House of Representatives
19 September 1912

4^th Parliament · 3^rd Session

PERSONAL EXPLANATION
QUESTION
- FEDERAL CAPITAL
QUESTION
- BIRTH CERTIFICATES
PAPERS
QUESTION
- SUGAR COMMISSION
QUEENSLAND ARBITRATION BILL
QUESTION
- POSTMASTER-GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT
QUESTION
- MILITARY UNIFORMS
QUESTION
- KARRI SLEEPERS
QUESTION
- INDEPENDENT CABLE SERVICE
VICTORIAN POWELL WOOD PROCESS

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

page 3228

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr ROBERTS:
Minister (without portfolio) · ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– Yesterday, the honor able member for North Sydney referred to Military Order 497, relating to the firing exercises of senior cadets, and I told him that that order had been’ suspended. I have since found that that is not so, and desire at the earliest moment to make this correction.

page 3228

QUESTION

FEDERAL CAPITAL

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

– When is the

Minister of Home Affairs likely to take steps towards having plans prepared for what he calls the shell of the Federal Parliament House, and for the other buildings which must be erected before the Seat of Government can be removed to the Capital site ?

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
Minister for Home Affairs · DARWIN, TASMANIA · ALP

– The matter will be gone into as soon as the Board which has been appointed furnishes a report on the designs.

page 3228

QUESTION

BIRTH CERTIFICATES

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

– In view of certain difficulties which have arisen in connexion ‘ with the furnishing of birth certificates, has the Prime Minister anyinformation to give the House regarding the arrangements made for the obtaining of certificates in connexion with employment in the Commonwealth Public Service?

Mr FISHER:
Prime Minister · WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– The Premiers of the States have agreed that in furnishing certificates of the registration of birth no unnecessary particulars shall be given.

page 3228

PAPERS

MINISTERS laid upon the table thefollowing papers : -

Government House, Sydney - Copy of letter to be included in the correspondence between the Government of the Commonwealth and the Government of New South Wales respecting occupancy by the Governor-General.

Ordered to be printed.

Census and Statistics Act - Regulation - Statutory Rules 1912, No. 184.

Northern Territory Lands Acquisition Ordinance - Land acquired under, at Goyder (Hundred of), County ofPalmerston, Northern Territory - For Experimental Farms.

Public Service Act - Department ofHome Affairs - Appointment of L. Haslam, as Draughtsman - Recommendations.

Defence Act - Regulations Amended (Provisional) - .

Universal Training -

Statutory Rules 1912, Nos. 176-178.

Military Forces -

Statutory Rules 1912, No, 175.

page 3228

QUESTION

SUGAR COMMISSION

Mr.KELLY.- I ask the Attorney-

General if the newspaper statement that the Government have withdrawn the information against Mr. Knox, the chairman of directors of the Colonial Sugar Refining Company, is correct?

Mr HUGHES:
Attorney-General · WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– Does the honorable member refer to a Police Court prosecution?

Mr Kelly:

– Yes.

Mr HUGHES:

– All the Informations have been withdrawn.

Mr KELLY:

– Why did the Government proceed against Sir Normand MacLaurin, who was on a sick bed, and withdraw the information against Mr. Knox, who, I understand, disturbed the peace of the Royal Commission when sitting in Sydney?

Mr HUGHES:

– The information was withdrawn against Mr. Knox and his codirectors because the law had been stated by the magistrate in the case against Sir Normand MacLaurin, and the question at issue had been referred to the Supreme Court of New South Wales. We are satisfied to leave the matter to the decision of the superior Court.

Mr KELLY:

– Why was Mr. Knox not prosecuted, seeing that he was the source of the trouble, when Sir Normand MacLaurin was fined, although guilty of only a technical offence?

Mr HUGHES:

– The Department, in directing prosecutions, acts in the way which it thinks most conducive to the public interest. That is why the course to which the honorable member refers was taken.

page 3229

QUEENSLAND ARBITRATION BILL

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

– I ask the Prime Minister whether he was requested by the Queensland Opposition to use his influence with Mr. Asquith in regard to the protest against the King’s assent to the Arbitration Bill recently passed by the Queensland Parliament?

Mr FISHER:
ALP

– I had heard nothing about the matter until the honorable member asked this question.

page 3229

QUESTION

Mr FRAZER:

– Yes.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

Will he place on the table of the House the whole of the correspondence and official documents which passed between the firm of Clarke, Padley, & Co., of Melbourne, and the Postal Department concerning proposals and offers in connexion with the introduction of the common battery and automatic systems of telephones?

Mr FRAZER:

– I have not the least objection to letting the honorable member see the file in question, but do not think it advisable to place it upon the table of the House.

Mr DEAKIN:
BALLAARAT, VICTORIA

asked the PostmasterGeneral,upon notice -

When will an automatic switchboard be installed at the Ballarat Telephone Exchange?

Mr FRAZER:

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

I am unable to say. An order was placed some time ago for a modern common battery switchboard of the latest pattern to be installed at Ballarat, and the work of its erection has already been commenced. It is proposed, when new switchboards are required in telephone exchanges with more than 500 existing lines, to give consideration to the suitableness of automatic and semi-automatic systems. The working of the automatic switchboard at present installed atGeelong is being carefully watched, and the experience gained will be utilized in deciding the type of working to be adopted in other telephone network, each of which must, however, be considered entirely on its own merits.

page 3230

QUESTION

MILITARY UNIFORMS

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

– Has the Minister representing the Minister of Defence any information to give the House pertaining to the cost of uniforms?

Mr ROBERTS:
ALP

– The information regarding the cost of uniforms for the Permanent Military Forces will be available in the course of a few days. The other information desired by the honorable gentleman is as follows : -

page 3230

QUESTION

KARRI SLEEPERS

Mr HEDGES:
FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister of

Home Affairs, upon notice -

If he will cause to be laid on the table of the House all papers in connexion with the adoption of karri sleepers for the construction of the Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta railway?
If so, will he include all reports which have been received both in favour of, and against, the use of karri for sleepers, including reports from the Western Australian Government and from Commonwealth officers?

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
ALP

– Yes.

page 3230

QUESTION

INDEPENDENT CABLE SERVICE

Mr KELLY:

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

What is the amount of the Commonwealth subsidy to the Independent Cable Service?
What are the terms upon which such subsidy is given?
Is the Minister aware that the Daily Standard, advertising as the Queensland Labour daily newspaper, makes the following statement : - “ The Independent Cable Service is admitted to be the most complete and up-to-date in Australia, and the fact that we have secured ‘the sole right to this excellent service should recommend the Standard to the reading public of Queensland ?”
Has the above newspaper secured the sole right to this service for any part of the Commonwealth; and, if so, over what area of the Commonwealth ?
Does the Minister approve of the Independent Cable Service giving to this Labour news paper a monopoly of cable news?
If not, what steps does he propose to take to prevent such monopoly?

Mr THOMAS:
Minister for External Affairs · BARRIER, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

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

£2,500 per annum for first year; £2,000 per annum for second year; £1,500 . per annum for third year; £2,000 per annum for fourth year; £2,000 per annum for fifth year; £2,000 per annum for sixth year.
The terms were published in the Commonwealth Gazette of 10th September,1910, and include the following provisions : - “ The proprietor of any newspaper in the Commonwealth shall be entitled to become a subscriber to the association for the cable service on payment of the annual rate applicable under schedule A.”
I am not aware.
I have no knowledge of any arrangement to this effect. 5 and 6. Any such arrangement would be contrary to the conditions agreed upon with the Government. I shall make immediate inquiries from the association to ascertain the facts of the case. In the event of any monopoly having been granted to a particular newspaper, the payment of the subsidy will be stopped.

SUPPLY (Formal).

Claims of Public Servants Transferred from South Australia - Colonial Sugar Refining Company: Prosecutions - Independent Press Cable Service : Labour Daily Newspaper - Sleepers : Port Augusta to Kalgoorlie Railway - Senior Cadet Training : Field Firing : Area Officers : Uniforms : Apportionment of Duties : Reimbursements - Summons for Non-attendance at Drill : Cadet Roberts - Home Affairs Department: Public Works Schedule - Sydney Post Office : Overtime.

Question - That Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair, and that the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply - proposed.

Mr GORDON:
Boothby

– I regret that, in the opinion of the Prime Minister, the exigencies of public business were such that it became necessary, so early in the session, to pass a motion which practically placed business in the names of private members on the shelf. It was because of that action I realized that I should not have the opportunity of dealing with. a motion which had appeared in my name on the paper for a considerable time ; and, therefore, I take this opportunity of bringing its subject-matter under the notice of honorable members. It was my intention to have moved, on the 3rd October -

That, as the Honorable Josiah Thomas (then Postmaster-General) on 15th December, 1 910, promised the officers to submit certain questions relating to the rights of South Australian transferred officers for settlement by arbitration on the grounds of equity only, and as, subsequently, the Attorney-General discovered that the then state of the law compelled the Government to withdraw such promise, and also, in view of the heavy costs of actions before the Arbitration Court and the grave doubt as to its untrammelled jurisdiction in matters of the accrued and accruing rights of transferred officers, this House directs that the three questions referred to by Mr. Thomas, namely, postmasters’ “ emoluments,” “ increments,” and “ age retirement,” be referred for settlement on the merits to a representative of the Government and representatives of the officers of the South Australian Post and Telegraph Service.

Although, presumably, there is no chance of my obtaining a vote on this important motion, I do hope that the Government will see their way to meet the wishes of a large body of men and women in South Australia who unanimously consider that an injustice has been done to them. This is not a question which merely affects this Government . It is one which involves the honour of this Parliament and the honour of the Commonwealth. I am going to ask the House whether it is prepared to allow to be broken what is practically a contract entered into in the name of the people of Australia with the officers of the Post and Telegraph service of, at least, South Australia. Some of my remarks will apply equally to officers of various other Departments - such, for instance, as the Department of Trade and Customs - in South Australia, who have not had their rights preserved; but, for the sake of convenience and conciseness, I shall confinemyself this afternoon to a statement of the case, as I understand it, on behalf of the Post and Telegraph Association of South Australia. I shall endeavour to show that, intentionally or not, by accident or design, something approaching a confidence trick has been perpetrated on a large body of men and women who, under State control, gave enthusiastic and loyal service to the Crown, as the result of which, an undertaking was given that their positions would not be worse, but rather better, when they came under the control of the Federal authorities. I know many of these men and women. Some of them were schoolmates of mine, many are old friends, and, from my knowledge of them, I have no hesitation in saying that they are a fine body of men and women, of whom the Public Service of Australia has every reason to be proud. They are giving to-day loyal and enthusiastic service to the public, and the Parliament of the Commonwealth ought not only to be prepared to listen to their appeal for fair play, but should be eager to give them justice. A feeling of intense surprise and chagrin came over officers when, in June, 1904, the Commonwealth Public Service Commissioner’s “ classification “ was issued, and it was found that the salaries of a large number of officials were reduced. Prior to that, there was not a man in the Service who did not implicitly rely on the Constitution and the Commonwealth Public Service Act preserving “ all the existing and accruing rights “ enjoyed under State Acts. About 100 postmasters had their incomes detrimentally affected in sums of from ^5 to ,£150 per annum - an average of about ;£34: - and eighty or ninety officers, entitled to “increments,” were called upon to lose from £Io to ,£30 per annum - most of them ^25. When classifying the Service in 1904, the Commis»sioner found postmasters and postmistresses in South Australia in. receipt of certain payments or allowances, such as rebate on sale of postage stamps - of these there were only a few - cases - and Savings Bank salary, &c, in addition to statutory salary. With the exception of one or two small allowances, such as fees for registering births and deaths, which the postmaster retained only until transferred to another office, the Commissioner abolished all emoluments, and, with only two or three exceptions, classified the officers at their statutory salary. The result was that sixty-four postmasters, and a large number of other officers, were deprived of portion of the remuneration which they had receive1?! under State control. Several postmasters were also deprived of increments to their statutory salary, which had accrued, and were accruing, under State law. The question to which we have to direct our attention this afternoon seems to me to be, “ Why should officers be penalized when transferred from the State service to the greater service of the Commonwealth?” That that was not intended by the framers of the Constitution I shall show by making one or two small quotations - they could be extended - from the reports of the Federal Convention. At the Adelaide sittings of the Convention, in April, 1897, Mr. O’Connor - now Mr. Justice O’Connor - used these words - .

