts of our newer settlements, and the methods of farming there are quite as good as the newer areas, if not better.

620. Do you not think it is different country altogether to handle?—Yes.

621. Do you not think the mallee stumps take a lot out of the land until they are right out?—I do, but as a sort of contradiction to that theory we went through small patches where the land had been hand grubbed and where there were no stumps, and the stubble was just as poor as elsewhere.

622. Have you had anything to do with mallee lands in the other States?—No; I have not been to the other States at all, but we have a good many patches of mallee land in this State.

623. I suppose you have seen reports that the mallee lands here are similar to the mallee lands in South Australia?—I have heard rumours to that effect.

624. By the CHAIRMAN : Is there any information you can give us that will be of value to us to enable us to make our report?—I do not think so. As I told you, my original impression of the land was that it would turn out average wheat country and ought to produce 12 bushels or something of that sort. But we have these very painful figures in front of us to go by, and as a business proposition of the Agricultural Bank it is the worst they have ever undertaken. But no one can look into the future, and I am not prepared to say there is not a probability of things being rectified, but in the meantime it is costing a lot of money. There is the light cost of clearing in the first place, but that is not altogether correct. The people who were running the Esperance Railway League wrote a lot of letters to the newspapers stating that the country could be cleared at a cost of 5s. per acre. That is perfectly absurd. In addition to the first clearing there are the mallee roots and suckers which have to be contended with for years, and that has to be added to the cost of clearing.