House of Representatives
26 September 1906

2nd Parliament · 3rd Session



Mr. Speaker took the chair at 10.30 a.m., and read prayers.

page 5421

QUESTION

OLD-AGE PENSIONS

Mr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

– I wish to ask the Prime Minister whether, if in the course of events he has the power, he will make a Bill to provide for old-age pensions one of the first measures to be introduced into this Chamber next session ?

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

– If by “power,” the honorable member means money, my answer is that it will be one of the first measures to receive the attention of the Government.

page 5421

QUESTION

PARADE OF TROOPS IN SYDNEY

Mr KELLY:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is the Minister representing the Minister of Defence now able to make available to honorable members the papers dealing with the parading of certain troops in January last at the Australian Natives Association Exhibition in Sydney? I asked for their production yesterday.

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

– The Department has been requested to furnish them at once.

Mr KELLY:

– When will they be available? Before the discussion of the Defence Estimates?

Mr EWING:

– To-day.

Mr CHANTER:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is it not a fact that in New South Wales troops have been allowed to take part in school gatherings, and other fetes as well as this Australian Natives Association Exhibition?

Mr EWING:

– I am unable to say ; but I think that when the papers are produced it will be seen that the right thing was done in this case.

Mr KELLY:

– Is it not a fact that two days which would otherwise have been devoted by the Australian Field Artillery in Sydney to firing practice were given up, with full pay, to help the Australian Natives Association Exhibition to obtain a bigger “gate”? Does not the Minister think that the efficiency of that force, which has only about five days in the year for firing practice, is of more importance to the country than the fostering of an exhibition held by the Australian Natives Association ?

Mr EWING:

– The papers will disclose the facts of the case.

Mr CHANTER:

– Were not these troops engaged in assisting the Australian

Natives Association to bold an exhibition to educate the public as to the resources of this country ?

Mr Reid:

– That is all very well, but why take away from the men opportunities for firing practice?

Mr EWING:

– I am satisfied that the right thing was done in this case, though in the absence of the papers it might not be wise to comment upon them.

page 5422

QUESTION

RUMOURED RESIGNATION OF THE TREASURER

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
DARWIN, TASMANIA

– I - I wish to know from the Prime Minister if he has read in this morning’s Argus the report that the Treasurer is about to resign, because of the insincerity of the Government in regard to the Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta Railway Survey Bill?

Mr Reid:

– The Treasurer’s resignation is the unlikeliest thing that I have ever heard of.

Mr DEAKIN:
Protectionist

– If I may repeat an answer given by an honorable colleague recently, I may say that the honorable member would be the last to suspect any one of insincerity, even in putting a question.

page 5422

QUESTION

MAIL SERVICE TO EUROPE

Mr REID:

– I have noticed a statement in various newspapers during the last few weeks lo the effect that the new steam-ship company which has contracted with the Government for the carriage of mails to Europe expects to receive a subvention from one source and another which will amount to £250,000 a year, and it has been reported that the steamers may go on from Adelaide to New Zealand. Is the Postmaster- General aware of an arrangement, either with this Government or the Government of New Zealand, under which the company will receive a greater subsidy than it has already contracted for?

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

– I have no information leading . me to think that the statements are correct.

page 5422

QUESTION

DEPUTY POSTMASTER-GENERAL’, SYDNEY

Mr BROWN:
CANOBOLAS, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I wish to know from the Postmaster-General if there is any possibility that the position- of Deputy PostmasterGeneral, Sydney, will be filled before the end of the session?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
Protectionist

– The matter is under consideration. No doubt the Public Service Commissioner will fill the vacancy .at the earliest possible moment.

page 5422

PUBLIC SERVICE (APPEALS) BILL

Bill presented, and (on motion by Mr. Hughes) read a first time.

page 5422

QUESTION

CASE OF CAPTAIN CROUCH

Mr JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I wish to know from the Vice-President of the Executive Council if the Minister of Defence is willing to lay on the table of the Library the papers in what is known as the Crouch surrender case, for which I asked yesterday ? ‘

Mr EWING:
Protectionist

– I have not had the pleasure of seeing the Minister “this morning, but I shall endeavour to do so during the day.

Mr REID:

– Can the honorable gentleman see any way of getting round the difficulty which he mentioned yesterday, a report having been received which, in the view of the Department, is abortive, and therefore cannot be laid on the table of the library as a report? Could it not be produced, accompanied by a written assurance to the effect that it is not a report ?

Mr KELLY:

– In view of the honorable gentleman’s answer yesterday, that the finding of the Board could not be acted upon, because the inquiry was informal, and therefore abortive, I wish to know how it came about that the Commandant received and made a recommendation on such a finding, and what explanation has been asked of him in regard to his action?

Mr EWING:

– The Minister informed me, as I stated yesterday, that the Commandant has reported that all connected with the case are satisfied to leave things as they stand, and that, therefore, he will not bother himself further in regard to it.

page 5422

QUESTION

TARIFF AGREEMENT: COMMONWEALTH AND NEW ZEALAND

Mr POYNTON:
GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I wish to know from the Prime Minister what is the position in regard to the New Zealand preferential trade agreement, since the Barrier mining industry is seriously affected by the dufy on Oregon ? Is it intended to go on with’ the Bill?

Mr DEAKIN:
Protectionist

– The Premier of New Zealand has replied to the telegram which I sent yesterday, that he will lay the matter before his Cabinet to-day. Unless both parties accept the agreement, it will be void.

page 5423

QUESTION

BRISBANE TELEGRAPHISTS

Mr CULPIN:
BRISBANE. QLD

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that the Commissioner has fixed seven hours per day for day men in Brisbane, and that such instruction is not being carried out, hut that they are working fom 9 a.m. to 6.10 p.m., with an hour for lunch?

    1. Will he instruct that they get their Saturday afternoon off from 1 p.m. ?
Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

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

  1. No. TheCommissioner ruled that where a telegraphist is not kept constantly busy and can get time off for meals, he should, if necessary, work 88 hours per fortnight.
  2. Inquiries are being made as to the arrangement in force with regard to the hours of attendance of the officers referred to.

page 5423

QUESTION

MELBOURNE-BURNIE MAIL SERVICE

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

ask asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

  1. What was the amount of the lowest tender received for the mail service between Melbourne and Burnie, shown as A3 in the notice issued recently inviting alternative tenders for a service between Victoria and Tasmania?
  2. Will the Minister slate what action was taken by him in fulfilment of the promise he made on the 12th July last, in connexion with the tenders for the service referred to?
Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
Protectionist

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

  1. No tender was received for the service referred to. It was, however, stated in subsequent correspondence that the cost of providing such a service would be not less than£25,000 per annum.
  2. Negotiations were entered into with the view of the Loongana calling once a week at Burnie, but the tenderers stated that they were unable to agree to this. The new contract provides for a twice a week service throughout the year between Melbourne and Burnie, as against the present service once a week for eight months, and twice a week for the remaining four months ; and for the replacing of the Flora (averaging 12 knots) by the Oonah (averaging 14 knots) before the end of 1907.

In consequence of the action taken by the representatives of Tasmania, particularly by Senator Keating, in the Senate, and by the honorable member for Darwin, in this House, every effort was made to obtain a service for the North Coast, but without success. We have, however, improved the existing service, and hope to do still more for the people of Tasmania later.

page 5423

POSTAL RATES BILL

Second Reading

Mr. AUSTIN CHAPMAN (Eden-

That the Bill be now read a second time.

In view of the information which has already been placed before honorable members, and the attention which has been given to this matter, it will hardly be necessary for me to detain the House at any great length. It is desirable, however, that certain facts should be submitted with a view to enabling honorable members to arrive at a determination as to the desirability of establishing uniform postage throughout the Commonwealth. I think that honorable members will agree that the spirit, if not the letter, of the Constitution imposes on us a solemn obligation to bring about uniformity in postal matters as well as in other respects, so that all the people of Australia may enjoy equal advantages and opportunities. This obligation has been recognised so far as Customs and Excise duties, and also defence matters, are concerned, and I am sure that we shall do well if we can secure uniformity in our postal charges. Except in the case of Tasmania, we have made the telegraphic rates as between the States uniform, and a Bill has been passed through, this House, and will, I trust, soon be agreed to by the Senate, which will place Tasmania upon the same footing as every other State of the Commonwealth. When that has been done, our telegraphic charges will be uniform throughout the States. This Bill proposes to place the whole of our citizens, whether they reside in the cities or the country, upon an equal footing so far as postal rates are concerned. Since I have been in charge of the Post and Telegraph Department, I have taken action with a view to secure uniformity in the money order system, and so far the results have been very satisfactory, not only from the point of view of increased business, but also from the revenue stand-point. My experience in this respect, as in others, goes to show that a reasonable reduction of charges always brings about an extension of business and an increase of revenue. We should have exposed ourselves to very severe criticism if we had allowed varying Customs duties to continue in operation for any lengthened period, and in view of the fact that the great majority of the people are more interested in postal matters than in Customs administration, I think that we should endeavour to bring about uniformity of conditions in the great Postal Department at the earliest possible date. The proposed reform is one which should appeal to every citizen in the Commonwealth. It is stated that a loss will be incurred by introducing penny postage, but I should like to point out that the term “ loss” should not be used in this connexion, because we do not incur a loss by merely refusing to take money out of the pockets of the people. We shall certainly receive less revenue for a time, but Ithink that I shall be able to show that any deficiency will very soon be made up. I would also urge that the longer we defer this reform the greater will be the immediate reduction of revenue involved by the change, because the volume of postal matter is increasing every day. I contend that we should long ago have made an attempt to remove the present postal barriers. We should also help the people to recognise that they are not only citizens of a State, but of theCommonwealth. This measure goes even further than that, because it will bring home to the people the fact that they are citizens of the Empire. Further, I believe that many countries that are not now parties to the arrangement for the introduction of penny postage will eventually come into line with us. When that occurs the people of Australia will realize that they are citizens of a world-wide postal system, and that Australia is prepared to step forward in the path of progress, and keep abreast of the nations. I think that it is time we made a change in the present unsatisfactory arrangements. In his address at the opening of the first Parliament of the Commonwealth, Lord Hopetoun said -

As soon as practicable the postal and telegraphic rates of the several States will be assimilated, and when the finances of the Commonwealth admit, an uniform, and if possible, universal penny postage rate will be established.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
Protectionist

– I think that I shall be able to show that they do admit of it now. Surely no honorable member will contend that this country is in such a bad financial position that we cannot afford to do justice to the people in the smaller centres and sparsely-populated districts, where the conditions of life are not so favorable as in the busy centres.

Mr Thomas:

– We cannot afford to pay old-age pensions.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– It would be a sorry day for the people of this country if we denied justice to the people because it was alleged that we cannot provide for old-age pensions. I have warmly advocated the payment of old-age pensions. I would point out that both New South Wales and Victoria have splendid surpluses, and that before any talk is indulged in with regard to the remission of income tax, we should give to the people of Australia uniform penny postage, and do justice to those who are living in the outlying districts.

Mr Reid:

– If the Postmaster-General first provided better postal facilities in the remote districts we should back him up.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I venture to say that in no single case within my knowledge has any reasonable postal facility been refused.

Mr McCay:

– Postal facilities have repeatedly been refused on the ground that the estimated revenue was not sufficient.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– In many cases that is a very good reason, although I hold that the Postal Department should not be looked upon as one whichmust, under existing circumstances, pay its way.

Mr Frazer:

– The difficulty lies in convincing the Department that a request is reasonable.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I propose to give some reasons in favour of my contention that we can afford to make the proposed reduction of postage. Is it to be supposed, for example, that New South Wales, where the Treasurer has a surplus of£1,000,000, cannot afford to spend £50,000 in extending to the people in the outlying districts and smaller centres the same advantages as are now enjoyed by residents in the cities?

Mr McLean:

– How can the Minister account for the fact that some postal services that were in existence for a quarter of a century before penny postage was introduced in Victoria were afterwards discontinued ?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– That may be explainable, but has nothing to do with this question. I would ask the honorable member if he is prepared to vote against the establishment of uniform penny postage, and to continue to give the people of Victoria the benefit of penny postage within that State, whilst twopence is charged upon all letters sent for a mile or two across the border. If he were consistent, the honorable member would support the increase of the postage to 2d. all round. We are aiming at uniformity. Papers which have been distri- buted among honorable members show clearly the unsatisfactory character of the present postal charges. The existing rates of postage are bristling with anomalies, and their continuance cannot be justified, and should no longer be permitted. Victoria comes easily first in comparison with other States, because she has penny postage throughout the State. You can send a letter from one end of Victoria to the other for id., and people living on the border cannot understand why they should have to pay 2d. to send a letter 2 or 3 miles into a neighbouring State.

Mr Reid:

– Victoria pays for her penny postage.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– That is quite true; but we hope to bring about uniformity within the Commonwealth, and to do away with provincial lines of demarcation. Is it fair that the people of New South Wales and other States should go on paying higher rates? After looking into this question very carefully, I have come to the conclusion that, if we are to act fairly, only one course is open to us, namely, to make our postal rates uniform. We must either reduce the postage to id. all round, or the Victorian rate must be raised to 2d. It has been urged that this measure is proposed in the interests of merchants and big business people. All that I can say is that I shall engage in no vendetta against big business people. If they send away large numbers of letters they must receive replies, and thus lead to an increase of the revenue of the Department. The history of penny postage in other parts of the world shows that, upon the reduction of the postage rates, big business houses have increased their contributions to the revenue. New South Wales already enjoys the advantages of penny , postage in sixty different areas, embracing 1,300^ post-offices ; but that is a very inequitable’ arrangement.

Mr Frazer:

– Has the Minister had any representations made to him as to the necessity for reducing the postal rates?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– What has that to do with the question?

Mr Frazer:

– -As soon as uniform penny postage is introduced, an agitation will be started in favour of extending further consideration to the residents in the cities.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Do I understand that the honorable member objects to penny postage on the ground that the moment we bring it about some On will advocate a reduction to a still lower rate? If that is his contention, I cannot understand it.

Mr Frazer:

– The Minister misrepresents my contention.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– If such be the case, the honorable member will have an opportunity later on of putting the matter right. As the representatives of New South Wales are aware, these penny postal radii, as they are termed, have been established in many parts of that State, whilst other localities, possessing a greater population, and doing a large volume of business, have been denied the benefits of that system. ‘ I would further point out that when a letter crosses the border line of these radii it must bear an additional penny stamp, and, if it does not. its recipient is subjected to a further fine of a penny. The operation of this arrangement occasions frequent complaints on the part of the public - complaints which are a source of annoyance to the postal officials, who are anxious to meet the people in every possible way. Moreover, we have often to refuse reasonable requests on account of this inequitable system. At the present time the majority of the letters which are posted in New South Wales bear only a penny stamp ; consequently, this proposal, if it will benefit one section of the community more than another, will benefit those who are resident outside of large towns arid cities. It will be of great advantage to those who are settled in the country districts, and who do not enjoy many of the facilities which are enjoyed bv city residents. Consequently, nobody can justly contend that it is a measure which will favour only the merchant or the city resident.

Mr Poynton:

– But the Minister will have to impose additional duties to make up the loss of revenue.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I do not propose to do anything of the kind. I maintain, that the adoption of penny postage will not result in a financial loss. It simply means that we would refuse to take a certain amount from’ the pockets of the people, and I contend that the increased volume of business which will result will soon make up any deficiency in revenue that may occur at the outset. That has been the history of penny postage , in all other countries. When it was adopted in Canada, nothing but disaster was predicted, but the fact remains that within three years the revenue derived under the new system was equal in the aggregate, to that obtained under the old.

Mr Frazer:

– I suppose that the Government will impose a tax upon tea and kerosene to make up the deficiency.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Some of the honorable member’s constituents enjoy the blessings of penny postage. I am aware that some of the residents of his electorate do not share those advantages. Qf course, there are always complaints against the Postal Department.

Mr Frazer:

– They are absolutely just complaints.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I shall be very glad to thresh out those complaints with the honorable member at any time.”

Mr Hughes:

– Will the Minister’s proposal affect the granting of other departmental facilities to the people?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– No. The question of making the rates uniform will not interfere with any service. The history of penny postage elsewhere has been that a very large revenue has resulted from its adoption. Within a short time after its introduction I think that we should be able to extend greater facilities to the people, owing to the largely increased revenue that would be derived. As I have already stated, there are sixty penny postal centres in New South Wales and 1,300 offices which enjoy the benefits conferred by that arrangement. In South Australia, on the other hand, there is no penny town rate at all. There, if one wishes to send a letter to his next-door neighbour, or across the street, he is required to pay 2d. upon it.

Mr DAVID THOMSON:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– A %’ery good provision, too.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Then let us make the law in all the States uniform. I notice that one of the leading daily newspapers in Adelaide views the proposal to establish penny postage throughout the Commonwealth with approval.

Mr McCay:

– Which newspaper?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Further, it has been very highly commended by leading public men in South Australia. I read with very great pleasure an article upon the subject which appeared in the Advertiser. A member of the South Australian Parliament has already given notice of a motion approving of the adoption of penny postage. But after .all, it ought not to be a question of who in South

Australia are in favour of it, but rather a question of simple justice. If anybody here is opposed to penny postage, it is his business to provide a substitute. Throughout Victoria the postal rate is a penny. But if a resident of Albury, in New South Wales, wishes to send a letter to Wodonga he is required to affix a 2d. stamp to it, and if he fails to do so, the recipient is liable to pay double the amount of the deficiency. The residents of these places are clamouring for the adoption of penny postage. They contend that it is a simple act of justice, and that the existing anomaly ought to be swept away at the earliest possible moment. It seems to me that the main objection which has been urged against its introduction is that we cannot afford it. But I have yet to learn that we cannot afford to do a simple act of justice, especially at a time when all the States are flourishing. At the present time, in many of the States, the Treasurers have large surpluses. What would be said if, because some ‘States were not financially as strong as others, we proposed to levy different Customs and Excise duties? What question goes home to the people more than does that of postal rates ? They are more interested in it than even in telegraphic rates, because for every person who uses the telegraph there are probably twenty who use the post-office. What will be the effect of penny postage from a financial stand-point ?

Mr DAVID THOMSON:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– Less taxation.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I quite agree with the honorable member. In the United Kingdom penny postage has been established for many years. With what result? The people there enjoy facilities which I wish the people of the Commonwealth shared, and which I hope, under proper administration, will very soon be extended to them. In consequence of the adoption of the penny postage system, which has been in operation there for a number of years, they post more letters per head than; do any other people in the world.

Mr Hutchison:

– What was the revenue and expenditure of the Postal Department of the United Kingdom last vear ?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I do not know. But I do know that every year the Postal Department contributes very largely towards paying for other services, and that every year some further privilege is extended to the people because of its expanding revenue.

Mr McCay:

– I - Is not that revenue the result of having a closely-settled population, and not of penny postage?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Then I ask the honorable and learned member whether he will deny to the residents in our sparsely-populated districts the privileges that are enjoyed by residents of towns and cities ?

Mr McCay:

– The proposal of the Government will hit the residents of sparselysettled districts harder than it will city residents.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– The honorable and learned member will have an opportunity of replying to my remarks at a later stage. I shall be glad to hear him explain why the residents of South Australia should continue to pay a postage rate of 2d. whilst those in Victoria are called upon to pay only id.

Mr Reid:

– The Victorians themselves pay that postage rate.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– But we do not look forward to a continuance of the bookkeeping provisions for ever. The Government further propose to make the postal rates for the carriage of letter cards, post cards, magazines, and printed matter uniform, so that a person in any part of Australia will know exactly the amount of postage which he has to pay without first asking himself whether he is upon one side or the other of the River Murray. It is well known that, owing to the high rates of postage upon printed matter, many large local firms have had their printing done in the United Kingdom. Under these circumstances, we have suffered a double loss. We have had to carry their printed matter, upon its arrival here, for nothing, and Australia has lost the employment that would have been provided had the printing been undertaken locally. This fact became so apparent some years since in New South Wales that reductions in the rates for the carriage of printed matter were agreed to with the object of endeavouring to bring that State into line with some of the other States. That circumstance evidences the grave danger of having high postage rates. This Bill provides for the establishment of uniform rates. Under existing conditions, the people of Tasmania are much more favorably situated than are those of any other State in respect of the carriage of printed matter, whilst the residents of Victoria and New South Wales enjoy advantages which are not shared by those of South Australia, Western Australia, and Queensland. The postage on printed papers iri Tasmania is only one-half that charged in New South Wales and Victoria, and only one-fourth that charged in Queensland, South Australia, and Western Australia on inland matter, and one-half that charged in the last three States on Inter-State matter. Surely we are not going to permit such a state of things to continue. I do not suppose that there are many officials who, without consulting . the schedule of rates, can say what the postage upon printed matter is in other States. We have levelled ;down in the case of one of the States, and in the case of Tasmania we have had to level ,up a little in order to bring the States into line.

Mr Poynton:

– Will not the States have to make up any deficiency which may be incurred as the result of the adoption of the penny postage?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– 1 am contending that no loss will result to the people if we refuse to take a certain amount from their pockets. I cannot agree with the contention of those who take up a different attitude. The adoption of uniform penny postage will result, not in a loss, but in a saving to the people. We have refused to take money out of their pockets by means of inequitable taxation, and I am going to show that we can well afford to reduce this tax. Surely we can impose taxation on a better basis.

Mr Frazer:

-°-Bv put putting duties on tea and kerosene.

Mr Tudor:

– So that the country people will have to pay.

Mr Reid:

– The big business people in the cities will secure the benefit of this reform.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– It is interesting to hear the right honorable member assert that the people in the cities will derive the chief benefit.

Mr Reid:

– Only a very few people in the cities will reap the benefit.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Is the right honorable member prepared to deny justice to the people in the outlying districts of New South Wales? Is he prepared to deny them a privilege which those residing in his electorate enjoy ? Are the people in the electorate which I represent to be required to place a 2d. stamp on every letter which they post even to an address only 2 miles distant, while those residing in his electorate may send a letter though the post to an address jo miles distant for one penny? If the right honorable member favours such a policy, I can only say that it is an inequitable one. I am at a loss to understand the contentions raised by some honorable members in opposition to this proposal. It is said that the merchants will chiefly benefit. I should like to inquire to whom the merchants chiefly address their correspondence. Is it not a fact that they have a large correspondence with country residents, and that farmers and others in the country districts are constantly writing to the business firms in the cities? Is it, fair that the business people of New South Wales - those residing in the right honorable member’s own electorate - should have to place a 2d. stamp on a letter addressed to a client living 50 miles from Sydney, when their competitors in Victoria may send a letter three times the distance at a cost of one penny ?

Mr McCay:

– That is what is troubling the honorable gentleman.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– It seems to me that at present I am not nearly so troubled as the honorable and learned member is.

Mr McLean:

– The worst postal service in Australia is that existing in the honorable gentleman’s own electorate.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– That ought to redound to my credit.

Mr Reid:

– I do not know that it will.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– If the honorable member for Gippsland will bring under mv notice any defects in the service in mv electorate I shall have them remedied without delay. His information cannot be of recent date. I have recently had the pleasure of removing several anomalies in relation to the postal service in my electorate.

Mr McLean:

– Scores of letters - some of them containing money - sent by my firm to persons residing in the honorable member’s district have gone astray

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Referring, further, to the Tasmanian postage rates, in connexion with the inland postage on books, the people of Tasmania are much more favorably situated than are the residents of other States, whilst the people of New South Wales have a concession with respect to the postage on books not exceeding 2 ozs. in weight, which is not enjoyed by the residents of Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, and Western Australia. The inland postage, on books in Tasmania is only one-half that charged in other States. There are also great anomalies in connexion with the postage on magazines, both inland and Inter-State, the rates charged for inland postage being higher in Queensland and Western Australia than in other States, and the InterState postage being higher in Queensland, Western Australia, and Tasmania than in the other three States. That is to say, magazines may be sent from New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia to Western Australia and Tasmania at half the rates of postage charged in the latter States on magazines sent to the other three States named. These are anomalies that we should endeavour to remove. Thev may be swept away at little cost. Experience shows that a reasonable reduction in postal charges leads ‘to an increased revenue. A few years ago the postal rates were much higher than thev are to-day. I can remember when we had to place a 6d. stamp on certain letters, but although the rate has been reduced to 2d., the revenue to-day is much greater than it was under the old conditions. It would be just as logical to say that it was wrong to reduce the old rate from 6d. to 2d. per letter, as it is to say that it is unwise to adopt uniform penny postage.

Mr Salmon:

– What are the postal rates in Victoria ?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I shall give the honorable member some information on that point. In accordance with arrangements made while the Department was under State control, the rates of postage payable on magazines sent from New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia to Queensland are double those charged on magazines sent to> Western Australia or Tasmania. There is another anomaly in relation to that very interesting publication - Hansard. In New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, and Tasmania, Hansard may be sent inland at onehalf the rates of postage charged in Queensland and in Western Australia, and from New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia to other States at one-half the rates of postage charged on Inter-State matter from Queensland, Western Australia, and Tasmania.

Mr McLean:

Hansard would be dear at any rate.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I think at all events that we ought to have a uniform rate. There is no reason why the postal rate on Hansard in one State should be higher than it is in another. When such anomalies exist, people are led to wonder whether Federation has really been established. As in other respects the taxation imposed by the Commonwealth is uniform, they naturally ask why the residents of some States should be called upon to pay double the postage rates imposed in others. Senator Stewart has taken action in connexion with this matter in the right direction, and if honorable members refer to the Bill they will see that we propose to allow Hansard to be sent through the post at a uniform rate.

Mr McCay:

– Is that a Boon to the public?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I recognise that the more general distribution of Hansard may affect some honorable members, but my duty is to consider not the convenience of individual honorable members, but the general demand for an extension of postal facilities. It is unnecessary for me to dwell upon the facts that I have submitted to the House. It seems to me that they speak for themselves. The practice of imposing in some States postal rates that are twice as high as those imposed in other States is indefensible. It certainly presses most heavily on those least able ‘ to bear the burden. The evidence we have with regard to the adoption of penn postage shows that it has given an impetus to business, and that any loss of revenue immediately following the reduction is soon made good. The adoption of penny postage in the United Kingdom has led to an enormous advance in the business of the Department. Every year its revenue shows an increase. The position is the same in regard to Canada, New Zealand, and Victoria. Are the people of the Commonwealth less enterprising, less energetic, than are the people of Canada, New Zealand, and other parts of the world where this system has been established? Have we less faith in our country than they have in theirs? Are we all pessimists? Are we to be lieve that what has proved a blessing in other countries will not prove a blessing here? I, at all events, am not in sympathy with the croakers. We should be hopeful. We should take credit for the fact that our country is as good as, if not better than, most others, and that our people are quite as energetic as are those of other lands. I feel that history will repeat itself in this regard, and that Australia will make still greater advances than have been made by other countries. I base my calculation on the improvements which have resulted from the adoption of penny postage elsewhere. I would point out that from 1 st April, 1901. the postage on letters posted in Victoria for delivery in that State was reduced from 2d.’ per oz. to id. per £ oz. That was not such a liberal reduction as we are now proposing. But what was the result of it. In 1900, when the reduced rate was not in operation the number of letters posted in Victoria for delivery therein was 61,813,218. In 1901 - and the reduced rate was in operation for only nine out of the twelve months - 70,255,396 letters were posted; in 1902, during which year the reduced rate was in full play, 83,748,327 letters were posted; in 1903, 84,871,415; in 1904, 86,802,756; and in 1905, 92,340,704. The increase per cent., as compared with 1900, was as follows: - 1901, 13.66; 1902, 35.49; 1903, 37.30; 1904, 40.43; 1905, 49.39. This was equal to an average increase of 35.25 per cent, per annum, as compared with the number of letters posted for inland delivery in 1900. In other words, the figures T have quoted indicate that the average number of letters posted between 1901 and 1905 was 35.25 per cent, greater than in 1900, when the higher rate of postage prevailed. Surely these figures speak for themselves.

Mr McLean:

– Has the honorable gentleman a return showing the increase which took place over a similar number of years before the reduction was made in Victoria.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I shall present the honorable member with some figures which I think he will admit are fairly convincing. Let me first of all deal with the result of the introduction of the system in Canada. “In 1900 the postage on letters posted in Canada for delivery therein was reduced from ijd. to id. per J oz. That is not such a liberal reduction as we propose, but the increase in the number of letters posted was as follows: -

showing an average increase of 51.18 per cent, per annum, as compared with 1899. The revenue in 1899 was only £654,027, leaving a deficit of £81,968, but it increased in 1905 to £1,053,159, showing a surplus of £100,858. Surely this evidence should satisfy honorable members of the wisdom of our proposal. If, as the result of the adoption of uniform penny postage, we secured anything like the same increase, I am sure that ever)’ one would be well satisfied.

Mr McLean:

– But immigrants have been pouring into Canada.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Will any one say that we should not have a stream of immigrants pouring into Australia? We shall certainly stand still if we do not give our people postal conveniences and postal rales equal to those enjoyed by the citizens of the Dominion. If we extend these conveniences to the people, a different state of affairs will arise. Surely we should make some effort in this direction. We have plenty of room for an increased population.

Mr Hutchison:

– We are too far from Europe to secure the immigrants that Canada has won.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

- Mr. Fielding, in making a statement of the finances of Canada, in May this year said -

It is but a few years since Canada had a 3-cent. (1 1/2d.) domestic letter rate, and a 5-cent. (2id.) rate on letters to Great Britain, and yet, even with these heavy, postal rates, the Post Office Department absorbed all the revenue it could collect, and, at the close of the year, some 600,000 or 700,000 dollars (^123,288 or £143,836) was usually required from the public Treasury to make good the deficiency and keep the Post Office running. We have no longer a 3-cent. rale ; Canada has penny postage within her own borders, and Denny postage with the mother country. The Post Office Department no longer absorbs all its own revenue, no longer calls for 600,000 or 700,000 dollars from the Treasury. After affording the people a very liberal postal service, after giving reduced rates, after establishing the blessing - for it is not too much to speak of it so - of penny postage, the Postmaster-General comes at the close of the year asking for nothing from the public Treasury, but tendering the splendid sum of 900,000 dollars (^184,932) to assist the other public services of the country.

Those statements ought to be convincing, except to honorable members who think that we should not progress, but should remain satisfied with things as they are. Those who believe with me that we’ are on the eve of good times will agree that we should extend to our people the privileges enjoyed by the people of Canada and of other countries. I had the pleasure of meeting at Rome Dr. Coulter, the Canadian Deputy Postmaster-General. In the course of conversation he told me that the developments which had followed the introduction of penny postage in Canada were remarkable in many districts. He is a man of ripe experience and political knowledge, having held his position for many years, and enjoyed the confidence of Sir William Mulock, so that we should respect his opinions. If we refuse to adopt penny postage, the Postal Union will, a few years hence, compel us to send and receive letters to and from all parts of the world at the penny rate, although we retain the twopenny rate for correspondence within and between the States.

Mr Cameron:

– :Are the people asking for penny postage?

Mr Reid:

– If the honorable gentleman had not. gone to Rome we should not have heard of this proposition.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Some years ago, when a member of the New South Wales Legislative Assembly, I carried a resolution affirming the desirability of establishing penny postage in that State, and I think that the right honorable gentleman supported it. I know that many of the same political party did. I also gave notice of my intention to move a similar motion in this Parliament. It is only a little time since the honorable member for Corinella, and others on the Opposition side of the House, were pressing for an answer to this question. Now, suddenly, for some reason which I am at a loss to understand, they assert that the country cannot afford to adopt penny postage. Are not honorable members prepared to do justice to the people in the country districts?

Mr Wilkinson:

– Will not the reduction of the rate prejudice country services?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– It will mean that the honorable member’s constituents will be able to send their letters anywhere thoughout Australia for id.

Mr Wilkinson:

– But they will have fewer post-offices.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– The “increase in business which will result from the reduction in the rates of postage will mean an increase in post-offices, and in postal facilities generally. Persons in the country districts will be able to post halfadozen letters for 6d., the rate charged for town letters, instead of having to pay rs. This is a matter of great domestic consequence. A penny may not seem much, but in the aggregate it amounts to a good deal in the case of many letter writers. In the country districts the women do a great deal of writing. It is a pleasure, and a means of information and education, to communicate freely with distant friends and persons in other centres. But is it fair to require them to pay twice as much for postage as is charged to those who live in the towns? The honorable member for Wilmot asks if the people want this reduction. I say that undoubtedly there is a demand for it from one end of Australia to another.

Sir John Forrest:

– They want equality of treatment.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Yes. Any person in a country district who is asked if he would sooner pay id. than 2d. for postage will reply in the affirmative, especially when he learns that he is now charged a higher rate than those living in towns and cities. If the honorable member questions his constituents on this subject from the platform, the reply will be a thunderous “ yes “ which will surprise him.”” In connexion with my attendance at the Postal Congress, where I met the great postal reformer, Mr. Henniker Heaton, to whom the thanks of millions are due for his great efforts towards obtaining cheaper postage, I had the pleasure of travelling for some months with Sir Joseph Ward, with whom I discussed this subject often and at great length. We know that, after a strenuous fight, he convinced the people of New Zealand that penny postage would be a good thing for that Colony, and now letters are transmitted, not only throughout New Zealand, but to the mother country, and to any other part of the world which will reciprocate, on payment of a postage of id. The public appreciation of Sir Joseph Ward’s services is shown bv the fact that he is now the trusted Prime Minister of New Zealand. The population of. New

Zealand is less than one-fourth that of the Commonwealth, and penny postage was established there on 1st January, 1901. During that year the increase in the number of letters posted amounted to 11,705, 109; during the second year to 1.6,269,463; during the third year to 19,207,712; and during the fourth year to 24,014,411 - a total increase of 72.78 per cent, on the number posted in 1900.’ Sir Joseph Ward says that the inauguration of penny postage has greatly stimulated business activity in New Zealand.

Mr Johnson:

– But the reduction was adopted there because an increase of revenue was expected, while the honorable gentleman looks for a decrease.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I look for an increase.. Sir Joseph Ward, when he attended the Postal Union, asked its members to adopt universal penny postage. I recorded my vote in favour of that proposal, and so did the representatives of 100,000,000 white men. The representatives of Great Britain, for some reason, abstained from voting ; but at the next conference the question will be a burning one, and I believe that five years hence the penny rate will be made universal. Will honorable members then be content to retain the twopenny rate within Australia?

Mr Hutchison:

– Five years hence we shaw have in power a Government which will be willing to impose a land tax.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Honorable members may delay this reform; they may leave us sticking in the mud for a little while; but the people of Australia will insist on being given the privileges enjoyed by those, of other countries. I do not think that ‘honorable members can advance good reasons why we should not adopt this reform. When Sir Joseph Ward made his financial statement the other day. he said that the result of establishing penny postage throughout New Zealand with other parts of the world was so satisfactory that he proposed to give still greater facilities by allowing the weight of letters to be increased without extra charge, and in other directions. He is at the head of one of the biggest and best commercial houses in the colony, and I have his personal assurance that the inauguration of penny postage so increased the volume of correspondence done by these .houses that, although the rates had been reduced bv one-half, their aggregate payments for stamps was increased. These are hard facts from which there is no escape. Penny postage is in force in Egypt, France, India, Germany, and the United States of America.

Mr Maloney:

– The rate of postage is less than id. in India.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– The representatives of the countries which I have named spoke highly of the penny system at the recent Postal Congress.

Mr Cameron:

– Is there a loss on the working of the system in those countries?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– There cannot be. They refuse to burden those who can least afford to pay high postage, and the revenue has gone up by leaps and bounds. It is estimated that if in a progressive country the rate of postage is reduced to a penny, the revenue at the end of three or four years will be greater than it was under the old rate.

Mr Johnson:

– That is assuming that there is an increase in the population.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– All I can say is, “God help this country!” if we are going to stand still and refuse to extend to our citizens the same privileges and conveniences that are enjoyed by residents in other countries. The PostmasterGeneral of New Zealand, Sir Joseph Ward, who knows what he is talking about when he speaks on this question, says that the reduction of postal and telegraph charges stimulates business, and there is no doubt that that result would be brought about if the proposed change is carried into effect. The Post Office affords means for the transaction of business, and there is no reason why the people in other States should not enjoy the same facilities as those now enjoyed by residents of Victoria. I have no complaint against that State. ‘ Every credit is due to her for having introduced the penny postage system. My contention, however, is that the residents of all the other States should enjoy a similar convenience. Let us go further, and extend penny postage throughout the world - the world with which we do business. Can any one for a moment suppose that there is the slightest comparison between the number of letters now posted and those despatched in the old days, when the postage rates were much higher. I look forward confidently to the time when we shall have uniformity in regard to postal, cable, and telegraphic rates, not only throughout the Empire, but throughout the world. When one meets the representatives of other countries, and has opportunities of conversing with them, he realizes that such a consummation is well within our reach. We should endeavour to be progressive. Let us take the case of France. Only this year the penny postage system was introduced there, and the representative of that country at the Postal Congress told me that it was estimated that, in consequence, £1,000,000 less would come into the Treasury. But he pointed out that the history of the world showed that that deficiency would soon be made up. He recognised that the falling off in revenue was not a loss, but a gain to the people. I should like to direct attention to the increase that has taken place in the postal revenue in Victoria.

Mr DAVID THOMSON:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– That is where they carry on sweating under the contract post office system.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– If the honorable member will brins any case of sweating under my notice, I shall very soon put a stop to it.

Mr Maloney:

– What about the last case I brought under the Minister’s notice?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I have endeavoured to prevent any abuses of the kind referred to. It is impossible to prevent anomalies creeping in occasionally. Unfortunately, the idea seems to be prevalent among some officials that it is their duty to sweat others; but I shall do my best to prevent anything of that kind taking place. That, however does not affect the question. We have about 11,000 officials in the Post and Telegraph Department, and it is a matter of surprise that there are not more complaints. I invite not only honorable members, but those who consider they are sweated, to direct my attention to any causes of complaint.

Mr Hutchison:

– For months I wrote to the Department about one case, which was proved up to the hilt, and I had the greatest difficulty in getting anything done.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– The honorable member must not charge that against the penny postage proposal. In Victoria, where the penny postage system has been in operation since the 1st April, 1901., the revenue increased from ;£545=533 in I900”1 - during the last three months of which year the penny postage system was in operation - to ;£735>493 in 1905-6. That was an increase of 35 per cent, in five years. Similarly, in New South Wales, where, the penny postage is in operation in sixty different areas, comprising over 1,300 postal towns, the revenue has increased from £833>94i in 1900-1 to ,£1,065,618 in 1905-6, an increase of nearly 28 per cent, in five years. In Queensland, Western Australia, and Tasmania, where such liberal arrangements as the foregoing do not apply, but 141 which States town letters may be sent at the penny rate, the increase of revenue was as follows: - Queensland increased from ^309,170 in 1900-1 to £359,755 in 1905-6, an increase of only 16 per cent, in five years. Western Australia increased from 210, 126 in 1900-T to £252,665 in 1905-6, an increase of 20 per cent, in five years. Tasmania increased from £102,911 in 1900-1 to £’118,724 in 1905-6, an increase of 15 per cent, in five years.

Mr Frazer:

– Why does not the honorable member tell us the increase in population?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Why does the honorable member ask me for information which I have already told him is not ready to my hand. In. South Australia, where the 2d. rate applies generally the postal and telegraphic revenue increased from £272,756 in 1900-1 to £291,927 in i905-6, an increase of only 7 per cent, in five years. These figures demonstrate the fact that cheap rates of postage create correspondence, and thus produce increased revenue, whilst high rates of postage restrict correspondence, and cause stagnation of revenue.

Mr Hutchison:

– South Australia lost 30,000 of her population in ten years.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– What do these figures prove?

Mr Frazer:

– Nothing.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Figures will not prove anything unless it suits the honorable member. We find that whereas in South Australia., where they have a 2d. rate of postage, the increase in the revenue has been only 7 per cent-, the Victorian revenue, under the penny postage system, has increased by 35 per cent.

Mr DAVID THOMSON:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– Victoria has sweated contract post-offices.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I am speaking of the revenue, and not of the expenditure. The revenue of Victoria has increased to a larger extent owing to the reduction of the postal rates. In New South Wales, where they have penny postal rates in different centres, the revenue increased by 28 per cent. In Western Australia, where penny postage prevails in the. towns, the revenue increased by 20 per cent. ; in Queensland, the revenue increased by 16 per cent., and in Tasmania the revenue receipts increased by 15 per cent. From these figures it would appear that the increase has been greatest where the rates have been lowest, and where the greatest facilities have been afforded to the people.

Mr Cameron:

– Will the Minister tell us the increased expenditure that has been incurred in order to bring about those results ?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– The expenditure has not increased in anything like the same ratio as the revenue. The facts I have mentioned cannot be disputed, and I am surprised that any objection should be raised by democratic honorable members who profess to desire to give the fullest facilities to the public. Now let us look at the financial aspect of the question from another stand-point. It is estimated by the officers of the Postmaster-General’s Department that, if penny postage were established, the immediate reduction in revenue would be £265,000 a year if limited to the Commonwealth, or about £300,000 per annum if extended to the places within the Empire and to other parts of the world. In view of the experiences in other countries, I venture to think that an increase of 40 per cent, in correspondence in the first year may be safely anticipated, which would reduce the amount for that year to £159,000 if limited to the Commonwealth, or £180.000, if extended throughout the Empire, and to other parts of the world. Besides that, there is another falling off in the revenue to be allowed for. The estimated immediate loss on other items included in the Bill are - Letter-cards, £”2,000 ; printed papers and books, ,£16,000; magazines, £500; Hansard, £700; or a total sum of £19,000 per annum, which, however, would soon be recovered consequent upon the growth of postage. ‘ I propose to make provision for the reductions in these directions, because I think we should aim at uniformity in all these matters. We have been asked where the money is to come from, but it is a matter, not of finding money, but of levying less taxation. We have not hitherto retained our full fourth share of the Customs and Excise revenue, to which we are entitled under the Constitution. We can carry out this proposal and others which have been indicated by the Treasurer, and yet udt wholly exhaust .the balance at our disposal. I should like to direct attention to the amounts which we have returned to the States in excess of the three-fourths of Customs and Excise revenue to which they are entitled. The figures are as follow : - For the half-year ended 30th June, 1901, £577,845; financial year. 1901-2, £888,741; 1902-3, £i,i45>234; i$>°3-4, £745:332; T9°4-5.- £735-286; 1905-6, £829,925; total, ,£4,922,363.

Mr DAVID THOMSON:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– How mucK does Queensland and Tasmania get out of that?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I will give the honorable .member figures presently. Thus, in five and a half years we returned to the States nearly £5,000,000 more than was required by the Constitution to be handed back to them.

Mr Hutchison:

– And yet the Government would not make provision for oldage pensions.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– No man is a stronger believer in old-age pensions than I am.

Mr Hutchison:

– But nothing has been done to provide for them.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Everything possible has been done by this Government, and yet our proposals have met with opposition from many honorable members who profess to desire that old-age pensions should be provided for. Honorable members should not urge that we cannot afford to give the people the advantages of penny postage, because of the necessity of providing for old-age pensions. The two things should be dealt with separately. In my opinion old-age pensions would be a proper charge upon the revenue of the country irrespective of any ear-marking of special duties. Old-age pensions are sure to come, and the advocates of the system need not fear that the establishment of penny postage would in any way interfere with the accomplishment of their desire. The amounts received by the States from Customs and Excise duties in the year 1900 aggregated, according to the Budget, 1.901, £7, 762,653, equal to a sum of £42,494,591 for the five and a half years ended the 30th June, 1906, during which period the Commonwealth returned to the States a total sum of £41,074,251, and also relieved the State Governments of all expenditure, previously borne bv them, in connexion with the Department of Defence, which expenditure, for the financial years 1901-2 to 1905-6 inclusive, although there was a reduction each year on that for 1900, amounted in the aggregate to £4,388,463, or about £5,000,000, so that as compared with 1900, the States have benefited to the extent of over £3,500,000. These figures show that they are better off under Federation than they were formerly. I maintain that this is not a provincial question, but a national one. We have to consider how it affects 4,000,000 people, and in this connexion I would ask, “ Is it fair that any one of the States whose people feel that this proposal does not exactly fit their circumstances at the present moment should deny to the other States the opportunity to secure uniform postal rates?”

Mr Batchelor:

– Will the Commonwealth pay any loss which’ may be incurred in South Australia?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– There will be no loss. I maintain that under these circumstances the States Governments have been liberally treated, and there should be no sound reason for complaint on their part were the amount of excess payment reduced by the sum necessary to provide for the proposed uniform postal rates, including the penny postage on letters.

Mr Cameron:

– The Postmaster-General has not given us the figures relating to Tasmania

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I intend to present those figures in my own way and in such a form that the honorable member will be able to understand them. Moreover, although we have given up about £.100,000 a year by reducing the charges on inland and Inter-State telegrams - £72,000 per annum immediate loss; reducing the fees for private bags and private boxes - £2,500 per annum immediate loss ; reducing the charges on Inter-State money orders - £1,800 per annum immediate loss; reducing the postage on letters to the United Kingdom and British Possessions from 2 1/2d. to 2d. per half-ounce - £9,000 per annum immediate loss ; foregoing the InterState poundage on. postal notes - £500 per annum immediate loss; and by the adoption of uniform terminal and transit charges on international telegrams - £13,000 per annum immediate loss ; and also given to the public other concessions involving loss of revenue, the revenue of the Department for the financial year 1905-6, namely, ,£2,824,182, exceeded that for the financial year 1 900-1 - £2,269,502 - by no less a sum than £554,680, whilst the revenue for 1905-6 exceeded that for the year 1901-2 by £’451,321. On the other hand the expenditure, omitting that for new works, which under State control was in most instances defrayed from loan votes, for the year 1905-6 exceeded that for the year 1901-2 by only £290,850. It is not possible to make a reliable comparison with the expenditure for 1900-1, as in that year certain items of expenditure such as pensions, repairs to buildings, rent, stores, fuel, and light, &c, which are now included in the expenditure of the Department, were charged to other State Departments. It will thus be seen that for the period from 1st July, 1901, to 30th June, 1906, the increase of revenue has exceeded the increase of expenditure by £160,471:, a sum which it is anticipated will be sufficient to cover the loss of revenue involved in the adoption of the penny postage within the Commonwealth. Now let us take the growth of revenue, and see how the figures work out. The important fact must not be lost sight of that the normal annual increase in the revenue collections of the Department represents a very substantial sum, the increase between the years 1904-5 and 1905-6 having been £191,631, and the average annual increase between 1901-2 and 1905-6 £11.2,830. Further, after reducing the estimates of revenue by £157,000, which represents the . immediate loss involved in the adoption of reduced rates for nine months from the 1st October next, and allowing for an anticipated increase of correspondence consequent upon the adoption of such reduced rates, it is anticipated that the revenue of th’e Department for the year 1906-7 will be £2,813,000, or only about £11,000 less than the actual receipts for the year 1905-6 - a sum largely in excess of the anticipated expenditure, exclusive of new works for the current year. In other words, it is within £11,000 of the esti- mated revenue foi) the current financial year, assuming, that we give penny postage from the 1st of October.

Mr Bamford:

– A loss of £11,000.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– There is no loss. It represents a gain to the people. Is it a loss to the country if we refuse to take a. certain amount from the people’s pockets ?

Mr Cameron:

– It applies unequally to the people.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– That is what I desire to alter. . It may be mentioned that for the year 1905-6 the revenue of the Department exceeded the ordinary expenditure by £186,666, or, if new works be also included, the revenue was £41,564 in excess of the expenditure. The honorable member for Parramatta has urged that we have made no provision in our Estimates of revenue and expenditure for the payment of interest upon the cost of transferred properties. But when certain facts are brought under the notice of honorable members it will be seen that such a statement is only apparently correct, and in reality is incorrect. In the first place, the revenue for 1905-6 exceeded the ordinary expenditure - that is, omitting the expenditure on new works which under State control would, in most cases, have been charged to loan votes - by no less a sum than £186,666. On the other hand, if the Department be charged with interest at the rate of 3 per cent, per annum, or £1.80,000 on the value of the transferred properties, which for our present purposes may be stated at £6,000,000, and if we add to that 3 per cent., £19,128. on the cost, £637 j 588, of new works completed by the Commonwealth, the revenue for 1905-6 would be short of the total expenditure, plus the above-mentioned charges, by only £12,462. As against this apparent shortage, however, must be set the cost - not less than £500,000 per annum. - of expenditure, th’e full amount of which, at any rate, is not properly chargeable against the Department. I maintain that in a new country like this the Postal Department ought not to be expected at the outset to pay. It ought rather to be expected to provide facilities for opening up the country. Many of the conveniences conferred by it are really the forerunners of settlement. I repeat that the Department is at present debited with many items of expenditure the full amount of which, at any rate, cannot fairly be charged against it. For instance, as a subsidy to the Vancouver mail service, we pay £36,627. But everybody knows that that is not essentially a postal service. In Canada the expenditure in this connexion is charged to the Department of Trade.

Mr Bamford:

– Why have not the Government the courage to do that here?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I wish to take one step at a time. Then I ask, “ Ought the Department to pay the whole of the money charged against it as mail subsidies?” It contributes, by way of subsidy, to the Orient Steam Navigation Company, £125,000 per annum. It also pays £28,500 for Pacific Cable guarantee, £4,000 per annum for the New Caledonia cable guarantee, £4.200 per annum as a Tasmanian cable subsidy-

Mr Cameron:

– The Government should have done that before.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Does the honorable member grumble because we h’ave done an act of justice? I am surprised to hear him protesting against it.

Mr Cameron:

– It is very_ late in the day for the Government to be seized with such a fit of- virtue.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– To the Pacific Islands mail service the Department contributes £3,600 per annum; and to the coastal mail services in Queensland and Western Australia £30,000 per annum. It can hardly be said that that money is paid entirely for postal services. Then there is the Tasmanian mail service, £13,000–

Mr Cameron:

– Up till the present year the cost of that service was charged to Tasmania.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– The Government have had to pay to alter that arrangement.

Mr Cameron:

– They ought to have done it long before.

Mr Tudor:

– Why did not the Government, which the honorable member supported, do it?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Exactly. The honorable member had the power in his own hands for a fortnight to effect this reform, and failed to do it.

Mr Wilkinson:

– The Minister admits that the £125,000, which we now pay as a subsidy for the carriage of our mails, is not, in reality, paid to provide a mail service ?

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I submit that the whole of. the amount ought not to be charged to the Postal Department. Besides this, numerous costly inland mail services, and also telegraphic communication, are maintained in sparsely populated districts, not in the interests of the PostmasterGeneral’s Department, but for the purpose of helping to open up the outback territory of the several States of the Commonwealth. If we continue to construct works out of revenue, we shall, later on, have a very handsome surplus to deal with. But at the present time we are handicapped’ by the fact that we have to pay excessively high charges for the carriage of our mails by rail. It is unfortunate that we should be compelled to do this. At the same time it is preferable that we should pay the railways for the carriage of our mails rather than that we should pay private individuals, because in the former case the money received is credited to the general revenues of the States. Nevertheless, we ought not to be called upon to pay for the carriage of our mails by rail twice, and even three times as much as we could get them carried for by road.

Mr Wilkinson:

– The State authorities increased the charges for the conveyance of mail matter just before the Federation was established.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– That is very true. When the railway balancesheet did not look too well it was a veryeasy matter to charge the Post Office more for the carriage of its mails. That is one of the reasons which militates against the Department paying. During the past five years, although the revenue has exceeded the expenditure charged against it in New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia, the expenditure has exceeded the revenue in other States by the following amounts: - Queensland, £5.13,186; Western Australia, £235,179; and Tasmania, £31,142; total, £779>5°7- This is accounted for to a certain extent by the fact that the services of some of the more sparsley populated districts, such as are to be found in Queensland and Western Australia, involve a heavy expenditure, whilst the revenue obtained from them is small. As pointed out in the memorandum of the 20th July, 1906, which I addressed to the Prime Minister -

The early introduction of uniform postal rales and also uniform telegraph rates (which latter have already been adopted), was considered by those who advocated the federation of the Australian States as one of the important matters, specially Federal in character and certain to appeal to the people of the Commonwealth as an outward and visible sign of Australian union.

I pointed out in that memorandum that -

The reduction in the letter postage rate in Victoria, taking effect as it did after the transfer of the Department to Federal control, only served to emphasize the local and temporary nature of the present system of charging for postal services. The want of uniformity of treatment within the Commonwealth is a standing illustration of the incompleteness of Federation.

To continue, for example, the twopenny rate in other States while Victoria enjoys a penny rate, as also to compel residents of South’ Australia to pay 2d. per half ounce for their town letters, while the residents of all other States pay only id. per half ounce for similar correspondence, is not in accordance with the real spirit of the Constitution, and such a state of things should be altered at the earliest possible moment.

J submit that the proper way to remedy existing anomalies is to introduce uniform postal rates, including penny postage, on letters throughout the whole of our territory. By this means we should remove State barriers, and bring home to the minds of the people more forcibly than could perhaps be done in any other way the fact that they are citizens of the Commonwealth, and also that Federal control has greatly improved their postal facilities.

There is a world-wide sentiment in favour of penny postage, and to grant it here will have a beneficial result from a national, a commercial, an educational, and a household point of view.

It would bring within the reach of the poorest an opportunity of making full and frequent use of the postal facilities provided by the Government, ft would give a greater opportunity for the people of Australia to communicate with each other, wilh other parts of the ‘Empire and with other countries. It would also facilitate the transaction of business; help to extend commerce; and, indirectly “opening up new avenues for employment, generally benefit Australians individually and collectively.

As indicated by the revenue returns for the financial year 1905-6, the” Commonwealth is at present in a prosperous condition; business is flourishing; new country is being occupied by farmers and others ; and there is good reason for the belief that this satisfactory condition of affairs will continue.

The change proposed is obligatory from a Federal point of view, so as to bring home to our minds the fact that Federation is a reality, and that, from a postal as well as any other point of view, Australians are one people.

Uniform postal rates are also essential for the purpose of removing the present anomalous condition of things under which, in this particular respect, the residents of one State have an undue advantage over those of other States, while the residents of cities and other large centres are afforded more liberal treatment than those in country, districts, though the latter, certainly quite as deserving of the same treatment as is accorded to the former, are, in a sense, penalized for their hardy enterprise in helping to open up and develop the interior of the Commonwealth.

Mr Tudor:

– The States themselves pay for these reductions.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I desire to consider this matter not from the standpoint of any one State but from a Commonwealth view point.

Mr Batchelor:

– Then the honorable gentleman should propose that the Commonwealth shall pay for these reforms.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– The experience of other countries has proved conclusively that the commercial community, the largest contributors to the postal revenue, almost invariably spend more under a reduced than under a higher postage, recognising that a cheaper rate enables them to communicate with a larger number of potential customers, and thus assists them to extend their business and create wealth, from which the people as a whole derive substantial benefit. I think that I have given honorable members sufficient facts to enable them to come to a decision on this question. If further argument were necessary I should be prepared to advance many reasons for the passing of the Bill.

Mr McLean:

– Is it in order for the honorable member to speak of all he has told us as being “facts?”

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Judging from what I have heard the honorable member describe as facts, I do not think it would be. From my stand-point, however, I consider that ample facts have been placed before the House to justify the passing of this Bill. I shall be surprised if the honorable member for Gippsland does not rise presently, and in his usual straightoutfromtheshoulder style advocate the’ adoption of penny postage, so that the residents of Bairnsdale may send their letters across the New South Wales border at a cost of a penny instead of 2d., as at present, and also that other existing anomalies may be removed. I have no desire to labour this question. The facts and figures relating to it have been, put before honorable members, and I have approached their consideration with an open mind. I trust that the House will consider this question carefully, and view it from a Commonwealth stand-point. I hope that they will realize that if the Bill be rejected a backward step will be taken. We should consider what will be the result of the passing of this Bill to-day. Are we to continue the old slip-shod methods of the past? Are we to continue the existing inequitable postal rates? Are we to have a different system in each State, giving rise to much irritation on the part of the public and causing great annoyance to postal officials? In a short time we shall have universal penny postage throughout the rest of the world. Are we to say that in some parts of Australia a 2d. stamp must be placed on letters posted to an address 50 miles distant, whilst we shall be compelled by the Postal Union-

Mr Hutchison:

– When that time arrives we shall be prepared to reconsider this question.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I maintain that now is the time to take action. The people demand this reform. Domestic correspondence is now an important feature in our social life; the higher standard of education of our people requires that increased facilities in the way of cheaper postage shall be afforded, so as to offer every inducement for the exchange of correspondence. Viewed either from an educational commercial, or domestic stand-point, it must be recognised that this proposal is a sound one. The people demand uniform penny postage as a matter of fair play. There can be no doubt that the Postal Department more closely touches the homes of the people than does any other branch of the Public Service.

Mr.Bamford. - I think that in that respect the Customs Department is ahead of it.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– There are many people who are only slightly affected by the Department of Trade and Customs, but the work of the Postal Department reaches every one. Every man, woman, and child in Australia is interested in it. If this Bill be passed, it will no longer be open to the people to complain that in some cases they are required to pay1s. for a service that should be rendered for6d. As to the effect which this reform may have on our finances, I think the facts go to show that wherever the postal rates have been reduced an increased revenue hasbeen secured. The reduction of postal rates and the adoption of a uniform system have always proved to be a step in the right direction. The new revenue has soon overlapped the old. I therefore ask honorable members to assist me in making the Postal Department a Department for the people. We ought to give the people of Australia this boon. They ask for it, and will insist upon it. No matter what opposition may be offered to this Bill - even if time will not permit of our properly dealing with this question to-day - the proposal cannot finally be defeated. I am just as confident that we shall have penny postage throughout the world as I am that this day will be followed by night.

Mr Watson:

– We shall have halfpenny postage by-and-by.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Certainly, but now is the timeto take the initiative. I believe that the honorable member was one of those who, as a member of the Parliament of New South Wales, advocated penny postage.

Mr Watson:

– That is not correct.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Did not the honorable member vote for the proposal that I submitted to that Parliament?

Mr Watson:

– I am sure that I did not. The honorable gentleman’s bluff does not always come off.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– The motion in question was carried, and I shall turn up the division list.

Mr Watson:

– The honorable member will turn himself up if he looks too closely into Hansard.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– The honorable member, at all events, has been an advocate of penny postage.

Mr Watson:

– That is not correct.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– Will the honorable member say that I cannot produce in cold type a statement made by him that we should at once have penny postage?

Mr Watson:

– I say most emphatically that the honorable gentleman cannot.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I accept the honorable member’s assurance.

Mr Watson:

– The Postmaster-General knows very well that he never saw any such statement by me in type.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I can only say that I think the honorable member is on the wrong track, when he seeks to mix up the question of penny postage with the adoption of an old-age pension scheme. Surely I am entitled to the opinion that the revenue will permit of the reduction of postal rates. I have produced the facts.

Mr Watson:

– The honorable member has presented not facts, but a few opinions.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I assert that I have brought forward facts in support of my contention. The views of officers of the Department support my statements.

Mr Watson:

– The honorable member has gone against them.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I do not wish to drag in the opinions of the officers. I have presented to the House facts which the officers of the Department have submitted1 to me, and I have expressed my own views upon them. If honorable members give the people of Australia the boon of penny postage they will do well. It is a mistake to suggest that we should, as it were, “ stick in the mud ‘ ‘ ; that we should make no progress. It is idle to say that we cannot afford to bring about this reform ; that the States now showing big surpluses cannot afford it. It may suit some of the States Treasurers to put forward that plea, but, as a matter of fact, the people of the States believe in fair play, and recognise that penny - postage is necessary. I therefore have pleasure in submitting this Bill to the House, and feel confident that it will be dealt with fairly and soon passed into law.

Mr POYNTON:
Grey

.- The speech made by the Postmaster-General was a very interesting one.

Sir John Forrest:

– It was not very palatable to some honorable members.

Mr POYNTON:

– The honorable gentleman carefully swept aside many pertinent interjections.

Mr Watson:

– The facts that we did not secure “from him are very interesting.

Mr POYNTON:

– The honorable gentleman prefaced his remarks with the statement that the House should do justice to the people - a sentiment with which we all agree - and then went on to show inequity of the present system. He urged that it was unfair that the people of some of the States should have to place a 2d. stamp on a letter posted to an address only a few miles distant, whilst others enjoyed the boon of penny postage. From his remarks one might have reasonably drawn the inference that this reform would not cost the people anything. The honorable gentleman certainly suggested that the cost of the reform in one State would be borne by tha people in others. When asked whether the States would not bear the loss that might result from the adoption of penny postage, he promptly replied that no loss would arise, since the money would remain in the pockets of the people. Such statements may do very well for the hustings, but they are not likely to prove acceptable to a deliberative assembly. Any financial loss which results from the adoption of this system must fall on the people. The estimated loss of £208,000 in the first year will have to be made good out of revenue, and the man who posts two or three letters in the course of the year will contribute as much to the amount necessary to make good that deficiency as will the business man who sends thousands of letters through the post, and will thus reap the chief benefit of the reduction. If the Postmaster-General is anxious to establish a uniform service, there are many other directions in which he might well take action. Why, for instance, has he failed to deal with the contract system of post-offices in Victoria ?

Mr Watson:

– The sweating dens.

Mr POYNTON:

– Quite so. I propose to give some figures showing the revenue which the Postal Department is receiving from some contract offices, and the salaries paid to those conducting them. Recently, on the motion of the honorable member for Darling, a return dealing with the contract post-offices in Victoria was presented to the House, and I shall invite the attention of the Postmaster-General to a few facts which it discloses. The honorable gentleman has said’ that he does not think that the Department should be a paying one. I am going to quote a few figures showing how some of these contract offices are made to pay.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– If the honor.orable member will point to a contract office having a revenue of over £500 a,’ year. I shall be willing to convert it into an official office.

Mr POYNTON:

– There is a number of them.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– In some places the public have protested against any alteration.

Mr POYNTON:

– I will give the House some information in regard to this subject from .a return furnished by the honorable gentleman’s own Department.

Mr Mauger:

– Things are vastly better now than they were before that return was prepared. It was kept back to allow improvements to be made.

Mr POYNTON:

– I shall pick out, from a long list of offices, the figures relating to those whose revenue is over .£500 a year. Let me direct honorable members to the following statistics : -

If the Postmaster-General wishes to bring about uniformity, and to do justice, let him consider those figures. In rectifying the anomalies to which I have pointed, his time will be fully occupied. While it is all very well to be generous, as he is in the proposal which he has placed before the House, he should, in the first instance, be just to those employed by the Department. It must be remembered that any loss accruing from a reduction in postage will have to be borne by the people of the’States. Although it has been said that the States get back something in addition to the threefourths of the Customs and Excise revenue returnable under the Constitution, I would point out that some of them do not receive even the proportion to which they are so entitled. Moreover, the Commonwealth does not pay interest On the post-offices built by the States, in which it conducts its business. It is believed that interest should be paid on an amount estimated to be from £9,000,000 to £11,000,000. It may be contended that it does not matter whether the Commonwealth or the States pay this interest, because the money has, in any case, to be found by the people of Australia. When a State receives something in excess of the three- fourths of Customs and Excise revenue returnable under the Constitution, that may be treated as a setoff against interest due on buildings transferred to the Commonwealth ; but when no such surplus is returned, the State has to pay this interest out of its own revenues, and this decreases the amount available for expenditure in other directions. Before making the proposed change, the PostmasterGeneral should do justice to the employes of the Department. Some of them were transferred to the Commonwealth at a time when thev were enjoying certain rights, which it was thought were preserved to them under section 84, but which have not been recognised by the Public Service Commissioner. For instance, under the South Australian law certain officials were entitled to increments up to £210 a year, but are not being given more than £185.

Mr Hutchison:

– And others who were entitled to remain in the service until they were seventy have been dismissed at sixtyfive.

Mr POYNTON:

– Yes, .-although still fit for the performance of their duties. Furthermore, the Commonwealth has charged them for the rental of the accommodation which they occupy, whereas under the State law no such charge was made. It is all very well to say that the people are in favour of penny postage. Every one of us is in favour of it; but I am not going to give business men a great advantage at the expense of the ordinary taxpayer, who posts comparatively few letters in a. year; and, in the present state of our finances, the proposed change is not justifiable.

Sitting suspended from 12.44 to 2.15 p.m.

Mr CAMERON:
Wilmot

.- I desire to congratulate the Postmaster-General on his very able speech. I was very much impressed by his statement that in all probability, when the next Postal Congress was held five years hence, universal penny postage would be decided upon, and that if we adhered to a twopenny rate we should stand in a very invidious position. But the prospect to which the PostmasterGeneral pointed seems to be so far off that we need” not allow it to influence us. We have to consider whether we can afford to make the proposed change. If I were a representative of New South Wales or Victoria I should probably be prepared to support the Bill, but the financial necessities of my own State compel me to oppose it.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– The honorable member must not forget that he is an Australian.

Mr CAMERON:

– No; but I must remember that I am a Tasmanian first. So far as I have been able to ascertain, the people of Tasmania are almost unanimous in believing that that State cannot afford to pay its share of the loss that would be incurred by adopting the penny postage system. I understand from the estimates which have been presented’ to us that, taking into account the loss incurred upon magazines and letter-cards, the share of the deficiency which Tasmania will have to make good will amount to about £24,000. In his last financial statement, the Tasmanian Treasurer announced a surplus of about £47,000, but he estimated that, owing to the increasing expenditure of the Commonwealth and the reduced amount that would be returned to the States, the surplus at the end of the current year would be only £6,000. He had not taken into consideration the loss of £24,000 that would be incurred in connexion with the adoption of the scheme now before us. Therefore, if the Bill be passed, Tasmania’s anticipated surplus will be converted into a deficiency of £18,000. Owing to the operation of the Braddon clause, Tasmania will absolutely lose three-fourths of this £18,000, or, say, £13,000. I admit that it is quite possible that the estimated deficiency will be reduced to some extent by the increase of postal business, but that will make no appreciable difference to Tasmania. For the last two or three years that State has been living from hand to mouth. The roads in the country districts have been allowed to fall into disrepair, and the construction of a number of desirable public works has been deferred, owing to the financial straits of the Treasurer. Therefore, much as I should like to see uniform penny postage established, I cannot support the second reading of the Bill. I say, unhesitatingly, that the commercial men in the large cities would derive the greatest advantage from the proposed reduction of postage. For every letter written by a man or woman residing in the back blocks, ‘ hundreds are posted by the commercial men in the city ; and I do not think that it would be fair to confer further benefits upon the residents in the great centres of population at the expense of the already heavily burdened settlers in the outlying districts. Those who send business letters through the post can very well afford to pav the present rates of postage, and I consider that the proposal is inopportune.

