House of Representatives
1 November 1905

2^nd Parliament · 2^nd Session

QUESTION
- MAJOR HAWKER
QUESTION
- ALTERATION OF THE TARIFF
QUESTION
- QUEENSLAND MILITARY INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF
QUESTION
- POSTAGE OF CIRCULARS
QUESTION
- FIDELITY AND GUARANTEE FUND
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
ADJOURNMENT
- Orderof Business

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

page 4391

QUESTION

MAJOR HAWKER

Mr KELLY:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the Vice-President of the Executive Council read the following paragraph, which appeared in the Age of Monday last, and refers to the proposed inquiry into the charges made in this House against Major Hawker : -

Tie particular form in which the attack on Major Hawker by a small section of members of the House of Representatives is to be dealt with has not been finally determined by the Minister of Defence. It is understood, however, that it will take the shape of a sort of roundtable conference, over which Mr. T. Ewing will preside, at the request of his colleague, the Minister of Defence. Major Hawker will be present, and the aggrieved members of Parliament will be there, too, with permission to ask that officer questions relevant to their attack in Parliament.

I do not ask if the whole of this extraordinary statement is true, because complete accuracy would be obviously too much to expect from the Age; but I wish to know if the honorable gentleman intends to preside at the gathering referred to, and what members of Parliament, if any, will be permitted to cross-examine Major Hawker? Will any honorable member who cares to be present be regarded as for the time being an “ aggrieved member,” and, as such, be permitted to take part in the performance?

Mr EWING:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · Protectionist

– I have not read the paragraph referred to, though I have heard of it. I can assure the honorable member that the statement isnot correct, and no one who heard what I had to say on Friday last would imagine that any arrangement could have been made at so early a date as last Monday.

page 4392

QUESTION

ALTERATION OF THE TARIFF

Mr CARPENTER:
FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I desire, Mr. Speaker, to again put to you, in another form, the question which I asked yesterday -

Whether, in the event of any Bill being introduced by the Government, proposing an increased duty on stripper harvesters only, an amendment would be in order which proposed to deal with any article other than that specified in the title of the Bill?

My reason for asking this question is that the matter has been discussed by some honorable members, who wish to know if the Government have power to introduce a Bill of the character referred to without re-opening the Tariff as a whole.

Mr SPEAKER:

– In the absence of any Bill, and of any specific amendment to be proposed in any Bill, I can only inform the honorable member generally that to any Bill to amend the Tariff it would be in order to move amendments relating to other items than those originally included in the proposal, subject to the provisions of standing orders 170, 171, 176, and 247.

page 4392

QUESTION

QUEENSLAND MILITARY INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF

Mr CHANTER:
for Mr. Wilkinson

asked the Minister representing the Minister of Defence, upon notice -

Will he cause the Commandant of the Queensland Branch of the Defence Force to produce, for the information of honorable members of this House, the correspondence referred to in circular 16, issued from District Head- Quarters, Brisbane, and dated 10th October, and which is put forward as a justification for the circular referred to, which reflects strongly on the zeal, intelligence, and ability of Warrant and Non-commissioned Officers of the Instructional Staff in Queensland?
Does the Minister consider that the language in which the above-mentioned circular is couched, whether justified or not, is in accordance with the letter; or spirit of paragraph 228 of the new Statutory Rules and Regulations for the Military Forces of the Commonwealth?

Mr EWING:
Protectionist

– In reply to the honorable member’s questions, I have been informed -

The Commandant states that there is no correspondence in connexion with the circular referred to (copy attached). It was issued with the idea of general and not special application, because, from time to time, vouchers for claims by Warrant and Non-Commissioned Officers of the Instructional Staff have been incorrectly rendered, necessitating much corespondence and extra postage. The Commandant considered the circular would effect a desirable remedy.
The second paragraph of the circular, which is applied to all warrant and Non-Commissioned Officers of the Instructional Staff, appears to the Minister to be of too general a character in view of the regulation referred to. The circular itself is as follows : -

“MILITARY FORCES OF ‘T HE COMMONWEALTH, QUEENSLAND.

” District Head-Quarters, “ Brisbane,19th October, 1905. “ Subject. - Vouchers incorrectly rendered by

W.O.’s and N.C.O.’s of the Instructional Staff. “From D.A.Q.M.G., Queensland. “To-_ “1. A large volume of correspondence in the offices of the D.A.Q.M.G. and the Accountant is necessitated by vouchers being constantly incorrectly rendered by Warrant and NonCommissioned Officers of the Instructional Staff for personal claims, such as travelling, &c. “ 2. The inattention to instructions and the ignorance of financial regulations displayed in the above instances is very discreditable, and the Commandant demands a great improvement in the future. “ 3. It is part of the duty of Warrant and Non-Commissiohed Officers of the Instructional Staff to thoroughly acquaint themselves with regulations, and in future glaring errors in rendering vouchers will he treated as neglect of duty, and dealt with accordingly. “4. The Commandant desires that the above be communicated to all Warrant and NonCommissioned Officers of the Instructional Staff attached to the unit under, your command, and that this circular, which is to be retained in your office, should be initiated by them. “By order, “ V. C. M. Sellheim, Major, “D.A.Q.M.G., Queensland.”

page 4392

QUESTION

POSTAGE OF CIRCULARS

Mr SALMON:
for Sir John Quick

asked the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

Whether it is true that the old rule allowing the postage of circulars to be paid in bulk if posted in batches of at least 100 (thus avoidingthe necessity of affixing a stamp on each circular) has been altered by requiring that not less than £1 worth shall be posted at a time to secure the concession; and, if so, what are the reasons for in- sisting on such a condition, and will he restore the old rule without the condition?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
Postmaster-General · EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES · Protectionist

– The answer to the honorable member’s question is as follows : -

Prior to the transfer of the Department to the Commonwealth, the rule with respect to this matter varied in the several States. In New South Wales it was necessary that the postage should amount to at least £1. In South Australia, not less than 500 circulars were accepted ; and in Queensland, 300 circulars were necessary to obtain the application of the rule. The existing regulation comes between the previous extremes. It is not considered desirable to revert to the oldVictorian regulation referred to, as for departmental reasons it is necessary to confine within reasonable limits the system of paying postage by cash.

page 4393

QUESTION

FIDELITY AND GUARANTEE FUND

Sir LANGDON BONYTHON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

What is the total for each State of amount withheld from the salaries of officers of his Department as contribution to Fidelity and Guarantee Fund?
What is the number of officers in each State who contribute to the fund?
What is the total loss by defalcation for each State?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
Protectionist

– In reply to the honorable member’s questions, I have to state that the following information has been furnished by the Secretary to the Treasury : -

page 4393

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Motion (by Mr. Batchelor) agreed to -

That leave of absence for one month be granted to the right honorable member for Adelaide, on account of ill health. estimates.

