771. Mr. Hammond , in dealing with this question, said that it could be done in the same manner as the Fremantle Harbour Trust carried on?—That would not work in practice. I was administering the Harbour Trust for a while , and I have not pleasant recollections of it either; and controlling the wheat scheme is quite a different propostion.

772. You do not think it is possible?—I do not think it is a fair proposition to the country to say that we as a Government should be responsible, and should handover the responsibility to an executive body. If the Government are financially responsible, they must retain full and complete control. The Premiers' Conference said that these guarantees would be made subject to the Government of each State retaining full control and responsibility. That was the recommendation sent from the Wheat Conference to the Premiers' Conference.

773. Would it not be possible to frame an Act whereby every executive body would be appointed with control subject to any financial arrangements being made with the Government?—Very likely, but where would the benefits come in from such a proposal? We have an advisory board now and it cannot be improved upon. Their recommendations are adopted. I have full confidence in them, and I believe they have confidence in me. I do not see how we could improve on the present position, unless it was suggested that the executive board should take over the whole control of the Scheme, and not need a manager. Moreover, you will not get an executive board with the technical knowlege of a manager. A suggestion was made that we should have two farmers' representatives on that board (we have those now), one representative of the Chamber of Commerce, one representative of the Associated Banks and one representative of the Government which is financially responsible. That proposal was ridiculous. Why there should be a representative of the banks and another of the Chamber of Commerce is puzzling to me. What has the Chamber of Commerce to do with the matter?—If the Associated Banks had a representative on the Central Wheat Board, some good might be done.

774. Do you not think more good would result if they met as a combined body having the Government's side placed before them and having practical experience which a Minister would not have. Of course we know that you are a farmer, but Mr. Mitchell told us yeterday that he knew nothing about it. There would be representatives on it who understood shipping, farmers' interests, and all other matters which would benefit the Scheme. Would not that work more economically so far as the State was concerned?—I do not think you would get better work done than is being done now.

775.The existing conditions have been in force for only two years. For some months the work was carried on as an executive board, and then a Minister came along who felt that what was being done was wrong; the minutes had to be sent from one to another, and there was a delay; then the minutes were not kept as they had been kept previously, meetings were not called regularly, and sometimes when they were called there was no business to transact. Then there was a change of Ministry and the Minister who took control adopted a similar attitude, and we find that in three months nothing was done. Would it not be far better to either have one thing or the other, an executive body, or entirely Government control, instead of going on under the conditions which have existed during the last two years?—I do not think that any Government would agree to the appointment of an executive board while being financially responsible.

776. The board would be bound so far as the finances of the Government were concerned?—I cannot look into the future, but under present arrangements I do not see how you could make any improvement.

777. Suppose the Fremantle Harbour Trust said that it would cost £10,000 to repair a wharf, they would have no power to spend that sum of money. Would not the same thing apply so far as the executive body were concerned?—I dare say it would, but with regard to a body like the Harbour Trust you have something permanent there. Wheat is not permanent. You have assets which melt away.

778. You referred just now to drying wheat by placing bags on end. How long do you think it would take several hundred bags of wheat to dry if they were placed in that position and kept apart, and with weather such as we have been having during the past month?—Under those conditions it would take a considerable period.

779. Would it take a week?—I do not think so.

780. Would you be surprised to know that I saw hundreds of bags of wheat on the Fremantle wharf in that condition, and afterwards, when we as a Commission visited the wharf, they were all in a stack?—I do not know about that. If the outer portion of the bags only was wet they should dry quickly.

781. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN : You suggested just now that there were difficulties this year in fixing the qualities of wheat, owing to the local agents being members of the local co-operative societies?—I said it was leaving the door open for that to creep in. I do not know of any difficulties in that direction. What i said was that the reason why we were so strict on the tonage was to prevent cases like that.

782. This year they are being handled by the local people as agents?—Yes.

783. It was not so previously?—Yes, in some cases.Taking wheat below f.a.q has been rampant before this year. I do not know of that having been done this year. The check has been severe.

784. Previously that was the risk of the agent?—Yes , but owing to their holding the wheat for so long it is very difficult to sheet it home to them.

785. This year who carries that risk?—The Westralian Farmers Ltd.

786. How are the millers without gristing agreements carrying on?—They are allowed to purchase and to sell the flour in the ordinary way.

787. By Mr. HARRISON: There is no restriction on the selling of wheat by those mills?—No, but it would not be good business for them to sell their wheat.

788. Has it been brought to your notice that the Bunbury mill is doing this ?—Yes.

789. You referred just now to the fact that in consequence of having only one agent in each country district there had not been the passing on of inferior wheat from one agent to another. Do you find that you have less smutty wheat this year than previously?—Yes. This year all the wheat is up to f.a.q.

790. That goes to prove that the having of one agent at each centre is the better method?—Decidedly.

791. Have you had many complaints from farmers to the effect that they could not get unloaded on account of there being only one agent?—Not one.

(The witness retired)

JOHN HAMILTON MOORE, Retired Farmer, Meckering, sworn and examined:

792. By the CHAIRMAN: You want to give us some evidence. What experience have you had?—I have had experience from the very early days. I have not only grown wheat but I have followed it right through to the loaf. In the old days when Frank McDonald was member for Fremantle I supplied practically all the coastal trade.

793. Have you any complaints about the present wheat Scheme?—I am retired.

794. How long have you been retired?—Ten or twelve years.

795. What have you had to do with the Scheme?—I have only got to renew the bills for my rent.

796. Do you know anything about silos?—Yes.

797. How much?—Too much. I was born in Ireland. There was a silo erected over 30 years ago at Dufferin Dock, Belfast, on correct American principals.