Senate
9 November 1905

2^nd Parliament · 2^nd Session

REPRESENTATION BILL
HIGH COMMISSIONER BILL
QUESTION
- RIFLE RANGE : HOBART
QUESTION
- DEFENCE POLICY: ANNUAL REPORTS
QUESTION
- PRINTING OF STAMPS
QUESTION
- IMMIGRATION RESTRICTION ACT
PAPERS
QUESTION
- WESTERN AUSTRALIA: FACTORIES ACT
IRON INDUSTRY
SECRET COMMISSIONS BILL
QUESTION
- PUBLIC SERVANTS: CIVIC POSITIONS
HOME RULE FOR IRELAND
TOBACCO MONOPOLY
TREATY WITH JAPAN
- Emigration and Immigration
COMMERCE BILL
- Second Reading
APPROPRIATION BILL
SECRET COMMISSIONS BILL

The President took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 4795

REPRESENTATION BILL

Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– I desire to ask the

Minister of Defence, without notice, whether it is true, as reported in the Age of this morning, that the Government do not intend to proceed with the Bill dealing with the representation of the States in the Commonwealth Parliament ?

Senator PLAYFORD:
Minister for Defence · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · Protectionist

– I saw a report to that effect in the newspaper, and that is all I know about the matter. I cannot answer the question until I have consulted my colleagues.

page 4795

HIGH COMMISSIONER BILL

Senator HIGGS:
QUEENSLAND

– I wish to ask the Minister of Defence, without notice, if he can give the Senate any idea as to why the Government do not propose to proceed with the High Commissioner Bill this session?

Senator PLAYFORD:
Protectionist

– If the honorable senator will give notice I shall get the information.

page 4795

QUESTION

RIFLE RANGE : HOBART

Senator DOBSON:
TASMANIA

– I desire to ask the Minister of Defence, without notice, whetherhewill send an officer to Hobart, not only to inspect such sites for a rifle range as can be pointed out to him, but to join with the local officers in selecting the best possible site which can be obtained, and whether in the meantime he will give instructions) to stay the taking of extra land at the Sandy Bay rifle range?

Senator PLAYFORD:
Protectionist

– So many officers have gone over to Hobart, and reported, and the subject has been so carefully considered, that I have come to a decision in favour of the site at Sandy Bay, and given adirection for the resumption of the necessary land. I do not see the slightest necessity to go to the expense of sending over another officer for the purpose of inspecting sites. It is only a week or two since I sent over a special officer who inspected the sites, and on whose report I have acted.

Senator DOBSON:

– What I wish to know is whether the Minister will send over an officer to join with the local officers ih selecting the most suitable site which can be obtained?

Senator PLAYFORD:

– That has been done. Every possible information has been obtained. The selection of a site was delayed for months at the request of the honorable and learned senator and his, colleagues. I have looked into the matter with the greatest care, and there is not the slightest necessity to send over an officer, because it has been considered with the local officers’, and they are all of one opinion.

Senator Dobson:

– We cannot allow the Department to take the land.

Senator PLAYFORD:

– That has been authorized, and I do not think it can be stopped.

– I have not had sufficient experience of the present system to be able to say whether it is preferable to the former one. I know that there are Boards in Great Britain and the United States. That wonderful little nation, Japan, never appoints a Commander-in-Chief except in time of war, and manages by boards. So far I have been able to work with the boards in a highly satisfactory manner.

page 4796

QUESTION

PRINTING OF STAMPS

Senator PLAYFORD:
Protectionist

– I am not sufficiently well acquainted with the subject to be able to answer the honorable and learned senator; but if he will give notice I shall be pleased to get the information.

page 4796

QUESTION

IMMIGRATION RESTRICTION ACT

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I wish to ask the Minister representing the Minister of External Affairs, without notice, whether the Secretary of State for the Colonies has sent a communication, asking the Government to alter the Immigration Restriction Act with a view to making a special arrangement with Japan, in order to overcome its alleged susceptibilities?

Senator PLAYFORD:
Protectionist

– I have heard of no communication of that character, but if the honorable senator will give notice I shall ascertain whether one has been received.

page 4796

PAPERS

Senator PLAYFORD laid upon the table the following papers : -

Provisional regulations under the Defence Acts - Statutory Rules, 1905, No. 69.

Letter from the Premier of New South Wales to the Prime Minister about the Federal Capital Site.

Ordered to be printed.

Senator KEATING laid upon the table the following papers : -

Provisional regulations under the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act - Statutory Rules, 1905, No. 70, and Rules of Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration - Statutory Rules, 1905, No. 71.

page 4796

QUESTION

WESTERN AUSTRALIA: FACTORIES ACT

Asiatics

Senator CROFT:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I desire, upon notice, to call the attention of the Minister of Defence to an article which appeared in the Age of 6th November, 1905, and which reads as follows : -

Perth, Sunday

It is stated that the Premier has received a despatch from the Colonial Office, intimating that the clauses in the Amended Factories Act relating to Asiatics are repugnant to the feelings of nations with which Great Britain is at peace, and must be repealed. The despatch is said to be peremptory in tone, and to leave the Premier no alternative but to comply with the demand. The Cabinet has observed the utmost reticence regarding the matter, but it is believed the Premier has cabled for permission to make the despatch public, or to lay it on the table of Parliament. and to ask the honorable senator - in view of the very important national issues which may be involved, will the Ministry request the Premier of Western Australia to supply copies of the despatch mentioned, and such other information as may be available in order that the Commonwealth Legislature may be accurately informed in respect to the matter?

Senator PLAYFORD:
Protectionist

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

The statement has since been modified as to the character of the despatch, but as in any case the question involved is important, full information regarding it will be sought and laid before Parliament when obtained.

page 4796

IRON INDUSTRY

Motion (by Senator Pearce) agreed to -

That the Returns to the Order of the Senate, laid on the table 31st October, 1905, relative to Ironworkers’ Wages, and Imports of Machinery, Nos. 1 and 2, be printed.

page 4797

SECRET COMMISSIONS BILL

Bill read a third time.

page 4797

QUESTION

PUBLIC SERVANTS: CIVIC POSITIONS

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia

– I move -

That, in the opinion of the Senate, members of the Commonwealth Public Service should be permitted to hold elected positions on municipal and other local governing bodies, so long as such positions do not interfere with the proper performance of their duties as public servants.

Senator MILLEN:

– The honorable senator’s interjection is an assent to my general proposition. Let us assume that a public servant takes an active part in such a centre as Broken Hill, where municipal politics are ‘fought out on the labour ticket. We may suppose that the public servant is postmaster of the town, and also electoral’ registrar. He takes an active part in a bitter municipal contest, and is immediately afterwards called upon, under the Electoral Act, to administer a law affecting Federal Politics. It is only human nature to suppose that in such circumstances a large number of people at Broken Hill would assume that this postmaster would be a partisan in the discharge of his duties under the Electoral 0Act. It is impossible to avoid such a conclusion. If there is one thing which makes me appreciate the basis of the Public Service of Australia and of Great Britain, as compared with that of the United States of America, it is the fact that our public servants, partly as the result of their own volition, and parti v because their participation in public affairs has been discountenanced, have stood apart from politics, with’ the result that we hear nothing of the system prevailing in America of “ the spoils to the victors.” The evils of that system arise distinctly from the association of public servants in the United States with electoral matters, and the same evils might be expected to follow the adoption of a similar system here.

Senator Stewart:

– What spoils?

Senator MILLEN:

– I leave Senator Stewart to determine that. I admit that I have not seen any. I say that it is impossible to avoid the suspicion that a public servant taking an active part in support of a particular party at an election would not to some extent, Chough perhaps, unconsciously, influence the feeling of the elected candidate towards him. In the interests of the public servants themselves, it is desirable that they should stand altogether outside of* the conflict and turmoil- of politics in which we are necessarily engaged. It is in the interests of the public servants particularly, as well as in the interests of the general community, that I feel called upon to oppose the motion.

Senator STEWART (Queensland).This is a very important subject, and deserves a good deal more consi’deration than it is likely to receive this afternoon.. I hold the opinion that it is high time we applied1 a little common sense to our treatment of the public servants in regard to elections generally. Honorable senators appear to forget one important consideration which, to my mind, stands out prominently before all others, so far as the civil servant is concerned : He is a citizen of the State before he ?s a public servant. He i.°. a citizen of the municipality of the local division, in which he lives before he is a public servant. He lives that life apart altogether from his life as a public servant. I should very much like to hear some of our constitutional authorities on the point of whether it is competent for Parliament to deprive a man- of rights which’ have been conferred upon him by the Constitution. I do not know whether that point has ever been discussed. “

Senator Mulcahy:

– Parliament has done it.

Senator STEWART:

– It is all very well for the Minister to say that the Act provides for every case to be dealt with on its merits; when, at the same time, the Ministry issue an instruction which practically prevents public officers from making an application to the heads of their Departments. They really have no opportunity of presenting the merits of their cases. The instruction takes, away ,f rom . public officers any little liberty in this re,gard which is allowed by the Act. In order to give the Seriate an idea of the attitude which Senator Keating took up when the Public Service Bill was under consideration, I propose to read the following quotation : -

I am entirely in accord with the principle cf the amendment -

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

-Col. Gould.- What was the nature of the amendment?

Senator DE LARGIE:

– The object of the amendment was to allow the .full exercise of political rights by public officers.

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

-Col. Gould. - Was this speech made on clause 79 of the Bill ?

Senator DE LARGIE:

– I am unable to tell the honorable and learned senator, because the passage I am reading was quoted by an honorable senator during a debate on Public Service Regulation No. 1 on-the 12th June, 1903 -

I am entirely in accord with the principle of the amendment, that there is nothing in the Bill which denies to civil servants the right to band themselves together, to associate as members of a civil service association, or to join one or the other of the many political tor semi-political organizations, or the national or semi-national organizations, which permeate the length and breadth of the Commonwealth.

Senator PLAYFORD:

Senator BEST:

– So far as I can judge from Senator Keating’s approval of my remarks, the honorable and learned .senator will have no objection to the withdrawal of the minute in order that each case may be dealt with on its merits. Senator Pearce has stated that in Western Australia! public servants have rendered very important service as members of road boards and such bodies. We have a right, first of all, to see that their duties as public servants are carried out, and that nothing shall be allowed to interfere with them, and where the meetings of local authorities are held at night time, there is very little difficulty about that, but where they are held during the day it is, of course, out of the question that public servants should be members of those bodies. If a strong opinion on the point is expressed it cannot very well be disregarded, and the Senate has a right to press its desire that the minute referred to should be withdrawn. I consider the motion, far too strong, as I believe the whole case will be met by a reconsideration of the minute. To carry such a motion as that submitted to the Senate might prove more or less embarrassing bv reason of its general terms. T cordially approve of the attitude of the leader of the Senate on the question, and after his* promise I think we have a right to be satisfied. I feel quite certain tha’: in view of the expression of opinion we have had the Government will be prepared to reconsider the instruction, and thus all that I think is desired will be attained.

Senator Lt Col GOULD:
New South Wales

– I agree with a good many of the remarks of Senator Best. At first, I was under the impression that an attempt was being made to interfere with the regulations under the Public Service Act. But I find that ,the difficulty with which Senator Pearce is confronted, is that a minute has been issued by a Government, discountenancing any applications from public servants to serve as members of municipalities. I quite agree that it is not reasonable to take away from the public servants any rights which Parliament has expressly given to them. The Public Service Act provides that public servants shall not occupy certain positions without obtaining the consent of the Governor-General in Council. I do not think that any minute should be issued to discourage or prevent any public servant from making his application to occupy a position of that character if he so desires. But the words of the motion are that the Senate expresses the opinion that public servants “ should be permitted “ to hold elected positions. I admit that there is a qualification - so long as such positions do not interfere with the proper performance of their duties as public servants.

