House of Representatives
9 November 1904

2^nd Parliament · 1^st Session

TRADE MARKS BILL
MANUFACTURES ENCOURAGEMENT BILL
QUESTION
- PREFERENTIAL TRADE
QUESTION
- SIX POTTERS PROSECUTION
QUESTION
- DUC D’ABRUZZI
QUESTION
- REPORTED RESIGNATION OF THE TREASURER
QUESTION
- KING’S BIRTHDAY
QUESTION
- ADVANTAGE TO FOREIGN TENDERERS
QUESTION
- LEAVE TO PUBLIC SERVANTS
QUESTION
- RUST IN WHEAT
QUESTION
- SUPPLY (1904-5)
ADJOURNMENT

Mr. Speaker took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 6697

TRADE MARKS BILL

Mr WATSON:
BLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I desire to know from the Prime Minister if he will be able to go on with the Trade Marks Bill should it shortly be received from the Senate? A deputation waited on the Minister of Trade and Customs yesterday in regard to the matter, and . I understand that he undertook to lay it before the Cabinet. So far as this side of the House is concerned, I can promise that if the measure is proceeded with we shall facilitate an early decision on the only contentious portion of the Bill.

Mr REID:
Minister for External Affairs · EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · Free Trade

-My honorable colleague has not yet had an opportunity to put the matter before the Cabinet, though he will have an opportunity to do so to-morrow. The Government are very anxious, before the recess occurs, to deal with Bills such asthe honorable member refers to; but the slow progress of the Estimates is making the prospect for their consideration less and less favorable.

page 6698

MANUFACTURES ENCOURAGEMENT BILL

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I wish to know from the Prime Minister if there will be an opportunity to deal with the Manufactures Encouragement Bill next week. I desire to be present when the Bill is discussed, but, as 1 shall have to go away from Melbourne at the endof this week, I should like a day or two’s notice.

Mr REID:
Free Trade

– The Government desire to proceed with one thing at a time, and as we are now on the Estimates, we shall finish them before taking up anything else ; but it is a perfectly reasonable request that a few days notice should be given of the intention to proceed with the Manufactures Encouragement Bill, and I shall be only too glad to give it.

page 6698

QUESTION

PREFERENTIAL TRADE

Mr HUTCHISON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I desire to call the attention of the Prime Minister to the following paragraph in to-day’s Age : -

Speaking to a deputation that waited on him yesterday, the Minister of Customs (Mr. Allan McLean) said : - There are many very important questions, such as preferential trade - which is a question of far-reaching importance- before Parliament. We do not feel that it will be possible to deal with that during the present session, but we propose to give Mr. Deakin an opportunity of explaining it from his point of view, so that it will be before the people, but there will be no opportunity of threshing out the matter this session.

Does he not think that other honorable members should have the same opportunity as is afforded to the honorable and learned member for Ballarat to express their views on this subject?

Mr REID:
Free Trade

– The Government wish to give the fullest opportunity for the discussion of this important question; but, like everything else, the matter must bear some relation to the necessities of public business.

page 6698

QUESTION

SIX POTTERS PROSECUTION

Mr CROUCH:
CORIO, VICTORIA

– I understand from the press that the Prime Minister does not propose to proceed with the prosecution of the men known as the six potters.Is that because they were not imported under contract? If not, what are the reasons for abandoning the prosecution?

Mr REID:
Free Trade

-As is now pretty generally known, the late Minister of External Affairs set the law in motion in the case referred to. The matter was placed in the hands of the Crown Solicitor in Sydney, who is acting for the Commonwealth Government, and he has reported to us that, after making, the most exhaustive efforts, he has been unable to obtain evidence which would warrant a prosecution, or such as it would be reasonable to put before any Court in support of an allegation of a breach of the law. There is no evidence of a breach of the law having taken place such as wouldwarrant him in going on with the proceedings.

Mr CROUCH:

– Are the papers open for inspection?

Mr REID:

– Iwill have them brought over to the House, so that any honorable member who desires to see them may do so.

page 6698

QUESTION

DUC D’ABRUZZI

Mr MAHON:
COOLGARDIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Yesterday I drew attention to a small item pf expenditure in the statement of receipts and expenditure for the quarter ending 30th September£17 4s. for the entertainment of the Duc D’Abruzzi. As we have to foot the Bill, I wish to know what the entertainment was, where it took place, and who gave if?

Mr REID:
Free Trade

– The entertainment consisted of a reception given by the Minister of Defence, the official head of the Naval and Military Forces pf the Commonwealth, as an act of hospitality to his Royal Highness.

Mr Mahon:

– Entertainments of the kind have previously always been paid for by the Ministers responsible for them.

Mr REID:

– The reception of His Royal Highness was an act of courtesy on the part of the Military and Naval Department, though I concur with the honorable member in the view that the cost of these little matters of hospitality had per haps better be discharged by Ministers, and that course will in future be followed by the present Ministry.

Sir John Forrest:

– Surely not when the entertainment is purely an official one.

Mr REID:

– I am happy to say that we have a Ministerial fund for the purpose, and I think that this would be a legitimate charge upon it.

page 6699

QUESTION

REPORTED RESIGNATION OF THE TREASURER

Mr PAGE:
MARANOA, QUEENSLAND

– I wish to know from the Prime Minister if the statement which has appeared in the Border Mail, a newspaper published at Albury, that the right honorable member for Balaclava has threatened to resign his position as Treasurer because coalition pledges have been broken by the Prime Minister, is true?

Mr REID:
Free Trade

– I have read a number of wild statements in the press, of which this is one. Honorable members will be very sorry to learn that the Treasurer is suffering from illness, and is therefore unable to be present. I suppose that that misfortune has caused these wild reports to be in circulation, though I need hardly say that there is absolutely no foundation for them.

page 6699

QUESTION

KING’S BIRTHDAY

Mr PAGE:

– Is the Prime Minister aware that to-day is the anniversary of the birthday of His Majesty the King? Doeshe intend to go on with business, seeing that the occasion is being observed as a general holiday throughout the Empire?

Mr REID:
Free Trade

– Monday next has been set apart for the official celebration of the anniversary of His Majesty’s birthday, and the Government, therefore, are relieved from the necessity of having to propose a respite for honorable members from their arduous labours in connexion with the consideration of the Estimates. We have thought it our duty, however, to transmit the congratulations of the Commonwealth to His Majesty upon the occasion, and to add an expression of the profound gratitude which we feel is entertained In the Commonwealth towards him for His great efforts to preserve the peace of the world.

page 6699

QUESTION

ADVANTAGE TO FOREIGN TENDERERS

Mr PAGE:
for Mr. Fisher

askedthe Postmaster-General, upon notice -

Is he yet in a position to inform this Housr whether it is correct, as stated by the honorable member for Wannon (Mr. Robinson), that successful tenderers not resident in Australia have not to pay. Customs duties on goods used in carrying out their contracts, while duty is paid on the goods used in a like manner by Australian successful tenderers for Commonwealth contracts?

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

– The information to enable me to answer this question is not yet to hand, but I hope to be able to furnish a reply in a few days.

page 6699

QUESTION

LEAVE TO PUBLIC SERVANTS

Mr PAGE:

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

Whether he is aware that officers in most of the country stations in Queensland go on their annual recreation leave without being relieved, the remainder of the staff having to perform the said officers’ duties while on leave, thus necessitating in most cases the remainder of the staff working overtime in order to cope with the work?
Where officers work overtime while one of the staff is on recreation leave, what remuneration does he recommend for such overtime?
Is he in favour of the said overtime being added on to officers’ annual leave?

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow: -

The general principle followed in regard to leave of absence for recreation is that it is given when the officer can be spared without inconvenience to the public business, and upon the understanding that where there are a number of officers, those remaining conduct the work of the office without additional assistance. Arelieving staff is employed in Queensland, and where the work cannot be reasonably carried on by the staff during the absence of any of its members, they are utilized in affording assistance.
The officers are compensated in such cir cumstances by the granting of time off for the overtime worked.
It would seriously interfere with the working of the various offices if provision had to be made to provide for differing periods of leave to officers, whereas it is practicable to allow an officer to take a day, or a few days, off occasionally without imposing too great a strain on the remainder of the staff. In country offices there are times when the work is slack, when the overtime can be easily worked off.

Action in these matters is governed by the provisions of the Commonwealth Public Service Act and Regulations.

page 6699

QUESTION

RUST IN WHEAT

Mr WEBSTER:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Prime Minis ter, upon notice -

Whether, in view of the serious annual losses caused by rust in wheat throughout the Commonwealth, and the prospective value of an effective remedy, the Government will consider the advisability of offering, or inducing the respective State Governments to offer, a satisfactory bonus to any person or persons who may discover a , remedy, and satisfactorily prove the efficacy of the same.

Mr REID:
Free Trade

– I think the subject which the honorable member mentions, is one of a number of practical value as to which the’ Commonwealth and States Governments might well co-operate.

page 6700

QUESTION

Mr CHANTER:
Riverina

– I desire to bring under the notice of the Committee a case which I deem ro be a very hard one. I have indicated to the Minister my intention to refer to this matter, so that he will doubtless be prepared with full information regarding it. It will be remembered that in connexion with the Customs Tariff Act, the duties were collected from the time that the Tariff was laid on the table, and that the regulations provided that under certain circumstances, refunds of duty should be made in cases where goods were made the subject of imposts which Parliament afterwards declined to ratify. One of my constituents, a man named Smith, resident at Tareena. on the border of New South Wales and South Australia, had a portable engine, which he had taken from New South Wales into South Australia for the purpose of doing some threshing, or something of that kind. When he wished to return to his home in New South Wales, he was stopped on the border,and a demand was made for the payment of the duty imposed upon that class of goods under the Tariff, as it was first presented to the House. He demurred to this, and placed himself in communication with me. I brought the matter under the attention of the then Minister, and I was informed that the duty should be paid under protest. I am advised that that course was taken. The matter remained in abeyance for a considerable time, and’ Mr. Smith died. I have a letter from his widow, which I shall read, which states that the duty was paid under protest as suggested, but has not yet been refunded. An action was recently brought against the Customs Department by a firm in Melbourne, and the High Court decided that the duty which had been paid bv the firm in respect to goods which were afterwards placed on the free list should be refunded. That, to my mind, was a case very similar to the one of which I have been speaking. Duty was demanded upon articles which Parliament afterwards declared should be exempt, and the money was paid under protest. In that case the High Court decided that the duty should be refunded. Under somewhat similar circumstances another gentleman, who is engaged in the iron industry in New South Wales, imported some iron or steel rails . from Victoria. Parliament subsequently decided that no duty should be levied upon these articles. He repeatedly applied for a refund of the amount paid by him as duty upon them, but his applications were of no avail, and finally he decided to sue the Government to recover it. In this connexion the honorable member for Hume recently. put the following question to the Minister of Trade and Customs: -

Can the Minister give the House any information regarding a claim made by Mr. Sandford for a refund of duty on steel rails paid some time ago? The matter was afterwards taken into court. I wish to know if the Government have withdrawn their defence, and if they are now prepared to pay the claim? If so, will theMinister lay the papers on the Table? I do not ask the question in any hostile spirit, but if the Government have done what I think they have done, I wish the papers to be made public, so that my action, and that of some of my colleagues, in reference to the matter may be disclosed.

