House of Representatives
26 November 1913

5^th Parliament · 1^st Session

QUESTION
- LETTER-CARRIERS’ CLOTHING
QUESTION
- HANSARD REPRINTS
QUESTION
- SMALL-POX OUTBREAK
COAL VEND PROSECUTIONS
QUESTION
- KALGOORLIE TO PORT AUGUSTA RAILWAY
QUESTION
- AMMUNITION WAGGONS
QUESTION
- NORTHERN TERRITORY
QUESTION
- FEDERAL CAPITAL : PARLIAMENT HOUSES
QUESTION
- TELEPHONE GUARANTEES AND RATES
QUESTION
- TELEPHONE INSTRUMENTS : LOCAL MANUFACTURE
QUESTION
- COUNTRY TELEPHONES
QUESTION
- WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY: LAND SERVICE
PAPERS
COCKATOO ISLAND DOCKYARD
- Preparation of Plans
QUESTION
- SUGAR INDUSTRY: EXCISE
QUESTION
- PRIVATE MEMBERS’ BUSINESS
QUESTION
- RAILWAY TRAFFIC
QUESTION
- COCKBURN SOUND NAVAL BASE
SUPPLY BILL (No. 5)

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

page 3439

QUESTION

LETTER-CARRIERS’ CLOTHING

Mr RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the PostmasterGeneral when is it the intention of his Department to issue summer clothing te the letter-carriers of New South Wales?

Mr AGAR WYNNE:
Postmaster-General · BALACLAVA, VICTORIA · LP

– I shall inquire into the matter.

page 3439

QUESTION

HANSARD REPRINTS

Headlines

Mr FISHER:
WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND

– Is the Prime Minister yet in a position to say what the Government, after consultation with Mr. Speaker, have decided to do in regard to the allowing of headlines in reprints of speeches from Hansard? Are ordinary members to have the same privileges in respect of reprints of speeches for which they pay as are enjoyed by a Minister who gets his speeches reprinted without payment?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
Minister for Home Affairs · PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– I decline to regard the matter in the light of what has been done in connexion with tha Treasurer’s speech. My honorable colleague has conformed to a time-honoured custom, and this question must be considered altogether apart from what was done in the reprinting of his Budget speech.

Mr Fisher:

– His speech on the Loan Bill, not his Budget speech.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– Well, that measure formed part of the financial proposals of the Government. On the general question, the more I think of the matter, the more I am of opinion that Mr. Deakin’s original proposal, to refer it to the Printing Committee for report, is the best procedure. Probably during the next day orso I shall take action to that end.

Mr SPEAKER:

– So far as the question concerns me, I may informthe

House that the Speaker has no control over the reprinting of speeches. Hip duty, in the matter of headlines, is confined to seeing that the resolution passed by Parliament is conformed with in Hansard. The reprinting of speeches is a matter coming within the Department of the Treasury.

page 3440

QUESTION

SMALL-POX OUTBREAK

Mr WEST:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Prime Minister make a statement to the House regarding the present position of Sydney? Has the quarantine embargo been removed ?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

– My honorable friend is rubbing his hands with evident satisfaction, and I have been doing the same for the last twenty-four hours, because, I am glad to say, the embargo has been lifted.

page 3440

COAL VEND PROSECUTIONS

Mr McDONALD:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND

– I noticed a statement the other day to the effect that the fines inflicted on coal mine proprietors, in connexion with the Vend prosecution, have been remitted. I wish to know if the statement is true, and, if so, the reason for the remission 1

Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– The fines have been remitted. The matter came before me about a month ago. Under an arrangement that was made between the late Attorney-General and some of the defendants in the suit, it was understood that if the case went against the Commonwealth on general grounds, the fines would be remitted.

Mr Fisher:

– That is not my recollection.

Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– The papers in the case are in the Department of Trade and Customs, but I apprehend that there will be no difficulty in making them available to honorable members.

Mr McDonald:

– Will the AttorneyGeneral place them on the table ?

Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– They are not in my possession, but I am assured that they will be placed on the table of the Library.

page 3440

QUESTION

KALGOORLIE TO PORT AUGUSTA RAILWAY

Day Labour

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

– I ask the Prime Minister whether it is a fact that, notwithstanding the announcement of the Government that, in future, all Commonwealth work will be carried out by contract, the whole of the work at the western end of the transcontinental railway is now being carried on with day labour ?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

– That work is being carried on with day labour until other arrangements can be made, which I hope will be shortly.

page 3440

QUESTION

AMMUNITION WAGGONS

Mr MATHEWS:
MELBOURNE PORTS, VICTORIA

– I ask the Prime Minister if the Government cannot, even at this late hour, dispense with the importation of more than one of the new ammunition waggons that have been ordered from the Old Country, and have the others manufactured locally to give work to our own people ? I point out. to him that one of these waggons will be sufficient to import for the sake, of having a pattern.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

– I shall see that an answer is given to the question tomorrow.

page 3440

QUESTION

NORTHERN TERRITORY

Costof Motor Trips

Mr FALKINER:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Can the Minister of External Affairs inform the House what the motor trips which are being made by the Administrator of the Northern Territory are costing ?

Mr GLYNN:
Minister for External Affairs · ANGAS, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

– I cannot give tha figures now, because the trip has not yet been completed ; but I may inform the House that when the purchase of a motorcar was under consideration, reports were furnished showing that it would enable the Administrator to do- in two or three days journeys that had previously occupied fifteen, and that it was considered, therefore, that there would be a large saving in travelling expenses where motor travel was. possible. As soon as I get the figures regarding the trips now being made, I shall be glad to let the honorable member have the information’ for which he asks.

page 3441

QUESTION

FEDERAL CAPITAL : PARLIAMENT HOUSES

Mr FINLAYSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND

– There are reports in circulation that competitive designs are to be called for the new Parliament Houses at the Federal Capital; and in view of recent statements in regard to the usefulness or otherwise of the Senate, does the Prime Minister propose to have two Houses of Parliament, or only one House, erected?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

– I hope my honorable friend does not require a serious answer fo the question.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Following on that answer, I desire to assure the Prime Minister that I am quite serious, and I should like to know-

Mr SPEAKER:

– It is not in’ order to ask further questions following on an answer -given by a Minister.

page 3441

QUESTION

TELEPHONE GUARANTEES AND RATES

Mr BENNETT:
GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA

– Having perused the balance-sheet showing the operations of the Department of the PostmasterGeneral, I ask the honorable gentleman whether it is his intention to issue a regulation requiring city and suburban subscribers to promise to make good the annual loss on their services which is required of country subscribers?

Mr AGAR WYNNE:
LP

– I shall consider the matter.

Mr TUDOR:
YARRA, VICTORIA

– In view of the fact that the report on the Post and Telegraph Department shows that there was a loss of over £220,000 on the telephone service last year, does the PostmasterGeneral intend to increase the rates, which were described as exorbitant when they were introduced by the Fisher Government ? Will the Postmaster-General have accounts kept, showing whether there is a’ loss in the towns and in the country, and, where there is a loss in either place, will he increase the rates?

Mr AGAR WYNNE:

– As soon as I can- get a few days to spare I am. going into the matter very carefully in order to see if it is not possible to make up the deficit.

Mr SAMPSON:
WIMMERA, VICTORIA

– Has the PostmasterGeneral taken into consideration the advisability of raising the ground rents for telephones in the city in order that more money may be made available for the extension of country lines ?

Mr AGAR WYNNE:

– The answer I gave to the last question will, I think, serve as an answer to the honorable member’s question.

page 3441

QUESTION

TELEPHONE INSTRUMENTS : LOCAL MANUFACTURE

Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

– Seeing that a largenumber of new telephones are being erected throughout the city, will the PostmasterGeneral inform the House whether the woodwork and other parts of these instruments are constructed in Australia ?

Mr AGAR WYNNE:
LP

– The telephones are, I think, all patented; at any rate Ericsson’s instruments are, and we have to buy them. I do not think that any of the instruments can be made in Australia. However, I shall make inquiries; and I may say that whenever it is possible to have articles made locally they are so made. In this policy I am loyally supported by the officers.

page 3441

QUESTION

COUNTRY TELEPHONES

Mr PATTEN:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES

– In view of the admitted very great convenience in country districts of telephone communication, will the Postmaster-General give generous consideration to all applications for such communication from those districts?

Mr AGAR WYNNE:
LP

– We are doing that at the present time. Every man on the staff is engaged in the work, and tenders have been called for a large number of extensions.

page 3441

QUESTION

WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY: LAND SERVICE

Mr LIVINGSTON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– Will the PostmasterGeneral take into consideration the advisability of erecting small wireless stations in various parts of the country, instead of proceeding further with line extensions?

Mr AGAR WYNNE:
LP

– The chief of the Radio-telegraph Branch is working out a plan in order to ascertain whether small wireless stations can be advantageously dotted all over Australia. I myself think that such stations would lead to a considerable saving of expense.

page 3442

PAPERS

MINISTERS laid upon the table the following papers: -

Defence Act -

Regulations Amended (Provisional) - Universal Training - Statutory Rules, 1913, No. 293.

