House of Representatives
23 November 1909

3^rd Parliament · 4^th Session

QUESTION
- COAL MINERS STRIKE
QUESTION
- NORTHERN TERRITORY
PRINTING OF PETITION
- Sugar Industry
QUESTION
- PATENT MEDICINES
QUESTION
- MILITARY TATTOO
QUESTION
- PATENT OFFICE CHARGES
QUESTION
- ELECTORAL DIVISIONS: WESTERN AUSTRALIA
PAPERS
ADJOURNMENT
- Conduct of Business

Mr. Speaker took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 6140

QUESTION

COAL MINERS STRIKE

Dr LIDDELL:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– In view of the wide distress, great suffering, and large monetary loss which must result from the dislocation of trade due to the disagreement between the miners and mineowners of New South Wales, I ask the Prime Minister if his notice has been called to a suggestion appearing recently in the public press that the Governor-General should be asked to intervene, with a view to bringing about a satisfactory arrangement?

Mr Frazer:

– He would do well to keep his hands out of it.

Mr Fisher:

– This is a good intention gone wrong.

Dr LIDDELL:

– I ask the Prime Minister whether, in his view, it is wise that such action should be taken for the settlement of this very lamentable difference?

Mr DEAKIN:
Prime Minister · BALLAARAT, VICTORIA · Protectionist

– Noticing the suggestion, emanating from a Victorian Minister, I gave it some consideration. The representative of the King could not act at the request of one party, nor adjudicate upon differences of opinion upon complicated mining questions. I assume the underlying desire to be that His Excellency should use the influence, which, by reason of the high position he occupies, he can always exercise, to bring the opposing parties into closer relations. I have ascertained from him that, so far as his service to the King’ and the duties’ of his office would permit, and at the request of both parties, he would be willing, though he does not desire, to attempt the task of mediation, the onerousness of which he fully understands.

Mr Crouch:

– It would be very inadvisable for him to do so.

page 6140

QUESTION

NORTHERN TERRITORY

Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925

– Has the Prime Minister yet received information from the Premier of South Australia as to the land held in the Northern Territory by the Northern Territory Railway League?

Mr DEAKIN:
Protectionist

– The following telegram was received an hour ago: -

In reply to your wire twenty-second instant there is no land owned by members of the Railways and Northern Territory League except that one or two may have town allotments. A few of them hold pastoral leases totalling 8,829 square miles. Am sending you a list of names of those who constitute the League, the great bulk of whom have no pecuniary interest, but are simply acting on what they consider patriotic motives. Full particulars by to-day’s post.

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES

– When the Northern Territory Bill was before the House last week, I interjected, during a speech by the honorable member for Went worth, that a Mr. Lindsay had told me also that the particular league, which was frequently spoken of in connexion with that Bill, owned land. Mr. Lindsay writes to me to say that he told me nothing of the kind ; that as a fact the league itself has no land, although some of its members might hold small areas. The statement of the Prime Minister, that members of the league hold 8,800 square miles, or in other words, 5,632,000 acres, seems to confirm my recollection. I think it fair, however, to Mr. Lindsay to mention his denial ; but I must add that, although he denies having made to me the statement in question, I still remain of the opinion that he admitted to me that the league had land.

page 6141

PRINTING OF PETITION

Sugar Industry

Mr EDWARDS:
Oxley

– On Friday last I desired to move for the printing of a petition presented to this Chamber by certain Queensland cane-growers, but did not do so, because I was informed that it was to be printed by order of another place. Having made further inquiries, I find that, although the Senate on Thursday last ordered the printing of the petition, it has been decided that, as it was presented to the House, and not to the Senate, it cannot be printed, except by order of the House. I therefore desire to move that it be printed.

Mr SPEAKER:

– The question is, that the honorable member have leave to move a motion.

Honorable Members. - Hear, hear !

Leave granted.

Mr EDWARDS:

– I move-

That the petition from certain sugar canegrowers, presented to this House on the 21st October last, be printed.

Mr DEAKIN:
Prime Minister · Ballarat · Protectionist

– I have ascertained that the cost of printing the petition would, if anything, be less than the small amount mentioned, and, in the circumstances, when an honorable member knows that a great interest is affected, it is usual to allow a petition to be printed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 6142

QUESTION

PATENT MEDICINES

Mr THOMAS:
BARRIER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I desire to ask the Minister representing the Minister of Trade and Customs whether his attention has been drawn to the following paragraph which appeared in the Melbourne Herald of Tuesday last : -

As an instance of the enormous profits sometimes made by the manufacturers and vendors of some patent or proprietary medicines, a case may be cited which has recently come under the notice of the Customs officers in connexion with the administration of the Commerce Act.

The expert advisers of the Department state that the estimated cost of the ingredients used in a box of the article under notice which is sold at 2s. 6d. is one-fortieth part of one penny only, that is to say, the cost - if the Department’s figures be accurate - of ingredients used in forty boxes which are sold for £5 retail is one penny.

If that statement is correct, will the Minister inform the House of the name of the patent medicine referred to, so that the public may learn what they are buying ?

Mr GROOM:
Minister for External Affairs · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · Protectionist

– My attention was not drawn to the paragraph in question until the honorable member read it to-day. I shall have it placed before the Minister of Trade and Customs, and cause to be made the inquiry that the honorable member desires.

page 6142

QUESTION

MILITARY TATTOO

Mr MAUGER:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

asked the Minister of Defence, upon notice -

Who was the senior permanent officer present at the Tattoo at the Exhibition on the 16th November ?
What permanent officers of the Victorian

Head-quarters Staff were then present?

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

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are - 1 and 2. The District Commandant reports as follows : -

No permanent officers were present on duty at the Naval, Military, Police, and Fire Brigade Tattoo, which was an entertainment organised by a civilian committee and not controlled in any way by the Defence Department. Colonel J. Stanley, R.A.A., Commandant, Commonwealth Military Forces, Victoria, and Lieutenant T. A. Blarney, Administrative and Instructional Staff (Cadets) were present merely as spectators.

page 6142

QUESTION

PATENT OFFICE CHARGES

Mr CROUCH:

asked the Minister representing the Minister of Trade and Customs, upon notice -

What is the present price charged by the Patent Office for a single copy of the specifications and plans of a patent?
What is the price which the Patent Office of the United States of America charges for a full set?
Can the Minister see his way to issue full sets at rates similar to those of the United States for public and private use?

Mr GROOM:
Protectionist

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

One shilling per copy when ordered singly, 4d. per copy to persons desirous of purchasing complete sets of the specifications already issued and those to be issued, and Twenty shillings per parcel of thirty specifications.
Five cents per copy singly. When ordered by sub-classes 3 cents, and when ordered by classes 2 cents per copy.
No. Prior to September last the price of Commonwealth specifications whether ordered singly or in quantities was One shilling per copy.