To that question the Minister made the following reply : -

The matter came under my notice a little time ago, as one which had been partly dealt with by my predecessors. On making inquiries, I found that the equities of the case were with Mr. Sandford, and I therefore sent instructions to Sydney not to enter a defence.

In one case legal proceedings were taken, and the decision of the Court was obtained ; in the other, proceedings were threatened, and in reply to a question by the honorable member for Hume, the Minister intimated that he had given instructions to withdraw the defence. In both of these cases a protest had been lodged against the collection of the duty. I am informed that effect was given to the instructions supplied to me by the Department, and transmitted by me to the persons interested. Upon the 1st September I received the following letter : -

I am enclosing you cuttings from the Adelaide Advertiser of August 18 and 19 referring to Customs dispute, and also letter received from you re portable engine brought into New South Wales in November, 1901. Could you kindly let me know if, in view of this judgment, I am entitled to a refund of the duty paid on the engine ? Under the N ew South Wales Tariff the engine would have been free, and also under the Tariff authorized by the Federal Parliament; but as it came in while the Draft Tariff was in force, we had to pay - under protest - nearly£34.

Mr Groom:

– Was the money accepted bv the Department under protest?

Mr.CHANTER.- I cannot say; but I am informed that it was paid under protest. The letter continues -

Had my husband lived, he meant to have written to you sooner, so I should be pleased. if you would let me know what you think about it. Trusting I am not troubling you too much. - I am, yours faithfully,

Jane Smith

I then communicated with the Department, directing attention to the judgment of the High Court, and pointing out that the equities of this case were in favour of the poor widow, who was seeking a refund of a sum of ^34- She is in necessitous circumstances, so that the amount involved represents a considerable item to her. In reply I received the following letter : -

Customs Department,

I Oth October, 1904

Dear Sir,

Adverting to your letter of 7th pit., enclosing a communciation from Mrs. Jane Smith, asking whether, in view of the judgment given by the High Court in the Cowan case, a refund could be granted on a portable engine transferred from South Australia to New South Wales, at Wentworth, in October, 1901, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister, to inform you that the judgment referred to applies only to cases where duty was paid under protest -

Mr CHANTER:

– No. They say, however, that -

As no written protest was made at the time the duty was paid on the engine under notice, the claim for refund cannot be recognised.

Yours faithfully,

N. P. W0LLAST0N.

In this case it will be seen that a person, paid duty under protest. But, because the individual was not so well versed in matters of law as to recognise the necessity for making a formal written protest, the Department is endeavouring to evade its just responsibility. J have had some conversation with the Minister upon this subject, and where the equities of a case are so clear as they are in this instance I do not think it is creditable to any Government to attempt to shield themselves behind a paltry in for.mality of that description.

Mr Groom:

– It is purely a technical point.

Mr CHANTER:

– Yes, it is a highlytechnical point. The Department do not dispute that the money was lodged under protest. They merely affirm that it was not lodged under a written protest. This individual did all that he possibly could to protect himself at the time the portable engine was about to cross over the South Australian border. He communicated with me, and was advised to pay the money under protest, and he did so. I claim that all the equities of the case are on the side of this widow. Money collected under similar circumstances has been refunded in the cases of Cowan and Company, and of Mr. Sandford ; why should it not be returned in that of this poor widow, who is not possessed of the means necessary, to establish her claim before a Court of Law ? I sincerely trust that the Minister, with the full consent of the House, will see his way clear to refund this amount of ^34.

Mr BAMFORD:
Herbert

Sir John Forrest:

Mr WILKINSON:

Mr Chanter:

– Did not the honorable member pay under protest.

Mr G B EDWARDS:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr McLEAN:

– The facts’ of this case are as follow :’ -

On the 28th October, 1901, C. H. Smith, Wingillie, Tareena, New South Wales, brought from Clutterbuck Bros., Adelaide, South Australia, a portable engine, Value about ^,225. This engine had been in South Australia for about four years, and had been admitted free into that State under the Tariff then in force. Mr. Smith brought the engine into New South Wales, vid Wentworth, and portable engines being then dutiable at- 15 per cent, under the Federal Tariff, duty at that rate became payable on the transfer of the engine. Duty was accordingly demanded by ‘the subcollector of Customs, Wentworth, and was collected by him on the 10th December, 1901, the amount paid being ^33 15s. On the 13th December, 1901, portable engines were made free by Parliament. Mr. Smith states that on that account he expected to get a refund; now he makes application therefor. The duty was correctly charged on the engine, and during the Tariff debates an amendment, proposed with the special object of authorizing refunds in cases where duty had been collected on machinery, afterwards made free, was negatived (Hansard 11S82). Submitted for approval that Mr. Chanter be informed that there is no power to make the refund asked for.

Mr KELLY:

Mr McDONALD:
Kennedy

– I wish to say a few words in regard to the attempts which are being made from time to time by certain persons who are interested in retaining coloured and Asiatic labour in the cane-fields, to discredit our legislation on the subject. The methods which are now being adopted in Queensland are similar to those which were adopted there some years ago, to procure the repeal of the State Act which prohibited the employment of kanakas in the sugar industry after a certain period. At that time a Commission was asked for, to enable evidence manufactured by one side to be placed before the public, because it was known that it was difficult to obtain evidence on the other side, and a report was brought in by persons who were interested in the continuance of black labour recommending a repeal of the law, the late Mr. W. H. Groom being one of the minority who objected to that course. The coalition Government of the day agreed to this repeal. Now a similar course is being followed again in Queensland. There has been a conference at Townsville, and attempts are being . made to obtain a report favorable to the employment of kanakas, on the plea that the industry must otherwise be ruined. I have, however, sufficient faith in the Government to feel that that will not be allowed.

Mr REID:
Minister of External Affairs · East Sydney · Free Trade

, - There is, I have reason to believe, some sort of expectation, based upon I do not know what of the present Government proposing an alteration of the policy of this Parliament, which was settled by the Pacific Island Labourers Act. To prevent any possible misapprehension on the subject, I think it right to state at once that the Government have no intention to interfere with a policy which represents, not only the policy of Parliament, but also the policy of which I and all my colleagues are personally in favour.

Mr. McDONALD (Kennedy)- I am very pleased to hear the statement of the Prime Minister, because it will demonstrate to those who are interested in the employment of coloured labour on the sugar plantations the utter futility of making appeals to the Government with a view to the restoration of former conditions. However we may differ upon other matters, I think we are practically unanimous with regard to the employment of white labour in the cane-fields. When a division was taken upon the Pacific Island Labourers Bill only six honorable members voted in favour of the retention of the kanakas. We are in the unfortunate position of having a press which does not give due prominence to that side of the question which is presented by the advocates of a White Australia. Before the Pacific Island Labourers Bill was passed we were told that it would be impossible to grow sugar by means of white labour upon the plantations north of Bun daberg. Afterwards that statement was modified, and it was asserted that white labour could not be employed with any advantage north of Mackay. Later on, when it had been shown that white labour could be employed in the Mackay district with satisfactory results, we were told that black labour only could be profitably employed north of Townsville - between 200 and 300 miles further north. . It is a well-known fact that to the north of Townsville are immense tracts of virgin soil suitable for the production of tropical products, particularly sugar. These lands are exceedingly fertile, and when placed under cultivation will without much doubt produce enormous crops of cane, and in the opinion of many persons that particular part of the coastal districts will before very long become the principal centre of the sugar industry.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– Does the honorable member think that the industry can be carried on without the assistance of a bonus ?

Mr McDONALD:

– I am not prepared to express an opinion upon that matter just now. I must confess that I have not inquired into that matter very closely. We shall have to deal with it later on, and in view of the fact that I originally voted for the payment of the bonus for a fixed period, my attitude towards any proposal for an extension of the bonus will largely depend upon the information presented to us. The idea I had in view in voting for the bonus was to assist the sugar-planters over the transition period during which white labour was being substituted for black upon their plantations, and my action in the future will depend upon the results laid before us. I have alwavs held that sugar could be grown successfully by means of white labour in Northern Queensland, and I have proceeded to the length of stating that if the industry could not be carried on without the assistance of coloured aliens it would be better to allow it to perish. I see no reason to recede from that position. Immediately prior to the passing of the Pacific Island Labourers Act, the proprietors of one mill in Northern Queensland indented as many kanakas as they could possibly secure, with the view to farming them out to the tenant farmers in the district. That should never have been allowed for the reason that it was contrary to the law of Queensland, which distinctly provides that indented kanakas shall be employed only by the persons who indent them. A number of the growers in the neighbourhood of the mill referred to merely entered into contracts to deliver their cane to the mill, the proprietors of which had nothing whatever to do with the cultivation of the plantations. Therefore, I maintain that the mill-owners practically introduced the kanakas as chattels, with a view to farming them out. A number of the planters who desired to carry on their operations by means of white labour, in order to secure the bonus, were prevented from doing so, because the mill-owners said that they had entered into an arrangement to introduce kanakas to work upon the plantations and that the growers would have to employ them. The mill-owner always has the grower under his thumb, for the reason that he can refuse to take the planters’ cane. If there be no mill to crush the cane, the whole crop becomes useless, and severe loss is inflicted upon the planter. Therefore, the grower is compelled by circumstances over which he has no control to enter into an arrangement with the mill-owner. In the case of some of the plantations, where arrangements had been made for the employment of white labour, a number of men were engaged to harvest and load the cane. In the first place, an agreement was made for the delivery of seventy tons daily at the mill. Shortly afterwards, a letter was sent to the men, stating that they must reduce this amount to forty tons per day. The men were cutting and loading more cane than the mill could operate upon, and the manager of the mill found it necessary to send the following letter : -

It being now necessary to reduce your cane deliveries to forty tons (40) per day, I am instructed to give you one (1) week’s notice to do so, as specified in the agreement between yourself and this company.