I should like to direct attention to the fact that, whilst it is proposed to throw away a large sum of money we are starving many of our postmasters and postmistresses. At a small town called Glenore, in Tasmania, the postmistress, Mrs. Baker, has to carry the mails twice a day to and from the railway station, which is a mile distant from the post-office. She has, in addition, to attend to all the other work connected with the post-office, such as the sorting, and delivery of letters, and for all this she receives the munificent remuneration, of £14 per annum. If honorable members will multiply the 300 working days in the year by four they will ascertain the number of miles over which this’ poor woman has to carry the mails for the sum of £14. If the anticipations of the Postmaster-General are realized there will’ be a considerable increase in the amount of mail matter. I ventured to remark whilst the Postmaster-General was speaking, that, if the reduced rates came into operation, persons, upon posting letters, would be inclined to say;, “ God bless Chapman!” But what would Mrs. Baker say ? If she found that the weight of the mails she had to carry was doubled, would she not be inclined to say, “ The devil fly away with Chapman !”

Mr Henry Willis:

– If the postal business increased, the Minister would be able to increase her remuneration.

Mr CAMERON:

– Perhaps so. But it is admitted that, for at least a year or two, there will be a deficit. If Mrs. Baker applies for an increase of salary, the PostmasterGeneral, as a keen business man, would naturally say, “ I shall be pleased to consider your case when the revenue increases; but while there is a deficit you must continue to carry double the amount of postal matter at the same low rate of pay that you have been receiving.” No doubt there are many other cases of the kind to which I have been referring, and, whilst a number of our officials are so poorly paid, we should not entertain a proposal which would have the effect of seriously depleting our revenue. As one who has a fair amount of correspondence to despatch, I am. perfectly prepared to pay the present rates of postage until anomalies such as I have described are removed, and fair consideration is shown for officials who have very responsible duties to discharge.

Before agreeing to the Minister’s proposal, I venture to say that we should increase, the remuneration of those officials. Personally, I am quite prepared to accept Mie responsibility of voting against the Bill. Unfortunately, in addressing, myself to this question at the present stage, I occupy a somewhat difficult position. In moving the second reading of the measure, the Postmaster-General submitted a bewildering number of figures. I attempted to obtain _ some of those figureswith a view to analyzing them, but I wasunable to do so. Consequently I have no alternative but to trust to my memory in this matter. We all know what a rapid speaker the Postmaster-General is, and how eloquent he is. Upon the present occasion, it is somewhat disconcerting to honorable members to be denied an opportunity of criticising the figures which . he presented. Whilst he was speaking, I attempted to elicit information from him, but he always evaded mv questions bv stating that he would deal with that point later on. He said that he would “ come back to it.” but he always forgot to do so. Being of a bashful and retiring nature, I naturally felt that I had received a rebuff. ‘

Mr Johnson:

– The Postmaster-General is a great “bluffer.”

Mr CAMERON:

– In my opinion, he adorns the position which he fills, but I trust that he will not fill it long. When he was describing what would probably happen during the next five years, the question which suggested itself to my mind was, “ Where will the honorable member be then?” Undoubtedly he will be out in the cold in a political sense. At the end of. that period, it will be a matter of no importance to him whether penny postage be carried or not. The real question which we have to consider is whether the States at the present time are in a position to bear the loss which the adoption of penny postage would involve. I have endeavoured to show that to the people of Tasmania it is far more important that they should be able to obtain roads, bridges, and railways than that thev should be able to secure penny postage, which would benefit only a verv limited section of the community. I submit, therefore, that this measure has been introduced at an inopportune time, and under the circumstances I have no option but to vote against it.

Mr HUTCHISON:
Hindmarsh

. - As the Postmaster-General truly re- marked, if this Bill be defeated, the adoption of penny postage will merely be delayed. I do not think that any honorable member of this House desires to see penny postage defeated. The whole question at issue is whether we can afford to adopt that system at the present moment, and to that question I think a large majority of honorable members will reply in the. negative. The Postmaster-General has pointed out the benefits which would flow from the proposed change, especially to South Australia. I congratulate him upon having made a judicious selection of figures, enabling him to make a very good presentment of the case from his stand-point. But he did not supply honorable .members with all the figures that they expected. For instance, we heard a great deal about the revenue aspect of the question, but verv little in regard to its expenditure side. The Minister attempted to bolster up his proposal by quoting the effect of penny postage in other countries, but without mentioning what was the increased expenditure there.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– I intended to tell honorable members that, according to the Postmaster-General of New Zealand, the increased expenditure there, consequent upon the increased business resulting from penny postage, amounts to only 5 per cent.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– In spite of the advantages, which he said, would flow to South Australia from the adoption of the system. I doubt whether there is a single representative of that State who will support the Bill at the present time. Prior to the advent of Federation the South Australian Postal Department was one of the best paying public Departments in Australia.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– The Tasmanian post-office was also returning a good profit.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– Yet we find that in boom times such as we are now experiencing the Postal Department is returning a profit of only £37,000 per annum. I venture to say that, ‘if full information were forthcoming, it would be seen that in reality it is incurring an enormous loss. The Minister has not allowed a single sixpence for depreciation in connexion with the enormous number of postal buildings scattered throughout the Commonwealth. He pointed out that penny postage obtains in the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Germany, the United States, Egypt, India, and France. But I would remind him that in those countries, with the exception, perhaps, of New Zealand, there is a very dense population. In New Zealand, too, there is a constant influx of immigrants which does not obtain in any part of Australia. The Postmaster-General further pointed out that South Australia had the lowest percentage of increase in the amount of correspondence which passed through the Department. But, as honorable members are aware, that State lost 30,000 of her population within ten years, and, consequently, one might expect a decrease and not an increase in the volume of postal business there. To Canada there is a constant stream of immigration from Europe, such as we cannot expect for many years - that is, until we have faster lines of steamers connecting us with the old world, and until the existing freights are lowered. Even, according to the most optimistic estimate of the PostmasterGeneral, the adoption of penny postage would mean a loss of £200,000 annually.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– Not a loss, but a saving to the people.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– It is absurd for the Minister to constantly repeat that statement. If it were true we ought to at once abolish the Customs House-

Mr McCay:

– And we ought to entirely abolish postal rates.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– Exactly. We should then be. able to tell the people that the money was still in their pockets. But I venture to say that the PostmasterGeneral would immediately want us to devise some other means of raising the wherewithal to run his Department. His own officers assure us that the immediate loss of revenue consequent upon the adoption of penny postage would be £265,000 per annum if limited to the Commonwealth, and £300,000 per annum if extended to all other parts of the world. They say that, in view of the experience of other countries, they think that an increase of 40 per cent, in correspondence in the first year might be safely anticipated, which would reduce the loss for nine months of that year to ‘£150,000 if limited to the Commonwealth. But here again they have not taken into consideration the enormous increased expenditure which would probably result from the introduction of the new system. I venture to say that if tomorrow Victoria could adopt a half -penny postage rate, the Postmaster-General would not urge that her example should be followed throughout the Commonwealth. He is not prepared to introduce uniformity into his Department at the present time. For instance, there is no uniformity in the matter of telegrams. He is not willing to propose that there shall be 6d. telegrams throughout the Commonwealth irrespective of distance. Then the Minister informed us that there is a world-wide sentiment in favour of penny postage. I venture to say that it is a matter of pounds, shillings, and pence, and that we have to discard sentiment in considering it, because we have a shrinking surplus. Why was not this Bill introduced when we were returning to the States such enormous surpluses? Why did we not make provision for this reform out of the £5,000,000 returned to the States, during the last five and a half years, in excess of the three-fourths of Customs and Excise revenue, to which they were entitled? It was because we considered the finances of some of the States were so disorganized that it would be improper for us to expend the whole of the one-fourth which we are entitled to retain. I think that the money might have been put to a better use, but, at present, I should not be in order in dealing with that phase of the question. The Postmaster-General has urged that we ought to entirely dissociate this question from that of old-age pensions. He ought to remember, however, that our expenditure on the Defence Department is increasing enormously; that we have to face an enormously increased military expenditure as well as the prospect of a large expenditure on old-age pensions. It is all very well to tell the people that we believe in old-age pensions, but they will be disposed to discount the plea that we have not the money to institute the system, when, at the same time, we introduce other reforms, seriously curtailing our revenue. There is no prospect of direct taxation being imposed by this Parliament, and I am afraid that the next Parliament will not be inclined to move in that direction. If I thought that it would, I should have no hesitation iri voting for this Bill. The honorable member ought to recognise that we have been compelled to do something which is really repugnant to us. We have been compelled, owing to lack of revenue, to ask the people to agree to an amendment of the Constitution enabling us to raise the funds necessary for old-age pensions by taxing the poorer sections of the community.-

Mr Austin Chapman:

– That amendment of the Constitution will not necessarily mean taxing the poorer sections of the community in order to provide for oldage pensions.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– If we ear-mark Customs revenue for the purpose, it will mean that old-age pensions will be paid for by the poor. They will have to submit to duties on tea and kerosene.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– I do not admit that. There is plenty of room for the taxation of luxuries.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– If the Government had not contemplated the taxation of tea and kerosene, they would not have asked for an amendment of the Constitution. I have not met an elector in my constituency who is in favour of penny postage. On the contrary, I have been asked by many whether I am prepared to ask the poor, instead of the wealthy, to pay more taxation. I certainly am not prepared to do anything of the kind. The Government of South Australia is very anxious to provide for a minimum wage of 7s. per day being paid to the labourers in the Public Service of that State, and they do not desire that the revenue which thev at present derive from the Commonwealth shall” be cut down.

Mr Wilkinson:

– Who pays the postage of the commercial classes?

Mr HUTCHISON:

– The poorer people all the time. I have already pointed out the result of the reduction of the telegraphic rates. The loss so incurred has’ had to be made good by the taxation of the poor through the Customs and Excise Departments. The PostmasterGeneral tells us that he is going to do much for the people of the back-blocks. As a matter of fact, if this Bill be passed, it will result in such, a loss of revenue that demands for increased facilities in the remote parts of the Commonwealth will be refused. The honorable gentleman mentioned that one newspaper in South Australia is in favour of this Bill. He did not tell us that it is the conservative organ, which represents’ only the commercial classes, and which, when dealing with national questions, has not a word to say for the democracy. The newspaper owned by the honorable member for Barker was. at one time, in favour of a penny postage, believing that it could be established without loss to the community ; but as soon as it was shown that it would involve a loss of revenue to South Australia, which, owing to the attitude of the Upper House, could not be made good in other ways, it pointed out the iniquity of the proposal. It is unnecessary to detain the House by adducing further arguments against the Bill. There is no doubt that penny postage, like old-age pensions, and many other reforms, will come when we are able to find the necessary revenue. The Postmaster-General has not shown how he would make good any deficiency arising from uniform penny postage.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– Both penny postage and old-age pensions should be at once established.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– If they are to come at once we shal’l require a new Government. If the Government would introduce an old-age pension scheme they would secure my support, since if we agreed to the payment of old-age pensions we should soon find the necessary funds. Having regard to the [present state of the finances of some of the States, I am not prepared at this stage to support the Bill. I hope that it will be shelved for the time being. The one State which the Postmaster-General said would derive the greatest benefit from this reform is opposed to it.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– The Government of that State have already made provision for it.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– Thev do not view with favour any proposal which must result in a reduction of the revenue now returned to them.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– Last year they had a. surplus of nearly £.r .000,000.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– I wish that were so. As I have said, the Government of South Australia are anxious to give a minimum wage of 7s. per day to the labourers in the Public Service of that State. No one would say that that is too bountiful a payment to be given a man who works all day with pick and shovel. As a matter of fact, however, the Government have been able to increase the wages of only a small section, bv 6d. per day, and if we cut down the revenue returned to them by the Commonwealth they will probably strike off that increase. If on the other hand this Bill is shelved, and the Postal Department, as well as the Department of Trade and Customs, yields an increased revenue, I am sure that the Premier of South Australia will be delighted to give every labourer in the service 7s. per day. I agree with the Postmaster-General that we should give postal facilities to people living in all parts of the Commonwealth, and particularly to those living in the back blocks, and therefore I shall- not vote for a Bill that would for some time to come hamper the extension of those facilities.

Mr MCLEAN:
Gippsland

.- I have to congratulate the PostmasterGeneral1 on his very comprehensive speech, and the excellent temper he displayed under the raking fire of interjections aimed at him from all sides of the House. I am just as anxious as he is for the establishment of penny postage. It is a progressive step, and one that we ought to try to work up to. The principal consideration that weighs with me at .present, however, is whether or not we can at this juncture afford to institute that reform. It is not a matter of the prosperity or want of prosperity of Australia. We all- know that Australia is prosperous. But we know also that the revenue rf the Commonwealth for some four years hence will be circumscribed by the Braddon section, whilst on the other hand our expenditure is increasing by leaps and bounds. In his Budget statement, the Treasurer told us that the expenditure this year would be increased by about £500,000. He also informed us that we were within £350.000 of the limit to our expenditure. It seems to me that one item of expenditure alone - the payment of interest on the transferred properties - will swallow up the whole of that balance. We must meet that claim. The Prime Minister suggested that the transferred land and buildings should remain the property of the States Governments. I do not see that our financial position would be affected in any way bv the adoption of his suggestion. If we did not pay anything in the shape of interest, we should certainly have to pay rent for these buildings, and we might just as well pay the interest as the rent. There is no just means bv which we can avoid paving the interest on the transferred properties. Assuming that they are worth something, like .£10,000.000 the interest bill in respect of them would amount to about £350,000 per annum. That being so, we have really reached the limit to our expenditure, and it will be impossible to go on. increasing it, seeing that we must meet the requirements of the different Departments, which are rapidly growing. Confronted as we are with these facts, it is most imprudent to suggest the cutting off of revenue to the extent which this Bill would involve. I found that the reduced postal rates in Victoria made it far more difficult for the country districts to obtain postal facilities than it was before. Our postal facilities should extend, as settlement progresses, throughout the country districts, but dayafter day these increased facilities are refused on the ground that the revenue would not justify the expenditure. When that is the position in a State of short distances like that of Victoria, one may well understand how gravely this Bill would affect those States of magnificent distances - Quensland, South Australia, and Western Australia. It would seriously affect residents of country districts. It, therefore, seems to me that it would be premature at present to adopt penny postage. I hope that when the next International Convention takes place, some five years hence, we shall be able to throw in our lot with other parts of the world in bringing about this reform ; but during the existence of the Braddon section it is hopeless to attempt anything of the kind. In reply to an interjection which I made, the Postmaster-General inquired whether I would be prepared to increase the postal rates in Victoria. He seemed to indicate that any loss accruing as the result of the reduced postal rates had to be made good by the other States. That is not so. Each State pays for the services rendered to it. If any one State has a lower rate of postage than has another, it has to bear the loss which that reduced rate involves.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– They thought when they introduced it that the Commonwealth would have to pay for it.

Mr McLEAN:

– That is quite possible. But the Commonwealth does not pay for it. Each State has to bear its own postal losses, and some of the States are not in a position to bear the further loss which would follow the adoption of universal penny postage. Within a very short time the Commonwealth will have to pay interest on the transferred properties. That will mop up the whole of the surplus. Much as I should like to see penny postage adopted, I think that the proposal is premature, and, therefore, I shall vote against it.

Mr RONALD:
Southern Melbourne

– - For one reason or another men have come to look upon a penny as the proper price to pay, for the postage of a letter, or for a newspaper, and if asked to pay ?d. they grudge the difference. A penny ‘is regarded as what might be called the orthodox rate, and one might imagine that the spirit of Rowland Hill would rise in protest aga”inst the timidity of some honorable members in regard to the proposed concession. We have surely reached a time when a penny might be regarded as the universal rate, not only for internal correspondence between the States, but for correspondence with all other parts of the world. Nothing will do more to make the nations one than the adoption of a uniform and low rate of postage; but until the internal rate of the Commonwealth’ is a penny, we cannot consistently advocate penny postage with the world at large. I shall support the proposal of the Government, because of the civilizing and unifying influence which I think will flow from the adoption of the proposed reform. If we have a surplus, there can be no better way of distributing it. It is the experience of other countries, however, that the making of concessions in regard to postal rates tends to so increase the volume of correspondence that the revenue does not suffer. There is nothing in the objection that the commercial classes will chiefly benefit bv the proposed reduction ; penny postage will be as great a boon, to the poor, although thev have only a few letters to post. The Bill will have my hearty and earnest support.

Mr McCAY:
Corinella

.- The Postmaster-General, in the eloquent address with which he introduced the measure, clothed certain figures with the flowers of his imagination, but left others discreetly in the background, as out of harmony with the picture he was drawing. I have not been able to appreciate the force of one of his arguments. If in re-stating it I make any mistake, I ask him to correct me. I understood him to say that the reduction of the postage to a universal rate of a penny will not mean any loss ; that it simply means that money which would otherwise be taken out of the pockets of the people will be left in them. Let me carry the assertion a little further, with’ a view to testing its soundness. If the reduction of the postage to a universal penny rate means, not a loss, but a saving to the people, obviously that saving would be greater, while there would still be no loss, if the rate were made Jd., while it would be still more if letters were conveyed free of charge. That is a perfectly fair and logical deduction from the PostmasterGeneral’s assertion.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– The honorable and learned gentleman should remember what he said last session when speaking on a similar proposal.

Mr McCAY:

– The Postmaster-General forgets that if the Commonwealth fails to receive revenue from postal charges, the expenditure of his Department - which must largely increase if there is to be an increase of business corresponding to any reduction - must be met in some other way, namely, out of the general revenue. Therefore, any falling off in the receipts of the Post Office must be regarded as a loss to the revenue. To my mind, the question we must ask ourselves is: Can we afford, at this stage, to make a reduction in the postal rate which will involve a diminution of revenue, estimated bv various authorities at from £150,000 to £200,000 a year? A few weeks ago, when the question of the total amount necessary to provide for a Commonwealth old-age pensions system was being discussed, the Prime Minister interjected that £200,000 saved in connexion with postal charges might be added to the other sums available. I took that interjection to indicate the abandonment of the present proposal, and the continuance of the existing rates. The £150,000 or £200,000 a year bv which the postal revenue would be diminished, if the proposed change were made, might well be diverted to the payment of Commonwealth old-age pensions. I should have no hesitation, if a choice had to be made between the reduction of the postage charges and the provision ofl an oldage pensions fund, about voting for the latter. If we cannot find the money necessary for both objects - and I venture to think that we cannot, because it will be difficult enough to obtain sufficient to provide for Commonwealth old-age pensions - the reduction of the postal rates must wait. The Commonwealth pensions system should certainly take priority. In mv opinion, the proposed reduction, if it did not result in a diminution of rural postal services, would prevent the improvement or increase of those services. At the present time, if one asks for any improvement, he is immediately faced with a report from a post-office official showing the revenue and expendture of the present office, or the estimated revenue and expenditure of the proposed office, and told that unless the revenue closely approaches the expenditure, no extension or improvement of service is justified. The reduction of the postal rates will mean that the revenue from rural services will be smaller, and, consequently, the Department will have still stronger reasons than it has at present for resisting requests for improvements or extensions. Therefore, as we must choose between reducing our rate and extending and improving the meagre services now given to rural and remote districts, I prefer to vote against the proposal of the Government, in order that our rural services may not suffer. There are two other points to which I wish to direct attention. It has been urged that the public ask for the proposed reduction. I am perfectly prepared to vote for a penny rate if its adoption will not hinder the extension and improvement of rural services, or create a deficiency which will have to be met out of the general revenue. The great mass of the public will be only slightly benefited by any reduction of rate. It is the great banking and commercial institutions which will benefit most. I venture tq say that when the Victorian rates were reduced to a penny, some of the banking institutions! in Melbourne saved between £3,000 and £4,000 a year in stamps. The people generally do not write many letters, and, therefore, would gain very little by any reduction such as is proposed. It is, no doubt, wise to try to extend our commercial and social facilities : but it is putting the present proposal on unsound grounds to advance the plea that it will financially benefit the great mass of the community. My position is this : The Commonwealth is within an appreciable distance of having to meet considerable financial troubles. I do not mean that we shall be short of money. We shall, however, find it difficult to arrange our income so as to meet our expenditure. When we have to pav interest on transferred properties, to provide old-age pensions, and to spend money in other directions which I need not mention, we must husband our resources very care.fully, unless, at the termination of the Braddon section, we choose to run riot, and expend a large portion of the Customs and Excise revenue, with, whicli we can then lawfully deal as we please. If we do that, it will mean mischief and trouble for the

States, which means mischief and trouble for the taxpayers, because we are too apt to forget that there is only one set of taxpayers, although there are two spending authorities in each State. We shall have all we can do to provide revenue to meet expenditure regarded as essential or extremely desirable. While it might be thought well, on sentimental, or even on practical grounds, to adopt penny postage, we cannot afford to do so at the present time. If the Postmaster-General will refer to Hansard, he will find that the views which I expressed last session in regard to this sub ject are those which I am now expressing. I have said all along that I will not vote for penny postage while it is likely to entail a loss, to be made up from the general revenue.

Mr Webster:

– How else can it be brought about?

Mr McCAY:

– I leave that for the honorable member to work out for himself.

Mr Webster:

– I should like a statement from the honorable and learned member on the subject.

Mr McCAY:

– I do not wish to occupy so much of the time of the House as it would be necessary to take to make the honorable member understand this or any other point. There are other and still more urgent reasons why we should pause in this matter. For example, the old-age pensions scheme is certainly in much more immediate prospect than it was twelve months ago. The Postmaster-General has estimated an increase of 40 per cent. in the number of letters carried during the first year of the penny postage, but I venture to believe that is a very generous estimate. In Canada the increase during the first year amounted to only 35 per cent., whilst in Victoria the access of business amounted to only 20 per cent. I do not think that we haveany reason to suppose that the increase throughout the Commonwealth will be any greater.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– The honorable and learned member must remember that Victoria reduced the weight of the letters as well as the postage.

Mr McCAY:

– The Minister must know that, except in the case of letters exchanged by those who are in the bright bloom of youth, the weight does not often exceed the½oz. And I do not think that even the Departmental estimate has taken any excess postage into account. When the Postmaster-General says that the pro posed reduction of postage is not likely to involve any diminution of revenue - the honorable gentleman does not like the word loss because he holds that the money will be kept in the pockets of the people, and taken out of the general revenue - or that, after ceasing to receive £150,000 or £200,000 per annum, there will still be enough money left to provide for other purposes, such as old-age pensions, which is so dear to his heart, I shall be prepared to give the matter ray favorable consideration. At present, however, the whole position resolves itself into this : That desirable as it may be to introduce penny postage, the Commonwealth cannot afford it. It is not necessary to introduce the change at present, and there are other worthy and more important objects to which our money should be devoted.

Mr.BAMFORD (Herbert) [3.20].- I wish to place on record my objection to the Government proposal. In noting the results that have followed upon the adoption of penny postage elsewhere, it must be remembered that the character of the population in other countries differs very materially from that of our own. I am sure that the difference between one-penny and two-penny postage would not greatly affect the volume of correspondence in Australia.

Mr Henry Willis:

– Yes, it would.

Mr BAMFORD:

– I am sure that it would not. Persons in different parts of the States who may desire to correspond are not deterred from doing so by the fact that it will cost them 2d. instead of 1d. to post their letters. The experience gained in Victoria has conclusively proved that what I am saying is correct. The fact that, after the rates were reduced, the volume of correspondence increased by only 20 per cent. indicates very clearly that we shall not be warranted in looking forward to a very large increase of mail matter. It must be recollected that if we reduce the postage rate by 50 per cent., we must increase our postal business by 100 per cent. in order to restore our revenue to its original position. I do not think that the number of letters posted in any country have been increased more than 70 per cent. by the reduction of the postal rates, and, therefore, if we pass the Bill we shall have to face a certain loss. As the representative of one of the smaller States. I shall have to vote against the second reading. I have asked repeatedly for increased postal facilities^ which are far more strongly desired than are cheaper postage rates by the people in my electorate. The Department has been fairly liberal, but they have not been able to give me a great many facilities for which I have asked, because there has been no money available. Now, it is proposed to make a free gift to a small section of the community at the expense of the rest of the people of Australia. As has been pointed out by other speakers, the loss of revenue that would result would seriously hamper the smaller States.

Mr Cameron:

– They do not want penny postage.

Mr BAMFORD:

– No; no community of people, either large or small, in the Commonwealth, has asked for the reduction of the postal rates.

Mr Henry Willis:

– Does the honorable member think that the’ people would be in favour of increasing the postal rates?

Mr BAMFORD:

– I do not think they would.

Mr HENRY WILLIS:
ROBERTSON, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906

– Why should they not be in favour of doing so, if it makes no difference?

Mr BAMFORD:

– If that be the argument of the honorable member, I must admit at once that a great many persons who do not understand the question would probably vote for the proposed reduction of postage. If the man in the street were asked whether he was in favour of penny postage, he would answer in the affirmative, although probably he would not post one letter per month. He would not take the consequences into consideration. I do not think that we could afford to incur the loss that would be involved by the proposed change, and therefore I shall vote against the Bill.

Mr WILKINSON:
Moreton

.- I regret to say that I shall have to vote against the Bill.* Although I believe thoroughly in the principle of the measure, I object to it on the ground mentioned by the honorable member for Herbert, namely, that the time for its introduction is inopportune. Of other things it has been said - “ If it were done, when ‘tis done, then ‘twere well lt were done quickly.”

But in view of the condition of some of the States finances, I think we should pause a little before we commit ourselves to the Government proposal. It does not follow that, because most of the States have been blessed with a surplus during the past year, that state of affairs will continue. The honorable member for Gippsland and others have already pointed out that we are’ rapidly approaching the end of our financial tether, and that we should hesitate to embark upon a policy of this kind, for which there has been no public demand. I do nob agree, with the honorable member for Grey, when he says that those who enjoy services should pav for them in proportion to the advantage they receive. The Post and Telegraph Service is of benefit to the whole community, and not only to the merchants, as has been suggested. If the commercial and banking classes use the Post and Telegraph Department more than ordinary individuals, they manage to pass their share of the cost on to their customers, and, after all, the general taxpayer has to bear the expense. There is much force in the contention that we should have a uniform system of postage, and, if the present time were opportune, I should be willing to support any measure in that direction. In some of the States cases- occur in which, if you live upon one side of the road, your letters are delivered for a penny, whilst upon the other side they cost 2d.

Sir John Forrest:

– And the honorable member would continue that state of affairs ?

Mr WILKINSON:

– I should be glad to see uniform rates of postage established if the finances of the States would permit of it, and I hope that the time will soon come when we shall be able to extend that benefit to the people. Whilst at present I feel compelled to vote against the Bill, I shall feel myself perfectly free during the forthcoming elections to urge the adoption of a system of penny postage. At present I have no mandate from my constituents to support such a reform, and I feel compelled to pay full regard to the financial necessities of the State which I represent. If the people of Queensland are willing that the incidence of taxation shall be changed, I am quite content that the postal rate shall be reduced. But at present I think we had better leave this matter over for the consideration of the next Parliament, after the public have had an opportunity of expressing their opinion upon it. In speaking of the increase that has taken place in the postal business of Victoria since the penny postage has been instituted, the Postmaster-General did not take into account the fact that the amount of mail matter has been largely .added to owing to the post-card craze, which has been in full swing during the last few years. Perhaps Victoria has benefited more than any’ other State from this new development, because of the very large number of Inter-State visitors who resort to her capital at certain seasons of the year. We know that the volume of postal business in the way of transmitting post-cards has very materially increased the revenues of the Post Office all over the world. Consequent! v the whole of the increase which has taken place in Victoria must not be attributed to the adoption of penny postage as against the mixed systems which obtain elsewhere. It would have been interesting if, amongst the voluminous figures which he quoted, the Postmaster-General had told us the number of letters per head that are annually received and despatched in the various countries which he cited. Had he done that I believe it would have been apparent that the position -in Victoria is not very much better than in Western Australia and Queensland. Certainly the position in France, Italy, and other Continental countries would not have compared at all favorably, even with the position in South Australia, where a 2d. rate of postage obtains. I noticed from the particulars given in the course of the Minister’s address that many items of expenditure are being unjustly charged to the Postal Department. The sooner that system is put an end to the better. Amongst other statements which he made, the honorable gentleman conceded something which upon previous occasions he has denied. He has repeatedly stated that the mail contract which was recently entered into bv the Commonwealth is a mail contract pure and simple. To-day he stated that the £125,000 which we pay for the existing service should not be entirely debited to the Postal Department, inasmuch as it did not provide purely for a mail service, but largely for a trading service. As a Queenslander, I claim, therefore, that differential treatment has been meted out to three of the southern States to the detriment of Queensland, inasmuch as the Commonwealth in subsidizing a line of steamers which are partly trading steamers has practically stipulated that the)’ shall visit only the capitals of those States. I now wish to say a word or two regarding the excessive charges made by the Railway Departments for the carriage of our mails. This is a matter which has been frequently referred to in this Parliament. It seemsto me that immediately prior to Federation the States Parliaments made a very grave mistake. When Victoria decided to lower her postage rate she did so under the impression that any loss sustained would have to be made up by the Commonwealth. In exactly the same way the Queensland Parliament, in October, 1900, increased the rate paid for the carriage of mails upon the railways of that State by £10,000 a year. Prior to that period the Railway Commissioners had been paid £40,000 annually for that service. That price was increased to £50,000, in the belief that the difference would have to be made good by the whole Commonwealth. In precisely the same fashion other items of expenditure were inflated - items out of which a good deal of capital is being made by certain enemies of Federation and by the States Treasurers, but by none more than by the Treasurer of Queensland. There is a grave necessity for separating from the Postal Department all items of expenditure which do not legitimately attach to it. If that were done, it would then be apparent whether the postal service would be able to stand the loss which would be occasioned by the adoption of penny postage. To my mind, the present time is inopportune for the introduction of this Bill. As every honorable member is aware, whenever the Postal Department is approached with a request that it should provide increased postal facilities in country districts an inspector is deputed to make an, investigation, and to report what would ‘be the cost of the undertaking, together with the probable amount of revenue which it would return. If the business does not appear sufficient to warrant the expenditure, the concession is refused upon the ground that the undertaking would not pay. Personally, I have nothing to complain of in this respect. I have been met in every possible way by the Department, and my constituency is well served. I am very fortunate, because I represent an electorate in which settlement is fairly close. In my district there are not more than fifteen or sixteen miles separating one country post-office from another, whereas in some districts the distance between the various offices is from fifty to sixty miles. I maintain that the residents of our back country are deserving of every consideration at our hands. They are not only frequently denied a mail service ; but, when they succeed in getting one,it is usually a very infrequent one. Moreover, they are often compelled to ride ten or twenty miles, in order to receive their correspondence, whereas in the cities there are five or six letter deliveries every day. Further, when country residents apply for the substitution of a tri-weekly for a biweekly mail service, they are often told that their request cannot be acceded to, because it is unlikely that the revenue forthcoming would be sufficient to cover the additional cost. If it were possible to extend postal facilities to our back country without having to impose extra taxation in some form or other, I should be entirely at one with the Postmaster-General in regard to this Bill.But, until the matter has been put before the electors, and until they have had an opportunity of declaring whether they are prepared, by some other form of taxation, to make good the deficiency which would certainly result from penny postage, I cannot support the measure. At the same time, I hold myself free to urge the advantages of penny postage upon the public platform.

Mr KNOX:
Kooyong

– In moving the second reading of this measure, the Postmaster-General delivered a very informativeaddress. If ; we were not so near the close of the session and of the Parliament, honorable members, before continuing the debate upon this question, would naturally have desired an opportunity of seeing that information in print, and of seriously studying it. I think it is generally admitted that the adoption of penny postage would for some time to come involve us in a loss of from £150,000 to £200,000 annually. It is true that the Postmaster-General pointed out that it would probably result in an increase of 40 per cent. in the volume of our postal business ; but we must deduct fromthat the increased cost of handling the additional mail material. For a long time, too, we must contemplate the granting of additional postal facilities, which will involve a very large outlay. My feeling is that the Minister will be acting injudiciously if he presses this Bill to a division. Most honorable members are just as desirous of seeing penny postage introduced throughout the Commonwealth as is the Postmaster-General himself ; but before we impose this extra charge upon the people, I feel that they ought to be afforded art opportunity of being heard. If the Bill be pressed to a division, I shall very reluctantly be compelled - in view of our present financial position - to vote against it. I trust that not many years will elapse before this reform is carried out, because I am one of those who hope before long to see Imperial penny postage established. I trust that honorable members will not be called upon now to vote against a Bill which, if the finances of the Commonwealth would permit, they would heartily support. I trust either that the adjournment of the debate will be agreed to, or that the Government, having regard to the clear expression of opinion during this debate, will withdraw the Bill for the time being.

Motion (by Mr. Kelly) proposed -

That the debate be now adjourned.

Mr Deakin:

– The adjournment of the debate will mean the “killing” of the Bill.

Question - That the debate be now adjourned - put. The House divided.

AYES: 31

NOES: 16

Majority……… 15

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

page 5452

ASSENT TO BILLS

Assent to the following Bills reported: -

Audit Bill.

Australian Industries Preservation Bill.

page 5452

QUESTION

ESTIMATES

In Committee of Supply (Consideration resumed from 25th September, vide page 5340-

Department of External Affairs

Division 13 (New Guinea), £20,000

Mr BROWN:
Canobolas

.- I listened with considerable interest to the discussion which took place last night on this division, and especially to the speeches delivered by the honorable and learned member for West Svdney, the honorable and learned member for Parkes, and the Prime Minister. Captain Strachan, upon whose case the debate chiefly centred last night, is not an intimate friend of mine, and I am unable to speak of him as the result of any lengthy acquaintance. I may say, however, that I was recently brought into contact with him, and that having inquired into his case, it seems to me that, although the Prime Minister sought to lightly brush aside the points raised on his behalf by the honorable and learned member for Parkes and the honorable and learned member for West Sydney, a grave injustice has been done him. That being so, I should be lacking .in my sense of the responsibility attaching to my position if I did not voice my feelings on this question. A further investigation should be made in order to ascertain whether a legitimate complaint can be made against the administration of Papua. . The complaints levelled at that administration are not confined to one or two individuals. Quite recently the conduct of a leading official, and one of his subordinates in Papua, was brought under our notice, with the result that a Commission was appointed to inquire into the matter. There is a possibility of that Commission rendering very valuable service bv investigating the whole question of the administration of Papua, instead of confining its attention to the two cases which were chiefly responsible for its appointment. It ought certainly to inquire into Captain Strachan’s case. He is an old trader, his connexion with the Australian coast and outlying islands extending over thirty or thirty-five years. Those who can speak from a very long personal knowledge give him the highest character as a seaman, and bear testimony to the very valuable work which he has done for the Empire in exploring remote places, particularly in New Guinea. He did a large amount of exploring there twenty-five or thirty years ago, when the island was very little known, and his explorations, among others, have made possible the occupation of part of it bv Great Britain. But, although intimately acquainted with a portion of the New Guinea coast, his connexion with the island has been very limited during the past ten or fifteen years, so whatever friction there may have been between him and residents there, cannot but be a matter of ancient history. According to the captain’s letters to the Department, copies of -which are now in ray possession, he set out to do some exploring in the neighbourhood of New Guinea, working in conjunction with the authorities at Port Darwin or on the northern coast of Australia. Whilst so engaged, he encountered a very severe storm, which caused him to lose his anchor and chain, and drove his vessel a considerable distance east, so buffeting it that it became very leaky. He therefore made for a point on the New Guinea coast where he knew that he could careen, and ascertain and repair the damage done. He made for a beach at the mouth of the Katau River, because, seventeen years previously, after a similar experience in another vessel, he had gone there, and had successfully effected the necessary repairs. The Prime Minister has asked why he did not make for the Port of Daru, or comply with the instruction of the officials to proceed there. If the honorable gentleman had given Captain Strachan a personal interview, he would have explained that the passage between the two places is uncharted, full of reefs, and, therefore, verv dangerous, and that, .when he made it some years ago, he met with so many difficulties that he was unwilling to risk the lives of those on board by repeating the experience. Whether that explanation is in accordance with fact could easily be ascertained bv . allowing an inquiry by some competent and disinterested authority. _ Mr. Deakin. - Why was it easier for him to go 900 miles to Port Darwin than to Daru; a distance of 12 miles?

Mr BROWN:

– Because as I have said, of the dangers of the passage.

Mr Deakin:

– Reefs and shallows abound for a longer distance on the way to Port Darwin.

Mr Johnson:

– But perhaps there is sufficient sea room to avoid them.

Mr Deakin:

– They have to be gone through in order to get out to sea.

Mr BROWN:

– I think that an investigation should be made to ascertain the facts, seeing that there is such a conflict of opinion on this point. At any rate, it was less dangerous to take his vessel to the point to which he wished to go.

Mr Deakin:

– There was no objection to his going to Katau

Mr BROWN:

– The captain states that he landed at Daru, with his papers, to secure permission from the local Customs officials to do what he desired. He interviewed Mr. Fitzgerald, the officer in charge, and handed him his papers. They were examined in his presence, and he was given to understand that he could take his vessel to the Katau River, and’ there careen her. He then went to the store, to purchase some supplies which he required, and, on his return to the Customs office, met the District Magistrate. Although not much passed between them, he was given to understand that the permission to go to Katau River was surrounded with certain conditions. The Customs authorities wished to search his vessel, treating him as a suspected person.

Mr Deakin:

– Every .one who does not go to a recognised port is treated in that way. That is absolutely necessary.

Mr BROWN:

– The Customs authorities have to discharge their duties, but the captain’s explanation as to how he came to the place is reasonable. He says that he was driven there bv stress of weather, and the condition of his ship. I do not think that it was the duty of the Customs authorities to deal harshly with seafarers in distress, as undesirable persons whose object was, not to secure safety and protection, but to infringe the law.

Mr Deakin:

– According to the papers, Captain Strachan, in order to get 70 Katau, .sailed past ‘Daru, through the dangerous reefs about which the honorable member has spoken.

Mr BROWN:

– The captain indicated to me the position of his vessel and of Daru, and made it clear that it would be more dangerous to go to Daru than to the spot which he wished to visit. Writing to the Department of External Affairs on the 1 2th May, 1905 - and I have verified my copy of the letter by reference to the original - he said -

On the second clay after clearing reefs -

Having been blown away from his anchorage - wind increased to a gale, blowing with great violence with heavy cross sea. On the tenth day out ship sprang a leak, which increased until pump had to be kept going continually ; finally pump gave out; ship making eight inches per hour. Got pump repaired, and on 14th ‘April -made Hellish Reefs, Coral sea. Here I lay with two anchors down for eight days, browing a living gale al! the time, there being no possibility of getting at the leak. I decided to run for the Katau River, British New Guinea, where twenty years ago I beached the schooner Herald. Wc sailed from Mellish Reef at’ 4 p.m., Saturday, 22nd April, and ran to the northward, with oil bags over the side to smooth the seas. On Sunday, 30th April, entered Torres Straits, and at 7 a.m. Tuesday, 2nd May, anchored in 3^ fathoms, three and a half miles distant from Katau River. Proceeded in my boat to village to engage native pilot to take ship into safety, was met by a canoe, and warned not to land.’

Then he proceeds to describe his interview with the Customs officers.

Mr Crouch:

– Does he say why he was warned not to land?

Mr BROWN:

– The natives warned him that he should not land at that particular point, because it was against the regulations. He engaged a canoe, and went to Daru, where he had an interview with Mr. Fitzgerald, to whom he handed his papers for the purpose of perusal. He practically obtained verbal permission to do what he required ; but, after purchasing some stores, called back at the office, and was then informed that it was considered necessary to search his vessel. Next morning Captain Strachan proceeded with the Customs officers to the place where his vessel was lying. He was asked what length of time he required to complete repairs, and very naturally said that that would depend upon the amount of work found necessary - that it might be done in a very short time, or might extend over some considerable period. The Customs official wished to limit him to four days at the outside, and then a dispute arose. The captain said that he did not wish to stay on the coast, because he had trading engagements to fulfil elsewhere; but, at the same time, he did not see why he should be required to give an undertaking that he would clear out in four days. Then, he alleges, he was told by the Customs officials that they would not allow him to go boxing about their coast.”

Mr Deakin:

– The officers absolutely deny using any such expression.

Mr BROWN:

– I am only placing one statement against another, and I contend that Captain Strachan’s account of the circumstances is as reliable as that given by the officers, who have landed themselves in an awkward position. I desire that the whole question shall be submitted for investigation to some competent tribunal, in order that we may know who is to be believed. Captain Strachan proceeded to Port Darwin without his papers. The officers say that Captain Strachan left his papers behind him; but he states that they took his papers, and that Mr. Fitzgerald, who had the papers with him when he visited the vessel, refused to hand them over, stating, that, after the careening of the vessel was completed, Captain Strachan would have to report himself at Daru, and would then have his papers restored to him. Captain Strachan says that, ‘according to international law, the Customs officials had no right to interfere with him, because he was beyond the three-mile limit, and therefore on the high seas. Mrs. Strachan, who’, I understand, is the owner of the vessel, demanded the return of the papers, but Mr. Fitzgerald took (hem back to Daru. The vessel was then put to sea, and finally reached Port Darwin.

Mr Maloney:

– Why did not Captain Strachan visit Thursday Island?

Mr BROWN:

– Captain Strachan says that if he had gone to Thursday Island it would have cost him much more to effect repairs - £100, instead of the £20, which was all that he had to pay at Port Darwin. I think that the honorable member will admit that that was a consideration.

Mr Maloney:

– Yes; unless the whole thing is a fairy tale.

Mr BROWN:

– I trust that the honorable member will assist me to secure an investigation of the matter, and ascertain whether Captain Strachan’s statement is true. The statements made by the officers in New Guinea suggest that the vessel was not in a leaky or dangerous condition, and that Captain Strachan’s request to be allowed to effect repairs was prompted by some ulterior motive. Whilst the vessel was at Port Darwin, she was examined by the harbor master who, writing on the 25th May, said -

In accordance with your request, I have this day examined the ketch Envy, and found that vessel in a most unseaworthy condition ; the seams in many places below the water line were open, the caulking had either come out, or had never been put in. When the copper had been removed daylight could be seen all along the seams both fore and aft.

Mr Watkins:

– Could he not tell whether caulking had been put in the seams?

Mr BROWN:

– I am not in a position to say. Upon that point, Captain Strachan, writing from Port Darwin on the 25th May, says -

The vessel has been surveyed here, and is now on the beach. A copy of the harbor master’s memo, to me I enclose herewith . . . and the cause of the tremendous influx of water was solely due to the defective work of Sydney caulkers, who had scamped whole seams, so that the long continued bad weather had opened them out to that extent that the ship was like a basket.

Mr Crouch:

– Will not the whole of the evidence come before the Royal Commission ?

Mr BROWN:

– That is the whole trouble. Captain Strachan will be only too pleased to lay the whole of the facts before the Commission, but under present conditions he cannot very well do so. Captain Strachan, having failed to secure any satisfaction from the Department of External Affairs, proceeded to New Guinea with a view to obtain redress. He put in at Samarai, and his vessel was at once seized because he could not produce his papers. The chief official was absent, and those who were acting on his behalf^ detained the vessel for forty-eight hours until his return. Captain Strachan then stated his case and obtained a clearance, afterwards proceeding to Port Moresby, where he interviewed Captain Barton. After the incident at Katau and Daru, Captain Strachan, upon reaching the very first place at which” a letter could be posted, despatched’ a communication to the Minister of External Affairs, and forwarded a copy to the Administrator of New Guinea. .When he interviewed Captain Barton, that gentleman told him that he had been instructed to refer him to the Department of External Affairs for any redress to which he might consider himself entitled. To his first telegram, .to the Sec- retary of External Affairs, he received the following reply : -

Referring to your telegram, desire to state that this Department accepts no responsibility for action of New Guinea officials complained of.

It was that reply which induced him to go direct to the New Guinea authorities for redress. When he approached Captain Barton he was informed - not that his papers had been forwarded to the Secretary of the Department of External Affairs, Mr. Hunt, but that they were at Daru, and that he could secure them by visiting that place. He was further told that if he wished to secure any redress he would have to communicate with the Department of External Affairs. After having been buffeted from pillar to post, without being able to obtain- any satisfaction, he brought his case before the High Court. It was only then - after he had incurred a considerable expenditure - that he was met with the plea of the Commonwealth Government that they were not legally responsible for any acts of their servants in New Guinea. That plea, Captain Strachan was informed, was fatal to the prosecution of his action. The Chief Justice of the High Court told him that, whatever moral claim he might have in respect of the wrong which had been done to him, he had no legal claim. Seeing that the Government had been charged with the administration of the Possession for four years, I ask honorable members whether it is creditable to the Commonwealth that it should urge a technica.1 plea of that sort? My own impression is that the proper course for the Commonwealth to pursue would be to accept responsibility for the acts of its servants, and to allow the Court to see that justice was done. As the result of his action, Captain Strachan has incurred out-of-pocket expenses amounting to about £100, and I understand that the Government have an account against him of £250 for legal expenses. Thus, through no fault of his own, he is denied what ought to be the right of every British subject. Of course, I am aware that it has been urged that Captain Strachan is not a reliable man, and that at some time in his history he was connected with certain shady transactions. Such accusations, I submit, are entirely extraneous matters, irrespective of whether or not they are true. Strange to say. however, these charges are chiefly made by the Secretary of the Administration1, Mr. Musgrave, who affirms that he knew Captain Strachan as far back as 1886. Captain Strachan, on the other hand, declares that Mr. Musgrave’ spersonal knowledge of him is very limited, that they have not spoken- half-a-dozen times during the twenty years, and that they had not at any time been brought into close contact. He further states that he is prepared to defend his honour before any impartial tribunal, and will place it alongside that of Mr. Musgrave. I hold in my hand a communication which I have received during the past few days. It purports to come from a disinterested person, who merely knows Captain- Strachan by repute, but who knows something of the officer who has made the charges against him to which I have referred. Hisstatements are of such a character as to invite inquiry in another direction, altogether apart from the allegations made against Captain Strachan. The latter has endeavoured to secure justice at the hands of the New Guinea officials, and it has been denied him. I do not think that this matter should be allowed to rest where it is. So far as I know, Captain Strachan has actually sought to appear before the Commission which has been appointed to investigate the administration of New Guinea. Some time ago I informed him that all he would have_ to do was to state his case to that body, when it would be inrvestigated He then informed me that he had interviewed the Chairman of the Commission before he had left Sydney, and had been told that the Commission had received no instructions to investigate his case, and had no papers relating to it. Under such circumstances surely the matter should be referred to that body !

Mr Thomas:

– Why not appoint a separate Royal Commission?

Mr BROWN:

– We do not want to unnecessarily increase the number of Commissions. The body which has already been appointed is quite capable of dealing with the matter. Inasmuch as Captain Strachan has ineffectually attempted to secure an investigation of his case, and has taken all the steps that were open to him without obtaining redress, I think that the Government ought to provide him with reasonable facilities for appearing before the Commission.

Mr Thomas:

– It is a pity that the honorable member cannot devote his efforts to a worthier object.

Mr BROWN:

– That remains to be proved. The honorable member is scarcely doing himself justice. He must recollect that there are two sides to this case. I am not an advocate of either side. But I say that it is not probable that in a fit of temper Captain ‘Strachan, as an old seaman, would commit the error which is charged against him. He must have known that he would be helpless without his papers, and that after leaving Daru he could not reasonably expect to secure them without considerable trouble and loss of time. All I ask is that there should be an impartial investigation of this matter, not only in the interests of Captain Strachan, but in the interests of the future administration of New Guinea. To my mind, the administration of the Possession is in1 ai very chaotic state. For instance, the papers disclose that the man who is alleged to be responsible for this trouble, Mr. Jiear, was appointed some years ago as acting- Magistrate, but although for some time he has been acting as if his appointment had been made, the Crown could not obtain any authoritative information on the point. The probabilities are that he has been properly appointed, but that a big Department should find itself in a difficulty in this’ regard does not reflect credit on the administration. Various cases affecting the administration of Papua have been brought under notice. We had, for instance, the case of Mr. Craig.

Mr Maloney:

– Do not drag in that case.

Mr BROWN:

– I merely wish to show that Captain . Strachan’s case is not an isolated one. We have had before us papers relating to the Richmond case and the O’Brien case, whilst we have been well informed on Mr. Craig’s complaints. The probability is that half-a-dozen other cases have yet to be reported. These facts go to show that there is something radically wrong with the administration, and that steps should be taken to insure its effectiveness. The Commission now proceeding to the Territory should, if necessary, have its powers enlarged so that it may investigate all these complaints. In the interests, not only of Captain Strachan, but of the Commonwealth itself, every facility should be given the Commission to inquire into these matters. The Prime Minister last night took up a biased attitude. I do not know whether he has since looked more carefully into the question, but I will test the feeling of the Committee by moving

That the proposed vote be reduced by ^2,000.

Such a reduction would practically cover the salaries of these officials.

Mr DEAKIN:
Minister of External Affairs · Ballarat · Protectionist

– This is an extraordinary procedure for any representative of the people to take. On a mere ex parte statement, placed in his hands by a person whose evidence on important points is mostly contradicted by other testimony, as- well as bv documents that we have in his own handwriting, the honorable member proposes to punish the administration by reducing the amount provided for their remuneration. Why is this to be done? Captain Strachan chose to bring against the Commonwealth an action that should have been brought, if at all, against the British Government who appointed these officers, and who at the time in question were responsible for their actions. He makes the further complaint that he is not permitted to bring his case before the Royal Commission. No obstacle has been put in the way of the Royal Commission hearing this or any other complaint. If Captain Strachan can show that his complaint affects the officers of New Guinea, or its administration, he is entitled to have his case heard by the Commission. The Courts still remain open to him; the Royal Commission is also open to him. What, then, is the meaning of this proposal? As I have said, on a mere ex parte statement against a body of officers who have not had arn opportunity of being heard in their own defence, the honorable member proposes to reduce the item. He is acting on a complaint made by a gentleman, several of whose assertions have already been disproved… What warrant, therefore, is there for such a proposition? I think that in this case the honorable member has allowed his feelings to get the better of his judgment. If the step which he has taken were successful, it would paralyze part of the administration of Papua. We are not responsible for the fact that Captain’ Strachan chose to proceed against the wrong person 01 in the wrong Court. We have already lost £200 in respect of law costs which we are not pressing him to pay. We have appointed a Commission charged with the duty of inquiring into anything affecting the admin- istration of Papua, and if that Commission considers Captain Strachan’s case is affected, it is at liberty to-morrow to inquire into it.

Mr BROWN:
Canobolas

– It seems to me that the Prime Minister is now doing me an injustice. I have looked through the papers relating to Captain Strachan’s case.

Mr Deakin:

– Has the honorable member read these papers?

Mr BROWN:

– I have read a number of them, and find that they contain many contradictory statements.

Mr Deakin:

– There is a great deal in these papers which neither the honorable member nor any friend of Captain Strachan’s has quoted, and which, out of generosity to Captain Strachan, the Government have refrained from referring to. I am very anxious that Captain Strachan shall be treated in the tenderest way.

Mr BROWN:

-I am very anxious that he should be heard.

Mr Thomas:

– The High Court is open to him.

Mr BROWN:

– He has been there.

Mr Deakin:

– But he sued the wrong person.

Mr BROWN:

– The Government raised the defence that they were not liable. The Prime Minister, however, has now made it clear that Captain Strachan may go before the Commission.

Mr Deakin:

– I said so more than once last night.

Mr BROWN:

– The captain says that his communications with the President of the Commission lead him to suppose that it is not provided with any papers relating to his case. Will the Prime Minister take steps to refer all the papers to the Commission, so that they may understand that it isopen to them to inquire into this complaint?

Mr Deakin:

– All our papers are at their disposal. They have but to ask for any papers we possess to secure them. There is no limitation whatever to their powers.

Mr BROWN:

– I am glad to have that assurance from the Prime Minister, and, in the circumstances, will withdraw the amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 14 (Mail service to Pacific Islands), £12,000, agreed to.

Division 15 (Miscellaneous), £32,100

Mr MAHON:
Coolgardie

.- It seems to me that the Prime Minister, in the goodness of his heart, is preparing trouble for himself and his successors by including in these estimates the item, “ Australian men of letters fund, £500.”

Mr Deakin:

– Perhaps if I spoke now I might give the honorable member something to criticise.

Mr MAHON:

– I merely desire to know whether the honorable and learned gentleman proposes to withdraw the item ?

Mr DEAKIN:
Minister of External Affairs · iBallarat · Protectionist

– I still hold what, from the honorable member’s point of view, is the erroneous opinion that some provision of this sort would befit Australia. But although I have received one or two rough sketches of the way in which the fund should be disposed of, and the persons by whom it should be dispensed - because it ought not to be a fund capable of being used for political or such other purposes - I have not yet arrived at a definite scheme. I do not propose to expend any part of this sum until a plan shall have been laid before the House, and either directly or tacitly approved by it. I am sorry to say that there have been brought under notice a certain number of cases in which the relatives of well-known Australian writers now deceased, and some living writers well known by reputation, are suffering privation. All that I ask the Committee to do now is to allow the item to stand, on the understanding that nothing will be done in connexion with it until the plan of distribution is submitted, and either expressly or tacitly approved by the House. The Committee must remember that if the proposal be adopted an annual proposition of the same sort must necessarily follow. The provision of £500 on the Estimates for one year may meet a few cases arising during that year, but cannot effect the purpose which a similar fund in London accomplishes. My rough idea is, at present, to ask some small body of competent persons to consider the various claims that are made, leaving in the hands of the Government, in submitting the item to Parliament, simply a power of veto in detail, and not the power to interfere with the distribution of the fund. Then we shall be faced by the question how much should be devoted to persons still living who, by ricans of this assistance, might be able to use their gifts for the benefit of the public, and what proportion should be. devoted to the families of men who have left them in. want, possibly because of their devotion to a pursuit which, although brilliantly remunerative in some cases, is poorly paid in others.

Mr Mahon:

– Those who lead sober and decent lives are very well paid.

Mr DEAKIN:

– Is not the rarest kind of work least appreciated in its own day ?

Mr Maloney:

– Take the position of Shakspeare.

Mr DEAKIN:

– Shakspeare had the good sense to do very well For himself.

Mr Maloney:

– But he was not afraid to drink in moderation.

Mr DEAKIN:

– This is a new item, and I recognise the right of honorable members to challenge it. I confess that the pressure upon me has been so great that I have been unable to prepare a scheme that would guarantee its effective and judicious distribution. I, therefore, only propose to ask the Committee to pass it subject to the House being hereafter satisfied as to the means proposed and the amount to be expended.

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

– - Whilst .recognising the good intent with which this proposal has been made, and appreciating the sentiment which prompts it, I still feel that we shall be entering upon a very dangerous course if we pass the item.

Mr Deakin:

– I admit that it will be a verv difficult one.

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

– I would appeal to the Prime Minister to withdraw the item. If we recognise such a proposal as this, we shall have to readjust our attitude on many questions. We have decided, for instance, that pensions or retiring allowances shall not be paid to the public servants of the Commonwealth, many of whom render very valuable literary services to Australia. Having adopted that attitude in dealing with those who devote their services to the Commonwealth, how can we justify the making of contributions - however desirable from sentimental reasons it may seem - to others who have not. directly at all events, served their country, or to their relatives who have been left unprovided for.

Mr Johnson:

– Poets and literary men are often looked upon as irresponsible persons.

Mr Thomas:

– Did not the Government of which the honorable member was a Minister give Mr. Plummer ,£400 a year?

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

– The Commonwealth must pay those whom it engages to do work for it.

Mr Mahon:

– He should not have been employed.

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

– That is a question of opinion which I am not going to discuss now. Having -been employed, he was entitled to be paid. The ‘Commonwealth may, 1 in the future, employ manyliterary men, and are they to be treated differently from ordinary public servants?

Mr Maloney:

– They will have the same claim as others upon the old-age pensions fund.

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

– Yes. It would be very difficult to select deserving cases.

Mr Mahon:

– If all who need assistance are helped, we shall have to vote £50,000 instead of £500.

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

– Yes. In many cases assistance for one year would be insufficient. Besides, literary merit is not the only merit, which benefits the community. What about the efforts of our inventors, our pioneers, and explorers?

Mr Mahon:

– Or the scientists who search for means for curing cancer and other diseases ^

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

– Is special provision to be made for literary men, and not for them?

Mr Webster:

– They would be considered under a proper system of government.

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

– The Prime Minister is unable to put forward any scheme on the present occasion, and the difficulties which he has mentioned will increase with time. I suggest, therefore, that the proposed vote should be withdrawn until the subject has been fully considered, and the Government, if they intend to persist in the proposal, are able to put a practical scheme before us.

Mr CROUCH:
Corio

.- I do not think that it is fair to argue that, because certain men are neglected and treated unjustly by the non-recognition of their ability, all should be so treated. The Prime Minister, in asking for a vote of £506, is making a small attempt to acknowledge the obligations of the community to a very deserving class, the work of whose brains,

Mr Deakin:

– I did not speak of passing special legislation, but of putting a statement before the House in regard to the matter.

Mr CROUCH:

– I am very glad to hear that, and think that £500 is not sufficient. We should vote £5,000 to commence with. A vote of £500 would not meet the cases now awaiting relief. Literary ability receives very little recognition from those who conduct our newspapers, which are filled with articles written elsewhere. We protect manufacturers, producers, and workmen, but not literary men. We foster industry, but we do not yet protect brains.

Mr Carpenter:

– This is in the nature of a bounty.

Mr CROUCH:

– Yes. We have authorized the Government to spend £500,000 during a period of ten years for the encouragement of tropical industries, and why should we not try to encourage literary production’? It is the literary work which does not attract a large reading public that gets too little consideration. Such work has been encouraged by the French Academy, and, recently, notwithstanding some abuses, by the Royal Pensions Fund of England. It is a disgrace to us that the widow of a distinguished Australian scientist, who did good work in the Commonwealth and in the Pacific, should have to depend on English bounty, by receiving help from that fund.

Mr Mahon:

– Why not do something for the relief of distressed politicians?

Mr CROUCH:

– In the early history of this Parliament I suggested that the ordinary member’s allowance of £400, which is paid to Ministers in addition to the remuneration attached to their offices, should be used to form a fund to which other members should contribute, to prevent politicians from falling on evil days. Every member of the French Chamber of Deputies contributes to such a fund. That would prevent men who had passed many years in public life from ultimately having to seek assistance from the community, as has happened in Melbourne recently. On

Mr Maloney:

– “Not a dog’s chance.

Mr CROUCH:

– Probably the Australian tone and character of his work would prevent it from receiving ready attention in London. I think that such men should be assisted, and I hope that the Prime Minister will consider the advisability of increasing the proposed vote to £5,000. If he cannot do that, I should like him to establish a grand prize for musical or literary competition such as is given in> France. That would encourage Australian effort, and would, probably, have helped Marcus Clark in his earlier years. The adverse conditions under which our literary men have to labour are a disgrace to the community, and our disregard of the finer literary and artistic aspects of life is not creditable to us. The proposal deserves the strongest support of the Committee.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- No doubt a pensions fund is an excellent thing, but why should we not provide, first, for those who have most claim upon us? The servants of the Commonwealth are not provided with pensions. Parliament having determined against the establishment of a pensions fund, and this Government has not shown any “anxiety to compensate unfortunates who have met with injuries inthe execution of their duty. I h’a.ve already had occasion to refer to the case of exDriver Fav who has been crippled for life bv injuries received in the performance of his work. The Government expressed willingness to do what thev could, but he has received practical lv nothing.

Mr Deakin:

– That is, nothing in addition to the ordinary compensation.

Mr KELLY:

– Yes. He Kas received only two years’ salary, amounting to, I think, £Ji8o.

Mr Deakin:

– To about £300.

Mr KELLY:

– Not so much. At any rate, he has received only the compensation provided for by the regulations.

Mr Watkins:

– Many persons not in the public service get nothing if injured in the performance of their duties.

Mr KELLY:

– They should be compensated, where the fault was not their own. The Government should recognise their responsibility to provide for men who are crippled whilst in the exercise of their duty.

Mr Storrer:

– That shows the necessity for a superannuation fund.

Mr KELLY:

– I have always held that some form of pension should be provided for even by means of a fund to which the men themselves could subscribe. My point is that the Government should assume their full responsibility in matters of this kind, and, until they show themselves prepared to do justice, I shall decline to vote for any such item as that to which I have been referring.

Mr SPENCE:
Darling

.- According to the honorable member for Wentworth, the Government should not be permitted to do what is right in this case, becausein another instance they will not do what he conceives to be just.

Mr Kelly:

– All that I desire is that they shall honour their responsibility.

Mr SPENCE:

– The best way in which we can encourage them to do that is by assisting them to take action such as that now proposed. I am prepared to support the item, because the Prime Minister has promised that no action shall be taken with regard to the distribution of the vote until some scheme has been prepared and submitted to the House. I am afraid that considerable difficulty will be experienced in laying down the principles upon which grants should be made, and that probably it will be some time before any of the money will be expended. The amount proposed to be voted is too small to be of much practical use, but we shall make a very good beginning if we throw upon the Government the obligation to prepare a scheme for the assistance of Australian men of letters. If we strike out the item, nothing will be done, whereas, if we permit it to remain something must be done. The proposed fund will have to be placed under the control of an independent board, which will have to take into account the benefits conferred upon the public by those who are now in need of assistance. Many literary men have been unable to make any reasonable provision for their old age, and as the community has benefited from their labours, we should take a generous view of their position, and do the best we can to place them in comfortable circumstances. I agree with the honorable and learned member for Corio that it is a disgrace that many of our leading and most wealthy journals pay large sums for contributions by writers in other parts of the world, and entirely overlook the talent which we have amongst us. Perhaps the Australian writers are too radical, and too much up to date to suit many of our leading newspaper people.

Mr McWilliams:

– Did the honorable member ever know of a decent book that the author could not get published?

Mr SPENCE:

– I am now talking of journalists, literary men who have found it possible to make a living by contributing to various journals. It is a disgrace that they have not received further encouragement from our leading newspaper proprietors.

Mr Deakin:

– Some of the finest fiction of the day is written, in this very Chamber.

Mr SPENCE:

– We are doing our best to encourage Australian industry, and honorable members on the Government side are filling up their dinner hours by preaching patriotism to the people. I suggest that we should do what we can to secure the protection of! Australian brain products, and the encouragement of our literary men.

Mr McWilliams:

– Why not propose an import duty upon brain products?

Mr SPENCE:

– It might be a very good thing to impose an import duty upon some of the literary productions that come from abroad. In addition to showing our appreciation of genius in literature, I think that we should go further and provide a fund with a view to enable men of genius amongst us, who have a scientific bent, to devote the whole of their lives to the service of the public. I refer to men of the type of Berthelot, the great French chemist, who performed such great service to humanity. Perhaps the provision I suggest could be made in connexion with some of our larger universities, but certainly it would be well for us to place men who devote themselves to scientific pursuits beyond the necessity for struggling for their mere bread and butter. They should be in a position to concentrate the whole of their energies upon scientific research, with a view to conferring benefit upon the community as a whole. I shall support the item.

Mr MALONEY:
Melbourne

.- I desire to compliment the Government upon having made provision for the expenditure of .£200 upon the investigation of tropical diseases. I regret that the amount is not larger, and that cancer is not included among the diseases to be investigated. I also cordially approve of the proposed vote of £500 for the assistance of Australian men of letters^ and I think that the Government are to be congratulated upon having been the first to place such an item upon the Estimates. I trust that we shall be in a position to increase the vote very largely in the near future. We should do everything, possible to encourage men engaged in literary, scientific, Or artistic pursuits, who are doing their best to keep up the end of Australia. We must add volume to the cry, “ Australia for the Australians, and goodwill for the whole of the Empire.” I am sure that, if the proposed vote were larger, a competent committee could make a selection of beneficiaries which would, if placed before honorable members, readily receive their approval. I wish to say a few words with reference to my old friend, Tom Roberts, who painted a picture in connexion with the opening of the Commonwealth Parliament, which I believe will become the most valuable work of art produced in Australia. Some criticism, which I consider to be far from just, has been directed to that great work, and I think that His Majesty is to be congratulated upon having it presented to him. I have known Tom Roberts for many years. I spent seven years with him in Europe, and no man upon the sunny plains of Spain, in the clear atmosphere of France, or in, the murky atmosphere of London, did more than Tom Roberts to keep up the name of Australia. No man was prouder of Australia than he was. ‘So great was his enthusiasm that, during our travels on foot through Spain, where we spent four months, he took good care to bring us <a branch of any gumtree that might be within reasonable reach. Having been permitted to mingle with the art world, I wish to say that his picture was a splendid one. It may not have fulfilled the ideals of men who judged it more from a photographic stand-point than the stand-point of art, but to my mind Tom Roberts did his duty well, and I think it would have ill-become me if, as an old comrade, I had not paid this little tribute to his art work and to his love of Australia.

Mr MAHON:
Coolgardie

.- I entirely appreciate the motives which prompted the Prime Minister to place this vote upon the Estimates as a fund for Australian men of letters. I am sure that he did so very much against his own inclination, because its allocation must involve much heartburning to himself and to his successors in office. But, apart altogether from the practical difficulties palpable to every one, and which were very forcibly put by the honorable member for North Sydney, the proposal is based on a notion that is now obsolete. The Prime Minister has yielded to an example set many centuries ago, when the recognition of literature was much more restricted than it is to-day. Despite what has been said by the honorable and learned member for Corio and the honorable member for Darling, I affirm that any competent literary man in Australia can find ample scope for the product of his pen. It is altogether wrong- to say that the newspapers of the Commonwealth, do not offer encouragement to literary men. There is not a big newspaper in Australia to-day which would not be gl’ad to obtain the services of a firstclass writer, and to pay him a handsome salary - a salary not inferior to that which is enjoyed by Ministers of the Crown in some of the States. That fact is indisputable. I think that the honorable member for Darling spoke upon this subject without full knowledge.

Mr Spence:

– Take the Sydney Morning Herald as an illustration.

Mr MAHON:

– I admit at once that our newspapers crib a good deal of matter from foreign publications, and thus save themselves the expense of providing original material.

Mr Spence:

– Does not that practice tend to prevent writers here from obtaining employment?

