sign-in
Home
/
Wheat (2)
/
Image 42
Wheat (2)
Image 42
image 42 of 52
If you need a symbol, fraction or a wider dash please highlight, copy (Ctrl C) and paste (Ctrl V): £ — ¼ ½ ¾ ⅓ ⅔ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞ ⊚ 🡹 /|\
spoken of, when we compare it with the cost of bags even before the war at per bushel, and the cost which is incurred each year. I realise that in addition to the interest on the capital cost there is also the handling cost. The Chairman asked me a good many questions in connection with bags, and asked if I did not think that on account of bags, and asked if I did not think that on account of bags bulk handling was desirable. I pointed out that I did not consider that bags were the one and vital thing. As a matter of fact, from the study I have given to the subject of bulk handling , it seems to me quite so, much in the interests of the people of the State and of all those who are dependent on the industry that bulk handling should be instituted, and that will benefit them as much as, if not more than, it will benefit the individual farmer. 8391. By the CHAIRMAN: The largest quantity of wheat that could be handled in bulk is two-thirds, and one-third must be shipped in bags. What saving will there be to the farmer in bulk handling if one-third of the wheat has to be shipped in bags. What advantage will he get out of it?— I was indicating not only what the farmer would save, but what the general community would save. It is not only a question of bags. There are other savings which would accrue. There would be a certain amount of saving through the wheat being more protected in silos from mice and weevil than under the present system. This has been borne by the merchants and other persons handling it, but if they have had to bear it indirectly, the farmer has also had to bear it, because this has been taken into account in the purchase price. The amount which has been received from the disposal of the bags afterwards, at 3s. 6d. a dozen second-hand, the Chairman claims would have reverted to the farmer. I think this is one of those things which is of such a speculative value that the merchant does not allow anything like the amount he happens to realise, and that the farmer does not directly get the benefit of what is realised. 8392. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: And yet you claim that possible losses are charged against him?— The middleman in every instance takes good care to protect himself against any possible loss. If there is a possible loss or a possible advantage which comes to him by selling a thing, the commercial man does not speculate over the matter, but adopts a safe attitude. 8393. Do you not think that competition regulates that?— No. There is too much of an understanding between those engaged in the trade. 8394. By the CHAIRMAN: You certainly hold that the person who takes any responsibility for merchandise will charge for taking that responsibility?— He does charge in the ordinary commercial way, either directly or indirectly. 8395. Is it necessary that he should charge in order to meet any possible losses?— I think that in the same circumstances we would all charge assuming that we wanted to succeed in business. 8396. Suppose you accepted the responsibility of caring for a million bushels of wheat; if you did not make a charge for taking that responsibility, there would be a possibility of your finding yourself in the bankruptcy court?— Yes. Dondlinger in his "Text Book on Wheat," page 213, paragraph 2, points out that the saving from bulk handling, in comparison with bag handling, is, according to the general experience of the United States, 2d. per bushel in the handling charges alone, across the United States to the boat. Any system of handling that will make such a saving is in the interests of the community as a whole. Last week I instanced the saving of time and man power at the point of unloading of the farmer's wagon. The saving is enormous, when one comes to think of it. Under a bulk handling system two men would do in 2½ minutes what, under the bag system, four men would need at least half an hour to do. Moreover, there is enormous saving in the handling when the wheat reaches the ship. For instance, the "Armadale" shipped 100,000 bags of wheat at Fremantle, and this took 25 men five days. That is independent of the men who were underneath, stowing the wheat on board the steamer. In contrast with that, the lake steamers of America, which have the bulk handling system installed, load the same quantity with five men in 1½ days. And not only does bulk handling save time, but it makes the work easier for those engaged on it, less arduous, and it sets free men for other spheres of employment, where they can contribute to the wealth of the State. A further source of saving is in the shipment of waste and screenings and foreign matter. For the 1916-17 shipments of 440,000 tons that represent 22,000 tons. The elimination of that waste would have saved 22,000 tons of shipping space, which, valued at the pre-war rate of 30s. per ton, would represent a clear saving of £33,000. 