sign-in
Home
/
Wheat (1) - Part 1
/
Image 65
Wheat (1) - Part 1
Image 65
image 65 of 99
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 ⊚ 🡹 /|\
1501. The whole of the natural increase has gone to the millers?—If there is any. If you hear the general manager on natural increases you will perhaps realise there is hardly such a thing. True, we have a surplus but it does not say that it is f.a.q. We get a certain amount for that surplus but not necessarily 4s. 9d. a bushel. 1502. A lot of the other you have got rid of at 4s. 9d.?—Practically the whole of it to the mills. All the allowance they would get would be an allowance for wet wheat going to the mill. You cannot call heavy rain on wheat going to the mill natural increase. 1503. Does not wheat increase in weight?—According to the season of the year. 1504. And is it not generally admitted that all wheat increases in weight in any part of this State almost?—Yes, and loses it again. It depends on when delivery is taken. 1505. Then you contend that owing to the wheat being held throughout the year it is possible to lose what it has gained by natural increase?—I understand it is possible but I cannot give an expert opinion. 1506. No doubt you have discussed this matter previously?—Yes. 1507. Thereby the Pool, owing to the wheat being stored, could not avail itself of the natural increase as it would under normal conditions?—That and other circumstances. 1508. There have been complaints in the Press about a lot of wheat in various parts of the country being destroyed as useless. Have you any information?—Are you referring to any particular year or generally? 1509. Generally?—Not the present season. 1510. Since you started?—Can I have that question again? 1511. It has been reported in the Press that there has been a lot of wheat damaged or wasted, shall I put it that way? —Yes, there has been some wheat. 1512. Can you give us the quantity?—Not offhand, but I will follow it up. 1513. Am I to take it that the whole of the 15 million bushels of wheat, as deliveries made by you, has been paid for or will be paid for?—Yes, this is wheat actually sold and quid pro quo got for it. 1514. It does not include the wheat I have just referred to?—No. (The witness retired.) The Commission adjourned. ———————————— WEDNESDAY, 10th JULY, 1918. (At Perth.) Present: Hon. W. C. Angwin, M. L. A. (Chairman), Hon. J. F. Allen, M.L.C. S. M. Brown, Esq., M. L. A. Hon. R. G. Ardagh, M. L. C. T. H. Harrison, Esq., M.L.A. ——————— T. S. J. HALL, further examined: 1515. By the CHAIRMAN: I was asking you yesterday about the surplus wheat. Is that surplus brought about by natural increase or moisture, or is it brought about in connection with the weighing?—It should not be in connection with the weighing; it ought to be by moisture from the atmosphere or rain, or by the method of handling by the various agents. The surplus may include a certain amount of sweepings from the stacks. There may be a certain amount of sweepings from the stacks. There may be a certain amount of foreign matter with the surplus. In re-conditioning and re-bagging, everything would go in and the wheat would be sold as inferior. 1516. Would those sweepings not be a very small proportion of the 74,000 bushels?—They should be a small proportion. 1517. You are not of the opinion that this surplus is brought about by errors in weighing?—I think errors might have occurred, especially in that year where so many agents were operating at the sidings. 1518. Can you explain why it has not occurred with millers, because the millers just delivered the exact amount of wheat they acquired?—We have found now that the better scheme would have been not to appoint them acquiring agents. 1519. Any surplus through errors in weighing, the millers have had advantage of?—Absolutely. 1520. By Mr. HARRISON: The more unscrupulous the acquiring agent of the miller, the more gain he gets?—That is so. 1521. By the CHAIRMAN: Then the Scheme in the past has lost by appointing millers acquiring agents?—The real reason for appointing them in the first instance was the undertaking given by Ministers and the Prime Minister that the interests then existing should be conserved as far as possible under the Scheme. We did not interpret that to mean that it should continue for ever. 1522. I made a mistake yesterday when I said that Dreyfus & Co's. surplus was about double; what I intended to say was that the surplus of the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., was over double that of Dreyfus & Co.?—The only reason I can give off-hand is that in the surplus delivered that year by the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., there was a bigger proportion of extraneous matter in what we call their inferior wheat than there was in that of any of the other agents operating. 1523. What was the cause of that?—Possibly inexperienced handling. The Westralian Farmers, Ltd., were in the first year inexperienced handlers. The mercantile agents had the benefit, to a great extent, of experienced sub-agents who had operated for them in previous years. The Westralian Farmers, Ltd, had to start off scratch and they had to make the best of the material, in the way of sub-agents, that was available. 1524. In other words, the Westralian Farmers had to learn their business at the expense of the Pool?—To a great extent, yes. 1525. Owing to want of experience there was not the same care taken?—Owing to want of experience. 1526. By Mr. HARRISON: Can you account for the surplus of the Westralian Farmers being enhanced, except by foreign matter?—That is so, in the cleaning up of the stack, soil and mice dirt, etc.
Save edits
prev
|
next
|
all images
|
history