Senate
21 May 1908

3rd Parliament · 2nd Session



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

page 11300

QUESTION

NEW GUINEA

Senator MILLEN:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– I desire to ask the Vice-President- of .the. Executive Council, without notice, if he has seen in this morn.ing’s press a telegram, dated Sydney, and in which it is set out that the Governor of German New Guinea has taken certain, action on territory which is assumed to be in dispute between Great Britain and Germany, and, if so, will he bring the matter under the attention of .the Minister for External. Affairs with the view to such measures as’ may be deemed to be necessary being adopted to protect the interests of the Commonwealth?

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

– I shall be very glad’ to bring the telegram under the notice of the Prime Minister; but I have little doubt in my own mind that it has already engaged his attention.

page 11301

MELBOURNE-SYDNEY EXPRESS

Senator KEATING:
Minister for Home Affairs · TASMANIA · Protectionist

– This morning I asked that the necessary inquiry should be made prior to any representations being made by me.

Senator Colonel NEILD:

– May I be permitted to represent to the honorable gentleman the urgency of the matter, inasmuch as the proposed change, if made, is to take place in the course of a few days ?

Senator KEATING:

– I have noted that.

page 11301

QUESTION

TORPEDO BOATS

Senator NEEDHAM:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– I desire to ask the Minister representing the Minister - of Defence, without notice, whether the report of the officers who were recently sent to Great Britain to prosecute an inquiry as to the construction of torpedo boats for Australian defence has been completed, and, if so, when it will be placed before honorable senators ?

Senator KEATING:
Protectionist

– I have not seen the report. If one has been presented, it has been sent to the Minister of Defence. I shall make inquiries and furnish the information which the honorable senator desires at a later date, if he will repeat his question.

page 11301

QUESTION

UNITED STATES FLEET

Free Stores

Senator PULSFORD:
NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the VicePresident of the Executive Council, upon notice -

Will there be anything to prevent the United States Fleet, whilst in. Australian ports, obtaining goods free of Customs duties?

Senator BEST:
Protectionist

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

Duty is not chargeable on the stores shipped in port on public vessels.

page 11301

QUESTION

PATENTS AND TRADE MARKS CASES

Senator PULSFORD:

asked the VicePresident of the Executive Council, upon notice -

  1. Is it a fact that in contentious cases, in the Patents and Trade Marks Office, the parties to the same are refused access to the file of papers, and that decisions are arrived at without the parties thereto being heard ?
  2. If this is not so, what really is the practice in a case where more than one party is interested in the decision ?
Senator BEST:
Protectionist

– The answer to the honorable senator’s questions is as follows - 1 and 2. I am not aware of any legitimate claim for inspection of documents having been refused.

With regard to matters in which under the Act and Regulations a discretion is allowed, no action adverse to an applicant is taken without hearing him in person, or considering his written views.

page 11301

QUESTION

HOBART POSTAL SERVICE

Senator MACFARLANE:
TASMANIA

asked the Vice-President of the Executive Council, upon notice -

Will the Government make immediate alteration in the postal service to Hobart, so that letters posted in Melbourne on Friday afternoons are delivered earlier than under the present arrangements, which means detention in Launceston for some thirty hours, and does not permit of replies being sent for five days, by any one who does not personally apply at the . Post-office in Hobart on Mondays at 10 o’clock at night ?

Senator BEST:
Protectionist

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

The matter is. receiving consideration, but the detention of correspondence for Hobart in Launceston for 30 hours appears to be due to railway arrangements.

Senator MACFARLANE:

– Is it not due as much to the alteration in the running of the steam-boat service?

Senator BEST:

– My honorable friend has heard what the official answer to his question is.

Senator CLEMONS:
TASMANIA · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1910; LP from 1913

– May I ask the Minister whether it is not a fact that during the summer a boat left Melbourne for Launceston on Friday, and that a boat left Melbourne for the North- West Coast on the same day? Also whether it is not a fact that letters can be posted now in Melbourne on the same day - Friday - and reach Hobart via the North-west coast at precisely the same hour as that on which letters used to arrive during the summer if forwarded from Melbourne by the Loongana on Friday ?

Senator BEST:

– I believe that is so.

Senator MACFARLANE:

– May I pointout to the Minister that my question relates to letters posted in Melbourne on Friday afternoon. Previously we were always able to post letters here om Friday afternoon.

Senator BEST:

– Have I not told my honorable friend about’ the railway?

Senator MACFARLANE:

– But now wehave to post our letters on Friday morning. That is an injustice.

page 11302

QUESTION

ADVERTISING AUSTRALIA

Senator PULSFORD:

asked the VicePresident of the Executive Council, upon notice -

  1. What is the total amount of money which the Government has agreed to pay the London Standard for advertising?
  2. How will this expenditure be apportioned as regards the States?
Senator BEST:
Protectionist

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

  1. The Government have agreed to take one page of the Standard supplement for three months, at £&n per page. Total cost, ^,832.
  2. The Government of Victoria, who have taken one-third of this space, will pay one-third of this amount, and the Government of Western Australia, who have taken one-sixth of the space, pay one-sixth. The balance will be apportioned as is the case with all similar expenditure, i.e., in proportion to the population qf the States.
Senator GRAY:
NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Vice-President of the Executive ‘Council, upon notice - ^ 1. What is the price paid or to be paid bv the Government per insertion of the advertisements dealing with the resources’ of the Commonwealth in the London Standard?

  1. Is not this paper recognised as the high Tory journal of England?
  2. Has the Government advertised, or is it the intention of the Government to advertise, in any of the papers recognised in England as the great daily Liberal and Democratic papers of that country ?
Senator BEST:

– The answers to the honorable senator’s questions are as follow : - £64 per issue, but the States of Victoria and Western .Australia have taken from the Commonwealth half the space, contributing half the cost.

  1. In answering a similar question in the House of Representatives on the “15th instant, the Prime Minister said - “ I do not attempt to discriminate between the several leading London papers, or to attach political labels, which are often more misleading than informative to Australians. There is a group of papers in the Mother Country which are distinctly friendly in their attitude towards Australia’. The Standard is one of these. This new supplement is being used for advertising purposes because its issue marks a new departure in English journalism. We have had no similar offer from any other paper.

In advertising it is necessary to alter both the mode of appeal to the public, and the matter published. It is hoped that the example set by the Standard will stimulate others to educate public opinion in the Mother Country by other means having a similar value to us.”

  1. The Government will consider any proposals that may be submitted which appear to offer equal or superior advantages to those of this special supplement of the. Standard.
Senator PULSFORD:

– Arising out of that answer, is the Vice-President of the Executive Council prepared to assert that there is a class of paper in England that is distinctly unfriendly to Australia?

Senator Best:

– Does the honorable senator mean free-trade papers?

Senator PULSFORD:

– I do not say free-trade or protectionist papers. The honorable senator said there was a class of paper friendly to Australia, the inference being that there was another class that was unfriendly. Are we to understand that?

Senator BEST:

– The honorable senator may judge that for himself.

Senator DE LARGIE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

– Arising out of the answer, seeing that Senator Gray seems to find fault with the Commonwealth Government for making the “ high Tory”, journals of England a vehicle for advertising

The PRESIDENT:

– Will the honorable senator ask his question?

Senator DE LARGIE:

– I cannot ask it without explaining it a little. Will the Vice-President of the Executive Council ascertain whether it is worth while, besides advertising in “high Tory” newspapers, to consider the low Labour journals?

Senator BEST:

– The answer I have already given indicates clearly that any application from a well’ established journal which is prepared to show favorable regard for- the interests of Australia will ‘receive consideration.

Senator FINDLEY:
VICTORIA

– I understand that the price which the Commonwealth is paying to a certain journal in’ London is £64. a page. What kind of mental pabulum is contained in that page, and who supplies it? Is the same kind of material to be provided in the columns of all the publications that the Commonwealth Governmentare disposed to utilize in the Old Country ?

Senator BEST:

– I ask the honorable senator to give formal notice of the question.

Senator FINDLEY:

– I will do so, because I want to know who is serving up this stuff.

Senator CHATAWAY:
QUEENSLAND

– Can the VicePresident of the Executive Council inform the Senate whether it is the intention of the Government that the matter to be published in the Standard supplement shall be information cabled from Australia, or simply written up advertisements’?

Senator BEST:

– I shall be glad to obtain definite information on the subject if the honorable senator will give notice of the question.

Senator GIVENS:
QUEENSLAND

– Does the VicePresident of the Executive Council think that there are any newspapers in England which would not be distinctly friendly to Australia if they were subsidized to the extent of64 a page for being so?

Senator BEST:

– A very good thing, too.

page 11303

LABOUR BUREAUX

Wages and Cost of Living

Senator ST LEDGER:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Vice-

President of the Executive Council, ufon notice -

  1. What are the numbers of registrations of applications for employment at the respective Stale Labour Bureaux for each year from 1901- 1907?
  2. The number of cases in which such applications have been successful in securing employment ?
  3. Has the Commonwealth Statistician been instructed to make inquiries with regard to the relation between wages and cost of living in the Commonwealth in the respective years 1901- 1907?
  4. If not, will the Government instruct, him to make such inquiries?
Senator KEATING:
Protectionist

– This is a matter of statistics within the Department of Home Affairs. The answers to the honorable senator’s questions are as follow - 1 and 2. The data at present available is very imperfect, but inquiries willbe made.

The figures obtained for me by the Commonwealth Statistician in reply to No. 1 were of such a character that I asked for a conference with him with regard to them ; but we could not arrive at any satisfactory understanding of them, as they seemed somewhat anomalous.

  1. No. The question of the relation of wages to cost of living is a very complicated one, as there is considerable variation, not only between the various States, but between different parts of the same State. It would not be possible at the present time to give satisfactory statistics for past years.
  2. It is not proposed to do more than make preliminary inquiries at the present time.

