sign-in
Home
/
Wheat (1) - Part 2
/
Image 182
Wheat (1) - Part 2
Image 182
image 83 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 ⊚ 🡹 /|\
done either on the advice of Mr. Sayer or after consultation with Mr. Baxter. 3973. I know that is the general system adopted. In order to get finality in the matter, several small points were given way upon?—I think the main point upon which we gave way was in regard to the running bulk samples. Most of the wheat had been received and we knew it would not affect the sampling in the country. 3974. The sampling was at the depots?—Our sampling against the Westralian Farmers. Most of the wheat had been received in the country, and whatever sampling had been done, and whatever dockage was going to be incurred, was incurred by the Westralian Farmers thinking they might be checked on the bag system at the depots. 3975. I find that eventually you stopped payment of any work done by the Westralian Farmers until the agreement was signed?—That is so. Payment was stopped on the instructions given by the Minister to the secretary. The first that I heard of it was when I heard that the Minister had phoned to the secretary telling him to withhold further payments. Mr. Murray blames me, but he knows well that I was not responsible for that action. I would not like to take a step of that nature with anybody. I specially mentioned this matter to Mr. Taylor, of the Westralian Farmers. Mr. Taylor said, "I am pleased to hear that and will mention it to Mr. Murray." He further said that Mr. Murray was cut up over the stoppage of payment and blamed me for it. I do not think Mr. Taylor could have forgotten to mention this to Mr. Murray, as the matter was of such a serious nature. 3976. There is a letter on the file written by Mr. Murray on the 1st February to the General Manager of the Wheat Scheme as follows:— Wheat 1917-18 season.—Advance against commission.—Herewith please find statement of claim for progress payment on account of commission, as per return of certificates issued up to the 26th ult. From now on statements will be rendered fortnightly as arranged. This letter was written this year. There is a foot note on this letter which reads,— Mr. Gellatly,—It has been arranged that the Westralian Farmers shall draw each fortnight, and the settlement will therefore be on each successive 14 days from the 26th ult. Please check, but do not pay until instructed. This is signed by "R.S.C." on 1/12/17. I am also looking for another letter dealing with the question of payment?—I do not think there is a letter. Mr. Taylor called at the office once or twice about the matter and a verbal communication was made to him. 3977. There is nothing in writing?—No. 3978. They were not told by letter that unless they signed the agreement no further payment would be made?—No. 3979. By Mr. BROWN: Did they sign the agreement before the payments were made?—No. 3980. Is the agreement yet signed?—Yes. We had to get it signed on account of a Hill we were putting before Parliament. 3981. By the CHAIRMAN: I find that Mr. Baxter, after several discussions, submitted the question of sampling, etc., to the Attorney General?—I do not know that he specially submitted it to him. I think he attended a conference at which the Westralian Farmers were going to be present. He went through the papers beforehand so that he would know what the conference was about. 3982. But it was submitted to him?—In that respect, yes. 3983. Mr. Robinson replied as follows:— I have carefully considered all the correspondence, and am of opinion that the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., can insist on the conditions relating to a running bulk sample as part of the agreement. It was put to me that the letter of the 23rd August had expired by reason of the non-acceptance of the offer founded on its terms. I find, however, that Mr. Sibbald, by letter of the 27th October, not only accepted provisionally an offer without competition, but also alternatively accepted the offer with competition in the same paragraph and without any differentiation saving price, and in the words "with or without" undoubtedly the offer with competition, and the conditions of the letter of the 23rd August as its basis. In my judgement the offer without competition carried the same conditions, so far as they apply. Signed, R. T. Robinson, Attorney General. 5/4/18. There is also a note— I agree. W. F. Sayer. 5/4/18. That was the reason for the agreement being entered into with the running bulk sample?—Yes. 3984. Did not the Westralian Farmers still insist that they were entitled to ship this wheat when the shipping time arrived?—We had a conference with them that day—Mr. Taylor represented them, and I think it was a Saturday. He practically agreed to give way on the shipping if we gave way on the running bulk sample. But he said he would have to consult one or two of his directors before the matter could be finalised. Anyhow, one of his directors, Mr. Harper, signed the agreement; and later on, I think, the Westralian Farmers still raised the point as to the shipping. 3985. But I find that on the 6th April, the day after, a letter was signed by you—or on your behalf—reading as follows:— Your rights in respect of the shipping, as set out in our letter of the 27th August, 1917, remain unprejudiced. That was probably in view of their further representations. 3986. So that question of the shipping might still come up later when the 1917-18 wheat was being shipped?—Yes. 3987. By Mr. BROWN: At the 2nd November meeting were all the persons present ordinarily calm, or were they more or less excited; I refer to the deputation introduced by Mr. Duffell?—At one meeting there was a bit of a breeze between Mr. Steward and Mr. Baxter. That possibly was this meeting. But the breeze occurred early in the proceedings. 3988. And would anyone with ordinary memory have reason to remember that meeting?—I do not say that a member of Parliament introducing the deputation would necessarily remember it. 3989. But one of the persons actually taking part in the discussion?—Such a person should remember it. 3990. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: When was the £20,000 bond under this agreement put up by the Westralian Farmers, Ltd.?—I cannot say offhand. It has been put up, but I do not know exactly when. 3991. Was it put up prior to the signing of the agreement?—No. 3992. So that the whole of the work was practically done before the bond was put up?—Yes; practically the whole of the receiving had been done. 3993. The old bond, for the previous year, was not carried forward?—No. We still held it, but we could not use it for that particular work. 3994. So there was not security until that new bond was put up?—No. The bond was useless until the agreement was signed. There has been a great deal said about the running bulk sample. The reason for objecting to the running bulk sample. The reason for objecting to the running bulk sample was that if we sampled against the Westralian Farmers at the depot with the running bulk sample we would have absolutely no check on them at all. In fact, if at the beginning of the season an agreement had been entered into, let me say on the 14th December, before any wheat was recovered, and those had been the terms as to sampling, and I had been manager of the Scheme, I would not have bothered to sample any wheat at all, beyond looking for weevil, or for inferior wheat that should not go into the depot at all. But as for trying to assess the amount of dockage, I would not have bothered about it. A running bulk sample is merely a sample of the day's deliveries. In the circumstances in which we arrive at f.a.q. Running bulk sample is useless as a check. 3995. By the CHAIRMAN: Why did the private agents suggest it in the first place?—It was only suggested as a basis of argument; that was all. We put in certain other conditions, but we did not think the
Save edits
prev
|
next
|
all images
|
history