From September last a reduction in price was made in cases where the specifications were ordered in quantities. Reckoned on a population basis, which is considered the proper method in such a case, the Commonwealth charges are far below the prices charged in America.

page 6143

QUESTION

ELECTORAL DIVISIONS: WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr FULLER:
Minister of Home Affairs · Illawarra · Free Trade

– I move -

That the House of Representatives approves of the distribution of the State of Western Australia into electoral divisions, as proposed by Mr. M. A. C. Fraser, the Commissioner for the purpose of distributing the said State into electoral divisions, in his report laid before Parliament on the 15th day of October, 1909.

It became necessary for the Commissioner appointed for the purpose to make a redistribution of the State of Western Australia under section 23 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act, which provides -

A redistribution of any State into divisions shall be made in the manner hereinbefore provided whenever directed by the GovernorGeneral by proclamation.
Such proclamation may be made -
1. Whenever an alteration is made in the number of members of the House of Representatives to be elected for the State; and
2. Whenever in one-fourth of the divisions in the State the number of electors differs from a quota ascertained in the manner provided in this Part by a greater extent than one-fifth more, or one-fifth less…..

On the occasion of the last canvass of Western Australia, made on the 31st December, 1908, the number of electors enrolled for the State was 142,461, and the quota, ascertained under the provision’s of section 15 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1902-5 was 28,492. The number of electors enrolled for any division, therefore, should not exceed 34,190, or be less than 22,794. The actual position when that canvass was made, however, was as follows : - Number of electors enrolled for Swan, 40,076, or 6,772 in excess of the maximum provided by law ; the number of electors enrolled for the divisions of Fremantle and Kalgoorlie fell short of the minimum provided by law, by 866 in the case of Fremantle. and 1,345 in the case of Kalgoorlie. It is, therefore, apparent that in more than onefourth of the divisions of the State the number of electors enrolled either exceeded or fell below the requirements of the law. In these circumstances Mr. Malcolm A. C. Fraser, who in 1:906 was appointed a Commissioner to distribute the State during the pleasure of the Governor-General, was asked to undertake the work of making a redistribution, and as he was an officer of the State Government, the consent of that Government was sought and obtained to his acting, in this connexion. He was furnished by the Department of Home Affairs with all the necessary data, including the quota which he was to use in connexion with the redistribution, and he followed out the directions of the Commonwealth Electoral Act, section 17 of which provides that -

Before reporting on the distribution of any State into divisions the Commissioner shall cause a map with a description of the boundaries of each proposed division to be exhibited at post offices in the proposed Division, and shall invite public attention thereto by advertisement in the Gazette.

Then, again, section 18 provides that -

Objections or suggestions in writing may be lodged with the Commissioner not later than thirty days after the first advertisement in the Gazette of the proposed distribution, and the Commissioner shall consider all objections and suggestions so lodged before making his report.

The procedure laid down by the Act was followed, and objections were received from the Albany Chamber of Commerce, the Honorable James Price, M.L.A., of Fremantle ) the National Political League, Fremantle, the Fremantle Chamber of Commerce, and the National Liberal League, Perth. These objections received the attention of the Commissioner, who, after the most careful review decided to adhere to his original scheme. In the maps placed before Parliament the divisions dealt with are marked respectively A, B, C, D, and E. Under the Commissioner’s proposal the boundaries of the existing division of Perth are unaltered. The boundaries of the division of Fremantle have been altered by the inclusion therein of the State electorates of Murray, Forrest, and Collie, which were previously included in the electorate of Swan, the electoral population being increased from 21,982 to 28,909. The boundaries of the division of Swan have been altered to the following extent : - The State electorates of Irwin and Toodyay have been transferred to the division of Coolgardie, and the State electorate of Albany to the division of Kalgoorlie, while the State electorates of Murray, Forrest, and Collie will, as already pointed out, form part of the division of Fremantle; the effect of this arrangement has been to reduce the electoral population of Swan from 40,076 to 27,507. The boundaries of the division of Coolgardie have been altered as follow : - The State electorates of Mount Margaret and Menzies have been transferred to the division of Kalgoorlie, and the State electorates of Irwin and Toodyay, previously in Swan, have been included in the division of Coolgardie. The electoral population <5f the division has been reduced from 30,163 to 28,533. The boundaries of the division of Kalgoorlie have been altered to allow the inclusion in the di-‘ vision of the following State electorates, namely, Albany, formerly in Swan, and Mount Margaret and Menzies, formerly in Coolgardie, the electoral population being increased from 21,657 to 29,929. It is not proposed to make any alteration in the names of the divisions. Honorable members have had this proposition before them for some considerable time. They will notice that the Commissioner has taken into consideration the question of community of interests, the means of communication, physical features, and the boundaries of the electorates. I think it would save time if I referred honorable members to his report, in which he states that he frankly recognises the difficulties which are experienced by the Commissioner in making a subdivision, and points out that in three instances the objections were not submitted until almost the last moment, thus virtually leaving no time for. their consideration. Mr. A. H. Dickson, President of the Albany Chamber of Commerce, on 23rd August, wired the Commissioner as follows : -

I wired you as follows : - “ Most emphatically protest against transfer Albany electorate to K Kalgoorlie ; practically disfranchises district ; interests not at all identical ; such subdivision most unfair to us.”

This telegram was followed by a letter, in which Mr. Dickson said : -

It seems unfair that, in order to adjust boundaries, the Albany electorate should be transferred to a district with which its interests are in no manner identical. It practically disfranchises all this district, as the vote here has always been in the majority for the opposite party returned by the Gold-fields. ] f this port were the acknowledged port of the Gold-fields, then there would be a reason for it, but the general impression here is, “ Oh ! Albany’s interests are nothing, we will tack it on to the Gold-fields.” I do not think at all that is your reason, but it is the general impression. I recognise the difficulty of adjustment, but most emphatically protest on behalf of the members of the Chamber of Commerce against our transfer to the electorate of Kalgoorlie, thus practically disfranchising the majority of the electors, and adding us to an electorate whose interests are not identical with our own.

Mr. Dickson also forwarded on 28th August the following letter in response to a communication from Mr. Fraser -

I beg, on behalf of the electors of Albany, to emphatically protest in the strongest possible terms against the re-division of the Federal electorates as far as Albany is concerned, and I think, on investigation, you’ will agree that to attach Albany district to Kalgoorlie is to entirely ignore the very essentials which should always be considered when such a division is made, viz., contiguity and community of interests. In the first place, by reference to the map, you will note that the only connexion with the Kalgoorlie district is by rail, with a journey of about 500 to 600 miles, and this journey, mark you, all through other Federal electorates. If this was the recognised port of the Goldfields, then there would be no objection, but the distance to traverse absolutely prohibits this.

It must be borne in mind that Albany is essentially the port of an agricultural district, and, being so, the interests with the Gold-fields are entirely opposed, and the electors here are practically disfranchised by the proposal. It is not at all fair that for the convenience of Federal legislation such a proposal should be carried, and I would therefore beseech you in the strongest manner possible on behalf of a community dependent on agriculture and fruitgrowing, not to attach this district to Kalgoorlie, as in neither contiguity nor community of interest does the proposed alteration of boundaries of this electorate run parallel.

I attach a leading article of the local paper dealing with the subject

Mr Fowler:

– From whom is that?