The Commonwealth Public- Service Act provides that except with the express permission of the Governor-General in Council, which permission may at any time by Order in Council’ be withdrawn, no public servant shall accept or continue to hold an office under the Government of any State or under ,a municipal corporation. An offi-cer is expressly authorized by the section to make his application to the Government. There seems to be some doubt as to whether the Government will withdraw the minute of which complaint has been made. I think that it is a fair thing that the minute should be withdrawn. An assurance has been given that the Government will consider the question. I feel satisfied that if the Government are assured that the withdrawal of the minute meets with the concurrence of the Senate, they will withdraw it ; unless, of course, they have some strong opinions of their own on the subject. In view of the assurance of the Minister, I appeal to Senator Pearce not to try to force a division on this very drastic motion. Suppose that he was successful in carrying it, and that a similar motion were to be brought before the other House, and to be negatived. The Government would then be confronted with opinions expressed by the two Houses in contrary directions. That shows how undesirable it is to issue regulations, except when they are in accordance with the law, or have been approved by Parliament. I think that, under the circumstances, Senator Pearce would be well advised if he withdrew his motion. He may rest assured that the object which he desires to attain has the sympathy of the Senate, and that the Government, who have already promised that the subject will be considered, will deal with it very much in accordance with his own desires. I do not feel inclined to take exception to Senator Pearce having brought forward the matter. He has done a good service to the public servants” and to the community generally, and what has taken place emphasizes the fact that the Senate is always willing to protect interests that are conferred upon individuals by law. While, strictly speaking, the Public Service Act itself would preclude public servants from occupying positions as committeemen of hospitals, schools1, of art. cricket clubs.

Or similar bodies, I should be very sorry to see it carried out in that way ; because I recognise that very often public servants render very valuable service in such capacities.. I should be extremely sorry to see anything done that would interfere with such work as they are able to do for the public in many country towns.

Senator PEARCE (Western Australia). - I have been very pleased to see that even those honorable senators who are opposed to the terms of my motion are against the action that was taken by a past Ministry. I do not wish to place honorable senators in a false position by calling upon them to vote for or against this, motion, or to make it appear as though they condoned the minute to which reference has been made. The Minister of Defence has made a very definite statement, but I cannot overlook the fact that the Minister representing the Minister of Home Affairs, with whose Department the Public Service Act has, to do, did not go so far as did the Minister of Defence. If the Minister representing the Minister of Home Affairs will adopt the same attitude as his colleague, and say that, in the light of the expression of opinion in the Senate, the Cabinet will take into consideration- the question of the withdrawal of the minute, I shall be prepared to withdraw the motion.

Senator Keating:

– I can promise that both my colleague and myself will bring the subject before the Cabinet. It must be remembered, however, that this matter has been dealt with by two previous Governments.

Senator PEARCE:

– It has been condoned by all the Governments since 1902.

Senator Keating:

– Personally, I rely upon the Act entirely, and think that everything necessary is therein provided for.

Senator PEARCE:

– I understand that the position of Ministers is that they are prepared to go back to what is laid down in the Public Service Act.

Senator Playford:

– Hear, hear; that is my view.

Senator PEARCE:

– In the light of that statement. I do not feel justified in pressing the motion to a division, and I ask leave to withdraw it.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

page 4811

HOME RULE FOR IRELAND

Senator DAWSON:
QUEENSLAND · ALP

– I beg to call attention, to the Journals of the Senate of the 19th October, by which it appears that the following resolution was passed by the Senate : -

That in accordance with the most treasured traditions of British Governments and British justice, and for the cementing of the Empire into one harmonious whole, this Senate is of opinion that Home Rule should be granted to Ireland.; and to move -

That the President be requested to take the necessary steps in order that this resolution of the Senate may be communicated to His Majesty the King, with the hope that effect may be given thereto.

In asking the Senate to accept this motion, r have no intention of occupying any time; in fact, if I were inclined to do so, I am not physically fit.It may appear strange that Ishould propose a motion of this kind. Theexplanation is a very simple one. As honorable senators are aware, a motion was carried by a substantial majority, expressing an opinion in favour of Home Rule for Ireland. By an oversight a formal provision was omitted from the motion. The matter entirely escaped my notice at the time. In fact, sir, until you yourself sent for me, and pointed out the omission, I had not noticed it. If Iunderstood you correctly, you said that it was very necessary that something should be added, and that seeing that the substance has been carried, a motion of this character would undoubtedlygo as purely formal.

The PRESIDENT:

– I could not have said that.

Senator DAWSON:
QUEENSLAND · ALP

– I understood that that was your view ; and it was under your advice that I brought the matter on again. After consulting the Clerk as to what would be, the proper! form in which what I desired should be framed, the present motion was hit upon. I do not intend to argue the subject, but simply to put it in its proper light in order that steps may be taken to deal with the substantive motion carried by the Senate in a proper way. That is all the explanation I have to make.

Debate (on motion by Senator Croft) adjourned.

page 4811

TOBACCO MONOPOLY

Motion (by Senator Pearce) agreed to -

That the Select Committee on the Tobacco Monopoly have leave to extend the time for bringing up the report to this day fortnight.

page 4811

TREATY WITH JAPAN

Emigration and Immigration

Debate resumed from 26th October (vide page 4127) on motion by Senator Pulsford -

That, recognising, as this Senate does, that it is the wish of both the Empire of Japan and the Commonwealth of Australia to maintain the purity of their respective races, this Senate hereby affirms the desirability of a treaty being made under which all questions relating to emigration and immigration may be arranged. This Senate further expressesits earnest hope that the friendship between the people of the Empire of Japan and those of the Commonwealth of Australia may be maintained, to their mutual advantage and to the well-being of the whole world.

Senator PULSFORD:
New South Wales

– A fortnight ago to-day, I had the honor to introduce this motion to the notice of the Senate. I commenced my speech late in the afternoon, and as halfpast six o’clock arrived before I had concluded, the Senate granted me leave to resume to-day. When I last spoke. I gave the Senate the gist of a considerable quantity of correspondence that had taken place in past years between the Secretary of State for the Colonies, the representatives of Japan in Australia, and the Commonwealth, and also correspondence in which the Japanese Ambassador in London was concerned ; the whole of it showing the feeling which existed in Japan regarding the character of the Australian legislation embodied in our Immigration Restriction Act. I desire now to continue the consideration of the whole subject. In the first place, I would ask the very careful attention of honorable senators while I direct their thoughts to the position now occupied in the great family’ of nations by the Empire of Japan. I desire them to realize what Ju pan has become, and with that object in view, I propose to give the Senate the benefit of information which I have gathered. In the early part of last year, great efforts were being made by both Russia and Germany to discredit Japan, and to produce throughout the civilized world a feeling that her success meant danger to civilization. In dealing with that proceeding, Dr. Morrison, the well-known and muchesteemed correspondent of the London Times, sent a very important communication, which was published in that newspaper last year. He wrote as follows : -

One can easily detect that Japanese publicists find difficulty in treating such a chimera seriously. Their country has associated herself so closely with the West during the past halfcentury, and has developed so many cardinal interests which, while thev lie at the very root of her present and future prosperity, plainly depend for their growth and security upon the preservation of good relations with Europe and America, that a racial conflict between Occident and Orient seems to them a detestable and unthinkable outlook. Thus, hard as it is to be treated with distrust ‘where tone reposes confidence, and with enmity where ‘one .tenders amity, the Japanese wisely keep their temper. It is useless, they perceive, to gird at a state sf affairs which can be mended only bv patient and good-humoured effort. Here and there, indeed, a growing fear can be detected that if Europe, falling under the influence of the spectre conjured up originally by the German Emperor from some realm of nightmares and bogics and now materialised by Russia in the cause of her own selfish aggressions, insists upon excluding the Japanese from Occidental society, they may ultimately be forced into actin” the part now most 11 n l u s t 1 v and unwarrantably assigned to them ; mav be compelled to organize a yellow-race resistance to this uncivilized ostracism.

He then dealt with the objects of the war, and in doing so he reproduced a statement made by Count Katsura, which was published in the United States, through the agency of the Rev. W. Imbrice, a prominent United States missionary. This is what Dr. Morrison wrote: - ‘

Much of Count Katsura’s explanation is intended to prove what the public have already agreed to admit - namely, that the object of the war is the security of the Japanese Empire and the permanent peace of the East. But he is particularly strong in declaring that the contest has nothing whatever to do with differences of race or religion - concerning which latter point his choice of a Christian missionary for mouthpiece is significant - and that it is a war carried on in the interests of justice, humanity, and the commerce and civilization of the world. His Excellency believes that no other Government ever look such, pains as Japan took at the outbreak of the war to inculcate “ the duty of conducting it in strict accord wilh the principles of humanity and the usages of international law.” Three precautions were adopted - first local officials were everywhere reminded that the fullest protection must be accorded to all Russians residing within their jurisdiction ; secondly, faculties of educational institutions, whatever their grade, were warned to instruct the students under their charge that foreigners must be treated with the utmost courtesy ; thirdly, to recognised representatives pf religious bodies, Buddhist, Shinto, and Christian alike, communications were addressed, asking them to teach their co-religionists that the war being solely between State and State, individuals had no concern in it, and that whatever a man’s nationality, he should be secure against molestation or annoyance so long as he ittended to his business peacefully.

Turning to the imputation that if Japan emerged victorious from the struggle, she would stir up the anti-foreign spirit now latent among the Chinese, and use it to serve her own ends, the Premier made two comments - one was that Japan’s conduct during the Boxer trouble should protect her against such suspicions ; the other that precisely in order to keep China beyond the range of exciting factors, Japan had never ceased to impress upon her the expediency of observing strict neutrality. If, again, the question Df religion were introduced, if it were suggested that whereas the West stands for Christianity, Japan is for Buddhism or for Shinto, then the answer is that absolute freedom of conscience exists in Japan; that in every town throughout the Empire Christianity is openly preached, and Christian schools are organized ; that to such schools the same privileges are extended as to Government schools of corresponding grade; that Christian newspapers and magazines circulate everywhere; that Christian associations are allowed to own land, buildings, and other property “ for the extension of Christianity, the “carrying on of Christian education, and the performance ;of works of charity and benevolence;” that such associations are incorporated under the article of the Civil Code which deals- with bodies founded for “purposes beneficial to the public;” that professing Christians are to be found among members of the Diet, Judges on the Bench, professors in the Universities, editors of leading papers, and officers in the army and navy ; that Christian chaplains are permitted to accompany the troops at public charges, and that, in view of Russia’s very different record, the argument that she stands for Christianity and Japan for Buddhism or Shinto will not hold for one instant.

Finally, with regard to the contention that Japan has taken only the superficial elements of Occidental civilization, and that since at heart she fosters the spirit of the East, her defeat by Russia in this contest, would make for the best interests of humanity, Count Katsura risks whether an educational system modelled on Occidental lines, laws drafted in conformity with the best principles of Occidental jurisprudence, a judiciary which in theory, at all events, satisfies Occidental standards, and a Constitution in accordance with those of the most: advanced Occidental nations - whether all these things can be called products of the spirit of the East or reconciled with superficial adherence t to the civilization of the West. Should Japan ever become the leader of the Orient, her influence will be exercised to turn her neighbours’ feet into the path she has herself irrevocably chosen - the path of close community with the Occident. (

In the same letter, Dr. Morrison quoted, as equally strong and convincing, a resolution which was unanimously passed on the 28th May of last year, at a meeting of the three Universities and all the principal educational institutions of Tokio. The principal clause of the resolution .runs as follows : -

That we confirm the statement that Japan has not entered the present struggle for aggrandisement or conquest, but has been forced into it for the security of the empire, for the permanent peace of the East, and for the progress of that beneficent and enlightened civilization which Japan herself has imbibed from the nations of the West, and which she has made her own.

Dr. Morrison then quoted from the manifesto which was issued by General Oku to the Chinese of the Liau-tung peninsula, and which, after stating the reasons which compelled Japan to enter upon the war, continues as follows : -

Twice in previous wars it has been proved that the discipline of our- troops, is strict and -that they are never guilty of excesses. You, people of China, have seen it with your eyes and heard it with your ears. This war is not inspired by the smallest enmity to the Chinese nation; on the contrary, its aim is to save your nation from the fire and the flood. You Lave no reason to be alarmed. Every one may pursue his avocation confidently. Our forces operate for your benefit and seek to secure your advantage.

Such being the motives that direct our arms, we have the world’s approval. Were there any doubts as to the chivalry of our country they should be dispelled by the provision we have made for the sick and wounded of our own and our enemy’s forces, by the presence of our women to tend them. The facts are selfevident. But, unfortunately, it is inevitable *hat the inhabitants of (he belligerent area should find their industry interrupted, should lie required to give their houses for the accommodation of troops should have their goods and their cattle requisitioned. Endeavour to submit to these things. And be persuaded, on the other hand, that our men will behave with strict discipline, and will never resort to intimidation or pillage. But if any of you, for the sake of personal profit, enter into collusion with the enemy to place obstacles in the way of our army, be assured that punishment will fc: inflicted without relenting.

