2390. In his evidence the ex-Minister said that in his time it was an executive board in fact. You never heard Mr Hammond raise any objection to this agreement at that time?—I do not think I ever discussed the matter with him.

2391. But did you hear any public statement to that effect made by him?—I do not remember it. We had no power to object to the advisory board, because the whole thing was without Parliamentary authority. This was not the first occasion upon which the wheat was taken, for in the drought year of 1914 the Government commandeered all the wheat at 6s. 8d., and in addition they imported two shipments of wheat grown by black labour at 8s. 7.14d., and after selling that they had to write off £45,000.

2392. that was s good job at that time?—Yes, but that is the outcome of the Government's handling of wheat. What we complain about is that they took our wheat at 6s. 8d. and paid the black grower 8s. 7.14d.

2393. What did the New South Wales Government pay?—I do not remember, but two wrong do not make a right. It exemplifies Government management of commercial business.

2394. By the CHAIRMAN : However, that wheat was principally used by the farmers?—No. The harvest that year was 1,900,000 bushels, and that wheat was not all used to put in crops.

2395. A large quantity of it was?—And a large quantity was used for milling and for the feeding people.

2396. Then the only loss on the wheat during 1915-16 was accounted for by what is termed the natural increase?—And the cost of re-bagging, which up to the 17th May ran into £16,000; and the cost of running the scheme.

2397. In regard to re-conditioning, the question has not been thoroughly settled yet?—I know that some claims have been paid with very little difficulty.

2398. But a large amount id outstanding?—Yes, and some of the firms have been cleaned right up.

2399. You say that serious claims have been made in regard to demurrage during the last few months?—I gave you one illustration—£48 at Kellerberrin for a rake of trucks which should not have been sent up.

2400. But you are aware that the Board do not intend to pay some of these claims?—I do not see how they can get out of paying a department when they sent up a rake of trucks far exceeding the requirements of the mill. The department is perfectly right in charging. It was a mistake of the manager's.

2401. In regard to gristing, do you not think the millers have fixed the price on a basis of the smallest mill instead of that of the large and improved mills?—At 7d. the price is allowing for the most incompetent management and obsolete plant to make a profit.

2402. What are they paying for gristing in New South Wales?—I do not know, but I know from what millers are saying about the town that milling is the best gold mine in Western Australia at present.

2403. You consider there should be a graduated scale?—No, because if I put up a mill costing a lot of money and someone else puts up a ramshackle little place, I should get some advantage for the extra money I put in, and the only fair was is to pay on a capital basis.

2404. Then you are of opinion that the only way to get over the difficulty is by compulsorily acquiring the mills?—Yes, exactly as with the wheat, and then the whole thing is one big enterprise. When you that the wheat you are running the farms, but the farmers do not necessarily get a profit. If you take over the mills the millers will be certain of a profit.

2404a. How would you run those mills?—Assuming that you appoint an executive board, the mills should be run by their own managers under the executive board.

2405. You are aware that in the beginning an undertaking was given that the business of the pre-war agents would be interfered with as little as possible, and that in return those private traders agreed to give the Scheme every possible information. It has been said that very great difficulties would have been experienced in carrying on the Scheme had it not been for the information given by those private traders?—I say that the wonderful experience necessary to the handling of wheat is a myth. F.a.q. wheat is f.a.q. all the world over, and is ascertained by set methods, not by guessing. Smut in wheat is apparent to anyone with any knowledge at all of wheat, while foreign matter, such as drake, barley, and oats is quite apparent to a man who knows wheat from oats. The stacking of wheat is nothing wonderful, because it proceeds on a set rule. I have grown wheat and I have run a mill, and I am not going to take any time from those who say they have had 15 years' experience, because I know that three months experience is quite sufficient for the running of a mill by a man with commercial experience. The running of a mill is easy, because it is on set rules and you have to get certain percentages of flour, bran, and pollard. The whole thing is in the miller' hands. It is in the commercial dealing and finance and attention to that sort of detail where you require experienced men.

2406. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN : In what capacity were you in the mill?—As attorney, that is to say, as owner.

2407. By the CHAIRMAN : We have seen that in Western Australia that agreement has been cast on one side?—But that agreement was never intended, in the case of war, to go on year in and year out. Take the Westralian Farmers, Ltd.; look at the profits they have made without their London agencies. Consider the wicket these people have been on in the past; they have made huge profits out of wheat.

2408. Do you think you would get from the millers the same assistance as they have rendered in the past if you were to compulsorily acquire their mills?—I say advisedly that one man in Western Australia could run all the mills if they were taken over, and run them the same as they are being run now, by the same managers. And if those managers did not want to do it they could walk out and I would run the mills myself.

2409. But you have had practical experience?—It did not take me long to get my practical experience. However, experience does not amount to very much, because when you have run a mill for three months you know just as much about it as if you had been running it for three years. And we need not fear anything in the nature of strikes or any other form of dissatisfaction, because they could be very easily handled.

2410. There would be no difficulty in the way at all?—None whatever. I would like to see them put up a proposition like that.

2411. You referred to the amount of deposit and you pointed out that the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., had a farthing a bushel and the reason was that they were not carrying the same responsibility the other agents were. You are not aware that the farthing a bushel was put on because the Westralian Farmer, Ltd., thought they should not carry any greater liability than their profit?—I would be surprised to hear it. In bringing that up, practically they were asked for a £20,000 bond when the whole wheat handled by them was 2,439,000 bags, which roughly, is 7,500,000 bushels. The bond, which is £20,000, is put up by financial institutions, and it is costing them money, and if you are going to put up £20,000 that has to be taken into consideration in the price they handle the wheat at.

2412. I think in March the agreement was signed and those in charge of the Scheme then knew what quantity of wheat they would acquire?—Undoubtedly. It was all acquired at that time.

2413. they did not intend to make the liability over a farthing; there was no necessity to make the bond £20,000. It was an increased charge for guarantee of the financial institutions?—A useless charge.

2414. the reason given was that as the Westralian Farmers had been working some time before the agreement was signed, the one farthing was included as the amount set down for their profit?—Even then, why did they not reckon it at a farthing?

2415. That is the reason why the farthing was put down this year?—Those handling should have been responsible for it.

2416. Whether they made a profit or otherwise?—Yes.

2417. If you were making the agreement, you would not put in a clause providing for a lesser amount of liability than you considered necessary as a bond?—I would not take into consideration the fact that the man