I think we are all agreed that when an officer is taken over’ by the Commonwealth, he should not be placed in an unfair position or lose any rights by being taken over, because it is no fault of his that the continuity of his service has been broken.

Then we have no less an authority than Mr. Isaacs - now Mr. Justice Isaacs - saying

I think it is important to put in the word “ accruing.” It is a principle we have adopted in Victoria. When gigantic establishments like the Post Office and Customs are taken over, there must be some hundreds and thousands of officers taken over, some of whom have rights now existing, and others who have rights accruing. In Victoria, when we have passed new Public Service Acts, we have been very careful not to take away from a man any interest he may have acquired when he joined the Service, irrespective of whether those interests have ripened into actual rights or remain in an inchoate state. When we transfer men to the Commonwealth - and this is the point I wish to emphasize - it behoves us to do them no injury. We ought to preserve to them not only their existing, but their accruing rights.

Another member of the Convention, Mr. Gordon - now Mr. Justice Gordon - referring to the public officers, said, ‘ ‘ Let all their rights be preserved.” He went on to say -

It is our duty to see that the civil servants do not suffer through the establishment of Federation.

These quotations from the proceedings of the Federal Convention prepare us for a declaration made in this House by a re-* presentative of the Government of the day, Sir William Lyne, in moving the second reading of the Bill. According to Hansard for 1901-2, page 1084, he made, on behalf of the Parliament of the Commonwealth, a promise that the promissory notes - if I may so express the situation - issued by the Federal Convention would be redeemed by this Parliament. He said -

I wish to emphasize the point that under clauses 51 and 52 of this Bill, and under section 84 of the Commonwealth Constitution Act, there is a provision to make it quite certain that no trouble shall arise with regard to transferred officers, and that all the rights that accrue to those officers who are taken over from the various States will be respected.

Mr MACKAY:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · NAT; UAP from 1931

– Is not this provision practically a repetition of the words of the Constitution? Is there anything gained by putting the provision in this Bill? The Commonwealth Act requires us to do everything that this clause says, and no further enactment is required.

Sir William Lyne, however, desired to emphasize the provision, and he said -

It will show to the public servants that we are not unmindful of their rights, and of the way we are directed by the Commonwealth Act to deal with them.

That pledge made in this Chamber imposes an obligation on this Parliament to-day. I do not know what public servants in other States were promised when the public were invited to vote “ Yes “ for Federation, but

I do know that in South Australia from the public platform, as well as in the press, State servants who were likely to be taken over by the Federation were distinctly promised that their existing position would be improved in the Federal Service. On 18th May, 1899, Messrs. C. C. Kingston, then Premier, and Holder, then Treasurer, of South Australia, addressed a meeting convened by the South Australian Public Service Association for the purpose of giving civil servants an opportunity of hearing their views on the Commonwealth Bill. They said that public servants would lose nothing by Federation; the rights of transferred officers were amply preserved under the Constitution. On the contrary, said Messrs. Kingston and Holder, they thought the probabilities were that the public servants would gain by the transfer. Public servants, they declared, had everything to hope for, and nothing to fear from Federation. But the experience of a large body of men and women in South Australia is that that promise has not been fulfilled, and the South Australian Post and Telegraph Association, which comprises a large body of officers, set out their claims as follows : - “(1)That the Federal Convention intended that no transferred officer should be worse off under Federal control than he was under State control, and enactedsection 84 to insure that intention being carried into effect. (2) That the first Federal Parliament felt bound by section 84 to respect the rights of transferred officers, hence section 60, Commonwealth Public Service Act. (See Sir William Lyne’s speech in moving second reading - Federal Hansard, Session 1901-2, page 1084 ; also see Quick and Garran’s Commentaries on Constitution, page 818, and pages 656-661.). (3) The High Court in Cousens v. the Commonwealth ruled that officers did take over with them rights - such as the right to a certain salary - in their transfer from the State, but that the Federal Parliament was a competent authority to vary or abolish such rights. (4) That the Public Service Commissioner, finding himself clothed with all the powers of Parliament in respect of Service matters, exercised the power claimed for the Parliament by the High Court in the Cousens case, without regard to the moral obligations imposed on the Commonwealth by the tacit agreement between the Convention and the Service (vide section 84), and in disregard of the direction given him in section 60, Commonwealth Public Service Act, by the First Federal Parliament. (5) That this action of the Commissioner, under the circumstances, amounted to an abuse of power, and, though his action by virtue of the powers conferred upon him by the Public Service Act has the force of law, it was an unjust and oppressive action, and a distinct repudiation of the Commonwealth’s obligations towards its servants. (6) That the law, apart from the Commissioner’s action, did not forbid, but clearly contemplated, the continuance, until their natural expiration, of the accrued and accruing rights of transferred officers. (7) That, in view of the Attorney-General’s statement that the Commissioner would not have been acting unconstitutionally had he, in his classification, recognised and provided for the accrued and accruing rights of transferred officers, the matters in dispute should, by direction of Parliament, be settled by arbitration on the grounds of equity without involving the officers in the heavy costs of a suit before the High Court or the Arbitration Court.”

The Federal Attorney-General, in a letter dated 26th February, 1911, addressed to the South Australian Post and Telegraph Association, said -

In making the first classification of the Clerical Division, I know of nothing in the Public Service Act which prevents the Commissioner from recommending that any officer be placed in any class or subdivision which he thinks appropriate - whether that involves an increase or a diminution in the salary and emoluments previously received by the officer.

That clearly shows that, in the opinion of the Attorney-General, there was nothing to prevent the Public Service Commissioner from recognising the claims of his officers, and the promise contained in the Constitution, which promise was also made on behalf of the Government of the day by Sir William Lyne. The following is a copy of a letter sent to the Postmaster-General, Melbourne, on behalf of the South Australian Post and Telegraph Association, and as it contains their case in a very short compass, I wish to submit it to the House.

Copy of letter to Postmaster-General, Melbourne, dated Adelaide, 7th December, 1911, from South Australian Post and Telegraph Association.

Sir,

We have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 24th ult., and beg to thank you for same, and for minutes of deputation.

The managing committee of this association desires us to express its great regret that you are unable to meet the wishes of the South Australian officers with regard to the requests placed before the Prime Minister in a memorandum of the 14th October. The committee had hoped that the principles involved in the “ accrued and accruing rights” questions, and also in the claims of the South Australian postmistresses to be placed on the same footing with postmistresses occupying similar offices in New South Wales and Tasmania, would have appealed to the sympathies of your Government. Indeed, the association is most reluctant to believe that the present Government, by adopting a negative attitude in regard to the flagrant injustices inflicted upon South Australian transferred officers by the Commissioner at the time of classification, indorses the repudiation of the moral obligation imposed upon the Commonwealth by clause 84 of the Constitution, and recognised by the Federal Parliament in clause 60 of the Commonwealth Public Service Act. Nor does it seem possible that the Commissioner’s demand that the postmistresses shall accept a degradation in status as a condition precedent to receiving a small increase of salary, can have the approval of a Labour Ministry. To indicate how keenly the postmistresses feel the slight cast upon them by the Commissioner, I beg to quote the text of a letter from a postmistress declining the Commissioner’s offer - “ In reply to your letter received on the 22nd instant, I note your acknowledgment that an increase to my salary is possible, but I must respectfully decline the alteration of my designation and subsequent degradation from the Clerical to the General Division. I have done nothing to deserve such indignity, and I feel I should be wanting in self-respect if I accepted it.”

Most of the postmistresses have indicated their intention not to accept the increased salary with such a condition, and my committee respectfully but strongly urges that increases should be given and their present designations retained.

From inquiries made, we gather that it is doubtful whether the accrued and accruing rights questions come within the scope of the Public Service Arbitration Bill now before the Federal Parliament. If the Court has jurisdiction on these matters, however, they appear to be prejudged by the provision that awards may be disallowed by Parliament if they conflict with the Commonwealth law or regulations.

With regard to the legal position stated to us by the Honorable the Attorney-General, Mr. Hughes was good enough to advance the opinion in a letter of 22nd February, that, had the Commissioner granted the claims of transferred officers in his classification, he would not have acted contrary to law. It is clear to us, therefore, that it was an act of the Commissioner - as a deputy of Parliament - which raised the legal difficulties spoken of by the Honorable the Attorney-General, and not any express act or intention of the Legislature.

Our committee would be glad to know if your letter of the , 14th November must be regarded as final reply of the Government to the association’s requests, contained in memorandum of the 14th October, to the Prime Minister. Also whether it will be competent to submit the questions of “accrued and accruing rights” to the Arbitration Court under the proposed Act, and which of the matters mentioned by us are covered by the proposed, amendments to the Public Service Act, vide paragraph 4 in your letter.

The only reply to that letter was to the effect that the Postmaster-General thought these accrued and accruing rights of transferred officers could be dealt with by . the Arbitration Court, but the Court itself would decide what matters were within its jurisdiction. Those matters to which I am referring are not new to the present Postmaster- General, or his predecessor. The grievances have been felt for a considerable time, and are causing discontent, more or less, throughout the Department, which has given, and is prepared to give in the future, loyal service to the public. So impressed was the predecessor of the present PostmasterGeneral with the facts brought before him that he made a distinct promise to this Association in Adelaide. The following are extracts taken from an official report of a deputation to the then Postmaster-General, the present Minister of External Affairs, on the 15th December, 1910 -

Mr. Macdonald said that when the Constitution was being prepared the position of the transferred officers was considered to be an important one in the opinion of the Convention. . . . Mr. Trenwith had said that unless the rights of the transferred officers were protected, a large number of the community might be induced to vote against Federation in defence of their own rights and their living, and in defence of justice. That was practically the keynote of the matter in connexion with the rights of transferred officers.

The Postmaster-General said that if that was the point, they would see that, in view of all that had taken place in the past, it was rather a difficult thing for the Government to say that it would pay these emoluments, but he would promise that if the officers would suggest a friendly suit to meet the case, the Government would do all it could to meet them.

Mr. Lucy said that Mr. Glynn, M.P.,had suggested such a course, but the Government said “no.” Mr. Glynn said he had had the utmost difficulty in getting any information whatever. All at once the position changed. The Cousens case came before the High Court, and Mr. Glynn advised them not to go on with a case in the face of the Cousens case, as the expenses would be heavy if they lost.