Mr FULLER:

– From Mr. A. H. Dickson, President of the Albany Chamber of Commerce. On the 1st September that gentleman wrote. -

I have read your letter very carefully; but, while Albany may be recognised as the port of distribution for the ports of the East coast, it must not be considered that, from a trade stand-point, it has anything approaching a large share. All ports, including Port Adelaide and Fremantle, undoubtedly participate as much as Albany ; but it must not be overlooked such a trade is very limited.

Albany is the recognised port of the Great Southern agricultural districts; and on these districts, practically, its existence depends, and in no way through contiguity or community of interest has it affinity with the chief portion of the Kalgoorlie district. For instance, in order to reach the centre of population of that division, a rail journey of 550 to 600 miles (and what is more, all the journey through other Federal electorates) has to be taken. If West Australia sees fit to give us a direct line with the Goldfields, and thus recognise us as the port for those fields, we will gladly accept the division, but at present our interest and contiguity is practically purely with the agricultural districts, which your proposal divides us from, and gives the impression (whether justified or not) that our interests are not the same as those on whom the port depends for its very life blood, which alienation is increased by the fact that in the proposed alteration we are coupled^ to a district essentially labour, which, whether rightly or wrongly, is generally considered opposed to farmers’ interests.

On 1st October Mr. Fraser replied -

With further reference to previous correspondence, I have now the honour to state that, in my opinion, owing to geographical position, the present trade and welfare of the port, town, and. surrounding district of Albany, are not in any way likely to be interfered with to their disadvantage by my proposed Federal electoral division scheme.

Further, in order to comply with the evident intention and provisions of the Acts, the Swan division, which has increased from 23,955 t0 41,076 electors, an increase of 17,121 since the redistribution of 1906, must be reduced as low as possible to avoid the necessity for any further alteration of its boundaries in the immediate future, whilst on the other hand, the Kalgoorlie division, for the opposite reason, certainly, at the present time, needs strengthening.

No better method to accomplish this end than the one I have suggested having been yet offered, I see no reason to alter my opinion, which was only arrived’ at after most careful consideration of all the facts of the case; I therefore adhere to my original proposal.

A copy of your letter, together with one of this reply, will be attached to my Report as an appendix when submitting it to the Honorable the Minister for Home Affairs for the consideration of the Federal Parliament.

Honorable members will, therefore, see that between Mr. Fraser and the Albany Chamber of Commerce there is a distinct difference of opinion in regard to the effect of the inclusion of Albany in the Kalgoorlie district. The Chamber of Commerce on behalf of the residents strongly takes the view that, if so included, Albany will be practically disfranchised.

Mr J H Catts:

– How do we know that the Chamber of Commerce speaks on behalf of the local residents?

Mr FULLER:

– Then I shall say that that view is taken by the Chamber of Commerce, a large and influential body in Albany. Mr. Fraser does not see that Albany would be disadvantaged or prejudiced, whereas the Chamber of Commerce takes the opposite view. That is all the correspondence in regard to Albany ; and the next refers to Fremantle. The first letter is one written by Mr. James Price, M.L.A., dated the Legislative Assembly, Western Australia^ 15th September, 1909. The letter contains the following :” -

I desire to enter my protest against the rearrangement of the Fremantle House of Representatives Electorate as suggested in your scheme for a re-arrangement of Western Australian Federal constituencies. You may, perhaps, remember that when I called upon you in reference to this matter, you expressed the opinion that “ community of interest “ existed between the Fremantles and the Electorates of Collie and Forrest, in that the major portion of the expert timber felled in the Forrest Electorate, and the bulk of the coal for export raised at Collie found its outlet from this State through the port of Fremantle. This idea was present in your mind when I saw you, and no doubt led you to believe that by adding Collie and Forrest to Fremantle, you would in no way do violence by your suggested arrangement to the principle of “ community of interest “ as laid down in Section 16 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act. When you expressed this view, I dissented from it, and subsequent investigation has convinced me that you were completely in error in the opinion you then expressed. I find that for the year 1908-9, the following timber and coal was exported through the ports of Fremantle and Bunbury respectively : -

Honorable members who have read the report carefully will notice that there is a difference between the coal tonnage given by Mr. Price, and subsequently by Mr.. Douglas G.. Gawler, of the National Political League, Fremantle, and that given by Mr. Fraser, who places it at 9,1.16 tons from Fremantle, and 10,936 tons from Bunbury. In view of such a discrepancy, I thought it my duty to ascertain the exact figures ; and I applied to the Government Statistician. In reply, I have received a telegram from the Collector of Customs in Western Australia, stating that the figures of Mr. Fraser are correct. The letter of Mr. Price continues -

Now, it is a well-known fact that the Electorate of Forrest is the largest timber producing district in the State, and that practically the whole of the coal’ output of Western Australia is raised in Collie.

These figures should, I think, lead you to review your re-arrangement of the Fremantle Electorate. If all the guiding principles laid down in Section 16 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act are applied to the two constituencies of Forrest and Collie, it becomes immediately apparent that, under these directions, they are more suited to be attached to the Federal Electorate containing the town and port of Bunbury rather than to Fremantle.

I “ desire to add that I completely recognise the very difficult task you have had to perform, one in which it is quite impossible to suit all parties. I have therefore not attempted to make suggestions in connexion with other Electorates in which I have no personal interest. I believe, however, with confidence, that the views I have put forward in this letter will lead you to reconsider your suggestion so that a great injustice shall not be done to that part of the State with which I have been for some time identified.

On the 17th September Mr. Fraser replied to Mr. Price as follows: -

In reply to your letter of the 15th inst. protesting against my suggested re-arrangement of the Commonwealth Electoral Divisions, but only, however, I understand, so far as the Fremantle Division is concerned, I shall be very pleased to receive for consideration your views in detail as to what re-arrangement you would wish to suggest as being more satisfactory for this division in the interests of the State than the ohe I have proposed.

You will naturaly realize that my endeavour, as Commissioner, has not been to suggest a plan to suit the ideals of the present political parties, but to study the interests of the State as a whole, and to obtain this not only by considering immediately existing conditions, but alsoby providing for some that may be reasonably anticipated in the near future.

Mr. Price did not reply, and so far as he is concerned the correspondence terminated. The next letter is also in connexion with the Fremantle electorate, and is from Mr. Douglas G. Gawler, of the National Political League, Fremantle, dated 21st September -

After most careful consideration, and with a ful recognition of the very difficult task you had been called upon to perform, I am directed by our organization, composed of some 1,100 members, who are electors in the Fremantle constituency, to record our emphatic protest against your proposals for this district on the following grounds : -

Because it does not appear that the principles laid down : in Section 16 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act, intended to guide the Commissioner in making any re-arrangements, have received that consideration we are entitled to expect.

Because there is no community of interest between the State Electorates of Collie and Forrest and the remainder of the Fremantle Electorate as proposed under your scheme ; on the other hand great diversity of interest exists.