The men were permitted to go on under the amended arrangement for some time, and subsequently received notice that they were not supplying the necessary forty tons per day. In the report of the company it was stated that the -men were ultimately discharged because they could not supply the (necessary quantity of cane. At Christmas time they received the following letter: -

I am instructed to inform you that according to your cane deliveries for some considerable time past, which has only averaged thirty-eight and a half tons per day, it is impossible for you to harvest all the white rebate cane, as per your agreement, before the termination of the present crushing season, thus causing the growers and the com-

10 Z

pany a great loss. Owing to the average dailysupply not coming near the amount of your contract, this ‘company is reluctantly compelled to notify you that your contract is cancelled through non-performance of the conditions contained therein ; therefore you are to discontinue work on Saturday afternoon, the 27th inst.

It will be seen that the company, after having reduced the quantity of cane from seventy to forty tons per day, practically declared that the white men were not reliable, and could not perform the work required of them. The statement was also made that the real reason why the men did not perform the work was that they wanted to go on the spree at Christmas-time. I desire to refute that statement in the interests of the men, who worked throughout the whole of the Christmas holidays, and who were called upon to contend with verygreat .disabilities. ‘Many of them were placed upon cane which it was most difficult’ to harvest, owing to the fact that a large quantity of it- had been knocked down, and that the yield per acre was very small. The letter to which I have referred states that the average quantity of cane harvested was 38! tons per day/ Yet, according to the testimony of the excise officer, the number of tons of cane supplied each day by these men were as follows: -

– No. In some cases they have obtained the land at a very lowrate, and are deriving a handsome revenue from the leasing of it to Chinese and other Asiatics, for the express purpose of having it cultivated. But I wish honorable members to bear in mind the further point, that they have resorted to this practice really as a means of stirring up an agitation in favour of the theory that the sugar-planters must ultimately revert to the employment of coloured aliens for the cultivation of their land. I regret that there is not a provision in the Constitution that would enable us to prevent coloured aliens passing from one State to another. With such a provision Chinese would not be able to pass from one State to another without paying a heavy polltax, and the sugar-planters would not be so eager as they are to introduce them into their service. The imposition of the heavy poll-tax in itself would deter them from taking action in this direction. Unfortunately, there is no such provision in the Constitution, and many persons, who are anxious to work up an agitation against the abolition of coloured labour, are inducing these Asiatics to leave other States for Queensland to engage in the industry. The matter is a serious one. It seems to me that the bounty system has worked very satisfactorily; and, although a number of . men have not registered as growers of sugar-cane by white labour, I feel that if they had a free hand many of them would avail themselves of the first opportunity to come under the Act. I hope that we shall do our utmost to reserve the industry for the white man. Sugar cultivation affords an opportunity for the employment of thousands and thousands of white labourers. We have not yet overtaken the local consumption of sugar. We shall have to produce 50,000 or 60,000 tons in excess of our present output before we shall overtake the Australian consumption, so that there is yet much room for expansion. We have given sugargrowers the protection of an import duty of £6 per ton on cane sugar. Some of them argue that they are not assisted to that extent, inasmuch as we levy an excise duty of £3 per ton; but they are certainly protected to the full extent of £6 per ton, in the sense that importers of the foreign-grown article have to pay that sum by way of duty before they can introduce it into Australia. Having regard to the constitution of the House, it is astonishing that a proposal to give such assistance was passed. But there was an earnest desire on the part of honorable members generally to make sugar-growing a white man’s industry, and I am sure that the people of

Queensland appreciate the loyalty to principle shown by the southern States in cheerfully paying a duty of £6 per ton on imported sugar in order that this may become a white man’s industry. I only regret that those actually interested in the industry are not making an earnest attempt to preserve it for the white man.

Mr McCOLL:
Echuca

– I have listened with considerable interest to the speech delivered by the honorable memberfor Kennedy, which was very timely, seeing that the Government proposes to deal specifically with the sugar bounty question during next session. The honorable’member has thrown a side light on the manner in which the industry is conducted, and has certainly afforded me much information. I do not think that the request that the Government should at this stage make a statement as to their intentions in reference to the. industry should be pressed by the representatives of Queensland.

Mr McDonald:

– I am not pressing any such request.

Mr McCOLL:

– Honorable members should be satisfied with the assurance of the Minister that the matter willreceive consideration during the recess. The point I should like to emphasize is that it should be the duty of the Government to make an absolutely impartial inquiry, by their own officers, not only in Queensland, but in the other States, as to the actual conditions of the industry. The inquiry should be thorough, but need not be an expensive one. As has been said, the other States are sacrificing a good deal with a view to further the principle of a White Australia, and to establish the great natural industry of Queensland on a firm and secure basis. If there is to be any extension of the period during which the bonuses are payable, it should be granted only on clear evidence adduced to the House that the industry is going to prosper, and in time will be a benefit not only to Queensland but to the whole of Australia. I would therefore ask the Government to give special attention to the statements made by the honorable member for Kennedy, and to institute an absolutely impartial inquiry, so that the fullest information may be given to the House next session, when the whole question will have to be dealt with.

Mr McWILLIAMS:
Franklin

– This is one of the most important questions before the Commonwealth at the present time. There is no doubt that the legis lation passed by the first Federal Parliament has not been so successful as was anticipated. I quite agree with the honorable member for South Sydney that the proposals put forward for the encouragement of sugar-growing by white labour were not dealt with from the fiscal standpoint. It was pointed out when the matter was before this Parliament that the planters of Queensland had been employingblack labour for a certain time, and that some assistance should be given them during the period in which black labour was to gradually give place to white. The facts show that, although the bounties have been payable for some dme, the production of sugar by black labour is absolutely increasing;. The figures put before the House by the Treasurer in the course of his Budget statement show that for the present year the output of sugar grown by white labour in Queensland has increased, in round numbers, from 24,000 tons to 31,000 tons, an increase of 7,000 tons ; while the output of sugar grown by black labour has increased from 65,000 tons to 97,000 tons, ora differenoe of 32,000 tons.

Mr Webster:

– That is owing to the fact that the black man is working the best ground.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– How is it that the increase is greater in the case of sugar grown by black labour?

Mr Webster:

– Because the land cultivated by the kanakas produces more for the labour applied to it.

Mr McWILLIAMS:

– That cannot be the reason, because the kanakas are still employed, I presume, on the land which they used to cultivate before the bounty became payable. These figures, so far as I am aware, have not been challenged.

Mr McDonald:

– Agreat deal more cane is being cultivatedby those employing black labour, because they have a number of kanakas under contract, and must keep them at work.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– I can accept that as an answer. Honorable members know my opinions on the subject of a White Australia. I do not speak as one who desires that Asiatics or kanakas shall be employed on the cane-fields. In a very able speech, an honorable senator who has given the matter great consideration for a number of years admits that our legislation on the subject has been a failure, and, as I live in a State whose conditions are very different from those of Queensland, it is my duty to get what information I can on this subject. The interjections which I have made while others have been speaking have been made, not with a desire to interrupt, but solely with the desire to obtain a solution of what to me is one of the greatest problems with which this Parliament has to deal. In a copy of the Queenslander which I read today, a member of the Queensland Ministry points out that it is necessary, for the sake of the sugar industry, that this Parliament should provide for the continuance of the bounties, which, he says, should be interminable as is the Tariff. I am glad, however, that some of the Queensland representatives in this, Chamber think that the bounties should be terminable. If they are continued for a further term, I think that they should be continued on a descending scale, and that the planters and others interested should know that there is a party in this Chamber - I believe a majority - opposed to the granting of bounties for all time, so that they may make their arrangements accordingly. It is not to be supposed that the people of the other States will be prepared to subsidize for all time a Queensland industry which, under such conditions, would be an artificial, and not a natural one.

Mr Lee:

– The bounties are paid out of the excise duties.

Mr McWILLIAMS:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA · REV TAR; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; CP from 1920; IND from 1928

– I hold that this Parliament has no more justification for voting bounties for the production of sugar, than for the production of fruit, wheat, wool potatoes, or other products; but, at the same time, we have no more right to handicap the sugar industry by the imposition of an excise duty on sugar, than to handicap other primary industries.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The question before the Chair is one of administration rather than of policy.

Mr McWILLIAMS:

– I think that the matter might be better discussed on a separate motion ; but I have said nearly all that I wish to say now. I do not desire that there shall be any misunderstanding as to my attitude in regard to the continuance of bounties. So far as I am concerned, the sugar industry must stand or fall on its merits, without the continuance of the bounties. The only support that I am ready to give to it is by voting for an extension of the term for which bounties shall be paid to a further period of not more than five years, during which they shall diminish year by year. If the sugar industry cannot stand on its own merits, it must, like other primary industries which have been tried unsuccessfully in Australia, go to the wall. I would greatly deplore any such occurrence, but, nevertheless, I cannot, having regard to the interests of the other States in which cane is not grown, consent to the continuance of bounties for the production of sugar which, if granted at all, should be made universal, which, of course, would be absurd.

Mr CARPENTER:
Fremantle

– I have listened with great interest to the speech of the honorable member for Kennedy, who, honorable members will agree with me, stated to us briefly the arguments in favour of the payment of sugar bounties. It has surprised me more than once to find how little public men who argue against the abolition of kanaka labour really understand the conditions under which the sugar industry is carried on. Although I have always had sympathy with our fellowcitizens in Queensland who are crying out for the abolition of kanaka labour, and the preservation of their State for white races, I was for a long time to some extent ignorant of the conditions prevailing there. Perhaps my ignorance may be accounted for by the fact that, like many others, I was dependent on the possibly garbled reports which appeared from time to time in newspapers antagonistic to the principles which the democratic portion of the Queensland people were enunciating. Eventually, however, I visited part of the Queensland sugar districts to ascertain for myself what the true facts of the case were. I understood at the time that Australia would be asked to contribute a considerable sum in bounties for the encouragement of white labour,and the information I received, both from those who are intimately acquainted with the sugar-growers, and from the sugar-growers themselves, dispelled any fear I had that the abolition of kanaka labour would injure, much less ruin, the sugar industry. I went to the fields, and saw the trashing, about which we have heard from the honorable member for Kennedy, being carried out. Whilst that work is very tiresome, and trying to white men, I agree with the honorable member for Kennedy that in certain districts it is not absolutely necessary. Indeed, the opinion I formed was that a different) method of planting the cane would largely obviate the need for trashing in any district. According to the Treasurers figures, the Commonwealth spent in bounties on sugar in Queensland, in 1902, £24,500, and in 1903,£50,600, while the expenditure for this year is estimated at ,£62,800, a total of ,£147,900. In New South Wales the expenditure in 1902 was .£36,300, and in 1903, ^40,200, while it is estimated that this year ,£37,200 will be spent, a total of ,£113,700, or a grand total for the two States of ,£261,600. I can understand some honorable members being somewhat staggered by those figures. That is what we pay for the encouragement of sugar-growing, and the abolition of kanaka labour. The honorable and learned member for Wannon has discussed this matter from the point of view of Victoria, and we all have to consider how the people whom we directly represent are affected by proposals of this kind.