The ultimate object that the honorable senator seems to have in view is one that I cordially agree with, but we can do nothing at present but make preliminary inquiries.

page 11303

QUESTION

MILITARY CLOTHING

Senator NEEDHAM:

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

  1. Has the officer commanding the No. 2 Battery, Australian Field Artillery, Fremantle, forwarded his explanation to the Department in reference to his action in placing an order for Military Clothing with an English firm, instead of an Australian firm, in accordance with his instructions? ‘
  2. If so, what is the nature of the explanation ?
  3. If the . explanation has been received, and is not considered, satisfactory, what steps lias the Department taken in connexion with the abovenamed officer?
Senator KEATING:
Protectionist

– I am informed by the Minister of. Defence, in’ reply to the honorable senator’s questions -

  1. Yes.
  2. The reason given by the Officer was, that, in his opinion, the local prices were too high in comparison with the prices at which the clothing could be imported. The order was placed by him without informing the Military Commandant, who was not aware of the ‘proceeding.
  3. As the Officer in question has resigned from the Forces, no further action can now be taken by the Department. Instructions have been issued with a view to preventing any such cause of complaint in the future.

page 11303

QUESTION

ANTI-TRUST AND COMMERCE LAWS

Senator CLEMONS:
TASMANIA

asked the VicePresident of the Executive Council, upon notice -

If he will have a report prepared showing the investigations and proceedings that have been made or taken during the present year under -

The Anti-Trust Legislation of the Commonwealth ?

The Commerce Act?

Senator BEST:
Protectionist

– Yes.

page 11303

QUESTION

PRIVILEGE : SELECT COMMITTEE UPON PROCEDURE

Senator. Colonel NEILD (New South Wales) [2.46].: - May I be permitted to intervene On behalf of the Joint Committee of the two Chambers on Privilege?. I have had placed in my hand a motion which I desire leave to move, giving the Committee power to sit during the sittings of the Senate. I am taking this action on account of the probable early close of the session. The Committee had a meeting this morning.

Leave granted.

Motion (by Senator Colonel Neild) agreed to -

That the Select Committee appointed to join with the Select Committee of the House of Representatives to inquire into and report on the question of parliamentary powers, privileges, and immunities have leave to sit during the sittings of the Senate.

page 11304

CUSTOMS TARIFF BILL

Item 303. Timber, viz. : -

Senate’s Request. - Insert the following footnotes -

Note (to come into force on and after 1st September, 1908). - For the purposes of this Division a superficial foot shall mean an area of one square foot on one surface, and being one inch or less in thickness.

Note. - The, term “super, face” means the superficial measurement of those surfaces (except edges) of the timber actually dressed or partly dressed.

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendment not made as to first note; made as to second note.

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

– By this request we sought to define the meaning of “superficial foot “ and “ super face.” Honorable members in another place have accepted our definition of “ super face,” harmonizing as it does with the practice of the’ Department and the usages of the trade. They have not, however, agreed to accept the amendment we requested them to make, defining the meaning of superficial foot. The matter has been discussed at such length that I need not now go into it very fully”. The practice under the previous Tariff, and of the trade, was to reckon a superficial foot as being one inch in thickness, and duty was charged accordingly. If a board was any proportion of an inch in thickness, one-sixth inch or oneeighth inch thick, only one-sixth, or oneeighth of the duty was charged upon it. It is quite true that in the Tariff as originally introduced, the Government provided for a definition of superficial foot in the terms of the definition proposed by the Seriate, but such strong representations were made from all the States, other than Queensland, and by the trade, that the Government were convinced that it would be most inequitable to alter the old practice in such a way as to quadruple the duty or increase it in the proportion to which the board was under one inch.

Senator Givens:

– How would the definition proposed quadruple the duty?

Senator BEST:

– By permitting the same duty to be charged on a quarter-inch board as on an inch board. That would be so very inequitable that, the Government abandoned their original proposal and determined to adhere to the old. and wellestablished practice in this regard.

Senator Turley:

– Where is the practice established ?

Senator BEST:

– It has been the practice throughout the Commonwealth.

Senator Chataway:

– Except in Queensland.

Senator BEST:

– I admit that it has not been the practice in Queensland.

Senator Givens:

– Or in other States.

Senator BEST:

– In what other States? Representation’s were made to the Government by, I think, all the States with the exception of Queensland, that the definition proposed by the Senate would work inequitably, and in the circumstances I have explained the Government saw fit to abandon their original proposal.

Senator Givens:

– They would abandon anything.

Senator BEST:

Senator Givens usually votes just exactly as it suits him, and has no particular regard for any fiscal faith one wav or another.

Senator Givens:

– What?

Senator BEST:

– The Government have decided to adopt what they consider to be a well-established and equitable practice. The Committee, by a majority of two, decided to request the House of Representatives to insert the proposed definition of superficial foot, but after full consideration of the matter, I think I am justified now in asking honorable senators not to press the request for the insertion of the first, note, I therefore move -

That the request as to the first note be not pressed.

Senator GIVENS:
Queensland

– I ask the Committee not to agree to the motion submitted by the Vice-President of the Executive Council. The honorable senator talks about consistency in protection, but in this case the Government are running away from a proposal which is calculated to give an enormous amount of employment to workers in timber in Australia, quite apart from the protection which it would afford to the national timber industry. I point out that it is impossible to cut an inch, board into two half-inch boards, because allowance must be made for the cut..

The definition of “superficial foot “ proposed by the Government would be an inducement to importers of timber not to import it in large sizes, but to have it cut up into small sizes abroad to avoid waste and duty. They would thus deprive the workers in timber in Australia of work to which they are legitimately entitled, and yet, in the face of this fact, the Minister has the unblushing effrontery to talk to’ other honorable senators about consistent protection. Arguments which the Minister has .not advanced at all were used elsewhere, and largely influenced the Government in altering their decision in connexion with this matter. It was urged that timber cut very thin, and required here to be used for veneers, could not be obtained in Australia. It is known that the Government has a very high regard for the local piano industry, which uses a great deal of veneer, and is very largely benefited by the protectionist policy. The Government has abandoned that policy as applied to a national Australian industry, to give another industry a further show, notwithstanding the fact that there is a high protection given to the piano industry already.

Senator Best:

– Is there not a high duty on veneers ?

Senator GIVENS:

– I do not deny that, but I am pointing OUt some of the reasons which induced the Government to back clown in this matter. I have always contended that veneers do not come under this item at all, but I am referring to the special pleading which was used in order to effect the back-down of the Government. To overcome the difficulty raised in this connexion, I am willing to make a concession in the proposal that I shall submit. My object is to prevent the importation of the half-inch rubbish which is imported here, chiefly in the form of American white pine.

Senator Pulsford:

– -Why say “rubbish”?

Senator GIVENS:

– Because I know it is rubbish. The half-inch lining boards of American’ white pine that are imported are the veriest rubbish.

Senator Pulsford:

– I suppose that the honorable senator means that it is “ rubbish “ because it is imported.

Senator GIVENS:

—No; some -splendid timbers are imported, but the half-inch American white pine that is imported is the veriest rubbish, and is used only by the jerry builders of Melbourne and other big cities. It is absolutely rotten and unfit to use in any decent work. I say that knowing what a piece of good timber is as well as anybody. . It would be better for a man to build his house of cardboard than to put this half-inch American white pine into it. My object is to prevent the importation of that kind of timber at the ridiculously low rate of duty imposed on timber in half-inch planks, tongued, grooved and dressed, To overcome the difficulty with regard to veneers, which has had such enormous . influence with the Government - and it would be useless to deny it, because every member of both Houses has been circularized . with regard to the effect of this particular definition of superficial foot, on the introduction of timber- for the manufacture of veneers -

Senator Best:

– I have never had a circular on the subject. -

Senator GIVENS:

– It is very much more likely that in the multiplicity of circulars which the honorable senator has received, he has forgotten this one, or, that having received it, he has merely opened’ it and thrown it into the waste-paper basket. The honorable senator is scarcely justified in saying that he never had such a circular.

Senator Best:

– I never saw such a circular, and certainly never read one.

Senator GIVENS:

– My proposal .is that we should modify our original request by making the proposed definition of superficial foot read in this way -

For the purposes of this division a superficial foot shall mean an area of one square foot on one surface, and being one inch or more than three-eighths of an inch in thickness.

That would mean that timber under threeeighths of an inch in thickness would pay duty according to its proportion of one inch, and timber over three-eighths of an inch in thickness would pay duty as if it were one inch thick. That would overcome the difficulty in the minds of members with regard to the detrimental effect of the definition we previously proposed on the introduction of thin boards for veneers. If the Government were sincere in their desire to give protection to the Australian woodworking industry and to the timber trade generally, they would support the amendment which I am submitting. I move -

That the words “ not pressed “ be left out, and that the following words be inserted in lieu thereof - “ modified by leaving out the word less,’ and inserting in lieu thereof the words more than three-eighths inch,’ “

Senator ST LEDGER:
Queensland

– A great deal of interest is taken in these timber questions in Queensland, as will be well understood from the warmth of the debate which took place last night, and as is also shown by a telegram which has been sent this morning to Senator Chata-‘ way, and which I shall read. The message is from a gentleman named Gore, the secretary of the Associated Timber Merchants; a body which, I take it, represents, more or less, the whole Queensland timber industry. He says -

Timber duties. This association trusts Senate will reaffirm their definition’ of. “superficial foot.”

In Queensland the overwhelmingly strong opinion is that the definition of “ superficial foot ‘ ‘ given by the Senate should be persisted in. No doubt Senator Givens is of the same opinion ; but, working on the salvage principle, he is adopting a wise course in proposing to throw some of the cargo overboard. There are strong reasons for accepting his amendment. The matter is, of course, of some concern to the sawmill employ6s, especially in Queensland, though it also affects every saw-mill in Australia. I dare say that 20,000 or 30,000 men in Queensland are directly or indirectly concerned in this matter. I hope that honorable senators opposite will remain stalwart in support of the Senate’s former, determination, and that we shall send the Tariff back to the House of Representatives with an indication of our , sense of the importance of the point at issue.