The Postmaster-General said he did not want anything of that kind, or to put them to any expense.

Mr. Macdonald said that before any decision was arrived at as to the suit, he would like to know whether it would be a question of equity or law.

Mr. Lucy. ; Arbitration or law?

The Postmaster-General said he would like them to have some one who would be mutually agreed upon as arbitrator. If they agreed to a Judge, they would endeavour to get one. There should be no difficulty in getting an. arbitrator in the matter.

Mr. Macdonald said they would have to submit the proposal to the Association, but he thought the wisdom - of the suggestion would commend itself, to the officers. He thanked the Minister for the proposal. Would the matter of increased payment (really the matter of increments) also be submitted to arbitration?

The Postmaster-General. - Yes. That ‘could be considered..

Mr Roberts:

asked as to legal expenses, and the right of officers to be present to state their case and to give evidence.

The Postmaster-General said, if possible, he would like to have no lawyers in the case, and to decide the matter on equity. They wanted to see justice done, and the men could, of course, get away. He presumed it was quite clear that this arbitration referred only to transferred officers.

At a later stage the Postmaster-General said - . . . He was very pleased to meet the representatives, and to have a talk with them. He could only say that, so far as the first matter was concerned (that of the postmasters’ emoluments), they could have this friendly suit. Mr. Batchelor, M.P-, would be acting for him for a. fortnight, during which he (Mr. Thomas) would be away, and they could make arrangements with him as far as arbitration was concerned. They could rely on him to deal with the matter.

Mr. Lucy. That will refer to three things emoluments, increments, and age of retirement.

The Postmaster-General replied that he had not said anything about the last, but it could be inserted.

Mr. Virgo asked whether the arbitration referred to all State rights?

The Postmaster-General said that what he had stated was that it referred to those who had these emoluments prior to Federation, and had had them taken away.

Mr. Hiscock said the question of their right to remain in the service beyond the age of 65 was a State right.

The Postmaster-General said that was not raised at the time. Apparently, there was no age limit at the time of Federation.

Mr. Hiscock said there was a clause in the Act which permitted an officer to remain indefinitely if competent.

The Postmaster-General said that after Federation the State had made the retiring age 70. But he had no objection to submitting the point to arbitration.

The following is an extract from the report of the deputation to the then PostmasterGeneral at Adelaide, on the 4th January, 1911 -

Mr. Lucy asked the Minister whether he would Acquiesce in the nomination of Mr. Commissioner Russell as arbitrator in connexion with the questions to be submitted to arbitration, as agreed upon at the deputation of 15th December, or whether he would prefer Mr. Justice Higgins?

The Minister said he had seen Mr. Batchelor (Minister for External Affairs), who had been dealing with the matter in his absence. He felt it would be a little inadvisable to have Mr. Russell, and he preferred, and felt sure the Government would prefer, the nomination of Mr. Justice Higgins.

On the 14th January, 191 1, the following telegram was sent to Mr. E. R. Lucy, President of the South Australian Post and Telegraph Association -

I am desired by Postmaster-General to inform you Government agreeable to friendly suit in High Court to decide questions of legal rights in dispute. Every effort be made to minimize costs. Government favours settlement of other than legal questions by arbitration. Details to be arranged by Attorney-General. (Sig.) Oxenham,

Acting Secretary,

Postmaster-General’s ‘Department.

Then we come to another stage of these negotiations as shown in the following extract from the report of a deputation from the South Australian Post and Telegraph Association which waited on the then PostmasterGeneral in Melbourne on the 17th February, 19 11 -

Mr. Hiscock …. Now, you offered us arbitration on three points when you were in Adelaide - on the postmasters’ emoluments question, on the increment question, and on the question of age retirement. Since you returned to Melbourne, we have had a telegram from you modifying that to some extent. Can you now let us see where we stand with reference to those points? Because, if the questions are to be submitted to arbitration, we need not deal with them now.

Mr Thomas:

– On those matters, I would like you to see the Attorney-General. As far as I am concerned, and as far as the Government is concerned, we are prepared to submit every question it is possible to arbitration. If, however, there are any questions which cannot constitutionally be submitted to arbitration, then we are willing to have a friendly suit; but, in regard to every question which can be submitted to arbitration, we are willing to submit it. On these matters I would be very glad for you to see thS Attorney-General, and deal with him. Everything we can legally and constitutionally submit to arbitration will be submitted. In regard to the other questions, we cannot submit them to arbitration, as it is not in our power to do so.

Mr McDONALD:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– Your statement in the telegram does not amount to any modification of your previous unconditional offer, because you remember you said : “ Keep the lawyers out of it. We only want justice.”

Mr Thomas:

– I cannot say what the law is

Dr is not. My wish and the wish of the Government is to have the whole thing settled; all, if possible, by arbitration. Where there are constitutional questions which cannot be settled by arbitration, it is impossible for us to say what will be done. But in regard to any point which can possibly be referred to arbitration, the Government are quite prepared, willing and anxious to have it referred. We cannot say anything about those questions which cannot be referred to arbitration. While you are here, you must see the Attorney-General on these points, and you can deal with him. As far as the Government is concerned, we are only too anxious, but we cannot go behind the law and the Constitution. As far as I am personally concerned, I am one of those who are against the lawyers every time ; but, at the same time, we have” a Constitution, and I am not in a position to say that we can go behind the Constitution.

This brings us to an interview between the Association and the Federal AttorneyGeneral which took place in Melbourne on the 18th February, 1911. The following is an extract from the report of what then took place -

Mr. Hiscock stated the position in which South Australian officers stood with regard to postmasters’ emoluments, increments under State law, and the right of officers to remain in the Service till incapacitated, irrespective of age.

Mr. Macdonald supported and claimed that, though State Acts had been superseded by Federal legislation and the Commissioner’s classification, the Commonwealth Public Service Act of 1902, section 60, kept alive certain rights enjoyed by transferred officers under State control. Section 60 was practically a repetition of section 34 of the Constitution, and he quoted the words of Sir William Lyne when moving the second reading of the Public Service Bill in the House of Representatives. Sir William Lyne had said : “ I wish to emphasize the point that, under clauses 51 and 52 of this Bill (clause 60 of the Act), and under section 84 of the Constitution, there is a provision to make it absolutely certain that no trouble shall arise with regard to transferred officers, and that all rights that accrue to those officers who are taken over from the State will be respected.”

The Attorney-General, in the course of his reply, indicated that the three points mentioned by the delegates - “ emoluments, increments, and Retiring age” - could not be submitted to arbitration, but must be decided by the Courts. He quoted the case of Cousens v. The Commonwealth, “ in which the Court lays down the position very clearly, and decides that section 84 of the Constitution, preserving accruing and accrued rights, is subject to Commonwealth, legislation, and it is not a right that is immutable, but that it is subject to legislation by a competent body.” Opinions by various AttorneysGeneral supporting this view were quoted by the Attorney-General, all of which, he said, went to show that the points mentioned could not constitutionally be submitted to arbitration.

Mr McDONALD:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– -The Federal Convention, in dealing with the question of the rights of transferred officers, was faced . with the possibility that, if the transferred officers were left open to possibly unjust treatment by their new employer, they would vote against Federation. Those very words were used by one member of the Convention. The various members of the Convention referred to what had been done in a particular case in Victoria, and another case mentioned in India, when the servants of one company or one service went over with the business to another service. In each of these cases it was stated that the rights of the officers were so preserved that they could not suffer loss ; and clause 84 of the Constitution was designed by the Convention for their protection. I take that to be the whole tenor of the debate. It was designed to prevent the officers who were to be transferred being unjustly treated or losing anything under their new employer. That is the way we viewed it, and that is the way we accepted Federation.

The Attorney-General. - I quite agree with you, butwould like to point out the difference between a private employé who has a contract with an employer and a public officer who is working under a Statute, both being transferred, is that the one has a contract which is not at all subject to anything except the terms ofthat contract and its interpretation in a Court of law, while the other is working under a Statute which can be annulled., modified, or amended by a competent authority. When they are handed over or transferred to another public body either to a State or to the Commonwealth, that qualification upon their rights continues, and that other body, that other Legislature, whatever it may be, has the right to take away every privilege and every right which he possessed. That does not happen at all in the case of a person who has a private contract. If. you have a private contract with me that I must pay you, say, £10 a week for life, it does not matter how much the thing is transferred. It is like the case of an apprentice transferred by one employer to another - if the transfer is properly done, then all the apprentice’s rights continue to the transfer ree, and the new employer has upon him all the burden that the original employer had. The transfer does not alter it, nor can he alter it without consent. I only want to point out to you that the analogy of a private employer is quite different from that of the State employer. The South Australian Legislature could, if it liked, of course, simply say. that all its employes should have£600 a year, or on the other hand only£50 a year, and there would be an end of it so far as the law is concerned, but not of course so far as other things are concerned.

Mr McDONALD:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– Had that view of the case been put before the Service prior to Federation there is no doubt whatever that it would very seriously have affected its vote with regard to it. That decision practically makes clause 84 of the Constitution so much waste paper so far as we are concerned.

The Attorney-General. - That is perfectly right. The only point is that the interpreter of the Constitution is the Court. I am only giving you what the Court says, and its reading of what is declared to be the law. As to whether the thing is right or wrong is a matter upon which we can all have our opinions:

The South Australian Post and Telegraph Association has been legally advised that it is extremely unlikely that the Court would make an award retrospective to the date of their claim. Unless the award dated back to the time of the classification, in 1904, it would be absolutely useless to the South Australian officers. This supports their contention that the Arbitration Court cannot satisfactorily deal with the matter in dispute. I think I have shown: - 1. That it was the intention of the framers of the Constitution to provide that officers transferred to the Commonwealth should not be reduced in status or in salary. That is clearly shown by the debates in the Federal Convention, and by the provision in the Constitution. 2. That the first Federal Parliament, in the Public Service Bill, undertook to preserve all rights of public servants, it being stated on behalf of the Government of the day that provisions were included in the measure to make it quite certain that no trouble could arise with regard to transferred officers. 3. That the classification of the Public Service Commissioner not only did not preserve existing and accruing rights, but actually reduced officers in status and salary, and in respect to the age of retirement. 4- That, recognising the special claims of officers of the South Australian Post and Telegraph Association, a promise was given on behalf of the present Government, to refer their claims to an arbitrator - not the Arbitration Court. 5. That such promise cannot be redeemed by inviting the officers to take their case to the Arbitration Court, as the Court would not be likely to make an award retrospective to the date of their claims. If we are to have an efficient Public Service, we must remove all suspicion of grievance or cause for discontent. Officers in South Australia feel deeply that a grave injustice has been done- to them. They are appealing to their employer, the Commonwealth Government, representing the people of Australia, to consider their claims, and give them a fair and square deal. The people of this country were invited a few days ago, in eloquent phrases by a Minister of the Crown, to liken Australia to “ the great Temple of Liberty, the corner-stone of whose strongest arch is universal justice, and the Bill of Rights and our matchless Constitution are its solid foundation.” I accept that invitation, and to-day, on behalf of a deserving body of men and women, who are giving loyal service to the Commonwealth, I appeal to the Government and to this Parliament for that measure of justice which our “ matchless Constitution,” in the words of the Minister, decrees shall be given to these public servants. These men and women, loyal servants of the public as they are, ask for no favour or concession, but they do appeal to this Parliament and to the Government for a fair hearing of their claims, confident that those claims are reasonable, and that justice will eventually be done to them. Although I have not had the opportunity of moving the motion which I had upon the business-paper, and of obtaining from all sections of the House that support which I am sure would have been forthcoming to such a reasonable request, I do sincerely hope that the Postmaster-General will give this matter all the consideration that he possibly can, that he will realize the difficulties which confront the officers in approaching the Conciliation and Arbitration Court, and that he will see if it is not possible for this -country to do bare justice to its servants. We do not want to reduce either the status or the salaries of the men and women who are giving such good service to the Commonwealth. We wish, rather, to remove all feelings of discontent from the ranks of the post and telegraph officials, because we recognise that they are rendering valuable service to the public. We want that service to be not only a loyal but an enthusiastic one, and the only way in which we can secure that object is to make these transferred officers feel that, when they left the State Service, they entered one which is prepared to pay them well, to deal justly by them, and to see that the conditions which they enjoyed under the State are fully preserved under the Commonwealth.