Mr Watson:

– The Commonwealth could not obtain an excise duty of .£3 per ton if no bounty were given to white-grown sugar.

Mr CARPENTER:

– I am not going into .the question of excise, nor “do I quarrel with any one who asks how the present system affects his own State. In fact, I believe there is some justification for the honorable and learned member, for Wannon raising this question. A few days ago the honorable member for Capricornia, when speaking on the subject of the proposed railway from Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta, asked why the State he represented should be called upon to pay a considerable sum of money towards the construction of a line which would not confer any benefit upon it. I interjected that that was a somewhat narrow view to take of a question that was essentially of & national character. In the same way, whilst we may be justified in looking at the sugar bonus question from the point of view of our own States only, we should at the same time endeavour to take a broad, national view of the matter, and that is’ what I propose to do. Just before the Pacific Island Labourers Bill was passed! I noticed’ that there was an inclination on the part of some of our farmers to employ black labour. I remember distinctly that one- prominent weekly journal openly advocated that the wheatgrowers upon the poorer agricultural lands of the States should follow the example of the sugar-planters in Queensland. Had it not been for the timely action of this Parliament in the direction of substituting white labour for black upon the sugar plantations, I Rave very little doubt that an agitation would have been entered upon by some of our farmers with a view to secure a supply of black labour, and that almost the same arguments would have been employed by them as have been urged in the interests of the sugar-growers. When I visited Northern Queensland I found that it was not the small grower with, say, fifty acres under cane, who wanted the kanaka, but the manager of the larger estates owned by absentees, who seldom, if ever, went to Queensland, and who merely invested their money, and looked for a certain return, and troubled themselves about nothing, so long as’ the dividends came along at the end of the year. I was .informed that although the small white planters were subjected to the competition of the large estates upon which coloured labour was employed,’ they were able to make a good living. The fear that white labourers cannot do the work required of them upon the sugar plantations is a bogy, which has, I believe, by this time, been finally disposed of. Perhaps some of the growers were really sincere in expressing the fear that a sufficient number of white labourers would not offer themselves ; but after having conversed with some of the planters, my impression was that, although they were using this argument in favour of the retention of the kanaka, they had no justification for arriving at the conclusion that white labourers would not offer themselves if they had an opportunity to do the work, and the conditions were made such as they should be. Not only in regard to sugargrowing, but in other industries, it has been found that if coloured aliens once obtain a footing a stigma attaches to the industry in which they engage, the work is called “blackfellows’ work,” and it is very hai i to persuade any white man that he should take it up. Take, for instance, marketgardening. In those States in which the work is undertaken almost exclusively by Chinamen, very few white men are prepared to engage in the occupation, not because it is not an honorable one, but because Chinamen have obtained control of it and the impression has got abroad that the work is degrading. In Queensland I found that the accommodation provided for kanakas was such that no decent white man would, or should, put up with it. If an industry is specially trying for thos£ engaged in it, the hardships of the workmencan be very much mitigated if proper provision is made for their comfort when they have finished their daily- toil. If the sugar-planters honestly desire to give the white labourer a fair trial they can do much towards solving any difficulty by providing their men with decent accommodation and comfortable surroundings, in which they can recuperate their exhausted energies. When the present crushing season began, and there was a prospect of fewer kanakas being available, some fears were expressed that the crops would not be cut, because of the want of sufficient labour. I was interested to read the following paragraph which appeared in the Melbourne Argus: -

Mr. Kenna, member for Bowen, who returned to Brisbane after a three-weeks’ tour in the Bowen, Burdekin, and Mackay districts, states that there is no anxiety among cane-growers about not being able to get sufficient labou’r. There was a superfluity of labour last year on the Proserpine and at Mackay. He had spoken to a large number of men, who were going to work as canecutters, and he had no hesitation in saying that the majority were good workers and anxious to obtain work, but some were destitute. White labour was beginning to organize itself ; that is, the men are writing to farmers they worked for in the previous cane season just in the way shearers do, and the same men will go back to the same places. Some harm was being done by people, possibly well-meaning, who continued to <;ry out that the removal of the kanaka will ruin the sugar industry. Mr. Kenna says that after speaking to a great many he could find no canegrower who had tried white labour last season disappointed with the result. On the contrary, a fresh area is being put under cultivation, and large estates, at present being cultivated with black labour, are being cut up, and white farmers encouraged to take them up on the share system in anticipation of the departure of the kanaka.

– We proposed, as I advocated at the outset, that the limitation should be eliminated from the Excise

Mr Fisher:

– That does not injure the local grower.

Mr G B EDWARDS:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

– Let us suppose that a few years hence we have a surplus of 5,000 tons of sugar, and that our manufacturers find it necessary to import 5,000 tons in order to obtain the full amount of the drawback. The Commonwealth will then have to pay the freight from Australia in addition to the freight to Australia of these two lots of sugar. I repeat that the manufactures in which I am interested are handicapped very heavily by present legislation. For the sake of preserving a White Australia, I am prepared to extend that legislation a little longer. At the same time, I am strongly of opinion that the Excise duty and the bounty should be gradually diminished, so that within a specified number of years they would completely disappear. The honorable member for Wide Bay desires the Government to declare that they will indefinitely continue the policy of granting a bounty upon sugar. To do th’at would result in a fiscal fight for the repeal of such legislation every year. My suggestion is, I think, an infinitely better and more practical one. The question, I admit, is most complicated. In the House of Commons a similar discussion took place a couple of years ago, and there were very few members of the gre”at mother of Parliaments who thoroughly understood the sugar question. Our difficulties are not so great as those with which that body was confronted, but they are much greater than honorable members imagine. When the Government come to decide upon a definite policy in regard to the termination of the bounty and excise duty upon sugar they will find it a troublesome question to deal with. For these reasons I do not think it is politic for the Committee to insist upon the Government making a declaration of policy whilst the general Estimates are under consideration.

Mr. FISHER (Wide Bay).- I think that the honorable member for South Sydney will admit that it would be unfair to remit this question to the Tariff Commission for investigation, considering that the terminable period of the sugar bounty is so near. I am of opinion that the limitation provided in the Sugar Bounty Act should be excised, and that Parliament should be allowed to deal with the matter as it chooses. I am quite prepared to trust it to deal justly with the sugar-growers.

Mr LEE:
Cowper

– I do not propose to occupy the time of the Committee at length, tout I desire to reply to an honorable member who has affirmed that if the sugar industry can be successfully carried on only by means of a bounty its extinction is desirable.

Mr Lonsdale:

– Hear, hear.

Mr LEE:

– So far as New South Wales is concerned, that State can get on very well without the aid of a bounty if the excise is abolished ; but at the same time its sugar-growers desire to secure a fair field and an absence of black labour competition. In my judgment freetraders can loyally support the payment of a sugar bounty, because by so doing they merely evidence their desire to maintain a White Austrafia. It is not right to say that the whole of Australia is taxed to pay the bounty. As a matter of fact, the farmers and producers themselves pay it. The people of Victoria have to pay. by way of excise on sugar, some £90,000 per annum, but New South Wales with not a much larger population pays in round figures £90,000 in excess of that sum. The producer really has to pay the excise in two ways. He pays on the sugar produced by him, and also on that which he consumes. That is the position. Sugar is not produced in this State, but the people have to pay the excise duty. Mr. Knox, the chairman of the Colonial Sugar Refining Company, said recently that -

The company would be prepared to give is.10d. per ton more for cane for every £1 reduction in excise with the present import duties.

Mr. CHANTER (Riverina).- Since the adjournment for dinner I have had an opportunity to read the judgment delivered by the High Court in the case of Cowan and Sons v. Lockyer, to which I referred earlier in the day, and I think it desirable to place it before the Committee. It is not a verv lengthy judgment, and as it is applicable to the case which I brought before the Committee, and may apply to others, U is well that honorable members should be familiar with its terms. The Court held that under section 167 of the Customs Act a sum of money paid under protest in respect of a duty which subsequently was not ratified by Parliament was not collectable, and was not at any time payable. The law has been laid down for the guidance of the present Minister of Trade and Customs. His predecessors had no such ruling to act upon, and I should like the honorable gentleman to say, after hearing this judgment read, whether he cannot see his way clear to take the action I have advised in regard to the case which I brought under his notice, as well as in relation to sill similar cases.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I should like to point out to the honorable member that by consent we are having a general discussion on the sugar industry, and that the specific’ case which he now desires to re-introduce might be dealt with by him when division 35 is before the Committee. The incident to which he refers relates to the action of an officer for whom provision is made in that division, and I would suggest to him that he should allow the discussion on the sugar industry to terminate before he deals with it.

Mr CHANTER:

– I should be very glad to accept your suggestion, Mr. Chairman, but I have to leave town to-morrow, and as the Estimates of the Department will have been dealt with before I return, I may not have another opportunity to bring this case under the notice of the Committee. The Chief Justice, in giving judgment, said -

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, si company carrying on business in New South Wales, against the Collector of Customs in New South Wales, to recover the sum of money, ^132 ys. 7c!., deposited by them in December, 1901, upon the importation into New South Wales of certain envelope folding machines. At that time, the goods in question were not liable to duty under the Tariff of New South Wales, which was, as a matter of law, the only Tariff applicable in that State. When the goods were imported, duty was demanded upon them by the defendant, on the ground that under the Tariff proposals then before Parliament such goods were proposed to be made dutiable. The money was paid under protest, as was understood by the parties, under the provisions of section 167 of the Customs Act 1901, which had come into operation shortly before, viz., on 4th October, 1901. The goods in question were included in the draft Tariff as laid upon the table of the House of Representatives on the 8th October, 1901. When the Tariff had passed through both Houses, and the Customs Tariff Act came to be passed into law on 16th September, 1902, these goods were exempted from taxation, so that, as a matter of law, no duty was ever payable on these goods. They were not taxable under the Tariff of New South Wales, and not taxable under the Tariff of the Commonwealth, and the only claim that could be made was that they were included in the draft Tariff laid upon the table of the House of Representatives. When the goods were imported, the plaintiffs denied the liability to duty, and deposited the money under section 167 of the Customs Act 1901, which had then been passed. That section runs - “ If any dispute shall arise as to the amount or rate of duty, or as to the liability of goods to duty, the owner may deposit with the Collector the amount of duty demanded, and thereupon the following consequences shall ensue : - (1) The owner, upon making proper entry, shall be entitled to delivery of the goods. (2) The deposit shall be deemed the proper duty unless by action commenced by the owner against the collector within six months after making the deposit, the contrary shall be determined. . . .” Now, that section occurs in Part VIII. of the Act, beginning with section 130, which provides - “ This part of this Act shall not affect any duties payable under any State Act.” It therefore had no application at all, according to the law as it then existed, to any duties that could be collected, according to law ; but, as we know very well, according to custom, they aic collected in such circumstances, and were collected in accordance with the draft Tariff. The terms of the section themselves also show that they were intended to apply to a Customs Tariff. They did not apply to a State Tariff, and, therefore, could only apply to a Federal Tariff. They assumed the existence of a Federal Tariff. In practice, the parties acted as if the section were the law, and it appears “to me that the proper conclusion is that the money was paid, not to be subject to the law under that section, but upon terms similar to those In the section, and, as a matter of agreement between the party paying and the party receiving, so that their rights might be thereafter determined. That construction of their conduct gets over a difficulty as to the action not being brought within six months, because the Act says - “ The deposit shall be deemed the proper duty unless, by action commenced within six months after making the deposit, the contrary shall be determined.” We need not determine a matter of speculation now, because, regarding the matter, as we do, in the light of an agreement between the parties, there can be no difficulty in extending the time for bringing this action, as has been done in fact, as is stated in the pleadings -

– But their commodities are protected.