Senator STORY:
South Australia

– I shall on this occasion reverse the vote which I gave when this matter was previously under discussion, and shall support the motion of the Vice-President of the Executive Council. Since we dealt with the matter some weeks ago, I have been placed in possession of more information than I then had. It is idle for any honorable senator to say that the imposition of this extra duty will give additional employment to saw-mill hands in any other State than Queensland ; and I doubt very much whether it will have such an effect there. As a matter of fact, the particular timber that will be affected is that which is used very, largely in the back-blocks by settlers who want to build cheap houses. They build almost entirely of timber, which, if the Senate’s former definition is enforced, will pay double duty. A considerable portion of that, timber is½-inch matchboarding.

Senator Givens:

– The result of carrying my amendment will be that timber will be imported in larger sizes and be cut up in Australia.

Senator STORY:

– Nothing of the kind will result. Matchboarding is cut up at the mills out of timber that would be practically waste if not so used. The½-inch stuff to which I am referring is cut out of the scantlings after the large* pieces of timber have been cut. It would” never pay to import the waste timber, because, on account of the awkwardness of the shape, it would be difficult to stack it. The same thing applies to i-inch floor boarding, which is certainly used by the poorer people who cannot afford expensive houses. The carrying of Senator Givens’ amendment would not lead to any additional employment in saw-mills, at any rate, in the southern portion of Australia.

Senator Findley:

– According to the telegram read by Senator St. Ledger, it will lead to employment in one portion of Australia.

Senator- STORY.- Of course there is timber- in Queensland, but it is not suitable for all purposes, and, as has been stated over and over again, the Queensland peoplehave not sufficient enterprise to supply orders from Melbourne and Adelaide which have been standing over for twelve or eighteen months.

Senator TURLEY:
QUEENSLAND · ALP

– Do they not cut Jjr-inch timber in Queensland ?

Senator STORY:

– Of course they do, to supply their own necessities ; but it appears that they are not prepared to supply the southern States. The imposition of the proposed duty would mean that people using J-inch timber would have to pay double duty, or bear the increased cost of obtaining Queensland timber. I hope that the Committee will agree to the Minister’s motion, and not press the request.

Senator GIVENS:
Queensland

– ‘In case any honorable senator should be led astray by the special pleading of Senator Story on’ behalf of the jerry builders, I wish to point out that the facts show a discrepancy in his own argument. The honorable senator says that fc-incli boards are nearly always cut out of the scantlings left over when- the larger, sizes have been cut up. There is not a member of the Senate who knows better than Senator Story does that this J-inch timber, imported “as matchboarding, is generally cut out of white pine that is useless foi almost every other purpose. It is never used for big work at all, because it would not be accepted for any of the purposes for which large timber is required.

Senator Story:

– Who told the honorable senator that?

Senator GIVENS:

– I am as certain of it as I stand here. Does the honorable senator contend that American white pine is fit for rafters or -joists ? .

Senator Story:

– It is fit for all kinds of shelving.

Senator GIVENS:

– Is shelving imported in big boards?

Senator Story:

– Of course it is - in boards 12 inches and 18 inches wide.

Senator GIVENS:

– In boards 12 inches and 18 inches, wide by about inch thick at the most. Wittingly or unwittingly the honorable senator led the Committee to believe by his argument that matchboards were only cut out of waste timber ; but he has had to back down, and to admit that no big timber is cut out of white pine.

Senator Story:

– I do not admit that.

Senator GIVENS:

– Therefore the whole of the log has to be cut up into½-inch matchboards, and it is not a matter of cutting up waste timber. Now, in regard to work being done in other States besides Queensland, I submit that the adoption of this definition would not increase the price by one iota to the poorsettler about whom the honorable senator made such an ad misericordiam appeal. It would lead to the timber being imported in larger sizes, and the saw-mills in the other States would be employed in cutting up the imported timber just as the sawmills in Queensland would be employed in cutting up local timber. I have travelled very considerably throughout Australia, but I have not yet known sawn timber to be carried into the back-blocks from the coast to be used in building houses. A good Australian slab humpy is infinitely superior to any house made out of that rubbish ; even a tent would be as good. As a matter of fact, we cannot afford to carry the timber away from the railway line, or to carry it very far in a train, because the cost is prohibitory. If, however, it is necessary to carry timber by railway,I submit that the test way to economize is to pay freight on good timber rather than on rubbish.

Senator Story:

– The honorable senator wants people to pay the cost of carrying the timber on two railway lines.

Senator GIVENS:

– No. My desire is to secure to Australian workmen as much employment as possible in the cutting up of the timber. I do not want the whole of that work to be done in Canada or the United States, or the Baltic. This timber is rarely, if ever, used by any one who is building a house for’ himself or wants honest workmanship in his house. It is mainly, if not entirely, used by jerry builders in the big cities. I do not think that they deserve any special consideration. With regard to the general application of this definition, in all the States, except New South Wales of late years, the definition of a super foot of timber has been one square foot, one inch or less in thickness. I have frequently bought timber, but any timber below1 inch thick has been, charged as if it were an inch thick.

Senator Millen:

– My honorable friend’s experience is different from mine.

Senator GIVENS:

– That has been my experience. When the trade treat other people in that way it is time for us to accept their definition.

Senator Millen:

– The price is altered to suit the thickness of the timber.

Senator GIVENS:

– No.

Senator Millen:

– The honorable senator does not , pay the same price per 100 super, feet for 1 inch timber as he pays for½-inch timber.

Senator GIVENS:

-In Queensland we pay at the same price for, say, §-inch timber,” as we do for1-inch timber. It could not be obtained on any other terms.

Senator Henderson:

– That is the only; place where it is done.

Senator GIVENS:

– The definition of a superficial foot is purely arbitrary. It is fixed for the purpose of expediency. It is quite within the competency of the Committee to apply an arbitrary term in what it. may think is the wisest and most expedient way. I contend that in order to give effect to the protectionist pjirtciple, which has been accepted bythe people of Australia, but which has not been applied by this Parliament to the extent to which it ought to have been, we should adopt a definition that will insure the largest amount of work to the people of Australia, and give the best possible protection to the saw-milling industry.

TheCHAIRMAN . - It has been suggested that the question, if put in its present form, will be very complicated. I. suggest that if the motion ‘of the Minister were withdrawn, Senator Givens might resubmit his proposal for a modification, when the Committee could vote directly on that question without the matter being complicated by the motion..

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

– I have given some consideration to the suggestion, and I think that it is the better plan to adopt, in order to avoid any complication. In asking leave to withdraw my motion, I may mention that I have suggested to Senator Givens the proper form in which he should frame his amendment. Senator Givens. - I ask leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment and motion, by leave’, withdrawn.

Senator GIVENS:
Queensland

– I rise to move the motion which has been suggested to me by the Vice-President of the Executive Council, I presume, on the advice of expert officers.

Senator Best:

– Yes; that is the proper form for my honorable friend to adopt, but, of course, I disapprove of his proposal.

Senator GIVENS:

– I move-

That the request be modified by leaving out the words “ and being one inch or less in thickness” and inserting the words “and being not more than one inch nor less than3/8 of an inch in thickness.”

Question put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 14

NOES: 15

Majority … … 1

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Motion negatived.

Senator GIVENS:
Queensland

– Perhaps it may overcome the scruples of certain honorable senators if the request is further modified, If “ one-half “ is substituted for “ if,” it will allow the match-board timber, of which some persons seem to have their souls possessed, to come in free, and, as regards the flooring boards, preserve a small portion of the work for oursaw-millers. I move -

That the request be modified by leaving out the words “ and being one inch or less in thickness,” and inserting “ and being not more than one inch, nor less than1/2 inch in thickness.”

SenatorSTORY (South Australia) [3.25]. - Why does Senator Givens intend to deprive the people who live in the bush in States other than Queensland of flooring for their houses ? The timber merchants of Queensland have never supplied any flooring boards for the southern States’. They have been requested to supply various kinds of timber, but orders sent eighteen months ago are still unfulfilled. This will be simply a revenue duty, and Senator Givens has stated over and over again in this chamber that he is strongly against such duties.

Senator MULCAHY:
Tasmania

– I hope Senator Givens will not press his motion. We have had a fair test of the feeling of the Committee, and have been beaten.

Senator TURLEY:
Queensland

– I hope a division will be taken. It is not fair of Senator Mulcahy to ask us not to press for another expression of opinion. How often has the honorable senator, during the consideration of the Tariff, moved for different rates of duty, and when he could not get one rate, modified his proposal a little and divided the Committee on it again? I have a distinct recollection of three separate divisions on one item, a proceeding which was characterized here asputting the matter up to auction. Now, when honorable senators have decided not to come down to three-eighths of an inch, and when Senator Givens is willing that the timber which has been described as matchboard shall be exempt from the provision, it seems fair to ask the Committee to agree that at least onehalf inch in thickness shall count throughout Australia under the Tariff just as it counts in Queensland now in connexion with all timbers. Senator Givens has pointed out that that is the regular method by which timber is sold there. This is not a new matter. It has been brought under the notice of Ministers of Trade and Customs time and again during the last four years, with a request that the question should be fixed up. The answer was that no alteration could be made, because under the old Tariff the practice was definitely agreed on, but surely, now that the Tariff isbeing revised, it is fair to ask, in the interests of those employed in the timber industry, that provision should be made in the schedule with regard to timber of these small sizes, which, if cut here, will give work to a large number of people.

Senator ST LEDGER:
Queensland

– I hope the proposal will be pressed to a division.

Senator Trenwith:

– There was a division last night on door stocks.

Senator ST LEDGER:

– I have heard so many eloquent- arguments from the honorable senator as to finding employment for Australian workmen thatI hope he will vote with us on this occasion. No honorable senator has been more persistent than he in advocating duties in order that employment might be provided. If he will stand by us this time, we may be able to carry the modified request now proposed.

Question put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 15

NOES: 14

Majority … 1

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

Request, as modified, pressed.

Item 340. Watch and clock main and hair springs . . . telescopes; barometers and thermometers, except advertising, ad val. (General Tariff), 5 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), free.

