House of Representatives
12 June 1918

7th Parliament · 2nd Session



Mr. Speaker (Hon. W. Elliot Johnson) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 5772

PETITION

Mr. CHARLTON presented a petition from certain residents of Cessnock, New South Wales, praying the House to prevent the deportation of Italians for military service.

Petition received.

page 5772

QUESTION

ENEMY COMPANIES

Mr KELLY:
WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES

– When goods belonging to a company declared to be an enemy company are sold by public auction, what happens with the money paid for them? Is it held by the Public Trustee for the ultimate benefit of the shareholders of the company?

Mr WATT:
Treasurer · BALACLAVA, VICTORIA · NAT

– I cannot be expected to give, off-hand, a definite answer to the question. I believe that the money goes into the hands of the Public Trustee, but I cannot say what its eventual destination is. If the honorable member will give notice of the question, I shall make an inquiry into the subject.

page 5772

QUESTION

PRICE OF SUGAR

Mr HIGGS:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

– Has the Treasurer concluded with the Government of Queensland any business arrangement on the sugar question?

Mr WATT:
NAT

– I thought that we had come to an arrangement, and was therefore surprised to receive last night a telegram in which the Treasurer of Queensland suggests very wide variations from the agreement at which we had arrived with the Premier of that State. I have replied in another telegram, and I hope to have an opportunity this afternoon, as the Premier of Queensland is passing through Melbourne on his way to Western Australia, to chat over the matter with him.

page 5772

QUESTION

CENTRAL WHEAT BOARD

Mr GREGORY:
DAMPIER, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– In connexion with the charges of the honorable member for Cook (Mr.Catts) in reference to the censoring of certain statements alleged to have been made by Mr. Giles, the repre sentative of the wheat-growers on the Central Wheat Board, will the Acting Prime Minister, as such misrepresentations may create unjust suspicion in the minds of producers, permit Mr Giles to make, free from censorship, a statement in reply which cannot affect our relations with our Allies?

Mr WATT:
NAT

– I am not aware that there has been any suppression of statements made by Mr. Giles, but if my honorable friend will give notice of the question, J shall make an inquiry from the Minister who is responsible for the Wheat Pool.

page 5772

QUESTION

THEFTS OF MAIL BAGS

Mr RILEY:
SOUTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is the PostmasterGeneral aware that there has been another disappearance of mail bags on a Sydney railway? Is the Government of New South Wales responsible for mail bags in transit from one station to another, or is the responsibility that of the PostmasterGeneral’s Department?

Mr WEBSTER:
Postmaster-General · MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– My Department is responsible for the safety of His Majesty’s mails until they have been handed over to the railway authorities, who then become responsible for their safe custody and proper delivery.

page 5772

QUESTION

WIVES OF INTERNED MEN

Mr HIGGS:

– Are the wives of internees permitted to live in internment camps with their husbands, as in some of the German prison camps in the Old Country ?

Mr WISE:
Honorary Minister · GIPPSLAND, VICTORIA · NAT

– I am not aware, but I shall inquire.

page 5772

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Manufacture of Wire Netting

Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA

– In the report of yesterday’s proceedings which appears in today’s Age, it is stated that -

Mr. Fenton (V.) asked whether the Acting Prime Minister could, in conjunction withthe State Government, make arrangements for the utilization of the wire netting machinery at Pentridge, either by the employment of prison or other labour.

I wish to correct that report.The unrevised Hansard report - and the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) will, no doubt, support my statement that it is the correct one, because his reply showed that hehad caught my meaning - is this -

Will the Acting Prime Minister endeavour, in conjunction with the Victorian State Go- vemment, to have the machinery for the manufacture of wire netting, which is now lying idle at Pentridge, put into operation, and other than prison labour employed in the industry, so that the requirements of the Commonwealth in this regardmay be satisfied ?

page 5773

QUESTION

LANDLORD ANDTENANT

Soldiers’Wives and Widows.

Mr WATKINS:
NEWCASTLE, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Is the Minister for Works and Railways in a position to make a further statement in reply to the question that I asked yesterday concerning the effect of the moratorium on the letting of houses to the wives of soldiers?

Mr GROOM:
Minister for Works and Railways · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · NAT

– It may be convenient if I answer in one reply the questions of the honorable member and of the honorable member for Herbert (Mr. Bamford). Yesterday the honorable member for Herbert asked -

Is the Acting Attorney-General (Mr. Groom) aware that the moratorium regulations are expressly excluded from all contracts for the sale or leasing of properties of any magnitude? I have been engaged in two transactions in which there would have been no sale if consent had not been given to such exemption being stated in the contract of sale. Will the honorable gentleman state whether the owner of a house occupied by the dependants of soldiers in the same way could contract himself out of the provisions of the moratorium ?

The War Precautions (Moratorium) Regulations provide that those regulations shall not apply to any mortgage, agreement for sale and purchase, or lease containing an optional or compulsory purchasing clause, which is executed after the 20th September, 1916, if the mortgage, agreement, or lease contains a condition or covenant expressly excluding the provisions of the regulations. TheWar Precautions (Active Service Moratorium) Regulations, those which relate to soldiers and their dependants, contain no such provision, and a lessor is not empowered to contract himself out of the provisions of those regulations. In this connexion the further question was asked by the honorable member for Newcastle (Mr. Watkins) -

Is the Acting Attorney-General aware that property owners, knowing that they cannot evict the wives of soldiers, are now refusing to let their houses to such persons, and will he take steps to so extend the moratorium regulations as to meet such refusals?

I invite the honorable member’s attention to tbe following provision of the War Pre cautions (ActiveService Moratorium) Regulations : - “17(4) Any member of the Forces or female dependant may, if he or she thinks fit, require the owner of a dwelling house to which this regulation applies, which is vacant, or is about to become vacant, to let the dwelling house to him or her at a reasonable rental, and the owner shall, unless he has reasonable cause for refusing so to do, let the dwelling house accordingly.”

If the owner of a dwelling house refuses, without reasonable cause, to let the house in accordance with this provision, he is guilty of an offence.

page 5773

QUESTION

SCOTTISH REGIMENT

Mr SINCLAIR:
MORETON, QUEENSLAND

– Does not the Minister for Recruiting consider that the war situation demands that every effort should be put forth to stimulate recruiting? With that end in view, have the Government considered yet the advisability of raising a Scottish regiment?

Mr ORCHARD:
Honorary Minister · NEPEAN, NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– That matter comes within the province of the Minister for Defence.

page 5773

QUESTION

SALUTING GERMAN OFFICERS

Mr RILEY:

– Have instructions been given to the mcn who have been called up for home defence, and are placed in charge of the German internees at Canberra, that they must salute the German officers? If so, can that practice be discontinued?

Mr WISE:
NAT

– I shall make inquiries, and give the honorable member an answer to-morrow.

page 5773

QUESTION

HONEY

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

– Is it the intention of the Government to fix the price of honey? If so, will the Minister in charge of foodstuffs, instead of arbitrarily fixing prices without regard to oversea values and the interests of the industry, give the apiarists, through their organization, an opportunity to state to him their side of the case?

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– In view of information that has reached us, to the effect that large quantities of honey are being purchased and stored by various commission agents in Australia, it is considered advisable to declare honey a necessary commodity, so that inquiries may be made. The apiarists, in common with everybody else interested, will have an opportunity of giving evidence before the Chief Prices Commissioner before the price is fixed.

page 5774

QUESTION

MEAT PRICES

Mr TUDOR:
YARRA, VICTORIA

– Has the Acting Prime Minister any further statement to make to the House regarding the fixation of the price of meat ? If not, are members likely to get that information before Parliament adjourns at the end of this week?

Mr WATT:
NAT

– I have no further statements make to-day, and it depends upon the speed with which the Minister in charge of the matter completes his work as to whether he will be able to make a statement in move detail before Parliament adjourns.

page 5774

QUESTION

SOLDIERS’ TRAIN FARES

Dr MALONEY:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

– Can the Assistant Minister for Defence inform the House if the Victorian Government are allowing any reduction on soldiers’ tickets to Broadmeadows and the Flying School at Laverton ?

Mr WISE:
NAT

– I will obtain an answer for the honorable member by to-morrow.

page 5774

QUESTION

NAVAL COLLEGE

Mr FALKINER:
HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Will the Government consider the advisability of raising the entrance age for the Naval College? At present, the age is thirteen, and there are hundreds of bush boys who, having less educational advantages than city boys, are not qualified at thirteen to enter the college.

Mr POYNTON:
Honorary Minister · GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

– I will give the matter my earnest consideration. There is a good deal to be said in favour of the honorable member’s suggestion. I will give him an answer later.

page 5774

QUESTION

CENTRAL WOOL COMMITTEE

Mr RILEY:

– Will the Government consider the advisability of appointing to the vacancy created on the Central Wool Committee by the retirement of Mr. F. W. Hughes a representative of the secondary branchof the wool industry? I refer to the fellmongers, tanners, and similar trades.

Mr WATT:
NAT

– The matter of filling the vacancy has been referred to the Central Wool Committee for consideration, and I have not yet received any reply from that body, but I will take an early opportunity of consulting with the chairman as to the advisability of filling the vacancyin the manner suggested.

page 5774

QUESTION

KALGOORLIE-PORT AUGUSTA RAILWAY

Linking tip with New South Wales System.

Mr CONSIDINE:
BARRIER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Has the Acting Prime Minister any information to give the House regarding the progress of the negotiations between the State and Commonwealth Governments for the linking up of the Kalgoorlie-Port Augusta railwaywith the New South Wales system?

Mr WATT:
NAT

– There have been no actual negotiations. The matter originated some months ago by a letter from the New South Wales Government to the Commonwealth Government suggesting the route from Port Augusta to Broken Hill, and via Condobolin.to Sydney. The Commonwealth Government considered the matter, and decided that the route suggested was not the best one for an east-west connexion between Sydney and Western Australia. They gave to the Government of New South Wales their reasons in a document that could not fail to convince even the honorable member for Barrier.

page 5774

QUESTION

FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY

Land Settlement

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Home and Territories, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that thousands of acres in the Federal Territory are at present unoccupied except by rabbits, and that much of this land has been enclosed and wire netted, and if placed under occupation would be suitable for afforestation and cultivation, and would make suitable homes for many returned soldiers?
  2. If so, will he take steps to bring this land into use and occupation, so that homes may be established there?
Mr GLYNN:
Minister for Home and Territories · ANGAS, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · NAT

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

  1. There are practically no lands suitable for grazing or agriculture in the Federal Capital Territory which are not held under lease for varying terms.
  2. The question of making suitable areas available for permanent settlement by returned soldiers and resident lessees has been under consideration for some time, and plans are being prepared showing what lands could be annually made available, and the classification of the same. These plans are nearly completed, and I am in touch with the Minister of Repatriation regarding the settlement of soldiers on suitable areas.

page 5775

QUESTION

KALGOORLIE TO PORT AUGUSTA RAILWAY

Rolling Stock

Mr Mcwilliams:
for Mr. Gregory

asked the Minister for Works and Railways, upon notice -

As Inter-State shipping may possibly be further reduced, what special efforts, if any, are being made to provide rolling-stock for the conveyance of goods on the transcontinental railway?

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– The Commonwealth Railways Commissioner states sufficient trucks are available for goods traffic.

page 5775

QUESTION

NAVY CONTRACTS

Alleged Attemptedbribery

Mr STORY:
for Mr. Lister

asked the Assistant Minister for the Navy, upon notice -

  1. Whether, in connexion with the Navy contracts, the meat contractor was recently found attempting to bribeanofficer on a ship to accept meat of inferior quality?
  2. If so, have any steps been taken to punish the offender-, and whatis the name of the firm ?’
  3. If the statement in paragraph 1 is correct, is the same firm still supplying meat under military contracts ?
Mr POYNTON:
NAT

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

  1. Some eight months ago- there was an incident of that description.
  2. The contract was cancelled. It is not desired to mention the firm’s name in view of possible proceedings on the return of the ship.
  3. The firm has no naval contracts. It is not known if it has military contracts.

page 5775

QUESTION

SUPPLY OF WOOLPACKS

Mr JOWETT:
GRAMPIANS, VICTORIA

asked the Assistant

Minister for the Navy, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that out of the total of 35,000 bales of woolpacks required: for the coming Australian clip of wool there are not more than 10,000 bales available for Australia ?
  2. Is it a fact that general shearing in Australia will begin In July and August, and that 25,000 additional bales of woolpacks are urgently needed for the purpose of packing the wool?
  3. Is it a fact that sufficient freight has not been provided for these 25,000 bales?
  4. Is it a fact that theCarina, expected, to load this week at Calcutta, could bring 14,000 bales of woolpacks if allowed?
  5. Is it a fact that the Carina is expected to be followed in a month’s time by the Fan- kalilla, which could bring about 10,000 bales if allowed?
  6. Is it a fact that, unless the Carina and theYankalilla are allowed to bring their full quantities of woolpacks, there is a serious prospect of a large portion of the Australian wool clip being damaged owing to the lack of woolpacks ?
  7. If so, will he endeavour to obtain priority for woolpacks in the Carina and the Yankalilla, and in subsequent steamers, until the 25,000 bales have been shipped ?
Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

-This question should have been addressed to me. The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow: -

  1. Yes.
  2. Yes.
  3. Every effort is being made to obtain sufficient freight.
  4. If she carried nothing else, probably nearly that quantity.
  5. Yes, if fully loaded with woolpacks; but other requirements must be met.
  6. Much depends upon the success of the efforts being made by the Government to obtain additional freight.
  7. Priority has already been given woolpacks, but, as pointed out in. answer 5, other requirements must be considered.

I wish to add that this matter was dealt with in my statement yesterday. The Government is fully apprised of all the facts, realizes the urgency and. pressure of the problem, sindis giving constant attention to. it.

I should like to add that since the answer to this question was framed by direction, another cablegram has been received, and that the news in regard to shipping is of a far more favorable character. I hope to be able to give the House full information to-morrow.

page 5775

QUESTION

AMALGAMATION OF BANKS

Mr WEST:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Treasurer,upon notice -

  1. Has the Treasurer received any official notification from the eight banking establishments in Australia that they propose to amalgamate the four banking establishments?
  2. Is it a fact that, under similar circumstances, the British Government appointed a Committee of twelve members to consider and report as to what extent, if at all, amalgamations between banks might affect prejudicially the interests of the industrial and mercantile communities, and whether it was desirable that legislation should be introduced to prohibit such amalgamations, or to provide safeguards under which they should continue to be permitted ?
  3. If so, will the Treasurer, in the public interest, make inquiries or obtain an official report on the mattter?
Mr WATT:
NAT

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

  1. Official notification has been received as regards six of the banks which have recently amalgamated. The only information of the proposed amalgamation of the other two banks is that which has been published in the press.
  2. Such a report has appeared in the press, but no official advice has been received.
  3. If this question refers to the subject of question 2 the answer is “ Yes.”

page 5776

QUESTION

HANDLING- OP OVERSEA MAILS

Prevention of Contagion from Scabies.

Mr BLAKELEY:
DARLING, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

  1. Whether it is a fact that nien handling mails from overseas are subject to a, disease called “scabies”?
  2. If so, what measures are being taken for the prevention of contagion from such disease?
  3. Is it a fact that permanent officials arc paid while absent suffering from this disease?
  4. Is the payment also made to casual employees; if not, for what reason?
Mr WEBSTER:
NAT

– Until a few minutes ago I had no information on this matter, and the answer that I had intended to give was that I knew nothing of it, but that if the honorable member would supply me with particulars I would investigate. I have since received some information which I propose to give by way of answer to the honorable member, as follows : -

  1. No. One officer presented himself to the Commonwealth Medical Officer on 17th April with well developed “scabies,” which had not been contracted through his work.
  2. He was immediately put off duty, and was not allowed to. resume till free, from contagion. Three other officers subsequently developed the contagion, which they had probably contracted from the first before he reported. They were dealt with similarly to the first, and were not allowed to resume duty until free from contagion. All have resumed.
  3. Yes. Under Public Service Regulation 77.
  4. Yes. In terms of sick leave arrangements for temporary employees. One temporary officer concerned who was absent thirteen days. He was allowed three days six and threequarter hours with pay, which, with a previous absence, made up a total of six days with pay due under the arrangements referred to. Balance of nine days one and a quarter hours without pay.

page 5776

QUESTION

RABBIT EXTERMINATION

Supply of Phosphorus

Mr PIGOTT:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Assistant Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

In view of the recent statements made by the Acting Prime Minister that there were hig stocks of phosphorus in Australia, will he inform the House why this commodity is almost unprocurable by farmers for rabbit extermination, and why the price is prohibitive?

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– In my reply to a question on this subject on the 7th instant, I said that the census taken in February last showed that there were con’siderable quantities of phosphorus and rabbit poison in the Commonwealth. It is not known that supplies of rabbit poisons are difficult to procure, but immediate inquiries will be made. The question of the price will be inquired into by the Prices Commissioner.

As to supplies from Great Britain, I desire to state that phosphorus is a prohibited export from Great Britain to all destinations. Phosphorus and its compounds are used in large quantities for direct or indirect war purposes and many essential industries, and while stocks which appear large may be held in some cases, the fact that phosphorus has only within the last few months been declared a prohibited export to all destinations is sufficient proof that there is no surplus in . Great Britain. Representations have been, and are being, made to obtain phosphorus from Great Britain for rabbit destruction and for other industries, and as soon as any is available for export it will be allowed shipment.

page 5776

QUESTION

STANDARD WOOLLEN COMPANY

Alleged “ Profiteering

Mr BLAKELEY:

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

Has the Minister any report to make in connexion with certain charges.- laid by the honorable member for Darling with reference to the Standard Woollen Company and the alleged “ profiteering “ of the people by a German firm?

Mr JENSEN:
Minister for Trade and Customs · BASS, TASMANIA · NAT

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

On 4th July, 1916, the Standard Woollen Company, to which the honorable member for Darling referred, was declared an “ enemy firm “ under the Trading with the Enemy Act 1914-1916. After due inquiry, the SolicitorGeneral recommended on 29th December, 1917. that an order be made by the Minister for Trade and Customs under section 9h of the Trading with the Enemy Act 1914-16 that the business of the Standard Woollen Company be wound up. The order was signed on 7th January. 1918, and Mr. H. H.Sherlock, a public accountant and senior partner of Messrs. Densham and Sherlock, accountants, and auditors, 53 Queen-street, Melbourne, was appointed controller.

In the disposal of the stocks of the Standard Woollen Company, Mr. Sherlock followed the policy of the Department of selling by public tender. This course was considered fair to all parties, and was approved by me prior to action being taken.

As to the disposal of the proceeds of the liquidation after all creditors have been satisfied, the Trading with the Enemy Act 1914- 1916 specially prescribes that so far as enemy subjects are concerned, the money is tobe paid to the Public Trustee, whilst any balance, after the discharge of liabilities, is to be distributed amongst persons interested therein in such a manner as the Minister directs. The question of the disposal of any profits secured over the book value is at present receiving my attention, and the honorable member for Darling may rest assured that if practicable, anyundue profits will be passed to revenue.

page 5777

QUESTION

MEAT PRICE FIXING

Mr WEST:

asked the Acting Prime Minister, upon notice -

In connexion with the statement made by him as to the price fixing of meat, does the Government refer to the London parity in the open market or the Imperial contract price as appears in the Inter-State Commission’s report?

Mr WATT:
NAT

– The reference was to the Imperial contract price parity.

page 5777

QUESTION

ANZAC DAY LEAVE

Pay of Returned Soldiers, Cockatoo Island

Mr WALLACE:
WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Assistant Minister for the Navy, upon notice -

  1. Whether the returned soldiers who were given a “day off” from Cockatoo Island on Anzac Day have been paid for such holiday?
  2. If not, what reasons are given for not paying them?
Mr POYNTON:
NAT

– Instructions were issued that returned soldiers were to be granted leave of absence on full pay on Anzac Day to attend the celebrations. Some members were unable to produce a certificate that they had attended parade, and their pay was withheld. The general manager now states that the certificates will be dispensed with, and payment has been authorized to all returned men who were given leave on that day.

page 5777

QUESTION

MEDALS FOR SOLDIERS’ MOTHERS

Alleged Breach or Wages Award

Mr WEST:

asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -

  1. Has any action for the alleged breaking of the Wages Board’s awards been taken against the contractor who is making the medals for the mothers of soldiers of the Australian Imperial Force?
  2. If not, willhe cause such action to be taken as will insure the employees being paid in accordance with the conditions of the contract?
Mr WISE:
NAT

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

  1. Action in this matter has already been commenced by this Department.
  2. Measures will be taken to see that the correct rates of wages are paid to all employees’ engaged upon the contract.

page 5777

QUESTION

BRITISH BORROWINGS IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Mr HIGGS:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

  1. Has the British Government during the war borrowed money in the United States of America?
  2. If so, what is the rate of interest to be paid on money soborrowed?
Mr WATT:
NAT

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

  1. Yes.
  2. The nominal rate of interest varied, in the case of different loans, from 5 to 5½ per cent. The effective rate of interest varied from5½ to 6 per cent.

This information relates to loans issued by Great Britain in the United States before the United States declared war. Since that time Great Briain hasnot issued loans in America, but the Government of the United States has made advances to Great Britain. The rate of interest on the advances made prior to 30th June, 1917, varied from 3 per cent. to4¼ per cent.

page 5777

QUESTION

EXPORT OF RAW SHEEPSKINS

Mr RILEY:

asked the Acting Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that the employees in the fellmongering industries hare been informed by the employers that it is probable they may shortly have to close their works?
  2. Is it a fact that priority is being given to the shipment of raw sheepskins over all other products, including wool and wheat?
  3. In view of the present urgent need for saving freight space, will the Minister insist that no sheepskins shall be shipped away, but that all shall be treated in Australia?
  4. Has he given the Central Wool Committee power to impose taxation in any form?
Mr WATT:
NAT

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

  1. I am not aware.
  2. As regards shipments to the United Kingdom, priority is given over wool to the extent of 1,000 bales, of a particular class of sheepskins per steamer when space is available.. These skins are urgently required for military purposes by Great Britain.
  3. War requirements must have first call over all other considerations. 4.No.

page 5778

QUESTION

MEAT IN COLD STORAGE

Wages Paid bt Hoskins Limited, Lithgow.

Mr NICHOLLS:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Trade and Customs, upon notice -

  1. Whether he will inform the House as to the amount of meat held in cold storagein the five States of the Commonwealth?
  2. Does the Government still assist Messrs. Hoskins Ltd., Lithgow, in the way of paying a bounty on all pig iron produced by that firm?
  3. If so, will the Minister take steps to see that the employees in that industry are paid a living wage?
Mr JENSEN:
NAT

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

  1. The information desired will be obtained and supplied to the honorable member.
  2. The Iron Bounty Act 1914-15, under which payment of bounty was made to Messrs. C. and G. Hoskins Ltd., Lithgow (which firm was the only claimant) on plg iron made from Australian ore, expired on the 31st December, 1916, and has not been renewed.
  3. See answer to No. 2:

page 5778

QUESTION

SMALL ARMS FACTORY: UNEMPLOYMENT

Mr NICHOLLS:

asked the Assistant Minister for Defence, upon notice -

Will the Minister consider the question of finding employment (temporary or otherwise) for the men who were previously employed at the Small Arms Factory, Lithgow, who are now idle through no fault of their own?

Mr WISE:
NAT

– The Minister has endeavoured to find employment for as many as possible of the former employees, with due regard to the policy of preference to returned soldiers. It is regretted that it is unlikely that there will be. many opportunities for re-employing the remainder of the former employees at the F’actory.

page 5778

QUESTION

MANUFACTURE OF WIRE AND CABLES

Mr HECTOR LAMOND:
ILLAWARRA, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Postmaster-General, upon notice -

  1. Whether he has considered the advisableness of installing a plant for reconditioning lead cables, or for the manufacture of wire and cables used in his Department?
  2. If so, has he arrived at any decision in the matter?
Mr WEBSTER:
NAT

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

  1. Yes, so far as reconditioning is concerned. The problem of manufacturing wire and cable in Australia is being dealt with by the Prime Minister’s Department. 2’. See answer to No.1.

page 5778

AVIATION CORPS

Case of Lieutenant Mcinerny

Mr NICHOLLS:

asked the Assistant

Minister for Defence, upon notice -

  1. Whether it is a fact that Lieutenant McInerny was removed from the Aviation Corps?
  2. If so, will he state the reason for the removal of Lieutenant McInerny?
Mr WISE:
NAT

– There is no record of any one of that name having gone through the Flying School. Perhaps further particulars can be given by the honorable member as to full name, &c.

page 5778

QUESTION

WEALTH REGISTRATION AND INCOME TAX

Dr MALONEY:

asked the Acting Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. If his attention has been drawn to a Bill to register the total wealth liable to income tax that has been introduced into the Legislature of the United States of America, and which has received the endorsement of Secretary McAdoo, who has estimated the saving to the revenue at £60,000,000 sterling a year. Vide Melbourne Herald of the 17th Maylast?
  2. Will the Acting Prime Minister, as Treasurer, consider the advisability of submitting a similar Bill to Parliament for the benefit of Australia?
Mr WATT:
NAT

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

  1. No.
  2. The matter will be considered.

page 5779

QUESTION

PRICE OF MOLYBDENITE

Mr NICHOLLS:

asked the Acting

Prime Minister, upon notice -

  1. Whether it is a fact that there is a large number of molybdenite leases held in Australia, the great bulk of which produces low-grade ore?
  2. Will he consider the advisability of regulating the price of molybdenite in order that the Australian producers may compete with other Dominions?
Mr WATT:
NAT

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

  1. There are a number of low-grade ore propositions, but the bulk are high grade.
  2. The Imperial Government fixes the price of molybdenite at 100s. per unit MoS2, 85 per cent. grade, payable at the producing centres. I would direct the honorable member’s attention to my answer to the member for Capricornia regarding wolfram (Hansard, page 44G0). It is hoped that whilst the Prime Minister is in London the matter will be adjusted, and uniformity established throughout the Dominions.

page 5779

PROFESSIONAL OFFICERS ASSOCIATION

Arbitration Court Award

Mr LIVINGSTON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Acting

Attorney-General, upon notice -

Does the Government intend to takeany action in connexionwith the award recently made by the Arbitration Court on the claim of the Professional Officers Association of the Public Service?

Mr GROOM:
NAT

– It is not intended to take specific action in connexion with the award, but the Government proposes at an early date to review the whole operation of the Arbitration (Public Service) Act. and to submit such alterations therein as appear necessary in the public interest.

page 5779

QUESTION

TELEPHONE OFFICIALS IN COUNTRY DISTRICTS

Mr NICHOLLS:

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

  1. Whether it is a fact that a large number of telephonic officials in country districts are complaining about the small remuneration that they receive for the work they perform?
  2. If so, will he consider their claim for an increase in their allowance?
  3. Isit correct that a large number of country mail contracts have been accepted at an abnormally low rate, and, if so, will he consider the claim of these contractors for an increase on their contracts?
Mr WEBSTER:
NAT

– The answers to the honorable member’s questions are as follow: - 1 and 2. I am not aware that such is the case, and as these officers are under an award of the Arbitration Court, I seeno reasonable cause for complaint.

  1. I am not aware of the fact. I do know, however, that the cost of mail services in the Commonwealth has increased by £18,055 during the past two years. Where mail or other contracts are let by tender, it would be unfair to other tenderers, and to the’ public, to increase the contract price during the period of the contract except under very special circumstances.

page 5779

QUESTION

DEFENCE DEPARTMENT

Information as to Employment.

Mr WISE:
NAT

– Last week the honorable member for Melbourne (Dr. Maloney) asked -

In view of the multiplicity of callings and occupations in the Defence Department, will the Assistant Minister for Defence favorably consider the issue of a leaflet so that those who desire to obtain employment there may know where to go?

I have to inform the honorable member that persons desiring temporary employment in the Defence Department should make application, either personally or by letter, to the Secretary’s office, Victoria Barracks, when they will be supplied with an application form. This form contains full particulars as to the class of employment available, and the officer to whom the application should be addressed. These particulars, I may state, have been shown on the form since 1915. Applications, when received, are registered, and on the occurrence of vacancies they are considered in order of receipt. Usually applicants are tested so as to ascertain their qualifications for vacancies which exist, and those found to be suitable are engaged.

page 5779

QUESTION

FIREWOOD FROM AMERICA

Mr POYNTON:
NAT

– Last week the honorable member for Brisbane (Mr. Finlayson) asked a question in reference to the importation pf firewood from America. Admiral Clarkson informs me -

With reference to my minute of 11th instant in connexion with the advertisement which appeared in the Sydney papers respecting the alleged importation of firewood from America : Inquiries made in Sydney indicate that this advertisement refers to a quantity of “ dunnage “ purchased by a fuel merchant ez American vessels. This “dunnage” consists of short pieces of wood used in and essential to the blocking off of cargo carried. It is in short lengths, and is practically valueless except for the purpose indicated in the advertisement, viz., utilization as firewood.

page 5780

ASSENT TO BILLS

Assent to the following Bills reported : -

Acts Interpretation Bill.

Supplementary Appropriation Bill1915-16.

Supplementary Appropriation (Works and Buildings) Bill 1915-16.

Supplementary Appropriation Bill 1916-17.

Supplementary Appropriation (Works and Buildings) Bill 1916-17.

War Loan Bill . (No. 3).

War Loans Securities Purchase Bill.

page 5780

SUPPLY BILL (No. 1) 1918-19

Military Raids upon Residences of Citizens - Shipbuilding : Importation of Officers - Estimates of Expenditure, 1917-18 - Shipping Board - Coax Trade - Sale of Australian Wool Clip - Price Fixing: Meat and other Foodstuffs : Kerosene and Benzine: Publication of Price. Lists - Adjournment of Parliament - Public Service Examinations - Employment of Returned Soldiers : Home Service - Interference with Members’ Correspondence - Censorship - Profiteering : Standard AVoollen Company - The War : Deportation of Italians: Australians in America: Situation on Western Front: Peace Terms - Australian Imperial Force: Soldiers’ Grievances: Ministerial Representation in London: Deductions and Delays in Payment : Recruiting Sergeants: Promotions : Administrative Staffs : Treatment of Soldiers on Transports : Invalided Soldiers in Bombay - Manufacture of Artificial Limbs - Queensland Frozen Meat: Claim for Storage.

Message recommending appropriation reported.

In Committee of Supply:

Mr WATT:
Acting Prime Minister and Treasurer · Balaclava · NAT

– I understand that it is the desire of honorable members that any remarks to be made might be made on the resolution, and in that spirit I submit and commend the following motion : -

That there be granted to His Majesty for or towards defraying the services of the year 1918-19 a sum not exceeding £5,574,440.

This represents roughly a fourth of the year’s Supply, and stretches through the months of July, August, and September in the next financial year. Some honorable members may not care for the procedure adopted - that is, postponing the ordinary Estimates for 1917-18, and asking the Committee to give attention to Supply for next year - but the main object of the Government, in recommending this procedure is to give the Senate some work to do.

Mr Mathews:

– You do not intend to close down discussion?

Mr WATT:

– No. The Committee has two chances of generally discussing financial and other matters. I should have been very glad if an arrangement could have been made to pass one of the Bills - either the Appropriation Bill or Supply for the new year - practically without discussion, and thus afford the two Houses a simultaneous opportunity to discuss the same problems. But we made such little progress yesterday that I hope the Committee will sanction the procedure proposed, and let us get back to the Estimates, when there will be the same opportunity for discussion as was enjoyed yesterday.

Mr Mathews:

– But when you get this Supply you can say, “ Ta-ta ! Kiss your grand-dad ! “

Mr WATT:

– If the honorable member thinks that the Government intends to do that, I give him the assurance that his surmise is not correct. I have told the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Tudor) that the Government desires the House to rise this week. But if the business is done in the way now suggested we shall still have three days in which to discuss matters, and, according to what I am led to believe by many honorable members, that will be sufficient time for the purpose. I hope that accusations of breach of faith will not be made by honorable members opposite who may misinterpret the circumstances.

Mr Mathews:

– I accept the honorable member’s word.

Mr WATT:

– I do not think that it is necessary to elaborate this motion. The £5,574.440 asked for represents one-fourth of the Supply for the coming year, based on this year’s expenditure. We cannot base it on definite calculations for the coming year, because they have not yet been made.

Therefore, as Governments and Treasurers have been obliged to do in the past, we have calculated the first few months of the coming year on this year’s results.

Taking into account a sum or £2,077,427 brought forward from the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Fund, and adding to that the revenue received for the first eleven months of this year, namely, £26,208,060, we get a total m hand of £28,285,487. The expenditure out of revenue for ordinary services, apart from tlie war, has been £20,153,347, and for services in connexion with the war - representing interest and sinking fund, war pensions, and other war services - £8,160,404. The total expenditure from revenue, therefore, has been £2S,313,751, showing on the 31st May a revenue deficit of £28,264. In’ addition to these expenditures out of revenue, a sum of £1,541,432 has been expended, to the 31st May, out of loan funds on works authorized by Parliament. The small revenue deficit of £28,264 has been covered by an appropriation of £30,000 from the Australian Notes Fund, for which parliamentary sanction exists. The amount of revenue received from direct taxation during the first eleven months - the period which I am covering - was 6,182,219. As the estimate for the year was £10,000,000, it will be seen that fully one-third of the anticipated revenue from direct taxation is expected to be received during the last month of the year; and judging by all the indications of the inflow of revenue, and the savings which the Departments can effect, as well as the condition of the public account on the 31st May, we shall have a small surplus at the 30t,11 June, as I indicated when introducing the last Supply Bill. I said on that occasion that it was expected that there would be a. surplus of at .least £750,000. The Treasury officials see no reason for varying that calculation. That is all the information that honorable members can expect at this stage; but if further particulars are desired, I shall be glad to give them on the Bill or at a later stage in Committee.

Mr TUDOR:
Yarra

.- As the Acting Prime Minister has stated, it is a rather unusual procedure to be discussing Supply for the next financial year when we have not passed the Estimates for the present year. The fault lies in the fact that the consideration of the Estimates has been postponed until they cannot be dealt with, except during the last few sittings of the House.

Mr Kelly:

– That has been the experience of the last three years.

Mr TUDOR:

– It has been experienced on several occasions; but it is a procedure against which I have always protested, even while I was a member of a Ministry, because it is not fair to continually hang up Estimates and deprive honorable members of the opportunity of discussing them before the money is spent. We are now starting off again to spend next year’s money to thi* extent of £5,500,000, excluding war expenditure, which, no doubt, will be covered by a separate Bill that it will be impossible to discuss during the next few days’. I do not suppose that it is the intention of the Acting Prime Minister to bring forward any proposal for works to be constructed out of loan funds before the House adjourns its present sittings. Of course the Government will run the business of the House and of the country to please themselves, independently of any advice that may be given from honorable members on this side, but they would be well advised in their own interests to allow honorable members the opportunity to criticise the way in which it is proposed to spend money before the money is actually spent. I hope that there are sufficient honorable members on the Ministerial side who will make their influence felt, and object to the procedure of spending money before opportunity is given to criticise the Government’s proposals for spending ;t.

The Acting Prime Minister tells us that he has nothing further to add in regard to the question of fixing the price of meat, and that further information during the present sittings depends upon the speed with which the Acting Minister can accomplish his task. I hoped that we would have a definite scheme placed before Parliament before it rises. I regret exceedingly that it will not be my privilege to remain during the discussion of this important matter. As a matter of fact, I cannot remain during the whole of the present sitting. I would like to hear honorable members on the other side of the chamber < objecting to the Government’s proposal to shut up shop before dealing with the meat question, and giving the public relief from the exorbitant prices which they are now paying. Yesterday we had the spectacle of two honorable members of the Opposition speaking after I had concluded my remarks on this question, and the only voices raised on the Ministerial side were in opposition to the proposal of the Government to take any action in this direction. Not a solitary voice was raised on that side in favour of the Government’s proposal. Apparently honorable members opposite are in sympathy with the idea that the people of Australia should continue to be exploited.

Mr Falkiner:

– We have been so diffident about opposing the experts on the honorable member’s side of the chamber.

Mr TUDOR:

– I have not the slightest, doubt as to how the honorable member will speak when he does get up. His interjections, and also those of the honorable member for Calare (Mr. Pigott), indicate th#.t both honorable members will back up the meat ring, and the continuance of high prices. No interjections from the Ministerial side sought to back up the consumers, or to claim that they were entitled to fair treatment.

Mr Archibald:

– I did not get a chance of speaking.

Mr TUDOR:

– I shall be pleased to hear any honorable member opposite say a word or two for the consumers, who represent 99 per cent, of the people of Australia, as against the producers of this article, who represent about 1 per cent, of the people. Apparently the whole of the Ministerial side is in sympathy with the 1 per cent., and not with the 99 per cent. It is possible that members opposite have, in their secret caucus told the Government their real opinions, and that, therefore, Ministers have reluctantly, nine months after the presentation of the first report of the Inter-State Commission, decided to take action : though exactly what they propose to do, not even their supporters know. I again protest against the taking away from Parliament of an opportunity for the full discussion of the Estimates. We cannot in one sitting deal properly with Estimates covering an expenditure, including war expenditure, but excluding expenditure on buildings constructed with loan money, of about £80 000.000. The Government is flouting the people by not permitting their representatives to discuss the Estimates fully and fairly. The intention is to hurry into recess, “nothing attempted,nothing done.” Many promises, but no performances, is the record of the Government. Ministers have been in office for more than thirteen months, but not one measure can be mentioned which will bring the ending of the war nearer; and all matters of vital “ importance to the people have been avoided.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– Why were these matters left off the list that the honorable member prepared when attending the Government House Conference?

Mr TUDOR:

– There was no attempt at that Conference to provide the Government with a policy. We merely set out there a list of the abuses which were hindering the success of recruiting.

Mr Archibald:

– It was a statement of the price demanded for support to the voluntary system.

Mr TUDOR:

– No price can buy my support. I could have been a member of the Ministry that preceded this one. had I been prepared to sacrifice my principles. I have always supported recruiting; but certain things have militated against the success of our efforts, and will continue to do so until they have been removed.. While the unrest caused by victimization, the deregistration of unions, the harsh administration of the censorship, and the passing of iniquitous War Precautions Regulations having no real connexion with the war, continues, it will be difficult to get recruits. This was recognised by those who attended the Government House Conference. Honorable members who read the report of the discussion that took place there will see that we did not make the removal of the abuses stated on our list the price of our assistance to recruiting; but I say, deliberately, that it is useless to attempt to get recruits without an honest effort to remove those abuses. Instead of Parliament going into recess, members should have an opportunity to deal with the various problems that confront the community.

Mr PIGOTT:
Calare

.- The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Tudor) had the audacity to declare that the Government has done nothing. He takes no account of the Australian Soldiers’ Repatriation Bill, one of the finest measures that could adorn any statute-book, which occupied the attention of members on both sides for over a fortnight.

I have something to say regarding the proposals for the fixation of the price of meat; but, in deference to the wishes of honorable members generally, I shall defer my remarks on that subject until the Estimates come before us.

Mr. MAHONY (Dalley [3.57].- There are several matters to which I desire to direct attention, the first of them being the outrageous conduct of the Defence Department in violating the sanctity of Australian homes by raids upon the houses of respectable citizens. In my electorate, several such raids have been made, most of those who have been interfered with being persons who have lived for many years in the locality, and possess characters against which no word of reproach has been, or could be, uttered. I shall give some definite instances of the action of which I am complaining. Apparently, no longer in Australia is the Englishman’s house his castle; no longer does the Australian householder enjoy the right of a British citizen to freedom from molestation while within the four walls of his domicile.

Here is one case in which the military authorities acted with gross callousness and impropriety. At Forest Lodge, a suburb of Sydney, there resides a Mr. McGinnis. He, with his -mother and sister, has been living there for a number of years, all three being persons of the highest character, greatly respected in the neighbourhood. They have played their part in public undertakings, and the sister especially has taken a large share of the patriotic work of the district. Last week, without notice, and in the absence of Mr. McGinnis, the military authorities came to their house, and demanded instant admission. The mother and daughter were locked in a room, and the military then ransacked the premises from top to bottom. They took possession of the personal and private belongings of the household - family photographs, private letters, and similar things which most persons cherish. These they bundled together, and took away. To show the callousness of the raiders, let me add that the baker, in his ordinary round, knocked at the door while they were there, and they refused to allow either mother or daughter to go to the door, and get bread from him. The only explanation of the incident is that McGinnis is an Irish name, ar,0 that the family supports the Labour party. But by no stretch of imagination can they be regarded as Sinn Feiners, or in sympathy with the enemies of the Empire. They can get no redress for the wrong that has been done to them; and their request that their photographs and other personal belongings shall be returned has been coldly refused by the Defence Department. This kind of thing should be stopped. Surely the military authorities, before taking action on information, can ascertain from the local police and magistrates the character of the persons complained of ! But they do nothing so sensible as that. . An unknown “ nincompoop” has only to send to them an anonymous letter stating that so and so are suspicious persons, and a military squad is sent to raid the premises. I challenge the Minister for Defence (Senator Pearce) to investigate this case. Every word that I have said can be proved to be true.

Mr Webster:

– I shall obtain an answer to the honorable member’s statement before very long.

Mr MAHONY:
DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– The persons of whom I have been speaking have a character which stands as high as that of the Postmaster-General. The case demands an answer. These people belong to no society that can be regarded as unlawful or opposed to our King and country. They are respectable citizens, who desire only to be allowed to go about their lawful occupations in the usual way. But they ask to be protected against the outrageous violation of their homes by the military authorities.

Another case is that of Mr. J. J. Brennan, of 224 Elswick-street, Leichhardt. Perhaps the name conjured up fancies in the minds of the military authorities because an honorable member of that name gives the Government rather a lively time in this House. The people to whom I am referring have been personal acquaintances of mine Tor a number of years, and they live in my constituency. Mr. Brennan writes to me -

I beg to bring under your notice an extraordinary act of pillage on the part of the military authorities committed against me and my home.

On Thursday last four men, the leader of whom read a warrant, entered my house and ransacked ft in every part. They even counted every coin that they could find. They spent about an hour and a half in carrying out this raid.

They took the following articles, some of which I have had for years : -

A post-card album.

A book of speeches.

A type-written copy of Robert Emmett s speech from the dock.

A memorandum book of songs, speeches, &c.

Premier Ryan’s policy speech which was delivered this year at Townsville.

Mr Webster:

– No wonder the raid took place.

Mr MAHONY:

– If it is the policy of the Government to raid the house of any person who has a copy of a speech of some political opponent, let them say so. The letter continues -

All my private correspondence.

Ancient Order of Hibernian’s badge.

Holy Name Society badge.

Reject papers received on my attempt to join the Australian Imperial Force.

This man had actually offered himself for military service and his rejection papers were seized by the military authorities. Why? Because they think it will help them to beat the Kaiser? These actions are absurd, and should cease immediately. I say candidly that if any person is attempting to assist the enemy, every step should be taken to suppress him, I shall not utter one word of complaint if the Government can show that these people whose homes have been raided are being influenced by the enemy in any way, or are attempting to convey information to the enemy, or assist him in any other manner. But these cases are so plain and open that one moment’s investigation would have cleared them up, and obviated the violence that has been done to the people concerned.

Mr Webster:

– The honorable member sits in judgment without asking the reasons for the Government’s action.

Mr MAHONY:

– There can be no reasons for raiding in this fashion the private residence of an ordinary lawabiding citizen. If the Government have suspicions against any person, or have received anonymous communications concerning him, before falling into a trap laid by some person in a spirit of spite and venom, let them make inquiries from the local police authorities, who would be only too pleased to furnish a confidential report as to the character of the persons affected.

Mr Webster:

– Have you submitted these cases to the Minister?

Mr MAHONY:

– No, I submit them to the House. What right had the Minister to order that these people’s homes should be raided? I cast upon the Government the duty of justifying their outrageous action.

Mr Webster:

– It was the honorable member’s duty to bring the case under the notice of the Minister whom he is charging.

Sir Robert Best:

– Does the honorable member think that the Minister takes these actions for amusement?

Mr MAHONY:

– The action is so absurd that one would imagine that to be the reason . But I think these raids arise through somebody who has a personal grudge or spite against an individual informing the Defence Department that that individual has been giving utterance to disloyal sentiments or acting disloyally. And probably upon an anonymous communication of that kind the military authorities carry out a raid.

Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– Has the honorable member any proof of that statement ? So far as I know the Defence Department bakes no notice of anonymous letters.

Mr MAHONY:

– Let the Minister state whence came the information upon which he acted in these cases, and also in the case of Mr. O’Connor, of Leichhardt, to whom I referred on a previous occasion. All these people are respectable citizens, against whose character nothinghas been alleged.

Mr Considine:

– The honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Wallace) read correspondence which showed that the Minister for Defence had taken action on anonymous correspondence.

Mr MAHONY:

– I am glad that the honorable memberhas reminded me of that fact. I leave these matters in the hope that the Minister will take some action to see that law-abiding citizens are protected, and are not made the victims of these unfair raids.

There seems to be a growing policy in this country to import a man for every little position that may become vacant. Some time ago the Government launched what they are pleased to term their shipbuilding scheme, and they hung out a notice, “ No Australian need apply.” The vessels to be constructed by the Government are mere tramps, the most elementary type of ship construction. But the Government imported to take charge of the building operations an Englishman at £2,000 per annum. No Australian need apply for that job ! Then for the ordinary position of shipyard manager, Mr. David Pickering was imported at a salary of £600 per annum. In Sydney alone the Government could have .engaged twenty men with the highest credentials and qualifications for the position of shipyard manager. But no Australians were wanted. For the position of chief draughtsman they engaged abroad a Mr. Hewison, who is to receive £520 per annum. At the Naval Dockyard, Sydney, are some of the most expert draughtsmen in the world, those employed in the designing of war-ships, which represent the very highest type of ship construction. But evidently none of them were considered fit for this job. The Government preferred to import a man from a second-rate shop in Great Britain. They imported also Thomas Wallace to be foreman iron man at £400 per annum. They could get 500 men fit for that position in Australia any day. As foreman shipwright they imported A. Grant at a salary of £400 per annum. We have in Australia shipwrights who stand at the very head of their profession, in not only the Commonwealth, but the whole world. They are already employed in the naval dockyards, but not one of them evidently was thought fit to occupy the position of an ordinary shipwright’s foreman. I suppose the fact that they are Australians is a bar to their selection for such appointments. Next we find that Kenneth Watson was imported to fill the position of chief marine engineer at a salary of £1,000 per annum. The Commonwealth is put to the expense of paying for the passages of these men,and on top of that we give them big salaries, although we already have in Australia men quite capable of carrying out the duties for which they are brought here. An Australian apparently has no hope of selection. The policy seems to be “ No Australian need apply.” One of the most sinister features of the matter is that Mr. Curchin, who was brought out and placed in charge of shipbuilding, comes from the same place from which most of these other men have been imported. It is remarkable, to say the least, that the imported manager should proceed to select for these .positions men who were with him in the Old Country. There is a familiar saying in Sydney that, once a man is imported to fill an important position, he wants to bring out all his brothers and cousins, with their families, to monopolize other good jobs in Australia.

Sir Robert Best:

– That would be a calamity !

Mr.- MAHONY. - I do not say it is a calamity that these people should come to Australia, because I recognise that we need a much larger population than we have, but- I certainly do contend that Australians who are capable of filling these positions, and are ready to do so, should receive preference.

Dr Maloney:

– The honorable member for Wannon (Mr. Rodgers), as an Australian native, will agree to that.

Mr MAHONY:

– I hope that the Australian Natives Association will bestir itself, and work as vigorously and as effectively as it used to do a year or two ago on behalf of Australia. These, I think, are glaring cases.

As my time has almost expired, I shall say no more but that I ask the Government to give consideration, first of all, to the question of the raiding of private premises to which I have referred, and, secondly, to my contention that before importing men to fill these important positions, the authorities should take steps to ascertain whether there are no Australians fit to occupy them

Mr Webster:

– I have just filled one of the premier positions in my Department by appointing an Australian to it.

Mr MAHONY:

– I am glad to hear it. T hope that the policy of importing men from other lands to fill important positions in the Commonwealth Service - a policy which seems to be creeping into our Government institutions - will be abandoned, and Australians given preference every time.

Mr CHARLTON:
Hunter

.- The Government have adopted a most unusual course in asking us to grant Supply before that to which we have already agreed has been exhausted. I understand that the .period covered by the last Supply Bill passed by us will not expire until early next month, yet we are asked today, before the business of the session has been completed, to grant three months’ Supply in respect ‘of the next financial year. This is a very dangerous procedure, since once the Government have secured Supply they will be able to do as they like in regard to the business of Parliament. It is also objectionable from the point of view that the Estimates in respect of the current financial year, which closes on the 30th inst. , have not yet been passed. Generally speaking, the proposed votes for which those Estimates provide have already been expended. The House has fallen into the objectionable practice of allowing the Estimates to remain undealt with until practically the close of the financial year to which they relate. No one can say that this is consistent with our duty to scrutinize expenditure to see that reasonable economy is observed, and to safeguard the interests of Australia. It is hardly to be credited that a deliberative body would allow more than eleven months of the financial year to elapse without dealing with the Estimates relating to it. We are now asked to grant Supply to cover the needs of the Government until September next. I enter my protest against this practice, as I have done on previous occasions, since I certainly do not think it makes for the best interests of the country.

I desire now to draw attention to the constitution of the Shipping Board. Since the outbreak of war, many Boards have been appointed, and it seems to me that, in respect to practically all these Boards, we have made the mistake of appointing to them only those directly interested in the services ‘ or commodities to which they relate. The result of such a selection is that the public has not the confidence that it should have in these Boards; and I have no doubt that the practice leads largely to an increase in the cost of living. Indeed, there, can be no escape from that position. The members of these Boards will naturally look after their own interests. It may be urged that we should have on the Shipping Board men who are experienced in the shipping industry ; but I do not think that the Board as constituted will work in the best interests of Australia in this time of crisis. We have on it men who are interested, not only in shipping, but in the supply of coal; and it is to their advantage that the vessels which the Commonwealth has leased, and for which we pay, should carry the commodities in which they are personally concerned. In this way, they derive -a considerable advantage. Let me quote what we pay for the use of these vessels. In the case of colliers and cargo vessels of 5,000 tons dead weight and over, we pay to the owners 14s. per ton per month; for ves- sels of from 4,000 to 5,000 tons dead! weight, 14s. 6d. per ton per month; 3,000> to 4,000 tons dead weight, 15s. .per month; 2,200 to 3,000 tons dead weight, 15s. 6d. per month; 1,800 to 2,200 tonsdead weight, 16s. per month; and for vessels of from 1,300 tons to. 1,800 tonsdead weight, 16s. 6d. per month. These are high rates to pay for the rental of these vessels, seeing that the owners, as I understand, have not to incur any expenditure in connexion with their running. That responsibility is undertaken by the Commonwealth. After we take them over, we place them under the control of the Shipping Board, which consists of men who are at the head of the very companies that own these vessels.

Mr Archibald:

– - The crews are shipped by the owners of the’ vessels.

Mr CHARLTON:

– I am not quite sure as to that; but I shall, accept the honorable member’s statement. The personnel of the Shipping Board is as. follows : - Rear-Admiral Sir William Clarkson-r C.M.G., Controller of Shipping (chairman) ; Colonel William Jas. Norman Oldershaw, representing the Commonwealth Government; Sir E. Owen Cox, of Birt and Company Limited, Sydney; Mr. Audrey GordonWesche, Peninsular and Oriental Steamship Navigation Company; Mr. CharlesMoreton Newman, of Messrs. Howard Smith Limited; Mr. David Hunter, of Mcllwraith, McEacharn and Company ; Mr. Walter James Young, ‘ of Elder, Smith and Company Limited : Mr. Alfred! Bright, of Gibbs, Bright and Company ; Mr. Malcolm McCaul Brodie, of JamesSanderson and Company; Mr. E. A. Eva? manager in Australia of the Commonwealth Fleet of steamers; and Senator Guthrie. I understand that, for some reason or other, Senator Guthrie has ceased to be associated with the Board. This Board has under it the InterState Central Committee, which deals with all our Inter-State trade, and comprises the following gentlemen : - RearAdmiral Sir William Clarkson, C.M.G… Controller of Shipping; Mr. D. Hunter, Deputy Controller of Coastal Shipping; Mr. W. T. Appleton, Huddart Parker Limited : Mr. C. H. Hughes, Union Steam-ship Company of New Zealand ; Mr. C. M. Newman, Howard Smith Company Limited; Mr. G. Northcote, Adelaide Steam-ship Company; Mr. D. York Syme, junior, Melbourne Steam-ship

Company; and Mr. J. Turnbull, of the Australian United Steam Navigation Company. These men are at the head of the several Australian shipping companies; and although we pay those companies big prices for the use of their vessels, they actually control them, and, indeed, the shipping and commerce of Australia. Does it appear to be in the interests of the people as a whole that only those directly concerned with shipping should be members of the Shipping Board ? Is it not reasonable that there should be on these Boards representatives of the people themselves? The position is, however, that the general public are not represented on any of the Boards that have been created by the Government.

I wish to make it abundantly clear that those who control the shipping have opportunties to use it to their own advantage. Take, for instance, the position in regard to coal, which is required chiefly in connexion with industrial operations throughout Australia. All the Inter-State companies to which I have referred hold an interest - and in most cases the predominating interest - in certain mines. It is to their advantage, therefore, that these vessels should carry the particular coal in which they are chiefly interested. They first of all make sure of securing good prices from the Government for the use of their vessels; and if those vessels are employed in carrying their own coal, they secure, in addition, the profits arising from that trade.

Mr Higgs:

– They can beat the other companies.

Mr CHARLTON:

– Yes. To-day there is only a limited amount of coal in consequence’ of the war. Foreign trade is cut off, and available boats are rightly taken for the conveyance of wheat. The Inter-State shipping has also been reduced, the boats having been taken off the coast and placed elsewhere, and industries are languishing to a certain extent in every State owing to the want of coal. It is in the interests of the community that what shipping we have, and especially the shipping the Government is paying for, shall be kept constantly engaged. Every vessel should be promptly despatched, and on arrival at the port of destination, unloaded and re-loaded without delay. The Shipping Board should have somebody at a port like Newcastle to see that the loading is expedited, so as to insure a supply of coal, and, at the same time, keep those engaged in the coal trade employed. Some time ago, at my request, a list of the vessels that had been delayed at Newcastle in the way I have described was prepared for me by a good authority; and I shall only quote sufficient to show the present state of affairs -

Delays to Ships at the Port of Newcastle.

Delay to s.s. “ St. Louis “ on the 29th March, 1918.

Delayed for two hours owingto crane emplovees being booked off duty.

Delay to s.s. “ Myola “ on the29th March, 1918.

Delayed for two hours owing to crane emplovees being booked off duty.

Delay to s.s. “ Lubra “ on the 29th April, 1918.

Berthed No. S Dyke Crane 7.50 a.m. Commenced loading at 11.10 a.m.; two hours and twenty minutes’ delay waiting on Abermain best coal.

Delay to s.s. “ Queen Bee “ on the 20th April, 1918.

Arrived in port6.30 a.m.; berthed No. 10 Dyke Crane 4.45 p.m.; was still waiting for Aberdare best coal. Commenced loading at 6.30 p.m..; finished 9.10 p.m. Twelve hours’ delay.

Delay to s.s. “ Hall Caine “ on the 29th April, 1918.

Berthed 8 a.m. at No. 9 Dyke Crane; commenced loading at 10 a.m. Two hours waiting for Northern Extended best. Shipped fifteen waggons. Then again waited for Northern Extended coal until 12.15. There were five waggons of this coal standing on the old coal road. The numbers are as follows: - 167, 196, 18, 215, 136; and had this coal been placed the ship would have saved delay.

S.S. “Yankalilla” on the 13th April, 1918.

Berthed at Nos. 5 and 6 Basin Cranes at 7.30 a.m. Commenced loading at No. 5 at 8.25 a.m., delay 55 minutes; No. 6 at 8.10 a.m., delay 40 minutes. Worked all meal hours, and ceased loading at 10 p.m. on the 13th. Resumed loading on the 15th April, 1918, at 12 a.m., and completed at 5.50 p.m., 15th April, 1918, a delay of twenty-six hours from 10 p.m. Saturday till 12 a.m. Monday. This vessel could have been berthed at the Electric Cranes, and worked an additional crane. This would have given quicker despatch and saved the extra cost of the hydraulic power-house staff being called to duty for six hours’ work on full rates of pay.

S.S. “ Werribee “ on the 29th April, 1918.

Out of coal six or seven times on the above date at No. 3 Basin Crane. Could not work a double berth till 4 p.m., owing to not being able to obtain the particular class of coal desired, viz., Pelaw Main best. No. 4 crane had No. 3 hatch run up at 5.40. Could not ship any more” Pelaw Main in No. 3 owing to no coal trimmers being then employed. The Pelaw Main best that was left then had to be horsed over the points, pulled back, and shipped in No. 4 hatch with No. 3 crane. This course further added to the delay.

S.S. “Alabama” on the 20th April, 1918.

Loading at No. 7 Dyke Crane finished bunkering at 3.40 p.m. Eighteen or twenty waggons of Whitburn best standing on the road ready for shipment. This ship ordered Nos. 5 and 6 Basin Cranes, to follow the s.s. Rakanoa when finished; at 3.40 p.m. No.6 Basin Crane had twenty-seven waggons of small on the road to be shipped, and four waggons of bagged coke to follow. No. 5 Basin Crane had twelve waggons of Newcastle best to ship. The s.s. Alabama waited from 3.40 to 4.40, and then commenced to ship the Whitburn, after an hour’s delay; and at 4.40 p.m. all the Whitburn best could have been shipped, and the s.s. Alabama brought to the Basin berth in readiness to immediately follow the Rakanoa. Instead of this, the s.s. Rakanoa cleared at 12 to 8 p.m., and the Alabama commenced at 12 to 10 p.m.

S.S. “Hexham” on the 29th April, 1918.

Berthed at No. 11 Dyke Crane at 6 a.m. Empty ship hung up from 9.5 to 9.25 a.m., again from 11.10 to 11.30, “Smoko.” The crane was then shipping from five to six waggons per hour owing to insufficient and incompetent labour being employed. This continued until the booby was finished, which was late in the afternoon.

S.S. “Five Islands,” on the 29th April, 1918.

Berthed No. 13 Dyke Crane at midnight. Crane being hung up from 7.50 a.m. to 8.5 a.m.; reserving six waggons. Then shipped the said six waggons on the “ go-slow “ policy, and again hung up from 9.40 to 11.20 - one hour and forty minutes’ delay - waiting on Hebburn and Neath coal. Finished at 11.35 a.m.

S.S. “Rakanoa” on the 29th April, 1918.

Waited3½ hours on Abermain, Neath, and Rothbury small.

S.S. “Austral” on the 29th April, 1918.

Arrive at No. 10 Dyke Crane 3.40 p.m.; berthed 4.55 p.m. Commenced loading at 4.55 p.m. - one hour and fifteen minutes’ delay. Completed loading at 7.15 p.m. at No. 9 Dyke Crane.

S.S. “Period” on the 30th April, 1918.

Worked at No. 10 H.E. Run up Nos. 1 and 2 hatches, and the booby had to ship to No. 3 hatch owing to no coal trimmers. (There was no stop with the crane.)

Friday, 3 May 1918

Canonbar arrived in port 10.7 p.m.; berthed 10.55; commenced loading.

Coombar arrived 11.45 p.m.; berthed 12.40 p.m; commenced loading.

Saturday, 4th May, 1918.

Ready arrived 12.21 a.m.; berthed 6.5 a.m., and commenced loading. Delay about5½ hours.

Astral arrived 3.27 a.m.; berthed 9 a.m., and commenced loading. Delay about 5½ hours.

Meeinderry arrived and berthed 5.40 a.m.; commenced loading 6 a.m. Delay twenty minutes.

Galava arrived 5.25; berthed 8.25. Delay three hours.

Monday, 6th May, 1918.

Urilla at Nos.l and 2 Basin Cranes. Delayed at No. 2 crane from 9.15 a.m. to 10 a.m. Delayed three-quarters of an hour getting ship ready.

Just imagine vessels waiting for particular kinds of coal when there are thousands of tons of coal on the waggons near by. We have to pay so much per ton per month for these boats, and we ought to see that we get a full return for our money. I havequoted sufficient to show that we are not getting the best out of those boats, although at the present time our prosperity hinges on the supply of coal.

Mr Riley:

– Are these vessels under the shipping control?

Mr CHARLTON:

– Yes, and these are all recent cases that I have quoted.

Mr Higgs:

– Are the employees paid for the waiting?

Mr CHARLTON:

– The trouble is that in some cases sufficient labour isnot engaged, although there is plenty available. I do not know who is responsible, but the vessels are under the Navy Department.

Mr Archibald:

– Is there not a schedule attached to all the contracts ?

Mr CHARLTON:

– There are no contracts; these vessels are under the Government.

Mr Archibald:

– Are there not contracts with the Victorian and South Australian Governments?

Mr CHARLTON:

– I am not speaking of that phase of the question just now, but of the delay in the loading at Newcastle. All the vessels, I contend, should be under Government control; and, indeed, a Board has been appointed for that purpose. Whatever contracts there may be, if, is the duty of those concerned to see that vessels are ready for loading, and that there is loading ready for vessels. If it is a certain coal that is required for a contract, and it cannot be supplied at a particular time, the vessel available ought to take coal for some other person, another and a later steamer being used for the purposes of the contract. The whole business requires regulating. The particular instances I have given are quite sufficient to justify the Government in taking some steps to remedy the state of affairs at Newcastle.

Again, I suggest that there ought to be a local Board, consisting of two ship-owners, two mine-owners, and representatives of the Waterside unions and Miners’ Federation, to see that both coal and men are there when wanted, and that the vessels are sent to sea with despatch. Here, and in every other part of the world, there is a great demand for shipping; and, surely, we ought to utilize the shipping we have to its fullest capacity ? Most of the companies represented on the Board are also interested in particular mines; and in order to keep those mines going regularly, boats are held up to be. used for the carriage of the coal. We have formed pools in connexion with wheat, wool, and other commodities, and in this time of national stress we ought to see that none of our shipping is allowed to lie idle for want of a little good management. I do not say anything against theShipping Board, but on all such bodies there should be a representative independently of those directly interested.

Mr Archibald:

– The Government are supposed to watch the interests of the public.

Mr CHARLTON:

– How can they do so at a time of national crisis such as that through which we are now passing, when everything is at fever heat? The Government watch the interests of the public by appointing a number of Boards to control certain things. These Boards submit reports to the Government from time to time, but I venture to say that no Minister can go into the details of the transactions carried out under the control of the Boards. At present, we are asked to go into recess in order to enable Ministers to formulate a financial policy, because they have not time to do it when the House is sitting. In these circumstances, how can Ministers afford the time to watch the interests of the public in connexion with the different Boards which have been appointed to control affairs on their behalf? My argument is that each Board should have on it a representative of the public interest. The people outside would then feel that they were getting a fair deal. If, on these Boards, there were representatives of both labour and commercial interests, instead of giving representation to one section of the community only, it would certainly create a far better feeling in the community. Of course, it would seem to be absurd to put a man without shipping knowledge on a Shipping Board, but I contend that the appointment of afew men of sensible judgment to the various Boards would enable the public to get better treatment than can be secured under the present arrangement. Certainly, there should be some one on the Shipping Board outside those who are directly concerned in the shipping business.

In the Newcastle district there are many mine-owners who are not getting a fair deal. They have opened up a good class of coal, but, because the shipping people are interested in other districts, their mines are lying idle, while mines in other districts are kept going full time. Surely at a time like this, every one should be able to get a fair share of the work that is available. Every one should be prepared to carry, his fair share of the load that has been placed upon us in connexion with the war in these abnormal times, but why should some men be idle while others are probably doing better than they have ever done in their lives before? It is a matter that should be remedied. Other things have been rectified. Surely this matter can also be rectified. The proposition that I am putting forward is eminently fair. The injustice to which I have drawn attention should be attended to, yet nothing is being done. Men in my district are working perhaps for two or three days a fortnight, while others in other districts are working eleven days a fortnight. The men to whom I refer cannot liveon what they earn. Surely some scheme can be devised whereby all the coal required for our steamers can be taken in fair proportions from the different collieries.

Mr Gregory:

– There must be a superabundance of old men in the honorable member’s district.

Mr CHARLTON:

– There is not.

Mr Gregory:

– Then we ought to be able to find room elsewhere for the others.

Mr CHARLTON:

– I can tell the honorable member why it cannot be done, and the truth of my statement would strike him if he only knew the district. The cessation of the foreign trade in coal has practically accounted for a falling off in coal production to the extent of fully 50 per cent. Prior to the war the coal mines frequently raised 100,000 tons of coal in the week, and as much as 120,000 tons was the output at times; but now the figure is down to about 50,000 tons per week. Many new mines were opened up to meet the bigger demand prior to the war, and now that there has been such a falling off in the output the work available for the coal minerhas been considerably reduced. My trouble, however, is that the method of taking all the coal required from one district means thatmen in that district are in regular employment, whereas other mines are getting next to nothing of the trade. I may tell the honorable member for Dampier (Mr. Gregory) that, although fully 3,000 men have enlisted from the Newcastle and Maitland districts, there are now between 2,000 and 3,000 men in the former district alone who are not working more than half time. They have to accept assistance from their fellow workers, who are willing to divide their wages with them; but, if we could divide the work under a better system each man. would be able to put in at least eight days a fortnight. Those who are now working full time are quite satisfied to share the work with their fellow men. It speaks volumes for them that at this time of crisis they are prepared to give up part of their crust to their fellow workers.

It would be in the interests of the different States to utilize our steamers to their fullest capacity so that as much coal can be shifted as it is possible to move with the limited tonnage available.We cannot supply the coal requirements of the Commonwealth with the vessels at our disposal, so that we must utilize them to the fullest extent possible. The Shipping Board as now constituted is not- satisfactory. Other interests besides the shipping interests should be represented. As the Commonwealth is paying so much money for the use of the vessels taken over from the shipping companies, steps should be taken to see that the interests of the public are properly represented upon the Board which is controlling the movements of the ships. As far as possible we should see that every member of the community carries the load which has been imposed upon us by the times through which we are passing. My proposition is a fair one, and should be adopted by any Government which happens to be in power. In a time of national crisis there should be harmony in the community - we should not have little pinpricks occurring, and when we find them we should attempt to remove them. This matter should be set right in the interests of harmony in the community. I bring the matter forward so that the Government may give some consideration to it.

Mr WATT:
Acting Prime Minister and Treasurer · Balaclava · NAT

– I would like to make an announcement in regard to a matter which the Government have had under consideration for some time, and in which many honorable members are vitally interested.. It is in connexion with the Australian wool clip. The negotiations which havebeen proceeding for several weeks between His Majesty’s Government and the Commonwealth Government have been satisfactorily completed. The Imperial Government have extended the purchase of the Australian wool. clips for a period covering the currency of the war and onefull wool year, commencing on the 1st July, after the termination of hostilities, and ending on the 30th June following.

The flat rate of ls. 3½d. per lb. of greasy wool, as at present, has been arranged for the term, plus charges to cover expenses from the wool warehouseto f.o.b. steamer. The Australian woolgrowers will participate to the extent of 50 per cent. in any profit accruing from the sale of wool for other than British Government purposes.

The conditions as to appraisement and payment are to be as per current contract. The control will remain in thehands of the Central Wool Committee, who have successfully conducted the wool scheme since its initiation, and who havethe confidence of the wool-growers.

This transaction is the largest ever completed in Australia. The estimated returns, embracing two wool clips only, will exceed £100,000,000, and it is by far the largest wool transaction ever recorded in the world.

Before negotiations were opened it was necessary for the Central Wool Committee to engage for the storage in Australia of large quantities of wool at three or four principal ports in order to take advantage of every available ton of shipping. These temporary warehouses are in course of erection, and will be available for the carry-over of the present and storage of the recently acquired clips.

To Commonwealth wool-growers and sheep-breeders, this Imperial Government wool purchase gives a security previously unknown in the pastoral history of Australia, and the circulation of the proceeds practically means stability to financial and commercial institutions throughout the Commonwealth for the period covered by the agreement.

On two or three occasions I have promised to make an announcement regarding this matter as soon as arrangements would permit me to do so, and as the final cables were only completed to-day, I have taken this early opportunity of stating the result of the negotiations for the benefit of the country.

Mr JOWETT:
Grampians

.- I congratulate the Acting Prime Minister, the Parliament, and the people of Australia upon the successful completion of the negotiations for the sale to the Imperial Government of the Australian wool clip - a transaction of a magnitude almost unparalleled in the annals of finance. . It is calculated to. maintain and increase the financial stability and general prosperity which Australia ha3 enjoyed for the last two years. I would like to take the opportunity of expressing the gratitude of this Parliament,’ and the people of Australia, to Sir John Higgins, the chairman of the Central Wool Committee, for the most able service that he has performed gratuitously in this matter and in other connexions, with so much assiduity, zeal, and efficiency for the last three years.

Mr WALLACE:
West Sydney

– Upon this motion I desire to continue the few remarks which I was making last night. It is singular that, on the question of supply of foodstuffs to the people the Ministerial side of the Chamber is filled with “ shrieks “ of silence, yet immediately the Acting Prime Minister makes an announcement that some more coin is to go into the pockets of the big pastoralists of Australia, and make their breakfast table pretty secure, there is a general uprising among honorable members sitting on that side.

Mr Poynton:

– Does not the honorable member think that the arrangement entered into is a good thing for the working people also?

Mr WALLACE:

– That may be so, but it is singular that what I have described should have occurred.

Mr Poynton:

– It would be a very bad thing for them if that money were not coming into Australia.

Mr WALLACE:

– It would be much better if some of it was to go into the pockets of the people who helped to create it. .

