and uniform system, and at the same time experience the benefit of each other's views. It has been a mistake to keep the accountants of the Scheme away from the East for so long. Personally, I derived much benefit from my trip, and believe I was able to benefit other accountants over there . 1986. The expenses incurred on Mr Buckeley's visit really represented a waste?— I do not consider that is so, because he helped to frame the synopsis of the arrangement under which the separation of the Pool is being made.

1987. Seeing that each State has full control in the working of the Scheme, how would it affect the management of the Scheme in Western Australia if the Australian Wheat Board only submitted to you the amounts of money which are payable from wheat which is sold?— The amounts of money they submit to us are very large. An urgent message to go to the Eastern States was sent to me by the Australian Wheat Board, chiefly for the purpose of looking into the question of the appointment of the overseas interest. Western Australia takes its apportionment from the Australian Wheat Board. That board apportions the figures received from every State. When a State has to receive an immense debit such £40,000, which ours will probably amount to, is it not reasonable to suppose that the financial experts of that State should attend and verify the accuracy of this debit? Should the Western Australian Scheme take the New South Wales figures for granted, or vice versa? When I went over I went into the basis of appointments. As a result chiefly of my representations it was decided that alternatively all documents bearing on other States' transactions should be certified to by the States auditor before going over, or else— and I favour chiefly the latter idea— that the Wheat Board appoint an auditor of their own to travel to each of the four States and examine the statement upon which the States had eventually to share out. Originally it was decided to adopt the former suggestion, and I was made aware of that about a month after returning. Consequently, our State auditor has verified our due date statements, but since then the decision was arrived at that the accountant of the Australian Wheat Board should visit each of the four States as necessary and check and examine the various statements prepared by each State in connection with the central pooling arrangement. Personally I consider it necessary, as this concern has developed to such an extent, that a bigger interchange of views should take place, and that a closer examination of each of the State's accounts will ultimately be to the benefit of the whole of the pool.

1988. You think it is beneficial that the accountants should confer in regard to the Pool as a whole instead of confining their work entirely to the State Pool?— Yes, because the State Pool is involved in the general Pool; it is part of the one organisation.

1989. The States have nothing to do with the actual sales of wheat?— The States make local sales, and all sales to the millers for export, say to Java, to the Eastern States, or to South Africa. The price is fixed by the Australian Wheat Board. The larger overseas contracts, however, are made through the Australian Wheat Board.

1990. Have you had any complaints from farmers as to the payment on their certificates not being made punctually?— No. As soon as a farmer receives his certificate he has only to present it at the bank in order to get the cash or credit passed to his account or to whoever holds his assignment.

1991. Is there any delay as to the farmer getting his payment?—No, providing he presents the certificate to the bank nominated.

1992. By Mr HARRISON: Who is responsible for the delay in farmers getting their certificates?—The agent who issues the certificates. After the agent has issued his certificate the matter becomes one for the Pool.

1993. With regard to the Industries Assistance Board farmer, the question of his getting the benefit of the one or two per cent. interest would depend upon the officers administering the Industries Assistance Board?—Yes.

1994. By Mr BROWN: What is your classification in the Agricultural Department?—From £204 to £240. If I had remained there I have reason to believe that I should have held a higher classification before now.

1995. What salary did you receive when first appointed to the Scheme?—A salary of £252. I remained at that figure for some months. Shortly after Mr. Sibbald took control he raised my salary to £276. Subsequently to Mr Keys taking control I was appointed accountant at £320.

1996. Are you in control of the accounts branch now?—Absolutely.

1997. Is there any more head office work during the time when the acquiring agents are operating than at other times of the year?—In certain branches, but not in all.

1998. Will your present staff in the accountant's branch be able to cope with the incoming harvest?—That will depend upon how it is handled. If it is handled under similar conditions to those existing this year I believe it will be sufficient with but few alterations.

1999. Does the signing of millers' agreements come under your department?—No. The making and signing of agreements has always been dealt with by the Minister in conjunction with the secretary and the committee.

2000. Did you find that your accountant's branch suffered through not having any legislation definitely fixing the complete operations of the Scheme prior to December, 1916?—It has been distinctly stated that the reason why there was no audit was because there was no Act authorising the Auditor General to make one, and he did not believe it was his duty to make an audit.

2001. Outside the auditing, you found no difficulty through the absence of legislation?—I think not.

2002. Do I understand that you are of opinion that the agitation for an outside auditor was prompted by a desire on the part of certain people who wanted to criticise the policy of those controlling the scheme rather than to simply check the accuracy of the accounts, as is the usual duty of an auditor?▬I do say that part of the agitation is to that effect.

2003. You are of opinion that when all the necessary data are to hand there will be no difficulty in finally, accurately, and expeditiously balancing the accounts of each seasons harvest separately?▬I think not. It will be a matter of considerable detail, but the whole of the detail is there, and it will only be a question of time to finally close the accounts and distribute the balance available.

2004. The system of bookkeeping is complete enough for that purpose ?▬Yes.

2005. By Mr. HARRISON: Were you in any way connected with the accounts on the 1st December, 1915?▬No. I did not come into the Scheme until March of 1916, three months after its inauguration.

2006. On your first visits to the mills, were the Committee in difficulty as to finding out the exact accounts millers held or had purchased on the 1st December?▬There was for a very considerable time difficulty in ascertaining how matters stood.

2007. Do you know whether any man from the Accounts Branch was instructed to go to the various millers and search their books and ascertain what quantities had been purchased?▬Yes. I did so as from the date of taking on. Previously there was a Mr. Murray, who attempted to get the information from certain millers, but I do not think he met with a very cordial response. In any case, I think, I obtained the first information in that connection.

2008. Would it be possible for any millers purchasing prior to that date to inflate their figures?▬They would have had to forge documents in order to do so, forge contract notes of sale.

2009. You saw all the sub-agents notes?▬Yes. I sighted contract notes for substantially every sale that was made.

2010. You made that inspection yourself?▬Yes. There may have been odd contract notes missing in some cases. I remember Mr. Padbury had one contract note signed up in his note book, and there were one or two cases like that. The millers would have had to forge contract notes or to arrange with farmers to put back dates on their contract notes, before the figures could have been inflated.

2011. Were these contract notes signed by the carious farmers?▬They were.