I.—lo.

know, our firm handles as much grain annually as any other firm in New Zealand. As a matter of fact, nearly all grain coming into store has been for years hoisted on to the stacks from drays and wagons with horse. Traction-engines, which cannot get into stores, have to be discharged nowadays by manual labour, but the sacks are only carried a very short distance, and are then hoisted. It will be a very serious matter to farmers if a different-size sack is adopted than the one now in use. A smaller sack does not stack well, and a man will only carry the same number of sacks per diem. Result, cost of receiving and delivering will be increased. This must come out of the pocket of the producer. Surely there are enough able-bodied men in this colony to do without the slightest injury to themselves this particular work. Let those, rhen, do this job and others unfit to carry a 4-bvishel sack look out for lighter work. In any case, if 4 bushels is too much, average the contents of a sack to be 210 lb. maximum, or 3 J bushels of wheat. For storage purposes 225 lb. would be more suitable if the time has come for a 4-bushel or 240 lb. sack to go; but I fear if a reduction is made it will be below 225 lb., and in that case 210 lb. is tfie best next thing. Why are you not giving us some of your stock business 1 Yours truly, Frbidlaudbe Beos. (Limited), ■ Per . Hugo Feeidlandek, G. W. Leadley, Esq., Wakanui. Managing Director.

EXHIBIT F. Dear Mr. Haudt, — Mitokam, 25rd July, 1907. I see by the papers that the size of the corn-sacks has been brought up again, and that the Premier said that the looms would have to be altered to make the sack required to hold 200 lb. of wheat. And I also noticed that Messrs. Buddo and Laurenson wished it to be made law that no more than 200 Ib. of wheat go into.a sack. Well, if they want the 200 Ib. in a sack, keep the size of the sack the same as now—viz.,.26 in. by 48 in.— put the 200 Ib. of wheat into it, and fold down whatever is required of the top. Then the sacks will do tor oats, barley, chaff, potatoes, and, in fact, any other farm-produce, and there need be no difference in the sack, and it will suit all concerned. Small sacks are very much trouble at the machine, as they are too short for the spout, and have to be kept up with a stool, and require an extra man to handle them. I thought I would just write and suggest this for your consideration, but I suppose you have thought the matter all over before. Yours, Sec, W. A. McPhail.

EXHIBIT G. Sir,— City Malthouse, Colombo Street, Christchuroh, 24th August, 1907. 1 would like to draw your attention to an Article in to-day's Lyttelton Times (24th August) re weight of grain-sacks, and lumpers of Lyttelton's opinions thereon. The article speaks for itself. lam and have been a fairly strong man, and during my time have carried thousands of grain-sacks. I have handled wheat, oats, and barley, and unhesitatingly say that 2001b. is plenty for any ordinary working-man to handle day after day. It is the limit in weight. I can confirm the remarks made at that meeting. * * * * *:.,..* ■* * * Yours very truly, Mr. Laurenson, M.H.R. James Daw son.

Memorandum, The late Dr. Lewis, of Lyttelton, said that lie was patching up men nearly every week from the effects of heavy carrying. When the potato season was on about eight or nine years ago large English grass-seed sacks were filled with potatoes, and the weight was 3 cwt. 2 qr. 5 lb. The men in the sheds refused to carry them, and the potatoes had to be rebagged in 200 lb. sacks. Geokoe Ruthebfobd.

Opinions of the Leading Men in Timabu, who have had Experience in the Handling of Grain, as to the Advisability of using the 200 lb. Bag for Wheat. Mr. W. Hawaii (Who has bad Twenty Years' Experience as Head Storenian in Hie C.F.C.A.). He is of the opinion that the 200 ib. sack would be a decided advantage. It is just as easy to stack and in handling an average young man can work all day with a 200 lb. sack, whereas it takes'a man of strength and physique to work all day with a 240 Ib. bag, and it is most difficult to »et men at all to work with wheat in the present 240 lb. bags. In the handling of wheat, too, if you can "- e t an active and light man he will get through a deal more work in a day with the light sack than, a heavy man will with the big sack. If the light sack was introduced you would get a better, class of men to pick from, but as it is now you cannot get young fellows, and only the* old stagers " who have been carrying for years will handle wheat.

4—l. 10.

25