My object in drawing your attention to this is to show that this year we did not dock until the wheat was 58lbs. to the bushel, and so we were giving them 2¼ lbs. which the ordinary acquiring agents would have docked.

5150. The standard was fixed at 60½lbs.?—Yes, but they all got a rebate on that. The dockage is done on a systematic basis. We have a percentage for foreign grain. The percentage of foreign grain is probably difficult to assess for a start, but it is wonderful how close one can get with a little experience. For five percent. of barley we docked 3d.; an ordinary safety matchbox holds 400 grains, and to an extent we would be guided by this test. I pass out oats quicker than anything else, for the reason that mice and rats are very keen on oats.

5151. What was your first for f.a.q. standard?—We accepted at 60½lbs. The first of our instructions was 61lbs., then came to 60½lbs., and we adopted 58lbs. as the point at which to start docking.

5152. Are you aware that the first 61lbs. was the standard fixed by Mr. Keys?—I do not think I am in receipt of any communication from the Westralian Farmers direct. My instruction are from the Scheme.

5153. Do you mean us to understand that the Scheme did not send you these instruction in regard to dockages?—Yes, here are the depot instructions from the Scheme. (Document handed in.)

5154. These instructions do not give you the weight?—No. I think that is why the other one from the Westralian Farmers was enclosed.

5155. You got those instruction from the Scheme when the standard was fixed by the Chamber of Commerce. Did you get further instructions from the Scheme?—Yes.

5156. When the standard was reduced later, did you get further instructions?—I wrote and asked particularly whether we adopt that standard, or still continue to commerce to dock with 58lbs., and the Scheme replied saying to continue to start docking at 58lbs.

5157. By Mr. BROWN: Previously you had docked higher than that?—Yes.

5158. What quantity would you have docked before you got this 58lbs. limit?—It must have been about the first week in February, because I find I have docked a wheat going 59lbs. That was the first week in February.

5159. So you had about a month's deliveries docking on the higher weight?—Yes.

5160. And you rebated to those people afterwards?—Yes. The standard was made retrospective and the Scheme or the Westralian Farmers made that rebate to the farmers in cash.

5161. By Mr. HARRISON: You have had no complaints from the farmers of the district that they have not got their proper rebate?—No, we have been singularly free from complaints at all up here.

5162. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: What do you do with the docked wheat?—It goes into the stack, but have a record showing what goes into each bay of the shed. We have here wheat which has gone 67lbs. If shipping, the chances are we would work some of the lighter wheats in to offset that in the bulk sample. We would go through our statement books and find where this lighter wheat was. The tally sheets show where the truck of light wheat went to.

5163. These wheats are so kept in the shed that they can be identified at any time?—Within reason, yes.

5164. By the CHAIRMAN: Seeing that three or four different samples get into one truck, how can the Scheme protect itself against the acquiring agents in regard to running bulk sample?—It cannot be done. That is the reason why they do not take a running bulk sample, which is a splendid thing for the acquiring agent but not for the Pool.

5165. Then you think the provision for a running bulk sample at depot is detrimental to the Scheme?—Yes, it is against the interests of the Pool. Under a running bulk sample a man with some crook stuff could work it in with the better stuff.

5166. By Hon. R.G. ARDAGH: Then in the interests of the Scheme every bag should be sampled?—Undoubtedly.

5167. By Mr. HARRISON: How did you obtain that inferior wheat at the west end of that shed?—It is 1917-18 wheat; it was sent into us and we had to receive it. But that inferior stuff is picked out by the individual sampling and is put into the reject stack. Under the running bulk sample it would be in with the other wheat.

5168. But other docked wheat not so inferior has already gone into the general stack?—Yes, but you could take the whole stack and it would give a satisfactory sample because the poorest stuff has been eliminated from it.

5169. By the CHAIRMAN: You have had a good deal of experience of the private acquiring agents and also of the co-operative societies?—Wheat experience, yes.

5170. In regard to the stacking of wheat, did you find any difference in the work carried out as between the Westralian Farmers and the other agents?—Yes.

5171. Whose was the best?---The man with experience in past handling.

5172. When appointed inspector for the Westralian Farmers, you were sent around to the secretary of the Farmers and Settlers' Association, Perth, in the zones I required.

5173. Were these names given to you on the instructions of the manager of the Westralian Farmers?---Certainly. I was told to go round and get the list of names in order to appoint those men sub-agents.

5174. In view of getting such instructions, were you under the impression that those men were connected with the Westralian Farmers?---It was hard to see where the line of demarcation could be.

5175. Then if the Westralian Farmers claim that they are not connected with any political organisation you would be inclined to doubt it, having regard to the instructions you receive?—Very much so.

5176. By Mr. HARRISON: Can you be clear whether the men you approached were secretaries of the then newly formed co-operative societies?—I was led to suppose that they belonged to the Farmers and Settlers' Association, because Mr. Wickstead fixed me up with their names, and at that time there were no co-operative societies in operation, or at most only one or two. This was in November, 1916.

5177. Were these secretaries appointed irrespective of the long distances some of the them resided from the siding?—Yes. In the case of Hodgson of Pithara, Rainer at Dalwallinu, and others, I could not get out to their farms to see them, but had to do it all by writing.

5178. Did you acquaint the Westralian Farmers of the inadvisability of appointing these men on account of the distance they were from the sidings?—Yes, two or three times; I felt strongly about it because I thought that we were out to acquire wheat.

5179. Then was the agency transferred to some other individual?—I do not think so.

5180. The responsibility of those various centres rested on you as inspector for the Westralian Farmers?—No. I had to see those men and instruct them in the business of acquiring wheat. When I got here I received a wire telling me to stand by at Geraldton and receive wheat. From that time I had nothing to do with the inspection.

5181. Was the acquiring of those on the part of those particular agents satisfactory?—Their wheat did not come into the Geraldton zone, and so I cannot say.

5182. By Mr. BROWN: When did you cease with the Westralian Farmers?—The 19th May, 1917.

5183. By the CHAIRMAN: You said that after the appointment of the sub-agents, the organisation was so satisfactory that the inspector was not required and that you were kept at Geraldton to receive wheat?—That is in this particular zone. General sentiment was so strong that the Westralian Farmers acquired sufficient wheat to keep them going. I remember a sample of wheat coming in for valuation. I sent it down to Perth with a covering letter. Later I wired for their valuation, and about a fortnight afterwards I got a letter in which they expressed the hope that in future I would be careful to see that sufficient postage was put on the envelope, as in their busy season they had not time to attend to such things. They never valued that wheat, and the 1,200 bags involved went somewhere else.