Senate’s Request - Leave out the words “ ; barometers and thermometers, except advertis- ing.”

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendment made, . with the following modification : - After “ telescopes “ the words “ ; and clinical thermometers “ inserted.

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

– The result of the course taken by another place will be that clinical thermometerswill be dutiable at 5. per cent., and free, while other thermometers and barometers will fall under “glass, n.e.i.,” dutiablear 25 and 20 per cent. I move -

That the modification be agreed to.

Motion agreed to.

Item 347. Slipper forms andRoyal Cord in the piece ; Prunella ; Lasting ; and Stud for Boots, Shoes, and Slippers, ad val. (General* Tariff), to per cent; (United Kingdom), 5 percent.

Senate’s Request. - Insert “and” before- “ Lasting “ ; leave out the words “and Stuff”; make the item free.

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendment not made as regards alterations of wording, but the following modifications made : - “Felt” inserted before “ Stutf,” and “Under Departmental by-laws” inserted after “Slippers.” Amendment as to alteration of duty made.

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

– The original idea of the Senate was to practically put’ these materials on the same footing as cottons with regard to duty. Another place has not accepted our wording, but has inserted “Felt” before “ Stuff.” As the free admission of these things is to be regulated under departmental by-law, there is no objection to the modifications.

Senator Pulsford:

– Why “ departmental by-law ?”

Senator BEST:

– Because that is a> proper precaution. I move -

That the modifications be agreed to.

Motion agreed to.

And on and after 7th December, 1907 -

Item 353

  1. Leather, viz. : - Kid and Patent andl

Enamelled Leather, ad val., 20 percent.

Senate’s Request.: - Make the duty, per square foot, 2d.

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendment not made.

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

– Strong exception was taken in another place to the specific duty, requested by the Senate, so far as glace kid is concerned. That attitude was- taken at the instance of: certain Sydney manufacturers. As them was considerable difference of opinion between the parties, I have endeavoured, b;; negotiation with the parliamentary sections, representing the various interests concerned , to come to some compromise. I . am happy to say that I have been successful, and I move -

That the request be not pressed, provided that the item be amended to read as follows : -

Leather, viz. : -

Patent and “ Enamelled, per square foot, 2d.

Kid, other than Patent and Enamelled, ad val., 20 per cent.

As it was contended by the Sydney manufacturers that they should have glace’ kid and dull kid under the 20 per cent, duty, my proposition will break up the item so as to allow of that, and to retain the specfic duty of 2d. per square foot, . as against patent and enamelled leather. The tanners also approve of the compromise.

Senator CLEMONS:
Tasmania

– I suggest that the honorable senator’s motion is not very happily worded. It seems to me that it would be much better to sav that we press our request with a modification than to say to the House of Representatives, “ We will do this prq- vided you do that.” Iam not opposing the motion, but I think some objection may be taken to the wording of it.

Senator Best:

– We have first of all. to say that we press our request. . I am not particular as to the phraseology, and I am prepared to amend the motion so that the request may. be’ pressed with the modification which I have suggested.

Motion amended accordingly and agreed’ to. “

Item 353

  1. Leather, viz. : - Calf- n.e.i., While Sheep and White Lamb, ad val. 15 per cent.

Senate’s Request. - Make the duty 20 per cent.

House of Representatives’ Message.- Made, with the following modification : - After sub-item (c) the following added, “And on and after 13th May, 1908 (in lieu of (c) above). (c) Leather, viz.-: - 1. Calf n.e.i., ad val., 15 per cent. 2. White Sheep and White Lamb, ad val., 20 per cent.”

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

– The effect of the modification made by another place is to reduce the duty proposed by the Senate on Calf n.e.i. from 20 to 15 per cent., and to make the duty on White Sheep and White Lamb 20 per cent. as proposed by the Senate. I think there is no objection to the modification, and I therefore move - .

That the modification be agreed to.

Motion agreed to.

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

– Before the next item is called on by the Chairman, I wish to explain that the item Leather has been so mutilated as to be hardly intelligible in the form in which it now appears in the Tariff. I intend to submit a request to the House of Representatives to put the whole item in a proper and business-like form, giving honorable senators the assurance that the remodelled form proposed for the item will carry out exactly what has been decided by the Senate and by another place. The item as now agreed to by the Senate reads as follows -

  1. Leather Rubber and Composition Belting and Greenhide, for belting and other purposes, ad val. (General Tariff), 25 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), 20 per cent.

This portion: of the item will not be affected by the remodelling. Paragraphs b, c. and d, as the result of frequent amendments, now read -

  1. Leather,’ viz. : -

    1. Patent arid Enamelled, per square foot, 2d.
    2. Kid other than Patent and Enamelled, ad val., 20 per cent.
  2. Leather, viz. : -

Calf n.e.i., White Sheep, and White Lamb, ad val., 15 per cent.

And on and a-fter 13th May,1908 -

  1. Leather, viz. : -

    1. Calf n.e.i., ad val., 15 per cent.
    2. White Sheep and White Lamb, ad val. 20 per cent.
  2. Leather n.e.i., ad val., 20 per cent.

Paragraph e is now worded -

  1. Belt Butts, ad val. (General Tarill), 20 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), 15 per cent.

In the remodelling this will be paragraph c, with no alteration in the wording or duty. To show that the remodelled foira will not in any way affect the duty, I give this information under headings describing the kind of leather. Patent and enamelled will be dutiable at 2d. per foot ; Kid, other than patent and enamelled, 20 per cent. ; Calf, other than patent and enamelled, 15 per cent. ; . White . Sheep and White Lamb, 20 per cent. ; and all other leather, 20 per cent. The advantages in the direction of simplicity and brevity of the remodelled form must be apparent. I therefore move -

That the House of Representatives be requested to amend item 353 (second time occurring) to read as follows : - 353. (a) Leather, Rubber, and Compositioa Belting and Green Hide for Belting and other purposes, ad val. (General Tariff) 25 per cent. ; (United Kingdom) 20 per cent.

Leather, viz. : -

Patent and Enamelled, per square foot, 2d.

Calf, other than Patent and Enamelled, ad val. 15 per cent.

N.E.I., ad val. 20 per cent,

Belt Butts, ad val. (General Tariff) 20 per cent. : (United Kingdom) 15 per cent.

Senator Clemons:

– That is a great improvement.

Senator Macfarlane:

– The word “ kid ‘’ appears to have disappeared from the item.

Senator BEST:

– Yes; it is included in the line “n.e.i.” The object of the remodelling is to get rid of surplus words.

Motion agreed to.

Item 356. Paper, viz. : -

  1. Australian Directories, Guides;, and Time tables, per lb. (General Tariff), 6d. ; (United Kingdom), 6d. ; and on and after 10th December, 1907, 4d.

Senate’s Request. - Make the duty (United Kingdom), 6d.

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendment not made.

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

.- After lengthy discussion, in which it was stated that the whole of the information required for certain Australian directories was compiled here and then sent to the Old Country to be printed, and the directories were imported in their completed form, the Committee decided that a duty of 6d. per lb. would represent only a fair protectionist duty on such imported publications. Another’ place has not seen fit to agree to the request we made, but in the circumstances I move -

That the request be pressed.

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

. -I think it is only right to point out that those interested in this matter have stated that the sole reason for getting this printing done abroad is that it has not been possible to get any Australian firm to take a contract tor the printing of these publications within the limited time which can be allowed for their preparation.

Senator Guthrie:

– That is denied by Australian printers.

Senator MILLEN:

– It may be denied, but let some Australian firm come forward and say that they will take such a contract. As previously before the Committee, it was proposed that the duty should be 6d. per lb- under the general Tariff, and that these publications should be. free if imported from Great Britain.

Senator Clemons:

– No ; the duty prpposed under the United Kingdom Tariff was 4d. per lb.

Senator MILLEN:

– Then I have been under a misapprehension, and in the circumstances I shall simply vote against the motion.

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

– I hope the Committee will adhere to their re quest. It was agreed to on a motion submitted by myself. The matter is one which, from a protectionist stand-point, is regarded as of considerable importance by the printers of Australia. . Having at one time filled the position of President of the Australian Typographical Union, comprising thousands of working printers, and constituting really a federation of the working printers of Australia,- I am in a position to say that they are unanimously of opinion that the duty which we requested to be imposed would be ah equitable one, and would give them the measure of protection to which, as protectionists, they claim they are entitled.

Senator Mulcahy:

– What, does it mean ad valorem ?

Senator FINDLEY:

– About 14½ per cent.

Senator Mulcahy:

– On the invoice value?

Senator FINDLEY:

– No; on the retail price at which the directories are sold.

Senator Mulcahy:

– We do not reckon ad valorem in that way. What- does the duty mean ad valorem, ‘ as we understand the term generally ?

Senator FINDLEY:

– I am informed that these directories are sold at 22s. 6d. per copy, and a duty of 6d. per lb. would be about 14J per cent.

Senator Millen:

– What is the weight of a . copy ?

Senator FINDLEY:

– I suppose about 3 or 4 lbs.

Senator Mulcahy:

– The Victorian Directory weighs 5 lbs.

Senator FINDLEY:

– Wise’s directories are now printed in England. The Australian printer needs to be protected against the ‘unfair competition which this firm enters into.

Senator Clemons:

– The honorable senator wants the Australian workman to be protected agamst the’ English workman in this case?

Senator FINDLEY:

– Yes ; es,peciallv as the material contained in the directories is obtained in Australia. Further than that, very little labour is employed by Wise’s in obtaining their material. I am informed, and I believe the information to’ be reliable, that Wise’s rely upon muni cipal, State, and parliamentary rolls for much of the information contained in their directories.

Senator Chataway:

– They send men round collecting information.

Senator FINDLEY:

– -They employ very few men on that work, I think. I have >been supplied with the name of a resident in one of the suburbs of Melbourne whose name had not appeared in Wise’s directories for six years. The reason given is that the rates had not been paid upon the ^.building occupied by this person, and his ~name did not appear upon the ratepayers’ roll. Wise’s depend in a large measure upon the rolls, and as the name did not appear there it did not appear in Wise’s -Directory.

