man receiving a certificate has then to approach the Minister for Industries on the other form. After setting out the number of certificates on this form, which he wishes to get transferred, the vendor says— "The amount owing is past due," and he agrees to give any surplus, should there be any on the estimated value of the certificate— as a refund in cash on demand, or to allow it to be placed at his option to credit of his account with assignee. He also says "it is understood that no interest shall be chargeable to me on the amount covered by the estimated value of the said certificate, from the date of the Minister's approval." Mr. Keys says that he allows eight per-cent. to be charged, but this form allows no interest to be charged. That is the reason why I put it forward that the procedure is absurd. Mr. Keys wants to make out that they are protecting the farmer against interest being charged. He must know all past due debts carry interest. If they do not the creditor soon puts himself in a such a position that they do. If a storekeeper cannot get his account paid he takes a promissory note or he sues and gets judgement, which carries interest. There seems to be a want of ability in handling this as a commercial scheme, when the Wheat Scheme can draw such clauses in proposed agreements for the transfer of certificates. Mr. Keys appears to me to have given his evidence with the assurance and arrogance that is attached to youth. In question 4278 Mr. Keys gives instances in Adelaide where the certificates in connection with the crop of 1916-17 were quoted on the 5th June at 7d. and those of 1917-18 were quoted at 11-7/16d. and that during the week ending 17th July, the certificates for 1916-17 were sold at 8-9/6d., showing that the persons who had bought the farmers crop on the 5th June at 7d. had made a profit of 1-9/16d., and further that the certificates for 1916-17 showed a profit of nearly 2d. a bushel during a period of six weeks. This may be perfectly correct, but Mr. Keys says nothing about the profits that the wheat merchants made in pre-war times by the rises in the values of wheat after they had bought it. You must remember that with the inside information of these wheat merchants, the rises are generally very much in favour of the wheat buyers. We do not say, as an association, that there will mot be profits made out of trafficking in certificates.

5376. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: To whom do you refer when you say "association"?— The Farmers & Settler's Association. I am here as their witness. If you sell pigs or sheep, you may still sell at under the value because the middleman generally makes profit. It must be remembered that even in the trafficking which has taken place in certificates, the wheat has not always been sold at under its value. In Sydney a little time back trafficking took place at over its value and the farmers in that case made a profit at the expense of the speculators. Some wrong information got among the knowing birds, and they fell in for once. The suggestion that we should make the Pool a perpetual Pool seems to bring a certain amount of criticism from Mr. Keys. He says that the idea is utopian. I am not here to advocate the establishment of perpetual Pool; all I have to say is that Mr. Keys is the first man in Australia who has used that expression towards the establishment of a perpetual Pool. Every one of us in the wheat-growing State has thoroughly endorsed the idea of perpetual Pool. We think it is eminently practicable. The idea has been placed before Mr Hughes on two occasions, and that gentleman, who is looked upon as one of the leading lights of the Empire, has not been able to fault it. In reply to another question, No. 4027, in connection with del credere commission, Mr. Keys appears to have let himself go. He seems to think I should know what del credere means; he also informs the Commission that it is Latin. This is like a case of young Australia teaching his mother to suck eggs. I know what del credere means just as well as Mr. Keys, and perhaps a little better. I have also asked a well-known lawyer in this town weather he thinks my suggestion with regard to the miller's agreement and the interpretation I put into it in Clauses 21 and 23, that del credere should be read in connection with all sales made under the agreement, and all commissions paid, and he said that I was perfectly correct. He did not say very much about the drawing of the agreement because he was rather sarcastic at the expense of the Pool. He said that Clause 21, dealing with selling agency and referring to the commission provided in Clause 23 being equally divided between the two millers who supply the particular order, and the fact that the miller accepts del credere risk whether there is any or not in connection with all sales, applies to all the remuneration set out under Clause 23. The fact that Mr Keys, at the time I appeared before Mr. Robinson as Minister for Industries, had dealt with this, carries no weight with me. In answer to question 4113 Mr. Keys says "Generally speaking the Scheme has been trying to ship wheat in a better manner than was the case with the shippers before. This has involved some expenditure. It is readily understood that the more money the shippers spend in loading the wheat, the less will their profits be. I would not say that they were generally neglectful, but they did cut things down to the bone." That makes me pause as to whether Mr. Keys in his present shipping arrangements is not doing more than is actually necessary. The object I have in bringing that forward is to ask the Commission to satisfy themselves as to whether in the previous shipping arrangements with the agents, when they were cutting things to the bone, satisfaction was given by them. If they did give satisfaction, we still expect things to be cut to the bone under the present management.

5377. By the CHAIRMAN: He also pointed out in his evidence that Mr. Love, the British representative in Australia, complained in regard to several cargoes which been sent to England?—I saw Mr. Love in the Eastern States and I spoke to him regarding shipping. He made no complaint to me. I do not suppose it was necessary for him to do so, but it would be peculiar if there should be something in his mind in connection with shipping, if he did not mention it. With regard to question 4241 Mr. Keys gave a most peculiar answer. I do not know what the object of the question was, but the answer is certainly strange coming from a man who is running the Wheat Scheme, and it is strange, too, if it has the endorsement of the farmers. The question asked was, "Would you not like to be clear of any inspection at all if you were doing work for anybody?" Mr. Keys answered, Absolutely. I would be only too pleased to meet some confiding gentleman who would give me a job and not check me on it."

5378. That is only human nature?—We want the people who are working on this Scheme to work as honestly if they are not checked as they would if they were being checked.

5379. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: Where will you get men to do that?—You can get them. Thank goodness, there are men who can be trusted. Anyhow, Mr. Keys admits himself that he is not one of them. After I read Mr. Child's evidence I wrote a letter suggesting that the Commission should call for the file in connection with the advance made to Ockerby & Co. of £12,500 in cash. I asked Mr. Macartney if you had that file and he said it had not been dealt with. I would suggest that you should get it and look at certain correspondence to which I have referred in my letter. It would be an eye-opener. That is all the information I wish to place before the Commission.

5380. By the CHAIRMAN: Mr. Taylor, when giving evidence the other day, supplied us with interesting papers dealing with co-operation in Canada. One of the provinces dealt with is Alberta. The society there, under a special Act of Parliament, handles the grain and the Act provides that the society shall furnish 15 per cent. of the cost of the erection of elevators, while 85 per cent. is to be loaned by the State, repayments to be made during a period of 20 years, the interest to be 5 per cent. In the first two years the society is to be exempt from payment of capitol cost. Do you think there is a possibility of any such arrangement being made in Western Australia?—The whole position is wrapped up in the management of the Pool. If the management of the wheat is given to a board upon which the farmers have decent representation—I mean representation which is effective—everything is possible. If the advisory board is as at present constituted at present, there will be no satisfaction for the farmer and the thing will be a source of trouble to any Government which might be in power. The thing, as it stands self-condemned. There are good points in everything, and there are also bad points. But where you have a Government department dealing with a perishable commodity such as wheat, which requires constant attention