Military Forces - Financial and Allowance Regulations Amended (Provisional) - Statutory Rules 1913, Nos. 292, 294.

Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta Railway Act -

Schedule 1 - Rate for Wool from Euro Bluff to Port Augusta.

Public Service Act -

Appointment of H. G. Burnet as Valuer, Class D, Professional Division, Land Tax Branch, South Australia.

Appointment of E. D. Gilchrist as Draughtsman, Class F, Professional Division, Lands and Surveys Branch.

Promotion of R. A. Shortland as Supervisor, 3rd Class, Mail Branch, New South Wales.

page 3442

COCKATOO ISLAND DOCKYARD

Preparation of Plans

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

– With reference to the remarks of the honorable member for South Sydney, made on the 28th October, vide page 2596 of Hansard, in connexion with the preparation of plans in Melbourne for work at the Cockatoo Island Dockyard, I have now been furnished with the following information: -

The procedure with regard to plans is as follows : -

They are immediately traced as they are received from the Admiralty, and copies are forwarded to Sydney for action.

If they are received in greater quantities than can be dealt with quickly by the staff at the Navy Office, they are sent to Sydney to be traced, and are then returned to the Navy Office for checking, approval, and issue.

The originals are retained in the Navy Office.

page 3442

QUESTION

SUGAR INDUSTRY: EXCISE

Mr BAMFORD:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

– Has the Minister of Trade and Customs received a reply yet, or is he in a position to answer the question I asked a few days ago, in reference to the agreement made between the exPrime Minister and the Premier of Queensland? This important matter is causing considerable unrest in the north; and if the Minister of Trade and Customs has not yet received a reply, will he send out what the ex -Minister of Home Affairs calls a “ chaser “ ?

Mr GROOM:
Minister for Trade and Customs · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · LP

– No reply is yet to hand, and I shall make further inquiries.

Mr TUDOR:

– Has the Minister of Trade and Customs yet received any of the £150,000 due to the Commonwealth as sugar Excise from the sugar companies ; and, if not, can he state when is he likely to receive any ?

Mr GROOM:

– None has yet been received.

page 3442

QUESTION

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ BUSINESS

Mr HIGGS:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

– Will the Prime Minister be good enough to state whether’ he proposes to allow private members to discuss motions standing in their names, and, if so, whether he will be able to do so this year ?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

– It all depends on the course of public business.

“COLONIAL TAXATION.”

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

Is there any truth in the following statement, which appears in the Age of the17th instant : -

“COLONIAL TAXATION.

Four per cent. on Capital.

London, 14th November.

At a meeting of the Scottish Australian Investment Company yesterday the chairman of directors said colonial taxation equalled 4 per cent, on the ordinary capital, and exceeded anything that could be termed reasonable “ ?

If the statement is untrue, will he instruct the High Commissioner to give to the press, the real facts of the case?

Sir JOHN FORREST:
LP

– The Commonwealth Statistician has furnished the’ following reply: -

With reference to the question asked in the House of Representatives by Mr. W. Maloney, it has not been possible to obtain all the facts of the case. The Scottish-Australian Investment Company does not operate in Victoria, and apparently has no representative in Melbourne. On application to the Sydney office, the manager there gave it as his belief that the figures quoted in the public press included the following : -

representing 1.9 per cent, on paid-up capital.

The amount of Federal land tax quoted differs markedly from that furnished in the memorandum of the Commissioner. The statement, moreover, is defective, since it takes no account of the State land tax in South Australia, or of the municipal rating in the States in which the company operates, or of the income tax in all the States except Queensland. In the absence of these items - for all of which the company is presumably liable - it is impossible to say whether the statement of the chairman of directors is justified.

I am sorry to say that the information is not altogether as complete as I should like it to be.

page 3443

QUESTION

RAILWAY TRAFFIC

Quorn and Oodnadatta: Port Darwin and Pine Creek

How many trains per month run between Quorn and Oodnadatta?
The gross earnings per month and gross cost per month of such service?
How many trains per month run between Port Darwin and Pine Creek?
The gross earnings per month and gross cost per month of such service?

Mr GLYNN:
LP

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow: - 1 and 2. The desired information is being obtained from the South Australian railway authorities.

We have information, but not as the honorable member has asked for it. For instance, the loss on the working of’ the Port Augusta-Oodnadatta railway for the two and a half years ending June, 1913, was £14,500. It is expected that, when the wharf is taken over by the Government, and the railway to the west is working, a profit of receipts over working expenses will be realized. The figures asked for by the honorable, member could be obtained only from the Railway Commissioners of South Australia.

There is a bi-weekly service between Dar win and Pine Creek, and specials are run as required.
The average monthly earnings for the 12 months ended 31st July last were £1,277 os. 2d., and the average monthly expenditure during the same period was£1,6031s. l0d.

page 3443

QUESTION

COCKBURN SOUND NAVAL BASE

Mr PAGE:
for Mr. Burchell

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

Whether it is correct that bores are being put down in Mangles Bay, Cockburn Sound?
If so, how many bores are being sunk, and what is the object of boring in this particular bay?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow : - 1 and 2. It is not correct that bores are being put down in Mangles Bay, Cockburn Sound. At the desire of Sir Maurice Fitzmaurice, however, test borings are being made at Case Point, between Mangles Bay and Woodman’s Point.

page 3443

SUPPLY BILL (No. 5)

Standing Orders : Revision - Position of Mr. Speaker - “ May’s Parliamentary Practice “ - Suspension of Mr.mcGrath - New Hebrides - Northern Territory : Settlement : Tropical Diseases - Post and Telegraph Department: Postal, Telegraphic, and Telephonic Facilities in Country Districts : Post-offices : Salaries, Deputy PostmastersGeneral, Chief Clerk, Queensland : Letter -sorters’ Increments : Manufacture of Typewriters : Balancesheet : Telephone Rates : Debits under European Mail Contract - Gulf of Carpentaria : Settlement : Suggested New Territory - Glucose Industry - Defence Department : Expenditure : Naval Defence : Compulsory Training - The Estimates : Contingencies - Auditor-General’s Report - Sugar Companies : Payment of Excise Duty - Citizen Forces and Industrial Disputes : Conciliation and Arbitration - Fitzroy Dock Machinery - Small Arms Factory - The Senate : Bicameral System - Maternity Allowance.

In Committee of Supply:

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · LP

– I move -

That a sum not exceeding£767,143 be granted to His Majesty for or towards defraying the services of the year ending 30th June, 1914.

This is the fifth Supply Bill that I have introduced this session, and with the preceding Bills, covers five and a half months of the year’s expenditure. Excluding the Treasurer’s Advance and Refunds, and including the amount covered by the present Bill, namely £757,143, the Supply granted in these five Bills is £4,259,307. I am sorry to say that the Customs and Excise revenue from 1st July to 21st November shows a decrease of £497,646

Mr Mathews:

– A good job, too.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– But as the sugar Excise, which has lapsed, accounts for about £160,000, the decrease is really about £340,000. It was estimated that Customs and Excise’ revenue would show a decrease of £653,000 for the whole of the year.

Mr Tudor:

– It will be £750,000 behind.

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I hope it will not. We shall receive about £150,000 due from sugar Excise. I hope, too, that the good harvest we are having all over Australia will have an effect on the revenue, and that, although we have commenced rather badly, we shall pull up as the year goes on.

Mr West:

– Has the change of Government anything to do with the reduction?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I should hardly think so. The estimated increase in the Post Office revenue is, I am glad to say, being realized. Altogether I think that the prospects ahead of us are good, in so far as the revenue is concerned, and there is no reason to be other than sanguine that the year will end very much better than it has begun. In a few days we shall be discussing the Estimates-in-Chief, when there will be opportunity for dealing with all the items of expenditure, and I hope, therefore, that we shall not take very long over this Bill. I trust that honorable members will treat it, as Supply Bills have very often been treated - in my experience, to a large extent - as a formal matter. We require Supply by Friday, which is pay-day, so that there is every reason why I should urge as much expedition as honorable members can give to the passage of the Bill. I may also add that Christmas is near at hand, and that we are getting towards what we call the “going-home time,” especially those who have been away from home for many months. I think I can say for every one that we have had a very arduous session, and I hope the fixing of a going-home time will be facilitated. It is becoming very urgent with some of us. Therefore, I hope that this Bill will pass very quickly, and also that we shall be able to come to an amicable and satisfactory arrangement by which we can bring the business of the session to an end.

Mr THOMAS:
Barrier

.- I think the time has now come when the Standing Orders Committee could very well revise our Standing Orders. I think they should be revised from time to time. The Constitution is necessarily revised from time to time; there are frequent discussions with” that end in view; and in the same way I think the rules and practice by which the House is governed should from time to time be revised by our Standing Orders Committee. I would draw particular attention to standing order No. 1. which says -

In all cases not provided for hereinafter, or by sessional or otheT orders, resort shall be had to the rules, forms, and practice of theCommons House of the Imperial Parliament” of Great Britain and Ireland in force at the- time of the adoption of these orders, which shall be followed as far as they can be applied to-

Ihe proceedings of the House of Representatives.