Now, here is direct conflict between Mr. Fraser and the representative of this large league at Fremantle -

Almost the whole of the timber exported from the Forrest Electorate leaves the State through tie port of Bunbury, trade relations of all description being almost non-existent between Forrest and the Tremantles. The electors of Forrest are almost entirely composed of operatives engaged in the saw-milling industry, whose interests are entirely opposed to those of the mercantile and business people of Fremantle. Coal mining is the principal interest of the Collie electorate - here again the main port of supply of coal to shipping is Bunbury. Exclusive of coal supplied to the Western Australian Government, this is the main source of consumption of the coalraised in Collie.

Then follow the figures, the correction of which I have already referred to: -

Because the means of communication between Forrest and Collie are more efficient and easy with Bunbury than with Fremantle.

Then follows a description of a more suitable constituency which could be formed in agreement with community of interests, which, of the five conditions provided for in the Act, is the only one taken into consideration. The letter proceeds -

En our opinion the most suitable additions to the Fremantle electorate would be the local electorates of Murray (1,244 electors), Irwin [2,062 electors), Swan (3,398 electors) ; this would then leave the Fremantle constituency , as follows : -

On the 1st of October Mr. Fraser, the Commissioner, replied to the proposition put forward by the National Political League. He said -

I may. remind you that the principal consideration to be observed in arriving at a scheme of redistribution framed in accordance with the provisions of the Acts, is distinctly laid down in section 16, as being the grouping of the existing electorates into divisions, containing an equal balance of electors as near to the basis of the quota as ordinary circumstances will admit. The Commissioner has at the same time to give due consideration to the five (a) to(e) points enumerated in section . 16 of the Acts, none of which has, however, any preponderating importance as compared with the matters mentioned in the others.

To deal with your two points of objection, I may perhaps be allowed to reply -

That the Fremantle Division, as a whole, has received from the Commissioner his most careful and impartial consideration.

That the “ community of interest “ between the State electorates of Collie and Forrest, with the remainder of the Fremantle electorates, would seem to be much more apparent than that between the remaining electorates and those of Swan and lrwin, which you would propose to substitute in their stead.

There is an important distinction between the views of the two parties in regard to community of interest, the National Political League setting out the position from one point of view, and the Commissioner from a directly opposite aspect. It will be for honorable members to say which is the correct view to take. The Commissioner in his letter goes on to say -

I may point out that there appears to me to be a distinct community of interest between the timber workers in the Forrest electorate and the timber operatives in the metropolitan area, that is, the country contained within a10-mile radius of the Perth Town Hall, embracing the greater part of Fremantle and Midland Junction. The latter, according to the latest official returns, numbered 450, omitting lumpers.

As regards Collie, in addition to the fact that the bulk of the output of Collie coal is used by the local railways, no less than£55,000 worth having been used from the railway stations within the metropolitan area during the year ended 30th June last,, it also seems highly probable that, so soon as its utility for bunker purposes becomes better known and appreciated for the numerous heavy tonnage vessels calling at the port of Fremantle, this coal will have a very considerable export from that port.

It would appear that the suggestions contained in your letter are, unfortunately, based upon insufficient, and, at that, erroneous data, and consequently, it would seem, on equally faulty premises.

A portion of the data referred to has been proved to be invalid from an investigation which I have had made through the Collector of Customs in Western Australia. The next communication regarding the matter was that of Mr. M. Edward Pye, secretary of the Fremantle Chamber of Commerce, who conveyed to the Commissioner, without comment, the following resolution : -

That while disclaiming any desire to interfere in politics, this Chamber respectfully but emphatically protests against the proposed inclusion of the State electorates of Forrest and Collie in the Federal electorate of Fremantle, on the ground that there is no community of interest as contemplated by section 16, sub-section (a) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act between such State electorates and the remainder of the Federal electorate of Fremantle.

The Commissioner replied to that letter on the 27th September. Passing over the preliminary paragraphs of his letter, I find he said -

I may point out that there appears to me to be a distinct community of interest between the timber workers in the Forrest electorate and the timber operatives in the metropolitan area, that is, the country contained within a 10-mile radius of the Perth Town Hall, embracing the greater part of Fremantle and Midland Junction. The latter, according to the latest official returns, numbered 450, omitting lumpers.

The rest of the letter is in accordance with what I have previously communicated to the House, in my quotation from the letter of 1st October, in answer to Mr. Douglas Gawler. The next communication of importance was from Mr. G. H. Lukin, and Mr. W. H. Clarke-James, president and honorary secretary of the National Liberal League. They gave a list of objections to the proposed scheme of distribution. First of all, they pointed out that the proposals set forth by the Commissioner were not, in their opinion, in accordance with the spirit of the Commonwealth Electoral Act, having regard to the five headings to which I Have already referred. They further pointed out -

That the inclusion of Albany, an agricultural and seaport district, in the Kalgoorlie division, solely a. mining district, would be equivalent: to disfranchising over 2,400 voters.

That the inclusion of Albany in the Kalgoorlie division is not in harmony with, the “ community of interests “ as laid down in the Act;

That the present Kalgoorlie division vote can be increased by the inclusion of State mining electorates from the Coolgardie division, thus preserving the “ community of interest,” viz., the inclusion of mining instead of. agricultural electorates.

That the present vote of the Coolgardie division, being semi-pastoral, agricultural, and mining, can be raised by the inclusion of pastoral and agricultural State electorates from the Swan division, which would be observing the essential features laid down in. Electoral Act “ contiguity “ (implied through sub-clauses (b), (c), (d), (e) ) and “ community of interests.”

That Fremantle is a coastal and. seaport division, and to increase its present vote by invading the agricultural and timber areas, when the vote can be raised by the inclusion of coastal and seaport electorates, is not preserving, the spirit and intention of the Act.

That the amendments suggested herein would result in the formation of Commonwealth divisions embodying the essential principles of the Electoral Act, and. that the divisions would then be respectively -

Perth, representing metropolitan and industrial interests.

Fremantle, representing seaport and coastal interests.

Swan, representing agricultural interests.

Kalgoorlie, representing mining interests’.

Coolgardie, representing pastoral, agricultural, and mining interests.

I need not weary honorable members by going through the whole of the details to show the way in which these proposed electorates are made up, but I wish to refer them to the end of the communication from which I have been quoting, which contains a comparison between the proposal of the National Liberal League and that of the Commissioner. Under the proposals of the league the electorate of Perth would contain 27,992 electors, whilst under the proposal of the Commissioner it would also contain 27,992. The electorate of Fremantle under the proposalof the league would contain 28,686 voters, whilst under the proposal of the Commissioner it would contain 28,909. The electorate of Swan under the proposal of the league would contain 27,500, whilst under the proposal of the Commissioner it would contain 27,507. The electorate of Kalgoorlie under the proposal of the league would contain 28,993, whilst under the proposal of the Commissioner it would contain 29,929. The electorate of Coolgardie under the proposal pf the league would contain 29,699, whilst under- the proposal of the Commissioner it would contain 28,533. s° that there is a very close resemblance between the two schemes respecting the number of voters in each electorate. The Commissioner replied to that communication on 1st October, pointing out -

As regards the opinion held by your league, that my proposal is not “ in accordance with the spirit of the Commonwealth Acts,” I may perhaps be allowed to differ on this point, and may remind you that the principal consideration 10 be observed in arriving at a scheme of redistribution framed in accordance with the provisions of the Acts, is distinctly laid down, in section 16, as being the grouping of the existing electorates into divisions, containing an equal balance of electors as near to the basis of the quota as ordinary circumstances will admit. The - Commissioner has at the same time to give due consideration to the five (a) to (e) points also enumerated in section 16 of the Acts, none of which has, however, any preponderating im- .portance as compared with the matter mentioned iii the others.