Mr MAHON:

– It does not prevent competent writers from securing employment. The fact that there are few front rank writers available here accounts to a large extent for the lifting of literary matter from foreign publications. Since the principle which the Prime Minister seek* to establish was first recognised, the public have become great readers. When these grants were made by the Crown many centuries ago, it was because the circle which appreciated great literary works was a limited one, and consequently men were not able to reap the full reward of their genius. That was the origin of the grants made by the Crown. But with the spread of education, and the general recognition of literary capacity, I again affirm that anything which is really worth reading can find a ready sale in Australia. Of course, one does not like to say anything harsh of the dead, but, speaking with some knowledge upon the subject, it must be admitted that most of our Australian literary men who have died during the . past twentyfive years could have earned very handsome salaries whilst Living, and have made ample provision for the families which they left behind. Even literary men of secondrate ability who remain moderately sober, and who do not live extravagantly, can maintain a family quite as comfortably as can the majority of individuals of equal capacity in any other walk of life. Certainly, the Prime Minister put the matter in a most attractive way when he said that he intends ‘ to spend none of this money until he has formulated a scheme for its distribution by an independent committee. That statement has mitigated my opposition to this item. At the same time, the principle involved is open to question for other reasons than that it is ordinarily within the power of the persons proposed to be benefited to make provision for themselves and their dependents. Then I would ask why we should make grants to literary men if we are not prepared to extend similar consideration to the dependents of those who have conferred benefit upon Australia in other directions. To my thinking, the scientist who discovers, for instance, a cure for cancer is worth as much to Humanity as all the poets that have ever lived. The individual who can rescue the afflicted from the suffering consequent upon such a terrible disease confers a far greater material blessing upon the community than can any literary genius. The most that can be said of the latter is that he ministers to our highest pleasures, whereas the former would relieve humanity of the most horrible pain and suffering. This is ray view of the matter, although I have every desire to see Australian literary men receive their just due. Whilst I admit that the big newspapers of the Commonwealth have a great many sins to answer for, the non-recognition of ability is not one of them. No man of real talent will experience any difficulty in obtaining employment upon the big journals of Australia. On the contrary, the position is that those newspapers cannot find in the ranks of literary men a sufficiency of the special talent which they require, and would* gladly employ.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:
Franklin

– I heartily indorse the remarks of the honorable member for Coolgardie. We are now asked to sanction the introduction of a principle which we ought not to adopt without very serious consideration. I desire to know whether this sum of £500 which has been placed upon the Estimates is to be bestowed upon men of genius who, through misfortune, have not been able to make provision for their future, or whether it is to be utilized as a fund for nursing budding genius which is not able to find an outlet for its productions. If it is to be spent in the latter direction, we shall require to spend, not £500, .but £5,000. Anybody who has had the privilege of occupying the editorial chair of a newspaper knows that one of the most unpleasant duties which falls to his lot is that of endeavouring to extend a kindly consideration to the literary effusions of youthful talent. But there is not a man, in Australia to-day who cannot obtain the publication of any article which is worthy of it-

Mr Maloney:

– At 30s. a column.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– If any writer can obtain 30s. a column for his manuscript, and a royalty upon its publication, he has no need to appeal to this Parliament for assistance. I understand that this vote originated in a suggestion that some action should be taken to recognise the writings of an Australian poet now deceased, who did not leave his family in very comfortable circumstances. If this fund is to take the form of a pension, by all means let us understand it. But from the tone of the discussion I gather that the ‘ impression is that we are about to create a fund to secure the publication of manuscripts which no private individual would, purchase. If that be so, the amount required will not be £500, but many thousands.

Mr Hutchison:

– Some of our best’ writers had found great difficulty in secur- ing publication. Look, for instance, at the early experience of Lawson.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– Every man has a difficulty in securing the publication of his first’ manuscript, and when he subsequently acquires fame the average man wonders why it should have been the case. The fact remains, however, that many a successful writer to-day is glad that some of his early manuscripts were rejected.

Mr Hutchison:

– I am referring to what are admittedly some of Lawson’s most brilliant verses.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– Because a writer in one town may have found a difficulty in securing the publication of his “copy,” we are asked to agree to the establishment of an institution for the publication of rejected manuscripts. I think it would be infinitely better for the Prime Minister to withdraw the item in order that a comprehensive scheme may be propounded. When such a scheme is submitted, we shall know- exactly how the money is to be spent. If we are to provide for the families of men of letters who have failed, we shall require to vote a much larger sum. As one who has done a little scribbling in his day, I sympathize with the object of the Prime Minister, but I think that the proposal requires to be more fully considered.

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

– How would the honorable member view a proposal to put a 75 per cent, duty on the works of Wordsworth and Carlyle ?

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– I am sure that no honorable member would be prepared to go so far as that. I do not think many honorable members would care to vote against this item, and I think that the Prime Minister would do well to withdraw it. If that were done, we should be able next session to deal with a ‘ workable scheme.

Mr DEAKIN:
Minister of External Affairs · Ballarat · Protectionist

– I fully admit that the proposition has been criticised from both sides in a friendly and fair manner. The speech by the honorable member for Coolgardie was a solid block of what the Americans would describe as “ horse sense,” with which it is very hard to deal. I agree with his main proposition that the rewards of literature to-day are greater and more widely distributed than ever before, and that we have also more competent litterateurs. But the consideration which I have been able to give to the proposal led me to look upon it free from association with what I may term successful commercial literature. There is no doubt that the journals and magazines to-day afford a field for those who can obtain a place in them, that exceeds in scope and reward the opportunities existing prior to our own time. It was a regard for some of our many difficulties in starting this fund that led me to pause before endeavouring to lay before the Committee a complete scheme. I have not yet been able to devise what I regard as a satisfactory scheme, but still think it would be possible to formulate one limited to unremunerative forms of literature which are yet of high quality. Poetry affords the best instance .of that class. One occasionally sees fugitive lyrics of rare delicacy and quality, the writers of which one cannot identify. Thev may be the happy product of a fortunate -mood, or they may indicate a possession of this rarest of all gifts for which there is no remuneration, unless the possessor happens to be both fertile and fortunate. Men like Tennyson have no doubt been able in the mother country to achieve fortune, merely by the publication of poems. But still, from the songsters, of whom we are to-day most proud, a number could be selected who. if thev re-published their early works - if they published works as foreign to our present taste as their first comnositions were to the time that saw their birth - could not expect to receive recognition for them. There are people who sacrifice their lives in the pursuit of high quality rather than aim at quantity, who cannot or will not turn to the open doors of modern journalism. Then there are men of capacity who devote themselves to abstract philosophy, metaphysics, and theology, and thus enter a field as unprofitable as that of poetry. If Australia chanced to produce such men. and a competent committee could find them. I do not think that the public would regret some expenditure in assisting them.

Mr Higgins:

– Does not the Prime Minister propose to repeat this vote next year?

Mr DEAKIN:

– In answer to the honorable and learned member, who is one of the parents, if not the chief parent, of this proposal; let me say that I have asked the Committee to pass the item on the understanding that a scheme will be laid before the next Parliament providing for the appointment of a small, independent Committee of qualified critics, and also laying down instructions foi that Committee in regard to the distribution of the vote. If the scheme is not approved, the item will be unnecessary. If it be fortunate enough to meet the approbation of the House, it may be adopted for a year or two, to test the wisdom of the expenditure.

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

– An expenditure of this kind in one direction will, as a matter of equity, involve a further outlay.

Mr DEAKIN:

– That remains to be determined. The subject is surrounded with risks, and requires full consideration. I hope to secure the assistance of the honorable and learned member for Northern Melbourne and others interested in devising a scheme that will satisfy the House. If such a scheme be not prepared, the project must fail. If, on the other hand, we satisfy the House that we have a fair and workable proposal for the encouragement of the rarer flowers of literature, which are certainly not likely to be immediately remunerative to their possessors, especially in a new country, we shall be warranted in incurring this expenditure. The Committee would do well not to reject the item. I admit that such a scheme should not be applied t.> the great army of the litterateurs of today, the bulk of whom- are well paid.

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

– Why select only literature?

Mr DEAKIN:

– It seems idle to speak of an expenditure of only £500 for the encouragement of literature, a wide term, which, when extended to art, including, of course, music, becomes still more inadequate. I have been faced by these facts, and the further one suggested by the honorable member as to whether grants should be made by way of recognition of merit, or as assistance, to the widows and families of those who have been left in distressed circumstances.

Mr Cameron:

– Why not wait until next session?

Mr DEAKIN:

– I do not propose to expend the item until a scheme has been adopted, but desire the obligation of laying such a scheme Before Parliament to remain.

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

– If Parliament approved of the scheme, and there was no money on the Estimates, the necessary funds could be taken out of the Treasurer’s advance account.

Mr DEAKIN:

– Such a rigorous financier as is the honorable member will admit that that would be an irregular procedure.

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

– Not if Parliament approved of it.

Mr DEAKIN:

– Quite so ; but I prefer that the item should remain till we have exhausted its possibilities. There may surely be found in a new country, even more than there is in older and more populous lands, a full justification for this expenditure.

Mr RONALD:
Southern Melbourne

– From my experience of literature, I feel that the assistance proposed to be given in this way will be productive of great good. When one recalls to mind the literature of Athens, and the great good which Pericles did by small donations to objects of this kind - when one remembers the splendid works in Greek literature - one can foresee in this proposal the beginning of what may yet be of very great importance to Australian character and nationality. We have only to think for a moment of the great work involved in the building up of that fine body of literature of which Carlyle’ s Sartor Resartus, Milton’s Paradise Lost, and John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress form part to appreciate what a boon this may prove to genius in its embryonic stage. The proposal shows that we are not governed solely by considerations of pounds, shillings, and pence. It lifts us beyond the position of a nation of shopkeepers. T hope that the demand on the fund will be such that we shall find it incumbent to make provision for the abundance of latent talent which undoubtedly exists in Australia. I would recommend honorable members to read the speech on University extension delivered fifty years ago by Mr. Gladstone, who spoke about working the lowest strata of genius in order to develop the finer and higher elements which exist in our national literature. Even- one who has had experience knows that the flowers in our literature have Seen refused by the magazines. Their authors have met only with rebuff, but, in the end, the world has had to acknowledge their merit. and. alas, too late, has deified them. This is but a beginning, but it is a move in “the right direction. It shows that we can appreciate the true, the beautiful, and the good, and the time mav come when we shall be glad that we have taken part in what is, at least, an effort to secure a national literature.

Mr HUTCHISON:
Hindmarsh

– I am glad that it is not proposed to strike out the item.

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

– I am going to move an amendment.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– -That being so, I shall avail myself of the opportunity to refer briefly to this item. As the honorable member for Coolgardie has said, there are many openings for those who are properly equipped for a journalistic career, but the Prime Minister has something more in view. We know that some of our brightest intellects have experienced the greatest difficulty in securing the acceptance of their manuscripts. One of the writings which made Mr. Henry Lawson famous was rejected by three or four journals, though to-day the work is admitted to be of the greatest value. I admit that writers in the old country have been similarly treated. It is not because work lacks merit that it is not accepted. If we can, we should provide for cases such as these. The beginning proposed is a small one, but I am sure that if the money is rightly expended Parliament will be ready to increase the grant. We should give encouragement to men of brains. It is only too true that thev receive very little encouragement at present. I have been acquainted with some of our brilliant literary men, and have found that they all possess the desire to get to London, where they will have an opportunity.

Mr Mahon:

– That is because there is a. larger, though not a more appreciative, reading public there.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– Those who have been able to raise the funds necessary to transport them to the metropolis of the Empire have been able to do infinitely better than they could have done here. I might instance the late Mr. Guy Boothby, the author of Dr. Nikola. I remember when he contributed to a journal which I had the pleasure of assisting to found. At the time it was about the only publication which would accept his efforts. But when he went to the old country he had no difficulty in (retting remunerative employment, and found a sale for all the books he could produce, working at the highest pressure. It is for us to consider whether we should not encourage such men to remain in the country, instead of letting them go away, or be compelled to perform manual labour to provide their wives and children with a living.

Mr McCay:

– Does the honorable member regard Guy Boothby’s books as literature?

Mr HUTCHISON:

– He did so well in London that he found it profitable to pander to what, in my opinion, is a depraved public taste. Had he remained here he might have written something of lasting value.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– Does the honorable member think that the chance of sharing in a grant of £500 would keep such a man in Australia ?

Mr HUTCHISON:

– This is only the beginning. I hope that we shall be able to do more later on. I remember when Mr. J. M. Barrie was a reporter for a newspaper in whose office I was employed. He was receiving a comparatively small wage at the time, and it is doubtful whether he could have got a start at all had he lived in Australia.

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

– He succeeded without assistance from the State.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– He did not require it, but perhaps if he had been in this country he might have needed it, to bring his genius t6 the front.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– He wrote stuff that was worth publishing, and, therefore, publishers were ready to accept it.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– He did meritorious work which was not recognised at first, and, like others, made his way with great difficulty. I should like to see things made easier for literary men in this country.

Mr HIGGINS:
Northern Melbourne

– I am glad that this proposal has been brought forward in a tentative way by the Prime Minister. It is characteristic of him, taking the interest which he does in literature, to make a concrete proposition of the kind. I asked a question on the subject some two or three months ago, and, at the present time, a committee of a society with which I am connected is debating the best way to disburse any amount which mav be voted bv Parliament for the purpose of assisting literary men.

Mr Crouch:

– For Victor Daley?

Mr HIGGINS:

– They are not dealing with his case alone, but are looking at the whole matter. The Prime Minister wished for some suggestions as to the best way of treating cases of the kind. The late Mr. Victor Daley’s name has not been mentioned by the society or to it. You may have literary merit and poverty.

Mr Henry Willis:

– They go together.

Mr HIGGINS:

– Very often. Those who give their attention to the higher things of life have frequently no time to attend to the smaller duty of providing sustenance for themselves and their families; and, finally, are laid in paupers’ graves, having made no provision for those dear to them. The idea in my mind is that Parliament might vote .£500 or £1,000 a year, leaving it to the Government to sa.y how the money should be expended, and in what sums. If £500 were granted, £100 of it might be given to assist the family of a literary men who had died ; another £100 to assist a literary man who was in poverty, but doing good work ; and a third sum to an aired author unable an longer to support himself. As time went on some ofl the pensioners would drop out, and new ones would come in. I admit that there might be gross abuse unless the distribution of the money were carefully watched bv Parliament, and I should like to see embodied in the Estimates each year a list of those receiving aid, and a list of those to whom it was proposed to make grants. Of course, the pensions would come from the Governor-General in Council, and if anything improper were done Parliament could visit its wrath upon the Ministers responsible. I would noi venture to dictate to a Government as to the best scheme. What we wish to do is not so much to give a quid fro quo as to es’tablish a fund for the assistance of men who have given the best years of their lives to literary work, thereby depriving themselves and their families of ordinary comforts. I hope that the Committee will vote for the item, so that some scheme may be put before the next Parliament. No doubt, the honorable member for North Sydnev can find good, practical business objections to any proposal which mav be made, but it will be something for this Parliament to show that, while it desires to increase the production and material prosperity of Australia, it also appreciates the work of its literary men.

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

– As there is an indirect connexion between the proposed vote and the assisting of the family of a literary man who has recently died, it is with great reluctance that I move -

That the item “Australian Men of Letters Fund, £500,” be left out.

Mr Mahon:

– I do not think that the late Victor Daley was in any one’s mind just now.

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

- His name, was mentioned. I do not wish to connect the consideration of the matter with the claims of any individual. For some reasons I would rather support than oppose the proposal, but it leads us into such a difficult and delicate position that I think it would be better to vote against it. What it is proposed to do is likely to be ineffective and unequal in operation. The proposal has been spoken of as a beginning, as though it is intended later to ask for ai much larger appropriation. I therefore ask how far are honorable members prepared to go? Are we to assist only literary men and their families?

Mr Wilkinson:

– What about inventors and artists?

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

– That question is very pertinent. A great deal is done for the art of the community by others than those engaged in literature. The pursuit of scientific knowledge is often not well rewarded, and men have spent large portions of their lives in trying to discover means for the practical application of scientific facts to the world’s business without reaping any reward. Then there are our pioneers and explorers. Are Ave to provide no fund for them? Either our recognition of merit and genius must be unequal and inequitable, or we must spend a very large amount. With every desire to recognise literary talent, and to help to remove distress from the families of literary men. I cannot support public expenditure in this direction.

Mr Higgins:

– Inventors like Edison make fortunes.

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

– Literary men often make large fortunes.

Mr Higgins:

– -Rarely

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

– It is quite common in these days.

Mr Higgins:

– Each case should be dealt with on its merits. In the very rare case of an inventor being absolutely poor, he must be dealt with accordingly.

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

– Suc Such cases are common, because the inventive faculty is often accompanied by very poor business qualifications.

Mr Higgins:

– What about Edison and Bell?

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

– There are exceptions among inventors, in the same way as among literary men.

Mr Higgins:

– The law makes provision for the protection of patents.

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

– And in the same way the law makes provision for the protection of copyright in literary work. Many literary men have made fortunes. The Prime Minister apparently recognises the difficulty that will be experienced in administering the fund. He frankly states that he has no scheme which he can submit to Parliament. Probably he’ has doubts as to how far we should go in appropriating funds, as to the extent to which individuals should receive grants, as to whether payments should be made to literary men in their lives, or to their families after their death, and whether we should take into account the fact that some able men are provident, whilst others equally capable are improvident. What I fear is that we shall commit ourselves to the creation of a fund to which we shall have to make large additions in the future. Under the circumstances, I think it would be better for us to take further time for consideration. Parliament should not be asked to vote money until some scheme has been formulated. The question arises as to whether we should make grants merely to literary men, or to those who have performed useful work in connexion with music and painting, or whether we should even extend our beneficence beyond the arts. What sufficient reason can be advanced for stopping short at any particular point? This is undoubtedly a scheme for granting assistance to those who have proved themselves to be deficient in certain qualifications - men who have had the ability to produce good work, but have not been sufficiently capable in other ways to find a market for the product of their brains. We should have to consider how far our duty lies in this direction in regard to other than literary men - how far we should assist all those who have qualities which enable them to create, but who do not possess the faculties necessary to enable them to turn their creations to good account. The honorable member for Hindmarsh mentioned the case of the late Guy Boothby, and stated that if he had remained in Australia he would not have secured such a good circulation for his books as he did in Great Britain, and would not have become such a prolific writer. If GuyBoothby had remained here, and had died in Australia, the question would have arisen whether, on account of the quality of his work, his family were entitled to any consideration. Where an author produces really good material, he generally finds for it a ready market, and misfortune may be due to the author’s lack of the energy necessary to furnish an output when there is a demand, or to the fact that those who have received the benefit of his contributions have paid too little for them.

Mr Crouch:

– One Melbourne weekly newspaper paid only £5 for a serial story the publication ofwhich extended over nine months.

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

– But the honorable and learned member would not suggest that we should make up to the writer any deficiency on the part of the publishers of the story. It seems to me that we are launching ourselves upon a sea of difficulties, and I do not see how the Prime Minister will be able to successfully navigate his way into a safe harbor. The honorable and learned member for Northern Melbourne said that Parliament should exercise oversight in regard to the payment of grants from the fund, and should decide to whom the grants should be paid. In such a case, Parliament would be placed in a very delicate position. Suppose, for example, that a clever writer, who became a claimant upon the fund, had in the course of his contributions lampooned Parliament, or had taken up a party attitude. Could his case be considered by members of this House upon one side or the other free from bias ? If such a writer had lampooned us, we should require to possess thoroughly angelic dispositions to enable us to display any anxiety to make provision for him. I think that the Prime Minister would do well to withdraw the proposed vote. If he cannot see his way clear to adopt that course I shall, although I have a very strong sentimentin favour of the idea of the proposal, move that the item be struck out. It seems to me to be utterly impossible to devise an equitable scheme of distribution, to provide an amount sufficient to meet the case, or to extend the scheme as far as it should be developed if we launch it at all. I do not see why a man who has written poems, for instance, should receive treatment different from that accorded to a man who has written valuable articles upon scientific matters, or to others who have done a great deal for the community without receiving any substantial reward.

Mr HENRY WILLIS:
Robertson

– I cannot understand the attitude taken up by the honorable member for North Sydney. There is no reason why we should not devise a scheme for the assistance of literary men. Dr. Charles Mackay, who was a contemporary of Tennyson at the time that the latter was appointed to the position of Poet Laureate of England, was, in his declining years, found to be upon the verge of starvation, and relief had to be afforded to him by means of public subscription. Dr. Mackay published his works for the benefit of the people, and his farm ballads probably were the first embodiment in song of the gospel of land reform. Tennyson, on the other hand, was never guilty of publishing anything at a low rate for the benefit of the people.

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

– Would Tennyson be excluded from the benefits of a scheme such as that now proposed?

Mr HENRY WILLIS:

– Tennyson was as poor as a Church mouse for a very long time. As soon as he achieved fame, however, he frowned down upon those whom he might have done something to raise. Any one occupying a position similar to that of Dr. Mackay would have a claim upon such a fund as that now proposed. It is difficult to remember the case of any poet who did not begin his career as a poor man. We know, for example, that Milton received only £10 for his Paradise Lost. Very few men have done so well as Tennysonhas done out of writing poetry, and I question whether any poet has proved himself to be so mean. Upon one occasion, he refused £1,000 for a poem which it was desired to publish at a cheap rate for the benefit of the masses.

Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 7. 45.

Mr HENRY WILLIS:

– When the sitting was suspended, I was remarking that some men, by reason of their genius amass wealth, but do nothing to uplift the people. Upon the other hand, men who have been endowed with equal ability, because of their generosity in publishing their works at a nominal figure, frequently die poor. In this connexion, I instanced the cases of Tennyson and Dr. Mackay, and I stated that men like the latter would have a very fair claim upon the fund which the Prime Minister proposes to establish. Why that fund should not be extended to the domain of art and music has not been made apparent. It is true that many Australian writers have found it necessary to go abroad in order to find a market for their writings. The name of Guy Boothby has been mentioned in this connexion. Haddon Chambers was another young man who wrote a great deal in Australia, but who received very little recognition here. In England, however, he has grown rich, because a demand exists there for what he is able to produce. Yet he was a prophet without honour in his own country, New South Wales, which has produced many writers who are above their fellows. In this connexion, I am reminded of a young lady in South Australia who wrote excellent poetry, and who passed away quite unnoticed twenty-two years ago. As I understand it is intended to compile an Australian library in connexion with this Parliament, I shall have pleasure in presenting to it the works of that poetess in manuscript.

Sir Langdon Bonython:

– To whom is the honorable member referring?

Mr HENRY WILLIS:

– To Miss Fanny Saltmarsh. South Australia produces not only writers, but musicians. She has recently turned out one of the greatest musicians ever produced in Australia. I refer to Miss Puddy, Mus. Bac. This lady, when she visited Melbourne, was not noticed by the daily newspapers, notwithstanding that she had taken the highest honours at the Adelaide University. But in Germany to-day, she is attracting a great deal of attention from the most eminent musicians. I make these observations so that honorable members may consider whether we are paying sufficient attention to the work of these artists, and whether it is not our duty to proffer them some assistance, should they ever need it. To my mind, the £500 provided upon the Estimates will not be adequate for the purposes indicated by the Prime Minister in his speech. I understand however, that the amount ismerely intended to form the nucleus of a fund from which those who are in need may be assisted. I shall support the retention of the item upon the Estimates.

Mr SALMON:
Laanecoorie

– I am astonished that so much time should have been occupied in discussing a matter of this sort. I thought that in a national Parliament, we should haveexhibited some appreciation of national obligations. To my mind, it is rather late in the day for an English-speaking community to debate a question of this character. We have too many shocking examples of the terrible neglect that has been too justly attributed to the British nation in this regard. In this connexion, the names of Dryden, Goldsmith, and others at once occur to us - of men who. during their lifetime, were actually denied by the nation, which they were benefiting by their magnificent genius, the means of existence. I thought that in Australia we should not be so unmindful of the teachings of history as to seek to prevent the paltry sum of £500 being included in the Estimates for a truly national work.

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

– Does the honorable member consider that this sum will be adequate for that work?

Mr SALMON:

– Time and again, the honorable member has shown himself to be possessed of such a purely commercial disposition that he actually weighs every proposal from the stand-point of the pounds, shillings, and pence benefit which can be extracted from it. I am astonished at the attitude which he has adopted in regard to this matter. I regret that one who so very justly occupies a high position in the estimation of the people should be prepared to deny to those who have assisted to build up the nation that recognition which their industry and genius should command. This question should not take a moment to consider. I am only sorry that the amount which the Government propose to set apart for the purpose is so paltry. Undoubtedly a nation owes a great deal of its virility and strength to the character of the work of its literary men. I sincerely hope that we shall not waste further time in debating this question, but that, by voting the small sum of £500, we shall indicate our preparedness to recognise the literary attainments of those who do so much to build up a nation.

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

– I should not have addressed myself to this question again but for the remarks of the honorable member for Laanecoorie. After having lectured the Committee for occupying time in dis cussing it, he straightway proceeded to occupy further time by debating it himself. The honorable member simply talked nonsense. He declared that the virility and power of a nation was largely due to its literary men. Yet it is now proposed to recognise the merit of the writers of Australia by setting aside a paltry sum of £500.

Mr Salmon:

– Unfortunately, the amount must be governed by consideration for such honorable members as the honorable member himself.

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

– If the honorable member believed what he is advocating he would be the first to propose an increase of that amount.

Mr Salmon:

– The honorable member knows that I cannot do that

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

– The honorable member can propose it. If his utterances were genuine, that is what he would do. I regret the difficulties of literary men and their families just as much as I do the difficulties of other men and their families. If an attempt were made to raise a public subscription to assist the family of a literary man or of any other man who is deserving of consideration, I should be found quite as willing to contribute to it as would the honorable member. When considering a proposed expenditure of public funds we must be satisfied that it is desirable and will be effective. We have no such assurance in this case. We have only an admission on the part of the Prime Minister that the difficulties in the way ofthis proposal are so great that he has not yet been able to prepare a satisfactory scheme. That being so, we should not discharge our duty as representatives of the people if we agreed to the passing of an item of this kind without having before us any proposal as to the way in which it should be distributed. I regret that the honorable member for Laanecoorie should have lectured the Committee, and have passed remarks about the pure commercialism of an honorable member, which the history of this Parliament shows were wholly unjustified.

Mr LIDDELL:
Hunter

– I am entirely opposed to this item. I have the greatest respect for the opinion of the honorable member for Laanecoorie, but I believe that the time has not yet arrived for the recognition of the literary ability of Australian authors. I am very much afraid that as politics are now conducted the allocation of a fund for the assistance of socalled literary genius would be largely influenced by the views of a section of this House. My. knowledge of the literary genius so far displayed by Australians is that there is very little in it that should be encouraged. Nothing better could happen to this country than that men like Kingsley and other English authors, who have written of sea life and deeds of gallantry should arise here. I believe that much of England’s successful colonization and supremacy on the sea is due to the fact that the youth of the old land have been urged to deeds of daring by her writers. 1 fail to recognise that Australian authors have done anything to stimulate our youth to the adoption of high principles,. What is the literature largely disseminated throughout Australia? Much of it is of a prurient kind. One journal, which is undoubtedly a remarkably clever publication, enjoying a large circulation, publishes stories that are absolutely repugnant to decent people. I have handed to friends in the old country books written by men who have been encouraged by that journal, and they have been disgusted with them. I have been approached by editors of certain pages in that paper, and have been extremely sorry to meet them. We should not take an action of this kind until we have authors writing clean and healthy literature, calculated to lead to. the advancement of Australia. I should be glad to do anything to encourage such men, but I do not think that the type of literature so far published in Australia is one that the Federal Parliament ought to encourage.

Mr MAHON:
Coolgardie

.- As. a division may be taken on this item, I desire to say that I am satisfied with the explanation of the Prime Minister that the fund is intended, not for the assistance of literary men whose abilities have a marketable value, but for the benefit of idealists who have gone through life without paying much attention to their own affairs, but have yet conferred much good on the community. We might well agree to the proposal of the Prime Minister that the item be passed on the understanding that no part of it will be expended until a scheme of distribution has been laid before Parliament. It seems to me that the object which the honorable member for North Sydney has in view in moving his amendment will be secured by the adoption of the Prime Minister’s proposal.

Although I disapprove, to some extent, of the principle involved in the item, I shall vote against the amendment if it be pressed to a division. I regret that the honorable member for Hunter should have seen fit to condemn a certain journal, and also to’ declare that if this fund were in. the hands of a certain party, it would not be properly distributed. The honorable member had no justification for casting such a reflection on any section of the House. I am inclined to think that he had the Labour Party in mind whenhe spoke. If he had, I would tell him that the Labour Party, if it were in office, would distribute this money as fairly and impartially as would any other sectionof the House. .Although I do not approve altogether of the journal to which the honorable member has impliedly referred, yet I recognise that it has rendered more service to literary ideals in Australia thanhas any other newspaper.

Mr Deakin:

– And a great service tothe Federal movement.

Mr MAHON:

– I am reminded by the Prime Minister that it has been a vigorous champion of the Federal movement. _ Mr. Frazer. - The honorable member did not mention the name of the newspaper.

Mr MAHON:

– He unquestionably referred to a weekly journal usually published in a red wrapper. I think that journal has done good work for Australia, and that the party to which he hasreferred would, if it had the opportunity, distribute this fund impartially, and relieve men who were in need of assistance without regard to their political opinions.

Mr HUGHES:
West Sydney

.- I know of nothing that would”- do more honour to us and greater service to thiscountry than such a proposal as this. We are now open to the taunt continually made that we care nothing for literatureand art. The average man’s conception of art is something which defies definition. Literature, to him, is confined to thecolumns of sporting newspapers, or “ Deadwood Dicks,” or still more banned’ publications. For the first time during the period that he has had the honour of occupying a seat in this House, the honorable member for Hunter seems to have lost that easy bed-side manner which no doubt did much to ingratiate him with the females of his electorate. I do not hesi-

Mr HUGHES:

– The honorable member has an objection to every proposal of the Government, but I shall be very pleased to support this item.

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

– The honorable member for Laanecoorie, and the honorable member for West Sydney, have made charges against the Opposition that ought to be repelled. The honorable and learned member for West Sydney said that the Government no sooner made a proposition than the Opposition “hurled an avalanche of criticism upon them, and that our criticism was stronger still when a definite proposal was made. I have not so far expressed my views on this question, but I have felt that the objection to the scheme is that it is wholly indefinite. If a proposal were made to-day to recompense some notable Australian literary man whose circumstances, or those of his family, required the granting of assistance - if. for example, a vote were proposed for Victor

Mr Salmon:

– The honorable member is a book-lover. That makes all the difference.

Mr Deakin:

– The book-lover in him says “ Yes “ to this proposition, while the member of the Opposition says “No.”

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

– If the Government proposed a vote for the family of the late Victor Daley I would support it.

Mr Ronald:

– That would be charity

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

– And what are the proposed doles to be?

Mr Ronald:

– An incentive to effort.

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

– What I suggest would not be charity, any more than are the English civil list pensions charity. They have been accepted by some of the greatest geniuses in literature, who have not felt themselves to be the recipients of charitable aid. It will be an ill day when this nation cannot afford to grant money as pensions to or aid for the families of literary men. But the proposal of the Government is full of difficulties, and it is hard to say where it will land us. I think that each case should stand upon its own merits. It is most difficult to lay down a general rule for assisting literary or scientific men or artists, but it would be possible to bring specific cases before Parliament, and all political parties would be found generous in acknowledging the claims upon the community of men of genius or of their families.

Mr BROWN:
Canobolas

.- I am disposed to compliment the Prime Minister upon this new departure, and hope that good will result from it. I recognise that the whole subject is surrounded by “difficulties, and that the only way to get rid of them is to make a move such as he proposes. Therefore I shall not support the amendment. I believe that Australian literary work, whether in newspapers, magazines or other publications, will compare favorably with the literary work published in other British-speaking countries. Exception may be taken to what appears in some of ourjournals at times, but if they are compared with the “ yellow journals “ of America the comparison is very much in their favour. I do not defend prurient literature but I cannot support any sweeping condemnation of our literary output. With regard to the Bulletin. while it contains a great deal with which I do not agree it has been of signal service to Australia in encouraging literary effort, which could not have found expression in the columns of the ordinary newspaper, and it has formed a school of literature which has given publicity to the merits of our leading writers, who have been accepted in the old country as creditable representatives of our literature. I trust that the outcome of the proposal will be the encouragement of high-class literature. A great deal can be done in helping struggling literary men, and assisting the families of those who, after a lifetime devoted to literature, have left very little material gain for the sup port of those dependent upon them. I do not think that the finger of scorn can be pointed at the late John Farrell, who was a poet of no mean ability, whose writings would do credit to any country. He was not a Bohemian, but lived a clean, pure life, and, notwithstanding good press appointments, was unable to make adequate provision for his family, with the result that his death left them in straitened circumstances. He will live in the hearts of succeeding generations when most of us have been forgotten. Part of a fund of the kind proposed could well be devoted to assisting his family, and thus expressing the public indebtedness for his labours. Then there is the case of the late Mr. Victor Daley. I was not personally acquainted with him, as I was with the late Mr. John Farrell; but his writings are of a high standard. I understand that his later days were rendered trying by the disease which has been properly termed the white plague, which ultimately caused his death. Had some fund of the kind proposed been in existence, his closing days might have been less miserable, and his family might have been spared much suffering. I am prepared to assist the Prime Minister in endeavouring to establish a workable scheme such as he has suggested.

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

– I am in sympathy with proposals for encouraging Australian literature, and, so far as a vote of this kind would tend in that direction, it would receive my cordial support. But the vagueness and indefiniteness of the scheme of the Prime Minister has been rightly complained of. The honorable member for Canobolas has referred to a writer who possessed great ability, and whose verses have a great charm for Australians ; but there are other brilliant. Australians who are doing good work of the same kind, and, perhaps, are suffering as much as he did. One wonders where a proposal of this kind is to find its proper and correct limits. What is required is a definite plan. We should know exactly what the Government intend. Literature is only one field of art. Why encourage only Australian men of letters ? Why not assist Australian artists in every direction? I have nothing to say against the merits of this proposal, except that a definite plan should be laid before us, and that the whole field of art should be covered. I believe that Australian litera- ture has already laid the world under a deep and lasting obligation.Because of youth and inexperience in some of the aspects of literary and artistic life, our writers have made mistakes; but that may be said of those of other countries, and Australian literature has already many bright pages. I advise the Government to let this proposal stand over until they have a definite scheme to put before us.

Mr Deakin:

– My undertaking is not to expend any sum until Parliament has approved of a plan which I shall propose. I ask for this vote for the sake of affirming a principle. I intend to propose the creation of an independent committee, and to formulate a plan for the distribution of the money voted.

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

– Then the only suggestion I have to make is that the fund shall apply to others besides “ Australian men of letters.”

Mr Deakin:

– I do not regard those words as limiting; I read them in the widest sense.

Mr Liddell:

– What about men of science ?

Mr Deakin:

– I have specially referred to them.

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

– I have no great objection to the proposal, though, as it marks a serious departure, we having no recognised pensions system, it behoves us to walk warily in regard to it. For insrance, only to-day I had a letter from a widow whose husband had given his whole life to the service of the State prior to his being transferred to the Commonwealth. The widow is left practically penniless, and asks for some little gratuity to which she thinks she is entitled, but after a great deal of correspondence, all I have been able to obtain is a reply in the negative.

Mr Mahon:

– We all know of such cases as that.

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

– I know that the case is merely a typical one. I think that we should walk warily in establishing a precedent of this kind. We must recognise that our artists - and I use the term in the very widest sense - work under conditions which do not obtain in the older countries of the world, where it is very much easier to find private friends and patrons and assistance of all kinds. But whether that is a justification for the Governmentstepping in as it now proposes, isa matter for grave reflection, and it is only because an undertaking has been given by the Prime Minister that no money will be spent until a definite scheme has been approved of by Parliament, that I can see my way clear to support the item. With these conditions and safeguards, I think we may fairly allow the vote to pass.

Amendment negatived.

Mr MAHON:
Coolgardie

.- There is a very important item in this division to which I should like to direct attention, and regarding which I trust that the Prime Minister will make a statement. The proposed vote to which I refer is that of £25,000 for the repatriation of Pacific islanders. In the first place, I think that such a large appropriation should have been made the subject of a special Bill, so that we might have fully discussed the principle involved in the proposal that the Commonwealth should bear the cost of repatriating these islanders. The fact must not be overlooked that the kanakas were brought to Australia by Queensland for the benefit of a Queensland industry,upon the distinct understanding - which has been carried out so far as the planters are concerned - that provision would be made for sending them back to the islands upon the expiration of their agreements. Under this arrangement, the planters have paid to the Queensland Government £5 in respect of each islander, to defray the expense of repatriation. I wish to impress upon the Committee the injustice of a State, which has benefited so largely from Federation, and which is drawing, and will continue to draw, not only enormous bounties which are being paid out of the Treasury, but which, under the system of protection accorded to the sugar industry, is drawing an equal, if not a larger sum out of the pockets of the people, calling upon the Commonwealth to defray the cost of repatriating these islanders. Before I go any further, Imay state that I propose to move for the reduction of the item from £25,000 to £5,000.

Mr Deakin:

– Why so much ?

Mr Hutchison:

– Why not strike it out altogether ?

Mr MAHON:

– For the reason that I am afraid that there would be a slight flaw in our case if we determined to imposeupon Queensland the whole cost of returning the kanakas to their homes. I see, by reference to the correspondence which has passed on the subject, that the Premier of Queensland, writing to the Prime Minister upon 23rd July, 1906, said -

The compulsory deportation of the kanaka, and the fact that after the end of the current year it will be illegal to employ him, are due to Commonwealth and not to State legislation.

He added that it was his duty to ask the Prime Minister to consider whether it was not desirable that the Commonwealth Government should make the necessary arrangements for the return of the islanders to their native homes, and among the reasons he gives is that Commonwealth legislation has made it illegal to further employ kanakas in Australia. I presume that what is meant is that the islanders are under complete Commonwealth control, and that the State is absolved from all responsibility - that it is desired that the Commonwealth shall maintain the kanakas whilst they are remaining in idleness in Queensland, after the expiration of their agreements, and shall defray the cost of sending them back ito the islands.

Mr Fisher:

– No.

Mr MAHON:

– The honorable member need not anticipate me, because I am coming to the point.

Mr Fisher:

– The honorable member is all astray as to his facts.

Mr MAHON:

– If I am so far astray, it is curious that I should not have heard from the honorable member before. I invite him to indicate in what respect I am astray. Does he deny that Queensland is deriving the benefit of an enormous bounty which is being contributed by the rest of the States?

Mr Fisher:

– Yes.

Mr MAHON:

– Then probably the honorable member will next proceed to question the axioms of Euclid or some other equally assured facts. Is if not a fact that a duty of £fi per ton has been imposed upon sugar for the protection of the Queensland product?

Mr Fisher:

– For the protection of sugar, not of the Queensland article.

Mr MAHON:

– Where is sugar grown in Australia, except in Queensland, and a small comer of New South Wales?

Mr Fisher:

– That is the whole case.

Mr MAHON:

– The honorable member will compel me to go into the matter much more extensively than I had intended.

Mr Fisher:

– No threats will have any influence upon me.

Mr MAHON:

– I may tell the honorable member that I am not in the habit of using threats or yielding to them either- I want to demonstrate, though it has beenrepeatedly demonstrated before, that the Commonwealth is making enormous sacrifices for the maintenance of the sugar industry, and that the State which is deriving the greatest benefit is taking advantage of circumstances to saddle the Commonwealth with the cost of repatriating the islanders who were imported into Queensland for the sole benefit of an industry inthat State. I hope, that the honorable member will_not compel me. to go into the whole question of the sugar bounties, and the import duty on sugar, which has been so repeatedly threshed out in this Chamber.

Mr Fisher:

– Hear, hear.

Mr MAHON:

– I want to know why the Government propose to vote such a large sum for the repatriation of the kanakas. The Premier of Queensland, in the letter to which I am referring, informed the Prime Minister -

The Queensland Government is prepared to co-operate in the work of repatriation to the following extent : by. handing to the Commonwealththe sum of for every islander that is deported, that being the amount which was contributed by the employers for the repatriation of each islander, and which would have sufficed for the purpose but for Commonwealth legislation.

In that paragraph I find the flaw which undoubtedly prevents us from completely repudiating responsibility for the repatriation of the islanders. Queensland would say - and I have no doubt it has already said - that if they had been allowed to continue the kanaka traffic, the £5 per head would have been sufficient for- repatriation purposes, because the vessels taking the islanders to their homes would have been able to obtain a return cargo of boys. But now that the traffic has been put an end to by our legislation, I suppose that the contention is that as the vessels cannot obtain back freight, it will be necessary to pay more for the single voyage to the islands. That, I believe, is the slender thread upon which hangs the case of Queensland in regard to the expenses of repatriation. I do not know how the Oueensland authorities came to convince the Prime Minister that their claim was a just one. and to induce him to take up his present position. Perhaps he has made so many sacrifices to avoid friction with the States Premiers that he is ready to concede almost anything rather than imperil the

Federation. I believe that he is ready to make almost any sacrifice in the interests of Federation, and to this fact I attribute the silence he has observed under the rebuffs he has received in connexion with the Federal Capital question and the matter now under discussion. I do not see that this Committee is under any obligation to consider the susceptibilities of Queensland in this matter. These men were brought there for the purpose of being employed in a Queensland industry.

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

– -And they are being sent away owing to the action of this Parliament.

Mr MAHON:

– Yes; but Queensland was also under an obligation to send them away. The honorable member reminds me of a great spider which never wakes up except one Happens to get in its vicinity. He is silent on all great Federal questions, except such as benefit Queensland.

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

– -We did not ask for the construction of a railway across a desert.

Mr MAHON:

– The honorable member had better not refer to that matter, because the figure which he and some of his colleagues cut in connexion with the Bill authorizing the survey of the transcontinental railway is not one to be proud of. I do not see why the Government require this sum of £25,000 for the deportation of kanakas. Prom a return which I obtained some time ago, through the courtesy of the Prime Minister, I gather that there cannot be more than 5,000 Pacific islanders in Queensland today. I asked for a return showing the number of kanakas who were engaged in the sugar industry on the 17 th December, 1901, the date upon which the Pacific Island Labourers Act received the assent of the Governor-General. The reply was that there were 9,530 Pacific islanders in Australia at that time. I then inquired, what was the number of Pacific islanders admitted into .Australia to work in the sugar industry between the 17th December, 1.901, and 31st March, 1904. Honorable members will recollect that the 31st March, 1904, was the date after which no fresh importations of kanakas could be made. I learned that the number so admitted was 2,243. In reply to a further question, I was informed that 917 Pacific islanders had died, and 5-369 had quitted Australia between 17th December, 1901, and 30th June, 1906. Performing the necessary calculation, I therefore conclude that the number of kanakas engaged in the sugar industry, and who are now in Australia, is 5,587. Of this number, probably 1,000 are men who have been in Australia twenty years, or who, for some reason or other, are exempt from the provisions of the Pacific Islands Labourers Act. After making a. liberal allowance, it is fair to assume that not more than 5,000 kanakas require to be repatriated.

Mr Bamford:

– Not more than 4,000.

Mr MAHON:

– The cost of sending them back, according to the estimate, which was furnished by the Premier of Queensland, is £5 10s. per head.

Mr Fisher:

– They must be provided for until the ships in which they are to be deported are ready to sail.

Mr MAHON:

– I am quite aware of that. They will not eat grass. They must be supplied with food and tobacco, &c. If Queensland had any self-respect, she would have paid for the maintenance of these kanakas till they were .ready for deportation.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– She has done very well out of them.

Mr MAHON:

– I would rather not discuss the question of the sugar bonus at the present stage, because I believe that, before long, the people of Australia will awake to an appreciation of what has happened in that connexion. The honorable member for Herbert must be a pretty good judge of the number of Pacific islanders who are awaiting deportation from Queensland.

Mr Bamford:

– I am accepting the official figures up to the 30th June last.

Mr MAHON:

– If there are only 4,000 kanakas to be deported, and if the Queensland Government are going to pay £5 10s. per head for their passages, I fail to see why we are asked to vote an additional

£25)000.

Mr Fisher:

– For the honour of the Commonwealth.

Mr MAHON:

– I put to the honorable member a very simple sum in addition.

Mr Hutchison:

– What about the honour of Queensland?

Mr MAHON:

– I leave the honorable member for Wide Bay to look after that. There must be a serious discrepancy somewhere. The Queensland Government estimate that it will not cost more than £5 10s. per head to repatriate the kanakas, so that a very small sum ought to be sufficient to cover the difference between the contribution of that State and the actual cost of their deportation. Why, then, is it proposed to vote .£25,000 for the purpose? Surely £5,000 is ample. The credit of the Commonwealth ought to be good enough for Messrs. Burns, Philp, and Company for the adjustment of any balance which can be paid from the Treasurer’s advance account. I object to the whole of the responsibility in connexion with this matter being thrown upon the Commonwealth by the Queensland authorities. I have shown that we are receiving an amount sufficient to pay for the cost of deportation.

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

– I suppose it is understood that the Commonwealth will receive that amount?

Mr MAHON:

– Oh, yes. In a letter dated 23rd July last, and which was laid upon the table of this House on 27th August, the Premier of Queensland states that he proposes to hand over to the Commonwealth £5 ros. for every islander deported. If the Queensland Government has received from the planters £5 10s. per head for every islander introduced into that State, they should in common justice hand over more than £5 10s. per head for the islanders to be deported, because 917 of them died between 17th December, 1901, and 30th June last. This sum of over £4,500 which Queensland has received ought to have been available for the upkeep of the surviving islanders pending their repatriation. They have received the money for the deportation of those who have died ; yet they throw upon the Commonwealth the cost of feeding and clothing the others from the time of the expiry of their agreements until their actual departure.

Mr Frazer:

– In other words, they have received £4,500 in that way?

Mr MAHON:

– Yes. I hope that I have not delayed the Committee too long. I think I was right in stating these facts for the information of honorable members. I feel sure that the Prime Minister will be able to make out a reasonable case from his stand-point. But it seems to me that he ought to have resisted the demand that the Commonwealth should maintain these men from the time their agreements expired until thev were ready for deportation, because the Queensland Government would have had to pay that amount if the kanaka traffic had continued. If we had not interfered with that traffic, the Queensland Government - unless the Pacific Islanders renewed their contracts - would have had to maintain them until they were ready for deportation.

Mr Bamford:

– The employers would have had to do that.

Mr MAHON:

– Why should they not do it now? It seems to me that the Commonwealth is asked to incur an expenditure which is unfair to the rest of the States.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– Would it not be better to strike out this amount and to put it in the Bill dealing with the Pacific Islanders which the Government have introduced ?

Mr MAHON:

– I should prefer to see it put in that Bill, because we should then know what it was to be used for, and the expenditure would be under the control of officers of the Commonwealth. Some time ago I intended to ask the Prime Minister whether the Commonwealth is responsible for the payment of the salaries of officers of the Polynesian Department who have been temporarily transferred to it. Who pays them?

Mr Deakin:

– Queensland.

Mr MAHON:

– I may be wrong in my contention, but, if so, I hope that the Prime Minister, or somebody else, will show that the injustice to the other States under this proposal is not so great as I have represented.

Mr DEAKIN:
Minister of External Affairs · Ballarat · Protectionist

– I fake no exception to the criticism of the honorable member, and am perfectly prepared to admit that the amount provided upon the Estimates is likely to prove much in excess of any demands that will be made upon the Commonwealth. That sum was placed upon the draft Estimates before any information had been received from Queensland, before the number of kanakas to be deported was determined, before the period over which their deportation would extend was known, and before any arrangement had been made in respect of the interval between 1st January next and their actual deportation. Though it was possible to set apart a smaller sum for the purpose, it seemed to me that it would be wise to provide what we regarded as the verv outside limit of expenditure in this connexion. Practically nothing was allowed per contra. Calculated in that way, the item of £25,000 was made ample to cover our expenses in all circumstances.

Mr McCay:

– Would that be the position if Queensland made no refund ?

Mr DEAKIN:

– Probably.

Mr Poynton:

– How much has Queensland set apart for this purpose?

Mr DEAKIN:

– I have heard it stated that £30,000 was set apart, and that it has since been reduced to between £10,000 and £15,000. My recollection is, however, that I derived the information as to the reduction from a newspaper statement, and it may not be accurate. Our responsibility arises, as the Premier of Queensland very fairly says, because not only do we require the deportation of the kanakas at any time after 1st January next, but we forbid them to enter into an agreement after that date. Without an agreement they cannot work, and without work they will not be paid or maintained. Consequently, by fixing upon that date for the cessation of the employment of kanakas in Queensland, and at the same time taking power to deport them, we interfered with what would probably have been the policy pursued by Queensland if Federation had not been accomplished. If, for instance, Queensland had decided to abandon the use of coloured labour, the Government of that State would have probably arranged for the agreements to expire at such times as would have enabled them to deport the, men by the small vessels plying between Queensland and the Solomon Islands, or the New Hebrides. Those vessels carry a maximum of 120 Pacific Islandlabourers, and usually obtain a return cargo. But the circumstances which confront us differ from any that Queensland has yet had to face. Queensland has been content to remove the islanders by small vessels sailing at comparatively long intervals, and charging low rates. We, however, have to deport them within the shortest possible time. This necessitates the employment of largervessels. It points peremptorily to the use of steamers capable of carrying a minimum of150, and probably a maximum of 400, kanakas, providing ample space for them. Our problem was to supervise and conduct a far greater exodus of kanakas than Queensland has ever had to contemplate. Then the proposal of the Queensland Government was to hand over to us the sum of £5 per head, which they had, or could have obtained, from the planters, for the return of kanakas.

Mr Mahon:

– Do the Queensland Government propose to hand over to the Commonwealth the money they have received for the return of those who died in that State ?

Mr DEAKIN:

– They propose now to pay us for those whom we return, and estimate that £5 per head would be within 10s., or possibly £1, of the full fare. If we sought to remove the whole of the kanakas either on or immediately after the 1st January next - say, in the months of January or February - that amount would be insufficient. Steamers would have to be specially chartered, and we should have to pay dearly for them ; but I have introduced a short measure, in which we ask for authority to continue, for six months at the outside, exactly the procedure which would have been followed by Queensland, had that State, independently of the Commonwealth Government, proceeded to make these deportations. We ask for authority in the Bill to enable time for making agreements to be extended for no longer than is necessary to permit of our continuing, from 1 st J anuary next, the process of shipping the kanakas to their homes by steamer. That, however, does not imply that we shall wait until January next before taking any action. As a matter of fact, we have already commenced operations.

Mr McCay:

– Who is to pay for their deportation ?

Mr DEAKIN:

– We receive £5 per head.

Mr McCay:

– Who is to pay for their maintenance in the interval ?

Mr DEAKIN:

– I am seeking power to prolong the existing agreements, so that the kanakas may be able to earn their own livelihood until they are ready to be placed on board ship.

Mr McCay:

– That will depend upon the employers being willing to extend the agreements.

Mr DEAKIN:

– The Queensland Government hare placed at our disposal the services of certain officers who are accustomed to deal with these matters. They are acting under our directions, and are paid by the Queensland Government. I learn that they at present anticipate no difficulty in finding employment for the kanakas practically up to the time of shipment. Honorable members will understand that we are confronted by several serious considerations. It is not good for the kanaka to be idle; it is not good for him that he should be called upon to expend any portion of his savings between the date of his cessation of work and his stepping on board ship. It is certainly not good for the community that large numbers of idle kanakas should be concentrated either at the ports of shipment, or should be proceeding to them in a leisurely manner. These circumstances demand careful adjustment. We have to provide for the discharge of a certain number of kanakas at fixed dates, in, order to meet the sailings of the vessels, and to allow the shortest possible interval between the date of their passing from the plantations on which they work to the ships that will carry them to their homes. The arrangement, therefore, has not been finally completed. The novelty of the situation arises from the fact that we have not only to remove from Queensland a larger number of kanakas than have been deported within the same space of time, but that we have to return them to their homes in much larger numbers than before. A certain number of the kanakas are tinctured with what cannot be described as civilization, but -with experiences of living under very different conditions from those of their tribes on the islands. They have formed fresh habits, and have lived among surroundings quite foreign to those existing in the islands from which they come. Some of them have adopted practices that are not likely to make them more peaceful than they were before.

Mr Liddell:

– And possibly some of them have contracted diseases.

Mr DEAKIN:

– That contingency will be provided for as far as possible ; but the honorable member knows that we cannot entirely avoid the dangers that he has in mind. ‘ The High Commissioner of the Western Pacific has been good enough to send to Sydney one of his officers, who has conferred ‘ with us as to the difficulties likely to arise at the other side. There have been apprehensions as to the food supplies in certain of the groups being insufficient. There have also been apprehensions that on one of the islands, at all events, if not on others, there may be some danger in returning the kanakas in any number. We require to provide that they shall be absorbed without friction bv their own native villages. If any particular part be disturbed about the time of the return of these men, we shall be able to retain them at t*0 central’, ; spOts - one in the New Hebrides, and the other in the Solomons - pending the return of normal conditions permitting them to take their place without disturbance among their own tribes.

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

– That may involve expense.

Mr DEAKIN:

– It does not appear likely to amount to a considerable item. The information we receive in regard to this matter is added to each mail, but the latest does not point to the expenditure of any large sum in that regard. We shall probably be able soon to return the kanakas to most of the Solomon Islands, and with the assistance of the missionaries it is anticipated that very little difficulty will arise in the New Hebrides. These contingencies, however, have been foreseen.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– Has any provision been made on the islands for the return of the kanakas?

Mr DEAKIN:

– The tribes on some of the islands were, informed some time ago of their contemplated return. Meanwhile we have to deal with another situation. The islanders have been properly described as “children of a larger growth.” They are gregarious and very imitative. At the present time, owing to an agitation, which I do not think originates with them, but has nevertheless impressed them, there is a good deal of uncertainty, in their desire to depart as quickly as possible; the officers, however, are not in the least alarmed. This sentiment is what might have been reasonably expected. They say that as soon as the kanakas have had time to accustom themselves to the idea of departure - when some of them commence to give the lead - the impulse which asserts itself among men of their class will be exhibited, and there will be a general movement outwards just as there is at present a tendency to hesitate.

Mr Hutchison:

– Every kanaka “that I met on the occasion of the parliamentary visit to Queensland said that he wished to go back.

Mr DEAKIN:

– The officers inform me that the kanakas are of variable moods. Thev have no persistency of purpose. This week they are anxious to go; next week they are anxious to remain, and the week after they are not certain whether they wish to remain or depart. Probably some of those whom the honorable member met have already “left for the islands ; others will follow. No’ difficulty is anticipated, but patience and consideration must be exercised. Then, again, the impulse from without has induced them to challenge the Commonwealth law providing for their deportation. A case has been taken before a Police Magistrate, and is now on appeal to the High Court. Fortunately, the Justices of the High Court left Melbourne today for Queensland, so that I hope that in the course of two or three weeks the High Court will be able to decide the points of law that have been raised on behalf of the kanakas who may desire to avoid the deportation. Honorable members should clearly understand that there are exemptions. It is not proposed to deport a!/ the kanakas now in Queensland. Under the law of that State a certain number are entitled, on account of long residence, to remain. The Commission which recently sat in Queensland, and, after making an exhaustive inquiry, made some excellent recommendations, proposed that exemptions should be extended to kanakas, for instance, who have married white women or aboriginal women of Australia, and do not desire to leave. We already have evidence that that exemption, of which the kanaka may or may not avail himself, will not be taken advantage of in all cases. We1, have had am application from one, if not more, kanakas married to aboriginal women who desire to be deported with their wives and children.

Mr McCay:

– How will their relations welcome the wives?

Mr Hutchison:

– Probably with open mouths.

Mr DEAKIN:

– That is a question upon which we are not competent to express an opinion, because their reception will differ according to the tribes, and the islands to which these kanakas belong.

Mr Liddell:

– If a kanaka leaves his wife behind him, will she become a charge upon the Commonwealth?

Mr DEAKIN:

– They do not propose to separate. So far, we are not confronted with that difficulty. I think I have placed before honorable members a fair outline of the position. Up to date everything is working smoothly. We have not finally entered into a contract with the lowest tenderers, Messrs. Burns, ‘Philp, and Company, because, although our legal advisers have no doubt as to the constitu tionality of our law, there is a contingency which must be allowed for until the point has been decided by the High Court in the case about to be heard. The suggestions made in the most friendly and considerate manner by the High Commissioner having jurisdiction over .the Solomon and New Hebrides, whence most of the ‘ kanakas came, have also to be regarded. He is willing to take any that are willing to’ work in plantations in Fiji. His resident Commissioners have been consulted. We desire to work amicably with them, and to have their assistance in providing every possible precaution against any undue disturbance likely to result from the return of a considerable number of islanders. We think that this can be prevented, but, remembering the people with whom we are dealing, care must be taken. The Commonwealth is providing, in what I hope will be considered a generous as well as a just and wise fashion, for the return to their homes of men who, speaking of the great mass,” should never have deserted them, but should have been left to the untiring and selfsacrificing labours of the missionaries, who endeavour to impart the principles of civilization as fast as they are qualified to receive them. There are exceptional natives, who have adapted themselves to our modes of life.- They will remain, and, no doubt, continue to be useful citizens of the Commonwealth. It must be remembered that the return of all these islanders was always contemplated.

Mr Bamford:

– There is no danger.

Mr DEAKIN:

– There may be danger in isolated cases, where men who have been absent for years, and have acquired other ideas and ways of regarding native customs, are returned to mix with those who have never left their own land.

Mr Wilkinson:

– That danger existed prior to Federation.

Mr DEAKIN:

– Yes. Disturbances still occur in islands where recruiting vessels have seldom or never touched.

Mr. Fisher. The death rate among kanakas is lower in their own islands than in Queensland.

Mr DEAKIN:

– The mortality in Queensland is due largely to change of conditions.

Mr Page:

– Want of tucker is the main cause.

Mr DEAKIN:

– We have regard to the possibilities of friction ; but it must, not be thought, because I have dwelt upon them, that we consider them serious. The reports of the High Commissioner and the Resident Commissioners are most encouraging, though they do not relieve us from the obligation of making careful provision against accident, so far as that can be done. We cannot return 4,000 or 5,000 Pacific Islanders to their homes without incurring slight risks. Had they remained in their islands, they would have had to take unnumbered risks, because in some of the islands there is a constant, though intermittent, tribal warfare.

Mr McCay:

– What is the deportation to cost?

Mr DEAKIN:

– It is possible that £5,000 will cover the cost, but, as much expenditure must be met which cannot be foreseen, I ask the Committee not to limit us too severely. We did not expect that the cost would be £25,000, unless every condition was adverse, and, as we now believe that half the sum provided will be sufficient, I move -

That the item “ Repatriation of Pacific Islanders, .£25,000,” be reduced by £12,500.

Mr Mahon:

– When does the Government expect to receive from Queensland the £5 per head to be paid for the deportation of the kanakas?

Mr DEAKIN:

– No doubt that will be paid as the kanakas are deported.

Mr Mahon:

– Why not get the money beforehand ?

Mr DEAKIN:

– I think that Queensland is rich enough to be trusted.

Mr HUTCHISON:
Hindmarsh

– I am glad that the Prime Minister has moved the reduction of the item, but his statement would justify us in making the reduction suggested by the honorable member for Coolgardie.

Mr Deakin:

– Nothing would be gained bv a further reduction.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– Then I am in favour of striking out the item. According to the honorable and learned member’s statement; very little need be spent in maintaining the kanakas who are waiting for ships, because it is proposed to extend their term of engagement, and, therefore, fewer kanakas will remain to be deported, because as the honorable member for Coolgardie has shown, they die off very rapidly in Queensland. Those who have the welfare of the kanakas at heart should be most anxious to send them from Australia. According to the returns, the death rale among them from consumption is thirty- times as large as the death rate from that disease among the white population, and it must be remembered that the kanakas in Queensland are mostly men in the prime of life, who have been selected after medical examination. The number of kanaka women and children there are very few, whereas the phthisis statistics relating to white persons apply to both sexes of all ages. If the reports of the debates of the Queensland Parliament are referred to, it will be seen that the Labour Party of the State has been anxious that the State authorities should take it upon themselves to deport the kanakas, who -were introduced against the will of the people of Queensland. In the old blackbird - ing days, a member of the Labour Party called for a return which showed that kanakas had been put underground at the rate of one a day ever since the system commenced, and, if anything the death rate has increased rather than diminished. It is the sugar-growers who have benefited by the employment of kanakas, and they should meet any expenditure incurred over and above the amount which the Queensland Government proposed to contribute, though we have no guarantee that that Government will pay anything. The- Prime Minister told us that originally there was a fund of £30,000 for the return of the kanakas, but he believes that it now amounts to only £15,000. If that is so, we have a right to know- what has become of the other half, and what guarantee there is that any money will be forthcoming.

Mr McCay:

– The Queensland Government undertakes to pay £5 a head in any case.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– Then I am satisfied on that point. But what has been done with the £5 collected in regard to each of the thousands of kanakas who have died?

Mr Frazer:

– Only 1,000.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– It does not take long for 1,000 kanakas to die. According to a return which has been handed to me, 917 died in the four and a half years between the 17th December, 1901, and the 30th June, 1906. I have spoken of the immense number of deaths from consumption among the kanakas.

Mr Fisher:

– The honorable member’s estimate is rather high.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– In a few weeks the honorable member will have proof that it is under the mark.

Mr Fisher:

– Do the honorable member’s! figures cover a long period?

Mr HUTCHISON:

– Yes.

Mr Fisher:

– The deaths from all diseases are seven times as numerous among kanakas as among white persons.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– Excluding the deaths from consumption, which are thirty times as numerous. The kanakas were imported into Queensland on the condition that they would be returned on the expiry of their agreements, and it is only fair that Queensland should do what the Labour Party of that State thought it to be her dutv to do, and take the responsibility of returning them, especially in view of the consideration which has been shown by_ the other States. If the honorable member for Coolgardie moves to reduce the item to £5,000, he will have my support.

Mr McCAY:
Corinella

.- I do not pretend to have such a knowledge of the legal position, or of the Queensland legislation upon this subject, as to enable me to farm an opinion as to the shoulders upon which the legal liability rests. Nor am I prepared to say that there is a moral liability on the Commonwealth to the extent even of expending £12,500 upon the repatriation of the kanakas. I feel, however, that, whether the legal or moral liability rests upon the State or the Commonwealth, we cannot afford - and I do not think Queensland could afford - to incur the risk of going wrong with respect to the return of the islanders to their homes. At the same time, we should not be justified in meekly submitting to any obviously unjust proposal on the part of Queensland. Reasonable counsels seem to have prevailed on both sides, and the representatives of the Commonwealth and the State appear to have met each other in a reasonable spirit, although some of us may think that Queensland is not unnaturally looking at the matter from her own point of view a little more carefully than from that of the Commonwealth. Whatever difficulties may exist as between the State and the Commonwealth, I heartily approve of the Government attitude in taking over the Polynesian Bureau, and in shouldering the responsibility of insuring, as far as possible, that the repatriation shall take place in a proper and satisfac tory way. Any differences that may exist can be settled subsequently.

Mr Mahon:

– Queensland previously conducted the work of repatriation satisfactorily, and she should be able to do it now.

Mr McCAY:

– The honorable member quoted what he admitted to be a very just statement by the Queensland Premier, to the effect that some of the responsibility, at any rate, rested upon the Commonwealth, because the wholesale repatriation was rendered necessary by Commonwealth legislation. We recognised that fact when we passed the Act, and I do not suppose that on that account any honorable member regrets that the measure was passed.

Mr Mahon:

– Did any one contemplate that the Commonwealth would have to pay the whole of the cost of repatriation ?

Mr McCAY:

– The Commonwealth is not going to pay the whole cost, but only to defray any expense in excess of the £5 per head already provided for. So far as one can guess - the Prime Minister did not give us any definite figures - the expenditure on our part should not exceed £10,000 - it may be nearer .£5,000. I am quite sure that the Government will not spend the money needlessly because it has been voted, and I’ am prepared to give the Administration more rope in a matter of this kind than in ordinary cases, because the honour of the Commonwealth is, to a considerable extent, involved. A much more onerous obligation rests upon us in this case than would have to be discharged by us under ordinary circumstances, because we are dealing with people who are not in the same stage of development as we are, and have to take into account unusual conditions owing to the still lower state of mental development and different environment of the kinsmen on the islands to which we are returning them. We must hold the Administration responsible for insuring that the repatriation is conducted as satisfactorily at the other end as at this end, and we must be prepared, on this account, to give them a little latitude in regard to the finances. I am prepared to accept the assurance that proper economies will be observed, and that all just obligation on the part of Queensland will be insisted on. I am pressed bv the consideration, which seems to outweigh all others, that our honour and moral obligation are deeply involved in seeing that the repatriation is properly carried out, and I submit that we must be prepared to trust the Administration more than in an ordinary case.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:
Franklin

– I think this is one of the most important matters that the Commonwealth has had to deal with. The very first question that I addressed to the Prime Minister in this House was in reference to this subject. I urged that as the Commonwealth: Parliament had deliberately adopted the policy of a “ White Australia,” it was our bounder duty to make immediate provision for the repatriation of the islanders in a commonsense and humane manner. It is to be regretted that we have allowed matters to remain in abeyance until almost the twelfth hour, when Parliament is expiring, and the kanakas have to be removed. Up to the present very little of a practical character has been done. I do not think that the Commonwealth Government should be called upon to pay is. towards the cost of repatriation.

Mr McCay:

– Would the honorable member fisk trouble of various kinds in order to assert what he believes to be the financial rights of the Commonwealth ?

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– There is a just way of looking at this matter. I yield to no man in the desire to see the kanakas treated kindly and properly. But we must remember that the kanaka trade has been in existence for something like forty years, and that since 1884 the law of Queensland has demanded a deposit of £5 per head in order to provide for the repatriation of the islanders. I have ascertained from a gentleman who is well qualified to speak upon the subject that something like 50,000 kanakas have died in Queensland, and that of this number probably 20:000 have expired since the Act to which I refer was brought into operation. Therefore, if the law has been complied with - and it was the duty of the Queensland Government to see that it was - the State authorities must have in their hands something like £100,000 which has been handed over to them in respect to islanders who have died.

Mr Fisher:

– The Queensland Government have - received nothing. The whole of the money has been paid into a trust fund, and is still there.

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

– The deposit was refunded in the event of a kanaka dying.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– i do not think so.

If my impression is correct, the Queensland

Government hold £100,000 of blood money, and yet are asking the other States to defray the cost of ‘repatriating kanakas who were imported into Queensland for the benefit of the sugar planters. I have no sympathy with the planters. The history of the kidnapping of the kanakas embraces the blackest pages in our records.