In concluding his letter, Dr. Morrison referred to the words addressed by Captain Shiina, of the Japanese transport Kinshiu Maru, at the moment when she was about to be torpedoed by the Russians of the Vladivostock squadron : -

Our’ ship has fallen in with the enemy’s war vessels, and our fate is sealed. Our lot is to sink with our ship. But after we have perished, it will not be long before our foes meet the same fate, for our fleet is at hand. When the moment for death comes it is but the flash of a rifle. You and I together will show our barbarous enemy how soldiers of the Empire ought to die. Loyal comrades, remain quietly below until I give> you the last order. If any survive remember that the land is in that direction (pointing to the west). And remember to tell the people at home of the fate of our ship, and how her freight of soldier friends died for their country. Good-bye.

When the Birkenhead went down off the Cape of Good Hope, long years ago, with the soldiers on board ail standing at attention, the people of the British Empire were proud of the discipline and selfcontrol exhibited by their countrymen. Japan has an equal right to be proud of that and the many other incidents of the supreme self-control of her sons when faced with death. On the 14th May, in a very powerful article dealing with’ Japan, and the wonderful effect she was having upon the world, and entitled “ The Surprise of the Continent,” the London Spectator wrote in these terms : -

The Japanese display’ a_ quality and kind of courage of which there are’ but few instances in history. Contempt of death like theirs has hardly been recorded, and they combine with it the rushing daring which makes a charge so overwhelming to any but the picked troops of the world. That offer of twenty thousand volunteers to assist in sinking the steamers in the entrance to the harbour of Port Arthur, which involved to each man almost the certainty of death by bullet or by drowning, was an incident which will live for ever in the future history of Japan. When an army is composed of the men who fill up forlorn hopes, that army will go far. Even the British, though they understood much more of the facts, scarcely expected such splendid purposeful valour as the Japanese have exhibited, in their recent engagements.

It is not, however, their daring which is the really wonderful quality displayed by the Jap anese in their recent actions, by land as well as by sea. Two other qualities, each manifested in an extraordinary degree, differentiate them from all other Asiatics. One is the apparent motive which, so far as the outside world can perceive, supplies strength to their soldiery and seamen. They are patriots in a degree rare even in Europe, and, so far as we are aware unknown in Asia, except among the men who defended Jerusalem against Titus. Patriotism, acute observers have declared, does not exist in Asia, and until this year the vast generalization appeared to be at least superficially true. Asiatics, from time to time, have fought magnificently for a creed, for a Sovereign, for a favorite leader, but of love for their land in the broad sense, as distinguished from every other land, it is difficult to rind clear traces. The Chinaman, it is true, boasts of the “ Flowery Land “ ; the Arab goes back to his secluded peninsula of oasis and desert with a feeling not easily distinguishable from that of the Scotsman ; and the writer has heard great Indians speak of their fertile and varied peninsula, with its original cities and its ancient civilization, with proprietary pride. None of these races, however, will die for their country only, or feel its repute and its beauty as possessions surpassing in intimate value any other. The men who offered to sink the steamers in order to seal up what strategy required should be sealed, offered to die for their country as readily as any British or German or French leader of a forlorn hope. The dominance of this feeling gives the Japanese a coherence and a perseverance which of themselves make them among the most effective of peoples. We speak of them as a little people, but they have more millions than France; and when grandeur or the interests of Japan are concerned they act and feel as one man. That is a source of strength which, when they are once in motion, it is impossible to exaggerate.

The second quality is a great, we should not hesitate to say an unequalled, power of foresight. They ‘prepare everything for their enterprises with an exact and scientific prevision which rivals that of the German staff in its best years. They waited through ten years of steady preparation to regain the prizes of their war with China, of which they_ had been unfairly deprived. They learnt, the difficult secret of transporting masses of soldiers by sea and landing them without .serious loss ; and as they move forward over the vast regions they have entered, their supplies,’ their munitions, their maps are as perfect as if their regiments were composed of sappers assisting at a geographical survey. Just compare for one instant their readiness with that of Napoleon III. when he declared war on Prussia, of ourselves when we received the ultimatum from President Kruger, or, to take a more recent instance still, of the great Military Monarchy of Russia, when the first shell fell in Port Arthur. To us, we confess, this is the feature of their recent history which most decisively separates them from all Asiatic peoples, who as a rule have moved forward, even in successful wars, without commissariat, with insufficient reserves of weapons, and dropping the wounded and exhausted by thousands as they marched on.

And this leads us to the final thought which we have to put forward to-day, the doubt whether in calling Japanese Asiatics we are not concealing the truth with words. That they are Asiatics by origin is certain ; but they have stood apart in their islands for centuries, during which time they have developed, and have grown up under the pressure of a civilization of their own. They have imbibed, like all other islanders, some, thing from all the forces with which they came in contact. They have passed, like Europeans, through a lengthened feudal period, and feudalism breeds at least courage and the habit of obedience to accepted leaders. They have developed an art of their own, a folk-lore of their own, a habit of political thinking widely distinct in kind irony that of any other Asiatic people. What they exactly are is still in many respects a mystery to European observers ; but it is quite possiblethat the broad generalizations by. which we describe continents do not fully apply to them - that they have become in the process of thecenturies during which they have remained ina seclusion without a parallel, a distinctly separatepeople, deriving their’ strength and their weakness from original sources, and no more Asiaticthan they are European.

The extracts which I have read are wellworthy of the close attention of honorablesenators. The Spectator is known throughout the world as one of the most intellectualof organs, the views of which are put forward with an ability acceptable “to every reader. During the war, Mr. Bennett Burleigh, correspondent of the LondonDaily Telegraph, sent to his newspaper anaccount of a remarkable religious gathering, recently held at Tokio.

Senator de Largie:

– Does the honorable senator know anything about Bennett Burleigh ?

Senator PULSFORD:

– I know a good’ deal about him.

Senator de Largie:

– Does the honorablesenator think that Bennett Burleigh is an authority on religious questions?

Senator PULSFORD:

– The statementsmade in the description I am about to read! are worthy of close notice, quite irrespectiveof what may happen to be Mr. Bennett Burleigh’s private character. The account is as follows: -

I have in my time seen something of religiousgatherings, from convocations 10 Exeter Hall,, and the Salvation Army at the Crystal Palace. Nay, more. I have witnessed in strange landsthe meetings of the representatives of other creeds than that of out own Christian Church. But never have I seen anything so extraordinary, so provocative of sane thought and reflection, asthat which was held in the “ Chukon Shido Kaikwan,” a large hall in this wide-spreading Tokio, upon the afternoon of the 16th June. In that hall there were gathered for serious purpose over 1,000 priests and teachers of all the chief beliefs and hopes of mankind. The East and theWest of the great brotherhood of religion, of theseeking and the doing of good, had met in. amity. And by far the larger number belonged-‘ to a form of worship that was old when thePentateuch was written. There were priests and professors of Shintoism, Buddhism, Israelites,. Mohammedans, and Christians of many churches. In that strange assemblage, even woman, nativeand foreign, was in evidence.; but are we not air their children? There were more shaven headsthan those tonsured after any pattern. Somewere covered by birettas others by more familiar clerical caps. And the vestments, they were of purple and other colours, white, yellow, gold1- embroidered, and what not, with stoles, &c, to plain black Geneva gowns. Where have I not set eyes upon nil those fashions of garb? If the meeting opened with prayer I did not hear it ; the invocation must have been made in silence. But there was a tinkling of something that sounded as an ancient spinnet, and a perilous scratching of a dubious violin for introduction. Thereupon, of one accord, the Japanese, Shintoists, Buddhists, and others sang very creditably an august hymn in their own language. Then a very venerable, gorgeously-clad Shinto magnate was duly proposed and took the chair,

And the proceedings began, and were conducted after our own orderly manner. The speakers made their points, and the audience caught them, applauding by clapping hands and crying something very like “Hear, hear !” And I noted that these, to me, strange priests were not lugubriousminded, but whimsical and humorous, telling quaint things that sent their audience into audible smiles and roars of laughter. There was a resolution proposed, supported, and carried unanimously, setting forth that the war is being carried on in “ the interests of justice, humanity, and the civilization of the world,” and expressing “ a most earnest desire for the speedy accomplishment of an honorable peace.”

And, to heighten the singular character of the whole proceeding, in the vestibule and lower reception-rooms - for it was a large upstairs hall, well lit and lofty - were spread Japanese tea service, with sweet’ biscuits, for refreshments. Attendants stood by to receive their foot-wear - pattens and sandals - and to light cigarettes for those who sought a turn in the garden to get a breath of cooler air after being in the hall. All very curious I found it, and to me interesting. I have found absolutely no creed bitterness amongst the natives of this wonderful land. There is a tolerance that might be thought to spring from indifference, but such is not the case. The apparently stolid Japanese is in reality a high-strung, sensitive being - yea, fanciful, and sentimental to a degree consonant with an artistic nature and training. I wired you about a meeting to discuss the founding of a new State Church or creed upon pro-Christian and Western lines. Such a movement is once again in the air. The old beliefs are passing into decrepitude. They fail to supply Japan’s modern requirements, and it is again coming within the bounds of probability that an Imperial edict may issue, as centuries ago did Constantine’s, and change the creed of this active Eastern world with a stroke of the pen. But all this is another story. Yet, anyhow, the new order is on the road. What will this latest State Church profess and teach? I am assured it is to be a “simple, clear doctrine, which shall appeal alike to philosophers and fools.

From whatever quarter it comes, the evidence all shows the wonderful mental activity of the Japanese. It points to a great development in the past, and to a probably greater development in the near future. The following is some account of the sufferings of the women of Japan during the war : -

A recent writer in the Japan Mail, says : - “ If <4he Japanese soldier is a hero, his wife is no less a heroine. The world has been hearing his praises sung so loudly of late that they hardly stop to inquire about his wife. In fact, they may have doubted whether he was married at all , and the truth is that the first batch were not; but owing to the long continuance- of the war the later batches have consisted of his elder brother, and his father, even, who, of course, were married. And it is of these poor wives and children left at home that a word needs to be said lest they be forgotten. It is in the quiet of the humble home that calls for the splendid exhibition of a heroism as unconscious as it is steadfast.

And yet, in the face of all this distress, the Japanese authorities in one town which had received 2,000 prisoners to keep, finding that more than one-half had received no school education, and that upwards of 37 per cent, were wholly illiterate, undertook to organize these into classes, and the educated officers were commissioned as instructors under the direct supervision of a Japanese officer who understood the Russian language, and such results have been already reached that men unable to sign their own names when captured have written to their friends and families in Russia after three hours’ daily instruction.” Of this action on the part of victorious Japan, the Washington correspondent of the Philadelphia Press- comments as follows : - “ But this is not all. The prisoners are well housed, well clad, and well fed. They are given outings three times a month. Entertainments are given for them in the prison buildings, and, oh the whole, these Russians have been treated more as guests than as enemies and prisoners of war. Such treatment is unprecedented. No nation ever accorded anything” like it to its enemies, and yet there is no reason why all civilized people should not have done as Japan has done in the present instance. The effects will be farreaching, not only in Russia, but on the whole world, which has been given a higher standard of humanity. And the wonderful part of it is that Japan should have taught the world so great a lesson.”

From these facts there is much for us to learn. I notice that the last issue of the National Review contains an article on “ Japanese Education and Character.” It is there shown that in the summer time the schools in Japan open at 7 o’clock in the morning, and are continued until 12 o’clock, and that the children, in order to attend, have to rise between 5 and 6 o’clock. Here is one extract : -

The pupils’ mental attitude is earnestness. They are, above all, anxious to learn. Nowhere in Japan is it a point of honour to look on lessons as tomfoolery, and the teacher as an enemy to be defeated if possible. The Government, knowing this, has abolished all corporal punishment.

A further extract from the same article refers to the general character of the Japanese -

Anger is prohibited, for it is self-assertive ; courage is hardly reckoned as a virtue. He who would choose his own ease rather than perform a customary virtue, no matter how hazardous, would be counted infamous. Hence the Japanese soldier simply does whatever he may be ordered, never considering the consequences to himself. This tremendous moral force of selfcontrol, and self-effacement has then, at its root, public opinion, habit, and patriotism.

The evidence that accumulates from all quarters of the power and character of the Japanese as individuals and as a nation is truly of a startling kind. In the pamphlet which I published sometime ago I ventured to affirm that the people of Australia as a whole were not in sympathy with the legislation embodied in, our Statutes.

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

-Col. Gould. - I- call attention to the state of the Senate. It is really too bad that we should not have a better attendance. [Quorum formed.]