Senator Chataway:

– I do not say that they send round from house to house.

Senator FINDLEY:

– But they” say in their circular that they go to all ‘ pains to make their directories reliable. They also say that Australian printers are not able to undertake their work because of the time in which they require to get it done. Now I have before me two directories. One is the Melbourne Directory published by Sands and McDougall - in my opinion the most important directory published in Australia. The work in it is much superior to that contained in Wise’s Directory. The printing and publishing of this book is performed within a period of three months by the firm of Sands and McDougall. Their directory is sold at 21s., while Wise’s costs 22s. 6d.

Senator Millen:

– So that the honorable senator wishes us to believe that the inferior article fetches is. 6d. more than the superior?

Senator FINDLEY:

– I do say that Sands and McDougall’s is the superior directory. It may be that Wise’s Directory contains more information about certain districts than is supplied in Sands -and McDougall’s, but looking at the two “volumes from a printer’s point of view there is no comparison between them. The printing of Sands and McDougall’ s Directory is ^superior, much more information is con”tained in it, and it would take a longer time to get out the work than to produce Wise’s. The proprietors of Wise’s directories have sent out a circular which contains some very misleading statements. They say -

We have made every effort, both by calling for tenders in the newspapers and -interviewing printing firms, to have our publications printed in Australia. We did for a time manage to have the New South Wales work printed in Sydney, but at the end of the contract the printers declined to renew at any price, and we again had to transfer the work outside the Commonwealth.

The facts are these. The New South Wales Directory was being printed in Sydney by the firm of William Brooks Limited. When I got a copy of Messrs. Wise’s circular, knowing .that Sands and McDougall’s was one of the largest firms in Australia, and that it would be quite possible for them within a short period to turn out such a work, I made inquiries, as to the correctness of the statements in the circular issued by Wise’s. Sands and McDougall’s thereupon sent a telegram to William Brooks Limited, and the following is the reply -

We printed Wise’s Directory several years, and voluntarily abandoned same only because proprietors’ views regarding price and conditions intolerable. Cheaper prices outside always use as- leverage. - Wm. Brooks Ltd., Sydney.

So -that William Brooks Limited, who held the contract for a number of years, gave it up because they were being continually screwed down. Then Wise and Company took their work to the Old Country.

Senator Chataway:

– It is only fair to say that Wise and Company state that the Sydney printers refused to renew the contract “ at any price.” One story is as good as the other.

Senator FINDLEY:

– William Brooks Limited say that Wise’s views regarding price and conditions were “ intolerable. “ Yet, in their circular, Wise’s “say that the firm declined to renew “at any price.” Evidently that statement is incorrect as to Wise’s being unable to find a local printer to do their work. I would have even undertaken the job myself. I have a letter from the manager of the Advocate printing office, Lonsdale-street, Melbourne, who says -

With reference to printing Wise’s Directory of Victoria, we should be delighted to take up this work, and would guarantee to turn this directory out complete in a style equally as good as the sample submitted to us. We would require for first issue five months to produce it, and for subsequent editions about three months. Of course, we recognise that our plant would have to be increased somewhat, but this, Mr. Winter says, he would .immediately do for such a work ‘ should he* secure it. Personally, I might say, as a practical printer, that there is not any reason, as far as machinery and men are concerned, why such a work should not bc printed in Melbourne.

I am not so much concerned about its being printed in Melbourne, dr even in Sydney, but I do say, as a protectionist, that these Australian directories should be printed in Australia.

Senator Macfarlane:

– Time is the essence of the contract in regard to printing directories.

Senator FINDLEY:

– The firm from whose letter I have quoted undertake to turn out the work in five months in the case of the first issue, and three months for all subsequent issues ; whereas Wise’s are prepared to allow nine months.

Senator Chataway:

– Does the honorable senator think that a matter of 2d. per lb. would make any. difference ?

Senator FINDLEY:

– It would make a considerable difference from a protectionist view-point. I ask, in the interests of the working, as well as of the employing printer, that this protection be granted to them, and that honorable senators stand by the request originally made.

Senator PULSFORD:
New South Wales

– The duty as it now stands ought, I think, to be sufficient for all purposes. Assuming that one of these directories weighs 4½ lbs., a duty of 4d. would come to about£75 on 1,000 copies. Now, £75 on the cost of 1,000 copies means a very considerable amount on the total number. The duty, it is to be remembered, is charged on the complete book, pot simply on the printed pages within the cover, so that, on the printed matter alone, the duty is far more than 4d. per lb.I cannot imagine why a larger duty should be asked for. The method of charging duty at per lb. is apt to be deceptive. If it were charged per ton, we should better understand what we were dealing with. Here is a duty amounting to £37 per ton, and we are asked to increase it to £56 per ton. It is too much altogether. If a protection of , £37 is not enough, I am sure that a protection of £56 is not justified.

Senator Trenwith:

– On a ton?

Senator PULSFORD:

– Yes. It should not be forgotten that the circulation of directories is limited, and that if the difficulties of production are made too great, a man may have to cease operations, so that the circulation which now takes place, and which does afford a very substantialdistribution of money, may be lost in the effort to get so much. I submit that, in the interests of Australia, the duty, as it now stands, is too high, and ought not to be increased.

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

Senator Pulsford would have the Committee believe that this is almost an excessive duty.

Senator Trenwith:

– He has not shown that by his figures.

Senator FINDLEY:

– No. If one could imagine what he says - that the duty is going to be so heavy as to crush out these people - of course it would have the effect I desire. Let me point out to those who talk about high duties the great disparity in wages in the printing, trade in Australia as compared with some of the important cities in the United Kingdom. In Victoria, printers work forty-eight hours a week, and receive £2 16s. In: New South Wales, printers receive about’ the same wage as in Victoria. In Tasmania, the wages paid to printers are as high, and in most cases higher, than the wages paid to many other classes of artisans. On referring to the British Printer, I find that in most cities in the United Kingdom the. hours of printers range from fifty-two to fifty-six, and the wages from 28s. to 32s. a week. Honorable senators can understand, therefore, why Mr. Wise is extremely anxious to have this work done, not in Australia, but in the United Kingdom, where the hours of work are considerably longer, and the wages, in many cases, only about onehalf of that which is paid to Australian workers.

Senator MULCAHY:
Tasmania

– On inquiring in the Library, I found that the price paid by the Commonwealth for these directories, large and small alike, is a guinea. Assuming, as a general basis, that to be the retail selling price of the books here, it is fair to assume that the invoicecost of them at Home would be about 12s. or 12s. 6d. Last night I weighed two directories. The New South Wales Directory weighed 5¼ lbs., and the Tasmanian Directory, 3 lbs. If we take the average weight at 4½ lbs., then, at the rate of 6d. per lb., the duty on a book worth 12s. 6d. would come to 2s. 3d. On that basis, in order to be consistent with the rates which we have imposed for protective purposes on other items, what is . now proposed seems to me to be pretty reasonable, although, of course, it’ represents an increase of 50 per cent, on tHe original duty of 4½. per lb. Under the old Tariff, these directories were admitted duty free. It must be borpe in mind, however, that the importers supply these directories, not only to Tasmania, but to Great Britain, and many other countries. Even New Zealand, which is even more protectionist than is Australia, imports Wise’s Directory. We have a directory established in Australia, and it seems to me very doubtful whether we should not give our own man a chance to competfe favorably with the outside production. There is no doubt that directories can be printed in Australia. Probably, the people . who are catering for other countries desire all the printing to be done in one establishment’, under their control. It would suit us better to have them printed in Australia, and, I think, that the present duty, although high, is a legitimate one to support.

SenatorCLEMONS (Tasmania) [4.18]. - I am not concerned very much about the duty. I could not see any reason for fixing the duty in the preferential Tariff at! 4d. per lb., if the duty in the general Tariff were made 6d. Suppose that we did press our request for a duty of 6d., is the other House- likely to give way, or should we have to thresh out this matter again ?

Senator Guthrie:

– Wait, and see.

Senator CLEMONS:

– So far, I have been doing my best to come to a happy agreement with that House, but, unfortunately, this item represents something illusory. Senator Findley has said that the duty of 6d. in the general Tariff may be disregarded, because, so far as he knows, it was not considered likely that these directories would be printed anywhere but in England. I understand from him that the sole competition comes from England.

Senator Keating:

– One ofthe reasons alleged for the preference to the United Kingdom,was that Japan was coming in, and printing advertisements for Australian firms.

Senator CLEMONS:

– I suppose that the Minister is indicating that he is rather in favour of the preference?

Senator Keating:

– Yes.

Senator CLEMONS:

– The VicePresident of the Executive Council has proposed not to have the preference, so that the position is becoming a little more complicated. By the motion, we are asked to adhere to the duty of 6d. per lb. against the United Kingdom, and not to give way in order to defeat, a problematical invasion from Japan.

Senator Millen:

– That is Senator Best’s wayof showing, his liking for preference.

Senator CLEMONS:

– The position is extraordinary. I repeat that I do not like preference. In the circumstances, I must seriously consider how I shall vote.

My desire has been to come into harmony with the other House.

Question - That the request (item 356,

Australian Directories, &c.) be pressed - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 17

NOES: 11

Majority … … 6

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Request pressed.

Item 356. Paper, viz:-

Newspaper, to be used exclusively for Newspapers under Departmental By-laws,, in sizes not less than 20 x 25 inches or its equivalent, ad val. (General Tariff), 10 per cent. ; and on and after roth December, 1907, free ; (United Kingdom), free.

Senate’s Request. - Leave out “ 10 per cent. ; and on and after 10th December, 1907, free”; insert “ 10 per cent, up to and including 9th December,1907.”

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendment not made.

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

– Our request was really made for departmental reasons, but it has not been acceded to by the other House. As the matter is of no importance, I move -

That the request be not pressed.

Motion agreed to.