Mr Mahon:

– And yet these planters .are now receiving heavy bounties, which are being paid out of the pockets of the people.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– If the Queensland Government are holding the amount I have mentioned-

Mr Fisher:

– The whole of the hospital charges in connexion with] the illness of the kanakas who died were defrayed out of the trust fund to which I have referred.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– The hospital charges should have been defrayed by the planters who obtained the labour of the Polynesians at an exceedingly cheap rate. I am informed that the death rate among the kanakas at one time ran up to 200 per 1,000. We are making a very great fuss about the repatriation of some 4,000 kanakas. I have always been a very stout defender of the policy of a “White Australia,” but it seems to me that we are making a mere pretence when we bring the whole of our machinery into operation for the purpose of deporting 4,000 kanakas, and leave behind in Queensland 18,000 other coloured aliens.

Mr Fisher:

– Not quite that number.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– I am credibly informed that, irrespective of kanakas, that number of coloured aliens are still in Queensland to-day

Mr Frazer:

– The “ Chow “ is twenty times worse than the kanaka.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– I quite agree with the honorable member. Some of these coloured aliens to whom I have referred are infinitely less desirable than the kanakas. I submit that we are dealing with this matter in anything but a proper manner. We should strike out the item altogether. A Bill to amend the Pacific Island Labourers Act is now awaiting our attention, and I think that it would have been better to include in that measure a provision such as that now sought to be made. We should then have been able to impose whatever conditions we considered necessary. It would be a. standing disgrace to the Commonwealth if we dumped the kanakas down upon their native islands without making the slightest provision for their welfare, or assuring ourselves that they would meet with a friendly reception.

Mr Deakin:

– That is what we are taking all the pains about.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– As I said last session, it was the duty of the_ Government to remove the kanakas as their agreements expired. If that course had been pursued, the work of repatriation would have been carried out far more cheaply, and we should not have experienced any of the difficulties that are now arising. If the Queensland Government shoulder their share of the responsibility which still remains to them, I think that the whole of the kanakas can be deported for £5 per head. I should like to know what it cost to bring them to Queensland. I under-, stand that the food bill of a kanaka represents only about £1 per month. There is no reason why an ordinary steaming vessel should not be able to convey them from Queensland to their homes within seven days, and it is therefore apparent that ,£5 per head would be ample to cover their deportation. If the Commonwealth Government are not able to make better terms with the shipping companies in this matter, it seems to me that they would be acting wisely if they chartered a vessel and themselves undertook the deportation of the Pacific islanders. Unless the honorable member for Coolgardie intends to submit an amendment, I shall move to reduce the amount of this item to £5,000. I should like the Queensland Government clearly to understand that this Parliament expects them to compel the sugar-planters of that State to pay £5 per head towards the repatriation of the kanakas in- accordance with the Act which was passed in 1884. If the provisions of that Statute have been enforced, the Queensland Government must have nearly £100.000 in hand which was contributed for the purpose of repatriating those who have-since died there.

Mr Fisher:

– They have no .such amount in hand.

Mr Mahon:

– What has been done with it?

Mr Fisher:

– It has been spent in providing hospital ‘accommodation for the kanakas.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– If the planters have been permitted to shirk their duty under the Act, the Queensland Government ought to shoulder the responsibility. In my judgment, honorable members should be afforded a great deal more information upon this subject. I am not prepared to vote a single shilling of the taxpayers’ money to make up any deficiency which has been caused by the planters being permitted to shirk their unmistakable duty.

Mr BAMFORD:
Herbert

.- I feel impelled to make a few observations, in view of the strictures which havel been passed upon the Queensland Government by honorable members who have preceded me. In the first place, I should like to tell the honorable member for Franklin that presumably the Queensland Government is responsible for a considerable portion of the fund which has been paid for the repatriation of the kanakas. From the Budget statement of the Queensland Treasurer, I learn that the Pacific Islanders Fund is in credit to the extent of £8,661, which sum will no doubt be handed over to the Commonwealth Government to assist to pay for their deportation. But I wish to point out that a great deal of the money which was provided by the indentors of the kanakas was, upon the death of a “ boy,” devoted to other purposes than that for which it was paid.

Mr Mahon:

– It was subscribed for a specific purpose, and should have been used for that purpose.

Mr BAMFORD:

– But the Government could not send deceased kanakas back to their homes.

Mr Mahon:

– A country like Queensland ought to have had the charity to bury them.

Mr BAMFORD:

– A great deal of the money subscribed for the repatriation of the islanders was, I understand, expended in the maintenance of kanaka hospitals. Further, I am told that when a kanaka died, it was customary for a trade chest to the value of £5 to be sent to the island from which he came for distribution among his relatives.

Mr Frazer:

– Did the Queensland Government collect the unpaid wages of deceased kanakas?

Mr BAMFORD:

– . No, I think not. Their wages were so small that any balance due to them was of no account. They only received about £6 per annum. Out of that thev had to pay for incidentals such as tobacco, blankets, &c, and consequently they had not very much to draw. The honorable member for Franklin has stated that the Commonwealth should, have deported the Pacific islanders as their agreements expired. But when the Pacific Island Labourers Bill was under consideration I asked the then Minister of Trade and Customs, the right honorable member for Adelaide, whether it was possible to insert such a provision in it. His reply was that it was impossible to do as I suggested, because, whilst we exercised full control over matters of immigration and emigration, we had no control over the conduct of kanakas in the State of Queensland. I would further point out to the honorable member for Coolgardie that the return from which he quoted specifically referred to the number of kanakas employed’ in the sugar industry in Australia.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– Are there any in New South Wales?

Mr BAMFORD:

– The honorable member had better ask the Vice-President of the Executive Council.

Mr Ewing:

– I think there are about

1,000.

Mr BAMFORD:

– I regard the request of the Prime Minister for £12,500 as a most reasonable one. We have to recollect that a special contract will require to be entered into for the deportation of these men. Inasmuch as no recruiting is now being done, fresh vessels will have to be chartered. At present there are, I believe, only two boats trading from Queensland to the islands, one of which, the Sydney Belle, is now taking kanakas aboard at Townsville. The Premier of Queensland estimates that the cost of repatriating the islanders will range from £5 to £5 10s. per head. If that be so, the cost to the Commonwealth will be very small indeed. If the Bill relating to Pacific islanders which was recently introduced bv the Prime Minister be passed into law, the cost will be still less. At the same time, I view the proposal of the Prime Minister in connexion with that Bill with some gravity. Upon, numerous occasions I have pointed out the necessity for taking . immediate action in regard to the repatriation of these Pacific islanders. I have always recognised that, whoever has to undertake the responsibility of deporting them within a brief period after the end of the current vear, will have a big contract on hand. We have also to recollect that in the early part of the vear the hurricane season., which is experienced along the Queensland coast, mav considerably affect the sailing of ships. I acknowledge that something must be done in the direction indicated by the Prime Minister, and I do not see that anything better than that which he has proposed can be attempted. I believe that the work could be carried out in three, or, at the most, four, months. When the honorable member for Coolgardie was referring to the number of kanakas in Queensland, I interjected that possibly not more than 4,000 would remain at the end of the year. The return to which he referred shows that, up to the 30th June last, there were in question 5,587 kanakas. It is reasonable to assume that 1,000 or more of the kanakas at present in Queensland and New South Wales will be exempt, and, having regard to the number who have been sent away since 30th June last, I think we may safely assume that not more than 4,000 will remain to be deported next year. That being so, I think that we should be able to get rid of the whole of them within four months of the 1st January next. I should like to point out to the honorable member for Franklin, who is very severe upon the Queensland farmer, the foundation upon which the farming community of Tasmania has been built. The farmers of that State originally cleared and cultivated their lands by means, of prison labour. They were not asked to pay for anything which the farmers of Queensland have now to pay for.

Mr Cameron:

– What has that to do with the subject? I fi they were prisoners, they were white men. I fancy there were convicts in New South Wales.

Mr BAMFORD:

– I have not heard of any representative of New South Wales adopting the argument used by the honorable member for Franklin, and therefore I am replying only to his assertion. The prison labour to which I refer was brought out at the cost of the country. The convicts, when sick, were treated at the cost of the country ; and yet the honorable member complains of this proposal.

Mr Cameron:

– They were treated at the cost of England.

Mr BAMFORD:

– Then Tasmania threw the burden on to England. She was meaner than I thought she was.

Mr Cameron:

– Just as Queensland is trying to throw this burden upon us.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– Does the honorable member approve of the kidnapping of kanakas ?

Mr BAMFORD:

– No man has spoken more strongly against it than I have. But for the action of the Imperial Government, that practice might still be going on. The

Government placed an agent on every ship to see that the kanakas were properly recruited, and I should like to know whether the Federal Government propose that officers shall be placed on board the vessels by which the islanders are returned to their homes.

Mr Deakin:

– It is proposed not only to have an officer on board the steamer, but to have officers at the depot.

Mr BAMFORD:

– That is satisfactory. In the event of the Bill to which the honorable and learned gentleman has referred being passed, enabling fresh agreements to be entered into after 30th January next, will the farmers or planters who employ these kanakas after that date be responsible for any portion of the passage money in addition to the£5 per head ?

Mr Deakin:

– No.

Mr BAMFORD:

– The Commonwealth will bear the whole expense?

Mr Deakin:

– Yes.

Mr BAMFORD:

– Some difficulty has arisen in reference to this matter.

Mr Fisher:

– Certificates will be issued showing the date at which they are to be shipped.

Mr Deakin:

– I should have mentioned that every kanaka who is exempted will have a certificate to that effect, and may be called upon to produce it to prove ‘his identity. Every kanaka to be deported will have a certificate showing the date on which he is to be ready for shipment.

Mr BAMFORD:

– The hirer, therefore, will become responsible for nothing more than the wage of the kanaka?

Mr Deakin:

– That is so.

Mr BAMFORD:

– I think that the Prime Minister’s proposition is a most reasonable one, and I hope that the Committee will agree to it. I shall vote for the proposal of the Government.

Mr FRAZER:
Kalgoorlie

.- The honorable member for Coolgardie is to be congratulated upon having opened up a debate which has led to a thorough investigation of the proposals of the Government. I am not very enthusiastic about the item as now proposed to be put, but I think it is far more satisfactory than as originally proposed. The Commonwealth has got rid of a very grave difficulty with less trouble than many contemplated when the undertaking was first entered upon. It would be lamentable if. as the result of any action on our part in the final stage of the pro ceeding, the fair name of Australia were besmirched.

Mr Mahon:

– Why should we fear anything of the kind?

Mr FRAZER:

– I do not think that anything is likely to arise that will involve our good name, but we should guard against such a contingency. The question we have to consider is as to who is to foot the Bill with respect to the deportation of the kanakas. I certainly share with the honorable member for Coolgardie the view that the people of Australia have sacrificed much for the sake of the policy of a White Australia, and that, so far, Queensland has reaped most of the benefits of that policy. The only result of it, so far as Western Australia is concerned, is that her people have had to pay something like 30 per cent. or 40 per cent. more for their sugar than they had to do.

Mr Kennedy:

– Does the honorable member assert that there has been such an increase ?

Mr FRAZER:

– That has been the result of the imposition of the duty of£6 per ton to assist the movement for the production of sugar by white labour in Queensland. During the debate on the Pacific Island Labourers Bill, the statement was freely made that there was under the control of the Queensland Government a fund sufficient to provide for the deportation of these kanakes. If that Government has chosen to misapply the fund raised by the planters for a particular purpose, the argument that the Commonwealth Parliament should now bear the cost of deporting the kanakas is not a sound one.

Mr Wilkinson:

– The Queensland Government are going to bear part of the cost.

Mr FRAZER:

– Quite so ; but when the Pacific Island Labourers Bill was passed it was understood that the cost of deporting the kanakas would be fully met by the fund in question. I think, therefore, that the Queensland Government should meet the obligation cast upon them by the passing of this measure. When I was travelling through the northern State as a member of the parliamentary party, I was strongly impressed with the view that a great number of the kanakas were anxious to return, at the first opportunity, to their island homes. In common with other honorable members. I conversed with scores of kanakas, and. in the cane-fields, met only one who was anxious to remain. Many of them made serious complaints against the immigration officers of Queensland. They said that when their original contracts expired they were told by the immigration officers that a ship would be sailing to the islands in a few days. They remained idle for some days, and on again calling at the immigration office, were told that the ship would be sailing a week hence. After being kept hanging about in this way for some time they were finally told that no ship would be sailing for some time, and, consequently, they had to re-engage. It is due partly to the tenacity with which the northern planters have clung to kanaka labour, and partly to the lack of proper attention to this question by the Queensland Government, that we are called upon, within a very short space of time, to deport so many of the islanders. In .these circumstances, and having regard to the fact that Queensland has reaped the advantage of the retention of the kanakas in Australia, I think it is fair that the Government of that State should bear the cost of returning them to their homes. I should like the Committee to take such action with regard to this item as would necessitate the Prime Minister entering into further negotiations with the Queensland Government. If they can be induced to accept the full responsibility, well and good: but I should prefer the Commonwealth to make some sacrifice rather than that the name of Australia should be besmirched in the closing stages of this movement.

Mr DAVID THOMSON:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– T - The black labour crowd will be delighted with the honorable member’s speech. They desire the matter to be delayed.

Mr FRAZER:

– I am not in favour of any delay, and have not said that I am. I have not done anything of the kind. I wish to leave the Prime Minister free to negotiate, and would be prepared to indorse’ his decision in the event of his not being able to make the Queensland Government recognise its responsibilities in this matter. In the meantime, any necessary expenditure can be met from the Treasurer’s Advance Account, or from the £5,000 which we are ready to vote, and Parliament will be sitting again long before the date after which no1 kanaka, with certain exceptions, mav remain in Australia.

Mr FISHER:
Wide Bay

.- The sentiments of the honorable member for Kalgoorlie are quite correct. It would be a pity if any action of this Parliament led to injustice or the appearance of it in regard to the kanakas who are to be repatriated.

Mr Mahon:

– Has Queensland done them no injustice?

Mr FISHER:

– The honorable member for Kalgoorlie is in error in thinking that the Queensland Government could have arranged for the deportation of the kanakas as their agreements expired. The State law made no provision for their return during the past two years.

Mr Frazer:

– Will the honorable member deny that many kanakas whose agreements had expired could not get away because the Government had not provided the necessary ships ?

Mr FISHER:

– I will not deny that; but, as the Prime Minister has pointed out, the kanakas change their minds two or three times in a week, at one time being desirous of going home, and at another of remaining, while there are mean whites who do their best to keep them here, and the Government has no power to send them away. This Parliament, ‘however, enacted that the traffic should cease at the end of this year. Had the honorable member for Kalgoorlie been a member of the first Parliament, he would not have said that the Government in power in Queensland when the Pacific Islands Labourers’ Act was passed, announced that it had a fund to provide for the renatriation of kanakas. That Government did all that it could to prevent the law from passing. It said that the sugar industry would be destroyed if Polynesian labour were not employed and got a resolution passed bv Parliament asking the Government to disallow the measure. Afterwards the King was petitioned *o the same effect.

Mr Frazer:

– I said that it was stated : not that the Queensland Government hadstated it.

Mr FISHER:

– The honorable member was right in saying that the Queensland Government should pay to this Government the £5 a head contributed by the planters for the return of the kanakas. Legally, it cannot be asked to do more. It devolves upon this Parliament, having enacted that the kanakas shall be deported at the end of a certain term, to see that that deportation takes place under proper supervision, even though! that may cost a few pounds. We know what an outcry there has been against the imprisonment of Chinese in. compounds in the Rand, and we should very much regret anything casting a reflection upon the good name of Australia. There are a large number of persons, both here and elsewhere, who seek to besmirch our reputation, and they would seize upon the paltriest injustice to support their denunciations of our legislation.

Mr Mahon:

– Some injustice may be done, even if we spend £50,000.

Mr FISHER:

– Yes, by reason of accident. If we spent nothing, and an injustice happened, we should be without an excuse; but if we do everything possible we cannot be held responsible for accidents. We may be charged with want of foresight, but not with dereliction of duty. The honorable member for Coolgardie argued the whole question of sugar bounties.

Mr Mahon:

– I only touched the fringe of it.

Mr FISHER:

– I shall not do so much as that. The honorable member for Franklin has pointed out again and again that the sugar industry depends upon black labour, and, when the question was discussed last session, tried to show that the production of black labour is increasing in a greater ratio than is the production of. white labour, so that when the kanakas are removed, disaster must overtake the industry. Yet, to-night, he said that Queensland would gain largely by -the deportation of the kanakas. Both positions cannot be right.

Mr Mahon:

– He referred to the kanakas who have died, for whose return the Queensland Government must have received money from the planters.

Mr FISHER:

– The Queensland Government have not used the money collected for the return of kanakas. If honorable members knew the fight that some of us made in Queensland against this traffic, they would be more considerate. Many men have sacrificed their positions in life in order to oppose it. I have never sought the vote of any person who favoured the traffic. The Labour Party, from the day of its inception, declared the whole system to be immoral, iniquitous, and a slander upon, and a disgrace to, the people of Queensland and of the Commonwealth. We have proved it? to be so, and have shown that the conduct of the sugar industry by white labour is an economical not a physical Question. But it is our duty to see that no blunder or want of foresight mars .the success of our efforts. Very few of “those who in Queensland supported the white labour policy believed that effect would be given to it in. so short a time. I am exceedingly thankful for what has happened. With regard to the bounty question’, I would point out that this Parliament has now imposed Excise duties in regard to the productions of certain protected industries, exempting from their incidence manufacturers employing white labour under proper conditions. All the sugar planters ask is for similar treatment; though the matter is one for argument at another time. I am glad that the Government have taken this action. I hope that the proposed repatriation will be carried out in January, February, March, and April. I approve of the granting ‘of certificates to those who are to be allowed to remain, and of permitting those who are to be repatriated to obtain work for the month, six weeks, two months, or three months during which they are waiting for ships. This will make it unnecessary to keep them in compounds. I feel sure that there will be no unnecessary expenditure, and as all parties are desirous that- nothing shall happenwhich might bring the good name of the Commonwealth* into disgrace, I ask the Committee, to agree to the Prime Minister’s proposal.

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

– The honorable member for Coolgardie was right in calling attention to this matter. He has given the Committee some very valuable information. I think, however, that he should be satisfied with the reduction of the proposed vote by one-half. We desire that there shall be no stain upon the Commonwealth in connexion with the deportation of the islanders. Already there are some stains on Australia’s escutcheon arising out of the traffic in island labour, and ‘long ago I formed the conclusion, without regard to the sugar industry, that it should not be encouraged. Although I have been charged with looking at everything through commercial spectacles, I came to the conclusion that no commercial advantage that might accrue would afford sufficient justification for the evils attendant upon the traffic.

Mr Mahon:

– Does the honorable member think that Queensland, which has been deriving such a large amount of benefit from the payment of the sugar bounties, should ask the Commonwealth to contribute towards the cost of repatriating the kanakas?

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

– I think that we ought to regard this matter as entirely apart from the payment of the bounty. The social disturbances caused in the islands by the removal of so many young men to Queensland, and the return of the islanders, many of whom were not improved by their residence in the State, whilst in some cases they took back very undesirable evidences of their contact with civilization, have no doubt led to serious consequences, and have tended to accelerate the disappearance of the island races. I take it that the Queensland attitude is this: “ Under our arrangements, it would cost us £5 per head to send the islanders back to their home, but under the arrangements made by the Commonwealth for a wholesale deportation extra expense will be incurred which should be defrayed by the Commonwealth Government.” The State has some reason for assuming that attitude, and the only question which arises is as to the payments that have been made of repatriation deposits in respect of kanakas who have died. Several representatives of Queensland have explained that some of the money was sent back to the relatives of the kanakas in their native homes, and that certain expenses in connexion with the return of their belongings and hospital charges had to be defrayed.

Mr Mahon:

– What about their wages?

Mr Wilkinson:

– The wages due to the kanakas who died were sent to their friends.

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

– I could scarcely believe that the Government would allow the wages to remain in the hands of the planters. I think that we can reasonably accept the offer that has been made by Queensland to pay £5 per head towards the cost of repatriation.

Mr Deakin:

– And to give us the services of their officers free of cost.

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

– The Queensland Government would have found it necessary to employ some officers in any case. Under all the circumstances, we should not hesitate to authorize the Prime Minister to incur the expenditure necessary to insure humane treatment, so that no further slur shall be cast upon our character. The honorable member for Coolgardie has rendered good service by drawing attention to the matter, but I think that he might very well fall in with the proposal of the Prime Minister.

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

– In my judgment, this Parliament has a responsibility in this matter altogether apart from that of the Queensland Government. It may be that we have treated Queensland liberally, and that the sugar bounties have’ been of immense advantage to that State. But that is not quite the question. We are simply shouldering the responsibility for the consequences of our own acts.

Mr Mahon:

– Would not the islanders have been returned by Queensland in any case under the operation of their own laws ?

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

– Yes, but if there had been no Federal legislation on the subject, it is reasonable to assume that many of the kanakas would have remained in Queensland, or would have come back to that State.

Mr Mahon:

– I allowed for all that.

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

– This is one of the matters in which there is a concurrent responsibility on the part of the Commonwealth and of Queensland. I do not deny that the Queensland Government have some obligation, because if the Pacific Islanders Labourers Act had not been passed they would still have had to insure the protection of the kanakas. From the correspondence between the Premier of Queensland and the Prime Minister it would appear that both Ministers recognised the responsibility of their respective Governments to an extent which seemed to reach the point of broad justice. I cannot help being struck bv the easy way in which this vote has teen brought forward. It does not say much for the care with which the Estimates have been prepared when the Prime Minister can so readily cut down a proposed vote bv half. He must have been extremely liberal in the first place.

Mr Deakin:

– I intended to err on that side, because I thought it would be more fair to the House than to provide for a small sum and ask for an increase later on.

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

– I do not think it is fair to ask for twice the amount required.

Mr Deakin:

– We fixed the vote liberally recording to the best information that we had at the time.

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

– So far as I can gather, the proposal now made by the Prime Minister is a very fair one. Whatever sum mav be required, if it be double or treble the amount now proposed to be provided, our obligation requires that we should spend the last copper in seeing that these boys are sent safely home, and that the greatest possible care is taken of them even after they get there. We are now being brought face to face with the full responsibility attaching to our previous action. I think that the sooner the kanaka traffic ceases the better for Australia. As was remarked to me in the course of a private conversation lust now, the kanakas belong to an apparently decadent race, and their contact with civilized conditions in Queensland has had a very serious effect upon them, and has led to very grave consequences. The sooner we send them back to their homes, and keen them there, the better it will be in the interests of the boys themselves, of their race, and of their islands - apart altogether from the relation of the kanaka traffic to the sugar industry. I am glad that an effort is being made to treat the kanakas humanely, and to repatriate them under conditions of safety.

Amendment agreed to.

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

– I should like to know what the Government propose to do with the .£5,000 which is proposed to be devoted to advertising the resources of the Commonwealth. If it is intended to enter upon a scheme worthy of the name and importance of Australia, the amount is paltry. If, on the other hand, it is intended to merely trifle with the question, the amount is too large to throw away. I should like to know whether the Government have any scheme in their minds for making better known the resources of Australia, and following in-the wake of Canada and other _young countries which are in need of population.

Mr DEAKIN:
Minister of External Affairs · Ballarat · Protectionist

– The story ‘ of the manner in which we have proceeded in connexion with this immigration question will be best told by the papers that I propose to lay upon the table, including the correspondence, partly printed, in which we have been engaged with the Premiers of the States. This correspondence commenced in July last year, when we obtained their assent to our communicating with their Agents-General, with the object of encouraging desirable immigrants, and establishing direct agencies in London. This assent was given, ‘in one case under some restriction. When we approached the business question of practically advertising Australia in connexion with immigration, it became clear that they held different opinions, which will be found set out in the correspondence. They appeared to apprehend some interference with the efforts which they were making to obtain settlers from Great Britain, and though they were reassured on that point, the first part of this correspondence, which closed at the beginning of the present year, left us without any definite understanding with the States as a body, or, indeed, with any of them. Then followed the Premiers’ Conference in Sydney, at which I took the opportunity of laying before them the practical proposals which had commended themselves to us. Honorable members are aware that the AgentsGeneral in London considered the question and prepared a report, which has been printed and laid upon the table. In that report they preferred suggestions for the advertising of. Australia with a view to encourage immigration. I laid that scheme before the Conference of Premiers with some amendments. My proposal, briefly was that the general task of advertising Australia as a whole should devolve upon the Commonwealth, and that the States should be asked to furnish us with the necessary statistics to’ enable us to present a correct and adequate view of their resources to the people of Great Britain, and, if necessary, of other parts of the world. In addition to that, I proposed that the Commonwealth should establish a ‘Central .Immigration Office, in which provision should be made for an agent or agents of each State. The object was that we should be able to point intending settlers to one place in Great Britain where thev could meet the representatives of the Commonwealth, and where, under the one roof, and without difficulty, they could make themselves acquainted with the attractions which the different States were offering. That appeared to be the most direct and promising course to pursue. At the present time, the offices of the Agents-General are separated by a considerable distance. The South! Australian AgentGeneral is located in the heart of the city, the New South Wales office is in Cannonstreet, and the offices of the other States are mainly in Victoria-street, Westminster. Hitherto the many to whom Australia is better known than are its individual parts have had to go to one Agent-General, and after having obtained what information they could as to the prospects offered by his State, have had to travel 2 or 3 miles to visit a second Agent-General, and possibly then may have been obliged to visit a third. That plan has been found disadvantageous. The idea of Federal unity, which is essential to Commonwealth action, demanded that we should bring the States together under one roof, without interfering in any way with their business, but simply for the purpose of placing before inquirers the whole of the statistics relating to Australia, and of enabling them to get into touch with every part of the Continent. That seemed to us a fair proposition. I shall presently lay before the Committee a second correspondence, which commenced after the Conference. . We began with ii request that we should be furnished with a general statement of the facts and figures which the States wished to have made known, with a summary showing the area of lands open for occupation by immigrants, with general plans and information as to soils, products, rainfall, access to markets, terms of purchase, &c, and with an outline of all concessions granted to settlers. Particularly did we wish to know the number of immigrants that could be annually absorbed during the next few years. Honorable members will be as disappointed as we are when they weigh the responses which have been received to that communication. Apart from New South Wales, which has gone to the length of informing us that it could absorb 100 families each week, we are without definite information from the States. Even the New South Wales Government were careful to point out that agricultural^ labourers could be absorbed only in the proportion of about four to each farmer of capital, and that immigrants were clearly to understand that they must take their chance of acquiring any Crown lands that might be thrown open for settlement, equally with other applicants.

Mr Spence:

– In that case, they would die before they got them.

Mr DEAKIN:

– During the past year or so, I have been collecting statistics relating to the lands available for settlement in the various States, and the number of applicants for them. I find that within the past few months applications for land in New South Wales have been received from 2,000 or 3,000 persons, a majority of whom have been disappointed. I desired to be in a position to study this question in connexion with the inducements that we can hold out to intending settlers from England. I found that even in the State which is throwing most energy into this matter the results are quite unsatisfactory from this point of view. The number of immigrants who have been placed in possession of the land is quite trifling. ‘ Almost all of them have been purchasers - that is to say, men possessed of small capital, whom we have every reason to believe will do well. In Victoria a good deal qf activity is being displayed in the re-purchase of large estates for closer settlement - a form of State Socialism to which nobody will take exception. But, even under these circumstances, the area of land available for buyers appears to be limited, and for anything like good land there seems to be an excess of purchasers. In regard to the encouragement of immigration, therefore, it was open to me to adopt the estimates which I took in respect of the repatriation of kanakas. But in the present instance I adopted the lowest figures, because experience justified me in doing so. Honorable members may well ask, “ What are we going to advertise in London if it is not the lands of Australia ?” If we cannot give intending settlers something like definite information as to what land can be obtained, as to its quality and its -rainfall, what shall we gain by extensive advertising in the mother country? I do not mean to suggest that the Agents-General have not put forth their best efforts. I do not say that in New South Wales, Western Australia, and Queensland, land has not been thrown open for selection in London. It has been to a limited extent. But the quantity of land available for immigrants who come from Australia under the present unadvertised conditions is as much as the States seem able to afford. I repeat that the only reply which I have received as to numbers is that New South) Wales is able to absorb about roo families per week. I do not know how that estimate has been arrived at. But T take it that the Government of that State are fully seized of its resources, and that we can rely upon their statement.

Mr Johnson:

– They are going in for the re-purchase of estates upon a large scale.

Mr DEAKIN:

– I have already mentioned that. That circumstance, however, appeals to only a limited number of new settlers. In Victoria there is an excess of purchasers for the good land which is available. A similar condition obtains in the other States. Consequently, the quantity of landavailable to immigrants from abroad is not large. The general impression which has been conveyed to me by more than twelve months of correspondence with the States is that their attitudein the matter of providing land for immigrants as compared with that of Canada is one of more or less lethargy. In some of the States there is entire lethargy, and in others a modified activity. The most active States are Western Australia, Queensland, and New South Wales. That is a discouraging condition of affairs.

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

– The AgentGeneral of New South Wales has a considerable number of applications for land.

Mr DEAKIN:

– They are chiefly applications from would-be purchasers, and the honorable member must recollect that the New South Wales Agent-General has been conspicuous for the energy which he has displayed in this matter ever since his arrival in London. More is being done in all the States than in the past, but nothing like enough.If I thought the States would exhibit no more disposition to make provision for intending settlers than they are doing at the present time, I should take a very much darker view of the future of immigration than I do. If I were to advertise the facts which we have been collecting, what would happen? If I were to show the excess in the number of applicants for land available, we should be out of court as compared with Canada, where the settler can always find land ready for the plough.

Mr Liddell:

– Is land our only asset?

Mr DEAKIN:

– The development of our mineral resources and our land are the two magnets upon which we must rely to attract population to this country. How can we attract it when the only advertisement we shall be authorized to publish shows that with but little outside competition our local demand for farming lands is more than equal to the present supply.

Mr Poynton:

– Our cities at the present time are far too congested.

Mr DEAKIN:

– I agree with the honorable member. Have we not great areas that ought to be opened up? If we have not, then we are incapable of providing for a great population. If we can advertise only what the States are advertising at present, this small sum will be quite sufficient to bring to Australia all the immigrants for whom we can provide homesteads.

Mr Johnson:

– The honorable and learned gentleman is new getting dangerously near a great economic truth.

Mr DEAKIN:

– The nearer we areto the truth the better.

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

– What is truth?

Mr DEAKIN:

– “ What is truth,” asked jesting Pilate. In this case the answer is that the States will require to throw far greater energy than they are doing at present into the opening up of farming lands if we are to have something substantial to offer. They must afford more opportunities for settlement if they are to reap the fruits of a proper advertising of Australia in Great Britain, such as we are prepared to undertake for them.

Mr McWilliams:

– Does not the honorable and learned gentleman think that they can do this work for themselves?

Mr DEAKIN:

– Not as well.

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

– What advantage should we derive from this expenditure if we cannot absorb more population?

Mr DEAKIN:

– The complaint made by the Agents-General, and repeated by many, is that, although the States are doing a great deal, the English mind refuses to divide Australia into parts and to distinguish the one from the other. The competition between States does not assist Australia.

Mr McWilliams:

– It should dogood.

Mr DEAKIN:

– Each immigration agent seeks to point out the advantages of his own State. When interrogated as to the prospect in some other part of Australia with which he has no relation, he is not disposed to represent it as favorably as that of his own section. The competition, between rival agents may have stimulating uses, but it has greater disadvantages. The people who seek information do not obtain that which they desire. What they wish for first of all is information about Australia as a whole. That we propose to supply. If the States consent to work with us, we intend to have a central office, which will undertake the work of making known throughout the length and breadth of the United Kingdom all the opportunities for settlementoffering in Australia. We will make public everything that is most attractive in Australia, and intending immigrants will then be brought to the one central office. Having done that, our part as canvassers ceases. Under the same roof representatives of each of the States will be found. They will be ready to give particulars as to the available lands that have been placed at their disposal, and to afford other information that may induce the emigrants to select the particular State to which they desire to go.

Mr Crouch:

– What has become of the proposal that certain newspaper editors should visit Australia?

Mr. DEAKIN It has fallen through. Personally, I encouraged it, with reservations ; but a difference of opinion arose among the States Governments, and Mr.. Carruthers has informed me that he has decided to allow the matter to remain temporarily in abeyance.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– Is there anything new in regard to General Booth’s proposal ?

Mr DEAKIN:

– General Booth appears to have sent to Canada ship-loads of immigrants, who have been very highly spoken of.

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

– I travelled with some of them, and a fine lot of fellows they were.

Mr DEAKIN:

– That appears to be the general verdict. The fear was expressed here that, if we accepted General Booth’s offer, the immigrants sent out might not be well chosen. I thought, however, that I knew enough of General Booth’s business acumen, apart from his great ability, to be able to rely upon him, and the experience of Canada proves that my supposition was correct. I am privately advised that one of the great Dominions of the Crown has recently been offering General Booth special inducements to send out a number of immigrants to that part of the Empire; it may be Canada. That information, however, has not yet been made public. Our position, I take it, is this : We recognise that the future of Australia lies in the steady increase of its population. Upon that increase, as rapidly as our powers of absorption will permit, much depends. The agriculturists of England seem to be most anxious to leave home, and that is the very class we desire to secure. If we do not, many fields in Australia will remain barren, and we shall have to look elsewhere for cultivators. In the first place, however, it was surely our obligation, as well as our privilege, to look to the mother country to supply us with a full share of the settlers who are leaving her shores. But we, as a Commonwealth, have no land, and cannot obtain our share of emigrants from the old country unless the States who own the land will put aside their lethargy, and do more to enable us to attract settlers. All the land here is State land.

Mr Hutchison:

– We can assist the States by imposing a land tax.

Mr DEAKIN:

– That is a matter with which the States themselves may deal.

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

– Some of them have dealt with it.

Mr DEAKIN:

– Quite so. At this hour, however, I have quite enough to do to deal with the question immediately before us, without discussing State policies. In this matter we must be dependent upon the activity of the States. Activity on our part in advertising in the mother country, in the absence of activity on the part of the States in throwing open new land, might be attended with disastrous results. If in such circumstances our advertising in the mother country met with an unexpected response, we might be placed in the dangerous position of being unable to provide suitable holdings for those who have been led to come here by our representations. That is a risk we cannot afford to run. This explains why for twelve months I have been venturing to press upon, the States Governments, with what some of them may regard as undue persistency, the necessity of giving us such information regarding the land they make available, and the encouragement they give to settlers, as will enable us to commence our advertising on proper lines.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– Has any use been made of the large hand-book? It is an exceedingly good one.

Mr DEAKIN:

– It is too costly to be placed in the hands of the individual immigrant, but is a most admirable work to be put in places of public resort, such as railway stations, hotel waiting rooms, and steam-ships. It is in every respect an excellent publication. Honorable members will recognise the difficulties under which the Commonwealth labours: Desirous of advertising, willing to advertise, with the money to advertise, we lack the proper material to advertise to make Australia really attractive. We can quote large figures, and make general statements ; but the prudent man in England who is looking for a new home needs something more. Canada supplies him with clear statements of what she has to offer. She has a central office in London. She presents him with maps; informs him of all the circumstances under which settlement is carried on; has an agent to put him on board ship ; and takes care of him until he reaches his land. I have put in order such information as we have been able to obtain, but it is not enough to enable us to launch out as we desire. The States latterly appear to have retreated, even from the proposal to establish a central office. The AgentsGeneral themselves appear to have become apprehensive of our appearance in London. One or two Governments have replied that they think thev are better able to look after themselves. . No one desires to prevent them from doing so. They must keep on doing so.

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

– Then is this vote necessary ?

Mr DEAKIN:

– It is, because we must press on with a Federal policy of immigration, which is of vital importance to Australia. We have to apply what stimulus we can to the States. I have endeavoured long enough to do so privately. We must now take public action. Let it be understood that it rests with the people of the Commonwealth as citizens of the States to take action to spur on their Legislatures. Great efforts have been made by some Agents-General, and by some of the States Governments so far as repurchases are concerned.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– What more can we do if they are working up to full speed?

Mr DEAKIN:

– Are they working up to full speed by providing simply for the population already here, and the handful of immigrants now coming to Australia? Is that all that Australia, can do? But T cannot deal with that phase of the question without trenching on State politics.

Mr Crouch:

– The need of immigration is not considered sufficient to justify the imposition of an extra 10 per cent, duty on woollens. If that were done it would find occupation for many immigrants.

Mr DEAKIN:

– One way of attracting people to our shore is by affording them employment in manufacturing industries. We desire our industries to thrive; we want them to attract more people; but we also want many more people on our untilled lands. We require more people on the land, and all over’ the land. I have hesitated, because of the crisis in South Australia, to lay before the Committee, as I suppose I must soon do, a proposition of a more definite character than we had previously put before the Government of that State. It bears directly on the Northern Territory, and indirectly upon both the transcontinental railways that have been under consideration. The information at present to hand does not show that the acquisition of that territory would enable us to attract English farmers to any great extent.

Mr Hutchison:

– The same land monopoly exists in the Northern Territory as is to be found in South Australia proper.

Mr DEAKIN:

– Large areas of the Northern Territory seem to be in occupation, and there appear to be rights in respect of them extending over a number of years. It has not been for want of searching for opportunities likely to attract settlers that we find ourselves unable to obtain the material for advertising that we ought to have. The real need of Australia is population, and the real wealth of Australia is its great area of unoccupied or partly used lands. I ask the Committee to agree to this item to enable us to proceed with the preliminaries towards obtaining, if possible, a central immigration office, where the States may join us in making a beginning to advertise Australia. as a whole in a way commensurate with the opportunities with which the States present us. Whatever their opportunities are, we are prepared to act up to them, and the better the opportunities they afford to settlers the more liberal this Parliament will be in agreeing to advertise them in the mother country, so as to induce the most desirable immigrants to come to Australia.

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

– There are one or two considerations in addition to those put forward by the Prime Minister of which we ought not to lose sight.

Mr Deakin:

– I do not pretend to have exhausted them.

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

– We have to do something in order that we may occupy the same position as does Canada in the London market. Canada has land on which she can place the people. We, as a Commonwealth, have no land of our own.

Mr Deakin:

– That is the great distinction.

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

– It is a fundamental distinction between Canada and the Commonwealth; it is the fundamental disadvantage under which we labour. Another difficulty, however, has to be removed. The Prime Minister suggested that some of the States wish to conduct this, business for themselves. The whole trouble arises from the fact that the States are competing against each other in Great Britain. The only way to get over that difficulty is for the Commonwealth, on its own responsibility, to publish information in regard to the conditions prevailing .in each of the States. In some of the hand-books published by Western Australia, the advantages offered by that State are contrasted with those offered by the other States. A page from one of these hand-books was sent to me the other day. In it, the statement is made that the Western Australian loans have been raised on terms more favorable than were obtained by some of the other States, that her lands were easier of access, and so on.

Mr Salmon:

– Western Australia has an agent who travels through the other States, pointing out the advantages offered to settlers there.

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

– I do not wish to press the point against Western Australia. What is being done by her authorities is being done more or less by the authorities of the other States. No doubt it .is friendly rivalry, but it tends to neutralize the effect of the advertising of Australian conditions. There should be an authority in London which would inform the people of the old country as to the actual conditions in each of the States, without reference to any consideration but the interests of truth. Then, too. each Agent-General, in the patriotic desire to do his best for the State which he represents, is neutralizing, to some extent, the efforts of the others, “and confusing those who are in search of information about Australia. The Commonwealth should harmonize these conflicting statements, and let the English public know the true facts.

Mr Chanter:

– How can we get over the difficulty that there is no land available?

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

– The next best thing to having land to offer is to let the people of Great Britain know the exact facts concerning the land available under State control. In my judgment, the land question is not so tremendously serious as it is apt to be regarded. If the country is made attractive people will come here, even though they may not be able to obtain land beforehand.

Mr Hutchison:

– I hope they will not come here if there is no land for them to go upon.

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

– If the country is (made attractive immigrants will take their chances, just as most of us who came from the old land did. It is not necessary that there should be a block of land awaiting the occupation of every intending immigrant. Only a small percentage of those who go to Canada go directly upon the land; they are attracted there by the chances of obtaining employment.

Mr Hutchison:

– And hundreds of them are sorry that thev have gone. The same thing would happen here.

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

– Temporary inconveniences always arise when men go to a new country; but they do not weigh against the advantages accruing to a country from immigration. Who is there who has come to Australia without having had to contend with initial disadvantages? I do not think that we should overemphasize the land difficulty.

Mr Spence:

– We have already a number of unemployed, and we do not want to flood the labour market.

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

– I do not wish to flood the labour market.

Mr Spence:

– What can immigrants find to do if there is no land available for them?

Mr Fisher:

– Could we insure that- any immigrant would get a piece of land within six months after reaching Australia ?

Mr Hutchison:

– Or a job?

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

– The honorable member, no doubt, came here ready to turn his hand to any task that might offer, and has succeeded without displacing any one previously employed.

Mr Fisher:

– I hope so.

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

– We are apt to over -emphasize the land difficulty, and the possibility of flooding the labour market. The right class of settlers would look after themselves, and make their way without injuring others. If land is available to men of enterprise and strong muscles, so much the better, but the Commonwealth has no need to stand idle because it has none to offer.

Mr Chanter:

– What is to prevent the Commonwealth from acquiring land?

Mr Hutchison:

– What is to prevent us from bursting up the large estates?

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

– If they were burst up to-morrow, it would not help us much in this matter.

Mr Hutchison:

– It would cause land to be available.

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

– No doubt there is abundance of land available in one part of Australia or another. What we wish to know is the best way of obtaining it. If there were one voice in London speaking on behalf of Australia, as there is one Canadian authority, we should begin to get a steady stream of immigrants, tending to the ultimate enrichment of the country. We shall have to get in between these conflicting representations of the States authorities which are confusing the people at Home as to the real condition of affairs in Australia. Therefore, instead of proposing to spend . £5,000, the Prime Minister would have done well to ask for £20,000. With such an amount at his disposal he would have been able to formulate a definite scheme enabling us to speak with one authoritative voice in London.

Mr POYNTON:
Grey

.- I would suggest that the Prime Minister could make better use of the £20,000 which it is suggested should be devoted to advertising Australia by expendingit in efforts to impress upon the land-owners, who are represented by honorable members of the Opposition, that the best way in which they could advance the true interests of Australia would be by utilizing their lands to the fullest possible extent, or throwing them open for settlement by other persons. If we could excite the patriotism of the landowners, we should accomplish more good than if we encouraged a number of people to come here and crowd into our already congested centres of population. Has the honorable member for Parramatta watched the records of the Land Board proceedings in the various States?

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

– Yes, I have.

Mr POYNTON:

– Has he noticed that for every available block of land there are from 20 to 100 applicants?

Mr Watson:

– There have been as many as 400 applicants in New South Wales.

Mr McWilliams:

– How many speculators and storekeepers were among them?

Mr POYNTON:

– I am not speaking of speculators, but of the sons of farmers who have been trained on the land, and have all the natural aptitude necessary to success as settlers. During recent years many of the best of our young men have gone to New Zealand, because of the greater encouragement offered to people to go on the land in that Colony.

Mr Liddell:

– Is the honorable member aware that the immigration from Australia to New Zealand is falling off ?

Mr POYNTON:

– I know that it is not falling off. I know of scores of the most desirable class of settlers who have gone there quite recently.

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

– Where do they get the land in New Zealand - what kind of land is it?

Mr POYNTON:

– Land that has been repurchased by the Government. It seems to me that the only solution of the present difficulty lies in the settlement of some of our best lands, which are now held by monopolists. It would be criminal on our part to induce immigrants to come here and compete with our city workers. The congestion of population in our principal cities is the curse of this country. If we are to make any real progress, we must encourage rural settlement, as is being done in New Zealand. I believe that Australia is the grandest country in the world, but we must stagnate so long as land monopoly prevails to the extent that it does to-day. The whole of the country lying between here and Warrnambool, which comprises some of the most valuable land in Australia, is occupied by a comparatively few settlers.

Mr Tudor:

– 4,000 square miles carry a population of less than 8,000.

Mr POYNTON:

– If the honorable member for Parramatta wants to hand his name down to posterity, let him go to the land-owners who are behind his party, and teach them that population can be encouraged, and Australia properly defended against outside aggression only by means of settlement upon their big estates. That is the true solution of the great problem that lies before us. Sheep must give place to human beings. In all the States land monopoly is proving a perfect curse, and our object should be to burst up the big estates and turn them to profitable use. If we adopted this course, we should have no need to enter upon an immigration policy. People would come here of their own accord because of the steps we were taking to develop our natural resources.

Mr HUTCHISON:
Hindmarsh

– I am entirely in accord with the Prime Minister so far as he goes. At an earlier stage of the evening I pointed out that in ten years South Australia lost 30,000 of her population - men who were the very backbone and sinew of the country. Many of them were the sons of farmers, who went to New Zealand and to Western Australia because they could not find land upon which to settle. This was not because there was no soil in South Australia, because, without mentioning the Northern Territory, South Australia has such a large area, that we could put New Zealand, with all. her cultivable country and magnificent mountain scenery, in one corner.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– And one acre in New Zealand would be worth half-a-mile of South Australian country.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– No, it would not. The soil of New Zealand will not compare with that of South Australia. I give as my authority Professor Lowrie, who, before he resigned the position of chief of the Agricultural College of South Australia to go to New Zealand, said that if he were going to engage in farming he would return to the State. He returned on a visit, and is confirmed in his opinion that, so far as farming is concerned, the land in some districtsis superior to that of New Zealand.

Mr McCay:

– Why does it not grow as much acre for acre?

Mr HUTCHISON:

– I shall tell the honorable member.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member will be in order in making a general reference, but not in going into details as to production in South Australia.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– I want to show the Prime Minister, if he will take the same view of the expenditure of the money as I do, that in one corner of Australia - the Yongala Estate - where at one time only a few sheep could be grown, there are over too families all doing well, and at the same time many more sheep to the acre. That is precisely what could be donein thousands of parts of the Commonwealth if we only had a mind to do it. If we vote £5,000 for the purpose of advertising Australia lief ore we open up our lands or find other employment, we shall only proclaim our own weakness. If the

Prime Minister is as much in earnest as I am, he will do something which would enable the finest land in. the world to be freed. This can be done by a simple process, and I ask the honorable member for Parramatta to revert to his old opinions, and then we shall have as constant a stream of immigration to Australia as there has been to New Zealand during the last few years. I do not intend to support the omission of the item, but I propose at the earliest possible opportunity to take some steps to carry my idea into effect.

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

– This is another proposal of the Government which I think has not been well thought out. My idea of advertising Australia is that we should begin by the appointment of a High Commissioner, and secure good offices in London, where the Agents-General would be located, and all available information would be supplied to inquiring persons. But. apart from that, it seems to me that the idea that every immigrant should have a block of land is most absurd. I travelled across the Atlantic in the same ship with Canadian’ immigrants, who were travelling third-class, in charge of a Salvation Army officer. I undertake to say that not one of the 450 immigrants was going to get a block of land on his arrival. A few of them had the whole or a part of the passage money advanced by the despatching organization, and certainly they were not going to take up a block of land. The officer in charge of the men told me that, with rare exceptions, the Salvation Army got the passage money returned.

Mr Chanter:

– What were the men going to do when they got to Canada?

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

– They would get work as farm labourers. While so many are taking up farms somebody must want labour. That is what we chiefly want in Australia. If the Government had considered this question, their proposal would have taken a more practical shape. I am assured by competent men that if circumstances continue as favorable as they are, we shall have the most bountiful harvest that Australia has ever had, and that there will not be available sufficient labour to deal with the crops. In various parts of. the Commonwealth a considerable number of farm hands could be absorbed. At the present moment, it would be very foolish to introduce mechanics or artisans to any considerable number. There will not be sufficient work available until we have advanced somewhat further in the work of breaking up huge land monopolies and opening up land for settlement. I agree with the honorable member for Grey that the crux of this position is land taxation of some sort. I have always been in favour of the Commonwealth imposing a land tax, but I do not go with the honorable member to the extent of making a £5,000 exemption, because I think that the occupier of 5,000 acres is a monopolist of some sort, and should be taxed as well as others. . There is another point which I think the Government have missed. Only an hour ago, we provided for repatriating 5,000 kanakas. There is not enough labour in Australia to take their places in the coming season.

Mr Hutchison:

– Three times the number of men required are now available.

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

– It is all very well for the honorable member to talk in that way. There have not been 5,000 or 6,000 who were available for work on the sugar plantation idle for years past, and certainly men will not be idle in the coming years when the crops are increasing. I would suggest to the Prime Minister that he should strive to get a class of immigrants who would be able to take up this work in the warm latitudes. I believe that in the district of Calabria, in the south of Italy, we could get a body of men who would be best suited to fake up work in either Queensland or the Northern Territory. I look forward to the time when the Commonwealth will take over the Northern Territory, and if possible a large slice of the northern part of Queensland, and set to work to develop the country by a stream of immigration from the southern part of Europe. We could do very well now with 5,000 immigrants from the south of Italy and France, In travelling through the district’ of Calabria, one can see the intense culture which is carried on and the ability of the men to labour in the fields would make them a most desirable class of immigrants. I notice that recently a Commission has come from Italy to Western Australia with a view to putting these very people on the land here. If the Government could s;et info touch with, the Commission and find out whether anything could be done in that regard, they would do well.

Thev would do better, however, if they would send an agent to the south of Italy and France. I am assured by an Italian gentleman of some experience - a banker - that many hundreds of these men would be willing to come to Australia if they received only a little assistance. They seem to be about as poor as any people in Europe. But they are well able to labour ; they understand farming, orchard work, and viticulture, and some of them have some experience in sugar-cane growing. I believe that they grow the cane for fodder purposes rather than to make sugar from it. These men would make the best class of immigrants we could ‘ have. A practical proposition would be to open up negotiations with the authorities in the southern parts of Italy and France, and by sending agents to act for us. We absolutely know that within the next few years we require 5,000 men to take the places of the kanakas who are to be removed from Queensland. The demand for labour is increasing in that portion of” the continent, and it is likely to increase further in the future. The area of Crown land available for plant ing in the Northern Territory and the north of Queensland is very large indeed. As to the question of making land available in other parts of Australia, I am quite with the honorable member for Grey in thinking that the crux of the whole question is to have a just system of land taxation, which will make it unprofitable for monopolists to hold vast tracts of country, and will force them to put their lands to higher forms of cultivation. It is ridiculous nonsense to think that there is not sufficient scope in our wide Australia for very many millions more people than we have at present. Any proposal in the direction, of a Federal land tax would have my support. I have been in favour of it from the first, and shall be to the last. But, in the meantime, the Government might seriously consider the practical question, of getting into communication with the authorities in the parts of Europe that I have mentioned, with a view to the immigration of 5,000 of their inhabitants to take the place of the kanakas whom we are sending back to their native islands.

Mr KENNEDY:
Moira

.- The proposed expenditure under discussion opens up a very’ wide question, into which I do not propose to enter ; but a point made bv the honorable member for Parramatta seems to me to comprehend the whole situation - that is, the desirableness of Australia being able to speak with one voice. That remark covers many features of Commonwealth affairs in Great Britain at the present moment. The States are, so to speak, warring against each other, not only in respect of immigration, but also in other matters, in Australia as well as in London. ‘We had the spectacle presented to us a little while ago of an agent being sent to Victoria, on behalf of the Government of Western Australia, advising our people as to the more favorable conditions that prevail there as compared with this State. Exactly the same condition of affairs might be related in respect of Queensland. Of course, people are free to pick and choose regarding where they shall settle ; but the honorable member for Parramatta was perfectly right in his statement that, if we want to attract people to Australia, the first essential is to make it attractive. Any one who knows Australia as we do must admit that there is no country on the face of the earth which offers greater opportunities for a man to make his way than this country does. But we have the strange spectacle presented to us that those who come here to make their way in the world, and who have prospered, go about decrying Australia, so that they have made its name odious to British people.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– That applies to men who have done better in Australia than they could have done in any other part of the world.

Mr KENNEDY:

– That is so. Men.’ who have accumulated fortunes in this country, and owe everything to it, can find nothing that is not bad to say about Australia and the Australians. It is unfortunate that it should be so, but it is only loo true. The consequence is that there is an, impression in the minds of British people to-day, as we hear from reliable sources, that the British immigrant coming to Australia, is in danger of being gaoled, instead of welcomed as a settler. As to the broader question, how we can make Australia more attractive to immigrants, we have this peculiar feature presented to us - that people will subject themselves to greater stress to earn a living in other countries than they seem inclined to do here. Let me give an illustration regard- ing our farming population. Where in Australia will you see a farmer who would think of settling on land above what we know as the snow line? Yet in Canada an enormous amount of the wheat production takes place in country which for six weeks or two months of the year is entirely covered with snow. In -the district which I have the honour to represent there is, roughly speaking, between twenty and thirty miles of land that is as fine as any to be found in Australia. It is magnificent fattening country. Yet there is not a single acre of it devoted to farming purposes. Why ? Because people can get their living under easier conditions elsewhere. But apart from that, although it is a question that the Federal authorities have not been able to deal with up to the present time, if the Government take an active hand in inducing immigrants to come to Australia they must face the question of settling them upon the land. We have, as the honorable member for Grey has pointed out, a large number of people in Australia who have been reared to farming pursuits, but who find it to be absolutely impossible to get land to pursue farming operations upon. I know personally several residents in my own electorate, men who have been trained to farming, who have been attending ballots in New South Wales with the object of getting land. Failing to secure it in that way, they have applied to the Lands Department of Victoria, and have more lately approached the Queensland Government respecting the possibility of settlement in that State.

Mr Poynton:

– Some men have spent many pounds in looking for land.

Mr KENNEDY:

– One of these men has attended every ballot in the southern part of New South Wales for years past. The average cost of attending a ballot has been £5. He has spent practically £100, apart from the value of his time, and yet he has not been successful. To attend these land ballots is just like participating in a Tattersall’s sweep - that is what it amounts to. What I wish to emphasize is that it is better to move slowly, and be absolutely sure of our ground than to make a false step. It would be disastrous to Australia if we brought one body of immigrants here, and from, any cause they were not able to get a living or to find land upon which to settle. It would retard the solution of the immigration question to a greater extent than anything I’ can conceive of. The

States Governments are coming to realize that, although they are doing a little, they are not doing enough to afford our own people the opportunity of settling on the land. Within the suburban radius there are holdings running into many thousands of acres, and these, of course, are tapped by the suburban railways. There is no reason why these holdings should be confiscated, but the policy of the Government should be framed in view of the fact that people are absolutely wanting in the means of earning a livelihood. Then, arising more, I think, from climatic conditions than any other cause, there are seasons of the year, in all the principal towns, when

Ave find a considerable number of men who though willing to work, are not able to get employment. Before Ave ask immigrants to come here, Ave should be most careful to see that there is a sufficiency of employment to enable them to earn a livelihood. I wish to emphasize the opinion that, until the Prime Minister is assured that there is an opening for immigrants - that there is a possibility for them to get land on which to make homes, or that there is employment for them, so that they may not swell the ranks of the unemployed, and become, a charge on the State - he should be verychary about asking a single individual to come to Australia

Mr LIDDELL:
Hunter

– I cannot allow this item to pass without some comment and some protest. The Prime Minister has told us frequently that he has a policy, the aim of which is to increase the population of Australia. I doubt whether the Prime Minister is in earnest in wha.t he says. Speaking on the AddressinReply, he said -

Tn this immense continent there is room, . and far more than room, for all the farmers’ sons we have, and for all that we can attract here.

That is a deliberate statement made by the Prime Minister.

Mr Poynton:

– And it is quite true.

Mr LIDDELL:

– Listening to the remarks of various honorable members, one would think the statement Avas not true. The Prime Minister went on to say -

We are in a position to embark on what I believe will prove to be a successful competition for immigrants of the same blood as our fathers - of the race which has made Australia, Canada, and New Zealand what they are.

These are A’ery good sentiments, and, the Prime Minister having given expression to them, it is the duty of Parliament to en-. deavour to support the honorable gentle- man in his noble ambitions. After all is said and done, the question has nothing to do Avith the various land laws of the States. I am not here to argue as to land taxation and matters of that sort; but I have one fact in my mind, namely, that we must ha.re an increase of population. It is absolutely necessary to have new blood if Ave are to keep up the stamina’ of the race. Further, it is absolutely necessary, if Ave are to hold this continent in our possession - if Ave are to protect our shores from foreign aggression - that Ave should ha’e more people. The only way to attain that object is to encourage immigration. It is ridiculous, in view of our resources, to talk about there being no room in Australia for others. Let people come, and thev will soon find work for themselves and, while they are looking for a means of livelihood. they will be giving employment to others. We hear it suggested that every man should be supplied with so many acres of land to squat on as soon as he arrives ; but that is not altogether Ay hat is wanted. Those already on the land require others to work for them j and Ave know that every man in the country gives employment to dozens of others. The honorable member who last addressed the House made a remark Avith which I disagree. I think it ‘* shows rather a petty class-feeling to say that people come here, and, after they have made fortunes, go Home and decry Australia.

Mr Mahon:

– It is true, though ; they, are always travelling about and decrying Australia.

Mr LIDDELL:

– Only a mere handful of people have made fortunes in Australia and returned to the old country. Those who decry Australia are those who come here and do well, but who write to their relatives at Home, and would complain, no matter where they were. Honorable members speak as though work ought to be found for the unemployed all the year round. I disagree Avith that view, because, in an agricultural country, there must be periods when a certain number of men are out of work - Ave cannot employ all the population all the vear round. It is ridiculous to say that because there are a certain number of unemployed, there is no room for others in the country. When Ave look at the amount which Canada spends in encouraging immigration, the item under consideration becomes absolutely ridiculous.

In 1904, Canada spent£150,000 in this direction.

Mr McWilliams:

– And the Canadian railway companies spent more.

Mr LIDDELL:

– I am now dealing purely with the efforts made by the Dominion Government. The Prime Minister has said that he thinks it would be well if the various agencies in London were unified, and placed under one roof.

Mr Deakin:

– Only so far as having the representatives under one roof is concerned.

Mr LIDDELL:

– I quite agree with that idea; but I think we ought to go very much further. When I last visited America and England, I was struck with the different methods of trade in the two countries. The American does not stand at his door and simply show his wares, but he puts them underyour very nose. In the railway trains books are handed to you open, so that you may become interested and buy them. In London, on the other hand, the idea seemed to be, “ Here are the goods ; if you want them, take them, but if you do not want them, leave them.” I suggest that the Prime Minister could not spend a large sum of money to better advantage than in establishing agencies in London, and in employing agents to travel in the villages and towns, and tell the people there the advantages and resources of Australia. Unless something of that sort is done, and a large scheme of advertising is entered upon, I quite agree with the deputy leader of the Opposition, that it would be better to spend a smaller sum than that which appears on the Estimates. I feel so strongly on the point that, although at this late hour I cannot express myself as I should like, I shall move that the item be increased by-

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member cannot movethat the item be increased.

Mr LIDDELL:

– If it were open to me to do so, I should move that the item be increased by £45,000. I should like to see the sum of £50,000 spent in advertising the resources of this great country and in encouraging emigrants from Europe to come here and develop the country in the way in which it ought to be developed.

Mr. McWlLLIAMS (Tasmania) [12.5]. -I regard the voting of £5,000 for advertising Australia as simply throwing money a way. It is, however, on a par with what we have been doing throughout the session, and that is making pretence. The. different

States are now represented by Agents General, who are advertising them to the extent approved by their Governments and Parliaments. We have heard a great deal as to what is being done by Canada in this connexion. It has been pointed out that the Government of the Dominion spent £150,000 last year, but, in addition to that, the Canadian railway companies, and others competing for immigrants, must have spent another £50,000. The probability is that nearly £250,000 was spent last year, chiefly in Great Britain, for the purpose of securing immigrants for Canada: We talk of diverting to Australia the stream of immigrants from the old country now going to Canada by an expenditure of £5,000. What we shall do will be to spend that money in covering the ground which is now covered by the AgentsGeneral of the different States. What can we hope to do for immigration by establishing an office in London? To establish an agency in London is not the way to secure the right class of immigrants. Canada found that out, and the Australian States found it out years ago, when they had State-aided immigration. If we want the right class of immigrants we must not go to London for them, but to the rural districts of the United Kingdom. Under this proposal we shall merely have the Commonwealth entering into the competition between the States. Believing as I do that to spend £5,000 will not have the slightest effect in securing immigrants for Australia, I should prefer to have the vote struck out altogether. If we are really in earnest in the matter of immigration, let the States and the Commonwealth Government formulate a scheme which can be carried out properly, but to attempt to start an immigration scheme with an expenditure of £5,000 is to make a laughing-stock of the whole thing. Some reference has been made to the introduction of Italian immigrants, and I should like to say that not one shilling will be passed with my consent to bring Italians or Southern Europeans to Australia. According to the verybest writers, the Italian immigrant is considered as almost as greata menace to the social well-being of the United States as the negro himself.

Mr Crouch:

– The southern States of America are now getting more of Italian immigrants than of any other class.

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

-The Canadians arenow discouraging immigration from

Southern Europe, as the honorable member for Corio would know if he kept himself acquainted with what is appearing in the Canadian and English press. The Canadian Government has found, as Australian Governments have found, that the Britisher is the best settler in any climate. Of the hundreds of thousands of Italians in the United States to-day, I do not believe that 10 per cent, are working on the land. They are engaged on railway work and in the Pittsburg iron works, where they have chiefly been introduced by the ironmasters as strike breakers; but they are not settled on the land, either as land-owners or as farm servants.

Mr Tudor:

– The Americans do not like them.

Mr mcwilliams:

– i know of no

American writer on social subjects who regards the Italian as a successful or desirable immigrant.

Mr Tudor:

– If you work with them you will find that out.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– No proposal to spend money in encouraging the immigration to Australia of Italians will have my support. fi is a great pity that important questions which might be usefully debated at considerable length are submitted to us at midnight, and at the fag end of a session, when honorable members are not prepared to give them the consideration thev merit. Believing, as I do, that £5,000 is so small a sum for the work proposed as to be quite useless, I shall vote against the item.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- Perhaps now that it is nearly 12.15 a.m., the Minister will see his way to adjourn.

Mr Mahon:

– Do not do anything of the kind : i*o right on.

Mr McCay:

– The boss has spoken ; go. on.

Mr KELLY:

– If the boss has really spoken, I do not know that the Minister will dare to adjourn’ now.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– We must make some progress.

Mr KELLY:

– I take the view that this vote is either too small to carry out the purpose for which it is proposed or too large to be wasted. If one thing more than another has contributed to the disparagement of Australia in the United Kingdom it has been the practice adopted by other countries who have been catering for immigrants. I believe it was the practice, although I understand it was discontinued during the last year, for the Canadian Government to give the shipping companies so much per head for every immigrant landed in Canada. The result of that was that every agent of the shipping companies throughout the United Kingdom made it his duty ‘ to disparage every other country but Canada. Australia therefore starts with a handicap which it will take many thousands of pounds to overcome. I suggest to the Prime Minister that he should not view Australian resources from the narrow stand-point of the quantity of land that is available for settlement. Of the immigrants to Canada each year, only a very small proportion acquired land before their arrival. In the same way, many who have immigrated to Australia have done so, confident in their own abilities and enterprise. They have prospered, and they do not regret the step which they took. I repeat that the Prime Minister should not content himself with advertising the lands which are available for settlement in the various States of the Commonwealth. Our wonderful mineral and other resources are in themselves sufficient to attract an enormous population.

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

– I should like to know the purpose to which it is intended to apply the £500 which has been set apart in these Estimates in connexion with the New Hebrides. It is a new item, and one in respect of which we have had no explanation whatever. I should also like to know why honorable members are being kept here till such a late hour? During the day we have been engaged in discussing the administration of New Guinea, the repatriation of kanakas, and the question of advertising the resources of Australia in the mother country. The debate upon each one of those subjects might very well have absorbed a whole day. Apparently we are to be called upon to dispose of a certain amount of work irrespective of the importance of the issues involved. If so, I am not inclined to assent to any such proposal. It is not our fault that we debated penny postage to-day-

The CHAIRMAN:

– Order. I would ask the honorable member to confine his remarks to the item which is under consideration.

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

– I am merely suggesting to the Prime Minister the propriety of granting an adjournment, at any rate, after this division has been disposed of.

