shipment mounts up it means that the net amount realised from the wheat is greater if you can reduce the handling costs from the producer to the consumer. Either the middleman gets a larger amount or the producer gets it, or possibly the consumer gets the wheat at a lower price.We hope if we can reduce these intermediate costs, a considerable portion of saving by bulk handling would go to the producer. It might go to the consumer or to the middleman.

8165. Have you seen the report by the Engineer-in-Chief when he returned from Canada ?—No

8166. Do you know that the saving under normal conditions, as the Engineer-in-Chief shows, might run to one penny per bushel ?—The Engineer-in-Chief recommended bulk handling, and his estimates were comparable with the estimates of the Bulk Handling Advisory Board.

8167. His estimates were based on those of the Advisory Board ?—Another phase is important : more of the world's wheat is handled in bulk than in bags. In 1905, when I was in England, I saw at the ports of London and of Liverpool wheat being handled by elevators, from the barges through the underground tunnels, in the immense granaries. I believe that something like 80 per cent. of the wheat of world is handled in bulk. Then we turn to the appendix of the report of this advisory board. We find that when the shipping people were consulted, 23 British shipping firms were prepared to carry wheat in bulk. Of the non-committal—I am not sure what the Indra line is, but probably it is German—of the four non-committal firms all were German. Of the five firms not interested, three were British and the replies were, "Not interested in trade from Fremantle. No regular boats carrying grain from Australian ports." Those not prepared to carry grain in bulk were three in number.

8168. Unfortunately for that view I have had an opportunity of perusing the replies and they do not coincide with the schedule. But to come back to bags. Mr. McManus's saving was principally in bags ?—Yes.

8169. And he was very favourably placed. He was not limited to any time delivery. With a great number of farmers in scattered districts it would be a matter of compulsion to have bags in which to deliver their wheat to the terminal elevator ?—I do not think so. It would be compulsory with some for a time, but we must prepare for the future. Those that were further away from the elevators would not get very full advantage until years had elapsed, and the production of their districts warranted the erection of elevators. But there are large numbers of people, probably more than 50 per cent. of those engaged in wheat growing, who would immediately reap a benefit.

8170. We have 300 sidings at which wheat is delivered, of which only 40 have over 60,000 bushels. Therefore a large number of farmers could not avail themselves of bulk handling ?—But the number of those who could deliver at the bigger centres is much greater than those at the other sidings.

8171. Would you say the numbers are greater or the areas under crop are greater ?—I should say the numbers.

8172. It is only an expression of opinion ?—You are asking me a number of questions which it is very difficult to answer without having come specially prepared.

8173. To get back to the bags. Would you be surprised to hear that in respect of the wheat being send from Australia to America under present conditions and under the Pool system, the full amount of the cost of the bags has been returned to the farmers ?—I do not think that state of affairs would prevail in normal times.

8174. Would you be surprised to hear that under normal conditions in respect of wheat sent to England in bags, half the value paid for the bags has been received ?—The farmer did not receive it.

8175. But those who sold the wheat did, and the farmer would get less for his wheat if it were otherwise ?— I do not think so.

8176. If you were a buyer of wheat and if you saw a possibility of getting 3s. 6d. for every 12 bags, you would take it into account in the price you paid for the wheat ?—Yes.

8177. So thereby the farmer has indirectly got a better price for his wheat ?—My opinion is that he has not. The item of bags is so small, it is one of the costs that is mopped up by the intermediary.

8178. The bags would come to a very large amount ?—Yes.

8179. We have in evidence that they did get 3s. 6d. per dozen under normal conditions ?—Pre-war conditions.

8180. Therefore, the bags are not such a consideration as previously considered ?—I specifically said I considered it was one of a number of small savings which, when accumulated, warrant bulk handling.

8181. When you take into consideration the extraordinary cost of material, will not the capital expenditure be such that interest and sinking fund charges, etc., would in all probability outweigh other advantages ?—Before I deal with that may I just direct attention in connection with bags to the big saving of the time that would accrue to the people who could use the storage tanks for delivery. The people who can deliver to the country elevators, as in different places in America and Canada, means two men will unload a wagon in 2½ minutes by automatic tipping and weighing. In comparison with that, if you take the ordinary carrying system, wagons going to the mill carrying 50 bags to the load, four men engaged in the operation of unloading, hauling and stacking, it would take half an hour or more to do the same work, and it is a common thing to see wagons held up for hours waiting for men. It would occupy twice as many men as it would otherwise do and take fourteen times as long, owing to the bag system so that there would be a tremendous saving to the people who can get the benefit, where the country elevators are installed. And because the whole of the people cannot participate, that seems to me is not satisfactory and sound argument for putting it in where it is wanted. With regard to the people who cannot have use of the elevators, their bags would last much longer than at present, when they use them for putting the wheat in and carting it to the siding up the ramp, and tipping it into the open trucks, that would e a quicker way for them to get rid of it. They will not need the same number of bags and the bags will stand more than a number of handlings compared with the case where they have to fill up the bags and sew them and get such credit as will accrue as a second-hand bag.

8182. Do you not think that, seeing under bulk handling you only provide for storage of one-third of the quantity. If we have bulk handling the farmers will be compelled to hold their wheat for a considerable period, and it may be detrimental to them and they may have to put up proper storage bins until they can use the silos ?—I have not heard any objection raised in connection with it. I have heard no complaints from Canada and it seems to me strange that if there were objections we have never heard of them. On the contrary I think it will be much easier for the farmer to advance.

8183. Is not Canada under different conditions for harvesting ?—Yes.

8184. Therefore, the wheat of the elevator companies has to be thrashed by thrashing machines and the farmers get an advance on their stacks from the companies, and the thrashing companies or elevator companies thrash the wheat and cart it to the silo as the silo can take it, and the silo is made use of three or four times. In this State the wheat is taken off in a week or two. You do not advocate there should be sufficient storage to take the whole of the wheat, therefore the farmers should make provision for the storage of that wheat ?—Yes, but in this climate it should not be an expensive matter. In many instances men do not deliver their crop right away.

8185. The majority do ?—Yes, but I do not look upon it as a substantial difficulty. They would be able to get an advance on their produce.

8186. Who would make the advance ?—I do not anticipate that my banker would make any difficulty as to an advance.

8187. Previously our wheat has been shipped away within three months, the whole lot, therefore we would have a heavy capital expenditure to bear all the time, which must be charged on the wheat that uses the elevator ?—When you view the whole position it is a matter of opinion whether it is a heavy capital expenditure. If you are saving that it makes the expenditure worth while. If you are introducing a system that enables you to economise in handling, and the grower to get a better price because of the reduced cost of handling and the better product, the method is warranted.

8188. New South Wales cement costs 11s. 8d. per cask. It would cost 16s. 8d. in Perth ?—There is another aspect in connection with this question. I want to make reference to the sheds. The silos proposed under the recent Bill were of five million bushel capacity.

8189. That is what stated in the House. Our evidence says four millions ?—The sheds last year provided for the handling of wheat were 8½ million bushels capacity. These are the officials figures. They may conflict a little with what Mr. Pearse gave you, but they are given to me on the authority of the Minister for Works and with his permission. I spoke to Mr. Pearse this morning, and he told me the total accumulated cost on this would be a little higher than when he gave evidence, because the iron was purchased through the Central Wheat Committee and they did not send their accounts along for a considerable period. So that it would.