Item 356. Paper, viz. : -

  1. N.E.I., including Cardboard; Pasteboard;

Pulpboard; Cloth-lined Boards; and Clothlined Paper; Floor Paper; Paperhangings, or Wall Papers; and Toilet Paper in rolls or packets, ad val. (General Tariff), 20 per cent. ; (United Kingdom),. 15per cent.

  1. Millboard; Greyboard; Leatherboard ;

Woodboard ; and Manillaboard - oh and after 10th December, 1907, ad val. (General Tariff), 5 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), free. .

Senate’s Request. - Leave out of paragraph m “Cardboard; Pasteboard.”

Insert the following paragraph : - (mm) To come into operation on date to be fixed by Proclamation, and in the meantime subject to duty as specified in sub-item (n) below. Proclamation to issue as soon as it is certified to Parliament by the Minister that similar Cardboard and Pasteboard fitted for the requirements of local industries can be produced in the Commonwealth in sufficient quantity to supply the demands of such industries, but no such Proclamation to issue except in pursuance of a Joint Address passed on the motion of Ministers by both Houses of Parliament stating that such production is sufficient for the purposes, required - Cardboard and Pasteboard, ad val. (General Tariff), 20 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), 15 per cent.

After “ Millboard,” in paragraph n, insert “ Cardboard ; Pasteboard.”

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendment made as regards paragraph m ; not made as regards insertion of new paragraph mm; and made as regards paragraph n.

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

– In this case we asked that cardboard and pasteboard should be removed from the duties of 20. and 15 per cent., that they should be dutiable at those rates only upon the ‘ issue of a proclamation, and. that in the meantime they should be dutiable at 5 per cent. and free under paragraph n. Another place have agreed to the amendments in paragraphs m and n, but have refused to insert new paragraph mm. , I move -

That the request as to paragraph mm be not pressed.

Motion agreed to.

Item 364. Pens, Pencils, &c. -

Senate’s Request. - Insert the following new paragraphs : -

  1. Pencils of wood with metal rubber or other attachments, ad val. (General Tariff), 5 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), free.
  2. Pencil Cases; Pen and Pencil Sets and

Penholders, n.e.i., ad val. (General Tariff), 30 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), 23 per cent.

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendments made as regards paragraphs f and g with the following modifications : - In paragraph f, under General Tariff, “5 per cent.” omitted and “ free “ inserted ; in paragraph g after the word “cases” the words “‘wholly or partly made of gold, silver, aluminium, or nickel “ inserted. .

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

– The effect of one modification made by another place is to insert in paragraph G a limited class of pencil cases, &c. The others fall under fancy goods. I move -

That the modifications be agreed to.

Motion agreed to.

Item 372. Bicycles, &c, ad val. (General Tariff), “30 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), 25 per cent.

Senate’s Request. - Insert before “ 30 per cent.” in the General Tariff column’ the original duties, viz., “ Each£5 5s., or ad val. 30 per’cent., whichever rate returns the higher duty up to and including 10th December, 1907, and on and after nth December, 1907.” Make the duty (General Tariff) “each 25s., or ad val. 30 per cent., whichever rate returns the higher duty.” Insert before “ 25 per cent.” in the United Kingdom column the original duties, viz.: - “Each£5, or ad val. . 20 per cent., up to and including roth December; 1907, and on and after rrth December, 1907.” Make the duty (United Kingdom) “ Each 20s., or ad val. 25 per cent., whichever rate returns the higher duty.”

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendments made with the following modification : - After “ 20 per cent.” in the United Kingdom column the words “whichever rate returns the higher duty “ inserted.

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

– By a clerical or printer’s error, the figures “20” have been inserted in the United Kingdom column as the old duty, instead of 25 per cent. The original proposal was for 25 per cent. We omitted by a mistake the words “whichever rate return’s the higher duty.” I move -

That the modification be agreed to, provided that the figures “ 20,” where first occurring in the United Kingdom column, be altered to “25.”

Motion agreed to.

Item 380. Vehicles -

  1. Axles….. ad val. (General Tariff), 35 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), 25 per cent. ; and on and after nth December, 1907, 30 per cent. . . .

    1. Bodies for Motor Lorries, &c. . . .
    2. Bodies for Motor Cars, &c. ‘ . . .

Senate’s Requests. - Insert the letters “n.e.i.” after “Axles” in. paragraph g. Insert the following new sub-paragraph iri paragraph 1 : - (c). Roller-bearing and Ball-bearing Axles for Motor Lorries and Waggons, ad val. (General Tariff), 5 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), free.

Insert the following new sub-paragraph in paragraph J : -

  1. Roller-bearing and Ball-bearing Axles for Motor Cars, ad val. (General Tariff), 5 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), free.

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendment made as regards insertion of “ n.e.i.” in paragraph g. Amendments not made as regards insertion of two new sub-paragraphs c in 1 and J, but instead thereof the following inserted after paragraph g : - (gg) Roller-bearing and Ball-bearing Axles, ad val. (General Tariff], 5 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), free.

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

– - Another place has made all roller-bearing and ball-bearing axles dutiable at 5 per cent, and free, instead of separating them as we did. The insertion of the letters “ n.e.i.” in paragraph g is therefore neces-sary. I move -

That the request as to new sub-paragraphs in paragraphs 1 and J be not pressed, and that the modification be agreed to.

Motion agreed to.

Item 406. Fumigators, Atomizers, Odorizers Vaporisers, and the like, ad val. (General Tariff), 20 .per cent. ; (United Kingdom), 20 per cent. ; and on and after 12th December, 1907, 15 per cent.

Senate’s Request. - Insert the letter “ a “ before “Fumigators” and the letters “n.e.i.” after “ Atomizers.” Insert the following new paragraph : - “b. Atomizers for mining purposes, free.”

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendments not made.

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

– I move -

That the request be not pressed.

There is very little in this request. These are appliances for laying dust. They are of simple construction, and it is impossible to say which are intended for mining and which for fifty and one other purposes. It is a very small matter.

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– I do not agree that. this is a small matter. It is of the utmost importance in connexion with the working of metalliferous mines. The Committee previously agreed that the freest importation should be allowed of machines of this description for use in mining. I have not seen any of them, but I have read of their invention and introduction into the mines of South Africa. I am not aware that there are any atomizers in Australia yet, but a special effort is ‘being made by the Western Australian Government to have them tried in the mines of that State. While they are at present confined to the patent stage, it is our duty to give special ‘consideration to them. This request was tossed on one side in another place with scarcely any thought or . consideration ; but, seriously, ‘it is a subject regarding the lives of the miners to which we should pay the most earnest attention. I hope the request will be pressed.

Senator CLEMONS:
Tasmania

– - I am sorry that Senator Best has followed the example of another place and given the .matter so little consideration, stating’ in a comparatively careless way that there were no means of distinguishing the article in its use for mining from its use in fifty and one other directions. Nothing could be more illusory than that . statement. The use of the atomizer is very simple. It is employed in conjunction with rock drills in order to prevent not merely the inconvenience but the danger of personal injury to miners arising from their being compelled to breathe the dry dust coming from the face where the drill is at work. There are crude methods at present employed in the Commonwealth of obviating that danger. One is to have a jet of water continually playing on the face of the rock, and especially on the hole that the drill is making. These atomizers are simple and ingenious, and comparatively cheap. .They prevent not only the inconvenience but the actual danger to miners from the inhalation of dust when using rock drills.

Senator Henderson:

– And the inconvenience of a water bath.

Senator CLEMONS:

– And, as the honorable senator suggests, the inconvenience to the miners of having the’ face and the whole of the drive in which they are working continually wet.

Senator Best:

– I will let it go on the voices.

Senator CLEMONS:

– I am glad to hear that, because really this is an appliance which should be admitted free of duty.

Motion negatived.

Request pressed.

Item 410. Lantern Slides ; Photographic Sensitized Films and Paper; Photographic Mounts; Photographic Backgrounds (mounted or unmounted) ; Photographs of Australian subjects ; Postcards (sensitized with or without letter press) ; Powdered Magnesium ; Sulphite of Soda ; Metabisulphite of Soda ; Metabisulphite of Potash; Nitrate of Silver; and Chloride ot Gold, ad val. (General Tariff), 35 per cent.’; and on and after 12th December, 1907, 30 per cent.; (United Kingdom), 25 per cent.

Senate’s Request. - -Leave out the words “ and Paper” after the word “Films”; “Photographic Backgrounds (mounted or unmounted)” after the word “Mounts”; and “ Metabisulphite of Soda; Metabisulphite of Potash” after- “ Sulphite of Soda.” Insert “ Photographic Sensitized Papers, n.e.i., Linen or other material after the word “ Films,” “ Stereoscopic Views” after the word “Press,” and new paragraph: - “b. Photographic materials, viz.:r. Platinotype Paper, Autotype Paper, aid Scenic Backgrounds, free. 2. Metabisulphite of Potassium and Metabisulphite of Sodium under Departmental by-laws, free.”

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendments made, with the following modification - the words; “ Photographic Backgrounds (mounted or unmounted) “ have not been omitted.

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

– In this case we requested another place to leave out the words “ Photographic Back Grounds (mounted or unmounted)” with a view to making them free, and we proposed that they should be free under “ Scenic Backgrounds “ in the new paragraph bi which we requested another place to insert. Representations evidently were made in another place that we were mistaken in the view that these photographic backgrounds mounted or unmounted were not made here. As a matter of fact from information which appears elsewhere, it is evident that they are manufactured or mounted here, and in the circumstances I move -

That the modification be agreed to, but that the words “ and Scenic Backgrounds “ be left out of paragraph Br.

Motion agreed to.

Item 417. Works of Art, framed or unframed, imported for public institutions or purposes under Departmental By-laws, free.

Senate’s Request. - Insert after the word “ Bylaws “ the words “ also Stained Glass Windows for churches or public institutions under Departmental By-laws.”

House of Representatives’ Message. - Made with the following modifications’: - After “417” the letter “a” inserted; requested insertion of words not made, but the following inserted : - “ (n) Stained Glass Windows for churches or public institutions under Departmental By-laws - On and after 19th May, 1908, ad val. 20 per cent.”

