Geraldton zone to the Spencer's Brook zone. Now, railage in the 1916-17 season from Morowa to Geraldton was 3¼d. per bushel. In the 1917-18 season the railage from Morowa to Spencer's Brook was 4d.; and when that same wheat comes to be railed from Spencer's Brook to Fremantle there will be an additional 2¾d., bringing the total railage for the 1917-18 season to 6¾d. per bushel. That , as against 3¼d. for the 1916-17 season, gives an increase of 3½d. per bushel for the current season.

7117. In railage only ?— Yes. Assume that there were 45,000 bushels received at Morowa, that 3½d. means an extra cost to the Pool in respect of that siding alone of about £655 for railage over and above what it cost the previous season. The Three Springs wheat of the 1916-17 season went to Geraldton , and the railage was 3¼d. The 1917-18 wheat was brought to Midland Junction , at 4d per bushel. When that wheat comes to be railed from Midland Junction to Fremantle it will cost another 1½d. — a total of 5½d. against 3¼d., or an increase of 2¼d. for railage. Wubin wheat of the 1916-17 season went to Geraldton at 4d. per bushel ; the 1917-18 season's wheat was brought to Spencer's at 3½d. and when it is taken from Spencer's to Fremantle it will cost another 2¾d.; or a total of 6¼d. for railage which against last year's 4d., gives an increase of 2¼d. per bushel.

7118. And then the additional handling charges are to be added in each case ? — Yes. As I have already said, one object of the adoption of the depot system was to eliminate the weevil. In addition, I would mention that we have already put up to the Scheme figures showing them that we can save them ⅛d. per bushel on their depot service. I am also of opinion , after having gone carefully into the matter, that we could save them ⅛d per bushel at least on the Scheme's administration costs. Last year their administration costs were £12,000 , which works out at ¾d. per bushel on last years's crop . The savings which I have just mentioned, and which are reasonably and practically possible, amount to approximately £50,000; £17,000 handling £25,000 freights ( a low estimate), and the balance consisting of savings which we say can be effected in depot handling and by the elimination of the duplication of office staff. I do not know of any arrangement having been made by the Scheme with the Railways to allow a reduction in freights. The position is that either the Pool has to pay all that additional freight or else the State is losing freight if the matter were compromised. If it is going to cost the State half of those savings which I say can be effected, namely, £25,000, to eliminate weevil, or even to reduce the grave danger of this pest, it would be well worth while. I should like briefly to refer to two points dealt with in former evidence. As regards weevily wheat that has got into the depots this season. Towards the end of May I had regard to the fact that many of the country stacks had been thoroughly saturated owing to lack of protection. Mr. Keys was in the East, but I got into touch with the Scheme and told them that I was issuing a circular of instructions to our agents regarding the care they were to exercise in the breaking down of specific instructions regarding weevil-infested wheat. I might read an extract from a letter we wrote to the Scheme dated 8th June last —

Only yesterday, when seeking from your Mr. Pearse authority for the consigning direct to nearest mill of any parcels of weevily wheat, it was only with difficulty we secured permission to allow agents to do this, Mr.Pearse imposing the limit of one truck per week, he contending that there is practically no weevily wheat at country sidings.

I was proposing to give the agents open instructions that all weevily wheat was to go to mills. Our suggestion was limited in the direction mentioned in the letter from which I have quoted. Dealing with the evidence given by Mr. Coote, of Katanning, I have here a statutory declaration which reads —

I, Samuel Kemble, of Badgebup, do solemnly and sincerely declares as follows:- That no 1917-18 wheat infected with weevil has been railed to the Tambellup or any other Government depot from either of the sidings under my charge, namely, Wurnup and Badgebup. Any statement I have made regarding weevil has been to the effect that empty trucks coming to the sidings for wheat have often contained weevil. Further, no weevil-infected wheat has been received during the 1917-18 season at either of the sidings above mentioned. My seven years experience as a wheat buyer for F & C Piesse is sufficient guarantee that the Knowledge gained during that period would not allow me to be deceived in the matter of weevily wheat or wheat otherwise affected.

This declaration was made and signed before E. A. Clegg, J. P. I have also brought specimen pages of a book which we suggest could be used to combine the records of certificates issued kept by the Westralian Farmers, and the records of advances buy the banks kept by the Scheme, thus eliminating a good deal of double work in connection with book-keeping. I wish to put this in as evidence. This is only an instance of what can be done in other directions.

7119. In visiting some of the old stacks we discovered them to be in a rather bad condition at Albany and Bunbury. At Bunbury we noticed the stack was adjoining the sidings where the railway people cleaned up the cattle trucks. This stack, we were informed belonged to the Westralian Farmers. I asked Mr. Hall "Did the acquring agents, prior to this year, have to provide the sites, or did they have the sites placed near the railways? " and his answer was, "They had to provide the sites in this way: they had to make arrangements with the Railway Department for Suitable sites and had to pay the usual rental charged." Was the site at Bunbury chosen by you ? — The position every where was that we had to pay for the sites but they were allotted by the Railway Department, who pegged them out, numbered them, and allotted the numbers to the different firms. In the country districts we were pushed on to what we deemed to be unsuitable sites in a number of instances. We refused to have anything to do with some of them because we thought the wheat would get damaged. I have two photographs here of a site at Baandee, selected by the Railway Department, You can see the pegs on the site which was on a salt lake. The other photograph shows the same site a little later on under a couple of feet of water. There was this, however, that if we refused to accept a country site we could rail the wheat to port. At ports, however we had no opinion but to accept the sites allotted to us. At Bunbury the matter to which you refer could have been avoided. There is a block of land between Bell's and Darling's wheat which is still vacant. It was allotted to those firms. Our representative asked for it but was refused the use of it. There would have been room on that vacant block for 40,000 bags of wheat. On our being forced to stack on the block you refer to, we made an arrangement with the Railway Department that when they were cleaning the trucks they would use the hose so that the water would flow away from the stacks, and we watched that they carried out that arrangement. I cannot say what has been done since the Scheme took over the wheat on the 1st January.

7120. I notice in the list which you have put in regard to sidings at which you consider sheds should be erected. Badjeling has been omitted? —It is a notoriously bad site. During the 1916-17 season it was under water for about a month and it is advisable therefore for the wheat top be removed from that sidings.

7121. By Hon. R.G. ARDAGH: With regard to the dipping tanks, have you formed any idea as to the cost? — I have not. A cost of a few thousand pounds would be justified.

7122. By Hon. J.F. ALLEN: Have you seen anything of the sort? — No, but i think the necessity justifies the experiment.

7123. By the CHAIRMAN: In other words, you think it will pay the Scheme to have the Railway trucks cleaned? — I think that is imperative, even if the cost will run into a few thousand pounds. Before concluding I would like to place on record the number of farmers who delivered wheat to the 1917-18 Pool. The question has been asked once or twice. The number was 6,596

(The witness retired )

The Commission adjourned.