ng of their crops, their indignation was
fanned to white heat.

It was useless for the farmers to build elevators of their own; for
these had to conform to the requirements of the railway and, as already
stated, it was impossible to run them profitably without making a
buyer's profit in addition to the commission for handling and storage.
The farmers were not buyers but sellers of grain and with very few
exceptions, where conditions were specially favorable, the farmers'
elevators that were attempted were soon in difficulties.

Leading farmers began to write strong letters to the newspapers and it
was not long before the agitation became so widespread that it reached
the floor of Parliament. Mr. James M. Douglas, member for East
Assiniboia, during two successive sessions introduced Bills to regulate
the shipping and transportation of grain in Manitoba and the North-West
Territories and these were discussed in the House of Commons. A
Special Committee of the House was appointed finally to investigate the
merits of the case and as considerable difference of opinion was
expressed as to the actual facts, the appointment of a Royal Commission
to make a full and impartial investigation of the whole subject in the
public interest was recommended.

This Royal Commission accordingly was appointed on October 7th, 1899,
and consisted of three Manitoba farmers--W. F. Sirett, of Glendale;
William Lothian, of Pipestone, and Charles C. Castle, of Foxton--with
His Honor E. J. Senkler, of St. Catharines, Ontario, as Chairman;
Charles N. Bell, of Winnipeg, acted as Secretary. Owing to the illness
and death of Judge Senkler, Albert Elswood Richards (afterwards the
late Hon. Mr. Justice Richards, of Winnipeg), succeeded as Chairman in
February, 1900.

Sittings were held at many places throughout Manitoba and the
North-West Territories and much evidence was taken as to the grievances
complained of, these being mainly: (1) That vendors of grain were being
subjected to unfair and excessive dockage at the time of sale; (2) That
doubt existed as to the fairness of the weights allowed or used by
owners of elevators; (3) That the owners of elevators enjoyed a
monopoly in the purchase of grain by refusing to permit the erection of
flat warehouses where standard elevators were situated and were thus
able to keep prices of grain below true value to their own benefit and
the disadvantage of the public generally as well as others who were
spec