8397. By Mr HARRISON: You have worked out those figures on a percentage basis?— Yes. These figures were thrown diagrammatically on the screen by Mr. Sutton when lecturing on this subject. The Chairman said last week as the grain is generally harvested in a week or two, the farmers would not have to provide storage, and that they would be inconvenienced through not being able to get financial assistance under the bulk handling system. In any case, any delay would apply only to those districts where the yield is sufficient to warrant the erection of elevators. But I think that under a bulk handling system the farmer would be in a better position than at present. Very few men harvest their crop in a week or two, it is a matter of months. 8398. By The CHAIRMAN: What about the climactic conditions?— Will not the grain drop out if the crop is not harvested within a certain time?— There are some wheats that will stand for a considerable time. Of course, some wheats the grain shakes out of the ear; but most growers go in for a wheat that does not either readily blow down or let the grain be shaken from it. 8399. By Mr. HARRISON: The average of the State for harvesting would be six or seven weeks, would it not?— I do not know. In many instances it takes a considerable time. Once the farmer was able to cart his wheat he would probably, under the bulk handling system, be in a better position to obtain advances. Moreover, he would be paid according to his quality— a very desirable innovation. Under the proper system he should be able to get a negotiable document right away, instead of having to accept a cash price which is fixed ay a rate making it safe for the merchant to buy. With regard to handling from the farmer's wagon into the mill or into the elevator, let me point out the great loss of time and plant which takes place in almost every centre under, existing conditions. Not only is the actual time lost, but it is a very common thing indeed to see at any point of delivery lines of teams waiting to be unloaded, waiting for hours. Those men, whether they are master farmers or employees, those men and the teams lose an enormous amount of time in idleness waiting to be unloaded. That is a condition of affairs which would be eliminated by bulk handling, even where only ramps are available. 8400. By The CHAIRMAN: You say that you think the farmer would be in a better position to get an advance under the bulk handling system than under existing conditions, by reason of the fact that this wheat would be graded and that he would get a certificate enabling those advancing to know the quality of wheat grown by him. Seeing that the bulk handling system provides for only about one-third of the harvest to be handled in bulk, how is it possible for the farmer to have his wheat graded at the silo with a view to obtaining an advance, when there is no room in that silo to take his wheat, because of the silo being full already?— I think you have misunderstood me. In the first instance I said that I did not think under the bulk handling system the farmer would have any difficult in getting a reasonable advance to tide him over any extended time of delivery made necessary. But later on, by reason of the system of sampling each man's product after it has been delivered, the samples being sent to the head office and valued there, each man would get the full value of what he grew, whereas under the f.a.q system, the man who grows a comparatively dirty crop is pretty well on the same basis as the good farmer who keeps his ground clean and grows a first quality of wheat. 8401. That is after it has been received at the silo?— And the samples have been dealt with. 8402. They would not sample it on the farm?— I do not know whether any such system would be likely to come into vogue. 8403. Mr. Sutton in giving evidence said that it was possible to get an advance after the wheat had been received at the silo and taken control of, but the difficulty is that the proposals we are dealing with now will only hold one-third of the season's harvest. That being so, the wheat would have to be stored somewhere else. How could you get an advance then?— It depends entirely on the an and the financial institution he is associated with. 8404. We have it in evidence from Mr. Prowse that he offered to build a silo on his own land and store his wheat there, but the Government of the day would not entertain the proposal?— Mr. Prowse's scheme is worthy of consideration if the existing conditions are likely to continue. Broadly speaking, if storage could be provided on the farms, the wheat would be a permanent and useful asset for the farmer in the future. Heavy penalties could be provided so as to make the man responsible for the out-turn.
Save edits
prev
|
next
|
all images
|
history