With reference to the Albany electorate, in my opinion, as the division of Kalgoorlie already includes all the ports and pastoral coun-1 ry along the southern ‘ coast east of Albany, their recognised port of distribution, and with which port their direct communication by steamer is carried on, there is certainly not wanting direct “ community of interest.”

The view taken by your league that Irwin and Swan can be classed as “ Coastal “ and especially “ Seaport electorates,” is one from which I entirely differ, they being undoubtedly purely pastoral and agricultural; whilst Collie and Forrest are actually, taken as a whole, nearer the seaboard than the greater portion of the districts before referred to, the eastern extremity of Forrest being about 40 miles from the coast, and that of Collie 70 miles, whereas that of Irwin is no less than no miles.

I can also see no such “ Community of interest “ between the purely pastoral and agricultural population of Irwin and Swan, and the industrial and shipping population of the present Fremantle division, as undoubtedly exists between the latter and the timber workers and miners of Forrest and Collie.

I may point out that there appears to me to be a distinct community of interest between the timber workers in the Forrest electorate and the numerous timber operatives in the metropolitan area.

He then repeated what he had said in connexion with a similar objection taken by a gentleman to whom I have already referred. That is the whole of the correspondence. There is a direct conflict so far as concerns the important matter of community of interest in the various portions of the electorates referred to, in the positions taken up by the Commissioner and by those who have objected to the re-distribution as proposed by him. The matter has caused me very great doubts. I have given it every consideration, and in view of all the circumstances I have been unable to arrive at a distinct conclusion. If there had been time, and I had the power, I should certainly have sent the report back to the Commissioner for re-consideration.

Mr Fisher:

– That is a poor thing for a member of the Government to say.

Mr FULLER:

– Why?

Mr Fisher:

– It is a paltry position for a Minister to take up.

Mr FULLER:

– I have placed the position before honorable members as clearly and distinctly as I could. I have shown the view taken by the Commissioner and the views taken by public bodies and others who placed their suggestions before him. I am sure that any reasonably minded man, if he gave the matter the same consideration as I have given it, viewing the whole of the arguments, facts, and figures which have been put before the Commissioner, and taking his report into consideration, must feel considerable doubt in connexion with the matter. In these circumstances I have no hesitation in saying, notwithstanding what the Leader of the Opposition says, that I have considerable doubt about the report, and that, if time had permitted, and I had the power - honorable members know there - is not time now- - I should certainly have sent it back to the Commissioner for reconsideration. I have submitted a motion approving of the report. I thought that, as there was no time to refer it back, and as I was in doubt, it was my duty to submit such a motion, in order to give the House a proper opportunity of considering the matter. Section 21 of the Electoral Act provides -

If both Houses of Parliament pass a resolution approving of any proposed distribution the Governor-General may by proclamation declare the names and boundaries of the divisions, and such divisions shall until altered be the electoral divisions for the State in which they are situated.

Section 22 provides -

If either House of Parliament passes a resolution disapproving of any proposed distribution, or negatives a motion for the approval of any proposed distribution, the Minister may direct the Commissioner to propose a fresh distribution of the State into divisions.

Is that the reason?

Sir John Forrest:

– That does not influence me in the slightest.

Mr BATCHELOR:

– Community of interest does not mean community of political interest.

Sir John Forrest:

– A Labour man was returned for the electorate of Albany the other day.

Mr BATCHELOR:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– There .are several residential seaside resorts in South Australia, such as the Semaphore and Henley Beach, in which economic interests “and political interests are absolutely opposed. Regarding the inclusion of Albany as proposed, Mr. A. H. Dickson, the President of the Albany Chamber of Commerce, says -

It practically disfranchises all this district, as the vote here has always been in the majority for the opposite party returned by the goldfields.

Here the Secretary of the Chamber of Commerce confuses community of interest with community of political interests. A similar mistake was made in the case of the division of South Australia into electorates. There, a number of seaside resorts possessing identical economic interests are politically opposed to each other. For instance, Glenelg objected to being included in the same electoral division as Henley Beach and the Semaphore, although its economic interests were identical. These are merely residential seaside resorts. Mr. Fraser, in reply to Mr. Dickson’s letter, clearly shows that a community of interest exists between Albany and Fremantle. He says -

This division, as you are aware, already includes all ports along the southern coast, east of Albany - their recognised port of distribution, and with which port their only direct communication by steamer is carried on.

Mr. Dickson’s reply to the Commissioner is as follows -

I have read your letter very carefully j but, while Albany may be recognised the port of distribution for the ports of the east coast, it must not be considered that, from a trade stand-point, it has anything approaching a large share.’ All ports, including Port Adelaide and Fremantle, undoubtedly participate as much as Albany; but it must not be overlooked such a trade is very limited.

– Exactly ; that is a very small step from setting aside the automatic operation of the law. The honorable member for Perth may smile.

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

– Does not the honorable member agree with that?

Mr BATCHELOR:

– On that occasion, in the case of New South Wales, I followed the lead of the Ministry of the day, whom I was supporting; and, as I say, it was the only lead I could take ; but I have told the Minister of Defence two or three times since that I think I then made a mistake. In the case of Victoria, I voted for upholding the opinion of the Commissioner, as did the honorable member for Perth.

Mr Tudor:

– No ; on that occasion the honorable member for Perth voted for gerrymandering.

Mr BATCHELOR:

– No wonder the honorable member is amused at political rectitude. The present Minister of Defence on that occasion went on to say -

As to the expression “ gerrymandering “ being insulting, I do not intend it to be so construed, but at the same time I regard the Minister as a very good judge of what is insulting.

Up : to that timethe words wereapplicable. To-day they are not. We have amuch more serious case of dereliction of political duty to-day. TheGovernment are setting aside their responsibility in this matter, and intend to vote against a proposal made by one of their own colleagues. That is nothing better than gerrymandering.

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

– I see that I said a great deal in the speech from which the honorable member has quoted.

Mr BATCHELOR:

– Yes, and it is very good matter indeed.The Minister of Defence must agree with me, if he stills holds the opinions which he then expressed, that this is a much more gross caseof wrong doing’ and dereliction of political duty than was the one to which he then referred. There was at that time, so far as I am aware, no particular instance of wrong doing in New South Wales, because the cases dealt with related to both sides of the House. It was generally agreed that the position of some members on both sides might be rendered more insecure by what was proposed.

Mr Thomas:

– No one is so bitter as he who rats from his party. The honorable member was elected by the Labour vote.