The Standing Orders Committee, I think, should be asked whether there is any need’ for that standing order to continue. Asa Parliament, we have been in existencefor over twelve years, and I consider thatthe House should be absolutely a law toitself in regard to all matters of procedure. There are many other reasonswhy this standing order should be excised, but I shall deal with only one at this sitting, because I quite agree with theTreasurer that we should hasten the passage of the Supply Bill to-day, and I donot intend to lengthen the debate upon it unnecessarily. The environment of theBritish House of Commons is quite- different from the environment of thisHouse, and it is possible that, in carrying out our standing order No. 1 to the very letter, and even in the spirit of theHouse of Commons practice, it may be used tyrannically, unjustly, and unfairly. It is within the range of- possibility, and even probability, that, in a Houseof seventy-five members, with two great parties in the country, the time maycome when the parties will be evenly divided on the floor of the House. It might even happen in the BritishHouse of Commons, with its 675 members, although the chances of the great parties in England being equally divided on the floor of the British House of Commons are not as great as they would be in a House of seventy-five members. We can very easily imagine that, on the floor of this House, the two sides may be evenly divided, and if ever that should happen, it might lead to almost an impasse. The Government might be blocked to some extent in the carrying out of what they deem to be the business of the country, “and, on the other hand, if anunscruplous Government were returned - we can imagine such a state of things - they might attempt to do something, or bring in some procedure of the House of Commons in order to remove some honorable member from the House so as to enable them to carry on business. A member of this House might very easily come, almost unknowingly, athwart some rule or procedure of the House of Commons. A member of this House might know every, rule and regulation a:nd standing-‘ order from No. 2 to 410. We- might all be able to understand every one of them, but unless a person is a student of political history, unless he spends a- good deal of time in so doing - and” amidst all the difficulties and turmoil of politics to-day it would be difficult for most of us to spare the time - he cannot expect to fully master the rules, practices, and procedure of the: House of Commons. A member might know every one of- the rules and procedure of the House, and do his best to conform to them, but unknowingly and unwittingly he might breaks some of the rules and procedure of the House of Commons, and the Government, having a majority, might possibly take’ advantage of the fact. It is not impossible to imagine that some member of this’ House might, go outside, and, at a public meeting, make some reflection on the Speaker of this House. A member of the House of Commons might do it. There have been two cases in recent times in which members of the House of Commons did go to public meetings and reflect upon the impartiality of the Speaker. One of these I happen to know something about. He was Mr. Conybeare, who represented in the House of Commons the constituency in which I was born. When member for Camborne he reflected at a public meeting on the Speaker of the House of Commons, and, under the rule? and procedure of the House, he was summoned to the House, and it was necessary for him to apologize, failing which he. would be suspended. I believe that he was actually suspended. More recently, during the Coronation time, while some of our members were in England, a Labour member of the House of Commons questioned the impartiality of the Speaker at a public meeting in London, and action was taken in his case in the House of Commons the next day. I can imagine that some member of this House might possibly go outside and reflect upon the impartiality of the Speaker. If that happened I think that, before we could deal with him absolutely on the same lines as are followed in the House of Commons we ought to take into consideration the position in which the Speaker of the House of Commons is placed, and his environment. I am indebted to a book in our Library, written by Mr. Edward Lummis, which deals with the Speaker’s chair for very interesting information about the Speaker of the British House of Commons. He says -

The Speaker of the House of Commons has in simple truth many of the attributes of Royalty. The Speaker lives in a Royal palace; he has his own court, his own civil list, and his own public household. His person is girt with much of the divinity that doth hedge a king.

I do not know that those statements apply to the Speaker of our House, and I do not think that the general idea in Australia is that we should attempt to fling around, even the ablest and most distinguished and impartial of our Speakers, the divinity that doth hedge a king. It is laid down as an essential in the House of Commons that the Speaker should dissociate himself absolutely from party politics. It is the invariable custom that he should not be opposed if he offers himself for re-election as Speaker, although there is nothing in the rules or Standing Orders of the British House of Commons to say that he shall not be so opposed. To show how strongly that custom has been observed, when Mr. Gully, a Liberal, was elected Speaker by eight or eleven votes, while a Liberal Government were in office on the retirement of Mr. Peel, it was said by the Conservatives and Liberal Unionists at the time that if return 3d to power after a general election they purposed running a candidate of their own party. They came back from the general elections with an overwhelming majority, yet they did hot remove Mr. Gully from the Speakership, and he was re-elected. Further, it is not the practice to oppose the Speaker when standing for re-election in his own constituency. Immediately a member has been made Speaker of the House of Commons, both parties agree not to oppose him. Mr. Harry Graham, in a very interesting book dealing with the House of Commons, says -

On 22nd July, 1813, at the prorogation of Parliament, Speaker Abbott, took it upon himself to deliver at the Bar of the House of Lon ls a lengthy party harangue on the subject of Catholic emancipation. This frank exposition of his private political views roused the indignation of the Commons, who took an early opportunity of expressing their disapproval of his conduct. Not even his friends could condone his action, and in April of the following year a resolution was moved in the House of Commons gravely censuring him for his behaviour on that occasion. For several hours he was forced to listen to criticisms and abuse from both sides of the*

– I shall not.

Mr THOMAS:

– If the honorable gentleman will not do so, then I shall believe that he made the statement I have attributed to him. If it were possible for the Prime Minister to attend a pubHe meeting and say, “ I can depend upon the casting vote of Mr. Speaker,” no fuss would be made in this House. But if, in the House of Commons, parties were equally divided, and Mr. Asquith attended a public meeting, and said, “ There is a vote of censure pending, but we have the vote of Mr. Speaker to fall back upon,” I venture to say a perfect pandemonium would be witnessed on the following day. In my opinion, it is very necessary that we should have this standing order excised and that we should be a law unto ourselves. As cases crop up, we should deal with them. Simply because we have not the same environment, it is not wise that we should fall back upon the rules of any Parliament - even those of the Mother of Parliaments, with all its traditions and history, of which every person born in England is so proud. Those traditions, because they relate to a civilization which is hoary with age, are inapplicable to a Parliament which is throbbing with the first pulsations of life.

Mr HIGGS:
Capricornia

.- I desire to say a few words in reference to the New Hebrides. I hold in my hand a communication from Messrs. Kerr Bros., of New South Wales, who complain that no rebate of duty is allowed on the produce of British settlers in the New Hebrides unless it is forwarded by the steamers of Messrs. Burns, Philp, and Company, which is the only Australian shipping company trading with the New Hebrides. Personally, I do not think any advantage is to be derived by Australia from endeavouring to encourage settlement in the New Hebrides by granting a rebate upon produce such as maize, which is grown by cheap labour, and which comes into competition with the produce of Australian farmers, who are taxed to pay the expenses incurred in endeavouring to settle the New Hebrides. I would like the Minister of Trade and Customs to take this matter into his consideration.

I am also in receipt of a letter from Messrs. Kerr Brothers, in reference to a debate which was originated in this House by the honorable member for Maribyrnong. It is a communication which was sent to the public press of New South Wales, which, I think, ought to appear- in Hansard, and to which, I think, a reply should be made. I presume that the persons who are affected by it will be able to reply to it. It reads as follows: -

New Hebrides.

Sir,

Mr. Fenton (Victoria), on Wednesday last, moved the adjournment of the House of Representatives to ventilate conditions existing in

New Hebrides, and termed those conditions “ a disgrace to white men,” that women and children should be torn from their relations by recruiters and forced to work on plantations. . Now, I wish to say that, although no doubt Mr. Fenton in all good faith moved in this matter, the conditions alleged as existing are altogether distorted and unreliable. The Presbyterian Mission of New Hebrides persists in making glaring statements that do not in any reasonable way represent conditions existing. It goes without saying that in any circumstances there will be incidents of abuse in any country or condition of life, whether under the British flag or any other flag; but to say that an incident of abuse represents the condition of affairs in the place is absurd.

Because a person was murdered in Sydney, it cannot be put down to “ awful conditions “ generally in Australia.

The natives in New Hebrides are easy-going, indolent, and generally suffer from want of regular work. There is no such thing as poverty among them as we know it among white peoples. They live in their native way with very little effort, as prolific Nature is very kind to them, and they have their native foods in plenty.

Our Presbyterian Mission friends would make it appear that the natives are in an awful condition, that recruiters go round snaring them, taking them away from their homes, ill-using them, and doing everything inhuman it is possible to imagine. I say this is absolutely untrue. The native is a very independent gentleman nowadays, and only goes away for plantation work when it suits him, or he has got into trouble with his tribe.

Conditions of life on plantations are very good- indeed, as the appearance of the natives on any plantation will show. They live a better life, are healthier and better men, than while leading the indolent life they do in their tribes. As to treatment on the plantations, hours of work, rations, &c, they are fully protected by the conditions of engagement, and those conditions are strictly carried out.