Mr DEAKIN:
Minister of External Affairs · Ballarat · Protectionist

– Honorable members are doubtless aware that the always unsettled condition of affairs in the New Hebrides has become even more unsatisfactory during the past twelve months. A Convention has been held in London, at which an agreement - subject to approval upon this side of the world - was entered into between the French and British Governments. In the meantime the concessions which have always been granted from New Caledonia to French settlers in the New Hebrides have been increased until they now amount to a very material assistance to them. British settlers, upon the other hand, enjoy no such concessions from Australia or any other country. The proposal which.- I have made for their exemption from the operation of the reciprocal Tariff agreement with New Zealand has not yet been accepted. In addition, they have had to struggle against the low price of maize in this country, which has forbidden its importation, against the general, uncertainty of their future, and against a variety of trials, which have reduced them almost to despair. In these circumstances we have placed on the Estimates this small item which we propose to expend, with the advice and under the supervision of the Resident Commissioner, Captain Raso’n, who is intimately acquainted with the circumstances of the settlers. This amount will enable them to tide over the difficulty of the present season. Owing to the “difficulties of communication, and the fact that Captain Rason has been absent in Fiji, no reply has been received to a letter which I addressed to him some time ago, nor to a cablegram sent in ample time to enable us under ordinary circumstances to obtain an answer before now. In those communications I inquired the best means of helping the settlers, whether we should provide them with additional labour for a particular season, or offer assistance in some other direction. We have been: pressing the Home Government to arrive at a conclusion as to the convention and to take steps to remove the present paralyzing condition of uncertainty. An answer to our request may come at any time. That is why this sum is not larger than it is. We may at any time receive intelligence that an agreement has been arrived at on the terms originally proposed between the two nations, taking into account also those made here. If the suggestions made by the late’ Mr. Seddon and myself be granted, the future of the British settlers, as well as of the French, in the New Hebrides - but particularly that of the British settlers, who have been subjected to many disabilities - will at last be placed on something like a permanent basis. It is also possible that under the proposed convention, Australia will be able to extend to the settlers in the New Hebrides some discrimination that will guarantee them the encouragement they deserve:

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.- This sum is altogether inadequate to grant relief to the British settlers in the New Hebrides. Distributed amongst them, it would average only something like £3 10s. per head. That is the magnificent payment that is to be made to tide them over difficulties that must be prolonged at least for many months, and probably for many years. The money might just as well be, pitched into the Pacific Ocean. The Commonwealth authorized steps to be taken by a steam-ship company to acquire land in the New Hebrides - practically on behalf of the Government - with the object of inducing men from Australia to cultivate it, and with the idea of establishing an effective British occupation of the group. The company acquired certain tracts of land, and invited a number of settlers to view it with the object of forming settlements. As we all know, the principal industry is that of raising cocoanuts for the purpose of making copra, in which the islands do a considerable export trade. It takes from seven to ten years for the cocoanut tree to reach maturity, and the settlers found it necessary, pending their plantations reaching a profitable stage, to grow maize and coffee in the expectation of the Australian market being opened to them. But no sooner had they proceeded to plant their crops than the Commonwealth imposed heavy duties upon the products they were raising, and absolutely shut them out from the only market available to them. As the result of this, their trading facilities were practically cut off. and they had to subsist as best they could. Most of them have undergone great hardship, and many of them have been reduced to absolute destitution. The French are constantly jeering at them, and contrasting their treatment at the hands of the Australian Government, with that which the French Government extend to their settlers. . Every inducement is offered to French settlers to cultivate the land, and to extend their interest in every direction. Immense subsidies have been paid to steam-ship companies to send their vessels to the group, and the French warship from New Caledonia, which usually visits only those ports where the French settlers are to be found last year, with the Governor of New Caledonia on board, visited the whole group. The trip was doubtless undertaken to enable the authorities to secure information likely to assist them in their colonizing experiments. The French authorities in New Caledonia offer every inducement to the Australian settlers to throw off their allegiance to Great Britain, and to become naturalized French citizens. Those who become naturalized are given the same privileges as the French subjects enjoy. Although duties are nominally charged upon the produce sent to. France from the New Hebrides, half is remitted directly to the growers, and the balance is returned to the authorities at Vila, to be spent on improving the .roads, wharfage accommodation and stores, and on other pub.lic works facilitating the development of the country and the export of produce. But jas this is a subject of great importance, it should be discussed in the presence of a quorum. [Quorum formed.] The British settlers in the New Hebrides have from time to time complained of the Commonwealth Government, and addressed petitions for relief to the Prime Minister and other Australian citizens, while the missionaries have also raised their voices on their behalf, and letters have appeared in the public newspapers setting forth the drawbacks under which they labour. The only notice which has been taken of these representations is this proposal to place £500 in the hands of Captain Rason for charitable distribution. This1 is merely a- mockery of the misery and destitution of the settlers, which is due, not to any fault of theirs, but to the action of the Commonwealth Parliament in debarring their produce from entering Australia. We could relieve their distresses .more effectually than by giving this miserable dole- if we removed the duties on island produce grown by British planters- I have on more than one occasion urged that step, and have on the business-paper a notice of motion affirming the desirability of such action, which, I am 1 afraid, will not now be reached this session. Unfortunately the Government ap pear disinclined to make this small concession, which would mean -so much to these unfortunate people. They can be” solidly benefited only by allowing their goods to enter Australia on special terms. Of course, the Tariff cannot be altered without the consent of Parliament, but- our time would be more profitably occupied in considering a measure of that sort than it has been in dealing with some of the other questions which have been brought before us.

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

– We should have a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Mr JOHNSON:

– If the Government are really anxious to afford substantial relief to the British settlers in the New Hebrides, they should grant them a rebate upon the duties imposed upon the produce sent by them to the Australian market. The maize received from the Islands could not be regarded as coming into serious competition with that produced in Australia.

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

– - I desire to call attention to the want 6f-‘a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Mr JOHNSON:

– I wish- to enter my strong protest against being called upon to deal with a matter of such vital importance at this hour of the morning. , If the Government are” determined to :1 bullock through “ their Estimates after we have endeavoured to assist them in transacting the public business, they cannot blame us for occupying the time of the Committee. Every one df the subjects debated to-day was of sufficient importance to warrant our devoting a whole sitting to its consideration, and no honorable member can be re- ,proached with having spoken at undue length. Personally I felt strongly tempted to address myself to some of the items, but I refrained from doing so owing to my desire to assist the Government in disposing of the business with the greatest possible despatch.

Mr Salmon:

– If there is one honorable member who is entitled to speak on this subject, it is the honorable member, and I am prepared to listen to him.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I am very much obliged to the honorable member ; but, after having sat for many .hours in an atmosphere which is admittedly poisonous, I do not feel capable of adequately dealing with the subject. It is nothing short of cruelty to keep us here for so many hours. The Government, instead of proposing a paltry vote of £500, which is ridiculously small when we consider the number of persons whose necessities it is intended to relieve, should have taken steps to provide a market for the products of British residents in the New Hebrides. Many Australians were induced to settle in the Islands on the understanding that their products’ would be admitted freely into our markets, and it is little short of criminal on our part to subject their commodities to heavy duties. Apart from the interests of the settlers themselves, there are important national considerations which should engage our attention. In view of probable commercial developments along the whole Pacific trade route, it is desirable that we should induce British settlers to make their homes in the New Hebrides. In a very short time - perhaps within halfadozen years - the Panama Canal will have become a reality. We have to consider how the opening of the canal would affect the trade routes of Australia. That is where the importance of the New Hebrides Group comes in.

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

– I think, sir, that we ought to have a quorum. * Quorum formed. 1*

Mr JOHNSON:

– Between Panama and Australia there is a number of more or less fertile islands in the occupation of naval powers who are amongst the greatest rivals of Great Britain _for the trade of Australia. Then, contiguous to that direct line of route, lie the New Hebrides. Their importance to Australia consists not so much in their fertility and natural wealth as in their possession of harbors which, from a strategic point of view, are incomparable, because they are capable of accommodating the fleets of any two of the most powerful naval powers in the world. Unlike most of the other island harbors in the Pacific, these harbors are approachable in all kinds of weather. They are free from those characteristic obstacles which render so many of the island harbors unsafe when hurricanes are blowing. Notwithstanding hurricanes and all other adverse weather conditions, vessels even of the heaviest type can approach these harbors with absolute safety. Take, for instance, the harbor of Havannah, -)n the island of Vate and the port of Mallicolo. in the island of Sandwich.

Mr Watson:

– I wish to know, sir, whether the honorable member is in order in entering into a detailed description of the island of Havannah

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

I “think, slr, that we ought to have a quorum to hear this point of order argued. (Quorum formed.]

Mr Watson:

– While’ I _ admit that an incidental reference to the harbor of Havannah. in the New Hebrides, is permissible, I contend that ‘ the question before the Chair is “the voting of a certain sum for a mail service, to the group, and that it does not permit of a detailed description of how many feet of water there are in that harbor.

The CHAIRMAN:

– It is purely a matter of taste with the honorable member for Lang. On the Estimates there is an item of £500 for the New Hebrides, and, so far as I know, it may be for deepening the harbor in question. The honorable member is quite in order in the line of argument which he is pursuing.

Mr JOHNSON:

– The leader of the Labour Party has only just awakened from slumber, and does not properly know what I have been saying. I was speaking on the assumption that the item of £500 was to be distributed in relief to settlers in the group, but as you, sir, have pointed out, it is quite possible that it might be used for other purposes. The Prime Minister may have received private despatches from the Home authorities authorizing him to incur certain expenditure in view of future developments from a naval stand-point. The Commonwealth Government arranged for Australian settlers to be taken over to the islands, with a view to secure effective occupation, in case any dispute arose concerning territorial rights between ‘British and foreign settlers. It was well known that France was anxious to obtain the islands for herself. The original policy of the Commonwealth Government was a wise one. But, unfortunately, ‘it was not persevered with. Some of the settlers have been practically ruined, and others have been struggling, vainly against adverse conditions in the delusive hope that at some time the Government would take a more sensible view of things. Now the Government comes down with a proposal to spend £500. We are entitled to know exactly how the sum, however small, is to be spent. All the information that has been given to us is that a certain, official has been over in Australia, and we must assume that he is to take the money back with him and enter into an arrangement with Captain Rason for its distribution. I do not propose to pursue the argument at the present stage, because I should like to hear what other honorable members have to say about it.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- The Committee should feel itself indebted to the honorable member for Lang, who has given an amount of attention to this subject that entitles him to speak with authority.

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

– I beg to call attention to the state of the Committee. [Quorum formed.]

Mr KELLY:

– What is to be done with this £”500 which appears on the Estimates? On these islands there are, I understand, about 250 white inhabitants, so that this sum, distributed, does not amount to much per head. Is it intended to spend the money in planting cocoanut trees, planting maize, fortifying the harbors, or in what direction? I fail to understand why the Ministry could desire to “bullock “ a proposal of this kind through at this earlyhour of the morning. My own opinion, in view of the preferential trade proposals we have recently had before us, is that a better form of assistance would be to give the products of the British settlers of the New Hebrides free entry into the markets of Australia. If the’ Ministry will undertake to pass such an alteration of the Tariff as will permit of the free importation of produce grown by British settlers in the New Hebrides, l’ shall make no further objection to the vote. I direct attention to the fact that British settlers in these islands are at a disadvantage when compared with their French rivals, because the Great Republic patriotically assists her subjects, and, while their produce is admitted free to the market of Noumea, a like concession is denied to the British settler. A peculiar result of this is that the unfortunate Britisher is compelled to make his French rivals the medium for the introduction of his produce to Noumea, where it is sold as the produce of French settlers. The importance of these islands from a strategic point of view is deserving of careful consideration. They are almost directly on the route between Australia and the proposed Panama Canal, which will vet become a most important trade route, and thev are within striking distance of the still more important trade route between Australia and the East. The teeming millions of the East are gradually awakening to the industrialism of the West, and this must lead inevitably to a vast increase of trade between Australia and the Eastern countries. On the same route we have to consider the proximity of another great power that occupies the northern part of the Island of New Guinea. I think it is most unfortunate that any of these islands were ever allowed to pass from the control of the Empire. We should do what we can to secure the New Hebrides for the Empire, but a vote of £500 will be useless to achieve this great Imperial end. It might be useful to consider what would follow if the ambition of the late Premier of New Zealand were realized, and these islands were annexed by that Colony. I call attention to the absence of a quorum. [Quorum formed.] To my mind, the honorable member for Lang overestimated the importance of these islands in one aspect. It is true that they possess the finest harbor in the Southern Pacific, with the exception of Port Jackson. But that harbor is not perfect, and it is quite possible that the £500 which we. are asked to expend in connexion with the New Hebrides is designed to improve it. lt can be best described as an open roadstead, with a long island stretching across the mouth of the bay, making everywhere enclosed water. This forms a harbor which is capable of floating all the navies of the world, but it is so extraordinarily deep that the only anchorage available covers only a few chains of one small section of the bay. Perhaps the Commonwealth Government may desire to put down a series of buoys to enable vessels to overcome the difficulty of finding bottom. As the whole division - is now under review, I propose now to refer to a previous item-.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member cannot do that.

Mr McCay:

– Upon a point of order, surely it is open to honorable members to discuss any item in the division. No motion has been put from the Chair, and we are in exactly the same position that we should occupy if we were discussing, the clause of a Bill.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The division, as amended, is under consideration.

Mr McCay:

– If a clause in a Bill, in the form in which it had been amended, were under consideration, the whole clause could be discussed, although no amendment prior to that which had been made could be moved.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable and learned member must recognise that, if I permitted the whole of the items in the division to be discussed, there would be no finality.

Mr McCay:

– The Standing Orders may be deficient in that respect. I quite recognise that the view which you, sir, have put is the common-sense one, but our Standing Orders do not give effect to it. If they did, after a clause had been amended, an honorable member would not be at liberty to discuss the whole of its provisions.

The CHAIRMAN:

– It is quite true that the whole of this division, as amended, is under review. At the same time, it is not advisable to allow honorable members to go back upon items which have already been discussed, and as to which a decision has been arrived at. They are at liberty to discuss the whole division, but not to refer to specific items prior to that relating to the New Hebrides.

Mr Kelly:

– If effect be given to your ruling, sir, honorable members will be unable to discuss the whole of the items in this division. I would suggest, therefore, the propriety of ascertaining the opinion of Mr. Speaker upon the point, so that we mayknow exactly where we stand. This is a very important subject, and one with which I am sure, Mr. Chairman, you are competent to deal, but I think it would be well, before we proceed further, to obtain Mr. Speaker’s ruling. I therefore move -

That the Chairman’s ruling be referred to Mr. Speaker.

Mr Salmon:

– I should like to know, sir, under what standing order the motion is receivable.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The Committee has power to deal with its own business, and it has been the practice to receive such motions.

Question put and division called for, but there being no tellers on the side of the ayes, question resolved in the negative.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- I listened with interest to the speech made by the Prime Minister on the subject of the advertising of the resources of Australia. There are many ways in which the resources of the Commonwealth might be placed prominently before the people of the old world. We might advertise the opportunities for the farmer, the miner, and the trader. But we must show that the country is one in which it is pleasant and profitable to live, and that it is well governed. This “bullocking” through of important legislation in the early hours of the morning will not tend to create the latter impression. A very successful exhibition of Australian products was recently held in the

Sydney Stock Exchange buildings, and Mr. Coghlan, who has done more than any other official representative in England for the advancement of Australian interests, some time ago arranged for a similar exhibition in London. Within reason, these exhibitions cannot be too frequent. The big wholesale firms, and even the retail shops, recognise that customers will not visit their establishments unless it is proved to them that it will be advantageous to do so, and, therefore, they send out commercial travellers, who exhibit samples of the wares which are for sale. Similarly, by exhibitions of our products, we should show the people of England what Australia is capable of. The Prime Minister seems to think that immigrants must be mollycoddled, and that we should determine beforehand exactly what is to be done with each new-comer ; but Parliament does all that is to be expected of it when it provides, equality of opportunity for every citizen.

Mr Ronald:

– That is Socialism.

Mr KELLY:

– No; the very reverse. Socialism is equality of servitude. All we have to do is to insure that every one shall have an equal opportunity to advance himself under the protection of just and enlightened laws. Some honorable members profess to fear the flooding of the labour market by the advent of new workers ; but every fresh arrival means a larger market for our producers, and a new instrument for the production of national wealth.

Mr Liddell:

– How does the honorable member account for the number of unemployed here at present?

Mr KELLY:

– It is due largely to bad financing.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member must not discuss the unemployed question.

Mr KELLY:

– A matter which demands our most serious attention is the report which appears in to-day’s Argus, that in the Western Australian Parliament a motion has been carried in favour of secession from the Commonwealth.

Mr Salmon:

– Why give it greater importance than it deserves?

Mr KELLY:

– The news cannot be regarded too seriously. When a resolution in favour of secession is passed in one of the States it is about time for us to seriously consider our position. Now we shall have to explain away, not only the Government ineptitude and irresponsibility, but the

Inter-State discord which exists. I. think that some portion of the amount proposed to be devoted to advertising Australia might be expended upon experiments in connexion with the conveyance of fruit and other perishables to the London market. The very fact of our being able to place before the people of England products which under present conditions cannot be brought under their notice, would in itself be a valuable advertisement of the resources of the Commonwealth.

Mr Liddell:

– I beg to call attention to the state of the Committee. [Quorum formed.]

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

– I tried to obtain by motion a return as to the quantity of produce which came to the Commonwealth from the New Hebrides. When I found that I was not able to reach the motion, I endeavoured to elicit the information from the Prime Minister by means of questions. Unfortunately he was not in a position to deal with the various points I submitted in anticipation of the consideration of the Estimates. But I have a return for last year which shows that the quantity of produce from the islands is so small that it cannot be regarded seriously as a source of competition with Australian produce. Therefore, we might well remit the duties on the articles, instead of voting a sum which would amount to only a miserable dole to the British settlers. Let us consider the treatment which is meted out to French settlers. In addition to getting land and being provided with facilities for its cultivation, and with means of transport to the markets of New Caledonia and elsewhere, they each received a bonus of £200 from the French Government. If it is intended to offer a sum by way of a bonus to British settlers, then, in view of the disabilities which they have had to suffer through the legislation of the Commonwealth, it would not have beentoo much had the Prime Minister asked the Committee to vote £500 to each settler who has been adversely affected by our enactments. I believe that if such a proposal had been submitted, it would have been sympathetically considered, and passed, perhaps, without material reduction. I believe that in some cases the settler has put as much as £1,000 into the venture,and every penny has been lost. I am informed that, owing to the persistent efforts of the French authorities to get British and

Australian settlers to foreswear their allegiance, some of them find their loyalty to the British flag so strained that, face to face with the choice between starvation and prosperity they are inclined to accept the protection which is offered to them by the French authorities. One or two of the settlers, I understand, have already renounced their allegiance to the King, and are now living under a Government which looks specially after their interests, not really because they are colonists, but because it is desired eventually to annex the islands. The press in New Caledonia and France openly avow that every effort of colonization on the part of France has that ultimate end in view. Possessing that information, and also knowing that the islands are required by the French for strategic purposes rather than for commercial reasons, the Commonwealth Government have nevertheless put forth no helping hand to the unfortunate British and Australian settlers. I have a mass of interesting and useful information, which, under more favorable conditions, I might have placed before honorable members; but I hope that the Government will now agree to report progress.

Mr McCAY:
Corinella

.- With every respect to those who differ, I think it is only a fair thing to pass this division of the Estimates.

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

– There is no use in prolonging the debate. I think that the Committee is indebted to the honorable member for Lang for his most informing speech. I believe that it is one of the best speeches on the subject that has yet been delivered here. Ifthe Government intends to push the Estimates through, of course it has the power ; but I venture to say that there has been no more unreasonable exercise of power than has been seen here to-day. First of all, the Government wasted the whole day on the discussion of a motion which they knew could not be carried.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I ask the honorable member to confine his remarks to the division.

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

– I do not wish to delay the passing of the division.

Mr McWILLIAMS:
Franklin

– The question of the management of the New Hebrides in connexion with other islands in the Pacific ought to receive a very great deal more attention from this Parliament than it has yet received. According to a recent conversation I had with a gentleman from the New Hebrides, the position of the British settlers in the group is anything but satisfactory. From every standpoint we have, a decided interest in the settlement of the islands with men of our own race. The British settlers are placed at a distinct disadvantage in comparison with the French settlers. Australia, while giving a mail subsidy and professing to assist the British settlers, excludes from her market practically everything which thev produce. The whole question of the treatment of the New Hebrides is a parody on statesmanship. The control of the Pacific is a very important item in the politics of the United States, and has recently become important from the point of view of Japan. The question which power is to rule in the Pacific will have to be decided one way or another very speedily. The best way in which Australia can strengthen her position there is by bringing the people of this country into close commercial relations with those who reside on the islands. But, instead of pursuing that policy, we seem to have done everything possible to prevent trade. We are shutting Australian ports to the chief articles of production of the. islands, and, having done that, we perpetrate the farce of voting a sum of £500 on account of the New Hebrides. The Commonwealth legislation seems to be absolutely to prohibit closer relations. It is time that the Government commenced to adopt a statesmanship-like attitude in regard to the islands to prevent their further removal from sympathy and relations with us. If we do not. instead of being a protection to Australia in the future, they will be a verv serious menace indeed. Proposed vote agreed to.

Attorney-General’s Department.

Division 16 (Secretary’s Office), £2,794.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- Thereare several items to be discussed in connexion with this proposal, but I do not propose to exercise my right of criticism under existing circumstances. I think it is pretty well unprecedented that the Estimates of a Department should be forced through in the unexplained absence of the Minister responsible for them.

Mr Groom:

– The Attorney-General is sick in bed.

Mr KELLY:

– I was not aware of that. 1 regret it, and withdraw at once.

Mr MAHON:
Coolgardie

– I wish to inquire whether the salary of the Chief Clerk and Assistant Parliamentary Draftsman, £560 - an increase of .£40. over last year - represents the total payment to the officer concerned, or whether he receives additional payment for other services ? I wish it to be understood that, if extra sums are paid to him, I am not offering an objection. He may be worth what he is receiving. But I hold that in framing Estimates, if any extra payment is made to an officer, it’ should be indicated, either by the now familiar device of a foot-note, or in some other manner. I believe that the officer in question is also the Registrar of the High Court and of the Conciliation and Arbitration Court. If he receives extra payment for discharging those duties it should be shown upon the Estimates.

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– I am informed that a sum of £30 or £40 is paid to the officer for discharging the duties of Registrar of the High Court and of the Arbitration Court. I quite agree with what the honorable member has said, and will draw the attention of the Attorney-General to the point.

Mr. Mcwilliams (Franklin) [2.47]. - This system of framing Estimates is exceedingly faulty from the point of view indicated by the honorable member for Coolgardie. In my own State, we had an exceedingly good ‘system, which is worth copying by the Commonwealth. Wherever an officer was in receipt of extra, payment apart from his ordinary salary, that information was conveyed in parenthesis.

Sir John Forrest:

– Our usual system is to indicate extra payments by an asterisk and foot-note; but there is evidently an omission in this instance.

Mr mcwilliams:

– if an officer is mentioned in the Estimates as in receipt of a fixed salary, and various other payments are made to him which are indicated in three or four other places in the Estimates, the Committee is not likely to know exactly what he is receiving. The Tasmanian system might verv well be adopted in framing the Commonwealth Estimates.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 17 - (Crown Solicitor’s Office), £2,942 - agreed to.

Division 18 (High Court), £5,375.

Mr MAHON:
Coolgardie

– I wish to draw attention to item 10, under Contingencies - “ Compensation for services of Commonwealth and State officers, £53°-“ It appears that in some of the States the local Governments very properly allow officers to receive the amounts which this Parliament votes to them for services performed for the Commonwealth. The amounts are, of course, first paid into the States Treasuries, and are afterwards handed over to the officers concerned. But in the State of Victoria the amounts voted by the Commonwealth to State officers for rendering Federal services are, in some instances at all events, retained by the State Government. There is a very glaring case in connexion with the High Court that has been brought under my notice. I am very reluctant to bring it before Parliament, but consider that it is my duty to do so, because I believe that Parliament will not allow an anomaly which amounts to a gross injustice to be perpetrated. The gentleman to whom I refer is a very able and highly trusted State officer, occupying the position of Prothonotary in Melbourne. He is also the Deputy-Registrar of the Principal Registry of the High Court. This officer, as I understand, has had everything to do with the initiation of the High* Court machinery throughout the various States.

Mr Crouch:

– He is a man of very great ability.

Mr MAHON:

– I am pleased to hear the honorable and learned member for Corio, who ought to know, give this testimony. I. also understand that if their Honours the Justices had been consulted they would have recommended that a very substantial allowance should be paid to this officer - in fact, that there should be a special vote for the work performed by him. . To show that his duties are not merely perfunctory, but involve transactions of very great .moment, I may mention that in connexion with the various election petitions decided by the High Court the whole of the ballot-papers were reviewed bv him. For instance, in the case of Chanter v. Blackwood, he had this duty to perform, and did it in such a manner as to win the approval of both parties to the litigation

Mr Chanter:

– Hear, hear.

Mr MAHON:

– I think that where an officer of this character has rendered valuable and substantial services to the Commonwealth, we ought not to allow a ‘State Government to interpose, and prevent him from receiving the reward which we as a Parliament have decided that he ought to receive, and that Ministers, in framing the Estimates, have recommended. I may point out that on one occasion at least the State Government have allowed a State official to receive a gratuity from the Commonwealth. .1 find in the Commonwealth Gasette of the nth August, 1906, a notification to the effect that the services of an officer might be placed at the disposal of the Commonwealth AttorneyGeneral for three months, on his salary being reimbursed to the State, and a gratuity of £25 being paid to the officer from Commonwealth funds. There are a number of other cases in other States, but I am now referring to the practice in Victoria. The Electoral Commissioner, Mr. Topp, a State officer, has been allowed to receive a gratuity for Federal work. If that officer and the Government Printer of Victoria be allowed to receive £150 a year, why should this gentleman, who has performed equally important work, be denied any recompense to which the Commonwealth Parliament thinks he is entitled”?

Mr Tudor:

– I think the Government Printer has to hand over his gratuity to the State Treasurer.

Mr MAHON:

– I may be mistaken, but I thought it was distinctly understood that the Government Printer had not to do so. There is the curious anomaly that the branch registry in Sydney receives a vote of £30 per year more than the principal registry in Melbourne. The actual expenditure on the Melbourne registry, even, supposing this gentleman receives his allowance, is only £70 a year, whereas- the vote in Sydney amounts to ^100. I can, see no justification for the anomaly, not merely in reference to the amounts, but in reference to the practice of refusing to allow officers in Victoria to receive gratuities, while permitting officers in New South Wales liberty in this respect. Both Mr. Higgins, when Attorney-General, and the present Attorney-General, approved of the payment to this officer of gratuities. In the case of Chanter v. Blackwood, the work of counting^ the ballot-papers was largely done in this officer’s own time;, and he was often engaged three or four days a week up to ii o’clock at night in this work. I have here a memorandum written on the 14th May, 1906, and addressed to the AttorneyGeneral of the State of Victoria, as follows: -

In the case of the Deputy-Registrar, the amount has been allocated on the basis of the amount which the Commonwealth Government thinks he should get for the services personally rendered to it.

Mr Groom:

– Will the honorable member kindly tell me what he proposes?

Mr MAHON:

– I wish to commend this case to the consideration of the Government, and to submit a motion which shall secure justice to this officer. The Justices of the High Court were appointed in October, 1903, and during all the years since then this officer has been doing the work of Registrar. As the Commonwealth Parliament considered that this gentleman is entitled to £40 per year, I propose to move that he be granted a special gratuity of £120.

Mr Groom:

– That would be increasing the amount on the Estimates.

Mr MAHON:

– Not at all. This would be bv way of amendment of the verbiage of the item. It is for the Government to allocate the .£53° as they think fit.

Mr Groom:

– But to pass the amendment of the honorable member might do an injustice to some one.

Mr MAHON:

– That, surely, is in the power of the Government to rectify ?

Mr McCay:

– Take it off the’ Judges’ travelling expenses; there is a thousand or so to spare.

Mr MAHON:

– I must not be taken as concurring in that remark. I should not like to make any reference to the Judges, except on a distinct motion.

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– This matter is one which has received the attention of the Attorney-General, who has been endeavouring to come to some arrangement, by which this gentleman may receive payment for his services. Not only in this, but in other instances, the Government of Victoria have objected to their officers receiving payment direct from the Commonwealth. The AttorneyGeneral is now making further representations with a view to have this money paid to this gentleman.

Mr Chanter:

– But suppose the AttorneyGeneral f ai ls ?

Mr GROOM:

– The money will be paid over to -the State Government

Mr Mahon:

– What money? There is only £40 down.

Mr GROOM:

– If the previous appropriations have not Been paid over, representations will be made in order that this gentleman may receive the remuneration to which he is fairly entitled. His doing the work for the Commonwealth increased his duties ; and my own personal feeling is that if an officer is asked to undertake Commonwealth duties which encroach upon his work-

Mr Mahon:

– And encroach on his time.

Mr GROOM:

– Yes ; and if it adds to his responsibilities, he ought to be remunerated for the extra services rendered.

Mr Mahon:

– The Attorney-General, who is in the best position to know, has; said that this officer ought to receive the money himself.

Mr GROOM:

– That is realized by the Department ; and if the honorable member will allow the matter to stand ever, I can assure him that the Attorney-General is making efforts to insure that the officer will receive this payment direct.

Mr Mahon:

– Shall we have another opportunity to consider the matter?

Mr GROOM:

– Of course the State has power to refuse to allow the payment.

Mr Mahon:

– Not if we put it as a gratuity ?

Mr GROOM:

– Yes.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– The State Government could reduce the officer’s salary.

Mr GROOM:

– Yes ; the Commonwealth Government could deal with the matter,but it is much better to arrange the affair amicably. I think that, if the matter be left to the Attorney-General, it will be arranged amicably, as in the case of Mr. Topp, the . Public Service Commissioner. We know that no State public servant can take outside employment without the consent of the Governor; and, though we cannot enforce that consent, we can make representations which I think are entitled to consideration.

Mr Mahon:

– I should like the Minister to say that the officer is entitled to what he claims.

Mr GROOM:

– The Attorney-General says so.

Mr Mahon:

– No; the Attorney-General says the officer is entitled to £40 for this year, but there are the back years.

Mr Mahon:

– So long as that is understood, I am satisfied.

Mr GROOM:

– If the State has received this money, it will be asked to do justice ; and I suggest that the honorable member for Coolgardie leave the matter to the Attorney-General.

Mr HUTCHISON:
Hindmarsh

– If any relative of mine wished to enter the Commonwealth service, I should be very careful that he- got to be chief of something, when he would be sure to receive a rise in his salary. Year after year we find that, if officers get far enough up the ladder, they are certain of an increase in their remuneration. But if a man be in receipt of a poor salary, Heaven help him ! He will have no consideration at the hands of the Public Service Commissioner. It is time we put a stop to the increases in the higher salaries until we are prepared to extend some consideration to those in the lower positions.-

Mr CHANTER:
Riverina

– I desire to lend ray support to the remarks of the honorable member for Coolgardie. From my own observation, I know that the officer in question conducted the business to which reference has been made, not in the time of the State, but i’n his own time ; and I do not think that Parliament, when voting the gratuity-

Mr Groom:

– It is a payment for services rendered.

Mr CHANTER:

– It was an absolute payment for services rendered, not only for a clay or two, but for long weary weeks, during hours when the officer ought to have been home with his family. He was engaged night after night, over many weeks, doing the work of the Commonwealth, and, in recognition of these services, the Parliament voted him a sum of money. I cannot see why this matter should not be arranged. The Commonwealth Parliament did not vote this money to the State of Victoria, any more than it has voted money under similar circumstances to the State of New South Wales ; the money was voted to a particular officer for specific services rendered. I can quite understand that the sympathies of the Attorney-General are with the officer; but we want something more than sympathy - we wish to be certain that the money will go to the individual, and not to the State. What is this Par

Mr Mcwilliams:

– Any officer who is in connexion with members of Parliament may depend on a rise.

Mr Mahon:

– Those who moved in the present instance were the solicitors in the case.

Mr CHANTER:

– The movement was by all parties connected with the suit to which I refer. There could not be a stronger case for consideration ; and I hope the Minister will point out to the proper authorities that the Commonwealth! Parliament expects this officer to receive the money. If the State does not meet the AttorneyGeneral in a reasonable way, then this Parliament must find some other means to duly recognise valuable services rendered.

Mr KENNEDY:
Moira

._There should be some clearly defined principle for dealing with matters of this kind. I have no doubt that the officer referred to in this case is most capable, but the personality of any officer should not be allowed to enter into the question. The principle involved is what we have to consider. Where a State officer performs duties for the Commonwealth, in addition to those which he performs for the State, I understand that the practice adopted is for the authority employing the officer to fix the salary of the office, and then for an apportionment of the salary to be made as between the Commonwealth and the State. I hold that in this case the Commonwealth would not be justified in offering a gratuity for services rendered, any more than the’ State would be justified in’ offering a gratuity to a Commonwealth officer for services performed in the same way for the State.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– I direct attention to the absence of a quorum. [Quorum formed.”]

Mr KENNEDY:

– It appears to me that an objectionable practice will- be introduced if either authority making use of the services of a public officer gives a gratuity beyond the salary appertaining to the office. 1 assume that where an officer is called upon to devote extra time to his work, that is a factor which is taken into consideration in determining the salary. If it should be necessary for an officer to work overtime occasionally, I expect that that will be made up to him by allowances in other directions.

Mr MAHON:
Coolgardie

– There is a good deal of force in the contention of the honorable member for” Moira, but it falls to the ground in this case, because the salary of the officer in question was fixed by the State authority before the creation of the High Court, and the extra duties which have Deen superimposed upon his State obligations are the result of the creation of that Court. There is surely here an anomaly which the Committee ought not to tolerate for a day longer. We have in the same Department the Chief Clerk and Assistant Parliamentary Draftsman, a Commonwealth officer enjoying a salary of £560 a year, and receiving an additional salary of £40 for the performance of duties in connexion with the High Court. He is allowed to receive this extra money, whilst another officer who actually does certain work is denied the right to draw the money to which he is entitled, because he- happens to be a State officer. Surely that is an injustice at which the Committee will not connive. Why should not the State official in this case receive the money to which he is entitled?

Sir John Forrest:

– Because the State Government will not permit him to receive at.

Mr MAHON:

– Does the right honorable gentleman mean to tell me that the Government of Victoria can prevent the Commonwealth Parliament paying away money in any direction in which it thinks fit?

Mr Groom:

– Thev cannot pay money to an officer of the State “without the consent of the Government of the State. In the same way Commonwealth officers cannot accept payment from a State Government without the consent of the GovernorGeneral in Council- that is the law.

Sir John Forrest:

– We have tried to make these payments, and the State Government will not allow it.

Mr MAHON:

– In reply to the right honorable gentleman, I again refer to a notification published in the Commonwealth Gazette not long ago, in which he undertook that a reimbursement should be made to the State of a certain officer’s salary at the rate of ,£285 per annum for a certain period, and that he be granted a gratuity of £25 from the Commonwealth- fund’s.

Mr Groom:

– The whole of that officer’s services were given to us at that time, and the gratuity was made with the consent of the State.

Mr MAHON:

– Then why should the State refuse to recognise the -gratuity ? Have not the Government the consent of the State to the officer to whom I have been referring doing the work he does for the Commonwealth ?

Mr Groom:

– We have the consent of the State to his doing the work, but not to his receiving the pay.

Mr MAHON:

– I confess complete inability to appreciate these fine distinctions.

Mr Groom:

– I have told the honorable member that we shall endeavour to get the consent cf the State.

Mr MAHON:

– Yes; but the honorable gentleman should say decisively that he means to get it. He should make up his mind, as a strong man would do, to get the consent, or if not, to make the payment without it.

Mr Storrer:

– Then the State might refuse to allow its servant to do the work.

Mr MAHON:

– I should give the money to his wife, or to his next-of-kin if he has no wife.

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · PROT; WAP from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– T - The State insists upon the money going into the State revenue.

Mr MAHON:

– I do not understand why they should ‘ insist upon that. Moreover, I fail to see why we should submit to their insistence. However, complying with the desire of the Minister for Home Affairs, I shall not at this stage press the matter further. I am satisfied with his promise on behalf of the Attorney-General that justice shall be done to this deserving officer, and that the Federal Government will no longer remain under the reproach of accepting valuable work performed by officers in their own time without giving adequate payment. We cannot condone in a Government conduct which we should reprehend in an individual. The practice to which I have directed attention has been continued for so long that it is time the Commonwealth Government stiffened their spine, and insisted that justice should be done to officers who are performing valuable work for the Commonwealth.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

– I have some observations to make upon this vote, but I think that we should first have a quorum. [Quorum formed.] I should like some explanation of the considerable excess of expenditure on the appropriation for last year in the vote for the travelling expenses of the Court.

Mr. GROOM (Darling Downs - Minister of Home Affairs) [3.31J. - That is explained by the fact that there was far more travelling done during last year than during the previous year, and the estimate was based on the experience of the previous year. The average for the previous year was 120 days, and for last year it reached 193 days owing to the increase of work.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- I am glad that the explanation is absolutely satisfactory. In connexion with another item, 1 should like to say that the system of compensation to States’ officers for doing Commonwealth work requires very careful investigation. I regret that the honorable member for Riverina, in dealing with this question, should have treated it so much as a personal matter. I remind the honorable member that, as only a limited number of the public officers come within our ken, by speaking very highly of them we may do some injustice to others quite as worthy of our appreciation, but who are unknown to us.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:
Franklin

– I think that a very great principle has been raised by the honorable member for Coolgardie. But I view this matter in an entirely different light from him. I hold that, wherever a State officer is in receipt of a salary which is commensurate with the duties which he performs, it was never intended that he should be paid an additional amount for any services which he might render to the. Commonwealth.

Mr Mahon:

– The honorable member forgets that this officer’s salary was fixed by the State before the High Court was established

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– That has nothing whatever to do with the case. As the years go by, and as the States and Federal Parliaments are brought into closer touch with the people, I believe that, instead of the salaries of highly-paid officials being increased, they will suffer a reduction. Where the States and the Commonwealth jointly employ an officer, there should be no overlapping of duties.

Mr Ronald:

– If the honorable member were engaged to perform certain work, and extra duties were imposed upon him, would he not expect to be paid for discharging them ?

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– Upon more than one occasion I have undertaken to discharge certain functions, and I have been called upon to undertake fresh duties, but I did not find that my salary was increased. I maintain that the principle which honorable members are striving to establish in connexion with these Estimates is one that ought not to be introduced. Of course, where a State officer can be employed to do Federal work, there can be no objection to the Commonwealth making the .State Government an allowance for the performance of that work. To my mind, there is always a danger that officers who are brought more closely into touch with members of Parliament than are the lower grades of the service will receive more in the nature of increments. For instance, the honorable member for Riverina saw that the Prothonotary to whom allusion has been made did very valuable work, and put in a deal of overtime. But there are officers in receipt of only £150 a year who are repeatedly called upon to work overtime.

Mr Chanter:

– This officer performed a special kind of work.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– We regard all work as of a special character when it is brought directly under our notice. I would prefer to see an addition made to the salaries of officers who are in receipt of only 50s. or 60s. a week, rather than that the emoluments of those who are in receipt of high salaries should be increased.

Mr LIDDELL:
Hunter

– It seems to me that an advance in the salary of this particular officer is being advocated by an honorable member who was the successful suitor in a law case. I am altogether opposed to personal interference in a matter of this kind. It is very bad taste for the honorable member to advocate an increase in the salary of this particular officer.

Mr CHANTER:
Riverina

– I cannot allow the honorable member for Hunter to reflect upon me in the way that he has done. I would point out to him that I was not the successful candidate at the last elections. It was my opponent who was successful. I took action because I saw that this officer had performed excep- tiona 1 work, which very few officials could have undertaken. Not only was he personally congratulated by everybody concerned in the litigation, but he was the . recipient of letters expressing appreciation of his services.

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

– By whom were they written?

Mr CHANTER:

– (By the solicitors and counsel, and by everybody connected with the case.

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

– I heard that the recount was bungled.

Mr CHANTER:

– It was so bungled that the Chief Justice of the High Court expressed his admiration of the manner in which it was carried out. The recount alone occupied several weeks. During that period this officer had to work many hours’ overtime. Under the circumstances, I hold that he should be specially recompensed. The money certainly should not be allowed to pass into the State Treasury instead of into the pockets of the individual whom it is intended to benefit.

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

– If this officer has been performing special work he ought to be paid for it. But may I remind the honorable member for Riverina that there are plenty of officers in the lower grades of the service who are earning only a bare living. I know of officers in the Postmaster-General’s Department who for months have been working up till 10 o’clock each night. Yet their claims in this matter have only just been recognised. Somehow ‘or other If is always the men who are in receipt of large salaries who are able to make their voices heard in this House.

Mr Mahon:

– This officer does not get a large salary.

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

– If he fills the office pf Prothonotary he receives a very respectable salary.

Mr Mahon:

– He gets £45° a year.

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

– I call that a very fair salary. I believe that the officer earns it, but there are scores of men in our Public Service who are constantly called upon to work overtime for nothing, and who are only earning a bare livelihood. If this officer has been performing special work for the Commonwealth by all means let him be paid for it.

Mr Groom:

– We cannot pay him without the consent of the State Government.

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

– I am of opinion that we can pay him what we choose.

Sir John Forrest:

– He would be dismissed if he accepted payment.

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

– If we regarded it as an honorarium?

Sir John Forrest:

– Yes. We have been told so.

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

– Is it not a fact that honorariums have been granted by this Parliament to State officers?

Mr Groom:

– Only with the consent of the State Government concerned.

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

– Is it not easy to obtain that consent ?

Sir John Forrest:

– We cannot get it.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 19 (.Court of Conciliation and

Arbitration), 190

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

– - I wish to call attention to the fact that no steps have yet been taken to make the contemplated appointments to the High Court Bench. I do not know whether the Government intend to make them before the session closes, or whether they propose to defer them until after the general elections. Certainly some definite statement on the subject ought to be forthcoming. I well remember the urgency which it was alleged existed for these appointments when the Judiciary Bill was under consideration. We were then told that the Justices of the High Court were being worked to death. We were assured that justice was being denied to litigants. That was the expression which was used in the correspondence which passed between the present occupants of the High Court Bench and the AttorneyGeneral. But as soon as ever the Bill had passed, and it was possible to afford relief to the Justices, we heard no more about the matter of urgency. Apparently, even the Justices themselves find that the necessity for additional appointments is not so urgent as they represented if to be. If these appointments are so desperately urgent as we were led to believe, why have they not been made? The Prime Minister himself has been offered a seat on the High Court Bench. I do not know whether his colleagues wished to shelve him - whether they thought he was a kind of Jonah, to be pitched overboard before the elections.

Mr Ronald:

– He is the captain of the ship.

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

– That makes the offer all the more remarkable. Either these appointments are urgent, or the corre- spondence which took place between the Attorney-General and the occupants of the High Court Bench was a piece of consummate bluff to secure reinforcements.I hope that when they are made they will not indicate that the only way to secure an appointment is to become a member or a supporter of a Government. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that they should be open to the whole of the legal talent of Australia. I hope that no consideration as to a member of the legal profession being in opposition to or a supporter of a Government will influence in the slightest degree these appointments. I trust that the only consideration will be that of fitness. If those possessing pre-eminent fitness are to be found in the ranks of the Government or amongst their supporters, well and good : but once let it be thought that the only way to secure an appointment of the kind is to become a party politician and a member of a Government, and a blow will be struck at the impartiality and legal standing of the Court. I am led to make these remarks owing to the unconscionable delay that has taken place. There is no dearth of eligible persons. A selection may be made from the whole bar of Australia, comprising many men who have worked for years to fit themselves for these high positions. The whole of that legal realm should be thoroughly searched. I do not know whether it is of any use to appeal to the Government for information.

Mr Groom:

– In reply to a question asked on the 18th inst., the Prime Minister said -

There are good reasons why the appointments should not be deferred ; but honorable members will agree that they are amongst the most responsible which a Government could be called upon to make. The subject will be taken into consideration immediately, though I do not promise that the appointments will be made at once.

That is a clear and definite statement.

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

– It is a marvellously definite statement. The Prime Minister emphasizes the urgency of making these appointments, and yet months after the passing of the Bill we find that they have not been made.

SirJohn Forrest. - How long is it since the Act was passed?

Mr.JOSEPH COOK.- At least two months have elapsed since the Bill passed this House.

SirJohn Forrest. - But another place must be considered.

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

– My complaint is that immediately the Bill left the House for another place it lost its urgency. I admit the importance of these appointments, and, that being so, the Government might very well put an end to this period of uncertainty, and furnish the High Court of Australia with that legal reinforcement which the present occupants of the Bench have declared to be so necessary, and even urgent. If the statement by the Prime Minister, to which reference has just been made, is a definite one, I congratulate Ministers on their conception of definiteness. It is just aboutas definite as have been most of their statements this session on matters of policy. Yesterday we discussed for hours a Bill which is said to be very urgent, but finally the Government allowed it to be taken out of their hands. Two or three days of our valuable time have also been wasted in discussing other proposals which were said to be of equal urgency, but which have quietly been set aside. There is no justification for delaying these appointments, and a definite statement should be given that they will be speedily made.

Mr Johnson:

– I think that we ought to have a quorum before dealing with this division. [Quorum formed.]

Proposed vote agreed to.

Department of Home Affairs.

Division 20 (Administrative Staff), £8,766.

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

– I thought there was an understanding that we should take the Estimates of the Treasury.

Mr Groom:

– A proposal was made, but no agreement was arrived at.

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

– Is it useless to appeal to the Prime Minister’s sense of fairness? Are we to pass all the Estimates before we adjourn?

Mr Deakin:

– Let us pass the Estimates of the Department of Home Affairs, and then adjourn until 2.30 p.m.

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

– Pass them without debate?

Mr Deakin:

– I do not say that.

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

– I do not consent to such a brutal proposal.I have never heard of more inept and brutal proceedings than are now taking place, at the instance of the Government.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member must withdraw the word “ brutal.”

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

– I withdraw the word “ brutal,” and substitute the words “ grossly mismanaged.” After wasting the whole of yesterday in discussing a Bill which the Prime Minister knew could not be carried, we are asked by him to sit up all night to deal with these Estimates. It is a travesty on legislation that items which should be the subject of reasonable discussion should be rushed through aftera whole day has been wasted by the Government in bringing forwarda proposal which they knew could not be carried. If this proceeding can be described as the carrying on of the King’s Government in a constitutional way, I do not know what the conduct of responsible government is. I have never seen anything more inept or more unjust than this action on the part of the Ministry. No sense of justice is shown in rushing business through the House at the point of physical endurance. The public have a right to expect these matters to be discussed in a fair and proper spirit. It is not the fault of the Opposition that we have been sitting here all night. Throughout the evening there has been nothing but fair discussion. As a matter of fact, there is no urgency, so far as the business of this Chamber is concerned. The urgency relates to the work of another place, the members of which are sleeping peacefully, whilst an attempt is being made to bludgeon business through this Committee. There is no sense of justice shown by such conduct If there were any need to take this step in order to complete the business of the session, no one would begrudge the sacrifice involved in sitting up all night. But after the Government have got their business through this House, we shall have to wait for the Senate, which has enough before it to occupy two or three weeks. We are kept out of our beds when there is no urgency, and later, shall have to fiddle about until the Senate finishes its work. However, protestations are wasted upon the Prime Minister.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.- I join with the deputy leader of the Opposition in emphatically protesting against proceeding with the consideration of the Estimates at this hour, honorable members having been here since 10.30yesterdav morning. It is nothing less than a scandal.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member must withdraw those words.

Mr JOHNSON:

– If they are considered unparliamentary, sir, I do so. At the same time, I draw your attention to the recumbent forms of sleeping members who are regarded as present, although they are unconscious of what is being done. Is this a fair or proper way in which to transact the business of the country,involving expenditure totalling tensof thousands of pounds? If a photograph of the Chamber were taken at the present moment, and copies were distributed throughout the electorates, the protests which are now being made by the members of the Opposition, who are awake and alert, would be reinforced bythose whose money we are voting away. As the Government is not alive to its responsibilities, it behoves us on the Opposition side to be all the more watchful in regard to its proposals, and since we are forced to this test of physical endurance, it will be ourduty to scrutinize every item very closely. I should like some information regarding the work of the Secretary to this Department. I notice that while he receives £800 and the Chief Clerk £600 per annum, three other clerks are paid only £705, and nine only £1,165. The Chief Clerk has a salary which amounts to more than half the amount paid to nine of his subordinates, which suggests that some of them must receive remuneration not in proportion to the services they render, and appears to justify the complaint sometimes heard that those who do most work are paid least.

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

– There is no quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

– I wish to refer to a matter to which I think I shall be in order in referring, since we are now dealing with the first item in the Department of Home Affairs.

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

– I take it that the whole administration of the Department is now under review.

The CHAIRMAN:

– In Committee of Supply, it is customary to allow a general discussion on the first item of a Department.

Mr KELLY:

– I do not wish to raise a bar against the triumphal progress of the Government, having already made known my objection tothis indecent procedure.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– That is hardly in order.

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

– Politically, the procedure now being enforced by the Government is most indecent.

Mr KELLY:

– The people of Paddington, Sydney - and the leader of ihe Labour Party, if awake, would indorse what I am about to say - have long realized that unless the Oxford-street frontage of the Victoria Barracks reserve is re-transferred to the State Government, with a view to subdivision and sale, the progress of that suburb will be seriously retarded. The Department of Home Affairs, when approached in regard to the matter, very rightly took the view that the interests of Defence are paramount to those of any municipality, but were willing, if the Defence Department felt that it could do without the frontage, or a portion of it, to agree to the re-transfer.

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

– There is not a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Mr KELLY:

– When the honorable and learned member for Corinella was Minister of Defence in the Reid-McLean Administration, he went very carefully into the matter, and minuted the papers in the case to the effect that a portion of the land fronting Oxford-street, of a reasonable depth, could be re-transferred to the New South Wales authorities, provided that sufficient was retained for entrances to the barracks. I, as representing the electoral division in which Paddington is situated, was duly notified of the minute, and informed the Municipal Council and people of Paddington accordingly. When a minute, written to express a Government intention, is made public, it must be taken to have become a Ministerial . promise ; but, although the promise to which d refer was made in January of last year, nothing has yet been done. The Department of Home Affairs, at one time, despite my representations, appeared to be under the impression that the municipality of Paddington is not altogether in favour of the retransfer. All my letters to the Department bearing upon this subject pointed to the unswerving desire of the municipality of Paddington to have this exchange effected, but for some reason or other the Department thought that this point was open, to question. Upon matters of this kind, it is usual for Government Departments to accept the representations of the member for the electorate in which the question arises.

Mr Groom:

– We were guided by the evidence and the advice which we received from our officers.

Mr KELLY:

– I found it very difficult to obtain any information as to the decision which the Government have arrived at. I wrote many urgent letters, asking for an immediate reply, and in some cases my communication remained unanswered for as long as six weeks.

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– Would the honorable member permit me? What the honorable member has stated is correct up to a certain point. In January of last year the late Minister of Defence expressed his opinion - no decision was given, but a minute was made, and no understanding was arrived at - that certain lands fronting Oxford-street could be conveyed to the State. In June, after the honorable member had been communicated with, the honorable and learned member for Corinella, who was still Minister of Defence, sent an officer to Sydney, who came back and reported against the Oxford-street frontage being handed over. The Minister concurred in that report. Subsequently, the matter came before me, and was again referred to the Defence Department, which adhered to the late decision of the previous Minister. The report presented by Colonel Bridges set out that the land that was proposed to be transferred could not be given over to the State without detriment to the property and the position of the barracks. It was considered by the Department undesirable to convey more than two small pieces of land. The papers were sent on to Sydney, and the whole matter. was re-opened, but the Defence Department adhered to the late decision.

Mr Kelly:

– What has happened in regard to the two small pieces of land referred to?

Mr GROOM:

– As the honorable member knows, we have no power to convey land to municipal bodies, but information was conveyed to the State Government to the effect that we were prepared to hand over the two pieces of land, subject to certain conditions, which would prevent the erection of any objectionable works, and would also relieve us from the necessity of paying the State for the land.

Mr Kelly:

– Then I understand that there is no objection on the part of the Commonwealth to the transfer of these particular pieces of land to the Paddington Council ?

Mr GROOM:

– Not if the State releases us from all financial liabilities, and certain conditions as to the user of the land are complied with.

Mr Kelly:

– Then if the Paddington Council are unable to become possessed of the land in question, the blame therefor does not attach to the Commonwealth Government ?

Mr GROOM:

– No.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.- The amount of £400 provided for postage and telegrams seems to me to be rather large.

Mr Groom:

– We have to provide for expenditure in that direction in connexion with our branches in every State. The expenditure last year was £319, and economy will continue to be exercised this year.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I see that £150 is set apart for the payment of travelling expenses, whereas only£118 was expended last year.

Mr Groom:

– The increased amount is intended to provide against contingencies, because there may be a little extra travelling this year in connexion with the negotiations regarding the transferred properties.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I see that £460 is provided for temporary assistance.

Mr Groom:

– The salary of the inquiry clerk in Sydney is included in that amount.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I see that no provision is made for increments to salaries of £160 and over. There is a general impression in the Public Service that increments are withheld from officers in the lower grades who arejustly entitled to have their salaries increased.

Mr Groom:

– There were no increases in this division.

Mr JOHNSON:

– But the increments are annual.

Mr Groom:

– The honorable member is mistaken. It is only in the fifth class that automatic increments are provided for.

Mr.JOHNSON. - I move-

That the item “Chief Clerk, £600,” be reduced by £1 .

I do not know what duties are performed by this officer, and I should like to know why we should pay him £600, whilst only £1,165 is provided for nine other clerks.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I can only look upon the honorable member’s amendment as frivolous. If he desires to reduce the salary attached to the office, he should propose to decrease the item by a substantial amount.

Mr Kelly:

– On a point of order, is it not usual to move for the reduction of an item by £1 with a view totest the feeling of the Committee upon a given question ?

The CHAIRMAN:

– Yes, that is frequently done; but the honorable member for Lang did not take up that position.

Mr Johnson:

– My object is to test the feeling of the Committee as to whether these Estimates should be proceeded with at this hour of the morning, and I understand that is the usual mode of procedure.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member would be quite in order in taking up that position.

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

– I think that we might have a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Mr JOHNSON:

– I moved the amendment under a misapprehension. I was thinking of the first item in the division while I was speaking of the Chief Clerk. I was deceived by the appearance of the figure “ 1 “ before the words “ Chief Clerk.” I quite overlooked the fact that at the top of the page there is a vote proposed for the Secretary, and, therefore, I ask leave to withdraw my amendment.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– I object.

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

– This is the first time that an honorable member has ever been refused permission to correct a mistake of that kind. In that respect the Minister is setting up a precedent. It is such conduct which is tending to bring our parliamentary institutions into disrepute. I can conceive of nothing so likely to bring them into contempt as this way of getting business done. I think that the honorable member for Lang was justified in marking his disapproval of the proceedings by moving a formal amendment. Surely there isno more sacred right than that of criticising the expenditure of the people’s money.

Mr Mahon:

– Let us get home.

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

– The honorable member has spent hours in “stone-walling “ the Estimates over a twopenny-halfpenny affair. It is he who issued his ukase to the Government a little while ago, and is responsible for this all -night sitting. Yet he now complains of having been compelled to sit up all night, after telling the Government in peremptory and swift tones that they must go on ; and “ go on “ they had to do.

Mr Mahon:

– I surrender. Let the honorable member now show mercy.

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

– The honorable member makes a very tardy surrender at this hour. I want somebody here to discuss the Estimates. I think I am justified in doing all I can to get them discussed in a reasonable manner, and by those who are in a proper position to do so. I deny that any one here is in that position. This is my second night out of bed, and I confess that I am not in a condition to undertake the task. One looks in vain for the slightest consideration from the Government, who are not governed by the ordinary rules of courtesy. They forsook them long ago.

Sir John Forrest:

– That is not complimentary to me.

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

– There is no urgency for the Estimates to be rushed through in this way. When the right honorable gentleman has rushed them through this Chamber he has to reckon that there is another Chamber which has a solid month’s work on its hands. I could understand this sort of proceeding if the other House were waiting for work to be sent up in order to close the session.

Sir John Forrest:

– They want some time up there.

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

– They want a great deal of time up there. If they had not spent all that time over the question of the transcontinental railway we might have been very much more forward with our business.

Sir John Forrest:

– The honorable member defeated that Bill. Why is he going on about it now? It is adding insult to injury.

Mr.JOSEPH COOK.- Who has defeated the Bill?

Sir John Forrest:

– The honorable member,I think.

Mr Chanter:

– What is the question before the Chair, sir?

The CHAIRMAN:

– Will the honorable member for Parramatta discuss the amendment?

Sir John Forrest:

– He seems very glad that the Bill has been defeated.

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

– As a matter of personal explanation, sir, I must reply to the remarks of the Treasurer.

The CHAIRMAN:

– Will the honorable member discuss the amendment ?

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

– Yes, sir, after I have repelled that unfair and absolutely incorrect statement.

Sir John Forrest:

– What is the honorable member jeering about?

The CHAIRMAN:

– Will the Treasurer keep silent ?

Sir John Forrest:

– Yes, sir; but the honorable member is jeering about the defeat of a measure in which I took a very great interest.

Mr.JOSEPH COOK.- Again the right honorable gentleman is grossly inaccurate.

Sir John Forrest:

– I beg the honorable member’s pardon if he has not. I understood that he was jeering.

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

– I am merely pointing out that that Bill, amongst other things, led to the congestion of business in the Senate, because the time which was occupied in its discussion could have been profitably occupied in the consideration of other measures.

Sir John Forrest:

– Why should it not take time to discuss that Bill?

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

– The right honorable member met his Nemesis over that Bill after his grossly unfair statements about the right honorable member for East Sydney. If ever a man tried hard to get it through, the right honorable gentleman did.

The CHAIRMAN:

– It is very tiring for the Chairman to be continually calling honorable members to order. If they continue to disregard his authority, it is of no use for him to be here. I ask honorable members to refrain from these continuous interchanges of personalities concerning irrelevant matters.

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

– I believe, sir, that all this disorder has come through our not having a quorum. [Quorum formed.] There are very many items in this division of the Estimates which ought to receive the earnest consideration of the Committee. How is it possible, for instance, to deal effectively with the proposed vote for the Electoral Office and its administration? It is impossible to deal with such items at this hour, and in the condition of physical and mental incapacity which characterizes honorable members generally.

Mr SALMON:
Laanecoorie

– I have listened carefully to the whole discussion, and have come to the conclusion that the best thing the Committee can do is to pass the division without further debate.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

– I rise to. protest further against the way in which our proceedings are being conducted. As an illustration of the soundness of my protest and of my statement that the Committee is not in a fit condition to proceed with business. - being in a state of physical and mental exhaustion - I may mention that I hold in my hand a list of the names of honorable members who are asleep in the Chamber at this moment. I have taken the names for the purpose of using them when the proper time comes to show how the Estimates, were bludgeoned through while honorable members were slumbering.

Mr Chanter:

– I ask the ruling of the Chairman as to whether the honorable member for Lang is in order in reflecting upon the procedure of the Committee, and in stating that he has taken names with the object of using them for a certain purpose later on.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member -is quite in order up to the present stage.

Mr Crouch:

– I beg to move -

That the honorable member for Lang be no further heard.

We are not going to sit here any longer listening to this twaddle.

The CHAIRMAN:

– Under what standing order does the honorable member submit his motion?

Mr Crouch:

– Under standing order C passed in November last. I am not going to be a party to business being blocked by stupid twaddle.

The CHAIRMAN:

– There can be no debate upon the motion.

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

– I rise to order. The honorable member for Corio used the phrase “insulting twaddle” concerning another honorable member.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I did not hear the remark, but if it was made the honorable member for Corio must withdraw it.

Mr Crouch:

– I gladly withdraw it on your instruction.

Question - That the honorable member for ““Lang be no further heard - put. Division called for, but there being no tellers for the “ Ayes,” question resolved in the negative.

Mr CROUCH:
Corio

– - After what has occurred I refuse to take any further part in this all-night sifting; and I shall leave the Chamber. An all-night sitting is only justified by obstruction, and if there is obstruction we have power to deal with it. I sat up several nights last vear to give the Government this power. 1 think the Government have a duty in the conduct of the business of the country, and to that end I think they ought to have voted to stop this stupid, senseless twaddle.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member must withdraw that remark.

Mr CROUCH:

– I withdraw it.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.- After sitting until this hour, honorable members are not in a condition to deal with large questions of finance. I have here a list of eleven honorable members who have been asleep in the Chamber during the discussion.

Mr Storrer:

– I rise to a point of order. If the honorable member for Lang has such a list he ought to read it, so that we maybe in a position to judge whether it is correct.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I am the judge of the correctness of the list, and I have 110 desire to read the names, and perhaps cause innocent members embarrassment. My point is that it is scandalous on the part of the Government to endeavour to transact important public business under the present conditions ; and I know .of no more effective protest than a motion of the kind I have submitted. Before I proceed further I should like to have a quorum. [Quorum formed.’] We were told that we should have a proper opportunity to discuss grievances when we consented to abolish grievance day. Under the circumstances, however, I wish my amendment to be regarded as a protest against this method of conducting public business.

Amendment negatived.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 21 (Electoral Office), £6,012. *

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

– I de: sire to draw attention to an improvement which I think should be made. In the Chief Electoral Office there is a great deal of work involved in placing the. names on the roll ; and I desire to point out that the office in Sydney is, perhaps, one of the most inaccessible in the city. It is situated at the top of Denman Chambers, and there is no lift. I feel quite sure that if there were an accessible office a great many more people would enroll themselves than we find under present conditions.

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– The enrolment of electors usually takes place at the offices of the electoral registrars and divisional returning officers. , In many instances the electoral registrar’s office is at the

Mr BROWN:
Canobolas

.- I wish to bring under the notice of the Minister a matter which has possibly been the cause of very grave irregularities in the past, and if not attended to might lead to complications in the future. I have here what is known as a tally-sheet, which is used by presiding officers for the purpose’ of recording votes polled. It is supposed to record 150 votes. It is marked off in squares of fives, but if closely inspected, it will be seen that the last square instead of providing for five should provide for ten in order to make up the 150. The result has been that where these sheets have been accepted as recording the full number of 150 “votes, they have recorded five more than has actually been polled.

Mr Groom:

– If the honorable member will let me have the tally-sheet, I shall make inquiries into the matter.

Mr BROWN:

– I shall do so. There is one other matter to which. I should like to refer. I think that better arrangements might be made for enabling electors to ascertain whether their names are on the various rolls. I understand that the rolls are now being compiled^ anc! it is proposed that as soon as Chey are printed they shall be issued to police stations, post offices, and public schools for the information of electors. It seems to me that in some instances rolls should be issued and exposed at polling places outside of the division to which they refer. Where the polling places, for instance, are on the boundary line of a division, this should certainly be done. I may take as an example the town of Young, which: was previously in the Bland electorate, and is now in the Calare electorate, and I think the rolls for both divisions should be exhibited there. The same thing would apply to Borenore, in the West Macquarie Division. The rolls for each of these divisions should, I think, be exhibited at both polling places. Again, residents in the vicinity of Wyalong, which is in the Riverina electorate, are on the Calare roll, and the rolls ‘for the two electorates should be exhibited at Wyalong. If the

Mr Groom:

– I shall attend to that matter.

Mr RONALD:
Southern Melbourne

– I wish to call attention to the remuneration given to returning officers. I ask the Minister to look into that matter, because I have been led to believe that they are verv poorly remunerated.

Mr Groom:

– I have looked into that matter, and will make a recommendation.

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

– I hope the Minister will take some notice of what has been said by the honorable member for Canobolas. I should like to mention the case of the North Shore polling -place. The North Sydney electorate has hitherto comprised all that northern suburb, and the electors have conveniently recorded their votes, at a polling booth established on the North Shore pier. The North Sydney electorate has since been curtailed very much, and the upper part of it has been included in the Parramatta electorate. If the polling place for the residents of this district is not continued at the North Shore pier, from 12,000 to 14.000 persons, who still travel to the city through the North Sydney electorate, will be greatly inconvenienced.

Mr Groom:

– The honorable member is going a little further. What the honorable member for Canobolas referred to was the exhibition of the rolls. The honorable member for Parramatta is referring to the establishment of polling Booths.

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

– Yes. The electors should have the same facilities as they have previously enjoyed.

Mr Groom:

– I think that the very place to which the honorable member has referred is under the consideration of the Department at the present moment.

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

– I shall be satisfied if a polling booth is established at which the electors can vote as thev go to the city. I should like to hear from the Minister some statement as to the condition of the rolls. From all the evidence I can get, thev would appear to be in a shocking, condition.

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– The New South Wales rolls were collected last year under instructions given by my predecessor. They were compiled and exhibited by the registrars, who received all applications for enrolment from that time up to the beginning of June. We then gave instructions to the New South Wales police in collecting the police rolls to include in our rolls the names of all persons who were entitled to be on them. These rolls are now being printed, and if the instructions given have been carried out, the New South Wales rolls should be complete to date. They are being distributed now, and will be exposed immediately in order that if by accident the name of any elector has been omitted an opportunity will be afforded for remedying the omission in the preparation of the supplementary rolls. By the middle of October, the whole of the rolls for New South Wales should be in the hands of the divisional returning officers and registrars.

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

– All I have to say in reply to that is that I heard a man say that on investigation he found that scores of names of persons residing in a s.ingle street were not on- the roll.

Mr Groom:

– Perhaps he has one of the old rolls, and not one of the rolls now in the hands of the registrars.

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

– I understand that he had a new roll.

Mr Groom:

– If the honorable member will supply me with exact information, I shall make inquiries.

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

– I I shall be glad to communicate with my informant, and ask him to forward the information.

Mr Groom:

– If what the honorable member says is correct, there must have been some defect in the police collection.

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

– I do not pretend to say who is to blame, but I have been informed that some of the Sydney city rolls are in a shocking condition.

Mr Groom:

– In some parts of the city area the annual movement of the population represents 33^ per cent, of the total number on the rolls.

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

– There should, therefore, be all the more care on the part of the Department. I am told that the names of nearly 10,000 persons have been added to the Dalley roll, and 8,000 or 9,000 names have been taken off that. roll. This bears out what the Minister has said.

Mr Groom:

– That would, I think, represent a movement of 50 per cent.

Mr Brown:

– I do not think that any of the new rolls have yet been exhibited, and it is, therefore, impossible to say what names ought to be on the roll.

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

– If instructions were given that the names should be collected as far back as June, the rolls should be ready for inspection before to-day.

Mr Groom:

– I think the police began their ‘Collection on the 1st July. It occupies about six weeks, and then the manuscript had to be prepared and the rolls printed from the manuscript.

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

– The Minister must see that if it takes three months to compile the rolls displacements to the extent of one-third of 33^ per cent, of the total names on the rolls will take place while they are being compiled.

Mr Groom:

– Quite so. But in the meantime notices are issued informing people that if they transfer their residence from one place to another they should notify the registrars of the change. All transfers which take place up to the date, of the issue of the writ will appear on the supplementary rolls.

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

– It was stated the other day that in the case of the new portion added to the Parramatta electorate alone no -less than 1,100 notices of objection had been lodged.

Mr Groom:

– That would probably be due to the police examination of the rolls. If they discover that people have removed from one district to another they notify the registrar, and he serves notices on the persons concerned, who have then twenty-one days within which to appear and object.

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

– I am’ afraid that even after we have done our best the rolls will be very imperfect.

Mr Groom:

– The trouble is chiefly due to the movement of population, and to the apathy which electors exhibit in respect of the registration of their names.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– Can the Minister explain why the names of persons who have sent in their electoral claims do not appear upon the roll ?

Mr Groom:

– We have had Instances in which registrars have failed to carry out their duties.

Mr Tudor:

– I suppose that the name of any elector who has sent in a claim within the past eighteen months will appear upon the roll which will be issued during the next fortnight?

Mr Groom:

– Yes.

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

– The probability is that a great number of them will »ot appear there. I presume that no postmaster who acts as an electoral official will be removed from the district in which he is at present located until after the elections ?

Mr Groom:

– No. All the divisional returning officers have received their instructions in anticipation of the election.

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

– When will the rolls be completed?

Mr Groom:

– In some instances, the country lists have been circulated.

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

– It is important that honorable members should be provided with copies of them at the earliest possible moment.

Mr Groom:

– I have issued instructions that so soon as the rolls for each electorate are issued, half-a-dozen copies shall be forwarded to the sitting member.

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

– When will they be ready?

Mr Groom:

– They will all have been issued by the 13th October.

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

– That is very late indeed, although I gather from the way in which business is progressing in the Senate that the general elections will not take place until December. I trust that we shall not have a repetition of what occurred at the last elections, when thousands of electors were disfranchised through no fault of their own.

Mr CHANTER:
Riverina

.- There is one matter that I should like to bring under the notice of the Minister.

