AGY-6096 | Royal Commission of inquiry respecting the Wheat Acquisition Act

Full description

The Royal Commission of inquiry respecting the Wheat Acquisition Act was presided over by Justice David Gilbert Ferguson. He was directed by the Governor, Sir Gerald Strickland, under the Commission dated 27 February 1915 to inquire into the following:
'1. Into any contracts, agreements, or arrangements made or alleged to have been made to secure or bring about the cancellation, by the Wheat Acquisition Bill or otherwise, of contracts for the sale and delivery of wheat, and into the facts and circumstances connected with or in any way relating to such contracts, agreements, or arrangements, and more particularly into the agreement alleged to have been made between one Nicholas Mutton and W.H. Drew in respect of such matters.
2. In connection with the aforesaid matters to inquire whether on the part of anyone there has been any interference or attempt at interference with the purity of Parliamentary or Departmental action.
3. And in so far as I might deem it essential to inquire generally into the said matters having regard to any public interest involved and the conduct of any official or person connected therewith.' (1)

In 1914 the rains failed during the cereal growing season in the southern states. The winter-spring rains in the New South Wales Riverina did not arrive, there was almost 12 months of severe drought from Booligal to Broken Hill and six to nine months drought in many other parts of the western plains. Victoria also experienced an almost complete failure of the May to October rainfall, particularly north of the Great Dividing Range. (2) By November 1914, the combination of the drought and the restrictions World War I placed on shipping and markets led to a shortage of wheat throughout Australia. Farmers who had made forward contracts for the sale of wheat were unable to supply. Agents who had contracted to buy from farmers, and had then onsold the wheat, could not fulfil their contracts.

The State Government was expected to provide relief through legislation. Following public meetings and resolutions, a Bill was introduced into Parliament to enable the Government to compulsorily acquire any wheat in the State. The Bill sought to cancel wheat contracts of farmers who had only sold what they expected to grow in a good year and whose crops had failed because of the drought. It did not cover the speculators. The Bill was introduced on 27 November. It was amended in Committee on 4 December to declare void every contract made in New South Wales relating to the sale of the new season's harvest where the wheat could not be delivered. The Wheat Acquisition Act 1914 (Act No.27, 1914) was assented to on 11 December 1914, and ceased to have effect on 10 September 1915. (3) The Bill's passage through Parliament was closely followed by opponents and supporters, many of whom had financial interests in the outcome, and was accompanied by rumours of large scale bribery of Ministers.

Ferguson investigated the rumours. He was 'satisfied beyond all shadow of doubt that no Minister so named received or was offered, directly or indirectly, any bribe or consideration whatever with a view to influencing his conduct in connection with the Bill. Nor can I find the slightest reason for supposing that any other Minister or Member of Parliament, or political body, or public official has been corruptly influenced or approached with that view'. (4)

He was also asked to investigate an agreement between Nicholas Mutton and William Hughes Drew. Mutton, a commission agent at Coolamon, had contracted to deliver 60,000 bags of wheat, but had contracts to buy only 20,000 bags, not all of which could be delivered. He consulted W.H. Drew, a Sydney solicitor, to see if he could get out of the contracts. Drew found the contracts binding, but Mutton engaged him to represent him in all litigation arising out of them for one thousand pounds. As well Drew would represent Mutton's interests to the Attorney General as one of a class of people interested in the Bill. Drew wanted Mutton to get others affected by the wheat shortfall to join him. It was the dealings of Mutton with the others that Ferguson investigated. He found that Mutton 'was disposed to speak somewhat boastfully of the large sums he had spent to secure the passing of the Bill ... he succeeded, whether by design or not, in conveying to numbers of people the impression that the money was being used for purposes into which it was better not to inquire too closely. So far as I can judge, this was the sole origin of all the rumours of bribery that had any tangible foundation at all.' (5) He also suggested that due to stress Mutton was unclear about the arrangement he had with Drew.

Endnotes:
(1) Report of the Royal Commission of inquiry respecting the Wheat Acquisition Act, Joint Volume of Papers presented to the Legislative Council and Legislative Assembly and ordered to be printed, Sydney, NSW Government Printer, 1916, 1915-1916 Session, Vol.6, p.729.
(2) Australian Encyclopaedia, Sydney, Angus and Robertson, Second edition, 1958, Vol 3, pp.288-291.
(3) Report of the Royal Commission of inquiry respecting the Wheat Acquisition Act, op cit., pp.731-732; An Act to enable the Government to compulsorily acquire wheat in New South Wales; to provide for compensation for wheat so acquired, and for its sale and distribution; to provide for varying or cancelling certain contracts for the sale and delivery of wheat; and for purposes consequent thereon or incidental thereto (Act Geo. V No.27).
(4) Report of the Royal Commission of inquiry respecting the Wheat Acquisition Act, op. cit., p.732.
(5) ibid., p.734; New South Wales Law Almanac for 1916, Sydney, NSW Government Printer, 1916, p.73.