Mr LONSDALE:

Mr McLean:

– The whole question will have to be threshed out next session.

Mr TUDOR:

– I admit that it will. I should not have spoken on this question but for the observations made by the honorable and learned member for Wannon. I think that the workers of Victoria are as keenly in favour of the present system of dealing with the sugar industry, as they are in. favour of protecting any of their own industries. I do not think that the arguments which may be adduced in favour of the consideration of the operation of the ordinary protective duties by the Tariff Commission apply to the suggestion that the sugar excise bounty should also be considered by that body. The latter will terminate at a fixed date, while the others will not do so. I sincerely hope that the Government will let those who are interested in the industry know, without delay, what are their intentions.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 33 (Patents),£7,853 ; division 34 (Statistics), £1,950; division 35 (New South Wales), £70,480; division 36 (Victoria), £64,501 ; agreed to.

Division 37 (Queensland), £51,934.

Mr PAGE:
Maranoa

– I should like some information about the item -

Gratuity to T. J. Stutchbury, for services as Acting Sub-collector of Customs at Newcastle,

These were put together, and no objection was raised to the adoption of that course. The leader of the Opposition was present at the time, he heard the division put, and requested that upon it a general discussion should take place. However, I am anxious to consult the desire of honorable members in this matter. Do I understand that they ‘ wish me to put subdivision No. 1 -

Honorable Members. - Hear, hear.

Mr. TUDOR (Yarra). - I desire to point out the increases for which provision has been made in these items. The Minister of Trade and Customs stated just now that he could explain the position of these Estimates in one minute, but I have waited for his explanation in vain.

Mr G B EDWARDS:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

– The Minister has not had a chance of explaining.

Mr McLean:

– Will the honorable member permit me to do so now?

Mr TUDOR:

– Certainly.

Mr McLEAN:

I think it is only reasonable that progress should be reported.

Mr BATCHELOR:
Boothby

– I think that the request that progress be reported is a reasonable one. The Government have no right to complain of the progress made by us to-day.

Mr McLean:

– I am not complaining.

Mr BATCHELOR:

– There can be no reason for sitting beyond the hour at which it is usual to adjourn. The discussion of the question affecting the sugar industry certainly did not occupy more time than it was reasonable to expect.

Mr Kelly:

– Has not the honorable member already approved of these Estimates ?

Mr BATCHELOR:

– No; I approved of the Estimates of the Department of Home Affairs, butthe general Estimates were not considered by the Cabinet of which I was a member. I have not raised my voice in connexion with any item in the Estimates for the Department of Home Affairs, but I had not previously seen the Estimates now before the Committee. Some of the divisionsare of considerable importance. I had intended to make some remarks in regard to the statistical branch of the Department, but the division in which it is provided for, and several other important divisions, were passed hurriedly, while I was absent from the Chamber. The fact that we have had a long discussion on important matters of principle is not a good reason for extending the sitting beyond the usual hour.

Mr HUTCHISON:
Hindmarsh

– On two or three occasions, when the noconfidence debate was proceeding, I stated that I was willing to sit later if other honorable members would do so, to get on with business, but honorable members opposite then objected that it would be unreasonable to sit after 11 o’clock. We have done good work to-night, and I think it would be wise to adjourn now, so that we may come fresh to the consideration of this division to-morrow.

Mr McLEAN:

– If there is any one Department whose Estimates are not contentious it is the Department of Trade and Customs.

Mr Brown:

– These are the most contentious of all the Estimates.

Mr McLEAN:

– I would be glad to know why? We have a splendid man at the head of the Customs Department, and, although the sub-department of the Patents Office was created towards the end of last year, and a statistical branch has been established, the expenditure of the Department, as a whole,has been reduced to the lowest amount compatible with efficiency, so that the sum asked for is £13,526 less than was voted last year. I admit, however, that the establishment of the statistical branch will effect a considerable saving, inasmuch as work which was formerly done in the States will now be done at the central office. I shall be very glad to give any information desired, but honorable members opposite are as responsible as we are for the progress of business. I am willing to postpone any contentious proposal, but I think that the rest of the Department should be passed to-night. The leader of the Opposition has, I believe, been through these Estimates, and I am sure that He will admit that there is nothing in them that can reasonably beobjected to.

Mr WATSON:
Bland

– Personally, I see nothing to object to in the Estimates, though I cannot ask other honorable members to take my word for that. Whoever happens to be in charge of the Estimates must be prepared to meet criticism. The debate to-night has been upon a very important question, and, so far as I know, the time has not been wasted.

Mr Johnson:

– lt was largely a debate on matters not affected by the Estimates.

Mr WATSON:

– The first item in a Department is generally used as a peg upon which to hang important criticism, such as that which we have had to-night. I think that we might well adjourn at 11 o’clock. In any case, I do not think we should be asked to go bevond the Queensland division.

Mr STORRER:
Bass

Mr McDonald:

– But I want to know why I am singled out in this manner. There is only one. way to have the question discussed. I move -

That your ruling be disagreed to.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member has written out his motion in the following words, “ That your ruling bedisagreed with,” but he has not stated what the ruling is. Standing order 228 is as follows : -

If any objection is taken to a ruling or decision of the Chairmanof Committees, such objection shall be stated at once in writing, and may forthwith be decided by the Committee ; and the proceedings shall then be resumed where they were interrupted.

– I do hope that individual officers will not be dragged into our little differenceshere, and made, as a result, to suffer. Personally, Ido not know the Collector of Customs in Brisbane; but I do know that last year he was voted his present salary by Parliament, and that the collector in Western Australia receives a larger remuneration. Leaving out of consideration the fact that a large quantity of gold is exported from the western State, surely the trade of Queensland warrants us in paying its Collector of Customs a salary equal to that which is paid to a similar officer in Western Australia. I do hope that his salary will not be made the sport of our differences in this Chamber.

Mr. PAGE (Maranoa). - I trust that the honorable member for Kennedy will withdraw his amendment, because the Collector of Customs at Brisbane, Mr. Irving, is one of the most capable officers in that Department. He is about 56 or 60 years of age, and may soon be called upon to retire. His salary under the State Government was £750 per year, and the particulars of his service show that he was State Collector of Customs, and was transferred to the service of the Commonwealth on the 1st January, 1901, when the Customs Departments of the various States were taken over by the Federal authorities. He has a total service of thirty-six years, and is entitled, on that account, to some consideration.

Mr Mahon:

– I think that there should be a quorum present. [Quorum formed.]

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I would like to ask, Mr. Chairman, whether you will take a motion from me - “ That the honorable member be no further heard.”

The CHAIRMAN:

– I cannot accept such a motion.

Mr PAGE:

– Mr. Irving is in Division A of the Commonwealth Service, and under the classification scheme, his salary, including rent, was fixed at £750. I have known him for a number of years as a very capable officer. He has to administer a number of Acts, among which is the Sugar Bounties Act. A report which was recently presented to the Minister will give honorable members an idea of the amount of travelling, by steamer, rail, buggy, and on horseback, which this entails, not only upon his inspectors, but upon the Collector himself.

Mr Henry Willis:

– Then let us come to a vote. The honorable member has made out a good case.

Mr PAGE:

– We will give honorable members a taste of what we can do first.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– Is the honorable member in order in threatening to obstruct business ?

The CHAIRMAN:

– If he desires his expression to convey a threat of obstruction he is not in order.

Mr PAGE:

– I have no wish to obstruct. The idea is an imagination of the honorable member’s debased mind. The officer to whom I am referring has also to administer the provisions of the Immigration Restriction Act, No. 17 of 1 90 1. He is an excellent linguist, speaking seven or eight languages, and accompanied the right honorable member for Adelaide, as an interpreter, during his visit to Northern Queensland. If the Minister wishes a person who is suspected of being a prohibited immigrant to be examined, the examination is part of the work of the Collector. The Act under which these duties are performed is entitled -

An Act to place certain restrictions on immigration, and to provide for the removal from the Commonwealth of prohibited immigrants.

That Act is as follows : -

Be it enacted by the King’s Most Excellent Majestythe Senate and House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Australia -

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I submit that the honorable member is not in order in reading the Immigration Restriction Act to the Committee.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The . honorable member, so far as I follow him, desires to show the work which this officer has to do under the Act.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– But the honorable member is reading the title of the Act.

The CHAIRMAN:

– It was not my intention to allow the honorable member for Maranoa to proceed further with the reading of matter not affecting this officer. I ask the honorable member to confine his quotation to those portions of the Act which affect the officer whose salary we are discussing.

Mr Webster:

– I desire to call attention to the state of the Committee. [Quo

Mr PAGE:

– I would direct special attention to the duties of this officer under section 3, which provides that, amongst others, the following shall be prohibited immigrants : -

any person likely, in the opinion of a Minister, or an officer, to become a charge upon the public, or any public or charitable institution.
Any person suffering from an infectious disease of a loathsome or dangerous character.

The CHAIRMAN:

– Standing order 276 provides -

The Speaker or the Chairman of Committees may call the attention of the House or the Committee, as the case may be, to continued irrelevance or tedious repetition or the taking up of time by a speech of such unwarrantable length….

AYES: 12

NOES: 28

Majority … … … 16

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Mr. WATSON (Bland).- I move-

That the Chairman do now leave the chair.

It seems to me, in view of the condition of irritation in which the Committee is, that it would be wise on the part of the Government to agree to adjourn. We have been trying the patience of the Chairman to a great extent to-night, and in his interests, as well as in the interests of the conduct of public business, it is reasonable that we should now adjourn, and allow the consideration of these Estimates to be resumed to-morrow. I must say that I have never before in this Parliament witnessed anything like what has occurred to-night.