Senator PULSFORD:

– The feeling of the people of Australia is of a more generous character than our laws would indicate. A singular evidence that this is so is now before us. Some three weeks ago the Synod of the Anglican Church met in Sydney, and on the motion of the Bishop of Carpentaria a resolution which might have been drafted by myself was proposed and unanimously agreed to. It was as follows : -

That this Synod, while recognising that it is lawful for a people to strive to prevent such an immigration of a foreign race, whether in peace or in war, as may threaten to upset the balance of their national life, desires to record its conviction that it is unreasonable to assume that the white man is, necessarily and inherently, superior to every race of another colour.
That this Synod also desires to affirm - (i.) That coloured nations who are advanced in culture and civilization are entitled to a measure of respect similar to that which is presumably enjoyed by a “ white “ nation, (ii.) That, with regard to the less advanced races, it is a Christian duty to afford them such protection and education as is due from the elder to the younger brethren in the great human family of God.

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

-Col. Gould. - After a veryinteresting speech by the Bishop that motion was carried on the voices.

Senator Playford:

– What does it amount to? It does not mean an unrestricted immigration of the yellow races?

Senator PULSFORD:

– I read with very great pleasure the brief report that appeared in the newspapers of the speech made by the Bishop of Carpentaria. I wrote to him and asked him if I might accept the report appearing in the news papers as correct. In reply he was good enough to forward me his manuscript. It is so thoroughly to the point, so able, and so far agrees with my own views, that I have no hesitation in submitting it to theSenate. This is what the Bishop of Carpentaria said in connexion with his motion : -

In the first place, let me answer this question z. Has the Church a right to take up such a subject as this? I reply, emphatically, yes. The Church has a right to take up any subject which involvesthe welfare and happiness of the people, except only such subjects as are distinctly matters of party politics. In this matter, we have, I believe, nothing of this sort to fear. Our Church has not identified itself with any politicalparty. If any one says it has, let them say what . party. I, for one, am absolutely unable to say. I claim for the Church the full right of ‘ free speech on all that touches the happiness of the people. If there be any such matter on which, a church dare not speak for fear of men, from dread of consequences, then that church would be already stricken with incipient paralysis;, she would be upon the path which does, and must, end in death.

My motion has been represented as an attack, upon White Australia. This is by no means the case. In a very real sense, I believe in a WhiteAustralia ; that is to say, I believe that the whiteraces have a message to bring and an example to set to the world ; but I believe in a White- Australia founded upon justice; brotherly love, and high aims. I do not believe in a White Australia, were there such a thing, founded upon prejudice, injustice, and selfish isolation. I believe in” whiteness,” when it is an expression of the grand old motto, noblesse oblige. I do not believe in “whiteness” as a survival of casteand prejudice. To turn now to the words of my motion, I believe that it is lawful for a people to strive to prevent such an immigration of a foreign race, whether in peace or war, asmay threaten to upset the balance of their national life. I believe that national life is . ? factor of great importance in the history of the world, that it is a distinctiongiven and implanted by God Himself, and that it cannot besuddenly disturbed without grave loss to all concerned.

Take the parallel case of the individual. Of what great benefit to society is a man’s own personality and individuality, and how disastrous is it to more than himself if the balance of hismind and the clearness of his judgment is upset by the too sudden inrush of new ideas. So with the nation. We may admit, indeed, that at certain times of national degeneracy an alien people has occasionally come as a “ scourge of God,” a call to a new and more strenuous life, but, speaking generally, nationality is a factor with which the world cannot lightly dispense and who does not feel that the10,000Athenian hoplites who faced the hosts of Asia on thefield of Marathon, were representatives of a national life, the extinction of which would have left the world inexpressibly the poorer. This fact has been recognised in the old country by the recent Aliens Restriction Act, and in Japan by the law which forbids foreigners to hold property in Japan. May we not illustrate the point by the right of private property. It is capable of the most gross and cruel abuse. It may result in most monstrous wrongs, and yet, for all that, we all recognise that the right of private property is in itself just and right, and it forms the basis of one of the Ten Commandments. So, however, the principle of nationality may have been degraded into selfishness and exclusive pride, yet we recognise that there is in it a principle which cannot be lightly neglected or despised.

Now, it is true, generally speaking, that Europeans have shown themselves superior to the Asiatic or coloured races in the practical affairs of life, because while the latter have been content to rest on the successes they, have achieved, the Europeans have, for the most part, been moved by a kind of “divine discontent” to always aim at something more, and usually something higher. It would, however, be very rash to assert that this superiority is owing to their colour, lt is more probably due partly to the fact of their living in a cooler and more stimulating climate, partly to their immense seaboard, with its possibilities of intercourse and adventure, and very largely also to that salt of Christianity which has preserved them from that decay which overlook their earlier manifestations in the civilizations of Greece and Rome. We must remember, however, that there is much to be said on the other side. If war be the test, we must remember that the Huns, a Mongolian tribe, nearly overran Europe; that the Arabs actually conquered, and long held, a great part of Spain; that the Turks still hold part of Europe; and that they, with the Sihks, Goorkhas, and other Asiatics, are probably the best soldiers in the world.

If civilization be the test, we must remember that we have little, if anything, to learn from the East in agriculture ; while in architecture we have not yet rivalled it. In art it is only in certain branches that we can compete, and- writing and arithmetic we learnt from it. If the realm of thought be the test we may profitably remember that all the great religions of the world, without exception, came from the East. Lest we should lightly and ignorantly despise, we have a living example in Japan, which has shown to an astonished world a high example of patriotism, of intelligence in planning, and of skill in execution, of forbearance, and of courtesy.

May not the difference between East and West be something like the difference between man and woman. There was a time when we all thought man was superior to woman. Now we understand that it is a difference of type and not of degree; that the excellencies of the one are complementary to those of the other, and that both are equally needed for the perfection of humanity.

I believe that we have come to the parting of the ways. The East is awakening, and to many that ‘awakening seems fraught with nameless terror. Yet why, after all, should we fear? Were it the awakening of a rival faith, a new religion which was not ours, we might, indeed, have cause for dread ; but it is not so. The awakening is undoubtedly a result, though an indirect result, of Christianity and Christian civilization, and we do not well to fear it.

There are two possible attitudes - one is that of the German Emperor, with his yellow peril, the other is that of the new Japanese alliance. I venture to think that the latter is alike the wiser and more Christian attitude. I ask only for the extension of courtesy and consideration. I do not advocate any admixture of ‘races; that is a different question altogether, and one of extreme difficult)’. It does not come within the scope of my present motion. I ask that we should treat those of another race and colour with respect and consideration, and that we should extend every aid and encouragement to those who are striving to rise to the level of our own civilization.

With regard to the less-advanced races, we surely owe them both protection and e’ducation. I may cite, as an example, the action of the Queensland Government, which has not only passed a most admirable Act for the protection of the aborigines, but provides schools for the natives of the islands, and encourages and aids those on mission stations.

I believe that this recognition of our duty to the lower races provides the only Christian grounds for our exclusion of some lest unrestricted immigration and competition should lower the general standard of life, and lower the ideals of the world. We can only justify our action by being willing to take up “ the white man’s burden,” and living, not merely for ourselves, but for others.

The object of my motion is to remove colour prejudice and race’ hatred, anc! to assert that, other things being equal, we owe to a coloured race just the same respect as we owe to a white race. My motion does not even assert that any coloured race is at the present moment equal to any white race, but it does recognise that it may be, or may become so. It admits fully the possibility. Even this may be a shock to our pride, but if so it is honest to admit mistakes, and it is the true spirit of Christianity.

It is easy to wreck my motion by bringing in side issues, but I appeal to the House to confine itself merely to the issues I have put before it, namely, that the white man must not claim superiority on the mere. grounds of colour alone, and that courtesy and consideration on the one hand, and protection and training on the other, are due to the coloured races with whom we have, to deal.

It may be said that my motion is one of mere sentiment. I reply that the greatest issues in the world’s history have hung on sentiment, and that many a time generous actions and generous admissions have turned foes into friends. We have a great opportunity. God forgive us if we cast it away.

Let East and West work out their own problems in their own way, only let it be unhampered by needless jealousy, mistrust, and prejudice. I appeal to the House to pass the motion which stands in my name.

Senator Playford:

– There is nothing practical in that.

Senator PULSFORD:

– I thoroughly indorse the remarks made by the Bishop, and think I am amply justified in taking up the time of the Senate in reading them with a view to their appearance and preservation in. the pages of *Hansard. * It is very desirable that we should take notice of the gradual - perhaps I might say rapid - awakening that is taking place in other parts of the East. China and India are every day becoming more alive. They are every day becoming more active. Political movement is taking the place of apathy.

Senator Playford:

– That may be a bad job for us.

Senator PULSFORD:

– It may be if we do not awaken to our opportunities. It is for us to behave ourselves - to lead, not to oppress.” Only the other day the following cablegram from London was published : -

Reuters’ Lahore correspondent reports that the ruling chiefs, nobility, and gentry of India are demanding with increased vigour that a Prince of the British Royal House should rule in India with the advice of a Ministry, the Viceroy being Prime Minister, and the leading chiefs counsellors.

That is a very natural movement in India. And is there any European who has in him the instinct of freedom who will say no to it? Shall we not all as a people rejoice to see the men of India gradually uplifting themselves and becoming capable of self-government? Are we likely to wish to prevent that ? Is it not wise for us to be true to our trust, and to our instincts and aspirations. About three weeks ago an article appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald under the heading of “ The Awakening of China.” It’ says -

A private letter was received on Tuesday from ‘ the Rev. “T. Howard Smith, of the London Mission, Peking, North China, containing an interesting reference to the change which is taking place in Chinese ideas, and the forward movement, of which we have heard so much of late. He indites his letter from Pei-ta-ho, a watering place on the shores of the Gulf of Pechili (the “ Manly “ of North China, as it may be termed), which is becoming the rendezvous of Europeans in search of rest and the picturesque in the way of natural scenery. Mr. Howard Smith writes : - “ Pei-ta-ho is changing somewhat, inasmuch as people now come looking for something else besides physical building up. The place is being used also as a centre for Christian workers’ conventions, &c, and its opportunities are quite unique, since missionaries from Manchuria, Chihli, Shantung, Shansi, Shensi, Honan, Shanghi, and other places come here for some part of the summer. For the last three years a convention of Chinese Christian workers “ has been held here, the number of workers growing from 40 odd to over a hundred this year. The general opinion expressed this year by many missionaries from places very far apart is that China has certainly entered upon a new era this new century, and that everywhere there are signs of an awakening and growth. Schools are being established wholesale in every province. Education on Western principles is decidedly in, the air ; and, remarkable of remarkables, a system (known as the Government system) of new characters, 50 in number, based on phonetic principles, is being inaugurated and taught in thesenorthern Mandarin speaking provinces, which, it is hoped, will enable the illiterate to get a grounding in general knowledge without the difficulties associated with the present Chinesecharacters. In the south the Romanised system has been largely adopted ; but to the use of thisthere are many objections, since it is, among, other things, of foreign origin. This new system is an adaptation of the more elementary strokes in Chinese character, and will alwaysmuch resemble Chinese without its attendant difficulties; hence it is thought that it will be trieone generally adopted, and if so it will play alarge part in the awakening of China. The unity of the Chinese on the boycott of Americangoods question has shown some of the possibilities lying dormant in the great mass of Chinese, but which are on the point of being awakened. Although the movement is a misguided one, seeing that America has already under consideration a new treaty, it nevertheless shows that the younger Chinese v/ho have been, or are now, abroad are beginning to realize that their country does not enjoy the privileges of other countries, and are intending to do what they can to winthose privileges for themselves and other Chinese. In one of the Peking Gazettes a few weeks ago the worst kinds of torture associated with death penalties were declared by edict to be abolished for ever; and for months past the Empress Dowager has been abolishing useless offices, of which there are thousands in China. Many of these actions of hers are quite puerile, as in some cases she has abolished offices without making provision for the work supposed to be associated with tEem ; but, in spite of all this, there is very much to encourage one, and make one feel that China can never go back to her former exclusiveness, and that a new era is really dawning for her. The old Empress Dowager has abolished, as the Emperor did before the coup d’ état, the bow and arrow as being an obsolete weapon, and in other ways has done things which helped to bring about the downfall of the Emperor seven years ago ; but the time is more ripe now for them, and her action does not arouse the same bitter and fierce opposition that his then did.”