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

– I think that we should have a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Mr CHANTER:

– The matter which I desire to bring under the notice of the Minister relates to the removal of names from the rolls.

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

– There is not a quorum present. The Prime Minister must remain in the chamber. He is under just as much’ obligation to be here as I am. [Quorum formed.]

Mr.- CHANTER. - In many instances the police lodge objections to certain names which appear upon the rolls. Their objections are forwarded to the electoral registrars, who in turn transmit them to the returning officer for the division. A letter is then sent to the last known address of the elector concerned, apprizing him of the objection which has been lodged. In scores of cases in which men have simply moved from one town to another in the same electoral division these communications have not reached them.

Sir John Forrest:

– Why did they not notify the electoral office of their change of address ?

Mr CHANTER:

– They are under the impression, that so long as they remain in the electoral division it is not necessary to do that. The result is that their names are struck off the rolls. The remedy for this evil appears to be a very simple one. Instead of a letter being forwarded by the authorities to the last known’ address of the voter it should be forwarded to his new address.

Mr Groom:

– I have taken a note of the honorable member’s complaint, and will have it attended to.

Mr MALONEY:
Melbourne

.- I should like to say that the Electoral De-‘ partment is always ready to accept claims for the insertion of new names -upon the roll. In my own electorate no less than 7,000 names have been added to it in about eight weeks.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

– I desire to ask the Minister if ifr is proposed to test the voting machine which is now on view in another portion of the parliamentary buildings?

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– In reply to the honorable member, I wish to say that many voting machines have been submitted to the Electoral Department, but it is utterly impossible for us to extend a preference toany one of them. ‘ I have asked the Commonwealth electoral officer to inspect the. machine which is now on view outside .”of this chamber, and, if advisable, to secure the expert advice of the Department upon it.

Mr Salmon:

– Could such a machine be used at an election without first securing an amendment of the Electoral Act?

Mr GROOM:

– We cannot allow any machine to be used in a polling booth, but if its proprietor is prepared to incur the cost of the experiment we may consider the advisability of testing it in some place near; to a polling booth. Of course, whatever’” privileges are extended to one machine- in that connexion will be extended to others.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.- The honorable member for Parramatta has mentioned one matter which is of very great importance. It relates to the compilation of our electoral rolls. Not long ago ninety names were collected in one street in Surrey

Hills, Sydney, which was selected haphazard.

Mr Groom:

– H - How long ago?

Mr JOHNSON:

– Only three or four weeks. A couple of persons armed with a small book made a house-to-house canvass with a view to ascertaining who were entitled to be enrolled. As soon as the work of collection was finished the names were checked with the manuscript which had been supplied by the police.

Mr Tudor:

– How were they able to get access to the manuscript of the police?

Mr JOHNSON:

– The names were checked at the electoral office. The result was that out of ninety names which had been collected, it was found that fifty persons were not upon the roll. The street in which the experiment was tried was chiefly inhabited by. artisans, with their wives and families.

Mr Groom:

– I should like to be supplied with full particulars of the case to which the honorable member refers, so that I might look into it.

Mr JOHNSON:

– Claims were entered on behalf of those who had been left off the rolls, and I presume that they received attention. It seems to me, however, that it is reasonable to assume that the names of persons residing in other streets, and in other electorates, may also have been left off in the same way. The omission was certainly a very serious one.

Mr Groom:

– It calls for a report, and if the honorable member will supply me with the particulars of the case, I shall obtain one.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I shall endeavour to supply the Minister with the necessary information. There is another matter which I desire to bring -under his attention. The polling places for the various electorateshave already been fixed, but I wish to know whether, on a complaint by any considerable body of electors that the polling booth nearest to them is inconvenient, a more convenient one would be appointed?

Mr Groom:

– If the honorable member will supply me with the names of polling places that are considered inconvenient I shall see what can be done in the matter. We had a complaint the other day in regard to a polling place at Mortlake. New South Wales.

Mr JOHNSON:

– It has been represented to me that, owing to the situation of some of* the polling places, much incon venience was experienced at the last general election.

Mr. Mcwilliams (Franklin) [6.37]. - i should like to know whether the Department could arrange with the States authorities to keep the approaches to the polling places clear ?

Mr Groom:

– Canvassing within twenty yards of a polling place is an offence.

Mr mcwilliams:

– i am referring, not to the canvassers, but to the crowd of “hangers on” who usually congregate around the entrance to polling places. Since the franchise has been extended to women, i think that it is desirable that the approaches should not be blocked up in that way, and that the move-on clause should be enforced.

Mr Groom:

– i shall make inquiries into the matter.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

. -i move -

That the item, “Chief Electoral Officer, £-00,” be reduced by £1. i take this step as a protest against our being compelled to remain here to deal with the Estimates at this hour in the morning.

Question put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 4

NOES: 24

Majority

20

AYES

NOES

Question ,so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 22 (Public Service Commissioner). -^8,785

Mr THOMAS:
Barrier

.- Some misunderstanding has arisen in certain quarters in connexion with the examinations held under the jurisdiction of the Public Service

Commissioner. From what I can gather, complaint has been made that the fact that so few members of the general division sought, nt a recent examination, to qualify for the clerical branch of the service was an evidence of a regrettable lack of ambition. It would appear, however, that many members of the general division of the Public Service, who had been training for months to pass the examination, were, at the last moment, constrained to stand aside, owing to an alteration of the subjects being made without sufficient notice. Mr. Muirden, the principal of a college at Adelaide, has written a letter to the press, in which he deals with the question. He tells me that he, personally, has no reason to complain, since three out of the five candidates who were successful at the last examination in the Commonwealth were coached by him. In the letter in question he states -

In the column containing Federal news in your issue of the 23rd inst., reference is made to the Civil Service examination which was held recently to enable officers in the general division to transfer to the clerical. The Public Service Commissioner reports that out of 700 general division officers entitled to compete only 20 felt disposed to face the examination. By inference the Commissioner assigns the cause to apathy on the part of the officers concerned, but a consideration’ of the facts will force one to a very different conclusion. Bv the regulations for transfer from the general division to the clerical officers are required to pass an examination in handwriting, dictation, English, arithmetic, and geography. Basing- their studies on these regulations, many officers spent a good deal of lime and money during last year to become proficient for transfer, and to take full advantage of the forthcoming examination. One can imagine their surprise, however, when it was publicly announced in January last that shorthand and typewriting were to be substituted for geography in the examination to be held within three months of that time, and that the test in shorthand was to be ‘120 words per minute. Later information revealed the fact that candidates were expected to make, in 30 minutes, a typewritten transcript of their shorthand notes, consisting of 600 words. The result was that many who had spent the previous twelve or eighteen months in hard study had to abandon the examination because thev felt that they could not in so short a time reach the standard required.

Such occurrences are very unfortunate.

Mr Groom:

– Hear, hear.

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

– We ought to have a quorum. [Quorum formed

Mr THOMAS:

– I think we ought to popularize these examinations. -Let the standard be as high as is considered desirable, and the examinations conducted on sound lines, and good results will be secured. If the successful candidates were in excess of the number for whom appointments could be found, I am sure that private employers would be glad to secure the services of those who had passed such a test.

Mr Groom:

– I will make a note of the point.

Mr THOMAS:

– Another matter to which I desire to call attention relates to the position of the Postal and Customs officials in the Barrier district, who hold that they should be entitled to receive at least the No. 2 scale of allowances. At present they are in the No. 1 scale, and they contend that, owing to the increased price of groceries, meat, greengroceries, wood and coal, lighting, sanitary fees, and milk, the cost of living there,, in the case of a man with ‘ a family, is about £52 per annum more than it is in Sydney. I understand the officers of the New South Wales Government who are stationed there receive living allowances on the No. 2 scale, if that is so, there seems to me to be an injustice to the Commonwealth officers.

Mr Groom:

– I shall look into the matter.

Mr. mcwilliams (Franklin) [6.57]. - I wish to know whether the telegraph messengers, who, under the Act, are compelled to leave the service on reaching the age of eighteen,, are the first to be chosen for other work when vacancies occur.

Mr Groom:

– No. The Government intend to pass a measure this session raising the age from eighteen to twenty.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:

– I also desire to direct the attention of the “Minister to the absurdity of requiring officers who will never have to use it to pass an examination testing their skill in shorthand writing. While the ability to write shorthand is undoubtedly of great service to those engaged in secretarial employments, for 75 per cent, of the officers, such as those in the accountants’ branches, it is practically a useless acquirement. If, as I have been informed has been the case, men have been asked to show their proficiency by writing shorthand at the rate of 120 words a minute after only three months’ notice that they would be examined in shorthand, great injustice has been done, because, although we sometimes read of persons who have attained that degree of skill in so short a time, one never meets actual shorthand writers who have done so.

Mr BROWN:
Canobolas

– I understand that under the Act, whenever a complaint is made against an officer in connexion with which an investigation is ordered, he is suspended, often to the inconvenience and loss of the Department, and sometimes suffers unmerited aspersion upon his character.

Mr Poynton:

– Sometimes an investigation is not ordered because of the inconvenience which suspension would cause.

Mr BROWN:

– Yes, and in those cases perhaps injustice is occasionally done. In New South Wales, probably because of alterations in the inspecting staff, and new officials taking charge, the rule is more rigidly insisted upon now than was formerly the case, with the result that men are sometimes suspended on the most trivial charges. In a. country town angry words may be used by an official to his subordinate as the result of a quarrel, and on the matter being reported, an investigation is ordered, and word goes round that “ Mr. So-and-so is suspended.” The public, not understanding the technical nature of the procedure, conclude that a very grave charge has been preferred, and for a time unjustifiable reproach is cast upon the person, suspended, notwithstanding perhaps years of good service. No doubt where the’ offence charged is serious, suspension should take place.

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

– There is not a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Mr BROWN:

– I understand that the Government propose to alter the law with respect to the retirement of telegraph messengers. I shall be ready to assist in having the Bill I have in hand discharged from the business paper.

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– A measure has been prepared to meet the case of the telegraph messengers. With regard to the other matter mentioned, the Public Service Commissioner has the subject under consideration, and it will be necessary to introduce an amending Bill to alter the Act in regard to several other provisions, including that under which the suspensions take place.

Mr Brown:

– Could not the matter be dealt with in the Bill dealing with the telegraph messengers ?

Mr GROOM:

– No, because its advisability has to be considered, and a number of consequential amendments would be necessary, which would provoke a great deal of discussion.

Mr Brown:

– Then it would be desirable for the Public Service Commissioner to issue the instruction that the section should not be applied unless that course is absolutely, necessary.

Mr GROOM:

– I shall make that suggestion to him to consider the matter.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

– I wish to bring under the notice of the Minister the case of two men employed in the Postal Department who are being buffeted between the Commonwealth and State authorities, and cannot obtain satisfaction from either. The particulars are set out very clearly in the following -statement, prepared for them by Messrs. Shipway and Berne, solicitors, Sydney :

William S. Gowen and Alfred E. B. Gilder for some time previous to 1896 were members of the New South Wales police force doing duty as detectives for the Postal Department. In i8g6 they were graded with the Postal Department by the New South Wales Public Service Board, the first intimation they had of the fact being the Gazette notice.

In consequence of this change, they made applications for a refund of the amounts which they had contributed to the Police Superannuation Fund, which in Gowen’s case amounted to £21 gs. 3d., and in Gilder’s, to ^37 :s. rod.

In support of their application they pointed out that in consequence of the transfer from the Police Department they were deprived of any prospective benefits from the Police Super,annuation Fund,; also that the transfer was not made at their request, but purely as a matter of Departmental arrangement and convenience, the duties remaining unchanged in any way. They therefore considered they were entitled to the refund asked for. The matter was submitted to the Police Department through the Chief Secretary’s Office. In September, r8o,6, the Inspector-General of Police wrote the following minute : - “This would not be legal under the provisions of the Police Regulation Act. There are many police who have left the service for other employment.”

Messrs. Gowen and Gilder pointed out that if as implied therein thev are regarded as having “ left the service for other employment,” by virtue of the action of the Public Service Board in placing them nominally under the Postal instead of the Police Department, it would be illegal to grant them the refund sought, the effect upon them would be serious, as they could neither obtain a pension under the police nor the Public Service Act, and would also be deprived of their superannuation contributions to the police fund.

On this appeal the then Postmaster-General (Mr. Crick), wrote the following minute : - “ I quite agree that Gowen and Gilder should be granted what they ask. They did not leave the service for other employment, but are in their present position as an act of obedience to the Government of New South Wales, and if the Colonial Secretary’s Department still refuse to comply, then I must strongly urge Mr. Drake to pay the amount as a matter of justice, but it will be well to bring the papers again before my honorable colleague Mr. See.”

As directed, the matter was again brought tinder the notice of the honorable Sir J. (then Mr.) See.

Reporting further, the Inspector-General of Police on 12th May, 1902, states - “ No such refund could be legally made unless by special vole of Parliament. I can see no distinction between these cases and thousands of others where members of the police force have resigned to improve their conditions. Some in other branches of the Public Service. The refund would create an embarrassing precedent.”

Messrs. Cowen and Gilder explained that there may of course be other cases similar to theirs, but they have never heard of any. They pointed out that the Postmaster-General, Mr. Crick, who is a recognised legal authority, agreed that their request was a just one; and they urged that if the refund could not be made to them from the Police Superannuation Fund the alternative course suggested by the InspectorGeneral of having the amount placed on the Estimates to meet the case by vote of Parliament be adopted. As suggested by Mr. Crick, the case was referred to the PostmasterGeneral of the Commonwealth, Mr. Drake. The transfer- of the Postal Department to the Commonwealth took place just at this time. The reply received through the Commonwealth inspector, Mr. G. A. McKay, then ActingSecretary, was as follows :- “ I am directed to return herein the papers in connexion with the above matter, and to say that the Public Service Commissioner has looked carefully into the facts of the case, and is of opinion that the claims are against those who are administering the Police Superannuation Fund, which is purely a State matter. If those administering that fund cannot legally pay the amounts said to be due, the State Government. I am to state, and not the Commonwealth, should, he considers, provide the necessary funds on the Estimates.” The position of Cowen and Gilder is they are confident, and quite unique. They were transferred as a matter of Departmental arrangement and convenience, and without being consulted, their case is fairly put by Mr. Crick in his minute, which recognises the equity of their claim, and points out that “ they are in their present positions in obedience to the Government of New South Wales.” Thev therefore humbly petition the Premier, the Honorable J. H. Carruthers, lo give their case the consideration it deserves.

Mr Groom:

– Did they apply to the State Government?

Mr JOHNSON:

– Yes, and the State Government refused to recognise any liability in the matter. Technically, the State may be responsible, but the moral liability rests upon the Commonwealth, because the accruing rights of these men should have been considered when they were taken over from the State service.

Mr Groom:

– The question is whether they nave any accruing rights within the meaning of the Constitution. I shall look into the case.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I do not rest any claim, so far as the Commonwealth is concerned, upon legal grounds. I certainly think that we should deal justly by them. There should be no suspicion of sharp practice on our part.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- This matter might very well be taken up and definitely settled by the Minister without further delay. A number of other cases involving almost as much hardship have been brought under my notice. Officers having certain rights under the States are not protected by section 84 of the Constitution, and, by means of a legal technicality, are being cheated out of that to which they are entitled. The Commonwealth is morally responsible beyond any doubt, and I trust that the clamour of the States Treasurers, who are seeking to evade their liability, will be resisted by the Minister. The intention of the provision in the Constitution is very clear, namely; that no officer transferred to re Commonwealth shall suffer any diminution of the rights to which he was entitled under the State laws at the time of transfer. I trust that the Minister will at once recognise the rights of these men, and take definite action in the matter.

Mr WATKINS:
Newcastle

.- I quite agree with the remarks of the honorable members for Lang and Wentworth with regard to the hardships inflicted upon some officers owing to the fact that their accruing rights are not sufficiently protected by the Constitution. I know of one case in which a postmaster, who had been considerably reduced in status by. the Public Service Commissioner in New South Wales, had an appeal pending at the transfer of the Department to the Commonwealth. Consequently, he was taken over at a veryconsiderable reduction upon his previous salary. The Commonwealth Commissioner could not take cognisance of anything that had occurred prior to the date of transfer, and, therefore, could not hear the appeal of th~e officer, whilst it was held that the hearing of the appeal could not be completed by the New South Wales Commissioners. As a result, the officer referred to has had to remain at his reduced status, and a number of juniors have been appointed over his head.

Mr Kelly:

– As a matter of fact, the officer’ had a right to an inquiry under the

State laws, and that right should have been preserved under the Commonwealth.

Mr WATKINS:

– Precisely. The officer was practically denied the right of appeal, and his case is typical of many others. It appears to me that the Commonwealth is taking advantage of a technicality to deny justice, and I trust that the Minister will give the matter his careful consideration.

Mr BROWN:
Canobolas

.- I think that grave injustice is being done to a large number of officers in connexion with their retiring allowances. Certain officers in the Postal Department were contributors to the New South Wales Superannuation Fund, and brought over with them their rights in connexion with that fund. I understand that since the transfer of the Department to the Commonwealth some alteration has been made in the conditions with regard to the payment of retiring allowances, and that the State authorities insist that these should apply to officers in the Federal service. I know of a line inspector who was recently compelled to retire owing to his having reached the prescribed age, and who, instead of receiving a month’s pay for every year of service has been asked to accept a fortnight’s pay.

Sir John Forrest:

– Not in final settlement. The Treasurer of New South Wales expressed his intention to take legal action to prevent us from giving the month’s pay.

Mr BROWN:

– It seems to me that, as a matter of justice, these men are entitled to their retiring allowance upon the scale previously fixed.

Sir John Forrest:

– I quite agree with the honorable member.

Mr BROWN:

– I hope that the Treasurer will not be frightened by_ any threats of the Premier of New South Wales, but that he will see that justice is done.

Sir John Forrest:

– The honorable member may safely leave the matter in my hands.

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

– I know something of the case to which the honorable member for Lang has referred. I believe that the transfer took place at the time that I was in charge of the Post Office in New South Wales, but that owing to their reliance upon the justice of their claim the two detectives did not bring the matter under my notice. Since then they have endeavoured to obtain some small meed of justice, and although succes sive Ministers have told them that they would look into the’ matter, no sati’sfaction has yet been obtained.

Mr Groom:

– I promise the honorable member that I shall look carefully into the papers, which I have not yet seen.

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

– The only difficulty that arises is due to the repudiation by the State of its obligation in the matter. There is no reason why the officers should be allowed to suffer owing to their transfer to the Commonwealth. The whole question hinges upon the certificate of the Inspector7General of Police, who did not want these men to leave his service. He was not very pleased with them, and perhaps was not very generous when he placed them in the same category as men who left the service voluntarily. As a matter of fact, they were transferred by the Public Service Commissioner from the Police to the Post and Telegraph Department, and it is only fair that the Department, after having had these men transferred for its own special purposes, should see that they are not penalized. The amount involved may not be very much, but it is of considerable importance to the men concerned. I should like to refer to the relation which the grant of leave to officers who are retiring bears to the value of their pension rights. A number of officers who have been transferred from the New South Wales service to that of the Commonwealth are entitled to receive pensions based upon the salary received during the three years immediately preceding their retirement. When a Commonwealth officer asks for six months’ leave on half pay. as he is entitled to do, and takes advantage of it, he is held to reduce the amount of salary upon which his pension is calculated. In the case of an officer receiving £200 or £3°° per annum, the reduction may represent a difference of £20 per annum in the value of his pension rights. I think that the difficulty might be overcome by a very simple act of legislation, which would - merely have the effect of carrying out the intention which was held in view when the holiday rights were granted.

Mr Groom:

– I shall look into the matter.

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

– I would also ask the Postmaster-General to give his careful consideration to the case of the two postoffice detectives in Sydney.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.- I notice that a sum of £500 is set down for temporary assistance, notwithstanding the fact that a similar expenditure under that head was incurred lastyear. I ask the Minister to explain for what purpose the temporary assistance is required.

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– Last year temporary assistance was required in connexion with theclassification, work, the holding of appeals, and other clerical work of that description. The services of shorthand writers and others were required for the preparation of documents both in the central office and in the offices of the inspectors. But this year it is expected that a vote of£500 will be ample for the purpose. Of course it also covers the travelling expenses.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.-In order to again enter my protest against what I conceive to be an unwarrantable method of conducting public business, I move -

That the item, “ Secretary, £600,” be reduced by £1.

Amendment negatived.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 23 (Public Works Staff), £12,746.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.- I observe that under this head an item of £350 is set down for temporary assistance, although £512 was expended for that purpose last year, notwithstanding the immense staff which is maintained.

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– We have not a large staff. This item will cover whatever temporary assistance may be required in the six States.

Mr Johnson:

– In view of the large number of clerks on the staff, why is it required at all ?

Mr GROOM:

– Sometimes it is required in the Sydney office, and also in Perth, where a good deal of our work is done. We have only a small clerical staff now.

Amendment (by Mr. Johnson) negatived -

That the item, “ Inspector-General of Works, £800,” be reduced by £1.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 24 (Census and Statistics), £8,704.

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

– I desire to know from the Minister what is being done in connexion with this extremely important Department.

Mr GROOM:
Minister of External Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– Immediately upon his appointment the Statistician was called upon to inquire into the work which was being done by the States, and also the work which was being done by other Departments ofthe Commonwealth, and to organize his Department on an efficient and economical scale. He has visited all the States in the Union. After the Census and Statistics Act was passed, the States Premiers held a Conference in Sydney, at which they passed a resolution to the effect that the Commonwealth should take over all general statistics, and that each State should confine itself to State statistical work. We then asked the States to define what in their opinion was State work and what was general work. I think New South Wales is the only State which has attempted to make the definition. It suggested that it was highly desirable to have a conference of statisticians presided over by the Commonwealth Statistician, in order that the Commonwealth and the States should realize where they stood, and arrange, if feasible, for co-operation and the practice of economy as far as possible, and also to secure uniformity in the collection of statistics. The Statistician has made a recommendation as to the officers whom he requires. There will shortly be held in Melbourne a conference of Statisticians, and then the Commonwealth Statistician will be in a position to lay down definitely and completely the work which will be undertaken by the Commonwealth. The proposal is not to have a statistical branch’ in connexion with each Department of the Commonwealth, but to prevent the duplication of work as much as possible, and to have all the work done in one bureau of census statistics.

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

– Has the Minister any idea as to when a publication will be issued ?

Mr GROOM:

-It will not be possible to produce a work before next year, because the Statistician is busily engaged in organizing his Department.

Mr McWilliams:

– Why is it necessary for nearly all the officers, when appointed, to make a kind of holiday tour?

Mr GROOM:

– I think the honorable member will admit that it was absolutely essential that the Statistician should visit the States. The Statistician also had to investigate in each State the statistical work which was being done by the

Department of Trade and Customs. His visithas been of great value, because it will lead to the adoption of a uniform system.

Mr McWilliams:

– All that was discussed and decided at the Conference.

Mr GROOM:

– I can assure the honorable member that the visit was absolutely essential. Very late in the year the New South Wales Government notified the Commonwealth that they did not intend to continue the publication of Mr. Coghlan’s book, and, therefore, no item was put on the Estimates for that particular purpose. We have since been informed by the Pre- mier of that State that Mr. Coghlan has brought his book up-to-date from information which has been supplied to him, presumably bythe Statisticians, and will publish it this year, thus completing the series of his works. We propose to assist Mr. Coghlan to the extent of taking so many copies of his book, and supplying honorable members of Parliament and the Departments with them, and giving him a grant, as hitherto. When the Statistician gets to work it is proposed to have a Commonwealth annual publication, and also a monthly statistical register, dealing especially with the returns relating to trade, commerce, and shipping.

Mr McWILLIAMS:
Franklin

.- We are getting into a most extraordinary state of affairs. Immediately the head of a Department is appointed, his first act is to make a holiday tour round the States, and to throw away money. The statisticians met in Melbourne, and all matters in regard to statistics and the division of work were thoroughly discussed. The Commonwealth then appointed a Statistician, and at once it was incumbent upon him to make a tour. Either to-day or to-morrow I shall endeavour to get a return of the travelling expenses of Commonwealth officers during the present year. I think that when the figures are produced they will shock honorable members. When we were asked to sanction the appointment of a Federal Statistician we were led to believe that there would be a considerable reduction in the work of the States offices. But, according to my information, the work which the Commonwealth requires will necessitate the employment of an increased staff in some of the States offices. I know that the cost of collecting Statistics in Tasmania will be greater as the result of the creation of a Federal Bureau than it was formerly. The promised reduction in the States offices has not been effected. That is not because the States are not willing to reduce their staffs, but because additional’ work has been cast upon them by the creation of the Federal Bureau. We are going to an absurd extent in the creation of Federal Departments and highly-paid offices. The time is close at hand, I think, when the Commonwealth will have to cry a halt and prevent the enormous increase in the annual expenditure. It is increasing so rapidly that I feel quite certain the electors will not be prepared to foot the bill. There will be grievous disappointment when it is discovered that the creation of a Federal Bureau of Census and Statistics has resulted, in some cases, in increased expenditure on statistical work in the States offices.

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

– Referring again to the matter of the publication of a volume of Commonwealth statistics, I see here an item of £500.

Mr Groom:

– That is for last year. The money will be paid out of contingencies. I may say in reference to this Department that the office has had to be fitted with calculating machines, tabulating machines, a library, stationery, and other requisites. But these items are not recurring.

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

– When is the publication likely to become available?

Mr Groom:

– My information is that the matter is all in type. It ought to be published soon.

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

– It is a pity that we cannot get it at once. I always regarded Mr. Coghlan’s publication as most valuable. It has long been recognised as an indispensable article of a politician’s equipment. We ought to be most grateful to Mr. Coghlan for undertaking the continuance of the work after leaving the State.

Mr Groom:

– A letter of recognition has been sent to him.

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

– Speaking of the Tasmanian Statistician I should like to bear my testimony to his great ability. I have had, on several occasions, to turn to his publications, and discovered there information that even Mr. Coghlan had not given. I happen to know that Mr. Coghlan had an extremely high opinion of Mr. Johnstone, and expressed it on more than one occasion.

In fact, he said that in some departments of his work Mr. Johnstone had no compeer.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- There is an item of £5,000 here for contingencies.

Mr Groom:

– £1,500 of that was formerly voted on account of the Customs.

Mr KELLY:

– I was glad to hear that the Commonwealth Statistician has set to work to bring about co-operation between his Department and those of the States. From what I have heard privately he has done much to encourage that very desirable state of things.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

– I have made repeated protests against the present method of doing our work. I again draw attention to the soporific insensibility of the recumbent forms in the Chamber as an attestation of the potency of my protest. To emphasize it I beg to move -

That the item, “ Statistician, £1,000,” be reduced by £1.

Amendment negatived.

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

– It is a matter of very great regret to me that the Commonwealth, in establishing a statistical bureau of its own, has not succeeded in securing the abolition of the States Statistical Departments.

Mr Groom:

– We had not the power.

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

– The hopes that we had of securing economy by Federal management have been dissipated. I should have preferred that the Commonwealth Government had left the work alone rather than brought about duplication. The spending of money twice over in this direction seems to me to be nothing short of a national calamity. Surely in the matter of statistics it ought to have been possible for the States to agree upon what was required, and to allow the Commonwealth Government to carry on the work. I still think that a strong effort should be’ made by the Federal Government as the custodian of the national purse, to protect the people from extravagance in this respect. I shall be prepared to support a Government that takes steps to protest against the States continuing what must be useless departments when once the Commonwealth Department is in working order.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 25 (Works and buildings), £106,002.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

– I move -

That the item, “ New South Wales, .£37,750,” be reduced by £1.

I move in this direction once more as a protest, which I think it necessary to maintain, against these scandalous proceedings’.

Amendment negatived.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 26 (Governor-General’s Establishment), £7,255.

Mr HUTCHISON:
Hindmarsh

– I should very much like to hear the views of the deputy leader of the Opposition with regard to this division. I was rather startled the other day to come across an account of the views of the honorable member in relation to the Governor-General. I am about to quote a passage from the New South Wales Hansard of 1st December, 1892, volume 61, page 2386. I find that he then said that it was not at all necessary to parliamentary government to have a Go- ernor-General.

Mr Johnson:

– I rise to order. Is the honorable member for Hindmarsh justified in making these observations upon a vote for the Governor-General’s establishment?

The CHAIRMAN:

– Of course, I do not know what the honorable member is about to read, but I hope that it will be relevant. Does it relate to the vote under discussion?

Mr HUTCHISON:

– Undoubtedly. I wish to know whether the honorable member for Parramatta, occupying the position of deputy leader of the Opposition, holdsthe same opinions as he did in 1892 in regard to the Governor-General? Surely that is in order.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I point out to the honorable member that there was no GovernorGeneral in 1892, and that, therefore, any remarks made by the honorable member for. Parramatta at that time could not have any connexion with this division.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– But there is a Governor-General now, and the question discussed by the honorable member for Parramatta in 1892 naturally arises when we are considering a vote that suggests the question whether we should import our Governor-General, or appoint him from amongst the citizens of Australia.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I point out to the honorable member that we are not dealing with a vote for the Governor-General, but for the Governor-General’s establishment.

Mr Mahon:

– There is an item in the next division on which the honorable member’s remarks might be made - “ Conveyance of Members of Parliament and others.”

Mr Groom:

– The honorable member will be able to get in his remarks on the next division.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– I respectfully submit that I am quite in order in discussing this question. Although there is no vote for the Governor-General, there is certainly a vote for a Governor-General’s establishment ; and it is for us to say whether we agree to an establishment under the present system.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member is quite in order in saying whether or not he is in favour of a GovernorGeneral’s establishment, but he is not in order in expressing the opinion of the honorable member for Parramatta.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– I do not propose to express the opinion of the honorable member for Parramatta, because I do not know what the opinion of that honorable member is to-day. Speaking on the subject of Federation on1st December, 1892, the honorable member, as reported in New South Wales Hansard, vol 61, page 2386, said -

It does not follow at all that to have Parliamentary government we must have a GovernorGeneral appointed by the authorities in England. … It seems to me that the better way to harmonize colonial with Imperial interests would be to allow the people of the Colonies to select a Governor-General of their own, who would be in touch with the aspirations of those people, who would know what their prejudices and aspirations are, what their conditions of life are more intimately and closely by reason of his having lived here a great number of years himself. And this need not necessarily interfere with the government as we know it to exist under the Crown. It would not do so. I venture to say that we should have a little less friction created in the machinery of government if permission were given to the Colonies to elect their own Governor-General.

At that time I had some sympathy with the views of the honorable member in this regard, but I am now quite satisfied with the experiment which has been tried, and I think we have reason to be proud of our imported Governors-General. Until something else happens, I hope we shall continue to have imported Governors-General, though I could wish some different plan in regard to the States

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

– I have not the slightest objection to respond to the desire of the honorable member for Hindmarsh that I should state my views. I want to say, in one word, that I believe the view I expressed at the time the honorable member mentions, to have been an utterly mistaken one. My next sentence is that I cordially support every item in this division.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 27 (Miscellaneous), £85,200.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

– I think it is about time something was done in reference to the Capital Site, and I take this opportunity to askfor some explanation of the item of£1,000 for expenses in connexion with the choosing of the site. There has been a solidifying of public sentiment in New South Wales on this question ; and I suggest that before we rise some effort should be made to obtain a concrete expression of opinion from the New South Wales representatives.

Mr Frazer:

– Does the honorable member think that the New South Wales members oughtto settle this Australian question ?

Mr KELLY:

– I have not expressed such an opinion. But quite a number of honorable members have expressed themselves as satisfied to vote for the site favoured by New South Wales if New South Wales will only come to a decision.

Mr Frazer:

– The honorable member assumes that New South Wales members have greater knowledge on this question than other honorable members.

Mr KELLY:

– With all respect, I say that the New South Wales representatives have, at any rate, a more intimate knowledge than have other honorable members of the feeling of New South Wales on this question.

Mr Frazer:

– We are not concerned, of necessity, with the feelings of the New South Wales people - we have to make the best Australian choice.

Mr KELLY:

– The honorable member seems to have forgotten that this question of the Capital Site is the result of a compromise entered into between the people of New South Wales on the one hand and the people of the Commonwealth, as a whole, on the other. That contract was that the Capital was to be in New South Wales within a reasonable distance of Sydney

Mr Hutchison:

– There was no compact to that effect.

Mr KELLY:

– Honorable members have seen the official correspondence, and they knew that I have in effect quoted the resolution which was arrived at at the Confer- ence of Premiers, and subsequently embodied in the Constitution.

Mr Hutchison:

– That contract has been carried out by the selection already made.

Mr KELLY:

– The site referred to is as far as possible from the 100-miles limit.

Mr Watson:

– In the most desolate spot that could be found.

Mr.KELLY. - Quite apart from the Constitution, the present site is so desolate and barren that trees will not grow, or, if they do, they grow awry. The contract entered into between the Commonwealth and New South Wales entitles the people of the latter State to express an opinion as to whether the bargain has been fully honoured in the spirit.

Sitting suspended from 8.15 to9. 45 a.m. (Thursday).

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.- There is an item included in this division, upon which I desire some information. I see that it is proposed to appropriate the sum of £1,000 in connexion with the choice of the Federal Capital Site. I should like to know how that money is to be expended?

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

– There is no quorum present, Mr. Chairman. (Quorum formed.)

Mr JOHNSON:

– I was under the impression that the last visit of honorable members to various suggested Capital Sites was conducted at the expense of the New South Wales Government. Consequently the item cannot relate to expenditure of that character, and, so far as I am aware, no fresh surveys have been undertaken. To what does the proposed appropriation relate?

Mr Groom:

– It is intended to cover expenses which may be incurred during the year.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I do not think that we should provide any additional sum to enable honorable members to visit sites which have already been inspected. I am aware that the Prime Minister informed us the other day that, in consequence of a desire on the part of some honorable members to re-visit certain sites in, the Albury district and at Tooma, this question could not be finally settled during the current session. But in view of the long hours which we are compelled to sit day after day, I hope that the Government will be able to set apart an. afternoon before the session closes for the discussion of it. Surely before we agree to any further ex penditure we should know exactly the purpose to which it is to be devoted. In the absence of that information we should refuse to sanction it. If any money be required to carry out further survey work it can be taken out of the Treasurer’s advance account.

Sir John Forrest:

– Not if this item be struck out.

Mr JOHNSON:

– Whatever Treasurer may be in power will be compelled to introduce Supply Bills during the progress of next session, and any necessary provision for expenditure in connexion with this vexed question can be made in them. In my judgment the Government are censurable for the apathywhich has marked their treatment of it from the very beginning. In New South Wales the matter is regarded in a far more serious light than it is by the representatives of other States and by the members of the Ministry. Certainly it is high time that it was finally disposed of.

Mr Chanter:

– If we select Albury, will the honorable member be satisfied?

Mr JOHNSON:

– I am not wedded to any particular site. I merely desire to see the most eligible one selected, always provided that it conforms to the spirit of the agreement which was arrived at by the Per- miers’ Conference prior to the draft Constitution as amended being submitted to the people. I fail to see why a decision upon this question cannot be arrived at before the close of the session.

Sir John Forrest:

– Which site does the honorable member prefer?

Mr JOHNSON:

– I do not bind myself to any particular site, but I believe it is now admitted that Mahkoolma or Canberra would be more suitable than Dalgety or Tumut. I am satisfied that the majority of the people of New South Wales would favour the Lyndhurst site. We know that several honorable members voted against Lyndhurst for a particular purpose, and it was not because they thought Dalgety the most suitable site. In view of the new sites which have been suggested, honorable members should now have an opportunity, without going back upon their previous vote, to give expression to the desire of the majority. They might select either Mahkoolma or Canberra.

Mr Watson:

– Mahkoolma is out of it.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I believe that the majority of honorable members would prefer the selection of Canberra.

Mr Ronald:

– My impression is that if the selection were left to the New South Wales people it would be Doomsday before it would be made.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I do not think there would be any trouble in securing unanimity amongst the people of New South Wales. They are, I think, mainly, desirous that the compact entered into at the Premiers’ Conference shall be adhered to as nearly as possible.

Mr Watson:

– I think they would be quite satisfied with Canberra.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I believe they would be prepared to leave the matter to their representatives in the Federal Parliament. I do not know how the members of the Labour Party feel upon this matter, but I think they would all be willing to fall into line with labour representatives from New South Wales if they expressed a desire for the selection of Canberra. In order that the Minister may give the Committee some information as to what is proposed to be done with the vote of £1,000, to which I have referred. I shall resume my seat.

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

.- I do not intend to oppose the vote of £1,000 submitted in connexion with the selection of the site of the Capital of the Commonwealth, but I should like to hear from the Minister of Home Affairs how long this expenditure is to continue. Ever since Federation was accomplished, some vote for this purpose has appeared on the Estimates, and we do not appear to be any nearer to a settlement of the question than we were four or five years ago. It is time the question was settled. I point out that the provision requiring that the site selected shall not be within 100 miles of Sydney, does not mean that it must be 200 or 300 miles from Sydney, but a reasonable distance beyond the 100-mile limit..

Mr- Groom. - Armidale, for instance.

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

– I should not object to Armidale, although I consider it would be somewhat beyond the limit.

Mr Tudor:

– Did not the honorable member vote for Armidale, and is it not 350 miles from Sydney?

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

– I did, and’ so did the honorable member for Maranoa. I did not think there was the slightest chance of Armidale being selected, but it was our duty, as representatives of the northern State, to vote for it.

Mr Salmon:

– Then the honorable member thinks it is the duty of the Vic torian representatives to vote for the site, nearest this State.

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

– They are able and selfish enough to look after the interests of their own State. I find no fault with them for doing so. The centre of the population of Australia will hereafter be found north of Sydney^ and I think that the Capital should be situated on the trunk line between Sydney and Armidale. We are becoming accustomed to hear of proposals to amend the Constitution, and I should be quite willing to support an amendment that would allow of the Capital being established not in Sydney itself, but within a reasonable distance of it, say, for instance, in the National Park. I have no desire to go into the wilderness, or to see the Commonwealth called upon to incur the expense of constructing a railway through a desert to the Seat of Government.

Mr Page:

– Does the honorable member think that we could be better off than we are in Victoria?

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

– I do not think so. If there is one State outside of Queensland that I like better than another it is Victoria, where I landed from the old’ country forty years ago next month, and resided for some years. Had the Capital been established in Victoria we should havehad South Australia and Western Australia on the left, New South Wales and Queensland to the north, and the beautiful island of Tasmania just across the pond to the south. I am prepared, however, to stand by the Constitution, and believe that if one State more than another has a right to the Capitalit is New South Wales. The expenditure on the selection of a site should not continue year after year. It is time that the whole question was settled.

Mr Johnson:

– Is the Minister prepared to explain how the item of £1,000 in regard to the choosing of the Capital is to be expended?

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– It is desirable that we should have a vote out of which we may meet any further expensesin connexion with the establishment of the site. The expenditure last year was reduced to a minimum, and the position will be the same during the current year.

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

– I should like to know whether it is true that further correspondence has passed between the Prime Minister and the

Premier of New South Wales in regard to the Federal Capital.

Mr Groom:

– I understand that a couple of letters have passed between them.

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

– Are we not to have any information on the subject?

Mr Groom:

– I can obtain the letters.

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

– This is about the last opportunity we shall have during the life of the present Parliament to deal with this question, and we should know exactly what is passing between the Prime Minister and the Premier of New South Wales. Is there any correspondence justifying further delay on the part of the Government? The question is apparently being quietly shelved. If Dalgety is the only alternative to the present condition of affairs, I personally should not be averse to the postponement of the matter. I say frankly that I would just about as soon see the Capital established in Melbourne as in Dalgety.

Mr Brown:

– The selection of Melbourne would be cheaper from the point of view of the Commonwealth.

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

– It would be as cheap, and in many respects it would be preferable. If Dalgety is to be the final choice, I do not feel particularly anxious to pull up our stakes in Melbourne and to transfer our interests there.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:
Franklin

– When do the Government intend that the preliminary expenditure in connexion with the selection of the site of the ‘Capital shall I cease? I am not in favour of the selection of Dalgety; but until the deliberate decision of the Parliament that it shall be the seat of Government is reversed, I fail to see why we should agree to the expenditure of one shilling upon visits to other sites. I strongly indorse the opinion expressed by the honorable member for Oxley that the trend of population is northwards. Within a couple of decades there will be an enormous population in northern New South Wales and on the rich agricultural lands of Queensland, especially along the east coast, where the rainfall is heavy. The example of Washington,’ which for sixty years was an insignificant town, should be a warning to us not to build a Capital in. the bush. I should like to see the question referred to the people of Australia. They should be asked if they favour the removal of the 100. miles limit. If it were struck out the best course to take wald be to erect a good Parliament House, and the necessary public offices, in one of the big parks of Sydney. The honorable member for Oxley referred to a matter of great importance when he showed that the drift of population is unquestionably northward, settlement becoming denser in the northern than in the southern parts of the Continent. The Federal Capital should, of course, be as near as possible to the great centres of business activity. I am averse to spending more money on the visiting of sites. At present we are going about like Japhet in search of a father. No sooner is one place decided upon than another, with which every one is pleased, is visited, and a few weeks later it loses ground, a third site taking its place. Some of the sites which we have been asked to inspect, such as Mahkoolma, are so obviously unsuitable that it has been an insult to our intelligence to ask us to visit them, and it is time that we stopped spending money in making visits to desolate bush scenes.

Mr BROWN:
Canobolas

– I do not agree with the honorable member for Franklin that money should not be voted for the visiting of sites until the decision in regard’ to Dalgety has been reversed. When, as has been recently the case, the Premier of New South Wales asks us to inspect likely localities, we should do him the courtesy of paying attention to his request. At this late stage in the life of this Parliament, I shall not debate the question generally. . I have already expressed my profound disgust at and disapproval of the manner in which it has been treated. The best thing we can do now is to let it stand over until the new Parliament has been chosen. I agree with the honorable member for Parramatta that Dalgety is the most undesirable and impossible site in New South Wales, Mahkoolma not excepted.

Mr Johnson:

– I should like the PostmasterGeneral to hear this. There is not a quorum present. [Quorum formed.’]

Mr BROWN:

– If the Federal Capital is located at Dalgety those who go there will soon have reason for indorsing my remarks.

Mr HENRY WILLIS:
Robertson

– How is it that the Federal Capital question has not been settled?

Sir John Forrest:

– Because the New South Wales Government will not allow it to be.

Mr Storrer:

– This Parliament has settled it.

Mr HENRY WILLIS:

– That is not so. New South Wales entered the union upon the condition that the Federal Capital should be located within her territory. Four other States had previously expressed themselves in favour of Federation, but they found it impossible to federate without the State whose population numbers one-third of that of the whole Commonwealth.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr.

Mauger). - The honorable member must address himself- to the immediate question.

Mr HENRY WILLIS:

– What I am saying is preliminary to its consideration.

Mr Wilson:

– I submit that the honorable member is entitled to show that without New South Wales there would have been no Federation, and, without Federation, expenditure upon a Federal Capital would have been unnecessary.

The TEMPORARY “ CHAIRMAN.- I rule that that is not the question under consideration. The item is “expenses in connexion with choosing the site of the Capital of the Commonwealth.”

Mr Kelly:

– On a point of order, I wish to submit that the item does not indicate what site is to be chosen, and therefore the whole question-

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:

– I cannot allow my ruling to be discussed.

Mr HENRY WILLIS:

– Provision is made in the Constitution that a. site for the Federal Capital shall be chosen not less than 100 miles from Sydney. It was first suggested by the Premiers that the capital should be located not less than 80 miles from Sydney, but the right honorable member for Balaclava feared that Moss Vale might be chosen, and the 100-mile limit was adopted. New South Wales desires that the work of choosing a site should be completed. She is tired of paying thousands of pounds every year towards the expenses incurred in Inspecting and reporting upon the sites. She has submitted certain areas within which a. site might be chosen.

Mr Ronald:

– Did she not submit the Dalgety site?

Mr HENRY WILLIS:

– No. Mr. Oliver merely made a passing reference to that site.

Mr Groom:

– Dalgety was included in the Southern Monaro site.

Mr HENRY WILLIS:

– The site suggested in Southern Monaro was a spot known as Oliver’s Hill, fully 60 miles from Dalgety.

Mr Kelly:

– I think we should have a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Mr HENRY WILLIS:

– The Government have not treated New South Wales courteously.

Mr Groom:

– Which Government - the Reid-McLean Ministry ?

Mr HENRY WILLIS:

– The ReidMcLean Government were not long in office, and in any case could not do much for the reason that they had a majority of only two behind them,, and could not fly in the face of those honorable members who had banded themselves together to defeat the object of the Constitution.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN.The honorable member must not reflect upon other honorable members.

Mr HENRY WILLIS:

– I had nd intention to do so. I was merely referring to certain members who resorted to party tactics to prevent the establishment of the Federal Capital. Why has the Government gone through the farce of arranging for visits of inspection to certain suggested sites ? They had not the slightest intention to take any action during this session, and therefore it was a waste of time and money to arrange for visits of inspection by a number of honorable members who mav not be in the next Parliament.

Mr Ronald:

– The honorable member entertains the view that this Parliament has no power to determine the Capital Site.

Mr HENRY WILLIS:

– I say that it has. If the Government wish to shield themselves behind an Act which was passed by this Parliament, why have they not acted upon it? They are simply fooling the people of New South Wales. Only in to-day’s newspapers I noticed a protest by the Premier of New South Wales against the action of this Parliament in accepting his invitation to visit certain sites, and then failing to finally determine the question during the current session. We must re-, collect that he represents a third of the people of the Commonwealth, whose claims we are ignoring and treating with contempt. If the Government will allow us an opportunity to finally dispose of the question before the prorogation, I shall be extremely pleased.

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– - The position is that the Government were prepared to deal with this question during the current session. But honorable members received an invitation from the New South Wales Go- vernment to visit three new sites, namely, Mahkoolma, Canberra, and Lake George, in addition to Dalgety.

Mr Kelly:

– They desired honorable members to have a chance of contrasting the merits of Dalgety with those of other sites.

Mr GROOM:

– We received that invitation only a few weeks ago - towards the end of August. Subsequently a communication was received from New South Wales giving us further information in reference to Canberra, and some honorable members also expressed a desire to visit Tumut. It was also stated that, if honorable members so desired, facilities would be afforded them of again visiting Lyndhurst. Had we not accepted the invitation of the New South Wales Government we should very properly have been accused of treating that State with scant courtesy. But, having accepted that invitation, it is impossible at this stage of the session - owing to the press of other important business - to finally deal with the Capital Site question.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

.- I was very much surprised to learn from the Minister that the invitation of the New South Wales Government to honorable members to visit Dalgety implied that it was prepared to concede that site if we confirmed our previous choice. He should recollect that when the New South Wales Parliament considered what sites should be offered to the Federal Parliament it deliberately eliminated Dalgety from the list. Was it likely that the New South Wales Government would have the temerity to flout the expressed opinion of its own Parliament by again offering the Dalgety site to this Parliament?

Mr Groom:

– I merely said that the Government invited us to again visit Dalgety. The honorable member himself suggested that they did so with an ulterior motive.

Mr KELLY:

– I can assure the Minister that I did no such thing.

Mr Groom:

– Then I am sorry that I misunderstood the honorable member.

Mr KELLY:

– Two of the main essentials in the selection of the Federal Capital should be accessibility and economy of construction.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– And water.

Mr KELLY:

– I think that .water can be obtained in most places, except in the Western Australian desert.

Sir John Forrest:

– The honorable member is jeering again.

Mr KELLY:

– I can assure the Treasurer that I am not. I am sympathizing with him.

Sir John Forrest:

– I do not want the honorable member’s sympathy

Mr KELLY:

– The Dalgety site is the most inaccessible of all those which have been suggested. If we are going to sanction the expenditure of .£1,000 in connexion with the Federal Capital, let us choose some other than the wind-swept spot so dear to the -heart of the PostmasterGeneral. I believe that Dalgety is the coldest, most inhospitable, barren, and treeless region in New South Wales.

Mr Watson:

– It is only beaten by Nimitybelle, which is in the same district.

Mr Page:

– If it is such an inhospitable place, why did the honorable member for Bland go there?

Mr KELLY:

– There are seasons in Queensland when the honorable member for Maranoa would gladly seek refuge in an ice chest, but he would not regard it as a fit place in which to spend the whole year. I should like the Minister to explain the item, “ Conveyance of Members of Parliament and others, £9,000.”

Mr Groom:

– It is the usual vote covering the payments to the States railways for carrying members to whom they issue passes. It also covers the cost of conveying honorable members to Western Australia.

Mr KELLY:

– Does the Department give honorable members the option of travelling by steamer to places which are also connected with the railway system?

Mr Groom:

– If honorable members are proceeding to places not connected with the railway system, but which can be reached by sea, the steamer fares are allowed; if there are railways to places to which they desire to go they must avail themselves of them.

Mr KELLY:

– Under the item relating to expenses in connexion with the administration of the Electoral Act, I would point out that the discrepancy between the recent police collection of names in New South Wales and that which previously took place is so extraordinary as to make one wonder whether it would not be better to have a permanent staff engaged upon that work.

Mr Groom:

– I explained the item some time ago. A conference of electoral officers is now taking place. I will make a note of the honorable member’s suggestion.

Mr KELLY:

– I suppose that parties in England are more highly organized than in any other part of the world. There the movements of voters from constituency to constituency are carefully marked. That method would be infinitely too expensive for a Government Department to undertake, but there might be an opportunity for a large saving and a more efficient working of the Act if a permanent staff were employed to make these collections. Another question that I wish to put to the Minister is whether it would be possible to arrange, for the satisfaction of the electoral officials, a test of the efficiency of the voting machines.

Mr Groom:

– The matter is before the Commonwealth Electoral Officer.

Mr KELLY:

– The Department will not lose sight of the expediency of making a test.

Mr Groom:

– That is so.

Mr KELLY:

– I should like to know whether the map, towards the cost of compiling which a sum of £500 appears in this division, is to be merely a technical map for the use of the Department of Home Affairs, or a general one, such as is to be found in the Times Atlas.

Mr Groom:

– The last map of Australia was compiled twenty years ago. That to which the item relates will be the official map of Australia. It will be compiled from the latest official data, and will give the most up-to-date geographical information.

Mr KELLY:

– The project is a very excellent one. I should like to know whether the Minister considers that the item of £1,000 towards the establishment of a Commonwealth meteorological bureau is adequate ?

Mr Groom:

– This year we shall incur only the initial expenses.

Mr KELLY:

– The item has nothing to do with salaries ?

Mr Groom:

– That is so.

Mr KELLY:

– I think that we have too long delayed the taking over ofthis important Department, and I trust that the Government are sincere in their desire to establish it on sound lines. As to the item relating to the Seven Colonies, I wish to know whether that publication is being produced in England by Mr. Coghlan?

Mr Groom:

– Yes, and is being revised and brought up-to-date.

Mr KELLY:

– The Commonwealth is much indebted to Mr. Coghlan, and I should be exceedingly sorry if we had to do without this excellent compendium of useful and well-compiled statistics. With regard to the £1,500 set down towards meeting the expense of making inquiries and preparing plans for additional lighthouses, I should like to know how many are in contemplation.

Mr Groom:

– Three or four.

Mr KELLY:

– I hope that the importance of properly lighting the Backstairs Passage will not be overlooked. Where are the others to be?

Mr Groom:

– One near Wilson’s Promontory, on the Glennie Group, one in South Australia, and another in Western Australia.

Mr KELLY:

– The lighting of the Barrier Reef should not be overlooked.

Mr Groom:

– The Queensland waters are very well lighted.

Mr KELLY:

– There are still some dangerous places.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.- I admit the desirability of making inquiries and preparing plans for additional lighthouses, because some parts of the coast are not too well lighted. I was glad to hear the Treasurer say in his Budget speech that he intends to obtain expert opinion as to the best way of improving the lighting of the coast in the interests of the shipping. At the same time, £1,500 seems a large sum to pay for what I take it will be chiefly drafting. I should like some information with regard to the proposal to expend £500 towards meeting the cost of compiling a map of Australasia.

Mr Groom:

– The present official map is nearly twenty years old, and it is necessary to bring it up to date. If the work can be done for less, the expenditure will be kept down.

Mr JOHNSON:

– How is the £21,000 asked for in connexion with the administration of the Electoral Act to be spent?

Mr Groom:

– £10,000 is to be spent on rolls, £1,000 on forms, £6,000 on the remunerationof registrars, and the balance in paying returning officers and other officials.

Mr JOHNSON:

– What is to be the date of the election?

Mr Groom:

– I am not in a position to give more definite information than was given by the Prime Minister.

Mr Kelly:

– I draw attention to the state of the House.[Quorum formed.]

Mr JOHNSON:

– I notice that there is 1,000 re- vote of £600 in, connexion with the valuation of properties taken over from the States. Why was not the money spent last’ year ?

Mr Groom:

– It was thought that a conference could be arranged, and the valuation proceeded with, but difficulty was found in getting the States to agree to terms.

Mr JOHNSON:

– The Minister’s statements in regard to what is proposed to be done about the Federal Capital are vague and unsatisfactory, and before the division is passed I shall move to reduce the item-

Expenses in connexion with choosing the site of the -Capital of the Commonwealth, £1,000

We know practically nothing as to the reason for the vote2 and I can only surmise that it is intended to allow the Minister of Trade and Customs to get up another excursion to the Tooma and Welaregang sites, which have already been inspected.

Mr CAMERON:
Wilmot

– I do not see why we should vote £1,000 towards the establishment of a Commonwealth Meteorological Bureau. The various States are furnishing excellent weather forecasts, and it would be difficult to improve upon the present system. I should like to know whether it is proposed to take over from the States the full responsibility of issuing weather forecasts? If so, a vote of from £10,000 to £15,000 would be necessary.

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– - 1 might explain that the proposed vote is intended to cover only the initial expenses. The Meteorology Act has only just been assented to, and we are at present advertising for a meteorologist, who cannot be appointed for some little time. It will be the duty of the newly appointed officer to report as to the organization best suited to Australian conditions, and when the organization of the new department is complete, a larger sum of money will have to be placed on the Estimates for the purpose of bringing the Act into full operation.

Mr Cameron:

– Are the States willing that the Commonwealth should take over the work?

Mr GROOM:

– They desired that we should take over their astronomical and meteorological departments, but the Meteorology . Act made provision only in regard to “the transfer of the meteoro logical departments. Further communications have been entered into, and the Victorian Government agrees that the Commonwealth adopted the right course. We suggested that the States should handover their astronomical work to the Universities, and I know that some of those competent to speak are favorable to that idea. We shall endeavour to co-operate with the States in the most efficient and economical way.

Mr Kelly:

– I think we should have a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

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

-In passing, I should like to say that I do not consider the present method of conducting business either desirable or necessary. An arrangement might have been made which would have enabled the Government, without resorting to all-night sittings or imposing an undue strain upon honorable members, to carry out the fullest programme that they could possibly expect to complete by the end of the week. With regard to the proposed vote in connexion with the selection of the Federal Capital Site, I should like to direct attention to the words used by the Prime Minister at the end of the 1903 session. He said -

It is the conviction of ever)’ one of us that it is a menace and an injury to legislation to leave the question in its present unsettled state. The sooner it is dealt with the better it will be for every State and for both branches of the Legislature. Its removal from the arena of politics will be of the greatest advantage to the transaction of business. The persistent inquiry and consideration which we have hitherto given to this question will not be desisted from in the future until a final, and I hope early, conclusion has been arrived at.

I do not attribute the whole of the blame for the delay to this Parliament, or to the Commonwealth Government ; but I place some of the responsibility upon the Ministries and Parliaments of New South Wales. Apart from any question of blame, however, I wish to direct attention to the fact that New South Wales would have a right to feel aggrieved if the terms that were arranged at the Premiers Conference were not adhered to. We cannot in all cases arrive at a clear understanding of what is meant by a decision, but in this case clear evidence of the intent is afforded by the memorandum which appears among the papers of the Premiers’” Conference. It reads -

It is considered that the fixing of the site of the Capital is a question which might well be left to the Parliament to decide; but in view of the strong expression of opinion in relation to this matter in New South Wales, the Premiers have modified the clause so that, while the Capital cannot be fixed at Sydney or in its neighbourhood, provision is made in the Constitution for its establishment in New South Wales at a reasonable distance from that city.

We can easily imagine what would be the feeling in New South Wales if the terms of that agreement were departed from. It would be very unfortunate indeed if any decision on our part were to cut right across the spirit of that memorandum.

Mr Chanter:

– What is meant by the term ‘ 1 reasonable distance from that city “?

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

–It means as near to the 100mile limit as a good site can be obtained. The people of New South Wales would be justly incensed if any departure were made from the understanding which was then arrived at. Within a reasonable distance of the I00-mile limit, excellent sites are available. When the Prime Minister spoke upon this question some time ago, he intimated that the Government were determined to push it forward during the present session. I do not say that there is not some justification for the nonfulfilment of that promise. But I do hope that in the next Parliament honorable members will recognise the necessity which exists for settling this question in accordance with the understanding to which I have referred. I do not know why it is proposed to appropriate the sum of £1,000 which is provided upon these Estimates. It is too small to enable any effective work to be undertaken in connexion with, the Capital Site.

Mr Groom:

– It is quite sufficient to cover the cost of any investigation which may become necessary.

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

– I should also like to draw attention to the proposed expenditure of £1,500 in the preparation of plans for additional lighthouses required on the coast of Australia. We ought to seriously consider what we are doing in this connexion. In his Budget statement the Treasurer intimated that he intended to make arrangements for the erection of three or four lighthouses. Why should we undertake the erection of some lighthouses, and leave the whole of the others in the hands of the States? I submit that we ought not to deal with this matter in a piecemeal fashion. The Government propose that we shall incur expenditure without receiving revenue from light dues, which will continue to go to the States.

Mr Kelly:

– I desire to call attention to the state of the Committee. [Quorum formed.’]

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

– Why should we erect isolated lighthouses instead of taking over the whole of the lighthouses of the States?

Sir John Forrest:

– We intend to take over the lighthouses.

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

– The procedure which is being adopted is a most extraordinary one. If we are to deal with lighthouses at all, why was not a measure introduced into the Parliament providing for the transfer of the whole of them to the Commonwealth ?

Mr Groom:

– We did obtain leave to introduce a Bill relating to marine lights and marks, but we have not been able to act upon it.

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

– Instead of exercising Our constitutional powers the Treasurer proposes that we shall expend £1,500 in preparing plans for additional lighthouses, and that we shall then proceed to erect three or four such buildings.

Sir John Forrest:

– It is a very good theme upon which to argue.

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

– It is a perfectly legitimate theme. Of course, the Treasurer would like to submit his Estimates and say to honorable members: “ These are what you must accept.”

Sir John Forrest:

– The honorable member should leave it to others to discuss these small matters.

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

– The Treasurer, is becoming so restive that the slightest criticism is sufficient to irritate him. We might just as well propose to erect a building relating to a Department that we had not yet taken over as to contemplate the erection of lighthouses before we have exercised our Federal power in respect of this service. I do not object to the building of certain lighthouses if it be part of a scheme to take over the whole of the lighthouses and lightships; but it would be unwise to have two authorities controlling the one service.

Mr Groom:

– That is not intended.

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

– The whole matter should be dealt with in one Bill. I do not think there would be any opposition to our taking over the whole system. The Ministry will have to decide how far they are prepared to go, whether they should take over only the ocean lights or the harbor and river as well as the outside lights. The control of the ocean lights is essentially a. Federal matter.

Sir John Forrest:

– We are dealing with the matter, but there is a great deal of trouble involved in obtaining the necessary information.

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

– I am aware of that, and am not suggesting that this item is excessive. If we are going to deal with three or four of the ocean lights, we should take over the whole of them. If ocean lights alone were taken over by the Commonwealth, it would not be difficult to separate the dues in respect of them from those of the harbor and river lights. I therefore see no reason for delay in this matter. The Government will have to decide to what extent they are prepared to rake over the harbor and river lights, as well as the ocean lights, and the total Jues need not necessarily be higher than they are at present. In these circumstances, I think the Ministry are to blame for dealing with the service in this piecemeal fashion. We have ample power to take oxer by proclamation lighthouses, lightships, Deacons, and buoys; but it appears that the Government have not yet decided how far they will .go - whether they will touch ‘the harbor or river lights. Reflections are often cast upon the Commonwealth for the ineffective way in which it proceeds to exercise its powers, and such action as this on the part of the Government is calculated to accentuate the feeling of dissatisfaction. Some of the members of the Ministry have been in office almost from the inception of Federation, but yet we have made no progress- in this direction. It is proposed to- take action in regard to three or four ocean lights, but in the meantime the question of the transfer of lights and lightships generally is to remain, in abeyance.

Mr. GROOM (Darling Downs- Minister of Home Affairs’! [12.251. - If the honorable member for North Sydney, gives careful consideration to our proposal, he will recognise that we are endeavouring, as quickly as possible, to do that which he himself desires. We agree with the honorable member that it is desirable f.o take over the ocean lights as soon as possible. With that object in view, the Government obtained leave to introduce a Bill in this House, and part of the general scheme was the placing of this item on the

Estimates, to provide, not for the construction of lighthouses, but for an investigation.

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

– Of particular lights ?

Mr GROOM:

– In regard to the more necessary lights, which are generally admitted to be so.

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

– What officer has approved of the erection of these lights ?

Mr GROOM:

– No Commonwealth officer has yet approved of them, because as a matter of fact no sum has yet been provided to enable the necessary surveys and investigations to be made. We have power to take over lighthouses and lights by proclamation, and if it be considered practicable and advisable that the power should be exercised during the recess, then side by side with the transfer of lights, there should be an investigation in regard to other lights that are essential to shipping.

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

– This is putting the cart before the horse.

Mr GROOM:

– No; it is a proposal to put the two matters side by side. This vote will enable us to make surveys, /prepare plans, and have everything in readiness for the construction of the works as soon as the necessary appropriation is agreed to. ‘ We are all agreed that we should take over the lights, but if this item were not agreed to, there would be a delay of twelve months in carrying out important works.

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

– Why should we decide on the erection of certain lights before we have the officers necessary to guide us in this matter ?

Mr GROOM:

– During the recess these matters can form the subject of consultation, and a practical distinction can be drawn between the lights which we should take over, and those which we should not. This item provides for a preliminary investigation. In the interests of shipping we ought not to remain idle. There should be no delay in placing one or two lights in position at points that are particularly dangerous. The sooner we can erect them the better.

Mr Fisher:

– Does the Minister suggest that we should proceed to put up lights before we take over the service ?

Mr GROOM:

– No : this item of £1,500 will enable us to send out boats to make the necessary surveys. Plans may then be prepared, and everything placed in readiness so that when next year’s Estimates are passed we shall be able to proceed immediately with the work. We have had a Bill dratted, and are eager to proceed with it. The Government are endeavouring to advance the matter as rapidly as possible.

Mr FISHER:
Wide Bay

– I think that the Minister has justified the proposed vote. But for his explanation one might have formed the conclusion that this was an attempt on the part of the Commonwealth to become a party to the erection of lighthouses before taking over the whole system. The Government ought not to undertake any of these works until we have a well matured scheme for the transfer of the service.

Sir John Forrest:

– We quite agree with that.

Mr FISHER:

– That being so, I have no objection to the expenditure of a certain sum upon necessary investigations. I think that it is better that the Federal Government, instead of calling conferences of Slates officials, should make an independent investigation, and inform itself by means of the reports of its own responsible officers. The money will be well spent if the Government employ efficient officers, and from that point of view I think the explanation completely satisfactory. Mr. BROWN (Canobolas) [12.32].- I am informed that considerable dissatisfaction exists in regard to the method of paying the New South Wales police who are engaged in collecting and revising the electoral rolls. They are compelled to send in vouchers for the’ amount of work which they do, and are paid accordingly. It sometimes happens, however - and I speak more particularly of country divisions where the duty, falls upon the mounted police - that a nian sets out intending to devote a whole day to electoral work, but some police matter being brought under his notice, it has to be at once taken in. hand, and the other work temporarily laid aside. It is found difficult to satisfactorily account in the vouchers for broken time thus occupied, and consequently the men are often not remunerated for work which they have done. I suggest that, instead of paying the police for the time spent in the work of collection, the same principle should be adopted as is applied to registrars, payment being made according to the number of names collected. I wish for some information regarding the remuneration to divisional returning officers.

Mr Groom:

– We have increased it. They are to have a grant of £20 each for the work done at the forthcoming election. A clear instruction to that effect has been issued, so that no mistake can occur.

Mr BROWN:

– I am glad that this is to be done. An immense amount of work is done by the divisional returning officers. The mere addressing of the envelopes required to send out from 7,000 to 10,000 notices must entail a tremendous expenditure of energy, and in addition to sending out these notices, the officers have manyother duties. For keeping everything running smoothly they receive the magnificent sum of £26 a year. If the services of officials were not made available, outsiders would not be got to do the work for such a miserable remuneration. The probabilities are that when the Department becomes fully seized of the amount of work to be done, these officers will be more liberally treated. Dealing with the electoral rolls, it was formerly the practice to charge 5s. each for divisional rolls, and is. each for pollingbooth rolls.

Mr Groom:

– The divisional rolls are now sold for 2s. 6d., and small polling- booth rolls for 3d. each.

Mr BROWN:

– Those charges are more reasonable. In country districts the pollingbooth rolls often consist of a single sheet of paper ; and, as in the new electorate of Calare, which I hope to have the honour of representing here in the next Parliament, there are no fewer than 130 polling places; it would have been very expensive to buv each of the polling-booth rolls at the old rate. In consequence of the high prices formerly charged, very fewrolls were sold to the public, although a large number was printed for sale, the result being, that when they became obsolete they had to be sent away to the rubbish heap. With lower charges - and I think the Department could make still further reductions with advantage - many people would purchase rolls to ascertain if their names or the names of their friends appeared there.. That would give revenue to the Department, and would assist in making the rolls complete and up-to-date, while there would be less waste paper to cart away when new rolls were required.

Mr Johnson:

– There would be a greater demand for the rolls if the prices were lowered.

Mr BROWN:

– Yes.

Mr Kelly:

– Cannot we have a quorum ? [Quorum formed.]