In Committee of Supply (Consideration resumed from 31st October, vide page 4337):

Postmaster-General’s Department

Mr Poynton:

– How many mails a week would the South Australian Railway Department carry, inreturn for the £450 per annum ?

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

– They would carry a mail by each train running to Pinnaroo. The point raised by the honorable member for Boothby is an important one. For some time the States Governments have been demanding additional rates for the conveyance of mails by rail ; and when 1 was in office I found that in many cases we could carry the mails by means of a motor car orbus for less than the amount charged by the railways. I discussed the matter with the Secretary to the Post and Telegraph Department; and we called for reports as to the weight of the mail matter , carried on the railways, and the price for which it would be carried at ordinary parcels rates. In Great Britain, the Post and Telegraph Department can call upon the rail way companies to fix their time-tables to suit its convenience ; but in Australia the Railway Departments have refused in some cases to comply with such requests on the part of the Commonwealth Government. It must not be forgotten that the carriage of parcels by the Railway Department involves the employment of a number of booking clerks and other officials ; whereas the mails are in charge of officers of the Postal Department.

Mr Batchelor:

– How do the rates for mails compare with the parcels rates?

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

– The report to which I referred had not been supplied when I retired from office ; but I know that the rates are not uniform. I should like to illustrate the point which I made as. to the fact that some of the trains are not run to suit the convenience of the Postal authorities. For instance, the Melbourne express which leaves Sydney every Friday at 7.50 p.m. carries mails from New South

– I felt that the Government would not be justified in agreeing to any important alterations of system until the exact position of affairs had been ascertained, so that they might know whether the system which it was proposed to alter had worked well or badly. The information which I desired had not been compiled when I left office. It is, in my opinion, very advisable that the accounts of the telephone and telegraph services should be kept separate. Occasionally, of course, one officer attends to both telegraphs and telephones, but a fair adjustment could be made even in those circumstances. The honorable member for Barrier complained of the manner in which inspectors in New South Wales were distributed in the various divisions. A Committee was appointed to make a recommendation in regard to the marking out of the divisions, but it was found that the work could not be satisfactorily carried out without an additional inspector. In order to still further facilitate the work of inspection it was decided to appoint subinspectors in the various districts. I asked for a return showing the work then in the hands of the various inspectors, and I found that a number of trivial matters were awaiting their attention,because, apparently, no one else could deal with them. For instance, where a mat was required, or a door needed repairs, or a letter-box was out of order, the inspector had to be referred to, and his decision was held’ over until he could visit the district. I thought that, in addition to having divisional inspectors, we might appoint some of the more competent postmasters in the various districts to act as sub-inspectors. We merely followed out the system adopted by some of the banks. They, of course, have their inspectors for various districts, but they delegate to the managers of their branches in the. more important centres the duty of inspecting various sub-branches. The same principle has been adopted in connexion with the Post Office, and is now in operation in some of the States. The sub-inspectors are now able to deal with many small matters, and thus obviate the necessity for the inspectors to travel long distances at considerable expense. The honorable member for Barrier stated that he had brought under my attention the question of adopting a uniform stamp for the Commonwealth. We are now approaching the end of the bookkeeping period, and I think some reform might very well be introduced. I placed upon record my opinion that’ some alteration was required in connexion with the printing of our stamps. I strongly hold the view that, instead of having our stamps printed in four States, the whole of the work should be done in one State, if only in order to enable a proper check to be kept upon the issue of the stamps. Honorable members know that no numbers are attached to the stamps, and that they are capable of being very easily forged. Therefore, extra care should be exercised in printing and issuing them.

Mr Page:

The CHAIRMAN:

– I must ask the honorable member not to discuss the classification scheme.

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

– I desire to refer to that matter incidentally, to show that the Public Service Commissioner has performed a stupendous task in a very creditable manner.

The CHAIRMAN:

– This is not the proper place to discuss that question.

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

– I think that it is. Surely I am at liberty to refer to the Commissioner’s work in classifying the officers in the Postal Department, seeing that it is the most extensive Department dealt with under that scheme. I have felt it my duty to reply to some of the statements which have been made in regard to the administration of the Department during the period that I acted as its Ministerial head. The desire of the late Government was to extend all necessary facilities to residents in the interior, and I think that the almost complete absence of complaints bv honorable members is a thorough vindication of the policv which we adopted. It shows that we did our duty and honestly endeavoured to extend postal and telephonic facilities to the people in the interior. The only item in the Estimates to which I take exception is that relating to the salaries of the Deputy Postmasters-General. i trust that the Minister will explain why he proposes to reduce the salary . of die Deputy Postmaster-General of New South Wales from £920 to £800 per annum. Such a reduction would be contrary to the recommendation made by the Public Sendee Commissioner, who reported that, in his opinion, a salary of £920 per annum should be fixed in order to enable him to secure a capable officer to administer this important branch of the service. No one can deny the importance of the office of Deputy Postmaster-General in each of the States, and I trust that the Government will review the whole matter and determine that the present occupant of the office in New South Wales shall not suffer a reduction. The Minister should call for a report from the Public Sendee Commissioner as to the salary which, in his opinion, should be given in order to secure the services of a man capable of controlling a Department of such magnitude. If such a report be obtained and laid om the table of the House, honorable members will be able to determine for themselves whether the attitude taken up by the Government in regard to this matter is a reasonable one.

Mr R EDWARDS:
OXLEY, QUEENSLAND · PROT; FT from 1913; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910

– I have no desire to place any obstacle in the way of passing the Estimates of the Post and Telegraph Department ; but there are one or two matters relating to services in my electorate which I wish to bring under the notice of the Minister. I refer more particularly to ari’ application which was made not long ago by residents of Tambourine Mountain for the establishment of a triweekly; coach mail service between Logan Village and that district. At one time the mails were carried on the Southport railway to a station in the neighbourhood of Coomera, where they were transferred to a coach and conveyed over what I believe is a very rough road to the mountain. The road via Logan Village, however, isinfinitely superior, and as the district is an important one, I think that the request might well have been complied with. A number of persons are taking up land in the neighbourhood of Tambourine Mountain, and largely devoting their attention to the dairying industry ; but, notwithstanding that settlement is rapidly increasing there, the reply , of the Department to the petition was as follows :-

With reference to your recent petition. . . . for the establishment of a three times a week coach mail service to run direct from Logan Village to Tambourine Mountain, I have the honour to inform you it is considered that the existing postal facilities in the locality in question are fairly adequate for present requirements, and that no further expenditure is warranted for a new service as suggested.

It is therefore regretted that your wishes cannot be complied with.

– The late Treasurer was opposed to it.

Mr BATCHELOR:

– I am quite aware of that, although I do not know the reason for his opposition. From a perusal of the official papers relating to the matter, it is difficult to conceive why he was opposed to it. When the Watson Government were in power, it was decided, on the recommendation of the 1 then Postmaster-General, the honorable member for Coolgardie, that all stamp printing should be done by the Commonwealth, and not by the various States. Accordingly a vote for that purpose was placed on the Estimates, and agreed to by Parliament. Reports were received from the Government Printers of the different States in opposition to the proposal. Naturally they did not desire the work to be taken out of their hands. They wished to continue the printing of Commonwealth postage stamps, because the price they were receiving for that work was in excess of its cost, so that they were actually making a profit upon it. Mr. Gullick, the Government Printer of New South Wales, after describing the machinery which would be required to enable him to print the whole of the stamps required by the Commonwealth, stated that it would cost £2,000, and added -

The proposal to produce postage stamps under separate administration appears likely to lead to an entirely new expenditure to the Commonwealth, and to be a reversion to a practice in vogue in this State, and abolished after long trial, fifty years ago.

The proposal was to produce postage stamps under one administration outside of the Government Printing, Offices of the States, a fact Mr. Gullick did not appear to grasp.

If one State is to monopolize the whole of this work, I may fairly point out that the sum of ^2,000 spent in certain indicated directions would, in conjunction with the existing facilities of this office, fully equip the plant for the work of the whole Continent.

Then Mr. Carruthers, the Premier of New South Wales, says -

In forwarding such report, I have, however, to enter an emphatic protest against the adoption of any proposal which would have the effect of removing the work of printing postage stamps to the Post and Telegraph Department in any one of the States. For the reasons given by Mr. Gullick, in whose views on this matter I concur, I think it neither economical nor expedient that the suggested change should he made, though if it should be determined to concentrate the whole of the work of printing postage stamps in any one establishment, as Mr. Gullick has pointed out, the Sydney Government Printing Office is quite competent to undertake it, after an additional expenditure of ,£2,000.

As I have already pointed out, the cost of printing these stamps in New South Wales is 7 Jd. per thousand, as against 4d. in Adelaide, and it is estimated that this price can be still further reduced to 2 1/4d. if the Department undertook this class of printing for the entire Commonwealth. The estimated cost of the plant required to fully equip that office is £1,350 as against £2,000 in Sydney. Upon the 2nd February of the present year, the Government Printer of Victoria, Mr. Brain, wrote to the Treasurer as follows ; -

With reference to your letter of 24th ult., inquiring when my report may be expected to be received in regard to the proposal that all postage stamps, &c, shall in future be printed by the Post and Telegraph Department at one of the State capitals, I beg to inform you that the present heavy pressure of urgent work in this Department has hitherto prevented me from furnishing the report asked for. I hope, however, to be in a position to forward it at an early date.

Then comes die following minute from the Secretary to the Treasurer: -

Should we not ask Post-office to notify Treasurer of any contemplated action in respect of the vote for Hie machinery (Division, 4/4/6) before such action is taken. The vote having been passed, the Post-office would be entitled to proceed without further reference to the Treasurer. There is nothing in these papers to show that the Post-office is aware of any possible objection on the part of the Treasurer. lt appears from this statement that the Treasurer had some objection to the proposal, and that it occurred to him that the Department might proceed to give effect to it without any further reference to him;. The Prime Minister then wired from Hobart to the Postmaster-General asking him to allow the matter to remain in abeyance until the Treasurer had considered the advisableness of having the work carried out in the office in which it could be most economically performed. A precis respecting the question of certain stamp printing for the various States being performed at the Departmental Printing Office, Adelaide, was prepared for the information of the Treasurer, and in this document it is pointed out that -

The postage stamps for New South Wales, Victoria, and Queensland, are printed in the Government Printing Offices of those States, respectively, those for Western Australia and Tasmania are printed in the Government Printing Office, Melbourne, and the South Australian stamps are printed at the Government Printing Office, Adelaide, by officials of this Department.

It was ascertained in 1902 that the cost of printing the stamps in Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane, was as follows : -

As I have already quoted the figures, I shall not refer to them again -

The Departmental printer in Adelaide estimated that the cost of printing postage stamps for this Department would be 2ta. per 1,000 for stamps of one colour; if of two colours, the cost would be the same, but a two-colour machine, costing about would be required.

On the 9th October, 1903, the Secretary, PostmasterGeneral’s Department, wrote that “ In view of all the facts, including the reduced cost of production in Adelaide, the ability to print the postage stamps .required for the Department throughout the - Commonwealth in our own office at Adelaide, and the jealousy that has been created when stamps for one State are printed in the Government Printing Office in another State, it is, I think, desirable that the whole of the postage stamps, postal notes, &c, required, should be printed in the printing office attached to the General Post Office, Adelaide, under the control and supervision of the Deputy PostmasterGeneral of that State, also that provision should be at once made for supplying to the Printer at Adelaide the two-colour printing machine required.” This was approved by the Postmaster-General (Sir P. O. Fysh) on the 19th id-em, and on the 12th November, 1903, the Deputy Postmaster-General, Adelaide, was asked for a report as to the additional plant that would be required in order to print in his office at Adelaide, pending the establishment of a Commonwealth Government Printing Office, all the postage stamps, postal notes, post-cards, both pictorial and plain, required for the whole of the Department throughout the Commonwealth, and also the estimated cost pf’ any additional assistance or labour- that might be considered necessary under such circumstances. The Deputy PostmasterGeneral replied on- the 16th December, 1903, asking for a rough proof of each stamp plate then inuse, and certain statistics as to the issues of stamps, &c, in the several States in 1902. These were obtained from the other Deputy PostmastersGeneral,, and forwarded to him on the 2nd March, 1904, and on the 22nd idem, he submitted a. report from the Stamp Printer, giving the information asked- for, on the 12th November, 1903.

On 1 2.th May, 1904, the honorable member for Coolgardie, who was PostmasterGeneral, wrote the- following minute: -

Referring to stamp printer’s report of 21st March, 1904, I think it desirable the Department should procure the best two-colour machine extant…..

No action appears to have been taken on this minute. Reports were then received from the Deputy Postmaster-General, giving the details of the machinery that would be required to carry out the whole of the work. The Departmental Printer stated that the annual saving effected by the introduction of the plant recommended - and I ask honorable members to pay particular attention to this point - would, be approximately .£1,699 ros. He went on to point out that -

When a uniform stamp was introduced, the plant, plus another perforator, would be- sufficient to cope with the work, and produce the stamps at a greatly reduced rate, and that the Department would be able to undertake a considerable amount of Departmental printing, thus saving, the State printer’s bill.

Then on the 23rd June, 1904, the Secretary to the Postmaster-General’s Department wrote the following minute: -

With reference to the proposal to have the printing of postage stamps, postcards, postal notes, and money order forms, executed in the printing office attached to the South Australian branch of the Postmaster-General’s Department, I have to suggest that, while full series of postage stamps, each of a different pattern, are necessarily produced and issued from plates and watermarked paper held by the Government Printing Offices of most of the States, the printing should be continued as at present in those offices, but stamps to be printed for States which have not hitherto had them produced in the Government Printing Office of the State, as for instance, Western Australia and. Tasmania, should for the future be printed in Adelaide, and that the plates, &c, now held in the Government Printing Office, Melbourne, for such stamps, be transferred as soon as the Deputy PostmasterGeneral, Adelaide, has reported that the officein that city is prepared to undertake the work.

On another paper I have recommended for consideration the advisability of inviting designs, uniform, except as to the name of the State, during the bookkeeping period.

Postcards, pictorial and. plain, and also postal notes and. money order forms of an uniform andimproved’ pattern for the whole Commonwealth, should, I think, be printed at Adelaide, as soon, as designs can be submitted and approved, and the necessary plant can be made available.

The Deputy Postmaster-General, Adelaide, to be asked to obtain and submit a full report covering the whole subject from, the Stamp Printer attached to his branch of the Department.

The then Postmaster-General, the honorable member for Coolgardie, asked that the matter should be treated as urgent, as a great saving could be made by the use of the improved machinery . The Deputy PostmasterGeneral of South Australia was then written to, and forwarded a further report as to the plant required. On the. 16th July, 1904. the Postmaster-General approved of the requisition submitted for the machinery. A note was made for the inclusion in the Estimates of an item of .£1,301 ios., as per the later list, in respect of the new plant, and the Deputy Postmaster-General was so informed. On 5th December of that year, further particulars were supplied, and on the 14th of the same month the amount on the Estimates was voted. On the 7th February, 1905, the Postmaster-General approved of tenders being invited, and the Deputy PostmasterGeneral was informed accordingly; but on the 13th February, 1905, the Prime Minister wired from Hobart - asking that action in the matter be stayed until the return of the Treasurer to Melbourne, and the Deputy Postmaster-General was so instructed the same day.

This is the information which was supplied to the Treasurer on his return from Hobart I shall now read a report submitted by Mr. Brain, in opposition to the proposal : -

In compliance with the honorable the Treasurer’s minute of 3rd inst., herewith, and also in reply to your letter of 17th August last, No. 3,0,52, I have the honour to state with respect to the proposal to print in future all postage stamps, postal notes, and postcards required for the different States at the Post and Telegraph Department of one of the State Capitals, that if stamps and other revenue documents are produced in the same Department as that which sells them, there, is a greater probability, if persons were so inclined, of frauds being committed by means of collusion than there would be if these documents were produced and sold in two distinct Departments. Of course, I do not wish to imply that fraud is likely to be committed at any post office situate in the_ Capital of either of the States. But in producing documents that are equivalents for money, it is only proper to adopt that method which most effectually discourages and prevents the committal of fraud.

It would occur to most persons that the distribution of this work over a number of offices in the several States would be more calculated to open the door to fraud than would its concentration in the hands of a few carefully selected men. It seems to me that Mr. Brain’s suggestion is absolutely farcical. His report continued -

Apart from this, aspect of the matter, it would seem that the Treasury and not the Post Office is the Department under whom documents possessing monetary value should be manufactured. South Australia is the only State amongst those producing these documents where the postage stamps, &c, are printed at the post office.