That is one of the best evidences that could be given of the awakening that is taking place in the East. I will next read a quotation from the Westminster Review relating to India. It mentions that in the opinion of the writer the example of Japan in recent years will lead to the awakening of other Oriental nations. Among other things., the writer quotes an article from one of the Indian vernacular journals, calling upon the people to profit by the example of Japan, and concluding with the following remarkable passage: - “ The present struggle, whether it ends in defeat or in victory for the Japanese, has proved unmistakably that no nation in the world can beat (hem in self-sacrifice, 5n patriotism, in courage, and in equipment for modern warfare. We have observed for years signs in our own country of an awakening from a slumber of centuries, owing to our contact with the West and the spread of Western ideas in our land, but a death-like despair has clamped our national energy. Now fortunately we have, to revive ourselves, a breath from the Far East - like the life-giving breath of Jesus - and the progress of Japan is a voice that cannot fail to be heard. It is stirring our lethargic limbs and bidding us come to life. My countrymen ! rise and share with other nations the good things of the world like a living people !” This appeal may be taken as fairly typical of the sentiments which the brilliant successes of Japan against a giant Power like Russia have evoked in India and in other Asiatic countries. A Persian patriot, for instance, writing to the Habl-ul-Matin of Calcutta, a well-known “Persian newspaper that received some time ago the patronage of the Shah, suggests to his countrymen the advantages of a commercial alliance between Japan and Persia: of making their military purchases in Japan, if possible; of sending Persian youths to Japan for military, naval, and other kinds of_ education ; and of requisitioning the services of Japanese officers for the training of Persian troops in the arts of modern warfare.

One phase of the expansion that is taking place in the East has relation to the increase in trade. I should be very sorry to ask the Senate to base its reasons for doing justice to other nations on trade considerations. That is a low ground to take; but it is not altogether a ground which can be ignored. I dare say that honorable senators have noticed the fact within the last few days that silver has been rising in price. Now, silver is a great Australian product. The steady rise in the value of silver within the fast few months is a sign of advancing prosperity and of an increase of commerce in the East. It ls as well for us to remember, in passing, that almost the entire prosperity of Broken Hill during all these years has been dependent upon the East.

Senator Staniforth Smith:

– Are not some Eastern countries considering the adoption of a. gold standard?

Senator PULSFORD:

– I am talking of the past and of the present. If it had n6t been for the demand for silver from the East broken Hill would -never have existed as a great employer of labour. During the last quarter of a century silver has been- demonetised in country after country. There has been great difficulty in getting rid of the stacks of silver in Europe and America. But, in. addition to that, there have been immense new supplies, and the great outlets for those sup plies have been India, China, and Japan. Those countries have really kept alive the industry in Broken Hill. There are thousands of Australians who are earning their bread by producing silver for the East, showing that already Australia is very greatly bound up in the prosperity of the Eastern countries. The following paragraph appeared in the “trade and commerce” column of the Age only a few days ago.

Japan is making efforts to extend her trade re%lations in unexpected quarters, doubtless with a view of supplying her wants direct from the producer. For instance, a line of steamers is to be established to develop a trade with South America. The initial purpose is to obtain from Argentina cheap wheat, and to this will be added later on dairy produce and frozen meat. It will be seen that this to a certain extent influences Australian expectations to supply our ally’s wants of this character. Those who desire to follow the argument cannot fail to arrive at a conclusion that may not be pleasant, but suggestive of unsatisfactory results to our hopes of trade expanding in the direction indicated. No Australian can desire an outflow on this continent of the “ Golden Horde,” but what we want are legislators who have Eastern tact in dealing with questions that behind all are racial.

The Age talks very (loudly, very arrogantly, and very unwisely generally, from the political point of view, on the subject of immigration, but in its commercial columns it speaks of tact being required “in dealing with questions, that behind all are racial.” The development in shipping which has taken place in. Japan during recent years is of a remarkable character. In 1894 her steam tonnage amounted to 273,419 tons ; last . year it amounted to 797,674 tons ; and I dare, say that before the close of thi= year it will have reached 1.000,000 tons. Her sailing tonnage has advanced from 46,959 tons in 1894 to 329,234 tons in 1904. So that, as a shipping nation, Japan has already taken rapidly a very high place. It is a singular thing,, when we come to think. of it, that one of the grounds upon which the’ Chinese have spoken of Europeans as being barbarians have been their dishonesty in trade. The Chinese, who have been noted from long antiquity for their honesty in trade, found so much dishonesty in, dealing- with the white races that they came to view them with great distrust, though I am happy to say that it was felt * less with regard to the Anglo-Saxon people than with regard to other people. It is only a few days ago that I noticed in a Sydney newspaper a letter from Captain

– I should like to refer briefly to the position in Great Britain. I believe that in that country public feeling is being educated, and that the people are beginning to understand a little of our difficulties. Although there are a number of politicians who speak very loudly and angrily of what I have done, and am doing, from time to time, yet I_ believe that there is no one who has put in a clearer light than I have, the necessity for the proper regulation of immigration. In my pamphlet, I put the figures relating to the immigration from China in a way which I think is more striking x and more calculated to attract attention than any figures which have appeared in the statistics of Australia. I did not make a comparison between the number of Chinese who had arrived and the total population of Australia. Recognising the fact that the Chinese who were here were all adult males, I compared the total number of the Chinese with the total number of Australian adults, and by that means I showed that Australia was driven some time ago to consider this matter. I have some reason to believe that my representations have been assisting to educate public men in the United Kingdom. According to a recent cable message,, which quoted an article from the London Times, it is evident that that newspaper is beginning to see things plainly,, is not asking Australia to open wide her doors, but is beginning to recognise the all-round difficulties which exist. While it admits that the Empirehas to recognise Australia’s position, it points out that Australia has. to recognise the position of the Empire. That is ‘alt I ask. Let us be united in recognising the wants of the Empire, and the wants of each component part. In its article, the Times says -

It is certain- that absolute laissez-faire as, regards coloured races would make Australia” thehome of a preponderatingly yellow and brownpopulation.

While England recognises that she will be fair to us, so let us be fair to her -

The existence of a British race demands restriction and regulation, which, however, ought to be as little invidious as possible. … . The growth of Imperial unity must be based on compromise and not on verbal subterfuge.

Verbal subterfuge is the basis of the Immigration Restriction Act, and the cause of the present unpleasantness and ill-feeling.

Senator Playford:

– And that was put in. at the instigation of the Colonial Office.

Senator PULSFORD:

– Not in this exact form -

The mother country must realize the nature o£ Australia’s problems, and modify preconceived, theories to suit them. Australia, in the interestsof the Empire and of her own progress, must learn to separate what is essential to the development of a white race, and the maintenance of her standard of living from what is unessential. She must retain the former and discard the la’tter.

My object is to induce Australia to discard that which is not essential to the maintenance of that which, I admit, is essential. I think that the position of affairs in theEast is that, if we were in any sort of political danger, it is rather from Germany than from any other part of the world that it would come. It is wise that we shouldbear that possibility in mind, and should riot thwart or offend those who, in a great crisis of the Empire, might aid in repealing’ German aggression. I desire to make an earnest appeal to honorable senatorsto deal with this as an important!’ matter. On one occasion I said I felt that this matter of arrangement’ between Australia and the countriesof the East overshadowed in importance any other political matter with which it has to deal. I feel that that is increasingly true. I consider that it would be a very regrettable circumstance if this session were to close without some step having been taken, without at least some expression of opinion having been given, to indicate that we are’ awake to our duties, and intend to fulfil them. Some time ago a cablegram contained a reference to a remark made by President Roosevelt, who, happily for America, is a man of high and fine character, and most outspoken utterance. He said -

America was bound to play a great part in the world, and she must raise her voice for righteousness and peace.

– The communication was presumably sent without the authority of the Japanese people.

Senator Pulsford:

– In the pamphlet from which I quoted, I show that Mr. Eitaki received cable ‘instructions from his Government.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH.The Japanese Government surely must know better than to communicate directly with the Prime Minister of Australia. We are a portion of the British Empire, and official communications of the kind must be sent, in the first place, to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and then be forwarded to us by means of the Secretary of State for the Colonies. The Japanese Government fell into a mistake in national etiquette, if they sent an official communication to the Australian Prime Minister direct.

Senator Pulsford:

– The Japanese Ambassador in London made repeated representations to the British Government, and I read his statements to the Senate. The honorable senator, unless he is aware of that fact, is not in a position to reply to my speech.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH.I am in as good a position as even Senator Pulsford to speak on the question. In my own small way I have endeavoured to keep myself au fait with the changing conditions, in all external affairs affecting Australia.

Senator Gray:

– Senator Pulsford read us extracts from the cables to show that representations had been made to the British Government.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH.I endeavoured to get the information when I askedthe Minister representing the Minister of External Affairs whether any official communication had been received from the Secretary of State for the Colonies, asking us to alter the Immigration Restriction Act, so as not to offend the alleged susceptibilities of Japan. In my belief no such communication has been received, and therefore we know nothing officially of anydesireonthe part of Japan to alter the present conditions. Senator Pulsford. - That is not at all a correct way ‘to put the matter. Has the honorable senator read what the Japanese Ambassador said in London within the last fortnight?

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH.No. I have not seen that.

Senator Pulsford:

– The honorable senator is playing with the subject.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– I am not. I am simply saying that we should not be asked to alter our legislation, because of some newspaper report of some alleged statements, made elsewhere.

Senator Pulsford:

– If the honorable senator thinks that Japan is coming cap in hand to Australia, he is very much mistaken ; he does not understand Japan.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– Japan is, a nation and an Empire ; and if she desires us to alter our legislation, there is only one course to be taken. The Japanese Ambassador should communicate with the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in England, and the information should reach us through the Secretary of

State for Colonial Affairs. Officially, we / have no cognisance whatever of any desire on the part of Japan to have the present conditions altered. I have indicated the only way in which Japan can officially approach Australia.

Senator Gray:

– What would the honorable senator have said had Japan adopted that course?

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH.I should have said that Japan was perfectly right to make any representation that might be deemed advisable; and it would be for us to decide the matter purely from the point of view of what is best for the Commonwealth.

Senator Gray:

– Is that the usual course taken as between nations?

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH.It is the invariable course, as the honorable senator ought to know.

Senator Sir William Zeal:

– Any representations on the part of Australia on the subject would have to be made through the Imperial Government.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– Of course. Senator Pulsford took exception to the Immigration Restriction Act, but is he aware that at the Colonial Conference Mr. Chamberlain, who was then Secretary of State for the Colonies, expressly requested the various representatives of the self-governing Colonies to apply the language test, . so as not to hurt the susceptibilities of coloured people? It was pointed out that the language test was applied in Natal, and Australia was asked to adopt a similar provision. Indeed, before the Commonwealth was brought into “existence three of the States of Australia had already taken that step, and the Commonwealth Parliamentsimply completed the work initiated at the request of the Secretary of State for the Colonies. We must admit that we have been largely guidedby the question of colour inapplying the educationtest ; but colour issimply a rough way of deciding between- extreme race divergence. Australian sentiment favours the building up of a nation, and we have declared for one nation and one flag. It is evident that if we admit those races, who may be-

Senator Playford:

– Our equals.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– Yes, if we admit those races, who, in every respect, may be our equals, but who, on account of their great racial divergence, cannot amalgamate with us, we shall build up not one nation under one flag, but two separate peoples.

Senator Playford:

– We shall have South America over again.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– We in Australia, for national and racial reasons, say that, while we will not allow those people to enter Australia, we will throw our doors open wide to all the white races’ of the world if they desire to settle here.

Senator Walker:

– Provided they do not come under contract.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH.Provided they do not come under contract, which is injurious, and, further, provided they have no physical or mental infirmity. I am speaking now not from a point of view of race prejudice, but from a scientific point of view. If we refer to the writings of leading biologists, we find it set forth that, if races extremely divergent be mixed, the progeny is inferior, either mentally or physically. We can see that as an actual result in the case of Eurasians, mullattosand people of that sort. The most extreme divergence in the human family is between the northern Teutonic races of Europe, and the negro and Turanian races, which, of course, embrace the Japanese. Those latter races cannot mingle with us to the advantage of either them or ourselves. We might put the case conversely, and say that if a million Europeans settle in Japan, and the races became mixed, the result would be an inferior type of Japanese.

– The honorable senator does ‘not believe it himself.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– It is almost incredible. I admit that it has appeared in the daily press, and I have seen no contradiction of it. Possibly the Minister of Defence may be in a position to contradict it. The paragraph goes on to say -

The writer is “ looking backward “ in Tokio in A.D. 2005, and reviews the causes from which “ India has fallen to Russia, South Africa to Germany, Egypt to the Sultan, while Canada has taken shelter beneath the wings of the American eagle, and Australia has become a protectorate of the Mikado.” In spite of its extravagance the pamphlet contains some sound ideas.

Senator Walker:

– Does the honorable senator expect to live to see the day when the statement will be realized?

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– No, I do not. If it were true that a work dealing with the gradual dismemberment of the British Empire, and the division of the Colonies of Great Britain between Russia, Germany, America, the Sultan of Turkey, and the Mikado of Japan, is to be used as* a text-book to inform Japanese youth as to the possibilities of the future, that would seem to be an extraordinary course for an ally of Great Britain to adopt.

Senator Sir William Zeal:

– It is an insult to Japan to suggest it.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– I quote the statement for what it is worth. Personally, I find myself largely in sympathy with what Senator Pulsford has said. We must recognise that the Japanese nation possesses every characteristic that goes to make a. great people. I feel sure that we have none of the race prejudice which would lead us to consider the Japanese an inferior type of people to ourselves. We desire to live on terms of the greatest friendship with them, as with all the nations of the world. Anything we can do to avoid wounding their susceptibilities we should do, so long as we do not abrogate the great principles which we have laid down for our national guidance. It is premature to talk of altering our Alien Immigration

Restriction Act, when we have received no request from the British Government that we should make any alteration of the conditions affecting Japanese immigration. The Government would be well advised if they let it be publicly known that distinguished Japanese visitors can come to Australia. The knowledge might serve to remove illfeeling. But if we attempt to adopt Senator Pulsford’s proposal, and make any exception in favour of the Japanese, we shall undoubtedly incur the hostility of the Chinese, and of the people of India; and we shall find that we will have launched ourselves on a sea of difficulties in the furtherance of a desire to do something which even the British Government has not yet asked us to do.

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

– I am unable to support the motion submitted to the Senate. I should like to say a word or two as to the reason why I take up this position. I do not intend to deal with the very many matters involved in what is known as the White Australia question. For me, at any rate, that is settled. I can imagine no advantage to myself, to the Senate, or the country at large, from discussing it until, at any rate there is some indication of the great change in public opinion, which might throw upon those who believe in that policy the obligation to defend it. At present I do not see any indication of such a change, and therefore in the few minutes during which I shall occupy the attention of the Senate, I shall address myself to a course of action which I think we might reasonably take. I do not think any one can deny that Japan does feel that an invidious distinction has been made as against her people. Whilst I desire as strongly as do other honorable senators to keep out, not merely the Japanese, but the people of any race whom we could not welcome here, and to whom we should hesitate ‘to extend the full rights of citizenship, I still think there is an obligation upon us to so frame our laws as. tc give as little offence .as possible to the people of other nations. Senator Smith, in speaking just now, said that if we were to make special arrangements with Japan, the people of other nations whom we desire to keep out would feel that an invidious distinction had been, made so far as they were concerned, and would resent it. I admit that at once, but there does appear to me to be a way in which we could meet what I regard as the reasonable requirements of Japan, without setting up a distinction which might be deemed to be invidious by the people of other nations. That would be by a very slight amendment of the Immigration Restriction Act. The provision under which were included practically all those people whom, on account of colour or for other reasons, we did not regard as desirable immigrants, is the first sub-section of section 3 -

Any person who when asked to do so by an officer fails to write out at dictation and sign in the presence of the officer a passage of fifty words in length in an European language dictated by the officer.

Second Reading

Debate resumed from8th November (vide page 4738) on motion by Senator Playford -

That the Bill be now read a second time.

Senator MULCAHY:
Tasmania

– This is an exceedingly important measure which of all others, I think ought to have been submitted in some way for the advice of experts in the various branches of industry which it is likely to affect. It affects the importers, and on that point I do not propose to say very much. Imports affect consumers, and I know that if anything is clone by the Bill which affects the whole com- . munity, it will very soon be altered. I am very much more concerned with the effect which the Bill may have on our exports. I do not believe in the cry of “Who is askingforthislegislation ?” which is heard so often when a new measure is introduced. If we were to wait for any section of the public to ask for special legislation, we should probably have very few Bills to consider. When special legislation is asked for it is often enough desired for a selfish and not altogether good purpose. At the same time, when we are dealing with a section of the community which is numerically smallI refer to the producers, manufacturers, and* exporters - we might very reasonably try to ascertain whether it desires such protection, as, apparently, we wish to force upon them by this Bill. In Tasmania we have had some experience of this legislation in a modified form. The principle underlying our Exported Products Act is the same as the principle which underlies this Bill. We must admit that it is a proper thing for the State to interfere for the protection of thehonest exporter against the dishonest exporter, and to see that the imports are what they profess to be - sound and wholesome, whether in the nature of food or medicine.

Senator Millen:

– I do not think that any one objects to that portion of this Bill.

Senator MULCAHY:

– No. The only question is. how far is it desirable and practicableto interfere? It is not a question of what we may desire to do, but a question of what we can accomplish, and very often in attempting to do a right and most desirable thing we run the risk of doing the very opposite. It seems to methat by passing a measure contain- ing extreme provisions such as have been advocated here we may run the risk of doing very serious mischief. It may be interesting to honorable senators to learn why the apple producers of Tasmania approached the Government of the day about four years ago. A dishonest practice had grown up with some shippers of exporting inferior fruit and placing the best apples on the top of the case, and sending to England the shipment each year under a different name. On one or two occasions the Agent-General reported that whole shipments of fruit had been more or less depreciated in value by the dishonest actions of some persons, who took care in the following season to conceal their identity by assuming another name or brand. The position became sp serious that the fruit-growers asked the Government to devise legislation for the purpose of putting down this dishonest practice, and, naturally, their first suggestion was an inspection of the fruit prior to shipment. We wisely discussed the matter with those who knew what they were talking about, and what was practicable. But every time we attempted to provide for compulsory inspection, we found ourselves confronted with insuperable difficulties. The persons who approached us in the first instance had in the end to admit the impracticability of so legislating as to prevent the mischief in the way which they had suggested. What followed? The Exported Products Act, which was passed in 1901, was largely of a permissive character, but it did one good thing. It provided a means of identifying every case of fruit which left the State. It required persons who shipped under any brand or mark, or under any assumed name, to register that brand, or mark, or name. Persons who shipped under their own name were easily identifiable each year. Consequently, if there was a bad parcel of fruit in a shipment, the shipper could always be easily traced. But as regards inspection, we found that all we could do was to provide means for the inspection of fruit by those persons who not only desired it, but were able to avail themselves of it. That fact is not quite fully appreciated, at any rate, in connexion with the export of apples. In trying to bring about uniformity of legislation, we have to remember that sometimes the conditions are not uniform. With regard to fruit-growing Tasmania is behind the other States a week or a fortnight, or three weeks, as the case may be. Under these circumstances, economy of time from the picking of the fruit until it is placed in the hands of the purchaser in England is of the greatest moment. The growers naturally desire to get their fruit sent away as early as possible, so that they may secure the good prices which prevail at the opening of the season. What happens? The fruit is not picked promiscuously or at random, as some honorable senators seem to think. It is carefully picked, and graded by the growers, who understand the necessity and the value of grading. In most cases, however, there is no time for making a proper inspection. The fruit is picked, sent to the river-side, and taken away by barges or steamers to be carried to the port, and placed in the ship’s hold. Sometimes not more than twenty-four or thirty hours elapse from the time the fruit is picked until it is placed in the ship’s hold.

Senator Keating:

– The Tasmanian Act provides for. local inspectors.

Senator MULCAHY:

– Yes, if the growers wish to put the Government brand of superiority on their fruit, but not otherwise. If they wish their fruit to be inspected, and to have it declared that at that time it was of first-class quality and well graded, they can obtain inspection. It is voluntary, not compulsory.

Senator Keating:

– The Act absolutely prohibits the exportation unless the fruit is marked.

Senator MULCAHY:

– The Minister is. I think, speaking from’ memory. The Act compels the exporter to so mark his fruit that it may be identified, and it also provides that if a man marks his fruit as first-class, it shall be first-class fruit, and provides penalties if it is not of that quality.

Senator Keating:

– Section 6 says -

No product shall be shipped or placed on board any vessel for exportation from Tasmania unless the package containing such product is clearly branded in the prescribed manner with a registered brand of the consignor, and withthe registered brand or the initials and surname of the producer.

Senator MULCAHY:

– That provision is for the purpose of identification, and has nothing to d’o with the grading or classification of the fruit.

Senator Dobson:

– No regulations have been issued under the section.

Senator Keating:

– There are subsequent provisions for dealing with the grading and other matters.

Senator Macfarlane:

– The section was never carried out.

Senator Keating:

– From want of funds, according to the Government.

Senator MULCAHY:

– As a rule, the greater proportion of our fruit is shipped from Hobart, but when the Act was passed it was being shipped from different parts of the State, and we could not afford to provide for inspection at every port. There is no provision in the Act for compulsory inspection. Section 6, to which Senator Keating has referred, merely provides for a method of identification. Section 7 says -

Any consignor may brand any package containing any product with the words “ First Grade “ or “ No. 1,” or any other prescribed word or mark signifying “First Grade” or “No. 1,” if the contents of such package comply in all respects with such conditions as may be prescribed by Regulations to be made hereunder for such purpose.

The consignor may brand the packages, but if he does, the fruit must correspond with the conditions laid down. He is not obliged to brand it. Section 8 says -

The inspector shall have full power and Authority to open any package branded with the words “ First Grade” or “ No. i,” or any other prescribed word or mark, indicating “ First Grade “ or “ No. 1 “ and to inspect and examine its contents, and’ to prevent any package marked as aforesaid from being shipped or placed on board any vessel, if the contents of such package sire not in accordance with the provisions of this Act and of any Regulations made hereunder.

The ‘inspector mav forbid the export of any product other than ‘ fruit intended for human consumption which he may consider unfit for such purpose.

SenatorGray. - Knowingly.

Senator BEST:

Senator BEST:

– Exactly. Then when it gets into the State, as I have already pointed out, -it wilt be the subject of complementary legislation to secure internal protection. We take the precaution at the very outset to have only truly branded goods introduced into the Commonwealth. Surely nothing could be more reasonable? As to the suggestion that this is most tyrannical, provision is made that the goods may be branded, while- here, in accordance with a prescribed description, or may be exported elsewhere, so that’ the importer need not suffer unduly. So far as imports are concerned, it is provided that they shall not bear a false trade description. Could anything be move fair or reasonable? Could anything be more fair than to provide that the trade description affixed to goods shall not be calculated to mislead in a material respect as regards the goods to which it is applied, and that every alteration of a trade description, whether by way of addition, effacement, or otherwise, which makes the description false or likely to mislead in a material respect, shall be prevented so far as it is possible to prevent it? These, in my opinion, are desirable objects. In connexion with exports, the same provisions apply. By clause 11, it is proposed, so far as we can do so, to protect the reputation of our products. In this connexion I need give but one example. Our exports last year of eucalyptus oil amounted in value to something like £18,000, or double the value of the export for the previous year. The oil has become very popular in the English market, but it has latterly been found that since it became so popular inferior, stuff is being placed on the market, with the result that the standard of our export has been alarmingly depreciated, and, what is worse, by reason of that depreciation, we cannot hope for any considerable increase in the export of this product. What might be urged in connexion with this example could be repeated in regard to butter, cheese, poultry, and food-stuffs generally. As regards exports we enact a similar provision prohibiting the application of false trade descrip-tions. It may be said that we shall fail to achieve the great things we are attempting to accomplish by this Bill, but that should not discourage us from making the attempt. It is only by experience in this direction that we can hope to learn the defects of our system which require to be remedied. It may be taken for granted that if we made no attempt in this direction we should never acquire the experience necessary to enable us to remedy the evils to which I have referred. Great exception is taken to clause 14, which provides that -

Any goods intended for export which have been inspected in pursuance of this Act may in manner prescribed be marked with the prescribed trade description. <

It has been said that this clause is unjust and tyrannical, but I pointed out that nothing novel is proposed. It is well known that all goods in the form of carcasses of cattle and hogs, and portions of those animals, which are introduced -into Great Britain from the United States are most carefully branded by the United States Department of Agriculture, which is one of the most useful institutions of that country. In this connexion I may say that a report was made in 1901 by a commercial agent, Mr. Sinclair, who represented Victoria in London.

Senator Styles:

– A good man.

Senator BEST:

– A very good man indeed. In the interests of Victoria he visited America, with a view to ascertain the means adopted by the Agricultural Department there in dealing with meat inspection. He furnished a report on this subject, and I will trouble the Senate with a few extracts from it. If honorable senators desire to peruse the report it will be at their disposal. Mr. Sinclair says -

A conversation with Dr. Salmon on the work of meat and live slock inspection by his division soon revealed its great extent, thoroughness, and value to the United States. He told me that their trade in animal products and live stock could never have been built up on the sound commercial basis on which it now stands, or have made such progress, had it not been for the existence of their State system of inspection, which being thorough in character, gave absolute confidence to foreign buyers and consumers.

Senator Gray:

– Have not buyers confidence in Australian meat?

Senator BEST:

– They would have greater confidence if it were branded, as the experience of the United States has shown. Mr. Sinclair further says -

An Act of Congress, approved 30th August, 1890, provided for the inspection of meat for exportation, but this was supplemented on 31st March, 1891, by an Act “ For the inspection of live cattle, hogs, and the carcases and products thereof, which are the subject of inter-State commerce, and for other purposes.”

Mr. Sinclair visited the vast establishment of Mr. Armour in Chicago, and later on in his report, he says -

So that I should have better evidence of the results of this inspection, the Doctor took me into the “ condemned chamber,” which was adjoining the large one in which they were then at work. . . . There were thirty-two carcases of cattle, each bearing the yellow condemnation tag, the majority being animals affected with tuberculosis, some to a slight extent, others very bad indeed. One animal was condemned for emaciation. The wisdom of the inspection as a safeguard to the consumer was apparent at a glance, and the possibility of any of these animals being sent out for food, or canned for that purpose would contribute towards destroying any oversea trade being largely developed.

This is particularly interesting, as it gives hopes that in Queensland and New South Wales in particular - as well as. perhaps, in Victoria - there is a possibility of a large trade ultimately being done in live and dead cattle.

Senator Gray:

– In live cattle? It has been tried, and has failed.

Senator BEST:

– To some extent in live cattle, but particularly in dead cattle. Later on he says -

With a desire of obtaining an expression of opinion from Armour and Company’s superintendent as to the action of the States Government in carrying out this system of meat inspection in their establishment, I asked him how they like this procedure, and the presence of so many officials in their killing and packing houses. His reply was that they could not but regard it with favour, as it enabled them to furnish a Government guarantee as to the sound condition of their meat and meat products exported to foreign countries ; further, that they took care to advertise the fact…..

This system of inspection of meat, which I saw in operation in Chicago, is carried on throughout the United States, the Federal Government dealing with the whole question as a matter affecting the interests of the whole nation. Had it been left to the various individual States to deal with, it could not possibly have been made so thorough and effective, and would have lacked uniformity, and in consequence would have failed in benefiting in such a marked degree their foreign export trade in meat products.

Further oni he says -

In regard ‘to the exportation of meat and meat products from Austrafia, now one of the Commonwealth chief sources of wealth, and a trade in the further development of which many thousands of its pastoralists and farmers have to depend so much upon, considering that the United ‘States is one of our great rivals in supplying the requirements of Great Britain and foreign countries, and can furnish such a perfect State guarantee of the quality and conditions of its products, I think its action in reference to system of federal meat inspection should be adopted by the Commonwealth of Australia.

– Suppose that what the honorable senator says is true ; and I do no doubt it, still, there is a process of inspection, for the benefit of the producer, and for the protection of the consumer. The principle which is embodied in this Bill is the recognised principle of inspection and grading. But what is more interesting, is what has been done in regard to other products. Let . me refer particularly to the grading of butter. Some time ago an expert was sent from Victoria to New Zealand to see if any of the processes followed there were different from our own. He furnished a report on the subject. He states that though he met hundreds of buyers, agents, and producers, he found only three who objected to the grading system, and one of them qualified his objection. But the general public opinion was favorable. He says -

Although a great number of dairymen, butter factory managers, secretaries, and directors were either much averse to the innovation at first, or looked upon it with a good deal of misgiving and doubt, now there is not one to be found who does not admit the pronounced success of the grading system.

Agents and buyers say, “Why, we simply Base all our bargains on it; we could not do without grading now. It acts on the managers just the same as giving marks to boys at school.” Dairymen state, “ We would be nowhere but for our grading system.” “ The best thing that ever happened for our dairy industry.” Managers usually answer, “ I know that if any one else is higher, I never rest till I get up to him.” “My word, it keeps us up to the tick all right.” Directors say, “ The grading system is acknowledged by banksand buyers in London, and advances are made, according to grade, on bills of lading with grade certificates attached.” “ The great advantage we find is in selling; it prevents disputes, and there is never any question as to the quality or standard, the Government graders’ verdict and stamp being final and binding.” “ If the grading system were dropped to-morrow, the quality would drop also.”

Experts assert, “They all like it now; it used not to be so ; people were frightened at first, but they quickly recognised the advantages once it got started.”

The Produce Exchange in England has recently embodied in its rules that the Government grade certificate shall be accepted by them as final in regard to quality ; and another that Government certificates of weights shall be binding. Such an acknowledgment, coming as it does from perhaps the most conservative element of the trade, should be convincing.

I will read a few lines from the report upon the grading system in Victoria. I am quoting from page 915 of Vol. II., part 9, of the. Victorian Journal of Agriculture - At the commencement of the season some of the butter factories requested the Department to grade and stamp their export butter as either “approved for export,1st grade,” or “approved for export, 2nd grade,” and so on. As some exporters appeared unaware that the Department would undertake to grade in the absence of legislation a circular was sent to all shippers informing them that it would be done whenever it was desired. Twenty-two factories applied to have their consignments graded and stamped prior to shipment. This was done, and certificates sent to the companies weekly showing the result, many factories expressing themselves as highly pleased with the value of these detailed reports, and all requesting that the grading should be continued.

Senator Keating:

– This season sixtyseven factories applied to have their butter graded in Victoria, as against twentyseven last year.

Senator BEST:

– I am thankful to the honorable senator for the information. This system of grading, which has been objected to so violently, has been proved by experts to have produced magnificent results in the interests of both producers and consumers. Surely it may be relied upon to be of the same advantage in regard to other producing interests.

Senator Dobson:

– In Victoria, it is only the first grade that is marked.

Senator BEST:

– It does not matter whether it is the first or second grade. I am contending for a principle. It will be for the Minister to frame regulations to accommodate the circumstances of the trade. Senator Pulsford and others declared in very strong terms that certain of the provisions of this Bill were most tyrannical, and that no Minister ought to be intrusted with the administration of them. Reference ‘has been made to clause 5 of the Bill, which provides that it will be competent to make an inspection of imports and exports ; and sub-clause 3 says that for the purposes of the section, the officer may enter any ship, wharf, or place, and open anypackages to enable him to carry out his powers and duties. We are enacting nothing new in this connexion. The provision is simply a repetition of a principle which we have already adopted. Let me draw attention to section 186 of the Customs Act, which provides that - any officer may open packages and examine weigh mark and seal any goods, subject to the control of the Customs, and the expense of the examination, including the cost of removal to the place of examination,shall be borne by the owner.

– For the purposes of the Bill, the draftsman has deemed it necessary that the principle should be re-enacted, and no doubt he is right. Section 52 of the Customs Act says: -

The following are prohibited imports : -

All goods the importation of which may be prohibited by proclamation.

Senator Millen:

– Read paragraphh.

Senator BEST:

All goods having thereon or therewith any false suggestion of any warranty guarantee or concern in the production or quality thereof by any persons, public officials, government, or country.

The same object as we have in view in this Bill.

Senator Millen:

– It isnot the same legislation.

Senator BEST:

– It is not exactly the same legislation. The principle is embodied in the Customs Act, and is simplybeing effectively carried out in this Bill.

Senator Keating:

– In the Customs Act we only prohibit imports, but in this Bill we penalize those who endeavour to bring in prohibited imports.

Senator BEST:

– That is the distinction. Section 56 says: -

The power of prohibiting importation of goods shall authorize prohibition subject to any specified condition or restriction, and goods imported contrary to any such condition or restriction shall be prohibited imports.

In the face of those provisions involving, precisely the same principle, is it a reasonable criticism of this measure to say that it is tyrannical and dangerous in the extreme? I think not. I had not the pleasure of’ being present when the report of the interview with Mr. Wade by a Sydney newspaper was read; but I took an opportunity to glance down the report, and I trunkthatMr. Wade would be very sorry to stake his reputation as a lawyer on the light and airy opinions which he then expressed.

Senator Keating:

– He shifted his ground in the interview from that which he took up in his first letter to the newspapers.

Senator BEST:

– I should think he would. I could not help being amused when I learned that he invited the Sydney public to realize what was going on in far- off Melbourne. Amongst other things, he charged this Parliament with infringing State rights. He said that we were prescribing how goods should be made, that that was essentially the duty of the States, and that we had no right to interfere. There is only one answer to his allegation, and that is that we are not attempting to infringe States rights in any possible form. What we say is that the transportation of imports and exports shall be done in a particular way, and subject to certain conditions and restrictions. We are not attempting to prescribe how the goods shall be manufactured. Then Mr. Wade said that the duty of the State is to protect the safety, the health, and the morals of the people. Am I to understand from this remark that he is jealous of the Federal Parliament attempting to legislate, so far as its jurisdiction extends ? He knows as well as we do that the Federal Parliament has not the power to go beyond a certain point. All we can do is to legislate to the extent of our jurisdiction, because, if we were to exceed our powers our legislation on appeal would at once be declared ultra vires by the High Court. We propose to protect the people, so far as our Federal power will permit us, and we expect the States to pass the complementary legislation. We are acting in this way because we are anxious to secure uniform legislation throughout Australia. The misfortune is that in one State there is one class of legislation concerning the component parts of certain products and manufactured articles, and that in other States there is either no legislation on the subject or different legislation. We are proposing to lay down certain restrictions in regard to the importation and exportation of manufactured articles,and thus protect the safety, the health, and the morals of the people to the utmost of our power. We desire to protect the honest trader, the innocent consumer, and, what is more, to build up the highest possible standard for our industries, for by that means alone can we hope to succeed.

Senator MILLEN (New South Wales).With all due deference to you, sir, I feel disposed to express the opinion that it is time we discussed the Commerce Bill. I have listened to the discussion for two nights, and I have heard a great deal about some very nicely sounding principles, to all of which I subscribe. But every honorable senator, who has spoken in support of the measure, seemed to me to purposely abstain from addressing his arguments to its crucial points.

Senator Guthrie:

– The honorable senator asked them, often enough, to deal with clause 7.

Senator MILLEN:

– Yes, and I admired the ingenuity with which they said they would come to that clause later on. I propose to deal with the clause at once.

Senator Playford:

– Senator Best dealt with it.

Senator MILLEN:

– I am glad that he is present to hear me say that- -of course quite unconsciously - he has misled the Senate 111 his affirmation that the Bill is founded upon principles embodied in legislation elsewhere. I shall come to that point later on.

Honorable Senators. - Oh !

Senator MILLEN:

– I shall come to the point now, as honorable senators ( seem to wish me to do, because it does not make very much difference to me whether I quote the English Act now or later on. We have been told that the Bill is founded on the English Act.

Senator Best:

– I said that most of its provisions are.

Senator MILLEN:

– In the first place, the Bill contains the principle of absolute compulsion, but in the English Act there is not a word about compulsion. The very title of the Act is -

An Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to fraudulent marks on merchandise.

– I am sure I do not - but it is quite evident that the criticisms which greeted the first appearance of the measure were justified by the fact that the Ministers themselves did not understand the extent of the powers they were seeking. I have already pointed out that the English Act is optional in its operation. Senator Best, in reply to a question interjected by me as to whether he could point to any parallel provision elsewhere, referred me to the English Act, and then went on to speak of Victorian grading. So far as i have been able to ascertain, there is no parallel to clause . 7 to be found anywhere in English legislation. There is no section in the English Act which gives the Minister power to decree the full particulars which are to be supplied on a multiplicity of points, and shown on every package of goods which is imported or exported. A statement was made last evening that under this extraordinary power it would be possible for the Minister to require particulars equivalent to a union label. Senator Pearce instantly denied the statement, but I ask his attention now while I refer him to the interpretation clause. Clause 7 is as follows: -

The regulations may prohibit the importation or introduction into Australia of any specified goods, unless there is applied to them a trade description of such a character, relating to such matters, and applied in such manner, as is prescribed.

– It is a great crime to assist the local manufacturer, is it not?

Senator MILLEN:

The clause goes on to provide that, subject to regulations - the Comptroller-General, or on appeal from him the Minister, may in any case, and if in his opinion, the contravention has not occurred either knowingly or negligently, shall permit any goods which are liable to be or have been seized as forfeited under this section to be delivered to the owner or importer upon security being given to the satisfaction of the ComptrollerGeneral that the prescribed trade description will be applied to the goods, or that they will be forthwith exported

It is contended by honorable senators who oppose this provision, that it is too extensive, and not sufficiently explicit. But if honorable senators refer to clause 15 they will see there provided that clauses 7 and 11 shall not apply to any goods other than -

articles used for food or drink by man, or used in the manufacture or preparation of articles used for food or drink by man; or
medicines or medicinal preparations for internal or external use ; or
manures; or
apparel (including boots and shoes) and the materials from which such apparel is manufactured ; or
seeds and plants.

– The author of the article has the modesty to admit that he may be open to the soft impeachment of knowing very little of the subject; but he, at the same time, states that he has taken the fullest possible precautions against being misled. He makes himself responsible for only three different classes of statements, namely, those made publicly, and more or less admitted; those made to him by individuals on whom he can thoroughly rely ; and a third class the designation of which has escaped my memory for the moment. He deals with various complaints, and goes on to say : -

The greatest indictment of modern commerce came from Mr. Herbert Spencer in his “ Morals of Trade,” an essay published in pamphlet form, together with a sermon by the late Canon Lyttleton on 11 Sins of Trade and Business,” but now out of print. Two sentences from this pamphlet will be enough for our purpose.

I do not say that 1 indorse the whole of what is stated by the writer of the article, but when a gentleman occupying this high position, publishes an article of the kind in a production like the National Review, there must be very grave cause for the criticism. The article proceeds: -

It has been said that the law of the animal creation is, “ Eat and be eaten “ ; and of our trading community it may be similarly said that its law is, “ Cheat and be cheated.” A system of keen competition, carried on, as it is, without adequate moral restraint, is very much a system of commercial cannibalism. Its alternatives are “ Use the same weapons as your antagonist, or be conquered and devoured.” It is not true, as many suppose, that only the lower classes of the commercial world are guilty of fraudulent dealing; those above them are to a great extent blameworthy. On the average, men who deal in bales and tons differ but little in morality from men who deal in yards and pounds. Illicit practices of every form and shade, from venial deception up to all but direct theft, may be brought home to the higher grades of our commercial world. Tricks innumerable, lies acted or uttered, elaborately devised frauds, are prevalent - many of them established as “ customs of the trade,” nay, not only established, but defended.

Now for the grocery trade. One person who likes is. 8d. tea says that he expected the reduction of tea duty would benefit him. But, apparently, he gets the same tea as before, and pays as much, being told (hat the grocer is out of the old quality, and can only supply a better kind at is. 8d., which used to be is. lod. A grocer’s assistant tells us that he had to turn out large tubs of the same butter, and put is. tickets on one half, and is. 4d. on the other. Currants, he says, were sold at three’ prices. A man employed by a wealthy grocer in the country had orders for is. butter, which he supplied with margarine at 8d., without a label. “ My attitude,” he says, “ towards this practice resulted in my having a week’s notice.” A “ manager “ says he had to ask two prices for is. butter, the same for sugar, and three prices for tea, if possible. This he was forced to do to make his stock account show a profit.

The writer then goes on to deal with the milk trade and various other trades.

An iron and brass founder writes to me : “ The contention of the bishop is practically true. The picture is not painted bad enough. Trade is only another name for theft. I have come to the conclusion that it is absolutely impossible to be a business man, and at the same time a Christian.”

Senator Millen:

– Surely the Minister does not believe that?

Senator KEATING:

– I have said that I do not indorse everything said in the article, but when a man of the attainments, experience, and character of the writer thinks it incumbent upon him to publish utterances of the kind there must be grave causes for his action. The article goes on : -

Now for more grocery frauds. Vinegar is watered, although even pure vinegar can be sold at an enormous profit. . . .

To sum up, one is struck by the ominous silence of some trades when accusations like these are made in public. No doubt many traders can defend themselves easily and truthfully. But others apparently cannot. We clergy are supposed to want to get at the dishonest trader in order to brand him. This is not the case. It is the honest ones we desire to exhibit in our crusade. We are convinced that there are enough honest traders and honest customers in this country to make falsehood impossible in business.

This Bill is for the protection of honest traders, who are the majority of those engaged in business enterprise. The desire is to prevent the dishonest trader injuring the health or prosperity of the community. Honorable senators contend that the Bill does not meet cases of the kind to which I have just referred; but I point to the article in the National Review in order that they may realize the ingenuity and resourcefulness which characterize different traders in perpetrating fraud.

Senator Gray:

– These things have been going on for a thousand years.

Senator KEATING:

– We know they have. If the honorable senator will refer to some of the ancient records of the time when it was proposed to make highway robbery an offence, he will doubtless find that there were people who justified it, on the ground that it had been carried on for years. Highway robbery, however, has been stopped; and there never was an offence proposed to be made punishable that some people were not retrograde enough to defend on the ground that it had been perpetrated for years. The article from which I quoted spoke of frauds which have not only become established as customs, but are actually as such defended. Surely Senator Gray would not defend tricks which amount to fraud simply because they have been perpetrated for years? The object of the Bill is to prevent such tricks so far as our legislation can prevent them. It is necessary in many respects for this Bill to differ from the English Act, owing to the experience under the administration of that Act. That Act was passed in 1887, and since then inquiries and articles have revealed many evils not provided for by legislation. Senator Millen would have us confine the Bill to clauses 5, 9, and 13. I pointed out by way of interjection that, although there are almost the same powers under the Customs Act as are proposed to be given the Minister under the Bill, an essential difference is that, whereas the Customs Act only prohibits the importation of certain classes of goods, the Bill goes one step further, and provides that those responsible for the endeavour to import such goods shall be guilty of an offence, and liable, on summary conviction, to a penalty in addition to the forfeiture of the goods. Clause 5 provides for the inspection of imports and exports, and empowers an inspector to examine, take samples, and for these purposes to enter a ship, and so forth. Clause g provides that no person shall import any goods to which a false trade description is applied under a penalty of £100, and want of knowledge is made a defence. Then so far as clause 13 is concerned there is provision made.

Senator Millen:

– The honorable senator will pardon me, clause 12 is the corresponding clause to clause 9.

Senator KEATING:

– Clause 12 provides that -

No person shall -

knowingly apply any false trade description toany goods intended or entered for export or brought to any wharf or place for the purpose of export.

Senator KEATING:

-The honorable senator did. So far as State trade is concerned, it is impossible to apply this Bill to goods manufactured in or .the production of any State. So far as the goods which come within the purview of this Bill are concerned, they will be goods which come from or are going abroad. They will l>e dealt with once when they come into the Commonwealth, and, having passed into a State, they wall have run the gauntlet of our jurisdiction, and may pass from State to State. There might be a class of goods produced or manufactured in the State which might be the subject of Inter-State commerce’. So far as those are concerned, in connexion with their manufacture and production, the States Parliaments have the fullest legislative authority at the present time. I take it that if the States legislative authority is exercised in that direction, in conformity with the principle of this Bill, there will never be any necessity for Federal interference in that regard. If, on the other hand, the legislative authority of the States is not exercised, or is -not exercised in all the States, or uniformly, or conformably with the requirements of the people of the whole Commonwealth, there will be a just cause for the Commonwealth Parliament to supplement the legislation at present proposed by the passing of an amending measure to make the provisions! of this Bill apply to Inter-State as well as to external commerce. I hope that the Bill will pass its’ second reading, and will be mad’e as perfect as possible in the Committee of the Senate.

Senator WALKER:
New South Wales

The PRESIDENT:

– Does the honorable senator think he is discussing the Bill ?

Senator DRAKE:

– I was drawn away by an interjection. It would.1 be much better for this Parliament to do work which lies undoubtedly within its province, than to deal with a Bill of this kind, which will lead to a great many difficulties, and not improve the relations between States and Commonwealth.

Question - That the Bill be now read a second time - put. The Senate divided.

AYES: 0

NOES: 6

Majority … … 6

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Senator O’KEEFE:

– I desire, by leave of the Senate, to make an explanation regarding the vote I have just given. I had arranged to pair with Senator Clemons, and, as that honorable senator was not present, I should not have .taken part in the division-. However, I was engaged entering pairs in the pair-book, and inadvertently I remained in the Chamber until the doors were closed. However, the majority was large enough to carry the second reading without mv vote, so the result is not affected.

The PRESIDENT:

– The Senate fakes no cognizance of pairs.

Senator Lt Col Gould:

– We willingly recognise that the honorable senator’s mistake was entirely inadvertent.

Bill read a second time, and committed pro io,ma

page 4859

APPROPRIATION BILL

Bill received from the House of Representatives.

Motion (by Senator Playford) proposed -

That the Bill be now read a first time.

Debate (on motion by Senator Higgs) adjourned.

page 4859

SECRET COMMISSIONS BILL

Bill returned from the House of Representatives, with a message, intimating agreement with the amendments made by the Senate.

Senate adjourned at 11. 15 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 9 November 1905, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1905/19051109_senate_2_28/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate 9 November 1905

REPRESENTATION BILL

Senator MILLEN:NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator PLAYFORD:Minister for Defence · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · Protectionist

HIGH COMMISSIONER BILL

Senator HIGGS:QUEENSLAND

Senator PLAYFORD:Protectionist

QUESTION

RIFLE RANGE : HOBART

Senator DOBSON:TASMANIA

Senator PLAYFORD:Protectionist

Senator DOBSON:

Senator PLAYFORD:

Senator Dobson:

Senator PLAYFORD:

QUESTION

DEFENCE POLICY: ANNUAL REPORTS

Senator MATHESON:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator PLAYFORD:Protectionist

Senator Lt Col Gould:

Senator PLAYFORD:

Senator MATHESON:

Senator PLAYFORD:

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator PLAYFORD:

QUESTION

PRINTING OF STAMPS

Senator PLAYFORD:Protectionist

QUESTION

IMMIGRATION RESTRICTION ACT

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator PLAYFORD:Protectionist

PAPERS

QUESTION

WESTERN AUSTRALIA: FACTORIES ACT

Senator CROFT:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator PLAYFORD:Protectionist

IRON INDUSTRY

SECRET COMMISSIONS BILL

QUESTION

PUBLIC SERVANTS: CIVIC POSITIONS

Senator PEARCE:Western Australia

Senator Millen:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator KEATING:Honorary Minister · Tasmania · Protectionist

Senator Dobson:

Senator KEATING:

Senator Lt Col Gould:

Senator KEATING:

Senator Pearce:

Senator KEATING:

Senator Dobson:

Senator Pearce:

Senator KEATING:

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator KEATING:

Senator HIGGS:Queensland

Senator Walker:

Senator HIGGS:

Senator Pulsford:

Senator HIGGS:

Senator Dobson:

Senator HIGGS:

Senator Millen:

Senator HIGGS:

Senator Dobson:

Senator HIGGS:

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator HIGGS:

Senator Millen:

Senator HIGGS:

Senator Millen:

Senator HIGGS:

Senator MILLEN:New South Wales

Senator Pearce:

Senator MILLEN:

Senator Stewart:

Senator MILLEN:

Senator Stewart:

Senator MILLEN:

Senate
9 November 1905

Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator PLAYFORD:
Minister for Defence · SOUTH AUSTRALIA · Protectionist

Senator HIGGS:
QUEENSLAND

Senator PLAYFORD:
Protectionist

Senator DOBSON:
TASMANIA

Senator PLAYFORD:
Protectionist

Senator MATHESON:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator PLAYFORD:
Protectionist

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator PLAYFORD:
Protectionist

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator PLAYFORD:
Protectionist

Senator CROFT:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator PLAYFORD:
Protectionist

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia

Senator KEATING:
Honorary Minister · Tasmania · Protectionist

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator HIGGS:
Queensland

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

Senator DAWSON:
QUEENSLAND · ALP

Senator MULCAHY:
Tasmania

Senator HENDERSON:
Western Australia

Senator WALKER:
New South Wales

Senator DE LARGIE:
Western Australia

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

Senator PLAYFORD:
Minister of Defence · South Australia · Protectionist

Senator TURLEY:
Queensland