Mr Falkiner:

– They get it all.

Mr WALLACE:

– Of course. That is why the Savings Bank accounts of the workers of the country are decreasing, while the big banking accounts are increasing.

Mr Pigott:

– Savings Bank deposits have increased from £75,000,000 to £109,000,000 since the war.

Mr WALLACE:

– If the honorable member goes through my electorate he will not find very much of an increase of Savings Bank deposits among the people there. However, I must congratulate the pastoralists on their annexation of this money from the Imperial Government, and I hope they’ will open their hearts and give the workers a much larger share of it than they have hitherto had. Perhaps, after the announcement of the Acting Prime Minister, there will not be so much hostility displayed to fixing the price of meat, such as is shown in to-day’s issues of the Age and Argus.

To resume my remarks on the profiteering displayed by pastoralists, to which exception was taken last night, I desire to draw attention to the report furnished by the Inter-State Commission They do not take the view that it would be detrimental to the industry in general to fix prices. On page 40 of their report they say -

It was common opinion that the grazing industry has never been so prosperous, more particularly for the mixed farmer and “ the small man,” as it is now; but it was contended that in some instances the losses of the year of drought had not yet been overtaken, and that the present prices should be left available as a compensation for the past and security in case of an adverse future. ‘

The opinion of the Commission is supported by a tabulated statement on page 42 of their report, from which it appears that in 1913 the value of the products was £49,385,000, and in 1916 £64,024,000 - a net increase of something like £14,639,000. On these figures, I cannot see that the cattle kings are in danger of having to pay ls. 6d. for a hook so that they may seek work on the wharfs in consequence of the fixing of the prices of meat. The effect of fixing the prices of meat will be similar to that of fixing the prices of flour and bread, which has been the elimination of the speculator and the middleman, while the producers and the consumers have got a fairer deal than they were getting. It has, been contended that the small retailer will be adversely affected by the fixing of the price of meat, yet the facts show the contrary. In a statement of the financial position of the Queensland Government’s butchers’ shops appearing in the report of the AuditorGeneral for the State, it is set out that for a period of eleven months, which ended on 30th September, 1916, a net profit of £2,564 19s.1d. was made, although the making of a profit was not aimed at, the shops having been established to serve the public. This profit resulted, even though the price of meat was reduced over 100 per cent. It may be objected that the Queensland Government shops have an advantage over private establishments, but the report states that that is not so, and that a saving was made by the abolition of extravagance and bad management. For the first lot of meat sold through the Roma-street shop the price paid was1/8d. per pound above that at which meat was being supplied to the British Government, the meat being some intended by a private company for Melbourne consumption. For its Romastreet butcher’s shop the Queensland Government pays a rental of £30 a week to the Railway Department of the State, a rental which would compare favorably with any in Melbourne or elsewhere for similar premises. The Commissioners point out that the squatters have been making immense sums out of their flocks, but that the average worker or consumer has been mulcted to the extent of from 4s. to 7s. per week by the increase in the price of meat. At page 5 of the second report they deal in these terms with the consumption of meat in Victoria -

There was a singular difference of opinion on the important question whether the consumption of meat has fallen off as a consequence of the increased prices. Some retail butchers insisted that they sold as much as before in the industrial districts; while, on the other hand, the secretary of a very large trade union, with 12,000 members in Australia, pointed out that lt was impossible for working men’s families to pay away for meat so great an additional part of their wages. He said that from figures collected by him the consumption of meat before the war was from 10s. to 12s. 6d. per average household. At present prices the same amount of meat would cost15s. to 18s. 6d., which, he suggested, is beyond the means of working-class households.

It is shown that the consumption of meat per head of population in New South Wales fell from 259 lbs. in 1913 to 181 lbs. in 1916- a drop of 78 lbs. Thirty years ago, when sheep could be purchased for ls. 6d. or 2s. per carcass, the average man may have bought more meat than he really needed, but since the establishment of freezing chambers and the development of the export business has made meat so much dearer, he has not bought more meat than he has needed, and consequently he must harm himself by any curtailment of his consumption. The result of any reduction of the present consumption of meat must be to reduce the physical standard required by squatters and other employers, of those whom they employ to make their profits. From an economic point of view, the employers are injuring themselvesby reducing the physical standard of their workmen.

Mr Falkiner:

– Those whom the pastoralists employ eat their 16 lbs. of meat a week, no matter what the price of it may be.

Mr WALLACE:

– My family cannot afford to eat meat in such quantities at present prices, at least it could not do so before I was elected to this Parliament. The working man on a wage of £3 a week cannot afford to purchase sufficient meat to maintain the standard of physical well-being necessary for the proper performance of his labour. The fixing of the prices of meat will not prejudice thepastoralists. It will tend to better organization in the industry, making the producer no worse off, and the consumer better off, and the middleman and speculator will be, to some extent, eliminated. The Commission’s report deals with a glaring case of speculation, though it is camouflaged to some extent in the report. The facts are these: In October last, during the strike, Mr. Tom Field and his colleagues were formed into a pool by the New South Wales Government to Tegulate the meat supply of Sydney, the Government having a representative on the Board. Their first action was to increase the price of meat by 4d. per lb. all round. After the abolition of the pool, meatwas still sold at the increased price, and Mr. Tom Field, when addressing a meeting of master butchers, retailers and others, in the presence of the Government representative, and when there was plenty of champagne flowing, pointed out that one of the things upon which the pool could compliment itself was the complete disorganization of “that set of bandits, the Australian Meat Em- ployees Union.” A fortnight later, the Commissioner discovered that Mr. Tom Field and two or three ‘others had been manipulating the market. They would bid against each other until prices had reached the standard that they had fixed, but when they had got sufficient meat in cold storage, they declined to buy, thus reducing the price of cattle. Then they went into the country, and bought stock, which they sent to the market, when they again increased its price.

Mr Jowett:

– The honorable member does not blame the graziers for that.

Mr WALLACE:

– No ; they were being exploited then. I have no quarrel with the primary producers, whether holding 2,000,000 or 20 acres, so long as they do not combine to fleece the consumers. I ask the honorable member who was the bigger bandit - the man who in war time was exploiting the community by increasing the price of a necessarycommodity, or a set of employees who were trying to obtain a living wage? This quotation from Socialism at Work, which sets out the results of the working of various State enterprises established by the Ryan Government in Queensland, shows the advantage of owning grazing property -

The working expenses of running cither a cattle or sheep station are very small. Always the main outgoing of the pastoralists is represented by rent, interest on a mortgage, or what he reckons as fair interest on the capital invested in his land, together with interest on the capital value of his stock. On a sheep station not 20 per cent. of the total revenue is absorbed in wages and other working expenses; whilst on a cattle station the working expenses bill amounts to less than 5 per cent. of the total.

The honorable member for Hume (Mr. Falkiner) will admit that the statement in regard to cattle stations is absolutely correct. On sheep stations there is more work to be done, but the honorable member knows that the more sheep he has the greater is his profit. Another paragraph reads -

The Labour Government, since coming into office, has been steadily establishing holdings for breeding and fattening stock at carefully selected spots throughout the State. Thirteen stations already are being managed, with the primary intention of supplying the needs of the Queensland population, and with the further view of exporting the surplus to meet Imperial needs. The following table shows the salient points regarding the State’s holdings:

Number. - Thirteen, not including “‘Cecil Plains.”

Area. - 13,848 square miles.

Stock.- 126,033 head of cattle.

Cost to the State.- £688,461.

Honorable members must admit that persons who control thirteen stations, having 126,000 cattle, are qualified to express an opinion on the meat question.

Mr Falkiner:

– Does the honorable member know what interest the Ryan Government are paying on their debentures ?

Mr WALLACE:

Mr. Ryan is in Melbourne to-day, and I am sure he would be prepared to give the honorable member any information he requires as to how to run a cattle station. I will leave the meat question now. Sufficient evidence has been adduced to show that the Government ought to take some action to fix prices, and I suggest that if the Minister in charge of prices is in a quandary as to how to proceed, he might read this little book, published by the Ryan Government, and I am sure that Mr. Ryan and his colleagues would be pleased to give the Minister further very valuable assistance.

I turn now to the price of kerosene. An inquiry held in February last established the fact that the Vacuum Oil Company was formed twenty-two years agowith a paid-up capital of £600,000. By 1914 the capital had increased to £800,000, and in 1917 to £1,600,000. Kerosene had increased from 7s. 2d. per case in 1914 to 13s. 6d. in February, 1918, and benzine from 13s. in 1914 to 23s. 6d. in February of this year. Since that date I believe that the Prices Commissioner has allowed a further increase on kerosene to 16s. per case, and benzine to about 26s. per case.

Mr Jensen:

– Freight in 1914 was 30s. per ton as compared with £10 per ton now.

Mr WALLACE:

– The evidence taken before the Inter-State Commission showed that freights did not affect the position to any extent. The Vacuum Oil Companyhas increased its capital from £800,000 to £1,600,000 in three years. That fact is proof that the profits have gone, not to the ship-owner, but to the Vacuum Oil Company. The position in regard to kerosene condemns the Government in the eyes of the public as not being sincere in their attempt to fix prices

It was apparent that the company was making sufficient money when charging 13s. 6d.. per case without being allowed to increase the price to 16s. The Government are not dealing fairly with the community when they allow a company of this description to flagrantly exploit the public. Every inquiry that has been held in regard to prices has shown that exploitation is in progress. To-day we read in the , press that certain persons had interviewed the Prices Commissioner, and recommended that certain prices should be fixed for their commodity, and the Commissioner adopted the prices they proposed.

Mr Falkiner:

Mr. Justice Higgins does that with wages.

Mr WALLACE:

– He does not. In the Arbitration Court exhaustive evidence is heard from both sides, but in regard to price fixing the Government accept the dictum of the manufacturer or middleman. Neither the consumer nor the small retailer is asked to give evidence.

The inquiry by the Inter-State Commission in regard to the price of boots disclosed that leather was adulterated and that the people were overcharged. Retailers admitted that when a person went into a shop, and did not care for a boot offered to them at a certain price, the boot was taken away and labelled at a higher price, and sold to the customer as a different article. Those practices show that the traders have no conception of their moral duty to the public. What right have they to foist upon the customer a rejected article at a higher price? The following extract from the Miners’ Magazine for April of this year shows that in England the authorities have a more effective method of dealing with this problem -

How theydo it in England.

In England the Army Council has taken a hand in the shoe industry by naming and describing what is necessary to manufacture a serviceable shoe and establishing a maximum price at which shoes shall besold to their people. The manufacturer is required to stamp on the top of the shoe his registered number, and on the sole of the shoe its selling price, which is not to be advanced or raised. The selling price ranges from $4.50 for the work shoes to $6.39 for the better grades of dress shoes for men. Women’s shoes sell at from $3.16 to $5.96. There are but thirtynine types of shoes described by the War Council, and no other kind may be manufactured during the war. The law also prescribes that the heels of women’s shoes shall not be higher than one and three-quarter inches.

Similar action should be taken in the Commonwealth. If the Government are really desirous of solving this problem, they should consider the advisability of taking control of’ various industries, placing them under Government supervision, and insuring that the people get a fair deal, not only during the war, but also after neace is declared.

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

– Unfortunately, there is a conspiracy of silence on the Government side, and a united effort on the part of Ministerialists, to shut up this House, and to prevent the discussion of some of those most serious problems that are confronting the country. I should be sorry to be one of a company that is prepared to do that sort of thing. Honorable members in the Ministerial corner, who are supposed to be candid critics of the Government, practically united their physical force and persuasive powers to haul down the honorable ‘member for Calare (Mr. Pigott) when he desired to discuss an important public question. It was a disgraceful exhibition of persons, not only evading their duty, but trying to coerce another honorable member from doing what he considered right. Being 12,000 miles away from the ‘ scene of the awful conflict that is raging in Europe, we can surely devote a little time in Parliament to looking after the interests of the people. Honorable members may see in the Library the Hansard volumes of the Imperial Parliament, which show that that Parliament was almost continuously in session from January, 1916, till the end of December, 1917. That is a serious reflection upon the Commonwealth Parliament. The British Government, although having to face bigger problems than confront us, and although having greater responsibilities than have the Ministers of the Commonwealth, are yet prepared to meet Parliament, and allow a free discussion of their every action and full debate on all measures brought before Parliament from time to time. I believe that if some honorable members on the Government side were prepared to adopt the attitude of freelances, and insist upon their rights, they would unite with the Opposition in preventing the Government from getting into recess, when so many problems are not only ripe, but rotten ripe, for solution. Unless the Government are prepared to show a greater desire to honour the promises they have made, and to do those things which are absolutely essential in order to produce more harmony in the community, instead of the adjournment of Parliament leading to a greater success in recruiting, it will prove the greatest hindrance to the obtaining of recruits. Honorable members on this side move amongst different sections of the community from those circles in which most honorable members opposite move, and recently it has fallen to my lot to address a number of public meetings, and in attending such gatherings one often brushes shoulders with the man in the street, and so obtains a good idea of publicopinion with regard to the work of this Parliament. A New South Wales senator, who recently took part in a State political contest, tells me that the inaction of the present Government is disgusting many of their own supporters. The position is the same in nearly every State, and yet we find honorable members opposite conniving with the Government in an attempt to close down Parliament immediately, and so to shut the mouths of the representatives of the people. When we were on the other side we were told over and over again by the then Opposition that we were like a lotof dumb, driven cattle in our sup,port of the Government; but if ever a Ministry had the whole of its supporters in the hollow of its hand it is the Ministry now in office. The Acting Prime Minister has only to say, “Ope, gape, and swallow; we lead, you follow,” and the supporters of the Government meekly obey.

Mr Considine:

– Does the honorable member say that, with regard to the fixing of the price of meat, the supporters of the Government are like dumb, driven cattle ?

Mr FENTON:

– No; so far as that question is concerned I believe that they have the whip hand. I intend to refer to that question later on. There will be further opportunities to do so, and I shall do everything within my power to prevent Parliament closing its doors for many weeks to come. In that regard I hope that I shall receive a little assistance from some honorable members opposite. I would remind them of what is being done in the Old Country. A reference to the official report of the debates in the British

House of Commons will show that, save for an occasional short adjournment, such as at Christmastide or in midsummer, that House applies itself steadily to the discharge of the duty for which it is paid. Why, then, should the doors of this Parliament be closed? If we go into recess next week, as the Government propose, the public will demand to know the reason why, and instead of recruiting meetings we shall have public meetings all over the country to condemn the Government for shutting down Parliament and keeping up the high cost of living.

As to the increased cost of living, I would refer the supporters of the Government to the pamphlet issued by the present Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) when he was leading the Labour party some time ago, and in which he dealt in striking fashion with the profiteers. After they have read it, I ask them to contrast the attitude of their leader to-day with that which he took up whenhe was at the head of our party. In this pamphlet the Prime Minister advanced solid arguments against profiteering. The key-note of it was that in war time we desired efficiency, and were looking for it; but that while the exploiter was dipping his hands deep into the pockets of the people we could have neither efficiency nor harmony. These are vital considerations to-day, and I fail to understand, therefore, why the Government and their supporters should be willing, at the behest of the Prime Minister, to shut down Parliament when such questions still remain to be dealt with.

Mr Jowett:

– We do not want to close it.

Mr FENTON:

– I certainly place the responsibility upon the supporters of the Government. I have no great anxiety for their political necks, but I warn them that if they persist in their present want of action many of them will be missing after the next general election.

Mr Higgs:

– I ask for a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Mr FENTON:

– I propose now to refer to a matter in respect of which I hope to secure the support of honorable members opposite. Two returned soldiers waited upon me yesterday in reference to certain permanent appointments in the Commonwealth Public Service that are shortly tobe filled. The Government Gazette bears out their statements as to the terms announced by the Commissioner,’ and to which they take exception.

Mr Nicholls:

– I ask for a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Mr FENTON:

– In the Government Gazette of 6th instant applications are invited from returned soldiers to fill a number of positions in the Commonwealth Public Service. The two. returned soldiers to whom I have referred consider that they are not receiving a fair deal, and I should certainly like tohave from the responsible Minister an explanation as to the reasons that have actuated the Commissioner in calling for applications in the way he has done. In the Gazette notice it is intimated that returned soldiers who can present a leaving-school certificate, signed by the headmaster of any college which theyhave attended, and testifying to the fact that they have passed a certain examination., will not be called upon to undergo the ordinary examination for appointment to the Public Service. Some time ago a number of returned soldiers, hearing that an examination for these positions was likely to be held, attended coaching colleges in order to prepare themselves. The examination was held in April; but up to yesterday, however, not a word had been forthcoming as to whether they had or had not been successful. I understand that there are about 300 men entitled to certificates from various colleges, and these are quite enough, practically, not only to fill the positions now vacant, but the vacancies there are likely to be for some considerable time ahead. I submit that before these positions are filled, the examination results should be made known, so as to give a chance of employment to some of the men who presented themselves. Many of them prior to the war were engaged in clerical pursuits, but, owing to the position of their parents, were not able to attend colleges, and, therefore, could not obtain leaving certificates. They spent time and money in preparing themselves for the examination, but they reasonably admit that, if they have failed, they are not entitled to positions in the Public Service, and all they ask is that they shall have their case clearly represented to the Public Service Commissioner. The examinations which are recognised are those of the Universities of Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane, Perth, and Hobart; the Public Service examinations of all the States; the examinations held by the Defence Department for the appointment of military staff clerk, and for admission to the Military College; the examinations by the Department of the Navy for the appointment of Naval staff clerks and paymasters’ clerks; and the examinations held since 1915 for the intermediate certificates for the Department of Education of New South “Wales, and the leaving certificate of the same Department. Those who have passed these examinations, who are returned soldiers, may step right into the Federal Public Service ; and Iurge that some consideration shall be shown to those who have passed the Commonwealth Public Service examinations. If college lads and others are to have an advantage, there must be considerable discontent.

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

– Did we not make special provisions waiving the conditions of the Public Service Act?

Mr FENTON:

– I am told by two of the returned soldiers, who presented themselved at the examination, that it was n very stiff one, calculated to give some of the returned soldiers from the colleges a “ tightrun.” I cannot think that those from the colleges would object to the others who have proved themselves by examination to be fit fbr appointment to the Public Service.

The honorable member for Hunter (Mr. Charlton) raised a very important question when he spoke of the composition of the Boards which deal with coal, shipping, wool, metals, and so forth. I do not object to gentlemen who know a great deal about a particular industry or calling, being appointed, but, as did the honorable member for Franklin (Mr. Mcwilliams) in the case of the Shipping Board, I do object to the members being practically all of one class, and with personal interests involved. No doubt some of the present representatives of producers and others would be very glad of the infusion of fresh blood, and it is only fair that consumers and the public generally should be represented.

Mr Jowett:

– What has the general public to do with the Wool Board, for instance ?

Mr FENTON:

– They have a great deal to do with it, for the simple reason that if they desire to have woollen cloth- ing they must pay exactly the price that the Wool Board fixed in the initial stages. ,

Mr Jowett:

– The Commonwealth Woollen Factory can turn out a suit of clothes, with a cap thrown in, for 30s., and pay the present price for wool.

Mr FENTON:

– Then how is it that the public are paying such exorbitant prices for woollen goods?

Mr Hector Lamond:

– Because your last statement is incorrect; the price of wool does not govern the price of clothing.

Mr FENTON:

– It is a very good excuse on the part of those who sell woollen clothing to say that the exorbitant rates for wool are the cause of the high price of clothing.

Mr Jowett:

– They do not have to pay exorbitant rates for wool.

Mr FENTON:

– The honorable member is getting a higher price for his wool now than ever before.

Mr Jowett:

– ‘The price is not exorbitant.

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

– The local manufacturer gets a concession on the Imperial price.

Mr Jowett:

– He gets his wool cheaper than anybody else.

Mr Falkiner:

– And last year he had the priority of selection of all the wool appraised.

Mr FENTON:

– What does he pay for his wool?

Mr Falkiner:

– He gets his wool at 10 per cent, less than other people.

Mr FENTON:

– From the interjection of the honorable member for Wannon (Mr. Rodgers) one would have thought the local manufacturer wa.s getting the wool thrown at him for nothing. Is the same distinction made in connexion with wheat?

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

– Yes: there is some concession, certainly.

Mr FENTON:

– The difference between the price of wheat in Australia and the price to buyers outside Australia is more than 10 per cent.

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

– Of course, it is.

Mr FENTON:

– The price of 9s. to Iia. per bushel in other parts of the world, and 4s. 9d. in Australia, shows a greater difference than there is between what the woollen magnates charge for their wool here to the local manufac turers, and what they charge to the British Government.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member’s time has expired.

Mr CONSIDINE:
Barrier

.- I desire to again call attention to the manner in which the censorship is being manipulated in relation to the correspondence of honorable members. When I asked the Postmaster-General about the retention of my telegrams from Broken Hill, in reference to the seizure of Italians for military service abroad, the honorable gentleman simply ignored the matter by stating that the despatch clerk at the Post-office had not submitted the telegram to the censor, and that a postal official, sent to Parliament House, obtained possession of it, submitted it to the censor, and subsequently delivered it to me after Parliament had adjourned. When I asked that an inquiry should be instituted in regard to the action of this military official, I was told that it was a matter for Mr. Speaker, and after Mr. Speaker had laid the facts before the House, honorable members opposite were loud in their assurances that they would assist in promoting an inquiry. Mr. Speaker has indorsed the statements that I made, but I am still waiting for honorable members opposite to force the Ministry, whom they sit behind, to institute an inquiry.

Mr Mahony:

– They were only “ pulling your leg.”

Mr CONSIDINE:

– They were not “ pulling my leg,” because I never expected them to really urge an inquiry. The Government will not grant an inquiry because they know that if the facts came to the knowledge of the public the people would insist on the abolition of the censorship. As the position is now, we meet and solemnly decide this and that thing, and claim that we are the people who control the destinies of Australia. At the same time a military official sits in judgment on our correspondence, deciding whether it is good for us to receive that correspondence, or whether it is judicious that our constituents should he allowed to communicate news to us that is not of the slightest military value, so far as giving information to the enemy is concerned. The alleged excuse for maintaining a military censorship over the press and over public utterances is to prevent the publication of information of value to the enemy. But not the slightest shadow of an excuse can be advanced for interference on the part of the censor in the instances which I have submitted to honorable members. There was not the slightest bit of military information that could be construed as being likely to benefit the Kaiser ot any of his supporters in the telegrams which I have read to the Committee, but the action of the censor was of some assistance to the Government to the extent that it prevented discussion of the action taken by the military in seizing certain Italians in a brutal manner.

Sir Robert Best:

– Does the honorable member repeat Ms accusation that the Government wilfully caused his telegram to be held back?

Mr CONSIDINE:

– The accusation which I made was that the Government had something to cover up, or else they would have allowed an inquiry to be held into the matter. The honorable member was loud in his protestations that he would support an inquiry.

Sir Robert Best:

– If we knew the facts

Mr CONSIDINE:

– The facts have been stated by Mr. Speaker, and they bear out the statements which I made to the House in every particular.

Sir Robert Best:

– No.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– My statements were borne out by Mr. Speaker. I pointed out at the time that Mr. Speaker’s inquiry could not extend beyond the precincts of the House, and that the identity of the individual responsible for the interference with my correspondence could not be ascertained by him. The Ministry have given no explanation as to why my telegram was held up. I say that the obvious reason for holding up the message was that a discussion on the seizure of these Italians might be prevented. If there was any other reason why do not the Ministry make it public? Why do we have interference with the correspondence of some honorable members and not with that of. others?

Following upon the refusal of the Government to permit an inquiry to beheld into the circumstances attending this interference with my correspondence, Mr. Censor sent a messenger here last week with instructions to secure my thirty-five copies of the speech I had delivered on a previous Friday. He did not get them. I was not in the building when he came,, but he went to the Hansard staff, and asked for the copies, and then he came to the messengers under the jurisdiction of Mr. Speaker, and asked for them. They did not have them. I did not have themAs a matter of fact, they had not beer* delivered to me at that time. I had delivered a speech referring to the military control of the telegraph and telephone service of the newspaper world of this country, and to the fact that, as soon as the Government secured their three months.’’ Supply, Parliament would be closed, and there would be no method available for ventilating abuses of authority on the part of the military. We have gone back, to the time of Cromwell. If the military can interfere with a member’scorrespondence and with speechesafter they have been delivered, in. order to prevent the transmission, of them to one’s constituents, itis but a little step further to say that if the military consider that any speech is. prejudicial to their view of affairs they should be allowed to bring a squad intothe House, and march an honorable member off. It might suit the honorablemember for Kooyong (Sir Robert Best) and others, but it does not happen tosuit me or honorable members of the party to which I belong.

Sir ROBERT Best:

– It would not suit, me to be marched off.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– But it would suitthe honorable member to see some of us marched off. It is my anxiety to impress myself so strongly .upon some honorablemembers that they would gladly see me gone. The honorable member for Grampians (Mr. Jowett) is always humorouswhen interference by the military is all on the one side, and when his interests and the interests of the crowd he represents - the exploiters of the people - are protected from criticism by the use of” the same military. One of these days the people of Australia will alter that state of things. I hope the time is not far distant when they will come to the conclusion that there shall be a cessation of all this militarism which is now being utilized for the purpose of suppressing speech and the rights of the general public in order to bolster up the profiteers of the country whom the honorable member represents.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M: Chanter:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Order! That is a very improper remark. The honorable member represents the electors of Grampians.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– I beg your pardon, sir ; he represents some of them.

Mr Jowett:

– A majority of them.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– In my estimation, he represents a minority of them. In common with the majority of honorable members opposite, he owes his seat to the fact that the patriotism of the people of

Australia was exploited in the interests of those who are now exploiting the people. Honorable members repudiate the suggestion. The other evening the honorable member for Grampians and some of his friends asked, “ Who are these profiteers?” Let them ask their own leader. After the last referendum the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) said he could forgive the Industrial Workers of the World and Sinn Feiners - they had ideals, although they were mistaken, and he could forgive them - but he could not forget, nor could he forgive, those people who were making huge profits out of the war, and who had led the Government on to hold the referendum, and then voted “ No.” Perhaps the honorable member for Grampians may remember that speech. If he wants to know who are the profiteers who urged the Government to take the referendum and then left them high and dry because the Prime Minister said that the Government wanted to get at their profits-

Mr Jowett:

– Then it appears that the profiteers were anti-conscriptionists.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– Yes. When profit and patriotism parted company they stuck to their profits. Those were the patriotic profiteers whom the Prime Minister denounced after the result of the referendum was made known. The honorable member seemed to think that this is a matter of no importance, but in supporting the action of those who have given the military instructions to encroach upon civil rights and the privileges of members of Parliament, honorable members are probably making a rod for their own. backs. What has occurred is quite unprecedented in the history of Australia and in the history of Great Britain. The censorship in Great Britain is nothing in comparison with that which is imposed in Australia. I ask honorable members to contrast the following utterance, reported in the Daily Mail of the 6th April last, with speeches which have been published in the Australian press : -

A feature of the Independent LabourParty Conference at Leicester was a speech by Mr. Robert Smillie, who spoke on a resolution embodying the spirit of the whole Conference that a democratic, unaggressive peace, secured by negotiation at the earliest possible moment, alone can save the nations from mutual destruction, ruin, and bankruptcy.” ‘ Referring to a charge-

This is the portion to which I wish to draw particular attention -

Against the party creating disaffection among the civilian population he boldly declared that it was their duty to create disaffection.

Would any newspaper in Australia be allowed to publish a statement like that?

Mr Archibald:

– You know the answer to that, don’t you? There is conscription in England and not in Australia.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– Exactly. In England the press are allowed to state the facts, and public men are allowed to go on the platform to express their views in connexion with this war.

Mr Archibald:

– But Smillie’s views are not indorsed in England.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– I am not concerned with that aspect of the matter at all.

Mr Archibald:

– You are only concerned in shuffling over the issue.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– I have quoted from the paper referred to in order to show that the press in England are allowed to publish statements which are not permitted in Australia. And the honorable member himself has supplied the reason, just as the Prime Minister did when he stated that honorable members on this side of the House could say what they liked, and the papers print what they liked if only they would consent to conscription.

Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– Does the honorable member indorse what Mr. Smillie said?

Mr CONSIDINE:

– That, is not the question at all.

Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– You are afraid to discuss it.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– That interjection is not worth answering. I am pointing out that in England the publication of statements is permitted without interference from the military authorities, because England having adopted conscription, it does not matter what views are expressed, since the men can be forced into the trenches. But the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Archibald) or the Prime Minister cannot derive any comfort from this fact, because the natural corollary is that if the people in Australia were told the truth, as in England, there would not be any recruits. Australia cannot have a free press and a free platform because we have not got conscription here; the censors even interfere with the correspondence of, ‘and speeches made by, honorable members of this House, The honorable member for Hindmarsh and those associated with him are not prepared to trust the people of Australia with the facts as they are placed before the people of England, America, France, and other conscript countries. The people of this country, quite apart from the political parties they may support, will resent this imputation. They will declare that their loyalty and patriotism are made of sterner stuff than that; that they can face the facts as they are. If the British Government or the Australian Government are prepared to do this: if they are prepared to state their war aims and lay their cards on the table : - without wrapping up statements in cotton-wool - if they can say we are fighting in a just war, that we have no idea of reaching out for territorial aggrandisement, and that we are not out to get huge indemnities, but are really fighting for the small nations, and in order to make Democracy safe, they will have to explain how they accepted the help of the Russian Czar, one of the bloodiest autocrats that has ever existed in the world, and how also they accepted the assistance, of that “democratic “ and well-organized country, Japan, where, out of a population of 50,000,000 people, less than 2,000,000 have any voice in the Parliament of the nation. This is the method employed for making safe the Democracies of the world. We know, of course, that the German model was very largely copied by the Japanese when they adopted Western civilization. If the people are allowed to know the facts,, and if the censorship is to be wiped out, honorable members may, perhaps, be able to explain why, since Russia has gone out of the war, the people of Australia are permitted to read what they would not have been allowed to read while Russia was in the war. Take, for instance, the interview given by Baron Rosen, the former

Russian Ambassador to the United States of America, to the Petrograd correspondent of the Manchester Guardian, Mr. Phillips Price. The Guardian of 28th February of this year states -

Baron Rosen, explains Mr. Price, belongs to the old aristocratic, international school of diplomacy, and has no sympathy with the “middle-class” diplomacy, even of men like Milyukoff and Terestchenko, and Sazanoff, much less with the diplomacy of the Bolsheviki. “ As one who saw the inside of Tsarist diplomacy,” he began, “ I knew that war was com: ing as far back as 1912. Behind the curtain of Russian secret diplomacy I saw that war was being made inevitable by the rising tide of revolution from below.- A clique of Ministers round the Tsar’s court knew that their only hope was to stave off revolution by setting the armies marching. From the beginning- I knew that the revolution was a national revolt of the Russian people against the war. The war was made by those who wanted-, by this means, to put down revolution, and, therefore, the revolution was made in order to put down the war.”

Will honorable members opposite say that if Russia, under Kerensky, had remained in the war, this criticism by the Czar’s Ambassador df Russian diplomacy would have appeared ? The statement shows that, in 1912, the Russian Ministers were planning to precipitate Russia into the war to prevent a revolution in Russia. But we have been told all along that it was the Germans, and the Germans alone, who were responsible for the war.

Mr. Laird Smith__ So they were.

Sir Robert Best:

– For the Bolsheviki business.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– If the honorable member for Kooyong wants to discuss the Bolsheviki, I air. prepared to meet him in any public hall he cares to name. If any reliance at all is to be placed upon the statement made by the former Russian Ambassador, it was known in 1912 that this war was coming, and that the Russian Armies would be forced to march inorder to prevent a revolution. Can honorable members opposite explain how, if Russia was taken on the “hop,” within five days of the outbreak of the war, Galicia was overrun, and they were collecting £20,000 in the streets of Petrograd for the first Russian soldier to enter Berlin ?

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– The honorable member’s time limit has expired.

Sitting suspended from 6.33 to 7.45 p.m~

Mr CONSIDINE:
Barrier

.- I propose to use the second opportunity for speaking allowed by the standing order to read some extracts from the official reports of the debates of the British Parliament, which contain statements of fact that have been made known to the British public, but which the Australian press has not been allowed to publish. According to the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Archibald), the reason why the people of Great Britain have been allowed to know these facts and others relating to the war is that that country has conscription, the natural deduction from that interjection being that it does not matter to the authorities what conscripted people may learn, because they can be compelled to fight in any case. On the 10th March, 1913, Lord Hugh Cecil, speaking in the British House of Commons, said (Hansard, Vol. L., columns 42 and 43) -

There is a very general belief that this country is under an obligation - not a treaty obligation, but an obligation arising owing to an assurance given by the Ministry in the course of diplomatic negotiations - to send a very large armed force out of this country to operate in Europe. . This is the general belief. It would he very presumptuous of any one who has not access to all the facts in the possession of the Government ….

The Prime Minister. - I ought to say that it is not true.

Then, on 24th March, 1913, Sir William Byles asked the Prime Minister -

Whether he will say if this country is under any, and, if so, what, obligation to France to send an armed force in certain contingencies to operate in Europe; and, if so, what are the limits of our . agreements - whether by assurance or treaty - with the French nation?

And Mr. King asked him -

  1. Whether the foreign policy of this country is at the present time, unhampered by any treaties, agreements, or obligations under which British military forces would, in certain eventualities, be called upon to be landed on the Continent and join there in military operations?
  2. And whether, in 1905, 1908, or 1911, this country spontaneously offered to France the assistance of the British Army, to be landed on the Continent to support France in the event of European hostilities?

The Prime Minister said -

As has been repeatedly stated, this country is not under any obligation, not public and known to Parliament, which compels it to take part in any war. In other words, if war arises between European Powers there are no unpublished agreements which will restrict or hamper the freedom of the Government or Parliament to decide whether or not Great Britain should participate in war. The use that would be made of the Naval and Military Forces if the Government and Parliament decided to take part in a war is, for obvious reasons, not a matter about which public statements can be made beforehand.

These statements are to be found in Hansard, 1913, Vol. L., columns 1316-7. On 28th April, 1914, a little over three months before the outbreak of war, Mr. King asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs -

Whether he is aware that demands have recently been put forward for a further military understanding between the Powers of the Triple Entente with a view to concerted action on the Continent in case of certain eventualities, and whether the policy of this still remains one of freedom from all obligations to engage in military operations on the Continent?

Sir Edward Grey. The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative, and as regards the latter part, the position now remains the same as stated by the Prime Minister in answer to a question in the House on 24th March, 1913.

That passage appears in Hansard, 1914, Vol. LXI, column 1499. On 11th June, 1914, Mr. King asked the Secretaryof

State for Foreign Affairs -

Whether any naval agreement had recently been entered into between Russia and Great Britain, and whether any negotiations with a view to a naval agreement have recently taken place, or are now taking place, between Russia and Great Britain?

Sir William Byles also asked the Secre tary of State for Foreign Affairs -

Whether he can make any statement with regard to an alleged naval agreement between Great Britain and Russia; how far such anagreement would affect our relations with Germany; and will he lay papers?

Sir Edward Grey. ; The honorable member for North Somerset asked a similar question last year with regard to Military Forces, and the honorable member for North Salford asked, a similar question also on the same day as he has again done to-day. The Prime Minister then replied that if war arose between European Powers there were no unpublished agreements which would restrict or hamper the freedom of the Government or of Parliament to decide whether or not Great Britain should participate in a war. The answer covers both the questions on the paper. It remains as truetoday as it did a year ago. No negotiations have since been concluded with any Power that, would make the statements any less true. Nosuch negotiations are in progress, and noneare likely to be entered upon so far as I can judge. But if any agreement were to bo concluded that made it necessary to withdraw or modify the Prime Minister’s statement of last year which I have quoted, it ought, in my opinion, to be, and I suppose that it would be, laid before Parliament.

My reference for that is Hansard, Vol. LXIII., columns 457-8. Despite the official denials in 1913 and 1914 that there was no agreement, written or understood, regarding the utilization of British troops in the event of a European war, Lord Haldane, speaking in the House of Lords on the 13th July, 1917, said -

What was done was done on a systematic plan. Sir Edward Grey (as he then was), in the speech he made to the House of Commons at the outbreak of the war. told the country of the informal - not binding - consultations which had taken place with the French about what would happen if a great emergency arose. We could not tell in those days whether or not the country would desire that we should throw in our lot on the side of France. But there was one thing which was clear, that if there was even a chance of our so doing, we ought to prepare beforehand. We did that. We took informal counsel with the French General Stall’, and they gave us, broadly speaking, this advice -that if we could put” 100,000 men within fifteen days on the eastern frontier of France we should have made such a contribution to the Military Force of France as would probably enable her to hold any attack that might be made, while our enormous Fleet was operating in other ways on the sea. We resolved, after consideration, to raise that force from 100,000 to 100,000, and aimed at placing it in its position on the frontier in twelve days instead of fifteen. That was carried out before Lord Kitchener took office. At 11 o’clock on Monday, 3rd August, it fell to me- I was at that time occupying the Woolsack, and the Seals of the Secretary of State for War were with the then Prime Minister- it fell to me, by his direction, to go to the War Office and mobilize the Army; and at 11 o’clock on Monday, 3rd August, 1914, the whole of the Expeditionary Force, amounting to 160,000 men, the whole of the Territorial Force - which was 50,000 to 60,000 short, but they were filled up at once - the Special Reserve. and other units were mobilized, amounting altogether to well over 500,000 men.

No doubt the Central Powers have their secret agreements and understandings concerning what is to take place should they obtain a military victory. When the second Russian revolution took place, and Kerensky and /Company were removed from the control of Russian affairs-

Sir Robert Best:

– The honorable member means the revolution that wrecked the genuine revolution in Russia .’

Mr CONSIDINE:

– No ; I refer to the genuine revolution that did away with the faked revolution. When it took place, and the secret documents came to light-

Mr McGrath:

– They came to light before that. Kerensky published them.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– No ; they were published by the revolutionaries on, I think, 28th November of last year. There were published then the secret treaties between Russia, England, and Prance, and between Italy and the other Powers. The war aims” stated in those documents are not those to secure which the war is being fought. Those treaties do not show that the Powers are fighting to make the world safe for” Democracy. On the contrary, they provide for the dividing up of the spoils. We have been told that what is desired by Italy is the restoration of Austrian subjects who are really Italians ; but we find that it is proposed to tear from Austria a purely Austrian province, just as Alsace and Lorraine were torn from France in 1871.

Sir Robert Best:

– They should be returned.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– Every part of the world should have the government acceptable to its people, who should be allowed to determine what form of government they would like, and what nation they should be joined to.

Mr McGrath:

– That is what the French Socialists are advocating to-day.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– Yes ; and the English and Australian Labour parties are advocating the same thing. I think that the honorable member for Kooyong (Sir Robert Best) will agree with me that other countries should enjoy the right of self-government which we in Australia claim; the right to determine the laws by which they will be governed, and to choose those who are to administer those laws. I contend that the moral aspect of the question should be placed -before the people, and that the people should be made to realize that they are behind a right cause. The Allies stand to gain considerably, from the moral view-point, if they can convince their own people- I speak now more especially with respect to the people of Australia, just at. this time when the Government, and those behind them, are saying it is absolutely necessary that recruiting should be stimulated. The argument that the people of Australia should not be permitted to read those secret agreements is fallacious. I sincerely wish the Allies would state their aims, and that the Central Powers would give expression to their purposes. And I’ hope to find that neither of the groups of belligerent nations desire to aggrandize themselves at the expense of their an- tagonists. If the Allies would only be prepared to say that they were not after one inch of further territory, or one penny of financial gain, but that they were out to fight for what we were told they were standing for, namely, the rights of small nations and of Democracy generally, then-

Mr Archibald:

– They have said it over and over again; and you know it.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– They have not; and that is demonstrated by these secret treaties which have now been published, and with respect to which the honorable member is supporting the Government in their policy of preventing the people of Australia from reading them.

I repeat that the moral force that would be gained by the Allies would be incalculable. If the Allies would say, “ We want no territory and no indemnities,” and if we could prove that we have nothing to lose and everything to gain by that expression, then they would have performed a universal service. If the Allies would say, “ We are prepared to remove the barriers between the workers of the Allied countries and those of the other combatants; and, to prove our bona fides, we are willing to allow men and women representatives of the workers of the various countries to meet together and see if any real reason exists why this awful slaughter should continue,” something, indeed, would haye been accomplished.

I am asked by an honorable member, do I think there is any chance of Germany acquiescing in that. I do not know. Probably, Germany might refuse; but that would only make my argument the sounder. If the Central Powers refused, they would stand convicted in the eyes of their people of the working classes, and in the eyes of the world, as the powers responsible for prolonging this terrible upheaval. How can we denounce Germany for tearing certain provinces from Russia when we read of secret treaties on the part of the Allied nations setting forth our guarantees that Constantinople and the Straits should go to Russia, that AlsaceLorraine and the territory on the left bank of the Rhine should be taken from the Central Powers and made into buffer States between Prance and Germany, that Italy should have more territory, that Mesopotamia should be divided between Great Britain and France, and that if Britain and France increased their territories in Africa at the expense of the Germanic powers Italy was to be free to add to her African territories?

Sir Robert Best:

– But there are no such secret treaties as you have stated.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– Very good, I will read them. The following particulars aretaken from the Manchester Guardian, which quotes from the Investia and Pravia of 23rd November, as follows: -

  1. A confidential telegram of the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Russia) to the Ambassador in Paris, 5th March, 1915 (No. 1226) : - “ On 23rd February (8th March), the French Ambassador, on behalf of his Government, announced to me that France wasprepared to take up a most favorable attitude in the matter of realization of our desires, as set out in my telegram to you (No. 937), in respects of the Straits and Constantinople for which I charged you to tender Declasse my gratitude. In his conversations with you, Declasse had previously more than once given his assurance that we could rely upon the sympathy of France, and only referred to the need of elucidating the question of the attitude of England, from whom he feared some objections, before he could give us ‘more definite assurance in the above sense. Now the British Government has given its complete consent, in writing, to the annexation, by Russia, of the Straits and Constantinople, within the limits indicated by us, and only demanded security for its economic interests and a similar benevolent attitude on our part to the political aspirations of England in other parts.

For me, personally, filled as I am with most complete confidence in Declasse, the assurancereceived from him is quite sufficient; but this Imperial Government would desire a more definite pronouncement of France’s assent to the complete satisfaction of our desires, similar to that made by the British Government.. -(Signed) Sasanoff.”

  1. Confidential telegram, dated 7th March, 191.5, from M. Sasanoff to the Ambassador in Paris (or London) (No. 1265) : - “ Referring to the memorandum of the British Government (Embassy) here of 12th March, will you please express to Grey the profound gratitude of the Imperial Government for the complete and final assent of Great Britain to the solution of the question of the Straits and Constantinople, in accordance with Russia’s desires.

The Imperial Government fully appreciates the sentiments of the British Government, and feels certain that a sincere recognition of mutual interests will secure for ever a firm friendship between Russia and Great Britain. Having already given its promise respecting the conditions of trade in the Straits and Constantinople, the Imperial Government sees no objection to confirming its assent to the establishment (1) of free transit through Constantinople for all goods not proceeding from or proceeding to Russia, and (2) free passage through the Straits for merchant vessels.

In order to facilitate the breaking through of the Dardanelles undertaken by the Allies, the Imperial Government is prepared to cooperate in inducing these States, whose help is considered useful by Great Britain and France, to join in the undertaking on reasonable terms.

The Imperial Government completely shares the views of the British Government that the holy Moslem places must also, in future, remain under an independent Moslem rule. It is desirable to elucidate at once whether it is contemplated to leavethese places under the rule of Turkey, the Sultan retaining the title of Caliph, or to create new independent States, since the Imperial Government would only be able to formulate its desires in accordance with one or other of these assumptions. On its part, the Imperial Government would regard the separation of the Caliphate from Turkey as very desirable: of course, the freedom of pilgrimage must he completely secured.

The Imperial Government confirms its assent to the inclusion of the neutral zone of Persia in the British sphere of influence. At the same time, however, it regards it as just to stipulate that the districts adjoining the cities of Ispehan and Yezd, forming with them one inseparable whole, should be secured for Russia, in view of the Russian interests which have arisen there. The neutral zone now forms a wedge between the Russian and Afghan frontiers, and comes up to the very frontier line of Russia at Sulfager. Hence a portion of this wedge will have to be annexed to the Russian sphere of influence. Of essential importance to the Imperial Government is the question of railway construction in the neutral zone, which will require further amicable discussion. The Imperial Government expects that in future its full liberty of action will be recognised in the sphere of influence allotted to it, coupled in particular with the right of preferentially developing in that sphere its financial and economic policies.

Lastly, “the Imperial Government considers it desirable simultaneously to solve the problems in Northern Afghanistan adjoining Russia in sense of the wishes expressed on the subject by the Imperial Ministry in the course of the negotiations of last year. - (Signed) Sasanoff.”

Central Europe and Poland. A confidential telegram to the Ambassador in Paris (No. 948) : - “Petrogrnd, 24th February, 1918.

Please refer to my telegram No. 6069, 1915. At the forthcoming conference you may be guided by the following general principles: -

The political agreements concluded between the Allies during the war must remain intact, and are not subject to revision. They conclude the agreement with France and England on Constantinople, the Straits, Syria, and Asia Minor, also the London treaty with Italy. . All suggestions for the future delimitation of Central Europe are at present premature; but, in general, we must bear in mind that we are prepared to allow France and England complete freedom in drawing up the western frontiers of Germany, in the expectation that the Allies, on their part, would allow us equal freedom in drawing up our frontier with Ger many and Austria. It is particularly necessary to insist on the exclusion of the Polish question from the subjects of international discussion, and on the elimination of all attempts to place the future of Poland under the guarantee and control of the Powers.

With regard to the Scandinavian States, it is necessary to endeavour to keep back Sweden from any action hostile to us, and, at the same time, to examine betimes measures for attracting Norway to our side, in case it should prove impossible to prevent war with Sweden.

Roumania has already been offered all the political advantage which could induce her to take up arms, and, therefore, it would be perfectly futile to search for new baits in this respect.”

Mr McGrath:

– All those particulars were published in every Liberal newspaper in England.

Mr CONSIDINE:

– That is so, and the whole point of my argument is that they should be permitted to be published also for the people of Australia to read. Honorable members opposite who challenged me and said no such secret treaties were in existence, could have read the whole of the particulars in the English press, which is available to them. But, unfortunately, those newspapers are not within the reach of the people of Australia generally. Those newspapers have been sold in every street of London, and in every town of England, and the particulars have been read without any effort at suppression. The British public, whose loyalty is beyond question, were allowed to read the details of those treaties; and they could stand the facts. But the Commonwealth Government are throwing an insult into the teeth of the Australian people by saying, in effect, that our loyalty is not such that we can put up with the facts, and, therefore, we must not be permitted to read them in our newspapers. It is the greatest insult that could be offered them. If the Allied powers generally desire to be cleared of any suspicion that they are out after territorial aggrandisement, the greatest test of their attitude would be to permit representatives of the workers among all the Allied nations to meet, free from interference, with delegates of the working classes among the Central Powers. They could then say to the representatives of the Central Powers, “ Your Governments alone are responsible for the continuance of the war.”

The CHAIRMAN:

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

Mr NICHOLLS:
Macquarie

– My brief remarks will be directed to the position of the meat industry. The silence of honorable members opposite today is particularly noteworthy. I had hoped that the chamber would be full to-night, because the speech I am about to deliver will serve as. a much-needed brain tonic to honorable members opposite. Not only is there silence on the Government benches regarding the meat question, but there is contempt also. I think I am entitled to have more honorable members present to listen to me.

Mr Brennan:

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

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I desire first of all to quote the letter written to the InterState Commission by the Prime Minister -

Sydney, 23rd February, 1918.

The Chairman. Inter-State Commission, Sydney.

Bear Sir, - Two deputations, representing the Wholesale Meat Traders and the Producers’ Association, ofNew South Wales, waited upon me. to-day in connexion with the proposal of the Government to adopt the recommendations of the Inter-State Commission to fix the local price of meat on the basis of the Imperial Government contracts, and made statements which would appear to call for further consideration.

As you are aware, the Government had instructed Mr. Whitton, Chief Prices Commissioner, to take the matter in hand, with a view to giving effect to the Commission’s recommendations; but after hearing the statements of the deputations, I have come to the conclusion that it is advisable to re-open the. question, to give them an opportunity of placing fresh evidence before you.

In the meantime I have promised to stay proceedings. Will you be good enough to arrange for the persons interested having an opportunity of placing their case before the Commission as early as possible?

I should be glad if Mr.Whitton could attend, in his official capacity, to take such part in the inquiry as may be necessary.

I have the honour to be, sir, your obedient servant, (Signed) W. M. Hughes.

That letter is very strange, having regard to the fact that the Commission had already submitted two reports in similar terms to the last report, and the Prime Minister knew, from the evidence submitted to the Commission, that the price of meat was too high. Yet, after careful consideration of the Commission’s two reports, he decided to defer action until the exploiters had had a further oppor tunity of placing their views before the Commission. Even after that body reported for the third time, it was only the force of public opinion and the persistency of honorable members on this side of the House that compelled the Government to take action. If there had been no protest from the public press and from members of the Opposition, the report of the Commission would be in the wastepaper basket.

I wish to deal briefly with the statements made by the honorable member for Grampians (Mr. Jowett) in order to show the inconsistency of members on the Government side. Last night, the honorable member stated that the members of the Commission were men of integrity and ability. Two minutes later he said that he did not agree with the recommendations of the Commission, because, presumably, ho believed that the middleman should exploit the consumers to the fullest possible extent.

Mr Jowett:

– I mean exactly the opposite, and said so.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– The honorable member said also that there were not two prices in existence at any one time in any one place. I will tell the Committee how the price of meat has been regulated throughout Australia. In the pastoral districts, where stock and station agents are operating, and where there are frequent sales of stock, the agents advise the pastoralists as to when there is likely to be a shortage, or over-supply, of stock on the market, so that the stock-breeders may know when to bring their stock along in order to get the best price. In that way, the price of meat is being regulated.

Mr Jowett:

– By the middleman.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– To a large extent. Many producers are not getting the full value of their product, because the profit is derived by the middleman, who is permitted to exploit the public.

Mr Jowett:

– I quite agree with the honorable member.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Nobody can tell me that the price of meat is not too high. That necessary commodity is not within reach of the working man, and, therefore, it is necessary for the Government to take action so that the working man may be permitted to get a sufficiency of the necessaries of life. When the honorable member for Grampians (Mr. Jowett) speaks, I regard him as a representative of the pastoral industry.

He is one of tlie greatest landholders in the Commonwealth, and controls a greater number of stations than any other individual in Australia. For those reasons, he can speak with some authority on pastoral matters, and he ought to be able to come to the assistance of the working classes by seeking to bring about a reduction in the price of meat. He knows well that meat prices have risen out of all proportion to those of any other commodity .

Mr Jowett:

– All my life I have been doing what I could to assist the working classes to get cheap meat.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I cannot agree with that remark, because, if the honorable member were sincere, he would have assisted the Government in reducing the price of meat. It is futile for honorable members to say that the high price of meat is caused by drought, because the statistics prove that there are in Australia to-day as many sheep and cattle as there were in 1914.

Mr Jowett:

– But not stock of fattening ages.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Stock can be fattened at any age, and is, in fact, sold at all ages; but in order that the producer may get the greatest profit from his product it is wise to allow stock to reach the age of five years before being placed in the market. In one portion of the report the Commission stated -

The Commission is satisfied that there is no combination among farmers, graziers, stock and station agents, wholesale dealers, or butchers in Victoria either to keep back stock or maintain prices.

Mr Jowett:

– Quite true.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– The honorable member knows perfectly well that there is a combination of stock and station agents for the purpose of sending up the price of meat.

Mr Sinclair:

– Can the honorable member tell us where they are.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– They are in every agricultural centre throughout the Commonwealth.

Mr Sinclair:

– The honorable member might point to a specific case.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I do not keep the names of stock and station agents in my mental note-book. If the honorable member is really desirous of securing the names of these people who are exploiting the public, I refer him to the honorable member for Calare (Mr. Pigott), who :s himself a stock and station agent. I quote the following from No. 4 report of the Inter-State Commission -

It is suggested that this main economic fact may be taken as the basis of the regulation of meat prices on broad lines. If the prices in each metropolis are fixed on a parity with the export price, meat will be uniformly cheaper throughout the Commonwealth, and a great deal of speculation, uncertainty, and wasteful migration of stock will be prevented.

Mr Jowett:

– That is the weakest thing in the report.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– It is, perhaps, the strongest portion of the report.

Mr Jowett:

– The Commissioners object to the migration of stack, and without that migration the position would be much worse in Melbourne and Adelaide than it is.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– The report continues -

The stability of the pastoral industry as a whole will not be impaired. In Queensland the Imperial prices operate to assure the grower of a fair return. Further, the abnormal high price of wool will leave sheep pastoralists in receipt of greater returns, even with .the price of mutton reduced, than before the war.

That is quite true. The sheep pastoralist will not send his sheep to the meat market at all, but will keep them for the purpose of growing wool. The Federal Government have assured wool-growers that during the currency of the war, and for twelve months afterwards, the price of wool will be 15d. per lb. plus’ freight. It is, therefore, only reasonable to assume that the sheep pastoralist will keep the bulk of his sheep for wool instead of sending them to the meat market.

Queensland is in a remarkably good position, so far as the price of meat -s concerned. In proof of this, I quote the following extract from the Worker -

Referring in Sydney last week to the Queensland Government’s system of State butcheries, Treasurer Theodore said that what had been done was merely the first step towards a complete scheme of meat production and distribution.

When only twelve shops had been in operation the profit realized had amounted to some £7,000, and since then a further eighteen shops had been established.

As an example of comparative prices Mr. Theodore instanced fillet steak, sold in private shops at lid., and in those of the State at Sd. When the Government scheme became fully developed, Mr. Theodore continued, sheep and cattle would be supplied by State stations, slaughtered at killing centres, and distributed to State shops throughout the country.

Already tbe State stations were paying handsomely, though most of the stock at present being killed were for the supply of meat to the British Government.

If, in Queensland, beef can be supplied at 8d. per lb., it should be possible to purchase it in New South Wales at the same price. That price would handsomely compensate the producers, whilst it would not be an unreasonable price for the workers to have to pay.

Mr Jowett:

– Where do the Queensland Government get that beef ?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I am not prepared to say.

Mr Jowett:

– We know.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I take it for granted that the cattle are reared in Queensland, and slaughtered there.

Mr Jowett:

– And commandeered.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– The price of meat should be as low in New South Wales as it is in Queensland. But the Government, of which the honorable member for Grampians is a supporter, have never interested themselves in the protection of the interests of the workers. They have never given the feeblest consideration to those interests. Under existing conditions the average worker with a wife and three children cannot obtain more than an average of1½1bs. of beef per week for himself and his family because the wages he receives do not enable him to purchase more. The Commonwealth Government have regulated to the finest point the wages which the worker can receive. They do not permit him even to obtain a living wage at the present time. If they can regulate the price of a man’s labour, they should be able to regulate the prices of the various commodities. ‘ They have regulated the price of wheat, and theycertainly did not overstep the mark in allowing the farmers only 4s. per bushel for their wheat. If there is one section more than another in the community that is deserving of consideration it is the man who produces grain.

Mr Jowett:

– And meat also.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I do not deny the rights of the men who produce meat. The wheat industry has been regulated to such an extent that it is not possible for the wheat-grower to make any profit. On the other hand, the man who raises “cattle can make a fairly large profit, and is making too great a profit at the present time. I have not the slightest objection to the producer of any commodity getting a fair price for it, but I strongly object that a body of men, who do not produce anything, should be permitted to exploit the people to the fullest extent.

Mr Jowett:

– I quite agree with the honorable member.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– When it comes to a question of exploitation the honorable member for Grampians (Mr. Jowett) is as capable of exploitation as is any other man.

Mr Jowett:

– I do not impute motives to my honorable friend.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

– Order! I must ask the honorable member for Macquarie to withdraw his statement. It is decidedly disorderly to impute improper motives to any honorable member.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I did not impute improper motives to any honorable member.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I distinctly heard the honorable member connect his remarks with the honorable member for Grampians.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I said that the honorable member for Grampians is as capable of exploitation as is any other man, and I believe that to be so.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I have ruled that that is not in order, and I ask the honorable member to obey the Chair and withdraw the remark.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– It is hard to withdraw some statement which an honorable member conscientiously believes to be cor- rect.

The CHAIRMAN:

– Will the honorable member withdraw the remark?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Yes, I withdraw it. I want to condemn the neglect of the Government in connexion with this question. The people have been asking for years that the price of commodities should be regulated. The Government decided some considerable time ago to appoint a Price Fixing Board.

Mr Riley:

– Which is a farce.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– It is an absolute farce, and a disgrace to any Government. The Price Fixing Board cannot enter upon its duties without the consent of the Minister for Defence (Senator Pearce). He is the man who decrees when and under what conditions the Board shall commence its operations. Most honorable members recognise that if a matter. i3 left entirely in the hands of the Minister for Defence it will receive only such attention as he desires to give it, and that can be judged by the work he has performed in the past. A Price Fixing Board should be constituted which should be compelled to sit continuously in every part of this country. It should have the power to say what the prices of necessary commodities shall be. In my opinion the whole of the commodities of ‘ life used by the workers should be brought under its jurisdiction. At present a few articles that are regarded as necessary commodities are dealt with, whilst exorbitant prices are charged for a vast number of articles that are not so regarded, but which are sold by a great number of merchants and distributors throughout Australia. The people of this country are being exploited by the prices charged for boots, clothes, and various other things, but no action is taken by the Government to prevent what is being done. There are thousands and tens of thousands of hungry children throughout the Commonwealth to-day who are crying for meat, whilst the great patriots and the Win- the- wa rites of Australia are sending the price of meat up to the greatest possible extent. There are thousands and tens of thousands of bare footed children in the Old Country crying for boots, whilst those controlling the sales of the article are permitted to raise the prices to such an extent that the working people of the British Empire cannot afford to purchase them.

Mr Brennan:

– That is right. “ Put the boot into them.”

Mr NICHOLLS:

– The boot should have been put into the present Government more frequently than it has been, because they have never attempted to reduce the cost of necessary commodities. When the exploiters decide to send up the price of an article, they wait upon the Prime Minister, with certain arguments in favour of their proposed action, and the right honorable gentleman, with the Necessary Commodities Commission, determines to permit them to increase prices to the fullest possible extent. That was done by the Colonial Sugar Refining Company, and also took place quite recently in connexion with the boot trade. In every branch of industry the Government have permitted the exploiter to put up the price of goods.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

– The honorable member’s time has expired.

Mr BLAKELEY:
Darling

.- I desire to refer to the profiteering which the Government are not only allowing, but fostering, and for which they are, in a good many instances, actually responsible. Some little time since, I drew the attention of the Government to the profiteering carried on in the interests of , the Standard Woollen Company, a German business concern, which had been declared an enemy firm; but I did so, evidently, with no result. The Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. Jensen), in answer to a question that I put to him today in regard to this company, which is now in process of liquidation, made the following observation: -

The question of the disposal of any profits secured over the book values is at present receiving my attention, and the honorable member for Darling can rest assured that, if practicable, any undue profit will be passed to revenue.

The “ Win-the-war “ Government are quite content to allow profiteering to be carried on in the interests of the German firm, whose business they are now managing, through the official liquidator, and they promise that whatever undue profit is made shall be paid, if practicable, into the revenue. These extra profits are practically bled from the people of Australia.

As the result of the shortage of woollens in the Commonwealth to-day, hundreds of tailors are being displaced. Suits which, in 1915, cost £5, now cost from £6 6s. to £6 10s. This firm made large importations in 1914 and the early part of 1915, and the benevolent Commonwealth Government propose, if practicable - if the German shareholders do not object - to pay into the Consolidated Revenue a certain amount of the money that has been filched from the people, The Standard Woollen Company is in process of liquidation. The official liquidator, appointed by the Government, is a Mr. Sherlock, and he is acting in cooperation with the manager, a German, who conducts the business from his office in York -street. These two persons, acting in collaboration, are robbing the people of Australia, the prices they are charging for the stock of tlie company being 300 per cent., 400 per cent., and as much as 500 per cent., on the 1914-15 invoices.

Sir Robert Best:

– I presume they are only asking for the market prices.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– I object to any profiteering in this country. I object to the honorable member for Grampians (Mr. Jowett), the honorable member for Hume (Mr. Falkiner), and others, profiteering in this community, or, to use a still better term, “ patrioteering “ Under the guise of patriotism, and amid loud cries of “ Win-the-war,” the people are being robbed.

Mr Jowett:

– That is a very unfair sneer.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Whether the bon- .orable member likes it or not, it is a true statement, and represents the opinion of the community outside. The official liquidator, who, by virtue of his appointment by this Government, is in charge of the business of the Standard Woollen Company, is acting’ in conjunction with the German manager in putting up the prices of woollens held by it. Taking advantage of the acute shortage of woollens’, this combination is robbing the people. It must have the blessing of honorable members opposite, otherwise, after my protest of a few weeks ago, it would have been discontinued. We are now told, deliberately, by the Minister for Trade and Customs that, if practicable, a certain proportion of the profits will be paid into the Consolidated Revenue. That will not help the .people who are being robbed. Hundreds of tailors in Sydney have been displaced, and many small tailoring establishments have had to close up because of the great shortage of these goods. The company has in Sydney and Melbourne £40,000 of stock still undisposed of. Its Adelaide stock has been sold at an increase of from 300 to 400 per cent, on the 1914-15 invoices. The Brisbane stock was allegedly - and I use the word “allegedly” advisedly - sold for 14s. Id. in the £-1 on the valuation of the German manager and the official of the Winthewar Government. I have the evidence of a tailor named Curran, carrying on business at Orange, New South Wales, that he tendered at 1Ss. 6d. in the fi on the valuation for Mahony’s Blarney tweeds, but was unsuccessful. Grace Brothers, of Sydney, however, announce in huge advertisements that they have bought the whole of the stock for 14s. Id. in the £1 on the valuation placed upon it. That fact warrants investigation at the hands of the Government.

Sir Robert Best:

– Was the stock offered in one- or more lots ?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– In lots. I have the whole of the tenders for the South Australian stock, and can show them to the honorable member. This robbery of the people must not be allowed to go on. Honorable members opposite are just as responsible for it as is the Minister to whose Department it relates. When I laid this information before the honorable gentleman a week or two ago, he should at once have taken action to put an end to this wholesale robbery. His reply to-day, however, shows that he does not intend to do so. On the contrary, he proposes to allow this German firm, and its German shareholders, to rob the people to a greater extent than they have done, because every day the prices of woollens are increasing.

When I first brought this case forward, I made a certain offer to the Government, and that offer still stands good. I am prepared to give the ‘ names of four reputable firms in Sydney who will buy the whole of the company’s stock at a price which will allow for a fair rate of interest, and a fair margin of profit,- on the 1914-15 invoices. They will also guarantee that not more than £500 worth of stock shall be sold to any . individual or company. Within the next few days, I anticipate receiving representations from the Master Tailors of New South Wales, from many of the large warehouses in that State, and also from the Tailors Union. I do not know what pressure is necessary to make the Government realize the enormity of the offence, or crime, to which they are giving their blessing.

I propose now to say something in regard to the deportation of Italians. If the Italians in Australia were 30,000 or 40,000 strong, the Government and their supporters would not have the courage to deport them. It is only because they are a mere handful that the Government and their supporters show their patriotism by sending these poor unfortunates out of the country. If it is logical to send any citizen of Australia to fight overseas, why do not the Government send our own people ? The answer is that they have not the courage to do so. They know what would happen to them if they did. But because it is only a mere handful of people that is involved, they are prepared to remorselessly send them away, to tear them from their wives and children, their homes and their businesses, and to deport them to the Armageddon overseas. These men have not sufficient votes to affect an election. If they had, they would not be treated as they are. While the Government have the courage to apply this immoral principle to a mere handful of people, they have not the courage to attempt to Derpetrate it upon Australian citizens. The honorable member for Barrier (Mr. Considine) tells me that the Government are not dealing with Italians who have votes, although at the outset of this infamous campaign they did. What is Australia coming to? Are we to be the mere tools of any nation, to act as their policemen in. carrying out their dirty work ? Australians who have enlisted as soldiers are being put to the degrading work of hunting out poor, unfortunate Italians, breaking into their houses at all hours of the night, and dragging them from their beds. Did they enlist for that purpose’/ I am sure they (“‘id not; but, unfortunately, they cannot refuse to do this degrading work. Many of them have protested in no uncertain terms, but without avail. So long as the position of the Government cannot be affected, honorable members opposite are quite prepared to show their patriotism by supporting the deportation of these poor unfortunates. A still more significant phase of this question is apparent. If it is right that the Commonweath Government should act as policeman in the deportation of Italian reservists to Italy, it is equally right that they should act in a similar capacity for any other Allied country. What would be the position if America asked the Commonwealth to police the deportation of every American from these shores ? I ask whether the Government would act in the capacity of policeman to deport all Americans? If France preferred a. similar request, would they render a similar service to her ? Would they perform a like service for the Belgians, the Greeks, and the whole of the Allied Forces? More significant still, if Great Britain asked the Commonwealth to deport every British-born subject - and surely she would have as much right to do that as has Italy - would the Government accede to her request? I doubt it very much. They would not have the moral courage to do it. While their morality may be elastic enough to permit of them sending a few unfortunate Italians out of the country, they would shrink from doing anything of the kind where a large number of people were concerned. They should at least have the courage to carry to its logical conclusion the action which they have initiated in regard to Italians.

I have previously mentioned the question of an American request to the Commonwealth Government, and I now wish to quote some correspondence which is very interesting in view of the deportation of Italians from. Australia. A treaty has been entered into between Great Britain and America for the deportation of Americans from Great Britain to America and for the deportation of British subjects from America to Great Britain. In this connexion I propose to quote from a letter which I have recently received from a friend who received the same from a friend who is resident in America. The communication is from Mr. Spencer Brodney, of 50 West 36th- street, New York City, and is dated 5th March of the present year. It reads -

The following letter will be interesting to you, and I think you should deal with it, using the facts as you think best, for Australians thinking of visiting the United States may find themselves in a predicament if the treaty is, as I fear, ratified. Australians will be interested to learn that, although conscription has been twice defeated in Australia, and the principle’ of personal freedom thereby vindicated in no uncertain manner, the British Government is, nevertheless, endeavouring to deprive of their liberties and rights Australians who happen to be in the United States. On 10 th February a treaty was signed by the Secretary of State of the United States, Robert Lansing, and the British Ambassador, Lord Reading, permitting their respective Governments to draft men of military age of either country residing in the other - that is, Americans between 21 and 31 in Great Britain, and Britons between the ages of 20 and 45 in the United States - were made liable to be drafted into the army of the country in which they were resident. There was, however, a second treaty between the United States and Canada, which recognised Canada as a self-governing Dominion, free to make its own arrangements in reciprocity in the matter of conscription.

This implies that a Briton was not the” sameas a British subject, but only one who did not belong to a self governing Dominion. The treaty between the United States and Canada was signed the same day as that between the United States and Great “Britain. According to the United States Constitution, no treaty is valid) unless it is ratified by the Senate. The Secretary of State therefore sent the two treaties to the Senate, which, according to its rule, referred them to its Foreign Relations Committee. The treaties are now before that Committee, waiting to be reported to the Senate.

Believing that a protest should be made on behalf of Australians, I first inquired from the British Ambassador what was the position of Australians, and, as the reply showed that the British Government intended to decide for itself when an Australian ceased to be an Australian, I wrote to Senator J. Stone, Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and followed this letter up with a circular letter to all members of the Senate. The following is the text of the letter: - “lie infringement of Australian rights under the Anglo-American draft treaty. - Before the Senate of the United States ratifies the treaty negotiated between the. United States and Great Britain, under which men of military age of either country residing in the other may be subjected to the draft, safeguards should be, I believe, insisted upon, so that the selfgoverning rights of the Commonwealth of Australia be not infringed; otherwise I, as an Australian, urge that the treaty be not ratified. The rights of Australians in the United States are recognised by ‘the British Government; but there is a danger lest these rights be encroached upon under the regulations which the British Ambassador will have power to frame as soon as the treaty is ratified.

The Commonwealth of Australia is a selfgoverning Dominion, and is autonomous in regard to all measures of military and naval defence. The assistance it has rendered to Great Britain in the present war has been entirely voluntary, and by the decision of the people at the two national referenda of October, 1016, and December, 1917, it has refused to subject any Australian to compulsion in the matter of military service.

Nevertheless, according to a statement made by Major Edward A. Mitchell Innes, on behalf of the British Ambassador, in a letter to me, dated 26th February, 1918, the Ambassador proposes, in certain cases, to bring Australians within the scope of a treaty in negotiating Which the Australian Government has had no voice. This is clearly an infringement of Australia’s self-governing rights. In his letter, Major Innes says - - With reference to your letter dated 21st February,- and addressed to the British Ambassador, I beg to state that the rejection by Australia of conscription is entirely immaterial to the position of Australians in the United States under the Recruiting Convention. But, by a British Act of Parliament, which controls the operation of the Convention in question, an Australian who ordinarily resided in Australia before coming to the United States, and who is not domiciled in the United States, is entitled, as of right, to exemption from military service at the hands of the Ambassador.’

Before dealing with the point that interests Australians, I should like to ask: How is it that a British Act of Parliament can be operative in the United States? I should have thought that only an Act of the United States

Congress, or of a State Legislature could have any force in this country. It seems to me, therefore, that, before the Senate ratifies the treaty, this matter also should be inquired into and settled.

