sign-in
Home
/
Wheat (1) - Part 2
/
Image 181
Wheat (1) - Part 2
Image 181
image 82 of 100
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 ⊚ 🡹 /|\
that. The whole trouble through dockages was that in previous years farmers with inferior wheat could work off one agent against another. 3947. Do you think it would be better for Western Australia if we accepted the same terms of dockage as the other States on account of the wheat being sold as one line? We do not get preference in Western Australia for the higher quality wheat? — No. The wheat shipped to America has been sold on grade. It is paid for according to the value of the wheat, and it is graded in America. An individual State, however, would not get the benefit of that. Whilst I was in Melbourne on the occasion of the last A.W.B. meeting I brought up this question, and Mr Baxter is going to move at the next meeting that in connection with shipments of wheat to America f.a.q., which shipments are sold at a premium, that premium should go to the State which shipped the wheat, and not to the Pool. 3948. The f.a.q. standard is different in the various States? — Yes. 3949. Has there been any attempt to grade the wheat which has gone to America? — No. It would not pay any State to attempt to grade it unless that State was going to receive the benefit of it. In regard to the standards of the States, it is interesting to know that the American Government refuse to take wheat under 59lbs. to the imperial bushel. That precludes the shipping of any of the New South Wales 1916-17 crop to America. 3950. By Hon. R. G. ARDAGH: With the system of agents operating at one station they would not be able to get the desired result? — We could always pick it out afterwards. 3951. It would cost more to do it? — If you sorted out the inferior wheat at the beginning it would be much cheaper than doing it afterwards. 3952. By the CHAIRMAN: With reference to the agreement, I notice that on the 19th September the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., sent a letter to the Scheme, in which they pointed out— In case a definite quotation, in accordance with the terms and provisions of your letter of the 23rd August, is insisted on, we append same as under-noted, viz., A. (1) One half-penny per bushel, (2) One penny and one-eighth of a penny per bushel. B. One-sixteenth of a penny per bushel. C. Seven-sixteenths of a penny per bushel. D. Three-eighths of a penny per bushel ( our responsibility not to exceed one-eighth of a penny per bushel). We think that the quotation detailed above will be hard to beat; the only item in which competing firms might equal our figure being in the handling at sidings (A 1 and 2). In this connection we would respectfully urge that a meagre paring of the allowance to sub-agents is not justified. If last year's sub-agency commissions be reduced, it will probably lead in the case of sub-agents, of all firms, to less careful stacking and sampling. You see that the quotation there was based on the letter of the 23rd August? — Yes. 3953. According to the file a comparison was made between the quotations which showed very little difference, and on the 6th October the shipping agents, Dreyfus, Darling, Bell, and Dalgety, but not the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., were asked whether they would do the work in competition at certain prices fixed by Mr. Sibbald and set out in the letter. You remember that letter? — Yes. 3954. And on the 8th October, those shipper agents replied? — Yes. 3955. In their reply they stated that they could not agree to act on the lines set out; they turned down the proposal?— Yes. 3956. On the 12th October a letter was written to the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., asking them whether they would accept certain rates for certain services without competition?— That is the letter on which the agreement was based. It states, "Provided the wheat is away from the siding by the 30th April." Does not that letter say that the wheat should be away from the sidings by the 30th April, "or as mutually agreed." That was one of the biggest arguments in finalising the agreement. The letter of the 23rd August stated definitively that the wheat was to be away by the 30th April, while the letter to the Westralian Farmers contained the alternative "or as mutually agreed." 3957. On the 17th October the Westralian Farmers replied stating that they were prepared without competition to acquire and handle the wheat at the rates previously set out?— But they assumed that a certain section of the letter of the 23rd August would be part of the agreement. If they were quoting on that letter, why did they mention only one section of it? 3958. At all events it was their assumption. On the 27th October Mr. Sibbald notified them that their offer to do the work at 2½d., with competition was accepted, provisionally that if they were able to do the work at any sidings without competition the rate would be 2⅛d. Mr Sibbald also intimated that he had advised the other ship agents that the same conditions were open to them. Would you not have expected Mr. Sibbald to have said in his reply to the Westralian Farmers that the section of the letter of the 23rd August referred to, did not apply?— That is what he should have done. 3959. He did not do so?— No. 3960. So silence gave consent?— To that particular portion perhaps, yes. 3961. The merchants turned down the offer?— They put in another quotation. 3962. On being notified of the acceptance of their offer, the Westralian Farmers immediately entered into arrangements with their sub-agents at the various sidings. Then we find that Mr. Duffell, M.L.C., on Friday, 2nd November, introduced to Mr. Baxter a deputation of four shipping agents. We have here what is described as an extract from the notes taken at that deputation. If an extract is taken from anything there must be something left?— Yes. I have never seen the extract you refer to except in the evidence. 3963. Mr. Baxter told me that if there was any other part of the report of that deputation, it ought to be procurable. Mr Hall said he would look it up, but he has since declared that there is nothing else, that this is the lot?— That was put on the file before I had anything to do with the scheme. 3964. Mr Hall says he prepared these notes, that he was present at the deputation?— And there was a stenographer there also. 3965. Yes, and took the notes from which this is an extract?— It might have been considered unnecessary to type out the whole of the notes; possibly they had typed only so much as was thought advisable to be placed on the file, merely the main point. 3966. When you left Mr. Baxter, were you under the impression that it was open to the shipper agents to again quote?— At that meeting I was representing Dreyfus & Co. In a roundabout way it had come to me that cabinet had decided to definitely accept the offer of the Westralian Farmers. However, I was not sure of that, and I determined to make sure of it while at the deputation by putting up a question to Mr. Baxter in such a manner that he would say definitely whether he had given the contract to Westralian Farmers or whether it was still open to competition. From his reply I gathered that it was still open to competition, and in consequence we put in a cut quotation. 3967. If it has been said to the Commission that it was impossible for any person to leave that room with any doubts as to whether the matter had been definitely settled, you would not agree with that?— I was positively disagree. 3968. You have seen a copy of this extract in the evidence?— Yes. What you read to Mr. Murray would just about sum up the position. 3969. You are satisfied that, if another quote had been put in at that time, the matter would have been considered?— Yes. We found out afterwards that the thing had been settled a number of days beforehand. 3970. There was some difference of opinion in regard to the agreement. You hold that the running bulk sample was not included in the letter of 23rd August, on the advice of Mr. Sayer?— We held that the letter of 23rd August was not on the basis of the agreement. 3971. The matter was discussed between yourself and the Minister on several occasions?— Everything was discussed with Mr. Baxter first in regard to the agreement with the Westralian Farmers. 3972. Then the gentleman named Mr. Keys was not responsible for the whole thing?—Mr Murray blames me up hill and down dale for everything in connection with the agreement. Everything that was done was
Save edits
prev
|
next
|
all images
|
history