1000. By the CHAIRMAN : But that was a matter in which you were specially interested at the time. You say you do not know that Mr Love said the machine was satisfactory, and yet the statement I have read to you appears in those minutes. If you have not read Mr Love's statement in regard to that matter, you cannot have read the minutes?—Yes, I can; excuse me. Whilst the information contained in those minutes would be embedded in my memory, the name of the man who made the state probably might not. 1001. You were so satisfied, that you committee took into consideration the advisability, or otherwise, of purchasing a sterilising plant?—Yes. But I do not think we decided what kind we were to purchase. I understand we deferred that matter until Mr Pearse, our engineering member, could go into the question and advise is which kind would be most suitable for our conditions. I have no doubt that these sterilising plats are effective, but the difficulty, as shown by the minutes, is not the efficiency of the machine, but the capacity of the machine. 1002. Your minutes, "the Board strongly urges that the erection of a sterilising plant should be expedited and arrangements made for Mr A. F. Pearse to make a special visit to Adelaide, and advise the Board, after inspection of the Adelaide machine, what class of plant should be installed at Fremantle. The Board requested that a wire be sent to the Minister to this effect, and also that if possible a portable machine procured"?—That was a long time ago. 1003. Before urging this you were satisfied that the sterilising plant was a success?—Yes. We had information from the Eastern States. But the information we had from Adelaide satisfied us. I was practically satisfied in January last, from inquiries and investigations I made in Adelaide, and from the experiments that were being conducted, and the results of which I saw. 1004. By Hon. R. G. ARDAGH : That was so far as efficiency was concerned?—Yes. But the kind of machine had to be decided. Mr Pearse had been to Sydney looking at various machines there, and we had learnt about this Adelaide machine which we were wanting him to see so that he could advise is which was the best machine. 1005. By the CHAIRMAN ; You had nothing to do with the conditioning plant mow lying at Fremantle, which was after your time?—That is so. 1006. Can you tell us whether any claims have been paid to the acquiring agents in respect of 1915-16 or 1916-17 harvests for damages caused by mice or water, or any other damage outside neglect?—I cannot tell you, because that was a matter which was in debate just when I terminated my intimate connection with the Scheme. 1007. Do you know of any wheat ever being sold to Messrs. Padbury for 4s. 6d. which should have been paid for at 4s. 9d.?—I do not know. I have just explained to Mr Ardagh that there may have been some wheat sold to Messrs. Ockerby damaged. 1008. But this was f.a.q. wheat?—I do not think it is possible. 1009. What has been the result of the 1915-16 harvest, whether there has been any loss as far as the State is concerned, how it works out, and the amount of wheat required and the amount sold? Can you tell us that?—It has been sold. 1010. What I mean is this: you might have acquires 3,500,000 bushels and only sole two million bushels?—I see. 1011. If you seel Mr Hall you might tell him I asked you that question?—I will. You asked me about the case of Padbury. It flashed through my mind that I heard a rumour about it. Still I have no official knowledge; the facts can be ascertained. 1012. You went into the charges of storage at Fremantle when you were chairman of the committee?—In what way? 1013. 1014. 1015. 1016. 1017. 1018. 1019. 1020. 1021. 1022. 1023. 1024. 1025. 1026. 1027. 1028.