The effect of the regulations which are to be issued by the British Ambassador will be to compel Australians to return to Australia before concluding the business, or other purpose, for which they caine to the United States, to prevent Australians from visiting the United States, and generally to interfere with the normal intercourse between the United States and Australia for business, professional, and other purposes: hence, clearly, it is difficult to frame limitations of time, and draw the line between periods which constitute domicile and those which do not. Clearly, also, it is futile to compel mcn to return to a country in which there is no compulsion of any kind in regard to military service. In short, while the rights of Australians arc recognised as a general proposition, there is apparently in contemplationan attempt on the part of the British Government to decide that, in certain cases, an Australian ceases to be an Australian, an attempt which, I can assure you, will cause needless resentment among Australians in the United States and at home in the Commonwealth.

The purpose of the treaty is clearly to subject to draft men who, if they were still resident in Great Britain, would be liable to military service. ‘ I submit, therefore, that it should be explicitly stated in the treaty that natives and citizens of self-governing Dominions, which have not entered into treaty agreements with the United States, are certainly outside the scope of the treaty between the United States and Great Britain. Further, I urge that, if such a proviso is not included, the treaty ought not to be ratified.

There is no need for me to point out to honorable senators the aims of the United States in this war; but, as an Australian, I wish to urge most earnestly that the United States cannot be too punctilious in its respect for the self-governing rights of the Australian people. Never in its history has the United States interfered with, or permitted interference with, the personal freedom of the people of another Democracy, and I trust that it will not depart from this great tradition in the present case.

That will give honorable members an idea of the importance of the treaty, which, doubtless, has been ratified, probably with some modification in regard to Australians, in the United States.

There is still another matter relating to the deportation of Italians to which I desire to refer. On Monday last I had occasion to introduce a deputation to the Italian Consul-General in Sydney. The deputation proceeded to the Victoria Barracks, where I found the Consul-General in a room which had been set apart for his special benefit and convenience. He was interviewing, and arguing with something like fifteen Italians. I went to the door of his room, and was accosted by a gentleman who was evidently high in rank, because he had quite a number of stars and gold decorations on his shoulders. He inquired of me the nature of my business. I gave him my name, informed him who I was, and told him that my business was to introduce a deputation to the Consul-General for Italy, Mr. Eles. Thereupon, he said, “ You cannot see him.” I replied, “ Ask him again.” He went to the Consul-General again. Tha latter shook his head, and spoke in a low tone of voice so that it was impossible for me to hear what he said. “Goldbraid and brass buttons” came back, and said, “He will not see you.” “ Goldbraid” is an Australian officer, evidently a body guard of the Consul-General for Italy. I then asked the Consul-General over “Goldbraid’s” shoulder, whether he would receive the deputation. He adopted a czarlike attitude, and said, “It is not my duty; I have not the power. I will not see you.” By this time, “ Goldbraid “ was frothing at the mouth, and almost bursting a blood-vessel in an attempt to put me out of the office. I indignantly resent any man placing his hands upon me, and I quickly threw “Goldbraid’s “ hands off my shoulder, and told him that he must not lay hands on me. After exchanging a few more words with the Czar of Italy, the Australian autocratic czar called for a military guard to remove me from the precincts of the Victoria Barracks, Sydney. Australia is, indeed, coining to a pitiable pass when officers of high rank ‘are placed at the disposal of foreigners in this country, and an Austrian at that - a person of enemy birth. The Consul-General for Italy is given high officials to act as his body guard inhis infamous deportation of citizens of this country. The Government pay all the expenses, and when any person goes to see if he cannot do something for the poor unfortunate people he is confronted with gold braid and brass buttons in the persons of high officials in our Army. It is a pitiable and damnable position that we have reached at the present time. I wish the Government well in their infamous conduct.

Mr McGRATH:
Ballarat

.- I do not intend to occupy very much time, but there are a few matters with which I wish to deal. There were quite a number of questions upon which I had intended to speak in connexion with our boys overseas. I have presented to the Minister for Defence (Senator Pearce) and the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) statements concerning the treatment of the lads oversea, and I wish to say that those honorable gentlemen have met the circumstances fairly generously. The Minister for Defence recognises the seriousness of the position, and has proraised that immediate steps shall be taken to remedy what is wrong. I did not wish to mention any of these matters, because I recognise the very serious position that the Allies are in at this juncture; but I owe a duty to the lads I left behind, and realize that something must be done in certain matters. However, as I say, I thought it wise not to mention them until I had at least given the Government an opportunity to do something ; and I trust that the Minister will be true to his promise.

I only wish that the Minister for Defence, or some representative of the Defence Department was in the House tonight, but perhaps the PostmasterGeneral (Mr. Webster) will take a note of what I say. During the time I was in London and France, I recognised very keenly the necessity there is for Australia having a Minister of the Crown in London - somebody who represents the civil power of the Commonwealth.

Mr Webster:

– That may be done.

Mr McGRATH:

– I sincerely hope it will. Canada has her Minister there, and the boys from the Dominion have somebody to whom they can appeal.

Sir Robert Best:

– What about our High Commissioner?

Mr McGRATH:

– The High Commissioner has no power whatever to deal with the complaints that are made. He is not in a position to do so; he is not a responsible Minister, but a public servant pure and simple. We have sent 300,000 soldiers to the other side of the world, and placed them completely at the mercy of the military. If there is one section of the community that is without a soul it is the military. Human life is of very little consideration indeed over there, and our lads are going through much suffering at the present juncture. Many things are occurring - dozens and dozens of things - and they have nobody to whom they can appeal. Considering what we are now spending, it would cost very little money to carry out my suggestion, and I repeat unhesitatingly that there ought to be a civil representative of Australia in England.

Mr Riley:

– There ought to be more than one.

Mr McGRATH:

– At least there should be one; and not only to look after the interests of the boys. We are spending more money at the Australian Imperial Force Head-Quarters in London than we are spending in Australia; and yet the military alone is responsible for this huge expenditure; no one else is responsible to Australia for the spending of a shilling. We have treated the military too generously and it is. time we exercised some check and control.

The honorable member for -Darling (Mr. Blakeley) has referred to hia treatment at Victoria Barracks, Sydney. I have been a long time out of this country, and I am afraid that I shall get into serious trouble if any of the military attempt to treat me in a similar manner. I am a representative of the people, and I hope that the civil power will ever be supreme over the military power. Much as we recognise the good work done by the military, I trust we shall never see the day when it will be allowed sole control. The past history of our race shows that we have bad many fights to check the military spirit, and preserve the liberties we enjoy. We entered into this war because of a nation that had fostered that spirit in its youth for forty years; I hope we shall check it here. The Minister for Defence should obtain a report in reference to the statements made by the honorable member for Darling, and find out who was responsible for giving a bodyguard to this Italian Consul.

Mr Riley:

– He is an Austrian.

Mr McGRATH:

– He is acting on behalf of the Italian Government, though only a Consul in name, for he is practically the representative of certain firms. He is a young man of military age, in good health, and instead of trying to conscript young Italians he ought to be over there “doing his bit.” He should be heartily ashamed of the action he is taking against these unfortunate young men. many of whom cannot speak a word of Italian. Their fathers are Italian, and . the sons have been taken by the neck and thrown amongst Italians, who, in customs, traditions, and everything else are entirely foreign to them.

Mr Pigott:

– If they were born in Australia there is not the power to send them away.

Mr McGRATH:

– They came to Australia possibly when a year or two years old, and are thoroughly Australian, and * we promised them the protection of the laws of this country. But I know cases where the sons of naturalized fathers have been conscripted. It is perhaps no use talking, for the Government have decided that these lads shall go. I trust, however, that the guard given to the Consul will be taken away. The idea of allowing him to go to Victoria Barracks and order a representative of the people to be escorted from the premises ! My God ! The only protection the people have to-day is the right of their representatives to go to the military barracks and other places where the military heads are. If honorable members had only seen what I have seen they would realize the position. I have seen poor Australian soldiers, dirty, filthy, and lousy, come to Horseferryroad on their twelve days’ leave, and there meet a crowd of cold-footers who had never heard a shot fired. And the insolent manner in which they speak to the dinkum Australian soldier! No wonder there was a big vote at the Front against conscription. No doubt such treatment accounts to a large degree for the majority against conscription, and shows the necessity there is to have a Minister or representative of Australia in London to watch these gentlemen.

Mr Riley:

– Do you advocate that we should also have a representative in France?

Mr McGRATH:

– There would be no harm in that. If honorable members saw the papers which I have submitted to the Minister for Defence, and on which that honorable gentleman has promised to take action, they would realize, as I do, that there ought to be a representative in England to whom the men could appeal, and who would see that they got a fair deal.

There are colonels and others who, after a day or two in France, are sent to England, and there hang about camps for a year or two, drawing their £2 and £3 a day. Nobody knows what use they are, and they ought to be sent to Australia and demobilized. There should be an immediate investigation as to why such a large army is kept over there, a large part of which is doing no useful work. In Brigadier-General Griffiths we have on© of the kindliest and finest men that it is possible to have in charge of Headquarters, and he is doing the best he can under very great difficulties. He is heart and soul with the boys, and, so far as one man can, he is doing bis utmost to protect their interests. But the influences at work are a bit too strong for him, and he deserves some support from the people of this country in the shape of a Minister or representative with full power to act. Do not let it be possible for a man to go from here, as a late reinforcement, and immediately be claimed by somebody in Horseferry-road as a private, only to emerge two months afterwards with two stars. Immediately such a man gets promotion he is not longer eligible to serve in the field; for the rest of the war he is free. When a man becomes an officer at Head-quarters, and gets one star on his shoulder, he will never hear the guns booming. But let him go there as a private,” and rise to the rank of Warrant Officer, and he will have to revert to the rank that he held when he enlisted. ‘ If that rule is all right for non-commissioned officers and privates, there can be nothing wrong in it for commissioned officers. The positions at Head-quarters could be well filled by wounded officers, who have done good work at the Front, and are no longer fit for active service, and such men would have some sympathy with the soldiers, for they know the conditions of the life in France.

Mr Higgs:

– I suppose that these gentlemen with three stars voted against conscription ?

Mr McGRATH:

– They were conscriptionists to a man ; they were afraid that if conscription was not carried they would have to do the duty for which they enlisted.

Many of the boys who went to the Front have made the supreme sacrifice. In some of their accounts, when they arrive in this country, there are found deductions in the shape of a number of little fines. If for some trivial offences fines have been inflicted on these lads, who subsequently gave their lives, let those fines be remitted. It is not so much a money matter, but these deductions in the pay books only add to the sorrow of their parents and relatives. It is thought that, because a man has had seven days’ pay deducted, he has been guilty of some dishonorable act, whereas it may only mean that after, perhaps, years of good conduct, he is fined for having overstayed his leave ten minutes, and the fine is inflicted by an officer who never heard a shot fired. The fine appears as a red mark in the pay book, and, of course, comes to the knowledge of the parents and relatives here. This ought not to be, and the fines ought to be remitted. The Australian is the gamest and best soldier the world- has ever seen - no better fighter than he oan be found. He has never been guilty of disobeying an order on the battlefield. It is his vitality which impels him to break rules in search. ‘ of a little pleasure, and makes him the gamest of soldiers. When he has paid the supreme penalty, these little offences should not be brought to the knowledge of his people in the way they are.

The matter of deferred pay is causing much anxiety and trouble to me, and, I suppose, other honorable members. I am besieged day and night with interviewers, and letters and telegrams from all over Australia. “My boy was killed twelve months ago,” a letter will say, “ and I cannot get the deferred pay.” Why is this?

Mr West:

– In New Zealand it is paid in eight months.

Mr McGRATH:

– And here it ought to be done in three months. When a soldier is marked at Horseferry-road to come back to Australia, his statement of accounts ought to be sent in the same boat, or, at latest, in the next. I can see nothing to prevent this being done.

Mr Mathews:

– The military will not do anything.

Mr McGRATH:

– Then the military must be shaken up, for we members are paying the penalty for their fault. Many of the lads when they come back desire to start a little business, but, in the absence of their pay, this is impossible. Strong representations ought to be made to Horseferry-road, and to the HeadQuarters in France, and those in control informed of the trouble and difficulty caused in Australia by this delay in the settlement of accounts.

I am glad the Minister for Recruiting (Mr. Orchard) is here. I have not verified what I am going to say, but I believe it> is true that the Department have here men who have come from oversea as sergeants, and been appointed recruiting sergeants, and a few weeks afterwards have appeared with two- stars on their shoulders. They stand on the platform appealing to men to volunteer, yet I am informed that numbers of them have never left Egypt.

Mr Orchard:

– I shall be very pleased if the honorable member will give me the names.

Mr McGRATH:

– I shall give the Minister7 privately, the name of one individual. I have drawn the attention of the authorities to the matter, and I find he is being shifted and promoted. We ought to employ no man to go on to the platform to appeal to other men to enlist- that is, no man of military age and wearing the uniform - unless he is prepared to go to France, or has already been there. How can we expect him to have any influence on others unless he has been on active service?

Mr Orchard:

– Do you mean they have never been away?

Mr McGRATH:

– They have been to Egypt, which is not active service. If a man has been seriously ill, and has been returned, I can forgive him. He has tried to do his best; but I have seen men physically in good health appealing for recruits as recruiting agents, and I am told that they have not been further than Egypt, and some of them have not been as far.

Mr Higgs:

– How would they get back?

Mr McGRATH:

– I do not want to go into particulars, because I have not verified the matter. I have no desire to do an injustice to any individual, although I believe what I have said to be absolutely true.

Mr Orchard:

– Would the honorable member explain how a man can be promoted when he is on the recruiting staff?

Mr McGRATH:

– I cannot explain how half of them get promotion. I see “ Johnnie Brown “ go away as a private, and know that he has been in’ every stunt over the parapet, but he never gets a stripe. He comes back to the township still plain “Johnnie Brown,” with no decorations; but if he happens to get, as a private, among friends at Horseferryroad, he blossoms forth as an officer in two or three months: and when the orders come out you see his name in the list. A case in point is that of Major Grassock head of the Pay Corps in Horseferryroad. He comes home a full-blown major. When orders of merit are being thrown about, he gets an order; yet he has never heard a shot fired in his life. The little private who has been risking his life, and perhaps been wounded several times, has the gold stripes for his only decoration. A lot of people will think the other man is the better soldier, because he comes back with decorations or stars.

I trust the Minister will go into the question of promotion, particularly the promotions given to-day to certain recruiting sergeants. There ought to be no such thing as a sergeant, corporal, lieutenant, or major in the administrative Head-quarters. The members of the staff there ought to be plain Mr. Jones, or Mr. Brown, because that is the civil part of the Department. An increase of pay should be given for good work, but no military rank. That is the thing which is causing more bother than enough in London. So long as I was a coldfooter in London, I did not mind saluting a cold-footer officer; but after I had been to France, I am blest if I was going to salute in London any officer who I knew had never left London. And what is true in my case is true of every soldier who has been to France. That is the cause of a lot of trouble ‘ in connexion with saluting in London to-day. I know a case in the High Commissioner’s office in London of a man who never enlisted in the Australian Forces, but is parading around the Strand and Picadilly with an officer’s uniform on and two stars. That is Mr. Smart, - the man who ran tha “ Win-the-war “ paper during the election of 5th May. Yet he never enlisted ! That reminds me of the gentleman who came over there, and by some influence became head of the Australian Headquarters in London. His name waa Robert McC. Anderson. He never enlisted, nor did he know anything about military matters, yet the first we heard of him was that he was a Brigadier-General at £2,000 per year.

Mr Mathews:

– Where is he now?

Mr McGRATH:

– I do not know; but I hope he will never be allowed to have anything to do with the Australian Forces again.

Mr Pigott:

– The Labour party sent him there.

Mr McGRATH:

– They may have. I am not speaking on this question froma party point of view, nor am I blaming the present Government for things that have occurred in London. I was a member of the House for eighteen months while the war was going on, but I knew nothing of the wrongs that were occurring on the other side. It was impossible to know unless one went there, and then only as a private. It is of no use for the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) to go there, and mingle with the officers. If he does, he will know nothing of what is going on among the privates. One must go and live the life of these boys to know the difficulties they are experiencing and the wrongs that are going on.

An injustice is being done in connexion with the service in Australia. Many of our soldiers come back, and immediately enlist for home service. They are told that the conditions of pay are similar to those of active service. If they fall ill, and have to go to hospital they receive full pay for. the first four weeks, half pay for the next four weeks, and, after that, they are paid nothing at all. Even the separation allowance is stopped from their wives and families. If the Department take men for home service, they must be prepared to pay them properly. These men ought to be treated fairly, and paid just the same as those on active service.

Mr Fenton:

– Do they get no allowance of any kind?

Mr McGRATH:

– They tell me that if they are taken ill, they get nothing after two months. That is not fair to those men who have volunteered for home service.

I notice by the press to-day that the United Service Press is making a complaint against a policy adopted by Colonel Fetherston, who has directed that, in the case of men who have lost one or two legs, the artificial limbs are to be made for them in Australia, and fitted here. I believe that is a good policy. No one in this House believes that there should be so much social distinction that an artificial leg for an officer should cost£11 more than for a private. They have all to go out afterwards into civil life and earn a living. Yet officers have been allowed to run the rule over things, with the result that they get a leg that costs £11 more than that for a private. It is also a fact that if a private loses an eye, and an officer loses an eye, the officer gets an artificial one with veins running through it to make it look more natural, while a private does not. That distinction ought not to be made. Probably in social life the private is superior to the officer. If not, at any rate, he has volunteered to do as much as the officer. We cannot dotoo much for these men, and I am glad the Government have decided to have the artificial limbs made here. One result will be to wipe out the distinction I spoke of because the Minister has assured me that the artificial legs will be of the best quality for both officers and privates. Many of the lads complain that they are fitted with the legs in England too soon, because the stump has not shrunk. When the artificial leg is fitted they have to stuff it as the leg shrinks. If the artificial legs are to be fitted out here ample time will be allowed for the leg to shrink. We ought to be very careful how we manufacture the limbs and how they are fitted. I believe we have very good men engaged in that work. I would impress on the Minister that if these limbless lads are to be brought out they ought not to be treated as were those who came out on my boat. Five of them, stone blind, and three double amputation cases, were put down on the lowest deck. When we eame through the Channel everybody was anxious lest we should strike a torpedo, so what must have been the mental torture of those poor lads, limbless and blind, five decks down, with nobody to look after them, and nobody caring ? These men ought to be provided with cabins. Surely it will not hurt to make that provision for them. If there are not enough cabins for the officers and the limbless men, let the officers go down and take hammocks. It will not hurt them. These boys have made the greatest sacrifice possible. I saw limbless men sleeping out in the open for seven weeks on the voyage out. These things I know. They will not be tolerated by the people of Australia when they become known. We must have ourcivil representatives over to watch some of these boats, and some of the things which are going on. If the Government do that it will be the best agent they can have for recruiting. The thing that is most detrimental to recruiting to-day is the fact that the lads are coming back with complaints, many of which are justified. I am not blaming the Government, because they have had nothing to do with it. They have left these things entirely in the hands of the military on the other side. I recommend the Government to take some of the power out of the hands of those people, and appoint civil representatives there to watch what is going on. I guarantee that it will be for the benefit of this country and for the men themselves, and do a great deal to stimulate recruiting.

We have forces elsewhere than in England and France. We have boys in Mesopotamia. I am told that quite a number have been sent as invalids from Mesopotamia to Rawal Pindi, in Bombay. They have been Class A for six and twelve months, and they are all praying to get back up to the line, because six months in camp is dreadfully monotonous. While they have been kept there reinforcements have come from Australia, going through there and going up the line, but these lads have not been allowed to go back to their mates.

Mr Riley:

– For what reason ?

Mr McGRATH:

– They cannot find out the reason. There are other men who have been marked C1 for six or nine months. C1 men ought to be back in Australia, but they cannot get back here, not because of the want of transports, but evidently because we have left the military in absolute control in that place also. Cl means that a man is beyond active service. If he is marked C1 in Great Britain, that means “back to Australia,” and if a man is marked C1 in Bombay he certainly ought to be back here. They have told me of another little trouble. While they are in camp in Bombay they are allowed only two meals, but they are paid 3d. to buy the third-meal. They do not complain about the amount, but when some of them have come back to Australia, and have been given their discharge, the military authorities have refused to recognise that 3d. which has been entered up in their books. It amounts in some cases to a fair sum, and the military authorities have deducted it from their payments, regarding it as an overpayment, in settling their accounts.

The secret treaties referred to by the honorable member for Barrier (Mr. Considine), were published freely in Great Britain, and they were not denied in the House of Commons When I left England it was my intention to deal with them on my arrival in Australia, but I realize now that this is not the time to talk about them. All our efforts should be concentrated on bringing the German offensive to a stand-still. It must be stopped, and the sooner we can do it the better it will be for humanity. The discussion of secret treaties will not bring it to an end. We cannot talk terms of peace with the military junkers of Germany, who are in absolute power in their own country. Already the Germans have overrun Russia, they are overrunning France, and there is a danger that they may overrun Great Britain.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

– The honorable member’s time has expired. Is it the pleasure of the Committee that he have leave to continue? (Leave granted.)

Mr McGRATH:

– There is every danger that the German military forces may overrun the civilized world. The position is about as serious as it can be. Paris is threatened, the Channel Ports are threatened, the Motherland is threatened, and our very national existence is threatened. I am proud of the country to which I belong, I am an internationalist so far as Socialism is concerned. I have not the slightest hatred of the Germans as a people, because I recognise that the system under which they are living has made them what they are to-day. I do not want to see it foisted on this country of ours. I want to live in this country, and I want to do so under the rule of Australians. We may have our wrongs, and there may be differences among us, but we have adult suffrage here, and once every three years we have the opportunity to settle differences amongst ourselves. It is because I want to see our nationality preserved that I am anxious that we shall have as few differences as possible among ourselves at this juncture. Whether we were wrong in entering the war or not, we have sent our boys away, and given them our promise that we shall stick to them. Our obligation to them must be fulfilled. We cannot desert the lads who are now fighting with their backs to the wall in order to prevent Paris from being taken, and prevent the Germans from reaching the Channel. Realizing how serious the situation is, I want to see the Government take action. Surely no one should be allowed to make a profit out of the war. It should not be tolerated for ten! minutes. It must cause discord among the people, and a lack of unanimity that may mean the success of the German arms. It has already had a serious effect in Great Britain. Let the Government do something. If they want men to go to the war let them step in and provide cheap meat, so that if a man does enlist and go to the Front, he will know that his children will be provided for in his absence.

We are getting -close to the finish of the war. I do not think that Germany ii aiming so much at acquiring territory. She is putting up this big offensive in the hope of making one gigantic scoop which will force France to her knees and compel Great Britain to sue for peace. She is suffering tremendous losses. Every time she moves forward she loses tens of thousands. She is weaker every day because of the gallant resistance of the Allies, and particularly of our own Australian boys. .1 believe that we shall prevent her from, achieving her object, and when we have brought her to a standstill, land demonstrated to *ne world that no nation by the use of the military arm can overrun civilization, and force her will upon other nations, then it will be possible to talk about getting back to the days of 1914. I believe that Great Britain entered this war with the highest of ideals, namely, to honour the word which she had given to Belgium, and to preserve the neutrality of that country, but history will judge us, not by the disinterested purpose we had when Ave entered the war, not by our mind as we went in, but upon the way in- which we come out of it, such as by claiming annexations or looking for other people’s territory. I believe that we can come out of the war with the ideals we had when we entered it. We ought not to want new territory. Our sole requirement should be the recognition of the fact that we made so many sacrifices and lost so many of the flower of our manhood fighting for a fine objective. If we secure that objective, it should be our only reward. I hope that the present offensive will soon come to an end. When it does it will be time to ask the Allies to revert to the -position of 1914.

Mr MACKAY:
Lilley

.- I appreciate the remarks of the honorable member for Ballarat (Mr. McGrath). He has certainly made some very serious statements in connexion with our Forces overseas, and I am glad that the Assistant

Minister for Defence (Mr. Wise) and the Minister in charge of recruiting (Mr. Orchard) were able to hear him. I trust that these matters will be inquired into, and, if necessary, rectified.

I am sorry to have to break ground widely different from ‘the subject of the interesting address of the honorable member for Ballarat, but I wish to deal with some of the assertions made by the honorable member for Barrier (Mr. Considine) a few nights ago, in connexion with the price of meat, and with some statements made to-night by the honorable member for Macquarie (Mr. Nicholls). To hear honorable members opposite speaking, on£ would believe that the State of Queensland is the place for cheap meat. The alleged cheapness of meat there has been rather overboomed, because, when we come down to bedrock, we find that the actual position is not nearly what it has been represented to be. Quite a wrong impression has been created. It is true that the Quensland Labour Government have purchased pastoral stations at a cost of something like £750,000; but they have not paid cash for them, or for the cattle on them. They have been bought on debentures, which posterity will have to honour. I contend that the utilization of debentures for the purchase of live stock is not legitimate business, because they are a disappearing asset. If a drought should happen to come along, the asset may not be there when posterity comes to foot the bill. There is also ah impression abroad that the Queensland Government supply their butchers’ shops with meat from their own stations. That impression is also entirely wrong. The Government have not killed a single beast from any of their stations for the purpose of supplying the State butchers’ shops. They have certainly sold a number of cattle from their stations to owners in New South Wales, and they have supplied various meat works in Queensland at 4$d. per lb., the full price under the Imperial contract.

Mr Fenton:

– They have sold cattle in the Enoggera market.

Mr MACKAY:

– There have been occasions when the yarding at Enoggera was small, and ‘the Government have run in a number of bullocks for the purpose, they say, of keeping the market down, but if they were really anxious to give the people of Queensland cheap meat they would enter into legitimate compe- tition with the private butchers’ shops, which they are certainly not doing now. Instead of selling their bullocks to the meat works, I contend that every beast the Queensland Government breed or own on their stations should be sent through the yards for the purpose of keeping up the supply.

One would gather from the statements which have been made in this House that a large proportion of the people of Queensland are being supplied with cheap meat, but according to a report of the State Auditor-General, less than 7,000 families are being supplied, which, on the average of five to a family, means that about 35,000, people out of a population of over half-a-million are getting alleged cheap meat.

Mr Higgs:

– How many thousand families dealing with private shops would get meat at a cheaper price on account of the State butchers’ shops selling cheaply ?

Mr MACKAY:

– The honorable member refers to a trifling benefit. This is what the State Auditor-General says in connexion with the State butchers’ shops in his report upon the accounts of the State industrial undertakings for the period ending 30th June, 1917 -

Under the agreementswith the various meat companies, the prices paid for heef and mutton by the State butchers’ shops, from April to 31st December, 1916, were as follow: -

Frozen beef, 3¾d. per lb.

Chilled beef, 31/8d. per lb.

Mutton, 4¼d. per lb.

From the 1st January, 1917, and continuing to the end of the war and for three months thereafter -

Frozen beef, 3½d. per lb.

Chilled beef, 3d. per lb.

Mutton, 4¼d. per lb.

The profit on the shops- £5,913 19s.1d. - is equivalent to 3.7 per cent. on the turnover, £160,118.

The conditions under which the business is conducted are exceptionally favorable, primarily due to the low price atwhich the meat is obtained, thereby enabling the shops to sell at correspondingly low prices and without any expense for soliciting custom, delivery of meat, cost of collection of moneys, and bad debts.

Here I would like to mention the fact that this meat is not obtained legitimately. It is quite apparent that Great Britain is giving a large subsidy to the Queensland Government. The arrangement made with the meat companies provides that 12,000 tons, or one-tenth of the total killings, whichever is the lesser, shall be supplied to the Queensland Government for the State butchers’ shops, and that the Imperial authorities shall pay the Queensland Government 47/8d. per pound on the meat exported. That means either that the British Government” are paying at the least £900,000 too much for their meat, or that the Queensland Government are responsible for taking at least another £100,000 out of the pockets of the graziers; for those figures represent the difference between the rate of 3½d. per pound for the 12,000 tons of meat which the State Government have commandeered and the rate of 47/8d. per pound which the British Government are paying for their meat.

It is quite time this matter was brought before the House in a proper way. I am in full sympathy with the consumer in regard to the price of meat. It is certainly too high, and it is the duty ofthe Government to attempt to control it in some way or other. I think, however, that on this question of price fixing the Government are beginning to find out on how many different lines it is really necessary to fix prices in order to do anything like a fair thing by the whole community. It seems to me that once they dabble in price fixing for certain lines, they will find others that ought to be fixed also; but, apart from that, I am quite in sympathy with the consumer at the present time, because I can wellre- m ember that, when cattle were much cheaper than they are now, stockowners were doing well. It is only within the last two or three years that there has been any considerable rise in the price of cattle, and I believe that the dealing element has been largely responsible for this increased price. One has only to move about in the country centres to realize how the same cattle come into the sale-yards time and time again. In fact, in some districts even the farmers simply deal in stock.

Queensland is not likely to suffer very much as the result of any action the Government may take ; but I would be sorry to see the small producers of the other States suffer through the fixing of prices. I do not think they will, because it is apparent they must have had a considerable number of cattle when prices began to rise, and if they happen to hold cattle at the high prices now prevailing, the position vill just about balance itself owing to the added profits.

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

– Will you explain how the dairymen in Victoria will be able to sell their calves at the old prices?

Mr MACKAY:

– I thought I made it abundantly clear that, in the early stages of this upward movement in stock prices, farmers must have had calves for which, no doubt, they got big prices, and which were bred from cows bought at low prices. I know that dairymen generally go to saleyards, and, if they see a line of poddies, for which they have pasture, they buy. The whole business community are affected in very much the same way. A large number of business people in the early days of the war had huge stocks on hand, for which they have since obtained big prices ; and if, at the conclusion of the war, they hold big stocks, for which they paid high prices, which waT competition will reduce, in tie long run the position should balance out all right. Whether this will be so or not, the fact remains that, at the present time, consumers are paying far too much for their meat, and I submit that the Government have to decide between restricting, export, which would be unfortunate, considering that export would be for the benefit of troops overseas, and supplying the people of Australia, if there is a shortage, by fixing upon a price that would enable the consumer to get his meat at something like a fair rate. I think it is possible to have a fair deal in this matter, and I believe it can easily be .arranged without injuring the producers to any extent.

Another matter to which I desire to refer is the claim for storage of meat made by the Queensland Government on the Commonwealth Government. I mentioned this matter when the last Supply Bill was under review, and the Treasurer (Mr. Watt), by interjection, assured me that it was being investigated, with a view to obtaining a refund. I should like to know as early as possible what progress is being made in this matter, which I regard as important. In order that the facts may be properly appreciated by honorable members, I shall read an extract from the report of the Queensland Auditor-General on the accounts of the 3tate industrial undertakings. It will be found on page 9, in paragraph 20, thus -

Regarding the amount of £19,627 8s. 4d. shown above as having been received from the Commonwealth Government, I find, from the correspondence submitted in reference thereto, that it represents payment by that Government of this State’s claim for storage charges from the 31st December, 1916, to 31st March, 1917, on all frozen meat held in store to the order of the Commonwealth Government. . . .

As no payment was made by the State butchers’ shops to the meat companies on this behalf, the amount remains as a credit to profit and loss account.

Some capital has been made put of the fact that the State butchers’ shops have shown a profit, but the sum includes this £20,000, which, I maintain, was taken from the Commonwealth in a manner which I do not think is creditable to the Queensland Government. It is necessary that I should also read what the AuditorGeneral of the Commonwealth has to say on this subject. His remarks will be found in paragraph 33, as follows: -

  1. Storage Charges on meat paid to Queensland Government. - In the months of June and July, 1916, an agreement was made as between the Governments of Queensland and the Commonwealth for the supply of an estimated quantity of 4,000 tons of frozen beef which was required for the troops in training camps in some of the States.

In the month of November, 1916, it was pointed out to the Queensland Government that owing to the difficulty experienced in obtaining freight to all the States where it was intended to use frozen beef, and to other circumstances which could not be foreseen, it was not likely that more than 1,800 tons would be required by the Defence Department. It was therefore requested that the State Government reserve that quantity only for the Department’s requirements.

A reply was received to the effect that owing to the meat companies ceasing operations for the season it became necessary to reserve sufficient beef to fulfil the order for 4,000 tons, and that a balance of 2,705 tons was then “reserved and now held in stores on behalf of Commonwealth Government pending freight being available.”

On the 6th December, 1916, the Minister acting for the Premier of Queensland drew attention to his letter of the 15th May, 1916, to the Acting Prime Minister, which, among other things, proposed that “ in the event of any works closing down with meat in store on your account, payment be made by you in full at once, and if not taken delivery of any storage incurred to be paid for by your Government,” but he mentioned that storage would be charged only in the event of the Queensland Government being called upon to pay same by those storing beef on the Commonwealth’s behalf.

A claim was made by the State Government on the 31st March, 1917, for interest, £1,365 ls. 6d., and for storage on 5,824,339 lb. of beef from 31st December, 1916, to 31st March, 1917, at l-16d. per lb. per week, £19,717 16s. 2d., and this claim was accompanied by a letter from the Minister writing for the Premier, which said: - “In the event of this Government being called upon to pay these charges we shall have to ask you to recoup us to that extent.”

The! charge for interest was waived, but the £19,717 10s. 2d. for storage was paid to Queensland on the 28th June, 1917. An application was then made, for audit purposes, for certified copies of vouchers showing the payments made to the several, meat works for the storage of meat for the Defence Department. The reply received from the Queensland Government” was “that the settlement of storage claims against this Government for meat held on State and Commonwealth account was adjusted when the new agreement for meat supplies was drawn up, without any cash transaction, and therefore no receipts were exchanged between the parties.”

The Acting Secretary, Department of Defence, states that “ the Premier’s colleague, the Honorable J. M. Hunter, informed officers representing the Prime Minister’s Department and the Department of Defence at an interview at the Auditorium Buildings, Melbourne, on 19th June, 1917, that the amount of storage had been actually paid by the Queensland Government to. the meat companies for storage of meat.”

In the meantime, the only voucher I hold in support of the payment of the £10,717 16s. 2d. is the claim made by Queensland, the payment of which is signed for by the supervisor of the Queensland State retail butchers’ shops.

Either a serious error has been made by the Queensland authorities, or the Commonwealth Government has been far too ready to hand over to it something like £20,000 of the money of the people of Australia. I trust that the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) has not forgotten this matter, and that he will have it fully investigated. If he finds that the money has been obtained wrongfully he should insist on its being refunded.

Dr MALONEY:
Melbourne

– I desire to make an explanation which may prevent an interjection which I made from being misunderstood. I am informed that General Fetherston was responsible for recommending what the honorable member for Ballarat (Mr. McGrath) was the first to suggest, namely, that artificial limbs -for maimed Australian soldiers should be made here, and that there should not be any difference between those supplied to officers and those supplied to privates, an absurdity which prevails in England, and is in keeping with the manner in which the survivors of the Balaclava charge were treated in that country. I had one man under me in St. Mary’s Hospital who had been operated on eighteen times, and they could not provide him with a gocart, although he had lost both limbs ; the students had to collect sixpences for the purpose. How many of those heroes died in the workhouse ! About ten years ago I had the portraits of those who survived taken, and Reynolds Weekly, a democratic newspaper, shamed the British, public into providing for the latter days of these veterans. Personally, I thank Dr. Fetherston for having been so wise as to make this recommendation, fearless of the storm of abuse that may rage against him in England. It is creditable to the honorable member for Ballarat that he was the first to expose the unfairness of the English system.

Those who heard the speech of the honorable member for Ballarat to-night about the treatment of our privates will be in sympathy with Kim. In this war, the privates risk more than the officers, who are not called upon to lead their men, as they used to do in the past. Possibly, the advance in the science of warfare justifies the keeping hack of the officers, but there should be no differentiation in their favour. If there is not room on the ships as they are now fitted up to bring back to Australia the soldiers who ought to return, let the officers’ quarters on board he swept away, so that all the accommodation may be available for soldiers. As I have stated on a former occasion, I intend to advocate the giving of the same payment to officers and men, and the same uniforms, food, pensions, and allowances for dependants.

Some of the men who are generals here will never see the Front, and run no risk of being killed. Possibly one of them would be ashamed to go to England, because there he would be the least eligible man serving under the British flag. There is not an officer in Australia today who is not his superior in attainments. He does not dare to enter the Melbourne or the Alfred Hospital as a surgeon. He is a woman’s doctor. Yet he is above men who are absolute surgeons, as is shown by their diplomas. He has become a general here by “ polishing up the handle of the big front door.” In the -witness box he swore that a man who was later sent to a lunatic asylum observation ward to be kept under close observation for six and a half months was well enough to go to work, because the poor fellow had beaten him at a court martial. In England, the decisions of a court martial never come before a civil court. This man has wronged a poor unfortunate private who was one of five brothers, all of whom went to the Front. The bones of one lie in Gallipoli, those of another lie in France, and a third brother has died of his wounds. Where are General Cuscaden and his brothers? Safe in Australia, where they can never be injured.

To-night I have been addressing a large meeting on the subject of the fixing of prices. I thank the Assistant Minister (Mr. Greene) for the courteous answers which he gave the other day to two questions asked by me. I asked -

Will he, in order to prevent citizens being unjustly charged, have the lists of retail prices for food posted in a permanent place in all post-offices, showing the local prices?

To that the reply given was -

Regulations are being prepared requiring the fixed prices to be exhibited in the shops themselves.

That is even better than the suggestion contained in the question. The second question was -

Will he have printed on such lists the name of the Commonwealth officer to whom citizens could write if overcharged?

To that the answer was “ Yes.” Many persons do not like to go to law, and I am sure that if the public knows where te write when overcharging is suspected, the overcharging that has been too frequent in the past will be largely prevented. I was asked at the meeting when these regulations would take effect, and I replied that I could hardly say, but that I trusted that, as Parliament was going into recess, the price-lists would bo published all over Australia within a month. This should enable the poor and lowly to get food at the prices fixed by the Government.

Only members of the Ministerial party are opposed to the fixing of prices, though all the members opposite are not without sympathy for the men, women, and children of this country.

I pay my meed of praise to Messrs. Piddington and Mills, who have written history in their report on the meat question. On 23rd October Messrs. Piddington, Swinburne, and Lockyer forwarded a report on the fixing of prices. These four gentlemen are paid a large salary to do certain work, . and they have honorably performed that work. -Their* report, however, was kept back. Why? Chiefly because those interested in the squatting industry objected to the fixing of prices, and a letter was sent to the Commission by the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) of anything but sainted memory. If ever a man has deserved being called the shadow of the father of all lies it is he, and, as I have said that to his face, I do not hesitate to repeat it now.

Mr Watt:

– What is that you are talking about?

Dr MALONEY:

– Your boss, and I hope he will not be your boss for long.

Mr Watt:

– The honorable member must not say those nasty things here.

Dr MALONEY:

– I have said them before; I have said them outside and inside this House. This is the wonderful letter that the Prime Minister sent, last October, to the Chairman of the Inter-State Commission -

Two deputations, representing the Wholesale Meat Traders and the Producers’ Association of New South Wales, waited upon me to-day, in connexion with the proposal of the Government to adopt the recommendations of the Inter-State Commission, to fix the local price . of meat on the basis of the Imperial Government contracts, and made statements which would appear to call for further consideration.

As you are aware, the Government had instructed Mr. Whitton, Chief Prices Commissioner, to take the matter in hand, with a view to giving effect to the Commission’s recommendations, but, after hearing the statements of the deputations, I have come to the conclusion that it is advisable to re-open the question, to give them an opportunity of placing fresh evidence before you.

In the meantime I have promised to stay proceedings.

The Prime Minister did not say that to common workmen and women who have a difficulty in paying for the meat for their families. He said to the Chairman of the Inter-State Commission, “ Meantime I have promised to stay proceedings.” The letter proceeds -

Will you be good enough to arrange for the persons interested having an opportunity of placing their case before the Commission as early as possible.

I should be glad if Mr. Whitton could attend, in his official capacity, to take such part in the inquiry as may be necessary.

And so it went on. The Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) now has the intention of fixing prices so that the worker shall get meat at a fair charge, based upon the wholesale price, which will be insisted upon by the Government. The only comment I can make upon that is that if the Acting Prime Minister brings such a state of affairs about he will have done better work than his colleague in the whole of the time he has been Prime Minister. We are told that sheep are not as numerous as they were. In 1916 they totalled 76,668,000 for the Commonwealth. We have been told that that number is not as great as in preceding years. Quite true, but when we know that 40 per cent. were ewes bearing lambs, and that such ewes have 60 per cent. of lambs - to which two prominent squatters agreed as being very small - if those figures are worked out it will be found that they represent an increase of 18,000,000. Last year the number was greater than in any other year Australia has known. And how much more will it be this season ? Is there any need to wonder, therefore, that the Commissioners, upon sworn evidence, stated -

The sheep in the Commonwealth are greater in numbers than in 1913, while the number of cattle is about the same as in that period.

The present prices of meat for home consumption in New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, and South Australia are about 100 per cent. higher than the prices in 1913.

The Imperial contract prices, after deducting3/8d. per lb. for freezing, are about 65 per cent. higher than the prices ruling in 1913, when the flocks and herds of the Commonwealth were about the same in number as at present. If the meat slaughtered in that year had been sold at the prices now suggested, the increased return to the grower would have been £13,500,000.

The Imperial contract price for wool as compared with the pre-war prices gives an increased annual return per sheep of not less than 4s. per head.

We have heard from the Acting Prime Minister to-day that that is to continue for one year after the war.

Mr Watt:

– It is a full-wool year. That should be a year and a half, and perhaps nearly two years.

Dr MALONEY:

– Yes ; it will mean considerably over twelve calendar months. The recommendations are -

  1. That the Imperial contract prices, less a deduction of3/8d. per lb. (freezing charges), be fixed as the maximum wholesale prices for meat in Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Perth (including Fremantle), Hobart, and Launceston, such prices to include delivery by wholesaler, where, as in Sydney and Melbourne, that is the custom of the trade. In Adelaide the maximum wholesale price for beef to be¼d. per lb. higher than in the other cities named, the maximum wholesale prices for mutton and lamb to be the same as in those cities.
  2. That the prices so fixed be used as a basis for fixing the price on the hoof of cattle, sheep, and lambs in the centres where there is no wholesale meat trade. In those centres an official declaration should be made of the maximum weights upon which the bidding is to be based.
  3. No action seems necessary with regard to retail prices, which (the evidence shows) will conform to wholesale prices.

Well, that may or may not be. The prices, fixed wholesale to the Imperial Government - for which we have to thank Mr. Ryan, Premier of Queensland, more than any one else, since it is to his farseeing policy that this has been due - are -

Prices to Imperial Government - Beef,47/8d.; mutton,51/8d. Prices to the Queensland Government - Chilled beef, 3d.; mutton,4¼d.; frozen beef,3½d.

That, in a nutshell, shows how a Government can control prices. The Commission also indicated that unfortunate women and children were suffering - as also were the men - food having gone up so high in price that, owing to the limited resources of the workers, they could not possibly pay for it.

The statistics show the following reductions in the consumption of meat per head of population : -

In the case of bacon and ham there was a slight increase from 7.9 lbs. to 8 lbs. Whenever the price is raised the workers cannot possibly obtain the food they need. Unfortunately, the birth rate is becoming seriously affected, and the marriage rate also has decreased. The Inter-State Commission says, on page 47 of Report No. 7-

In Report No. 2 statistical proof was given of a marked falling off in the consumption per head in New South Wales and Victoria, and the opinion was expressed that-

After making all necessary allowances, it appears certain that the working classes have been obliged to curtail their consumption of this commodity and that the poor of the community suffer privation in this respect.

In the present inquiry evidence concerning these views from a personal, rather than a statistical, stand-point was brought forward. In Adelaide a leading retail butcher (whose statements were supported by others) spoke as follows: -

When meat can be sold at reasonable prices the consumer buys larger joints. In the case of mutton and lamb, for instance, he would be induced to take full quarters.

In this case, the butcher practically gets rid of the carcass without much trimming or waste, and is able to Bell at a less margin on cost than if he has to cut the carcass into small joints and pieces. On high prices the public are forced to buy small quantities, and there is a big demand for chops, steaks, and small cuts. As a consequence, there is a waste and loss, and a quantity of prime meat’ suitable for joints finds its way into the factory. It is significant that the average household now has a roasting joint for the Sunday dinner only, whereas it used to be customary to have these joints perhaps two or three times a week.

Corroborative evidence was put forward in Melbourne, where, in 1917, the practice of selling lamb by the quarter (averaging 7* lbs.) has been displaced in favour of selling by the single pound to meet the reduced purchasing power of the community.

In Sydney, witnesses who have been engaged in the distribution of relief for the distress occasioned by last year’s strike, gave convincing evidence of the result of existing prices of the ordinary household. Of this evidence, perhaps the most important feature was the result shown that in order that the bread-winner may eat meat, children are to a large extent deprived of it. In the homely language of one witness - “The father gets the meat and the children the gravy.” The seriousness of curtailing the meat diet of the growing generation of a nation whose fine physique is attributable in part to plenty in the past, and which has been a meat-eating people in an unusual degree, may be judged by the action taken by the Food Controller in the United Kingdom. The following .cable appeared in the morning papers of the 6th April, 1918:-

page 5824

BRITAIN’S MEAT RATION

The new national scheme of meat rations in Great Britain reduces the ration of butchers’ meat by one-third, and correspondingly increases that of other meat. It allows children over six years of age an adult ration, and boys between thirteen and eighteen years a supplementary ration

At the meeting I addressed to-night were two women who asked me when the price of meat would be reduced. Inquiry elicited the fact that one woman had to keep a family of seven children on £2 15s. a week. Her case was not as bad as that of a. man who called on me to-day, and who has nine children and an income of £2 14s. a week. All the time the prices of meat and bread are rising. Who is to blame? Not the Government or Parliament ; but we shall be to blame if we take a holiday when we have work to do. I am willing to resign from my seat and contest it with the Acting Prime Minister on the question as to whether Parliament should at such a time go into recess. We should continue the work for which we are paid £12 per week. It is an infamy that Parliament should be asked to loaf at this time.

Dr MALONEY:

– I dare say the Minister does, but he is damned well paid for it! I speak for the women and children outside, and I am sick and tired with the way we are carrying on business in this Parliament. We are paid a minimum wage of £12 per week, and yet we aTe told that we cannot sit and carry on the work of government. Are there any of these lengthy adjournments by the British Parliament, which is nearer the centre of war, and has a hundred times more trouble than has this Parliament? Does the American Congress adjourn?

Mr Watt:

– The British Imperial Parliament has often gone into recess during the war.

Dr MALONEY:

– Yes, but not for such lengthy periods as those which this Parliament has adjourned from time to time. There have been frequent changes of Cabinet Ministers in Great Britain.

Mr Watt:

– We have had them in Australia.

Dr MALONEY:

– But the Acting Prime Minister cannot point to any other instance in the political history of the world of one man having been Prime Minister of four separate Governments representing different and diverse parties, without an interregnum of another Prime Minister. Is there no private business that we may proceed with? Limit the speeches to a quarter of an hour each if you like, or let us go straight to a division on every pro- posal that is on the notice-paper, and I shall be content. I do not urge that Parliament should continue sitting because I live in Melbourne. I wish to God the Federal Parliament were removed from this city! Let any honorable member come to my office and see the number of people who call on me on political business on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and they will know why I desire that Parliament should continue at work. The people are being robbed right and left. One has only to read the Bulletin every week to see the huge profits that are made by different companies.

Mr.Considine. - I think we ought to have a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Dr MALONEY:

– I was asked at the meeting I addressed to-night whether I had read the leading articles on the subject of price-fixing which have appeared in the Age. I said that I had. Honorable members opposite may not agree with me, but I believe that we should not have had the promise that prices would be fixed but for the appearance of those articles. Honorable members representing Victorian constituencies might well consult them. Let us see what was said in the article which appeared on 1st June.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. Charlton). - The honorable member’s time has expired.

Progress reported.

page 5825

QUESTION

BUDGET, 1917-18

In Committee of Supply:

Progress reported.

Dr MALONEY:

– May one ask a reason for what is being done? There seems to be a little bit of “topsyturvyism.” It may be all right, but I do not understand it. I should like you, sir, to explain for the benefit of my benighted intelligence. There seems to me to be too much of jumping out of one chair and into another.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon J M Chanter:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– The procedure is quite in order. The question is that the Committee have leave to sit again at this sitting to consider the Estimates.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 5825

SUPPLY BILL (No. 1) 1918-1919-

Australian Imperial Force: Soldiers’ Grievances : Recruiting : Age of Enlistment and Parental Consent: Liverpool Camp - Government War Policy - Food Scarcity and Food Prices : Profiteering - Administration by Boards - Adjournment of Parliament - Finance - Fixing of Meat Prices : Queensland State Butcheries - War Aims of Allied Powers - Secret Agreements - Monroe Doctrine in Pacific - Northern Territory - Deportation of Italian Citizens - Defence Department Clerks : Overtime Payment - Public Service : Arbitration Awards - Victimization of Unionists - Australians of German Origin: Discriminatory Treatment - Vacuum Oil Company - Russian Revolution Land Settlement - Industrial Developments - Commonwealth Board of Trade - Export of Leather and Skins - Papuan Oil Fields - Boot Prices - Shipbuilding - Industrial Organization - Prevention of Strikes - Tariff Reform - Shipment of Wool : Loading: Employment of NokUnionists - Venereal Diseases - Repatriation: Employment of Returned Soldiers - Amalgamation of Banks - Remission of Penalties incurred by Deceased Soldiers.

In Committee of Supply (Consideration resumed) :

Mr FINLAYSON:
Brisbane

– One of the most common remarks heard in Australia during recent times is that but for the presence in our streets of khaki-clad men we should scarcely realize that Australia is engaged in a war in which its very existence is at stake. However true that may be, it is undeniable that Australia is undergoing an experience of war that will be remembered by the present and succeeding generations, and the longer the war lasts the more permanent and the more unfortunate that experience will be. The honorable member for Ballarat (Mr. McGrath) was able to-night, from first-hand information, to give us some details of the military experiences the present generation of Australians axe undergoing. We are all more or less acquainted with facts similar to those which were stated by the honorable member. Every member of the Committee is in almost daily receipt of communications showing that so far as the military administration of the country during the war is concerned, the experience of Australia is of a very sad and unsatisfactory character. The honorable member for Ballarat was able to speak of things from first-hand information, because he has been brought into close personal contact with them, and with each additional batch of returned soldiers. Those whose acquaintance with the war has been confined to Australia are discovering how general and well-founded, unfortunately, are the statements made by the honorable member. Our military experience is certainly most unfortunate. What the honorable member for Ballarat suggested is true. The Empire went into this war with the most high, noble, and honorable intentions, and Australia went into it with certainly the most honorable and laudable desires; but Australians are beginning to feel that, whether it is due to the unchangeable character of war and its inherent vices, wrongs, and wickedness, however worthy their particular desires and intentions . were, all that was primarily right and laudable is rapidly being dispelled and dissipated.

In regard to the conduct of war affairs by the Government, in order to lead up to what I wish to say particularly later on, I shall only say now that the Government have been in office for thirteen months. They were elected on’ their own claim to have some special virtues which would enable them to win the war. They promised the people of Australia an almost immediate cessation of hostilities, an honorable peace, virtues, blessings, and abundant satisfaction if they were elected. It has to be admitted that while some little reform has been secured, every one that has been gained so far has had actually to be torn from the Government. It has- had to be .dragged from their very teeth. Indeed, in some respects, the position of Australia in connexion with military affairs is worse to-day than it was thirteen months ago when the present Government took office.

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

– Is this a wake or an inquest ?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– It is not a wake; I wish it were. A wake is certainly the due of the Win-the-war Government. If they were to face the country at present, they would get their desserts, and an in quest would be held. The Government made lavish promises in regard to the war. I do not overlook the fact that our party also professed an ability, based upon a two years’ administration during the war period, to win the war. There was a big difference in the policy propounded by each party, but the basic suggestion in each instance was the same. The present Government, however, by lavish promises and questionable methods, secured a majority in this House; and having a majority also in another place, they have been able to absolutely control the affairs of Australia. To-day we are faced with the position that, whatever else the Government may have done to carry out their policy of winning the warT they have shown an utter disregard for the interests of the masses of the people. They will go down to posterity as a Government that were good to their friends the profiteers and the “ patrioteers.” It will be said of them that, whoever else they forgot, they certainly did not forget those who financed and supported them, and who, also like the Government, have had an utter disregard for the interests of the people.

The economic position in every country to-day is of very grave concern. Throughout the world we have to-day an economic situation unparalleled in history. It is one of the peculiar facts adding to the horrors of war, and one that will tell in the intelligence of the people against war, that the withdrawal from productive employment, of the men necessary to carry on the conflict, and the dissipation of the ordinary economic activities of the people, have resulted in the horrors of starvation. The horrors of war are bad enough, and have been exposed in all their nakedness during recent years. The old idea of the glories of war have been overwhelmed by the people’s appreciation of the horrors of war. However tragic may be the circumstances connected with the experiences of men on the battlefields, however pathetic and inhumane may be the descriptions we read or realize in connexion with .this holocaust, the most pathetic one that appeals more directly to humanity than any other is the enormous amount of suffering entailed on the women and children of the various belligerent nations by reason of the shortage of foodstuffs. We have been told that victory in this war will rest, not with the nation with the largest army, or possessed of the most scientific war weapons, but with the nation that has the biggest reserve of food supplies. We have been assured that- this war, after all, is a stomach problem rather than a problem associated with .military achievements. If that be so, one must consider how the food supplies of the nation are to be so conserved as to secure victory. Because of the exigencies of the circumstances, every nation has been compelled to devote special attention, not only to the proper apportionment of its food supplies, but to the protection of its people from extortionate prices with respect to those supplies. Before the war, the suggestion that in France, England, America, or even in ‘Australia, a general system of food control would be adopted, and that the fixing of prices would be an accepted Government policy, would have been scouted as the dream of foolish idealists. And yet such a system has been adopted and adopted because it was the only reasonable, legitimate, obvious method by which the Government could protect the people.

This war has displayed remarkable advances in scientific achievement. I dare say that the scientists, the chemists, and the engineers never showed greater adaptability, greater inventiveness, a braver or more courageous adventure in their several spheres than they have displayed in connexion with this war. It is one of the regrettable features of the conflict that science, capable of doing so much for the advancement of the human race, should have its wonderful powers prostituted to the destruction of the human race. Science has been utilized in this war to the advantage of the profiteer, and against the interests of the masses. Scientific arrangements, whereby we had hoped to conserve food supplies - the provision of refrigerating chambers and similar measures, which we had hoped would enable us to secure permanent supplies of food and avoid those periods of glut and scarcity - has worked to the disadvantage, instead of to the advantage? of the people. Science in this war has proved rather a bane than a blessing. In the ordinary economic affairs of the nation, during the war, science again has made for the benefit of the few and the disadvantage of the many. Whatever the cause, we are faced with this position in the economic spheres of all countries engaged in this war: that prices are rising; that huge profits are being reaped; that the rich are being made richer; and the poor, poorer; that the rich so far from suffering or losing anything because of the war, are, on the contrary, experiencing the best time of their lives. They are having their property, their assets, and their peculiar possessions protected, secured, guaranteed, and guaranteed by the lives and by the starvation of the workers of the country. It has been well said that this is a rich man’s war and a poor man’s fight. For while the rich are being made richer, the poor man is being obliged to fight for his economic existence - for bread and butter. As a matter of fact, the securing of bread and butter is a keener question on the workers of the world to-day than ever it was before. This is true of all countries, because human nature is just the same in Germany and England as it is elsewhere. There are people in even the most developed and highly progressive countries who are quite willing to take advantage of their fellows for their own selfish aggrandizement. Australia is not free from the same disease. It is a most unfortunate development of human nature, it is a most unfortunate exhibition of the development of that type of civilization which has grown up in the countries of the world - and particularly during recent years - which makes some men utterly indifferent to the welfare of others, so long as their own particular interests can be safeguarded and protected. If there is one thing more than another for which this Government stand condemned it is their shameless disregard of the interests of the masses of the people and their tender concern for the wealthy corporations and wealthy individuals. There is not an Act or a regulation which they have passed which has not, in its incidence, protected the rich and penalized the poor.

Mr Jowett:

– This Government?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Yes.

Mr Jowett:

– The honorable member amazes me.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I made the same charge against them when the Income Tax Assessment Bill was under consideration in this chamber.

Mr Jowett:

– I did not hear it.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I propose to give some concrete facts to prove it. I have here a table showing the reserves and undistributed profits of a number of Australian firms. The writer says: “ When it is remembered that these amounts are exclusive of the profits distributed, it will be at once seen how profitable the war has been to mammon.” The table is as follows: -

There is a list of companies in Australia which have been able not only to make the huge profits which they have added to their reserves, but also to pay not less than their usual dividends, and in some cases much more.

Mr Bamford:

– An honorable member interjects that you might tell us what Finlayson Brothers are doing.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The honorable member for Herbert (Mr. Bamford) must surely be speaking in his sleep. If he desires information on that point I would advise him to ask for it direct, and not through an intermediary. Surely there is no need in this chamber to have a question asked through a middleman. The list which I have quoted does not include the banks, all of which have paid not less than their pre-war. dividends, in addition to which they have hugely increased their reserves and undistributed profits.

Mr Jowett:

– That- list includes the Melbourne Tramway Company?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Yes.

Mr Jowett:

– Does the honorable member consider that the Government are responsible for their increased profits during the war?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– My argument is that during the war the corporations which are authorized by the people to meet their requirements in the form of light, food, clothing, transportation facilities, and shelter, have been able during this war to make huge and increased profits.

Mr Jowett:

– Does the honorable member suggest that it is the duty of the Government to prevent anybody making profits during the war?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– That is my contention absolutely.

Mr Jowett:

– In other words, they should destroy all industry and commerce ?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– That is not a logical deduction. My contention is that, instead of imposing a war-time profits tax, which will have the effect suggested by the honorable member, of stopping industry, and preventing the investment of capital for the development of industries, it should be illegal for any profits to be made during war time. That is where the viciousness of the war-time profits tax comes in, because it is a recognition of the principle that it is right to make profits during war - that the practice is entirely free from blame so long as the Government can share in those profits.

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Does the honorable member apply that argument to his own business?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– In what way.

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– By making no profits during war time.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– No. The Minister’ is suggesting that some firms should do something that would place them at a disadvantage with other firms who are not compelled, or under any obligation to do the same thing. Obviously that would be destructive of any reasonable method of carrying on business. During the war, in any well-governed community, it ought to be impossible for the people to have extracted from them unreasonable and increased profits, just at a time when they are least able to bear an increased financial burden. Surely the war in itself represents a burden of sufficient magnitude, and to increase and render it abnormal is to put an additional burden on them. We on this side are not- so much concerned with the fact of these profits being made by this or that firm, as against the principle that allows some people to make money at a time when other people are struggling for their very existence.

Mr Jowett:

– Will the honorable member explain how the increased profits of the Melbourne Tramway- Company have imposed an additional burden on the people?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– If the profits of the Melbourne Tramway Company had been kept within reasonable bounds the company would have been able to provide a better service at cheaper rates. In other countries a man in uniform is entitled to travel free on trams and trains, and the suggestion has been made that the returned original Anzacs should, during furlough, be given free passes for. these means of transport. :

Mr Jowett:

– You have not answered my question.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I claim that the profits of the company have necessarily to be made out of the people.

Mr Jowett:

– By rendering the people services.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– During war, which involves an abnormal financial strain, is a time when all the other services of the nation should be controlled to such an extent as to make the conditions as easy as possible for the people. Yet during that time the Tramway Company has made a bigger profit than before.

Mr Jowett:

– Perhaps by giving more services.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The people certainly paid for the services, while out of the additional profits they could have been relieved by a reduction of fares.

Mr Jowett:

– But the company has not imposed any increased burden on the people.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– That does apply to the others I have mentioned » These increased profits and dividends have gone to the benefit of a very small section. Whatever the reason, the people whs are carrying the heaviest burden of the war are worse off than they were at the beginning of the war, while those carrying the least of the burden are better off.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The honorable member’s time has expired.

Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong

– I intend to quote two separate reports of a reply given by the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) to -a deputation of graziers and others interested in the meat trade who waited on him in Sydney when it was felt likely that the Government would act on the recommendations of the Inter-State Commission. One report is from the Sydney Morning Herald of the 22nd February, 1918, and the other from the” Age of the 21st of the same month.

Mr Higgs:

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

Mr FENTON:

– According to the Sydney Morning Herald, the Prime Minister said -

The Prime Minister stated on Wednesday that there seemed to be a good deal of misapprehension on the part of the meat trade in Sydney as to the intentions of the Federal Government in connexion with a proposal to deal with the question of fixing the price of meat. “ Some people,” he said, “ apparently believe that a regulation has already been issued making the scheme immediately effective. That is not so. The Government has, on the recommendation of the Inter-State Commission and the Chief Prices Commissioner, approved of the principle of fixing meat prices for local consumption, taking Imperial meat prices as a basis. Before definite prices can, however, be fixed for the different centres, further investigation will be necessary, and the Chief Prices Commissioner has been instructed to institute these as early as possible. Eis recommendations will be submitted to the Government, and a date will be fixed upon which the new system will come into operation. In fixing this date, due consideration will be given t» trade interests, and full publicity will begiven to it. In the meantime an opportunity will be given to all sections of the trade to state their case before the Commissioner.

That was a favorable reply, and no doubt it sounded well. in the ears of the gentlemen who heard it; but I will read now from the Sydney Morning Herald of 22nd February, 1918. The Prime Minister was waited upon by a deputation, the chief spokesman for which was another Mr. Hughes, at one time a member of the Central Wool Board, and a gentleman who is interested in a variety of businesses, which, I have no doubt, yield a considerable profit to himself and everyone associated with him. In his reply, the Prime Minister said -

He would ask Mr. Whitton to re-open the case in order that they (the graziers) might be given an opportunity-

Dr Maloney:

– I call your attention, Mr. Chairman, to the absence of a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

MrFENTON. -

He would ask Mr. Whitton to re-open the case, in order that they (the graziers) might be given an opportunity to bring this fresh evidence forward. The representations which had been made would receive the serious and immediate attention of the Government. The Inter-State Commission was appointed to inquire into the cost of living as a result of some very serious complaints, to the effect that costs were unduly high - unnecessarily so, indeed, and that the people were being exploited. The Government so constituted the Commission as to extend its powers to all the principal articles of food, and living generally, and said it would give effect to its recommendations. In view of its representations, it was for the deputation to put its case before the. Commission at once by way of addendum.”

I point out that the Prime Minister, as reported in three different papers, said that it was the intention of the Government to accept the recommendations of the Inter-State Commission. This definite promise was given to two deputations on the same day, and it seems peculiar that, although the Prime Minister said he was speaking with the authority of the Government, instead of accepting the report of the Inter-State Commission and adopting its recommendations, the Government now intimate that, after studying the report and analyzing the recommendations, they are going to introduce what may be termed a substitute proposal for the fixation of prices. It is evident, therefore, that the Government, as now led by the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt), are not adhering to the pledge given by the Prime Minister on the occasion referred to.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– Do you approve of the Inter-State Commission’s recommendations ?

Mr FENTON:
MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA · ALP; UAP from 1931

– The time for questions has passed, and if I were the honorable member I would not put questions now, and, at the crack of the Government whip, keep silent when the proper opportunity presents itself. Another report which appeared in the Sydney Daily

Telegraph stated that Mr. Hughes had said -

The Commission had made a recommendation, and, unless it could be shown that thai recommendation should not stand on the evidence presented, the Government must carry it out.

Mr Watt:

– Who said this?

Mr FENTON:

Mr. Hughes, the Prime Minister.

Mr Watt:

– And we have shown that it cannot stand.

Mr FENTON:

– But the Prime Minister said that the evidence must show that it cannot stand. I maintain that the evidence has shown conclusively that it must stand. The Inter-State Commission, after taking additional evidence, has intimated that the first conclusion arrived at was quite right, and that it was amplified by the second inquiry. The Government should come within a reasonable distance of giving effect to their undertaking, though I do not suppose we can expect that, in these times of change, when powerful influences are at work. We had an exhibition of this in the Queen’s Hall about an hour , and a half ago, when gentlemen representing the squatocracy and the stock and station agents of this country, as well as some financial institutions, made representations to the Government on this subject. I want this Government to show a little backbone in connexion with this important matter, even at this late hour.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– If they develop backbone they will cut this out.

Mr FENTON:

– Cut what out?

Mr Hector Lamond:

– This waste of time.

Mr Brennan:

– I submit, Mr. Chairman, that the honorable member not in order in making a reflection on the Committee, and that he must withdraw the remark.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– I withdraw the imputation, Mr. Chairman.

Mr FENTON:

– The Government, I repeat, have not carried out the emphatic promise made by the Prime Minister that they intended to give effect to the recommendations of the Inter-State Commission. The big graziers now are using the small farmer in just the same way as the “poor widow” was used when the shops and factories legislation was introduced in Victoria. The wealthy graziers are now saying that the small farmers will suffer most from the effects of this proposal. Honorable members who are acquainted with stock operations in this country must knowthat practically the same number of fat cattle come into the Homebush and Flemington markets every week. How is that managed?

Mr Pigott:

– Because the Railway Commissioners are only able to provide a certain number of trucks.

Mr FENTON:

– But this regularity of supply of stock is noticeable all the year round, and the Railway Departments cannot always be short of trucks. I have perused the files of the Sydney Morning Herald and the Melbourne Argus, both Conservative papers, and I find there is a remarkable regularity in the number of fat cattle sent forward to each market. According to the Sydney Morning Herald, the weekly yardings at Homebush for February were - 1st February, 1,582; 8th February, 1,657; 15th February, 1,804; 22nd February, 1,742. In the yardings of 15th February, there was this comment - “ over 200 more than drawn for.” In the Melbourne market for the month of May, the weekly yardings were- 2nd May, 1,835; 9th May, 2,005 ; 16th May, 1,785 ; 30th May, 2,105. Practically the same number of cattle come forward every week, and any honorable member who has any knowledge of the stock business must know that arrangements are made, in order to yard only a certain number of cattle, so that the price may be kept up, and that if they know that the market is already overstocked, the agents wilt advise owners to hold off. Will any honorable member deny that?

Mr Poynton:

– Quite right, too.

Mr FENTON:

– Arrangements are so made that only a certain number of stock will come on to the market at a particular time. This proves conclusively that graziers are in collusion with stock and station agents, in order to maintain the prices of stock.

Mr Pigott:

– What would you do in similar circumstances?

Mr FENTON:

– The Mark Lane Express of 25th March of this year tells a different tale. The March prices for meat in London seem to have been pretty well on a par with the prices in Australia. It is true that the National

Farmers Union passed a resolution asking the Comptroller of Foodstuffs that the raisers and fatteners of cattle in Ireland might be brought under the rules that were being applied to those in England. Beef bullocks were selling in Ireland readily at from SOs. to 90s. per cwt., the prices in England ranging from 75s. per cwt for oxen to 42s. per cwt. for fat cows, live weight. In Great Britain the sale of stock by one dealer to another has been prohibited in war time, being permitted only in exceptional cases.

Mr Jowett:

– Does the honorable member recommend that here?

Mr FENTON:

– Yes. Dealers should not be allowed to gamble in food stocks. The Queensland Government have closely followed stock operations in Australia, and according to Mr. Hunter, an able business man who is a member of it, one line of stock changed hands no fewer than five times within a comparatively short period. Five profits and five commissions were paid in those deals. In the ultimate result, the consumer paid them. By eliminating quite a number of middlemen, prices have been kept at reasonable rates in the Old Country.

Mr Brennan:

– I draw attention to attenuated condition of the Committee. [Quorum formed.]

Mr FENTON:

– I was glad to hear the solitary speaker on the Ministerial side, the honorable member for Lilley (Mr. Mackay), refer to the operations of the Queensland Government. In refutation of his statements, I propose to quote from an article headed, “ Better living conditions: Queensland’s notable example: Opportunities for soldiers,” which occupies a full page of the issue of the 24th May last of The Soldier, the official organ of the Returned Soldiers Association. The article commences -

The living conditions obtaining in the various States will have a profound effect in influencing discharged soldiers in the choice of their future homes. Naturally, one of the first questions they will ask is, “What State is the best to live in?” That may be an arguable point, but recent developments in Queensland considerably advance the claim of the northern State to a leading place -

Mr Spence:

– Is the honorable member reading an advertisement?

Mr FENTON:

– I am not here to advertise the great State of Queensland. I was born’ in Victoria, and am proud of my State. But I should be glad if the Victorian Government were offering to returned soldiers inducements to settle here as good as those offered by the Government of Queensland.

Mr Pigott:

– There is not the land.

Mr FENTON:

– Victoria does not cover so large an area as Queensland, but it has a fair amount of land yet undeveloped. Returned soldiers will naturally seek? to establish themselves where they can get the best conditions, and I regret that Victoria, because it is not enjoying the vigorous up-to-date administration that Queensland enjoys at the present time, cannot offer the same advantages as that State. Reference has been made to the fact that the Queensland Government has issued debentures for £750,000 to provide for Governmentcontrolled stations. That the policy of the Labour Administration of that State meets with the approval of its people was shown recently by the verdict of the electors when Parliament had to submit itself for re-election after three years of Labour administration.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– Those who voted to retain the Labour Government in office in Queensland comprised all the enemy subjects there, numbering about onetenth of the whole population.

Mr FENTON:

– In my judgment, those people are not such great enemies to Australia and the Empire as those who would perpetuate a system under which this community is being robbed from day to day.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

– The honorable member’s time has expired.

Mr ATKINSON:
Wilmot

.- I do not wish to delay the Committee, but this may be the only opportunity for expressing my views on a subject to which a considerable amount of attention has been given of late - the fixing of the price of meat. The position becomes serious when foodstuffs are so dear that some persons in the community are not able to purchase them, and that seems to be happening in regard to meat in parts of Australia. Even before the war it was one of the world’s problems how to provide sufficient food to enable the poorer members of society to live, and to provide for the healthy development of their children. That problem may become even more difficult of solution after the war. But the fixing of prices is a difficult and complex matter.