Mr FOWLER:

Mr FOWLER:

– If the honorable member wants to know, I may say at once that the whole matter has been published in newspapers in Western Australia. That is a sufficient reply to his. insinuation. The letter is somewhat lengthy, but its importance, I trust, will justify my reading it. It is dated 25th September, 1909, and was addressed by Mr. Horan to Mr. Fraser. It reads -

Sir, - I have made a careful study of all the literature bearing on this subject, and I at once admit the difficulty that you had to contend with in your endeavour to equalize an unstable and conflicting population.

Complying with the conditions of the Act, and duly sensible of the suggestions contained in the West Australian of August 23rd and September 22nd, as well as those of other writers and representative public bodies, I still feel that the proposals which follow are worthy of very careful consideration.

The figures being admitted, the necessity for adjustment between Fremantle, Swan, Coolgardie, and Kalgoorlie has engaged public attention.

May I submit a proposal that so fat has not been published, although doubtless considered, and my arrangement would be as follows : -

Although Mr. Horan’s scheme varies in certain respects from others that have been made, still in its essentials it agrees with P those which have been advanced as alternative proposals to that of the Commissioner. All have proceeded on much the same lines ; all have aimed at eliminating the objectionable redistribution which the Commissioner proposes- with regard to Fremantle. Mr. Horan’s scheme includes within the electorate of Fremantle the State electorates of Fremantle, East, North, and South ; Canning, Claremont, Guildford, Murray, Irwin, and Swan. In the electorate of Swan he includes Beverley, Bunbury, Katanning, Northam, Sussex, Wellington, Williams, York, Forrest, and Toodyay. In the electorate of Coolgardie he includes Coolgardie, Yilgarn, Mount Margaret, Menzies, Leonora, Cue, Mount Magnet, Murchison, Pilbarra, Roeburne, Kimberley, Greenough, Gascoyne, and Geraldton, whilst in the electorate of Kalgoorlie he includes Boulder, Brown Hill, Kanowna, Dundas, Hannans, Ivanhoe, Albany, Nelson, and Collie. That redistribution would give us electorates comprising the following number of electors - Perth, 27,992 ; Fremantle, 28,686 ; Swan, 26,597 ; Coolgardie, 30,163; and Kalgoorlie, 29,432. Mr. Horan’ went on to say -

I deem it unnecessary to recapitulate the governing conditions laid down by the Federal Act, but will demonstrate the advantages of the above outline of redistribution, bearing in mind the comments that have been made during the last few weeks on the proposals first submitted by you, and which I venture to hope were only of a tentative character, and liable, as implied by the Act, to any alteration that might be deemed expedient. To Fremantle I have added Murray, Irwin, and Swan; they are coastal in geography and interests, dealing alone with Perth as their capital and Fremantle as their seaport.

The Murray you have already agreed to, and I hope on reconsideration you will as full)’ appreciate the difficulty of excluding Irwin and Swan as you will in including Forrest and Collie, whose interests are largely indifferent, if not strongly opposed, to those of Fremantle.

The Irwin electorate, largely benefited by the sale of the Midland Company’s lands, will find its interests, business houses, and financial organizations in either Fremantle or Perth, and it is difficult to understand why it should be associated with Coolgardie.

The State Swan is an electorate acting as a buffer stop between the city and country electorates, and is largely composed of fruitgrowers and market gardeners, who deal with the metropolis or Fremantle more frequently and more directly than do the agricultural elec,torates included in the electoral Swan division. I most certainly claim the electorate of Fre- mantle as outlined herein complies with the conditions of the Act better than that proposed. From the Federal of Swan, I have .excluded State Swan for the reasons already given. I have included Toodyay, for it is almost impossible to separate Newcastle, Goomalling, and such places from Northam ; they have been associated by domestic, banking, and railway interests since these conditions came into vogue. I include Forrest for the reason that Bunbury is practically its only shipping port for timber, and its connexion with Fremantle does not appear desirable because it is possible that the differences that might arise in the ordinary competition of harbor trade might operate prejudicially to both, whereas my proposal gives each a free hand. YOU will observe the additions I propose to your scheme are Nelson and Collie ; these adjoin each other and also Albany. Briefly, my reasons are these : Nelson contains all the miners on the tin-fields at Greenbushes; does the bulk of its shipping at Albany, or has its commercial interests concentrated there, and it is desirable to bring the miners of the tin-fields in touch with the miners of Collie who, in turn, my suggestion brings in contact with the miners of Kalgoorlie. Thus would we preserve in an admirable degree the community of interests laid’ down by the Act. It will be noticed that I have excluded Irwin and Toodyay, as there are strong reasons for this course, but the grounds for inclusion of Mount Margaret and Menzies are mostly of a numerical nature, and conditions being very similar no special reason need be advanced. If it be contended that Coolgardie has the largest number of electors, then my reply is that the experience of the past shows that they have migrated to the Swan, which is now lowest, but would probably be equalized during the course of agricultural advancement.

That is a very opportune and sensible remark. The writer adds -

In- conclusion, I desire to say the Commissioner’s task has been a difficult one, and, having freely invited criticism according to legal provisions, I commend the foregoing to your earnest consideration, believing that it possesses merits in advance of any yet made public. Might I add that it is extremely desirable we should avoid, as far as possible, a duplication of names in the Federal and State electorates. Perth is acceptable ; Fremantle is doubtful ; the Swan, Kalgoorlie, and Coolgardie are altogether objectionable.

In reply to that communication the Com monwealth Electoral Commissioner wrote on 28th September -

Sir, - I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of 25th inst., and to thank you for the suggestions therein contained relative to the redistribution of the State for Federal electoral purposes, which unfortunately, however, - 1 regret to have to inform you, are too late now to receive my consideration, my report to the honorable the Minister of Home Affairs being practically completed. I may mention that several of the more important features of the alternative, scheme suggested by you had already received my very careful consideration, but the arguments in their favour had not -appeared to* me sum. ciently strong to necessitate the alteration of the arrangement which I had previously come to.

Mr. Horan was so thoroughly satisfied that his scheme was an improvement upon the scheme laid down by the Commissioner that he sent the following letter to the Minister of Home Affairs -

Perth, 1st October, 1909.

Sir, - I have the honour to inviteyour attention to the enclosed letters which have passed between Mr. Fraser and myself. I am not aware that Mr. Fraser has been influenced in any way by my correspondence, and perhaps it speaks well for that freedom of thought and action contemplated by the Federal Act, that although a member for many years, and of several Parliaments, I have never had the pleasure of meeting this gentleman. Therefore, no local circumstances influenced our views. The attached letter has been shown to many members of Parliament, and the contents have been approved in every case. It is not within the province of the House to act in this- matter, but if it were, I am free to express the opinion that Mr. Fraser’s recast would be amended if not on the lines laid down by me, at least sufficiently so to remove the obvious incongruity of associating mining electorates with coastal districts, no possible connexion being visible to the layman’s mind.

– The honorable member did. Are we to accept this proposal or to inquire for ourselves whether or not it is a right distribution, and then record our votes? In 1903 the honorable member for Hume, who was Minister of Home Affairs, proposed that only two of the schemes should be approved ; in other words, that the schemes for the redistribution of Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland, and” Western Australia should be disapproved of. What did he say then about the responsibility of honorable members concerning the Commissioner’s report? On page 3577 of Hansard I find this statement -

What would be the use of bringing a report before the House if we were compelled to abide by the Commissioner’s recommendation?

