5992. All these places where the stacks are, are wet places. Are there any places adjacent to the line where wheat could be stacked where it is not wet?—Yes, in the open.

5993. Is there plenty of accomodation?—Yes.

5994. And just as convenient as the existing sites?—More so.

5995. Have you pointed that out to the officers of the Scheme?—No.

5996. Have they asked you about these sites?—No, I do not think so.

5997. By the CHAIRMAN. There are no sites around here that could be conveniently got at, and which would be away from the water frontage?—No. With regard to No. 19, Mr. Pearse, the Chief Inspector, who came down after my appointment will remember that the curtain around that stack was hanging in ribbons when I took it over.

(The witness retired.)

MONDAY, 19th AUGUST, 1918. (At Spencer's Brook.)

Present:

Hon. W. C. Angwin, M.L.A. (Chairman). Hon. J. F. Allen, M.L.C. | S. M. Brown, Esq., M.L.A. T. H. Harrison, Esq., M.L.A.

EDWARD WOODS WRIGHT, Wheat Sampler, sworn and examined:

5998. By the CHAIRMAN: You have been sampling wheat here on behalf of the Scheme?—Yes, since January.

5999. Were you employed sampling wheat before?—Yes, at Geraldton. I worked for Darlings, Dreyfus, and Dalgetys, and supervised shipping for all those firms. I have had 30 years experience.

6000. How do you find the quality of wheat which is coming into this depot?—Very fair.

6001. Do you find it in any way dirty from some of the districts?—Yes, from some there is barley in it. It is more marked in some districts that others. From Perenjori and Morawa it is fairly dirty. We sample every bag as a general rule.

6002. The bulk sampling was not adopted here?—No.

6003. Have you found it weevily?—Not until about April.

6004. Do you think it is sent from the stacks with weevil in it or is the weevil due to the dirty trucks?—Agents will put old wheat in with the new, and the old wheat is weevily. That damages the lot.

6005. Were you ever notified by the sub-agents that wheat sent in is weevily?—I had to find out myself.

6006. And if a bulk sample were taken there would be a great loss?—Yes; you could not do with a bulk sample.

6007. Have you seen any of the stacks in the country?—No; I have been here since January.

6008. You have a fair knowledge of what wheat came into this depot?—Yes, some was very wet.

6009. Was that damaged through being wet in stacks or in transit?—A fair proportion was wet in stacks. You can easily tell the difference.

6010. By Mr. BROWN: With regard to the old wheat, was there a big proportion of it?—You would find an odd bag or two in the truck.

6011. Would you get old wheat in every truck?—No, only an odd bag.

6012. When that was discovered what became of it?—It was transferred to the mill as weevily. It never went to the stack.

6013. You said that the wheat, as a general rule, was sampled in every bag. What do you mean by a general rule?—It is f.a.q., there is no need to sample every bag. If it is dirty you sample every bag.

6014. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: Would you be able to tell when the wheat came in whether it came from sidings where there were receiving agents, or whether it had been sent in by farmers direct?—It all comes through agents.

6015. And they should have detected the old wheat?—Yes.

6016. And refused to take it?—That is right.

6017. By Mr. HARRISON: Is it your duty to examine the time in transit by rail of any wheat damaged by water?—Yes.

6018. Have you taken a record of how long such damaged wheat was on rail?—I do not think I did. It was not part of my duty.

6019. If you found any bag as you described damaged by being weevily on account of old grain, was it your duty to trace that?—I simply sent it ot the mill as weevily wheat. I notified the office here where it came from. My duty then ceased.

6020. The sample I saw in the shed was an average bulk sample taken from various grades of wheat. Was that a fair representation of the wheats you receive?—Yes.

6021. Do you find that equal to the wheat you received prior to the agents purchasing?—It is a fair average sample of the bulk that is coming in this year.

6022. Do you find it a fair average compared with that you received in other years?—No. That sample goes up to 60 and 61½ lbs., f.a.q., this year is 59lbs.

6023. It would have been a better sample if it had been handled by other means?—It would not.

6024. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: By whom was the f.a.q. standard, 59lbs., fixed?—By the Chamber of Commerce.

6025. I think they fixed it at 60½lbs.?—They started with 60lbs., and they brought it down to 59lbs.

6026. Your instructions were 59lbs.?—Yes.

6027. By Mr. HARRISON: Is it not correct that, as far as 59lbs. was concerned, that was the point at which you commenced to dock?—Yes.

6028. Therefore, what you term f.a.q. started at 59 lbs., although the Chamber of Commerce fixed it at 60½lbs.?—Yes.

6029. By the CHAIRMAN: I notice a lot of the wheat in D shed is very dirty, consisting of barley, oats, etc.?—That has all been docked.