Mr BROWN:

– I am glad that the Minister is disposed to deal reasonably with the question of affording increased facilities to voters. There are two methods by which votes can be recorded by electors who are absent upon the polling day from the division for which they are enrolled. One of these, the postal voting system, is liable to considerable abuse, and is also attended with considerable disadvantages, which detract from its usefulness. I think that the use of postal votes should be restricted as far as possible to those who, owing to sickness or some physical disability, are unable to attend the poll. The other method to which I refer. is that which enables an absent voter to record his vote at a polling place outside the electorate for which he is enrolled. The condition attached to the exercise of the vote under that provision is that the polling place must be presided over either by a divisional returning officer or an assistant returning officer. At the last election very few assistant returning officers were appointed, and the result was that the provision could not be availed of to any large extent. I trust that assistant returning officers will be appointed to preside at all fairly large centres. This method of recording the votes of electors who may be absent from their electorates on the polling day is much to be preferred to the postal voting system. The Q form is intended to be used by. electors wishing to record their votes at polling places in their own division other than those for which they are enrolled. That is a very useful provision, because, otherwise, in many cases, an elector, although, he might be in his own electorate on polling day, would not be able to vote.

Mr CHANTER:
Riverina

.- Immediately prior to all elections, a number of electors, who find it necessary to leave their divisions, are unable to obtain postal certificates. I should like to know whether any objection could be urged to allowing such persons to vote at any polling place by using a Q form after they have referred the matter to a divisional returning officer,, and he has ascertained that the names are on the roll, and that all the necessary forms have been complied with.

Mr Groom:

– I am afraid that that could not be done without an amendment of the Act, but I shall look into the matter.

Mr KNOX:
Kooyong

.- I am very glad that the honorable member for

Canobolas referred to the question of the’ remuneration of electoral officers. I have repeatedly brought this matter under the” attention of the Home Affairs Department, and I am pleased that the’ Minister has seen his way to increase the payment to £20. .His predecessors in office are aware that on a former occasion great discontent was caused owing to the non-fulfilment of a promise which was made to the electoral officers, and it is a matter of regret that this grievance should still exist. I earnestly ask the Minister to consider whether he cannot, even now, remove the cause of dissatisfaction.

Mr Groom:

– That matter was fully dealt with by the honorable member for North Sydney when he was in charge of the Department.

Mr KNOX:

– Nevertheless, dissatisfaction exists among the officers, because it is ‘ alleged that an undertaking given to them has never been fulfilled. I think that there has been a breach of faith, and that the feeling of the officers is fully justified.

Mr Batchelor:

– The Commonwealth did a good deal more than honour the promise in some cases.

Mr KNOX:

– Many of the officers feel that faith has not been kept with them.

Mr Brown:

– There was an understanding that they were to receive £20.

Mr Batchelor:

– No official undertaking was given to that effect.

Sitting suspended from i to 2.15 p.m. (Thursday).

Mr KNOX:

– I notice that a sum of £500 is provided in these Estimates for the compilation of a map of Australia. It seems to me that, unless the Minister is prepared to spend much more than that sum, he will not obtain the best results.

Mr Groom:

– I am assured that £500 will be ample to cover the cost of the work. No official map of Australia has been published for twenty years.

Mr KNOX:

– Very excellent maps are issued by the different States, and, notably, by Queensland. I hope that we shall follow upon the lines of the map which is issued by the Government of that State. With reference to the Seven Colonies, I would point out that a very excellent practice is adopted in Victoria by the Government Statistician, who issues his valuable work in sections so soon as they are completed. The Commonwealth might, with advantage, emulate that example. The practice at present adopted is to wait for the production of the whole work, and thus valuable time is sacrificed.

Mr Groom:

– I will refer the matter to the Statistician.

Mr KNOX:

– The honorable member for Canobolas has referred to the matter of the preparation of our electoral rolls, and I have no desire to repeat his statements. Nevertheless, it seems to me that a clear intimation might be given to the public through the medium of the press as to the latest date upon which electors can secure enrolment.

Mr Groom:

– That will be done.

Mr KNOX:

– I am sure that the Minister must agree that the present method of securing enrolment through the police canvass is not satisfactory. In this connexion, I should like him to consider whether, in future, it would not be possible to leave at each household a memorandum - to be filled up by the head of the family - similar to that which is left when the census is taken. It is absolutely impossible for the police to obtain full information in every instance.

Mr Groom:

– The plan suggested by the honorable member would prove almost as costly as the taking of a census.

Mr KNOX:

– I have gone into the matter very carefully, so far as one electorate is concerned, and I can assure the Minister that the adoption of my suggestion would not involve the large expenditure which he anticipates. But, even assuming that it would cost a little more than does the present system, I do think that, above everything else, we should procure pure and complete rolls, which are at the foundation of our whole parliamentary system.

Mr McLEAN:
Gippsland

.- In this division I notice that there are two items of electoral expenditure, one involving £21,000, and the other £50,000. That appears to me to be a very large expenditure to fall upon any one year, and I suggest to the Minister that, in the interests of sound financing and of greater uniformity, it is desirable that, in future, such amounts should be distributed over three years.

Mr Groom:

– That would involve the creation of trust funds. There is a constitutional difficulty in the way.

Mr McLEAN:

– At any rate, I discussed the matter with the late Treasurer, and he informed me that it could be clone.

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

– I suggest to the Committee that we should now seriously address ourselves to the consideration of these Estimates with a view to expediting their passing. The Minister will doubtless recollect that yesterday the Postmaster-General invited me to obtain a certain compromise as between the Opposition and the Government concerning the business which, should be transacted before the House adjourned last evening. I eventually succeeded in getting the Opposition to agree to the Postmaster-General’s proposal, but, unfortunately, by that time the Prime Minister had decided that the Estimates of an additional Department must be agreed to that evening. The Opposition then offered to pass three divisions of the Estimates upon the understanding that, upon its rising, the House should adjourn until half-past two o’clock to-day, when the consideration of the Defence Estimates would be entered upon. But the Government insisted that at least four Departments must be dealt with. The then suggested hour of meeting has now arrived, but the Government have only succeeded in passing the Estimates of, not three, but only one Department. It will be seen, therefore, that thev would have acted more wisely had thev not treated the Opposition with such scant courtesy. I now ask the Government whether we cannot arrange to rise at a reasonable hour to-day if good work is accomplished? I think we ought to rise at a reasonable hour, and come back in the morning for a fresh day’s work. If the Minister accepts mv proposal, I shall be prepared to do all that I can to facilitate the passing of the Estimates.

Mr FISHER:
Wide Bay

– I do noi know whether the Minister is going to reply to the honorable member’s request.

Sir John Forrest:

– We shall consider it.

Mr FISHER:

– Whilst arrangements are necessary towards the close of a session, I do not know that an individual member-

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

– I should like to know, Mr. Chairman, whether honorable members are addressing themselves to the question before the Chair?

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Batchelor:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– The remarks are not in order.

Mr FISHER:

– The honorable member for Wentworth has made a statement of what are not altogether facts, and a point of order has been taken to prevent a reply being made.

Mr Kelly:

– Does the honorable member say that any statement I have made is not a fact?

Mr FISHER:

– The honorable member made only a partial statement of the case. I merely wish to point out that no arrangement could be made to prevent an honorable member from reasonably discussing the Estimates. I am not a believer in allnight sittings, but we all know that towards the end of a session extraordinary steps have sometimes to be taken to facilitate the conduct of business.

Mr PAGE:
Maranoa

.- After the last general election a promise was made by the then Minister of Home Affairs that a special allowance qf £20 would be granted to the divisional returning officers in recognition of the sendees they rendered on that occasion. I foolishly accepted that promise, believing that the word of a Minister was sacred, but I am sorry to say that the honorable member for Boothby, when holding office as Minister of Home Affairs, went back on that promise. I do not think, however, that he was altogether to blame. An ex-Minister of Trade and Customs was the man who did the damage during his temporary absence from Melbourne. I have never heard of any other Ministry being guilty of such a mean despicable act. Two successive Ministers of Home Affairs said that an allowance of £20 should be granted; but the officials of the Department, with the acquiescence of the Minister of the day, who was, therefore, equally blameworthy, deducted from that amount £13 in respect of the half-year’s salary, to which, under ordinary circumstances, they were entitled. I am sorry to say that this action was taken by a Labour Government. I now wish the Minister to state definitely that, in addition to their regular allowance of £26 per annum, these officers will receive £20 for the special services in question.

Mr Groom:

– I have already announced that an allowance of £20 will be granted to divisional officers for conducting future elections.

Mr PAGE:

– If the Minister considers that the work to be done at future elections is worth a special allowance of £20, surely the duties carried out by these divisional officers at the last general election, when they had to attend to new and complicated machinery, was worth more than £7. The Government should keep faith with the people.

Mr GROOM:
Minister of Home Affairs · Darling Downs · Protectionist

– The complaint mentioned by the honorable member relates to the last general election, and, I understand, was thoroughly investigated by more than one of my predecessors. The promise alleged to have been made by responsible officers “in one or two States, that a special grant of £20 would be given to divisional returning officers, was investigated by the honorable member for North Sydney, then Minister of Home Affairs, who finally said that if evidence of such a promise having been made could be produced, it would be honoured. He subsequently arranged for an all-round grant of £10 to each of these officers, provided they were able to show that they had incurred certain expenditure. I believe that the matter was also investigated by the honorable member for Boothby when Minister of Home Affairs, and that every effort was made to do justice. The honorable member for Canobolas brought the matter before the House.

Mr Brown:

– The matter was brought under the attention of four different Ministers.

Mr GROOM:

– Quite so.

Mr Johnson:

– There must have been some pretty strong lying on the part of officials at the time in question.

Mr GROOM:

– The responsible Ministers have tried to do justice. After carefully estimating the work done by the divisional returning officers it appeared to me that the ordinary remuneration granted them was not sufficient compensation for the special services rendered by them in conducting an election, and it has been decided that in future they shall receive the additional sum of £20. (

Mr Poynton:

– What will the assistants receive?

Mr GROOM:

– Their remuneration is fixed by regulations applying throughout Australia. All officers appointed to act at the forthcoming election know exactly the remuneration they are to receive, and have signed agreements accordingly. We are guided by experience, and the Department is doing all it can to insure the smooth, just, and efficient conduct of the election.

Mr Fisher:

– Will the Government appoint a Royal Commission to determine who was responsible for the trouble?

Mr GROOM:

– I think that the honorable member for Maranoa realizes that Ministers have done their best to overcome the difficulty.

Mr Page:

– I am satisfied, but do not wish, it to happen again.

Mr GROOM:

– It will not.

Mr PAGE:
Maranoa

– In reply to the interjection made just now by the honorable member for Wide Bay, I may say that I do not ask for the appointment of a Royal Commission to cover his footsteps when Minister of Trade and Customs. If he wishes evidence in support of the case I have put before the Committee, I can obtain it for hin. in, five minutes. All I ask is that what happened at the last election- shall not be allowed to happen this time.

Mr BROWN:
Canobolas

.- The charges made by the honorable member for Maranoa against a previous Minister are not altogether fair. The matter was -first dealt with by the present Treasurer, who was succeeded in the office of Minister of Home Affairs by the honorable member for Boothby. The honorable member for North Sydney followed. He devoted a considerable amount of attention to the case, and it was finally dealt with by the present occupant of the office. The divisional returning officers of New South Wales, and I think of Victoria also, understood from the gentleman then discharging the duties of Chief Electoral Officer, that if the election was carried through successfully they would receive a bonus of £20 each ; but he denied having made that promise.

Mr Poynton:

– -If it had been made, it would have been in writing.

Mr BROWN:

– Al though shorthand reporters were present, no report was made of the speech in which the promise was understood to occur. However, a divisional returning officer, who was not present at the meeting, wrote to the Chief Electoral Officer for New South Wales, asking to know what the undertaking was, and received the reply that the promise I have referred to was made bv the Chief Electoral Officer of the Commonwealth. This document was submitted to the Minister, and after the matter had been fully threshed out, the divisional returning, officers were given £10 each.

Mr Knox:

– Did I understand the Minister to say that in some cases more than £to was given?

Mr Groom:

– No. My recollection is that all were treated alike, receiving £10 each.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.- The explanation of the Minister of the conduct of himself and his predecessors in regard to the matter just referred to is perfectly satisfactory. We all acknowledge his willingness to see that justice is done in a matter of this kind. I wish now to move the amendment of which I have already given notice, though I shall somewhat alter its form. I move it as my last protest against the action of the Government in trying to bludgeon through the Estimates, and also because there seems to be no justification for the vote asked for. I move -

That the item “ Expenses in connexion with choosing the site of the Capital of the Commonwealth, ,£1,000” be reduced by £800

Mr Groom:

– Some of this money has been already spent. I do not know quite how much, but fully £100.

Mr JOHNSON:

– If If mv proposal is carried, that expenditure will be covered, and the Minister will have £100 with which to meet unforeseen contingencies. The amount appropriated last year was £1,000, but of that, only £136 was spent, and we have not been told in what direction it is proposed to incur further ex- .penditure this year. If the money is needed it can easily be supplied by the Treasurer, and voted in a SUpPlY Bill next vear.

Mr MCWILLIAMS:
Franklin

. - I shall support the amendment. Although I am not in favour of the Dalgety site, Parliament is committed to it, and we should not spend money in running about New South Wales looking at other sites until we have reversed our decision, and reopened the whole matter. In any case, I do not know why £1,000 should be needed, because only £136 was spent last vear. The Minister says that he has spent about £100 this year ; but if the amendment be agreed to he will still have nearly £100 left in hand.

Amendment negatived.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Department of the Treasury.

Division 28 (The Treasury). £8,913.

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

– I rise to draw attention to the fact that no provision is made in the Esti- mates for giving effect to the resolution of this House that the Commonwealth should institute a system of decimal coinage, and mint a silver and bronze token currency. A Committee of this House reported in favour of these two reforms, and, in the second session of the first Parliament, that report was adopted. In the first session of the second Parliament, the principle was again indorsed by this House, and I pressed upon the Ministry of the day, and succeeding Governments, that something should be done to carry out the doublyexpressed will of honorable members. I succeeded in inducing the right honorable member for Balaclava, to open up correspondence with the Home authorities, to ascertain, not whether we had the power to do as was proposed, but how we could carry out our design with the least inconvenience to the institutions of the motherland, which had hitherto taken charge of our currency. This correspondence disclosed that there was no desire on the part of the Imperial authorities to stay our hands ; on the contrary, they were willing to help us in every reasonable way., Great Britain had offered to relieve us of the existing currency to the extent of £100,000 per annum, but the right honorable member for Balaclava and I thought some persuasion might be used to induce them to relieve us to the extent of £200,000 so that, estimating the silver currency at £2,000,000, we could complete the proposed reform within ten years. Up to this point every one was in accord, but, subsequently, misunderstandings arose, in consequence of the Commonwealth Government not understanding what the House desired, and carrying arn the correspondence with a view to obtain the seigniorage or profit on the silver coinage, leaving the arrangements as to minting as at present. So the matter dragged on for some little time, until the late Prime Minister - who was as much at sea as those who preceded him - wrote a letter to the Treasurer, in which he set forth the view that we should endeavour to obtain the profits on the silver coinage without insisting upon a special system of coinage of our own. Last session, when these items were before the Committee, the Treasurer gave me his promise that the whole question would receive the careful consideration of the Cabinet during the recess. The other day I asked him whether this promise had been fulfilled,, and he stated that while he was at Home he had consulted the Imperial authorities, and had obtained from them certain information which he had placed before the Cabinet with a recommendation that the question should be deferred until the Imperial Conference should be held in London next year. There was nothing in that reply to indicate that the promise made to me had been fulfilled.

Sir John Forrest:

– The question has received the serious consideration of the Government.

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

– Has the Government, as a body, considered the question and arrived at a determination with regard to it?

Sir John Forrest:

– After consulting with me, the Prime Minister came to a conclusion upon it, and gave me directions, which I carried out when in London.

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

– All the information we can obtain is that the Treasurer was directed to make certain inquiries, and that the result was that the Imperial authorities still offered to relieve us of £100,000 of silver coinage per annum. There was no need for’ the Treasurer to go to London to obtain that information! He said -

The Treasury officials fear that the withdrawal of a larger value per annum than £100,000 would result in considerable loss, and even at that rate it would take twenty years to withdraw the £2,000,000 of silver in circulation in Australia. The continuance of two silver coinages in circulation during that period would be unsatisfactory.

That is a question for us, and it is not for the Imperial authorities to tell us what would be satisfactory to us within our own territory. The Treasurer remarked, further -

The maintenance of the gold coinage of Australia at its full standard weight, which is now borne by the Imperial Mint, would, if the existing silver currency were withdrawn, become a burden on Australia, and it would have to be ascertained and decided as to how much of that coinage the obligation would rest upon.

Again we did not need that information, because the Select Committee upon coinage reported in very much the same terms, and this House, upon their recommendation, adopted the obligation to keep up to its standard weight the gold coinage that was required for currency purposes in Australia.

Sir John Forrest:

– The proposal I mentioned went further than the maintenance of the currency in use iri Australia.

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

– Then the Treasurer does not understand the question at all. The right honorable member for East Sydney thought that we ought to keep good all the gold coined in Australia. We coin here as much as £7,000,000 or £8,000,000 of gold, which is used for export purposes, and we could not be expected to keep that good. % Sir John Forrest. - The British Government do.

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

– Exactly, because they coin for themselves. I shall endeavour to show how the burden of the gold coinage could be very largely reduced, and how the expenses of our mints could be minimized if the proper course were adopted. The Treasurer . says in his minute to the Prime Minister -

There would appear to be no likelihood of the United Kingdom establishing decimal currency in the near future, and the general opinion expressed was to the effect that any interference with the value of the people’s penny would lead to widespread dissatisfaction and resentment. Having regard to the foregoing considerations, it was agreed that the question of silver coinage and decimal currency should be one of the subjects to be submitted to the Imperial Conference to meet in London next year, and in the meantime fuller consideration could be given to the question.

This House cannot hope ‘to establish a decimal system of coinage and coin its own silver, if it leaves this purely local question to the decision of the Imperial Conference in London. There is no hope of the British people adopting decimal currency within a reasonable period, and I do not think that we should postpone indefinitely the reforms which we desire to bring about.

Sir John Forrest:

– The Imperial authorities do not object at all.

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

– The Then why should the matter be referred to them? The fact is that the Government desire to obtain a share of the profits upon silver coinage in Australia without adopting the decimal reforms recommended by the Coinage Committee, and we have to consider whether we should be justified in allowing the Government to adopt one reform, and ignore the larger and more important one. The correspondence shows that the Imperial authorities have all along been quite willing that we should adopt the proposed reform, and that it has never been suggested that we should submit our views to the Imperial Conference. The correspondence which was published in 1 904 be gins with a letter from the then Prime Minister, Sir Edmund Barton, who, writing upon the question of the coinage of silver in Australia, stated -

It has been reported that the Government of Canada buy silver and pay a fixed charge for its conversion into coin, thus securing the profits between its bullion and currency value.

He inquired whether similar consideration could be extended to the Commonwealth. On the 24th June a reply was received to the effect that Canada purchased the silver, and that the Mint charged 3 per cent, for its conversion into coin. Then, in August, the Prime Minister wrote to ask whether the same concession which had been given to Canada could be made to Australia. On the 13th October, 1903, the Imperial Colonial Office wrote, stating that the Imperial Treasury would be prepared to undertake the manufacture of the coins required at one of the Australian branch mints on the basis of the payment by the Commonwealth Government of the actual expenses incurred. I ask honorable members to remember that brief sentence, which practically concedes all that we are asking for. The Colonial Office stated, further, that this course would be preferable to executing the proposed coinage at the Royal Mint in London, as was done in the case of Canada, because the coinage with which they had to deal was as much as thev could cope with, and because of considerations of local convenience. The communication continued -

  1. The new subsidiary currency could be coined to any extent which the resources of the mint will allow, either out of existing sterling coins withdrawn from circulation, or out of new silver to be supplied by the Commonwealth Government, within such annual limit of amount as will not occasion such a displacement of the existing currency as would cause inconvenience to other places that use currency.
  2. In the event of the latter alternative being adopted, (Treat importance is attached to the restriction of the annual withdrawal of the existing currency to the limit which can conveniently be absorbed elsewhere. This limit is estimated at £100,000 a year.
  3. If a decimal system of coinage is adopted, as recommended bv the Commonwealth Select Committee, the immediate withdrawal of the half-crown and threepence would presumably be necessary ; and, in that case, to meet (he convenience of the Commonwealth, favorable consideration will be given to any suggestions which mav be made for arranging for” an immediate withdrawal of these two coins, subject to the safeguard indicated above.”

It was further stated that the Commonwealth should undertake the responsibility of making good the deterioration of the gold coin circulating in Australia. Honorable members will see that that is almost a complete reply to the inquiries which we made. It conceded almost all that we had hoped to attain. It presented no obstacles to the introduction of the change immediately. The right honorable member for Balaclava, in a memorandum to the Prime Minister, dated 3rd April, 1904 - a memorandum in which he reviewed the question up to that date, thus concluded -

In my opinion the following course should be adopted : -

As to gold coinage, the present practice should be discontinued, but if the Commonwealth receives a profit on the coinage of silver, it should bear the expense of replacing future gold issues circulating in Australia, which should be distinctly marked for the purpose.

As to silver coinage, the London Mint should coin for the ‘Commonwealth at cost, and out of the profits the Commonwealth should bear the expense of replacing worn coins of future issues, such future issues to be distinctly marked, as in the case of gold coins.

It is here that the new position arises. It is here that the Commonwealth Government cease to ask the British Government to help us to institute decimal coinage. Upon the 13th April, the present Prime Minister wrote to the Imperial authorities, and, except that; he again! requested that the coins should be minted in London instead of in Australia, he asked merely for what had already been offered, and for the withdrawal of £200,000 annually instead of £100,000, which the British Government had offered. The objection which he admitted had been raised to the course recommended by the Coinage Committee emanated almost exclusively from the mint authorities in Australia. As these are the only practical objections which have been urged against the recommendations of the Committee, I intend briefly to refer to them. The objections were based upon quite erroneous ideas, as the result of my recent travels conclusively proved. In the first place, the mint authorities declared that it would be impossible to coin the two metals in the same room of the same mint, and it was impossible to use the same machines. I may add that during my recent visit to Switzerland, France, England, California, and other countries. I found the two metals were being used in the same mint, and in connexion with the same machines. The mint authorities further stated that it would require a considerable amount of machinery to carry out this work in the

British mints in Australia. They affirmed that the silver would have to be coined at a different room from that in which .gold coinage was undertaken. They arrived at the conclusion that -^21,000 would require to be expended for new machinery, besides a considerable amount for additional buildings. The calculation which I have made shows that about £50,000 or £60,000 would thoroughly equip a mint which would be capable of turning out all the silver that Australia requires. But such an institution would not be able to provide our first supply of silver coins. Consequently, the Coinage Committee reported in favour of obtaining those coins from Great Britain. My own view is that after we have obtained our first supply - seeing that we have silver in the country - we ought to coin our own money in Australia, and that we should be able to do so for much less than the amount suggested by the mint officials. In paragraph 6 of the despatch to which I have referred, the present Prime Minister says -

In the opinion of this Government, such an arrangement might well continue until it has been decided to adopt the decimal system. When that event happens the Question might be reconsidered, and if found to be necessary, fresh arrangements could then be made.

Clearly he is responsible for the change in the character of the application which has recently been made to the Imperial authorities. In the first instance, it was stated that the Coinage Committee had decided in favour of the adoption of a system of decimal coinage, and the Imperial authorities were asked to assist us in minting our first supply of coins, and were requested to outline the terms upon which they were willing to do so. They agreed to meet us upon all points. In reply to the last letter of the honorable and learned gentleman, the Treasury of Great Britain wrote upon the 30th July, 1904-

As it now appears that the new silver coin required is estimated at not more than £60,000, though we are prepared to allow the work to be undertaken in London at cost, we could not consent to withdrawal of more than £100,000 a year.

If we only required £60,000, I do not see why an offer should be made to withdraw anything. The writer adds -

It may be, however, that the question of the withdrawal of the existing circulation is of less importance than it appeared to be when the subject was before the Treasury in the autumn of last year. My Lords then understood that the Commonwealth Government had in view the immediate introduction of the coinage system, such as was recommended by the Select Committee in 1902. But from paragraph 6 of the memorandum now under consideration it appears that such is not the present intention. My Lords have no information as to the details of the currency system proposed for adoption. Assuming, however, that the purpose is to introduce a currency of denominations corresponding to those of the existing coinage, but of distinctive Australian design, there would be no necessity for the adoption of any special measures for rapid withdrawal.

Then on 20th October, 1904, the right honorable member for East Sydney wrote -

Ministers think it is not expedient to await the introduction of the decimal system before entering upon the new arrangements which have been proposed. As the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury are of opinion that it would be desirable that the coins for Australian use should be of special design, and not differentiated from the Imperial tokens by a mere mint mark, I shall be glad if the mint authorities in England can be asked to undertake the preparation of the special designs without delay, so that the new coinage may be commenced as early as possible.

Honorable members will see that what we are committed to in this correspondence is an effort to secure from the Imperial authorities a share of the large profit which is derivable from the coinage of silver, without any change in our currency system ? When this letter was published, I drew attention to that fact with a view to preventing any such arrangement being concluded with the Imperial authorities, and thus postponing the adoption of the decimal coinage system perhaps for ever. The House recognised that the stand which I took was the correct one, and the right honorable member for East Sydney, who was then Prime Minister, agreed that nothing should be done. He did not seem to understand the question until Parliament had an opportunity of considering the report. I inferred from his observations that he had no idea that this House had adopted the report of the Coinage Committee in favour of decimal coinage. But when it was pointed out to him that upon two occasions it had declared itself in favour of that system, he intimated that he would stay his hand in the matter until the Government were afforded time during the recess to consider the position, and to decide whether or not they would give effect to the recommendations of the Committee. Later on, the present Treasurer visited England. All that he contemplated was to enter into a conference with other Imperial representatives, with a view to ascertaining whether anything could be done in the direction of securing decimal coinage for the whole British Empire, and insuring that the profits derived should be distributed -pro rata amongst the various portions of the Empire. As any such movement is bound to come to nought, I fear that unless fresh action be taken the period when we shall adopt the reform ourselves will be still further postponed. I do not wish to see that. This is a matter on which we do not need to consult the Secretary of State for the Colonies. It is a question which Australia can decide for herself. If there was the slightest possibility that England would adopt the decimal system, we could well afford, for the sake of securing uniformity, to postpone the reform for a year or two. We know, however, that she is not- likely to do so. If the Government hold that the decimal system has nothing to recommend it, and will say straight out that they are determined to take no action, we shall know what to do. But I object to the drift which is going on. We are losing all the profits and benefits that would Bow from the adoption of such a system. Whilst abroad I inquired into this question, and learned that other parts of the British Dominions are more anxious than we are to secure the profit to be derived from the coinage of silver;. Canada, owing to its contiguity to the United States, adopted the monetary system of that country - the dollar and the cent. By reason of its being the smaller country of the two, it was also led to adopt the silver money of the States, which has always been current there. As far back as 1870. however, the Canadians arrived at the conclusion that this was not the best system to pursue, and began to export the American money, with a view to replacing it by Canadian currency. In 1870 Canada sent to New York $3,128,000, and to England $1,417,000 of American currency. She replaced that money by Canadian currency, coined in the British Royal Mint, paying 3 per cent, over the cost of the si Itver used in the silver coinage and 10 per cent, over the cost of the metal contained in the copper coinage. As a Federation, she was able to secure this great concession as far back as 1870, although the individual Colonies of Australia found it impossible to do so. The controversy in regard to this question in Australia ranged over a period of thirteen or fourteen years, and, finally, the Imperial authorities said that as federation would shortly be accomplished, the question might well be postponed so that the Commonwealth Government would be able to do all that the separate Colonies required. It seems difficult, however, to urge the Commonwealth Government to take action.

Sir John Forrest:

– Action will be taken in a few months.

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

– I am tired of waiting for the Government to take action, more particularly as those who, from time to time, have had this matter in their hands, have appeared to show an absolute want of knowledge of the subject. I am referring not only to the present Treasurer, but to the three Federal Treasurers who have dealt with this question. I have obtained from Mr. Fielding, Canadian Minister of Finance, figures showing that, from 1870 until three years ago, Canada found it unnecessary to make any further exports of United States silver. In 1903, however., arrangements were made with the Canadian Banking Association to collect the United States silver current in the Dominion, and to ship it to the Bank of Montreal’s agents in New York, where it was paid to the credit of the Treasurer. In adjusting h’is financial balances with America, the Treasurer drew upon this bank, and was paid in gold. One of the predecessors of the present Treasurer always put to me what he thought was a poser. “ How should we get rid of the coin already in circulation here?” and, in reply to that question, I invariably suggested the course that has actually been adopted by Canada. We could make arrangements with a banking institution, as soon as we were ready to issue our new coinage, to collect and ship the old silver coinage to their agents in other parts of the world where there is a demand for silver.

Sir John Forrest:

– The task is not so easy as it looks.

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

– The system has been adopted by Canada and seems to work very well. I recognise that it would be wrong for us as a British dependency to collect £1,000,000 of our silver currency and suddenly land it in London, although in reserve in the banks it would be just as good as gold. In his last financial state ment in the Dominion House of Commons, Mr. Fielding said -

Our method will be to arrange with the banksthat they shall take the silver at its face value, and then send it abroad. We shall pay them a special commission for that service, 3-Sths of 1 per cent, besides which we will pav the express charges.

That is precisely what I told the Treasurer we could do. We could arrange to pay the banks a small percentage as well as the interest, and the cost of sending the present coinage to some other part of the world where silver is required. Mr. Fielding says, that up to the 30th June, 1904, a second batch of American coinage, representing $500,000, was exported to New York, and that, should the necessity arise, resort will again’ be had to that system. The problem there is more troublesome than if is in Australia. Money flows from the United States into Canada and cannot be rejected, since a refusal would lead to a restriction of her trade with the States. Last year Canada’s profit on her coinage of silver was $55,000 - equal to £11,500; but in one year she has made as great a profit as $200,000, or £44,666. The Select Committee estimated that the profit to be derived by Australia from a new silver coinage would be about £35,000 per annum, and, judging by the experience of Canada, I think we may say that that estimate is likely to prove fairly accurate. Canada has not only a silver currency as we have, but a large paper currency of small denomination which to a certain extent displaces silver. She has now arranged with the Imperial authorities to establish a mint in the Dominion. The necessary buildings are now being erected at Ottawa for the coinage, not only of gold, which has not hitherto been minted there, but of silver. This Imperial institution will be similar to one of the branch mints in the Commonwealth. The Canadian Government has to advance to the Master of the Mint a certain sum of money for a start, and accounts are subsequently to be adjusted. The Canadian Act goes on to provide that all the profits derivable from the mint after the discharge of its undertakings and obligations are to be handed over to the Canadian Treasurer. Since 1870 Canada has minted 90,000,000 dollars, or £1,825,000, for silver currency. The new mint is to cost £80,000, or something like the amount which the authorities here say will have to be expended in making the necessary alterations to the existing mint to provide for the coining of silver in Australia. The experience of Canada is valuable to us, since it is similar in many respects to Australia, and is also a British dependency. I desire, however, to point to the experience of the Philippines. The American authorities there were met with a more complicated problem than that with which we are faced. When they took over the Philippines, they found that the local currency was not only bad, but a very mixed one. If the contention of the Treasurer, that it is desirable that we should have a uniform system of currency throughout the Empire, were correct, one would think that the United States would have compelled the Philippines to adopt the dollar and cent system. According to the second annual report of the Master of the Division upon that currency, however, a different system was adopted in the Philippines - the system of the peso, which is worth about half-a-dollar, and the centavo. The report sets forth that -

The Government’s net profit on the coinage of Philippine currency from bullion purchased was estimated at P2,72o,342.5g. If we deduct from this sum the estimated net loss on the re-coinage we arrive at a net seigniorage profit of P2,50o,i40.2g on the entire process of coinage and re-coinage up to ist July, igo5-

This profit in British currency would be equal to £250,118. It is derived, not only from the coinage of new metal,, but the re-coinage of depreciated currency upon which an actual loss is made. Prior to the introduction of this reform, Mexican dollars, Spanish dollars, Philippine dollars, and American clipped and worn dollars were in currency in the Philippines. The new system, which has given satisfaction, and is producing a very considerable profit, as I have said, differs io some respects from the currency of the United States. These facts show that it should be easy for us to bring about this reform. They demonstrate very clearly that it is not necessary that the new system should be intimately related with the monetary system of the governing country, and that there is a considerable profit to be derived from the coinage of silver. I desire now to place before honorable members a few facts which I gathered in Switzerland as to the system in force there. Switzerland has a smaller population than has the Commonwealth, and we may naturally suppose that it uses less money per head of the population than is required for the purposes of Australian trade. Then, again she has a considerable paper system, and, as a member of the Latin Monetary Union, allows the coinage of France, Spain, Italy, and one or two smaller Powers to be circulated there. For a number of years, however, she has had a mint in operation, and for a few years has been exclusively minting her own money, and making a very handsome profit. The mint at Berne employs thirteen hands in money-making and it has five men and three women manufacturing the stamps used for inland revenue and postal purposes. The total amount paid in wages was £1,500 a year. With this limited provision they were able to turn out 148,135,000 francs, or £5,555,000 If we eliminate the gold, we have left 3,562,500 francs, or £1,993,500 in silver, so that Switzerland requires about the same amount of silver currency as the Committee reported would be required by Australia. In addition, she uses paper money of small denomination, and the coins of the surrounding countries, so that the Committee’s estimate of £2,000,000 as the sum required for silver currency in Australia is almost sure to be exceeded. Herr Adrian estimates that this is the total currency of silver, because none of this coinage has been withdrawn. I believe that few of the francs are much worn, but, on the whole, the Swiss ‘silver currency is in a good state of preservation, because it has been minted largely within the last seven or eight years. In six years - 1900 to 1905 - the profits obtained by the Swiss amounted to 4,952,000 francs, equal to £30,646 per annum. That is the sum which, the Committee reported would be made by the Commonwealth if it coined its own currency. As Switzerland, whose population and requirements are more limited than ours, makes that profit, Australia, could at least do -as well. This saving is paid into’ a reserve fund which totals £431,000, and is earning interest at a rate of 3^ per cent. The Committee recommended that any saving made here should be similarly treated. The old mint lias now been found too small, and not sufficiently modern, and a new mint has been built, where it is proposed to mint coins, and on the upper story to print not only stamps, but also. I believe, the notes which are to be issued by the Government

National Bank, which is ultimately to become the sole bank of issue in Switzerland. This building was erected at a total cost of £41,250, including all the extra material and plant required to make its equipment up to date. We cannot expect that Australian institutions will rival in economy those of Switzerland. The low rates of pay given to responsible departmental officers there are marvellous. We cannot hope to operate a mint and pay only £1,500 a year in wages. But a building similar to the new Swiss mint would meet our requirements, and need cost very little more than the Swiss mint has cost. Seeing how little would have to be expended in buildings and plant, I think that we should coin our own money. I do not think that we could make a start by ourselves, but, seeing that we require only about £60,000 a year, the sooner we begin to turn out coins of our own, with the special designations required by the new system, the better it will be. In the first instance, some arrangement must be made with the Imperial Government for the supply of coins, and the English currency can be safely taken up by degrees, and used elsewhere. If Great Britain will agree to only £100,000 a year being taken up, let us commence with that. Let us then mint decimal coins to that value, and move, year by year, nearer the realization of our hope. The Imperial authorities have taken it upon themselves to advise that there are difficulties in this matter. According to them, confusion will be caused by the use of two currencies. But the present twoshilling piece can still remain, being called a florin or a dollar. A shilling would be a half-florin, or a half-dollar, and therefore it would not be difficult to make the change without withdrawing all coins of the present system. The only difficulty would arise from the fact that we should have to discharge immediately threepenny pieces and halfcrowns, which do not fall into the new system. The highest silver coin would be the florin, and we should have to substitute for the threepenny bit and our present copper coins, new coins of the lower denominations suggested by the Committee. These changes should be made at once, or as soon as the people become habituated to the proposal. There is no reason why we should put off the adoption of the change until the decimal system is adopted by the whole Empire. I am a member of the Decimal Association of

Great Britain, the secretary of which assures me that there is no prospect of this reform being even properly advocated for some years to come.

Sir John Forrest:

– How could we bring it into work?

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

– We have done nothing for the last three years. It will take at least four years after a decision has been come to to get anything done, because the people must have timely notice. The Decimal Association is using all its efforts to bring about the introductionof the metric system, and this reform is one that it would be well for the proposed Conference to consider, for it would be almost impossible for us to adopt a system of weights and measures which has not been’ adopted by the rest of the Empire. It would be a good thing if we could induce the people of Great Britain to adopt decimal coinage; but, in any case, it is desirable that we should adopt it. That it is not necessary for us to have the same system as that of Great Britain has been shown by the experience of other countries. Canada and France, which both do a large trade with Great Britain, have a different coinage. The Philippines recently started to reform their coinage under the guidance of the United States of America.

Mr Maloney:

– That coinage is now worth more than its face value.

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

– The old coinage was worth only its weight, and has nearly all been bought out. This limits the profits made in the Philippines, because they have to take old and, in some cases, impaired coins; but, with all disadvantages, the profits made by the Philippines is shown to amount to £250,000 in two years, after providing for replacing the debased coinage now in existence. Every fact speaks in favour of the reform, but the difficulty is to get the Government to understand, or even to take an interest in, the subject. No Federal Government seems to have understood it, and it has not been given a fair trial. If Ministers make up their minds that we are not to have it, we must go withoutit and get what profits we can from the coinage of silver by arrangement with Great Britain.

Sir John Forrest:

– We are going to do that.

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

– I ask the Minister to consider whether the country is not in favour of the adoption of the decimal system. If it is, we should try to bring it about

Mr.MALONEY (Melbourne) [3.58].- I should like the Government to take over the coinage of silver. At the present time, we coin gold at a loss. Example is worth an ocean of talk. I hold in my hand an English coin whose weight is a trifle heavier than the 5s. -piece, and of better alloy. The difference I take to be the profit Great Britain makes by the coinage of silver here. Silver is now 2s. 7d. an ounce.

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

– When the Committee reported, silver was1s.10d. an ounce.

Mr MALONEY:

– An ounce of silver will coin five shillings and sixpence, so that the rest is profit. To say that one coin bearing the King’s head is worth more than another coin is ridiculous. The facts show that Great Britain makes a great deal of profit from the silver coinage. I am in favour of constructing a railway across the Commonwealth. If the Government were wise enough to buy £1,000,000 of silver and coin it, there would be a profit of £1,150,000, which would go a long way towards building that railway, or towards constructing a Federal Capital. I hope that the Treasurer will take hold of this question, and request the Home authorities to give us the right to issue silver coins. I do not think that it will be refused. The justice of the request could not be ignored. The silken bonds of kinship must be strengthened by kindly acts and justice. I trust that the Treasurer will pay attention to this question, and that he will also give his serious consideration to the suggestions of the honorable member for Brisbane with regard to the issue of paper currency.

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

.-I should like to say a word or two in support of the remarks of the honorable member for South Sydney. The Treasurer must realize that the Ministry will have to declare whether or not they are favorable to the adoption of a decimal system of coinage. He seems to have been s wayed by the reasons given in England against the adoption of the decimal system in the United Kingdom. But I would point out that the same difficulties do not exist here as in the old country. A decimal system of coinage would be undoubtedly superior to that now in existence amongst us, because the operations of business men would be facilitated, and instruction in our schools would be rendered much more easy. It seems absurd to suppose that, because Great Britain is reluctant to adopt a decimal system of coinage we should hesitate to adopt a desirable reform. If we are to make the change, the longer we postpone it the greater our difficulty will become. It is not necessary that Great Britain should join with us in the adoption of a decimal coinage system, but it is in the highest degree desirable that she should join us in the adoption of a metric system of weights and measures.

Sir John Forrest:

– I am afraid that the adoption of the metric system would give a great shock to the mercantile community.

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

– Not at all. The change would be a great improvement, and would be much appreciated by business men. I am sorry that the Treasurer could not see his way to support the adoption of decimal coinage.

Sir John Forrest:

– The Imperial Conference is so close at hand that it is reasonable to allow the matter to stand in abeyance for the present.

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

– I do not anticipate any result from that Conference so far as decimal coinage is concerned. But the adoption of a metric system ofweights and measures is decidedly a matter for consultation between the representatives of different parts of the Empire, because our transactions with the mother country and British Possessions are so extensive that the adoption of different systems of weights and measures would lead to much inconvenience and confusion. Britain is being driven to the adoption of the metric system by the advance made by other countries in the production of machinery. One or two British manufacturers have already been put to the expense of adopting double plants for the manufacture of machinery upon the British system of measures, and the metric system respectively. The Treasurer quotes the objections urged in Great Britain against the adoption of the decimal system. He says -

In addition to the foregoing considerations -

These relate to the withdrawal from circulation of the present silver coinage, and the necessity of Australia undertaking to maintain her portion of the gold coinage - is the question as to whether the establishment of a different silver currency might not be in the direction of widening rather than tightening the bonds of Empire.

What has that to do with the question? Canada has a currency different from that of the mother country, and it cannot be for one moment urged that it has had an influence in the direction of widening the bonds of Empire. The dependencies of Great Britain have the most heterogenous collection of coinages that can well be conceived, and yet the bonds of Empire have not been in the slightest degree affected, nor is there difficulty in interchange. The case might be different if we were situated alongside of Great Britain, and had only a borderline separating us. The report continues -

Such a currency would require very careful watching to avoid its being either depreciated by reason of an excess issue of silver, or the public being inconvenienced through an inadequate quantity being in circulation.

Surely the ‘Government of Australia, which has had so many important powers conferred upon it, could be trusted to see that there was not an over-issue, or an inadequate issue, of silver coins.

Sir John Forrest:

– The difficulty referred to is experienced in India.

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

– Canada has experienced no difficulty. Those who have the direction of affairs in British communities always look to the soundness of the currency, and the Commonwealth Government .might verv well be trusted to observe the same caution that has been exercised in Great Britain and Canada. We are told, further -

There would appear to be no likelihood of the United Kingdom establishing a decimal currency in the near future.

Probably that is correct., because there are enormous difficulties in bringing about such a reform in a country like Great Britain.

The general opinion expressed was to the effect that any interference with the value of the people’s penny would lead to widespread dissatisfaction and resentment.

I entirely disagree with that view, because the proposal made by the Coinage Committee, and which was adopted by this House, was that an alteration should be made in the value of the penny to the extent of only 4 per cent. It was proposed that the penny should be of 4 per cent, less value than the coin now in circulation, and it was considered that this change would be in the interests of the poorer classes, who would be able with the new coin to purchase a great many articles for which a penny is now paid. They would* thus gain 4 per cent, in every case where the new penny would have the same purchasing, power as the old one. In order to show the absurdity of the statement made by the Treasurer, I would point out that Great Britain has proceeded part of the way towards the adoption of a decimal system by using the florin. That coin was to be used as a standard for a decimal system, if such were adopted, and it would thus be necessary to alter the value of the penny to some slight extent. It would be absolutely impossible for Great Britain to adopt a ‘decimal system of coinage without changing the value of either the sovereign or the penny, and there can be no question that it would be far less inconvenient to change the value of the lower coin than that of the higher. one, which has a currency throughout the world and a recognised value. I hope that if the Treasurer remains in office he will give his serious attention to this question. As I have pointed out, our difficulties will increase, rather than diminish, as. time goes on and our business and population increase. We should make .all haste to bring about a most desirable reform.

Mr CULPIN:
Brisbane

.- It is very much to be regretted that the Treasurer did not, in the course of his Budget speech, indicate that he intended to make some provision for the adoption of a system of paper currency for the Commonwealth. The Treasury note system has been in use in Queensland since 1893, when the circulation was only about £700,000. Ever since its introduction it has been gradually extending. In June last vear, the Treasury notes in circulation in Queensland amounted to £1,166,532^ the following month to £1,178,209, in June of t(he present year to £1,296,912, in July to £1,332,789, and according to the latest returns they now aggregate £1,344,586. When honorable members recognise that the Queensland note system has practically doubled, whereas the banknote issue throughout Australia is at a standstill, they will recognise that little merit attaches to the note system as a public utility. At present the bank notes in circulation in Victoria - which possesses nearly two-and-a-half times the population of Queensland, and which is probably two-and-a-half times as wealthy - amount to only £881,683, whilst those of New South Wales aggregate £1,446,196. According to the Treasurer’s Budget, the notes in circulation in all the States total £3,270,195. It will be recognised, therefore, that the proposal that the Commonwealth should adopt a similar system to the Queensland Treasury note issue would confer upon us a greater measure of advantage in this connexion than we ait present enjoy. I need scarcely point out that Queensland possesses only about one-seventh of the population of the other five States, whereas its Treasury notes in circulation represent more than one-third of the paper money in use throughout the other five States of the Commonwealth. Just a word as to the revenue which is produced in the various States by the bank-note issue. In Victoria the duty upon bank notes produces £16,443 annually, and in New South Wales it yields a net revenue of £26,640 annually, whilst in Queensland the revenue returned is £22,946 per annum. In the last-named State the expenses incurred in connexion with the note issue amount to only £1,851. Queensland thus derives a clear profit from it of £21,095. In addition to that, Queensland uses the gold received in excess of the 25 per cent, reserve held against the £1,344,586 worth of Treasury notes which are in circulation for the purpose of repurchasing her bonds, thereby saving interest upon them. Federation has already been established for five years, and it is a great pity that we have not attempted to do anything in the way of obtaining our own paper money issue. I trust that the time is not far distant when we shall take some steps in that direction.

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · Protectionist

– I am much! obliged to the honorable member for South. Sydney and the honorable member for North Sydney for the information which they have given the Committee on decimal coinage and the silver currency. But even if I agreed with everything that they have said, the matter is riot so urgent as to make it inadvisable to defer taking action until after the Imperial Conference has been held. I have no doubt whatever that great good will result from that Conference. So far as I can gather, the British Government have no desire to do anything which is not approved by this Parliament. They do not wish to benefit monetarily by the coinage of silver. Con sequently, the matter can be dealt with in our own way, if we think it best, or in some other way to be mutually agreed upon. Concerning the remarks of the honorable member for Brisbane, I am sure that we are all! obliged to him for the trouble he has taken to bring the Queensland Treasury note system under our attention. Personally, I think that it would be better to deal with that question when we are considering, the Banking Bill, which will no doubt be introduced in the next Parliament. I quite agree with Mm that it is desirable that we should institute a Treasury note which will be negotiable all over Australia. The day for the issue of bank notes, having a currency only in different States has passed, and there is a real necessity for a a Treasury note which will be current at face value throughout Australia. No doubt that matter will be dealt with when the Banking Bill is under consideration. I trust that honorable members will now assist me to pass the Treasury Estimates.

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 29 (Audit Office), £12,180; division 30 (Government Printer), £13,802 ; division 31 (Governor-General’s Office), £1,910; division 32 (Unforeseen expenditure), £700; division 33 (Refunds of Revenue), £120,000 ; division 34 (Advance to the Treasurer), £200,000, agreed to.

Department or Trade and Customs.

Division 35 (Central Staff), £6,873.

Mr HUGHES:
West Sydney

.- I wish to direct the attention of the Minister to a matter of some importance. The officers of the Public Service Association attached to the Customs House, in Sydney, are, so I am informed, subjected to an influence which amounts to nothing more nor less than a modified reign of terror. I have already made private representations to the Minister in respect of this matter, and I now propose to supply some details, which I ask him to notice, because I can conceive of nothing more improper and odious than that members of the Public Service should be terrorized and prevented from accepting positions on such a body as the. council of the Public Service Association. I am told that certain members of the Public Service could not have secured increments in the Customs Department while they remaned on the council. I am prepared ‘atd to give the Minister the names of these men, or, for that matter, to mention them now.

Sir William Lyne:

– Would it not be well to publish the name of the man who makes such a statement?

Mr HUGHES:

– Any honorable member mav see the statement that I . have before me. The charge is a very serious one. I do not know whether it is true; I am acting simply as the mouthpiece of the complainants. I am informed, for instance, that an officer, on resigning from the Trades and Customs Association, received an increment of £25, after being notified by the Collector that he must leave the council of the association or lose the increment. The statement before me sets forth that-

This officer, probably smarting under the fact that his fellow officers remaining on the council treated him with coolness after his resignation, made a clean breast of the affair to his fellow clerks.

He told them that he was informed by the Collector that as long as he remained on the council he was not to be granted an increment. Another man resigned from the council, and, according to this statement - received £2^ increment, which passed him over the heads of his seniors by many years.

A third man resigned from the council, and received an increment of £40 over the heads of his seniors. Still another man - after being warned personally by the Collector that he “ stood in the line of fire,” subsequently resigned from the council, and has now been recommended for an increment.

Then, again, it is said that a transferee from Victoria decided not to stand for reelection on the council, pleading as his reason that “ he had a wife and family to consider.” The Collector informed him that he was surprised that a man of his intelligence should have anything to do with the council. I have quoted five definite statements to the effect that it is the practice of the Collector not to recommend for an increment any person who is on the council of the association. If that charge can be proved, the Collector should not remain another week in office, and if the Minister is standing behind that officer in this matter, the same remark may be applied to him. The honorable gentleman must not. regard this as a laughing matter. It is a most serious thing that the rights which an individual enjoys under the law should be taken from him at the will of some person dressed in a little brief authority.

Sir William Lyne:

– The honorable and learned member must not forget that the Public Service Commissioner would have to be a party to such proceedings.

Mr HUGHES:

– I do not say that this allegation is true; but if it is not, the man who makes it ought to be drummed out of the service.

Sir William Lyne:

– I agree with the honorable and learned member.

Mr HUGHES:

– The Minister should appoint a special commission to inquire into it. No useful purpose would be served by a departmental inquiry.

Sir William Lyne:

– Rubbish ! Are we to have a departmental inquiry into every allegation that a man chooses to make against the Administration? I have heard all about these charges. I have sent for the Collector, Mr, Lockyer, who will be here in a few minutes.

Mr HUGHES:

– What course does the Minister intend to take to determine whether these charges are worthy of investigation ?

Sir William Lyne:

– I say that they are absolutely incorrect. I have already” inquired into them.

Mr HUGHES:

– How does the honorable gentleman . know that these charges are incorrect ?

Sir William Lyne:

– I have inquired, I believe, into every one of them.

Mr HUGHES:

-The honorable gentleman has no right to say that they are incorrect. I presented them to the Committee with the statement that I did not know whether they were or were not correct, but that, if they were, something ought to be done. The Minister now says, in effect, that he will make no inquiries. Why should he take up that attitude ?

Sir William Lyne:

– I have inquired into all, or nearly all, the cases mentioned by the honorable member.

Mr HUGHES:

– How ? By going, to the party interested, and asking him whether these charges are correct? When a bond fAe complaint is made in this way, it should receive different treatment from that which the Minister is according to it. I am astonished at his lack of courtesy.

Sir William Lyne:

– I have no desire to be discourteous, but I have been worried for a long time over these statements, and have inquired into them. The Collector of Customs in New South Wales, Mr.

Mr HUGHES:

– Will the honorable member make inquiries ?

Sir William Lyne:

– No. I will not inquire into cases that I have already dealt with, although I am quite prepared to inquire into those that have not already come before me*

Mr HUGHES:

– If an affidavit be made giving the names of these persons, and the particulars of their cases, will the Minister take steps to ascertain whether the substance of that affidavit is correct?

Sir William Lyne:

– Certainly.

Mr HUGHES:

– If a prima facie case be made out, will he cause the inquiry to be such that officers will not be afraid to give evidence ?

Sir William Lyne:

– Certainly.

Mr HUGHES:

– A departmental board of inquiry has no power, and it is not right that officers should be asked to testify before their chief. The honorable gentleman’s experience, both in the Parliament of New South Wales and that of the Commonwealth, should teach him that there are occasions on which it is necessary to check heads of Departments. In one case of the kind he had to take action, and did so with advantage. I shall supply him with these particulars, and give him the name of the persons who make these charges. I ask him, in fairness to these men and to the service generally, to have a thorough inquiry.

Sir William Lyne:

– If they sign statutory declarations, I shall be glad to have the fullest inquiry.

Mr JOHNSON:
Lang

.- I have no doubt that the Minister will cause an. inquiry to be made into the statements contained in the document from which the honorable member for West Sydney quoted. Of course, in a large Department like the Customs, there are always anomalies and conditions which create irritation and discontent; but, from my. knowledge of the New South Wales Collector, I should say that, so far from being a tyrant, he is a man of kindly disposition, and takes the greatest interest in the welfare of his officers. Of course, he has also to keep in mind die interests of the public, by studying economy. Scores of complaints come to me from one source and another which I would never think of bringing before the Committee ; but there are two or three grievances which the officers of this De per annum, which is paid to third class examining officers. I find” a number of officers who are termed assistant examining officers in receipt of salaries ranging from £185 to £240 per annum. Now, in a number of cases, there are officers in this grade who do exactly the same class of work as examining officers, third class, with the same responsibility. They are in every essential, capable, good officers, with length of service and ability to recommend them. I am not speaking of young officers new to the position, who have yet their spurs to win, but of old and experienced men who seem to be entitled to more consideration than has been meted out to them in the past. To use a military phrase, if it is necessary for some to “ mark time,” it should apply to the higher-paid officials, and not to the lower grade, with a view to giving a fairer and more equitable distribution of increments. Again, when a vacancy occurs by death or otherwise, at a salary of, say, £260 per annum, an officer will be appointed to it from, say, the £235 grade, providing, of course, his qualifications are suitable. The Commissioner does not then put nil the eligible officers up one step. Some apparently extraordinary anomalies exist in connexion with the Fidelity Guarantee Fund. For instance, I am informed that two officers, one in receipt of a salary of £285 per annum, and the other in receipt of a salary of £185, each pav 12s. 6d. to the fund, and that two other officers, one in receipt of £200. and the other in receipt of £no, each pay 7s. 6d. Those are anomalies that I should like the Minister to explain. Then, too, how is it that an officer receiving £185 ls required to pay 12s. 66.. when an officer receiving £200 pays only 7s. 6d. ? There may, of course, be good and sufficient reasons for these discrepancies, but I should like to hear the Minister’s explanation in regard to the matter. Possibly the payments to the fund are determined bv the amount of money for which each officer is responsible. Another matter to which I wish to refer is the remuneration paid in the Excise branch. The chief inspector of New South Wales was originally graded at £360 per annum. That salary was increased to £380, and he now receives £420, which, I think, is not too high for so important a post.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Batchelor:

– The honorable member cannot deal with items in detail.

Mr JOHNSON:

– I wish, to say all that I have to say in regard to the Department in one speech.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:

– Do I understand that it is the desire of the Committee that the divisions of this Department be put en bloc ?

Mr McCay:

– Yes. Honorable members will still be able to speak on any subject to which they wish to direct attention.

Mr JOHNSON:

– No doubt that course would facilitate the passing of the Estimates.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN:

– I f no objection is raised, it can be taken.

Mr JOHNSON:

– In view of the onerous duties which the officer referred to has to perform, his salary is not too high. I think, however, that many of the lockers and other subordinate officers are entitled to more liberal treatment. I believe that one locker receives a salary of £200 per annum, but that the majority of them receive £160 per annum. These officers are very frequently put in positions of trust, involving heavy financial responsibility. The British-Australian Tobacco Company pay Excise duty to the amount of £150,000 per annum, and the locker in charge of their factory in Sydney is paid £160 per annum, and has an assistant at £120 per annum. Then again, the Colonial Sugar Refining Company pav Excise duty amounting to £1.40,000 per annum, and yet the locker at their refinery in Sydney receives a salary of £160, and has an assistant at a salary of £120. I think that, whenever possible, officers capable of discharging such highly responsible duties should be promoted, and that their salaries should be increased. I would ask the Minister to bring this matter under the notice of the Collector of Customs in New South Wales, and request him to look into it. I have not the slightest doubt that any recommendations made bv the Collector will receive due attention, because it is recognised that at all times he endeavours to do his best for the Commonwealth, and for the officers under his charge. With reference to the cases referred “to by the honorable member for West Sydney,” I think thev ought, if dulattested before a justice of the peace or a Commissioner for Affidavits, to be investigated by an independent tribunal. But I do not think it is fair to make charges against the Collector of Customs, or any other responsible official, under cover of privilege, on the mere unsupported assertions of persons who feel themselves aggrieved. A Departmental Board, for obvious reasons, is not the most satisfactory form of inquiry to elicit the truth. Any inquiry, to be satisfactory, must be conducted by an impartial and unprejudiced tribunal.

Mr BROWN:
Canobolas

– I wish to make a few remarks with reference to the case referred to by the honorable and learned member for West Sydney. I am not acquainted with any of the officials concerned, and therefore I can speak disinterestedly. I know that there is a very strong feeling on the part of some officers who exercise control over large bodies of men against any combined action on the part of their “ subordinates. I think that that attitude of mind is a most unreasonable one. If the controlling officers only knew it, unity of action on the part of large bodies of employes frequently leads to the ready disposal of trivial complaints, and facilitates the settlement of disputes and the redress of real grievances. Some officers have a quite unreasonable dread of combinations among those under their control. Mr. Richardson, a prominent officer in the Railways Department in Syd-‘ ney, recently testified to the great assistance which he received from the employes’ organization, and bore testimony to the good feeling that existed between the higher officials and the great body of employes owing to the readiness with which grievances brought forward by the union could be remedied and the service as a whole placed upon a satisfactory footing. I trust that the Minister will take prompt action if he finds any prejudice manifested in the direction I have indicated by his principal ‘officers, and that he will at once establish the right of the men to combine for the purposes of bringing their grievances before those in authority. Some high officials look upon any man who advocates union and combination among his fellow employes as an element of danger which must be removed, even though injustice may be done.

Mr HUTCHISON:
Hindmarsh

– I wish to call attention to a glaring injustice which is being perpetrated in the Customs Department. When we appointed the Public Service Commissioner and his staff of inspectors, we understood that the public servants would be classified and paid according to the value of the work they performed. According to a return furnished last year, the Department of the Public Service Commissioner- has involved the Commonwealth in an outlay of £60,000 within less than five years, and I would ask honorable members to consider what return we have obtained for that large outlay. The conditions of the Public Service are full of anomalies, and irritation and discontent are rife among the officers.

Mr Frazer:

– Would the honorable member be in favour of a return to political control ?

Mr HUTCHISON:

– Certainly I would. What does political control amount to? It merely means that any honorable member is in a position to see that no injustice is done to any public servant. I now wish to show what has happened under the regime of the’ Public Service Commissioner, In the Excise Department of South Australia there are fifteen inspectors of the fourth class. I need scarcely remind honorable members that South Australia is the largest distilling and wine-making State in the Commonwealth. But although the Public Service Commissioner was supposed to classify the officers of our Commonwealth service in accordance with the value of the work which they performed, I find that the grossest anomalies still exist. This will be readily appreciated by a reference to the following table, which shows the number of inspectors of the fourth class of the Commonwealth service, together with the total and average salary paid to them on the 1st January of the present year : -

In other words, for performing precisely the same work the officers in South Australia receive £100 a year less than do those of other States.

Mr Page:

– Are they in receipt of smaller salaries now than they were prior to Federation?

Mr HUTCHISON:

– Their salaries have not been increased. Some of them have received no increments during the past two years. I have also had prepared a statement showing the number of inspectors in each subdivision of the fourth class in various States on the 1st January last. It reads as follows: -

Under the circumstances, I would not wonder if the work is not too well performed in some cases in South Australia.

Mr Page:

– The officers in the_ other States ‘do not “take down” the Government as they do in South Australian-

Mr HUTCHISON:

– These officers are employed by the Commonwealth, and not by South Australia. I am astonished^ that the honorable member should make such a stupid statement. If he had found that the officers in Queensland were being treated as badly as they are in my own State, I should have been the first to go to his assistance.

Mr Page:

– I am talking about a member of the South Australian Parliament, Mr. Tucker.

Mr HUTCHISON:

– I never like to comment upon a case which is sub judice. Such a course of action is very reprehensible, and ought not to be tolerated. I believe that the Acting Collector of Customs must have recommended these poorly-paid officials for increments.

Mr Page:

– Why not compel the Minister to lay the report of the sub-collector upon the table of the House?

Mr HUTCHISON:

– That is a very good suggestion, and I thank the honor- able member for it. Only two officers in South Australia have received increments during the past year, and one was bound to receive his under the law. Section 23, sub-section 2, of the Commonwealth Public Service Act reads -

An officer may be promoted within a class in the clerical division from one sub-division thereof to another, whether there is or is nor a vacancy in the sub-division to which the promotion is made.

It will thus be seen that an officer who is doing his work well is eligible for promotion, irrespective of whether there is a vacancy or not. I shall have to enter a different sort of protest against the administration of the Public Service Commissioner if these anomalies are permitted to continue. I feel strongly upon these glaring injustices, and I hope that the Minister will remedy them at the earliest possible moment.

Mr THOMAS:
Barrier

– I feel somewhat dissatisfied that a promise which was made by the Minister has not been carried out. Some time ago the House unanimously agreed . to a motion which I submitted, providing that all patent and proprietary medicines imported into Australia should bear labels showing their component parts. A few days ago I put a question to the Minister as to what action was being taken to give effect to that resolution, and received a reply containing so many technical terms that the honorable gentleman did not think it was worth while reading it to the House. I gather from that statement that the Department is taking steps to ascertain the proportion of poison contained in certain patent medicines ; but my desire, and that of those who supported the motion, is that something more should be done. Action should be taken to require the component parts of patent medicines that are absolutely valueless to be shown on the labels in order that the public may know what they are buying. The Minister said that he had power to take action under the Commerce Act, but I notice that although the motion was passed at the beginning of August last, patent and proprietary medicines are still being sold without being labelled in the way we desire. I hope that the Minister will take action to give effect to that part of the resolution with which he declared himself in sympathy. It has been pointed out to me that it would be impossible to give effect to one part of the resolution, but there is nothing to prevent the Minister taking action in the direction I have indicated.

Mr FISHER:
Wide Bay

.- I wish to congratulate the Minister of Trade and Customs on the fact that he has been able to allay the spirit of rebellion evidenced by the mercantile community of New South Wales by transferring on frequent occasions part of his administrative staff, and also by making frequent visits himself, to the city of the beautiful harbor. I would ask whether he is prepared to further inconvenience himself by making his. administration of the Department still more perambulatory, and visiting the capitals of all the’ States. As New South Wales, with characteristic modesty, has demanded that part of the administrative work of the Department shall be conducted in Sydney, I fail to see why the remaining States capitals should not have an occasional visit from the honorable gentleman and his staff. Such visits by the Minister, who has become known, by many titles, to the people all over Australia, might do much to remove antiFederal feeling.

Mr WATKINS:
Newcastle

._A number of men who have recently entered the Customs service complain that uniforms have not yet been distributed amongst them, and that as they have frequently to do night duty on the wharfs, the wearing of civilian’s clothes does not tend to the efficient discharge of their duties. They are not recognised . by outsiders as Customs officials, and when on might duty are liable to insult and assault. I hope that the Minister will see that the uniforms are supplied.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:
Minister of Trade and Customs · Hume · Protectionist

– I think that the representations made by the honorable member for Hindmarsh as to the treatment of the Excise officers in South Australia are absolutely wrong.

Mr Hutchison:

– I have quoted figures in support of my case.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– Immediately after the honorable member spoke, I communicated by telephone with the Public Service Commissioner, and in reply received a message stating that the Excise officers in South Australia have been exceptionally well treated, and have been promoted as far as the Public Service Act will allow. To give them further increases would be to inflict an injustice on many officers. The men in question are receiving far more than they would have received under the State law, and Mr. McLachlan considers that they have no cause of complaint. That is the statement I have received in answer to my inquiry. I am also advised that the reason why these men do not receive as high a salary as that paid to officers in Victoria is that the latter are very much senior in service to the South Australian officers, the average length of service in Victoria being twenty-three years, and in South Australia only fifteen. These facts, which I have received from the Public Service Commissioner will, I hope, prove satisfactory to the honorable member. In reply to the honorable member for Barrier, I may’ say that I have had an opportunity to consult Mr. Lockyer, the Collector of Customs in Sydney, who attends to the administration of that part of the Commerce Act and the regulations which relate to the point referred to. The matter is now under consideration, and a proclamation will shortly be issued” in regard to the labelling of injurious medicines. Section 16, in the Commerce Act, however, renders it necessary for’ us to proceed very carefully. It provides that-

The regulations ‘ under sections seven and eleven of this Act shall not prescribe a trade description which discloses trade secrets of manufacture or preparation, unless, in the opinion of the Governor-General, the disclosure is necessary for the protection of the health or welfare of the public.

The proclamation will require that patent medicines shall bear labels showing their component parts in all cases where such a precaution is necessary for the protection of the public. But I cannot compel the ingredients to be stated on the labels in’ every case.

Mr Thomas:

– The Minister may prohibit the introduction of goods that are not so labelled as to indicate their constituent parts.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– I shall require patent medicines to be so labelled unless the description would divulge a trade secret that ought not to be made public.

Sir WILLIAM LYNE:

– If objection were taken to a demand that the component parts of a medicine that was not harmful should be placed on the labels, I could not do anything in the direction desired by the honorable member if it would involve the disclosure of a trade secret. I intend, however, as far as poS,sible to meet his request, and I am quite sure that the action I shall take will *prove satisfactory to him. As to the request made by the honorable member for Newcastle, I may say that the Collector of Customs for New South Wales is present, and that I shall instruct him to make the necessary inquiries. Every officer shall be treated alike. I come now to the complaint made by the honorable and learned member for West Sydney, that the Collector has prevented officers in the Customs Department from acting on the council of an association. I told the honorable and learned member, by way of interjection, that I had already inquired into some, if not all the cases to which he referred, and that, so far as I was able to ascertain, there was no foundation for the charge. If, however, these officers will make a statutory^ declaration, I shall cause a full inquiry to be made. The Collector of Customs in New South Wales says that the whole statement is incorrect. I repeat, however, that if these officers will make’ a statement to which I can bind them - if they will make an affidavit - I shall be prepared to take action. If they do not substantiate their case, their offence will be visited upon them. They have no right to make such a charge unless they are prepared to prove it. If they substantiate their allegations, some one will have to suffer ; if they do not, they themselves will suffer. I am prepared to have the most complete and searching inquiry into the allegation that, as members of the council of an association, certain officers had no hope of securing increments.

Mr HUTCHISON:
Hindmarsh

– I am not satisfied with the Minister’s reply. It may be satisfactory, so far as it concerns officers who do not possess a

Proposed vote agreed to.

Division 36 (Patents), £11,523; division 37 (Trade marks, copyrights, and designs), £3,198; division 38 (New South. Wales), £71,532; division 39 (Victoria), £61,755; division 40 (Queensland), £50,640 ; division 41 (South Australia), £25,668; division 42 (Western Australia), j£32.5°4; division 43 (Tasmania), £8,622 agreed to.

Department of Defence.

Division 44 (Central Administration), £21,164.