In that view the honorable member was supported, I shall not say by all, but cer tainly by a majority of the members of the Labour party, who then sat on this side of the chamber.

Mr Webster:

– That was a courageous course for the Minister to take.

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

– I shall show that it was not such a courageous course as the honorable member suggests it was. In reply to that interjection from the Minister, I said -

There is no necessity to do that. The idea was that if the report were not accepted by the House after good reasons had been shown, it should be referred back to the Commissioner.

Again, on pages 3580-1 I said -

I very much regret that the Minister has failed to take the course which he led us to believe would be followed in dealing with this matter, namely, that any distribution to which there might be reasonable and proper objection would be sent back to the Commissioner. When the Minister was introducing the Electoral Bill, he indicated that that course would be adopted, and, I think, that it would be a very proper one to take if the House saw fit.

On pages 3668-9 I said -

I do not say that if good reasons are shown we should not disapprove of the Commissioner’s recommendation….. I am prepared to support a motion to refer the proposed distribution again to the Commissioner.

– The best scheme, that of Mr. Horan, a State Labour member, does not appear in the Commissioner’s report.

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

– It seems an. eminently good proposal, but was received too late to be published in the report. A defect of the Commissioner’s distribution is that sufficient account is not taken of the rapidity with which the population of the Swan electorate is increasing, it having been added to by 11,807 electors between 1-906 and 1909. This increase is still going on, the agricultural settlement of the State taking place largely in that electorate. As the number of electors included within the Swan electorate is larger than it need be, it is likely that in a very short time the electorate will again be disproportionate.

Mr Fowler:

– There is not the least doubt about it.

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

– It only requires two electorates to be disproportionate to necessitate a redistribution in Western Australia, and the Commissioner has allotted to the Swan division 4,638 electors more than he was forced to assign to it. To have reduced the number would have improved the distribution scheme. However, the honorable member for Perth, who possesses local knowledge, has dealt with the matter more fully and completely than I could do. I should like to refer to some of the Commissioner’s replies to objections to his distribution. He proposes to associate Albany with Kalgoorlie, and says in support of that proposal -

With reference to the Albany electorate, in my opinion, as the Division of Kalgoorlie already includes all the ports and pastoral coun try along the Southern coast east of Albany, their recognised port of distribution, and with which port their direct communication by steamer is carried on, there is certainly not wanting direct “ Community of interest.”

In that instance he regards geographical situation as creating community of interest, and undoubtedly it is one of the factors. But he goes on to say -

The view taken by your league that Irwin and Swan can be classed as “ Coastal,” and especially “ Seaport electorates,” is one from which I entirely differ, they being undoubtedly purely pastoral and agricultural ; whilst Collie and Forrest are actually, taken as a whole, nearer the seaboard than the greater portion of the districts before referred to, the eastern extremity of Forrest being about 40 miles from the coast, and that of Collie 70 miles, whereas that of Irwin is no less than no miles.

He refuses to group these coastal places with Fremantle, in spite of geographical association, although he has grouped Albany and coastal places near it with- Kalgoorlie. He continues -

I can also see no such “ Community of interest “ between the purely pastoral and agricultural population of Irwin and Swan, and the industrial and shipping population of the present Fremantle division, as undoubtedly exists between the latter and the timber workers and miners of Forrest and Collie.

While in the first instance he adopted geographical situation as constituting community of interest, in this case he refuses to do so, and pays regard rather to similarity of occupation. A little later he accepts trade intercourse as constituting community of interest. He says -

I may point out that there appears to me to be a distinct community of interest between the timber workers in the Forrest electorate and the numerous timber operatives in the metropolitan area, that is, the country contained within a 10-mile radius of the Perth Town Hall, embracing the greater part of Fremantle and Midland Junction. The latter, according tb the latest official returns, numbered 450, receiving wages slightly over ^50,000 per annum, omitting lumpers. As regards Collie, in addition to the fact that the hulk of the output of Collie coal is used by the local railways, no less than £55,000 worth having been used and handled from the railway stations within the metropolitan area during the year ended 30th June last, providing employment and wages accordingly, it also seems highly probable that, so soon as its utility for bunker purposes becomes better known and’ appreciated for the numerous heavy tonnage vessels calling at the port of Fremantle, this coal will have a very considerable export from that port.

Mr FRAZER:

Mr WISE:
Gippsland

.- This is the first opportunity I have had of witnessing the manner in which this House deals with a new scheme for the subdivision of electorates in any State ; and I must confess that I am not impressed with it. I find that under the Act, a redistribution can only be brought about by the Governor- General moving in the first instance. When the Governor-General has taken action, the Commissioner has to forward his scheme to the Government. They have to lay it upon the table of the House within seven days after receiving it. Then the Act provides that -

If both Houses of Parliament pass a resolution approving of any proposed distribution the Governor-General may by proclamation declare the names and boundaries of the divisions.

But I also find that -

If either House of Parliament passes a resolution disapproving of any proposed distribution, or negatives a motion for the approval of any proposed distribution, the Minister may direct the Commissioner to propose a fresh distribution of the State into divisions.

If it had been suggested that there was any reflection on the officers this motion would not have been moved. But it has been moved as an expression of his - that is, the Minister’s - confidence in their judgment

That is, the judgment of- the officers. Then there was a striking and extraordinary statement from the Prime Minister -

At the same time, he has told the House that he has been unable to convince his colleagues - so far as I know, to convince any of them - that this scheme is better than the present subdivision of the constituencies.

Surely that was an extraordinary statement to be made by the head of the Government in regard to a motion submitted by one of his colleagues. The Minister of Home Affairs has not submitted this motion as a private member, but as a Minister, and as an expression of his confidence in the Commissioner who drew up the scheme. But now we are told by the Prime Minister that the Minister of Home Affairs has not been able to convince any of his colleagues that it is a better scheme of distribution than the one which is at present in operation. To my mind, the honest course to follow would have been for the Minister of Home Affairs, finding that his colleagues were against him, to come down with a motion expressing disapproval of the scheme. In the first place, the Government are to blame for the inexcusable delay which has occurred, and, secondly, responsibility attaches to them on account of the extraordinary position taken up by them in regard to their own colleague. I am not personally interested in this matter in any way whatever. I know nothing about it, except what I have heard this afternoon. But I see no reason whatever, from what I have heard, for voting against the scheme. The position was put very graphically to me by a supporter of the Government this afternoon, when asking for a pair. He asked me, “ Are you against the Government, or rather, are you with Fuller?” That was an extraordinary way to put it. On this occasion, therefore, I am “ with’ Fuller and against the Government.”

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
Parkes

Mr Fuller:

– No, I have not.

