are not the same as a seaport. He is always looking after the perfect thing.

4641. Looking after what he is paid for?---Yes.

4642. There was a lot of wheat sent from Geraldton to Northam under an arrangement which was made, and it was optional to the committee whether the Northam mill should pay 4s. per bushed for it whether it should be gristed The committee decided that on the 31st August 1917. Can you tell us what was done with that?-I think the Northam mill sent in account sales for the products. I do not think they were compelled to pay 4s a bushel for it.

4643. According to the minute the decision was that 4s. a bushed had to be paid?---I think there must be something wrong, because i happen to know what the wheat was like, and i do not think any miller would have paid 4s.for it ; it was caraway seeds, not wheat. 4644. If it was bought on those conditions, would you not think that the conditions would have to be adhered to ?----I am pretty sure the conditions were adhered to. I saw the account sales and discussed the matter with the accountant at the time. We were preparing the balance sheet for the subsidiary pool to which this wheat belonged, and I feel sure the accountant would not have accepted the account sales if it had not been in conformity with the Northam mills arrangements.

4645. With regard to the erection of sheds, I note you are going to provide sheds somewhat similar to those of previous years, that is, the sites are limited. Would it not be advantage to the Scheme if a larger number of depots were provided? —To provide a larger number of depots would be more costly to start with, more costly to run on account of having a larger number of supervisors in charge, and it would be very difficult to get suitable stack sites, and with a large number of depots it would be more costly for railway sidings to be put into them, and it would be practically impossible on account of the weevil at the sidings to make depots of any of the present sidings.

4646. there would be no greater danger from tho weevil point of view by having the wheat at a smaller number of sidings? —I do not think so, but it would be better to have the wheat at one siding, and if you have to treat it eventually for weevil you have it at the spot where you want to treat it.

4647. Mr Pearse told us that he estimated the loss of wheat at about 5 per cent. what is your estimate? —I cannot estimate it. In my remarks on weevil this morning I quoted the stack we were recently shifting from Fremantle, that is the stack an ordinary individual would reckon was badly infected, and on that stack the loss by actual weight we reckoned at about 2 per cent.

4648. Mr Pearse estimated the loss altogether at 5 per cent.? —I would not off hand give an opinion; it would be practically impossible to estimate it.

4649. Do you know anything about the bank agreement; if you have a copy of it you might send it to us?—We must have a copy of it; I have perused it.

4651. In regard to the settlement of the stacks of wheat when they were taken over from the agents, were the settlements made in accordance with the claim made by Dreyfus & Co.?—Do you mean the 1915/16 stacks?

4652. Any that have been taken over?—The stacks we took over from the agents were those of 1916-17, and all firms were settled on the same basis.

4653. Was that settlement fixed on the claim made by Dreyfus &Co?—I do not know that Dreyfus &Co, made any special claim. We had a number of meetings with agents at which all the agents were represented with the exception of the Westralian Farmers at the beginning, and we dealt with then as a body of agents. They all put in the same claim. Before we discussed the matter with them they had several meetings themselves and they decided the basis on which they wanted the settlement. Then they came along and discussed the matter with us.

4654 .With regard to the claims for the damage to 1915-16 stacks, what action was taken?—The various firms put in their claims under the continuation agreement for re-conditioning, and they have been squared up on various bases settled first. That was before I joined the Scheme. I understand Darlings' claim followed, and theirs was squared on the same basis as that of Dreyfus, though after a lot of trouble. They wanted more favourable treatment but they decided to accept what the scheme offered. The next people were Beli & Co. They got slightly different treatment from the others as they threatened to go to arbitration rather than reduce their claims. I do not know that all have been paid cash, but the basis of settlement has been arrived at.

4655. By Hon J. F. ALLEN: They have no further liability in regard to that wheat?—No.

4656. And the bonds have been returned?—Probably they have.

4657. Who had the adjusting of the differences between the acquiring agents and the Scheme?—For the 1915-16 wheat the secretary and the chief inspector. I refused to have anything to do with it.

4658. It has been done since your appointment?—Yes.

4659. By the CHAIRMAN: What is this in the minutes of the 17th May in regard to Dreyfus's commission on surplus?—Under their agreement they are entitled on the 1915-16 crop to 3d. per bushel for all wheat shipped. There was a surplus increase in the wheat shipped by Dreyfus and they claim the commission on that surplus.

4660. You settled that when in Melbourne?—No. we were going to arbitrate on the matter, but Dreyfus have now left themselves entirely in the hands of the Minister.

4661. By Mr. BROWN: The board offered £98 to square the claim of £106?—I cannot say.

4662. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: They claim under clause 13 of the agreement?—That is so.

4663. By the CHAIRMAN: On the subject of weevils requiring moisture: why is it that there is so much more weevil at Geraldton than at other depots?—The Calandra oryzae which, from our point of view, is the worst, will work in any moisture over eight per cent. The ideal conditions for weevil are moisture and warm temperature.

4664. So the trouble is worse near the sea than inland?—In this state, yes.

4665. You spoke of having re-weighed certain bags at the port after they had been in stack for some time. Is such a test reliable when we are told that they do not mark the bags according to the real weight?—The bags we weighed were all of about 180lbs. and therefore the marks were fairly reliable.

4666. You do not claim that silos will eradicate weevils?—No, but they will help us.

4667. You think that by extra handling you may be able to cope with the pest?—yes, by shifting it from one bin to another.

4468. By Hon. J F ALLEN: That would necessitate groups of soils with spare bins?—Yes, unless some means can be found of conveying it from the bottom to the top.

4669. By the CHAIRMAN: You are satisfied that silos represent the only secure method of storing wheat?—Under present conditions, it is the best method.

4670. After allowing for increased cost?—Yes.

4671. You realise that the cost to-day is probably one-third more than it will be after the war?—I know it is greater than it will be.

4672. You have not gone into that with Mr Pearse?—No.

4673. Cement is 4s or 5s per cask more than it was steel is up £11 or £12 per ton?—The labour, one of the biggest items, has not increased materially.

4674. By Hon J. F. ALLEN: But the cost of labour will be small as against that of material?—I do not think so.

4675. by the CHAIRMAN: You aurce that from the bulk handling point of view the erection of soils at present is unwanted?—Were it not for the weevil, I would not contemplate starting bulk handling just now.

4676. At present you would do it for storage only?—Yes, and the extra cost would be met by the amount that could be charged for the storage of Wheat, the saving it would make.

4677. Would it reduce it much when you are only providing for 4,000,00 bushels?—Every little helps.