Wheat (1) - Part 4

Image 307
image 8 of 50

This transcription is complete

see a penny more capital put into the work than would be used in practical working costs.

6332. Have you ever heard as to whether the system of taking wheat out of the bottom of the silo and putting it in at the top has proved successful in dealing with the weevil ?—I have heard it said that there are processes involving the elevation of the wheat from the bottom of a silo to the top by which the wheat is cleaned. I should think that Mr. Piesse's evidence is dependent upon the condition in which the wheat was put into the silo. If Mr. Piesse can show that the wheat was put in dry and then contracted weevil I should be astonished. All the evidence goes to show that nine-tenths of the battle against weevil must be fought between the time of stripping and the time when it is under protection. It must not get dirty or wet. If it is put into complete protection thoroughly dry it is much more unlikely to contract weevil. If Mr. Piesse's wheat had been put in clean and dry into a dry silo I should be surprised to hear that weevil had got into it.

6333. It has been demonstrated that weevil will live down through the silo ?—If Mr. Piesse says so I should never dream of doubting it.

6334. By Mr. HARRISON : You recognise that if it were required to recondition wheat at every centre at which there were silos, there must be another silo empty of the same capacity as the other to deal with it ?—That is so, if you had to pass all the wheat through.

6335. That would mean considerable additional capital expenditure ?—Yes, unless there was some process of cleaning wheat in its own silo.

6336. By the CHAIRMAN : If the Scheme should build in any district a larger number of big bins than would be required under normal conditions for bulk handling, you could not expect the co-operative companies to take them over at capital cost and work them successfully from a financial point of view ?—No.

6337. It would be necessary for the owners of the silo to hold the wheat and put further burdens on the farmer in the way of charges to meet interest and other costs ?—Yes. It must be remembered that if you do not do that you must do something else. And the something else you do may be more burdensome to the farmer.

6338. Do you not think if wheat were properly looked after from the time when it left the field to the time when it was put into proper storage sheds, kept thoroughly dry, and away from weevil, it would keep for a considerable time without being damaged ?—Certainly.

6339. And with extra care provision could be made at considerably less cost to meet the requirements ?—There is abundant proof of that everywhere. On the other hand these provisions which you are making now would in a bulk handling business be utterly useless, for they would probably utterly disappear. Your capital cost would have to be scrapped in a short period of time provided normal conditions returned.

6340. Mr. Piesse also said it would be unwise to put the wheat all in one bin as it would be impossible to make a uniform grade of flour. If wheat was all mixed up together the millers could not grade the various kinds of wheat in order to make a certain standard of flour. Do you agree with that ?—I have no ideas on the subject.

6341. I notice you also claim that by the farmers, through their co-operative society, handling the wheat, they would take greater care of it ?—Yes.

6342. Are you aware that agents in some places this year have sent weevily wheat from their stacks into the depot knowingly, and have not informed the Scheme officers of this fact ?—I have been told that this has happened. On the day I left for Melbourne I received the first intimation of this. I telegraphed from Kalgoorlie to Mr. Taylor to see what had happened and what the position was. I believe that some trucks were sent to Spencer's Brook, which contained weevil. All the wheat going to Spencer's Brook is subject to inspection and supervision. If wheat was placed into the Spencer's Brook stack in that condition it would be an even more heinous sin than that of loading it into the trucks in that condition.

6343. The man who merely examined the wheat during the rush of its receipt at the depot would have some difficulty unless the weevil was very bad in ascertaining that it was present ?—The same thing applies to the siding.

6344. It has been under control at the siding for some time ?—A stack might be opened up at a siding and to all intents and purposes be perfectly sound, but might have been attacked at the bottom or at the end. I should be glad to turn up details as to what has happened.

6345. We have it from the secretary of the Southern Farmers' Co-operative Society that a stack of wheat was sent from Wurnup to Tambellup in this condition. He says the wheat was not rejected at Tambellup ?—I will look the matter up. The only answer I could give is that in handling 300 sidings whatever we do we will get our proportion of fools to the number in the community. One cannot guard against a man being an idiot.

6346. You agree that the negligence of the agent was endangering the wheat stack ?▬Yes. He should never have trucked weevily wheat to the depot unless he did it under definite instructions from the inspector who was there. I should certainly condemn any agent who trucked weevily wheat to the depot.

6347. We saw at Spencer's Brook a large number of bags of wheat in the trucks which were considerably damaged by mice or rats ?▬Yes.

6348. These bags had not been repaired on leaving the siding. Whose duty is it to repair them ? This was wheat from the last harvest, and these particular bags came from Ballidu ?▬I believe the instructions from the Scheme are that where there is any re-conditioning to be done they are to provide the bags. We had no end of trouble in getting bags and twine. The explanation I had given to me is that a man will be loading his stack and will come to some bad bags. He has no bags on hand and cannot get any, and is faced with the alternative of either hanging up the whole of the work and cleaning up the stack for the sake of a truck of wheat, or sending it to the depot. he has accordingly sent it to the depot.

6349. Could not the bags have been repaired ?—That is a difficult matter. The bags would probably have torn out before they were finished with. I contend that many of these conditions have been due to the immense time which has elapsed between the period when the wheat was trucked and when it reached the depôt.

6350. There was a truck G3725 loaded on the 17th August, 1917, from Ballidu, R4722 and H1512 loaded on the 16th August, H3924, and G6609 loaded on the 16th also ?▬I will find out exactly what has happened.

6351. It is the duty of the man in charge of the siding if bags are available to see that the wheat is rebagged if necessary ?▬Yes. A man with any common sense would never put a bag which is leaking wheat into a truck.

6352. Some of these bags are almost empty ?▬The thing is absolutely bad. One cannot excuse a man for permitting an act of that kind.

6353. You made a statement in regard to dockages. Mr.Taylor told me that they did ask for dockages to be fixed ?▬It is easy to twist that statement. We were told in our contract with the Government that we had to dock the farmer, and they would dock us at the depôt, and we merely asked them under what standard of dockage we were to dock. We asked them to fix a standard. We said, " You want us to dock the farmer. Now you are to dock us at the depôt, and any difference between these two dockages you are going to hold the Westralian Farmers responsible for. We want to know under what system you wish the wheat to be docked." When the Scheme fixed the scale of dockages for inferior wheat we immediately said, " If you are going to fix the dockage for under f.a.q., you should also fix the rate for anything above the f.a.q." If they would not do that the scale fixed by the Minister was too high.

6354. I notice since you were here that the officers of the Scheme in regard to the first dockages that were fixed were working under a communication sent from your office headed " Westralian Farmers, Ltd."; do you know if it was sent by you or the Scheme ?▬Sent who to?

6355. The agents of the Scheme ?▬I could not say, but I will turn it up.

6356. It was sent by you, and if so it proves that you are doing some of the Scheme work, are you not ?▬Before answering that I would like to look into it.

6357. I also note later on a letter was sent by the Scheme pointing out the f.a.q. standard was fixed at 60½, the first sent out was on your paper 61; the next sent out later was 60½ . Later on the Minister at your