Wheat (2)

Image 11
image 11 of 52

This transcription is complete

fact that he may have to carry the flour in stock for a considerable time until freight is available—he is immediately called upon to pay up on his week's gristing, because he has been milling for private export. The consequence is he does not trouble to anticipate freight but contents himself in grinding for the Imperial order. Should casual freight be suddenly made available he has no stock on hand and the opportunity for shipment is lost. As an illustration of what has actually occurred, we might cite the case of the "Nisshu Maru." This vessel has 3,000 tons space available for Singapore. Had millers any Singapore packages on hand the tonnage could easily have been filled, as there is ample inquiry. All we could do was to ship 1,000 tons in stacks of 150's, which is an unsuitable package for this market, and which we have been unable to sell, although we could have readily placed the parcel of 3,000 tons in the proper size, namely, 49lb. calico bags. Again, the Chairman of the Overseas Freight Committee advised the Miller's Association on Monday that there was a steamer then in port, which was sailing the following day for Durban and could take 250 tons of flour. But as the Millers had no African packages (98lbs.) on hand, and there was no time to make any, it was impossible to take advantage of the freight offered. Thus, in spite of the fact that it will take some considerable time to get rid of the 1916-17 harvest, and that we shall have the 1917-18 on us in a few months' time, chances of shipping flour cannot be availed of. This is owing to the scheme having decided to conduct its affairs as if normal conditions were prevailing, and on strict business lines. Therefore, probably thousands of tons of wheat could be shipped in the shape of flour, if the Scheme were a little more liberal in its policy, instead of remaining in the stack at the risk of wastage by weather and weevil, to the detriment of the Scheme, the ultimate loss to the grower and to the taxpayer, who guarantees the grower his minimum price. We would respectfully suggest, therefore, that millers be allowed to mill as such wheat into flour for subsequent private export as the respective miller may deem desirable, and that millers should not be called upon to pay for the wheat until the flour is actually shipped, when an immediate settlement would be forthcoming. When the Imperial flour order is completed the Scheme will either have to keep mills running full time or hand over wheat to the ravages of the weevil. If mills operate without orders on hand they will doubtless pack such sizes as they think are suitable for any possible freight which may be made available from time to time. It is not also likely that while milling in this manner they will be called upon to pay for the wheat any more than they have for the Imperial orders. It seems more than probable then that in the near future millers will be encouraged to pack for private export business, without paying for the wheat until the flour is shipped; and if eventually why not now, and get the flour shipped as freight offers, instead of vessels being allowed to leave with some thousands of tons space unfilled. I was a true prophet in that respect, because three months afterwards the gristing arrangements were entered into, and we were all told to keep on gristing as hard as we could. I have here further correspondence as to the price of wheat and the way the Australian Wheat board were treating us in regard to those prices. This is dated the 30th September, 1917, and is addressed to the General Manager of the Scheme. I show in this letter that they quoted 5s. 9d. for September and 5s. 10½d. for October and November, to 5s. 10½d. for September-October-November. A few days afterwards December was fixed at 5s. 10½d. Then about two days later 6s. was quoted for September-October-November-December.

The letter continues—

This means that we quote a client a price and should he accept we may have to cable him that the price was advanced before we got his acceptance. He again might cable his acceptance and we again would probably have to wire him that we could only confirm at an advanced rate. And so the letter continues. That went on for some time, until finally they decided to fix the price for about three months at a time. With regard to the Imperial order a large quantity of flour was placed. I think my firm's quota was 2,000 tons a month for the 12 months. The Imperial order in 150lb. bags paid better than private export business to Singapore at 5s. and 6s. per bushel for wheat, we having to pay an excessive price for calico bags, but we kept our Singapore connection together. I pointed out on the 16th July, 1917, as follows, in reply to a letter from the Scheme re Imperial flour shipped in the s.s. "War Prince":— Condition of flour we are also pleased to note is good. We might point out we know it is better than good . As we believe it to be the only 70 per cent. flour that is being shipped. Our contract on the Imperial flour was to be 70 per cent. extraction. That means that we could only take 70 per cent. flour extraction from 60lbs. of dirty wheat. In fact it seems a pity that we should be shipping the high grade patent which is 70 per cent. extraction on a modern mill such as ours, when a 72 to 74 percentage would be quite as good as the 70 per cent. extraction from a small mill. Mr. Sibbald was the General Manager at the time, and I pointed out that the extraction of the Imperial flour was not on a quality basis, but merely on a percentage of extraction without reference to quality. He said the extraction was the contract and must be adhered to. We guaranteed a 74 per cent. extraction which meant putting more into the flour bag than into the pollard bag. The Scheme would benefit by that, but the suggestion was not accepted. We adhered to our 70 per cent. extraction and we also made a really good low grade flour and shipped it to the far east.

7494. You made a lot of low grade flour?—A fairly large quantity. We paid the Scheme a little more than pollard price for it and made a fair profit. The Scheme could have had it. We were on a purchase basis, but the Scheme could have had it if they accepted our suggestion as to extraction.

7495. I notice your returns are fairly high as far as flour is concerned. Is that on account of the low grade?—No, we claim to be able to make a better extraction. We have spent a large amount on machinery. There are mills that go in for a sudden death principle; we go in for long drawn-out extraction.

7496. You claim it is not on account of the low grade flour?—No. If we count the low grade as flour and not pollard our returns would be so much higher.

7497. I suppose you saw the evidence which we had the other day from Mr. Child?—Yes. I would like to show you one or two of our milling returns. (Handed in.) Mr. Keys a little while ago said our flour was too good and the other mills under the Scheme were complaining that we were robbing the flour in order to make it better than they could do. They said we were robbing the flour and putting it into the pollard bag. If we had done that, our extraction would have been down to 40 or 39 and we should have been making an excessive quantity of bran and pollard. My Kellerberrin mill is not quite on the same basis as the Cottesloe mill, and I showed Mr. Keys where the Kellerberrin was doing from 42 to 43lbs. of flour on the Imperial orders at the same time making Sharps — bran and pollard.

7498. I notice yours is 42.49 lbs. per bushel — that is the general average on all wheat gristed from November 3rd to August 31st? — If I had been robbing the flour and putting what Mr. Allen well knows, the tailings into the pollard bag, my returns in flour would have been so much less.

7499. I notice Perth is 42.15 and Kellerberrin 40.99; five mills show over 40?—Any modern mill without difficulty is able to produce 42lbs. of flour per 60lbs. of dirty wheat. When I ship to Singapore I do not make a low grade flour. My returns for Singapore flour are up to 45lbs. flour per 60lbs. dirty wheat.

7500. Seeing the Scheme benefits more by obtaining more flour returns per bushel, would you advocate that the gristing should be struck on the basis of the cost of gristing? — As far as arrangements with the Scheme in the future are concerned , we are at a deadlock. They have declined to meet us. They have told us in the future it must be on a purchasing basis. The other day they offered us for large mills equal to 30s. per