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

– This matter evidently formed the subject of a compromise in another place. Stained glass windows for churches or public institutions were liable to duties of 30 and 25 per cent. We requested that ‘ they should be admitted free, and the compromise to which I have referred appears in the suggestion of another place that they should be admitted under departmental by-laws, not at duties of 30 and 25 per cent., but at 20 per cent.

Senator Clemons:

– Doing away with the preference.

Senator BEST:

– That is so.

Senator Mulcahy:

– I hope the honorable senator is not going to ask the Committee to accept the modification.

Senator BEST:

– It has been demonstrated beyond doubt that in every State in the Commonwealth there are establishments in which magnificent stained glass windows are being manufactured, and that their productions are purchased for churches and public institutions.

Senator Mulcahy:

– The honorable senator probably means coloured glass windows.

Senator BEST:

– No; I mean something more than that. ‘ Senator Keating mentioned several productions of the kind manufactured in Tasmania, which he stated are of a very high-class, character, and command much admiration. In the circumstances, a protection of 20 per cent, for the industry is not unreasonable, and the compromise agreed to in another place might well be accepted. I move -

That the modifications be agreed to.

Senator MULCAHY:
Tasmania

– The wretched proposal which the honorable senator describes as a compromise involves a miserable reduction of 5 per cent, in the duties sought to be imposed on. works of the highest form of art. Merely because something of a similar nature is being manufactured here, it is assumed that these works of art can be produced in the Commonwealth. I should prefer that the duty should remain as it is to accepting such a proposal as a compromise. Honorable senators were practically unanimous in asking that these stained glass windows, which are most frequently imported for the decoration of churches, should be admitted duty free. To suggest that the production of these works of art is an Australian industry is altogether too absurd. It is true that something is being done in the production of coloured glass, and possibly of painted glass, in several of the States, but there should certainly be a strong objection to the imposition of any duty on highclass works of art of this character, which are usually very costly, and often depict subjects which- probably could not even be copied here without the consent of the proprietors of the original designs. I hope that the Committee will either press the request or abandon it altogether.

Senator CLEMONS:
Tasmania

. - It would be a very great pity after the vote previously taken on this particular item for the Committee now to assent to the imposition of a duty of 20 per cent, on these stained glass windows. In my opinion, the Vice-President of the Executive Council is seeking to impose a duty upon works which, when they are carried out to perfection:, represent the’ finest exemplifications of art. He is seeking to impose that duty on such works of art when imported for the ornamentation of churches or public institutions, where they would be open to every one to admire them, and any one possessed of an artistic sense might gratify that sense. There might be some excuse for the- imposition of a duty on the highest specimens of art if it were intended that they should be kept in some place where they would not be open to the public. We desire to admit free of duty such magnificent specimens of art as can be seen in many of the cathedrals, churches, and public institutions of the Old Country. We made the request because we knew that for many years to come our people could not possibly hope to reach such a degree of perfection in’ the production of these works of art as is exhibited elsewhere. The stained glass window work done in Australia is, for the most part, represented by the beaded or leaded glass which we find in many places over doors and windows. The stained glass windows which the Committee had previously in mind were specimens, for the most part, of ecclesiastical art to be found in cathedrals, and sometimes in important public institutions, where it is well that the people should have an opportunity of seeing them. By imposing a duty of 20 per cent, on such productions we should do ourselves little credit, and we should be doing something to suppress an ambition which we all ought to have, to* be able artistically to enjoy the contemplation of works of art of this kind. I hope that the Committee will again request another place to make these importations free.

Senator DE LARGIE:
Western Australia

– This matter was debated fully on two previous occasions in the Senate, and the feeling -of honorable senators that works of art qf all kinds should be admitted free of duty was very clearly expressed. I ask the Government to stand by the decision previously arrived at by the Senate. Otherwise all works of art should be treated on the same basis, whether D1Ctures, pieces of statuary, or stained glass windows. That is the only way. to act’ consistently. To leave the matter in the hands of the Department with ‘ power to impose a duty of -20’ per cent, on any work imported would not be satisfactory.

Senator BEST (Victoria - Vice-President of the Executive Council) £4.57]- - It -is only fair that the representations which have been made to the Department with regard to this industry should be understood by the Senate. I learn from the information which has been supplied to me that -

There are four businesses in Australia which produce stained glass windows for churches and public institutions. The owners of two or three businesses know nothing whatever of the technical work of the business, but employ competent workmen to design and execute the work. The owners of the other two are practically technical men who have been trained to the work, and who, at the same time, conduct the ordinary business arrangements. ‘ All the establishments in England and on the Continent which supply stained glass windows for churches and public institutions are, with a few exceptions, owned and conducted by persons who have no technical knowledge of the business, and who were never trained to it, but who employ skilled workmen to do the work for them. The few exceptions are businesses owned and conducted by practical men. It is clear, therefore, that ‘the businesses in Europe are practically the same as those in Australia. Mr. Montgomery added, that it was an extremely rare thing for an ordinary artist to attempt” to design stained glass windows, as that work requires a special technical training; in the absence of which Sir Joshua Reynolds is said to have made a failure of a stained glass window, designed by him, and which is to be seen in one of the public institutions at Oxford. Whilst the designing of stained glass windows is an art, it is not recognised as high art amongst those who are engaged in the work; it’ is known as “Applied Art.” Mr. Montgomery stated that a stained glass window is designed and the design handed over to ordinary craftsmen to copy, in about one-tenth of the time which an artist working on canvas would occupy in producing a similar picture. The Australian houses, which are carrying on an identical business with the European houses, are charged 15 per cent, on their raw material, while the finished article will be admitted free if the Senate’s request is acceded to. As the production of stained glass windows is everywhere carried on as an ordinary business, it is strongly urged by the Australian” producers that it is an injustice to admit the finished product free whilst the raw material (not produced ia Australia) for the Australian producers is taxed.

Senator CLEMONS:

– Who is the author of the statement which ‘the Minister has communicated to the Committee ?

Senator BEST:

– It- is a statement made to the Department by Mr. Montgomery, who, I believe, is an artist in stained glass.

Senator Lt Col NEILD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

-Colonel GOULD (New South Wales) [5.1]. - I hope that the Committee will insist upon the request sent down to the House of Representatives. The question was thoroughly debated od the previous occasion, when similar representations to those which have been laid before us by the’ Vice-President of the Executive Council were submitted. The result was that our request was adopted without a division. Honorable senators considered that it was only a fair and reasonable request to make that stained glass windows, which are works of art, should be admitted duty free. The request is one that ought to be reaffirmed, and it will be a proper thing for honorable senators to stand firm by what we deliberately did.

Senator McGREGOR:
South Australia

– Poor Australia! We shall never be able to produce stained glass windows of our own.

Senator Mulcahy:

– Whynot put a duty on pictures?

Senator McGREGOR:

– There is a duty, unless they are original works of art. It has to be remembered that those engaged in producing stained glass have to pay duty on the raw material with which they operate. It is much to be regretted that this question has not been discussed without the introduction of sentimental and religious feeling. Will any honorable senator maintain that there are not firms in Australia that are capable of making a stained glass window? Some honorable senators talk about churches and public institutions as if there were a sacredness about them which should debar any man from raising a finger aginst their requirements in matters of this description. There are dozens of men in Australia who are capable of doing such work, and are longing to do more of it. They should have an opportunity of developing the genius that is in them. Those honorable senators who, for the purpose of catching a few votes have introduced the element of religious sentimentality have simply been trying to induce the Committee to take a side view of the matter. The real question is that we should by this duty give the genuine workman an opportunity of proving what he is worth. I hope- that the duty, of 20 per cent, will be sanctioned; and that the result of it will be to prove in’ the near future that we have artists in’ Australia who are equal to any in the world. .

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

Senator McGregor may. rest assured that when we have artists of the first rank they will find a ready market for their work and obtain good prices outside of Australia as well as within it. This is a question that should be lifted high above the level of ordinary fiscalism. We are quite justified in imposing duties that we regard as sufficient when we are dealing with industries that if is advisable to protect by means of a Tariff. But when it comes to supplying the community with works of art, we are dealing with matters that appeal to the finer emotions of men. I have known men who had very little, if any, religion in their composition, but who were quick to admire fine works of art. In the present instance, ordinary fiscal principles do not apply. If we were to impose a duty of 20 per cent. upon the works of art with which we are dealing, the extra amount would have to be paid by those who are determined to obtain the best possible works of the kind. I have gone to some trouble to ascertain for myself what kind of coloured windows could be produced in Australia. I have seen some of the Australian works, and I honestly did my best to bring myself to believe that acceptable stained glass work was being done here. But, after the closest examination, I found that only about two out of halfadozen works which, I saw were worth looking at. I went with the hope that I should find something which would satisfy my taste in this direction, but was disappointed. I am satisfied that people who require stained glass windows for churches and other public institutions- will continue to go to the best artists in the world for them. I cannot vote for this as a revenue item, and hope that the Senate’s request will be pressed.

Question - That the modifications be agreed to (item 417, Works of Art) - put. The Committee divided.

AYES: 12

NOES: 17

Majority … … 5

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

Modifications not agreed to.

Request pressed.

Item 427. Surgical Appliances, n.e.i., including Belts, Trusses, Pads, Corsets, Braces, Breast Supports, Vaccination Shields, ad val. (General Tariff), 25 per cent. ; (United Kingdom), 25 per cent. ; and on and after 12th December, 1907, 20 per cent.

Senate’s Request. - Make the item free.

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendment not made.

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

– I do not want to repeat what I urged very strongly when this item was previously before the Committee. I believe tha’t a number of honorable senators have seen surgical appliances which have been made in Australia, and I ask them why the manufacturers of them should not receive the protection which the Government proposed. I move -

That the request be not pressed.

Question put. The- Committee divided.

Ayes … … … 15

Noes … … … 14

Majority … … 1

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Request not pressed.