Mr Considine:

– We had better have a quorum to hear what a Ministerialist has to say on this subject. [Quorum formed.]

Mr.ATKINSON.- I doubt that the attempt to fix the prices of meat will give much genuine relief to those who must command our sympathy. The report of the Inter-State Commission shows that there is not in Australia any trust or combine which is taking an unfair advantage of the situation. If such an organization did exist, I should be prepared to do what I could to help to scotch it, because I am opposed to profiteering in any form. The Government in proposing to fix the retail prices of meat are taking a better course than was recommended by the Inter-State Commission, which proposed that the price of beasts on the hoof should be fixed. The recommendation of the Commission would, I think, have been found impracticable, because of the inconveni ence, trouble, and delay that it would have caused to graziers and others connected with the pastoral industry. In no case would it have prevented profiteering. I am satisfied that the majority of the graziers and small farmers are not benefiting by the present high prices of meat. Much cannot be hoped for in the way of relief from this attempt to fix pricessince it is a matter of supply and demand. It is partly due to the shortage of stock that prices have been so high; and when we hear people say - as the Commission has said - that we have in Australia to-day as many sheep and cattle as in 1913,it may be fairly replied that not so great a proportion of the stock is fit for the market. A great many more sheep are kept for their wool than was formerly the case, and very many of the cattle are too young at this stage to be sent to the market. It would be a shame to market them too soon. What is really wanted is that we should help production. That is the way to reduce prices in Australia. We want more of the commodity.

Mr Blakeley:

– I call your attention, Mr. Chairman, to the state of the Committee. [Quorum formed..]

Mr ATKINSON:

– If an attempt was made to adopt the Commission’s recommendation, namely, to fix the price on the hoof, we would not be increasing production, but would be hitting the very class of people whom we should always encourage - the people whom we are always asking to go out into the backblocks, the people who are carrying Australia to-day. We ask them to endure all the inconveniences and hardships of country life, and at the same time we do nothing to prevent their ruin, in many instances. That is not the way to conduct the affairs of the country.

Another point to which I desire to give brief attention is that we have heard a great deal about the high prices of other commodities; but nothing has been said as to the high price which farmers and others must pay for their implements, for the stock which they are bound to buy to carry on operations, and for food supplies and clothing. Honorable members opposite seem to forget that the cause of the high prices of meat is largely due to the general rise in the price of many commodities. Owing to the inflation of the currency in Australia, and to the widely extended purchases of war bonds, people are now buying as they never previously were able to do. They are making the price of meat higher because they are in a position now to purchase prime cuts, and will have nothing else. There was a time when they were forced to buy according to their pockets, which were not too well lined, and butchers could sell the whole of a carcass. The demand for choice cuts to-day is higher for the reason that people will have nothing else, and are in a monetary position to demand the best

It is all very well for big breeders to say they can sell at present prices, and make money, i-fo doubt, they can; but even Mr. Kidman, when he said he was satisfied with the prices he was getting in Queensland, confined his remark to that State. He says, now, he could not afford to accept those prices in South Australia or Victoria, ox other places where he would have to send his stock a distance. It is the man who has stock on hand, and has not a great capital outlay, who is really making the profit to-day. Many small men have been tempted, for the first time in their experience, to go in for breeding calves. They have done so be.cause of the high prices ruling; but as soon as the price of cattle falls, many of those men will have to give up breeding. While farmers can get £4 or £5 a head for calves, they consider that they can make a better profit by breeding than by buying store cattle at £10 to £12, and selling them when they are fat at a few pounds’* rise. I remember hearing the honorable member for Maranoa (Mr. Page) remark in this House some time ago that the grazier was only then getting a fair deal. Prices at that time were tending to rise, for the reason that the world’s demand was growing, and the supply in the United States of America for export was not so great owing to the extension of home consumption. The honorable member for Maranoa, who understood the position, remarked that the graziers had had to stand the brunt of things for many years, and were at last only getting a fair thing. The big man can stand a knock better than the small man. There are not many Kidmans in Australia, but there are many small farmers who purchased stock at high prices, and will be almost ruined if the market slumps.

Altogether there will be a big upset in rural industries. .1 know of a case where a man is working 800 acres, for which he pays a good rent. He employs six married men most of the year, and two single men, and also occasional labour. Owing to the price of calves he has done what he had never undertaken before ; he has bred from 100 cows. But he says unless he can get £4 or £5 for calves he will have to stop breeding at once. Through his rent and wages he has an expenditure of £2 an acre before he oan get one penny for himself. There are many similar cases in my district. This person usually fattened 130 to 200 cattle, and, besides, he had to grow fodder to assist in feeding them.

Mr Brennan:

– I think the state of the Committee is inadequate to the circumstances of the subject. I would ask that a quorum be formed. [Quorum formed.]

Mr ATKINSON:

– We have heard that there is 100 per cent, rise in prices. Let us look at the other side. The man to whom I have already alluded bought thirty-eight calves, for which he gave five guineas a head. Similar animals could have been bought four years ago at £1 per head. He purchased sixty-one steers at £10 each. The price of similar animals before the war was £4 10s. to £4 15s. He bought fourteen store cattle at £13 17s. 6d., the price for which before the war would have been £6 5s. to £6 10s. Also, he secured forty-four heifers at over £10 per head, the pre-war price for which would have been £3 10s. Then there were sixty-three yearlings at £6 each. Previously he would have got them at £2 per head. He also bought eighty-one other yearlings at £6 5s. each, when only a few years before that he could have got them for £2 a head. There are hundreds of people throughout the Commonwealth who are in the same position. That should indicate to honorable members opposite, and to the public outside, that it is not the farmer who is making fabulous profits out of the increase in stock.

I hope that when the Minister concerned gets to work, if there is any profiteering going on between the stage when the cattle leave the hands of the producer and the meat is actually retailed over the counter, he will be able to discover the responsible parties and punish them. I will do my best to help him. I do not think the Inter-State Commission have really given a verdict according to the evidence at the second inquiry. They seem to me to have ignored very good evidence then put before them, and to have stood to the original idea.

Mr Gregory:

– The honorable member should call it a delusion, not an idea.

Mr ATKINSON:

– The Commission might perhaps have given a verdict slightly different from that arrived at by them. I hope the Government will deal with this question promptly, so that stockowners may know how they stand. I am not going to criticise their proposal tonight, because we do not yet know what their actual decision is; but I reserve to myself the right to take what action I see fit when their final decision shall have been made known.

Sitting suspended from 12.7 to 1.7 a.m.

Mr MATHEWS:
Melbourne Ports

– During this debate we have heard a good deal concerning the sins of the Government. I propose to deal with a few of their peculiarities. The Public Service of the Commonwealth comprises as smart a body of public officials as is to be found in any country, but, unfortunately, they are treated in a way that is not calculated to get the best out of them. They have little hope of improving their positions, and the various Departments seem to go out of their way to apply to them regulations and conditions not calculated to improve the efficiency of the Service. In the Defence Department, for instance, a large staff of clerks is employed, and the Court decided that they should not be paid overtime until they had been working for seven and a half hours per day. At that time it was the practice of the departmental staff to work seven hours a day, and those who returned after tea were paid overtime. Two years later it was discovered by some of the officials that since these men had been working for only seven hours when they left for tea, they should have been required, when brought back at night, to work for another half-hour without being paid overtime. The Department then proceeded in a most unjust way to get back as quickly as possible from men who were receiving only 10s. per day the money that had in this way been overpaid. No one will say that a married man at the present time can keep himself and his family comfortably on 10s. a day. And yet these men have had as much as £2 per month deducted from their salaries in respect to the overpayment of overtime. I know of one man who, because of these deductions, had to give up his house and rent a couple of rooms.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– When was this practice resorted to?

Mr MATHEWS:

– I believe it is still going on. The Defence Department is most ingenious in overcoming a difficulty, as will be seen from the following letter addressed by the secretary, Mr. Trumble, to the secretary of the Australian Clerical Association: - 28th May, 1918.

Dear Sir,

With reference to your letter of the 0th May, relative to the deductions being made from the salaries of temporary clerks on account of overpayment of overtime, I am directed to inform you that the Minister is unable to approve of the request of the union to waive these refunds. It is considered that if by an interpretation of an award of the Court it had been found that the Department had underpaid temporary clerks, there is no question that the union would have claimed that retrospective action should have been taken.

I am not going to blame Mr. Trumble for this.

Mr Jowett:

– He is a good man.

Mr MATHEWS:

– I have always found him so, and I suppose that in this case he was merely carrying out the decision of the Minister. Mr. Trumble wrote that if the men had been underpaid, no doubt the union would have claimed that retrospective action should be taken, and a refund made to them. As a matter of fact, the Postal Department has refused to do anything of the kind. The letter-carriers obtained an award of the Arbitration Court, which the Department refused to honour. They appealed to the Court for an interpretation of the award. The Judge gave his decision in favour of the Letter Carriers Association. But the remarkable fact is that the Postal Department refused to pay the members of that Association the back money which was due to them, notwithstanding that the Judge ruled, when he gave the award, that it was his intention they should get it.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– What does the Postmaster-General say to that?

Mr Webster:

– I say that the honorable member for Melbourne Ports (Mr. Mathews) does not understand the law.

Mr MATHEWS:

– I repeat my statement that the Postal Department declined to pay the letter-carriers the back money which was due to them under the award of the Arbitration Court.

Mr Webster:

– The Acting Public Service Commissioner says that they are not entitled to it.

Mr MATHEWS:

– But we have placed the question of the wages which shall be paid to our public servants above the Minister and above the Public Service Commissioner.

Mr Webster:

– I do not think that the honorable member is entitled to deal with this matter, because it is sub judice.

Mr Brennan:

– The honorable member is the mannikin of the Public Service.

Mr Kelly:

– I rise to a point of order. Is the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) in order in referring to the honorable member for Melbourne Ports as the “ mannikin “ of the Public Service?

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

– If the honorable member for Batman “did make the remark which has been attributed to him, I ask him to withdraw it.

Mr Brennan:

– I submit with great respect that I have been misunderstood. I did not refer to the honorable member for Melbourne Ports in the way that I have been represented. I would be very loath to refer to him in terms of that character. I referred merely to the PostmasterGeneral.

The CHAIRMAN:

– The term is equally offensive when applied to any member of the Committee, and I must ask the honorable member to withdraw it unconditionally.

Mr Brennan:

– In that case I withdraw it unconditionally.

Mr MATHEWS:

– I leave these two cases for the Ministry to consider. If their action is right in both instances I am a Dutchman. I am quite certain that if it were possible to take a vote upon the question to-morrow they would not only have to pay the letter carriers the award of the Arbitration Court, but - seeing that a mistake was made in the payment of the clerks attached to the Defence Department - those employees would not have to refund the money which is now being extorted from them.

Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– The honorable member might get a double dissolution on that question.

Mr MATHEWS:

– Honorable members may laugh. I do not say that they are laughing at the position of these men-

Mr Kelly:

– We are only regretting that their just claims should be made the subject of a “stone-wall.”

Mr Brennan:

– I take exception to that observation. The honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. Kelly) has stated that the honorable member for Melbourne Ports is engaged in making a “ stonewalling” speech. That is a reflection upon all honorable members, which, I submit, is not in order.

The CHAIRMAN:

– If the honorable member for Wentworth did make that statement I call upon him to withdraw it.

Mr Kelly:

– I at once withdraw it.

Mr MATHEWS:

– This will be a funny speech of mine when read in Hansard. I propose now to deal with another peculiarity of the Government. I have here a letter from a man, who says-

I am employed at the General Post Office as a -mail-driver. My salary is £150 per annum - 9s. 7d. per day. I am a returned soldier, and at times get severe heart attack, caused through shell-shock received on Gallipoli. Whilst so indisposed I am unable to work. As

I have before stated, my wage is 9s. 7d. per day, but when I drop out a day 10s. 5d. is stopped. Last week I was away for one day, and two hours out of the next day, and the sum of 13s. Id. was stopped out of my magnificent salary of £2 17s. Cd. per week, which is’ paid to married men - returned soldiers who are employed in the Commonwealth Post Office by a Win-the-war Government. The conditions in the Post Office as far as returned soldiers are concerned are absolutely in a bad way.

We have heard a good deal recently about the private employer who conducts his business upon business lines, and who does not deal with returned soldiers whom he formerly employed as many of us think he should do. I do not believe that private employers should be made to suffer individually. The community ought to suffer. But here we have an instance of the way in which the Federal Government themselves deal with returned .soldiers. If this man is a malingerer, he ought to be exposed, but if he is not, he is surely entitled to better treatment than is disclosed by the stopping of 10s. 5d. per day out of his daily wage of 9s. Jd., whenever he is absent from duty.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– But his statements may be misrepresentations.

Mr MATHEWS:

– No. I have received half-a-dozen similar communications, but I selected his particular case, because it is that of a returned soldier. But bad as the Postal Department may be when supervised by a gentleman who has many good points, and some faults, it is heaven compared with the Defence Department, which is presided over by a gentleman who has not one good point, and “Alio is full of faults. Here is the case of a gunner in the artillery, with twenty-seven years of military service to his credit. Incidentally, I may mention that many of these gunners are acting temporarily as non-commissioned officers during the absence of men at the Front This particular gunner has four children, and his consolidated pay is 7s. lOd. per day. He is expected to live upon that wage, with the prices of commodities soaring as they are to-day. He lives at Queenscliff, where the minimum cost of living for a man and his wife only may be thus summarized: - Meat (every other day, beef and mutton), ls. lOd. per day; bread, 4id.; potatoes, 3d.; butter, 4Jd. ; vegetables, 3d.; groceries, 3s.; milk, 2d.; wood, 6d.; rent, ls. 8d.; sanitary rates, l$d; clothing, boots, &c., 8d. ; a total of 9s. 2£d. Every honorable member will admit that not a single item in that list is exaggerated.

Mr Poynton:

– Groceries 3s. a day?

Mr MATHEWS:

– Yes, that is 18s per week.

Mr Webster:

– The man and his wife have meat every day ?

Mr MATHEWS:

– Yes. In addition to the above, breakages and the replacing of crockery, bed linen, furniture, &c, would easily represent another 3d. per day, making a total of 9s. 5id. Yet this man receives in consolidated .pay only 7s. lOd. per day.

Mr Webster:

– Does he get paid for seven days a week?

Mr MATHEWS:

– Yes. He receives 52s. 6d. per week.

Mr Webster:

– And he is found in clothes.

Mr MATHEWS:

– The PostmasterGeneral knows very well what the military clothes are. The man himself has to pay for his clothing when he appears in mufti. _ In any case he has not put down an extraordinary amount for clothing - only 8d. per day.

Mr Webster:

– That is for boots.

Mr MATHEWS:

– No, it is clothing, boots, &c. I have placed his case before the Committee to ascertain whether the Government will inquire into it. I do not know whether the constituents of honorable members are composed of the same flesh and blood as are my own constituents, but I presume that they are. I assume, too, that every honorable member has the same consideration for his constituents that I have for mine. That being so, it does seem a pity that our Government Departments cannot be administered in such a way as to prevent a continuance of evils of this character. I hope that during the recess the Ministry will investigate these matters, with a view to seeing if they cannot deal more fairly with their employees, no matter in what Department they may be found.

I want now to say a few words about the” position in Australia from the standpoint of organized unions. No matter what the opinions of honorable members may be, and no matter what may be the desires of the masters of industry outside as to how they would like to deal with the men in their employment, there is a duty cast upon the Government to see that the resolutions carried at the Conference called by the Governor-General with the object of bringing about amity in the community for a certain purpose, are given effect to. In spite of all that was said at the Conference, the position in Melbourne, at all events, is very acute, and I know that the conditions in my own particular division are not conducive to amity. I may be told, of course, that the industrial organizations should have conformed to the suggestions made at the Conference ; but I maintain that it is the duty of the Federal and State Governments to do something in the direction indicated at the Conference, in order to bring about a better feeling in the community.

Mr Brennan:

– Did not the Prime Minister say that, no matter what we on this side did, the Government would carry out their part of the agreement?

Mr MATHEWS:

– That is so.

Mr McWilliams:

– But if an agreement is entered into, ought not both sides to give effect to it ?

Mr MATHEWS:

– Decidedly. But, after all, there was no bargaining. Mr. Tudor, as the leader on our side, has claimed that he made no bargain; and the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes), as well as the State Premiers, have agreed that there was no bargaining. When they met in Conference, the representatives of the Governments put their cards on the table and said they wanted to bring about a certain condition in the community, so as to insure an increase in enlistments; and the representatives of the industrial organizations then pointed out that certain things were necessary in order to bring about that result. The Governments could not agree to place organized unionism in the position it occupied before the strike, or before the taking of the first conscription referendum in 1916, so that men who have been victimized may again be in a position to earn a decent living. And what do we find to-day? We find that, not only have unionists received no concessions, but that Governments and private employers are fostering “ scab “ unions, whose funds are supplemented by the different employers’ organizations throughout Australia. If that is to go on, and if the various Governments think that organized labour is down and out for ever, they are making one of the biggest mistakes they ever made. Members of these “ scab “ unions will find, eventually, that they will have to organize unions in the non-union movement in order to get from their employers and the Governments concessions which they will undoubtedly desire. To call these men “scabs” is hardly a fit name to apply to them. It is not nasty enough. There is no employer in the community who does not detest every one of them, but is using them as an instrument to beat the true Labour organizations. I know, myself, that in the past, after industrial trouble was over, employers looked upon “ scabs “ with contempt, and usually the best workers, who are also the best unionists, were given their old positions again. The fact that organized labour is continually endeavouring to improve the position of its members is not to be condemned. Is there anybody who does not try to improve his position?

Mr Archibald:

– By striking against society ?

Mr MATHEWS:

– Many a time the honorable member has advocated strikes against society.

Mr Archibald:

– Never in my life.

Mr MATHEWS:

– I do not believe the honorable member. No man on the other side of the Chamber will condemn any man in the community for trying to improve his position even by striking against society, because it will be “ goodbye “ to any improvement if ever organized labour becomes satisfied with the conditions of its members. Let me read for the information of honorable members an extract of a speech by Chas. M. Schwab, one of the best organizers that the Allies have - the man who has done more to organize the iron industry in America than any man in the world.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon. J. M.

Chanter) . -Order! The honorablemember has reached his time limit.

Mr BRENNAN:
Batman

– I have waited with exemplary patience for about seven hours and a half with the object of putting on record some very important reflections concerning a matter of the very highest public importance, but before ‘I come to that I desire to say quite frankly that Iwelcome a late sitting of this kind in the special circumstances in which it is held, for the reason that it helps to rivet attention upon the conduct of this Government. Tomy mind it is little less than scandalous that the Government should be drifting into an unearned recess without having come to a decision upon the vital question of the cost of living as disclosed in recent reports by the Inter-State Commission and other bodies, and without giving members any declaration of policy or opportunity of discussing a policy. This is a very serious matter which cannot be treated lightly. There has been disclosed, as a result of an inquiry by the highest authority, a very grave condition of affairs in regard to the prices being extorted from the public in respect of one staple product in particular, and that is meat. I remind honorable members that the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) promised me, in reply to questions which I was justified in putting to him, that this subject would be dealt with by the House, but it is evident from the present attitude of the Government that they have no intention of giving members an opportunity of dealing with it, and apparently there is no intention , on the part of the Government to let the people know, at least before the House goes into recess, what they propose to. do. This matter affects the well-being of the poorest people in this community, and it is of such consequence that if the Government regarded only their own political well-being, they would at least have the courage to say what their policy really is.

My time being limited - although I know other opportunities may be given to me to speak at a later hour in the day - I want to refer specially now to the question raised in another form by the honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley), namely, the deportation of our brother Italians, and the conduct in regard to them of the Italian Consul in this country. I am loath to take advantage of the privilege of Parliament, to reflect in any way upon a public or private individual who is not in a position to reply under the same privilege that honorable members enjoy, but I speak on behalf of a large body of persons who have special claims upon our consideration. They are persons who have come here at our invitation, as approved immigrants, and are law-abiding, domiciled persons, and I am satisfied that a very grave wrong is being done to them day after day by the Commonwealth Government, at the request of the Consul, wrongly, I think, sometimes called the ConsulGeneral in Australia for Italy. I hold in

Mr. Brennan. my hand a memorandum prepared by an Italian lawyer under instructions from representative Italians in this country, expressing their views almost unanimously, and expressing also the law, so far as the Italian law is applicable to this particular case. I propose to read the document, but, for obvious reasons, I will not give the signatories unless the truth of any statement is controverted,, or if my own good faith in bringing the matter forward, or its authenticity, should be doubted. The document is a translation from the Italian, and, therefore, in some respects, the English is quaint, though I think it is, on the whole, very good English. It reads as follows -

Dear Sir, -

Italians are not seeking for excuses in order to relieve themselves of their duty toward the Mother Country.

Australia gave to Italy a special grant in permitting the latter to enforce in Australian territory the Italian law, and, what is still more important, in giving to the Italian law executive power by means of Australian law and force.

Furthermore, Australia gave to the representative of the Italian Government such an extension of power that the Consul, with the help of the Federal authorities, became a kind of despotic King, master of the liberties of Italians, interfering in every form of communication between them and the Italian Government, and in some cases cutting communication altogether.

In respect of that matter, in particular, this Government has shown a painful want of appreciation of its duty. It should not have cut off communication between the Italians in Australia and the Italian Government. This communication should have been left free and open. It is the right of a foreigner to communicate with his home Government.

Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– Through his consul.

Mr BRENNAN:

– The interjection shows the honorable member’s want of knowledge of the law and practice in these matters. Some time ago, I quoted authorities in this chamber which make plain the nature of the position of a consul. A consul is a mere subordinate agent, without diplomatic status, powers, or authority. He has no right, except in special circumstances, to communicate with his Government regarding the people of his nation; and under no circumstances must he arrogate to himself the right to alone communicate on behalf of his compatriots with his own

Government. To continue the quotation -

Acting in this way, the Federal authority took on itself a great deal of responsibility, and especially should the Italian law not be observed byConsul Eles; and this responsibility is even greater, owing to the fact that the Federal Government, probably, knows little about Italian law.

In the face of the evidence which I put before honorable members a week ago, I was astounded to read in the newspapers that a young Italian has been arrested and convicted in Sydney of having made statements prejudicial to recruiting. In the course of the trial, the statement was made on behalf of the prosecution, and accepted, that no naturalized person had been arrested in connexion with the calling up of men. This young Italian was fined £25, or three months’ imprisonment, for having stated the contrary, though, to my certain knowledge, a dozen, and perhaps a score, of naturalized men have been arrested under the rule of conduct followed by the Italian Consul.

Mr Bayley:

– Were they subsequently released?

Mr BRENNAN:

– Of course, they were, because they had friends in the Labour party, and some few outside of it, who agitated for their release, following up their cases with ceaseless energy. They would not have been released could the Italian Consul have deported them.

Mr Sinclair:

– Their naturalization protected them.

Mr BRENNAN:

– In a number of cases, the Consul absolutely disregarded their letters of naturalization. He said that he did not care a snap of his fingers for their papers.

Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– Who caused them to be released - the Minister for Home and Territories (Mr. Glynn)?

Mr Blakeley:

– The row kicked up by the honorable member for Batman was the chief cause of their release.

Mr BRENNAN:

– The Minister for Home and Territories has been sympathetic, but he has been disregarded. He naturalizes, and the Minister for Defence denaturalizes. Italians under the age of twenty-one who have resided with a father naturalized in Australia, are assumed by our law to have become, ipso facto, naturalized.

Mr Sinclair:

– That does not apply in Queensland.

Mr BRENNAN:

– There is only one naturalization law in Australia.

Mr Sinclair:

– The Federal law carried out the pre-Federal State law.

Mr BRENNAN:

– All persons naturalized under State laws at the time the Federal law was passed became naturalized under the Federal law by virtue of their State naturalization. The young fellows to whom I refer are, under our Federal law, deemed to be naturalized, although they do not possess letters of naturalization. The Minister for Home and Territories has issued special certificates to them, stating that they shall be deemed to be naturalized ; yet the Italian Consul has disregarded those certificates, which, strictly, are not necessary. A comparatively recent amendment of the naturalization law makes that perfectly clear -

And as Italians cannot communicate with the Italian Government, and cannot communicate with Consul Eles, who expels them from the Consulate, the situation is unmistakably bad.

A Consul, as an employee with only administrative power, has no authority for making in his own name any call to arm’s; he must only give effect to the orders of the Minister for Defence, who, too, is acting under the powers of a specialRoyal decree.

Now, the main question put forward by Italians is this: Does this decree exist; and, if so, how is it lettered?

This question is not an immaterial one, because all the decrees dealing with calls to arms from the beginning of the war until October, 1917, always exclude the Italians resident in Australia from any obligation of serving.

One of the fundamental rules of law is the presumption of knowledge of law. Should any Italian pretend to be exempted from responsibility for breaking the law on the ground of his ignorance on the matter, his plea would be checked, because Australian law, before being enforced, is duly published.

But Italian laws are not known in Australia, nor may Italian residents here bc expected to acquaint themselves with laws which are not published in Australia, and are generally useless outside the Italian territory.

Consequently, the legal presumption in this case is just the reverse of the ordinary, namely, Italian law is legally unknown to the Italian subjects in Australia.

Then, if for some reason these Italian laws are to have force in Australia, the first duty of the Italian Government, before enacting obedience, was to make them known.

And what did Consul Eles do in this connexion ? Nothing at all, or worse than nothing.

In Italy, besides the usual system of publication of law (viz., the gazetting, affixing in every town hall, &c), special provisions are made for the call to arms in order to give it the widest publicity. To this intent the Consuls of every Province (they are called Preffetti ) , from two months before the day of the medical examination, are obliged to specially publish the Royal decree with the special regulations, if any, of the Minister for Defence, indicating the various days for the medical examinations, the regulations in connexion with the separation allowance, and the various cases in which and means by which any citizen may appeal against any error or wrong of which he believes himself to be the victim.

These regulations are made public, not only in the ways mentioned, but also by special manifestoes posted up in every market, at every busy point of every city and village, bo that the people cannot avoid being fully warned.

And all that is done in Italy, where people have endless other means for knowing the laws

Now let us see what Consul Eles did here, so far away from. Italy.

At various times appeared in some papers a short advertisement (in English, too, sometimes), as the following: - “All Italians born in the years from 1874 up to 1899 inclusive residents in Victoria, are summoned to present themselves at the Drill Hall, , for medical examination. Failure to do so will entail the consequence of arrest..”

This, or another similar, was the publication made by Consul Eles in this part of the world, where Italian laws are unknown, and where Italians knew that they were exempted by the regulations of a few months before.

Consul Eles, in the exercise of hia unBritish and un-Italian methods, thinks that Italians here are not free people with duties and rights; people who do not love their Fatherland, do not obey the laws; slaves or criminals, and subject, so he thinks, to his despotic will, from which there is no appeal. So he thinks, so he acts, drunk with the extraordinary power so easily acquired, and exercised under the unsuspecting credulity of the Federal authorities.

Following this complacent opinion, Consol Eles did not feel obliged to give any warning nor any explanation, although we contend that he was bound by law to do so; but he himself, assuming the powers of an Austrian Emperor,, calls all Italians to the colours, abruptly requires them to destroy all their business, and to leave their families.

And Australia is helping this policy of violation with the deportation of the Italian subjects.

This open contempt of people’s rights Consul Eles has brought to provoking extremes, because to the great majority of Italians who went -to the Consulate for explanations, he gave a curt answer, and should someone have insisted on a more complete answer, the interview nearly always ended with the expulsion of the poor astonished Italian from the Consulate.

The favourite argument of the Consul is: - “ If you fail to obey my orders I will put you under arrest.”

” Arrest “ was and is the most cherished idea of Consul Eles, and he used it freely.

At the medical examination the result of the visit of each man is laid down in a special book, and is signed by the doctor and the man concerned. Many have been dissatisfied with the examination and its results, and naturally were not willing to accept them as final.

But Consul Eles protested hf each case, angrily and aggressively, that the book must be signed, threatening the objectors with arrest, and to keep them under arrest until the sailing of the contingent. Viggiano Francesco, Barea Bartolomeo, Testa Alfredo, Lorenzo Rodriguez are the names of some of the sufferers.

To unveil the mystery with which Consul Eles was carefully obscuring the matters relating to the call, a special selected Commission of married men was Bent to him (Messrs. A. Pellegrini, C. Boffa, G. Travaglia, M. Lacava, and G. Santamaria).

At the Consulate, Consul Eles explained that he would accord a reception to the Commission only under the condition that all the members had signed a declaration previously prepared by him, which he read, and the contents of which declared the Consul to be an authority from - which there was no appeal.

Naturally that document was not signed, and the Commission came hack unheard.

And, it must be remembered, that what the Commission was inquiring for, the Consul should have kept permanently posted up for the information of the Italian people.

And so Consul Eles, with the Australian authorities, put Italians in a very peculiar and distressing position. From him there is no answer but rebuffs. To Australian authorities we are forbidden to go, and they do not seem inclined to give us any help against the unlawful proceedings of the Consul. To our Government we cannot apply, cut off as we are from Rome.

We can only account for this sometimes contemptuous and sometimes aggressive attitude of the Consul by reference to his Austrian ancestry, of which he has recently expressed his pride.

But if the Federal Government had not imposed in the Consul such boundless trust, he would have remained in his secondary situation of Consul, and from there he could not have thrown on Italians such a sequence of injustices, and on the Australian nation the responsibility of helping in the violation of the elementary rights of man.

This contempt on the part of Consul Eles toward Italians and their rights he has used indiscriminately against Italians and naturalized British subjects.

A great many of the latter were summoned, and several were arrested, or threatened with arrest (Labattaglia, B. Santamaria, and others) .

And this happened, not by mistake of the officials, but apparently by the order of the Consul, acting with a full knowledge of the facts,.

At Port Pirie the an ti- Australian policy found its most open expression.

Vincenzo Salvemini, fisherman, a naturalized British subject, thirty-seven years old, of Port Pirie, trusting in the word of the highest Italian authority (never before seen in Port

Pirie), who told him of a” endless number of pains and punishments awaiting him in Italy should he fail to obey the call of the Consul, consented to present himself for medical examination. But before doing so be obtained from the Consul an assurance that he would be allowed three months’ grace to arrange his business.

Some other Italians, British subjects, followed Salvemini’s example - Leonardo Caputo, Paolo Gagliardi, Sebastiano Meszina, Saverio Minervini, &e.

But, three days after medical examination was passed, they received a peremptory order to get ready for leaving Port Pirie on the 22nd April, that is four days later. And it must be remembered also that the Italian Consul went to Port Pirie on the 8th of April for the medical examinations, which were passed on the 9-13.

Notwithstanding that this unfortunate fisherman - in tears for his coming ruin - reminded the Consul many times of his solemn promise, the Consul did not allow any delay, even for a week. Salvemini and the others are British subjects. ‘

Salvemini was, financially, seriously embarrassed as the result of these outrages on British subjects.

From the parliamentary debates we know that the Federal Government passed provisions by which dependants resident in Australia are receiving separation allowance as laid down for the dependants of the members of the Australian Imperial Force, and that a further allowance of 2s. a day is passed by Australia to the said dependants.

The Australian nation in so doing follow that wonderful rule of humanity and respect for a high standard of living, which is the pride of this ultra-civilized people.

But, as a logical deduction, we Italians feel the bitterness of the unavoidable consequence that the Italian Government call home the sons of Italy, leaving in the charge of a foreign country to care for and support, as generously as possible, their dependants.

And we do not blame our Mother Country for that, whatever may be our bitterness, because the Italian Government always knew very well, until a few months ago, how far the general conditions and standard of living differ in the two countries, and so relieved the residents in Australia from serving.

Then, again, we do not blame Italy if, even aware of these great differences, she calls Italians to arms without asking any special provisions for their dependants here; because we know that should the Italian Government depart from the common law, they would establish a very dangerous precedent.

But we blame Consul Eles because, departing from his subordinate character of Consul, he influenced, apparently, the Italian Government to make a sudden change of policy in regard to Australia.

We blame the Consul because he did not appreciate the problem and was content to make every Italian either a criminal or a beggar.

Consul Eles forbade us to call for assistance on any Australian authority, and told us that Australian authority will not have anything to do with this concern, which he alone has power and right to deal with.

If so, then the Consul must officially make known to us in detail what the Italian and Australian Governments will do for the dependants of Italian soldiers from here.

He must, officially, tell us to what amount the said dependants are entitled, and where are the offices and officials in charge of the payment, whether Italian or Australian.

Italians must know what is the position of their dependants in case of death, and whether pensions will be under the Italian or tlie Australian regulations, and in what amount and subject to what conditions.

Two days ago, in reply to a question, I learned, for the first time, that Australia would grant no pensions to them or their dependants.

Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– Does not the honorable member think that Australia has acted generously to them ?

Mr BRENNAN:

– No; they have been treated very meanly, and what has been conceded has been done under the pressure of my° party and myself -

Bid Consul Eles do anything in this very important and human regard ? Nothing, so far as we know, and we are entitled to know, except persuading the Federal authorities that Italians are anti-Italian, unpatriotic, and so on.

Italians are faithfully standing for the Fatherland and for obedience to law ; they are not protesting against military service, but against Consul Eles’ practices, which are against law, equity, and social justice. The state of things is now a very bad one, and the Federal authorities must give to it more serious consideration. It is no longer a mere matter between Italians and their Consul, or between the Italian Consul and the Italian Government, from which Australia is at liberty to hold herself aloof.

Australia’s confidence in Consul Eles’ selfcomplacency leads to this conclusion :

At the expense of Italy and of the Italians, as well as of the honour of Australia, she is helping this person to make his secondary function of Consul something which it ought not to be.

Well, this conclusion may, perhaps, be a trifling one if you do not give any consideration to this fact - that the whole matter is a game in which Consul Eles is playing in his private interests, and proves himself a more intelligent and keen player than all the Australian authorities together.

Consul Eles seems to be the oracle for Australia, and, just as in the old times, the game is going well - absolutely well - for Oracle Eles, beyond his own most ambitious hopes.

Consequently, Australia as a matter of honour has the duty now of interfering in the question to abolish the right of censorshp indirectly conferred on Consul Eles, and to let the whole truth be known.

The CHAIRMAN:

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

Mr FINLAYSON:
Brisbane

– It had not been my intention to make any particular reference to price fixing in connexion with meat supplies, as

I had proposed to wait until the Govern^ ment had declared their policy; and, but for the remarks of the honorable member for Lilley (Mr. Mackay) I would not have called attention to the subject at this stage. Nothing more lamentable in the administration of public affairs has occurred on the part of the present Government than their absolute want of control of the necessaries of life during the present critical period. I am prepared to admit that the late Hughes Government, and the Labour Government before that, also failed to an extent in their duty in the same matter. A Committee, under the chairmanship of the honorable member for Cook (Mr. J. H. Catts), and composed of honorable members from both sides of the House, was appointed by the Labour Government to deal with the question of price fixing.

Mr Sinclair:

– And they would not accept our recommendations.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– That is so. The Government either refused to give the Committee reasonable assistance or to honour its recommendations, whereupon it refused to carry on such a farcical proceeding. We have to admit that it has” taken us a long while to make up our minds as to the necessity for doing something to protect the consumer. The Government have shown a desire to delay as long as possible in this direction. As I pointed out in the course of remarks earlier in the day’s debate, every reform has to be dragged from the present Government. It is an unfortunate fact in connexion with the meat problem that it is only in yielding to strong and indignant public opinion that the Government have been compelled to take some action now. What that action is to be is not yet apparent. The Government so far have been unwilling to tell the public what they propose to do. That is neither fair to the men who grow the stock, nor to consumers. Such an attitude must have a detrimental effect upon the market. It is obvious that until the Government have declared their policy there must be created and continued au unusually uncertain position of affairs with regard to the meat trade.

Mr McWilliams:

– Until the decision is made public the stock -market will be paralyzed, or else it will be a gamble.

Mr Wise:

– The Ballarat market was not affected to-day at all.

Mr Brennan:

– Because the big buyers are buying up stock with the certainty that the Government will stand behind them.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– It is obvious that there is an uncertainly in the public mind in regard to the whole subject. It is especially unreasonable, because a statement has been made by Mr. Greene, speaking on behalf of the Government, to the effect that they have determined upon a line of policy. But the details of that policy, and the particulars of how it is to be applied, have been left unannounced. The public remain in the dark as to how the whole business is to be controlled. Seeing that the Government were not prepared to go further than just exactly as far as Mr. Greene did go, it would have been better to have said nothing at all. If the full statement is to be made through Parliament, I trust that opportunity will be provided for a discussion upon it.

Meanwhile, I am particularly concerned in pointing out what has actually happened in Queensland, with satisfactory results to the public of that State so far as the fixation of meat prices and the control of the business are concerned. Rightly or wrongly, the Queensland Labour Government have paid special attention to this matter. The honorable member for Lilley (Mr. Mackay) sought to show that the business had been a conspicuous failure ; but it is fair to remember that residents of Queensland who are most closely affected are also the most likely to be aware of its advantages or disadvantages. After considerable experience, now, the people of Queensland have stated in no uncertain terms that they approve of the policy; and the Labour Government, at the end of three years of effort, so favorably impressed the public with the virtue of their methods that they were returned at the last elections with an increased majority. The meat question was one of the vital issues on which they appealed to their constituents.

Queensland, very early in the war, made a contract with the Imperial Government, giving them first call on the meat supplies of the State for the use of the Imperial and Allied troops. .That contract was made by a Liberal Govern- ment. It was very satisfactory to the” Imperial authorities, and a very useful contract to Queensland pastoralists. It is satisfactory also to every loyal Australian that it was possible to enter upon terms for such an important purpose and at such a special period. The price was, and is, reasonable; and, in fact, so satisfactory was the contract to the parties on both sides of the world that the Labour Government, when they came into power in 1915, were quite content not to interrupt or interfere in the arrangement. Since then the Queensland authorities have had to consider not only overseas supplies, but local necessities. The Government proceeded oil a very satisfactory principle, namely, that the people of a country are entitled to prime consideration in regard to the products of that territory. Queensland was stocked with plenty of cattle and sheep, and was able to supply not only its own requirements, but, having a huge surplus over and above its contract supplies, was able to furnish meat to the markets of the other States. The Labour Government were committed, under their policy announced to the electors in 1915, to reduce the cost of living. That, indeed, was the election cry. That policy they honorably and rather effectively carried out. In some directions, in matters over which they had no control, they were unable to bring down the cost of living. But, as to one item of very great importance, the Government did effect a very substantial reduction; it is one which is the envy of every other State.

In carrying out the policy of providing cheap meat to the people the Government found it necessary to commandeer supplies of meat. Having no original sources of supply, they had to create an artificial source. Much comment has been made upon the fact that they imposed on the meat companies and pastoralists a demand for a certain supply at a fixed price; but there has been no very serious complaint that that was an unreasonable price, or that it entailed any degree of financial loss to the producers. On the contrary, we have clear statements that the price so fixed was highly satisfactory. The pastoralists, however, finding themselves tied up with a lower price than they could secure in the southern markets of Australia, which then, unfortunately, were denuded of supplies, sought to somewhat increase the transference of their stocks to the southern States. The Government, in carrying out their policy, imposed an embargo on the export of live cattle from Queensland to the other States. That policy was severely criticised as being anti-Federal, and, indeed, illegal under the Federal Constitution; and, after a good deal of difficulty, the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes), under the War Precautions Regulations, insisted on the removal of the embargo. It was removed, and cattle were despatched without hindrance over the border. While the embargo lasted it was freely stated throughout Australia that the high prices of meat in the southern States were due to the embargo; that the Queensland Government,’ pursuing a selfish policy, .had created an artificial scarcity in the southern States, as the result of which high prices had been brought about. Well, if that was so, it should be reasonable to expect that the high prices would have been reduced upon the removal of the embargo. Instead of a reduction, however, the prices have continued to soar until they have reached their present high, unreasonable, and altogether unfair standard. The embargo neither had the effect at the time claimed against it of forcing up the price, nor has its removal resulted in a reduction. By some means or other, pastoralists found that they were able - embargo or no embargo - to secure high prices in the southern States.

During the period in question, the Queensland Government made repeated offers of supplies of meat to the southern States. The Premier of Queensland informed me yesterday afternoon in this House that his Government, in anticipation of relieving the southern markets, by despatching supplies of meat, had committed themselves to the purchase of certain quantities from the meat companies, and that, when the southern authorities refused to accept at the price named by Queensland, the northern State Government found themselves in the awkward predicament of having to reduce the amounts, and of having to make terms with the meat companies to take back the unnecessary surplus. The southern States had their own reasons for rejecting the offer of the Queensland Government I understand that, in South

Australia, for example, it was due to ita Abattoirs Act. This requires that all meat sold in Adelaideshall pass through the abattoirs, and undergo Government inspection there. Victoria made some effort, and, I think, accepted one small supply; but political influences came into operation, and private interests began to play a very active part, with the result that Victoria turned a deaf ear to any business proposals from Queensland.

However, the Queensland Government, in pursuance of their home policy, very largely extended their offers of local supplies. They opened a number of shops, and it is interesting to note that the first lot of meat offered in the first State butcher’s shop was purchased at1/8d. higher than the price being paid by the Imperial Government for the meat at that stage being shipped overseas. Since the opening of that first Government shop, which now is a most successful business, other establishments have been opened up in quite a number of towns throughout the State, and further extensions are in prospect.

Mr Corser:

– There are not very many of them.

Mr Bayley:

– There will be more of these shops opened before the next State election.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– There are sure to be.

Mr Bayley:

-With the £19,000 off-

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The answer to all the arguments advanced by honorable members opposite is that the people of Queensland rejoice in the fact that they are able to buy such good meat at such reasonable prices. The honorable member for Oxley (Mr. Bayley) should be the last to decry this State enterprise, since he is aware that in a town in his own electorate the Government were faced with the difficulty of having either to close down the State butcher’s shop there or to expend a large sum in refitting it to meet the increased trade.

Mr Sinclair:

– The State Government closed it down because they lost the seat.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– That is not correct. The honorable member knows as a matter of fact that the new representative of that district in the State Parliament (Mr. Barnes) introduced a deputation to the Minister, asking that the State butchery in the town in question should not be closed, although he had himself stated during the election campaign that he was absolutely opposed to the State butcheries. The position today is that the Government are still undecided as to whether the business in the town would warrant the expenditure of £5,000 or £6,000 in properly equipping the State butcher’s shop with refrigerating appliances, or whether they should close down the business altogether. A second deputation of the residents has waited on the Minister, and has made certain offers, so that the Government shall not take from the district this particular source of meat supply. The Government of Queensland are besieged with applications for branches to be established in all parts of the State. In trying to meet the wishes of the people they have said that where they cannot at present open a State butcher’s shop they are prepared to supply to approved butchers at a rate which will enable them to sell at the prices ruling in the State butcheries.

This is one illustration of an honest and persevering attempt on the part of a Government to meet this particular difficulty. That it is a difficulty honorable members will freely admit. It should be a source of satisfaction to us to know that in one State at least the problem has been solved to the benefit of the people, and not to the detriment of the industry. The argument is advanced that the State butchers’ shops in Queensland show only a certain proportion of profit. My complaint in that regard is that they show any profit. In providing the necessaries of life it is just as bad in principle for the State to make a profit out of the people as it is for private firms to do so. One of the arguments we advance in support of Socialism through State operations is that all profits over and above working expenses should disappear. The making of huge profits in connexion with such an undertaking is no proof of success, and the making of small profits does not show lack of success. On the contrary, Socialism in these directions, effectively carried on, would result not in huge profits but in reduced prices to the people, because profits are not required.

Mr Corser:

– They ought to pay their way.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– And they do. In this as in most other matters the chief working expenses are in respect of distribution. If we could solve the problem of the distribution of food products, we should cut away a very heavy proportion of the expenses attaching to their supply. I am told that if it were possible, for instance, to confine the delivery of bread to one or two firms operating within circumscribed localities, that commodity could be sold at from £d. to Id. per loaf below the prevailing rates. The State butchers’ shops in Queensland save the expense of distribution, and the public have learned very quickly to go to the shops for their meat. The expenses of distribution alone being eliminated from the business, the Government are able, as private enterprise would be, to supply the public at reduced rates.

Mr Bayley:

– .And the people pay more in tram fares to reach these State butchers’ shops than the additional cost incurred in buying from the nearest privatelyowned shops.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– We may be sure that the people are the best judges as to that matter. Those who buy from the State butchers’ shops know what it costs to do so, and what best suits their pockets. The private suppliers of meat in Queensland to-day are finding it advisable to adopt the methods of the State Government ; they have reduced their distribution expenses with considerable advantage to themselves, and with some advantage to the public. This meat question is gradually going to solve itself.

Mr Bayley:

– A system that meets the requirements of only a small section of the community cannot be said to be successful.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– What is the turnover ?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– In the pamphlet entitled Socialism^ at Work, in which the result of the working of various State enterprises established by the Queensland Government are detailed, it is stated -

The Auditor-General’s report shows that for the period ended 30th September, 1916 - that ls slightly less than eleven months - the State butchers’ shops returned a net profit to the Government of £2,564 19s. Id. Profit was not being aimed at. The shops had been established to serve a public need, and it was intended to make them pay their way. . . . The direct gain to the consumers may be gathered from the fact that during the week in June, 1917, prior to the date of writing, 17,050 customers bought meat at the metropolitan shops alone; whilst a large and growing trade was also carried on at provincial centres. Before the other shops had been established the business at Roma-street averaged approximately 2,500 purchasers per day, whilst the average takings per”’ customer were 2s. 63d. A moderate estimate would be that at least 25,000 customers per .week are served by the State. Some of these would have been served twice within seven days, and to be on the safe side it may be calculated that 12,500 persons buy their meat from the Government.

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

– That is an infinitesimal proportion of the population of Queensland.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– But it is only the beginning of things.

Mr Poynton:

– In this morning’s newspapers there appears a statement by Mr. Ryan that twenty-eight of these shops have been opened.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I want to point out in conclusion, and this is the correct policy for the Government to adopt in interfering at all with the supply of foodstuffs, that -

The Government’s policy is not to endeavour to capture the whole of the retail meat business, but to force the private sellers, by means of legitimate competition, to treat their customers fairly.

The great virtue of State enterprise in this direction is not to cut out private business and to obtain a monopoly, but to steady the prices in such a way as to secure to the people an adequate supply at reasonable prices. On these lines State enterprise is safe; along other lines it is of uncertain value.

Mr MATHEWS:
Melbourne Ports

– When I was addressing the Committee on a previous occasion the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Archibald) made an unruly remark to the effect that the workers here should try to improve their positions without acting like Bolsheviki. I propose in this connexion to make the following quotation : -

Charles M. Schwab, president of the Bethlehem Steel Corporation, and now Hon. Director of Transportation for the United States Government, declared in an address at a dinner in New York on 24th January, that the time is at hand ‘‘when the men of the working class - the men without property - will control the destinies of the world.” “The Bolsheviki sentiment must be taken into consideration,” Mr. Schwab declared. “ and in the very near future we must look to the worker for a solution of the great economic questions now being considered. I am not one to carelessly turn over my belongings for the uplift of the nation, but I am one who has come to a belief that the worker -will rule, and the sooner we realize this the better it will be for our country and the world at large.”

I have already warned both, the Federal and State Governments that if they attempt to “ squelch “ the trade unionists of Australia they will cause trouble. They should not, ostrich-like, bury their heads in the sand and refuse to take notice of this menace. At the Recruiting Conference convened by the GovernorGeneral certain promises were made on behalf of the Government, and having regard to them I propose to read letters written by the secretary of the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters - the members of which cannot be said to be Bolsheviki - to the Victorian Minister for Agriculture, as well as to the Acting Prime Minister and others. This union, has been organized for generations, but, as a result of the late strike, it is not now recognized as such. The Flour and Grain Workers Union refused to allow its members to be employed as carpenters unless they engaged through their organization. Dealing with this subject, Mr. John Dias, secretary of the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners of Australasia, on 28th May last wrote the following letter to Mr. D. S. Oman, the Victorian Minister for Agriculture: -

Dear Sir.- In continuation of my interview with you on the 27th January, and subsequent correspondence, in regard to the Flour and Grain Workers Union discriminating against members of the above organization, by forcing them to become members of the Flour and Gr,ain Workers Union, we have, it seems, arrived at some finality in this matter. .

I am therefore enclosing you copies of correspondence forwarded to the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth, and Mr. Brittingham, of the Victorian Produce Company Limited.

Trusting that you will use your good offices, and thanking you for past favours.

To the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) he wrote as follows on the same date :-

Sir. - I enclose you copies of correspondence wi.th the Victorian Produce Association, in order that you may exert your influence with the Victorian Produce Company to prevent members of the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners from being forced to join the bogus union (i.e., Flour and Grain Workers Union) and to cease their membership with this society.

I was given to understand, by the late Mr. Elmslie, who had the whole file of correspondence in his possession, that after the Conference convened by the Governor-General all obstacles in connexion with our members working on the wheat stacks were to be removed.

This has not been done, and the position therefore is as acute as ever.

Trusting that we will have your good offices in allaying this cause of friction.

Then, again, he addressed the following letter to Mr. Brittingham, secretary to the Victorian Produce Co-operation Limited : -

Dear Sir. - I have to thank you for the courtesy which you extended to me on my last interview with you on the 23rd May, 1918, when you were kind enough to ask me to state my case for the above organization to Mr. Beere, of the Wheat Department, and I am pleased to say that we, at last, seem to have got to the bottom of this much discussed matter, as Mr. Beere informed me that men can only be employed by and through the Flour and Grain Workers Union on the wheat stacks.

He also informs mc that the Victorian Produce Company have an agreement with the Four and Grain Workers. Union to do their work, and if a member ceases to belong to that organization he will be discharged from working on wheat stacks.

As it has now become obvious that your Association is the agency for bolstering up this bogus union, to our detriment, inasmuch as the rules provide that a member cannot belong to a legitimate Trade Union Organization, we have to accept this decision.

But at the same time we would point out that there was an understanding arrived at by a Conference convened by the Governor-General, that all further attacks against legitimate unionism should cease, in order that all obstacles to recruiting be removed.

I have been informed that Messrs. Waterman, Quincey, and Clark, foremen on the wheat stacks, are particularly insistent that members of our organization must join the Flour and Grain Workers Union, and remain members of the same, if they wish to be employed, and continue in their employment, on the wheat stacks.

I am therefore forwarding copies of this letter to the Minister of Agriculture, Mr. D. S. Oman, and the Acting Prime Minister of the Commonwealth, Mr. W. Watt, so that the matter may be brought under their notice.

The Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners is an organization of undoubted integrity, that has done much to uplift the wage-earning section of the community. I have, read these letters with the object of showing the Committee what it was generally understood would be the outcome of the Conference called by the Governor-General. It was believed that, as the result of that Conference, the disadvantages under which unionists were labouring would be wiped away. In this morning’s issue of the Age it is stated that; -

Mr. Watt said yesterday that the necessity for renewed efforts to bring home to the people the gravity of the present position was shown in the decrease in the latest recruiting figures. A few weeks ago there appeared to be every promise of a great awakening to the peril that was threatening the democracy of Australia and the rest of the world, but after that patriotic burst Australia seemed to be in danger of going to sleep again. Already Australia had witnessed the saddening spectacle of Australian battalions, with glorious fighting records, being broken up……

The Acting Prime Minister has admitted that after the Conference which was called by the Governor-General there was an increase in recruiting. That increase was due to the fact that the sons of unionists and the dependants of unionists understood that they were not to be victimized for what had occurred between 1916 and this year. Yet here we find that genuine unionists are being victimized in favour of “ scab “ unionists. The Acting Prime Minister now admits that there is a slump in recruiting.

Mr Poynton:

– Is not the slump due to the fact that youths of. eighteen years of age will not be enlisted ?

Mr MATHEWS:

– I do not think so. There is another union, known as the Australian Ship Wharf Workers Union, and in the Age of 27th May last there appeared a letter from its secretary, in which he took exception to my description of that organization as a non-union union.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– For a time its members were working only about six and a half hours a day on the wharfs.

Mr MATHEWS:

– I am directing my remarks purely to the question of what was promised by the Government at the Recruiting Conference. There is also what is known’ as the Yarra Stevedoring Company. In reality it is not a company, but merely a committee formed by the employers for the purpose of engaging men to work their ships. If honorable members had been with me last summer in the building which is used for the purpose of picking up the men required for this work, they would have been surprised that such a place could exist. The atmosphere in it was horrible. The place itself was lousy. The derelicts of society were there looking for work. Men had to be taken out from it and disinfected* Yet the clean unionists were obliged to go there and consort with these dirty creatures. Further, a genuine unionist had no chance of getting employment until the members of the bogus union had been exhausted. There is another bogus union, namely, the Naval Employees Union, which is regis tered under the Arbitration Act. Its members get a preference over members of the genuine organization, namely, the Ship Painters and Dockers Union. I admit that in the Commonwealth yards the unionists get a fair deal, but in the private yards they certainly do not. Yet we are asked to sink our differences and to join our friends opposite in the recruiting campaign. Further, quite a number cif private firms outside those I have mentioned are victimizing the unionists of Melbourne. In my own electorate there is the Dunlop Rubber Company, which has made profits to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds, solely because of the duties which have been levied upon rubber goods imported from other countries, with a view to fostering local industries. But for the beneficent legislation of this Parliament, that company could not have made a cent. Last year a strike occurred at this establishment. Had not the employers looked for it there need have been no strike at- all. In other words, they wanted the men to strike, because the latter were then appealing to the Arbitration Court for better conditions and higher wages. What happened? Whilst there were hundreds of tons of rubber which could have been used before the necessity arose to use fresh material, the company insisted that the men should work on the black rubber, which had been imported during the strike. I say that the industrial disturbance at the Dunlop Company was fostered by the employers as part of the conspiracy which existed at the time to break down unionism. To-day, whilst other rubber firms in Victoria are giving unionists a fair deal, this particular firm is employing only “ scab “ labour. Is it any wonder that the twenty-odd old men who were working there when the general strike occurred, ceased work in sympathy with the strikers? Eight of those men are to-day cracking stones because the company refuses to reemploy them. It refuses to re-employ them because, in their old age, they would not “ scab “ on their fellows. In such circumstances, do the Government expect the sons and grandsons of these men to have any feeling for the Empire or the flag about which we prate so much ?

Mr Poynton:

– Is this a recruiting speech ?

Mr MATHEWS:

– The Assistant Minister must accept my remarks in the form in which I am putting them. We were told at the Recruiting Conference that certain things would be done. They have not been done. Is the victimization of which I complain consonant with the understanding which was arrived at by the Conference? Then we have the Colonial Sugar Refining Company, another company which has made a fortune out of the community. To-day this company is penalizing men who ceased work during the recent great strike. It purposely looked for trouble by asking its employees to handle black sugar when there was plenty of white sugar available for them to handle. Mr. Dyett has endeavoured to get the Farmers’ Producing Company to mete out to the unionists a fair deal. But it refuses to do so. I have here a statement which reads -

  1. Dynes, 317 Park-street.. South Melbourne; G-. Canterbury, 115 Charles-street, Footscray; P. Dwyer, Joe Newman, and M. Nicholls, were picked up for work by Mr. Linklater, for Louis Dreyfus, and were prevented from going by the president of the Flour and Grain Union. He asked us to write out an order for him to draw on our wages enough to make us financial members of his union. We refused, and the consequences were : no work.

Because they would not join a “scab” union, these men were denied work. This union was formed by the employers to defeat the genuine unions. Yet I am asked by the Assistant Minister (Mr. Poynton) whether I am making a recruiting speech. I would make the same statements on the street corners of this city but for the punishment that would be meted out to me. No doubt, my speech will be censored.

Mr Poynton:

– I would like to see a little recognition in this Chamber of the wisdom of allowing bygones to be bygones.

Mr MATHEWS:

– I am endeavouring to show that nothing has been conceded to the unionists. But since the Prime Minister left for England, I have not witnessed anything in the nature of recrimination from honorable members on this side of the chamber.

Mr Poynton:

– See how the honorable member is helping us to get through the work here.

Mr MATHEWS:

– I am surprised at the Assistant Minister taking up that stand. He is too old a politician not to know that incidents of this character will occur. If he were in Opposition to-day he would resort to exactly the same methods that we are employing now. I ask the honorable gentleman whether there has been any recrimination indulged in here to-night?

Mr Poynton:

– The honorable member ought to read his own speech.

Mr MATHEWS:

– I have not indulged in any recrimination. I have already admitted that the Department which the honorable gentleman controls has done a fair thing to the unionists. But the Victorian Government and the private employees are not doing that. As the Commonwealth Government are all-powerful it is up to them to exert their power in the direction of compelling others to do what is just to the community. I might go on enumerating instances of this sort all night. I say candidly that I will not assist recruiting again until a fair deal has been given to the men who sent me to this House. For more than two years I assisted recruiting to the utmost of my powers. I did so up till September, 1916, and I would do so again if fair treatment were extended to the men and women who sent me here. ButI say unhesitatingly that no man is justified in recruiting until the British Government have definitely stated what are their war aims. We should then know exactly where they are. But, apart from the question of our war aims, the fact remains that’ a Recruiting Conference waa recently held at Federal Government House, at which a certain understanding was arrived at. Nothing has since been done to fulfil the promise which was made to that gathering so far as the private employers and the Victorian Government are concerned. The Government have made no attempt to conform to the desire expressed by the Conference. Nobody can prophesy what will take place before this Parliament reassembles after the recess. But if those who are opposed to genuine unionism think that they can break down the unions of Australia by the methods they are adopting, they are making a mistake. Their efforts will recoil upon themselves individually and collectively, and must prove detrimental to the best interests of the Empire, about which we talk so much. One would imagine, after listening to their talk about the Empire, that it was composed of palatial halls, of a great mercantile fleet, and of huge corporations of capital. But my own idea of the Empire is that it consists of the people of the community. The more the interests of the people are looked after, the better will it be for the Empire. Until that fact is grasped we shall not secure that amity for which the Recruiting Conference was called by the Governor-General.

Mr BLAKELEY:
Darling

– I desire to say a few words concerning the treatment which has been meted out by the Government to Germans in Australia. In my opinion, which is based upon a great deal of evidence, the Ministry have discriminated between Australianborn Germans who hold political views in opposition to their own, and the wealthy Germans of this community. “Whether it is due to political influence or money influence I do not know. But it is certain that the discrimination exists, and that fact does not reflect any great credit upon the Government.

Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– The honorable member will admit that there are some very wealthy Germans interned?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– I admit that, for spectacular purposes, the Prime Minister interned a wealthy brewer named Resch. With a great fanfare of trumpets and a big parading of the good influences at work in the Win-the-war Government, Mr. Hughes proclaimed that they were starting on a campaign to intern the Germans of the community. He said, “ This is only a beginning. We are going to take action, and we shall be very active in regard to this matter.” They interned Mr. Resch.

Mr Poynton:

– The honorable member is complaining that the Government have not done enough?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– No. I am complaining of the discrimination which has been exhibited.

Mr Poynton:

– I agree that some others besides Germans ought to be interned.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– And probably some should be from among the honorable member’s supporters for profiteering. And in view of the honorable member’s political past history he is cutting a sorry spectacle now as a member of this Government. The Prime Minister was just as bad on his trip to Queensland prior to the second referendum as he was in regard to this question of the internment of Germans. If a man is deemed to be dangerous to the community or to any of our Allies he ought to be placed in such a position as to . render him innocuous to the community, but political influence in regard to this matter has made the whole thing a farce and a menace, to Australia. Last night I drew attention to a German firm who, although declared to be an enemy firm, were still carrying on operations, the Government apparently being indifferent so long as they can get a cut out of the proceeds of this robbery of the people of Australia, prices having been put up 400 or 500 per cent., with the assistance of Government officials and the blessing of the Minister for Trade and Customs. This is one of the most shameful outrages that has ever been perpetrated upon the people of this country. The Government act with perfect friendliness towards Germans who hold certain political opinions, but display marked antagonism towards other Germans holding different political opinions, as instanced by the large number of fullblooded Germans in the services of the Commonwealth and the States, and even in the Military Department.

Mr Poynton:

– Do you want to put that as an illustration?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– I say that, for political reasons, the Government believe, apparently, that certain residents with a German-sounding name should be disfranchised. They have gone further. Many Australian Germans, because of their political leanings, have been interned; while wealthy Germans holding different political opinions are allowed to go free. I have already quoted one case here. Some little time ago I asked certain questions in regard to Mrs. Buhmeyer, who accompanied the Hon. R. D. Hall, the Attorney-General of New South Wales, to Japan-

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

– Order! The honorable member may not discuss that. That subject is down on the business-paper.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Only in a formal question, I understand

The CHAIRMAN:

– That debars it from being debated now.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– I made special inquiries of my colleagues, and they informed me that the fact that a question may be on the notice-paper does not prevent its being dealt with.

The CHAIRMAN:

– I may say, for the honorable member’s information, that questions, Orders of the Day, or motions set down for consideration by. the House or in Committee, may not be anticipated in debate.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Then I shall have to deal with this matter on some other occasion.

I shall refer now to the firm of Kershaw and Martin, of Sydney, a German firm operating with the cognisance of the Government. Whether political influences are at work, .or whether friendship, which is alleged to exist between certain of the Win-the-war party and the firm, is the reason, I do not know; but probably at a later stage we shall learn the real reason why this particular firm is allowed to operate. I do not wish to say anything further now, except that this Government will be’ known for their action in depriving Australian citizens of the franchise. Many thousands of re,putable Australian citizens, born of German parents, are now denied the fight to say who shall be elected to the National Legislature to frame the laws under which they are compelled to live. The Government have adopted this most contemptible attitude for purely political reasons, but I remind them they are on very dangerous ground indeed. They might as well go further, and issue regulations prohibiting every man holding political opinions different from theirs from having a vote at all. The position would then be simplified, for I believe this was the main reason actuating the Government in issuing the regulation disfranchising so many Australian-born citizens.

Mr WALLACE:
West Sydney

– I am sorry the Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. Jensen) is not present, because this afternoon, when I was referring to the Vacuum Oil Company, he interrupted, and stated that, owing to the ruling freights, it was essential that the company should be allowed to increase prices. I think many honorable members would be only too pleased if they could get into a concern with a financial history so attractive as that of the Vacuum Oil Company. In the Melbourne Age of 7th February, 1918, Mr. Henry Calvin Cornforth, managing director of the company, was reported as having given evidence before the sittings of the Inter-State Commission. He said that, in 1912, 1913, and 1914, the paidup capital of the company was £600,000; in 1915 and 1916, it was £800,000; and in 1917, it was £1,600,000. He added that from 50 to 60 per cent, of the shareholders were British, and the rest were Americans, so that there were no Australian shareholders in the company at all. Mr. Commissioner Swinburne read extracts from Moody’s Directory with the object of showing that there was some connexion between the Vacuum and Standard Oil Companies, but this was denied by Mr. Cornforth, and when asked about the turnover, tlie witness said that, from .1913 to 1917, it had increased by 9 per cent, in volume, and 81 per cent, in value, also that, during the past three years, 6B per cent, of the trade in kerosene, and 38 per cent, of trade in benzine, in Australia, had been done by them. Mr. Hugh Hamilton, a director of the company, in his evidence, said that the price of kerosene before the war broke out, was 7s. 2d. per case, and benzine 13s. 4d. per case, and, in January, 1918, the price of kerosene was 13s. 6d. per case, while benzine was 23s. 8d. At a later stage in the examination, Mr. Hamilton said he thought 12£ per cent, profit on the turnover was fair and reasonable, and Mr. Cornforth, when reexamined, said -

Two-thirds of the total turnover of the company was in Australia. For the half year ending 30th November, 1912, the percentage of profit on turnover was 17.69 per. cent., and outside Australia for the same period it was 23.86 per cent. The respective figures in subsequent years were - 1913, 12.8 and 14.15; 1914, 12.87 and 13.11; 1915, 17.33 and 18.53; 1916, 20.03 and 20.48; and in 1917 (six months ended 31st May), 8.51 and 8.59. He did not think the profit in a year would be equal todouble the capital employed in the business.

Commissioner Swinburne. - It looks more like three times the amount.

Witness said that for the year just closed there was a difference of £30,000 between the turnover and the actual capital used in the business.

Commissioner Mills. - Virtually the capital lias been turned over once.

Commissioner Swinburne. - One and a half times, is it not?

The Chairman:

– Is there a Vacuum Oil Company, apart from the several Vaccum Oil companies such as this one? Is there a parent company, or any group of subsidiary companies under one management?

Witness said that the Vacuum Oil Company of Rochester had branches in various parts of the world.

Are they “ pups “ ? - I don’t know, but if they are they seem to be very valuable ones.

Is it really a fact that the Vacuum Oil Company of Rochester has a number of subsidiary companies doing business in various parts of the world on the same lines as your company in Australia? - I don’t know.

Witness, in reply to Commissioner Swinburne, said he did not think their profit on turnover was greater than that of any average business in Australia.

All this goes to show that the company, by heavy increases in prices, were amply compensated for any extra outlay in the conduct of their business, yet, in spite of this, the Government allowed a further increase in the prices of _ these essential commodities. The increase in the price of oil may be unavoidable, because we are under the heel of the Vacuum Oil Company, but the Government should use every endeavour to make Australia independent of it. A million pounds, or even £2,000,000, would be well spent in providing us with a supply of oil. Were Ministers to take the advice of the honorable member for Brisbane (Mr. Finlayson), and follow the example of the Ryan Government, by establishing socialistic ventures, the community would benefit. Under the “ come day, go day, God send Sunday “ methods that are “being followed, we shall find ourselves at the end of this war where we were at the beginning, and the result of allowing the exploiter to continue his operations will be another cataclysm. It must be generally admitted that the cause of the war was the struggle of the commercial classes for possession of this world’s goods, and a place in the sun. An old lecturer, to whom I have often listened, used to say that one should not mix charcoal, saltpetre, and sulphur and pray to God to make a plum pudding of it, because God had decided that the result should be gunpowder, and that, similarly, it was useless to mix competition, private property, and production for profit, and pray for a sound social system. If the Government honestly desires to grapple with social problems, and to make the world better, it will follow the example of the Queensland Government, which is benefiting the working and the producing classes alike, thus establishing good feeling in the community. i

The newspapers are blaming the Labour movement for its undoubted coolness towards the war. Some honorable members opposite claim to have been associated with the Labour movement and to understand its ideals and aspirations,” but it seems to me that there is a screw loose somewhere.

Mr Lynch:

– There would be several screws loose if the honorable member’s plans were put into operation.

Mr WALLACE:

– The farming community has not objected to Socialism when it could get cheap wire netting from the State. In Queensland it has got thousands of miles of wire netting for nothing.

Mr Lynch:

– None has been obtained in New South Wales for nothing, and few of our settlers can now get any at all.

Mr WALLACE:

– The farmers of New South Wales have received a great deal of assistance from Labour Governments. The lot of the man on the land has been better under the Labour regime than under the old Liberal rule.

Mr Lynch:

– Certain advantages have been conferred by Labour Administrations, but in the course of a few years they have put an immense debt upon the land.

Mr WALLACE:

– Before the 1890 strike, those on the land were having a bad time. Then came the strike, and a little later the bank smashes. It was only after Labour had got going, and the banks were able to give back the money that had been locked up, that the settlers began to prosper; but since that time they have never looked back. The Government gives to the farmers all the assistance that it is possible to give under our obsolete conditions of- land settlement. It is impossible, because of the way in which settlement is scattered, to provide all the facilities necessary for bringing the produce to market. Under a sane land system we would not have one farmer 200 miles from the city, and another 300 miles, with the intervening country held by some big squatter or financial institution. At ‘one time a square mile could be bought for 5s., and thousands of acres were secured in this way, making a wise settlement of the country impossible. The only legitimate way to bring back the land to the people would be to adopt some such method as that suggested by Brother Grant, or to confiscate it, and let it revert to the Crown.

The workers have not had a fair deal during the war. At the beginning, they, like the rest of the community, took up arms in defence of the country. They were led to believe that it was a defensive war, a war to end war, and a war to uphold the rights of small nations. When, after twelve or eighteen months of fighting, it was thought that we were on top, certain statesmen made long orations advocating an economic war on Germany, and the seizure of territory.

Mr Higgs:

– I think that we are entitled to a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Mr WALLACE:

– The worker knows little about problems of foreign policy, but when he began to hear the annexation of territory and the extension of national boundaries proposed, he began to wonder what the war was about. While he has been giving his best for the prosecution of the war, his rights and privileges have been filched from him. This, of course, he resents, and it has therefore come about that to-day there is a pronounced anti-war feeling among the working class of Australia and of the world. It does not follow that the workers are willing to give up the game altogether, now that we are in it, but the stop-the-war influences can be as easily underrated as overrated. If it be wished to rouse the workers to greater effort, and to stimulate the feeling that was excited by the outbreak of the war, the conditions which obtained when the war commenced must be restored. It may be asked, What about the boys in the trenches? Now, those boys, when they left this country to fight for our rights, and to protect us from German aggression, did so on the understanding that certain obligations would be fulfilled. Those who were left behind look upon themselves as responsible for seeing that those obligations are fulfilled. When they saw that the conditions of the workers were being altered, they found themselves on the horns of a dilemma. If they allowed industrial conditions to be altered, they would be traitors to their mates. They had to decide between disloyalty to their country and disloyalty to their mates; and of two evils, they chose the lesser, preferring to be called disloyal to their country than disloyal to their mates.

Mr Wise:

– Did the honorable member hear what the honorable member for Ballarat (Mr. McGrath) said to-night?

Mr WALLACE:

– The honorable member for Ballarat will bear out what I am saying. His position is the same as mine in this matter. You say that it is necessary to conduct this war to a successful conclusion.

Mr Wise:

– That is what he said.

