8608. We could not compare with Canada in that respect?—I think we could.

8609. It is considerably more than thrice in Canada?—No, I think it is less than three times.

8610. By the CHAIRMAN: The Engineer-in-Chief says six?—I had in mind that in Canada the capacity of the silos was a fifth or a sixth of the crop. That includes terminal as well as country silos, and is for all grain.

8611. By Mr. HARRISON: If you could fill it six times you would have very much more revenue?—In any proposals we made that aspect was kept in view.

8612. Would it not be necessary that two-thirds of our harvest should be put into bags or some other storage capacity?—I do not think so, because the wheat comes in periodically and goes away periodically.

8613. If Canada can use her storage capacity six times and we can use ours only three times, they could compete on better terms than could we?—They would have that advantage, together with other advantages and disadvantages which they already have.

8614. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: Did you ever investigate the system in the Argentine as against the Canadian system?—We did not pay special attention to it.

8615. Have you studied the development of wheat farming in the Argentines?—Only generally.

8616. You have not made any comparison between the Canadian and the Argentine systems?—No, because the climatic conditions are different.

8617. Which is more similar to ours?—That of the Argentine.

8618. And would it not have been wise to take the Argentine into consideration as well as Canada?—Not necessarily, because we knew our own conditions, and all the information we could gather was to the effect that the Canadian system was the better one.

8619. You have never heard that the same system had to be abandoned in the Argentine on account of the scattered condition of the wheat growing community?—That would not affect the position here.

8620. By the CHAIRMAN: It was recommended that the silo to be constructed at the port should be larger. Was not that in order that the wheat could go direct to the port silo instead of being handled twice?—That would be one of the reasons.

8621. Now that the war is practically over, there will be no necessity to erect large storage bins in the country as previously proposed?—Not unless it is proposed to instal the bulk handling system.

8622. Then you would not want the large storage bin?—I think so.

8623. Would you not grade your wheat?—Yes, but about four-fifths of it will be of one grade. That is why the 40,000 bushel unit was decided upon.

8624. Then the various wheat hard and soft will not require separate bins?—For all practical purposes the quantity of hard wheat as compared with soft wheat at a country centre is very small indeed. Nearly the whole of our wheat from any district is almost all one grade.

8625. How is it the millers find it necessary to erect various bins for various classes of wheat?—That is rather to accommodate wheat from various districts.

8626. The Perth mill has six separate bins and intends to erect another six?—But they are building with jarrah silos on the crib method. Small bins are inseparable from that method.

8627. Are you aware that in the Argentine they have a system which can be used in conjunction with bags, and which is not used in Canada?—They have a system under which bags can be used.

8628. Having regard to the scattered nature of our wheat growing community, would not that system be of advantage to Western Australia?—Any properly equipped elevator provides for handling wheat in bags as well as in bulk.

8629. Have you seen any reports on the Argentine system?—Yes, and read them.

8630. That system has given every satisfaction?—I think their experience has been somewhat mixed.

8631. By Mr. HARRISON: When making up your calculations in regard to bulk handling, did not you put down the bag as a total loss, or did you allow for bagged wheat bringing an enhanced price?—We estimated that the wheat sold in bags would bring more, that is along the lines of the shipments that had been sent home. Some of the wheat sent home in bags brought 6d. per quarter more than wheat in bulk.

8632. Mr. Keys said that under normal conditions some of the wheat sold would equal the bags at 3s. 6d. per dozen?—I do not know what the 6d. per quarter would work out at. The whole of the bagged wheat brings an extra price, and this is reflected in the amount received for the bags.

8633. Prior to the Pool, I have been told by acquiring agents that they got no advantage whatever?—The one shipment I have in mind brought at the rate of 6d. per quarter more. It amounts to ¾d. per bushel for the wheat, but rather more for the bags than the difference of 6d. per quarter would at first sight indicate.

8634. Did it enter into your calculation that a certain percentage of the wheat would have to be shipped in bags, although most of it would be on the bulk system?—Yes.

8635. Did you allow as high as a fifth?—I believe the allowance is 20 per cent., although Mr. Brown indicated that it was 33 per cent. I understand from the ship maters, whom I have seen on the subject, that they rarely insisted upon that amount in bags. We calculated, however, on the legal amount.

8636. How would you arrange between the farmers, who supplied in bulk, and those who supplied in bags, for this stiffening in the ships?—I would arrange it on some equitable basis.

8637. By Mr. BROWN: In connection with the agreement which will be made, have any of these agreements with the millers been signed by both parties?—I believe so.

8638. You have a three months' option either to close them down or in which they can depart from the agreement?—I think the agreement is for three months from the 3rd November, and for continuance with the option of one month's notice of termination on either side.

8639. If Parliament should not ratify that agreement, the Scheme could break it at a month's notice after the lapse of three months?—If that is what the agreement says.

8640. Have some, or all, of the millers signed the agreement?—I am under the impression that they have, but the secretary of the Scheme could more readily supply that information.

(The witness retired.)

The Commission adjourned.