Mr GLYNN:
Angas

.- I must compliment the honorable member for Boothby upon the clear and convincing case which he has made out for Ministerial consideration of the claims of transferred officers. As far as my memory serves me, I can bear out his statement that the position of these officers is a matter upon which opinions have been given by AttorneysGeneral upon four or five different occasions. Their opinions related, not merely to the South Australian transferred officers, but also to the transferred officers of Victoria, and of some of the other States. In all cases, I think, the opinions stated that it was competent for this Parliament tointerfere with the salaries or privileges of such officers, which were the equivalent of payments, by legislative enactment. I think that was the advice which was given by ex-Senator Drake when he was AttorneyGeneral, and also by Sir Josiah Symon. If I remember rightly, Mr. Isaacs also expressed the opinion that certain claims made by transferred officers were capable of alteration by this Parliament. But the point is that, though the matters at issue are comparatively small in regard to some of the States, they amount to a very substantial sum in the case of the South Australiantransferred officers- As has been mentioned by the honorable member for Boothby, under the classification scheme which was adopted by the Public Service Commissioner, and which became effective onthe ist June, 1904, the South Australianpostal and telegraph officers suffered anincidental reduction of their salaries ranging from £5 to £150 per annum. I do not say that the Public Service Commissioner- was not obliged by the terms of the Commonwealth Public Service Act of 1901 to classify them in such a way that there would be an incidental reduction of their salaries. There may be two opinions upon that point I understand that the present Attorney-General has ventured the opinion that the classification might have been so made that the claims of the transferred officers could have been recognised. But, whether that be so or not, it is competent for this Parliament to so amend our Public Service Act - without referring this matter to the High Court - as to give to those officers who thought that their position would be untouched! by Federation, the salaries which they consider to be their “ accrued “ and “ accruing “ rights, as well as the other privileges which they would have enjoyed if Federation had not been consummated. The South Australian officers say that there are four privileges or rights which they enjoyed under the Public Service Act of that State which have been interfered with by Federation. The first is their right to annual increments of salaries, which would have placed them in a much better position financially than they occupy at the present time. The second is their right to extended furlough. The third has reference to the question of retirement. Under the South Australian Public Service Act, they were entitled to remain in the Service as long as they were capable of discharging their duties. There was no provision in that Act for their retirement upon reaching the age of sixtyfive years. They were also entitled as part of their salaries to an allowance in connexion with the sale of stamps and for business done by them in connexion with the Savings Banks. When all these amounts are totted up it. will be found that, through the classification scheme which was framed by the Public Service Commissioner, and adopted by this Parliament, there has been a very substantial reduction in the salaries and privileges which certain of these transferred officers enjoyed. When this matter was mentioned about 1903, I remember that Sir George Turner estimated that, in the case of South Australia, about ,£4,000 a year would have covered the whole amount which was then involved. It does seem to rr.e that at that time Parliament would have agreed to any amendment of our Public Service Act which would have made special, provision for these transferred officers. They did understand that the provision in the Constitution relating to their accrued and accruing rights would have preserved to them, not merely their pensions, but their annual increases as established by the South Australian Public Service Act of 1874. That Act has been respected by the State- I do not think there has been more than one reduction under it since it was passed. In one year, I believe, there was a percentage reduction made in the salaries of the public servants of South Australia, because it was a time of very great financial depression. It is rather significant that the officers whose salaries were made up of annual salaries and allowances were affected under the classification of the Public Service Commissioner, not only by percentage reductions in their salaries, but also in their allowances. They contend that the allowances which have been cut. off by the Commonwealth Public Service Act of 1901 were part of their regular salaries, and ought, consequently, to have been preserved to them as an accruing right. But apart altogether from the legal aspect of the matter, I ask honorable members to recollect that the public servants of South Australia were told, prior to Federation, that if they were transferred to the Commonwealth, their existing and accruing rights would be respected. What they had in mind was, not merely pension rights, which have been respected, but certain statutory increments of salary. There is no doubt that an Act of Parliament could have altered their position prior to Federation. Hence the High Court decided, in the case of Bond v. The Commonwealth, and, later, in the case of Cousens v. The Commonwealth, thereby indorsing the opinions of Attorneys-General, that whatever a State Act could have done in the way of altering salaries, it was competent for a Commonwealth Act to do, the Commonwealth being the sovereign body to which the State powers in the matter have been transferred. But the question we have to consider is whether it is politic to stand strictly by the legal position. Did not these public servants think that their salaries would be as good, and their increases as regular, after Federation as they were under State control? They were led to think that, not only by what was said in the Convention, but also by what was said by the honorable member for Hume when he introduced the Public Service Bill, and by the fact that section 60 of the Public Service Act practically repeats the words of the Constitution preserving their accrued and accruing rights. The annual outlay involved in meeting their claims would be comparatively small, and would diminish as the officers concerned leave the Service or die. The proper course would be to bring in an amending Bill permitting the Public Service Commissioner to pay, in addition to the ordinary salaries fixed according to the classification, such an amount as would keep South Australian officers in the position which they would have occupied had the States not federated. I think that is what the suggestion of the honorable member for Boothby amounts to. I do not think that the Arbitration Court could, under the Act of last year, decide the question of accruing rights. You might refer to a tribunal the question whether, in view of all the circumstances, provision should be made for the case of these transferred officers, but it is competent for Parliament to. deal with the matter without such a reference. You cannot refer to the Arbitra- tion Court, or to any other tribunal except the High Court, the question whether, under the Constitution, these officers are entitled, as accrued or accruing rights, to the increments of salary, furlough, allowances, &c, of which they have been deprived by the classification. That is a pure matter of law, which can only be determined by the High Court, and that tribunal has practically decided already that this Parliament has the power to alter the status of officers transferred from the service of the States to that of the Commonwealth. But, considering the way in which the words “ accrued and accruing, rights “ would3 be interpreted by the man in the street, would it be proper to send the question to the High Court? The proper course is to refer it to a Committee, or to some other body on which proper representation would be given to the officers concerned, or, better still, to deal with it in an amending Bill. I think that if the facts were thus laid before Parliament with the clearness arid convincing logic that the honorable member for Boothby has applied to-day, honorable members would not hesitate to make thesmall provision that would be necessary to realize the just expectation of these officers. As. for arbitration proceedings, unless the Government helps the officers to put their case clear of technicalities, they may be defeated. I am doubtful whether they constitute a body that can be an organization within the meaning of the Act.’

Mr FRAZER:
ALP

-That ‘ will not affect the merits of their case.

Mr GLYNN:

– Then the Minister should waive all objections that may be taken to the technical procedure adopted to present the case, which, I think, is one of the demands made by the officers’ in their letter to the Attorney-General read this afternoon. If the case is to go before the Arbitration Court, or any other body, I suggest that it should be decided, not on a question of law, but on its pure merits, and that no technical objection ‘ should be raised to its adequate presentation.

Mr ARCHIBALD:
Hindmarsh

– The question that has been brought under the notice of honorable members affects the honour of this Parliament, and is of great concern to many officers in South Australia. Although the present PostmasterGeneral must meet the case submitted by the honorable member for Boothby, the difficulty is a legacy which was left to this Government by its predecessors, and without wishing to reflect on earlier Parliaments, I say that it is to be regretted that a matter of so much importance was not . settled long ago. I hope that the debate and the inquiry by the Postmaster-General will finally dispose of it. A large body of public servants ought not to be permitted to feel that, although the law is against them, they have a good case in equity. I shall not go over the ground traversed by previous speakers, but shall mention one or two points that have occurred to me. Prior to Federation, the public servants of the States were told that their transference to the Commonwealth Service would not destroy the rights which they enjoyed under State control. In South Australia the principle has been laid down that, whenever a change of conditions is made by the passing of an Act, the status and salaries of existing officers shall be left unimpaired, any alteration affecting only those who were appointed afterwards to the Civil Service. That is a principle which has been recognised by Governments all over the Commonwealth, and I believe outside of Australia, too. In the Convention there was a great amount of tall talk indulged in by those who were advocating the Federation of the Colonies. Very often they must have had their tongues in their cheeks when they were addressing the public, knowing, full, well that a good deal of what they were saying was buncombe, and would not be realized. I donot know whether that was the impression with regard to the rights of civil servants, but. it seems to me .that deception, was. practised in that respect. The Constitution, as submitted to the people, was one which had been drawn up by lawyers. There was a feeling amongst the people of Australia- unwisely, I think - that it was well that lawyers should have the settling of a matter of such great importance, as laymen, although all very well in their way, knew nothing about such questions. What are the facts of the case? The lawyers knew full well when they indulged in their tall talk that a measure could be passed by the Commonwealth Parliament which would break all the promises made to civil servants, and which, while annulling their rights in equity, would still be sound in law. In the face of that it does not seem to me remarkable that, although leading men had made promises to civil servants that their rights should be protected, they passed a measure in this House “knowing that those rights were being taken away. I believe it is a matter of law that as a State could vary its contracts or the salaries of its employes,- so the Commonwealth inherited all the rights which the States possessed in that respect. I submit that the gentlemen who advocated the adoption of the Constitution knew all that. Unfortunately for the postal employes of South Australia, who, of course, had had no legal training, they accepted the statements of these men, believing them to have been made in good faith, and they have fallen in. In submitting the measure which empowered the Public Service Commissioner to fix the status and the salaries of public servants, including the employe’s of the Postmaster-General, what seems to me not at all a fair or just thing was done. A clause could have been introduced directing the Commissioner to recognise the moral claims of these men, and to see that justice was done to them. What was put in the Bill? Nothing at all. We have occasionally heard a quotation from a speech by Sir William Lyne, that the men were entitled to all their rights, to this, that, and the other; but that could not have been the opinion of the AttorneyGeneral who sat by him, for he must have known that his colleague in charge of the Bill was allowing the House to draw an inference which would not be borne out. Without passing any reflection, I hold that in consequence of the error of judgment committed by previous Parliaments of the Commonwealth, this grievance of postal employes in South Australia should be finalized. It appears to me that for some reason or other there has been an error of judgment or a general muddle all round. It should be remembered that these men are not lawyers. They are very much in the position of the man in the street, who knows absolutely nothing about law, and who is bound to take in good faith statements made to him by those who occupy responsible positions, and ought to know the law, and how it affects the equity of a- case of this description. Therefore, it is of no use for the Postmaster-General to tell me that his employes can appeal to the High Court, because that Court has already ruled that their claim is untenable. If they appeal to the Arbitration Court, what is likely to be the position? I take it that if they did appeal the Arbitration Court would rule that it had no jurisdiction over matters which arose a considerable time prior to its being clothed with power to deal with appeals from public servants. I am of that opinion, and have hesitated over and over again to advise postal employes in South Australia to place any faith in the jurisdiction of that Court. Now, what course can be taken to finalize this grievance? The honorable member for Angas has stated that it is possible for Parliament to pass an Act to grant the justice to which these rr.en are, in my opinion, entitled. What I would urge the Government to do, and what I believe would bring about finality, would be to submit the equity of the case between the Crown and its employes to the decision °of an arbitrator who might be a Judge, or other person of ability in the Commonwealth. We’ want the matter dealt with in equity, and not in law, because we have had plenty of law already. In my youth, in the .Old Country I heard of the fusion of law and equity. There is a fusion of law and equity here, but not so far as these postal employes are concerned. They can get any amount of law which does them an injustice all day long, year in and year out. If the Government will agree to refer the question in equity to an arbitrator of the kind I have suggested it would be competent for the Parliament to adopt his recommendation. I admit that this grievance is well known to the representatives of South Australia, but its merits or demerits are not so well known to other members of this House. It would take the latter a considerable time to make themselves familiar with the merits of the case. I think it would be better settled as- I have suggested. I do not know how the-