The principal trouble that arises in recruiting is in regard to women. Their marriage obligations are hardly on the lines recognised by white people, as the woman changes husbands or the man changes wives, and there is some trouble ; perhaps the woman runs away with her new husband and they recruit to some handy recruiting vessel to get away from the trouble. Perhaps the missionary wants to marry a young girl to some old native who supports the mission. She objects, and runs away, recruits on some French recruiting ship, and then we hear some awful vara of kidnapping, taken away against her will, and so forth.

Under the terms of the Convention women were allowed to be recruited ; but, at the instance of the Presbyterian Mission, a King’s regulation was passed which prohibited British settlers recruiting women at all.

The French have carried out the terms of the Convention, whilst the British have practically had to give up recruiting, let their plantations lie idle, and look on. But why blame the Frenchman for all this? Here they blame the Frenchman, but in the islands nobody’s reputation is safe. British settlers are dragged to Vila on some trumped-up charge. What does it avail that they prove the charge false? As an instance, Mr. D. H. Kerr was summoned to Vila on a charge by a Presbyterian missionary, had to bring his witnesses to Vila, proved the charge false, but he lost a lot of valuable time, and altogether it cost him about £200..

What recourse have the British settlers against this sort of thing? This is simply an instance; there are others. I do not think there is a British settler, except a few ex-missionaries, or those under the wing of the Mission, who have not been brought to Vila on some trivial and trumped-up charge.

We are not suffering from Government control, but missionary rule. No one objects to the missionaries trying to raise the natives to a higher plane of life, but the Mission should not be allowed to rule the country. Of course, their statements carry a lot of weight here and in Great Britain, where the actual conditions are not known. The present British Commissioner does not pander to the Mission or any other body, but the trouble is beyond his control.

Australia undoubtedly should have control of these islands - they are a natural dependency - and they could be administered in a more rational way from here, where local conditions would more readily be known. But save us from missionary rule. The friction between the British and French is almost wholly created by the missionaries. There are incidents perpetrated at mission stations which would make “ white men” ashamed. It would be as reasonable to apply this to all missionaries as for them to apply remote incidents of abuse in recruiting as general conditions in the islands.

I am, &c., (Sgd.) Graham L. S. Kerr.

Sydnev 14th November, 1913.

The writer of that letter is a member of the firm of Kerr Brothers Limited, Sydney and New Hebrides. Their Sydney address is 375 George-street. Mr. Kerr’s view is entitled to be placed on the records with the other views which have been put before this. House. I wrote to Mr. Kerr to ask him whether any of the missionaries are engaged in trading in the New Hebrides, and £ received from him the following reply -

In regard to the question of Presbyterian missionaries engaging in trade in the New Hebrides, it is a well-known fact that some of them do, and it has been a public scandal for years. The Mission Synod have, I believe, at various times, brought the matter up, but apparently they are not able to control all their members.

A permanent Joint Protectorate, representative of both countries, founded upon conditions giving security for investment and settlement, preventing any preferences being granted to settlers of a particular nationality, and establishing a Government capable of protecting the natives, securing religious liberty, and fostering civilization in the group, would certainly be preferable to the state of affairs that now obtains. The harbors of the group, while open to commerce, would not, in that event, become the basis of hostile action in the Pacific. The permanence of the Protectorate need not imply that its minor terms must be unalterable. It would be most acceptable if the conditions upon which the Protectorate is to be established, or any amendment of them afterwards, in addition to receiving the approval of His Majesty’s Government and the Republic of France, were submitted for the consents of the Commonwealth and of New Zealand prior to their adoption by His Majesty’s Government. *

The sentiment of the people of the Commonwealth is so averse to anything resembling a sacrifice of the great Imperial possibilities of the New Hebrides that this inquiry is tentative only, in order to ascertain the prospects of such an arrangement, and afford an opportunity for its consideration in the event of no better alternative being open to us.

No reply was given to that despatch until 1906, when the following telegram was received from the Colonial Office: -

Referring to your despatch of 29th August, and (2) referring to your telegram, 5th December, Joint Anglo-French Commission has signed

Convention for submission to British and French Governments for settlement of questions in New Hebrides. Convention will not be confirmed until .His Majesty’s Government has had opportunity of considering views of your Ministers. Copy will be sent by next mail.-.

The copy referred to was sent, and the terms of the Convention were outlined. The Convention provided for a Court dealing, on the French side, with the French residents, and, on the British side, with the British residents of the islands. Mr. Deakin thereupon pointed out that separate tribunals for French and British were objectionable ; that there should be a common Court for the territory. He pointed out, further, that the Convention gave the employers of native labour too much power; that the conditions under which land was to be allotted would enable native land-owners to be exploited; and that it was possible that the conditions under which native labour might be employed might bring about something in the nature of slavery. Letters which have since reached members of this House show that Mr. Deakin’s fears have been justified, or, at least, afford ground for urging that there should be a thorough inquiry into the government of the islands, to ascertain how far the charges of injustice can be sustained. Although the Imperial Government invited suggestions regarding the Convention from the Commonwealth Government, the same despatch informed the Commonwealth Ministers that the agreement which had been drawn up would have to be rejected or accepted practically as it stood. The conferences between the representatives of Great Britain and France on the subject Of the Convention extended over eight or nine months, but no reference was made to the Commonwealth Government regarding them, nor was any information given of the meetings, except through the newspapers. Diplomatic considerations might have prevented the Imperial Government at the time, from making public what was transpiring, but there should have been official communications with the Commonwealth authorities while the representatives of the two nations were conferring. Better still, as suggested by Mr. Deakin, when Prime Minister, the Government should have been invited to send a delegate representing the Commonwealth and New Zealand, or the Commonwealth and the Dominion should each have been invited to send a member to the Conference in order that the views and sentiments of Australasia .might be represented, -seeing that at some time or other we shall inevitably have to exercise a kind of parental control over these territories. From the correspondence between New Zealand and the Colonial Office, and the Commonwealth and the Colonial Office, which was laid on the table in 1907, it can be seen that the whole of the negotiations were carried on without any . reference to the Commonwealth or the Dominion. We now hear rumours, filtering from exactly the same source as the information filtered respect-‘ ing the Conference in 1906, that there is a possibility, of some modification of the terms then agreed upon. The French residents of the New Hebrides have been making far greater strides than the British residents. According to a recent return, two-thirds of the freehold land are held .by the French, and only one«third by the British, while we know that subsidized steamers run between the New Hebrides and France under specially favorable trade conditions. My chief purpose is to ascertain, if possible, from the Minister whether there are any negotiations going on with respect to a modification of the present agreement, involving greater concession to the French residents without any cognisance on the part of the Federal Parliament. This is a matter of great importance to us. We know that the Joint Protectorate was instituted without the knowledge of the Commonwealth Government, and it would seem that we ought to be on our guard in regard to the future. A close perusal of the objections taken to the present Convention by Mr. Deakin will show that all the fears he expressed have, according to recent information, been fully justified. Apart altogether from the value of the territorial possessions of Australia, from a strategic point of view, we have also to pay some regard to the broad question of the proper treatment of the natives. I feel sure that the Minister of External Affairs is giving close attention to this matter ; and I hope that he will be able to procure an independent and direct report in regard to the administration of the law on the island, so as to show whether the very serious charges presented to the House last week have any justification. We ought to know at the earliest opportunity whether the Courts of Justice are working satisfactorily, and whether or not it would be wise to continue to allow French jurisdiction to control the French people, and English jurisdiction to control the British residents. It was pointed out by Mr. Deakin that the divided control would lead to serious complications, and he re’ferred to what is now one of the present troubles, namely, the power of the magistrate to remit penalties after these have been imposed by the properly constituted Courts. This power has been disclaimed, but, as I say, it was pointed out as a likely thing to occur if the Convention were ratified in its original -form. I hope the Minister will .be able to tell us how far the negotiations, if any, have advanced between France and Great Britain with a view to an amendment, and also whether there is any possibility of an early and independent report regarding the natives.

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

.- I do not know that I should have referred to the New Hebrides at the present juncture had it not been for the letter quoted by the honorable member for Capricornia. I received the same communication .myself, and I find that it has ‘been published in one of the Sydney newspapers. -I also notice that the Minister of External Affairs received a deputation a week ago in Adelaide, when very full representations were made to him from the mission and church stand-point in respect to the state of affairs in the New Hebrides, and I was more than pleased to read the very generous reply that the Minister gave to the deputation. I should not like to misinterpret any words of the honorable gentleman, but there are one or two sentences to which I should like to refer. I took the Minister to speak of a Mr. Kerr, and I do not know whether that is the same Mr. Kerr to whom reference has been made to-day.

Mr Glynn:

– I did not mention him; I spoke “of a petition which. had been sent, professedly by British residents, to the French Commissioner, asking that the French should be given the islands.

Mr FENTON:

– In any case, it is strange that that should be the same name as appears at the foot of the communica-tion received by honorable members. I have had several letters * from various quarters concerning this matter, and one as late as this morning. We are prepared, of course, to pay every ^attention to communications we receive from what we regard as responsible quarters, but we may not be inclined to accept all they say as representing exactly what has occurred, because the writers, of necessity, must get their information sometimes -secondhand. I have, however, received a communication which is official so far as it -concerns a particular denomination whichhas missionaries there. Strange to say, the letters received from people on the -islands practically corroborate many of the main statements made by the Rev. G. L. Paton, and, unless those letters are representative of the true state of affairs, I can hardly conceive of the missionaries of three important denominations appending “to the circular from which I read on the occasion their signatures. When I spoke previously on this matter, I contended that if there was one thing the British nation ought to -do it was to take care of the native -.races, and see that they get justice. I have in my hand a communication from Mr. J. I. Mudford, who is secretary to the Federal Foreign Missionary Committee of the Churches of Christ in Australia, and who happens to be a constituent of mine. He writes -

The following information may be of use to you in dealing with the New Hebrides question : -

Our Foreign Missionary Committee passed a resolution at its meeting on 17th inst. This resolution appeared in the Argus on Thursday, 20th inst. Unfortunately I have not a copy by me as I write. “ Mr. B. A. Chappell, our .missionary on the Isalnd of Maewo (New Hebrides), wrote on 16th September last, ‘ Am glad the resolutions carried at Paama are being taken up by the Federal Parliament. I do trust that conditions here will be changed for the better, so that the unfortunate natives and Britishers will receive justice.’ “

Mr. F. G. Filmer, under date 16th September. 1 013, with reference to the kidnapping case of 1st “November, 1912 (see Mr. Paton’s pamphlet, “ Slavery under British Flag,” pages 5 and 6), that the three natives concerned “have been -quietly returned” to Pentecost. “ No justice has been dealt out.” The three had “eight months’ slavery, during which time the only one who could speak English was knocked senseless several times., first by the brutal buccaneer of a Frenchman, who is over 6 feet, “and weighs about 16 stone, and then bv ten natives, to whom Tie was handed over for three days’ punishment for daring to tell the native advocate that he was stolen.”

I understand that the native advocate is a solicitor named Jacomb, who takes a great interest in the natives -

Under same date, Mr. Filmer writes-‘* Over «ix (6) years ago a Frenchman of this island brought an Ambrim man and his wife to Pentecost under engagement to work three years. At the end of that time they ran away here for protection; the Frenchman followed, and, seeing that I could do nothing, I obtained promises of better treatment for them, and then advised them to return with him. They went. The man was flogged, and then put aboard a vessel and sent away. About a week later it- was given out by the Frenchman that he had jumped overboard and been eaten by a shark. The woman has laboured on for three years and four months since then, until yesterday morning she again arrived here for help. The Frenchman followed and demanded her. I would not let him’ touch her, and so he went off in his boat for govermental aid. He has not yet returned, but will be too late when he does, for to-day I ran .the woman over to Ambrim in the launch, an’d gave her back to her own people.” (I tlo not know that this latter case will be of assistance. Mr. Filmer does not say whether the woman signed on at the expiry of the first three years. It does, however, seem to show that she must have been ill-treated.) “ A Frenchman cannot be touched by our officials,” Mr. F. continues, “and his own pre afraid to touch him, or he will head a petition for his removal, and away will go the French official who dares to interfere with the colonist.”

Mr. A. T. Waters, missionary on Island of Oha, writes under date 24th October, 1913 . - “ The French trader at Longana (Oba) was taken prisoner by the natives recently, and tied in the smouldering ruins of a big ‘ kamale ‘ (men’s quarters), which he had burned, till he paid *£20. They got tired of waiting for the Condominium, and took the law into their own hands. The heathen wanted to kill him. He has since sold out, and taken to the sea.” “ Two .months ago the French section of the Condominium Government sent the ‘ man-of war,’ and look to Vila our leading teacher, Peter Pentecost, and about twenty-five other men from the same district, as witnesses in a disputed land case, Natives v. The French Company. A number of these men are Christians, including several of our teachers and the ‘ Government head men.’ I am informed that the French Government is exploiting them for ‘free labour’ on the public works. One man was found dead in his cell. Mr. Jacomb, the lawyer, is looking after their interests in the ,case and keeping me informed.”

Mr. Waters gives information to show that, not only Frenchmen, but others, are implicated, in law breaking. “Another company of four men,” he says, “are going to. Vila on ‘this steamer as witnesses in a case of illegal recruiting of women, by a Britisher this time. He is really a Scandinavian, under the British flag.”

– They did so in this case, but it was after the agreement of 1906 was made.

Mr FENTON:

– I am not prepared to say that the best has been done for Australian interests in the arrangements made by the British Government concerning the New Hebrides. I do not think I am out of order in saying so. At the last Imperial Conference, Mr. Asquith and Mr. Harcourt intimated to the delegates assembled what course the British Government would take. Sir Joseph Ward,

Mr. Fisher, Mr. Batchelor, formerly Minister of External Affairs, and others, had made very strong representations, pointing out that the British Government sometimes entered into, and completed, treaty arrangements, and utterly ignored the Dominions, and claiming that as the Dominions were part and parcel of the Empire, they should be consulted before arrangements, where their interests were vitally concerned, were finally ratified. I know that the present Minister of External Affairs has made certain representations on this subject, and I hope - and believe that my hope is well founded - that he will not allow one rebuff to balk him in placing the true Australian view in regard to the New Hebrides before the British Government, though I do not imagine that he will receive any rebuff from the Colonial Office or any British Minister, or even the British Government. I hope he will particularly draw attention to the fact that the Condominium, and some of the Courts in the New Hebrides have fallen into disuse. Unfortunately, men are detained awaiting trial, and pending the arrival of a British or French warship to constitute the Court they are hired out as slaves. This treatment is not likely to lead the natives to respect the white race, because delayed justice is often even worse than the punishment actually meted out for the offence. We cannot ignore what is going on in the New Hebrides from the point of view of the protection of the natives, of the work of the missionaries, and of Australian trade with the islands, nor from the point of view of the important geographical position of the islands, lying as they do midway between the two great countries of Australia and America, and on the route to other countries, now that the Panama Canal is opened. I believe the Minister realizes that this is a very serious question to Australia, and one in which Australians must always take a very lively interest.

Mr DANKEL:
Boothby

.- It has been my intention <;o say a word or two before the close of the session upon the very important subject of the Northern Territory, and I embrace this opportunity. Those who hail from South Australia know that the matter of the Northern Territory has been a question of great prominence in the Houses of Parliament in South Australia for many years past. Ever since 1864, when the Northern Territory was taken over by that State, the subject has been discussed over and over again. I look upon the Northern Territory as a white elephant to Australia. I go further, and say that it seems to me the Territory is not only a white elephant, but a Moloch, into whose throat we are continually shovelling wealth without getting any return. I have heard very long speeches, and very eloquent speeches, in the South AustraHan Parliament upon the subject of the Northern Territory, but whenever a speech was delivered, it always struck me as being full of meretriciousness. I think it is just about -time we faced the real position. We should not play the part of the ostrich, which foolish bird hides » its head in the sand, and, with its head so hidden, thinks that everything is lovely and- right. We should really be true to ourselves in reference to this part of the’ Commonwealth. I have heard glorious descriptions of the Northern Territory. I have heard references in the South Australian Parliament to this “ glorious inheritance “ of ours,” its “boundless resources,” and its “undeveloped possibilities;” but there is very little truth in many of these statements. I do not think there is any honorable member of the House, or any person with common-sense outside, who for one brief moment really thinks that these descriptions tell the truth in regard to the likelihood of the Northern Territory becoming a paying proposition within the life of even the youngest Australian living amongst us to-day. Honorable members may ask, “ Have you been there?” Some honorable -members have been there for a little while. I have not been there, but I have made it my business again and again to speak to people who have not only put in a day or two in the Northern Territory, not only been on a brief visit there, but who have lived there for a considerable number of years. A few days ago I spoke to a gentleman, an ex-Federal Minister, who has spent some time in the Northern Territory, and some of his friends have lived there for years. It is the opinion of every one of these men to whom I have spoken - and there are dozens of them - that this Territory is a white elephant, and that we should face the proposition in a different manner from the present. For two years I sat in the State Parliament of South Australia alongside the late Mr. Thomas Crush, the representative of the Northern Territory. He lived in the Territory, and he had nothing to say against it; he was passionately fond -of it, and he liked to live there ; but even he had to admit that he did not think for a moment it was likely to be a paying proposition within a reasonable time.

Mr Sampson:

– Was he referring- to mining or agriculture?

Mr DANKEL:

– In his opinion, the only hope for the Territory - that is, the northern portion extending about 150 miles from Port Darwin - lay in the mining industry.

Mr McDonald:

– And mining would not settle anybody there.

Mr DANKEL:

– Not permanently. We know mining matters are usually very erratic, and that one never knows when a mine will become worked out. A fortnight ago I made it my business to speak to an old friend of mine ‘in South Australia, who had spent twenty-one years in the Territory, who knew practically every inch of it, who had travelled over it from one end to the other. He also ridiculed the idea of the Government offering free farms, and giving the settlers an advance up to £800. He predicted that people might go there, remain until the money was expended, and thensuddenly come back again. The main objection, as far as the northern part of the Territory is concerned, is that white people cannot live there with comfort and decency. They cannot bring up their families with any hope of having strong, healthy, virile children. The climate does not agree at all with many of the children when they come to the age of puberty. The same old gentleman told me that when women come to the change of life, it is absolutely necessary for them to leave those climes and come southward in order to recuperate. It is of no use for us to try to settle the Territory with white peoplewhen there is no possibility of them bringing up their families there with any hope of their, growing up physically strong.

Sir John Forrest:

– What does the honorable member suggest?

Mr DANKEL:

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member for Maranoa must not interrupt in that persistent way.

Mr CONROY:

– Of course, I shall have to support this expenditure just as every member of the Labour party will be bound to support it, unless he wishes to pass a vote of censure on- the late Minister of Defence. These commitments, having been made, must be carried out. It does not matter whether I disagree or agree with this expenditure, it will be necessary to pass these votes this year, but next year the Liberal party will be in a position to put forward their own Estimates, and to put an end to the wanton extravagance upon military affairs that has recently taken place. It must be remembered that the members of the present Government came into office only three days before the close of the financial year. They had only about two days in which to cut down the Estimates of expenditure before them, and at most they could not, in the time, cut off more than about one one-hundred-and-eighty-third of the whole expenditure.

Mr Tudor:

Mr ROBERTS:
ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– If the honorable mem ber had an elementary knowledge of the Defence Act he would know that they cannot be ‘Called out.

Mr CONROY:

Mr Conroy:

– The Labour party would double the expenditure if it came intopower.

Mr ROBERTS:
ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– That is a violent assertion, like others that the honorablemember has made. What authority has he for it ?

Mr Conroy:

– The previous conduct of the party.

Mr ROBERTS:
ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– Has the honorablemember changed his colour again:? Hashe made another jump from the grass to the tree ? Not only can he speak of thepast, . but he can also prophesy. However, I shall not pursue the subject further. I merely desire to put into Hansard’ a few words which will follow his, so that those who read that publication, and donot know the honorable member for Werriwa, may not he misled by what he hassaid.

Mr GLYNN:
Minister of External Affairs · Angas · LP

– In compliance with the suggestions of the honorable members for Wimmera and Maribyrnong, I wish to say a few words to allay anxiety regarding the position of the NewHebrides business I did not know that that matter was to be brought under notice this afternoon ; but, while honorable members were speaking, I jotted down a few heads, to which I shall now makeshort references. I may, in the first place, assure the Committee that the Governments concerned are, in my opinion. fairly seized of the essential facts for dension. The representations which have been exhaustively made by such bodies as the Associated Churches, which met on the 13th June last, at Paama, and forwarded resolutions, not only to me, but to other honorable members, have been eommunicated to the Imperial Government; as has also the report of a deputation which subsequently waited on me. There will be sent, too, by next mail, the report of a representative deputation which met me in Adelaide on the 17th of this month. Its members comprised representatives of the Church of England, of the Presbyterian Mission, and of the Church of Christ, who have had a zealous and disinterested connexion with the New Hebrides for a period extending over sixty-four years.

Mr Fenton:

– Are you referring to the native who tried to escape, and was shot while in the water?

Mr GLYNN:

– Yes. I cannot take everything for Gospel that is said to me by deputations. A Minister has to secure other sources of information in order to criticise and examine matters. He must be guided by people’s characters, by their services to duty, and by their sacrifices in their callings, and so forth. It is my duty in submitting representations to the Home Government, with the view to their being forwarded to the French Government, so far as it is reasonably possible, to sift these statements, and to see that they are sufficiently tested as to their accuracy; but beyond that, from official sources alone, I believe there are several matters sufficiently established to be capable of being brought before both Governments. I need not go into all the weaknesses of the Convention. There are several flaws in it. For instance, there is the provision against the supply of firearms to the natives, but Miss Grimshaw says, that notwithstanding this provision, the New Hebrides are practically an explosives magazine. Firearms seem to be very freely and wantonly used, not for crimes, but in a general way throughout the islands, and that may be due to the f .a0t that shot-guns are excepted, and shotguns are quite as effective as rifles in, times of peace. Then, again, there is a difficulty that the Naval Commission is not very frequent in its visitations to certain parts of the islands. I believe that the British man-of-war clears out in the hurricane season. Sometimes the French boat remains during the hurricane season, but as the vessels of both Powers must act jointly, an island must await a visit from both warships before the Commission can have jurisdiction, and in the meantime a man who may have been arrested is kept and treated as if convicted. There was one case where a man at Vila was kept for eleven months before trial, which is very harsh procedure against a native. Seeing that we are of the white race, and interested in the welfare of these coloured races with which we come into such close relationship, this must strike us as exceedingly harsh treatment. I shall not detail all the weaknesses of the Convention. There were some pointed out in 1905 by the then PrimeMinister, Mr. Deakin, in a communication sent to the Imperial Government. We have also recently communicated with the Imperial Government, drawing their attention to the fact that the established weaknesses - I am using the word “ established “ authoritatively, not only on. what has been said, but on sources that are official - were foreshadowed in a communication of 1905, after the terms of the Convention has been accepted, and it was too late for effective criticism. It was stated in one despatch -

But it will be seen that under Article LVI. the Joint Court is to inflict penalties and to assess damages for breaches of the regulations in order to insure reasonable uniformity in the’ punish- . ment of offences.

Mr. Deakin, in one communication, went on to- point out in the correspondence to which the honorable member for Wimmera has referred, on the question of the different laws that apply for different offences in the islands -

What is desired by us is the establishment of uniform conditions so as to secure perfect equality of treatment of all persons, French or English, an equal degree of cognisance of their wrong doings, and an impartial allotment of punishment where such is merited. It is felt that this will be almost impossible to be maintained under the system of separate tribunals administering separate systems of law which will in no way be bound by each other’s decisions. It is. easy to conceive how serious difficulties may arise through the peoples, of two nations living under sets of laws which in important features, or in administration, may produce or permit undesirable discriminations.

– Is it the pleasure of the Committee that the Minister of External Affairs have leave to continue his remarks?

Leave granted.

Mr GLYNN:

– This despatch is not confidential, and I may refer to it. It is in reference to the petition alleged to have been sent by some British residents of the New Hebrides, asking the Resident Commissioner of France to advocate the cession to France. This petition was sent Home, and considered by the Imperial Government, on a despatch sent by, I think Mr. Mahaffy. That was the occasion of the despatch, dated 29th August, 1913, from Mr. Harcourt to Lord Denman, our Governor-General, of which I shall give this extract -

I shall, be glad if yon will assure your Ministers’ that His Majesty’s Government are not considering, any proposal for allowing the New Hebrides to become a French possession.

In conclusion, all I can say is that we have endeavoured to interpret the sense of Australia in this matter. That feeling was reflected in 1905, and ‘ I believe the Imperial Government will not ignore us when any vital arrangement is established, deciding the future control of the New Hebrides.

Mr SHARPE:
Oxley

Mr TUDOR:

– If we can give greater facilities in either place, we have a right to do so. I have never approached any Postmaster-General with a view to securing a concession in the city, and I have never opposed the extension of telephonic facilities to the country. Our postal rates should be such that everybody can take advantage of them.

Sir Robert Best:

– That branch of the Department pays well.

– I did not get it from the honorable member. It was given to me, and there is no- reason why we should not know what we say about each other. The Prime , Minister, when Leader of the Opposition, said -

Meantime, these facts emerge with regard to the Post Office : -

The ordinary outgo, therefore^ exceeds the income by -an amount in the region of halfamillion. But to this must be added new works and buildings, which mean Another £1, 152,275.

Mr Bennett:

– Whether the report is right or wrong.

Mr TUDOR:

– It happens to be right, for . I have absolute proof now. On Saturday last, I waB down at the place where the honorable member made the statement, and I can get half-a-dozen men to make a statutory declaration that he said that- £3,000,000 had been spent by the Labour Government, and that no one knew where the money had gone ; and that a . Church . of England minister at that particular meeting which the honorable member addressed during the election campaign said it was robbery. I think that every member of the House, including the honorable member for Gippsland, will admit that each Department has to account for every Id. which it expends. Whether money is extravagantly spent or not is another matter, but every penny ‘of every vote must be accounted for. Yet we have the wild statement made that £3,000,000 was spent under the head’ of” Contingencies,” and not one penny of that amount was accounted for. In this year’s Estimates the amount for . “ Contingencies ‘.’ will be over- £3,500,000. Dealing with the contingencies for the Postal Department, the Prime Minister, when he was leading the Oppo sition, made this statement on page 28 of The Financial Carnival -

Take, as an instance of its necessity, the huge increases in items such as “ Contingencies,” which, in thelost Office alone,has risen from £450,000 ten years ago to £1,090,000 to-day.

The honorable gentleman was referring to the expenditure last year. The amount has gone up this year to £1,238,000, . showing an increase of £148,000. Referring to new Departments, the honorable gentleman said -

There is, for instance, a new Department, called the Prime Minister’s Department, and a sum of £50,000 is set down for the cost thereof.

This year, nnder his own control,’- the cost of the Department is to be £83,000 according to the Estimates. If the expenditure of £50,000 on the Department last year was gross extravagance, surely the expenditure of £83,000 on.it this year will be . more gross ! If it was extravagance to spend £1,090,000 on contingencies for the Post Office last year, and ‘it was doubtful -where the money went to, ‘ although I know it was not doubtful at all, surely it is worse to spend . this year £1,258,000 on contingencies for the same Department?

Mr Atkinson:

– That all depends upon the circumstances of the case.

Mr TUDOR:

– They are on exactly the ‘ same lines to-day.

Mr Atkinson:

– We have to pay for them’ this year. You did not have them so far advanced last year.

Mr TUDOR:

– Contingencies are not works and buildings.

The CHAIRMAN:

– Order I The honorable member’s time has expired.

Dr. MALONEY (Melbourne) [8.471.- I intend to devote most of my remarks to a speech- which was made by the honorable member for Boothby, and in which he took up a position regarding the settlement, of the Northern Territory that is entertained by most persons outside who have not given some study to- the subject. Twenty years ago every remark he made would possibly have been supported by scientific men, hut to-day, with the record of science triumphing over diseases in the tropics, I can look forward with a heart full of hope to the early and permanent settlement . of the Territory. The tropics produce a vast amount of food that is needed by the centres of population. The peoples of the world are increasing so fast that they will have to push into the territories even in the tropics. The difficulty hitherto, has been that the tropics generally, have been inhabited by a large population who are willing to accept remuneration at a very low rate. When white persons attempt to settle down in the tropics they have first to meet certain diseases. Dr. Breinl, Director of the Institute for Tropical Diseases at Townsville, is one of the highest authorities in the world. In three lectures he gave here recently he showed very clearly that the tropics of Australia have many advantages with which the tropics in other parts of the world cannot possibly compete. First of all, he stated that where the men may have a chance to succeed, the women have not, for reasons which cause them at certain times to spend a period of the year in a cooler climate. As honorable members understand, that can only apply to persons possessed of means. But one great point is that the women folk in the tropics, ou account of the cheap labour, do not do as much work as health would need them to do. Our aboriginals cannot possibly assist in the daily routine of the household duties. But in our tropics we have this advantage, that we have to face only disease and heat. I intend to quote a few words from a synopsis of the lecture which Dr. Breinl delivered in Melbourne last Monday night. His three lectures were free to every one, but I am sorry to say they were not as well attended as they should have been. He said -

The influence of high temperature on the animal organism has been studied by many workers, both by observations carried on in the tropics and under artificially produced conditions. The results of these experiments are by no means conclusive, but they appear to point lo the fact that no essential difference obtains between the methods employed by the human organism in regulating its temperature and carrying on its functional activities under tropical conditions, from those which obtain in a temperate climate.

Of the organs of the body the blood is suspected to suffer the most under the influence of a tropical climate. Observations have been made on the number of blood corpuscles and quantity of red coloring matter in the blood of acclimatized Europeans in the East Indies, and on that of American soldiers on service in the Philippines, and these showed that no appreciable change had taken place. Similar observations are being carried out in Townsville on the blood of school children, and so far these show that there is no appreciable difference between the blood of children of the second and third generation, as far as the number of corpuscles is concerned.

– The honorable member for Maranoa will bear me out in the statement that Queensland has a lower death-rate than any other State of the Commonwealth, although there are more kanakas there than in any other State, and the death-rate of the kanakas under the best conditions was ten times that of the white man. To conclude my quotations from. Dr. Breinl’s lecture -

Tropical Australia, enjoys a unique position in tropical lands, lt has a diversity of climate, ranging from the bracing atmosphere of a high tableland to the humid, hot conditions of the coastal districts. The almost total absence of a black population renders the dealing with disease an easy matter, so that we have actually only one factor which might prevent the successful colonization by a white working race - that of climate.

– I admit that the Prime Minister is very skilful in debate.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– It is the whole point. He does it regularly.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– It would require a good deal of searching to ascertain the number of times on which the Speaker of the House of Commons has given a casting vote.

Mr Atkinson:

– But he does do it when the numbers are even. That is the point.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I wish to refer to a case relating to the administration of the Maternity Allowance Act, which I brought under the notice of the Treasurer a few weeks ago, and in regard to which I think I should have had a sympathetic reply. I hope that, in the administration of the Act, there will be displayed a little more sympathy than is evidenced in this case. I propose to read the letter which I sent to the Treasurer, and which sets forth the facts. It is dated 9th October last, and is addressed to Sir John Forrest, M.P., G.C.M.G., Federal Treasurer, Melbourne. It reads - and I shall leave out the name of the woman concerned - as follows: -

Dear Sir John, - There is a case in my electorate coming within the administration of the Maternity Allowance Act which 1 think is a hardship, and in which I think an injustice has been done. It is in the case of Mrs.- , of Enmore.

During August (I have not the exact date by me), Mrs.- gave birth to a child, which lived about three hours only. An application was made for the maternity allowance, but was refused on the ground that the child was not “ viable.” The matter was brought under my notice bv a mutual friend, which caused me to make personal investigations. There was no doctor in attendance at the birth, and the nurse did nol give her whole attention to the case. Being very poor people, I understand the nurse comes in for a small fee and simply visits the patient in the same way as a doctor would do - at intervals. The mother and child were, therefore, without assistance for some hours immediately after birth, and during this period, it appears, the child died. The birth was premature; the nurse gave her opinion about six months; but the mother states that it was nearer seven, and I tnink the mother’s statement would be more accurate. The child was born alive, and was capable of living,and did live for about three hours. The mother states that she could have saved the child had she been able, without a risk to her own life, to give it the attention required. This she was unable to do. I am quite positive there were no undesirable circumstances, such as it is the policy of the Act to prevent, present in this case. I find that in the case of several of Mrs.- children they were born under the same circumstances, and ore now healthy children. It appears there is some medical reason for these early births. On the1st September I wrote to the nurse and asked the following questions : -

Was the child a full-time baby?
Was it born naturally?
Was it born alive?
Did it live after birth; and, if so, how long? and -received the following answers : -
No.
Yes.
Yes.
To my knowledge, one hour and a half. (I sent a copv of my letter to the nurse and her reply to the Department in Sydney.) There are the whole facts in a nutshell. Vou could call for the papers from Sydney, and you would find that I have represented matters unsuccessfully to” the departmental head. In my opinion, the. Department are relying upon some provisions of the Act which enable them to refuse the application, which I think is harsh and undue straining of the law. Section c (3) gives a discretion to the Administrationto pay the allowance, where it is satisfactorily proved by evidence that a child was born alive or was a viable child, to dispense with medical certificates. In this case the mother was too poor to provide medical assistance, and in view of the previous experience it was not thought to be so necessary as it transpired afterwards. And as there was no doctor it is an absolute impossibility for a doctor’s certificate to be produced. It seems to me the intention of the Act is to discourage objectionable practices. I am absolutely sure there is no suggestion of anything of the kind in this case. The nurse has answered some stereotyped questions, and these have been construed to the detriment of the application. I asked the Department locally to send an inspector out to interview the nurse, who would at once impress any officer of her reliability, and she will give the most positive statements that everything in this case is bond fide. The fact that the nurse only knows that the child lived for one and a half hours is due to the fact, as I stated before, that she went in and attended as a medical man and left, and it was during her absence that the death took place. This is a case of very great hardship. The funeral expenses are still unpaid : the husband of the woman in question was away looking for work in the country at the time, and in view of all the circumstances I would suggest that you might exercise your authority as Minister to see that the technicalities are weighed and the inherent justice of the case itself recognised.

– It is idle to quibble about the- technicalities of the-

Act. The Treasurer knows perfectly well that, if a flagrant injustice is brought under his notice, he has power to remedy it.

Sir John Forrest:

– I am not sure that an injustice has been done. On the honorable member’s own statement, I think it is very questionable. It appears to me that he is likely to be wrong. It is purely a medical question. Whether a child which lives only one and a half hours - and especially a seven-months’ child - is a viable child, is a matter for a doctor to determine..

Mr J H CATTS:

– Some of the greatest men who have ever lived have been seven-months’ children. If an injustice has been done in the honorable gentleman’s Department, we have a right to hold him responsible for it. At any rate, I hope that he will look into the facts of the case. If a doctor had been available, of course, the certificate could have been forwarded, and it would not have been open to question. But the people are very poor, and after the child had died it would have been idle to call in a medical man. The fact is that the child was born alive, and lived for some time, and the dictionary meaning of the word “viable” is “born alive and capable of life.” I ask the Treasurer to look into’ the papers.