Mr WALLACE:

– We admit that, having entered into the war, it must be concluded in a manner satisfactory to all parties interested.

Mr Wise:

– That would be a strange finish.

Mr WALLACE:

– It is all very well to say that we must gain a victory over Germany, but a decisive victory does not seem at all likely. General Smuts, who is a good patriot, and has done his best for the Empire, told the ship-yard employees recently that it was time that we dropped the idea of smashing Germany, and began to recognise that we could not do so. His views and ours exactly coincide. The Australian Workers Union ha3 over 40,000 members at the Front; of the union to which I belong, between 3,000 and 4,000 members are now in the trenches, and most of the remaining 50 per cent. are engaged on war services. It is the same with every other organization. We have agreed to a repatriation scheme for improving the lot of the returned soldier; but many men when they come back will wish to resume their former occupations, and to return to the union which protected their interests in times of peace. While I do not say that the Government are deliberately trying to smash the unions, they are not in any way endeavouring to restore their status, as they promised to do. Until that is done, the workers are quite right in looking toward the finale of this war with no great anticipation.

Mr Wise:

– Is that loyalty to your mates who are fighting for you ?

Mr WALLACE:

– Yes; the conditions that obtained in Australia before they went away should be restored before they return. It is within the power of the Government to restore and improve those conditions, and it will be the wiser course. It was. the attitude of an Australian Government which first precipitated the crisis during which those conditions were taken away from the working men ; and it is up to the National Government of the Commonwealth to see that the original status is restored. Then there will be no reason to question the loyalty of the workers. The workers cannot be appealed to by any one telling them that this is a just war. Any man connected with the Labour movement knows that no war is just.

Mr Wise:

– Labour people in America say so.

Mr WALLACE:

– They say the same as we do here. A certain section of the labour community in America has adopted the same attitude as Labour here. Mr. Samuel Gompers. President of the American Federation of Labour, has already announced that profiteering is going on in the United States, and he has addressed protests to the Government in that respect.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Atkinson:
WILMOT, TASMANIA

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

Mr HECTOR LAMOND:
Illawarra

– The honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Wallace) was rather unfortunate in quoting General Smuts. I do not know whence he obtained his quotation, but, during the debate, I happened to be reading a speech of General Smuts in regard to the war, and I shall quote certain of his remarks: -

I verily believe that we are within reach of priceless and immeasurable good, not only for this United Kingdom and group of nations to which we belong, but also to the whole world. But, of course, it will depend largely upon us whether the great prize is achieved now in this struggle, or whether the world will be doomed to long, weary waiting in the future. The prize is within our grasp, if we have strength, especially the strength of soul, which I hope we shall have, to see this thing through without getting tired of waiting, until victory crowns the efforts of our brave men in the field.

Mr Wallace:

– When was that statement made?

Mr HECTOR LAMOND:

– On the 15th May of last year.

I wish now to refer briefly to some of the remarks of the honorable member for West Sydney as to Labour’s position in this war. I deny that the gentlemen who meet in the Trades Hall, in Sydney, under the name of the Sydney Labour Council, and who pass resolutions against recruiting, represent the opinions of the working class of Australia at all.

Mr Wallace:

– You cannot speak for the working class now.

Mr HECTOR LAMOND:

– I speak for them in greater measure, and in greater numbers, than do those who say that the working class is opposed to the Empire’s position in the war, and te Australia’s activities concerning the conflict. From the beginning of the conflict there has been within the ranks of the Labour party of Australia a section which, to-day again, has expressed itself in opposition to the war. The very first war article printed in the Worker newspaper, in Sydney, was a protest against the first 20,000 men being sent from the Commonwealth to stand shoulder to shoulder with men of other parts of the Empire. That article opposed recruiting in any shape or form, but it no more represented the views of the workers than does that attitude represent them to-day. It represents the views of those who do not wish the Empire to succeed, and of those who have left no stone unturned to weaken the Commonwealth and the Empire in the prosecution of the war. I regret that some of those who have asserted themselves in this way should ever have seen fit to take such a course.

Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– What is the position in New South Wales now?

Mr HECTOR LAMOND:

– The absence of certain honorable members from this chamber during the past fortnight is sufficiently eloquent as to the position in New South Wales.

The attitude which some members of the Labour party as it exists to-day adopt with regard to such questions as the future of the Pacific, and, indeed, their general outlook upon the war, indicates a complete failure yet to realize what the war means and may mean to this country. The honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Wallace) speaks of the difficulties and troubles of the working class in Australia. Unfortunately, many things have occurred which should never have happened. There was the stoppage of the transport of supplies to the troops, for example. There have been things which have not occurred in any other country, and which have not had the approval of organized Labour here.

Mr Wallace:

– Do you mean to say there have been no strikes in Great Britain?

Mr HECTOR LAMOND:

– There have been no strikes that have prevented hospital ships from being despatched to the soldiers. I appeal to that section of the Labour movement which is inclined, if not yet determined, to oppose proposals which will make for the security of the Commonwealth in relation to the problems of the Pacific. It has been said that the future diplomacy of the world will centre around the Pacific, and I cordially indorse that. So long ago as the time when, with foresight little appreciated, the then Premier of Queensland annexed New Guinea, I was impressed with the importance of the islands surrounding thi3 Continent in regard to our future. Every year that has passed since, and every development in the Pacific, has emphasized to any thoughtful man that the Commonwealth is not and cannot be safe so long as those islands may be made the bases for aggression against this country. The war will afford an opportunity of righting the wrong which the British authorities did to Australia at that time, and should secure to us more fully the advantages which the democratic institutions of this land have won for its people.

I seriously appeal to those who are being misled with the suggestion that this is merely an attempt to grasp territory. I hailed with delight the declaration of the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth (Mr. Hughes) of a Monroe doctrine for the Pacific. If that can be achieved as a result of this struggle I shall not regret it, even though some of my nearest and dearest friends have fallen; for they will not have made their sacrifice in vain if it will have brought security to the Commonwealth.

Mr Brennan:

– But who is to enforce the Monroe doctrine? Is it to bo Australia alone?

Mr HECTOR LAMOND:

– I hardly think it necessary to say that a Monroe doctrine for the Pacific does not mean that one nation alone is to stand behind it. No doubt, one purpose of Mr. Hughes in announcing that doctrine in America was to enlist the sympathy of the United States with Australia’s view-point. I hope that the statesmen assembled to take part in the Imperial Conference will see their way to framing such, conditions of peace as shall confer upon Australia that sense of security which a re-adjustment of the Pacific problem alone can confer.

Mr HIGGS:
Capricornia

– Is no other honorable member upon the Government side prepared to say a few words? I am surprised that the promise which was given to this side of the House that full opportunity would be af forded to discuss the financial measures of the Government has not been fulfilled. This seems to be a Ministry of broken promises. Evidently there are other methods of applying the gag besides the closure resolutions within the Standing Orders. There is that method being pursued by the Government at present, of inflicting upon honorable members opposed to the Government the responsibility of carrying on debate in a state of mental exhaustion. How can honorable members at this hour apply their minds to the discussion of the problems which have arisen out of the circumstances in which we find ourselves?

I desire to refer to some remarks by the honorable member for Illawarra (Mr. Lamond), who took exception to certain utterances of the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Wallace) in his expression of the position of the colonies in the Pacific. The honorable member for Iiia-‘ warra regrets that the action taken by Sir Thomas Mcllwraith was not approved in its entirety by the British Government. The honorable member surely has not looked at the map of Australia. Apparently, he is not seized with the realization of what puny results have accrued from the efforts to people this great continent. Are” we entitled to take over all the islands of the Pacific for the purpose of their development ? And if we are going to take them over, what is to be our attitude towards the native inhabitants? How are we treating the natives in New Guinea at present? True, we are doing better in that respect, I suppose, than has been the experience of natives in any part of the world. That improved attitude towards the benighted heathen is due to the presence of a Labour party in the Commonwealth. I have not known the Conservatives, or the so-called Liberals, to adopt towards the natives that Christian attitude which should be observed if we are truly our brother’s keepers. I remember reading some time ago a book by Sir Harry H. Johnston on the negro races. He spent a great deal of time, and applied a very critical mind, to ascertaining what had been the treatment of the negroid races by the various nations. There was very little to choose between them wherever they were in control of coloured peoples - whether the rulers were Spanish, Dutch, Portuguese, German, or British. Capitalists cannot be let loose uncontrolled among the coloured peoples of the world - in New Guinea, for example - and the natives continue to be well treated. The Labour programme is not in operation in British or German New Guinea.

I take the greatest exception to the idea set forth by the honorable member for Illawarra (Mr. Lamond), that we should keep German New Guinea and take over the islands of the Pacific in the interests of this country. The further we get away from the coast line of Australia the more difficult it will be for us to defend Australia, and the more expensive- will be our military and naval systems. What advantage was it to Germany to hold German New Guinea?

Mr Spence:

– The great advantage arose from Germany’s ambition to take Australia.

Mr HIGGS:

– That view-point arose merely in the imagination of the Minister for Defence (Senator Pearce). How absurd it is ! Germany will have more than she can deal with for a long time to come in Europe. The Minister for Defence said the other day that Germany’s main objectin the war was to get Australia. Of what advantage was the possession of German New Guinea to Germany before the war, seeing that the moment the war broke out her colonies fell away from her almost automatically, because she could not defend them ? And when it is said that the German Navy might lie up in one of the harbours of New Guinea, I want to know what the Germans would be doing with their Navy there? In the early days of Federation, when we had far more money to spend on idealistic enterprises than we shall have in the future, we thought of settling the Northern Territory. The Argus newspaper, which I am unfortunately compelled to read every morning in order to learn the views of the other side, urged that we could not hope to hold Australia unless we develop that Territory, and that Ave must spend money upon it. We have done so. Ever since we took the Territory over we have had in connexion with it a growing deficit. What a bargain, the Assistant Minister for the Navy (Mr. Poynton) succeeded in making for South Australia with the Commonwealth ! No wonder he received a presentation from his admirers.

Mr Poynton:

-. - I have never had a presentation in connexion with the taking over of the Territory.

Mr HIGGS:

– I have a recollection of seeing an inkstand that was presented to the honorable member.

Mr Poynton:

– That was for my services in connexion with the construction of the Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta railway.

Mr HIGGS:

– That is another very expensive work that the honorable member succeeded in having carried out. I thought he received the testimonial in question for his work in unloading the Northern Territory on the Commonwealth. Whilst that Territory was under the control of South Australia, the deficit in respect of it amounted to £150,000 a year. Since then it has been growing, until in 1916-17 we showed a deficit of £702,000 in respect of it.

Mr Lynch:

– Does the honorable member think it cannot be properly developed? It is the back door of Australia.

Mr HIGGS:

– I would treat it largely as many a man is compelled to treat an area of three or four acres within easy distance of Melbourne on which he has built his home. He has a flower garden in front, and at the back he may have a small lawn, but he allows the hinterland, so to speak, to be undeveloped. And so until we have done a great deal more in the way of developing the south-eastern and south-western portions of this country, we must leave the Northern Territory practically undeveloped.

Mr Lynch:

– When the honorable member’s party was in power with a big majority, it attempted nothing in the direction of developing the Territory.

Mr HIGGS:

– We spent money there. When Senator Thomas was Minister for Home and Territories we established a number of experimental farms on the Daly River, but there was no market for the produce, and they were a failure. If we are prepared to have a deficit of £702,000 a year in connexion with our* administration of the Northern Territory, it would be far better to build a railway through it. Such a sum would pay interest on about £14,000,000, with which we could build the line. Our financial obligations, however, will be so large very shortly that we shall be unable to permit of such a deficit. Honorable members opposite talk about the Northern Territory being the back door of Australia.

Mr Spence:

– It is the front door.

Mr HIGGS:

– If . it were, Australia would never have been in the possession of the British, who followed the Portuguese and the French in the discovery of it. If it were as fertile as some honorable members, including the Assistant Minister for the Navy, have led this House to believe, the coloured races would have had it long ago.

Mr Poynton:

– The honorable member knows that the Barklay tablelands comprise the best grazing areas in Australia.

Mr HIGGS:

– The honorable member, in making that statement, is overlooking the claims of Queensland. The Barklay tableland resembles, to some extent, some of the Downs country of Queensland.

The honorable member for Illawarra (Mr. Lamond) has referred to a speech made by General Smuts at the Imperial Conference in 1916. What is his attitude to-day?

Mr Spence:

– There is no alteration in. it.

Mr HIGGS:

– Last month General Smuts, a member of the Imperial War Cabinet, said in effect, “We used to talk about the ‘ knock-out ‘ blow ; but Brother Bosch has come out and knocked that damnable nonsense out of us.”

Mr Poynton:

– If he comes here, he will knock this damnable nonsense out of the honorable member.

Mr HIGGS:

– Does the honorable gentleman suggest that I have ever said, as the Prime Minister has. that we should be able to bring the Germans to their knees, to plant the flag of Liberty in Berlin, and to crush Hohenzollernism ?

Mr Poynton:

– The honorable member has suggested that we should terrify Germany by peace negotiations.

Mr. HIGGS__ I have said that Britain and her Allies made a great mistake in refusing to discuss peace proposals when, in the words of Lloyd George, who was then Minister for Munitions, the Germans were “ squealing for peace.”

Mr. Spence__ They have never squealed for peace.

Mr Poynton:

– German writers ridicule and sneer at peace proposals.

Mr HIGGS:

- Mr. Lloyd George s-id they were doing so at that time, and many people believed in 1915, when

Russia was gaining territory from the Austrians and Germans, that Germany was beaten. Britain and her Allies thought that she was beaten in 1915, as no doubt she was when she asked for peace. The Allies, however, paid no attention to their request. Did the British Government reply to the note sent by the Pope urging peace? No.

Mr Spence:

– That was “ made in Germany.”

Mr Lynch:

– It was not.

Mr Bayley:

– Russia, to its cost, did reply.

Mr HIGGS:

– I shall have something to say as to the position of Russia. The Pope wrote in favour of peace; and in my opinion the Anglican Church, to which I belong, has made a great mistake in failing to speak in favour of peace. Some of its clergy have done so, but the main body has not.

Mr Pigott:

– The action of the pacifists at Home has prolonged the war.

Mr HIGGS:

– I think the clergy on all occasions ought to remember that they are the followers of the Prince of Peace, and should talk peace, regardless of the extent to which the people may indulge in fighting. According to a German military maxim, when an invader is driven back he is beaten ; and when the Germans were turned back from the Marne, it was then that the Allies should have discussed peace with them. The hon .’able member for Calare (Mr. Pigott) says that the pacifists in England have led to the prolongation of the war. My answer is that the speeches of the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) have helped to prolong it. He said that we were to crush Germany, to bring her to her knees, and to boycott her for all time. The Prussian jingoes carried these speeches to the pacifists and said, “ This is what Mr. Hughes, who is proclaimed by Mr. Lloyd George to be a flame-bearer and Empire saver, has to say, as to our fate.” The result was that the Germans continued to fight to the uttermost. They acted on the defensive, and. were thus able to make a stand with a limited number of men, whilst the forces taking the offensive against them had to be numerically very much stronger. They continued on the defensive for some time. During all this period the throne of the Czar was beginning to tumble.

Mr Poynton:

– It has tumbled.

Mr HIGGS:

– We have heard a good deal about the tyranny which the Germans are exercising in Russia. But I would remind the Committee that only the other day we were told by a high military expert in London that the Germans have excelled us in many ways. I ask honorable members whether they believe for a moment that the Germans are likely to antagonize the Russians? Certainly not. On the contrary, they will be devoting themselves to the very utmost, to making friends with the Russians.

Mr Poynton:

– Then why is there no peace there?

Mr HIGGS:

– For the simple reason that amongst the highest and the lowest classes alike “in Russia there are to be found a number of people who will do all that they can to make trouble.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. Atkinson). - The honorable member’s time has expired.

Mr MAHONY:
Dalley

.The most remarkable feature of this debate is that neither the Government nor their supporters deem it necessary to reply to the very serious statements which have been made by honorable members on this side of the chamber concerning the grave problems which confront us to-day. We have been told that the people of the Commonwealth are suffering acutely from the high cost of necessary commodities. But honorable members opposite vouchsafe no reply. Meat is at famineprices, so that the ordinary working man is absolutely unable to provide his family with a meat diet. The cost of clothing has advanced beyond all reason. Yet there is a conspiracy of silence on the part of honorable members opposite. Have they no reasons to advance for the present high cost of living?Cannot they devise some scheme for dealing with the profiteers? The price of boots is excessively high. Workers in receipt of a weekly wage of £3 are quite unable to provide the necessaries of life for their families. Yet, in spite of all these things, the Government have only one objective, namely, to close this Parliament, and thus shut the mouths of the people’s representatives.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– Stop talking and get to work ! That is our motto.

Mr MAHONY:

– I have heard the honorable member on many occasions talk with wonderful fluency. But now there is no talk from him, because he has been very effectively gagged by his own party.

The honorable member desires me to cease speaking in order that the Government may be enabled to close this Parliament, and to govern the Commonwealth by means of regulations issued under the War Precautions Act. But we owe a duty to the people, and that duty is to agitate until the Ministry are prepared to seriously tackle the weighty problems with which we are faced. Until they are prepared to tackle the high cost of living, I intend to seize every available opportunity to attack them. To-day responsible Government is a thing of the past. When Parliament gets into recess the Commonwealth will be governed merely by the dictum of two or three men who will sit in Cabinet and decide to issue certain regulations under the powers conferred upon them by the War Precautions Act. If Ministers had the interests of the people at heart they would keep Parliament at work.

Mr Poynton:

– We have been trying to do that for the past eighteen hours.

Mr MAHONY:

– The interjection of the Assistant Minister is a very clever attempt to sidestep the issue. Honorable members upon this side of the chamber are keeping Parliament open longer than honorable members opposite desire it to remain open.

Mr Poynton:

– Our anxiety is to work but the honorable member will not let us.

Mr MAHONY:

– The anxiety of the Assistant Minister is to close Parliament, and to allow the Commonwealth to be governed by regulations issued under the War Precautions Act.

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Does the honorable member object to all regulations under that Act?

Mr MAHONY:

– I object to any regulation which interferes with the civil rights of law-abiding citizens. The Government have no right to do by means of a regulation that which Parliament would not permit them to do by means of Statute. It must be remembered that the powers which we are now exercising under the War Precautions Act, in respect of trade and commerce, will disappear at the close of the war. We have entered into big commercial undertakings in respect of wheat, wool, metals, and shipping. There are a thousand and one important questions with which the Government are dealing by means of regulations. Have Ministers considered the position that will arise in connexion with these matters after the war? Surely the Government do not think it is their duty merely to sit in their offices without attempting to devise some means for meeting these great post-war problems. Yet they have enunciated no policy of their own, but have merely exhibited an anxiety to get into recess.

Mr Higgs:

– To hand over the business of the country to Boards.

Mr MAHONY:

– Exactly. We may presently expect to see the Commonwealth governed entirely by Boards. One of the most significant features in connexion with these Boards is that nearly all of them are composed of men who are directly interested in the industries which they control. Ought not the Government to take the preliminary steps necessary to enable Ministers adequately to discharge their functions at the close of the war when the powers under which they are now operating will be withdrawn from them? We have no word of policy from the Government upon this subject, which is of absorbing interest to the people of Australia. The Government are silent, and their followers are gagged. Now is the time-

Mr Poynton:

– To do everything to win the war.

Mr MAHONY:

– It must be apparent to every thoughtful man that if we do not take steps now we shall be in a chaotic commercial position at the conclusion of the war. This question is too serious to be treated lightly.

Mr Poynton:

– Make a few suggestions as to what we ought to do.

Mr MAHONY:

– Very well. I suggest that steps be taken to secure an extension of constitutional powers to deal with these questions.

Mr Poynton:

– We are doing it under the War Precautions Act.

Mr MAHONY:

– Yes, but destroying the principle of responsible government at the same time.

Mr Poynton:

– We are following a precedent established by Mr. Andrew Fisher, whom you supported.

Mr MAHONY:

– Evidently the Government intend to give no consideration to this phase of the question, for the Acting Minister for the Navy (Mr. Poynton) has just stated that the Government are using these powers to-day under the War Precautions Act7 Of course, they are. That is the point. But cannot the Minis ter see that the moment the war is over these powers will automatically be taken from the Government, and that, therefore, we should now seek authority for an extension of our constitutional powers, so that when peace comes we may be able to approach these problems and deal with them in a satisfactory manner?

Mr Poynton:

– Only a fortnight ago you asked me to use further powers under the War Precautions Act.

Mr MAHONY:

– The Minister must be suffering from a delusion.

Mr Poynton:

– It was to get better distribution of coal.

Mr MAHONY:

– I made no such representations to the Minister. I did not speak to him about that matter.

Mr Poynton:

– But your party did.

Mr MAHONY:

– Now, the Minister is sidestepping again. He said at first that I had approached him, and then qualified his statement by saying that members of my party had done so.

It would not be out of place now if I made some reference to the Government shipbuilding scheme, and especially to the IsherWood system. The other day the Minister made a statement that royalties were being paid to Isherwood by shipbuilders in Great Britain, the United States of America, Canada, Germany, Holland, Belgium, France, Spain, and Italy. I was curious, so I asked him if he could give the names of the firms and the amount of royalty paid, and in his reply he told me that the information was not in the possession of the Government, but that steps were being taken to obtain it-

Mr Poynton:

– You will have the particulars. I will cable for them.

Mr MAHONY:

– In view of the fact that the Minister did not have the information, by what right did he make that statement in the House ?

Mr Poynton:

– What I said was that in certain countries royalties were being paid, and I am now getting the information as to the details. That is what you asked for.

Mr HIGGS:
Capricornia

– When I was interrupted earlier in the debate I was making some remarks about the condition of Russia, and was pointing out to honorable members that, as in the case of the French Revolution, which the aristocrats and members of the privileged classes endeavoured to check, so if any honorable members were in Russia to-day they would, I feel sure, find that the aristocrats and privileged classes of that country are doing their level best to make a failure of the Bolshevik revolution. The Minister controlling Price Fixing (Mr. Greene), who has not yet been able to deal with meat, seems to be sometimes a little worried over the duties cast upon him, and I feel sure that if he were in Russia to-day he would have a great deal of sympathy for the Bolsheviki. If in his younger days he had read Step.niak’s Underground Russia and Tolstoy’s writings, he would have learned that so great have been the sufferings of the masses in Russia that revolution was inevitable. In view of this known condition of things in Russia, one can the more readily believe the statement that the Czar and those about him allowed Russia to enter this war because of the strikes that were threatened and were taking place in Petrograd in July, 1914, as the result of the growing social unrest in that country.

Mr Poynton:

– Does not that remark apply to Germany too?

Mr Hector Lamond:

– To a greater degree than in Russia.

Mr HIGGS:

– There is a great difference between the two countries. Only the other day I came across some extracts which I had made from newspapers twenty-five years ago pointing out that the food adulteration laws in Germany were then stricter than in any other part of the world, and that effective labour protection laws had been enacted. Honorable members will perhaps remember that Bismarck, by the adoption of principles advocated by Ferdinand Lassalle, initiated a programme which cut the ground to a great extent from under the feet of the Socialists, so that there has always been a considerable difference between Russia and Germany. According to the last Statesman’s Year-Book, seventy out of every one hundred people in Russia are unable to read, whereas in Germany it was said that, prior to the war, more Shakespearean plays were being produced than in any other part of the world. We know quite well that her educational system is most complete, and that it has been responsible for her remarkable progress.

Mr Considine:

– What did the House of Commons Committee that went over to investigate have to say on this subject?

Mr HIGGS:

– My impression is that the report by the House of Commons Committee referred to was suppressed.

Mr Poynton:

– And the Germans went over to England in 1911 to spy out the situation.

Mr HIGGS:

– There were a number of Germans in England in 1911, and I think a number of the members of the House of Commons also visited Germany at about the same time; because I understand that, while war was regarded as being inevitable, an effort was being made to prevent it. It is no use shutting our eyes to the factors which have been responsible for the extraordinary development of Germany. We shall have to open our eyes, and follow the advice given by Sir Henry Parkes, who said, on one occasion, he always tried to learn from his enemies.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– Do you seriously suggest that Russia wanted this war ?

Mr HIGGS:

– I am prepared to believe that the Czar and those about him allowed Russia to enter this’ war in order to divide the Democracy in just the same way that Napoleon ITI. went to war for the purpose of dividing the masses of the people. The greatest and most united political party that has been known in Australia was shattered by the war into a thousand fragments. That is always the effect of war. The intelligent and yet unintelligent rulers” of Russia thought that if they could bring about a war, they might stave off the revolution, as in 1905 they staved off a revolution by turning the palace guns on the populace on Red Sunday. Honorable members appear to think that we who advocate peace by negotiation want the peace that Russia, Roumania, and Servia have got. Not at all. Those are practically conquered countries. Not one member opposite thinks that Germany will ever be in a position to beat the Allies, or to take Australia.

I should like to have a quorum to hear what I have to say on the subject of the policy for the Government. - [Quorum formed.] - In Victoria as much as £2(5 per acre is being paid for land on which returned soldiers are to be settled.

Mr Poynton:

– Land might be cheaper at that price than other land at £2 per acre. Some land in the Camperdown district is cheap at £40 an acre.

Mr HIGGS:

– The honorable member is speaking of land in the settled districts. Some of the land of which I speak is not cleared, and may cost £5 an acre to clear. We are going to spend, perhaps, millions in buying land for soldier settlers, many of whom will have had no knowledge of agricultural pursuits. Unless the Government provides for the distribution of the produce of these settlers, their lot will he a very unhappy one. What is the cause of the exodus from country districts to the town? It is that, as a rule, the’ man on the land has an extremely hard time. What recommends the country life is the freedom that it gives. Many, however, cannot resist the temptation of the city’s bustle and excitement. More than anything else the opportunities for education draw people to the cities. We are all moved more or less by the same motives, and the great desire of the modern parent is to give his children th» best possible education. Farmers live ofttimes remote from schools and churches, and naturally, if they see the chance, are glad to get to the cities to educate their families. Now, the Commonwealth has the right to impose land taxation.

Mr Gregory:

– Would the honorably member tax men off the land?

Mr HIGGS:

– That is not taking place in Queensland under Labour rule. Very few farmers there pay much in land tax. I consider that those who have been brought up in the country are privileged. City life is not healthy for many young persons. It is the country districts which, to a large extent, replenish the supply of brains to the city. Those in the country breathe pure air ; they have to work hard, and they are exempt from the temptations f the city. I have the happiest recollections of the decade that I passed at Orange, when between the ages of ten and twenty. We should apply our power to tax to compel those who own unused land along the railway lines to put it into use. If it is agricultural land they should be required to cultivate it, and if pastoral land, to put stock on it. We should exercise pressure by increasing the taxation on unused land. Travelling by train from Melbourne to Rockhampton one passes through millions of acres that are uncultivated, and on which there is not a hoof. The lanS is being held until seme one will offer the person who originally took it up 5 per cent, on his investment. The public debt of the country is growing, but before we can establish a large and prosperous farming class in the country, we must provide railways and good roads, and thus encourage production. I think, too, that we should continue our shipping enterprise. Some honorable members opposite believe in a State line of steamers, but the large capitalists supporting the Government, and the directors of the private shipping companies, will not continue their support of the Win-the-war party if it proposes to keep the Commonwealth steamers running after the war. We must see, however, that the farmers who wish to send produce to London and elsewhere can get the necessary refrigerated space without having to apply for if to some monopolist. Unless we adopt some comprehensive scheme for encouraging rural industry, the millions that we are to spend on repatriation will be wasted. Were the Postmaster-General present, I would draw attention to the need for proper motor vehicles for the transport of produce and the reduction of expenses.

I desire now to draw attention to what was a great mistake on the part of Those responsible. I believe it was the Minister for Defence who was really to blame for the suppression of the news concerning the torpedoing of two ships of the Commonwealth fleet. I refer to the Australdale and the Australbush. It is said that the news was known in Melbourne several months before the facts were made public. The Minister for Defence was informed of the circumstances by the manager of the Commonwealth line of steamers, and Senator Pearce has stated that he gave what details he had to the Acting Minister for the Navy, and that it was for Mr. Poynton to make the news public when and as he thought fit. What was the reason for the suppression of the information ?

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Atkinson:

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

Mr BRENNAN:
Batman

. -I desire to supplement one or two observations which honorable members were good enough te hear from me earlier ia the morning. It is in regard to certain uncompleted matter which I was quoting, namely, a memorandum by representative

Italian citizens, and prepared and indorsed by a legal authority of reputation in Italy with respect to the position of the Italian Consul here. The document proceeds: -

There seems no doubt, and no denial of the Federal authority can destroy the fact, that telegrams and private letters of Italians were and are, banned to Consul Eles.

Telegrams of one Italian citizen in Australia were loudly read in the private room of Consul Eles at the Consulate, on the 22nd of April - so loudly, indeed, that some Italians waiting in the next room to be admitted to his presence heard all the contents. Private correspondence of Italians is under censorship of the Consul. Directly or indirectly, it is the same thing, because some of such letters are handed to and read by some person who is very intimately connected with the Consul.

From his arrival in Australia, Consul Eles created a marked division between the Italian residents with enmities that never before existed among them. He offends the poorest and least-informed Italians, and intrudes unduly in their private business.

This call to arms is intended for all Italians in Australia as a uniform body under the control of an unique administrative authority, namely, the Consul at Melbourne. All the other representatives in the various State capitals are only honorary consular agents. That “the call is intended for all the Italians resident in Australia, with no distinction between the various States, is proved by the Consul’s manifesto itself. Consequently, in a matter concerning in the same degree all the subjects within his province, the Consul of Italy should adopt a uniform application of principle with no regard to local divisions. The consequences of purely local action are very evident.

Operations of the Consulate for the call started about the 20th January, so that up to date there are a. little more than four months’ work to deal with the Italian residents in Victoria, South Australia, and Broken Hill, with a total of 750 men, of whom some 200 have sailed. Now, as in New South Wales there are, perhaps, 600 Italians; in Queensland, 1,700; and, in Western Australia, 2,000, twelve or fourteen months will be necessary to finish it. And, should the war, as we hope, be over in these twelve to fourteen months, what object can there be in this objectionable proceeding ?

The Federal authorities should order Consul Eles to finish the medical examination and the enrolment of all eligibles in Australia before sending any other contingent abroad, and afterward to follow the rules of justice, law, and equity, which are properly applicable to every people, including the people of Italy.

That concludes the manifesto, which is temperately worded, and yet is strongly reasoned, on the pant of men, who, with their knowledge of Italian law, and of what has taken place among their fellowcountrymen, have delivered this strong in dictment. Their accusations are levelled against a gentleman who - they feel - no longer fairly represents them here, and in regard to whom they desire to make representations to their own Government. However, the Commonwealth Government are shielding and protecting the official in question from the criticism of his own countrymen.

I now come to a matter which is of profound interest in connexion with the war. I desire to bring forward certain facts, because, although the war is raging apparently at its very zenith, we do not know the day on which lt may come to an end. When that does occur we should have the minds of the people informed of most of the facts which are material in appraising the causes of the war. We require to illuminate the intelligence of our people with those wise counsels offorbearance and good sense which may enable them to grasp ihe fir3t opportunity of entering into negotiations for peace, thus facilitating the end of this colossal tragedy. I speak, as I have often spoken, with a confident belief that nothing makes more strongly for perpetual peace than the clear and courageous examination of our own acts and . motives. I refer to the growth of materialism and militarism in the minds of the public. I believe that the curse of militarism, developing with special rapidity in the Prussian mind, has grown also in a marked degree in the minds of a section of the British people. I draw no great fundamental dictinction between the junkers of Prussia and the junkers of any other country, including our own. It is a curious thing that for many years after Waterloo there was no strong Imperialistic or militaristic feeling in Great Britain. J. Bruce Glasier, an Englishman deeply attached to his own country, writes -

Lord Beaconsfield, speaking at Manchester in 1872, referred to foreign affairs in apologetic terms. “ The very phrase ‘ foreign affairs,’ “ he said, “ makes an Englishman convinced that I am about to treat of subjects in which he has no concern,” and he went on to excuse his dealing with those questions on the ground that upon them depended “ the increase or reduction of taxation, the encouragement or embarrassment of industry.” Mr. Gladstone was almost as frigid towards military sentiment as was Quaker John Bright, and profoundly distrusted foreign politics. Speaking at West Calder( 1879), he said: “Pericles, the great

Athenian statesman, said, with regard to women, their greatest merit was never to be heard of. Now, what Pericles untruly said of women, I am very much disposed to say of foreign affairs - their greatest merit would bo never to be heard of.” Mr. Chamberlain, in his Radical Programme of 1885, makes no allusion whatever to Imperial affairs, or to the Army or Navy; and so late as 1891, the Liberal party, in its famous Newcastle programme, consisting of twenty-four planks, has not a single reference to military or Imperial policy. Military questions had, in fact, ceased, as Buckle said, to interest the British public. The Crimean War aroused patriotic feeling, chiefly as a great spectacular event, while the Afghan, Abyssinian, Gold Coast, Zulu, and Egyptian campaigns were looked upon as little more than glorified police affrays.

But a change was looming on the horizon. The closing years of the nineteenth century saw the commercial classes beginning to raise their eyes with strange thoughts across the seas. Foreign countries, notably America and Germany, had, in the course of a generation, leapt forward as keen industrial rivals to Great Britain in the world’s markets, and the pinch of competition had begun to tell on the profits and temper of British capitalists. In a dull way it was dawning on them that Britain’s commercial supremacy was not, perhaps, after all, divinely appointed; and that if Britain wished to hold the first, or even the second or third place, she would have to work hard, and, perhaps, fight hard for it. They bethought them of the colonies - of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa, - now grown into full nationhood and virtual independence, and the hope flashed upon them of forming an allBritish combination against foreign competition for the profits of the world’s market. And lo, suddenly the star of the new British Imperialism burst into the sky, and with it its dark companion, the new British Militarism.”

Here was the opportunity for men of fleshly instincts and fatal and facile capacity for idealizing the attributes of physical strength and spurious courage. Here was an open door for men of third class moral calibre like Rudyard Kipling, of whom Mr. Glasier says he “ found himself magically transported into the blaze of London fame, and laurelled as the authentic singer of Britain’s new Imperial day.”

Then it was that Mr. Cecil Rhodes, flattering the imagination of the junkers and vaulting Imperialists of our own country, to quote Mr. Glasier again - “ Miraculously emerged from his diamond booth* in South Africa as the new man of destiny, plotting out the Empire at one end of the world in telepathic accord with Mr. Joseph Chamberlain, of the British Colonial Office, at the other. The fates awoke and rubbed their eyes. History, opening a fresh scroll, headed her new- chapters : “ The Cape to Cairo Railway, The Jamieson Raid on the Transvaal, and tlie British War against the South African Republics.”

Mr. Glasier’s opinion of that war may well stand comparison with that of Professor Cramb, an “ educated “ Imperialist -

Of that war - a war in which Great Britain treated as “ a scrap of paper “ her conventions with the Boer Government, wrested from them their independence, introduced Chinese slave labour under the newly-hoisted British flag, and brought the anger of every self-governing nation in the world against our country, all in the interests of predatory capitalism- of that war of pure aggression, the late Professor Cramb, an enthusiastic apostle of militarism and Imperialism, says: - “ It was the first event or series of events upon a great scale, the genius of which lies in this force named Imperialism. It is the first conspicuous expression of this ideal in the world of action - of heroic action which always implies heroic suffering. No other war in our history is in its origin and aims so evidently the realization, so exclusively the result, of this Imperial ideal. … It is a war between two ideals, between the two principles that strike deep into the life history of modern States.”

Such, then, was the “ first event,” the “ first conspicuous expression” of the new Imperialist ideal and its twin brother, the new militarism, in action. If, as a famous thinker tells us, we can only understand the real character of movements by ascertaining their origin, by their origin let the new Imperialism and the new militarism be judged…..

Mr. Glasier rubs it in ;

Flagrantly as Christian nations have set at naught the pacifist obligations of their creed, Christian teachers have hitherto generally acknowledged that war is accursed, and that peace and goodwill are blessed of God. It was evident also that, with the growing enlightenment of the people, and the spread of Democracy and social enthusiasm in recent times, the feeling of repugnance to war and brutal conflict of all kinds was taking a deep hold on the nation. It was clearly impossible to fasten the yoke of militarism on the nation, so long as the people were “ steeped in the superstition and maudliny sentimentality of peace.” It was necessary to overthrow the’ “ base ideals “ of peace, and exalt the “ greatness “ and “ glory “ of war.

And so it came to pass. One after another of war apologists arose in quick succession - professors, preachers, and politicians, who boldly challenged the old-fashioned ideas that “ might is not right,” that “ force is no remedy,” that “war is inhuman, and ought to be abolished.” Darwinism, and the Old Testament were both appealed to, and science and religion were mutually reconciled on this question, at least.

In this pamphlet we have also the statement that -

It is to an English, not a German, writer that we owe the first explicit enunciation in modern form of the doctrine that militarism is the noblest expression of human energy, and that war is the highest means of social progress. The Philosophy of War, by James Ham, was published in 1877.. while as yet Treitschke was as, unknown in Germany as he was in England before the outbreak of the present war, and more than thirty years in advance of Bernardi’s Germany and. Vie Next War. . . . “ As for conscription,” he says, “ if England cannot command voluntary soldiers enough to defend her homes and maintain her Empire, the sooner we give up the role of a powerful nation the better. A nation that cannot find voluntary soldiers of her own stock deserves to be conquered by any other who can.”

Mr. Norman Angell in The GreatIllusion and Mr. J. A. Hobson in bis Imperialism: A Study pilloried a number of utterances by recent English and American apologists for war, in which slaughter and conquest are extolled as the supremest manifestation of the spiritual and material energy of mankind. To quote again from Professor Cramb -

In war and the right of war man has a possession which he values above religion, above industry, and above social comfort; in war man values the power which it affords to life of rising above life, the power which the spirit of man possesses to pursue the ideal. Amongst the Powers and States of the Continent and of~the world that (the strife from a high to an even higher reality) seems Germany’s part at the present hour.

And here let me say with regard to Germany that of all England’s enemies she is by far the greatest, and by “greatness” I mean not merely magnitude, not her millions of soldiers, her millions of inhabitants, I mean her grandeur of soul. She is the greatest and most heroic enemy - if she is our enemy - that England in the thousand years of her history has ever confronted.

Mr Webster:

– Does the honorable member indorse that statement?

Mr BRENNAN:

– From the point of view of which he, as a militarist, speaks, absolutely; from my point of view, as an anti-militarist, absolutely no. Huxley and Darwin, as a cultured friend reminded me a day or two ago, would turn in their graves if they found their views on ethics and evolution quoted with approval by the vain materialists and narrow militarists of our day. The point I am making is that the junkers have no reason to complain whether they be in our country or in any other. I and those who think with me have every reason to complain that men of the type of a Cramb, or, worse still, a Kipling, have contributed their share to that mental . condition which brought this war about. To continue to quote from this pamphlet -

Professor Karl Pearson speaks from a “ scientific stand-point “ in a similar strain : It is to the real interests of a vigorous race to be kept up to a high pitch of external efficiency by contest, chiefly by way of war with inferior races and with equal races, by a struggle for trade routes and the sources of raw supply. This is the national history view of mankind, and I don’t think you can, in its main features, subvert it.

Professor W. Ridgeway, Professor of Archaeology and Classics, Cambridge, is no less Prussian in his point of view. He says -

A modern world, filled only with Democratic States, would be a stagnant pool in some shady spot in which no higher forms could live, but overflowing with all the baser sorts of life. In a word, a perfect peace humanity would perish from its own physical and moral corruption.

Does the Postmaster-General agree with that?

Mr Webster:

– I do not; the honorable member does.

Mr BRENNAN:

– The honorable member knows that I do not. Mr. E. B. Osborn, a man of some standing in Great Britain, has written -

That is why war, for war’s sake, appeals to so many. It is a gymnasium of the naked soul, in which virtue .renews her hardihood after the corroding comfort of a long period of peace. War has always been, and still is the ultimate secret of progress throughout the demesnes of life….. But for war millions of battles, extending over millions of years, we anight even now be nothing but mud fish, peacefully reposing in the secular slime.

Theodore Roosevelt, that arch apostle of the cruel and crude policy of force, upon which my honorable friends opposite so stoutly rely, has said -

We must play a great part in the world, and perform those deeds of blood and valour which, above everything else, bring national renown. By war alone can we acquire those virile Qualities necessary to win in the stern strife of actual life. In this, world the nation that is trained to a career of unwarlike and isolated ease is bound to go- down in the end before other nations which have not lost the manly and adventurous qualities.

In an. article in the Nineteenth Century and After, Mr. Harold Fraser Wyatt, the founder and honorary secretary of the Imperial Maritime League, wrote -

Victory is the result of efficiency, and that efficiency is the result, of a spiritual quality. And the efficiency or inefficiency of its armaments is the determining factor in a nation’s success or of a nation’s failure, at that culminating moment of long processes of commercial and diplomatic rivalry - the moment of war.

He emulates the bishops in the religious fervour with which he contemplates the results of collective homicide as an evidence of the Divine purpose in human society -

The Lord of Hosts has made righteousness the path of victory. In the crash of conflict, in the horrors of the battlefields piled with the dying, the dead, and the wounded, a _ vast ethical purpose prevails. In the great majority of instances which determine general _ results the issue of war has made for the ethical advantage of mankind. It must be so; it could not be otherwise, because ethical quality has tended always to produce military efficiency.

All tEese Pagan doctrines, which we have attributed solely to the enemy, have been promulgated by our own people, as well as by the enemy. Let us bare our souls and confess the truth, realizing that after this war of artificial construction there will follow a war of ideals in which will be involved much more enduring issues. Mr. Wyatt went on to say that -

War remains the means by which, as between nations or races, the universal law,- that the higher shall supersede the lower, continues to work. From Great Britain and from the United States, whence the military spirit is passing away, this bleat of feebleness is now proceeding. But it is not heard among the two most energetic and efficient peoples now upon earth. It is not heard in Germany, and it 1b not heard in Japan. The wolf who has lost hig teeth does not wish to fight, but the wolves whose jaws are still strong do not share Ms pious desire.

According to this philosopher, the extent to which we departed, then, from Prussian ideals was the measure of our decay and retrogression. Mr. Austin Harrison, who is said to have written “ the best book about, the war,” and who is alleged to be one of the soundest English minds of our time, writes -

I do not myself understand our theoretical craze for no war, which would mean a constipated civilization. . . . All great creative movements have flourished in. or sprung from, warlike conditions. Even the power of the churches waned the moment they ceased to be State fighting institutions. The idea that, as the result of this war, Europe is going to develop into an abode of Arcady, where men no longer fight, or learn to fight, or want to fight, while lawyers and politicians rule over us with unctuous infallibility, and there is no longer need for a stout heart and a “ dripping sword “ - this is one of the drollest views ever kibbled for the Democratic table. . . . The spirit of fighting is directly associated with the sex instinct. Atrophy of the one inevitably brings about atrophy of the other. . . To talk of the abolition of war is to conceive of life without strife, which is its inherent reason and beauty.

These quotations make Nietzsche and Treitschke appear mere plagiarists.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Atkinson:

– The honorable member’s time has expired.

Mr NICHOLLS:
Macquarie

– I desire to enter my .protest against the action of the Government in refusing honorable members the freedom of speech to which they are entitled. I understood, when I- was returned to Parliament, that every facility would be afforded me to voice any grievances that required to be ventilated. I find, however, that the Government propose, within the next few hours, to shut down Parliament, so that, for the next two or three “months, we shall have no opportunity to give expression to our views in this House. There was never a time in our history when a greater responsibility rested upon the Parliament and the Government of Australia; and Parliament might wisely occupy the whole of its time in attending to the many interests of the Commonwealth that need to be conserved. During the coming recess the affairs of the Commonwealth will, no doubt, be conducted largely under the War Precautions Act. I enter my emphatic protest against the doors of Parliament being closed by any Government during the currency of this war.

The farmers of New South Wales labour under a serious grievance, which could be rectified by this Parliament. The State Government recently offered to guarantee them 4s. per bushel for all wheat produced there ;” but the Federal Government is disputing the matter, and offers the farmers something in the vicinity of 3s. lOd. per bushel. The primary producer and the industrialist are equally entitled to the full product of their labour, and I do not think that a return of 3s. lOd. per bushel would be sufficient to enable our farmers to produce wheat at a profit. The present Government have deliberately determined, apparently, not to assist the farming community. In Tuesday’s issue of tie Sydney Daily Telegraph the following statement appeared -

It is difficult to understand what is the object of the Federal Government in placing obstacles in the way of the State Government in giving essential assistance to wheat production. Whatever may be the position in other States, some such step as that taken to increase the amount of the payment upon de- livery was necessary if the area under wheat in New South Wales was not further to diminish. As it was, wheat production was affected adversely because such a step was not taken earlier. Owing to the bad times experienced by the majority of growers, particularly the small men, during the last three years, the. wheat position has become most serious. It would seem doubtful if this was fully recognised by the Federal Government. Its present action indicates failure to realize the position in this State, or why is the present attitude taken up ? Why should the Federal Government object to the Government of this State endeavouring to maintain the stability of one of our most important industries, when such a step can mean nothing but good for the Commonwealth? Whether other States consider it necessary or not to follow the example set by this State is surely a matter to be settled between the wheat-growers and the Governments of such States individually. But the Government of New South Wales has taken the only conceivable stand that could be taken. Even if its action in giving an additional guarantee had not been a wise step from the stand-point of preserving the industry, a pledge is a pledge, and must be honorably observed.

That is one thing which the Government have not done. They have not respected their pledges.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– How much wheat is stored in Australia?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I will come to that matter directly.

Surely this fact cannot be ignored by the Federal Government, and if it persists in forcing the issue it is difficult to see how it can escape responsibility for any friction that might result. The position at present is a complicated and delicate one, but, firstly, there should be realization of the absolute need for harmony and co-operation in this period of national stress; and, secondly, that the interests of the wheat-growers should not be penalized in any dispute between the Governments concerned.

I am of opinion that the wheat-growers should not be penalized because friction exists between two Governments. If the New South Wales Government can guarantee the grower 4s. a bushel upon all wheat produced within that State, the Commonwealth ought to guarantee either that amount or, say, 4s. 2d. or 4s. 3d. per bushel upon all wheat produced within Australia. But there seems to be something radically wrong in the administration of the Wheat Pool throughout the length and breadth of the Commonwealth, because the South Australian Wheat Commission, some time ago, when dealing with the question of the amounts paid to the agents of that Pool, brought to light some of the most astounding statements which could possibly be published. Here is one of the statements made by the Commission -

The South Australian Wheat Commission has been the means of bringing to light some illuminating figures concerning the actual sums paid during the past three years to the Wheat Pool agents. The figures relate to the payments in only one State - South Australia - but they cover firms who operate in several States, and they are so large as to suggest the necessity for further analysis to show - (1) how much of the money paid represents commission netted by the agents, and (2) how much represents payments by the agents for work performed in receiving, stacking, and forwarding wheat to seaboard. From the forwarding to the Wheat Pool to 30th April, 1918, the agents in South Australia were paid over £1,000,000, according to the evidence of Mr. G. G. Nicholls, the manager for the Pool in the State named, given in Adelaide on Monday last. In 1915-16, £445,274 was paid; in 1916-17, £490,788; and in 1917-18, £151,223; making the total for the three seasons £1,087,285.

Mr Gregory:

– From what is the honorable member quoting?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– From the Melbourne Age - quite a reliable journal from the honorable member’s stand-point - of 23rd April or 23rd May of this year. The article continues -

The principal amounts paid to agents participating in the distribution were as follow: -

Mr Gregory:

– Those are all handling charges.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– The whole of them are not handling charges.

Mr Gregory:

– The items which the honorablemember has just mentioned are handling charges.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Is the honorable member sure of it ?

Mr Gregory:

– Decidedly.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Very well. I shall deal with that matter presently. Dalgety and Company do not handle cargo for the exact amount which they receive by way of handling charges.

Mr Livingston:

– The honorable member does not handle the newspaper that he is now handling for nothing. Further, he is not in order in doing what he is doing.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Then the honorable member should put me in order.

Mr Livingston:

– I would put the honorable memberon order very quickly if I were in the Chair.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I entertain a very grave doubt as to whether the honorable member could put me in order, even if he were in the Chair.

Mr Livingston:

– If I were not a better man than the honorable member I would shut up.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Then I think it would be a case of shutting up with the honorable member. The list continues -

Mr Livingston:

– The honorable member knows that he is quoting figures wrongly, and he is quoting them for a purpose.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– The figures are absolutely correct, and the honorable member may come over here and verify them.

Mr Livingston:

– The honorable member knows that they represent handling charges. But he wishes his statement to go out to the country.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– If the honorable member thinks I am reading incorrect figures, why does he not come here and verify them?

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

– What is the honorable member setting out to prove?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I stated at the commencement that I proposed to quote the figures that have been published in the press. I take it that those figuresare correct.

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

– The honorable member knows that the greater portion of those amounts went in wages.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Oh, no.

Perhaps the exampleof the South Australian Wheat Commission may induce the Federal Government to reveal the payments in Victoria and New South Wales, with an explanatory report analyzing the payments, so as to indicate the proportion of these huge commissions retained by the firms interested, when all legitimate outgoings in wages, plant, &c, have been deducted.

I do not say that the whole of these amounts have been paid in commission for the stacking and handling of that wheat. A large portion of it has been spent in wages and for stacking the grain. But I believe that a huge sum, which has been paid to agents representing the Wheat Pool has been paid under false pretences. In New South Wales, at the present time, there are agents operating in this industry who, before the establishment of the Wheat Pool, were not in a position to purchase anything. But, since then, they have accumulated huge farms.

Mr Webster:

– Does the honorable member say that they have accumulated those farms out of the Wheat Pool money ?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I do not say that they have accumulated them out of the Wheat Pool money, but I do say that, prior to the establishment of the Pool, they were not in a position even to meet heir liabilities. Yet, after they had had twelve or eighteen months’ access to the Pool, they were able to accumulate large areas of land-

Mr Gregory:

– Who are they?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I refer to a firm in Mudgee, New South Wales. It is only within the past five years that that firm has commenced to accumulate land.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– The Wheat Pool has not been in existence for five rears.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– It has been in sxistence for three years.

Mr Webster:

– The honorable member does not know what he is talking about.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I will deal with be Postmaster-General directly. I did not infer that there was corruption in connexion with the agents of the Wheat Pool. But an investigation of the amounts received by persons acting on behalf of the Wheat Pool should most certainly be made.

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

– The largest figures quoted by the honorable member were figures in relation to the farmers themselves.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– The Farmers Union did receive the chief amount, and it is only reasonable to expect that, in South Australia, it would control the greatest quantity of wheat. However, I have given the figures, and the honorable member is at perfect liberty to refute them if he is in a position to do so. I wish to make the case for the farmers as strong as I can, but I cannot do so if honorable members continually interrupt me. I am particularly interested in the man on the land, and I desire to see his interests protected to the fullest extent. At the present moment those interests are not being protected by the Government. Nor are they being protected by agents operating on behalf of the Wheat Pool.

Mr LYNCH:

– I think that the honorable member is wrong in saying that a firm in Mudgee has made money out of it.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I did not even infer that they had made money out of the Wheat Pool. What I did say was that, previous to the Wheat Pool coming into operation, he had not accumulated any land.

Mr LYNCH:

– We took his evidence upon oath before a Royal Commission, and he was entirely opposed to Government intervention.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– To-day he controls tens of thousands of acres of wheat land within the Mudgee district. He was operating a flour mill at that particular time, and it is only fair that he should expect to reap some profit out of the work performed by him. However, I do not. want to discuss the business of this firm. I want to discuss the position of the farmers.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Atkinson:

– The honorable member’s time has expired.

Dr MALONEY:
Melbourne

– I am somewhat surprised that some of the arguments used by honorable members on this side of the House have not been replied to by supporters of the Government. When I was interrupted last night I was alluding to the Age newspaper, which, in its issue of 31st May, contained, I think, one of the strongest indictments it has ever made against any Government or party. Last night when I was addressing a large public meeting, comprising a number of working women folk, I referred to the fact that Parliament was about to go into recess, and when I asked them if they had the power of recall would they drag out the members and make them face the electors, they declared emphatically in the affirmative. If the people had the power of recall no member of this House would dare to support the Government in their proposal to get into recess. The Age leading article stated -

  1. . a settled determination on the part of Ministers to assist the wealthiest class in sweating extortionate profits out of the war. The facts are flagrant - too flagrant to pass from any mind capable of feeling abhorrence -for that loathsome brand of patriotism which cloaks a policy of private greed and cruelty with a fair national pretence.

In its long history of criticism of Governments the Age has never used stronger language than this.

Mr Webster:

– But the Age has said the same things about your party, you know.

Dr MALONEY:

– I am aware that the Age has said many things about me and my party, but in those circumstances I have always considered the Age to be wrong. In the present instance I believe that paper to be right, and Victorian members who are supporting the Government know that if their present policy is continued their seats are doomed. The Age continues -

The Inter-State Commission was deputed to make an investigation. It came to the conclusion that the prices were reasonable, and the Government promptly adopted the recommendation, to which the people submitted as to an authoritative decision. A little later, th« Commission was asked to ‘make an inquiry in respect to the abnormal cost of meat. After a patient examination it showed that the prices were far too high, and it recommended in this case also that they be fixed according to the London parity; in other words, that tie Australian people be supplied at the same prices as are being received for meat that is exported.

It is an infamy to say that the people of Australia should be compelled to pay more than the export parity for meat.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– But it is exported for our soldiers.

Dr MALONEY:

– Yes ; but what did the Government do to the man who sold rotten meat to our troops - the man whom the Minister for the Navy (Mr. Joseph Cook) endeavoured to shelter by suggesting that the diseased livers came from the Melbourne Municipal Abattoirs, which, it has been proved, has never allowed any bullocks’ livers to leave its establishment except for dogs’ meat? Here is a great testimonial for the Liberal party! Angliss fined eighteen or nineteen times for having sold adulte-rated sausage meat, or other offences against the law. Another paragraph from the Age leading article states -

While some men are making immense sums out of the industry, there is evidence of meat being denied to children because of its high price, with probably serious effects to their physique, and that there is world-wide precedent for national action. Surely that is strong enough. Our children should be able to get good and wholesome food. Another paragraph in the Age stated -

The Government were asked in Parliament whether they intended to take action. The answer was delightfully political, and it ought not to be forgotten. The Government did not consider, said the Minister, that the recommendation “was capable of practical operation.”

Of course it is never practical to do anything that may injure the rich; but we know quite well that if the people had the power to drag honorable members back, which I venture to prophesy they will have before long, honorable members on the other side, and perhaps some on this side, would be made to “ sit up.” The Age stated further -

The income from stock during the two fat years of 1918-17 - from beef, mutton, lamb, and wool - was £27,000,000 more than in 1913. The Commission holds that the determining factor is, What price will pay the producer? Broadly, it says, the present prices for meat are 100 per cent, higher in the case of beef and mutton (wholesale) than is the year’ before £he war, though the country contains as many cattle and more sheep.

I cannot understand how any one can logically object to the course recommended by the Commission. Australia does not depend upon her herds, her coal, wool, or minerals. This country depends for its greatness upon its people, the majority of whom are workers, and I am speaking on their behalf now when I am protesting against thea endeavour of the

Government to get into recess. This Parliament is farthest from the seat of war, where murder is rampant, and where so many lives are being lost every day, and it is going into recess because the Government will not provide, honorable member^ with work to do. This Government will be judged by their actions, and they are going into recess so that the country may be ruled under the War Precautions Act. That is what it means. During the course of the debate an honorable member in khaki said that the civil power should always be dominant. Honorable members will perhaps remember that I always questioned Mr. Fisher on this point whenever any measure was brought in, and if there was any doubt about the civil power not being dominant I did not hesitate to secure an amendment of the measure in order to bring it into line with what I consider to be the true principles of Democracy. I regret that that course had been departed from, because although the War Precautions Regulations are not called laws, they are in effect laws, as under them citizens may be fined or imprisoned without any recourse to those legal protections of our liberties which are provided in our Constitution. On one occasion when I refused to accept the word of the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes), he asked angrily, “Why will you not take my word? I am the AttorneyGeneral, and in charge of the Bill.” I replied that I would not take his word on anything, and repeated what I had said in Caucus - that I did not trust him. His sinuous mind will bring him to a bad end. He came to an executive of which I was vice-president, and said to us, “ Gentlemen, we wish you to join with those of .New South Wales and Queensland, who have just passed a resolution promising immunity from opposition at the coming election to any Liberal candidate who will support the Watson Government against the ‘ Reidites ‘ and the Cookites.’ “ The deputation which came to us consisted of Mr. Fisher, Mr. Hughes, Senator McGregor, and Mr. Batchelor. We thought the proposition a fair one, and passed the resolution asked for.

Mr Poynton:

– The honorable member can safely make these statements ; two of the gentlemen he has named being dead, and the other two absent from Australia.

Dr MALONEY:

– Two of them are alive. I speak as if in the presence of my Maker, and can prove what I say by minutes of the proceedings. Mr. Hughes then went to Sydney, and told them there that Victoria had passed the resolution that I speak of, and asked them to do the same. He did not say that we had been induced to pass it by false pretences. The Sydney executive, being better Democrats, or knowing him better than we did, refused to do what he asked. Ten days later we found that we had been lied to and deceived, and Mr. Fisher, so long as he remained in this Parliament, was ashamed of the use that had been made of him. We resigned as a protest against what had been done, but we kept silence, and the matter was not allowed to get into the press.

Mr Poynton:

– Yet the honorable member continued for ye’ars to follow Mr. Hughes.

Dr MALONEY:

– And why not? Then there was the unfortunate moneylending transaction in Perth. Does the honorable member approve of that? There are about ten other dirty cases against the Prime Minister.

Mr. Sydney Kidman, the great cattle owner and grazier, is reported to have said, “ I am satisfied to sell my cattle in Queensland at the Imperial prices, because I make enough out of them. I reckon that we get more than they are worth, and the same with the wool. If other growers would give the Imperial Government so many bales in every hundred, I would do’ the same.” Mr. Kidman is one of the wealthiest men in Australia, and I put him in the same category as Mr. Baillieu, who is reputed to be making, his second million, and who has been man enough to declare that’ the war-time profits tax will not touch men like him. If Parliament continued in session, it would be possible to amend that measure.

The honorable member for Grey (Mr. Poynton) knows well that our wine producers pay no Excise duty, and yet have increased the prices of their wines up to the prices of foreign wines, so that the Australian public are now paying twice as much as they used to pay for wine. At least, £300,000 could be obtained by Excise duties on wine without injuring the wine, industry. Similarly, the prices of beer and spirits made locally have in creased. It was given in evidence before one Commission that, in Scotland, the cost of making a gallon of the best whisky was lOd. One may judge from that of the profit that is being made in Australia.

In the Melbourne Age of 1st June it is stated that -

Prices for meat are nearly double what is reasonable, and, as a consequence, the stockowning interests are making extra war-time profits to the extent of millions a year.

The same statement might pretty well be made of bread, which, according to the information that I have, costs much more than it should. For this the Government are largely to blame, because they have allowed millions of bushels of grain to be destroyed by weevils, mice, and damp. I hold that the people of the country in which a commodity is produced should be able to purchase that commodity as cheaply as possible; that no other community should be able to get it more cheaply, except during a time of famine.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– Or of war.

Dr MALONEY:

– That is so. Famine too frequently follows in the steps- of war. We know, however, that the people of England do not get meat at the price paid for it in Queensland by the Imperial Government, namely, 4d. per lb.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Atkinson:

– The honorable member’s time has expired.

Mr WEST:
East Sydney

– There are times when honorable members should rise to the occasion and make known to a callous Government the opinions of the people.

Mr Nicholls:

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

Mr WEST:

– Those who sit on this side of the chamber are now voicing the opinions of the people. This Government came into power after the election on 5th May of last year, and I was then in accord with a part of their policy. Mr. Tudor’s manifesto was a facsimile of the manifesto issued by the Labour party in 1914, in which we said that we. would do all in our power for the winning of the war. No Government have been so long in office as this and have done so little, though they have had but little opposition to face. At the outset, we determined not to speak on the usual motion for the adoption of an Address-in-Reply to the Governor-General’s opening speech. No doubt, the Government expected a fort-, night’s debate on that motion, and hoped in that time to find out where they stood. After all, they are a Coalition Ministry - a conglomeration. To ask such a Government to bring down any business that is in the best interests of the country is more than can be expected, and would be, indeed, the most impossible thing that has occurred since the world began. Can any honorable member point to any benefit accruing to the country as the result of the present Government being in office? So far as finances are concerned, they are the greatest possible muddlers. But what else could one expect? The welfare of vested interests predominates all their actions.

Who is pulling the strings behind the Government? Who is keeping the tongues of their supporters silent? Only vested interests. Every departmental statement given to the House -from any one of the Ministers comes from an outside source. Committees of men outside of the control and influence of Parliament are now running every conceivable subject and enterprise. Take one vested interest alone, namely, the pastoral industry. That is an interest which predominates every action of the Government. There are fifty-six gentlemen closely identified with pastoral interests who are looking after the meat and wool industries - a fact which is detrimental to the highest good of the people. What has patriotism to do with the actions of the Government ? Itf is not patriotism to cause the prices of commodities to more than double themselves upon the unfortunate people. We were told at the last general elections that the Government were out to win the war. What have they done to that end? They have muddled things beautifully. The war will never be won by any efforts or actions of theirs. But the Labour Government did something practical towards helping the Allies to win the war. Honorable members know full well that it was a real live Government, composed of men who put their country first and the winning of the war equally with it. No members of a Government have had such opportunities as those at present in occupation of the Ministerial benches. No Ministers have had the money to spend, and, at the same time, no Ministers have been so reckless either of their conduct or of their pledges. If ever there was a heaven-born Government it was that which was in power from 1910 to 1913. Providence, if it has the control of Governments, must have been well satisfied with the work of those who held office during those year3. But the present Government have no record like that. They seem to have no ambition, either. They do not even try to show the patriotism which they claim to possess. At the present time they are chasing the people’s representatives out of this House as fast as they can. They first avail themselves of the War Precautions Act and Regulations, and then they fall back upon various Committees. About 270 persons have been brought in to assist the Government in running the country; and the outstanding fact has been that they are all of the same colour politically, with the exception of eight. Out of the whole number, not one of them has attempted to show a little justice to consumers. They are loyal people - loyal to the interests opposed to the highest good of the country.

All my life my ideal has been to lift up the bottom dog. Vested interests want no lifting up; but one would think the present Government regarded them as the bottom dog and wanted to do nothing else but lift them along. Vested interests are so greedy and ambitious that they require no one to look after them. We were told there would be no party during this awful war; but has any attempt been made by the Government to treat their political opponents in that spirit ? If there had been more contentment among the people, recruiting to-day would have been much better. The fact is, the people possess no confidence in the Government. The people whom we represent look back on the past and realize that they cannot expect the Government and their supporters in this House to hold the ideals which have always actuated men like myself. But we have been deluded and cast down, just as wealth has ever ground down the poor. After the declaration of the poll at the last general election, I was invited, as a successful candidate, to attend a meeting of the Trades and Labour Council in Sydney, and on that occasion made a speech which the Sydney Morning Herald paid me the compliment of reporting. I said then, speaking with the greatest solemnity, that I deplored the fact that the great Australian Labour party had been defeated, and I expressed the opinion that, even before the return of the writs, the electors themselves would have cause to regret their decision. I feel that that utterance on my part has already been more than justified. Why should the Government be so anxious to shut down this Parliament? We do not find the Parliament of New Zealand, or the British Parliament, closing their doors. The British Parliament consists largely of representatives of vested interests, but there is no anxiety on their part for an adjournment. The British Government are desirous, in this time of crisis, to keep in touch with the wishes and ambitions of the people, and, in order that nothing may be left undone that ought to be done, Parliament is constantly in session. No Government that is anxious to do the right thing should fear criticism. His Majesty’s Opposition in this Parliament is charged with the duty, amongst others, of scrutinizing the actions of the Government, and of criticising them with the object of insuring the proper expenditure of the public funds, and a sound system of administration. Governments are not infallible.

Mr Jowett:

– And the Opposition are not infallible.

Mr WEST:

– They are not responsible for the government of the country. The honorable member’s interjection shows that he is a political new chum.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Atkinson:

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

Mr WEST:

– I desire, by leave, to avail myself of the additional half -hour to which I should, in ordinary circumstances, be entitled later on.

Let me refer now to the fixing of the price of meat, which is a question of grave concern. The fixing of the prices of necessary commodities generally is all-important. I an? glad that a section of the press which supports the Government has come to our assistance in urging that steps should be taken to prevent profiteering in connexion with necessary commodities, and especially in demanding the fixing of the .price of meat. The Government invited the editors of the big newspapers, a few weeks ago, to attend a conference, and, no doubt, then discussed with them many matters, including the reasons why the right of the press to criticise the Ministry should be cur tailed. But a section of the press, to its credit, is urging that, in the interests of the people generally, the Government should proceed at once to fix the price of meat. I have had the pleasure “of meeting, on several occasions, both in public and private life, the members of the Inter-State Commission, and am satisfied that they are anxious to give the people the real facts as to the position of the meat industry. I believe that, in their reports to Parliament, they have done so. The honorable member for Grampians (Mr. Jowett) and the honorable member for Hume (Mr. Falkiner) are members of the Wool Board. They are interested in the meat industry, and they are using all the power they possess in a way that is not befitting representative men. I said a few days ago that the members of another Board established by the Government were well-paid servants of the companies and associations to be controlled by that Board. I pointed out that they could not serve two masters, that they must either throw over the interests of the institutions from which they drew large sums of money, or retire from the Board. And so with members of the Board that has to do with the wool and, incidentally, with the meat industry. They are likely to throw over the interests of the people. One of them has said again and again that he does not agree with the findings of the Inter-State Commission in regard to the fixing of the price of meat. What prisoner has ever agreed with a jury that brought in against him a verdict of guilty? I have never heard of a defendant who was satisfied with a verdict that went against him. The position is the same with regard to those interested in the meat industry. They are dissatisfied with the recommendations of the Inter-State Commission. That Commission has found that the cost of living has been considerably increased as the result of certain operations, and I am sure that, if honorable members opposite were free to give expression to their unbiased views, they would protest against the proposal to allow Parliament to go into recess, so that the settlement of this question of price fixing may be still further delayed. The Government display a most callous disregard for the needs of the people. The Prime Minister, in his Bendigo policy speech, wild it would be the duty of the Government to try to put a stop to profiteering in Australia. That statement was applauded by the people. But the recommendations of the Commission have not .been carried into effect. Had a Labour Government been in power, and had the Minister for the Navy (Mr. Cook) been the Leader of the Opposition, I venture to say that when the Commission c presented its first report, if the Government had exhibited any indisposition to give effect to its recommendations, we should have had, not one, hut numerous all-night sittings. There was sufficient information in that report to warrant any Governmentmoving in the matter. Yet nothing has been done. But the moment action was threatened in the direction suggested, these meat profiteers, who were extracting from the people annually no less than £27,000,000 more than they were receiving in pre-war times, immediately rushed to the Government to impress them with the hardship that would be inflicted by the” fixation of meat prices. With what result? The Prime Minister sent word to the Commission, through the Food Controller, that they must go slow. I suppose he had read so many statements about the I.W.W. and the going slow process that he thought it would be a good thing for the Commission to go slow.

Mr Poynton:

– How can we deal with these profiteers if the honorable member will not let us?

Mr WEST:

– No honorable member knows more about the hardship that is incidental to the rearing of a family than does the Prime Minister. Yet he decided to allow the profiteers to continue exploiting the public. Would the Government have been returned to power in May of last year if their attitude towards the cost of living had been known? They would not have had a dog’s chance. The honorable member for Gippsland (Mr. Wise) would never have been elected had he told his constituents that the report of the Inter-State Commission .upon the price of meat would be pigeon-holed, and that the robbery of the people would be permitted to continue.

There are no greater criminals in this world than those who exploit the public in the matter of foodstuffs.

Mr Webster:

– To whom does the honorable member refer as “ criminals “ ?

Mr WEST:

-To those who deprive the people of the opportunity to obtain neces sary commodities. It cannot be denied that before the fixation of prices in Great Britain a phenomenal increase took place in the cost of necessary commodities there. The Imperial Government were absolutely forced by the pressure of public opinion to adopt the principle of price fixing. Nobody contributed to that result more than did those who were in charge of the cattle industry there. It was only when the price of bullocks was run up from £50 to £70 per head that the Government stepped in. The honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) has told us that the prices of the necessaries of life in France, where there is no price fixing, are double the prices- of similar commodities in England, where prices are controlled. America, too, has adopted the principle of price fixing. After all, it is opportunity which makes thieves. It is necessary for us to adopt the principle of price fixing in order to deal with the thieves who are interested in exploiting the people in the matter of foodstuffs. It is absolutely necessary that we should have price fixing. The Government in May, 1917, did not say a word in opposition to this proposal, because, when members who had been sitting on this side of the House coalesced with them and got Ministerial positions, they must have known that, as a Government, they would be called upon to deal with this question. So far, however, they have done nothing to relieve the position, or even to substitute something else.

Mr Webster:

– What did we do with sugar ?

Mr WEST:

– That was done by a former Government, in which the honorable member was included. The present Government cannot touch sugar, the Queensland interests and the interests of the sugar company being too strong to allow them,;; and if they had not had the Prime Minister, what has been done would not have been carried out.

Mr Finlayson:

– What about the state of the House, Mr. Chairman ? The honorable member is talking upon a very important matter and we should have a quorum. [Quorum formed.]

Mr WEST:

– I hold the opinion, which is indorsed by many writers in the press who have never given members on this side much support, that it is the duty of the Opposition to employ every ingenuity of political warfare to prevent Parliament from adjourning until such time as this great question of food prices has been settled. It is not an unreasonable request to make, but we are satisfied, and I presume the press are satisfied, that nothing will be done, because this Ministry have never done anything in the nation’s welfare.

This is no ordinary time, and at such a crisis in the nation’s affairs the Government should call to its councils all who might render them assistance. Instead of doing so, they put an end to the meetings of Parliament. No other Government in the Empire has treated its Parliament as we have been treated by this Government. Is it because Ministers fear criticism ? God knows they have, given plenty of reasons for criticism. Never before has such lack of initiative been apparent in an Australian Parliament. I used to think it bad enough in the State Parliament, where Jack was turned out to put in John, -Governments having to depend for support on the vested interests.

Callous indifference has been shown in the management of the finances of Australia, the conduct of which has been immoral. Every financial expert in the country will admit the reasonableness of my financial criticism. Lord Forrest was opposed to the levying of additional taxation.’ We have a community of only 5,000,000 persons, among whom is being distributed annually £80,000,000. The people are told that instead of spending on luxuries the money that they are ‘receiving they should put it into their savings bank accounts. No doubt it would be a good thing for them if they did so. The Government should learn what is going on in other parts of the world, in Great Britain, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States of America. In all those countries financial matters are considered of the first importance in connexion with the war. In the United States of America no less than thirteen Bills have been passed through Congress dealing with financial matters since that country entered into the war, in order to provide that the national -assets may be utilized for the purpose of carrying on the war.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Bamford:
HERBERT, QUEENSLAND

– The honorable member’s time has expired.

Mr RILEY:
South Sydney

– I am glad that the Acting Prime

Minister (Mr. Watt) is present this morning, because there are several matters of importance that I should like to bring under his notice. I direct his attention to the fact that the New South Wales Government have appointed a Board of Trade, and that if we are to take full advantage of circumstances arising out of the war we should have a Commonwealth Board of Trade appointed to consider what new avenues of industry may be opened up. The Government should be prepared to assist in the development of any new industry. It is said that, notwithstanding our losses in men and money, and the drain upon our resources, new industries will spring up in Australia after the war, but in my view it will be too late then to consider what industries might be developed. We should now look carefully into the position of industries which depend for their continuance upon imports from abroad. I know of no better way of doing that than to appoint a .Board of Trade to systematically investigate these matters and report to Parliament. I hope that the war will soon be over, but certainly the country is looking to this Parliament to see that the fullest advantage is taken of circumstances arising out of it. In the electorate which I represent there are several important industries which at the present time are hampered through the difficulty of importing necessary supplies required in the manufacture of the articles with which they are concerned. Notwithstanding the great railway and tramway systems of the Commonwealth we have so far been importing all wheel tyres for rolling-stock. As a result of the difficulty of securing freight at the present time our rolling-stock “is being run down, and we should certainly begin as early as possible the manufacture in Australia of wheel tyres for railway rollingstock. There are many industries which might be established, but before capital is invested in their development the sanction of the Treasurer must bo obtained. I do not speak of the present Treasurer” (Mr. Watt), but I know that in the past, when men have been anxious to start new industries, and lave sought the permission of the Treasurer for the investment of capital in them, they have received very little encouragement. They have been met with the statement, “ We want all the money for the war.” I think that is a short-sighted way of looking at things.

Mr Watt:

– It is a very narrow way.

Mr RILEY:

– I believe it is, and I hope that the present Commonwealth Treasurer will see his way to reverse some of the decisions of his predecessors, because it would be a step in the right direction to encourage the investment of capital in new industries in Australia. In my district there are many wool and tanning industries started, and in addition to the manufacture of wool-tops, persons are prepared to go, in for spinning and the manufacture of cloth. The establishment of these industries would be of vast benefit to the people. Of what use is it to send our wool away from Australia in a raw state only to import it again as manufactured cloth ? Australians have already demonstrated in connexion with every industry that they have undertaken the intelligence and ability necessary to make it a success.

I point out that the Wool Board is constituted of men whose’ interests are confined to the growing of wool, and there are no representatives upon it of the fellmongery industry. This industry is dislocated at the present time because it is impossible to get shipment for pelts. The result is that we have nearly £1,000,000 worth of pelts prepared for the manufacture of the finer leathers which cannot be exported.

Mr Watt:

– The honorable member is talking of basils.

Mr RILEY:

– Yes. There is a great supply also of tanned leather that cannot be exported. I do not blame the Government entirely for this, but I believe that the difficulty might be overcome by negotiation. The Government might stipulate that shipping space should be found for cured pelts. If the Shipping Board were looking after the interests of the manufacturers of this country they would provide that for every bale of dry skins exported the ships must take one bale of cured pelts or basils. I hope that the Acting Prime Minister will see whether something may not be done to secure greater shipping space for the export of manufactured leather and basils as well as of dry skins, which take up more space than cured pelt*.

Mr Watt:

– The Shipping Board cannot determine that. The agreement is to load according to British specifications.

Mr RILEY:

– Cannot the specifications be altered?

Mr Watt:

– We have often made representations with regard to the priority list. We have frequently done so in connexion with leather, but we cannot actually deter- . mine the matter.

Mr RILEY:

– If the British Government say they want so many bales of dry skins, is it not possible for the Commonwealth Government to Bay, “ You can have them if you take so many bales of pelts also”?

Mr Watt:

– We have agreed that what is wanted for war purposes shall have first consideration ; and if the Imperial authorities tell us to send this, that, and the other, we try to secure those things for them.

Mr RILEY:

– My idea is to secure the permanent establishment of these industries, and there is a possibility that they may be dislocated by circumstances arising out of the war. I impress upon the Acting Prime Minister the necessity for giving every encouragement possible for the development of new industries. We should, in Australia, be able to supply all the requirements of our people; but that can only be done if local manufactures are encouraged.

T am glad that the Minister for Home and Territories (Mr. Glynn) is present, because I wish to say a word about the development of the oil resources of Papua. I have taken a great interest in this matter, and, having read the reports upon what has been done, I am greatly disappointed with the progress, made. I think the time has arrived when we should appoint a Royal Commission to inquire into the expenditure incurred in the development of the oil-fields of Papua. I do not think we are getting a fair return for the money that is being expended there. We receive a report that bores have been put down for so many hundred feet, and that is all, though the work has been going on for four years. We should do all that is possible to develop these oil resources.

Mr McWilliams:

– How can we develop Papua when we place that Possession in the same position as a foreign country under our Tariff?

Mr RILEY:

– I do not desire that that should be done, but I think that, for the money that ha3 been expended on the development of the oil resources of Papua, we should have been in a position now to determine whether it is worth while to go further in the matter. We have a right to know what the prospects of successful development are before we spend any more money there. The Government would be wise to appoint two or three members of this House to investigate the matter and report to Parliament.

I congratulate the Government upon their expressed intention to regulate the price of meat. I regret that action in the matter has been so long delayed, but now that it has been decided upon, I hope that the price will be fixed at an early date. But I see a danger. A man in the meat business in Sydney said to me, “It is all very well for the Government to fix prices, but so long as we can get good prices for our-wool, we will not send our stock into the market.” The Government’s trouble will lie in the fact that men who are getting such a high price for wool will not send sheep to the market.

Mr McWilliams:

– Any man who has fat stock would be a lunatic to allow it to become poor again.

Mr RILEY:

- No doubt he will send fat stock to the market after he has taken off the wool. But there will be a strong movement to “prevent the Government regulating the price of meat, and Ministers will require to be firm. I hope that pricefixing will be a success, because it is “beyond question that we are paying too much for meat.

There is a matter I should like to bring under the notice of the Assistant Minister for Defence (Mr. Wise). On last Saturday week,, after the men at Liverpool Camp were dismissed from drill, and were about, to sit down to dinner, the officers called them all out, and sent them on various parades. They were kept on parade so long that their dinner was wasted, and even when they were released they had to run- to catch the afternoon train. Surely such things are avoidable in a camp like Liverpool. The officers knew that the day was a half -holiday, and if special parades were necessary, they could have been called for the morning. The circumstances I have related caused a good deal of dis.content among the men, and they have been saying harsh things about the officers. The accommodation for the washing-up of dishes at Liverpool is very scanty, and after the first fifty men have cleansed their dishes, others have to wash up in water that has almost the. consistency and colour of soup. Surely the Government can provide adequate washing-up facilities, and if the Minister will attend to this matter he will do a good turn to the men”.

In regard to the Opposition’s attitude to the Government, we have no desire to hamper them, so long a3 we are given ample opportunity to discuss matters. I am prepared tor, assist the Government to win the war, and if they bring before Parliament any measure that has 4hat as its object, it will get support from honorable members on this side.

Mr Groom:

– Prom the honorable member.

Mr RILEY:

– Prom- the members of the Labour party. We are as much concerned as are the Government in the willing of the war.

The Government should hesitate about enlisting boys under twenty-one years of age without the consent of their parents. I have been approached by many people who are’ opposed to the Government’s policy in this matter, and I know that the enlistment of minors has caused a good deal of friction.» So far, we have succeeded fairly well in getting recruits without the enlistment of youths, and the Government are making a mistake in depriving parents of their rights. The Government will be acting wisely if they revert to the old regulation, which required every youth under twenty-one years of age to get his parents’ consent before enlisting.

The Inter-State Commission has been taking evidence in Sydney in regard to the prices of boots. I hope that, when the Government receive the report, they will immediately undertake the regulation of prices. I have had the pleasure of visiting several large boot factories, and I have also known men who made boots by hand. It used to be possible to buy a pair of hand-made boots for 18s. 6d. Today, notwithstanding the introduction of up-to-date machinery, which enables one man to do as much work as thirty men were able to do on their knees, we are paying 50 per cent, and 100 per cent more for boots. We understood that the introduction of machinery meant a reduced cost of production.

Mr McWilliams:

– For bonedust, which we used to pay 30s. per ton, we are now paying £4 10s.

Mr RILEY:

– Everybody does not use bonedust, but all people in the community require boots.

Mr Mcwilliams:

– But the price of bonedust affects the price of other commodities.

Mr RILEY:

– The Government would do well to regulate the price of boots. We have in Australia the leather, the factories, the machinery,and the workmen, and there is no reason why the price of boots should be as high as they are at present. The Government’s duty is tosee that the people are not “ fleeced.” The evidence before the Inter-State Commission disclosed some very glaring abuses. Hardly any boot that is made in Australia is branded to that effect. Nearly all are given fictitious names, and are branded as having been made in America or Paris. The reason is that the people have been led to believe that an imported boot is better than one locally made. Manufacturers should be compelled to stamp their goods “Made in Australia,” and, if that were done, we should get a better article.

I understand that the Treasurer (Mr. Watt) intends to spend a few weeks in Btudying the financial problems.

Mr McWilliams:

– This will be the first time it has been studied.

Mr RILEY:

– The adjustment of our finances is a big job, and the Treasurer ought to have plenty of time to deal with it. I think the war-time profits tax will require to be recast. I know of firms which were established in New South Wales before the commencement of the war and whose business has increased tenfold during the last four years. Yet they will not be taxed to the same extent as will many new businesses. Why should big established businesses be practically immune from the war-time profits tax? If the community is to make any financial sacrifices in connexion with the war, every business and every individual in the country should contribute 50 per cent. of income towards the war expenditure.

Mr Watt:

– Is the Opposition unanimous in that view?

Mr RILEY:

– At any rate, that is my view. The financial position has become so acute that we cannot continue borrowing as we have been doing. Any firm which is making profits should be compelled to give half those profits to the Treasury. I am prepared to lose half of my income, and I believe that every honorable member in the House would be willing to do the same if that sacrifice were made general throughout the community. The adoption of a policy of that kind would help materially to solve the financial problem. We should all assist in bringing about an equitable form of taxation. I urge the Treasurer to appropriate half of all net profits made henceforth during the currency of the war.

Mr Higgs:

– When the people are educated up to that point there will be no further war.

Mr RILEY:

– It is our duty to educate the people, and to give to the Treasurer our ideas, which may assist him to formulate his policy. Will the Treasurer be able to give to the House, before we adjourn, any intimation of the form which further taxation will take, so that honorable members may be able during the recess to consider the proposal, and be in a position to help the Government with advice on Parliament re-assembling?

Mr Watt:

– I cannot forecast any thing definitely before the close of the financial year. .

Mr RILEY:

– Shipping is of great importance to the Commonwealth at the present juncture, and in meeting our requirements in this direction, we have to make every post a winning post. Of course, we are anxious to have vessels of steel and wood, but I understand that the Prime Minister, when in the United States of America, learnt something of concrete shipbuilding. This appears to be a coming change ; and it is said that the German Government, seeing a future shortage of steel, introduced concrete as a material a considerable time ago.

Mr McWilliams:

– Concrete ships are nothing new ; they are being built in Notway, Sweden, England, and other countries.

Mr RILEY:

– In Australia we have all the material to make concrete, and the Government would be wise to look ahead.

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

AYES: 24

NOES: 10

Majority … … 14

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

Resolution reported.

Motion (by Mr. Watt) proposed -

That the Standing Orders be suspended to enable the remaining stages to be passed without delay.

Sitting suspended from 8.42 to 10 a.m. (Thursday).

Mr HIGGS:
Capricornia

.It is with great regret that I find it necessary to oppose the motion. As the House does not know what takes place in Committee, we must presume that you, Mr. Speaker, are not aware that wehave been sitting for a number of hours, with comparatively little rest, and are not in a condition to consider this Bill, which is one of great importance. The motion would indicate that there is great urgencyfor the measure, but we gave the Treasurer, some time ago, Supply to carry him on to about the 14th of July, which is several weeks away. Honorable members will, therefore, see what a pretence it is to suggest that there is any occasion for haste. It is not fair to the country to compel the Opposition - which deems it its duty to stay here and thwart the attempts of the Government to get into recess, when there is sucha great deal of important ‘business to be considered - to continue sitting when it is fatigued. Our minds, so to speak, are tired.

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– That is not unusual, is it?

Mr HIGGS:

– It is considered that the Australian native generally has a tired feeling, being born with it, but there are exceptions. I say, deliberately and advisedly, that we are not in a fit and proper state to carry on the deliberations which should characterize an assembly of this kind. We require rest, and we have had no rest. The occasional intermittent repose that some honorable members have been able to obtain during the night is not enough. It is all very well for the followers of the Government - I would not say the dumb-driven cattle - for those ultra loyal supporters of the Win-the-war Government, who have been able to go to their hotels, to come here now refreshed. The Government ‘have reinforcements; they have called up their reserves, and it amounts to deliberate cruelty to attempt to force honorable members on this side of the House to considerand pass the Bill without delay. The Bill covers a sum of £5,500,000. How can we, after an allnight sitting, especially those honorable members who have travelled from other States, protect the interests of Australia if we are compelled to deal with the measure now? It is in the interest of every country that there should be a strong Opposition. We are few, and honorable members opposite are many, but if we were allowed a reasonable time to recuperate we could do justice to the people we represent.

Mr Glynn:

– You have the rest of the day before you.

Mr.HIGGS. - How is it proposed by the Minister for Home and Territories to deal with the rest of the day? Is it not proposed to carry on in the same harsh and brutal fashion, because it amounts to brutality? Only inrare instances, during the past twenty-four hours, have members supporting the Government carried out their pledge to the country to see that the country’s business is looked after.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– There are harder work and longer shifts at the Front.

Mr HIGGS:

– That is quite true. The honorable member reminds me that we owe a duty to the gallant men at the Front. If we allow the Government to expend millions of pounds in the manner proposed without due deliberation we are. not doing our duty to them.

Mr Jowett:

– Our duty to the men at the Front is to carry on.

Mr HIGGS:

– The Ministry do not propose to carry on. They propose to shutup shop. They intend to withdraw from the fighting line. The fighting line is here, and this table in front of me is no man’s land, but the Government are going to retire to their dug-outs, where none of our shells will disturb them. In fact, the Government, having censors, will not allow us to express our due and well-considered opinions in appropriate language. As I have no wish to delay the measure, I shall be satisfied with making what I hope will be deemed, by the readers of that volume that I trust circulates freely throughout Australia, a vigorous protest against the suspension of the Standing Orders on this occasion.

Mr WEST:
East Sydney

– I must express my indignation at the action of those who are trying to misgovern the country. My temporary leader (Mr. Higgs) rightly pointed out that after the preliminary rehearsal last night and in the early hours of the morning we ought to have some relaxation with a view to a mental recovery from the effects of the arduous duties we have been performing, before we get to real business. If it was an ordinary matter before the House we could, with some show of decency, allow honorable members an opportunity to get away early; but we are dealing with a Bill affecting the finances, which are most essential for carrying on the war. An Opposition which properly attends to its duties ought to see that money is not wasted, because expenditure wasted is revenue lost, and expenditure saved is revenue gained. We should be quite justified in protecting the revenue, because the Government will not tax those who are able to pay, and therefore it devolves upon those who sit on this side to see that no unwarranted expenditure takes place with the millions of money from loans at the command of the Government. We ave on velvet, and the Government ought to commend us for our action. If they put the case as I am putting it next time they go before the electors I am satisfied that the people will say the Opposition Were right and the Government were wrong. The honorable member for Capricornia (Mr. Higgs) drew attention to the smallness of our numbers, but some of the greatest causes have been supported by small parties. The great slave trade-

Mr SPEAKER (Hon W Elliot Johnson:
LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Order! I remind the honorable member that the question before the Chair is the suspension of the Standing and Sessional Orders.

Mr WEST:

– As I have no wish to be turned . out of the chamber I shall not quarrel with you, sir, but you may perhaps allow me to enlighten you as to the ulterior motive of the Government. In this Parliament, as I suppose in all Parliaments, there are those who represent the interests of liberty and good government, and the cause of the people, and there are others who represent the wool trade and the meat trade and other big callings in which wealth is gained and the influence of wealth predominates. The ulterior motive of the Government is so serious that I feel weought to trespass on your goodwill-

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! The honorable member will not be in order in discussing ulterior motives.

Mr WEST:

– I am afraid that when the history of this session, as it affects the finances, is written up, many members sitting on the Government side will feel ashamed of their actions. We have had the spectacle of members opposite sitting like dumb dogs. They are like a dog that does not bark, which is no good to anybody. Nobody keeps a dog that does not bark, . but those gentlemen opposite cannot reply to the accusations made from this side. They sit there calmly in their seats, some of them wrapped up carefully and comfortably in Australian wool, keeping themselves warm-

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! The honorable member is wandering from the question before the Chair.

Mr WEST:

– I am very desirous of upholding the dignity of this Chamber at all times, and I felt that in doing so I might trespass a little in my enthusiasm for the people’s interests. Every honorable member opposite must know that the object of moving for the suspension of the Standing Orders is to prevent discussion : and when the fact becomes known outside every citizen of repute must condemn it. There is too much rush about our procedure. No other Parliament is dealing with important matters as we are dealing with them. The Standing Orders should only be suspended to deal with questions of urgency. There is nothing urgent about the expenditure covered by the Supply Bill. I hope that Ministers will not lose all sense of reasonableness. It is no pleasure to me to say hard things in impressing on honorable members the folly of suspending standing orders in the present circumstances, when there is no warrant for it. There are serious items of expenditure covered by the Bill; bur the same spirit which is behind this motion will attempt to push those items through the House without allowing honorable members the opportunity to discuss them. If I could only bring my honorable friends opposite to my frame of mind, they would later on be pleased with themselves for refusing to suspend the Standing Orders on this occasion. The press, which has exercised such a great influence in placing honorable members on the Treasury bench, cannot find any pleasure in the suspension of the Standing Orders on this occasion. I trust that honorable members will exercise the gifts with which the Almighty has endowed them, and which have enabled them to secure the positions they now occupy, and that they will noi: oppose the wishes of honorable members on this side who do not desire to have the Standing Orders suspended. I urge Ministers not to rush matters, and to have some regard for the poor creatures on this side of the chamber, who are trying to do their best to bring them to a realization of their responsibilities. There are; always two parties in a Parliament, and, because the party on this side stands for liberty and progress, it cannot fail to oppose the motion. No one with a knowledge of the principles of Democracy would support it. I hope that honorable members on the Ministerial side will not forget the very strong remarks which they have often made in reference to rushing items covering millions of pounds through the House. It was never thought, when Federation was established, that the provisions enabling the Standing Orders to be suspended would be put into operation for the purpose of preventing the discussion of financial matters. I really thought that the National Parliament would be a little above the ordinary fights that occur in the smaller Legislatures of Australia. The power to suspend the Standing Orders ought to be removed from the Statutes, in order to set an example to local governing bodies in Australia, and show . them that the stifling of debate should not be permitted, and that the privilege of the people’s representatives to make themselves heard at all times should be jealously guarded. We know what the Government have been doing under the War Precautions Act. A list has been supplied to us giving the names of persons who have, under the Act, more control at the present time than has Parliament, yetprobably not one man on that list, if he stood for election to any Legislature, would secure sufficient votes to run to more than three figures. I could speak volumes on this motion. I regret I have not the ability of another honorable member who was able *o make a nine-hours’ speech. I doubt whether such a lengthy speech could be delivered upon this question. There is not sufficient material to enable it to be done. It is a national calamity that the opportunity to discuss financial matters should be prevented. Finance makes for that efficiency without which the war could not be carried on. I can hardly realize why the Government have brought this motion forward. They musthave done so in a moment of excitement. Ministers should be calm and deliberate, and should have a judicial frame of mind. They should not permit themselves to be carried away by excitement. A Scotchman once told me that if ever I was faced by a difficult problem it was best to take a night’s sleep before attempting to solve it. If honorable members opposite would take the opportunity to secure a little sleep, many of them would be much wiser, and the suspension of the Standing Orders would be unnecessary. No deliberative Parliament should permit a suspension of standing orders while the finances are in such a muddle, and I hope that honorable members opposite will think twice before they give a vote in favour of it. If they would but give serious consideration to the reports which have been placed before them, and to the problems which would have to be faced after the war, they would not be prepared to suspend the Standing Orders. A statesman would look to the future. He would not be a lover of the suspension of standing orders.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– He would suspend them at every opportunity.

Mr WEST:

– The honorable member is thinking of the next election. Let him put his mind to something above the level of the mere ordinary politician. I came into this House to be a statesman, if I possibly could be one.

Mr SPEAKER (Hon W Elliot Johnson:

– I ask the honorable member not to follow up irrelevant interjections.

Mr WEST:

– There are honorable members on the other side who are against the single tax.

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honorable member is again wandering away from the question.

Mr WEST:

– I was going to suggest that honorable members opposite might possibly avoid systems of taxation to which they object if, instead of agreeing to the suspension of the Standing Orders, they seriously dealt with the question of the finances of the country as affected by taxation.

Mr SPEAKER:

– I ask the honorable member to resume his seat for a moment. I am loath to interrupt the honorable member’s speech, but however interesting an address on the general subjects with which he is dealing may be, I must again remind him that the motion is to suspend the Standing Orders for a specific object, and the discussion must be confined to the suspension of the Standing Orders for that object.

Mr WEST:

– The Government would be well advised in the interests of the country not to rush through the consideration of a financial measure by the suspension of the Standing Orders. We ought not to go into reces3 ignorant of what the proposed expenditure is for. I shall be in a position to tell my electors what I have done to bring honorable members opposite to a sense of their responsibility, and I have no doubt that that will secure my seat for me. Honorable members opposite should, instead of supporting the motion, take such a course as will not leave them ashamed to tell the electors what the National Parliament is doing. I am so free of self-interest that I am not considering my own side in this matter. I have no desire to monopolize all the talking, and there are other honorable members on this side who are just as much opposed as I am to the suspension of the Standing Orders. The rights and privileges of honorable members should not be curtailed, especially in the discussion of financial measures, and the Standing Orders have been framed to protect those rights in the interests of the liberties of the people. Once the attempt is made to stifle debate, Parliament becomes a place only for tyrants, and not for men who love liberty.

Dr MALONEY:
Melbourne

– I protest against the motion to suspend the Standing Orders for several reasons. I look upon it as a challenge by the Government to a fight al’outrance. What it means is that by the force of a continuous sitting and the application of the closure the Government will have their will. We have now been sitting continuously for about twenty hours, and, whilst honorable members have been able to secure rest and sleep, the officers of the House, the Hansard staff, and the policemen on duty have been kept in continuous attendance. That is not fair. If there is to be a fight, let the Government use the closure. I may say that, if I were on the other side, from my experience of the present Government I would use it without fear whenever I thought it necessary. I ask, on behalf of the officers of the House and of honorable members, that the Government should use the closure. I would have more respect for them if they did than if they persist in trying to weary honorable members on this side by a continuous sitting. In every Parliament in the world, after due consideration, Standing Orders have been framed for the purpose, not only of enabling the Government to carry on business, but of enabling the Opposition to criticise Government measures, and especially financial measures, such as that which will come before us as soon as this motion is disposed of. If, in spite of the wish of the people expressed at so many public meetings, the Government intend to go straight into recess, the sooner they do so the better; and I repeat that I would have more respect for them if they applied the closure at once than if they persist in their present course. I am afraid that the fight must go on as long as parties remain as they are in this House.

Mr MATHEWS:
Melbourne Ports

– I do not intend to protract the debate, but honorable members on the Government side must admit that the Opposition have certain duties to perform. The position of a majority of the people is acute at the present time because of the high cost of living. That question should be dealt with at once and while. Parliament is sitting, so that honorable members may review what is proposed to be done. The Opposition may not have much power in the matter, but they should have the opportunity to criticise. The Government propose to go into recess, possibly for three months, and the position may become worse as time goes on. In the circumstances we should not be doing our duty if we did not protest against the delay in dealing with the matter. I agree that Ministers at the present time have a great deal to do, but there are other people in the community who also have important duties to perform. It is especially our duty to see that Parliament shall have an opportunity of considering the question which at the present time is of most importance to the public. The Government, in attempting to fix prices, must look for opposition from those whose interests will be affected; but it is their duty to consider the interests of the general community, and it is the duty of the Opposition to see that those interests are protected. I intend to vote against any attempt by the Government to expedite business merely in order that Parliament may go into recess. I feel very strongly that the most important question ofthe fixation of prices should be dealt with by the Ministry while the House is sitting.

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

AYES: 30

NOES: 13

Majority . . . . 17

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Standing Orders suspended, and resolution adopted.

In Committee of Ways and Means:

Motion (by Mr. Watt) proposed -

That towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the services of the year 1918-19, there be granted out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund a sum not exceeding £5,574,440.

Mr FINLAYSON:
Brisbane

– I wish to reiterate my protest against the indecent haste with which the Government are hurrying into recess. It is quite obvious that neither the country nor Parliament is of opinion that Parliament should adjourn when so many matters of urgent importance are demanding attention. The present Government have had charge of the affairs of this country for 399 days, and during that time Parliament has sat for only seventy-fivedays. The record of those seventy-five days is not at all commensurate with the promises and policy put before the people on the 5th May, 1917. I have here the Argus of the 28th March, 1917, containing the policy speech made by the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) at Bendigo on the 27th March. That speech included a large number of items which the Prime Minister said would be the particular concern of the Government if they were returned to power. The “ Win-the-war “ policy was to be the dominating feature of their administration, but the events which have happened since prove what the Government and every intelligent citizen knew at the time, viz., that the Government could do no more to win the war than Australia was already doing. All that was possible was for Australia to proceed vigorously with the policy which up to that time had proved eminently successful. The Government have absolutely failed to redeem the promise they made to the .people regarding winning the war. The people were looking then, as they are looking more pitifully now, for victory, and theGovernment have failed, as they knew they were bound to do, when they made “win the Avar” their slogan, because they knew that Australia’s contribution to the war could only be of comparatively small assistance in bringing victory to the Allies. In protesting against the Government taking Parliament into recess I am concerned not only because their war policy has proved so utterly unsatisfactory, and because they have cheated the public of the policy which they promised, but because the Prime Minister’s speech included a large number of items which, if the Government were sincere then, ov are sincere now, ought to be receiving consideration. It cannot be said that Parliament is being hastened into recess because there is no business to do, or because we are unwilling to do business. The reason can only be either that the Government are unable to agree as to the details of their policy or are unwilling to put their policy into operation.

I shall review briefly some of the items of the policy on which the Government were returned to office, and we shall see how they have failed in every particular to carry out the promises made to the electors. Much was said by the Prime Minister regarding men, money, and products, and of the necessity for Australia making superhuman efforts to send to our kinsmen overseas a regular supply of food-

Mr. Finlayson. stuffs. That the Government have failed in that particular cannot be contradicted. One item of the speech related to markets and prices, and the Prime Minister pointed out how necessary it was that particular attention should be given to securing oversea markets. He said -

The recently-imposed prohibition of imports into Britain has seriously affected the producers of every one of our primary products. The overseas markets are thus wholly closed or seriously affected, and the Government, in order to protect the consumer from exploitation, has adopted a policy of appointing Boards to regulate prices and find markets.

In respect of that policy the Government have been compelled to take action by the indignant protests of a disappointed public. Thirteen months ago the Government said they would protect the consumer from exploitation, yet the position in Australia to-day is such that the Government have had to be driven to adopt such a policy by the stress of public opinion, and the reports of an independent tribunal which they appointed to investigate the matter. So far from the Government even knowing their policy, or having the courage to declare it, Parliament and the country are waiting to know what the Government mean, and what the details of their policy are in regard to one of the most necessary and common articles of food. Thirteen months ago the Government said, “ We will secure oversea markets for the primary producer, and protect the consumer from exploitation “ ; but we are waiting in vain for a statement from them.

Mr Pigott:

– Do you say there was any exploitation in connexion with beef and mutton ?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Yes.

Mr Pigott:

– The Inter-State Commis-. sion says there was not.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The Prime Minister, at Bendigo, said there was.

Mr Pigott:

– But you pin your faith to the Inter-State Commission.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I am dealing with the Prime Minister’s policy speech at Bendigo, and I make no reference to what the Inter-State Commission has said.

Mr Pigott:

– Did the Prime Minister, at Bendigo, say that there was exploitation in regard to meat?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Yes ; and Parliament and the country are waiting for the Government policy. It is a fair and reasonable request that, before Parliament rises, we should have that policy placed before us; and I, for one, shall not consent to an adjournment until I have exhausted every means to induce the Government to declare themselves, so that we may know whether or not their intentions are satisfactory. The Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) said yesterday that it was not intended by the Government to make a statement this week. It is intended, however, that Parliament shall rise this week, which means that the only opportunity which consumers and the public generally have of voicing their opinions in an effective way will have gone, and the Government will be absolutely unhampered in what they may do.

Mr.Falkiner. - What of the protection of the primary producer?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The honorable member for Hume (Mr. Falkiner) reminds me of the fact that not only has the consuming public to be considered, but also the men engaged in production, who are in a very unfair and unreasonable position because of this delay. What objection can there be to letting the public know the Government policy? After the Cabinet meeting held last Saturday morning, it was announced that the Government had arrived at a decision, but the Minister in charge (Mr. Greene) publicly stated that, although a policy had been determined upon, no details had been finally arranged. We desire to have those details before the recess. We wish to know where we arc. We are the custodians of the people’s rights, and our duty is to protect the people from that exploitation which the Prime Minister, thirteen months ago, said was then rife, and which, unfortunately, is rife, in a much more drastic manner, at the present moment.

The Prime Minister, in that speech, said that the policy of the Government would be to guarantee a minimum price for wheat, so that a cheap loaf might be assured for the next three years. That the Government have done something more or less satisfactory in regard to the wheat question is, of course, to be admitted. I do not profess to know all the intricacies of the subject. I hear from some quarters that the farmers are satisfied with the price, and, from other quarters, that there is dissatisfaction; but, whatever may be said in regard to wheat itself, we have to remember that nothing has yet been done effectively in regard to the price of bread to the consuming public. We had evidence in the newspapers only the other day that men who are prepared to sell bread at a reasonable price are unable to get flour, not only because of combines among the bakers to prevent competition, but also because of combines among the millers, who refuse to supply flour unless bakers are prepared to sell at a price agreed on by the Bakers’ Association.

Mr.Rodgers. - I think that the Wheat Boardhas dealt with that grievance.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Yes; but the trouble is that the Prime Minister said something would be done by the Government to guarantee a minimum price for wheat, so that a cheap loaf might be assured for the next three years, and that, he thought, would be good news for the community as a whole.

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

– For home consumption wheat has been fixed at 4s. 9d., so that that part is satisfactory.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– But who can say that 6d. and 7d. for the 4-lb. loaf is cheap in view of the supplies of wheat?

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

– It is cheaper than elsewhere in the world.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– What an argument for intelligent men to advance ! Because bread is not so dear here as it is on the other side of the world, therefore it is cheap!

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

– You will spoil some of your other points if you press that one unduly.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I press it to the extent of saying that here in Australia, at the present time, owing to various circumstances, there is an enormous surplus of wheat which we are unable to ship, and bread should be at a price, not only a little less, but very much less, than in other parts of the world.

Mr Pigott:

– It is very much less - not half in many cases.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– It is not much less; and it is a peculiar anomaly that here, where wheat is actually going to waste and being destroyed by weevils and mice, bread should be 7d. a 4-lb. loaf.

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

– Tell us what you suggest?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I suggest that the policy outlined by the Prime Minister should be put into operation - that before Parliament goes into recess something effective should be done to carry out the promises of the Government in this particular regard.

The Prime Minister in his policy speech also referred to industrial operations.

Mr McGrath:

– His policy was to win the elections.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The Prime Minister told ‘the public that the policy of the Government was to win the war. I have already referred to that matter, and shown how lamentably and miserably the Government have failed to do anything successfully in that direction. They knew well enough at the time that it was impossible to do anything more than Australia was then doing to win the war. As the honorable member for Ballarat (Mr. McGrath) suggests, what the Government meant then was that their policy was to win the election; and any cry was good enough to carry them into power. But their programme included quite a number of matters of great importance to the people, and, accepted at their face value, these would be eminently useful in the government of the country. But not a single item then put forward have they honestly and faithfully attempted to carry into effect.

Mr Falkiner:

– And your party has endeavoured to assist the Government by organizing the biggest strike since the maritime strike. This is only hypocrisy !

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I distinctly and emphatically deny the correctness of the statement that we organized the biggest strike since the maritime strike, and reply that, in my judgment, that strike was deliberately organized by the Hughes Goverment and the New South Wales Government in collaboration.

Mr Falkiner:

– Camouflage !

Mr FINLAYSON:

– That strike was brought about for a deliberate purpose, If the Government pursue the tactics that were adopted last year in connexion with the strike, and continue the .practice of irritating the workers of the country, that strike of which they complain will only be the precursor of much bigger industrial troubles.

Mr Pigott:

– Why did you keep the strike going for five or six months ?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– It is strange that honorable members opposite should refer to this matter in view of the fact that the Prime Minister in his policy speech pointed out how necessary it was to have some industrial organization to give us a policy in regard to commerce and industry, and secure the development of our natural resources. He told us that this industrial organization would be so wide in its ramifications as to secure us against industrial troubles. If there is any force in what honorable members opposite are contending - that we organized the strike - why is it that the Government have not brought forward their industrial policy to give us the advantages the Prime Minister so graphically described at Bendigo? If some industrial machinery could be devised to protect us against strikes, no members of this Parliament would be more anxious to assist this, or any other Government, than the members on the Opposition benches. We do not advocate or desire strikes, but rather to avoid them; and if the Prime Minister had in his mind, or the Government have in their minds now, any policy that will secure us an industrial organization to prevent the recurrence of strikes, and secure the development of our industrial resources, this Parliament should immediately proceed with the consideration of such an important measure. No better work could engage our attention; we should certainly be better employed than we shall be if we go into recess for a couple of months. If honorable members had made any request for a recess, or there was any. need for it for a particular purpose, the Government might be excused.

Mr Falkiner:

– Why not suggest peace with the employers instead of peace with Germany?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Who is preventing peace with the employers?

Mr Mathews:

– The employers.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Exactly.

Mr Falkiner:

– Be as forgiving to the employers as you are to Germany.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– If T adopted the same mental attitude towards the employers of Australia as I do towards the Germans, there would be no peace, for I should think the employers a villanous lot of traitors. That, however, I do not think, because I do not place them in the same category as I do the Germans.

Mr McGrath:

– Is not the industrial peace we have wonderful considering the exploitation that is going on]

Mr Falkiner:

– After all the Labour Governments and oratory ? You will have to give it up as hopeless !

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The Prime Minister assured the public that labour legislation would be absolutely safeguarded - that not one stone in the temple of labour legislation would be interfered with under his beneficent control. Yet no man has attempted more seriously to interfere with the most vital principles of labour policy - no man has more determinedly interfered with trade unionism - than the Prime Minister since he made that policy speech. He was the first man who, in defiance of all the principles he had previously held, deliberately opened bureaux for the enrolment of strike-breakers. In this connexion I may say that I have in my possession, though not at the present moment, a letter from a Brisbane friend of mine who is now, absolutely . wrongfully in my opinion, in the internment camp in New South Wales; and he tells me that during the strike the honorable member for Wentworth (Mr. Kelly), the honorable member for Moreton (Mr. Sinclair), and the Minister for Recruiting (Mr. Orchard) visited that camp, but did not get inside. Mr. Hall, Ae AttorneyGeneral of New South Wales, visited the camp, and invited the Germans to volunteer for strike-breaking. They refused, because this man tells me that 95 per cent, of them are workers, and would not go out as strike-breakers against their Australian comrades.

Mr Pigott:

– Who told you that?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I have it in a letter. I am sorry I have not brought it here.

Mr Pigott:

– Did you write -te Mr. Hall and ask him if it was a fact? Has he not denied it?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I do not know whether he has or not. I am taking the statement of the man who writes to me - a man I know.

Mr Pigott:

– A labour organizer, I suppose?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– If the honorable member suggests that, because this man is different from him therefore he is not to be trusted, he is welcome to his opinion.

Mr Pigott:

– You are making wild suggestions.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I am quoting a plain statement from a letter; but, now that the honorable member for Calare mentions it, I shall take pains to see that Mr. Hall does have an opportunity of repudiating it if he can.

In the policy speech at Bendigo, on 27th March, 1917, the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) recognised that there was need for some alteration in our industrial operations. He said that the condition of affairs in Australia demanded some organization which would guarantee us the development of our resources. industrial peace, and industrial activity. Thirteen months have gone by, and nothing has been done. Is there nothing Parliament can do to help in that direction? I most heartily co-operate in the suggestion of the honorable member for Hume (Mr. Falkiner) that we should do something to secure that stability of industrial affairs which will guarantee us against strikes, and give us that industrial development for which we are all so anxious.

The Prime Minister also referred at Bendigo to the Tariff and industry. He made a clear, plain statement that the Government would push on with the policy of the late Administration, and seek the aid of science for the development of industry. He said, “ It is the intention of the Government to develop Australian production and industries, and to proceed with such amendments of the present Tariff as may be necessary to obtain this end.” The honorable member for Capricornia (Mr. Higgs) has repeatedly appealed to the Government to do something about Tariff matters. The genial Minister for Trade and Customs (Mr. Jensen) honors and beautifies the House with his benign presence, and does everything but bring in a Tariff Bill. An amendment of the Tariff is accepted by both sections of Parliament as one of the most urgent necessities of our legislation. Yet, although the Prime Minister, thirteen months ago, said the Government would do something effective to stimulate Australian industries, and protect us against foreign goods, nothing has been done. Parliament is going into recess, and there has not been a single suggestion that the policy of the Government in that direction has reached a concrete stage. It is merely a nebulous idea, stillfloating about in the air, still a remnant of the Bendigo pledges.

The repatriation problem was referred to. I admit frankly, and with considerable pleasure, that Parliament has given some consideration to it, and the Government and their supporters cannot complain of lack of support or friendly criticism from this side of the Government’s repatriation policy. We supported the appointment of a Minister for Repatriation, and have given our best assistance in the most friendly way to make the Repatriation Act efficient and effective. We all realize, as there is no party in the matter of repatriation, that the settlement of the returned soldiers demands the best that is in us, and our utmost efforts on their behalf.

Mr Pigott:

– It is a pity that you could not approach all legislation in the same spirit.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– If the Government bring forward legislation on the samebasis, and with the same object in view, they will get the same assistance. Any accentuation of party ideals has not come from this side of the House. It has come, perhaps, not from the ‘honorable member’s immediate political friends, but from the political associates that he now has, and who were once our friends.

Mr Lynch:

– We had to choose between you and the principles that you abused.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– It is a matter of choice, and the honorable member knows -

Once to every man and nation

Comes the moment to decide,

In the strife twixt good and falsehood,

For the good or evil side.

The honorable member has made his choice, and is the last man to complain if his ‘choice turns out wrong, because he is too good a sport.

Mr Lynch:

– The people have indorsed our choice.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– That does not make it right. The honorable member must not run away with- the idea that because a thing is popular it is therefore right. The popular choice was Barabbas, but it was a wrong choice. The judgments of majorities are generally wrong.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

– The honorable member’s time has expired.

Mr WALLACE:
West Sydney

– Those in the pastoral industry will be greatly interested in the revelations I am about to make regarding the control of shipping. The Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Watt) yesterday announced that theImperial Government had agreed to take our wool, and pay a price satisfactory to all concerned in the industry, but the fact remains that the shipping tonnage available for the carriage of wool to the Old Country is not being utilized to its fullest extent. The method of loading the wool is such as to lose in every shipment, according to the size of the ship, any number of bales from 10 to 1,000, or perhaps more.

Mr Watt:

-Is the honorable member sure of that?

Mr WALLACE:

– I am positive.

Mr Watt:

– I am advised otherwise.

Mr WALLACE:

– The Secretary of the Wharf Labourers’ Union Avrote to the Prime Minister’s Department, protesting against his men being discharged from a vessel, and against non-unionists being put on to stow the wool. He pointed out that the wool, after his men had been discharged, was simply dumped into the ship.

Mr Watt:

– You are speaking of Mr. Wood’s letter?

Mr WALLACE:

– Yes, and the following was the reply from the Prime Minis ter’s Department : -

With reference to your letter of the 21st March, addressed to the Right Honorable Joseph Cook, M.P., Minister for the Navy, I am directed to inform you that the Controller of Shipping advises that, while it may be quite true that vessels leaving Australia may have vacant space, the nature of the cargo carried has to he taken into consideration; and that if, as recently, onlywheat or flour is taken, vessels will be loaded down to their marks before all hold space available is full.

The particular instance cited by you, viz., s.s.Rajah, would come under the above category. In ‘her case, it would have been waste of labour, time, and money to have “ screwed “ the wool taken. Owing to the space available and the limited lifting capacity of the steamer with the cargo ordered for her by the Imperial authorities, it was only necessary to place the wool in position.

From the information I have obtained from the secretary and others employed, it appears that this vessel was loading at Brown’s “Wharf, Woolloomooloo, with wool for the Old Country. Unionist wharf labourers were engaged, and also non-unionists. The non-unionists were working on one side of the ship, and the unionists on the other. They were what is called “ winging out,” that is, bringing the wool out from the ship’s side to the square of the hatch. The unionists were putting three bales in the tiers. That is to say, they were putting the bales three high in every “ half-longer “ from the bulkhead. They could do that because of their greater skill. The non-unionists on the other side were putting only two bales where the unionists were putting three. The consequence was that on every “ halflonger” of wool coming to the square of the hatch, the non-unionists were losing five bales.

Mr Falkiner:

– Was the space there for the other bale?

Mr WALLACE:

– Yes.

Mr Falkiner:

– What skill was required?

Mr WALLACE:

– A good deal of skill is required in stowing wool. There may not be much skill required in stacking bales on top of one another in a store, but it is a different thing when loading it into a ship. In. the days of sailing ships and small steamers it was necessary to use screws, and also to double the bales, in order to get a certain amount in. In these days, with bigger ships, they have practically dispensed with the screws. In loading a ship you start from the bottom and work up all the time until you approach the upper deck. One man gets under a bale and puts it in position at the top, where it is held by a piece of wood or screw. The bottom bale is placed just outside the tier, immediately under the top bale. The middle bale is then placed on top of this, and the two are rolled into position. All this requires a certain amount of skill. If the middle bale happens to jut out 5 or 6 inches, the consequence is that you lose a bale of wool in your next “ half -longer.” A bale of wool, according to the usual practice, takes up 2 ft. 6 in. of space. The nonunionists were getting only two bales in height in every “half-longer.” They could not get the third bale into position because they knew absolutely nothing about the work. Consequently five bales of wool were being lost in every “halflonger.”

Mr Falkiner:

– It would be ten bale3, because they were double.

Mr WALLACE:

– In this case they were dealing with single wool. In a space of this kind - three heights - you cannot get two doubles. You can get only a double and a single. My information is that it was single wool, and that they were getting three heights in against two which were put in by other men.

Mr Falkiner:

– They could not cut the bands, because the practice is to dump two bales into one.

Mr WALLACE:

– The bands could be cut. When two bales are dumped together, it is the practice to cut the bands. When a space like that has to be filled, it is necessary to use a double bale and a single one. I have not seen a double dump put into a vessel unless it has been cut. Certainly the practice may have been altered during the last five or six years.

Mr Falkiner:

– It has been altered in order to save space.

Mr WALLACE:

– When extra space is available, it is not necessary to go to the trouble of double-dumping.

Mr Poynton:

– Wool cannot be shipped unless it is double-dumped to a certain height. All the space on shipping is now taken on the basis of bales being double-dumped to occupy a certain amount of room.

Mr WALLACE:

– Are not the bands cut?

Mr Falkiner:

– If the bands were cut the bales would be undone.

Mr WALLACE:

– However, my information is that one party of men were getting this amount of wool into the vessel, whereas the others were not doing so. In the White Star and Shire line vessels, the .practice was to double-dump the wool, in order to avoid the use of screws, but the bands were cut in order to spread the wool, and, as I understand, so as not to interfere with the growth of the t wool on the passage home.

Mr Falkiner:

– The shortage of bands is so great that we are double-dumping now with fencing- wire. There is a very small proportion of single bales dumped.

The practice is to double-dump even for temporary storage.

Mr WALLACE:

– Then my information must have been -wrong. It is impossible to get in three heights of doubledumped bale’s. There must be something wrong, and I will leave the matter for the Acting Prime Minister to explain.

On the 29th of last month, thirty-three unionists were knocked off when they were working on the Australind, a Dutch ship, and non-unionists were put on in their place. If the work done by the nonunionists on the Rajah was unsatisfactory, or if, as my letter infers, it was not necessary to take up all the space available, the same remarks must apply to their work on the Australind. I should imagine that, if the Government are anxious to get the wool away, they would do all they possibly could to get as much wool as possible into a given space .on a vessel on which it is being loaded.

Mr Falkiner:

– It depends sometimes on whether a vessel is to be filled with wool. The Central Wool Committee receive instructions to ship so many bales on a certain steamer for, perhaps, an Allied port; and I take it that, in such cases, a certain amount of space only is available for wool. When we ship to London or some other port, and we can send away as much wool as we like, it would be a waste of space not to get in every possible bale.

Mr WALLACE:

– As far as I know, this ship was going to London. Perhaps the Acting Prime Minister will explain why inefficient men are employed in preference to men who have all the necessary skill for this work, and who are prepared to do the work at the rate of wage which is paid to the other men? I can see no economy in pursuing a policy of that description.

Mr Fenton:

– Is there any danger in allowing men who are not practical to load stuff into vessels?

Mr WALLACE:

– There is danger with certain cargoes. If tallow is being loaded into a, vessel, the chances are that half the cargo may be in the bilges if it is inefficiently stowed; but it makes very little difference when the cargo is wool. There is not so much liability to damage. -

The point is that the Government, through the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) , before he left for the Old Country, decided that bygones should be bygones, and that unionists would be restored to the position they occupied prior to the strike; but during the last few weeks we find that the Government are still giving preference to non-unionists, and that they will not employ unionists when others are available; also, that unionists are knocked off in order to make room for non-unionists. This practice is altogether contrary to the spirit with which the Prime Minister received the report of the Conference convened by the Governor-General, and it does not reflect any credit on the administration of the Shipping Board, or whoever is responsible for the loading and discharge of these vessels. I trust that the Acting Prime Minister will do something to rectify this grievance in the interests of the pastoralists, and also in the interests of the wharf labourers and the community generally.

In the quarterly summary of Statistics, Bulletin No. 71, we find that the total revenue received from all sources was £34,067,434, and that the disbursements for the same period amounted to £87,181,669; that the net revenue was £6 19s. 9d. per head of the population, and the total disbursements were at the rate of £17 7s. 8d. per head of the population. We find also that the national debt amounts to the huge sum of £200,501,018. These figures require serious consideration, and I am pleased to find that the Acting Prime Minister has determined to set apart a financial session to deal with them. It is due to us to find out where m’e are going in the matter of finance, and it is up to the Government to bring down some policy of annexing the large profits which the reports that have been placed before honorable members show us have been made by some people in our community. We are given to understand that the war-time profits tax is totally ineffective to get at the large profits which are being made by oldestablished businesses, and that the industries which are affected by the tax are mostly those which have come into existence since the outbreak of the war; industries which, in my opinion, should be fostered by us. The Sydney Sun, in its last issue, states that considerable hostility is displayed by the British Government to the investment of British capital in Australia. I was pleased to learn from, the Acting Prime Minister that certain industries were to be established here, and that a certain amount of British capital was to be invested in them. It should be the aim of the Government to encourage the establishment of Australian industries as much as possible, so that at the termination of the war we may be in a position to meet our huge obligations. Our national debt is already huge-, and it will be added to considerably while the war is in progress, but it will be an obligation we cannot afford to put aside. I have no desire to see Australia pledged up to the neck to the London Jews. It is time we raised some of the money in Australia. A new and drastic method of taxation should be brought into existence for the purpose. However, in the promised special session I hope to have something to say on the matter of the finances, and I conclude by asking the Acting Prime Minister to see that the anomaly in connexion with the wharf labourers is removed, and that the men to whom I have referred may be able to secure a fair share of the work which is offering on the vessels controlled by the Government.

Mr BLAKELEY:
Darling

– If I were asked which was tlie greater curse to mankind,’ the war or the ravages of syphilis and gonorrhoea, I would certainly say that the latter was. In view of the experience that has followed all wars, and of the rapid spread of this disease, it is very essential that the Government should take immediate and adequate steps to protect the people of Australia, not only the men who are now returning to us, but also those who will return when the war is over. It ii my intention to mention some statistics in regard to the ravages of- the disease and its effect upon society, but I deplore that they are not by any means as full as they should be because there is a certain amount of false delicacy about dealing with this subject, and because a good deal of unhappiness and divorce would be occasioned if medical men gave tine certificates of tlie causes of all deaths.

Mr Jowett:

– Surely death certificates cannot bring about divorces?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Most decidedly they can do so. If it can be proved that a child’s death is due to hereditary’ syphilis it is proof that the mother or the father must have been affected by the disease. It has been recommended by the English Royal Commission on Divorce that venereal disease should constitute an incapacity for marriage, and in Australia it would most certainly influence the mind of the ordinary Judge in divorce proceedings.

Mr Considine:

– It might be construed as cruelty.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– It could be so construed. It has, as a matter of fact, been held to be cruelty.

Mr Poynton:

– Would it not be a difficult matter to prove from which side the disease came?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– No, it is a very easy matter. The Wassermann test would show it. Whilst syphilis may be latent, and may show no more than the ordinary pimples or sores during its various stages, or may possibly show a few eruptions, it may not make itself felt for twenty or thirty years. People may go through life without knowing that they have had it.

Mr Considine:

– It may miss one generation.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– I have never heard of such a case as that. Because of mockmodesty, which leads people to speak of this subject with bated breath, because of the old Biblical teaching that the sins of the fathers shall be visited upon the children, and for many other reasons, this question has not received the consideration which it deserves, and which it must receive at the hands of all Governments in the immediate future.

If there were a system under which doctors would be obliged to furnish two certificates of death - one for the relatives and family, in which the cause of death might be stated in any terms the doctor pleased, and one for the Registrar-General, which should be absolutely confidential, and give the true cause of death - a vast improvement might be effected. By that means,, and that means alone, it is possible for the people of Australia, or of any other country, to discover the total ^mortality from syphilitic diseases.

Mr Poynton:

– That would not indicate from which side the disease came.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– No; I have left the question of the influence of the disease upon divorce, on the ground of cruelty. Mr. Knibbs is confronted by considerable difficulty in dealing with the statistics on this matter. General paralysis, locomotor ataxia, and apoplexy are essentially diseases brought about through syphilis. A few years ago locomotor ataxia was quite a common cause of death, but now, because its origin is known, it is not so common. People now die of locomotor ataxia, and their death certificate discloses a totally different cause of death. A good deal of apoplexy is caused by syphilis. A great deal of paralysis is due to the same cause. A certain amount of simple meningitis, palsy, organic heart disease, diseases of the arteries, and a certain amount of Bright’s disease, debility, and such-like diseases, are also due to syphilis. Under the existing system adopted for the collation of death statistics, it is impossible for us to arrive at the true state of affairs. Certain formulae have been laid down by the prominent syphilologists of Europe and the world for determining the frequency of venereal diseases. While these are fairly accurate, and give a good general idea of the prevalence of these diseases, we should not be dependent upon the use of formulae to decide, or, rather, to guess, how many people in our community are suffering from these diseases.

Mr Jowett:

– Has the honorable member any plan for stamping out the disease?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– I have; but I shall deal with that later on. Many investigations into the matter have been made in Paris and in the United States of America, and especially in connexion with the United States Army. I may inform honorable members that the investigation of the Surgeon-General’s Department of the United States Army is probably the most complete investigation of the kind in the world. They may be said there to have control of the patient, and immediately a man enters the United States Army he is subjected to the Wasser mann blood test, by which it is possible to discover whether he is syphilitic or otherwise with practical certainty. On the percentages worked out from information collected by Dr. Cumpston and many other doctors in Australia, and by the special committee of the Australian Medi cal Association, I find that the estimate of the syphilitic in Australia is between 10 and 14 per cent, of the population.

Mr Jowett:

– Male and female?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Yes. It is reckoned that somewhere between 8 per cent, and 10 per cent, of the children in Australia are syphilitic. It has been proved by experiments throughout the world that, to estimate the number suffering from gonorrhoea, the syphilitic cases can always be multiplied by at least four. According to the latest figures, Australia has to-day a population of 4,894,824, and on a more conservative estimate, which I have worked out from the formula? generally recognised, there must be at least 4S9,oS9 syphilitics in Australia. This estimate is on the basis of 10 per cent, of the population; but investigation has proved that, in the case of young men in the United States, no less than 20 per cent, are syphilitic.

Mr Considine:

– The honorable member’s figures are on a pre-war basis?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Yes; all the figures I quote are pre-war figures, and the prevalence of the disease must be taken to be greatly accentuated from the commencement of the war for a considerable time to come.

Mr Kelly:

– Is not the figure of 20 per cent, the honorable member has quoted from the United States of America applicable only to the big cities?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– It is applicable to the whole of the persons from whom the United States Army is recruited, and, as I have pointed out, they are most dependable, because every man enlisted in the United States Army is subjected to the Wassermann blood test.

Mr Kelly:

– Is that at the time of enlistment ?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– It is almost immediately after enlistment. In the first instance the recruit visits a recruiting office, and is examined, hut without any very great care. At this examination any person showing signs of syphilis is rejected? It is estimated that something like 2 per cent, showing signs of syphilis are rejected immediately. If there are no signs, the man goes to a second recruiting office, and must there pass through a more severe examination, where an additional number i3 weeded out. Then he is accepted, and goes into the army, and the Wassermann blood test i3 then applied to him.

Warbusse, the writer of Medical Sociology, estimates that syphilitics may be multiplied by at least six, and not four, to estimate the number suffering from gonorrhoea. It is, therefore, a most conservative estimate of the number suffering from this disease if we multiply the number of syphilitics by four. I have said that there must be at least 489,589 people in Australia suffering from syphilis., estimating the number upon a pre-war basis, and there must be at least 1,958,356 people in Australia who are suffering from gonorrhoea. In the United States army, I find that 2 per cent, annually are infected. That is to say, that in the course of fifty years the total population of the United States would be infected. But for various reasons, the rate of infection is not so high. By reason’ of deaths and of syphilitics leaving the army, the increase due to infection over a period of years does not amount to the full 2 per cent, per annum.

Mr Kelly:

– ‘What is the number of adults in Australia?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– I have not the number of adults. I have taken the whole population. The formula? are always applied to the total, and not to the adult population of a country. The Committee on Venereal Diseases of the Australasian Medical Conference, held at Auckland, New Zealand, and which was attended by medical men in practice throughout Australasia, stated in their report, showing that my figures are conservative, that the decision to which they came was that tho syphilitic represent from 12 per cent, to 15 per cent, of the total population of Australia. The conference did not estimate the percentage of those suffering from gonorrhoea, but merely said that a much larger number suffered from that disease.

Mr Kelly:

– Is the reference to the number who are suffering from the disease or to the number who would at some time have suffered from it ?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– The infection and the term of gonorrhoea, with ordinary care, may cover but a very short period as compared with syphilis.

Mr Considine:

– You quoted a figure of from 12 per cent. to 15 per cent., and the honorable mem!ber for Wentworth (Mi*. Kelly) asked whether that referred to persons who are at present affected, or were affected at some time or other.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– The reference was to those actually suffering from syphilis. I was referring to the syphilitic. Wu have to take into consideration the fact that syphilis is a very insidious disease. In a large number of cases, apart from the primary sore, or slight eruption of the skin, the sufferer does not know much about it. Tho primary sore is self-healing, and may in a few weeks have entirely disappeared, but the poison remains in the veins, and will ultimately go throughout the system. There is no part of the system which the spirochata pallida - the organism . of syphilis - will not attack.

Syphilis is always contagious, but there are stages when the disease is latent. There is no fixed stage or period at which it can be said that a syphilitic will or will not affect others. Generally speaking, from the time syphilitics acquire the disease until they undergo treatment either with salvarsan or neo-salvarsan, which is less toxic than salvarsan, or with kharsevan or neo-kharsevan and mercury, or with mercury, they are likely to be contagious either by intercourse, or if there are sores from which pus is exuding, by kissing or the use of the same utensils. Honorable members may assume that ten out of every hundred persons they meet are suffering from syphilis. That is a conservative estimate. “ The British Royal Commission on Venereal Diseases reported that through the absence of the necessary statistics they were unable to arrive at a definite conclusion, but they were of opinion that syphilitics in England represented not less than 10 per cent, of tho population. That is the most conservative estimate that has been made by any authority in the world. Dr. J. W. Barrett, of Melbourne, carried out a very interesting test in connexion with an eye clinic. Ho made a blood test of 500 consecutive patients, a great many of whom attended for mere errors of refraction, and not because they suspected that they were syphilitic. Out of that 500, forty-seven gave a positive reaction to the Wassermann test, and thirty-one gave a partial reaction, which means that 14 per cent. of them showed direct evidence of syphilis. Those are interesting and significant figures. Mr. Clubbe, F.R.C.S., stated in evidence before the Commission that every year 500 children suffering from gonorrhoea are admitted into the Children’s Hospital. Those figures are more significant than the statistics regarding adults, and one is led to wonder whether we are doing sufficient research work, or providing that education which is necessary to bring about a better state of health in the community.

Every war is very productive of venereal disease, and the late Professor Neisser, of a German University, who died in 1916, and to whom the world owes much for his work in connexion with syphilology, expressed the opinion that the disease is spreading so rapidly in the German Army, and thence throughout Germany in consequence of contact with the soldiers when they were on furlough, that it was essential that at any cost every officer and man in the Army should besubjected to the Wassermann test, and if showing signs of syphilis or gonorrhoea should not be allowed to return to private life until they were cured. In the Austrian Army practically the same conditions were found. Professor Finger, another eminent syphilologist, who has done great work in syphilological research, estimated, according to a reprint of the report of the Medical Society of Vienna, published in the British Medical Journal, of 4th November, 1914, that of 7,000,000 men in the Austrian Army, between 700,000 and 800,000 were suffering from venereal diseases. He did not separate the two diseases, although they are totally distinct. Syphilis owes its origin to the spirochata pallida, whilst the organism of gonorrhoea is the gonococcus. The latter was discover«d by Professor Neisser in 1878, and the spirochata pallida in 1905 by Schaudinn. The Government can find ample scope for further research and for preventive work in connexion with the soldiers.

Lieut. -Colonel Sir Herbert Maitland , of the Royal Army Medical Corps, stated before the Australian Royal Commission that he recognised the rapidity of the growth of venereal disease in Sydney since the war. 3?he war hae lasted nearly four years. Comparatively speaking, very few of our men have returned, but even those who have returned have left their mark upon society. During the first seven months of 1916 Lieutenant-Colonel Maitland personally examined 2,000 soldiers who. were suffering from venereal diseases.

I am indebted to the Surgeon-General of the United States of America Army Medical Department for Bulletin No. 8, dealing with the prevalence of syphilis in the United States of America Army. As I have already said, because of the Army authorities having full control of the soldier, adequate facilities for dealing with each patient by applying the Wassermann test, and following up each case throughout its history, the figures from that source can be accepted as reliable, and as fully reflecting, perhaps on a conservative basis, the prevalence of the disease in the United States of America. The same standard may safely be applied in connexion with investigations in Australia.

Extension of time granted.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– I am thankful to honorable members for allowing me to exercise now my right to speak a second time. In the report of the SurgeonGeneral of the United States of America Army for 1913 he showed that venereal disease was responsible for 97.73 per thousand of the rejects in 1912; and in 1911, 111.67 per thousand; whilst amongst the coloured races the rejections from the same cause, in 1911, were 221.65 per thousand; and in 1912, 167.86 per thousand. The coloured races of America are in a very bad condition, and acquire gonorrhoea very early in life. Generally speaking, the negro races of America suffer more from venereal disease than the people of any other country in the world, with the exception of Zanzibar, the Gold Coast, and a few other portions of Africa. In Medical Sociology, Dr. J. P. Warbusse has collated from various sources a number of interesting figures, for the accuracy of which he and other prominent syphilologists vouch. He estimates that 75 per cent. of the total population of Europe is suffering from gonorrhoea, and of the population of America, 65 per cent. The United States of America Surgeon-General estimates that at least 20 per cent. of those from whom the Army is drawn suffer from syphilis; and, if that is multiplied by four - gonorrhoea being usually prevalent in the proportion of four cases to one of syphilis - we get a result of 80 per cent. of venereal disease, which shows that the estimate of Dr. Warbusse is very conservative. This gentleman estimates rhat out of 14,000,000 people 8,000,000 have either syphilis or gonorrhoea. When we take into consideration the fact that 20 per cent. of the population of America is syphilitic, and that that number can be safely multiplied by four to give the number of gonorrhoea cases, the figures are, as I say, conservative. It is vitally important to all countries that its children shall be born healthy - that they shall be given a fair chance, not only of life, but of healthy life. Gynaecologists from many hospitals in Europe, and also from the Sydney Hospital, are of opinion that’ of operations for inflammatory diseases iu women something like 70 per cent. are due to gonorrhoea and syphilis. As a specific instance, I may say that, in 1914, of such operations performed at the Sydney Hospital, 70 per cent. owed their origin to venereal diseases. These women were apparently respectable married women; for, in New South Wales, prostitutes are generally sent to Long Bay. These hospital patients are mothers of the future generations; and it is on the married women of the country we rely to produce healthy citizens. Then we are told that 75 per cent. of the cases of sterility in women in the United States of America are due to venereal diseases; that 80 per cent. of the cases of blindness in the new born in the United States of America are due to syphilis; and that 20 per cent. of the cases of blindness in the State of New York are due to gonorrhoea, with a fair quota due to syphilis. In Australia it is estimated that between 20 and 22 per cent. of cases of blindness have their origin in venereal diseases, and that anything up to 25 per cent. of the insane owe their condition to the same cause. These figures alone clearly show that these diseases are of vital importance to us, and that too much money could not be spent in their suppression.

Professor Pinnard, a French syphilologist, in a series of 20,000 cases of mis carriage, found 42 per cent. associated with syphilis. What with miscarriages, sterility, and operations involving loss of productive powers, venereal diseases are truly a great factor in the population question. Hereditary syphilis, which brings a child into the world handicapped from the start, claims a mortality of over 60 per cent. In France, according to Professor Pinnard, 20,000 children die annually. In Russia, syphilis is quite common; whole villages are sometimes attacked, and it is the few, and not the many, who may be said to be free of it. On the Gold Coast it is estimated that 30 per cent. of the natives have syphilis; and in Zanzibar some five-sixths of the population suffer from the fell disease. In a report on the prevalence of syphilis in the United States of America Army, issued by the SurgeonGeneral, there is a significant seriesof findings well worth repeating. In that report we are told: -

  1. With Reference to the Military Service.

    1. A very large number of recruits, estimated at 16.77 per cent., are already syphilitic at the time they enter the service.
    2. Since there are only 3.44 per cent. of white enlisted men on the sick report for syphilis, it is certain that the majority of these syphilitic recruits never are diagnosed.
    3. Many of these undiagnosed cases of syphilis are admitted to sick report under other diagnoses, and a certain, but at present unknown, amount of expense is thereby incurred by the Government.
    4. From 2 to 5 per cent. of the commissioned personnel of the Army are already infected with syphilis at the time they enter the service.
    5. The percentage of syphilis among white enlisted men of the Army, estimated at 16.08 per cent., is slightly lower than the estimated percentage of infected accepted recruits.
    6. Since there are about 3 per cent. of fresh infections annually among these troops, it follows that syphilitics are leaving’ the service in 6ome way faster than new cases are being acquired.
    7. Study of the syphilitic registers of completed cases confirms this belief, because the rates for discharge for disability are twice as great for syphilitics as for all enlisted men.
    8. Wassermann surveys of military prisoners, insane soldiers, tuberculous soldiers, and inmates of the Soldiers’ -Home also confirm this belief, because they all include a prevalence of syphilis considerably higher than that obtaining among enlisted men.
    9. Syphilis is much more common among negro troops than white troops, and is acquired at a much earlier age in the case of negroes, so that it may be expected that a very large percentage of coloured men are already syphilitic at the time they enter the service
    10. The highest rate for syphilis encountered in these surveys is among the soldiers of the Porto Rico Regiment of Infantry.
    11. About 13 per cent, of the insanity in the service is directly attributable to, syphilitic infection.
    12. There is a distinct tendency in any group of men for syphilitic infection to accumulate with advancing years, so that the older the group the higher “the percentage of syphilis.
    13. The percentage of syphilitic infection is lower among men in the Army than among similar men in civil life.
    1. With Reference to the Civil Population.

    2. We may estimate that about 20 per cent, of the young adult male population of the class from which the Army is recruited are infected with syphilis.
    3. We may estimate that about 5 per cent, of the young men in our colleges are syphilitic.
    4. This study confirms observations that have already been published indicating that syphilis is so prevalent among negroes that it is possibly the greatest single factor in the production of disability and high mortality rates among the race.
    5. The high percentage of syphilis among Porto Rican soldiers indicates that syphilis may be one of the important causes of disability among native Porto Ricans.
    6. Since syphilitic infection is so common, is productive of so much disability, and has so far entirely evaded sanitary control, it is believed that syphilis is a greater menace to the public health than any other single infectious disease, not even excepting tuberculosis.

The last line of that report is significant.

I opened my remarks by saying that if I were asked which is the greater calamity - the present Armageddon in Europe or the scourge of venereal diseases - I should say the diseases.

Mr Finlayson:

– That is because it never ceases.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– It is always with us; and in 1914, in Australia alone, out of a population of something over -4,900,000, there were 7,189 deaths from this cause. At the end of Hie report to which I have referred the opinion is expressed that when a man’s daughter marries, the chances are one in five that she will become “ damaged goods.” When we take into consideration the fact that practically 20 per cent, of the population of America, and that, on a conservative estimate, 10 per cent, of the population in Australia, is affected, it is easy to understand that a man’s ^daughter has a very fail” chance indeed of becoming “damaged goods.”

Mr Kelly:

– Does the honorable member propose to finish with a suggestion that there should be Federal action?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– I do. It is absolutely necessary that no soldier should be allowed to return to civil life until he has passed the Wassermann test and is declared absolutely free from syphilis. For some time past our soldiers have been coming back, and we shall continue to have weekly detachments arriving; and if they do not show outward signs of venereal disease these men will be discharged and absorbed into the civil life of the country-.

Mr Kelly:

– Most certainly a smaller percentage of soldiers would fail to pass that rough-and-ready test than would civilians.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– I am not prepared to even venture an opinion on that particular point. No doubt, in the Army, prophylactic tents .and other measures have done enormous good in preventing the spread of the disease; but men who, after two to five months in the trenches, are set free for twelve days or so, may not take those precautions and that care of their health which they would under ordinary circumstances. The point I stress is that the Government should see that not one soldier is let free with either gonorrhoea or syphilis. Gonorrhoea always shows signs, and is not a difficult disease to diagnose.

Mr Kelly:

– What you are suggesting is that, in addition to the. ordinary examination, there should be added the Wassermann test?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Yes, but even the Wassermann test can give a negative reaction while syphilis is present. That occurs in rare cases. Every man should be clean before he is allowed to go again into civil life.

For the current financial year £13,000 is set aside for -subsidizing the States pound for pound in their effort to deal with venereal diseases. Four of the States have passed the necessary legislation on the fines laid down by the Commonwealth Committee in their report on venereal diseases. The other two States have not done so. It is very necessary that the Commonwealth should vote a large sum of money for this purpose, because, in view of the enormous loss of life per year through venereal disease, it would be worth hundreds of thousands of pounds every year to the Commonwealth if half of it could be prevented. A permanent standing committee should be appointed, with Dr. Cumpston, who has made a special study of the subject, as chairman, with, say, two other medical men, prominent syphilologists for preference, who could (be found in Australia, and one or two ‘honorable members of this House or the Senate. Large sums of money should be placed at their disposal for the establishment of laboratories for research purposes, the manufacture of formula? for the treatment of the disease, and the manufacture of ‘all the necessary material and instruments, with free distribution by the Commonwealth Government of all salvarsan, or neo-salvarsan, or kharsevan, or neo-kharsevan, or whatever remedy it may foe determined to manufacture. The Commonwealth Government should act as father to the whole of the ‘States in this matter, and give them a lead. We should say to the .States, “ If you’ are prepared to administer this matter with the men who are available, we are prepared, not only to supply you with all the material necessary, but to subsidize you heavily.” After all, the question is one more of Commonwealth than of State concern, and I am sorry the Commonwealth has not the power’ necessary to deal with it. The main point in the recommendations of the Committee is compulsory notification. This has been adopted in four of the States.

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

– How has that operated in Victoria ?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Evidently there is some unknown factor operating against it in this State. During ten months of the operation of the Act only 7,000 eases were notified, which certainly does not show the total venereal infection in Victoria. It is necessary when a doctor treats a venereal patient that the person should be kept under proper care and attention. The only way in which that can be done is to register him. About six years ago I had the temerity, at a Political Labour League Conference, to advocate compulsory notification, the abolition of quackery in the treatment of venereal diseases, the heavy subsidizing of hospitals, and the free distribution of the formula? of sal.varsan and such like. A couple of the newspapers obtained the opinions of the leading medical men, and the leading men in the political world of New South Wales, and, extraordinary to relate, found, without exception, that they were against compulsory notification. Since that time, however, the people- have become fairly rapidly educated on the question, and now most people, no matter how conservative, recognise the absolute necessity of compulsory notification.

Mr Finlayson:

– -Do you favour compulsory notification and a clean bill of health before either party is allowed to marry ?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– I do. I have a daughter, and when she grows up I should like to know that her husband is clean. Quite a large percentage of syphilis is innocent. It may be contracted by means of contagion, or through hereditary influences, and that being so, no stigma of sin should rest on the head of the unoffending girl or boy. A young man may grow up suffering with hereditary’ syphilis, and showing no signs of it, except, perhaps, a slight eruption. He may marry, and innocently cause a syphilitic child to be brought into the world. It is, known that syphilis will go down three generations, some say even four. When one takes into consideration the fact that a person may have the disease innocently, it is very necessary that a clean bill of health should be produced by both parties. I would make no discrimination, because the woman is just as liable to innocent infection, by hereditary influences and otherwise, as the man is. For that reason there should be a clean certificate between man and woman before a marriage can take place.

Mr Finlayson:

– That is the law in quite a number of places now.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– No; I do not know of one country in the world where such a law is in operation. I appeal to the Government to recognise the urgency of this question. I believe the very existence of the race is at stake.

According to the report of the Committee, of which the honorable member for Melbourne Ports (Mr. Mathews) was chairman, an attempt was made to estimate the deaths that occurred from syphilis in Paris in the year 1910, and a schedule was produced. On this the Committee comment -

If this schedule were applied to the mortalities in the Commonwealth in 1914, the statement would be as follows : -

The total is 7,189 deaths which, onthis schedule, may more or less correctly be assigned to syphilis. Those are big figures, which make the thoughtful pause to consider whether we are doing our fair share to curb this awful scourge which has been handed down to us. Prom the babe in the mother’s womb, or the babe in the cot, right through life, no one is immune from the ravages of the disease. The Commonwealth Parliament can check it.

Extension of time granted.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– It is imperative to appoint a standing committee which will deal with the question for the whole of Australia, acting in cooperation with the Health Departments of all the States. Large sums of money must be placed at their disposal to carry out this great work. The Government cannot undertake the task too quickly. They should make immediate provision

Mr Webster:

– Already some provision has been made in that direction.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– Only £13,000.

Mr Webster:

– That is something, is it not?

Mr BLAKELEY:

– It is something for which I am duly grateful, but it should be hundreds of thousands of pounds.

Mr Webster:

– Victoria is going to spend £20,000 forthwith.

Mr BLAKELEY:

– For which we will subsidize them £1 for £1. Other States will do the same if they receive sufficient encouragement from the Commonwealth Government. That encouragement should be given.

Mr FINLAYSON:
BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND · ALP

– When my remarks were cut short previously I was discussing the failure of the Government to carry out the policy announced by the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) at Bendigo in March, 1917. There are a few other items which in that speech the Government themselves propounded as worthy of attention, and yet to which they have given practically no attention, or at any rate not sufficient attention to warrant the adjournment of the House and the suspension of business. For instance, there is the matter of taxation, to which the Prime Minister devoted a considerable part of. his speech. On that subject he said -

Wealth has its duties and its responsibilities in this great struggle, as well as manhood, and I feel sure that no loyal Australian will complain because he is called upon to contribute his fair share of wealth towards helping the Commonwealth and the Empire to achieve decisive victory. The wealthy classes of Britain have set a splendid example to the world, and are cheerfully pouring out, not only their money, but their blood, for their country. And in this, as in other things, Australia will not lag behind. It is only right that we should do our duty by those who have done their duty so heroically by us; that every man should contribute his fair share towards this war, and that no man should make a profit at his country’s expense. The Government intends to proceed with the War-time Profits Bill. Every consideration will be given to new businesses, to exceptional industries, and to individual cases where hardship would arise; but the principle that no man is entitled to make undue profits in war time is sound, equitable, and will be applied.

I charge the Government with having failed to carry out their own policy in that particular.

Mr Webster:

– Do you do so in the light of the investigations of the InterState Commission in every direction?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I do so in the light of the returns, which show the increased profits which were made by the financial institutions of Australia last year. The only thing the Government has done in connexion with this taxation is to effect a slight amendment to the War-time Profits Tax Assessment Act. I heartily agree with the principle laid down by the Prime Minister that it is unsound and inequitable to allow any one to make undue profits during war time, and that- it should be stopped.

Mr Webster:

– The matter is being investigated.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– After thirteen months.

Mr Webster:

– That is not the point. The honorable member says that the Government have done nothing in regard to the matter.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The point is that the Government stated their own policy.

Mr Webster:

– And they are carrying it out.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Then they cannot be condemned for having displayed undue haste. The statement of the honorable member for Feith (Mr. Fowler) might be repeated, namely, that any ability the Ministry might have in regard to carrying out this particular part of their policy is very carefully and successfully concealed.

There is quite a list of subjects that the Prime Minister, in his speech at Bendigo, said would need attention. I have referred to a few of them. Others come under the headings of pools and consumers, markets and prices, population and defence, regulation of imports, and Tariff and industries, to which practically no attention has been given.

Mr Webster:

– That is not correct.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– This is the record of the measures which have been submitted to Parliament since that policy was announced : - Bills dealing with wheat storage, naturalization, freight arrangement, sugar purchase, war loans, unlawful associations, Public Service, invalid and old-age pensions, war-time profits taxation, Commonwealth Railways, States loan, repatriation, daylight saving repeal, defence, shale oil bounty and rock phosphates bounty, and a Bill increasing the number of portfolioed Ministers from eight to nine. Those measures were dealt with prior to the adjournment in July last. Since then ‘ we have been dealing with Bills concerning such matters as Supply, income tax, lands acquisition, sinking fund, inscribed stock, war bonds purchase, defence, war loan, and appropriation. Those are the measures which are supposed to be carrying out the policy enunciated twelve months ago. Could anything show more * emphatically that the Government have failed utterly to carry out their policy? If they are adjourning for a recess, it cannot be because they have not matters to bring before the House - their policy speech is packed full of very important and urgent matters - it can only be because they are unwilling, or not ready, to go on with them.

Mr Webster:

– Most of the matters are being investigated with a view to action. The honorable member knows this, but will not admit it.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– It is a remarkable thing that investigations for the purpose of taking action should take such an unreasonably long time. Ministers cannot complain of not having had periods of recess during which these matters could have been attended to.

Mr Wise:

– Has the honorable member the faintest idea of the amount of administrative work that now exists in comparison with previous times?

Mr Fenton:

– But Boards have been appointed to assist Ministers.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I propose to deal with that matter straight away. A return has been circulated among honorable members giving information in regard to the commercial and other Boards, Pools, and Committees operating under Government control, and showing the personnel. occupations, and functions of the members of these bodies. There are 7 Boards connected with the Prime Minister’s Department, providing 80 positions. In the Department of the Attorney-General there are 6 Boards, providing 29 positions. In the Department of the Navy there are 8 Boards, providing 31 positions. In the Treasury there is one Board only, providing 6 positions. In the Defence Department there are 5 Boards, providing 18 positions; and others which are not specified. In connexion with the Repatriation Department there are 7 Boards, providing 49 positions. In the Department of Trade and Customs there are 9 Boards, providing 94 positions; and others not specified. The total is 43 Boards, Councils or Committees, providing for 307 positions; and in the list allowance is made for Ministers to create other Boards, as occasion requires.

Mr Palmer:

– Does not that indicate great activity ?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– It does; but it does not indicate that it is following the line of obtaining the most utility, which was propounded in the policy speech at Bendigo.

I object to going into recess, because there are matters affecting the general welfare of the community which demand immediate attention, particularly those relating to the necessities of life; and Parliament is to be given no opportunity to discuss them, although they are of urgent importance. We are toldthat the Ministry require time for the consideration of the financial positi on.

Mr Webster:

– And other matters.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– No. The Acting Prime Minister did not mention other things, though, naturally, they must be included. I have noticed that no Boards or new positions are provided for in the Postal Department ; but the other day the Acting Prime Minister suggested that the question of appointing a Postal Commission was being considered, which probably means that a permanent Board of at least three members, drawing big salaries, will be appointed. Probably the PostmasterGeneral anticipates the prospect with some pleasure.

Mr Webster:

– I have never anticipated anything.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Perhaps the philosophic temperament of the honorable member prevents him from anticipating, in case he might meet with a disappointment. However, I think it may be expected that, before long, some Board will be created, even in the Postal Department.

We are dividing the administrative work of the country in such a way that Parliament has practically no control over it, or no place on the Boards, Councils, and Committees which have been appointed. The honorable member for Franklin (Mr. Mcwilliams) and others have repeatedly called attention to this fact. Quite properly, the Ministry are represented on several Boards, and some Ministers are specifically allotted certain duties on them.

Mr Webster:

– On what date were those Boards appointed?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The dates are not stated on the list which has been supplied to honorable members.

Mr Webster:

– The honorable member is aware that these Boards have been ap pointed recently, and yet he expects that their work should already be matured.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I am not talking about that matter now. I am talking about the constitution of the Boards. The point I am making is that the administrative duties of Parliament are devolving upon a number of Boards, which are linking up into the work of governing the country a number of gentlemen who are not members of Parliament. Only three members of this Parliament, the honorable members for Grampians (Mr. Jowett) and Hume (Mr. Falkiner), who are on the Central Wool Committee, and Senator Guthrie, who is on the Shipping Board, find seats on these fortythree Boards, Councils, and Committees.

Mr Webster:

– -A little while ago the honorable member’s party was complaining about our creating positions.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The trouble in this House is that a member has an awful job to stick to his line of argument. I wish to come to the point - Why have these Boards been created? I believe that some of them are very necessary, and that they will do valuable work; in fact, there are opportunities in other directions for the appointment of additional Boards upon which we might secure the advice and guidance of experts ; however, the point is that these Boards are really responsible for carrying out or suggesting the measures by which the policy of the Government may be carried out, as outlined by the Prime Minister in his speech at Bendigo last year. Honorable members opposite have ground for complaint in the fact that they have been left severely alone in respect to this most important function, in which no men in the community could give more useful and material assistance and experience than can members of Parliament.

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

– A clear line of distinction must be drawn between Boards carrying out administrative duties and those which are merely carrying out policy.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– The Boards which are carrying out administrative duties are on different lines from those which have advisory or consultative powers. There are also Boards on which men with expert knowledge find a place.

Surely there are some honorable members who, while they may not be considered experts, may yet be able to render considerable assistance on Boards which are mostly comprised of experts.

We have just had a most interesting and thought-provoking speech from the honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley). I venture to suggest that the inclusion of the honorable member on any committee of experts intrusted with the task of carrying out a policy relating to the treatment of the danger which threatens from venereal disease would be of advantage to that body as well as to the country generally. I make no complaint as to the qualifications of the gentlemen occupying seats on the various Boards, Councils, or Committees. My complaint is. that places should be found on those Boards for members of this Parliament, who could at least bring to their work some experience and some judgment that would not be useless in the discussion of the various matters that come up for consideration.

Sitting suspended from 1 to 2.30 p.m.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– In the Ministerial statement circulated on the 10th April this year,the concluding paragraph reads thus -

Labour. - To establish and maintain better interests between capital and labour, it is proposed that the Attorney-General shall also be Minister for Labour; and an advisory council, representing employers and employees, will be appointed to keep touch between the Department and the industrial interests affected.

Legislation will also be brought forward to remove certain defects of the existing industrial machinery, and provide more effective methods of dealing with industrial problems.

The matter is, in this time of national crisis, of thu highest importance for defence, and it is proposed to deal with it by a Bill framed in reliance upon the defence power, and, therefore, free from the complicated constitutional limitations of the Commonwealth arbitration power.

The scope of the measure will be limited to certain industries of national importance, e.g., transport, ‘base metal mining and metallurgy, coal mining, the manufacture of iron and steel, the handling of wheat, &c., for export, manufacture of munitions, &c.

I venture to suggest that at any time such a proposal as that is worthy of serious and immediate consideration. To successfully carry on the industrial operations of this country is undoubtedly one of the greatest things to which members of Parliament could devote their time and attention, and I regret that the Government have not yet seen their way clear to give us any indication as to the lines upon which they propose to modelthis new system of industrial organization. I confess also to a feeling of nervousness concerning the intimation contained in the extract I have just read that it is proposed that the scheme shall be under the Defence power, because in that there is a suggestion of military control of our industrial operations which will cause apprehension in the minds of many people.

W e have, with more or less success, but certainly not with full satisfaction, experimented along the lines of industrial arbitration tribunals to provide for the settlement of industrial disputes by conciliation and arbitration. Admittedly that system has not proveda success; but we must not overlook the fact that at the best it is an experiment, and that in treading new paths we must be prepared to face difficulties previously unknown, and to experience disappointments. I am prepared to go a long way in seeking the end which I think we all have in view, namely, the maintenance of industrial peace and the security of industrial operations in Australia, which is undeniably an urgent problem. In Australia to-day there are thousands of unemployed, not only amongst returned soldiers, whose position is becoming more and more acute as the day3 go by, but amongst other sections of the community, and this problem will become more serious when our soldiers are returning in greater numbers at the conclusion of the war.

The situation was foreseen, to some extent, and some little effort was made to meet it. Honorable members will recollect that promises were made by employers of labour that the men who went to the Front would be protected in their employment. In the Melbourne Herald, during 1915, a number of these pledges appeared in this form -

In view of the great sacrifices made by most of the men who have enlisted, and in order further to stimulate recruiting, we wish it to bc known that we will keep open positions vacated by any of our employees, and that, when filling up positions after the war, wo intend to give preference to those who have served their country under arms.

Signature of employer…………

Trade…………

Address…………

In a way the ‘Commonwealth made an effort to recognise their responsibilities, for we passed certain measures so to open the door to the Commonwealth Public Service that returned soldiers shall have preference, and be provided for, so far as is possible, under the Public Service Act. The fact, however, remains that privateemployers of labour - I speak only in a general sense - ‘have not kept their promises, because a large number of returned soldiers may he seen walking the streets of our cities and country towns unable to get back into occupation again. At the present time I have three, if not four, letters from returned soldiers before the Minister for Repatriation, dealing with this subject.

Mr Jowett:

– Have you seen their former employers?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– No; but I have the letters, and their cases are now before the Minister for Repatriation.

Mr Jowett:

– But I think you said their former employers would not employ them again ?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I said that, speaking generally, the employers are not standing loyal to the promises they made.

Mr Jowett:

– We cannot find any such cases.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Well,” the following statement appeared in a Brisbane paper this week - “ I wish more employers of labour in Sydney would awake to their responsibilities to returned Soldiers,” recently said Colonel Farr, director for New South Wales of the Department of Repatriation. “ Every day there are between 300 and 400 men at this office. Day after day some of them come seeking for work. While we do all we can for them, we cannot give them jobs unless, by the heart)’ cooperation of employers, the jobs are offered, to us to fill. It is depressing to us to have the same men come back time after time en a fruitless quest. How much more depressing must it be, to the man himself to feel that he is unwanted by anybody - almost an outcast. Employers, awake.”

We talk about the stimulation of recruiting, but I venture to say that the publication of a statement like that, coming from a responsible officer like Colonel Farr, must have a prejudicial effect on recruiting, as’ mea will not feel inclined to offer themselves if they know that at present there are between 300 and 400 returned men looking for jobs in Sydney.

Mr Kelly:

– The honorable member will realize that the statement is that employers generally are not making places for men, not that they are breaking their promises to reinstate men.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– That is only true to a certain extent.

Mr Kelly:

– It is true of the whole length of the statement.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– It cannot be, because I suppose at least 80 per cent, of the men were in some employment before they went to the Front, and naturally, so far as their abilities will allow them, will seek to get back to the places they previously occupied. They certainly went away under the impression that when they came back their jobs would be open for them if they were able to do the work.

Mr Corser:

– My experience in my division is that the promises have been respected. _

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Then how “is it that so many men are going about looking for employment?

Mr Corser:

– That may be the position in Brisbane.

Mr Kelly:

– I get particulars of cases of unemployment, but none of men who have been refused employment by former employers.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I am willing to admit that, with regard to the cases I have mentioned, I have not troubled to inquire whether farmer employers had refused employment to them or not, as I consider that i3 the business of the Repatriation Department. It is enough for me to know that returned soldiers are seeking employment and are unable to find it.

I believe that in Melbourne the position is even worse than in Sydney, and that over 1,000 men are unable to get employment in this city. Surely one of the most important duties that a Government can undertake is to see that men are kept in employment, and I want to know, before Parliament is forced into recess, if the Government have any proposal in this direction.

Mr Kelly:

– Would you go to the length of saying that in any case where employment is offering private employers should give preference to returned soldiers ?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I think they ought to.

Mr Kelly:

– But would you suggest the passing of a Bill to provide for that?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– I do not think it necessary to pass a Bill. It is obvious that many returned soldiers are physically incapable of filling the positions they previously occupied.

Mr.Corser. - Repatriation will provide for them.

Mr FINLAYSON:

– Yes, and that is why I amcontent not to make personal inquiries as to whether men were previously employed or not. I consider it is the responsibility of the Repatriation Department either to see that men are put back in their previous positions, or, if they are unsuitable for their former positions, to find them other employment.

Mr Jowett:

– Would you suggest that in the Government service returned soldiers should have preference over all others ?

Mr FINLAYSON:

– We passed a Bill for that purpose, and may I remind the honorable member that I proposed an amendment providing that the ordinary medical test should not be applied to returned soldiers, but the Government refused to accept it? The position is that, in the Ministerial statement of 10th April, the Government give no indication when the new Department of Labour will be created. So far as Parliament has been informed, the proposal began and ended with the paragraph I have read. This matter is, perhaps,more serious than the Government seem to imagine. It may be that, because of our closer association with the masses of the workers, we on this side are better acquainted with the true position. If we visit any of our seaport towns today we find that, principally owing to the collapse of oversea shipping and the reduction of the Inter-State sailings, there is an enormous number of waterside workers out of employment. There are also a great many men in the building trade and persons following occupations incidental to some of the bigger industries who are unable to find work. No time should be lost in discovering some system whereby we can link up these men with useful employment.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

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

Mr WEST:
East Sydney

.- During the last few days I have had on the business-paper questions of great importance in regard to the amalgamation of banking institutions. Owing to the multitudinous duties of the Treasurer, to whom these questions have been addressed, I have not been able so far to secure for them the attention they ought to receive. Finance is most sensitive, and any suspicion in the minds of the people with regard to an alteration of our banking system might be attended with very serious harm tothe whole community. Once such a suspicion is aroused in the public mind it is like a fire, in that once started no one can tell where it will end.- I have a vivid recollection of the trouble and loss occasioned the community in connexion with the closing of some Australian banks, and the panic then created was such as should induce us to take steps to prevent any recurrence of it. A movement for the amalgamation of some of the big English banking houses has been going on in the Old Country for some time. Recently eight banking institutions in Great Britain have been amalgamated into four. Parr’s Bank and Smith’s Bank, for instance, have amalgamated into a joint stock company. Some of the private banking establishments of England were founded early in the last century, and have remained in the hands of the same families ever since. Joint stock banks have also been in existence for a great many years, and their capital represents many millions of pounds.

Mr Falkiner:

– What is the object of the amalgamation - to do away with competition?

Mr WEST:

– That may be one of the objects in view. I hope I shall be assisted by the honorable member in urging the Government to take care that the amalgamation of banking institutions in this country is in the best interests of their customers and of the public generally. Mr. Bonar Law, Chancellor of the Exchequer, has thought this question of sufficient importance to warrant the appointment of a Committee of twelve eminent men to inquire into it. Amongst the members of that Committee is Lord Cunliffe, the Governor of the Bank of England, who is about to retire, as well as several others of equally high calibre. When men of such eminence are selected by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to conduct an inquiry of this kind it must be recognised that he is anxious that nothing shall be done that is not in the best interests of the whole community.

Mr Falkiner:

– Should Ave not have a Board to control the Commonwealth Bank?

Mr WEST:

– I think I shall be able to show the honorable member that that would not be a wise course to follow. In the House of Commons, in March last, Mr. Bonar Law announced that the Committee would consist of Lord Colwyn (chairman), Lord Cunliffe, Mr. Keswick, M.P., the Hon. Rupert Beckett, the Hon. Herbert Gibbs, Sir Arthur Haworth, Mr. E. Manville, Mr. H. McGovan, Sir John Purcell, Mr. John Rae, Sir R. VassarSmith, and Mr. Douglas Vickers. He went ou to state that the object of the Committee was to consider and report to what extent, if at all, amalgamation between banks might affect prejudicially the interests of the industrial and mercantile community, and whether it was desirable that legislation should be introduced to prohibit such amalgamations, or to provide safeguards under which they might continue to be permitted. Such a commission is wide enough to empower the Committee to inquire into the whole ramifications of the institutions concerned. In the ,public discussion which followed the announcement it was suggested that Lord Cunliffe was not likely to approve of proposals in the way of amalgamation of private banking institutions, but his selection was said to be justified on the ground that a gentleman who desired to secure the services of a good gamekeeper could not do better than engage for that purpose a man who was used to poaching.

In answer to questions that I have addressed to the Treasurer I find that four Queensland, two Victorian, and two New South Wales banking companies have amalgamated. I was under the impression that no alteration in the business arrangement of any financial or commercial company, even if it did not involve an extension of capital, could be made during war time without due notice to the Treasurer. 3fr. West.

I learn, however, from the honorable gentleman’s reply that, while six of these institutions have applied to the Government for permission to amalgamate, two of them, who contemplate a like step, have not done so. Those two companies have their head offices in New South Wales, where the banking and company laws are amongst the most rotten in Australia, and are liable to abuse. The Treasurer admits that the whole question is of sufficient importance to warrant inquiry, but it seems to me that unless I had brought this matter forward these amalgamations would have been allowed to go on without any governmental intervention. That is a state of affairs which ought not to be allowed. Any financial arrangement likely to affect the industrial or commercial life of the community should be submitted to the Treasurer for approval, and I hold that the Government in this case should know what is the object of the proposed amalgamations. I have no desire to cast any reflection on the gentlemen connected with our banking institutions. I have known many of them for a great many years. I have been personally ‘ friendly with many of them, and have received at their hands every courtesy. That, however, is quite beside the question. When we have to deal with a matter of such magnitude, personal considerations must be wholly set aside. If a banking institution were to close its doors the whole ramifications of finance would be disturbed. It is because of this that the British Government have considered the matter of so much importance that, notwithstanding the many demands made upon public men in this time of national crisis, they have called upon some of the leading financial authorities of Great Britain to take part in the inquiry. Should not Australians be equally careful ? The Government should see that the interests of the commercial and industrial world, as well as the customers of the banking institutions concerned, are properly conserved. I fail to understand why two of these eight banks did not sae fit to consult the Treasurer in regard to the step they contemplated. I have had occasion to make representations to the Treasurer in regard to several proposals to raise fresh capital for Australian enterprises. One gentleman wished to raise £6,000 for the purposes of an Australian industry, but since it was proposed that part of that capital should be devoted to building purposes incidental to the industry, the sanction of the Treasurer of the day was withheld.

Mr Poynton:

– Was it not a picture show ?

Mr WEST:

– It was; and for the production of Australian nlms.

Mr Poynton:

– I do not look upon a picture show as an industry.

Mr WEST:

– I have referred to the matter merely by way of illustrating the supervision exercised by the Treasurer over company notations in war time. Is it not far more necessary that the amalgamation of banking institutions, representing an enormous capital, should be under supervision? I presume from the reply I have received to my questions that something will be done in that direction. I am not abusing these institutions; but’ I consider it necessary that protection should be given to the public.

Mr Poynton:

– No bank can increase its capital without the permission of the Treasurer.

Mr WEST:

– When an amalgamation takes place without notice being given to the Government, Ministers cannot know whether there has been an increase of capital or not. Recently, two of our banks amalgamated, and I am told that the Government received no information from them regarding the amalgamation. No harm may arise out of these amalgamations, but the Government should have official knowledge of them, and Parliament should be satisfied that the transactions have been satisfactorily carried out, and the public’s interests protected.

This war is like a raging fire, and no one knows when or where it will be stopped. Neither do we know what our post bellum problems and responsibilities will be. If it becomes no longer possible to borrow money from the public, we may have to call on the reserves of the banks to assist in the maintenance of the credit of the country, and to provide for the conduct, in all its ramifications, of the industrial and commercial affairs of the community. It may be that the next loan will not be a success. Hitherto our appeals to the public have been most successful, and I am proud of the way in which they have been answered bv the people. I am glad to have supported Mr. Fisher in the floating of the first loan. But there must be a limitation to the amount that we can borrow. The tanks will not always be full ; neither will the big companies nor the public always have money to lend. I should be entirely opposed to borrowing at an exorbitant rate of interest, and the bank reserves might be used to help u3 to get back to the position in which we were in 1913. Those who do not move in financial circles can have no conception of the extent and the variety of the interests involved in a bank amalgamation. The banks would lose nothing by making public the conditions of their amalgamations, and in the interests of the public the information should be made known. Even the best informed financiers may make mistakes, and be guilty of serious oversights, detrimental to the interests of the institutions with which they are connected, their depositors, and all who do business with them. Those acquainted with commercial customs know that on the 4tn of the month merchants are required to meet their bills ; but when war broke out, , Mr. Lloyd George, with great foresight, or because he was admirably advised, provided for the meeting of every bill that could not be renewed, and for any foreign exchange, and thus saved the financial position. The honorable member for Hume (Mr. Falkiner), by interjection, has suggested that by curtailing the number of banks we may reduce competition. The same suggestion has been made in Great Britain. The sharebrokers there waited on the Government to know what the position would be if the financial affairs of the country were controlled by a few monetary institutions, thus creating a monopoly. As a large owner of stations, my honorable friend knows that it may be advantageous to a man to be able to go from one bank to another to get better terms. We have been informed by cablegram that the Committee of the House of Commons, which is inquiring into the advisability of permitting bank amalgamationsin 1913, £800,000,000 was controlled by the joint stock and private banks of the United Kingdom - has got to work, and’ it is likely that great good will come from its investigations. An industrial union cannot alter its name, or make any change in its constitution, without going before the Arbitration Court, and producing witnesses for examination. Pastoralists . are always ready to employ the best legal talent to smash up the unions. Bankers resemble lawyers in this, that they know most about the private affairs of the community. If one has doubt as to the character or commercial stability of a business man, he goes to a banker for information, though when I started in business no one applied to a bank to know what my position was, because I had no bank assets. What the public must know is that every institution which is doing banking business has sufficient assets, and is being properly conducted. Without confidence, proper banking is impossible. We must know that our financial institutions are built on firm, solid ground, and are not to be shaken by mere passing changes.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Resolution reported, and adopted.

Ordered -

That Mr. Watt and Mr. Jensen do prepare and bring in a Bill to carry out the foregoing resolution.

Bill presented by Mr. Watt, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr WATT:
Acting Prime Minister and Treasurer · Balaclava · NAT

– I move -

That this Bill be now read a second time.

In view of the fact that I have already fully indicated the contents and general effect of the measure, I am sure honorable members will not expect me to make a second -reading speech.

Mr HIGGS:
Capricornia

.- I protest against the action of the Government in pressing through legislation after this manner. As we have already made as strong protest as possible, however, we shall content ourselves by dividing against the Bill.

Mr WATKINS:
Newcastle

.- I desire to call attention to one point only. That is in relation to fines collected by the military authorities in Australia out of the amounts available to dependants of soldiers who have lost their lives at the Front. I hold strongly that all penalties should be wiped out in the circumstances of the death of any soldier who may have been fined for a delinquency, so that his dependants might be spared the knowledge of what, alter all, are probably but small offences on the part of the deceased. When any of our men have paid the supremesacrifice, that should wipe out the record of anything which may have occurred.

Mr Watt:

– I am in entire sympathy with the, proposition, and will discuss the question of remission of all penalties with the Minister for Defence (Senator Pearce).

Question put. The House divided.

AYES: 34

NOES: 12

Majority … … 22

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee:

Mr WATT:
Acting Prime Minister and Treasurer · Balaclava · NAT

– I think it would accord with the views of honorable members if the Bill were dealt with as a whole.

Honorable Members. - Hear, heart

Question - That the Bill be agreed to - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 33

NOES: 12

Majority . . . . 21

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.

Bill read a third time.

page 5905

AUSTRALIAN SOLDIERS’ REPATRIATION BILL (No. 2)

Bill returned from the Senate with a message intimating that it had agreed to certain amendments, and had agreed to other amendments with the amendments indicated in the annexed schedule, to which amendments it desired the concurrence of the House.

page 5905

INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT BILL

Bill returned from the Senate with a message intimating that it had agreed to an amendment of one amendment; that it did not insist on its amendment leaving out clause 38, and had agreed to the amendment made by the House of Representatives in the clause, and that it did not insist on other amendments which had been disagreed to by the House of Representatives.

page 5905

QUESTION

BUDGET 1917-18

In Committee (Consideration resumed from 11th June, vide page5748,on motion by Lord Forrest) :

That the first item in the Estimates under Division I., The Parliament, namely, “ The President, £1,100,” be agreed to.

Mr PIGOTT:
Calare

.- I regret that, despite an all-night sitting, honorable members opposite have put forward no practical suggestions of a character calculated to help us to win the war. Instead, they have indulged only in empty arguments. I congratulate the Government upon the recent action they have taken in regard to wheat. It is within the knowledge of honorable members that recently the New South Wales Government came to the rescue of the farmers of that State by guaranteeing them a sum of 4s. per bushel for their wheat f.o.b. Sydney, a price which constitutes a great improvement upon that which previously obtained. I am glad to know that the Commonwealth have now agreed to pay the wheat producers throughout Australia 4s. 4d. per bushel, less freight, for their wheat. I congratulate Ministers upon guaranteeing the farmers this increased amount, and hope before long to see a further increase of 6d. At the same time I do not agree with the Government proposals concerning the fixation of the prices of beef and mutton. I desire to let the country and my own electorate know exactly where I stand on this matter. I do not think the present is the time for the Government to enter into any scheme for the fixation of the prices of beef and mutton. We know that when the Roman Empire had reached the zenith of its glory an attempt was made to fix the price of wheat there - an attempt which failed lamentably, and which brought the people of that Empire to the very verge of starvation. Again, in the time of the French Revolution, a similar effort was made, with the result that the people of Paris were reduced to a condition of semi-starvation. The empty spaces of Australia require to be filled with a healthy yeomanry, and it is incumbent upon us to use our best efforts in that direction. In New Zealand the dairy industry has been fostered by the granting of bonuses, whilst substantial encouragement has also been given to the pastoralists, with the result that to-day the Dominion is very prosperous. But, instead of following her example, we find the Commonwealth Government attempting to fix the prices of meat. Honorable members will recollect that during the last elections a good deal was heard about the operations of the Beef Trust. During this debate - that bull has not bellowed. We have not heard any members of the Opposition make reference to the Beef Trust. They have eulogized the finding of the Inter-State Commission, but I point out that the Commission report states there has been no suggestion of exploiting. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Tudor), and many honorable members opposite, as well as the Age, one of the leading newspapers in Victoria, have repeatedly referred to the fact that the Commission has stated that the number of sheep in the Commonwealth at the present time is greater than in 1913, while the number of cattle is about the same. The Age has had five or six leading articles on this subject, and in every one it has reiterated this statement concerning the flocks and “herds of Australia. As a matter of fact, the Age says that, at the present time, there are 90,000,000 sheep in Australia as compared with 85,000,000 in 1913, these figures being based on the Commission’s report, which is taken as the groundwork for these criticisms. But Mr. Piddington’s report contains nothing definite. It is all surmise. He states that the number of cattle in the State of New South Wales is “ about so-and-so “ and that the sheep are “about” the same number as in 1913. In regard to Victoria, the figures are also “about,” or that he “believes” or “estimates” them to be “about.” I have gone to a great deal of trouble to get the exact facts concerning the flocks and herds of Australia. I saw Mr. Knibbs, who was able to give me figures so far as New South Wales and Victoria are concerned, and I applied to the Stock Inspectors of the different States for the information contained in the annual re- turns furnished to them by stock-owners. The figures which I have compiled from these sources are, in some cases, up till the 31st December, 1917, and others up to 31st March, 1918. They may be accepted as accurate. I place the number of sheep at 79,027,000, as compared with 85,057,000 in 1913, the difference being 6,030,000.

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

– Stock-owners generally agree that there was an overstatement as regards both sheep and cattle in the figures given by the Inter-State Commission.

Mr PIGOTT:

– Yes. With regard to cattle, I find that, in 1913, there were in Australia 11,483,000, and in 1918, 10,500,000, a difference of 983,000 head, or, roughly speaking, about 1,000,000 head of cattle short of the number in 1913. My figures are confirmed by Mr. Pearse, the editor of the Pastoralists’ Review, in a letter which appeared in the Argus. He says that the correct figures for the Commonwealth are: - Sheep, 78,958,525; cattle, not including the Territory, 9,969,000. My figures, allowing for the stock in the Northern Territory, will square with those supplied by Mr. Pearce.

I think I have shown that the figures appearing in the Age, based on the information furnished to Mr. Piddington, are not reliable. I want to point out also that, in addition to this discrepancy, there is also a greater shortage in the number of fat sheep and cattle. Do honorable members assume that, because there are so many million sheep and cattle in the country, they are all fat? I can assure them there- is a very great difference. On this question of fat stock, I might remark that, up till about four months ago, we have had very good seasons, but suitable only for fattening cattle, and not for sheep. All flock masters know that high, coarse, rank grass is not the best . for fattening sheep, as it is conducive to the appearance of grass seed, worms, and other sheep troubles. Speaking of our own experience, I can say that we have sent away about one-tenth of the number of fat sheep this year as compared with the numbers sent away two or three years .ago. As I have already said, the seasons have been favorable for the fattening of cattle, but, unfortunately for the other States, most of the fat stock are in Queensland.

Dr Maloney:

– That is fortunate for the people of Queensland, because, thanks to their Government, they are able to get cheap meat.

Mr PIGOTT:

– I have shown that the number of cattle in the Commonwealth is about 1,000,000 short of the figures for 1913, and I want also to point out that cattle slaughtered this year are very much lighter than formerly. Honorable members who care to visit the saleyards at Homebush or Flemington, or attend country stock sales, will find that cattle offering are much younger and lighter than they used to be. I have observed in country districts that for the most part the cattle offering, instead of being five and six year-old bullocks, are steers not more than four years old. The condition of the cattle is good, but the weight is lacking. In these circumstances, when we have a shortage of 1,000,000 head of cattle, and when the cattle available for slaughtering are from 25 per cent, to 30 per cent, lighter in weight than they used to be, we can well understand how the great deficiency in the quantity of beef available has been brought about.

Mr Jowett:

– In Queensland the supply of fat cattle is very short compared with what it was last year.

Mr PIGOTT:

– That is so. I have obtained from the editor of the Pastoralists’ Review a report received from his Queensland agent in which it is set out that it is estimated that the works in Queensland this year will kill from 260,000 to 300,000, and that Darwin will deal with 25,000. This, the writer says, will mean a reduction of about 20 per cent, on the number killed last year. He states that the drought of 1914-15 is telling on the supplies of killable cattle, as naturally during that time of stress brandings were very poor, and that there will, therefore, be a poor showing next year. The Southern Queensland works, he goes on to state, have been affected owing to numbers of cattle having crossed the border, and younger and lighter cattle - steers of two and three years old - are being killed instead of five and sixyearold cattle. The prospects in Queensland, therefore, are not as bright as they were.

Mr Jowett:

– In respect of pure fat cattle the position is worse now than it was last year in Queensland.

Mr PIGOTT:

– Quite so. I come now to the position in Victoria. Although Vic toria has exported fat sheep and lambs, she has not exported cattle. She has to depend upon New South Wales and Queensland for portion of her supplies of beef. If the recommendations of the InterState Commission were carried out stock breeders in other States would have no inducement to send cattle to Victoria .

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

– Victoria’s fattening country is being devoted to dairying.

Mr PIGOTT:

– To a large extent that is so. If the recommendation of the Inter-State Commission were adopted, graziers in Queensland and New South Wales would get the same price for their beef in the Old Country as would be obtainable here, and would not send supplies to Victoria. The Queensland exporters would ship direct from Rockhampton, Townsviile, and elsewhere to England, and, unless Government intervention took place, there would be no direct supplies for Victoria. The result would be that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Tudor), and others who support the recommendation of the Commission, would have to be content with frozen beef in Victoria.

Mr Jowett:

– Victoria would not get even that, because we have not the shipping available to send frozen beef down here from Queensland.

Mr PIGOTT:

– There would be, at all events, a great shortage in the supply of beef in Victoria.

I come now to another important question touched upon by the Commission. In their report they state that the price of beef and mutton to-day is something like 100 per cent, more than it was in 1913. That statement is incorrect.

Mr Nicholls:

– Does the honorable member accuse the Commission of falsehood?

Mr PIGOTT:

– No; I say the Commission have been misled. The Age newspaper slavishly follows the arguments advanced in the report of the Commission, and puts them before its readers as irrefutable. I have gone to great trouble to verify my facts, and have spent much time in endeavouring to get at the root of this question. I recently visited Mr. Knibbs, and asked him for a statement, in his own handwriting, that I could put before the House as to what is the actual increase in prices. He has supplied me with a statement showing that the average price for all cuts and joints of beef, mutton, and pork in 1913 was 5.23d., while at the end of 1917 the price was 8.87d.’, a difference of 3.64d. On a percentage basis the increase works out at 59 jper cent., instead of 100 per cent. as reported by the Commission.

Mr Nicholls:

– The honorable member will admit that the evidence submitted to the Commission is just as reliable as the statement supplied to him by Mr. Knibbs.

Mr PIGOTT:

– Not at all. I think that random statements were indulged in by many witnesses. I have inspected the daily price-lists and find that they practically agree with Mr. Knibbs’ figures.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– What was the increase in the price of stock on the hoof?

Mr PIGOTT:

– I cannot, for the moment, supply that information. In connexion with the State election for Albert Park, during the last few weeks statements have been made by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Tudor) and other Labour men, that the price of beef has increased to the extent of 100 per cent. since 1913, and that the people of Australia are paying more for their beef and mutton than the people of Great Britain have to do. The Age, on Saturday last, published an article from its special London correspondent, in which the figures as to the actual prices of meat in London and Paris were given as in April, 1918. According to that article, London prices on the 2nd April, 1918, were as follow: - Leg of mutton, ls. 7d. per lb.; rump steak, 2s. 2d. per lb.; fillet of steak, 2s. 2d. per lb.; and pork, ls. 7d. per lb. In Paris the prices were - 3s. 4d., 4s. 2d., 5s., and 3s. 4d. per lb., respectively. The prices in London averaged ls. 10½d. per lb., and in Paris 3s. 11 1-7 d. per lb., as against practically 8d. per lb. in Australia.

Mr Blakeley:

– Which only goes to show that profiteering is more rampant in the Old World than here.

Mr PIGOTT:

– Not at all. The rationing principle is in operation in Great Britain. My sister, who lives in London, tells me that the allowance of beef for a family of two is 3 lbs. per week. The figures I have quoted show that beef is nearly three times dearer in Great Britain than it is here. It is cheaper in Australia to-day than in any other part of the world. The price in New Zealand for all cuts is1d. per lb. in excess of the Australian price. In San Francisco, where we are told prices are fixed, it is from ls. 4d. to ls. 6d. per lb., while in Canada prices are on the same level.

Mr. Hoover, the Prices Commissioner in the United States, called together the leading sheep and cattle men of that country, after it had declared war against Germany, and said, in effect, to them, “We want you to breed as many sheep and cattle as possible, because a good supply of meat is necessary to help us to win the war.” The stock producers replied, “ That is all very well, but as soon as we raise supplies to a certain level, the Government will fix prices at a level that will not afford us a reasonable living.” Prices were fixed, as the Age states, but - and this makes all the difference - the minimum, and not the maximum, prices were determined.

Mr Jowett:

– A minimum price was guaranteed.

Mr PIGOTT:

– Yes, a minimum price of7½d. per lb. for live weight pork and of ls. per lb. dead weight beef and mutton. The producers of the United States, therefore, are getting 4d. per lb. more than the guaranteed minimum for beef and mutton, while the price of pork there to-day is ls. 6d. per lb., or something like 6d. per lb. in excess of the guaranteed minimum for dressed weight, which works out at about ls. per lb.

I wish now to compare the increase in the cost of living in various countries, “weighted according to the proportions consumed by the working classes “ as from 31st July, 1914, to 31st July, 1917. In the United States the increase in cost of living during this period is 102 per cent. ; in Canada, 60 per cent.; Sweden, 75 per cent.; Italy, 64 per cent; and in Vienna, 188per cent. In New Zealand there has been an increase of only 27 per cent., and in Australia an increase of 26 per cent. According to these figures, as published in the Round Table, Australia is the cheapest country in which any one can live.

Mr Nicholls:

– Since the honorable member believes that the price of beef in Australia has increased only 59 per cent. since 1913, is he prepared to support a reduction to that extent?

Mr PIGOTT:

– Why should I do so, in view of the fact that producers of stock have to pay for everything they use something like 400 per cent, more than they had to pay before the war? If the Labour party will support a corresponding reduction in the price of everything used on the stations and the farms of Australia, the primary producers, no doubt, will be ready to adopt the honorable member’s suggestion. But why should they have to pay more for everything produced in the big cities and towns of Australia, and, on the other hand, be called upon to take less for everything they sell to the people of those cities and towns?

Mr Nicholls:

– I want the producers to secure a fair profit, but I object to the middlemen mopping up the profits.

Mr PIGOTT:

– I sympathize with the poor as much as does any man, but I would remind honorable members that in the awards of Arbitration Courts and Wages Boards provision is always made for any increase in the cost of living. Whenever application is made to the Arbitration Courts, or to the wages tribunals, it is urged on behalf of the workers that the cost of living has gone up; and to meet that plea the Judges and magistrates have increased the rates ‘of wages, so that, according to Mr. Knibbs, the average weekly rate of wages for adult males has increased from 55s. Id. in 1914 to 64s. 2d. at the end of 1917- an increase of over 9s. This increase largely covers the increases in the price of foodstuffs and other commodities. It must be remembered, too, that many of the workers are single men without responsibilities, as many are boys under twenty-one years of age.

The recommendation of the Commissioners that prices should be fixed on the hoof might do well enough for Queensland, but would be impracticable in New South Wales and Victoria, where the conditions are different. When in Queensland some time ago, I found that the people round about were paying from $d. to Id. per acre for their land. Some were getting a square mile for a rental of £1.

Mr Jowett:

– Do not forget the taxes.

Mr PIGOTT:

– Taking into account taxation and other things, it is estimated that in Queensland £10 worth of land is needed to fatten a bullock, in New South

Wales about £b0 worth, and in Victoria about £80 worth. How, then, could the same prices apply in all three States? There are eight or nine cuts to be got out of the carcass of beef, and cattle are marketed at various ages, and in various conditions. There are vealers, steers,wellgrown bullocks, spayed cows, and old cows, which differ in value. Coming to sheep, we have lambs, tegs, two-toothed and four-toothed wethers, ewes which have never lambed, ewes which have lambed, old ewes, and so on. These differ, further, in condition and size. The Commissioners recommended that sheep and cattle should be sold according to weight, which was to be ascertained by an official appointed for the purpose. Clearly, the recommendation is impracticable.

Members of the Opposition are continually complaining of the big men in the pastoral industry, but the figures show that most of those in that industry are small men. There are 46,344 flocks of from 100 to 500 sheep; 8,355 flocks of from 500 to 1,000 sheep; and 5,297 flocks of from 1,000 .to 2,000 sheep; so that there are 59,976 flocks containing not more than 2,000 sheep.

Mr Falkiner:

– And a flock may be owned by three or four persons.

Mr PIGOTT:

– Yes. These 60,000 small men are the “profiteers” against whom honorable members opposite rail. There are only 6,285 flocks of over 2,000 sheep; that is, there are a little over 6,000 big men, as against about 60,000 small men.

Coming to the cost of production, it must be remembered that hardly a year passes without the re-appraisement of the Crown leases, the rents of which are much higher now than they were in i913. Then, in New South Wales, the Railway Commissioners have on two occasions imposed increases of freight up to 10 per cent. The railway is largely used there for the conveyance of store stock, and must be used for the conveyance of fat stock to market. Further, the President of the Commonwealth Arbitration Court recently increased the wages of the employees iu the pastoral industry by from 97 to 98 per cent. Boundary riders, for instance, who used to get 25s. a week, are now getting 48s. and their keep. These increases imposed a burden on the industry of about. £4,000,000 a. year, and the honorable member for Darling (Mr. Blakeley) has said that this burden will be increased to £6,000,000 eventually.

Everything that the pastoralist uses in his business has increased in price from 100 to 400 per cent. Woolpacks, which were 3s., are now 7s. 6d.; branding oils have increased in price from 4s. 6d. to 6s. 6d. ; strychnine, for poisoning vermin, from 2s. 9d. to 25s., an increase of nearly 900 per cent. Rock salt is unprocurable, and Liverpool salt has increased in price 400 per cent.

Mr Falkiner:

– And we pay through the. nose for locally-manufactured articles to give the workers in the city their high rates of wages.

Mr PIGOTT:

– Wire netting, . “A” grade, 42 x 17 x l¼, which before the war cost £26, now costs £100; No. 8 wire has increased in price from £8 to £50; and barbed wire from £15 to £55 10s. Paint has gone up 150 per cent. ; and petrol, which is used for driving motor machinery of various kinds, has increased in price from 13s. 8d. to 25s.11d. The price of oil has increased by 100 per cent., and that of Stockholm tar by 45 per cent. The man on the land has to pay about 200 per cent. more than he used to be charged for everything that he needs; but the price of beef in Melbourne and Sydney has increased by only 59 per cent.

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

– The mortgage rate has increased by 2 per cent.

Mr PIGOTT:

– The rate of interest has increased considerably. Graziers send their cattle down to the various saleyards, and have to accept whatever price is offered. They do not know what they are going to get, or what they have received, until they are advised by their agents. One of the reasons why the price of beef is higher than it otherwise would be is due to the lack of organization in distribution. I attended an important saleyard in New South Wales, and noticed some fine fat bullocks sold to a butcher from the town in which I reside, at the rate of 50s. per 100 lbs. I followed the history of those beasts. The butcher killed them, and we purchased various cuts at ls. to1s. 3d. per lb. The grazier who produced the bullock got 6d. per lb., and the butcher, who held it for only about a week or ten days, got 100 per cent., and up to 150 per cent. over and above what the breeder secured. He -averaged about ls. per lb. from tongue to tail, and had the hides to the good.

Another reason why prices have gone up so considerably is that there are too many employees in the butchers’ shops. That is since the Wages Boards and such institutions have come about. In the same town as that to which I have already referred, namely, Blayney, where I reside, I know of the case of a young farmer who lefthis holding and establishedhimself as a butcher. He was fairly supcessful; but one day the secretary of a union came and asked for his log. Having come from the bush, he said he did not know anythingabout a log, but he. had his butcher’s block. The union official remarked, “I want to see the list of your employees, and the particulars of their wages and hours.” The butcher replied, “ I have only one assistant. I pay him so much, and he is idle half his time.” The official then said, “ You must have four hands in this shop. You want a slaughterman, another to deal with the meat in the shop, another to deliver, and still another employee.”

Mr Nicholls:

– Name that inspector. Was. it Inspector Nolan? That is a serious accusation to make against any inspector.

Mr PIGOTT:

– I shall find out tie name for you. The outcome was that the butcher had either to go on with the business, paying the wages of four men whom he did not want - which wages wouldhave to be made up by the consumers - or else he would have to shut down. He was compelled to choose the latter course, and he went back on to his farm. That leftthe two older-established butchers in the town to carry on as hitherto.

Mr Jowett:

– That is Why meat is dear to the consumer.

Mr PIGOTT:

– That is one of the reasons. I have a report before me which appeared in the Age about six weeks ago, under the heading, “An opulent unionist.” The report shows that at Wyndham, in Western Australia, there was a strike in the freezing works, and 500 men came out, because they would not agree to accept the minimum wage of £8 per week. They were slaughtermen. Mr. Colebatch, the Acting Premier of Western Australia, reported -

Negotiations with the unions have been proceeding for three weeks. The Government’s final offer was - Slaughterman, 3s. 6d. per head for cattle, minimum, £8 per week.

It wa3 after that offer the men went out on strike, and they were out three weeks. Those men could live fairly comfortably on £S a week. It i3 a good wage; it is a sum, too, .which has to be added to the cost of meat to the consumer.

As the honorable member for Wannon o (Mr. Rodgers) pointed out, there is an- other factor in the high price in that we see, ..everywhere, butchers’ establishments grouped in the same neighbourhood, ‘but without any attempt at organizing distribution. Each man has his separate carts, which go exactly the same way as the vehicles of the other butchers; and, altogether, there is a huge waste.

Mr Fenton:

– Hear, hear! A loss and a waste.

Mr PIGOTT:

– We want some systematic scheme in this respect. There should he .some means of delivering meat to .the door of the consumer direct from the producer. Another reason why the price of meat is so high is that the owners of city properties take a big percentage of a butcher’s profits by way of rent.

I shall quote now from a book entitled The ‘High Cost of Living, ‘by Professor Howe, of New York. He states -

No one knows “how many middlemen there are between the producer and the consumer in a’ city ‘like New York. Even the individual middleman only -knows the groups immediately above, below, or around him, and each of these feels that he has a vested right in his business that should not bc interfered with by the Government. He resists every attempt to dislodge him by the opening of municipal markets or by the regulation of prices. Mr. Dillon states that there are seven or eight middlemen between the ‘farm and consumers of New York city, each one of which adds from 5 to 10 per -cent, to the cost of the food which he handles.

Mr Falkiner:

– Those are the parasites who live, on the producer.

Mr PIGOTT:

– Exactly ; at all events, many of them.

Mr Wallace:

– The consumer pays the lot.

Mr PIGOTT:

– He .and the producer do. Some years ago the .then PostmasterGeneral (Mr. Agar Wynne) suggested a scheme by which we should have delivery of produce by post. Professor Howe refers to that in the book from which I have just quoted. He states -

The parcel post is a marketing agency widely used for feeding the urban population without the intervention of any dealers or middlemen. Some years ago, in company with a group of American visitors, I attended a private dinner party given by a member of the Reichstag in Berlin. As we entered the dining-room our hostess pointed to the flowers upon the table, and said : “ These fresh flowers were brought this morning by the postman. Not only that, but the vegetables, eggs, butter, poultry, in fact, all of the fresh food for the dinner, came by parcel post. I buy most of my supplies in this way from a farmer .who lives many .miles out in the country. He comes to Berlin three or four times a year; he calls on all of his customers, who give him standing orders, which he fills three or four times a week. The deliveries are made in a few hours by parcel post, almost as fresh aa when they left the garden. If I .want to give a dinner party, I send him a postal card or call him on the telephone. That is the way I do my marketing.”

Mr Falkiner:

– Does the writer mako any suggestion as to doing away with thu waste and the high cost through the consumer demanding only the best cuts and joints ?

Mr PIGOTT:

– I am not sure whether he deals with that phase.; but I haves shown sufficient to emphasize the importance of minimizing the cost between consumer and producer, and of cutting out the heavy profits made by .parasites who come in between them.

We have been told that the people -of Australia are very poor at present. I see’ no more signs of poverty than in 1913. I know the cost of living has gone Up, but I am aware, also, that a great deal of wealth is in circulation. Savings Bank reports show that total deposits have increased from £75,000,000 in 1912- 13 to £109,000,000 last year.

The honorable member for Wannon (Mr. Rodgers) has pointed out that if the announced intentions of the Government are carried out- in respect to fixing the price of meat, it will mean the diminishing of the capital of the producers on the capital value of their stock. In 1917 there were 79,000,000 sheep in Australia.

Mr Falkiner:

– Your total is not quite correct. There were 74,900,000.

Mr PIGOTT:

– There has been no exaggeration on my part. I know- that my figures are -correct. At the end of 1917 there were 79,027,000 sheep in Australia. The Commission proposes that the price of these sheep shall be reduced to the extent of 4s. per head - in other words, that there shall be a reduction in their value of £15,800,000. It also recommends a reduction of £4 per head upon 10,500,000 cattle - a further loss of £42,000,000 - and a total loss to the stock-owners of Australia of £57,000,000. That does not represent fair treatment of them. The stock-owners have to submit, to all sorts of privations. They are not merely the backbone, but the ballast of the country. We all know that when a ship leaves port) unless she has plenty of ballast on board she is likely to capsize during the first storm that she encounters. But with an abundant supply of ballast she can sail the seas on an even keel. In like manner the more we can encourage production, which in Australia is equivalent to ballast, the better will it be for the country, because it will enable the ship of State to be kept upon an even keel.

Mr NICHOLLS:
Macquarie

.- Either the statistics quoted by the honorable member for Calare are absolutely incorrect or the report of the Inter-State Commission is grossly inaccurate. Personally, I am prepared to accept the evidence tendered to that Commission in preference to the figures quoted by the honorable member. Between the two sets of figures there is a difference of 11,000,000 sheep. Now, it is surprising to me that such an enormous blunder should have been passed over without comment by the experts who represented the pastoralists of Australia before that Commission.

Mr Falkiner:

– According to the Commission’s report, the weight of grown sheep and lambs is calculated at 52 lbs. per head. But any practical man knows, without looking at the figures at all, that even fat sheep do not average 52 lbs.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Fat sheep average that weight, but Jambs do not. I am not prepared to say whether fat sheep and Iambs, taken together, average 52 lbs. I am inclined to think that they do not. But, possibly, the Inter-State Commission looked upon sheep eighteen months or two years old as lambs.

Mr Falkiner:

– Upon page 42 of the Commission’s report it is stated that sheep and lambs average 52 lbs. That report was made by a man who is not a practical man, and it is teeming with inaccuracies.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– If the report is teeming with inaccuracies it is strange that some of the practical witnesses who appeared before the Commission did not endeavour to have those inaccuracies rectified.

Mr Poynton:

– How could they rectify the Commission’s report . before that report had been published?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– The report was based on the evidence tendered to the Commission, and if the pastoralists allowed incorrect evidence to be submitted, they have only themselves to blame. I propose to read from the Commission’s report a table, the figures of which certainly do not coincide with those quoted by the honorable member for Calare. Personally, I am of opinion that stock in New South Wales to-day is just as numerous as it was in 1913. In that year New South Wales possessed 2,815,113 head of cattle, and exported 18,172,575 lbs. of meat. During the same year its sheep numbered 39,701,384. In Victoria, in 1913, there were 1,528,553 cattle, and 12,113,682 sheep; in Queensland, 5,322,033 cattle, and 21,786,600 sheep, and in South Australia there were 352,905 cattle, and 5,073,057 sheep. In 1914-15 there were in New South Wales, 2,472,631 cattle, and 32,874,359 sheep; in Victoria there were 1,362,542 cattle, and 12,051,685 sheep; in Queensland there were 5,455,943 cattle, and 23,129,991 sheep; and in South Australia, there were 300,579 cattle, and 4,208,461 sheep. I come now to 1917. The reason urged for the increases which have taken place in the price of beef and mutton is that the drought which occurred in 1914 caused enormous losses of stock. If it could be shown that the number of stock in Australia in 1916-17 is not equal to the number of stock in 1913-14, there would certainly be some excuse for those increases. But the figures conclusively prove that the Commonwealth is not so short of stock as the honorable member for Calare would have us believe. I find that, in 1916-17, there were 2,765,767 cattle in New South Wales.

Mr Jowett:

– Why not give the totals for Australia?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I have no objection to doing that. In 1916-17 the total cattle in Australia numbered 8,995,409, and the sheep aggregated 69,371,882. It will thus be seen that there was approximately a difference of 5,000,000 between the number of sheep we possessed in 1913-14, and the number that we possess at present. To-day there is also about 1,000,000 less cattle in the Commonwealth. Whether or not these figures aTe correct, I cannot say. But I base my arguments upon the facilities that were offered to the pastoralists of Australia to combat any false statement which may have been made to the Inter-State Commission, and to cross-examine the witnesses who appeared before that body.

Mr Falkiner:

– You can cross-examine a witness, but you cannot prevent any theoretical judge from drawing his own conclusions from the evidence.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– According to the’ honorable member, if a person were innocently charged with murder, there would be a grave possibility of his being hanged.

Mr Falkiner:

– No. That would be a question of fact, whereas this is a question of practical knowledge.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Let me deal now with the statement of the honorable member for Calare in regard to a butcher who started business in his electorate. The honorable member stated that this man commenced operations in Blayney, and that he had not been there very long before he was confronted with an inspector who told him that, instead of employing only one hand, he must immediately engage three more hands, or close up his business. I would remind the honorable member that these inspectors are Government officers.

Mr Pigott:

– That fact does not affect my argument.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Then the position is either that this butcher was sweating his employee-

Mr Pigott:

– He says that he was not, because the employee was not fully employed half his time.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Then it is reasonable to assume that the butcher was not killing more than two bullocks per week, as he employed only one man, who was occupied for only half his time/ Either the inspector had overstepped his duty or the statement made by the honorable member for Calare is incorrect.

Mr Pigott:

– All I know is that the butcher closed ‘his shop, and gave me that as his reason for doing so.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– The honorable member has ma’de some statements in connexion with the extra cost of materials used by the primary producer. I am quite in sympathy with him. I think the primary producer has been called upon to pay an enormous extra amount for commodities necessary to carry on hi3 particular industry ; but it doe3 not necessarily follow that everybody else should be forced to pay a similar increase. That logic does not appear to me to be particularly clear.

Mr Jowett:

– -But it is a very good argument for not crushing the producer.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– -Nobody has any desire to ‘do that. On the contrary, we all desire that every nian should get a fair deal. I say that the primary producers have suffered greater hardships than fall to the lot of the great bulk of men who are in more congenial occupations in Australia, and I am trying to prevent the middleman from stepping in and taking what .belongs to the producers by right.

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

– Not one bit of machinery suggested on your side of the House has been in the direction of preventing the whole of. the loss being borne by the producer alone.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I believe that the producer should get the full benefit of his labour, and, possibly, if the price of meat were regulated, justice would still be done to him. I agree that it would be most difficult to fix the price of beef on the hoof; but, if no other solution is offered, I shall support any proposal to regulate the price of beef in some way, because I am ‘convinced that the middleman is getting practically the whole of the profit, and something should he done to relieve the people of this community. In my judgment, the system of distribution is absolutely wrong. If we take, as an illustration, a town of 5,000 people, we will find that, as a rule, it contains about five retail butchers, whose rental charges ‘are probably £2 10s. per week, and who, in addition, have to maintain a fair amount of plant, in the way of horses, carts, &c, and employ a certain number of men. All these charges have to be passed -on to the consumer. If a person orders only 1 lb. of chops, the butcher is called upon to deliver it, though he may have no other orders in that particular street. Likewise with the general storekeeper. If a person orders only 1 lb. of butter, or 2 lbs. of sugar, it has to be delivered, and perhaps no other order is required for the particular street in which the customer is living. If the Government established distributing depots in every town, the producer would be able to get the full product of hi3 labour, and, at. the same time, the consumer would be relieved of some of the burdens at present bearing upon him.

Mr Jowett:

– Does the honorable member realize that he is not supporting the recommendations of the Commission?

Mr NICHOLLS:

-I say that, although the recommendations may not be the best solution of the problem, in ordeT to bring about immediate relief, the Government are bound to adopt it, because, at the present time, no other solution is offered.

Mr Jowett:

– You are offering another solution, and. you are pointing out that the Commission’s recommendations are inadequate.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I have proposed another solution, it is true, but I am confident that the Government will not give it any consideration.

Many people run away with the idea that competition is the best means of keeping down the cost of living. I maintain that, on the contrary, competition, because of the existing faulty methods of distribution, has increased the cost of living in Australia, and lowered the standard of production. Cooperative societies offer the best solution of the problem. I could name two such societies in my own electorate, one of which I was instrumental myself in assisting to establish. Both are selling bread to-day id. per loaf cheaper than other bakers in the town, and, moreover, they are returning to the customers a bonus of 2s. in the £1 on all purchases, and paying 5 per cent. on the share capital invested.

Mr Jowett:

– We ought to have them all over Australia.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– But neither the Commonwealth nor State Governments have done anything to assist in the establishment of such societies, either from a productive or distributing point of view.

Mr Jowett:

– I will be prepared to assist, whether the Government does or not.

Mr McWilliams:

– I thought Government assistance was not required for the establishment of co-operative societies.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– If the working classes were dependent on the Government for assistance in the establishment of co-operative societies there would be none. Force of circumstances have compelled the workers in many districts to do something. One society I know of started in a small industrial town eight years ago, with a share capital of only £70, and with no premises or plant. Today that society owns its land, for which it paid £500, has premises of a value of over £1,000, has stock to the value of between £2,000 and £3,000, and is employing from eight to ten men. At the same time it is selling at prices below those charged by individual business firms, and is returning to customers a bonus of 2s. in the £1. From a productive point of view a cooperative society would be ten times more beneficialthan the present system, but whilst such societies are obtaining a foothold they should receive some protection from the Government.

Mr Webster:

– I thought they were better without Government assistance.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I do not suggest that the Government should dip into the Treasury and hand out £10,000 or £15,000 as initial assistance to a cooperative society. What I mean is that the Government should place some restrictions upon the exploiters until such time as the working classes, through their co-operative societies, are in a positionto deal with the situation. I do not regard as a co-operative society, although it might be so styled, a combination of three or four individuals, with a capital of £15,000 or £20,000. Where the workers are excluded there can be no co-operation, and that is the position in regard to some of the co-operative societies associated. with the dairying industry.

Mr Pigott:

– How would the honorable member bring in the workers ?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– From the point of view of production, all classes can participate in co-operation on the small share system.

Mr Webster:

– Does the honorable member say that the dairy farmer is not a worker?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I certainly do not. Dairymen are fully entitled to the product of their labour, and they represent one of the classes that should be allowed “to participate in the benefits of cooperation. I hold tha’t the present system of distribution is entirely at fault, and should be rectified by the Government.

I wish now to refer to one or two matters affecting the Department of the PostmasterGeneral,, and hope that I shall’ be able to reach a soft spot in his heart. I have repeatedly urged that greater consideration should be given country residents in ‘the matter of the construction of telephone lines; but, so far, nothing bias been ‘done in the desired direction. I recognise that- the honorable gentleman has many duties to attend to, and that it is impossible tor him to visit every small country centre, so that he cannot be thoroughly conversant with the requirements of rural districts. But I regard as absolutely absurd the conditions Which his Department has laid - down in connexion with the construction of telephone lines in country districts. The conditions are such as cannot be tolerated.

Mr Webster:

– ‘What are they?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I shall read a- letter from residents of Duckmaloi, in the Oberon district, which I have received, and -which illustrates the point that I wish to make. The letter is as follows : -

Dear sir,; - Mr. Those Boyle;, an experienced line builder, is ready to sign a contract to -complete our ‘phone line; but the specifications in use for ordinary lines arc 20 feet cleared on each side of the- line-

That is to say, the conditions require that there shall be a clear space of 20 feet on «ach side of lines of this character -

The farmers - eleven of t/hem - were prepared, and are now, to clear the line, to make it safe and efficient; but to clear 3 miles of heavy forest timber is a contract that would take £30 alone. The line from Oberon, vi& Shooter’s Hill, Ginkum, Little River, is 31 miles long, has been working for fourteen years, and has not been cleared of timber as proposed by specifications. Please ask the Deputy Postmaster-General to instruct his engineer at Dubbo to suspend the strict letter of the regulation, and, instead, to provide for clearing all dead timber and overhanging limbs on and near -tlie line. This done, we shall have the line -working in a few weeks.

My complaint is that the Department -should expect these farmers to clear the track and construct the line for them selves. It is beyond all reason that country residents should be called upon to clear a track 20 feet wide on each side- of the proposed line, and practically to construct the line itself free of charge. In order to secure these facilities, however, the people are compelled to submit to these conditions. In other cases the Post. master-General’3 Department requires to be satisfied that a proposed line will prove a paying proposition, otherwise its construction will not be sanctioned.

Mr Webster:

– Nothing of the sort. We bear 50 per cent, of the loss.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I do not wish to misrepresent the attitude of the Department. Country residents are called upon to supply “telephone poles, and to erect them, at a price that is not sufficient to pay them for the time occupied in travelling to and from the work. Settlers wish to have telephone facilities so that they may be in ready touch with agents for the sale of their products. The Postmaster-General’s Department, however, insists upon subjecting this section of the community to hardship.

Mr Falkiner:

– It is the old, old story over again. Everything has to be done for the people of the cities and towns, including the provision of cheap meat.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– The cities receive every consideration, although they depend for their very existence upon the rural districts. Surely if the Department can see its way, as it does, to give immediate attention to any application on the part of a city resident to be connected with a telephone exchange, it should be able to give equal consideration to every country resident, irrespective of any question of cost. It is all very well for the PostmasterGeneral to claim that his Department is a paying concern; but I would remind him that he is making it a payable concern by the sweat of the farming community.

Mr Webster:

– That is incorrect.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– The honorable gentleman will not deny that he calls upon country residents who ask for a telephone line to bear half the cost of construction as well as half the cost of upkeep.

Mr Webster:

– That statement is also incorrect.

Mr NICHOLLS:

– I urge the honorable gentleman to see- that his Department gives more consideration to the wants of country residents than it has hitherto done. Surely settlers 8 or 10 miles away from a township are entitled to some system of telephone comunication ?

Mr Jowett:

– Do not they provide it for themselves?

Mr NICHOLLS:

– Most of them are compelled to do so.

I have now to refer to a matter which affects the industrial section of my constituents. I urge the Federal and State Governments to see that better treatment is meted out to the industrialists of Australia. At the Recruiting Conference, convened by the Governor-General, the promise was made by the Prime Minister (Mr. Hughes) that every union that had been de-registered as the result of the recent strike would be allowed to reregister. A couple of days since I received from the secretary of the Lithgow branch of the New South Wales Railway and Tramway Service Association a letter asking me to approach the Federal Government with the object of securing the re-registration of that body. It is stated in this letter that Mr. Beeby had said that in no circumstances would that union be granted re-registration. If it is fair to allow one organization to re-register, it is only reasonable to allow every other organization which was de-registered as a result of the strike to secure restoration to its original status. Why subject one section to a disadvantage, and give to another what is regarded as a concession ? I am not prepared to say whether the Federal Government has power to do anything in this matter; but if they have, they ought certainly to take action. The members of the Railway and Tramway Service Association are just as much entitled to consideration in this respect as are other industrialists throughout Australia.

Repeated applications have been made by me to the Assistant Minister for Defence (Mr. Wise) to reinstate the men who were dismissed some time ago from the Small Arms Factory at Lithgow. On each occasion the honorable gentleman has told me that everything possible is being done to relieve distress in that town; but I can show that twenty or thirty men, whose cases I have brought before the Minister, have not been reinstated. Some time ago I stated in this House that I believed there were sixty cases of victimization in connexion with these dismissals. I still adhere to that statement. I hope that the Minister will take notice of what I have said, and do justice to these men. They did not strike, but, under his instructions, were put off, and have not been permitted to return to work. Some of them have houses for which they have only partly paid, and they are unable to meet the payments coming due, and many are married, with wives and children to support. The (production of rifles is as necessary now as it was two or three years ago, and to produce all the rifles we need these men must be employed. There seems to.be a black list which prevents them from getting work, because when some of them tried to get work elsewhere they were told that, although men were wanted, they could not employ those who had been working in the Small Arms Factory.

Mr FALKINER:
Hume

.- The debate on the meat question has. discovered so many experts, without knowledge of their subject, that I rise with diffidence to express opinions which are the result of a lifetime spent in the grazing industry. My objection to the report of the Inter-State Commissioners is that it is the report of other than practical men. During my first speech in the House I related an incident connected with the hearing of an arbitration case five or six years ago, in the course of which I was prompting the barrister who appeared for the pastoralists. For several weeks the witnesses had been speaking of two-tooth, four-tooth, and six-tooth sheep, and so on, and we began to think that the learned Judge and counsel had become conversant with their manner of describing the ages of sheep ; but we were astounded one morning to hear them conversing among themselves of ‘‘adult sheep” and “middleaged wethers.” The Chairman of the Inter-State Commission is a legal gentleman, whose appointment to the High Court Bench some years ago raised such a howl of indignation that he declined the position. From want of practical knowledge Be has assumed, in his report, many things contrary to facts. Let me refer briefly to one or two of his statements. On page- 38 of “The Further Report on Reinvestigation,” he says -

From the point of view of the price which is fair to tlie producer, the main economic fact in the meat trade of Australia is that the Imperial contract prices pay the grower.

I am not interested in fat stock, being a stud sheep breeder, but during the past thirty years I have seen many pastoral families, some holding large and some small areas, fail, and I say that this statement cannot be accepted. What price will pay the grower depends entirely on the season. Then on page 39 we get this bright gem -

Similar considerations apply to the objection that bankers and other financiers would not advance to graziers as much, particularly for the future purchase of store stock, if the value of fat stock comes down. The answer is that the requirements in the way of loan will be correspondingly less.

Fancy a man spending four or five years at a University to come to that conclusion. It is obvious to a schoolboy that the requirements will be correspondingly less, but the fact is ignored that advances have been made at present prices on the 11,000,000 cattle and 75,000,000 or 76,000,000 sheep which represent our stock. When the price of stock goes down, the dealer suffers a loss of income, but the man who owns breeding flocks and herds loses part of his capital, much of which has been borrowed.

Mr Poynton:

– To him the event is worse than the wealth tax.

Mr FALKINER:

– Par worse; it amounts to confiscation. Of course, the Commissioners could not be wrong every time. They say- -

It has already been pointed out that cattle, once fat, must be sent to market, and it may be added that there are reasons, almost amounting to positive demonstration, for the belief that killable sheep in such numbers and of such ages exist in the Commonwealth that “ holding back “ would be imprudent, even if it could be practised generally with a view to defeating the action of the authorities.

Every ohe with any knowledge of the pastoral industry is aware that the carrying capacity of a holding, especially of a breeding station, is limited, and that when lambs are old enough to wean, stock has to be sold to make room for the increase, less deaths and those killed. It is moonshine to talk about stock agents wiring to owners to hold back stock. The agents are all so anxious for business that if the market is up ls. per head they will send a “ spec “ wire advising the forwarding of stock for the next market. I never knew one to advise me to keep back stock. The Commissioners’ want of practical knowledge in the dairying industry was adverted to by the honorable member for Wannon (Mr. Rodgers). This is what the report says -

It seems strange that representatives of the dairying industry should, in this inquiry, have swung so far away from the argument used with great force - indeed; the main argument - when dealing with dairying, as to advocate a high price for stock so as to retain existing profits from a single “ side line “ of the industry, viz., calves. The high price of dairy stock- both cows and bulls - was universally advanced in the Farm Products Inquiry as a prime difficulty in the way of the dairyman seeking either to replenish “his herd after the drought troubles or to maintain it at its ordinary number, in spite of normal reductions or losses.

Naturally it is difficult to stock up when stock are at a high price.

Dairy cows are, so. to speak, the raw material of the dairying industry, and a fall in their cost to the’ dairyman would be a main advantage in the constant replacements which are necessary.

The assumption is that the dairyman must always buy his stock, whereas he keeps the heifer calves of his best milkers. It is stated that calves are a side line, but if a dairyman can sell eighty poddies for. £5 each, he makes £400 out of them, while from the mothers he would not make more than £8 per head, or £640. A dairyman would not consider a line which brought him nearly half his income a side line. The report goes on to say that the grazing industry, particularly where mixed farmers and small men are concerned, was never so prosperous before, and that the losses of the drought have been overtaken. I do not think, however, that the man whose only capital is his labour is better off than he used to be, because the high cost of living affects him as much as it affects the consumers in the towns. The grazier, with a medium-sized holding, who escapes the very heavy Federal and State taxation, may be doing well enough. Then we get this -

Figures are quoted later tending to show that the industry, viewed as a whole, has already recovered the losses of the drought year, and if meat prices are now fixed on the basis of ordinary season conditions, the position might be reviewed in the face of any calamity, such as drought, just as the railway systems frequently carry starving stock free or at reduced rates.

Would honorable members opposite be willing, if values fell as low as they did in the nineties, when good sheep had to be boiled down or turned into manure, to give to graziers prices that would pay them ? That would be only fair. In the days of which I speak the banks were closing down on the pastoralists, but there was no word heard then about giving the grazier a fair price.

Mr Fenton:

– The collapse of the land boom occurred in the early nineties.

Mr FALKINER:

– It was not due to the collapse of the land boom. It was owing to the prices for primary produce dropping so low. For example, best quality New South Wales wool was not fetching 8d. in the market. The report continues -

It must be borne in mind, too, that many carcass butchers - leading buyers both at sales and on stations - are also pastoralists.

I say, with some knowledge of the industry, that that statement is absolutely incorrect. It is not only incorrect, it is absolutely untrue. There are few carcass butchers who are also pastoralists. There never have been carcass butchers in any numbers engaged in pastoral pursuits. As regards Mr. Tom Field, a carcass butcher who has been referred to, one of his stations - Willandra, in New South Wales - is becoming one of the leading stud-breeding stations in Australia, and his Northern Territory border property, Oban, is a station where they do not fatten. But they have recently taken up new country, improved it, and stocked it, and now he and his partners are finding that the war-time profits tas may wipe them out. The report proceeds with respect to the evidence of Mr. R. Griffiths, who, in answering a question by the Chief Commissioner, said: “ Assuming he has got his ewes and cows already on the property, it may pay.” In other words, he says, “ Assuming that he was already stocked at low prices, it might pay.” Mr. Field says -

The Imperial contract prices will pay, provided seasons are good and store stock can be bought at values which allow a margin for the fattener.

Sir Richard Butler states, “ Under ordinary conditions the Imperial contract price is a payable one.” If there is any calling in Australia, however, where ordinary conditions cannot be guaranteed it is the pastoral industry. Australia can be divided into three areas as regards rainfall. One-third of the centre of Australia has a rainfall of less than 10 inches, and very often there is none. Another third has a rainfall up to 15 inches, but it is frequently T or 8 inches, as many people know to their cost. Between the barren heart of Australia and the coastal country there .are no natural features to keep the constant drought in Central Australia from ebbing and flowing right through tothe coast. We never know what our seasons are going to be, and that is the main reason why prices should not be fixed in the grazing industry.

Mr. Sidney Kidman, who owns a few million acres of the interior and some hundreds of thousands of cattle, bought in his stations when prices of cattle were low. He had worked for his living in theinterior. He knew the country well, and he put his practical knowledge to his own pecuniary advantage. I know Mr. Kidman personally, and have great respect for him. He does not attempt to largely improve his stations, but uses them as fattening centres, and concentrates on the priceswhich he is able to obtain for his cattle. Mr. Kidman may be able to sell his cattleat the Imperial prices, and find them pay him well; but not so the smaller grazier and freeholder.

If there is one thing more than another that has enhanced the price of meat in the Commonwealth, it is the threat towipe out the hig men - the capitalists. This threat has issued from every platform, from every Labour orator.

Mr Fenton:

– Why should a threat make any difference?

Mr FALKINER:

– Because you never know when those threats, which are the outcome of class prejudice and hatred,, may be carried out as the result of a majority of the electors putting into power the parties who have made the threats. There are many men who, realizing these menaces against theirbusinesses, refuse to take risks. I remember telling the honorable member for Batman (Mr. Brennan) one night, when we were walking home together from the House, that I expected to live to see the day when he and his colleagues would be giving to the pastoralists a bonus to go out back and grow their chops for them. When a man is regarded, not as a producer and a benefactor, but as an enemy of the country in which he has been born and reared, then one cannot wonder if he does not care to launch outwith his capital.

I will quote now another sweet- gem from the report. And I might say that an ordinary professional man who goes to a university and leads a narrow life does not know how little he really knows. He frequently considers that, having acquired a. certain amount of book-learning, that may be taken for brains. In the Letters from a Self-made Merchant to his Son, the old merchant remarks, “ Sending, some fools to college only makes them a different sort of fool from the fool, they would have been in any case.” I do not wish to be rude to professional men, but one occasionally meets with those who think, because they have acquired the contents of a text-book, that that amounts to brain power. And then it is when they are appointed .to, their positions that the practical man has to suffer.

On page 42 of the report there is a reference to mutton and lamb averaging 52 lb. per animal. I do not know whence the Commission got its figures, but I have handled enough sheep in. my life to be positively certain that those particulars are absolutely wrong. The average weight, especially of small sheep like those of southern Victoria, is fairly low. It may be increasing throughout Australia owing to the increase of crossbreds, but the average weight is from 48 lbs. to 52 lbs., according to the season. As regards lambs, the average weight is 30 lbs. A crossbred lamb will weigh from 42 to 4o lbs. if it is well on ‘ towards a year old ; but it is a matter of practical knowledge that- the average lamb “ goes “ about 30 lb. Yet this is one of the bases on which the report- and recommendations regarding our profits are calculated. On page 43 the Commission states -

But all additional expenditure of raising stock or in salvage is amply covered by the amount of £27,600,000 over and above the incomes earned by the aggregate flocks and herds in the normal year 1913.

The Commissioners regard the expenditure as being confined to hand-feeding or the rent of land. Any man with practical knowledge knows that the land rented to save stock is not the only loss. When a.severe drought occurs, the money spent in keeping sheep alive does not at all’ represent the whole of the loss. Besides that, there is the death rate and the shrinkage in the wool clip. I remind experts on the other side- of the House that the more wool put on the sheep the more can be starved off. In a drought a heavily-woolled sheep which is ill-fed can easily starve off fully 40 per cent, of its wool, and the wool itself is worth only about 35 per cent, of what it would have been had the sheep been fully fed. Such factors as those, however, are ignored in the report. Here is another illustration, showing where the Commissioner lacks practical knowledge. The report states: “A well-known breeder of stud sheep found that the demand for rams could not be supplied.” And then the Commissioner continues with the following little joke - “ the Iwanoff system of artificial increase of sire-power not being practised in Australia.” To show that he knows what he is talking about, the Commissioner supplies a footnote, as follows : -

See Davis’ Impotency, Sterility, and Artificial Impregnation (1917) - ‘“Most of those who keep horses and jacks for breeding purposes make use of the impregnator, to permit of the impregnation of a number of females without too great a drain upon a male.”

Apparently the Commissioner wishes breeders to run around with an artificial impregnator, chasing a flock of 20,000 or 30,000 stud ewes. It would be absolutely ludicrous, if it were not all part of the opinion upon which is based the intention of robbing the graziers of Australia of millions of pounds. I do not know who was- the stud-breeder indicated by the Commissioner; but, having controlled the largest ram-breeding station in Australia, and possibly in the world, *T, hold that I am in a position to state the reason why the demand for rams could not be supplied. It was entirely due to the maggot-fly trouble. There are many rams bred to-day, perhaps more than ever before in Australia, and there are more breeders. But the shortage, in merino rams particularly, was entirely due to the ravages of the blow-fly in the northern portion of New South Wales and in Queensland. With a view to showing how little the Commissioner assimilated the evidence which was put before him, I may mention that he talks about speculation inflating prices. The position is that in the case of breeding sheep there are dealers. If a man thinks that my necessity compels me to sell store stock at a low price, he will buy it from me. But for fat stock there is no market. The man who owns fat stock knows exactly what it is worth, and there is thus no margin left for the speculator. Under the heading of “ Demand for Stock,” the Commissioner, upon page 47 of his report, says -

But it is important to remember that “ demand “ for stock in relation to “ supply “ cannot be limited to demand for meat purposes only. The demand for breeding and stocking up, for fattening, for wool, and for dairying are all factors, the potency of which has been greatly heightened by the special incentives already mentioned.

There he is quite right, and in this connexion I would point out that in 1891-2 when we had 102,000,000 sheep in Australia, low prices ruled because we could not sell the surplus. But since 1891 millions of acres had been substantially improved, and millions sterling had been expended on water conservation. Yet today there are only 75,000,000 sheep in Australia. It is obvious, therefore, that the land is not stocked up to its highest capacity, and until it is fully stocked, the grazier will be a competitor with the consumer for meat. In the markets of Sydney and Melbourne the grazier is always ready to buy anything which is not quite fit for the butcher, or for which, the butcher will not give the full price. While our lands remain unstocked to their full capacity, the grazier will continue to be a buyer of sheep. Now that we know we can sell our clip for ls. 3d. per lb. during the next two or three years, it is quite possible that the price of fat stock, may be no higher than the grazier can afford to give. I sold a little lot of twotooth wethers the other day for 29s. 6d. While a grazier. will give that price for a sheep twelve months old, which is not fit for killing, there is no chance of the public getting cheap mutton.

The Commissioner further says -

Assuming normal seasonal conditions, the carrying capacity of the grazing land now occupied in the Commonwealth has been nearly reached.

That is utter folly. It has not been nearly reached, nor will it be nearly reached for years. If the pastoral Boards of New South Wales will only make the farmers and pastoralists destroy rabbits, I am quite sure that Australia will be able to carry 100,000.000 sheep and more, just as she did as far back as 1891. Further, if there be no interference with the industry, the prices which are now ruling for stock may tempt some adventurous spirits, like Mr. Field, to stock up country in Queensland which hitherto has been unoccupied. The honorable member for Calare quoted statistics relating to the number of flocks of sheep that there are in the Commonwealth. He did not tell us that the total number of sheep owned by these flock-owners with under 5,000 was 34,000,000. That is to say, these flocks constitute 45 per cent. of the sheep of Australia. It is the owners of these small flocks who’ go in principally for fattening, sheep. The pastoralist who has 100,00^ sheep is usually to be found in the arid districts, and in every case he is a breeder. In New South Wales there are only two stations, at the present time carrying 100,000 sheep. If the recommendations, of the Commissioners be adopted, the returns which have been furnished to the Taxation Department in connexion with income taxation and war-time profits taxation will need to be revised, seeing that they are based upon present capital values. The Income Tax Commissioner, therefore, will require to have the returns amended, and will require to revise his ideas regarding the value of stock.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– The poor pastoralist !

Mr FALKINER:

– He is not poor in spirit, or he would have been wiped out long ago. I do not wish to see prices reduced by artificial means, but, as an Australian, I should like to see them reduced by reason of a natural increase in the number of our sheep and cattle. The present price of stock is too high for the welfare of Australia. A reduction, resulting from good seasons and a natural increase, is very much to be desired, especially when we bear’ in mind .the needs of our pastoral areas, which have an annual rainfall of only 10 and 15 inches. At the present time sheep are worth too much money to permit of their being allowed to run about in these districts far distant from railways, and where no relief can be obtained. The prices that we are getting for sheep today represent merely our out-of-pocket expenses on account of drought, fly-blow, and are the result of our own energy and ability. In the past, during drought years, we have been obliged ‘to keep the animals alive. I, myself, have worked five of the best stations in Australia absolutely without profit during a drought merely in order to keep the sheep alive. One witness before the Inter-State Commission affirmed that 34,000,000 sheep to-day cut as much wool as did 60,000,000 sheep a few years ago. That statement is entirely wrong. But the fact that sheep do cut more wool today, and that the wool is of a higher quality, is ‘entirely due to the intelligence exercised by the pastoralists themselves. Surely Honorable members opposite do not wish to take away from the pastoralists something which they have secured, not out of labour, but as the result of their own ability.

Mr Fenton:

– They have bred the sheep up to producing more wool, and wool of a better quality?

Mr FALKINER:

– Yes. Then I would remind the Committee that the ordinary wool-grower, whether he be in a large or small way, does consider the consumer in our cities in that nearly every country constituency returns a Protectionist member to this Parliament. As a result, we pay more for everything that we use than we otherwise would do. In fact, I sometimes think that the only things for which we do not pay are the air that we breathe and the water that we drink. All the wool which is consumed by the city dweller represents an entirely negligible quantity. As a matter of fact, we are solely dependent on Great Britain in the matter of the disposal of our wool clip. Just here, I would like to mention what the honorable member for Grampians (Mr. Jowett) overlooked when he was speaking the other day, namely, that, the thanks of Australia, and certainly of this Parliament, are due to Great Britain for the generosity she has exhibited, not merely in purchasing our wool, but in purchasing and paying for it in the full knowledge that she cannot obtain delivery of it.

Mr Mathews:

– The squatters ought to thank her more than anybody else.

Mr FALKINER:

– I am prepared to give my thanks in the proper quarter, as one of those individuals who believe that our wool industry is the principal financial factor in the prosperity of Australia. I think that the Ministry will be ill-advised if they fix the prices of meat. I have already said that their action will not affect me- personally, because I am not a grower of fat sheep. I do not know how far the fixing of prices will reduce the capital value of stock, but if it has that effect to. any appreciable extent, there is a possibility that the grazier will be able to give more for live stock than can the fat stock butcher, and thus the consumers in our cities will suffer.

Before concluding, I wish to say a word or two in -regard to Papua. Many Australian .companies have a large amount of money invested there, and they are confronted with one or two difficulties which, I think, the Minister (Mr. Glynn) might be able to help, in a large measure, to overcome. I refer to the labour conditions. Under the Papuan labour ordinance, tlie native boys are paid for the full contract time whether they work or not, and, though the Administrator has power to deal with them, this does not cultivate the plantations. I think the ordinance might be altered so as to provide that the boys should be paid only for the days upon which they work. I point out, also, that in all tropical countries women are, allowed to work on plantations, and it appears to me quite reasonable that when a native boy is engaged tapping rubber trees, which is very light occupation, his wife should be allowed to accompany him, and be also allowed to work.

Mr Glynn:

– The report I have is to the effect that they do not care to leave the villages.

Mr FALKINER:

– And the report I have is that the boys are taken away from their wives, and, naturally, after they bad been absent for a week or two, they desire to return, and so they clear out.

Mr Mathews:

– If the women are allowed to work, the result will be the breaking up of the communal settlements.

Mr FALKINER:

– I have been asked to bring this matter under the notice of the Minister, in order that an investigation might be made.

Mr Glynn:

– I have been inquiring into the matter, and, in most cases, the trouble is believed to be due to the’ treatment of the men.

Mr FALKINER:

– I do not know anything about the matter personally, and. as I said, I was only asked to bring it under the notice of the Minister. In regard to hemp, rubber, and copra, the growers are entirely dependent, in regard to the marketing of their product, on the local manufacturers, who, if they put their heads together, can pay what they like.

Mr Glynn:

– I have drawn up certain reciprocity agreements in order to deal with that matter. I received a deputation on the subject seven or eight months ago.

Mr FALKINER:

– This afternoon, when the honorable member for West Sydney (Mr. Wallace) was speaking, he mentioned that in Sydney they were loading single-dumped bales on the ships, and as a member of the Central Wool Committee I know an instruction was issued that, in order to save space and bands, the’ wool was to be double-dumped except for a small percentage which would go into the corners. Since then I have made some inquiries to see whether I or he was right, and, while I do not know for certain whether the bales on the Rajah were double-dumped or. not, it is possible that the honorable member’s statement was quite correct.

Mr ARCHIBALD:
Hindmarsh

– On a vital matter such as that which has been before the Committee this afternoon it is essential that if our party, consisting as it does of two groups, is to remain a National party in the truest sense, the consideration of such questions as this should be approached from the consumers’ as well as the producers’ stand-point. It seems to me that this phase has largely been lost sight of during the debate. The honorable member for Hume (Mr. Falkiner) has given some very valuable information regarding the pastoral industry, but we cannot get away from the fact that prices have increased enormously in Australia during the last year or two, and, in my judgment, this advance has not been warranted by all the circumstances nf the case. One effect of this policy of price fixing is that there is a tendency for a gamble in certain commodities in general use not affected by regulations. I have in mind one or two articles in regard to which a certain substantial amount of gambling is going on at the present time.

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– Does the honorable member propose to say what they are ?

Mr ARCHIBALD:

– I do not think it is desirable to make any public statement at the present time, but I shall be prepared to supply the information privately to the Minister.. I do not think that there is any desire on the part of the great bulk of the people to do injury to the great pastoral interests of this country. I am not going to say, however, that there is not a small section of the industrialists who do not care a “ hang-“ for the squatters or anybody else, and who would be perfectly willing to ruin the country in order to give effect to their mad schemes; but the great majority of the workers have no desire to injure the pastoral interests in any way. That lndubtry, like any other business, must be prepared to defend itself on the facts of the case. Looking into the future a little, I am inclined to think that this midsummer madness will soon pass alway. In regard to the question of price-fixing, I maintain that this Government and this Parliament, if they have any selfrespect, must do something.

Mr MASSY-GREENE:
Honorary Minister · RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP; NAT from 1917

– That is the policy of the Government.

Mr ARCHIBALD:

– Any remarks I may make will be for the purpose of strengthening the hands of the Government, not, however, that I suggest any lack of sincerity on the part of the Ministry. What are the facts as far as we can gather them ? The honorable member for Hume has stated the position of those engaged in the stock-raising industry, and I have no doubt that there is a great amount of truth in what he has said. But the position must be looked atfrom more than one angle, if we are to be guided by the whole of the facts.

Sitting suspended from 6.28 to 8 p.m.

Mr ARCHIBALD:

– The information supplied to us- is certainly valuable, but so diffuse that we find it difficult to reach the kernel of it. We have received’ a number of reports in regard to the question of meat, and I am afraid that we are liable, in the abundance of the information supplied, to lose sight of some of the chief points. In the fourth report of the Inter-State Commission it is stated on page 22 that the retail prices of meat in Sydney before the war and in March, 1917, show the following striking advances in main lines of consumption : -

Sirloin, 6.75d. to 10.89d. - 61 per cent.

Leg of mutton, 4.95d.. to 8:35d. - 68 per cent.

In dealing with economic questions, it is essential that we should have regard to facts, and here we have a statement of facts from which there can be no escape.

The honorable member for Hume (Mr. Falkiner), and those who share his views, will probably seek to explain away these very big increases of 61 per cent, and 68 per cent. by referring to the drought. That explanation, however, will not account for the rises. The Inter-State Commission points out on the same page of the report to which I. have just referred that the figures as to loss of stock in the 1914-15 drought show that in New South Wales sheep diminished by 18.144 per cent. and cattle by 14.742 per cent. In Victoria the corresponding figures are 12.944 per cent. and 31.726 per cent. -

The percentage of loss in Victoria in the case of cattle was more than double that in New South Wales. Victoria is, to begin with, far less self-providing in the matter of beef than New South Wales. It might therefore have been supposed that with a lower proportion ‘of beef stock to population, and with a higher rate of loss due to droughty the Melbourne beef price would have risen higher than the Sydney beef price. The figures show the opposite result.

Melbourne -

July, 1914 - Sirloin, 7.20d. March, 1917 - 9.90d.

Sydney -

July, 1914-6.75d. March, 1917- 10.89d.

In other words, Melbourne started the drought ½d. per lb. in advance of Sydney, suffered greater losses during the drought, and yet, after it was over, obtained beef1d. per lb. cheaper than Sydney.

The increases in the prices of beef and mutton in Victoria are somewhat similar to those which have taken place in my own State. How are these increases to be explained? Clearly, as the figures I have just quoted show, the drought will not account for them. It is imperative that we should endeavour to discover the cause. Our friends of the pastoral and grazing industry warn us that we must not attempt to fix the price of meat, since to do so would be to ruin that industry. I would ask them whether the industry was ruined when no better prices could be obtained than those which prevailed before these increases took place?

Mr Sinclair:

– The honorable member must admit that all other prices have gone up in proportion.

Mr ARCHIBALD:

– I do not know so much about that; let us look at things as they are. The reports of the InterState Commission show that the graziers, the butchers, and, in fact, all interested in stock, indulge in dealing. They are all “ jobbing “ on the market. Where we find buyers playing also the part of sellers, where we have all-round speculating, the only result can be the forcing up of the market. There can be no doubt that that sort of thing has been going on. These people may imagine that speculation in time of war is quite justifiable; but I shall say nothing as to that, since we have to take human nature as it is.

Mr Pigott:

– The speculators are not dealing with fat stock, but mostly with stores.

Mr ARCHIBALD:

– We had “fats” and “ stores “ before these increases took place, but we did not have the market phenomena of to-day.. We know that, of recent years, many stations have changed hands, and that it is possible for stationowners to regulate the market by holding back stock.

Mr Falkiner:

– That is rubbish.

Mr ARCHIBALD:

– I do not think it is. When the grazier, the butcher - the buyer and the seller - are all engaged in dealing, the market must go up. Who is going to pull it down? To whose interest would it be in such circumstances to beat down the market? Complaint has been made that some of the butchers are making enormous profits. In the large cities in my own State the number of butchers’ shops has decreased sincethe war. Many butchers have been driven out of the trade; their businesses have ceased to pay.

When there is a general forcing up of the price of any particular commodity, public clamour must naturally take place, and I think it is our duty to look at the effect of these increases upon the great masses of the community. I think there is a means of solving this problem. The Labour party constantly complain about the War Precautions Act and the regulations framed under it ; but, as I told them recently, six months after the war is over they will be very sorry that we are not still subject to such regulations.

Mr Blakeley:

– We shall not get the war over while profits are to be made out of it.

Mr ARCHIBALD:

– The honorable member is not talking common sense.

Mr LAIRD SMITH:
DENISON, TASMANIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

– It is a cruel statement to make.

Mr Blakeley:

– There is a lot of money in war.

Mr ARCHIBALD:

– That is the class of statement that is doing much harm amongst the workers to-day. It is more -than ever necessary that we should organize. AH classes should strive to understand each other, and to pull together for the public good. The public interest must predominate over private interests, and we must strive to remove class hatred. If this Parliament is worthy of its salt, it should take action in this matter. We have had placed before us figures as to the increase in the price of meat which cannot be controverted. In fixing prices, I think the Government would be well advised in having regard to the London parity. It certainly pays the Australian pastoralist to sell his beef and mutton to the British Government, and .the basis of the contract made with the British Government should supply a good foundation for us to work upon. Regard must be had, of course, to local circumstances. More stock is raised in Victoria than in South Australia, where we depend on Queensland for our supplies of beef, and in fixing prices care must be taken to make it worth while for Queensland stock-owners to continue to supply the wants of my State. The usual practice is for stock to be driven to Farina and trucked thence to Adelaide. The additional cost thus incurred must be allowed for in fixing the prices for South Australia. We must not lose sight of the business aspect of these matters. I think that some like provision will have to be made in regard to the prices fixed for Victoria, in order to make it worth while for stock-owners in New South Wales and Queensland to send stock down here.

The attitude of the wonderful Industrial Workers of the World - alias Labour - Government of . Queensland has been responsible, amongst other things, for the position in regard to the meat supply of South Australia. The Queensland Labour Government has shown its want of a truly Federal spirit by prohibiting the sending of stock from that State to South Australia. If that sort of thing represents the high-water mark of such Labour Administrations, then the less we have of them the better. Their actions may have benefited the citizens of their own State, but they have not benefited the people of Australia at large.

I recognise that the Government must fix the retail prices of meat, though there will be difficulty in doing that. It will be necessary to fix two sets of prices. Not to do so would considerably disturb the trade. If certain persons are willing to pay high prices, let them do so ; this is a free country; but we must protect those who have no money to throw away. ‘ No sound principle for the fixing of prices has yet been enunciated. I have always held that in dealing with economic problems you must be guided, not by fine-spun theories, but by facts. The only political economists worth reading - I would not waste half-an-hour on the others - -ar Thorold Rogers and Sir Leo Chiozza Money. Rogers’ book, The Economic Interpretation of History, is a very valuable one, because no one can understand economic problems without an economic interpretation of history. Sir Leo Chiozza Money also deals with facts, not merely with theories. Rogers contends that to arrive at a determination regarding values you must take their variations during a decade. The average price of meat throughout a decade would provide a scientific basis for our price fixing. So with land values. Never was there a country in which the laws of average might so well be applied as in Australia. The troubles of the pastoralists are due chiefly to droughts, yet there are not droughts every year. If there were, there would be an end of the industry. There are good seasons and bad seasons. Many squatters have made princely fortunes. Mr. Pigott. - But how many have lost?

Mr ARCHIBALD:

– Many of them were fools, who did not know when to buy in. The honorable member for Hume (Mr. Falkiner) mentioned one or two gentlemen who would not buy in at the wrong time. In a country like this, where seasonal changes are so great, the law of averages must be invoked to obtain a scientific basis for any economical proposal. Had I the time and material, I would have no difficulty in working out a scientific basis for the prices of meat, and Government officials should bc able to do this with a regard for the fact3 which should satisfy every one.

I shall not attempt to reply to everything that has been said in the debate. “When a witness is being examined before a Commission, he does not tell all that he knows, and unless the examiners are exceptionally smart, they will not put the right questions to him. Why should he give away all his business knowledge ? Besides, you must take a pinch of salt with a lot of evidence. But you cannot get away from historical facts. We have been told that the fixing of prices will ruin people. No doubt some persons will get a good bump. I do not know that we should consider them. Their speculation has been forcing the market up in war time. There has been nothing particularly wicked in what they have done. They are merely smart business men who are “out to make money, and they should have foreseen that the Government might step in to protect the interests of the people during this crisis. From what I heard not many weeks ago, I gathered that the grazing industry desires to compensate itself for the heavy taxation imposed on it in consequence of the war. That the Government should prevent.

Mr Jowett:

– Has any grazier pushed np the price of meat?

Mr ARCHIBALD:

– I do not know what individual graziers have clone. All I know is that those who are interested in selling will try to push up the market, just as those who are interested in buying will try to keep it down. People in business are out to make money.

I recognise that while Parliament exists for talking, the Government exists for the administration of the public affairs, and when parliamentary talk is interfering with proper administration it should cease.

Mr Jowett:

– Would the honorable member fix the price of speeches?

Mr ARCHIBALD:

– Many of them are not worth any price at all.

The honorable member for Calare (Mr. Pigott), who has exercised his right of speech, wishes me to read the following telegram which he has received from Mr. Hall, the Attorney-General of New South Wales -

Your wire Finlayson’s sstatement that I approached German internees either directly or indirectly absolutely without foundation.

Apparently, as is often the case, some old woman of the male sex has made a disclosure, and a rush has been made to fire it off in Parliament, and get it recorded in Ilansard, the proper receptacle for such double-distilled trash.

A great deal could be said in contradiction of the statements of the Opposition, but, no doubt, other opportunities will be afforded for that.

I do not often air grievances in Parliament, because I can generally get them remedied by personal representation to Ministers. I wish, however, to speak of the interpretation that is being put upon a regulation regarding long-service leave. After twenty years, a public servant is entitled to six months’ leave of absence on full pay, and when female public” servants leave the Service to get married, they are entitled in lieu of this leave to a certain sum for every year of service. I have always held, and I believe it to be the general opinion of the Service, that after a second period of twenty years the public servant is entitled to a further six months’ leave on full pay. But the Government have left the position vague by saying that, on application being made to him, the Public Service Commissioner may advise the Governor-General to grant them leave. I do not know that anybody has ever got it upon those terms. Suppose a man has been in the Public Service for thirty years. His ability to enjoy his furlough depends very largely upon his financial status when it is due. .If he has been handicapped by sickness in his family, as in more than one case that I have in mind, he is not financially able to enjoy his leave as he would desire, and in many instances public servants decide not to take their furlough. What is the good of their wandering about the place, looking into the shop windows ? If we are to admit the principle in the abstract, it should be widely applied. A young woman should be entitled to benefit when she has retired from the Service to be married, after four, five, or six years. And the principle should be recognised in the case of a man who has gone beyond his twenty years of service. I ask the Government to look into the whole matter. It appears that some official has interpreted the regulation in a manner that was not intended. We do not want to do any one an injustice. It would be better to sweep the whale principle away unless it is to he applied fairly all round.

Mr Finlayson:

– I desire to make a personal explanation. Somewhat fortunately, I entered the chamber in time to hear the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Archibald) read a wire from Sydney, despatched to the honorable member for Calare (Mr. Pigott). The statement which I made this afternoon was from a letter that I now hold in my hand. I received it from a Brisbane man, who is an internee in the camp in Sydney. I will read, verbatim, an extract from the letter - -

Kelly. Orchard, Sinclair were here, but not inside. Attorney-General Hall was here the time of the strike to get scabs. He got none. Ninety-five per cent, of them here are workers.

That is the statement which I made this afternoon.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– On whose authority ?

Mr Finlayson:

– On the authority of this letter. The authority is the man who has written it.

Mr Archibald:

– What is his name ?

Mr Finlayson:

– I do not think it would be fair to give it.

Mr Hector Lamond:

– A slander is published on the authority of an interned enemy.

Mr Finlayson:

– My explanation is that the statement which I made is absolutely correct, according to this letter. Mr. Hall, the Attorney-General, denies it. Very well, then. It is a matter between Mr. Hall and this man.

Sir Robert Best:

– Will you give Mr. Hall the name of that party ?

Mr Finlayson:

– I certainly shall do so. Mr. Hall is entitled to know the name, but honorable members are not. The honorable member for Moreton (Mr. Sinclair), however, is quite welcome’ to look at the letter, and I hand it to him. If the authenticity of the letter is in doubt, here it is; he may see for himself.

Mr Atkinson:

– Do you mean to say that it was from a German internee?

Mr Finlayson:

– Yes. I have made the statement, and Mr. Hall denies it. I do not say that I disbelieve Mr. Hall, or -that I believe the writer of the letter against the statement of Mr. Hall.

Mr Pigott:

– Well, why do you make the statement in this House 1

Mr Finlayson:

– Because I am justifying the assertion which I made earlier, and am showing my authority for it. It is a matter for each honorable member now to please himself whom he believes. I will take the opportunity to tell Mr. Hall,, with whom I hold a somewhat close personal friendship, the exact quotation from the letter; and I shall give him a chance to deny it to the man himself.

Mr WALLACE:
West Sydney

– I desire to preface my remarks at this stage by a brief reference to certain statements which I made this morning with respect to the stowing of wool on ships by wharf labourers in Sydney. In the course of my earlier speech to-day the honorable member for Hume (Mr. Falkiner) entered into a controversy with me as to the way in which wool was carried oh board those vessels. I am pleased to hear now that the honorablemember has been informed from a reliable source that to a certain extent he was wrong. On my part, I also admit, from another reliable source, that I, too, tosome extent, was wrong. The fact is, as an official of the Waterside WorkersUnion stated to me to-day, the Katoomba was the last vessel loaded here with wool. Most of the bales were doubles. Only a few single bales were taken. On the boatin question, namely, the Rajah, at the time when the Sydney wharf labourerswere working upon her the bales were all singles; she was taking them in at that stage to finish off her load. The practice- is to carry the wool in double bales, and not cut, so that the wool shall not occupy too much space upon the railways at itsdestination. Upon this matter, therefore, the honorable member for Hume and myself are both right and both ‘wrong.

I desire briefly now to refer to the profiteering which is going on in our midst. Honorable members have been discussing beef for the past two days. But not only in respect to beef are consumers being exploited. The same holds good with practically every commodity that we eat, and everything we wear, from our head to our feet, besides everything with which we furnish our homes. The enhanced prices are caused by speculation > and by the eagerness of people generally - as the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mr. Archibald) has just pointed out - to make money, while the war is on. In the Argus of the- 10th instant the cost of clothing is referred to in the course of a report. Mr. Piddington therein quotes from a statement supplied by a witness named Morgan, manager for Robert Reid and Company Limited. That gentleman mentioned that the price of working men’s shirts delivered in the store in 1914 was 20s. 5d. - I presume per dozen - whereas the selling price then was 27s. 6d. In 1917 the price, delivered at the store, was 27s. 5d., while the selling price wa3 42s. The difference in 1914 to Messrs Robert Reid was 7s.1d. profit on every dozen shirts. In 1917, however, the profit per dozen was 14s. 7d. The firm had doubled its profit.

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

– That was to meet the war-time profits tax.

Mr WALLACE:

– Yes ?

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

– Andyet you do not see that that tax increases the cost of living.

Mr WALLACE:

– The one logical conclusion is to nationalize the industry.

Mr Jowett:

– It was not the producer of those shirts who exploited the consumer.

Mr WALLACE:

– The process of exploitation does not commence at any particular point. Everybody does his little bit - the producer, the wholesaler, and the retailer. Theonly party who cannot do any exploiting is the unhappy consumer. He pays for. the lot.

Mr Bruce:

– Is the honorable member suggesting that a dozen shirtssold at 27s. and a dozen sold at 42s. are both to bear only a profit of 7s. ?

Mr Mcgrath:

– Why not? It is the same quality shirt.

Mr WALLACE:

– If 7s.1d. profit was good enough for Robert Reid and Company in 1914, when the selling price was 27s., surely the same percentage of profit should be sufficient to-day. The contention of the honorable member for Flinders (Mr. Bruce) is that these shirts should have been sold at a profit of 7s. per dozen. But instead of that, they were sold at a profit of 14s. per dozen.

Mr Bruce:

– The question is what was the profit on the selling price of the goods ?

Mr WALLACE:

– In 1914, this firm paid 20s. 5d. per dozen for the shirts, and sold them for 27s. 6d. per dozen, whereas in 1917 they bought them for 27s. 5d. per dozen and sold them for 42s. per dozen. In other words, they made a profit of 7s.21. per dozen, or 33 per cent. in 1914, and a profit of 14s. 7d. upon an outlay of 27s. 5d in 1917.

Mr Bruce:

– The basis of any such calculation should be, “What was the profit on the selling price?” That is the only basis upon which a business can be run.

Mr WALLACE:

– The honorable member ought to be perfectly satisfied with the profit which his firm - that of Messrs. Patterson, Laing, and Bruce - have made.. They have just doubled their reserves since the outbreak of the war. They have doubled their profits.

Mr Bruce:

– I rise to a point oforder. I regard the honorable member’s observation, as more or less in the nature of a personal reflection on me.

Dr Maloney:

– Is- the statement true ?

Mr Bruce:

– It is not.

The CHAIRMAN (Hon J M Chanter:

– If the honorable member for Flinders regards any remark made by the honorable member for West Sydney as a personal reflection upon himself, I must ask the honorable member for West Sydney to withdraw it.

Mr WALLACE:

– If the honorable member for Flinders construes my remark as a personal reflection upon himself, I unhesitatingly withdraw it. But I was merely making a reference to the profits of the firm with which, unfortunately, he happens to be connected. I come now to the case of Messrs. Buckley and Nunn. Within three years, that firm has increased its profits by £12,878, without any additional outlay so far as the InterState Commission could ascertain.

Sir Robert Best:

– Is there anything in the Commission’s report which says so?

Mr WALLACE:

– If the honorable member will take the trouble to peruse the report he will find that the whole position is there stated. I dare say that when other reports are published, it will be found that the same thing applies throughout the entire clothing trade. I know that in clothing huge profits are being made alike by the wholesalers and retailers.

Mr Falkiner:

– If the cost of living is so high, how can the public spend so much with the drapers ?

Mr WALLACE:

– We all recognise that, during this war, there is a lot of money itv. circulation which would not be in circulation during normal times. More than 300,000 men are absent from Australia engaged either in war or warlike operations. Most of these men have left dependants behind them. There are plenty of women in the community to-day who are in receipt of from £1 to £2 per week in addition to their previous income.

Dr Maloney:

– I wish that they were.

Mr WALLACE:

– There is no doubt that they are. Any number of young girls married soldiers on the eve of their embarkation, for the purpose of securing the separation allowances, -which they are drawing to-day. It is to these persons that the retailers look for their profits. These girls will pay almost any price for clothing and boots. As a result, there is a lot of money in circulation which would not be in circulation during normal times. During the course of the investigation conducted by the Inter-State Commission the “ manager of Messrs. Buckley and Nunn attributed the high cost of commodities to the fact that certain men are going round to the various warehouses, selling and re-selling the same goods. I. come now to the question of boots. The Commission inquired into that matter, and we find that the same system obtains in respect to these articles. It has been alleged by the retailers that if a female customer comes into one of their shops, and asks for a pair of boots, they show her a pair which is valued, say, at 25s. Should she express dissatisfaction with the boots, the shopman goes round to the back of the counter, puts them .into a nice box, and, returning, offers them to her at an increased price, which she frequently pays. Now, if any man dropped a pound-note in the street, would any honorable member be justified in picking it up and keeping it? I think not.

Mr Falkiner:

– The honorable member is quite right. Only the other day the people were coming out of Myers’ clearing sale like a mob of sheep out of the yard.

Mr WALLACE:

– If honorable members will take the trouble to peruse the Daily Telegraph of 21st May last, they will see a very interesting account of the operations of Joe Gardiner and Company,’ of Sydney. His firm practically has a monopoly of the boot trade there. He has established shops throughout the metropolitan area, and these shops are run under different names. The boots bear fictitious brands. One class of boot is supposed to be manufactured in New York, when, as a matter of fact, it is manufactured in Australia. It is sold at the price at which imported boots are sold.

Mr Fenton:

– I am almost inclined to say, “ Serve the people right.”

Mr WALLACE:

– But they are absolutely at the mercy of this firm. They have either to pay the price of the boots, or go without them.

Mr Falkiner:

– We shall have to standardize boots and clothing as they have done in England.

Mr WALLACE:

– It may be necessary to do that in order to abolish profiteering. Only the other day, some honorable members visited the Commonwealth Clothing Factory. They learned that that Factory is turning out suits of clothes for 30s. One article, with the manufacture of which I was specially impressed, was the pilot coat. I recollect purchasing one of these coats nine years ago for £6. At that time it was regarded as a cheap article. Yet I am assured that the Factory can import the cloth, and manufacture that coat for 45s.

Mr West:

– Then the honorable member was taken’ down in his purchase ?

Mr WALLACE:

– No. The price which I paid was the price of the coat in London at that time.” If the honorable member will walk down Bourkestreet, and look at the overcoats exhibited in the shop windows there, he will see that it is not possible to obtain a decent overcoat for less than £6.

Mr Jowett:

– And the Commonwealth Factory pays exactly the same price for its wool.

Mr WALLACE:

– -I admit that the make of the overcoats seen in the Bourkestreet shops may be superior to the make of. the garments manufactured at the Clothing Factory. But if the latter can pay 7s. 6d. a yard for the material used in those coats, and manufacture the coatsthemselves for 30s., surely the overcoatsin our shops can be sold for 70s. ?

Dr Maloney:

– Why not 40s. ?

Mr WALLACE:

– I am allowing them to make double the price charged by theClothing Factory, and a little bit over. It is only when we have a’ direct contrast presented to us of the character to which I have referred that we realize how bigis the disparity between prices, and that the difference is goin? into the pockets of” people who are not legitimately entitled to it. In regard to boots, I intend reading an extract from the Sydney Baily Telegraph. Doubtless it will appear in the Inter-State Commission’s report, but in view of the large quantity of matter which has been put into Hansard in connexion with profiteering, I think that this extract should also be placed in our official record. The extract reads -

page 5929

QUESTION

BOOT BUYING

In Suburbs and City. margins between prices. “ It seems from your prices generally that in 1917-18 there is a much bigger gap between the cost price and selling price, and a bigger percentage gap than in 1916,” said Mr. Piddington, K.C., to Mr. Joe Gardiner during the inquiry of the Inter-State Commission yesterday into the question of regulating the prices of footwear. “How is that?” he continued. “Because you get what you can?” “ Reasonably,” answered witness. “ To a large extent, prices are controlled by competition.”

The Commissioner examined a specific case. A boot in 1916 cost 13s. 9d., and 4s. was added to make the selling price. In 1917 the cost went up ls. 3d., but instead of 4s. being added to make the selling price, 7s. 6d. was added. “Why was that?” asked the Commissioner.

Witness could give no specific reason for it.

A lady’s high-grade boot was exhibited. That would be sold at a price about 3s. higher in the city than the suburbs, witness said.

The Commissioner. - Is the moral “ Shop in the suburbs “?

Witness. - Not necessarily. In the city shop expenses are higher.

A dilapidated pump sole shoe waa produced by Mr. Kleinsmith (representative of People’s Food Protection Association). Holes had been worn in the sole after nine weeks’ use; the heel (top of which was made of pulp) had become detached. In the boot was also a cardboard shank: Regarding the composition, witness said that as long as there were three layers of leather on the lower portion of the heel of such a shoe, it was all right to have a pulp composition top. “They might have had only nine weeks’ wear,” witness said, “ but the person who used them might have walked up mountains or through pools.”

Mr. Kleinsmith. ; Would it not be a fair tiling to brand that boot, so as to indicate its composition ?

Witness. - I see no reason why it should not bo done. I think that in Victoria recently an Act was passed enforcing the mention of the cardboard in a heel.

Witness discussed with the Commissioner his evidence of previous days. Mr. Piddington replied: “ So far as we are concerned, the only shop of yours that has the ‘ Bostock ‘ announcement very freely spread out in its windows is the Boss Pitt shop.”

The Boss Pitt is supposed to be an excellent boot, equal to the imported article, and it is sold at the price of an imported boot; that is to say, the cost of trans- ‘ port from the other side of the world is added to the cost of manufacture, and the consumer has to pay. This is not playing the game with the community as a whole, in view of the fact that Arbitration Courts have been established to regulate conditions. If price-fixing generally is adopted, it will be necessary, of course, to have more inspectors to see that the regulations are enforced, otherwise they will be evaded. A pair of glace kid boots with good leather in them, costing from 23s. to 24s., will give better wear than a pair of Blucher boots at 7s. 6d., because in the latter boot the leather is of inferior quality, and except for veiy rough usage, will not stand the same wear as the glace kid article. If it is necessary - and this is conceded - that we should wear clothes, it is preferable that we should wear the best obtainable within a reasonable range of prices. An undershirt at 3s. 6d. to 4s. 6d. will not give anything like the same wear, or be as comfortable as a similar article at . 12s. 6d. or 13s. 6d., and I say that if we are going to control the prices of commodities, we should eliminate the rubbish and fix fair prices for articles of good standard value. That is what is required. I do not believe in shoddy goods for any person. Because there are certain class distinctions in our social system, I do not believe that the navvy should not wear a pair of decent boots or a tailor-made suit of clothes, though I remember a few years ago, when three or four of us came ashore from a ship looking quite as respectable as the officers, the latter made comments, and said we were dressing above our means. I suppose some honorable members opposite even to-day think that of the working classes.

I agree with the honorable member for Hindmarsh (Mt. Archibald) that the present time is an excellentopportunity for the Government to do something. They have been in office for about thirteen months, and as far as winning the waris concerned, I do not think they have done very much, so it is up to them to make a name for themselves by taking measures to prevent exploitation of the people . I regret very much that Parliament seems determined to go into recess at a time when all these reports by the several Commissions are about due. The representatives of the people should have an. opportunity of discussing all the Government proposals in their various aspects-. I think these reports are of more interest to the people even than winning the war, because if the people are hungry and cannot get the necessaries of life they cannot be expected to have much interest in. a war 16,000 miles away.

A little while ago the honorable member for Illawarra (Mr. Hector Lamond) seemed to doubt very much the credibility of statements I made with regard to General Smuts, so I refer the honorable member to the files of any of the daily papers of Monday, 20th May, 1918, containing quotations from a speech delivered by General Smuts. The honorable member, I believe) quoted utterances by General Smuts in May of last year, but we must remember that in the course of twelve months the leaders of the Empire, including even Mr. Lloyd George, are found thinking along somewhat different lines. The following paragraph appeared in Stead’s Review on 1st June: -

It will be seen that General Smuts has altered hisopinion somewhat in respect of war conditions; and if I might be pardoned for saying so, he has come round to our way of thinking. We were laughed at twelve months ago, and the peace proposals which emanated from the New South Wales Conference last year were ridiculed, but since then similar views have been expounded by Mr. Lloyd George, by President Wilson, by Count

Czernin, and, in fact, by the leaders of thought in the countries of our Allies and enemies alike. The honorable member also alluded to Mr. Samuel Gompers, who apparently must be regarded as sacrosanct, because his attitude appeared to be in conformity with views of honorable members opposite. But I remind him that Mr. Gompers is not the satisfied individual he is believed to be.

Mr WALLACE:

– Gompers is beginning to get off. the handle a little, and if they do not look out there will be occurs rences in America similar to those experienced in Australia. Let me quote what Mr. Gompers said, recently in an article written by him for the American Federationist of 19 th February -

Another aggressive has been begun in. the campaign against protected humanitarian legislation known as labour laws. Profiteers have not changed their methods and purposes because of the war. On the contrary, their greed and consciencelessness become more conspicuous as they take advantage of the nation’s necessity, and endanger those who are risking their lives in the nation’s defence. . . .

It devolves upon the labour movements of the various States to carry out this proposed programme within their own boundary. Alert, intelligent activity is necessary to guard the interests of the workers in the various States. Already in several States efforts are under way to create the impression that there is a need for suspending labour legislation. Several of these efforts have tried to misconstrue the declaration of the Council of National Defence into a statement that suspension of labour laws is necessary in furtherance of national needs. The intention of the Council of National Defence is diametrically opposite. It was intended to check the onslaught of predatory interests and profiteers.

Labour everywhere should guard vigilantly against the attack on. labour laws and standards.

Everything for our beloved Republic !

Nothing for private profiteering!

It. must be apparent to honorable members that what occurred in Australia is occurring in America. They must admit that, so far as the Labour movement in Australia is concerned, the greatest militarist could not have taken exception to the attitude of the Labour movement at the commencement of this war. Supporters of the Labour party rallied round the flag in their thousands to fight overseas in defence of their ideals.

Mr West:

– And the Labour Government while it was in power did its best to win the war.

Mr WALLACE:

– The people outside are as well aware of that fact as we are. As the war progressed, Labour discovered that the ideals for which it had so long, stood were being undermined, and that, as the result of profiteering, the cost of living was so increased as to have the effect of bringing down wages. No doubt, the same sort of thing is occurring in America. The workers of America doubtless entered the war as we did, but many strikes have since occurred there, and more, no doubt, will take place before the termination of the war. If profiteering is continued in the United States, and an endeavour is made, as in other countries, to make fortunes out of the war, the state of affairs that has arisen here will be repeated there. In that case, Mr. Gompers will, no doubt, be regarded as a false god.

I trust that the Government will reconsider their decision that the Parliament shall go immediately into recess. If it is necessary that they should have time to prepare their financial measures, thm let us adjourn, but not for more than a fortnight. I am anxious, like others, to assist the Government in fixing the price of,meat, and to take other steps to combat the high cost of living. I shall be very dissatisfied if Parliament goes at once into recess, and the control of our industries is carried on by means of regulations under the War Precautions Act. Last February, when we went into recess, Lt was decided by the Government that the price of .meat should be fixed. Nothing, however, has yet been done. Supporters of the Government who are interested in the cattle industry were prepared last February to unload at .any price. Finding, however, that the Government were standing by them in their resistance of the price- fixing proposal, they proceeded to speculate once more, but since they believe that the Government now intend to take action they are anxious to gain time in which to unload. Brother Pigott and others are looking very down in the mouth.

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

– The honorable member for Calare (Mr. Pigott) put up a great fight this afternoon.

Mr WALLACE:

– I (Congratulate him on the fight he put up in defence of the interests he represents. I should be well satisfied if I could do as well for the interests that I represent. I trustthat the Government will at once deal with this question of price fixing. Something should be done immediately to curtail the upward tendency of prices. It is impossible for a man to maintain his wife and family on £3 per week, having regard to the present high cost of living, and if an attempt is not made to check the soaring of prices, there will be aneffort to increase wages, with the result that we shall have, perhaps, just such another industrial upheaval as we had last year.

Mr SINCLAIR:
Moreton

.- I desire, first of all, to refer to the quotation made by the honorable member for Brisbane (Mr. Finlayson) from a letterthat he produced.

Mr Finlayson:

– Here it is.

Mr Jowett:

– Who wrote it?

Mr SINCLAIR:

– It is an anonymous* letter- I find that my name is mentioned twice in it. I do not think the honorablemember did me justice, since he read only one portion of the letter in which reference is made to myself. It .astated in this letter that -

Kelly, Orchard, Sinclair were here, hut not’ inside. Attorney-General Hall was here thetime of. the strike, to get scabs. . . .

That is the portion which the honorablemember read in reference to myself. I desire to deny that I ever visited the concentration camp in company with any of the honorable members named. It is rather unfortunate that the honorable member should have quoted from thisletter. I do not say that I have never visited the camp. As a matter of fact, I visited an Australian in it, and chatted with him in the company of an officer for an hour or so. That completed the visit so far as I was concerned.

Mr Finlayson:

– The writer of that letter is Australian-born.

Mr SINCLAIR:

– I know nothing as to that. It is painful to have to listen to some of the statements and quotations- that have been made during the debate on Supply. It is generally understood, and, I think, is a well-authenticated fact, that throughout the civilized world, and particularly in the Allied countries, a publicity propaganda is being carried on by the enemy with the object of sowing discord and discontent amongst the- workers and otter classes. There is insidious work going on. The enemy is fighting us, not only with shot and shell, and with every inhuman device that genius can invent, but with a lying propaganda designed to split up the forces of the Allies. His deadly work in that direction has borne good fruit for him in Russia. Could . he but create disunion amongst the Allies, he would be well satisfied. In some quarters we are told that this is a sordid trade war, the intention being, of course, to dishearten the working classes, to lead them to say, “ What have we to do with the bloated capitalist? Why should we fight to keep the war going for his benefit V Some very fine work is being done in that direction. Our honorable friends opposite who say !that they are fighting for better wages or better conditions are making it just as much a sordid trade war when they advance such a plea for not fighting at all unless certain industrial conditions are considered, as is the man who charges id. or Id. per lb. more for his beef. What we want is unity among the Allied nations. If we have unity we shall conquer, but divided we shall fall. Our enemies know that only too well, and, consequently, they are busily engaged in a propaganda designed to divide us.

During the last few days papers have been read and quotations made from alleged secret treaties, which could have no other effect than that of disheartening the people of Australia, and making them war weary. To use a sporting phrase, the object is to make our people ‘ ‘ sky the towel.”

Mr Considine:

– Does the honorable member deny the accuracy of the treaty in question ?

Mr SINCLAIR:

– The honorable member himself did not prove it. We know that Germany got in some very fine work in Russia. The enemy not only betrayed the. Russian nation, but attempted by the distribution of either concocted or genuine treaties to betray other nations as well. Whether these documents are true or not, this is no time for us to fight amongst ourselves about such matters. We should fight with every ounce of power to down our enemies, after which we shall be able to fight out our own little differences.

Mr Considine:

– Should not the people know the truth?

Mr SINCLAIR:

– The truth sometimes can be couched in language which, in war time more particularly, it would be better not to employ. Especially is this so in respect of half truths. In regard to this matter, I wish to make a quotation from an article in the Nineteenth Gent-wry and After, by George Makgill, Bart. -

This ‘brings us finally to the social side of the German preparations for war. Since the notorious Stieber combined in himself the part of Socialist, secret police agent, and Kaiser’s spy _ on the police, Germany has undoubtedly utilized the Socialist and similar movements to undermine other nations. . It was Stieber who, as the founder of the German spy system, first devised this method, and under his successors the Socialist machine has been in great measure directed from Germany. Lanoir has shown, too, that the Syndicalist movement in France was originated in France with German secret service money, in order to weaken the Republic. He also has shown that in France candidates of the International Revolutionary party were in the pay of Germany, and he quotes Stieber’s Memoirs to prove that a subsidy was granted by Germany “to every parliamentary candidate in France or elsewhere (my italics) who supports a policy useful to that of tlie Empire.” We all remember the election of Tribitch Lincoln, the spy, to a British constituency!

Recent events have proved that the revolutionary movement in Russia has been precipitated by the paid spy, Rasputin. Still more recently, the German agents, Lenin and Trotsky, have brought about the Bolshevik reign of anarchy and terror, which has laid Russia helpless at the feet of Germany.

It is known that the dangerous anarchist movement known as the I.W.W. (Independent Workers of the World) is directed and financed from Germany, and both in Australia and the United States its agents have been arrested and the society proclaimed illegal - this by the two most democratic countries in the world. It is noteworthy that during recent years the Socialist, Syndicalist, and Anarchist movements have, with one accord, taken a single “pacifist” turn; and if we analyze the “pacifist “ catchwords and ‘policy we find that they have their origin in Germany. As we have seen, “ the freedom of the seas “ appeared as a German demand in the propaganda of the Anglo-German Conciliation Committee in 1912. In 1915 the phrase was used in Casement’s rebel pamphlet disseminated in Ireland in September of that year. The appearance of this pamphlet was to have been the signal for the rising: but, owing to a miscarriage of plans, the rebellion was postponed until the following Easter. The formula adopted by Lenin and the Bolshevists of Russia, “ no annexations,” I find in a leaflet issued by the Labour press in 1915. headed “An appeal to women - make way for peace.” Underlined are these words: peace!” It is signed “Kiara Zetkin, International Secretary of Socialist Women,” and is dated from Stuttgart, with the illuminating remark “ translated from the German.” This was about the time when Germany saw that her plots in South Africa, India, and Egypt had failed, and that her colonies were going, ot gone. That leaflet came from Switzerland, and was only one of many. Finally the Bolshevist formula recently adopted by the “‘pacifist” wing of -Labour here, “ self-determination of peoples,” is borrowed from the page3 of Treitschke! Surely these facts should convince those who still assert that the “ pacifist “ movement here has nothing to do with Germany, that the agitators do not always know what hand is directing their efforts, and in whose interests they are really working. *

The “whole article is worth perusing. I warn the members of the Opposition that by introducing some of the matters which they have introduced into this debate, they are effectively doing the work of the enemy. I hope that in future they may show their bona fides by putting in a good word for the Allies.

I have a few words to say on the fixing of the prices of meat, a subject which has been largely referred to during the debate. In normal times I am opposed, on principle, to the fixing of prices. But we are living in abnormal times, and organization is necessary to enable the country to put forth its strength most effectively, and to conserve its resources by living cheaply. Still, if we are to fix prices, we should not confine our attention to one or two local products, but should fix prices generally. So far, attention has been directed to the pric.es of things that arc produced locally, and the cost of imported commodities has grown almost too heavy to be borne. I am surprised at the new-born zeal for price-fixing shown by our Labour friends. In 19.15, there was in power a Labour Government with a solid following.

Mr Lynch:

– It would be in power now had some of its followers had any sense.

Mr SINCLAIR:

– Yes,- and it would have had the whole of the then Opposition behind it, too, because we were supporting every measure proposed for the prosecution of the war, swallowing principles that we had advocated for years in order that there might be no division between political parties. That Labour Government appointed a commission to fix prices, which did some good work. It fixed the price of bread at 6½d. for the double loaf over the counter, a price which has not been altered. A sectional committee investigated the prices of beef, with a view to making a recommendation, and the Commission advised the Government to fix the price of all commodities at the price then ruling, any increase to be subject to inquiry, and to declare everything a necessary commodity, to allow of the general fixing of prices. That was the shortest cut to take to prevent exploitation. Before the price of any commodity could be fixed, it had to be declared a necessary commodity. Were I at the head of the Government, I would take some short cuts through constitutional difficulties. I would do things, and inquire afterwards whether they could be done constitutionally.

There has been an attempt to inflame the public mind regarding the cost of foodstuffs. No doubt, the condition of some of our workers is deplorable; but it is not entirely due to the high price of foodstuffs. Things just as necessary to a household as food have increased in price out of all proportion. It has been said, and I believe truly, that we have the cheapest food supply in the world, though I do not say that prices are not .higher than they should be, especially the price of beef. The distribution of beef has much to do with the inflation of its price above actual values. But the day fellow prices in beef has gone for ever, so far as Australia is concerned. We shall never again see the prices that ruled a few. years ago. Various things are responsible for this, the chief among them being the land taxation measures of my honorable friends opposite, which have burst up the large estates in Victoria and New South Wales, and in the agricultural areas of Queensland. This has driven tho cattle men out into the Never-Never country. Are they expected to bury themselves there merely for the benefit of citydwellers, who would rob them of their just earnings? No.

Mr Nicholls:

– Big estates are not necessary for the rearing of cattle.

Mr SINCLAIR:

– To raise beef cheaply you must have large estates. You could not afford to employ two or three men to look after a few hundred head of cattle. The Queensland growers would be only too pleased to sell their cattle at the export parity. I have been assured by growers that if the people of Melbourne or of any other part of Australia wished, they would supply beef at that parity, that is, for about 40s. or422s. per cwt. on the. hoof in Queensland. In addition, there would be the cost of droving the cattle to Melbourne,about £5 per head, or of sending them by rail, which would be more. At one time, when beef was cheap, we were glad to get £5 a head for cattle.

Another thing which affects prices is the question of the taste of the people with respect to choice cuts. Only about 25 per cent, of a beast comprises choice cuts. About 50 per centis of a kind at which people today would turn (their noses up. Another 25 per cent. is fit only for boiling down. When people talk about getting1s. a lb. for a beast weighting 800 lbs. the argumentis absurd. A great portion of that must be sold at much under the cost price to the butcher so as to get rid of it at all. I do not object to people demanding the choice cuts, but they must not squeal if they have to pay for them. When all the people want only the best portion of the meat, they cannot hope to get cheap meat.

Some time ago I asked a question of the Postmaster-General with regard to the conveyance of mails by rail. The Government of Australia is for the people, whether it be a State or Federal authority in question, and, if some arrangement cannot be agreed upon between the State railway authorities and the. Federal Postal Department as to the carriage of mails by rail, there will have to be a change of Government, one way or the other. It is ridiculous to present an answer such as did the PostmasterGeneral whenI asked him on the 16th May -

Whether the practice of making up small parcels of mails for transmission from one railway station to another has been abandoned, and whether it has been determined that all mails shall be forwarded by train to some central clearing office where they are to be redistributed over lines along which they have already travelled.

The Minister (Mr. Webster) inhisreply stated -

It is a fact that an efforthas been made to get rid of the superfluous exchange of mails.

This does not involve any unnecessary inconvenience to the public, since other facilities are provided. It is not the rule, nor is it expected, that mails shall be conveyed- from post-office to post-office by a complete system of exchanges. As a matter of fact, that could not be done. 1 am sorry the Minister was not more frank with me, and that he did not exactly state the reason. To say that “it could not be done is absurd, because it has been done in my district for years, until quite recently. The Minister was merely trying to parry my question. I placed the matter before the Deputy PostmasterGeneral in Brisbane. He is an official who considers the conveniences of the public so far as his powers will permit. He is a very worthy man, buthis scope is circumscribed; he gets his instructions from head-quarters. On the 29th May I received the following letter from him : -

Adverting to your recent representations regarding complaints made to you respecting the despatch of mail matter posted at small stations for other stations along the same line, and to the residents’ request for a reversion to the old system of exchanging direct mail’s, I hava to inform you that the Department’s practice generally has been to abolish only exchanges between small offices where the delay occasioned by despatching such correspondence to a distributing office was inconsiderable, and the amount of. mail matter very small. On branch lines where trains do not run daily these exchanges have not been curtailed; and on the main line, whenever the T.P.O. is not running the mails between intermediate offices are exchanged by the next available train. Wherever it is found that curtailment would cause undue inconvenience to the public, e.g., where orders for meat or other perishable necessaries of life have to be obtained from the nearest tradesmen, no alteration has been made.

It is considered no hardship has. been inflicted by the action taken by the Department, which action, on the other hand, has effected a considerable saving.

Yours faithfully, (Sgd.) H. B. Templeton,

Deputy Postmaster-General

In Queensland for the past ten or eleven years, at least, it has been the practice to send small packages of mail matter merely made up in an envelope, given to the guard, and handed out at the station to which it was addressed. That has been discontinued, and the mails along the whole of a line are sent to one clearing office; then, often, the next day, they are sent back along the line to the individual offices.. That applies to the whole of the lines throughout my district, and, I suppose, throughout Australia. 1 ascertained from another source the reason why this is done, and I cannot understand why the PostmasterGeneral did not tell the House why it was necessary to adopt the new method. I have been given to understand on good authority that the ‘rate for the carriage of mails as between the State and Federal Governments was disputed some time ago. The subject came before the Inter-State Commission. By the decision of that body it was decided that mails should bear the minimum parcel rate, which, in some instances, means that a letter sent from one station to another would cost the Department 3d. That* decision is wrong. It is not in the interests of the people ; and if the railway authorities insist upon their attitude, it is time the public arose in their wrath and said, “ We must have our mails by the nearest and quickest route available.” If the old arrangement is no longer acceptable to the railway authorities, let the PostmasterGeneral hold a conference with the State Governments, and endeavour to secure some better and more satisfactory system.

One other item to which I direct attention has reference to mechanics who have enlisted, and who have afterwards applied for admission to the air service. One or two cases have been brought under my notice where men joined the Australian Imperial Force and secured a transfer to the Air Branch. They receive a mechanic’s wage of 8s. a day; and so much of their allotment money, or separation allowance, f as would make the total exceed 10s. a day is immediately stopped. A single man gets his mechanic’s wages, and also, if he has any dependants, a certain amount of allotment pay. In his case it does not exceed 10s. a day. Where a good tradesman gives up a good position, in which he can earn 14s., and even up to 20s., a day, and joins the Australian Imperial Force, and subsequently the Air Service, he deserves some recognition as a mechanic. Just why his allotment and separation allowance combined is reduced to 10s. a day I cannot understand. It is an injustice to a married man, who may have a family to maintain, that he should be placed on the same footing as a single man.

I have still one other small matter to bring forward. It has to do with discharges given to returned soldiers. Those discharges are printed upon paper which is not of the very best quality. While the men are walking about the streets in uniform, they are expected to exhibit their discharges to the military police. They must present them also to other persons. I, myself, often ask a man to show me his discharge when he applies for advice or assistance. It would not mean much move expense if the discharges could be printed upon parchment, and even enclosed in a wallet. They would be something of which the soldiers would be even more proud than they are to-day.

As to deferred pay, it has come under my .notice that a. certain lad, who was wounded in October last, and was sent to England, and then ‘home on furlough, arrived here in, March. -He was temporarily discharged, but was told he could not ‘ draw his deferred pay for another three months.

Mr SINCLAIR:

– That would be a help; but I do not know whether he availed himself of it. Is it not possible that, in the six months or more between the date of a man receiving his wounds and reaching Australia, the whole of his papers could be collected and dealt with ?

Mr Wise:

– Unfortunately, there are unsettled cases eighteen . months old.

Mr SINCLAIR:

– Well, I cannot understand that there should be thousands of cases of the character to “which I have referred - cases in which men who have been in hospital in England for some time have been told on their arrival here that they cannot obtain their final payments for three months. There is just one other matter which seems to be a source of irritation to our returned men. I am informed th’at, unless they hand over their uniforms to the Department when they are about to be discharged, they are required to pay -for them. Now it can readily .be understood that, in many instances, their uniforms were destroyed when they were wounded, and it seems to me that this demand represents rather an arbitrary exercise of authority. I hope that the allegation made to me is not true, but if it be true, I shall be glad if the Minister will see that the injustice is remedied.

I come now to the question of electoral reform. For some considerable time I have been battling quietly for the adoption of the preferential vote, and for other electoral reforms. I understand that next session a measure of electoral reform will be submitted for our consideration. What I wish particularly to impress on the Government is the advisableness of co-ordinating our work with that of the States wherever it is possible to do so. Some time ago I had the honour of being Chairman of a Commission, which inquired into electoral matters generally, and, during the course of our investigation, we found that in Tasmania, where a joint roll has been adopted, that roll is more complete than’ is the roll in any other part of Australia. Further, the people there are more satisfied with their electoral system than are those of any other part of the Commonwealth. In that State the saving effected in the printing of the rolls is a very considerable one, apart altogether from the saving which is effected in their compilation. I trust that the Minister for Home and Territories will give this matter his earnest consideration. He should not merely study the finances of the Commonwealth, but also the finances of the States, seeing that we are all one people. If a saving can be’effected by the adoption of a uniform roll for both the Commonwealth and the States, by all means let us effect it. Let us fall into line with those States which are willing to co-operate with us in this matter. The other States will soon join us.

Mr Glynn:

– We are ready to go on at once.

Mr SINCLAIR:

– I was told that four years ago. But the fact remains that we have not gone on yet. I believe that the existing condition of things will continue for four more years, and perhaps for forty years, unless we take a forward step ourselves.

Reference has been made to the question of the development of our oil-bearing areas in Papua. Some five or six years ago, when a Labour Government were in power, I recollect making representations to the then Minister for External Affairs (Mr. Thomas) on behalf of a gentleman named Priddle, who had spent the previous thirteen years of his life in prospecting for oil in Papua. He discovered the oil, but as soon as he made an application for a lease to exploit the oil-fields there he was informed that he could not obtain one. Shortly afterwards the Government appointed Mr. Wade to test the oil-bearing fields in Papua. I do not blame Ministers for being very careful to guard against our oil deposits getting into the hands of a monopoly. But surely they can adequately protect the Commonwealth against exploitation. Surely they could insist upon the payment of a royalty and the observance of conditions which would effectually safeguard Commonwealth interests. Had the field been left to private enterprise, I feel sure that we should have had our oil-fields in Papua going to-day. At any rate we should have known whether or not they were capable of producing oil. The gentleman to whom I have referred was offered £1,000 a year to work for a firm in German New Guinea. But he refused to do so. He said: “I am a Britisher, and I intend to work for the members of my own race.” If the Government are not prepared to exploit these oil-fields themselves, for goodness’ sake let private enterprize have a show. Let us press forward in this great empty continent. Let us develop our resources, so that we may become a self-contained community. There would be less talk about the hardships which people have to endure if they would only exhibit a little energy themselves.

Progress reported.

page 5936

PAPERS

The following papers were presented : -

Customs Act -

Proclamations Prohibiting the Exportation (except under certain conditions) of -

Bicarbonate of Soda (dated 5th June, 1918).

Salt (dated 29th May, 1918).

Proclamation Prohibiting the Exportation of Butter. Cheese, Cream, Concentrated Milk. Condensed Milk, Condensed Skimmed Milk, or Dried Milk, if unfit for export (dated 5th June, 1918).

Trading with the Enemy Act- Regulations Amended- Statutory Rules 1918. No. 153.

House adjourned at 10.8 p.m. (Thursday).

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 12 June 1918, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1918/19180612_reps_7_85/>.