Government view my suggestion. They may take up this attitude. “ As our predecessors were not disposed to act when the matter was ripe, and as the postal employes have evidently slept over their rights for a considerable time, we are not going to intervene.” Undoubtedly some Governments would be disposed to take that line of action, but I do not know whether it will be taken by the present Government. It would be no reflection upon their dignity to accept the decision of an independent arbitrator, and if the arbitration should go against the postal employes in equity, they would know that they had had a fair inquiry. They would know that the matter had been fairly gone into, and if the proceedings had not worked out as they thought they would, they would have to put up with the situation. In a case of this kind, the supporters of a Government do not care to oppose them when they have taken up a certain line of action, and there are many reasons why such a question cannot be settled on the best principles in an assembly of this kind. The facts show that this is a trouble which the Minister has inherited. A decision has been given, which I hope will be reversed, and an effort made to finally settle the matter. A few days ago I called the attention of the Postmaster-General to this difficulty, which I have had under my attention for some time, and I am very anxious that it should be settled. Unless it is, it will be raised again in the next Parliament, and is bound to be canvassed until the men feel that their grievance has been referred to some equitable tribunal, and that they have had :i fair deal. Australians labouring under what they believe to be an injustice are not likely to remain quiet. I think that these officers will continue to do their duty to the Commonwealth as they have always done. I take no notice of the threats that have been made; but as long as they have a grievance - and a grievance they have - they will find that there are in this Parliament men who are prepared to ventilate it. If the Government desire a healthy agitation of this kind to cease, the best thing they can do is to devise a means of finalizing it so that we shall be free to devote our attention to the grievances of other sections of the community. We do not want to have this vexatious question constantly before us. I hope that the Minister will disregard the fact that this is a trouble which he has inherited, and that he will deal with it on its merits. I certainly trust that the Ministry will not decide to give us two or three editions of law. We know all about the law at the present time. We know that it seldom helps any one in equity. The law Courts , may afford a very ready means of spending money; but these employes of the Commonwealth have no money to waste on the lawyers, and they have too much wit, I trust, to do so. Money spent by them on the lawyers might just as well, for all practical purposes, be thrown into the sea. I ask the Minister to deal with this grievance from the stand-point of equity, and to be prepared to waive his legal right. The honorable member for Angas said that to grant what was desired would involve an additional expenditure of about ^4,000 per annum; but I am confident that the Commonwealth Government is not so poor as to think it necessary to retain ^4,000, or even £8,ooo, year after year if there is any section of the Service honestly entitled to receive it. In the long run, we shall be none the poorer if we deal with this trouble on just and equitable lines.

Mr KELLY:

– The electors who sent my honorable friend here are humorists,

I think. The fact remains that we do grant to newspapers special consideration under the Post and Telegraph Act, on the ground, which is generally urged, that they aid in public education. There is no principle of new Protection involved. We do not say, “ If we give you these postal facilities you shall render accurate service to the public.” Here we have a newspaper which is just about to start, and I think it is a fair thing to direct attention to one matter in relation to it. In this circular we have emphasized in the reddest of red ink, the following statement : -

The independent cable service is admitted to be the most complete and up-to-date in Australia, and the fact that we have secured the sole right to this excellent service should recommend the Standard to the reading public of Queensland.

Mr West:

– The honorable member is giving the newspaper a great advertisement. Mr. KELLY. - Here is the first Australian daily Labour newspaper getting what the honorable member for East Sydney calls “a great advertisement,” when I am proving it to be a public liar 1 This circular says -

The policy of the Standard is clearly defined, being consistent with the advocacy of the objective of the Queensland Labour party, as set out in the official programme and adopted by the Labour Daily Newspaper Company Limited in their articles of association. ‘

The proprietor of any newspaper in the Commonwealth shall be entitled to become a subscriber to the association for the cable service on payment of the annual rate applicable under Schedule A.

In answer to my question concerning the advertisement of the Daily Standard, the Minister stated, “ I am not aware.” Apparently, projected Labour newspapers only send their advertisements to Liberal members of Parliament. My next question was whether the newspaper had secured the sole right to this service. The Minister’s answer was -

I have no knowledge of any arrangement to this effect.

In answer to my fifth and sixth questions, the Minister stated that -

Any such arrangement would be contrary to the conditions agreed upon with the Government. I shall make immediate inquiries from the association to ascertain the facts of the case. In the event of any monopoly having been granted to a particular* newspaper the payment of the subsidy will be stopped.

Mr Roberts:

– Is that correct?

Mr KELLY:

– I do not know, but that is as far as we have got, and we shall not quarrel on that point. It goes on - and the fact -

The “ fact,” mind you- that we have secured the sole right -

Not the right, but “ the sole right “ - to this excellent service should recommend The Standard to the reading public of Queensland.

Mr Roberts:

– It is quite correct- it means that this will be the sole daily paper in Queensland using this service.

Mr KELLY:

– The circular says that this paper has secured the” sole right”; and even the Honorary Minister, in his most honest moments, could not rise to heights of mendacity equal to this. I suggest that it is “a little bit over the odds “ when Ministers try to tell us that the brains and intelligence of their party - the persons they select to preach the gospel to the public in black and white; not in red ink - do not know the difference between the “ sole right “ to a thing, and being the only user of a thing. It may be possible that this newspaper is the only user of the service, but the statement that it has the “ sole right “ is untrue and unworthy, and augurs badly for the future decent conduct of the first Labour daily newspaper in the Commonwealth. I do not wish to detain honorable members any further; the time I have taken is due to the refusal of my friends opposite to appreciate the plain English of this red-type advertisement. I implore honorable members who take an interest in Labour journalism - I implore the sophists opposite, including the Honorary Minister - to advise their friends in Brisbane that it is bad business - I do not ask them to advise on commercial morality - to issue false advertisements as to the nature of a publication to be issued. I hope that this circular will be immediately withdrawn, and that the first issue of this newspaper will explain to those persons who have been induced to subscribe by a false advertisement that it was not intended to convey anything that was not the truth, but the fact was that those who issued the circular did not know the difference between having the “ sole, right “ to a thing, and being the only newspaper that cared to use the right.

Mr POYNTON:
Grey

– I desire to take this opportunity to make a few remarks in reference to the classification of the Public Service in South Australia. I should have preferred a direct motion on which we could come to close quarters, because in this connexion there has been trouble ever since the classification was made a few years ago. I feel confident that until justice is done to those who are affected there must be continuous trouble. I do not blame the present Government, for this is a heritage from previous Governments; but, all the same, 1 he results are most unfortunate for members of the Public Service. Men who were well advanced when the classification war. made have been made junior to others who joined many years after them, and, further, in some cases they have, for many years past, been deprived of a portion of emoluments which they received when in the service of the State. It is true that these payments ‘ were made under different forms, but, under the State Government, they were recognised as part of the salaries attached to the offices. Perhaps the worst case of the lot is that of an old public servant who was utterly “broken up” by this classification. He had given long and faithful service, having joined about the same time as the late Sir Charles Todd, and he found that under the classification he suffered to the extent of ^150 3 year. There are- many other cases in which loss has been sustained, though, as 1 say, the one I have cited is, perhaps, the worst. It is quite clear that at the Federal Convention, when this question was discussed, it was fully intended that, under the section which has caused the trouble, the rights and accruing rights of the transferred public servants were to be preserved. I wish to make a brief reference to the points raised in connexion with this matter at the Convention. When clause 83 of the Commonwealth Bill was before the Convention in its original form, Mr., now Mr. Justice, Gordon, one of the delegates from South Australia, drew attention to the fact that it did not cover all rights and accruing rights of transferred officers. He was followed by Sir George Turner, who said -

When these men enter into the service of the various States there are given to them by Act of Parliament certain rights which they enjoy

S3 long as they remain in the service of those States. If, therefore, they are transferred to some other body, surely it is only fair and right that they should carry to the new body whatever rights they had *in the old body.

Mr., now Mr. Justice, O’Connor, at the same time, said - i think we are all agreed that when an officer is taken over by the Commonwealth he should not be placed in an unfair position or lose any rights by being taken over, because it is no fault of his that the continuity of his service has been broken.

A reference was made to certain cases in which the continuity of service of officers under existing Acts in South Australia would be broken by their transfer, and the men would be deprived of certain rights they possessed under those Acts. The present Mr. Justice Barton also dealt with the matter, and said -

All we suggest is that where a person is entitled to a locally-accruing right, tinder the law of the State in which he has served, that right shall not be impaired ; but where under the law of the Stale in which he has served he is not entitled to any gratuity, pension, or retiring allowance, the mere fact of the transfer does not give him the right to the payment of such.

Mr. Deakin said ;

I do not understand why all rights and privileges are not simply continued, and why a change of master should involve any change in the conditions under which he is employed. Any statutory rights which exist should be continued.

It apperrs to me that the legal decision given in the Victorian case turned entirely upon the question of what was a statutory right. The claims of the South Australian officers may not be looked upon in a strictly legal sense as statutory rights ; but, viewing them on the ground of equity and in the light of die debates of the Federal Convention, no one can doubt that the rights of these men are accruing rights, and should be preserved to them. Acting upon a suggestion made by Sir George Turner,

Mr. Deakin moved in the Convention the amendment of the clause, so that it might read -

Arid all existing and accruing rights of any such officers who shall remain in the service of the Commonwealth shall be preserved.

Referring to this later, Mr., now Mr. Justice, Isaacs, said -

I think it is highly important that we should have some provision such as is suggested by my honorable friend, Mr. Deakin. I think it is important to put in the word “ accruing.” It is a principle we have adopted in Victoria.

Later he said -

I think we shall be doing more harm than good if we ignore rights. As States, when we are entering into this bargain, we must preserve honour and faithfulness towards our public servants as well as towards our other creditors. I think the words proposed ought certainly to be inserted.

I shall not quote further extracts from the Convention debate, but I express a hope that the Minister will view this matter apart from legal technicality. I have no doubt that, if he does so, he will find that injustice has been done to certain transferred officers by the Public Service classification. I have already referred to the case of some bright men in the Service, who, by that classification, have been made junior to men who were boys when they held high and important positions in the service of the State.

Mr Fenton:

– How do they stand from the point of view of merit?

Mr POYNTON:

– There has never been a mark against them. Their present position is due entirely to the classification. Quite a number of officers who filled important positions for years are to-day receiving far less remuneration than when they were taken over by the Commonwealth. I am quite sure that that was never the intention of the framers of the Constitution. I do not believe that it is the intention of this House that the injustice which these public servants have laboured under for so long should continue. If the Minister finds that he is legally not in a position to do justice to these men, I am satisfied that this House will support him if he takes the necessary action on grounds of equity. The men for whom I am speaking, and whose case has also been put by the honorable members for Hindmarsh and Boothby, desire only fair play, and they will never consider that they have been given fair treatment while the settlement of this matter is de ferred. We cannot expect that men who have had up to £150 a year cut off their remuneration, and who have been classified as juniors to men who were boys when they held prominent positions, will be satisfied with such a condition of things. I trust that the Minister will have a thorough inquiry made into the matter, with the object of having justice done to a number of public servants from whom it has been withheld for a very long time.

Mr HEDGES:
Fremantle

– I wish to bring under the attention of the House a matter which I hope will not be treated as a party question. I refer to the class of timber to be used as sleepers on the Port Augusta and Kalgoorlie railway. I am as deeply interested in the welfare of Western Australia as is any member of this House, and I have no desire that any injury should be done to that State. The information given to honorable members from time to time has pointed to the fact that a big contract has been made with the Western Australian Government for the supply of 1,500,000 karri sleepers for use in the construction of the railway. In connexion with this matter, the Minister of Home Affairs has stated -

It is only within the last few years ‘ that sleepers in Western Australia have been treated with preservatives, and during such period I am advised that no karri has had to be taken up.

In the course of my remarks, I shall show the value of that statement. The Minister said further that he was making arrangements for 9,000 sleepers per week to be powellized at Bunbury. I shall show the value of that before I have finished. He has also stated that no decision has been arrived at with regard to the kind of preservative process to be applied to the remainder of the karri sleepers, indicating that the Government are still in the dark as to what shall be done with them. These karri sleepers are to be used, we are told, not because jarrah sleepers are not available. I have * a report here on the timbers of Western Australia which was made by Mr. G. A. Julius, B.Sc, M.E., Engineer-in-charge of all testing operations on behalf of the Western Australian Government. This gentleman, I believe, is now running the powellizing process in Australia. His report sets out the exhaustive tests” which he made of this class of timber, and the conclusions at which he arrived whilst he was in the service of the Western Australian Government. I wish to show that it is

not because jarrah is not available that karri is being used for railway sleepers. His report states -

The State Royal Commission on Forestry, which sat in 1904, and took very exhaustive evidence, reported to the following effect upon the available supplies of jarrah, karri, tuart, and blackbutt : -

Supplies of Jarrah. - Virgin jarrah forest to the north of Blackwood River, and suitable for milling, is estimated at 2,000,000 acres. Based on the present rateof cutting, this would be equivalent to about thirtv-two years’ supply. To the south of the Blackwood River there are also considerable supplies of this timber; but, being so constantly intergrown with karri, blackbutt, and red gum, no fair estimate of quantities can be given. In addition to these areas, there are several millions of acres of jarrah country not of sufficient commercial value for milling purposes, but which will, as the railway system develops, afford immense scope for sleeper-hewing.

Surely our railway system is developing, seeing that we are now about to build our first transcontinental railway, which will cover a distance of over 1,000 miles, and which will be the longest line in Australia. I hold that the sleepers for that railway should be hewn in this tract of country, which is suitable for no other purpose. Men can hew them there in a quarter of the time that they can be obtained by any other means. I have had tens of thousands of sleepers hewn, so that I know what I am talking about. Where time is a consideration”, obviously it would be common sense to adopt the course which I have suggested. By doing so, we should obviate the necessity for spending thousands of pounds in erecting mills, and providing machinery, horses, whims, &c. The reportfrom which I have quoted conclusively proves that in the construction of the transcontinental line, we should use timber which is suitable only for sleeper hewing. We ought not to utilize the timber of our best forests in building this transcontinental railway, when we have large areas of country which is suitable only For the hewing of jarrah sleepers. I hold in my hand a report upon the economic uses of the principal timbers of Western Australia. It states -

Jarrah. - This timber is the most generally employed for railway construction, railway sleepers, marine and engineering work of all kinds, and building construction, and is specially suitable for underground use, and where in contact with wind and water.

The chemical and microscopical examination of eucalyptus woods generally dis closes certain special qualities, and is thus interestingly described by Baron von Mueller -

It may be summed up that the capability of different kinds of eucalyptus wood to endure for lengthened periods contact with humidity, air, and temperature, depends largely, and perhaps mainly, on phlobaphenic substance, unchangeable by water; further, probably, also on the occurrence of oleo-resin, on the reduced number of hollow vascular tubes, on the organization of the walls of the ligneous fibre, on the decreased copiousness of parenchymatic substance, and on the lesser space occupied by the medullary rays. The hard variety of jarrah wood fulfils most of these conditions, eminently so of the first one.

That opinion is backed up by the late Mr. O’Connor, M.I.C.E., who was the distinguished Engineer-in-Chief of Western Australia. He says -

For durability and general construction work of all classes, jarrahis undoubtedly one of the best of all State timbers. It is almost exclusively used throughout the State, in railway construction work, as sleepers, piles, bridge beams, &c, and shows great durability both in and above ground.

Mr. Palmer, his successor, has expressed a similar opinion, and Mr. Moncrieff, the present Railway Commissioner of South Australia, who was formerly the Engineerin Chief of that State, says -

Jarrah has been used for railway sleepers, in the construction of bridges, wharves, and jetties, and for general work in buildings, such as goods sheds and platforms, where a heavy durable timber is required; and where the timber was of full growth and seasoned before use, it has in every case proved satisfactory.

Appended to that report is a footnote which reads -

As regards the value and advantages of jarrah for use as railway sleepers, a full account is given further on in the special report by Mr. Dartnall, M.Inst. C.E., Chief Engineer of Existing Lines for Western Australia.

Mr. Dartnall says ;

The following instance is given of the life of jarrah sleepers where they have not been disturbed : - A portion of the Great Southern Railway, from Beverley to Cuballing, about 50 miles in length, was laid with about 110,000 8-in. by 4-in. jarrah sleepers in the year 1886 or 1887, and the line was purchased by the Government in1896. Practically none of the sleepers had been renewed when the line was purchased, and since that time the Railway Department has renewed about 4,300, equal to about 3.9 per cent. in eighteen years; and the balance is still in the road.

Again -

The species of timber chiefly used in Western Australia is jarrah. The total number used on the railways, including renewals, has been 4,000,000 to 5,000,000.

Why is this Government disregarding the experience of Western Australia? Mr. Dartnall says -

Kairi has been used, and used by myself, in Government work on bridge construction. . . . Although this report has more particular reference to sleepers, it may not be out of place to mention the fact that renewals in timber bridges are being effected with jarrah timber.

I draw attention to this statement in the standard specification of the Western Australian Government -

Unless the specification agreed upon between the contracting parties is in reasonably close accordance with this standard specification, the Government will not accept the responsibility of inspection. First-Sleepers may be cut from either of the following timbers : - Jarrah, wandoo

There is no mention of karri. Wandoo is not much used, because it is so expensive to cut. During the time that I have been in Western Australia, karri has been barred in Government specifications, and had we put it in the railroads, we should have done so at our own risk, and should have had to take it out again. Although the Commonwealth Government is undertaking an enterprise such as it has never before engaged upon, and its officers, perhaps, have no practical knowledge of Western Australian timbers, it is ignoring the experience of that State, and failure is bound to follow. Karri was used in the first jetty at Port Darwin, which was constructed with iron spans and karri beams, but the ‘white ants ate the beams, and the teredo riddled the piers. Honorable members must bear in mind that in this matter the Commonwealth has nearly ,£2,000,000 at stake, everything being made to depend on the success of a process called powellizing, which may be a good one, but on which we are not justified in risking so much with bur present knowledge of it. It will take nearly ,£1,000,000 to provide the first lot of sleepers for the railroad, and the replacing of them with jarrah will cost a great deal more, because the work will have to be done without disturbing the traffic, and the replacing of sleepers under such circumstances costs ten times as much as the original laying. The acid sap of karri eats away the dogs, which, if removed after they have been in position for a time, are found to be flaked with rust.

Mr Fenton:

– What effect will powellizing have on it?

Mr HEDGES:

– I shall deal with that directly. It is necessary, in any preserving process, to first withdraw the sap from the timber, by creating a vacuum, or in some other way. Freshly cut karri is as full of moisture as a carrot, containing 40 per cent, of water. To be powellized it is put into a bath, but I have been told that when timber so treated has been afterwards cut up it has been found that it has not been affected for more than one-eighth of an inch from the surface. On only one railway in Western Australia were karri sleepers used, and every one of them had to be pulled up, because they rotted so much that* in treading on them one’s foot sank to the ankle. Karri is useless for sleepers, unless it can be preserved. For waggon building, and other work in which it is exposed to the weather, it is one of the finest timbers of the world when properly seasoned, but should be cut two or three years before being used. I built between 150 and 200 railway waggons with karri, which had been cut for over three years, and no finer timber could have been used. The freshlycut karri will shrink as much as an inch in a foot, so that if you want a length of twelve inches you must cut thirteen. The karri to be used on the proposed line will have to be carried altogether a distance of 800 miles, and, as 30 or 40 per cent, of moisture is to be found in the freshly-cut wood, it will be seen how costly its transport will be. Even if jarrah sleepers had been determined on, a supply should have been commenced as soon as the construction of the line was agreed to, because the longer sleepers have been cit before being used the better they last. Australian timber rarely gets a fair show in railway construction in this country. When it is exported to South America, India, and other places, it is laid down in a much better condition than here, because of the seasoning it has received while lying in stacks previous to shipment and on its journey. We are risking nearly £2,000,000 on the faith of an experiment made with thirty sleepers put into a cutting near Perth, 400 miles from the proposed railway. They were laid on sandy soil, and it is known that white ants will not work on such soil, unless there is clay with it, because they always use clay for their covering. I sent the following telegram to find out the position -

Karri sleepers reply through any office stating total number used in Government railway construction during past twenty years, also number used for experimental purposes, and locality where used, and any authentic information available.

To that message I received this reply -

Karri sleepers have never been used in Government railway construction. Great Southern Railway was laid principally with karri, which had to be replaced with jarrah. A few years after existing railways experimented with about thirty powellized karri sleepers in cutting between East Perth station and river now reported good as day put down six years ago. Small quantity untreated karri laid same time and place rotted within two or three years.

Mr Frazer:

– How long has that powellizing experiment been made?

Mr HEDGES:

– It has been made for six years with thirty sleepers, but we are going to use 3,000,000 sleepers. Why did they make the experiment in a country where white ants cannot live? Why did they make the test in the sand nearPerth? In dealing with railway construction inland, there is quite a different proposition. It is not only a matter of white ants, but also a matter of dry rot. I saw at Broken Hill years ago verandah posts which had been put into dry soil. While that portion of a post which was above the surface was as sound as a rock, one could kick his foot through that portion out of which the dry soil had taken all the nature - dry rot had made it perfectly useless.

Mr West:

– It was loose soil.

Mr HEDGES:

– It was tramped on enough, being on the main street. It has been reported that powellizing has been an unqualified success in New Zealand. 1 took the trouble to send a cablegram to find out whether that was the case or not, and I received the following reply -

Your cable re powellized timber experience in New Zealand insufficient enable authoritative opinion to be expressed. A number of sleepers which there is reason to believe were not properly treated by the process have been unsatisfactory. But, on the other hand, timber that has been efficiently treated for carriage and waggon building has been satisfactory.

During my visitto the Eastern States I spent considerable time in my efforts to secure for Western Australia a fair consideration. I personally interviewed the Prime Minister, the Minister in charge of the work (Mr. King O’Malley), Senator Pearce, also Messrs. Thomas, Tudor, and Frazer, and the Engineer-in-Chief (Mr. Deane), and urged the use of our native timbers.

That is all right so far. The extract continues -

I also made ah effort to secure the work direct for the Union, but did not press this when I found the State prepared to supply. I personally advocated the use of jarrah sleepers in the work, but the reports concerning the powellised karri are favorable, and it isto be hoped that the anticipation will be realized to the fullest extent; though I regret to say that from what I saw in Melbourne an effort had been made to push forward the karri rather on the demerits of jarrah than upon its own merits. This, in my opinion, is altogether wrong. Jarrah has a world-widereputation as a durable timber.

Karri is splendid in superstructure; if the powel Using will impart the necessary preservative qualities to the karri underground it will mean a vast increase in the marketable value of the forests of this State.

– I do not. In his report on “ The Physical Characteristics of the Hardwoods of Western Australia,” Mr. G. A. Julius, B.Sc, M.E., deals with diseases to which timbers are prone, and, referring to dry-rot, writes -

The disease occurs generally in timber used in damp and unventilated conditions, particularly when the timber has been used in the “ green “ state -

We shall have to use this timber in a green state. We have no time to season it - and hence railway sleepers are very prone to develop it.

It appears to be infectious, and is probably due to, or at least assisted by, the decomposition of the sap.

I invite honorable members to read the last paragraph in conjunction with the following paragraph in the same report -

Karri, whilst in every other respect almost unequalled as a sleeper timber, is prone to develop dry-rot if used when green in damp ground, and in the examination of its sap it was found to decompose when exposed to the air; and, further, that it exercised a greater effect upon the metals immersed in it -

– Like Mark Twain in regard to early rising, it thinks it excellent for other people.

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

– I have also an extract from the report of the Consult- ing Railway Engineer, dated 20th September, 191 1, relating to sleepers -

The question of the supply of sleepers is one of considerable importance. The forests in Australia where the best classes of timber grow are becoming rapidly depleted. This is particularly the case on the eastern side of the continent, where, at one time, ironbark was considered the only timber suitable for sleepers. Since then, owing to the growing scarcity of ironbark, other very good but relatively inferior timbers are being used.

In Western Australia the forests in the southwest can yet be depended upon for large supplies. Jarrah is the only suitable timber, karri not being sufficiently durable or resistant to white ants. -“The Railways Department of Western Australia possesses a powellizing plant, and the results are said to be most satisfactory. The process seems to cause a wonderful improvement in the quality of even poor timber.

In Gippsland and Tasmania there are large forests, including the so-called mountain ash, messmate, and bluegum. These timbers treated by the Powell process seem to be completely altered. Judging by results on other timber, they would resist the ravages of white ants and dry-rot, in which case they should make remarkably good sleepers, and afford a source of supply for the South Australian end of the railway. I have asked Mr. Bethell, the manager of the company in Sydney, to furnish me with particulars of the plant which would be suitable for erection in Port Augusta, on the assumption that it would be necessary to treat 4,000 sleepers per day.

I have inquired of timber merchants in Sydney as to the possibility of obtaining large supplies of sleepers from the coast of New South Wales, north of Newcastle, but it is thought impracticable, owing to the absence of co-operation among timber getters.

Then there is this report by the Chief Engineer for Existing Lines, Western Australian Government railways, dated at Perth, 21st March, 1910, and addressed to the Managing Director, Western Australian Powell Wood Process Limited, Surrey Chambers, St. George’s Terrace, Perth -

In the year 1906 some karri sleepers were treated by the Powell wood process in the experimental plant at Midland Junction railway shops.

These sleepers were placed in the road on the 16th November, 1906, at certain points alternately with non-tieated karri sleepers, all of the sleepers having been cut at the same time.

On the 17th November, 1909, one set of these sleepers was examined in the road, and “dry-rot “ was found to exist in some of the non-treated ones. One of each kind was removed from the line, and has been examined by the Departmental Analytical Chemist, a transcription of whose report I have much pleasure in submitting hereunder for your information : - “ With regard to the above, I have to state that I have physically examined the two sleepers submitted. I find that the untreated karri sleeper is affected with dry-rot.’ This timber disease seems to have travelled in a certain direction, as one side and the end are the parts most affected. I found in several places along the side that the apparent affected area extended to a depth of five-eighths of an inch. At these places the fibrous nature of karri has almost disappeared, having given place to a granular and friable mass, which can be readily removed with the finger-nail. This structure is best seen with a microscope, which explains the cause for the disintegration.

It is impossible for me, at this stage, to say whether the ‘dry-rot ‘ has penetrated deeper. If it has, the fibre has not been visibly affected by it.

I have examined the powellized karri sleeper, and find it free from the above disease. In no part of the sleeper could any of the fungi be found, and the fibre is sound all over the portion exposed. The condition of this sleeper is much more sound than the untreated sleeper.”

We admit that untreated karri is not good, but the treated timber is another matter. I have also a report by Professor D. F. Mackenzie, Fellow of the Surveyors Institute and of the Botanical Society. It is dated 4th November, 1905.

Referring to the specimens of powellized timbers submitted to me some time ago for the purpose of testing, I have to report that I have now completed the tests, and, in consequence of the results obtained, I am prepared to indorse all you claim for your process.

With regard to its immunity from the attack of “ dry-rot “ (Merulius lacryntans), I have made a prolonged and thorough test. In order that this test might be thoroughly reliable, I took care to produce and maintain the necessary conditions to induce the attack of the “ dryrot” fungus. These conditions are moisture, temperature, and full contact with a vigorous fungus. As is well known, the moisture and an equable temperature predisposes the wood by dissolving the soluble matter and softening the cell walls, rendering it liable to attack from fungoid plants, and thereby causing rapid decay.

In order that there might be no mistake, such as weakness of the fungoid growth, I had placed alternately with your specimens similar pieces of other well-seasoned timbers. These were all attacked by this “dry-rot” and partly consumed, while those sent by you had no appearance of being even touched by Mycelium, and, what may be considered a good feature, the tissue was hardly at all affected by months of contact with moisture.

Examining the tissue of your treated timbers under the lens of a powerful microscope, I did not find a single “ thread “ of Mycelium or a spore. There being no penetration by Mycelium there was, consequently, no disintegration of the cells or general tissue.

Making a similar examination of the untreated wood, I found the whole tissue permeated with the Mycelium of the “ dry-rot “ fungus, with a large proportion of the cells and tissues disintegrated and collapsed. A more severe test than I have made would be impossible to carry out.

F. Mackenzie.

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

– My honorable f riend can take the report and read it. I have another document to which I ask honorable members to listen -

page 3258

VICTORIAN POWELL WOOD PROCESS

Equitable Building,

Melbourne, 8th February, 1912

The Hon. King O’Malley,

Minister for Home Affairs,

Melbourne

Dear Sir,

With reference to the powellizing of sleepers and timber for the transcontinental railway from Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta, we assume that at least two million sleepers will be treated out of the total amount required, and that at least twenty million feet of timber will be required for various other works and buildings, or, say, a total - not taking into account any future requirements during the continuance of the patent - of one hundred million super, feet.

The royalty we asked, i.e., two shillings (25.) per 100 super, feet, is the same amount that we are receiving from other Governments, and would amount on this basis to ^100,000. We are willing, however, to accept the sum of sixty thousand pounds (,£60,000) payable in cash or Treasury bonds, for the right to use the Powell process during the continuance of our patent, for the treatment of all timbers required by the Commonwealth Government in connexion with the transcontinental railway from Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta.

It will be seen that they do not consider it very cheap. Generally an article which has a marketable value has a big one.

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
ALP

– They are sawn and hewn. We have an agreement to get so many thousands of karri a month until this thing is ready.

Sir John Forrest:

– Are they to be newn or sawn sleepers that you are going to treat?

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

– Some will be hewn and some will be sawn. The document continues -

The amount we would receive per sleeper is about fourpence, which is small compared to the value in the lengthened life of the sleepers, apart from any cost of renewals, and the results of the process to date are as definite as it is possible to be.

With regard to the white ant resisting timbers, we venture to emphatically state that there is no timber suitable for sleepers that will resist the attacks of these pests, more particularly those in the country through which the proposed line will pass.

The Western Australian Government recently powellized the whole of the jarrah sleepers and scantling required in the Port Hedland to Marble Bay Railway, and are enlarging their present plant to powellize all timbers used by them.

It has been found by the Indian railways that the ravages by white ants and dry-rot were increasing to an alarming extent, so much so that a Commission was recently appointed to go into the question. The report of which shows that timbers hitherto looked upon as dry-rot and white ant resisting, were found to be quite the reverse. Two further powellizing plants are tobe erected in India to cope with the increasing demand, so satisfactory have been the results of all tests made.

We would also take the liberty of pointing out that the establishing and proving of the Powell process in Australasia has entailed the spending of large sums of money, but its proved efficiency” will make thousands of acres of inferior timbers into valuable marketable ones, sothat the benefit to the country at large is of such magnitude as to make the sum we ask of small account; and with all due deference we would point out that the use of steel sleepers - inferior as we think they admittedly are to wooden ones - would probably entail the spending out of the country of considerable sums of money which would otherwise be spent here. The adoption of the process would doubtless be of benefit to us, but it would also be a great advertisement for Australian timbers throughout the world, whereas the use of steel sleepers would be the opposite.

We quite recognise that the powellizing of this amount of timber will entail considerable outlay on the part of your Government in the erection of works, but we think this amount will not reach twenty thousand pounds (£20,000), nor do we think the cost of these works should altogether be put against the Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta railway; we hope and believe that the benefits of the process will be such as will induce the Commonwealth to treat other timber for further works.

The plant is one that, owing to its nature, suffers only slight depreciation, and we have no doubt that should it meet with your wishes, the South Australian Government would from time to time take advantage of the plant being on its territory, to have timber treated there.

We take the liberty of sending herewith some few reports and testimonials.

Yours faithfully,

Victorian Powell Wood Process Ltd., J. Gorton, Director

The following is an extract from a letter written by the Assistant Engineer at Perth for the Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta railway to the Engineer-in-Chief of Commonwealth railways : -

Mr. Scaddan informed me that all the Government Engineers have convinced him that powellized karri is better than treated jarrah, and as the karri forests are quite in the hands of the Government, whilst the jarrah areas are almost exclusively in the hands of. Millars Company, the State Government are determined to utilize this timber (karri) for their own benefit.

Mr. Light, the Chief Engineer for Existing Lines, is thoroughly convinced that treated karri sleepers are better in every respect than jarrah, and that the extra cost for the powellizing will more than, double the life of an untreated jarrah sleeper.

It will thus be. seen that the Premier of Western Australia declares that all the Government engineers have convinced him that powellized karri is better, than treated jarrah, whilst the Engineer-in-Chief, Western Australia ; Mr. Deane,. EngineerinChief; Mr. Saunders, Assistant Engineer, South Australia; and Mr. Chinn, Assistant Engineer, Western. Australia, all report in favour of it. We have the tests of eminent scientific men to support us, and we know that the Indian Government is putting in a powellizing plant. I had thought of using, steel sleepers, but when I went to Western Australia and had interviews with Mr. Thompson and other engineers, who put before me all. the evidence that it was possible to obtain, I decided upon the course I. have followed. I waited all this time before arriving at a decision. The right honorable member for Swan has put to me many questions relating to the railway, but no one knows better than he does that when things are at the experimental stage - when they are in a state of nebulosity - it is unwise to tell every one about them. If you do, the whole world is in your business, and, indeed, knows, your business better than you do yourself. No matter how successful a man may be in managing a business, he will find that there are some people who have failed in a great many undertakings, but who think nevertheless that they can manage that business, a great deal better than he can. I therefore keep these things to myself, not that I desire to give unkind or unsatisfactory answers to questions put to me-

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
ALP

– I do not like to do that, but I am prepared to tell any- honorable member privately anything that he wants to know regarding any bargain before it is. actually completed. Once a bargain is made, all the facts relating to it are laid on the table of the; House.

Sir John Forrest:

– Why did not the honorable member select jarrah sleepers?

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

– I decided to use karri sleepers because I was convinced of their value by the tests of engineers all over the world.

Mr Mathews:

– Why does not the honorable member tell the Opposition that the jarrah, forests were cornered,, whilst the’ karri forests were not.

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

– I do not like to hurt, their feelings. I am, perfectly satisfied that the sleepers- used in the construction of the transcontinental railway will outlive most of us.

Sitting suspended from 6.27 to 7.45 p.m.

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
Calare

Mr. RYRIE (North Sydney [8.0].- lt is a very serious matter for the Government, in embarking on a big undertaking such as that of a transcontinental railway, to accept sleepers for practically 1,000 miles of line without being absolutely certain that the sleepers will be serviceable. Nothing that the Minister has told us would convince me, nor, I think, honorable members opposite, that karri sleepers will prove more durable simply because they have been powellized. In company with the Minister of External Affairs and other honorable members, I was shown blocks of karri and jarrah by the superintendent of the railway workshops at Port Darwin. Some of those blocks had been subjected to the powellizing treatment, while others had not; and I can say emphatically that, while the blocks which had been treated were not so badly infected as the others, they had been riddled through and through by the white ant.

Mr Higgs:

– Try powellizing on the Opposition !

Mr RYRIE:
NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr RYRIE:

– Very well’. This order is absolutely contrary to the regulations under which cadet training is carried out. Paragraph 4 of regulation 50 says -

Ball ammunition is not to be issued to senior’ cadets individually except when in position to /ire, and the officer commanding will be held responsible that no ammunition unfired is allowed to remain in their possession on leaving such position. .

Mr RYRIE:

– There is one other matter to which I desire to refer. A cadet named Roberts, son of Commander Roberts, of

Osborne-road, Manly, was served with a summons, although it would appear that the service of a summons upon him was quite unjustifiable. It transpires that he had never missed a parade or a drill of any sort. His father was very wrath, and, at his request, I took up the matter, and brought it before the Department. In reply, I received the following letter from the Minister of Defence -

Melbourne,29th August, 1912.

Dear Sir,- With further reference to the letter addressed to you by Commander M. A. Roberts, “ Maiolsa,” Osborne-road, Manly, relative to the case of his son, Walter Frederick, I desire to inform you that reports received disclose -

That the cadet concerned was not transferred from “B” Company to “A” Company.

He neglected to apply to the officer commanding for transfer, as instructed by officer commanding “A” Company.

At roll-call in each parade, cadets whose names have not been called are asked to signify, in order that no one may be missed, and that cadets putting’ in parades with other companies than their own may receive credit for same. Cadet Roberts failed to signify his presence when called upon to do so.

The company officer concerned, (however, is considered to have shown lack of supervision in repeatedly passing over this cadet, and has been informed to that effect, and given instructions, to exercise more care in this regard.

This is evidently an attempt to saddle Cadet Roberts with the blame - to show that it was due to his own neglect that a summons was served upon him’. The boy,” however, has made a statutory declaration, which reads as follows -

I, Walter Frederick Roberts, of Manly, near Sydney, in the State of New South Wales, schoolboy, do hereby solemnly and sincerely declare that -

I am the cadet referred to in a certain letter from the Department of Defence to Colonel G. de L. Ryrie, M.P., Federal Parliament House, Melbourne, dated 29th August,1912.

I will be seventeenyears of age on the 23rd inst., and reside with my parentsat “ Maiolsa,” Osborne-road, Manly.

With regard to paragraph 1 in the abovementioned letter - in which it was stated that he was not transferred from “ B “ Company to “ A “ Company -

I was transferred to “ A “ Company in January last, with the full knowledge and approval of the officer commanding same, who, at the time and subsequently, told me that he would see me fixed upall right.

The reports disclosed in paragraphs 2 and 3 in the abovementioned letter are absolutely false and misleading in every detail.
Prior to the 30th ult. I was never instructed by the officer commanding “ A “ Company, or by any other person, to appl’y to the officer commanding for the transfer in question.
My name having not been called on parade, I never, on any occasion, failed to signify my presence. On giving my name to the section commander, he called it to the officer commanding “ A “ Company, who thereupon frequently remarked, “ Roberts is all right, I will fix him up.”

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– I ask the Minister to make inquiries, and tell the House what the facts are.

I turn to another matter. I allude to a very interesting little enterprise of the inimitable Minister who has been addressing us this evening - I mean the Minister of Home Affairs.

Mr PARKER MOLONEY:
INDI, VICTORIA · ALP

– Is it. a ‘ chaser ‘ ‘ that the honorable member has before him?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– I do not think it is what they call a “ chaser.” It is a schedule. The issue of this interesting schedule by the Home Affairs’ Department began in a very small way, but it is developing. What I strongly object to is the political tone that it is taking. I do not want the Minister of Home Affairs to send me the latter part of this stuff. I do not object to the earlier part of the publication. If the Minister will confine himself to telling me how works are progressing in my electorate, I shall be glad, although I must confess that I have not gathered much comfort in that direction up to date. I do not mind that, however, as long as I am reminded that something is being attempted, something done. But when the Minister sends me political argument in this form, I say to him that I would rather make my own political arguments, if he pleases. I should like to inquire whether the section of “ Census and Statistics” to which I allude has been inserted by Mr. Knibbs without consultation with the Minister of Home Affairs, or whether the Minister has directed the Statistician to make the compilation in this particular way. For instance, here is an article under the heading “ The alleged withdrawal of capital from Australia.” It is stated -

It is alleged in certain quarters thatin the last year or two there has been a marked withdrawal of foreign capital from Australia.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

- Mr. Knibbs goes on to say -

As a matter of fact, no such evidence is furnished by the trade or financial returns.

In the first place, I do not think that the trade or financial returns, as he is able to tabulate them here, are conclusive on the point. There are so many intricate matters to be considered in endeavouring to make an estimate of the kind that the data he supplies are not at all conclusive. It is not conclusive for another reason, which he himself sets out right at the foot of the figures -

As regards the private investment of foreign capital -

There is now a. simple process being experimented with which promises to make thiskarri timber immune from dry-rot and white ants. The process is simple and cheap, and when treated in that way karri will prove one of the most valuable sleeper timbers in the world.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 19 September 1912, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1912/19120919_reps_4_66/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives19 September 1912

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr ROBERTS:Minister (without portfolio) · ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

QUESTION

FEDERAL CAPITAL

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

Mr KING O’MALLEY:Minister for Home Affairs · DARWIN, TASMANIA · ALP

QUESTION

BIRTH CERTIFICATES

Dr MALONEY:MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr FISHER:Prime Minister · WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

PAPERS

QUESTION

SUGAR COMMISSION

Mr HUGHES:Attorney-General · WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr Kelly:

Mr HUGHES:

Mr KELLY:

Mr HUGHES:

Mr KELLY:

Mr HUGHES:

QUEENSLAND ARBITRATION BILL

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

Mr FISHER:ALP

QUESTION

POSTMASTER-GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT

Mr ATKINSON:WILMOT, TASMANIA

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr ATKINSON:

Mr FRAZER:Postmaster-General · KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

Sir JOHN FORREST:SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr FRAZER:

Mr BAMFORD:HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

Mr FRAZER:

Mr FRAZER:

Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr FRAZER:

Sir JOHN FORREST:

Mr FRAZER:

Mr DEAKIN:BALLAARAT, VICTORIA

Mr FRAZER:

QUESTION

MILITARY UNIFORMS

Dr MALONEY:MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr ROBERTS:ALP

QUESTION

KARRI SLEEPERS

Mr HEDGES:FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr KING O’MALLEY:ALP

QUESTION

INDEPENDENT CABLE SERVICE

Mr KELLY:

Mr THOMAS:Minister for External Affairs · BARRIER, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr GORDON:Boothby

Mr MACKAY:LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · NAT; UAP from 1931

Mr Roberts:

Mr Thomas:

Mr McDONALD:KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Mr Thomas:

Mr McDONALD:KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Mr McDONALD:KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Mr GLYNN:Angas

Mr FRAZER:ALP

Mr GLYNN:

Mr ARCHIBALD:Hindmarsh

Mr KELLY:Wentworth

Mr West:

Mr KELLY:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr KELLY:

Mr Tudor:

Mr KELLY:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr KELLY:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr KELLY:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr KELLY:

Mr Roberts:

Mr KELLY:

House of Representatives
19 September 1912

Mr ROBERTS:
Minister (without portfolio) · ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

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

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
Minister for Home Affairs · DARWIN, TASMANIA · ALP

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr FISHER:
Prime Minister · WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Mr HUGHES:
Attorney-General · WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

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

Mr FISHER:
ALP

Mr ATKINSON:
WILMOT, TASMANIA

Mr FRAZER:
Postmaster-General · KALGOORLIE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

Sir JOHN FORREST:
SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr BAMFORD:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr DEAKIN:
BALLAARAT, VICTORIA

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA · ALP; FLP from 1931; ALP from 1936

Mr ROBERTS:
ALP

Mr HEDGES:
FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr KING O’MALLEY:
ALP

Mr THOMAS:
Minister for External Affairs · BARRIER, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr GORDON:
Boothby

Mr MACKAY:
LILLEY, QUEENSLAND · NAT; UAP from 1931

Mr McDONALD:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Mr McDONALD:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Mr McDONALD:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND · ALP

Mr GLYNN:
Angas

Mr FRAZER:
ALP

Mr ARCHIBALD:
Hindmarsh

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

Mr W ELLIOT JOHNSON:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr POYNTON:
Grey

Mr HEDGES:
Fremantle

Mr WEBSTER:
-Gwydir

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Swan