Honorable Members. - Hear, hear.

An Honorable Member. - The Committee supported the Chairman.

Honorable Members. - It had.

Mr. MAHON (Coolgardie).- I regret 4ha.t it should have fallen to my lot to move that your ruling be dissented from, Mr. Chairman ; but I cannot allow it io pass unchallenged. I feel that ‘ a very serious error was made by you, and, without wasting time, or making use of a word that would give the slightest offence either to you or to any honorable gentleman opposite, I respectfully submit that your decision cannot be upheld by the Committee. Directly you had informed the Committee that the honorable member for Gwydir was guilty of tedious repetition under standing order 276, I rose to move that your ruling be dissented from, and you then told the Committee that what you had given was a decision, not a ruling. Standing order 276 reads as follows: -

The Speaker or the Chairman of Committees may call the attention of the House or the Committee, as the case may be, to continued irrelevance or tedious repetition, or the taking up of time by a speech of such unwarrantable length as to obstruct the business on the part of a member, and may direct such member to discontinue his speech-.

You ruled that your direction under that standing order is not a ruling which may be challenged by the Committee. I respectfully submit that it is, and in support of my position I refer you to standing order 228, which say’s -

If any objection is taken to a .ruling or decision of the Chairman of Committees, such objection shall be stated at once “in writing, and may forthwith be decided by the Committee ; and the proceedings shall then be resumed where they were interrupted.

– Was it not in reason to ask honorable members to sit a little later than 11 o’clock?

Mr BROWN:

The CHAIRMAN:

Mr Reid:

– I will help the honorable member along if he will only trust me a little bit.

Mr WEBSTER:

– I am perfectly prepared to trust the Prime Minister. I regret that I have been the cause of an incorrect decision on the part of the Chairman, or of something worse than that.

The ACTING- CHAIRMAN (Mr. Batchelor). - Is the honorable member reflecting upon the Chair?

Mr WEBSTER:

– No; I am speaking of the Chairman who is now absent. These all-night sittings, I contend, are calculated to makehonorable members unreasonable towards one another. Personally, I believe that the Chairman was growing tired; that he was suffering from mental exhaustion, and that consequently he was induced to rule as he did. I think that he was sincerely desirous of doing his best to expedite the conduct of public business.

The ACTING - CHAIRMAN (Mr. Batchelor). - I think that the honorable member is reflecting upon the Chair.

Mr WEBSTER:

– Western Australia is being flooded with foreigners of all descriptions, who are coming into the country under the very eyes of the Customs officials. I think, however, that it is too late to discuss the matter now. Surely, as business men, we can come to some reasonable compromise which will enable us to get to bed, and will bring us here fresh for to-morrow’s sitting. I appeal to the Prime Minister to make a suggestion for such a compromise.

Mr. HUTCHISON (Hindmarsh). - I pointed out last night that a few weeks ago, when honorable members on this side of the Chamber were anxious to sit late to finish the no-confidence debate, Ministerial supporters objected, and yet they opposed the adjournment to-night. The Committee was in a good frame of mind when the adjournment was suggested at 11 o’clock, and I am sure that even the Prime Minister will admit that nothing has been gained by not consenting to adjourn. In my opinion, nothing will be gained by continuing the present proceedings. The Chairman was good enough to allow me to proceed perhaps further than was quite in conformity with the rules of debate, in introducing the matter which has been referred to by the honorable member for Boothby. It was then pointed out to me that a proper occasion for its discussion would arrive later. It is not, however, fair to ask us to discuss it at this hour, when many honorable members are away. I wish also to say something in regard to the administration of the Customs Department in South Australia.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK (Parramatta).Although the honorable member for Hindmarsh says thatthe Committee was in a good frame of mind at 11 o’clock, to-day’s Age - surely an impartial judge - says of our proceedings last night -

After a general talk about the White Australia question, sugar bonuses, the advisability of authorizing the Tariff Commission to inquire into the sugar industry -

Mr Watkins:

– Is it in order for the honorable member to quote a newspaper article dealing with a debate now in progress ?

Mr Kelly:

– I would point out that we are now discussing, not the Estimates, but the motion that the Chairman do now leave the chair, so that the honorable member’s point of order has no application, since the Age newspaper article deals with quite another debate.

Mr McDonald:

– It is a recognised parliamentary rule that members may not read extracts from newspapers commenting on the proceedings of Parliament. If that were allowed we might be domineered over by the press with very serious results.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I give in.

Mr McDonald:

– I was sure that the honorable member’s intelligence would cause him to recognise the seriousness of the matter.

The CHAIRMAN:

– Standing order 268 provides that -

No member shall read extracts from newspapers or other documents referring to debates in the House during the same session..

Mr. TUDOR (Yarra). - I regret that the Government did not see fit to consent to an adjournment at a reasonable hour. A fair offer was made to them, but they were not ready to accept it. They seemed to think that because rhey had a sufficient number of supporters here to insure a quorum, they could proceed at their own sweet will. Realizing the position of a certain measure in another place - and appreciating the treatment which has been accorded to certain amendments-

Mr Reid:

– I rise to a point of order. The question under consideration is not an item upon the Estimates, but whether you, sir, shall leave the Chair and report progress. Even if the honorable member can connect his remarks with the item to which he has referred, that fact will not make them relevant to the motion before the Chair. He has deliberately stated that he intends to read a certain report for the purpose of wasting time.

Mr Watson:

– No.

Mr Reid:

– He has stated that up till 11 o’clock last evening his remarks were in the nature of fair criticism, but that he now intends to read about 210 pages from the report of a sugar expert, and he has added that the task will occupy him until breakfast time. In view of these statements, I ask whether the reading of a long report by a Government expert in Queensland has any reference to the motion before the Chair?

Mr Watson:

– Might I point out that the Prime Minister has misstated the position of the honorable member for Maranoa. He admitted that he had participated in a waste of time - not that he proposed to do so.

Mr WEBSTER:

Honorable Members. - Hear, hear.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The sitting of the Committee will be resumed at a quarterpast 9 o’clock.

Sitting resumed.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. Groom). - I must ask the honorable and learned member not to reflect on the conduct of the Chairman.

Mr HUGHES:

– I think that the honorable member for Kennedy was quite right in entering a protest. I understand that the honorable member for Gwydir was ruled out of order when he had been speaking for only a few minutes. Naturally, that irritated some honorable members on this side, and one thing leading to another the Prime Minister said that it would be a trial of brute strength. It ought never to be a trial of brute strength, but a trial to see which side has the better cause. These are the Estimates, not so much of one Government as of two or three Governments. So far as I know, they are not marked by any of those undesirable features, which from time to time have distinguished the Estimates submitted in the States Parliaments, and in the Imperial Parliament. They have been pruned down to such an extent that the criticisms, which are made by ill-conditioned and ill-informed persons, are simply ridiculous. There is little or no room for further retrenchment, but it may be necessary to discuss a particular item. I shall always be ready to protest against any effort to interfere with the privileges of the representatives of the people. I submit that the Estimates ought to be stated from the Chair, not in divisions, but in sections. I think that a Minister ought not to agree to the Chairman submitting the Estimates in globo, and that good progress would have been made if, at the end of the week, the Estimates for the Department of Trade and Customs had been passed. I understand that the honorable member for Maranoa was not permitted last night to deal at length with the report of Dr. Maxwell on the sugar industry. It was hardly conducive to the bestinterests of the country that he should have been restricted to any serious extent in dealing with that document. No amount of discussion on the sugar question can fairly be regarded as a waste of time, or an abuse of the privileges of the House. I cannot understand why an effort was made to block the honorable member, even though he was speaking on an item, rather than on the Estimates for the Department. I trust that an arrangement may be arrived at whereby this irritating state of affairs may be terminated, and the Estimates may be submitted either item by item, or section by section.

Mr WATSON:
Bland

– The Prime Minister interjected while the honorable member for Wide Bay was speaking, that this motion was moved with a view to block the consideration of the Estimates. That was” hardly the motive which animated me, I submitted the motion, because, in my view, the honorable member for Gwydir had been harshly treated. He had been speaking for only a short time when the Chairman enforced the standing order, and I moved the motion to mark my disapproval of that act, and not with the intention of blocking the discussion of the Estimates, because a number of honorable members on my side were anxious to discuss some matters of adminstration. After the long discussion we have had, it seems to me that my object has been sufficiently served, and therefore I ask leave to withdraw the motion.

Mr Reid:

– We are not setting a task ; we are simply stating that if honorable members discharge their duties of criticism by one o’clock, private members’ business will be taken in the afternoon, and when it is concluded, the Government will consent to an adjournment.

Mr BATCHELOR:

– I am prepared to do everything in my power to assist in getting the Treasurer’s Estimates through, tout I do not intend to forego my right of discussion in the slightest degree.

Mr. HUGHES (West Sydney).- The statement of the Prime Minister is all very well, but it is not fair to say that the responsibility will rest upon the Opposition in the event of private members’ time being abridged during the afternoon. In regard to the Treasurer’s Estimates, the position is such that as far as the desire to effect retrenchments is concerned, there is no need for discussion. Practically the Treasurer’s Estimates have been submitted to three Governments, and it does not lie in the mouth of any well-informed man to say that extravagance exists in any direction. But without desiring to reduce items on the ground of extravagance, ah honorable member may desire to criticise the Estimates, and should have every opportunity to do so. We have less than three hours in which to finish the Estimates for the Department of Trade and Customs, and to deal with the whole of theTreasurer’s Estimates. If it is not possible to finish the work in that time the responsibility must lie upon the Government, and not upon the Opposition. I do not remember any all-night sitting previously when the Government did not consent to an adjournment at this stage.

Mr Reid:

– I do not remember anything like this in New South Wales.

Mr HUGHES:

– I remember one occasion in New South Wales when we started sitting on Monday morning, and continued right on till the following Saturday night. Honorable members who have not been connected with New South Wales politics may thank their lucky stars that we have had nothing like that in the Federal Parliament. Provided private members are given a reasonable opportunity to bring their business on this afternoon, I see no objection to the course proposed.

Mr. WATSON (Bland).- I think that the suggestion of the Prime Minister is a reasonable one, under the circumstances. Of course, it must be recollected that in the absence of any understanding whatever, the present debate will continue, and private members will be debarred from bringing on their business in the afternoon. Those who are anxious to give them an opportunity, will not achieve their end by refusing to accept the suggestion of the Prime Minister. With regard to the Treasurer’s Estimates, having been for a short period in the office of Treasurer myself , I am partly responsible for them, and if any honorable member cares to say a word against them, I am afraid I shall be constrained to defend them. But in view of the very regrettable illness of the Treasurer, the Committee might concede the request of the Prime Minister, and allow those Estimates to go through. I am sure there is not an honorable member of this House who is held in higher respect than the Treasurer, and if, in any way, we can pay him a compliment, that may help to relieve the mental strain upon him, everyone of us will be glad to do it. I certainly respond heartily to that portion of the Prime Minister’s request.

Mr. PAGE (Maranoa). - I am very pleased indeed that the Prime Minister and the leader of our party have arrived at a compromise. The only matter in the Estimates about which I am concerned is the position of the Collector of Customs, to whom I have already referred, and as long as that is attended to, I shall be satisfied.

– I can explain the expenditure without any difficulty. The money is voted to cover law costs, awards, and rewards to officers who have been zealous in unearthing cases of evasion of Customs duties. It will be understood at once that we cannot regulate the expenditure as between the States for such a purpose. In some cases the law costs will be very small, but if, on the other hand, a number of cases occur, the costs will be proportionately larger. It is impossible to maintain a proportion between the various States.

Mr. BROWN (Canobolas).- The Minister’s explanation clears away a great deal of difficulty. I understand that the money referred to is mainly on account of legal proceedings. No doubt the very great difference between the expenditure for Victoria and that for New South Wales is accounted for by the free-trade system which has prevailed in New South Wales, and to the fact that the people of that State have not been educated up to methods of evading Customs duties to the same extent as the people in Victoria.

Mr McLean:

– I think the honorable member has made a mistake as to the New South Wales figures ; if he looks at page 43 he will see that the sum is .£2,010. He has merely quoted the figures for the border.

Mr BROWN:

– I see that the New South Wales people have been learning a few wrinkles from the Victorians. There is one other matter which .1 wish to mention. A considerable amount of smuggling is carried on by sailors and others who arrive at our ports in vessels from the East. Detections are frequently made, and heavy fines are imposed ; but in spite of the watchfulness of the officers, and the severity of the punishment, smuggling is still continued. It has been suggested to me that the revenue would be safeguarded if, in addition to having vigilant officers at Australian ports, the Department of Trade and Customs would employ detectives at eastern ports with the object of affording information to the Customs authorities in Australia as to goods that were attempted to be smuggled. I commend the suggestion to the careful consideration of the Minister. I believe that if this plan were adopted, it would result in large detections being made, and a great amount of revenue being collected.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 38 (South Australia), £24,352.

Mr BATCHELOR:
Boothby

– I wish to direct attention to the item -

To adjust salaries of officers entitled to increments under State laws, £237.

Similar items appear in connexionwith the South Australian Estimates, under various departmental headings. No such items appear in connexion with the Estimates of the other States. The explanation probably is that the South Australian Public Service Act renders the Commonwealth liable to pay certain increments to transferred officers, whether the Public Service Commissioner approves of them or not. The Public Service Commissioner, in classifying the service, graded the officers according to the duties they were discharging, but in some cases he did not recommend the increases to which the officers were entitled under the State law. This amount of £237 covers, I think, theannual increases of £10 to Customs officers up to the end of this financial year. I understand that the Commissioner is of opinion that whatever rights the officers may have had up to the time their offices were classified, they should cease from that date, and that he is not under any necessity to retain the officers at the salaries which they will hold at the end of this financial year.

Mr McLean:

– It has been ruled that these officers are entitled by law if they were passing through a class on transfer to the increments accruing therein, but that when they are promoted afterwards they come under the classification.

Mr BATCHELOR:

– That is the position which the officers have always maintained. I do not think they have ever maintained that the law entitles them to carry their right to increments up to another class. I wish to direct the attention of the Government to a matter which affects public officers in South Australia, more particularly in the Post and Telegraph Office, who have received a certain sum as salary, and a certain sum as allowances for quarters, selling stamps, and doing the work of the Savings Bank. In some cases these allowances amounted to a very large sum ; for instance, to about £200 in the case of the Port Adelaide Post Office, and to about £100 in the case of the Moonta Post Office. In many cases the loss of these allowances has meant a very considerable reduction in the earnings of an officer. The Public Service Commissioner stated in his report that he had been able to bring about a considerable improvement in the condition of the service, and one which would ultimately lead to a large saving, and that at the same time he had not reduced the salary of a single individual. In a highly technical sense, his statement is correct. The salary of the office has not been reduced, but the emoluments of the holder have been very considerably reduced, in some cases by as much as £200 per annum. It is not very much satisfaction to an officer to be told that his salary has not been reduced when the payments made to him have been very greatly reduced. The commissions which the Savings Banks Commissioners pay for the transaction of their business have now to be paid into the Treasury, instead of being paid directly to the officers who do the work. When the late Government left office, the question was under consideration whether it would not be a proper thing to place on the Estimates an amount to meet the cases of the men who would suffer extreme hardship from this alteration in the conditions of their appointment. Let me illustrate the position by taking the case of Mr. Gillen, who collaborated with Professor Baldwin Spencer in the production of a work on the native tribes of Australia, and who occupied the position of postmaster at Alice Springs. Being an exceedingly able man, he was made Protector of the Aborigines, and in recognition of his good services in that position, and of the scientific work he had done, he was promoted to the position of postmaster at Moonta, where the salary of the office was low, but carried allowances which provided him with an income of about £400 per year. Owing to the classification of the office, he has to suffer a very heavy reduction, after having spent a lifetime in the service of the people. There are other cases where the amount involved is very much larger than it is in his case. I should like the Government to look into the matter and see whether it would not be justified in asking Parliament to vote a sum so that no considerable reduction may be made in the salaries of these men, whilst they hold the positions. Of course, the officers who are qualified to take better positions should be promoted at the first opportunity. It would not be necessary to vote this amount for many years, because I believe that in a short time things would right themselves.

Mr POYNTON:
Grey

– I wish to direct the attention of the Minister of Trade and Customs to the travelling allow- ance of temporary Excise officers. According to Public Service regulation No. 134 -

The Permanent Head, or Chief Officer, when forwarding an application to the Commissioner, shall state what amount of salary, fee, or allowance is, in his opinion, appropriate to the work to be performed; but the rate of payment shall be the same as is paid to permanent employees of the Commonwealth in the State for similar work.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 39 (Western Australia), £32 , 699.

Mr McLEAN:
Protectionist

-I move-

That the item “ Collector of Customs,£800,” be reduced by £100.

– This officer was taken over by the Commonwealth with a salary and a house allowance. If an allowance is payable to an officer, it ought to be voted specifically on the Estimates, and ought not to be paid out of a contingencies vote.

Mr McLEAN:

– In reply to the honorable member for Hindmarsh, I desire to say that where an officer was taken over by the Commonwealth at a higher salary than that provided for in the classification it was not reduced, but his successor will be paid according to the classification. The Collector of Customs in South Australia received an increase of £150, so that, although he is receiving a lower salary than the Collector of Customs in Western Australia, he has had a substantial increase.

Sir JOHN FORREST (Swan). - I desire to ask the Minister whether the amount voted last year to the Collector of Customs in Western Australia was £700 or £800? It is possible that he may be told next year that the contingencies vote is not large enough to provide his house allowance of £100.

Mr McLean:

– A salary of £700 was voted last year. A mistake was made this year in asking for a vote of £800. The Commissioner classified the office at £800 without regard to the fact that the officer was receiving an allowance of £100.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– As a rule, when an allowance is given to an officer, it is specifically voted.

Mr McLean:

– Last year this allowance of £100 was paid out of the vote for contingencies. There is no necessity for a specific vote of £100.

Mr FRAZER:
Kalgoorlie

– I wish to refer to the administration of the Immigration Restriction Act in Western Australia by a Customs officer. I mentioned some time ago that the influx of foreigners into that State was so rapid that serious trouble was likely to occur in some places. It is notorious that the number of Italian immigrants has excited great alarm in several localities. It is very generally believed that they are coming out under contract. At any rate, it is a fact that they go into employment nearly as soon as they land. Only last week there was a riot in a northern town - in Leonora, I think - between British and Italian workers. I believe that as regards the Italians the administration of the Act is not nearly as efficient as it should be, because the inquiries are not sufficiently searching. It is also notorious that Chinese are landing in Western Australia at a rapid rate. The Chinese are being smuggled into the State with almost the same facility as the goods to which the honorable member for Canobolas referred this morning. It will be generally admitted that owing to our extensive coast-line, the efficient administration of the Act by reliable officers at every port is likely to be very expensive. I would suggest for the consideration of the Minister of External Affairs, that in each State there should be only one port at which foreigners could gain admission. At Broome and Carnarvon and other ports on the north-west coast of Western Australia, where the inspection is not close, foreigners land, and after they have received a note from a countryman that they have been domiciled there for a certain time, they proceed by another boat toF remantle and gain admission. I think that foreigners should only be permitted to land at the principal port in the State.

Sir John Forrest:

– The honorable member would not bring these men down to Fremantle and send them right back to Broome or Carnarvon?

Mr FRAZER:

– I would, because, except under extraordinary conditions they have no right to enter the State. In the case of the pearl fishers a special arrangement is made, but in other cases all foreigners should be brought down to the principal port, and there subjected to a test by a responsible officer. I hope that the Minister of External Affairs will look into this question at an early date, . and see if an arrangement cannot be made to prevent this heavy influx of aliens into that State.

Reduced vote agreed to.

Division 40 (Tasmania), £9,416, agreed to.

Department of the Treasury.

Division 25 (Treasury), £7,891 ; division 26 (Audit Office), £13,327 ; division 27 (Government Printer), £15,239; agreed to.

Division 28 (Miscellaneous), £36.

Mr CHANTER:
Riverina

– I should toe glad if the Minister in charge of the Treasury Estimates can give an explanation concerning the following item: -

Refund of duty paid under exceptional circumstances, viz., on trophies presented for competition at the Geelong Fire Brigades demonstration, £3513s.7d., £36.

Only recently I brought under the notice of honorable members a case in which, on application, a refund of duty was refused. in this case, however, the law has been broken, and a refund of the duty has been made. I should like the Minister to explain why the distinction is drawn?

Mr McLean:

– I understand that in this case the Department is only following out the practice of the State, but how the money is paid I do not know.

Mr CHANTER:

– It is clearly an instance of favoritism. The Minister has nothing to do with the practice of the State. He is bound by the law of the Commonwealth. In a much more necessitious case a refund of duty was refused. I do not see why it should be made in this case, and therefore I move -

That the item, “Refund of duty . . . . £36,” be left out.

Mr DUGALD THOMSON:
Minister of Home Affairs · NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906

– It seems that the custom in the State in connexion with trophies for public objects such as a fire brigade has been to refund the duty paid. In this case the Commonwealth has simply followed the State precedent, no doubt in every other similar case that will 6e done. It has not been considered desirable in the State that the cost of a trophy should be unnecessarily increased by the amount of the duty. In this case the duty had been paid, and is to be refunded.

Mr. CHANTER (Riverina).- I should like the Minister to mention a case where the States have taken this course, and why it was done. I also wish to know who presented these trophies for competition at the demonstration of the Geelong Fire Brigades, and also where they were purchased ? There are hundreds of public demonstrations where trophies have been given, and no application for a refund of duty has ever been made. It is very unfair to discriminate in a matter of this kind. I should like the Minister to show me his authority for making a refund in one case and refusing it in another. It is alleged that in this case the trophies were presented for a public object. I have mentioned a case where, according to the decision of the High Court, a duty was illegally collected. The case of the poor widow, which I brought under the notice of the Minister this morning, is, in my opinion, a case of legalized robbery. I should like to get a promise that the same action will be taken in her case as in this case ?

Mr McLean:

– My difficulty is that I have no legal power to do what the honorable member asks. The only way in which it could be done would be by submitting a special item.

Mr CHANTER:

– If the Minister will submit a special item on the Supplementary

Estimates, I shall be quite satisfied to take the decision of the Committee.

Mr McLEAN:
Protectionist

– The difficulty with, regard to the matter brought forward by the honorable member for Riverina is this : When the Tariff Bill was first introduced, duties were collectable on the scale there proposed. That Bill was under consideration for more than twelve months. Duty was collected on the scale proposed, but Parliament in its wisdom reduced a large number of the items. But in order to protect the revenue, Parliament passed a section providing that any duties collected under the original scale should be deemed to be legally collected. In the case upon which the honorable member relies some person refused to pay duty, believing that it was not legally collectable. The money was paid under protest. The decision of the Court was that it was not collected legally. It was only held pending the decision of the Court. The case mentioned by my honorable friend is on all fours with thousands of other cases. There are honorable members of this House from whom large sums have been collected, but they have not asked for any refund. I am certain the honorable member is quite sincere in the action which he has taken in his desire to benefit this widow, but I do not see how we can pay these amounts, and at the same time refuse to pay in thousands of other cases which are precisely on all fours.

Mr Chanter:

– Are we not differentiating in the case under consideration ?

Mr McLEAN:

– I do not know the circumstances of this particular case, but .1 understand that this is a rebate following out a practice which has prevailed in the States in the past.

Mr GROOM:
Darling Downs

– There is a good deal to be said for the point of view which the Minister has advanced, but there is one matter upon which I should like him to satisfy the Committee. Will he undertake, before coming to a final decision, to make inquiries from the officer who received the money, and ascertain distinctly whether it was paid under protest or not?

Mr McLean:

– I shall be glad to do that.

Mr GROOM:

– That ought to settle the. matter, because, as far as I can ascertain, if the officer received the money under protest, acting on behalf of the public, in? equity there is not a bit of difference between that and receiving a written protest.

The facts are these : A person was taking a piece of machinery from one State into another State. Before he did that, the honorable member for Riverina was communicated with. He saw Mr. Kingston, who was then Minister of Customs; and was told that the money could be paid under protest. Acting under that advice, the honorable member for Riverina communicated with his constituents, and the money was paid under a protest - not given in writing, but verbally. But I do not think that we ought to take advantage of a mere technicality like that. If it is found that the money was actually paid under protest, we ought to refund it.

Mr McLean:

– I will maTte inquiries with a view to ascertain.

Mr GROOM:

– The item “ refund of duty paid on trophies presented for competition “ opens up a serious question. All over the Commonwealth, competitions of various kinds are constantly taking place, and trophies are given as ‘prizes. We ought to deal with this matter upon a broad general Australian, footing. Is it fair and reasonable that any particular person or persons who get up a competition in one State, should have a refund on account of the money they pay for their trophies, when the same consideration is riot extended to persons in other States? This practice practically nullifies the effect of the Customs Tariff. There is no reason why we should make ah exception in favour of a fire brigades’ demonstration. Agricultural shows are just as important. Are we bound to recognise the practice which has prevailed in one State in connexion with one demonstration ? It is highly probable that these trophies can be manufactured in Australia, and if that is so there certainly ought not to be any remission of duty, in the interest of one competition. A large’ firm in my. own constituency some time ago imported a large machine for the purpose of destroying city garbage. The machine was duty free before Federation, but after Federation a heavy duty was imposed. The machine was required by a municipality for public purposes. But a refund was not allowed, although there was in existence a proclamation issued by the State before Federation, for the express purpose of bringing in the machine free of duty. We were told that there was a general Australian principle at stake, and that there could be no refund of duties on any articles. The Minister will admit that we should lay down general rules. ii b

Mr REID:
Free Trade

– We all appreciate the importance of the matter, and if the honorable and learned member will allow the vote to pass now, we will afford an opportunity to re-consider it on the Appropriation Bill.

Mr Groom:

– I am prepared to accept the assurance of the Prime Minster.

Mr REID:

– Although I am not AttorneyGeneral, I think it right to say that the point with regard -to .a written or verbal protest has nothing whatever to do with the question. The Customs Regulation Act prescribes the course to be followed when there is a dispute as to whether duty is payable or otherwise. The question of protest does not arise one way or the other. First of all a .dispute must arise. When there is an effort to pass a free entry for a particular article and the Customs officer demands duty, the person: passing the entry ‘has two courses open to him. One is to pay the demand, the other is to dispute the demand. If instead of paying he disputes the demand, his course is to pay, pass the entry, and get the goods. The amount pi id is treated as a deposit ; and then the law provides that -

The deposit shall bc deemed to be the pr.oper duty, unless by action commenced by the ow aci against the Collector within six . months al te] making the deposit the contrary shall be determined, in which case any excess of the. depor.it over the proper duty shall be refunded, with 5 per cent, interest.

In case of a deposit the amount becomes the proper duty by force of law, unless the person disputing it takes proceedings in a court of law to test whether the duty is payable or not. He has six months within which to take action. I wish to point that out so that the Committee may not run away with the idea that this is a mere matter of dispute with regard to a verbal or written protest; because if the person- has not taken action the deposit is deemed to be the proper duty.

Mr. CHANTER (Riverina).- I think the Minister is fully’ seized of the facts pf She case. It will be understood that I advised my constituent to pay the money under protest, on the recommendation of the highest authority for the time being - the Minister.

Mr McLean:

– j promise to make full inquiries,

Mr Reid:

– The proper course was to commence proceedings to test the matter.

Mr CHANTER:

– The Prime Minister cannot expect every farmer to be acquainted with all the requirements of the law. I feel strongly upon this case, thinking that the Department ought not to take advantage of a technicality to deprive this person of what was due to him. But I shall be satisfied if the Minister will make inquiries.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Proposed vote agreed fo.

Division 29 (Unforeseen expenditure), £700 ; division 30 (Refunds pf revenue), £30,000; division 31 (Advance to Treasurer), £200,000, agreed to.

Progress reported.

page 6786

ADJOURNMENT

Message from the King.

Mr REID:
Minister of External Affairs · East Sydney · Free Trade

– In moving -

That the House do now adjourn,

I should like to inform honorable members that ‘ the message I referred to as having been forwarded yesterday through the Governor-General to the King was transmitted to His Majesty at Sandringham, and His Majesty has sent the following, very gracious reply - .

Please convey my sincere thanks to the Ministers and Commonwealth of Australia for the message of congratulation and good wishes forwarded through you, which I greatly value and appreciate. - Edward R.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 12.25 P-m- (Thursday).

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 9 November 1904, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1904/19041109_reps_2_23/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives 9 November 1904

TRADE MARKS BILL

Mr WATSON:BLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr REID:Minister for External Affairs · EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · Free Trade

MANUFACTURES ENCOURAGEMENT BILL

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr REID:Free Trade

QUESTION

PREFERENTIAL TRADE

Mr HUTCHISON:HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr REID:Free Trade

QUESTION

SIX POTTERS PROSECUTION

Mr CROUCH:CORIO, VICTORIA

Mr REID:Free Trade

Mr CROUCH:

Mr REID:

QUESTION

DUC D’ABRUZZI

Mr MAHON:COOLGARDIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr REID:Free Trade

Mr Mahon:

Mr REID:

Sir John Forrest:

Mr REID:

QUESTION

REPORTED RESIGNATION OF THE TREASURER

Mr PAGE:MARANOA, QUEENSLAND

Mr REID:Free Trade

QUESTION

KING’S BIRTHDAY

Mr PAGE:

Mr REID:Free Trade

QUESTION

ADVANTAGE TO FOREIGN TENDERERS

Mr PAGE:for Mr. Fisher

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

QUESTION

LEAVE TO PUBLIC SERVANTS

Mr PAGE:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

QUESTION

RUST IN WHEAT

Mr WEBSTER:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr REID:Free Trade

QUESTION

SUPPLY (1904-5)

Mr WATSON:Bland

Mr Groom:

Mr WATSON:

Mr Mcwilliams:

Mr WATSON:

Mr Mcwilliams:

Mr WATSON:

Mr Mcwilliams:

Mr WATSON:

Mr LEE:Cowper

Mr Watson:

Mr LEE:

Mr Chanter:

Mr LEE:

Mr CHANTER:Riverina

Mr Groom:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Groom:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr BAMFORD:Herbert

Mr McLean:

Mr BAMFORD:

Mr McDonald:

Mr BAMFORD:

Mr Groom:

Mr BAMFORD:

Mr McDonald:

Mr BAMFORD:

Mr Mcwilliams:

Mr BAMFORD:

Mr Webster:

Mr BAMFORD:

Mr McLean:

House of Representatives
9 November 1904

Mr WATSON:
BLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr REID:
Minister for External Affairs · EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · Free Trade

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr REID:
Free Trade

Mr HUTCHISON:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr REID:
Free Trade

Mr CROUCH:
CORIO, VICTORIA

Mr REID:
Free Trade

Mr MAHON:
COOLGARDIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr REID:
Free Trade

Mr PAGE:
MARANOA, QUEENSLAND

Mr REID:
Free Trade

Mr REID:
Free Trade

Mr PAGE:
for Mr. Fisher

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr WEBSTER:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr REID:
Free Trade

Mr WATSON:
Bland

Mr LEE:
Cowper

Mr CHANTER:
Riverina

Mr BAMFORD:
Herbert

Mr MALONEY:
Melbourne

Mr GROOM:
Darling Downs

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr ROBINSON:
Wannon

Mr WILKINSON:
Moreton

Mr EWING:
Richmond

Mr HUTCHISON:
Hindmarsh

Mr McLEAN:
Minister of Trade and Customs · Gippsland · Protectionist

Mr G B EDWARDS:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr G B EDWARDS:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr G B EDWARDS:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT