Senate
22 November 1907

3rd Parliament · 2nd Session

  1. Senate
  2. 3rd Parliament
  3. 1907

The President took the chair at 12 noon, and read prayers.

page 6407

QUESTION

FEDERAL CAPITAL

Senator BEST:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · VICTORIA · Protectionist

– I have receivedno official information of the kind suggested by my honorable friend, and notwithstanding the suggestions and threats which have been mentioned, the Government intend, courageously, to pursue the even tenor of their way.

page 6407

QUESTION

ADVERTISING THE COMMONWEALTH

Cable Messages

Senator McGREGOR:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Executive Council, without notice, if he can tell the Senate what rate per word is charged by Reuter’s Telegraph Company in respect of the cables which are sent home for the Government ?

Senator BEST:
Protectionist

– The Government has a special concession, and is charged is. per word in respect of the press messages which I referred to last night and which are circulated amongst some of the newspapers in the United Kingdom. The rate for ordinary Government messages is is 7½d. per word, and, of course, the rate to the public is 3s. per word. I am given to understand that the charge of is per word to the Government barely covers the expenses.

page 6407

QUESTION

SPRINGFIELD POST OFFICE

Case of Mrs. Murray

Senator CLEMONS:
TASMANIA

– I desire to ask. the Minister representing the PostmasterGeneral, without notice, if he can give me any information with regard to the recent dismissal of Mrs. Murray from the postoffice at Springfield, in Tasmania ; and also if he will see that Mrs. Murray is given an opportunity which, so far she has not had, to answer any specific charge which has been made against her?

Senator KEATING:
Minister for Home Affairs · TASMANIA · Protectionist

– Some time ago the honorable senator notified me that he proposed to ask a question about this case, but he refrained from doing so until I could make an inquiry of the Post and Telegraph Department. It supplied me with some information, with which the honorable senator was furnished, but, as he desired that Mrs. Murray should be acquainted with the nature of the specific charges made against her, I asked the Department for further information. It has now supplied me with a memorandum . from which it appears that a letter had been written by a resident in Tasmania. with regard to the case, and forwarded to the Department through a member of the other House. The memorandum reads as follows -

In connexion with a letter received from Mr. Alexander Kidd through Mr. D. Starrer, M.P., relative to the removal of the Fast Office at Springfield from the charge of Mrs. Murray, the Deputy Postmaster-General, Hobart, reported on 14th November, 1907, that owing to complaints which had been made to him at various times respecting the manner in which the Tost Office referred to was conducted and a petition for removal of the Office to Mr. J.

Lobb’s ‘ place, the Postal Inspector visited the District and reported on 14th September last that, after hearing the statements of a number of the residents, he considered there was good ground for the complaint made ; the Inspector added that a large majority of the residents desired the change asked for.

  1. In consequence of the receipt of a petition and letters from residents for the retention of Mrs. Murray’s services, the Deputy PostmasterGeneral states he instructed the Inspector to again visit the locality and make a further investigation. This was done and the Inspector reported that his previous opinion wasfully confirmed. The Deputy Postmaster-General therefore deemed it best to transfer the Office, which was done on 1st October last, since when he states no complaint has reached him concerning the management of the Office.

With regard to knowledge on the part of the late postmistress of the charges made against her, the memorandum goes on to say -

  1. Regarding statements made in Mr. Kidd’s letter that the Inspector took statements only from a Mr. Hingston, who was the principal mover and informer in the matter, and who it is stated is at enmity with Mrs. Murray, and that the Inspector would not inform the latter what charges were laid against her, the Inspector states that he interviewed several of the residents of the district who were not in any way, so far as he is aware, connected with Mr. Hingston, and that he gave Mrs. Murray all the information in his possession respecting complaints made against her.
  2. In connexion with Mr. Kidd’s further statement that the Inspector said Mr. Lobb was an old friend of his, the Inspector asserts this is not correct and that the request for Mr. Lobb’s appointment was made by the residents before he (the inspector) knew anything of an impending change.

page 6408

QUESTION

EUROPEAN MAILS: ADELAIDE

Penalties for Late Deliveries

Senator TURLEY:
QUEENSLAND

– Yesterday I asked the Vice-President of’ the Executive Council the following questions -

  1. During the time the Orient Steam-ship Com pany has held contracts forthe delivery of mails, uponhow many occasions have they been late in delivering such mails at Adelaide?
  2. What are the dates on which such deliveries have been late, and the number of hours over contract time in each case?
  3. What would be the amount of the penalties under conditions in respective contracts, at full rates specified inthe contracts for such late deliveries?

The honorable gentleman supplied me with a portion of the information I sought, and said he would look up the matter and furnish the remainder of the desired information if I would make another inquiry.

Senator BEST:
Protectionist

– I gave to my honorable friend the best information which I could.

Senator Turley:

– No. The honorable senator gave no information as to the number of late arrivals at Adelaide and as to the amount of the penalties.

Senator BEST:

– The Secretary to the Post and Telegraph Department states that it will take a considerable time to get that information completed, and that when completed it will be forwarded to the honorable senator. He desires to know “upon how many occasions” the Orient Steam Navigation Company have been late in delivering the mails, and makes no reference to any particular period. If he will fix upon a date to which he wishes the Department to go back, it will considerably facilitate the getting of the information.

page 6408

QUESTION

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

The PRESIDENT:

– Yesterday the Senate determined to suspend so much of the Standing Orders as would prevent the passage of the Supply Bill through, all its stages without delay. The Sessional Orders provide that Government business shall take precedence at certain times, and private business at other times “unless otherwise ordered.” The suspension of the Standing Orders was made with the intention of enabling the Supply Bill to go through all its stages irrespective of other business, and I construed that as an expression of the will of the House that the. Sessional Orders should not interfere with the consideration of the Bill.

page 6409

EARLY CLOSING OF POST OFFICES

Senator BEST:
Protectionist

– The hour when I spoke last night was so late, that it was quite impossible for me to make an adequate reply to the criticisms of honorable senators. Evidently, Senator Neild was under the impression that the Postmaster-General had determined to close post and telegraph offices in the Commonwealth at 6 p.m.

Senator Colonel Neild:

– To close them generally.

Senator BEST:

– As a matter of fact, the order was not intended to apply to telegraph offices at all. As regard postoffices -

In the opinion of the Postmaster-General, there are many places where office’s can be closed at 6 p.m. without any serious inconvenience, and only in such cases will offices be closed at that hour. In several States a large proportion of the Post Offices are already closed at 6 o’clock, and it is considered desirable, with a view to reduce to reasonable limits the working hours of the staffs, to extend this arrangement wherever practicable. Where mails arrive after 6 p.m. and up to 8 p.m., arrangements will be made, as at present, for the delivery of correspondence, but it is thought unnecessary to keep offices open continuously after 6 p.m. merely for the purpose of waiting for these mails and transacting an infinitesimal amount of business.

Senator WALKER:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– Arising out of that answer, I desire to acquaint the VicePresident of the Executive Council with the fact that the postmaster atEdgecliff Post Office, near Sydney, has informed me that the closing of that office at 6 p.m. would be of no use to him, because he would have to keep open for the receipt and delivery of telegrams.

The PRESIDENT:

– The honorable senator cannot debate the matter, but he can ask a question.

Senator WALKER:

– In a case of that sort, what is to be done? Is the postmaster to remain on duty and to deliver letters just as he did before?

Senator BEST:

– From the explanation supplied to me by the Department, I gather that that will be so. It is only in cases where the public will not be seriously inconvenienced, that it is intended to close the post-offices.

page 6409

QUESTION

AMMUNITION FACTORY

Senator KEATING:
Protectionist

– I am not in a position to state the latest development in regard to this matter, because, during the last few days, I have had no communication on the subject with my honorable colleague.

page 6409

DISPUTED ELECTIONS. AND QUALIFICATIONS BILL

Assent reported.

page 6409

QUESTION

CUSTOMS LEAKAGES

Senator GUTHRIE:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

-I wish, upon notice, to draw the attention of the VicePresident of the Executive Council to a paragraph in the daily papers of the 21st November, headed “ Customs Administration,” “Proposed System of Inspectors,” and more particularly the last portion -

It is said that an overhaul of the methods pursued at some of the other capitals would reveal leakages which would parallel those discovered at Adelaide, and to ask if the Department has any knowledge or suspicion of such alleged leakages ?

Senator BEST:
Protectionist

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

The Department has no knowledge or suspicion of any such leakages, nor have any facts been communicated to it, or any precise statements made on the subject which give any grounds for apprehension. The duty of inspection of accounts and of transactions relating to Customs revenue devolves upon the AuditorGeneral by law, and it is presumed that that officer does his duty. The question as to whether an improved system of inspection is required is now engaging the attention of the Minister.

page 6410

QUESTION

EUROPEAN MAIL TENDERS, 1906

Senator TURLEY:

asked the VicePresident of the Executive Council, upon notice -

  1. What was the amount of subsidy asked by the Orient Company in their tender of last year for the carriage of mails, &c, between Australia and the United Kingdom?
  2. Did the conditions of the tender include the ships calling at Brisbane without any additional subsidy ?
  3. Were the conditions in the tender regarding class of ships, speed, and freights considered by the Government as favorable to the producers and people of Australia generally as those embodied in the contract just agreed to by the Senate ?
Senator BEST:
Protectionist

– I find that I am unable to give my honorable friend any further information than that which I gave yesterday.I can only repeat the departmental reply, which is as follows-

Number 7 of the “Conditions of Tender” provided that - “ Except in the case of the tender that is accepted by the Postmaster-General, no information whatever shall be given with respect to any tender (except as to the amount of the three lowest tenders then under consideration), or with respect to the person or persons by whom any tender is made.”

In view of this undertaking, it is regretted that the information asked for by the honorable senator cannot be furnished.

Senator Turley:

– What about question No. 3?

Senator BEST:

– An opinion could only be arrived at by utilizing the private or confidential information.

page 6410

SUPPLY BILL (No. 4)

Bill read a third time.

page 6410

BOUNTIES BILL

Bill returned from, the House of Representatives with the following message : -

Message No. 14.

Mr. President,

The House of Representatives returns to the Senate the Bill intituled “A Bill for an Act to provide for the Payment of Bounties on the Production of certain Goods,” and acquaints the Senate that the House of Representatives has agreed to Nos, 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10 of the amendments made by the Senate, has agreed to Nos. 2. 11, and 12 with amendments, and has made a consequential amendment in No. 2, as shown by the annexed Schedule, and has disagreed to amendments Nos. 7 and 9, as indicated by the annexed Schedule, and for the Reasons assigned herewith. The House of Representatives desires the concurrence of the Senate in the amendments to the amendments of the Senate, and desires its reconsideration of the Bill in respect of the amendments disagreed to.

F. W. Holder,

Speaker.

House of Representatives,

Melbourne, 21st November, 1907.

Reasons of the House of Representatives for

Disagreeing to certain Amendments of the Senate.

As to Amendment No. 7 -

As to Amendment No. 9 -

Motion (by Senator Keating) proposed -

That the message be taken into consideration forthwith.

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

– I should like to ask the Minister in charge of the Bill whether the schedule setting out the amendments made by the House of Representatives is available for honorable senators. I have not received a copy of it.

Senator Keating:

– I do not think it has yet been printed.

Senator MILLEN:

– I listened to the reading of the message, and whilst I think I gleaned something of its purport, the Minister will admit that it is rather inconvenient to ask honorable senators to consider the message without a copy of the schedule of the amendments before them. I recognise the disability under which the honorable gentleman has laboured in the matter of time, but he will admit that the objection I urge is not without force.

Senator Keating:

– I proposed to make a statement as soon as the Senate went into Committee, which would explain exactly the alterations which have been made, and better, perhaps, than they would be explained by the printed schedule.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

In Committee (Consideration of House of Representatives’ message) :

Senator KEATING:
Minister of Home Affairs · Tasmania · Protectionist

– As Honorable senators will remember, the Bounties Bill was before the Senate for a considerable portion of this session. In Committee, a majority of honorable members decided to strike out of the schedule of items mohair, copra, and tobacco leaf. Having struck out those items, it was necessary to make in the body of the Bill, and in the second schedule, certain consequential amendments. The message now received from the House of Representatives, lengthy though it is, indicates merely that another place agrees to the amendment striking out mohair, but does not agree to the amendments made by the Senate striking out copra and tobacco leaf, or to the amendment with regard to the allocation of the bounty proposed in respect of combed wool or tops. It was provided in -the Bill as originally introduced that on combed wool or tops exported, for two years, commencing from the 1st . January, 1908, a bounty should be paid at the rate of 1½d. per lb., and thereafter for three years at ad. per lb. The Senate amended that provision on the suggestion of Senator Walker, and the House of Representatives, after considering the amendment, has sent back the Bill with a modification . of the amendment, the object of which is to provide that in the last year the bounty payable shall be at the rate of id. instead of £d. per lb. Senator Walker’s amendment provided for a sliding scale from 1½d. to id., and then Jd. per lb. All, therefore, that the Senate is asked to do by another place is to restore the items copra and tobacco leaf to the schedule of products on which bounty shall be payable, and to agree to their modification of the Senate’s amendment in regard to combed wool or tops. The other amendments to which the Senate is asked to agree are simply consequential amendments in the second schedule and the second clause. As some of the amendments occur in the body of the Bill, and can only be dealt with after we have disposed of those in the. schedule, I move -

That the consideration of. the House of Representatives’ message with regard to amendments 1 to 6 be postponed until after the consideration of the House of Representatives’ message with regard to amendment No. 7.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Copra (period), 15 years; (rate of bounty), 15 per cent: on market value; (maximum payable -in any one year), ^5,000.

Senate’s amendment - Leave out item.

House of ‘ Representatives’ message - Amendment disagreed to. . .

Senator KEATING:
Minister of Home Affairs · Tasmania · Protectionist

– I move-

That the amendment ! be not insisted- on.

This item was discussed, not only in Committee, but also during the second-reading debate. It was argued that copra could be produced in the New Hebrides and Papua, and that consideration largely influenced some honorable senators to vote against the granting of this bounty. But that ought npt to be the sole determining factor.

Senator Gray:

– The factor was that it could be produced in those islands at a third of the cost.

Senator KEATING:

– That may be, but if copra is not likely to be produced to commercial advantage in the Commonwealth, the bounty provision will probably not be drawn upon. We have in the Commonwealth land and climatic conditions that warrant us in believing that we can grow copra with a fair degree of commercial profit, and, therefore, we should include it in a general system of bounties for the stimulation of tropical productions. Copra is of great commercial value’ throughout the world. It is very largely used in certain manufactures, and markets for it may be found, not only in the Commonwealth; but abroad. Senator Gray and others may say that, as it can ‘ be produced more cheaply elsewhere, we’ could be’ under-sold in the world’s markets ; but all .that the Government ask is that’ a provision shall- bc made in” this schedule in the nature of a promise to those who can ‘grow copra in the. Com.monwealth under the conditions’ laid- down in the Bill, in commercial quantities, and of marketable value, :that they.- will receive a bounty at the rate provided if - the article is grown during the period, specified. -‘If the circumstances are ;such as ‘not’, to induce persons to undertake, the cultivation^ of copra, we are not incurring any financial responsibility by- offering the bounty, but if,, on the other hand, some find that they can undertake its- cultivation, even though -the prospects are not very alluring -to the eyes of others, they should be compensated equally with those who- pioneer in the Cor%monwealth other important industries for which provision -is made in the Bill.

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

– I do not propose to discuss the merits or otherwise of the proposed bounty for copra.- The matter was previously debated at considerable length, and all” the reasons for and against it were freely advanced and considered. The Senate twice arrived at a’ decision regarding the item. I admit that on the first occasion’ it was struck out on an equality of votes, but, subsequently, in a larger House, a motion for recommittal with regard to copra was negatived by the substantial majority of 18 to 12. Another place has furnished us with scanty reasons for asking us to reverse our verdict. The only reason offered was that the bounty would tend to establish an important industry. That argument was put forward in the first instance regarding every one of the items in the schedule, and is in no sense a reason which was not previously considered why the Senate should undo what it has done. In the absence of fuller information, or some additional reason which was not before us previously, I do not see my way to reverse the vote which I then gave.

Senator TRENWITH:
Victoria

. -We should consider this matter a little more carefully before a vote is taken. The item has been twice passed by another place. That is some reason why the Senate should give it careful consideration, although of course it is not in itself a sufficient reason why the Senate should alter its previous decision. But, in the circumstances, when we are looking about for fresh avenues of employment for our people, seeing that copra is an essentially tropical product, and that we have such an enormous area of tropical and semitropical country, a very large sectionof which is about to be taken under direct Federal control, it is our duty to consider whether it is not desirable to encourage the production of copra in the Commonwealth. Honorable senators need not necessarily consider themselves bound to vote against the item now simply because they voted against iton a previous occasion. That was Senator Millen’s only argument.

SenatorClemons. - Does the honorable Senator think that it is a poor argument that honorable senators should vote as they think right?

Senator TRENWITH:

– What the honorable senator suggests is a very good argument, but the fact that a person thought a certain course right many days ago is by no means conclusive proof that he thinks the same thing right now. I would not dream of urging the honorable senator to do what he thought was not right.

Senator Clemons:

– Do not waste time.

Senator TRENWITH:

– I thought it advisable to urge those considerations, but I see now that it is of no use to discuss the matter further.

Question - That the amendment be not insisted on - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 10

NOES: 18

Majority … … 8

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment insisted on.

Tobacco leaf for the manufacture of cigars, high grade, of a quality to be prescribed (period), 5 years; (rate of bounty), 2d. per lb.; (maximum payable in any one year),£4,000.

Senate’s amendment - Leave out item.

House of Representatives’ message - Amendment disagreed to.

Senator KEATING:
Minister of Home Affairs · Tasmania · Protectionist

– I move -

That the amendment be not insisted on.

It will be remembered that this matter was discussed at considerable length. The circumstances under which a majority of the Senate decided in the first instance not to retain the item in the schedule will also be remembered. It was a decision which, I think, surprised the majority as much as it surprised the minority. On a subsequent occasion the matter was dealt with again, when the voting was even. It is unnecessary to labour the question as to the desirableness or otherwise of providing a bounty for the production of high-grade tobacco leaf, nor shall I reiterate any of the arguments previously adduced as to the practicability of establishing the industry in Australia, and the suitability of our soil for the growth of cigar tobacco.

Question put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 13

NOES: 11

Majority … … 2

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment not insisted on.

Combed wool or tops exported (period insisted on, rates of bounty), two years commencing from 1st July, 1908,1½d. per lb.; and thereafter three years,1d. per lb. (maximum payable in any one year), £ 10,000.

Senate’s amendment. - Leave out “ two years, commencing from 1st July, 1908,1½d. per lb., and thereafter three years,1d. per lb.” ; and insert “ three years, commencing from ist January, 1909,1½d. per lb. ; one year, commencing from1st January, 1912,1d. per lb. ; one year, commencing from1st January, 1913,½d. per lb.”

House of Representatives’ message. - Amendment agreed to, with amendment leaving out “½d. per lb.” and inserting in lieu thereof “1d. per lb.”

Senator KEATING:
Minister of Home Affairs · Tasmania · Protectionist

– The original proposal of the Bill in regard to wool tops was that for two years commencing from the1st July, 1908, the bounty shall be 1½d. per lb., and for three years thereafter 1d. per lb. The Senate thought it desirable to commence the bounty not from the1st July, 1908, but from the1st January, 1909, in order that those endeavouring to get the benefit of it should have an opportunity of erecting the necessary machinery. Therefore, the Senate altered the item so as to make the bounty payable at the rate of1½d. per lb. for three years from the1st January, 1909, at1d. per lb. for one year commencing1st January, 1 91 2, and½d. per lb. for one year commencing1st January, 1913. The House of Representatives have agreed to our amendment except that they propose that the bounty for one year commencing1st January, 1913, shall be1d. per lb. instead of½d. per lb. If the amendment is agreed to it will not affect the total appropriation made by the Bill nor will it affect the totals in the second schedule. Under these circumstances I can safely ask the Committee to agree to this small amendment. I move -

That the House of Representatives’ amendment be agreed to.

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

– I think there is a very good reason why the Houseof Representatives’ amendment should be agreed to. Since the matter was last before the Senate I have ascertained that there is a strong probability that the expensive machinery which would be requisite if this industry is to be initiated could not be erected in time for the bounty to be claimed for the first year or two. Consequently it seems to be not unreasonable that those who go into the industry, and who, owing to the circumstances of the case, are unable to claim the bounty in the first two years, should be treated a little more liberally in the last year for which the bounty runs. For that reason I shall support the Minister’s motion.

Motion agreed to.

Second schedule.

Senate’s amendment - Leave out schedule and insert in lieu thereof the following new schedule : -

House of Representatives’ Message - Leave out figures in second column and insert the following amounts in lieu thereof : -

Senator KEATING:
Minister of Home Affairs · Tasmania · Protectionist

.- We made a series of amendments in the second schedule for the purpose of making the amounts conform to the alterations made in the first schedule. In the original schedule the amounts ranged from £60,000 in 1908 to £412,500 in 1922. Consequentupon amendments made by the Senate those amounts were altered, and in the amended schedule ranged from £43,000 to £323,500. But, as the other House asked for the restoration of copra and tobacco leaf, it was necessary to make the second schedule harmonious. The Committee has now agreed to restore tobacco leaf, but has refused to restore copra. I have had prepared different schedules for any contingency, and now intend to propose the insertion of an amended schedule which has been worked out on the basis of the insertion of tobacco leaf and the omission of copra. The amounts range from £46,000 in the first year to , £339,000 in the last year. I will read the amounts for each year to be provided by the schedule, as I desire to have it amended. They are: - £46,000, £97,000 , £151,000, £205,600, £259,500, £279,500, £297,500, £311,500, £319,000, £326,500, £329,000, £331,500, £334,000, £336,500,and£339,000. These, of course, are not cumulative amounts, but the maximum expenditure allowable up to the end of each succeeding year of the Bill’s operation. This schedule has been prepared very carefully, and I can confidentially recommend it to the Committee as representing the proper proportion of the amount which is provided in the first schedule. On a previous occasion, when amendmentswere made, Senator Walker calculated out in each instance what alterations would have to be made in the second schedule, and I think he found in every instance that the official calculation was exact. I think it will be found so on this occasion. I therefore move -

That the House of Representatives’ amendment be amended to read as follows -

“£46,000

97,000

151,000

205,000

259,500

279,500

297,500

311,500

319,000

326,500

329,000

331,500

334,000

336,500

339,000.”

Motion agreed to.

Postponed clause 2-

There shall be payable out of the Consolidated Revenue . Fund, which is hereby appro priated accordingly, the sum of Four hundred and twelve thousand five hundred pounds during the period of fifteen years commencing on the first-day of July, One thousand nine hundred and seven, for the payment of bounties in accordance with this Act.

Senate’s Amendment - Leave out “twelve” and insert “ twenty-three.”

House of Representatives’ Message. - Omission of “ twelve “ agreed to, but insert “ ninetyseven,” and leave out “ five hundred.”

Senator KEATING:
Minister of Home Affairs · Tasmania · Protectionist

– The amount proposed to be appropriated when the Bill reached the Senate was £412,500, but as the result of our amendments it was altered to £323,500, and the other House now asks us to agree to the sum of £397,000. It is necessary for the Senate to adopt the total which is last mentioned in the amendment just made, namely, £339,000. Therefore I move -

That the amendment of the House of Representatives be amended by inserting the words “ thirty-nine “ in lieu of “ ninety-seven,” and that the consequential amendment to strike out the words “ five hundred “ be agreed to.

Motion agreed to.

Resolutions reported ; report adopted.

Sitting suspended from 1.10 to 2.30 p.m.

page 6414

PAPER

Senator BEST laid upon the tablethe following paper -

Papua. - Ordinances of 1907 -

No.9. - Appropriation.

No. 10. - Appropriation.

page 6414

SUSPENSION OF SITTING

Senator BEST:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · Victoria · Protectionist

– I am expecting every minute the message from the House of Representatives returning the Bounties Bill, and I suggest that the sitting be further suspended, and that the bells be rung when we have word that the message is on its way.

The PRESIDENT:

– As the expected message has not yet been received, I purpose leaving the Chair until 2.55. The bells will be rung five minutes before that time.

Sitting suspendedfrom 2.31 to 2.55 p.m.

page 6414

BOUNTIES BILL

The PRESIDENT announced the re ceipt of the message that the House of Representatives had agreed to the amendment insisted on by the Senate, and to a consequential amendment made by the Senate.

page 6415

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Senator BEST:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · Victoria; · Protectionist

– I move -

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn until Wednesday, sand January, 1908.

I may explain to honorable senators that it is not my intention to ask the Senate to assemble for the transaction of business on the date named in the event of the Tariff not being concluded in another place before that date. Although we have every reason to hope that the consideration of the Tariff will have been concluded in another place before that date, that contingency has been thought of, and it is proposed to provide for it in this way : A number of honorable senators representing adjoining States have been good enough to intimate that they will assist to provide a quorum on the 22nd January next if it should be necessary at that date to propose a further adjournment of the Senate until such time as we shall have received the Tariff from another place. Of course, if the Tariff has been received from another place, we shall then resume the transaction of business. May I take this opportunity to thank you, sir, and the Chairman of Committees, Senator Pearce, for the manner in which you have discharged the duties of your respective offices. I must say that the manner in which the proceedings of the Senate have been conducted by yourselves has been a source of universal satisfaction to honorable senators. The very best traditions of the Chairs have been most worthily upheld by you, sir, and by the Chairman of Committees, I take this opportunity also to extend my most hearty thanks to honorable senators generally for the assiduous attention they have given to the very important work submitted for their consideration since we met. We have been at work continuously since the 3rd July last, and measures of the greatest importance have been dealt with by the Senate in the interval.It is a source of very great satisfaction to remember that the courtesy and consideration which has been extended by honorable senators generally has resulted in the expeditious performance of the work of the Senate and the maintenance of the very best feeling amongst honorable senators. I think I should say that we have regretted exceedingly the absence from his place of the Clerk of Parliaments, Mr. Blackmore, who possesses the high esteem of every member of the Senate. We have been exceedingly fortunate in having in his place the Acting Clerk of Parliaments, Mr. Boydell, who has discharged the duties of the office with marked ability and courtesy. We have to extend to him our sincere thanks for the zeal, energy, and ability he has displayed in the performance of his duties. I wish to recognise also the duties performed by Mr. Upward, Mr. Monahan, Mr. Lennox, and the other officers associated with them in the conduct of the business of this Chamber. I take this opportunity, early as it may seem, to extend to one and all the compliments of the season and to express the hope that we may all reassemble for work, thoroughly recuperated and with the same zeal and anxiety as have hitherto been displayed to discharge the duties of our various offices in the highest and best interests of the community.

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

– I am sure that honorable senators will appreciate the sound business considerations which have induced the VicePresident of the Executive Council to propose the adjournment of the Senate in the circumstances which he has related. It will undoubtedly meet the convenience of honorable senators if the proposal he has indicated is carried out. I desire on behalf of honorable senators on this sideto indorse the remarks of the Vice-President of the Executive Council with regard to yourself, sir. and the other officers of the Senate. There will be very little contest for the honours as to the number of those on either side whose remarks have occasionally called for your interposition. I feel that on this side, and throughout the Chamber, honorable senators generally recognise the admirable manner in which you have discharged duties, which at times, have rendered it necessary that you should rebuke some of us. I reciprocate very cordially the pleasant things which the Vice-President of the Executive Council has said. Honorable senators on this side arc, of course, frequently in conflict with the Government, and perhaps can understand better than those who support them the difficulties which confront the Government in carrying out their duties. We on this side have nothing but the kindest thoughts of the Vice-President of the Executive Council, and the Minister of Home Affairs, for the, way in which they have strenuously fought for their measures. I can say that with an added emphasis, because whilst I recognise that they are invariably wrong, I still understand that they are trying to do the wrong thing in the pleasantest way. I desire to express, on behalf of honorable senators on this side, my hearty wishes that the coming season will be a pleasant one, and that we shall meet in the forthcoming year, and for many future years, in the best of health, strength,and happiness.

Senator McGREGOR:
South Australia

– On behalf of the members of the Labour Party, I indorse all that has been said by the leader of theGovernment and the leader of the Opposition, and, with them, I wish every one, including ourselves, a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

The PRESIDENT:

– Although it may be somewhat unusual for the Chair to speak with reference to the remarks that have been made by the leader of the Government, the leader of the Opposition and the leader of the Labour Party, still I feel that I should be wanting in my duty were I not, on behalf of myself, the Chairmen of Committees, the Clerks of the Senate, and the other officers, to say a word of thanks for the very kind sentiments expressed regarding the way in which they have discharged the duties of their respective offices. I may safely say that it has been a matter of pleasure as well as of duty for myself, the Chairmen of Committees, and the other officers, to give our best efforts and energies to the orderly and proper conduct of the business of the Chamber. It is at all times a pleasure for men occupying positions of responsibility to find that their efforts are appreciated, and that credit is given to them for their desire to do what is best in the interests of the Chamber and of Parliament. The feeling that exists in the minds of all of us is not only that we have a duty to perform, but that we are called upon to perform it as efficiently, pleasantly, and agreeably as possible. If at any time it has fallen to my lot, as perhaps it has occasionally, to say a few words of rebuke to honorable senators, I can assure them that it has always been done with the most earnest desire to conduct the business honestly and fairly, and in the interests as much of honorable senators themselves as of the Chamber.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 6416

ADJOURNMENT

Senator BEST:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · Protectionist

– In moving -

That the Senate do now adjourn,

I desire to take this opportunity of saying that in what I said before I spoke on behalf not only of myself but of my colleague, the Minister of Home Affairs, whose valuable help and willing assistance I most keenly appreciate.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 3.4 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 22 November 1907, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1907/19071122_senate_3_41/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant