The lamentable fact is that wheat has been stacked there throughout the whole of the handling operations of this year. When that letter was shown to Mr Keys his reply was, "This is not my signature on the letter." I said,"It is signed F. C. Keys" and he said "That is a stamped signature." I said, "Do you expect us to examine the letters which come from your office and see whether your personal signature is on them, or whether it is only a stamp signature?" Are we not to take it when we get an official letter with the signature " F. C. Keys" stamped on it as being an official document from the Wheat Scheme, but his reply to that was that he did not know that any such letter had been written to us. I do not bring this up in any spirit of complaint. Mr. Keys has my absolute sympathy over these things. First of all he was entirely misled in regard to that letter which had the word "not" left out of it. I say that it is a wrong method to adopt when a Government department is created of handling this business. It is an unbusinesslike method and uneconomical.

3222. By the CHAIRMAN: I do not know whose initials are at the bottom of this memorandum which was put on the letter you read "this site is having our attention and we hope to have it cleared up early in January"? — I see it is signed F. C. Keys per H.M.S. I do not know who that is.

3223. There is a habit in the various departments of using a stamp for signatures? — This is an autograph signature. It is not an ordinary stamp signature. I would now like to deal with the question of gristing. This is a matter for which we were howled at throughout the length and breadth of the country. The arrangements made for gristing farmers' wheat was that they should bring the wheat into the siding and get from the Westralian Farmers a gristing receipt, which was an acknowledgement of their wheat. The wheat was to be put into the stack at the siding, and in exchange for the gristing receipt sent by the farmer, the mill would forward the equivalent in flour, bran, and pollard. They were not allowed to truck one bag of wheat to a mill without a gristing receipt. Early in December there was an official statement in the Press that arrangements had been completed with the mills, between the Scheme and the mills, as to the method of gristing to be adopted. We had no knowledge of that arrangement, and several times suggested early in January that we should be given some knowledge of it. Although we asked for instructions regarding this matter on several occasions, we did not get them. On the 14th January, nearly three weeks after the arrangement had apparently been entered into with the mills, Mr. Keys wrote to us that Thomas & Co. were complaining that the Westralian Farmers had no knowledge of the gristing arrangements. We had repeatedly asked the Scheme for instructions,and on 16th January, two days after, Mr. Keys complaint was lodged with us, for the time we received our instructions. We therefore pointed out the absurdity of this complaint but received no reply. The Scheme then supplied 125 books of gristing receipts. We had 300 sidings to supply, and we advised the Scheme that an extra lot of books would be required. We were definitely assured that the balance of supply would be prepared and forwarded at once. In spite of repeated requests by letter, no more receipt books were issued to us. I wrote this letter on the 21st February and up to that date no more gristing receipts had been supplied. We were from 16th January to the 22nd February constantly asking for these gristing receipts and constantly being put off. This would have been enough, but on the 25th and 30th Mr. Keys wrote four letters to us that sidings were complaining that no gristing receipts had been received. He called on us to carry out our instructions. These letters from him very clearly indicated that the farmers at the sidings mentioned were blaming us for the delay. In December they make their arrangements with the mills. We attempt to find out what these arrangements are, and on the 16th January we received for the first time a certain number of gristing receipts and instructions. We point out that we have got out 125 books of gristing receipts but that we have 300 sidings, and we appeal repeatedly for the extra gristing receipts required. While that appeal is going on Mr. Keys writes four letters of complaint to us that we are not doing our business because the farmers could not get gristing receipts at certain sidings.

3224. By Mr. HARRISON: You do not mean 300 sidings but 300 receiving centres? — We were operating at 300 places where we were receiving. Here is a letter which is an example of many which we can provide the Commission with and which I intend to read and place before the Commission. It is from a man that said there was no store at his place and they had no flour. He and his farmer friends combined to bring in a load of wheat; they could not get gristing receipts, and this is the letter: — If some of the brainy men who manipulate the strings in their easy chairs in the Wheat Marketing Scheme's office were up here, and their children living on the luxury of boiled wheat, perhaps there would be a little less heartlessness and more vigour put into this work. We had any number of letters complaining as to our not issuing gristing receipts. I placed those facts before Mr. Baxter, who sent them to Mr. Keys for his remarks, and Mr. Keys wrote this: — This is a complaint by the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., that is too trivial to bother about.

3225. By the CHAIRMAN: Did the Minister supply you with a copy? — Yes.

3226. Which is an unusual procedure? — The Minister having received Mr. Keys' reply to our memorial would see from Mr. Keys' reply that our complaints were a set of inconsequential trivialities. He suggested something which I very keenly resented, that I had written the letter with an object. In my letter I wished to clear up any misapprehension and to see if I could not put an end to this growing Government department. Mr. Baxter discovered one of my objects, which was to get rid of the Government department, and plainly stated that in the letter. I resented the charge he stated that the object of my letter was not as stated, and he would not discuss questions of Government policy with a Government wheat agent. There is a mass of stuff that I could put before the Commission, but I do not suggest placing it before you as any complaint against Mr. Keys or Mr. Baxter or anyone, but I am here to suggest that the present methods on principle are not right and sound, and the method which I suggest should be adopted for the future is this.

3227. I received a letter this morning specially asking the Commission to pay a visit to the railway yards and look at certain trucks of wheat which would speak for themselves and see what was being done by the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., and I suggest that we should go and see them in your presence? — I trust you will carefully see what happens to that wheat. We have protested against these methods times out of number and there has been no satisfactory result. The present arrangements are that all the pick-up and cleaning up wheat is sent to Dalgety's. We suggested that it should be sold in bulk to neighbouring farmers or persons who wanted it.

3228. I will read you this letter so that you will see what it says: — We respectfully beg that you will with your members of the Wheat Commission pay a visit to the railway yards, and on 15 Rd. you will see trucks 1499 ex Alderside, 7981 and 8016 ex Alderside, also 9063 ex Kungin. These trucks will speak for themselves and serve to show what is being done by the W.A. Farmers' Co., Ltd. The cost of bags and labour, freight, commission on sales etc., will give you some fair idea of what we merchants are asked to buy. We merely desire to draw your attention to the shocking quality of (supposed wheat) is being sent to this market. It would be to the interests of the Government to destroy this rubbish or give it back free to the farmer rather than to put the Wheat Scheme to the cost of bags, freight, labour, etc. We trust that you will be good enough to pay the yards a visit as you can to-day to inspect the trucks mentioned. I want the Commission to thoroughly understand the position. This is pick-up wheat of the 1916-17 harvest. When wheat is sent to the mill there is a great deal of refuse left on the ground; that is the refuse of the stack which has been removed to the mill; it is on the ground under the stack, and a great deal of wheat is mixed with the dirt and foreign matter, and it becomes a question of what shall be done with it. Is it good