Sir John Forrest:

– I will do that.

Mr J H CATTS:

– If the honorable gentleman expresses an opinion that a mere technicality has prevented justice being done, I am sure that the error will be rectified.

Mr FINLAYSON:
Brisbane

– I desire to reply to an interjection by the honorable member for Wilmot concerning the censure motion which was moved in this House by the Hon. Alfred Deakin, on 21st June, 1912. In the course of a speech extending over three and a half hours, no less than fifteen pages of Hansard are occupied by Mr. Deakin in referring to the Brisbane tramway strike. He concluded his remarks by moving -

That the following words be added to the Address : - “ And to inform Your Excellency that the Government merits the censure of the House and the country foa- its failure to realize its national and constitutional obligations, for flagrant neglect of its duty to secure industrial peace and good order, and to uphold the law within the Commonwealth ; for its maladministration of public affairs and public departments; for its gross partisan actions and ap pointments, and its reckless irresponsibility in the financial affairs of the Commonwealth.’’

Mr Atkinson:

– What does that say about sending the military to Brisbane?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Honorable members who were in this Chamber at the time will recollect that the whole debate turned on the question of the correctness or otherwise of the conduct of the late Government in refusing to send the military to Brisbane.

Mr Atkinson:

– I say that it did not.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Honorable members will recollect what took place on that occasion. I propose to read, in this connexion, tlie opinion expressed by Colonel Heard, of New Zealand, in regard to the position there. He says -

Many people do not realize the seriousness of the position when the military are called out. I have seen it in Ireland, and know what it meant. It is only at the last emergency that the military should be used. If soldiers and sailors come out they do not come out as police, as some people seem to think, simply tu look on. They come out as soldiers, with rifles, ball cartridges, and bayonets, and come out to shoot if called on by the civil POW* to do so.

My whole desire in raising this question is to endeavour to create in the minds of honorable members a horror of any such position arising in Australia. I should not Have mentioned the matter, but for the remarks of the honorable member for Werriwa. I believe that we are travelling towards a better state of affairs. I well remember that, during the debate on the censure motion, which took place in 1912, the then Ministerial supporters remarked with some surprise that the present Prime Minister made very slight reference to the Brisbane strike. But he said - as will be seen by reference to Hansard, page 149-

I was never more serious than I am in expressing the hope that both sides will vie with each other to keep Syndicalism out of Australia. We do not want it here. We have, I hope, in this sunny land of ours a more excellent way of dealing with these matters. What I fear is, however, that the people outside will become disgusted with the legislative tinkering of Labour Governments from time to time. As a matter of fact, if I am any judge of the situation, they are becoming disgusted. Their votes on every conceivable occasion show that they are. So far as honorable members opposite are concerned, the handwriting is already on the wall. They may smile, but the people of Australia, and their own supporters in particular, are turning from them in thousands, and it is important to note in what direction their faces are set. It becomes us to inquire very seriously into the question of industrial unrest. I subscribe entirely to the statement made by my leader that something ought to be done to encourage to the fullest extent . greater cooperation_ greater harmony and better and more intimate relationship - between the capitalists of Australia and their own workmen.

– I shall refer to that later. This is ‘what appears in the Sunday Times. The honorable gentleman is reported to have said -

What will happen then I caDnot say, except that we shall win again, probably by our usual majority of one.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– What is there wrong about that)

Mr THOMAS:

– That one is the Speaker. I am not objecting to the honorable gentleman having said that.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– It was not a positive statement anyhow, as the honorable gentleman can see for himself.

Mr THOMAS:

– With respect to what occurred ‘ at Wangaratta, the honorable gentleman is reported in the Argus of l2th September to have said -

In the House of Representatives it might be possible to scramble through with the. assistance of the Speaker and the Chairman of Committees. In these circumstances it did not look as if the present Parliament would be a very long one.

The honorable gentleman there said that in the House of Representatives it might be possible for the Government to. scramble through with the assistance of the Speaker and Chairman of Committees.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
ParramattaPrime Minister and Minister of Home Affairs · LP

– I am much obliged to the honorable member for Barrier for answering a tissue of misstatements that my honorable friends opposite are repeating throughout this country. They have repeatedly made me say that I had. the Speaker’s vote in my pocket.

Mr Thomas:

– Did I say that this afternoon?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– The honorable gentleman now says that all I ever said was a mere expression of opinion as to what would probably happen-

Mr McDonald:

– The honorable gentleman should not stir it up again.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– It was only an expression of opinion as to what would probably happen in the case of an equal vote. I hope my honorable friends will no longer make the- statement to which I have referred, now that out of their own mouths they show that there is not the slightest justification for it.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Resolution reported.

Standing Orders suspended.

Report adopted.

Resolution of Committee of Ways and Means covering resolution of Supply adopted.

Ordered -

That Sir John Forrest and Mr. W. H. Irvine do prepare and bring in a Bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill presented by Sir John Forrest, and passed through all its stages.

House adjourned at 10.35 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 26 November 1913, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1913/19131126_reps_5_72/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives26 November 1913

QUESTION

LETTER-CARRIERS’ CLOTHING

Mr RILEY:SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr AGAR WYNNE:Postmaster-General · BALACLAVA, VICTORIA · LP

QUESTION

HANSARD REPRINTS

Mr FISHER:WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND

Mr JOSEPH COOK:Minister for Home Affairs · PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

Mr Fisher:

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

Mr SPEAKER:

QUESTION

SMALL-POX OUTBREAK

Mr WEST:EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr JOSEPH COOK:LP

COAL VEND PROSECUTIONS

Mr McDONALD:KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND

Mr W H IRVINE:FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr Fisher:

Mr W H IRVINE:FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr McDonald:

Mr W H IRVINE:FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

QUESTION

KALGOORLIE TO PORT AUGUSTA RAILWAY

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

Mr JOSEPH COOK:LP

QUESTION

AMMUNITION WAGGONS

Mr MATHEWS:MELBOURNE PORTS, VICTORIA

Mr JOSEPH COOK:LP

QUESTION

NORTHERN TERRITORY

Mr FALKINER:RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr GLYNN:Minister for External Affairs · ANGAS, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

QUESTION

FEDERAL CAPITAL : PARLIAMENT HOUSES

Mr FINLAYSON:BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND

Mr JOSEPH COOK:LP

Mr FINLAYSON:

Mr SPEAKER:

QUESTION

TELEPHONE GUARANTEES AND RATES

Mr BENNETT:GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA

Mr AGAR WYNNE:LP

Mr TUDOR:YARRA, VICTORIA

Mr AGAR WYNNE:

Mr SAMPSON:WIMMERA, VICTORIA

Mr AGAR WYNNE:

QUESTION

TELEPHONE INSTRUMENTS : LOCAL MANUFACTURE

Mr FENTON:MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

Mr AGAR WYNNE:LP

QUESTION

COUNTRY TELEPHONES

Mr PATTEN:HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr AGAR WYNNE:LP

QUESTION

WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY: LAND SERVICE

Mr LIVINGSTON:BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr AGAR WYNNE:LP

PAPERS

COCKATOO ISLAND DOCKYARD

Preparation of Plans

Sir JOHN FORREST:Treasurer · SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

QUESTION

SUGAR INDUSTRY: EXCISE

Mr BAMFORD:HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

Mr GROOM:Minister for Trade and Customs · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · LP

Mr TUDOR:

Mr GROOM:

QUESTION

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ BUSINESS

Mr HIGGS:CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

Mr JOSEPH COOK:LP

Dr MALONEY:MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

Sir JOHN FORREST:LP

QUESTION

RAILWAY TRAFFIC

Mr GLYNN:LP

House of Representatives
26 November 1913

Mr RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr AGAR WYNNE:
Postmaster-General · BALACLAVA, VICTORIA · LP

Mr FISHER:
WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
Minister for Home Affairs · PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

Mr WEST:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

Mr McDONALD:
KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND

Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

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

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

Mr MATHEWS:
MELBOURNE PORTS, VICTORIA

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

Mr FALKINER:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr GLYNN:
Minister for External Affairs · ANGAS, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

Mr FINLAYSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

Mr BENNETT:
GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA

Mr AGAR WYNNE:
LP

Mr TUDOR:
YARRA, VICTORIA

Mr SAMPSON:
WIMMERA, VICTORIA

Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

Mr AGAR WYNNE:
LP

Mr PATTEN:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr AGAR WYNNE:
LP

Mr LIVINGSTON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr AGAR WYNNE:
LP

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

Mr BAMFORD:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

Mr GROOM:
Minister for Trade and Customs · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · LP

Mr HIGGS:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

Sir JOHN FORREST:
LP

Mr GLYNN:
LP

Mr PAGE:
for Mr. Burchell

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · Swan · LP

Mr THOMAS:
Barrier

Mr RODGERS:
WANNON, VICTORIA · LP; NAT from 1917

Mr HIGGS:
Capricornia

Mr SAMPSON:
Wimmera

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

Mr DANKEL:
Boothby