Mr TUDOR:

– I took the trouble to look them over, and I find that the honorable gentleman was very keen against the Government proposal at that time. I believe that the course he adopted on that occasion has had great influence in inducing him not to submit a motion for the disapproval of the scheme now before the House. On the occasion to which I refer the Minister of Defence, after a very long speech, said -

I can conceive of no grosser wrongdoingor dereliction of political duty than that of which the Ministry are guilty, in seeking to deprive the people of Australia of the full value of their votes at the first election at which they will have an opportunity to use them. As to the expression “ gerrymandering “ being insulting, I do not intend it to be so construed, but at the game time I regard the Minister as a very good judge of what is insulting. . . . Since, however, “ gerrymandering “ is a term that must not be used, all I have to say is that Iprotest as strongly as I am able against the course proposed by the Government. I hope that the protest of those who think with me will be made as effective as possible - not only here, but on the public platform, so that the people may know that they have been deliberately deprived by the Government of the voting power to which they are justly entitled under the Constitution. We know that the distribution schemes debated on that occasion were not disposed of at one sitting: The debate on the Victorian and on the New South Wales schemes occupied a couple of days, and there was later a debate on the proposed distribution for Queensland. If, in this instance, the seat of the honorable member for Kalgoorlie had been in danger, instead of that of the honorable member for Fremantle, we should not have found so much objection expressed on the other side. There would have been Ministerial unanimity on the question. Their supporters would have been rolled up, and the matter would have been brought on weeks ago in order to “ biff out Frazer “ at any cost.

Mr Fuller:

– Had the Commissioner’s report been submitted for consideration immediately it was received, there would not have been time to refer it back to him for reconsideration, and to get a further scheme from him during this Parliament.

Mr MATHEWS:

– I accept the Minister’s assurance, though I should not feel inclined to accept that of some of his colleagues. I sympathize with him in the position in which he has been placed by them. I look upon proposals brought forward by a Minister as Ministerial.

Mr Fuller:

– This is not a party question.

Mr MATHEWS:

Mr Frazer:

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

Motion (by Mr. Fuller) agreed to -

That the question be now put.

Question - That the motion be agreed to - put. The House divided.

AYES: 18

NOES: 26

Majority … … 8

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

page 6196

PAPERS

Sir JOHN QUICK laid upon the table the following papers : -

Post and Telegraph Act - Regulations Amended -

Postal Regulation No. 7 ; Telegraphic Regulation No. 17 - Statutory Rules 1909, No. 123.

Telegrams beyond the Commonwealth - Statutory Rules 1909, No. 124.

The Clerk laid upon the table the follow i ng pa per : -

Sugar Mills - Coloured Aliens employed - Return to an Order of the House dated 20th October,1909.

page 6196

ADJOURNMENT

Conduct of Business

Motion (by Mr. Deakin) proposed -

That the House do now adjourn.

Mr FISHER:
Wide Bay

.- I wish to express my view on the matter which has been under discussion during the evening. I think that the Prime Minister has conducted affairs to-day in a manner that reflects no credit on this House.

Mr Frazer:

– Political corruption.

Mr FISHER:

– I do not think that I remember a spectacle of the kind, where a Minister in charge of a piece of business brought down a proposal, and stated that he was in favour of it, whilst the whole of his colleagues voted against it.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order !

Mr FISHER:

– If I am not in order, I shall at once resume my seat ; but 1 understand that on the motion for the adjournment of the House I am at liberty to draw attention to any matter of public importance. I do not wish to stand here on a point of privilege. If I am in order, however, I wish again to call attention to procedure that casts a serious reflection on the honour of the members of this House, on Parliament as a whole, and on the Government. I hope that this is the last exhibition of the kind that we shall witness in this House.

Mr DEAKIN:
Prime Minister · Ballarat · Protectionist

– I simply desire to say, in reply to the Leader of the Opposition, that it must be obvious even to those who have had very little experience in this House, that the proposals submitted to-day had no connexion with what is usually referred to as responsible government. We have been dealing with a motion connected with the administration of the affairs of this House in so far as they relate to the representation of the people and the redistribution of electorates. As such, the business had no party complexion. No question of policy was involved. It required no Cabinet unity. The Ministry had no responsibility as such. It was simply a proposal submitted by an independent State officer specially charged to prepare a scheme–

Motion (by Mr. Webster) proposed -

That the honorable member be not further heard.

Question put. The House divided.

AYES: 30

NOES: 10

Majority … … 20.

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Original question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 11. 10 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 23 November 1909, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1909/19091123_reps_3_54/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives23 November 1909

QUESTION

COAL MINERS STRIKE

Dr LIDDELL:HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr Frazer:

Mr Fisher:

Dr LIDDELL:

Mr DEAKIN:Prime Minister · BALLAARAT, VICTORIA · Protectionist

Mr Crouch:

QUESTION

NORTHERN TERRITORY

Mr RICHARD FOSTER:WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925

Mr DEAKIN:Protectionist

Mr BRUCE SMITH:PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES

PRINTING OF PETITION

Sugar Industry

Mr EDWARDS:Oxley

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr EDWARDS:

Mr Fisher:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr EDWARDS:

Mr Crouch:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr FRAZER:Kalgoorlie

Mr Wilks:

Mr FRAZER:

Mr Watkins:

Mr McWilliams:

Mr FRAZER:

Mr Edwards:

Mr FRAZER:

Mr Edwards:

Mr FRAZER:

Mr DEAKIN:Prime Minister · Ballarat · Protectionist

QUESTION

PATENT MEDICINES

Mr THOMAS:BARRIER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr GROOM:Minister for External Affairs · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · Protectionist

QUESTION

MILITARY TATTOO

Mr MAUGER:MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

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

QUESTION

PATENT OFFICE CHARGES

Mr CROUCH:

Mr GROOM:Protectionist

QUESTION

ELECTORAL DIVISIONS: WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr FULLER:Minister of Home Affairs · Illawarra · Free Trade

Mr Fowler:

Mr FULLER:

Mr J H Catts:

Mr FULLER:

Mr Fisher:

Mr FULLER:

Mr Fisher:

Mr FULLER:

Mr Fisher:

Mr Deakin:

Mr FULLER:

Mr FISHER:Wide Bay

Sir John Forrest:

Mr FISHER:

Mr Kelly:

Mr FISHER:

Mr Fuller:

Mr FISHER:

Mr Fuller:

Mr Kelly:

Mr FISHER:

Mr Fuller:

Mr Batchelor:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr FISHER:

Mr Kelly:

Mr FISHER:

Mr Thomas:

Mr FISHER:

Mr Webster:

House of Representatives
23 November 1909

Dr LIDDELL:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr DEAKIN:
Prime Minister · BALLAARAT, VICTORIA · Protectionist

Mr RICHARD FOSTER:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; LP from 1922; NAT from 1925

Mr DEAKIN:
Protectionist

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr EDWARDS:
Oxley

Mr FRAZER:
Kalgoorlie

Mr DEAKIN:
Prime Minister · Ballarat · Protectionist

Mr THOMAS:
BARRIER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr GROOM:
Minister for External Affairs · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · Protectionist

Mr MAUGER:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

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

Mr GROOM:
Protectionist

Mr FULLER:
Minister of Home Affairs · Illawarra · Free Trade

Mr FISHER:
Wide Bay

Mr DEAKIN:
Prime Minister · Ballarat · Protectionist

Mr BATCHELOR:
Hindmarsh