It is interesting to learn that because stamps are equivalents for money, the mechanical work associated with their production should be under the control of the Treasury. These are some of the reasons advanced by the Government Printer of Victoria against the proposal to effect a reform that would result in a saving of over £1.700 per annum. Stamp printing is a work which relates to the Post and Telegraph Department, and it seems to me that it is no less fitting that it should be placed under the control of the Postmaster-General than that it should be controlled by the Department of the Treasury.

Sir John Forrest:

– I should be very glad if it were transferred.

Mr BATCHELOR:

– I am simply putting before the Committee the arguments advanced against the desirableness of making in the system a change that would result in a very large saving. The proposal has been hanging fire for something like five years, and these are some of the reasons that have been offered against its adoption. As to the statements that South Australia is the only State in which postage stamps are printed at the General Post Office, I would point out that the Government of South Australia, having had an accumulation of deficits, felt constrained to adopt the most economical methods of carrying out public services. The Adelaide stamp printer, replying to Mr. Brain’s strictures, pointed out that the latter was mistaken in supposing that he had fallen into error in making his estimate; and in regard to the printing of uniform postal notes, Mr. Brain gave five quotations, ranging from ns. id. down to 3s. 8d. per thousand, against his estimate of 3s. 3d. per thousand, and a saving of some £2,000 was effected. The AuditorGeneral was asked by the Post Office authorities to make inquiries during his visit to Adelaide as to whether the stamp printer there was mistaken in his estimate, or had made his calculations on a wrong basis, and he furnished the following report : -

I have the honour to report for the information of the right honorable the Treasurer, that, at the desire of the Secretary, Postmaster-General’s Department, I have inquired closely into the question of the proposal made to print all stamps and postal notes for the Commonwealth at the Adelaide Post Office. The quotations, I understand - given by Mr. Cooke, the printer attached to the Post Office branch at Adelaide - were 2£d. per 1,000 for postage stamps, and 3s. 3d. per 1,000 for postal notes. I have examined this officer’s calculations, and it appears to me that his estimates are reliable. He has taken into account the cost of paper delivered at the General Post Office, Adelaide ; labour ; wear and tear of machinery; type, and blocks; cost of ink; cleaning material; motive power; cutting; taking -and delivering stamps from and to the Custodian ; numbering; banding; lining; designing; engraving1; interest on cost of machinery; and cost of supervision. I find that Mr. Cooke recently gave a quotation for the production of 2,100 copies of lists of money order offices - the amount estimated being ^140, and that the actual cost was £111 17s. 6d. This appears to show the reliability of this officer’s estimates. .

– I wish to refer to a matter which I omitted to mention in my earlier address, and that is the application of the condenser system of telephone communication to country towns. A number of country towns are being brought into telephonic communication with each other, and it is becoming apparent that some alteration is needed in the regulations of the Department governing country exchanges. Hitherto, the rates charged by the Department have hindered the establishment of country exchanges. At the present time, what is known as the flat-rate system is universal, ^5 per annum being charged for the rental of the telephones placed in private houses, and £9 for telephones placed in business establishments. This charge is, in many cases, prohibitory. The township of Parkes is connected by means of the condenser system with places like Bogan Gate, Trundle, Fifield, Alectown, Peak Hill, and other similar centres within thirty miles of it ; but to get the fullest advantage of this ‘arrangement it is necessary to have a telephone exchange in the town itself, so that the business people there may be put into communication with people living in the surrounding district. An attempt is being made to establish such a change, but the high rates charged are an obstacle to its success. The business places in Parkes are alL close together, and near to the telegraph office, so that the telephone is not as necessary for communication between the business people there as it is in towns where the business places are more scattered. I think that lower rates should prevail in connexion with country town exchanges, and I would suggest a rental of ^3 per annum for private telephones, and ^5 per annum for business telephones. There is no comparison between the business done on a telephone in a country town and that done on a city telephone. In Sydney, for instance, the telephone of a large business house is being used continuously throughout the day, hundreds of messages being transmitted to all parts of the city and suburbs to a considerable distance from the metropolis. For that service the subscriber pays only as much to the Department as is paid by a subscriber who has only a few calls a day.

Mr Lonsdale:

– Some of the big business places in the city rent eight or nine telephones, and pay eight or nine subscriptions. ,

Mr BROWN:

– That is because’ their business is too large for one telephone ; but for a telephone doing the work I have described, only as much is paid as is cHarged. for a much smaller and less valuable service in a country town. It is unjust that the charge should be the same in the two cases,, and it has been suggested that the toll system should be adopted in lieu of the flat system. I am not prepared to express an opinion upon the merits or the demerits of the former, but the .flat system certainly appears to me to be inequitable, and I think that if the Postmaster-General looks into the matter he will find that the usefulness of our telephone system can be extended by reducing .the charges in little country towns like Parkes, Condobolin, and Molong. Another cause of complaint in country districts is that the telephone instruments supplied to country exchanges are such as have become obsolete in the large centres of population, and a report appeared in a recent number of the Forbes *Times, giving an account of a public meeting held at Dubbo, to protest against this treatment. I do not know what ground there is for the complaint, but if the policy followed by the Government is” as alleged, it is a penny-wise and pound-foolish policy. To make the telephone system effective, the bestinstruments procurable should be supplied, and country subscribers have as much right, to consideration as have city subscribers. The honorable member for Riverina brought under the notice of the Postmaster- General the excessive nature of the fee charged for country post bags - £2 per annum. I think that in fixing a schedule for such a service, regard should be had to the number of times per week the bag has to be made up. In cases where mails have to be made uponce a week, a smaller charge should be made than in instances where the bags have to be sent out daily. Some persons have been in the habit of supplying their own canvas bags, and the practice proved convenient to both the postmaster and the mail contractor. Cases have beenbrought under my notice in which postmasters have gone to the trouble of tyingup the private bags, thus preventing the lossof letters. They have now been informed, however, that they must discontinue the practice, and it has been intimated that if persons require to have their letters placed in private bags, they must use the article supplied by the Department, and pay the annual fee of £2. I trust that the PostmasterGeneral, will consider the needs of the country residents in. this respect, and. -that, he will see his way to reduce the charge for private bags to 10s. or j£j per annum, according to the number of. mails despatched weekly. I am sure that if the charge were reduced, the system would be much more largely availed of than at present.

Mr. LONSDALE (New England).-! am very glad that the honorable member for Canobolas has mentioned the matter of private mail bags. I had intended to refer to it when I spoke on a previous occasion. I * look upon the present charge as an imposition. I do not agree with the honorable member that the charge should be varied according to the number of occasions upon which the bags are used. All the letters received in country post-offices have to be sorted, and they can be placed in private bags without involving any extra work upon the officials. Therefore, it seems to me to be utterly unjustifiable to charge country residents £2 per annum for the use of such bags. In the large centres of population, we deliver letters to the residences of every citizen, and yet we require country residents to pay an exorbitant fee for a very small convenience. It would be sufficient -for the Department to charge the cost of the bag, or to allow persons to supply their own bags. It is ridiculous to charge nearly one shilling per week to a person who desires to have his letters carried in a special “bag. The other day a gentleman in my constituency wished to arrange that the Postal Department should give him an extra service per week, and it was ascertained that the contractor demanded £3 15s. for the extra work required of him. The gentleman referred to was perfectly willing to pay this amount, which he regarded as a fair charge; but the post-office authorities required him to pay in addition £2 per annum for the ‘use of a mail bag. That seems to me to be an imposition that should not be tolerated. I suppose that the officials thought that the £5 15s. would not be paid, and that they would not be put to any further trouble.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK (Parramatta).- I move -

That the vote be reduced by £1.

– He was not appointed at a salary of £920.

Mr WATSON:

– Yes, he was, and he has received, that salary for at least one year. It has been recognised as a principle by this Parliament that unless a general retrenchment scheme is being carried out, the salaries of officers shall not be reduced during their tenure of office, except, of course, they prove themselves to be inefficient or grossly careless. I do not know of one instance in which an officer with whom no fault could be found, has had his salary reduced during his tenure of office, and I think that a very worthy gentleman has been singled out for special treatment in a most undesirable manner. I trust that, in view of the opinions expressed by honorable members, the Government will reconsider the position, and see if they cannot deal with Mr. Unwin quite apart from the question as to the salary which would attach to the office under ordinary conditions.

Mr. SYDNEY SMITH (Macquarie).I am sure that the honorable member for Coolgardie did not intend to do me any injustice when he referred to my action in this matter. When the subject was under discussion last year, and the suggestion was made! that Mr. Unwin’s salary should lie reduced, I took a ‘Strong stand against it. I said -

The suggestion was then made that the salary attaching to the office should be reduced to £800 per annum. It is, perhaps, needless to say that I do not agree with that suggestion. I think that an officer who is qualified to fill such an important position should, by reason of his ability and experience, be able to command a salary of£920 per annum. There is no doubt whatever as to the ability of the present occupant of that office. He has to control a revenue which, last year, amounted to£941,000, and an expenditure which aggregated£950,000. Further, he has to take charge of the Government Savings Bank’s transactions, and of all moneyorder and postal-note business. He has also to accept a responsibility which he was not previously called upon to bear. In pre-Federation days the Postmaster-General shouldered the responsibility of approving of practically all expenditure in connexion with the Department, but at the present time it devolves upon the Deputy PostmastersGeneral. . . . Last year this officer had to control no less a sum than£11,000,000.

Mr Thomas:

– Will the honorable member explain what he dad in connexion with the matter when he was PostmasterGeneral?

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

– Honorable members may be ‘anxious to go home, but I think that it is our duty to look after the interests-

Mr Page:

– Of the taxpayers.

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

– By securing a competent man to control the Postal Department in New South Wales we shall be conserving the interests of the taxpayers. Honorable members urge that the increase from £700 to £920, which Mr. Unwin received, was a very large one, and yet they make no complaint about the Deputy Postmaster-General in Queensland, who upon his appointment to that position received an increase from £500 to £700. i trust that the salary of the Deputy PostmasterGeneral in New South Wales will Be restored to £920.

Mr. BROWN (Canobolas). - I intend to support the amendment of the deputy leader of the Opposition, because I desire the full salary of Mr. Unwin to be restored to him. He is a very faithful and competent officer. He has been in the service for forty-five years, and has risen to his present position from the lowest grade. During the latter portion of his service the office of Deputy PostmasterGeneral in New South Wales was filled by Mr. Lambton and Mr. Dalgarno, who have since retired in quick succession in consequence of attaining the age limit. During their tenure of office Mr. Unwin had a large amount of work thrust upon him. He practically acted as Deputy Postmaster-General whilst nominally they discharged the duties of the office. Mr. Unwin was appointed to his present position last year, when Parliament voted the full salary which has attached to it for some time, namely, £920. Upon the present occasion, however, the Government, without assigning any reason for their action, ask the Committee to vote only £800. It seems to me that that is not a generous way in which to treat an officer who has rendered such valuable service as has Mr. Unwin. Had he been appointed to his present position at a salary of £800 per annum the policy of the Government iti this connexion would not have been open to so much objection. But after this officer has been paid £920 for twelve months’ service, and after he has given the , Department every satisfaction, the Government seek to ‘reduce the amount to £800. They urge that the office is worth only £800. I venture to say that the salary of any position to which the same amount of responsibility attached would be appraised at considerably more than £920 per annum - the salary which the State originally proposed to give. I understand from the late Postmaster-General that if the decision of this matter were left to the Public Service Commissioner, the present salary would be maintained. I do not know what authority he had for making that statement, but apparently he spoke with some warrant. If that is the case, the position ought to be under the control of the Commissioner, and the Government should not be asked to fix the amount of salary. If he is competent to fix the salary of not only every officer under this gentleman, but every officer in other Departments, surely the amount of information he possesses qualifies him better to fix the salary of this officer than the Minister or the Committee can be ! Itseems to me that a great injustice is being inflicted upon a deserving and capable officer, and I trust that, as the outcome of this debate his salary will be restored to the amount which he received last year.

Mr THOMAS:
Barrier

– I think that the Postmaster- General ought to give an explanation to the Committee.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– I am quite willing to give it at any moment.

Mr THOMAS:

– All I want to hear from the Minister is an explanation of the reason for reducing the salary of this officer,

Mr. AUSTIN CHAPMAN (EdenMonaro - PostmassterGenera 1 ) . - The honor able member for Parramatta was hardly fair, in the inference he drew concerning the Queensland officer. I believe that any one of us would be very sorry to think that because the secretary to the Central Office comes from that State he would be induced to favour a Queensland officer. I hardly think that the honorable member- could have meant to convey that impression, although his words were capable of that construction. The late Postmaster-General took sound ground when he said that the fixing of these salaries might very well be left to the Public Service Commissioner. But he gave his case away when he said that he had discussed this particular question with the Commissioner, and knew that that officer approved of the salary he had proposed. He would lead the Committee to believe that this appointment was made like every other ordinary appoint ment, and that no intimation was made to Mr. Unwin that he was to receive £920 for only the current financial year. Whenan appointment is made in the ordinary course, what intimation is made to the gentleman who is appointed? He is informed of the salary which the position carries, but no special stipulation of any kind is made. To show what must have been in the mind of the late PostmasterGeneral, I propose to read the telegram which was sent to Mr. Unwin on the 10th February, 1905 -

Governor-General in Council has approved your promotion to the position of Deputy Postmaster- General, New South Wales ; salary attached to that position for current financial year to be at the rate of ^920 per annum, but to be subject thereafter to provisions of annual Appropriation Acts ; such promotion to date from the 1st July, 1904, for the purpose of seniority. Please note accordingly. Confirmation follows by post.

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

– The Minister stands by the grading of the office for a future occupant ?

Mr Austin Chapman:

– Yes.

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

– In that case there are two considerations -the grading of the office for a future occupant, and the treatment of the present occupant. If the Minister could suggest a separation of the vote in any way, I should be willing to agree to it; but it must not be forgotten that there are two distinct questions involved.

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
Darwin

– It seems to me that the members of the Opposition advocated Federation under false pretences. They were continually preaching that, by the centralization of administration in regard to post, telegraph, and telephones, and other services, a tremendous saving would be made, but now that immense head-quarters’ staffs have been established, they object to the reduction of the salaries of leading officers elsewhere. How then can any saving be effected ?

Mr Watson:

– That is a fair request.

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

– I strongly desire to impress upon the Minister the desirability of submitting the grading of these administrative offices to the Public Service Commissioner. Let the honorable gentleman remit the question to the man whose business it is to grade every other office in the Commonwealth, and get from him a report. Whatever that report might be, I should be willing to accept it without quibble.

Mr. AUSTIN CHAPMAN (EdenMonaro - Postmaster-General). - I have not the slightest objection to re-submit the matter to the Cabinet, but I must, in all frankness, tell the honorable member that I consider that the present grading is correct. I do not think that any case has been made out for increasing the salary attached to the office of the Deputy Postmaster-General in New South Wales but I consider that Mr. Unwin has claims to consideration which I shall be very glad to submit to my colleagues.

Mr Maloney:

– Will the reduction of Mr. Unwin ‘s salary affect the amount of his pension ?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Yes ; his pension will be calculated upon the amount of salary received by him during the three years preceding his retirement, and, consequently, the reduction will affect the allowance to a small extent. He has been for upwards of forty years in the service - he started by selling stamps, and gradually worked his way up to the highest grade - and he is a most excellent officer, to whom we shall be glad to extend the utmost consideration.

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

– In view of the Minister’s statement, I shall be very glad to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 177 (New South Wales), £886,584

– What did honorable members expect?

Mr THOMAS:

– The Melbourne Age always advocates “keeping the money in the country,” and seeks to encourage local industries. But I remember that the honorable and learned member for East Sydney said on one occasion that that newspaper is free-trade in its commercial department, whilst protectionist in its leading articles. If the Eastern Extension Company’s charges are the cheaper, then the newspapers are justified in using that line; but if that company is charging less than the recognised charges, the Postmaster-General ought to make some inquiry. As I pointed out a few days ago, the sum we lose on the Pacific Cable does not amount to quite so much as the subsidy previously paid to the Eastern Extension Company. At the same time, I should like to know whether the Postmaster-General intends to do anything in order to prevent this annual loss.

Mr. AUSTIN CHAPMAN (Eden- Monaro - Postmaster-General). - The question of the Pacific Cable has caused me a lot of trouble and worry, and it is certainly a very serious matter. The Government are endeavouring, as far as possible, to safeguard the rights and interests of the Commonwealth, and I am in accord with a good deal which fell from the honorable member for Parramatta last night. I realize, however, that we have a strong combination to fight, and I do not think I can reasonably be asked to disclose what the Government propose or hope to do.

Mr Thomas:

– Does the PostmasterGeneral intend to do something?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I certainly do. The whole matter has been before the Cabinet, and immediately some decision is come to which promises satisfactory results, I shall give the information to honorable members.

Mr BROWN:
Canobolas

– I should like to know what the Postmaster-General intends to do in connexion with the Orient mail contract. When the matter was being discussed, , the suggestion was made that if the contract were ratified, steps should be taken at the earliest opportunity to give the Orient Steam Navigation Company notice of its termination, in order that a mail service might be secured on more favorable terms.

Mr. AUSTIN CHAPMAN (EdenMonaro - Postmaster-General). - I should like to inform the Committee that notice of the termination of the contract has been given, and tenders will be invited at the very earliest opportunity, that ample time may be given for competition, and that, if necessary, time may be allowed for tenderers to provide ships. I am giving the matter close attention, and willpush it forward as much as I possibly can..

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 178 (Victoria), £620,402

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

– I direct attention to the item, “ Increments to salaries of £160 and over in the professional and clerical divisions, £600.” When compared with the amount set down for the other States, it appears to me that the amount set down for this purpose for Victoria is too small. I am given to understand that a number of anomalies will be created by reason of the fact that certain officers will receive increments, whilst otherswho are just as much entitled to them will not receivethem. The amount set down for this purpose for New South Wales is £1,000, and for Western Aus tral ia £450, although, according to the figures given to-night by the honorable member for Parramatta, the officers in that State do not number more than one-third of those in Victoria. For Tasmania, £350 is provided for this purpose; I should like to know from the PostmasterGeneral whether, in the event of the amount set down for Victoria proving to be insufficient, officers who will not receive increments out of the vote will have their position in the classification scheme affected? If that should be the case, we shall be undoing what we tried to build up in the classification scheme.

Mr HUME COOK:
BOURKE, VICTORIA · PROT

– As I understand the situation, it is as follows-: If, for example, there are twenty officers in any given Department of the Post Office in Melbourne, the amount of money provided on the Estimates for this purpose will not be sufficient to pay increments to more than half of those officers.

My. Deakin. - That is on the assumption that all are entitled to increments.

Mr HUME COOK:
BOURKE, VICTORIA · PROT

– The officers say that they are all entitled to them, and I understand that the Deputy PostmasterGeneral is not in a position to discriminate between them.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– That is in the General Post Office; but that does not apply to all.

Mr HUME COOK:
BOURKE, VICTORIA · PROT

– If the Minister will assure me that no injustice will be done to any of these men, I shall withdraw all that I am saying. I am assured that injustice will be done to some of them unless the Minister steps in to prevent it. Assuming that twenty men are entitled to increments, the sum provided will give increments only to ten. Though all are equally entitled to, promotion in this way, only half of the officers will be promoted, and if must be manifest that that will lead to all sorts of trouble and confusion for the Public Service Commissioner and the Department. I am told that in times past, with a desire to keep the estimates down as much as possible, officers at the head of branches have not asked the full amount required to pay all increments to the officers under them, and have trusted to get the additional amount required out of the Treasurer’s advance account. The present Treasurer says that he will not pay any increases of salaries out of the Treasurer’s advance account;

Mr Austin Chapman:

– Where did the right honorable gentleman say that?

Mr HUME COOK:
BOURKE, VICTORIA · PROT

– I have it from the right honorable gentleman’s own lips. If the Department in Victoria, acting in the way I have stated, has asked for only £600, when £1,200 will be required, and the Treasurer will not pay the additional £600 out of his advance account, half of the officers will be denied the incrementsto which they are entitled, and an anomaly will be created which, as I have said, will lead to all sorts of confusion. The Minister should here and now make a statement to the effect that all officers who have the Public Service Commissioner’s recommendation, and the approval of the head of their Department, will get the increments to which they are justly entitled, in spite of the fact that the full amount required for the purpose maynot be provided for on these Estimates. If that statement is forthcoming all will be well, but if that statement cannot be made there is no doubt that anomalies will arise which it will be difficult to overcome.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
Postmaster-General · EdenMonaro · Protectionist

– I shall endeavour to see that no such anomalies are created. I must, however, disabuse officers’ minds of the idea that they are all entitled to increases. Increases are supposed to be granted to deserving officers, and of course consideration will have to be paid to all who are deserving. The matter is one which has given me a lot of trouble, but I shall look into it very’ carefully to see that no anomalies are created, and that every consideration is given to the representations which honorable members have made.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 179 (Queensland), £411,159; division 180 (South Australia), £255,281 ; division 181 (Western Australia),£282,576; division 182 (Tasmania), £115,605, agreed to.

Progress reported.

page 4452

ADJOURNMENT

Orderof Business

Motion (by Mr. Deakin) proposed -

That the House do now adjourn.

Mr KELLY:
Wentwortb

-Will the Prime Minister state what will be the order of Government business to-morrow?

Mr DEAKIN:
Minister for External Affairs · BALLAARAT, VICTORIA · Protectionist

– We shall ask the House to resume the consideration of the Estimates.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 12.10 a.m. (Thursday).

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 1 November 1905, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1905/19051101_reps_2_28/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives 1 November 1905

QUESTION

MAJOR HAWKER

Mr KELLY:WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr EWING:Vice-President of the Executive Council · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · Protectionist

QUESTION

ALTERATION OF THE TARIFF

Mr CARPENTER:FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr SPEAKER:

QUESTION

QUEENSLAND MILITARY INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF

Mr CHANTER:for Mr. Wilkinson

Mr EWING:Protectionist

QUESTION

POSTAGE OF CIRCULARS

Mr SALMON:for Sir John Quick

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:Postmaster-General · EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES · Protectionist

QUESTION

FIDELITY AND GUARANTEE FUND

Sir LANGDON BONYTHON:BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:Protectionist

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Postmaster-General’s Department

Division 176 (Central Staff),£7,231

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Bamford:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Page:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Page:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Mahon:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Webster:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Bamford:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Mahon:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Mahon:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Mahon:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Page:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Mahon:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Bamford:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

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

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Mahon:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Mahon:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Mahon:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr DAVID THOMSON:CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr DAVID THOMSON:CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Poynton:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Poynton:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Poynton:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Batchelor:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Poynton:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Batchelor:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr Culpin:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Sir Langdon Bonython:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Sir Langdon Bonython:

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

House of Representatives
1 November 1905

Mr KELLY:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr EWING:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · Protectionist

Mr CARPENTER:
FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr CHANTER:
for Mr. Wilkinson

Mr EWING:
Protectionist

Mr SALMON:
for Sir John Quick

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
Postmaster-General · EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES · Protectionist

Sir LANGDON BONYTHON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
Protectionist

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

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

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr DAVID THOMSON:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr DAVID THOMSON:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

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

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

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

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

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

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

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

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr SYDNEY SMITH:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

Mr R EDWARDS:
OXLEY, QUEENSLAND · PROT; FT from 1913; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910