Mr DEAKIN:
Minister of External Affairs · Ballarat · Protectionist

– I rise to make a plain business statement of the position in which the Commonwealth is placed in relation to the vital issue of defence. Few, if any, questions are more important. Probably none would admit of more expansive treatment, or reference to a greater variety of grave topics. But my desire is to avoid, except by implication, more than a reference to any of them. From days long prior to Federation until now, military and naval authorities have contributed various valuable reports on the subject, and since the Union a series of memoranda by experts and committees of

Mr Frazer:

– Is the Naval Subsidy included in the £253,000?

Mr Chanter:

– It makes a patriot of the soldier.

Mr DEAKIN:

– A true patriot, enabling him to make his patriotism a power. I do not present our defence proposals, even as such, as a mere recourse to tooth and claw ; to me they are an essential part of the training of manhood, and a recognition of one of the first duties of citizenship. We rely upon two arms - a citizen soldiery, the demands upon whose time are reduced to the minimum compatible with efficiency, and our Naval Forces, whose service calls for a longer devotion to duty. The task of devising a complete scheme which will harmonize our defence by land and sea, sufficient for probable emergencies, has not yet been satisfactorily accomplished. No complete scheme has yet been formulated, although different aspects of defence have been effectively treated on more than one occasion. Now that we are in possession of the general report of the Imperial Defence Committee, and the local applications of it by Committees of our officers, we are in a better position than we have ever before occupied to elaborate such a scheme. Under it we can supply our deficiencies, and proceed upon an even course of development, in accordance with wellthoughtout general plans.

Mr Kelly:

– Is the Government scheme the adoption of the Imperial Defence Committee’s report?

Mr DEAKIN:

– Our local officers have furnished suggestions in regard to that report - some for additions, others for amendments, others for the application of the proposals to our local circumstances. While preparing a complete policy, it is not to be supposed that we have been acting without a guide. We have not had the complete and harmonious proposals desired, but we have had a policy which, though it has varied during the history of the Commonwealth, has been gradually taking a fixed shape. The simple duty that devolves upon me owing to the fact that the Estimates are presented in this House, instead of in the other Chamber - where the Minister of Defence would have been charged with a responsibility that I would have willingly left to him - is to show how our present police has been developing by degrees, to recall our first steps when Federation was established, indicating the direction in which we are travelling, and the object at which we are aiming. It is possible for me to present only the most general view of the situation. Much, too, will remain to be done before we finally decide exactly at what rate, and in what manner, we shall apply our policy, which this Parliament, or its successor, is now called upon to adopt with more definiteness than has hitherto been the case. In this connexion, we shall be faced from the first step to the last by financial considerations, which must govern this as well as every other matter of business that comes before this House. These are now assuming far greater importance than they have ever done before. Speaking colloquially, there have been three periods in the development of our defences. The first commenced on March 1st, 1901, when the States Forces were taken over, and a settled regime was established on the arrival of the first General Officer Commanding, Major-General Sir Edward Hutton, in February, 1902. What we may call the General Officer Commanding system was in operation, until November, 1904. That marks the first period. Then came a second period, beginning with the establishment of the Council of Defence on the 17th of November, 1904, and extending until the 4th of July last year. This period was occupied in the preliminary work inseparable from the introduction of the new method of control. From July of last year, to September of the present year, we have been busy obtaining from Great Britain and from our own officers the materials upon which our new system of defence is to be based. I venture to think that we are now at the beginning of a third period, when a complete and harmonious scheme can, owing to our having at last a sufficient knowledge of the facts, be undertaken with effectiveness. The first period showed a very slight transition from the systems previously in force in the seve-ral States. In 1899, for instance, the expenditure upon the defence systems of the States amounted to a little short of £1,000,000. At that time the naval subsidy was only one-half of the amount nowbeing paid. Allowing for the extra subsidy of £100,000, our expenditure during the current vear will be practically the same as that incurred in the year when we assumed control of the several forces of the States.

The following is a statement showing the the Naval and Military Forces from 1901 proportion of expenditure in each year upon until the present time : - Statement showing Appropriation and Expenditure on Central Administration, Naval: Forces, and Military Forces for the years 1901-2 to 1905-6, and Estimated Expenditure for 1906-7. We began in 1901-2 with an actual expenditure of £665,311. In 1902-3 we expended £581,844; in 1903-4, £518,952; in 1904-5, £553:997 ; in 1905-6, £564,881. For the current year the estimated expenditure is £639,001. This last amount cannot be compared with the actual expenditure of previous years, but should properly be contrasted with the Estimates for those periods. {: .speaker-JUV} ##### Mr Mcwilliams: -- The Commonwealth has multiplied the expenditure in Tasmania three times, and yet has only half the number of men formerly under arms. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- That is because Tasmania deliberately cut down her outlay, and postponed necessary changes, because the Commonwealth was about to be established. {: .speaker-JUV} ##### Mr Mcwilliams: -- The Prime Minister is absolutely wrong. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- I have Tasmanian authority for my statement. {: .speaker-KPM} ##### Mr McCay: -- The Defence Department has the file of official papers, which shows that the forces were cut ' down by nearly half. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- D - During the first period to which I have referred, we adopted practically the same system that had previously obtained in the States, but upon a somewhat larger scale. The Naval Forces were of little importance, and during the first Federal period were ignored to a still further degree. Our forces were practically wholly military, consisting of 26,000 men of all arms in time of peace, and 40,000 upon a war footing. During the first year, the' expenditure, as I have stated, amounted to £665,311. In addition to that, MajorGeneral **Sir Edward** Hutton recommended, and this Parliament approved of a scheme, setting apart a special capital sum for the purchase of defence material amounting, in the first instance, to £486,000, increased in 1904-5 to £524,000. If was proposed to spread this expenditure over a series of years, and the whole amount has net yet been exhausted. The form of the forces and their members were all inherited from the States. Provision had been made by them for military defence, with a small complement of harbor defences. Under the Commonwealth these forces were organized and unified, but were altered very little in character beyond the degree necessary for those purposes. One great change was made. Under the States control, the expenditure upon forts and military material was often charged to» loan account, whereas under the Commonwealth the whole expenditure has beencharged against the revenue of the year. Our second period under the Council of Defence, which commenced in 1904, has been one of incubation. The first Minister, the honorable and learned member for Corinella, was engaged in consideringschemes for additional expenditure, approaching £1,000,000, upon war material,, in order to bring our forces into a state; of efficiency. In the speech which the honorable and learned member delivered in 1905, he indicated that items amounting to ^£800,000 were then under review. His proposals, although they were under serious consideration, were not adopted. {: .speaker-KPM} ##### Mr McCay: -- I stated that it would require another £800,000 to complete our defence equipment. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- Yes ; in addition to the £313,000 remaining unexpended of the amount set apart by Major-General **Sir Edward** Hutton. In 1905, the present Minister of Defence, reaping the fruits of the labours of the previous Administration, obtained additional information from his officers, which he presented to Parliament. He estimated that an expenditure of nearly £4,000,000 would have to be incurred in order to provide for a naval equipment, roughly speaking, upon the same scale as the Military Defence Forces, and involving an annual expenditure on the latter at least as large as that previously proposed. The conflict which then existed between our naval and military advisers was accentuated by a' report of the Colonial Defence Committee, which was briefly summarized by the Naval Director, Captain Creswell, as follows: - >The opinions expressed in the memorandum involved the abolition of all naval organization and naval effort of any kind by Australia, other than contribution to the Imperial fleet. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- That contribution was to be in both men and money. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- The Minister was confronted by , the recommendations of the Colonial Defence Committee, absolutely opposed to the schemes which his naval advisers were laying before him. In addition, there was a considerable divergence of opinion on the military side as to the expenditure necessary for us to incur in providing for fixed defences. We had a dozen different types of guns - a most undesirable condition of affairs - and it was absolutely necessary to reduce the number. It then became a question as to which type should be preferred, and that involved other considerations of importance. Under these circumstances, it appeared to the Government that, before taking any definite step forward, it was imperative to obtain fuller advice, not simply from the Colonial Defence Committee, but from the Imperial Defence Committee, the highest authority in the British Empire. After some unavoidable delay, the report of the Imperial Defence Committee has been received, and, if we were to set aside its great value, in so far as it relates to our general proposals, and to concentrate our attention only on the criticisms which it offers upon our fixed defences, we should be more than amply repaid for the time that we have had to wait for it. We have in that report, parts of which must, in the very nature of things, remain to some extent confidential, a review of our fortifications, together with' recommendations as to the manner in which they must be dealt with in order to be rendered efficient. In regard to our fixed defences, we now have the best obtainable authority for reducing the expenditure proposed to us by our local advisers by no less a sum than £330,000. That great saving, which can now be made with confidence, seeing that it is recommended on such unimpeachable authority, would have been contemplated with great anxiety if we had been called upon to consider it in the teeth of the advice tendered to us bv our local experts. I do not suggest that the advice of the local experts was not sound. But through the Imperial Defence Committee we come into touch with the latest defence doctrines and developments, and are specially warned against attempting to make provision too far in advance. We are told that we may safely content ourselves with a smaller ambit of protection, and with, apparently, less powerful, but equally effective, means of defence for our coastal forts. {: .speaker-KPM} ##### Mr McCay: -- That is advised because the forts must be re-armed every ten years. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- Exactly. The attitude in regard to the Naval Forces of the Commonwealth remains practically unaltered. The Imperial Defence Committee, on the last page of their report, tell us that the value of any vessels we had for local defences was never great. They go on to say that the Colonial Defence Committee have hitherto hesitated to recommend the extinction of the local Naval Forces. They then proceed to urge that the best and, indeed, the only necessary naval defence for Australia can be provided bv the Admiralty increasing the number of its own ships, which may be manned and officered by Australians, but which will be included in the Royal Navy. This means that what is ordinarily called " blue water ' ' defence is to suffice for Australia, and that there is no necessity for undertaking harbor- defence df a floating character. What the Imperial Defence Committee foresee as a possibility pf war is a raid of three or four unarmoured cruisers upon our shores. In their opinion that can be provided against by the Imperial Squadron. This view, of course, does not agree with the opinion of our first General Officer Commanding who, in 1903, pointed out that - >As long as the supremacy of the sea is in the hands of the Royal Navy, no serious attack upon Australia upon a large scale may be considered as practicable. In this regard little attention need be paid to the temporary and local effect of a raid of one or two of an enemy's ships upon one or other of the undefended ports. It would, however, be the height of folly to disregard the possibility of the supremacy of the sea being temporarily or permanently lost. The Imperial Defence Committee consider that the possibility of the supremacy of the sea being temporarily or permanently lost by Great Britain mav be set aside, since to provide against it would involve a greater expense than would be justified by results. This report of this Committee reached our hands a- month ago. The reports of the local Committees reached us only a few days ago. Consequently, we have only had an opportunity to consider them in their general bearing on our defences as a whole. {: .speaker-KPM} ##### Mr McCay: -- These Estimates are merely " carry on " Estimates. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- But there are also certain developments already in progress to which. I shall refer in a moment, by which we have been broadening the policy that previously prevailed. I do not propose to weary honorable members with a criticism of reports which are already in their hands, and, therefore, content myself with a reference to paragraph 5 of our Military Committee's report, which deserves special attention. That paragraph states - >On the assumption that the Military Forces of the Commonwealth are to be of substantially the same strength and cost as at present, the Committee submit the -following as the most suitable, organization and allotment into Field and Garrison Forces respectively for such forces in accordance with the Minister's instructions, keeping in view the report of the Imperial Defence Committee, with which they agree, except as hereinafter mentioned. So that, in perusing this military report, honorable members must recall that they are reading advice tendered to us under the very important assumption that substantially the same strength, cost, and character of defence that has hitherto prevailed is to be continued. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- The permanent forces seem to have been weakened very considerably. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- The estimated expenditure for the current year is £41,000 more than was the actual expenditure of last year. Of this sum, " cadets " absorb £15,000, and the militia £10,000. . The present Estimates represent a continuation and the broadening of the policy which had previously been followed, whilst the report of our Military Committee adopts that system as the basis of any recommendation which it makes. What I mean by the "broadening" system may be best illustrated by calling attention to the progress which has been made during the past twelve months - that is to say, from 30th June, 1905, to 30th, June last. During that period the permanent forces have increased from 1,276 to 1,356; the militia from 14,506 to 15,252; and the volunteers from 4,694 to 5,333; or from 20.476 to 21,941. During the same period the cadets have increased from 10,000 to 23,000, of whom 3,000 are senior cadets. Since 1st July, 1905, the rifle clubs have increased from' 30,242 to 37,082. The rifles in our possession in 1905 numbered 35,900, 8,000 are now under order, and we are making provision for 10,000 more, though we have not yet received those which have already been ordered, on account of the rapidly with which alterations are being made by the War Office. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr Watson: -- Was the money sent to England ? {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- The money for the first consignment was sent to England. There will be over 54,000 rifles in the Commonwealth when the number provided for. on the Estimates is obtained, without reckoning 26,000 Martini-Enfield rifles, single-loaders, which are not regarded as up-to-date, but which are quite serviceable, and which use the same ammunition as magazine rifles. The senior cadets and about 20 per cent, of the junior cadets will be provided with 303 rifles, the remainder of the cadets will be armed with Westley-Richards and Francotte rifles, of which there are approximately 7,300 on issue and in hand, 3,4°° ordered, and 5,300 more proposed to be ordered this vear. When Federation was accomplished, the average of rounds per rifle in stock was 200. Provision on this year's Estimates will brins the average up to 700 rounds per rifle, which is regarded as the minimum which should be available. In regard to. field guns, twenty-four of the latest pattern field artillery guns - 18-pounder quick firers - arrived this year, with 474 rounds per gun. The Estimates provide for 12 18-pounder quick-firers and limbers, with 600 rounds of ammunition each. These are intended to complete the batteries of our garrison forces. We also provide for 36 18-pounder ammunition waggons for guns which were arranged for last year. Thirty-six Colt automatic machine guns have been ordered, of which eighteen have been received. Six pom-poms have been received, but orders for three others have been cancelled, as the Imperial authorities are now unfavorable to them. Full effect is being given to the policy of sending officers abroad for instruction. Lieut. Long-Innes, R.A.A., has been sent to Canada, and has been attached for duty to the Royal Canadian Artillery, at Halifax. His glace has been taken by Lieut. Clairmonte of the Royal Canadian Artillery. **Major Sellheim,** CB., of Queensland, is now in England, having been replaced by **Major Haag** from the Imperial Army. **Major Luscombe,** of New South Wales, has left for England and India on exchange with an officer of the Indian Army. **Major Patterson,** of Victoria, has been sent to England and India, and two non-commissioned officers of the instructional staff are also in England for instruction. The regulations published in October - besides the allowance for .303 ammunition - made provision for an annual grant of 100 rounds of Morris tube ammunition to each efficient member of a rifle club possessing a Morris tube or miniature rifle range, and also extended railway facilities to members of rifle clubs travelling to and from competitions. Provision has been made on the Estimates for railway and steamer fares and freights for rifle clubs and associations. Grants to rifle associations and matches have been increased this year by £600. It is intended to still further augment the number of rifle clubs, and to arrange for officers in charge to rank .as volunteer officers. I do not wish to detain the Committee by referring to orders which have been given for electric light, nor to plans for encouraging naval cadets, nor to the encouragement of miniature rifle ranges, nor to the opening of the Sydney University to lectures by Colonel Foster and' other officers under him, which will give us something approaching a military college. Arrangements are also being made for the manufacture of arms and ammunition within the Commonwealth, beginning with important parts in the first instance. I shall have no proposals to submit in that connexion to-night, because no provision has been made -upon the Estimates for any marked departure. {: .speaker-KPM} ##### Mr McCay: -- Is the scheme which I brought under the notice of the Prime Minister being adopted in any way? {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- It was referred to the Inspector of Explosives for report. His report was then forwarded to the gentlemen who drafted that scheme, and it has since been remitted for advice to the mother country. If my memory serves me accurately, it has reference to the use of machinery for the purpose of' preparing discs for cartridges, &c. The sum which appears upon the Estimates this year for the military side of the Commonwealth Defence Forces is £585,000. The Military Committee's recommendations will, if adopted, involve us in an additional expenditure of £100,000 annually, and if we allow another £150,000 for special defence stores and material, we shall get a total outlay upon the Military Forces of the Commonwealth of about £850,000 a year. That sum will provide for a land force alone - a land force of 26,000 upon a peace footing. *Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 7.4.5 p-m. (Thursday).* {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- Honorable members have before them a table which puts, almost in pictorial form, the successive changes that have taken place in the schemes relating to the land force that have been from time to time favoured in the Commonwealth. It is, perhaps, because I found the table useful to- myself that I venture to hope it may be of some service to honorable members. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- It is not half complete enough. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- I have intentionally excluded the missing half to which the honorable and learned member refers. The table sets forth the main features that I desire to bring out. I do not present it as embodying all the information that can be found in the reports. The less experienced of us are liable in the multitude of details to lose sight of the main features of the different proposals that have been submitted, and thus become unable to observe their similarities and contrasts. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- Can the Prime Minister fill up the blank in the third line of the fourth column relating to the Royal Australian. Artillery ? {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- The Royal Australian Artillery -is to be left as it is. Those who look at the first column of the table will see given, as far as can be given in this way, the scheme proposed by MajorGeneral Hutton when General Officer Commanding. In the next column, we come to the stage reached under the Council of Defence of 1904-5, with the different proposals for expanding and altering that scheme in some particulars. The third column shows the recommendations of the Imperial Defence Committee lately received, while in the fourth column we have the recommendations made by the local officers after the receipt of that Committee's scheme. The last column is best interpreted by an examination of the three columns preceding it. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- The honorable and learned member said that the Imperial Defence Committee's report was a harmonized report. How can the two reports of the local Committees harmonize like the original single report? {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- The Imperial Defence Committee's report is harmonized by the obliteration of our proposals for floating defences for coastal and harbor purposes. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- I agree with the honorable and learned member. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- It is, therefore, a harmonious scheme. That is dealt with, first of all, by our military officers, in regard to fixed defences and our general military organization. These reports, except so far as locality may require, vary but slightly from those of the Imperial Defence Committee. It -is only when we come to the third part, the recommendations of our naval officers, that we find a wide departure. I am still dealing, however, with the military alone. This table is intended to present in as simple a form as possible, and in bold outline, the variations that have been made upon the first scheme of the General Officer Commanding in 1903. That scheme in itself was largely derived from the previously existing States schemes. Despite the blanks which have to occur in the columns, I think that, when read in connexion with the reports, this table furnishes a kind of key to the progress and changes that have been made. I shall not dwell upon it> it seems to me to speak for itself. The value of the Imperial Defence Committee's report is clearly indicated there. Turning from the military side to the recommendations of the naval officers of the Commonwealth, we find a marked departure from the Imperial Defence Committee's, report. That departure does not date from the recommendations of the naval officers. Turning to a speech on the Naval Agreement Bill, delivered on 22nd July, 1903, by **Sir Edmund** Barton. thenPrime Minister of the Commonwealth, and reported in *Hansard,* page 2436, I find that the right honorable gentleman said- >I have already indicated that it would be very welcome to me if Parliament would- agree to provide a somewhat better measure of harbor and coastal defence. I take it that such a measure is to be found either in the employment of first-class torpedo boats or destroyers, or any other means of offensive defence. Then, summing up the position, he says - >It is well to bear in mind that there are two lines of defence before we come to the actual employment of our land forces as distinct from those attached to our fortifications. First, there is the navy, and then the combined coastal and harbor defences. Again, at page. 2437, he is reported to have said- >I am prepared, therefore, to lay it down that nothing in this agreement that we wish to enforce shall be deemed to affect any purely Australian naval defence force or purely Australian ships or armament that we maintain for harbor and .coast defence purposes. I am prepared, also to see it laid down, in order that there may be no mistake, that such Australian forces, ships, and armaments as the Parliament may provide for shall be maintained bv the 'Commonwealth, and be under our sole control. At page 2440. we find that he said - >If it should be the wish of Parliament to increase our floating defence by strengthening it, and making it capable of aggression, bv the use of torpedo gun boats, or other similar means, I shall be very pleased, and I shall be encouraged in my future efforts in that direction. Looking back to the earliest days of the Federation, we learn that this conception of harbor and coastal defences was already in the minds of the Government of the day. But, during .what I describe as the General Officer Commanding period almost all our attention was absorbed in the organization of land forces. The expenditure upon harbor and coastal floating defences, which before Federation had amounted to {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- The scheme prepared by Captain Creswell, and presented to the Senate in 1902, has not been embodied in this table. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- The Defence Department furnished Bie with the different schemes, and, on looking at those supplied, I . seemed to recollect some prior sketch ; but, as it had not been sent to me. thought it could not have been an official paper. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- I have a copy of the paper. The scheme embodied in it is very contradictory of those now before us. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- As the honorable member says, this paper was presented to the Senate in February, 1902. This preliminary proposal, which is not included in the papers I have distributed amongst honorable members, proposed four cruisers, to cost £300,000 each, the expenditure on the upkeep of which was estimated to be £47,000 per annum. The first ship was to be ordered forthwith, and completed in 1903, and the second, third, and fourth ships were to be completed in 1905, 1907, and 1909 respectively. The tost of accessory establishment and training ships was to be met by an appropriation extending over ten years of from £300,000 to ^350,000. Captain Creswell pointed out in the report that - >An Appropriation Act extending over ten years, setting aside £300,000 to ,£350,000 annually for naval defences, would be a more satisfactory arrangement. It would suffice to provide a fleet of five cruisers suitable for our defence, and leave no debt. If continued, even at a reduced amount, it would provide for all renewals as required An expenditure of £350,000 per annum for ten years would have covered that scheme. Then follows the scheme of 1905 embodied in the table which I have presented to honorable members. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr Watson: -- In the meantime we had arranged the Naval Agreement. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- In the meantime the Naval Agreement Act had beep passed. The paper before honorable members shows {: .speaker-KDR} ##### Mr Ewing: -- Which represents their present views. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- Exactly. It may be of some assistance to honorable members if I point out. what this last proposal means. It includes, first, three ocean-going destroyers of 1,300 tons each, with a speed of 33 knots, and a total war complement of 832 men, costing £167,000 a year. These are the descriptions of the vessels proposed by the Naval Committee - >Ocean-Going Destroyer, First Class. > >This is a special type for ocean-going service " to keep the sea under all conditions," and resembles the type of special ocean-going destroyers now being built for the Admiralty in accordance with their policy to build larger destroyers. > >Speed - 33 knots. > >Armament - Torpedo tubes, 2 18-inch; guns, 6 4-inch Q.F., 4 R.C. Maxima. > >Steaming radius- At r5 knots, oil fuel, 3,750 knots; coal, 2,600 knots. At ro knots, oil fuel, 6,250 knots; coal, 4,500 knots. ' > >Ocean-Going Destroyer, Second Class. > >This is practically identical with the *Tartar, Afridi,* and *Ghurka* class of Royal Navy, but armament is heavier. > >Armament - Torpedo tubes, 2 iS-inch; guns. 4 4-inch Q.F., 4 R.C. Maxima. > >Coastal Destroyer. > >The *Teviot* class is the River class, *i.e.,* the class named after rivers in the United Kingdom. > >This is the best sea-keeping class of Torpedo Destroyers. > >The class was designed after the loss of the *Cobra,* to have a speed of 25 knots instead of the 30 knots of the earlier type. > >Tried, however, at the same load draft on trial, the older 30 knot class was actually capable of only 27 knots. > >The River class is therefore only two knots less nominal speed than the 30 knot boats. This superiority of two knot's disappears at sea directly- wind and sea rise. The River class lose their speed but slightly in comparison with the other earlier and nominally faster class. The River class outstrip the other in most weathers. > >Besides being good sea boats, they have a great range of action. A flotilla of these destroyers returning from China averaged 13 knots for the passage of 1,560 miles from Singa-pore to Colombo, and 12^ knots for the run of 2,330 miles from Colombo to Aden. > >Armament - Torpedo tubes, 2 ; guns, r '12-Ddr. Q.F., 5 6-pdr. Q.F. > >First Class Torpedo Boat. > >Armament - Torpedo tubes, 3; guns, 3 3-nifc. Complements. The complements are based on the establishments for vessels of theRoyal Navy, but some reduction has been made in anticipation of burning oil fuel, and of turbine propulsion. Attention may be directed to the fact that the first three classes are destroyers, of which Great Britain possesses 140; France and Germany, over 60 each; Italy, a great number; and Japan and the United States, about 40 each. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Are not destroyers designed to hunt down torpedo boats? {: #subdebate-12-0-s167 .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN:
Protectionist -- That was their original purpose, but their scope is being greatly enlarged. Great Britain has a few reaching 600 tons, while France has some up to 300 tons, Germany to 420 tons, Italy to 320 tons, Japan to 370 tons, Sweden to 400 tons, and the United States to 420 tons. Originally, torpedo destroyers were not much larger than torpedo boats, but the class is being gradually enlarged, until the mother country is now building destroyers resembling in type the: largest proposed in this scheme. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Vessels able to keep at sea outside the ports which might be attacked by torpedo boats. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- And able to operate oyer a larger area. Great Britain is now building 12, Italy 16. France 4, Germany 6, Brazil 4, and Sweden6 destroyers. The latest reports show them to be a most favoured type, their usefulness being recognised, and their size increased. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- What is the difference between a "cruiser destroyer" and an " ocean-going destroyer " ? {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- There is a difference in tonnage, in armament, and in most other respects. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Is not " cruiser destroyer " a. new definition ? {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- It is taken from the new proposals of the Admiralty, and is a special type for ocean-going service to keep the sea under all conditions. In the first scheme submitted, it was proposed to spend £350,000 a year on construction during a period of five years, with an annual upkeep of £120,000, or £470,000 in all. The second scheme, though the money is somewhat differently distributed, would cost the same amount. In the light of the Imperial Defence Committee's report comes a third proposal from the Committee of naval officers, the proposed expenditure being £450,000. The outlay on mainten ance, manning, and so on, would begin at £78,000, and reach £167,000 a year, when the vessels were completed. That would mean an annual expenditure, commencing at £528,000, and running up to £627,000, having regard to both construction and maintenance. Taking thatexpenditure annually, we should have a sum which would enable us, in the course of every ten years, to entirely renew our fleet. The annual increase in upkeep would begin at £25,000, and go up to £114,000 ; add the subsidy of £200,000 a year, which is paid towards the upkeep of the Australian Squadron, and we obtain a maximum of£82 7,000 a year. My object in quoting these figures is to show the financial position at which we shall arrive if we take both proposals in conjunction. I have had these tables prepared to show honorable members what is asked. This means an expenditure on land forces of £825,000 a year, and on naval forces of £827,000, or of, in all, £1,650,000. It is true that if the military and naval expenditure of Great Britain were contrasted, we should then be paying proportionately only onethird of the sum paid by the mother coun- try. Nevertheless, it will be admitted that a scheme demanding the expenditure of £1,650,000 a year for the defence of Australia is beyond our means. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- I - It would spell bankruptcy. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- It would mean the diversion of a large sum of money from reproductive usesto the purpose of defence. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- If we are not ready to face the duty of protecting ourselves against every possible danger, we are not a national Parliament. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- If we did face it at once, while our object would be beyond impeachment, such an inroad upon the public finances would meet with the disapproval of the great majority of the people of the country. {: .speaker-KJ8} ##### Mr Hutchison: -- No doubt about that. {: .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr Crouch: -- We shall have to face it. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- It is necessary to make a beginning, and to proceed by steady advances, taking advantage of local means or knowledge, and seeking more economical methods than those at present advised. I think honorable members will recognise that since the proposal of the Committee of military and naval officers calls for an expenditure of £1,600,000 a year, we must review our establishment, in order to see how far we can attain our ends by economies in existing expenditure. As we are frequently reminded, the defence of the Commonwealth has now become a serious question. We are gradually entering upon our full Federal obligations, and the discharge of all our functions, including the provision of defence by land and by sea, will not only absorb all the revenue at present available, but will make large demands on other sources. The .gravity of the situation can hardly be overstated, and we must examine it closely in relation to defence as well as to all other expenditure. There must be a determination of the sum which, after full deliberation, shall be set aside for the purposes of national defence. Having determined our annual expenditure, we shall be confronted by the question whether we should adopt the recommendation of the Imperial Defence Committee, that we should add probably £100,000 a year to the . present cost of our military establishment, confining any contribution towards coastal and harbor defence to increasing the subsidy to the Naval Squadron. The amount at present paid has been openly described . as insufficient by an admiral who was recently Naval Commander-in-Chief in these seas, and the same criticism has come from other quarters. Any estimates which have been put forward in this relation have been based on arbitrary calculations, or assume imperfect data upon which the responsibilities of portions of the Empire for naval protection have been differently assessed. Until there is agreement as to the data, there can be verv little expectation of coincidence in the conclusions. Putting that calculation aside, the Imperial Defence Committee's proposals mean that our present subsidy must be increased by from £200,000 to £500,000 a year, in order to meet the views which have been expressed semi-official by by high authorities as to our proportional responsibility for naval defence. We may dispute about the proportion, but we cannot deny that the security of Australia is based upon the *dominant* position of the British Navy. If. the British fleet were driven from these seas the security of Australia would be gone, and the opportunities of Anglo-Saxon growth here in instant danger of curtailment. {: .speaker-L0Y} ##### Mr Wilkinson: -- Yet we look at the expenditure of a few pounds. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- We are right in seeing that our money is expended in the most efficient manner, but not in regarding the claim penuriously. Upon the maintenance of the supremacy of the British Navy rests the whole security of Australia. We have therefore to consider whether any contribution to the Australian Squadron ought to content our aspirations for a floating defence of our harbors and coasts. To discuss that question would involve a repetition of the arguments set forth in the general report of the Imperial Defence Committee, and also in the naval officers' report now before honorable members. In the latter local considerations are taken into account, and a different application is given to the general doctrine laid down by the Imperial Defence Committee. For my own part, and speaking also for the Government, I do not hesitate to say that they are of the opinion expressed by the first Prime Minister of the Commonwealth in the very earliest days, that the provision of harbor and coastal defence is necessary in the interests of Australia for guarding our shipping commerce and large cities. The opportunities to our citizens to enter the Imperial Navy, which are being used under the scheme of naval reserves, and which I trust will continue to be used to a liberal extent, bv no means satisfy Australian aspirations. The number of those who join the Imperial Navy, and enjoy the great advantage of receiving the finest sea training that the world can give, by enlisting under the greatest maritime power is, for various reasons of taste and circumstances, limited. Many others would gladly avail themselves of an opportunity to join in the defence of the Empire by undertaking the more immediate care and! custody of our harbors and coasts. Norneed the two be dissociated. On the contrary, there is every reason why they should be united. In the report of theImperial Defence Committee allusion is made to the possible necessity of local forces of destroyers to meet future strategical conditions. It would be part of the general responsibility of the Admiralty to provide such vessels, but at page 13 of the report the Committee say - >Should this necessity arise, it would no doubt be advantageous that these vessels should be manned by Australians trained in sea-going fleets under the Naval Agreement. Exactly the same line of argument applies to any proposals for harbor and coastal defence. Our vessels should be manned almost wholly, if not entirely, by Australians trained in sea-going fleets under the Naval Agreement. Some of those so trained would doubtless prefer to remain in the Imperial Navy, where, of course, larger opportunities are offered', especially to those who qualify themselves as officers. But men who would prefer to remain on our own ' coasts, nearer to their own bornes, ought also to be offered an opportunity to devote themselves to the defence of their country and of this part of the Empire. By . associating with our defence vessels men trained in sea-going warships, or in vessels of similar type, that is to say, destroyers and torpedo boats, in the mother country, we shall avoid what has always been regarded as a peril, namely, the establishment of a small force with small opportunities for. training or promotion, as compared with those afforded by the Imperial Navy. His Excellency the' present Admiral on the Australian Station has submitted to the Defence Department proposals for amended regulations which will enable Australians *cow* passing through their course of training on the Squadron in these seas to proceed for a fixed period to the great ships or torpedo boats and destroyers on the coast of England, as well as to the British Naval training schools. There they would be able to receive the instruction which is absolutely necessary for men who have to manage the highly complicated pieces of delicate machinery upon modem war vessels. His Excellency the Admiral thinks that this training would- be gladly given to Australian seamen. {: .speaker-JUV} ##### Mr Mcwilliams: -- I am afraid that would be rather costly for individuals who wished to enter upon an officer's career. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- Of course, officers in both the Army and the Navy require to possess special advantages to enable them to meet the exigencies of those services. The difficulties, however, are not insuperable. They can be conquered by courage, endurance, and capacity. So far as seamen are concerned, they would have to enlist for a further period than that for which they now take service. In the absence of some provision such as I have indicated, it might be difficult for us to keep up a thoroughly well-trained body of men capable of managing our' defence vessels. But if the training schools of Great Britain, the great battleships of the fleet, a"d the torpedo boats on the English coast are thrown open to our men, we shall have unrivalled means of maintaining in our coast and harbor defence forces the high standard of efficiency which at present exists in the Royal Navy. When, having regard to a proposal such as that submitted by the Naval Defence Committee, and to the figures that I have quoted, we have determined what sum we can devote for national defence purposes, we shall have to decide what proportion we shall set apart for our land forces and our sea forces respectively. If it be impossible to provide for an annual expenditure of £1,600,000, we shall be unable to adopt the. full schemes proposed by the expert Committees. We must curtail them. We may curtail one more than the other. At all events, we shall first have to decide how much we shall put aside annually, and, in the next place, to decide in what manner we shall distribute the amount between our land and sea forces. Further, we shall have to look at the land forces, and see how the money for them can best be applied. Honorable members will find associated with the Minister's memorandum, laid upon the table in connexion with the Estimates, a very instructive table showing the relative cost of the . different arms of the military service. The most costly is the corps of permanent submarine miners, which involve an outlay of £167 per member per annum. Then comes the Royal Australian Artillery, also a permanent force, the outlay upon which amounts to £118 per member. In our militia, too, the Feld Artillery costs nearly £20 per member, the Army Service Corps £17, the Engineer Corps £16, the Artillery £14, the Infantry £13, the Volunteers nearly £6 1 os., and the rifle clubs - if they are to be considered - 30s. per member... In dealing with our land forces, we shall have to take that table into serious consideration, especially if we are to couple with our new scheme the retention of a partially-paid, and so far as the. circumstances permit, well -drilled force of 26,000 men. We must also consider whether we should not encourage a purely volunteer force with a view of advancing by steady strides, in connexion also with the cadet and similar movements, towards the ideal of universal service. Personally, it appears to me that this is the true ideal. Not only will it give us the greatest reserves in connexion with our defences; but will enable us to avail ourselves of the educational influences of military discipline when applied to youthful manhood. We cannot look forward to an extension of the numbers of our defenders on shore, except by curtailment of the expenditure now incurred in connexion with some of the paid branches of the Forces. We cannot dispense with the submarine miners, or with the permanent artillerymen, but must revise our expenditure in connexion with other branches of the Military Forces. Then we shall find ourselves placed in a similar position with regard to the Naval Forces. In this case the number of men permanently employed will be larger in proportion. It will be possible to supplement our permanent forces bv means of naval reserves such as have been, maintained with success in this country in the past, and by the development of the naval cadet system. If we have a fleet of destroyers and torpedo boats, they must be manned by permanent men- {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr Watson: -- We need only have skeleton crews. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- Certainly ; but we shall have to maintain reserves, which will have to undergo training for considerable periods in order that they may be kept iri touch with their professional duties. The crews will not be large in number, but will require to . be exceptionally welltrained for their work. We shall have to decide as to the proportion of our available money that shall be spent upon floating harbor defences or upon coastal defences ; how many first-class torpedo vessels should be provided for harbor defence and for proceeding some distance beyond our harbors; and how far we should maintain coastal destroyers, able to traverse the more settled Australian coast from end to end. The warning in the report of the Imperial Defence Committee that we should not look too far ahead, will require to be taken into account. Having in view, first of all, our financial limitations, and the many other demands that will be made upon us, the Government have come to two conclusions : First, that in the immediate future Parliament should be recommended to establish a system of harbor and coastal defence - not to adopt the programme laid out for the five years, nor for ten years. Having regard both to. the rapid changes in modern armament and the necessary revision of plans which must follow them, and bearing in mind also our own financial necessities, we propose to limit our present project to three years. Looking at the proposal of the Naval Com.mittee we shall1 commence], as appears judicious, with the most economic, the bestknown and the best-tried of the floating defences they advise - that is to say, with torpedo boats, of which we propose to order four, and with coastal destroyers resembling the *Teviot,* of which we propose to order eight in three years. At the end of three years, commencing with the next Parliament, we should therefore have twelve boats, viz., four first-class torpedo destroyers and eight vessels of the *Teviot* class. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- -What is the radius of the *Teviots?* {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- I mentioned their run from Singapore to Colombo, a distance of 1,650 miles; but that 'is not the radius to which the honorable member refers. I think that their radius is a few hundred miles. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- That would not be of much use. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- It gives them a con- 1siderable range outside the ports in which ' they may be stationed. The cost of the four first-class torpedo destroyers would be £120,000, and that of the eight coastal destroyers £640,000, or a total of £760,000. This expenditure would require us to set apart £250,000 a year for three years. The proposal would be to obtain from Great Britain one or two of these torpedo boats as rapidly as possible, with a view to securing estimates of cost from Australian ship-builders, who might, and, it is believed, could, with very little, if any. addition, to their present machinery, undertake the construction of similar vessels. Of course, the question of extra cost could not be ignored, but, in balancing that, we should have to weigh very carefully the great value of encouraging the equipment locally, either of existing or of new dockyards, in which vessels of this type might be repaired. Without proper opportunities to repair them, and without the skilled artisans who are employed in their construction, these complicated pieces of machinery' might prove unavailable in our hour of ' need. Under these circumstances, there is every reason, both upon defence; and patriotic grounds, to encourage the building of these boats within our own harbors. Nor do we see any reason why the coastal destroyers of thf. *Teviot* type should not also be built ir. Australia. With a view of preparing the way for this, we propose, so soon as the specifications are available, to throw them open to builders in all parts of the Commonwealth, in order that they may consider their requirements, if any, in the way of fresh machinery or of expert labour. With these twelve boats we shall have gone a long way towards accomplishing what may be termed the complete harbor defence of Australia. In the course of another three years, assuming that naval ideas do not change - {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Naval opinions are opposed to the Prime Minister's scheme. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- The naval experts of the Admiralty are opposed to the employment of the class of vessels that we propose to purchase in Australia, on account of our distance, and on account of our liability to raids- {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- They say that such vessels are wasteful for strictly local defensive purposes. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- They say- >There is no strategical justification for the creation at great expense of a local force of destroyers. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr Watson: -- According to some experts at Home, there is very great justification. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- According to what experts ? {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- I think that Admirals Fremantle and Fitzgerald are among them. However, I do not desire to discuss that.I wish to confine myself to a plain business statement. I am not now proceeding to offer reasons for the establishment of an Australian coastal and harbor defence. When Parliament is invited to appropriate money for that purpose, it will be time enough for me to endeavour to show that this is the course which ought to be pursued in the interests of the Empire as a whole. In the second three years - provided that there is no great change in naval construction - we should be able to pass from merely harbor defence to defence. If the scheme stood the test of three years experience, we should have an admirable harbor defence, which ought to put us beyond all danger of the suspension of Inter-State traffic, or of any harbor attack which the Imperial Defence Committee can foresee. At the same time our ocean-going destroyers would enable our ports to keep in touch with each other along the whole line of our seaboard. During the second three years, we should complete the whole scheme with any amendment experience might show to be necessary. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr Watson: -- By how much is it proposed to reduce the Military Estimates? Would the £250,000 annually be an addition to our present defence expenditure? {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- That is the very point to which I was about to address myself. First, we must add to the £250,000 annual expenditure the sum of £200,000 which we now pay by way of subsidy- {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr Watson: -- Had not the Prime Minister better omit the subsidy from his calculations, and confine them to new expenditure ? {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- If we set apart £250,000 annuallyfor the construction of these vessels, £200,000 for subsidy, and a further £100,000 for maintenance, we get a total of £550,000 a year. Then we have at present military proposals for an expenditure of £835,000 per annum. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr Watson: -- Exclusive of the purchase of warlike stores ? {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- No; inclusive of everything. The joint total is nearly £1,400,000. In view of these proposals, the Government are unable to see their way to accept the recommendations of the Military Committee of officers, which would have involved an additional expenditure of £100,000 annually. In the next place, the necessity will arise - and it is one to which my honorable colleague will devote his best attention - of scrutinizing our present military vote, in order to discover where economies car be effected. Honorable members will understand that the report of our military advisers has not been in our hands a week, so that we have not yet had time to scrutinize it carefully. But, obviously, our proposal for naval development will require to be accompanied by a very searching, examination into our present expenditure, with a view to ascertaining where savings can be effected. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr Watson: -- Has the Prime Minister attempted to estimate what the new expenditure will be after allowing for any reduction which may take place upon the military side? {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- That question cannot be answered until the Military Estimates have been re-studied. But we feel that the time has arrived when our coastal and harbor defence ought to be brought up to the same level as our military defence. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Are not the present garrison forces in the nature of coastal and harbor defence forces ? {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- Undoubtedly. I recognise that the simpler I can make my statement at- the present stage, .the better it will be for all concerned. It is only because we realize our immediate responsibility to. Parliament and the country that we lay these broad proposals before honorable members at this hour, and invite their consideration. An election must intervene, and a new Parliament must be returned, before any appropriation can be made for the purpose of giving effect to die scheme which I have outlined. If I have enabled honorable members to recall the various stages by which we have reached our present position, and to realize the differences between the several schemes which have been put forward, I shall have fulfilled my task. In urging honorable members to reflect upon these proposals, I do not think it necessary to indulge in alarmist appeals, to endeavour to evoke a warlike spirit, or in any sense to go outside the lines of the matter-of-fact statement which we feel to be due. But there is one circumstance of recent occurrence to which attention may fittingly be drawn here, as it has been all over the world. I refer to the recent alterations in the ship-building programme of the British Government, coupled with the intimation of the new ship-building programme of Germany. No part of this Empire can afford to overlook the circumstance that the mother country has thought- it judicious to pause in the construction of those great battleships that have recently dwarfed into insignificance most of the fighting vessels of the world, whilst the German Empire has proposed to increase her own strength in that direction to an extent that, without further action on the part of the mother country, must lead to an alteration of the greatest moment in the battleship sea-power of the world. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- It is necessary to increase battle strength. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- Exactly. We at a distance from the mother country are exposed, so1 we are told, to the raids of unarmoured or probably armoured cruisers. But, after all, the decisive events in the great naval battles of the future will be decided by what are distinctively termed battleships. With their line of battleships once destroyed, cruisers, armoured or unarmoured, would have an exciting experi ence before them. In these circumstances, any one can conceive it possible that if the domination of the ocean which the mother country has enjoyed were in any respect shaken, we certainly should be exposed more than even the Defence Committee have thought probable to attacks not only of unarmoured, but of armoured cruisers. In circumstances of that kind, the safeguarding of the ports and coasts of this part of the Empire would certainly require attention at our hands. That it cannot receive unless we take action at least three or four years in advance. In the programme for the construction of vessels of the *Dreadnought* type, which is at present authorized^ at Home, the Admiralty are looking forward only to the years 1908-9. In these circumstances, it is certainly not too much for us now to consider our own conditions, and the possibility of an attack of a more serious nature than has hitherto been contemplated. That contingency may possibly be removed by future events. Meanwhile, we must all recognise with sympathy the burden of the " weary Titan," as Great Britain has been poetically termed, bearing " the too vast orb of her fate." We can realize how great, even for so wealthy a people, is the cost of her Army and Navy, amounting to £60,000,000 per annum. Still, even while recognising that enormous strain, it comes somewhat as a shock of surprise to find that if the present policy be pursued, she appears likely to assume the character of " a weary Triton," conscious at last of the weight of the sceptre, of the seas. Is her fleet sufficient for her destiny? It is said not. {: .speaker-F4N} ##### Mr Fisher: -- These are partisan political statements. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr DEAKIN: -- They are statements partially accepted, but it is admitted that if the present ship-building programmes remain unaltered there will be a serious disturbance of the battleship power of the world and of the naval influence, which depend so largely upon the command of battleships. I am simply referring to these possibilities, not actualities, as supplying another reason why Australia should develop to the utmost extent her selfdependence in our waters. They alford another reason why we should be prepared, not only te take our share in discharging - as I trust we shall always assist to discharge - our Imperial obligation due to our protection by the Imperial fleet, and to do something more. We can discharge part of our obligations by attending to the necessities of our own coasts and harbors ; by the creation of a force that would relieve the Imperial Navy of some of the anxiety which its directors would at present feel in the event of the Empire being engaged in a great naval war. The protection of our ports and coasts will be for the benefit, not only of Australian, but of British shipping. By providing safe harbors of retirement, and protection for our commerce in the immediate neighbourhood of our coast, we shall do something towards the discharge of our general obligation. We shall be doing something, but not all. As I have stated already, the British Navy upon the high seas extends to us a protective power which no effort of ours could hope to rival. It is of inestimable value to the people and to the future of this country. Under its shelter we have grown, are growing, and, I trust, will continue to grow, loyal and selfdependent, never forgetting to recognise our responsibility, or, so far as our means permit, to discharge it both to Australia and to the Flag. {: #subdebate-12-0-s168 .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY:
Wentworth .- One could scarcely be expected, at the close of a continuous sitting of thirty-six hours, to discuss to-night a speech of the magnitude and importance of that to which we have just listened. I rise now only because I think it is the desire of the Committee that we should deal with the Estimates with all celerity. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr Deakin: -- If I may be permitted to answer a question which the honorable member put to me a few moments ago, I would say that my honorable colleague, the VicePresident of the Executive Council, informs me that the vessels of the *Teviot* class have a radius of about 3½ days, or, in other words, 1,000 miles, at least steaming about 20 knots. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- Without endeavouring to reply tothe speech made by the Prime Minister, I should like to deal with one or two suggestions which he made. I was most impressed by the Prime Minister's concluding periods, in which he drew attention to the enormous and far-reaching changes in battleship construction that are now taking place in European waters, and went on to remind us that, after all, the command of the seas and all that pertains to it must, in the end, rest ultimately with battle fleets. The honorable and learned gentleman pointed out that, of all ships comprising battle fleets, those enormous vessels of the *Dreadnought* class were destined to be all-powerful and overshadowing. He also pointed out that Germany was making greater efforts in the construction of these ships than is the mother country. That suggests a conclusion which seems to strike at the very root of the desirability of establishing an incomplete and fallacious system of local naval protection on the coast-line of Australia. I think we are all agreed that our safety is indissolubly bound up with the safety of other parts of the Empire, and especially with that of the mother country. That being so, it is necessary for us to see that, so far as we can help to maintain it, the Imperial battle strength of these great fleets will not be allowed to decrease below the measure of general safety. Honorable members will see that it is absolutely impossible for Australia to branch out for herself by acquiring these great battleships. That, I think, is one of the reasons why the Prime Minister proposes that we should begin at the bottom by the construction of destroyers, even although there is no crying necessity for this type of vessel. Now, I take it that it is the duty of Australia, knowing where her true danger lies, and knowing her inability to meet that danger alone, to set about obtaining a system of common naval co-operation; to join for our common purposes with other portions of our race overseas who have the same need, the same object, as we ourselves have. Whilst we alone cannot maintain our object, when we combine with other sections of our race overseas we shall be able to maintain a navy of such power that every section of the Empire will be secured from reasonable danger. That is my ideal. It is not, as a section of the press which has done me the honour of opposing my views on the subject, would have honorable members believe, the payment of tribute money. My ideal is a co-operative Imperial Navy, in which all sections of the Empire will have a common ownership - a navy under one expert administration, who will decide our common needs, a navy to which we shall all contribute in men as well as money. I admit that it is an ideal that in present circumstances is. and for some time to come will be, unattainable. {: .speaker-009MD} ##### Mr Deakin: -- Because all parts are not under the one political control. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- Exactly. The difficulties, however, are not insurmountable, and the mere existence of difficulties should not lead us to shirk the consideration of the problem. The military argument, however, is irrefutable. Our safety from invasion lies absolutely in the direction of these great battle-ship fleets. If anything were needed to satisfy us on that point, we should find it in the concluding periods of the Prime Minister's speech. We cannot obtain that security alone. Therefore we, like men of the working classes when their personal safety is threatened, must band ourselves into one great union - a union of the Britishspeaking people. There need be no loss of self-respect on the part of the people of Australia in contributing in men and money to a great commonlyowned Imperial Navy. There is no greater loss of self-respect involved in making such a contribution than that which is suffered by a trade unionist who joins with other trade unionists for common trade purposes. That is the main consideration which the remarks of the Prime Minister have suggested to me. The honorable and learned gentleman is proposing to ask a future Parliament to agree to establish a fleet of eight coastal destroyers and four first-class torpedo boats. Before honorable members take sides on this question, I hope they will ask themselves what these ships are for. What is their purpose? If the Prime Minister says that their object is to spur on the very laudable ambition of the Australian people to become a maritime race, there is something in the proposal. Although it may be faulty from a military point of view, there is then something in it. The military proposition, however, will not stand investigation. The Prime Minister has himself shown our danger. He has himself shown the essentiality of battle fleets, and would be the first to recognise that, if Great Britain lost command of the seas, we could not prevent an invading army from landing in Australia, even if we had ten times as many destroyers as are suggested. If our main line of defence, the battle fleets of the Empire, fail, our coastal defence cannot save us from the one great crowning danger of war, the invasion of our territory. Therefore, viewed entirely from a military stand-point, the Prime Minister's proposal will not bear investigation. Whether we do right or wrong, in anything concerning the integrity of our country, we should by all means pull together. If this will create an Australian national feeling which will not be detrimental to the proper Imperial co-operation which alone will save Australia, I for one will not offer any strenuous opposition to it, although I regard it as a wasteful means of arriving at our ambition. But I ask honorable members to weigh the Prime Minister's words very carefully. He urged the necessity of a common system of discipline, a common standard of efficiency throughout the naval affairs of the Empire, and would have nothing to do with an isolated force in Australia, having its own school, its own standard and ideals. Such a force would be no more able to work with an Imperial fleet, if it were necessary to do so, than one stranger could pull together with another. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr Watson: -- Nonsense. The experience of the world is against the honorable member. He might as well say, after what happened in South Africa, that Australian soldiers cannot fight alongside Imperial soldiers, although they are trained on widely different lines. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- There are fleets built, designed, and controlled on homogeneous lines, and other fleers without homogeneity which have a good ship of one design and another good ship of another design. The second greatest navy in the world, that of France, has been condemned by its admirals for this failing, in no unmeasured terms. A couple of years ago the admiral commanding the northern squadron of France, communicated to the Chamber of Deputies his opinion that that fleet was so dissimilar in construction, that there was such a want of homogeneity in regard to its ships, that he doubted whether they could satisfactorily engage in any common naval action. That is one side of the objection which I have offered. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr Watson: -- I am aware that vessels may differ in regard to speed and in other points. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- The diversity referred to was mainly that of gun position. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr Watson: -- Would that destroy the homogeneity of the fleet so far as its operations were concerned? {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- The French battle-ships of the present time are of two main types. Those of the one type, as their primary armament, can bring to bear three great guns in any direction. The others can bring to bear four guns on each beam, and only two forward and two aft. The admiral who had to combine the offensive energy of a fleet composed of different units, would be at a disadvantage in manoeuvring if opposed to an admiral whose vessels fired the same number of guns from the same positions. For, however he manoeuvred his ships, some of them would always be failing to give their full offensive results. This, of course, is a problem in construction, which is governed practically by a common control of design. The point with which we have mainly to deal now is the common standard of discipline. I have been assured bv naval officers that so delicate is the operation of manoeuvring torpedo boats and cruisers in company that they would rather be without the assistance of torpedo boats than be associated with vessels of the standard of whose discipline they could not be sure. There must be the greatest mutual confidence between these two arms of the service. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr Watson: -- Even so, the value of destroyers for coastal and harbor defence would remain. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr KELLY: -- But we should not get the best value out of them. I suggest that the Prime Minister should ta.ke steps to act on the principles he voiced this afternoon by providing a common standard of discipline and efficiency by means of a common control, by associating the proposed vessels with the principle of the Naval Agreement. {: #subdebate-12-0-s169 .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON:
Bland -- I think that honorable members .generally will join in complimenting the Prime Minister on the speech which he delivered in introducing these Estimates, because of its clearness and its grasp of the great problems which confront us in regard to defence. I do not pretend *to* be able to offer any opinion, much less any criticism, at this stage on the detailed propositions put before us, but, no doubt long before there can be any practical outcome of these schemes we shall have an opportunity to deal with them in detail. Generally, I agree with the ideas outlined by the Prime Minister. Those who, like the honorable member for Wentworth, adversely criticise the proposal to establish floating defences for our coast and harbors, confuse two great purposes. I do not for a moment say that in our time coastal defence can take' the place of the British fleet. Wes must accept the opinion of those who have made naval power a study that it is essential to concentrate your. mobile forces to smash- the enemy wherever he may be found. The proposals put forward are for home defences. Great Britain, in addition to her ocean-going squadrons,, has a separate home defence. I do not refer to the Channel Squadron, which may steam a long distance from the coast, but to the torpedo boats and destroyers which combine with the land defences. Of course, they are not independent, but they constitute a separate branch of the coastal defence. Those who are hostile to the provision of similar floating defences for our coast confuse the. general naval defence of Australia with the strengthening of our coast defences. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Would not even a purely defensive fleet be determined by the nature of the probable opposition to it ? {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- We can go only on probabilities. The Imperial Defence Committee says that what we have to fear is' attacks from raiding cruisers. That is the assumption of all who have considered this question. It is recognised at once that if the British fleet were absolutely defeated a torpedo defence would not be of much avail. {: .speaker-JUV} ##### Mr Mcwilliams: -- Is not *n* torpedo force always defended and protected by the naval squadrons? {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- Torpedo teats cannot attack battle-ships, or even cruisers in the light of day, but they can prevent cruisers from attempting to enter havens at night, and can keep them at a respectful distance during the hours of darkness, while during the day the fixed defences have an opportunity to cope with them. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- A ship will never attack a fortified port. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- The guns are put there on the assumption that the port may be attacked. I remember upon one occasion the honorable member spoke of the necessity of providing small guns to harass landing parties. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- If the right kind of guns are not provided, ships will attack a fort ; but they will not do so if the guns are there. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- The authorities do not seem to be absolutely agreed on that head. Thev- say that, in the absence of torpedo boats or something of that character, there is verv great danger of night attacks. I think that it would be wise for us to provide some means for insuring the safety of our harbors. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The question is: What should we provide? {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- I think that the bestthing we can do is to maintain a mosquito fleet, and not to depend upon the sea-going squadron on the Australian station. Every one knows that it is almost inevitable that, in. the event of war, the British squadron will, for strategical reasons, be taken away from our shores. From the point of view of protection of British interests, I have nothing to urge against that. But, while the squadron is absent, we shall require to provide some defences against sudden raids by cruisers. It is a common thing for one fleet to escape the notice of another. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The honorable member spoke of the British coast defences. Are not those intended to repel attacks by the torpedo craft which are swarming in French waters? {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- I do not think that they are intended for that purpose alone ; but no doubt they would secure that end. Thev are designed to ward off attacks by raiding cruiser squadrons. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- The British harbors are now protected by submersibles. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- Yes ; and I am inclined to think that once a standard type of submersible has been decided upon, it would be wise for us to procure craft of that kind, and to reduce the number of our torpedo boats. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- How many submersibles should we require to protect the whole of our coast-line? {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- I do not think that we need protect the whole of our coast-line. But we must provide reasonably safe havens of refuge at a reasonable distance apart, to which our shipping could repair. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Does not the honorable member think that the enormous predominance of strength in cruisers which distinguishes the British Navy would enable the Admiralty to arrange for keeping any cruisers On the move? {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- No doubt Ave could rely upon the British Navy to speedily account for the enemy when he met him, but our trade might be paralyzed by the sudden appearance of a few raiders that had escaped the vigilance of the British Fleet. If the expenditure of a comparatively small sum would protect us against risks of that kind, I think that we should incur the outlay. {: .speaker-KXO} ##### Mr Page: -- But, as the honorable member knows, a small sum would not be sufficient. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- The expenditure would be comparatively small. Rather than do anything on the naval side, I should be willing to reduce the Military Estimates by £250,000, and spend the money thus saved in the direction I have indicated. According to my idea, it is far more necessary that we should provide for a floating harbor and coastal defence than that we should maintain our present military forces. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'malley: -- H - Hear, hear; of what use are they? {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- Some of our forces would- be decidedly useful, particularly those which garrison our forts, and which are as essential to the security of our harbors as our floating defences would be. I do not agree with those who think that we should disband all our military forces, but I hold that we should do well to spend a comparatively large sum upon our naval defences. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- But if we want to take a manlu part, why should we not co-operate with the Imperial authorities in attacking the coast-lines of the enemy ? {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- Because our resources are limited. According to my view, the provision of safe bases for the Imperial fleets would be the best contribution that we could make towards the Imperial Navy. By directing our energies in that direction we should serve the general purposes, of the Empire as well as the local purposes of Australia. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- We can best aid the Navy by contributing men. {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- No doubt plenty of men will be forthcoming when they are needed. Any money contribution we might make towards the British naval expenditure would be so small in comparison with the total that it would be hardly worth considering. In view of the fact that the Government are looking forward to the expenditure next vear of an additional £250,000 upon the naval side of our defences, I do not understand why it is proposed to increase the military expenditure during the current year b- £77,000. Ministers should have opposed a resolute front to those who were asking for increased military expenditure. {: .speaker-KDR} ##### Mr Ewing: -- What about the cadets and rifle clubs? {: .speaker-F4R} ##### Mr WATSON: -- Any increase of expenditure directed to the encouragement of rifle clubs should be compensated for by savings in other directions, in which expenditure will have to be cut down, if the scheme of naval defence is to be anything more than a proposal on paper. So far as the cadets are concerned, I think that they were being well looked after by the States. I believe that in some cases there are fewer cadets now than there were before. When the Estimates for 1902-3were under consideration an arrangement was arrived at between theGovernment and members of the Committee that our defence expenditure should not exceed £700,000 per annum. Since then, however, the naval subsidy has been increased by £100,000. The Government now propose to spend £876,000, or an increase of £76,000 over the amount agreed upon in 1902-3. It is evident that Ministers have lost sight of that agreement, to which most of them were parties, and also of the proposal that has been put forward to-night. I shall ask the Committee to agree to a reduction of the Estimates, and to impose upon the Government the duty of saying how the saving shall be effected. I think that we should at least endeavour to revert to the position that we occupied in 1902-3. {: #subdebate-12-0-s170 .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr CROUCH:
Corio -- I congratulate the Prime Minister upon his splendid speech. It is marvellous that, notwithstanding the many responsibilities thrown upon him, he should be able to take up a special subject such as that dealt with this evening, and master it so thoroughly as he has done. It is gratifying to find that at least some honorable members are prepared to pay regard to those large national issues which the Commonwealth Parliament has so far failed to face with resolution. It seems to me that we have entered upon a new era. As a nation, we have embarked upon a policy of national provocation. It is a great pity that we should do that, unless we are able to defend ourselves. Recently we noticed that, whilst Natal was ready enough to embarrass the British Government, she was only too anxious to fall back upon Great Britain for her defence. We ought either to be ready to accept the tutelage ofthe British Government, or we ought to be prepared to shoulder our responsibility for having given umbrage to nations like Japan - by reason of our White Australia policy - by defending our action through the taxation of our own people and by the force of our own arms. It seems to me that honorable members are afraid to adopt the latter alternative. When the Prime Minister announced that his scheme would involve an annual expenditure of £1,000,000, a general note of alarm seemed to pervade the Chamber. It is not fair to expect the Empire to defend us, and at the same time to adopt a policy which is constantly embarrassing it. The Prime Minister has told us that two Committees have investigated the question of Australian defence. One has recommended that certain military improvements should be effected, and the other that we should incur an annual expenditure of £600,000 upon an Australian Navy. The honorable member for Bland is ready to advocate the establishment of such a Navy, but is apparently afraid to face the cost that it would involve. Surely we are here to lead the people, and if we cannot do that, be sure - >The wild mob's million feet, > >Will kick us from our place. In order to secure the establishment of an Australian Navy, I would suggest that we should discontinue the payment of the naval subsidy at the earliest possible moment. The agreement has not been honestly observed, either in the matter of the size of the ships in our waters or in the number of Australians who are employed upon them. Then I think that in order to permit of. the establishment of a navy of our own we should cut down all our military forces apart from our coastal defence. At the present time we have too many light horse regiments in Australia. These bodies were established by MajorGeneral **Sir Edward** Hutton largely for Imperial purposes. His object was to provide a recruiting ground from which he could obtain levies for Great Britain in time of need. When I come to examine the scheme which has been outlined by the Prime Minister, it seems to propose increased expenditure in every direction. For instance, our light horse, militia, and field engineers are to be increased. The only cutting down contemplated seems to be in connexion with our coastal defences. I noticed that our coastal defence, in one place, is to be reduced by sixty men, and in another by 110. There is one other aspect of this matter which ought to be considered - it has reference to the question of military control. At the present time that control is in a chaotic state - a condition of affairs which is chiefly due to the divided system of responsibility that was intro- duced under the Defence Bill of 1904, and under which a Council of Defence and a Military Board were established. Speaking upon that measure on 25th November of that year, I said - >Under whatever scheme we may adopt, there must be one man who will have the final word to say. In an autocratic body like as army there must be a head man, one supreme control. Otherwise the whole organization breaks down. If there is an organized body in the world, which is essentially autocratic in its character, it is an army. Therefore, I think that, as this scheme develops itself, we shall come back more or less to the old system, and that there will be some person - whatever we choose to call him - who will develop into a CommanderinChief, and virtually take the position which the Commander-in-Chief occupies at the present time. When that scheme was submitted, I predicted that it would result in a struggle for pre-eminence between the InspectorGeneral, the members of the Military Board, and the Minister. Those who have closely watched the trend of events since then must be convinced that a duel has been going on between the Board and the Inspector-General, and that one member of the Board, an officer of exceptional ability and energy, has been able to dominate his fellows. Seeing that this divided system of military control has so largely resulted in failure, I should like the Minister to continue the present position of affairs under which the Chief Staff Officer is also the Inspector-General. I feel that we can combine the two offices, and thus create again the old condition of a responsible Officer Commanding. We must have a central and not a divided military control. Military forces cannot be governed by a Committee. Otherwise, when the Minister is wrong, he will shelter himself behind the Military Board, and when the Board are wrong, they will seek refuge behind the Inspector-General. If the Government have really decided to create an Australian Navy, the best thing that they can do is to convene a joint meeting of the Military and Naval Boards. Naval and Military defence are so inter-related that it is extraordinary that any scheme should have been submitted to Parliament without the two bodies which I have mentioned having first met in conference, and having been told definitely the amount they can expend. Only by co-operation is it possible to evolve a workable scheme of defence. Progress reported. {: .page-start } page 5583 {:#debate-13} ### PAPERS MINISTERS laid upon the table the following papers: - >Report of Committee of Naval Officers of the Commonwealth assembled " at Melbourne, Victoria, to consider the Memorandum of the Committee of Imperial Defence and report as regards the Naval Defence of Australia. > >Report of Committee of Officers appointed by the Minister of State for Defence to consider and report upon the General Scheme of Def ence for Australia as submitted by the Committee of Imperial Defence - Organization, &c. > >Statement of Schemes for Commonwealth Naval Defence. > >Statement of Schemes for the Defence of the Commonwealth. > >Immigration - > >Correspondence with State Premiers *re* AgentsGeneral acting on behalf of the Commonwealth - (Dated 31st July, 1905, to 38th February, 1906.) > >Correspondence with State premiers inregard to proposals of the Commonwealth Government for the promotion of Immigration - (Dated 2nd May, 1906, to 29th August, 1906.) > >Rabbit Destruction - **Dr. Danysz's** Experiments - Report on the virus proposed for use (by Frank Tidswell, Principal Assistant Medical Officer of the Government of New South Wales, and Microbiologist to the Board of Health). Ordered to be printed. Recommendations and approval in connexion with the promotion of **Mr. ].** G. McLaren, as Clerk-in-Charge, Commonwealth Electoral office, Sydney, and **Mr. M.** M. Fowles, as clerk, 4th Class, Commonwealth Electoral office, Adelaide. {: .page-start } page 5583 {:#debate-14} ### EXCISE OFFICERS Motion (by **Mr. Hutchison)** agreed to - >That a return be laid upon the table show ing - > >The number of Inspectors of Excise in Victoria, length of service of each officer, and amount of salary for year 1906-7. > >The number of Inspectors of Exicse in South Australia, length of service of each officer, and amount of salary for year 1906-7. {: .page-start } page 5583 {:#debate-15} ### PUBLIC SERVICE BILL Order of the day read and discharged. Bill withdrawn. {: .page-start } page 5583 {:#debate-16} ### ADJOURNMENT {:#subdebate-16-0} #### Personal Explanations Motion (by **Sir JohnForrest)** proposed - >That the House do now adjourn. {: #subdebate-16-0-s0 .speaker-K7U} ##### Mr CROUCH:
Corio -- I desire to make apersonal explanation in regard to the vote which I cast yesterdayon the motion for the adjournment of the debate on the Postal Rates Bill. In certainquarters, there hasbeen an attempt to make capital out of the fact that seine of the supporters of the Government voted against them upon that question. I should like to state that, on entering the House, I was proceeding to take my seat near the Prime Minister, as I understood it was a question of adjournment only, when I was informed by him that the division was a test one to determine the fate of the Bill, and that I was. free to vote as I pleased. That being so, as one who opposed the Bill, I voted for the adjournment of the debate. I had not the slightest intention of embarrassing the Government, and feel confident that two-thirds of those who voted for the motion would have stood by the Government so far as the adjournment of the debate was concerned, had they been requested to do so. {: #subdebate-16-0-s1 .speaker-KJ8} ##### Mr HUTCHISON:
Hindmarsh -- I wish to make a personal explanation in reference to the following paragraph from the *Herald* report of the all-night sitting : - >After the last train bad left the city, members settled down for an all-night sitting. The items under each division evoked much criticism from Messrs. Joseph Cook, Kelly, Mcwilliams, Johnson, and Hutchison, who were continuously in their places. As a matter of fact, about 11.35 P,m- yesterday, I was speaking to the question before the Chair, when I was told that members were anxious to catch their trains. Iimmediately resumed my seat, and, as a matter of fact, ' I do not think that I spoke for more than one minute during the whole night. Question resolved in the affirmative. House adjourned at 9.53 p.m. (Thursday).

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 26 September 1906, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1906/19060926_reps_2_35/>.