Item 442. Surgical and Dental and VeterinaryInstruments and Appliances (not being Furniture), viz. : - Amputating; …. Operating Tables; Dressing and Instrument Trays; Accident Emergency Cases; Hot Air Apparatus for legs and arms ; X-rav apparatus except Motors ; Snakebite Outfits; ad val. (General Tariff), to per cent. ; and on and after r2th December, 1907, free; (United Kingdom), free.

Senate’s Request. - After “Operating Tables” insert “ Dental Chairs “ ; leave out “ except Motors “ ; and insert “ viz. - X-ray tubes, tube shields, fluorescent screens, tube holders, apparatus for localization and stereoscopic radiography.” ‘

House of Representatives’ Message. - Amendments made, with the modification (hat words “Dental Chairs” not inserted..

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

– The other House acceded to our request except as regards the inclusion of dental chairs, which are made in the leading cities of the Commonwealth. There is no reason why the manufacturers of them should not enjoy the protection which we intended, and therefore I move -

That the modification be agreed to.

Motion agreed to.

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

– On page 22 of the printed message from theHouse of Representatives, honorable senatorr. will see eight amendments which it made in the body of the Bill consequential upon the insertion of schedule B at our request. It will be remembered that we requested the insertion of a schedule in order to permit certain rebates of duty paid on certain piece goods and machinery. When the Tariff was laid before the other House on the 8th August, it contained a schedule which provided for a rebate of three-fourths of the duty paid. under item- 124 on -

Piece Goods of any material, when used in the manufacture of Rubber Waterproof Cloth.

The schedule also provided for a rebate of the full duty paid under items 164 and 166 on -

Machinery, and parts thereof, used in the manufacture of Fibrous Materials and Felt, and Felt Hats, when installed for use in a Woollen Mill or a Hat Factory for the manufacture of such Materials, Felt, and Hats.

When the other House came to deal with the schedule, it refused to allow a rebate to the manufacturers and importers in those cases, but, . of course, between ‘ the 8th August and the date on which it cancelled the provision in the schedule - that -is, the nth December - certain piece goods had been used in the manufacture of rubber waterproof cloth, and some manufacturers had obtained the benefit of the drawback. The object of our request was to give other manufacturers who had used such materials between those dates the benefit of the rebate to which they were originally entitled. So.it was, too, with regard to the second part of the schedule. Some manufacturers who had imported a certain class of machinery got the benefit of a rebate of the full duty paid between the 8th August and the 28th November, when it was decided that no rebate should be allowed in the case of such machinery. The object of our request for the insertion of the new schedule was to treat all these persons alike. I believe that claims for rebates to the amount of about£400 have not been paid. Consequential upon acceding to our request, the other House had to make certain alterations in the Bill. The Tariff itself is now called schedule A, and the new schedule which Ave requested is called schedule B. That involved consequential alterations in the text of the Bill, which, as honorable senators are aware, are categorically set out in the message from the other House. I move -

That the amendments, consequential upon the insertion of new schedule B; be agreed to.

Motion agreed to.

Resolutions reported ; report adopted.

page 11321

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

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

– I move -

That the Senate, at its rising, adjourn until Wednesday next, at half -past two p.m.

Senator Millen:

– Is there no prospect of getting the Tariff back to-morrow?

Senator BEST:

– No. I had hoped to get the Additional Estimates for to-morrow, but there is no prospect of that. I have just sent to inquire, and that is the latest information. I must therefore bow to theinevitable.

Senator MILLEN:
New South Wales

– I do not propose to offer any opposition to the motion, but must express my deep regret that it was not possible by an arrangement of Government business elsewhere for us to get a message back from another place in regard to the Tariff, and to deal with it to-morrow. I see no insurmountable difficulty in the way of our message being forwarded to another place tonight, dealt with there in the morning, and sent back to us in the afternoon, with every reasonable probability of the Tariff being finally disposed of to-morrow. I regret that the Government have not handled the business in the way I have suggested, which would have permitted of this longdrawnout Tariff being made the law of the country this week.

Senator Best:

– It will be many hours before the message can go to the other Chamber. There is a lot of work to be done to-night in connexion with it, and then there are over forty items in dispute to be dealt with by another place.

Senator CLEMONS:
Tasmania

– I agree with Senator Millen, but he did not go far enough. I still think, with deference to what Senator -Best has just interjected, that it would be possible for us to do some work to-morrow. No honorable senator representing other States will be able to leave Melbourne in any case before 4 o’clock to-morrow afternoon. No harm will be done to any one by our meeting tomorrow. There is sure to be a quorum, and at that stage the Minister will be able to tell honorable senators definitely whether he has succeeded in the interval in getting a message sent to another place and returned to us, so that we may finish the Tariff. It is to be regretted that the otherwork that we expected has not reached us, but, jf another place have not finished theAdditional Estimates, we are at their mercy. Still, if we meet at 12, or even 2 o’clock to-morrow, there may be work for us in finishing the Tariff.

Senator Best:

– There are forty or fifty controversial items. It will be hours before the message goes to the other Chamber, if it goes to-night at all.

Senator CLEMONS:

– A great deal can be done in the next five hours. If we meet to-morrow no one will be’ inconvenienced, nor will we run any risk, while there is a chance of the Additional Estimates coming up. I ask the Minister to amend his motion so that we may meet to-morrow, at, say, 12 or 2 o’clock.

Senator PEARCE:
Western Australia

– We all anticipated that another place would make sufficient progress with the Additional Estimates to enable us to deal with them to-morrow.

Senator Clemons:

– That is still possible.

Senator Best:

– The Minister of HomeAffairs has just come back. He tells methat there is no hope of getting those Estimates. Another place are still discussing Grievances.

Senator PEARCE:

– In that case itwould be wasting our time to ask us to meet to-morrow. We have just finished dealing with a number of extremely complicated questions, and our resolutions have to be written out, and sent to the printer. They( will not leave the printing office until early to-morrow morning. Each member of another place must be supplied with a copy. The most sanguine of us do not anticipate that another place will agree to all that we have done. If they disagree with anything, their message in turn’ will have to be printed and circulated amongst honorable senators. It will, therefore, be absolutely impossible for us to get’ a message regarding the Tariff back before half -past 4 o’clock to-morrow.

Senator Clemons:

– If they knew we were waiting, for the Additional Estimates to-morrow, they might’ pass them to-night.

Senator PEARCE:

– For all the good that will be done by the discussion on the Estimates, they might have been passed by now. Our information is that’ honorable members elsewhere do not think so, and are going on in a free and easy/1 fashion. Those Estimates are the only business that we could possibly deal with to-morrow, and we must accept the Ministerial assurance that’ there is no possibility of our getting them.

Senator McGREGOR:
South .Australia

– I am sorry that better tidings have not reached us from another place, but’ I agree with Senators Millen- and Clemons that it would be better for the Senate to meet to-morrow, as an indication to another place that we are prepared to do the work straight away. If we adjourn until Wednesday next, that will give them to-morrow and Tuesday’ to waste. If they knew we were meeting tomorrow, and every day next week, to complete the work, they would have no excuse for dilly-dallying. My’ experience has always been that one House of Parliament takes its cue from the other. If we adjourn until Wednesday week, members of another place will find plenty of things to talk about until we come back again.

Senator Pearce:

– The honorable senator’s faith in their talking power is fully justified.

Senator McGREGOR:

– I feel that it is, but we have no right’ to give them’ the excuse for indulging it. If we meet tomorrow, no one will be inconvenienced. The representatives of other States will Mill be here, and Victorian senators -will surely not’ object to rising in time to be present at half-past 10 o’clock. If there was no work to’ do to-morrow, we should still be in a better position to judge whether we should1 meet om Tuesday or We’d-‘ ,nesday next’. I urge the Vice-President of the Executive ‘Council to allow the Senate to meet to-morrow morning, and then 1here would be more justification for adjourning . until next Wednesday, or even Wednesday week.

Senator PULSFORD:
New South Wales

– I urge the Vice-President of the Executive Council to let us meet at half-past 10 to-morrow. As we are all here, there will be nothing to lose, and something may be gained, by taking ‘ that course. After all, the Additional Estimates may be ready for us to-morrow. If there is no work to do, it will be a simple matter to adjourn until next week. It would be a great mistake to do so to-night.

Senator FINDLEY:
Victoria

.- I have no objection to meeting at any hour to-morrow, but’ it is strange’ that when .the Government are disposed to. convenience honorable senators, some of them should object.

Senator Fraser:

– It is not a convenience ; it is a duty.

Senator Best:

– Is it ? I am glad to see the honorable senator here, where duty is concerned.

Senator FINDLEY:

– I have heard hon- .orable senators criticise the .Government when they have been called together’ with no business to go on with. The Minister now says there is no hope of any business being ready for us to-morrow.

Senator Mulcahy:

– That is only his opinion.

Senator FINDLEY:

– It is the voice of the Government. The Minister would not give that assurance without making the fullest inquiry.’ If he had not made inquiry, and the Senate met to-morrow with no business to do, those honorable senators who are now demanding a meeting to-morrow, would denounce him for not telling. them that there was no business to be done. Senator McGregor is. of opinion that if we decide to meet to-morrow at 10.30 a.m. that will be an indication that we desire honorable members in another place to go full steam ahead, and that if we decide to adjourn until Wednesday next they will be given some inducement to be more talkative. I do not think that they take very serious notice of our adjournments. If I’ may be permitted to say so, T think that honorable members in another place are as anxious as are honorable senators to deal definitely and finally with the Tariff. We have been told that the Government do not expect that the Additional Estimates will be ready for our consideration to-morrow, and no member of the Senate can. by any stretch of imagination conclude that the Tariff will be ready for further consideration tomorrow. The requests which we have disposed of to-day can scarcely reach’ the printer’s hands for the next couple of hours, and it will take time to carry out the printing which our work has made necessary. If honorable senators believe that an adjournment until to-morrow will mean work for the Senate. I suggest that we might meet at 10 a.m., and if there is then no work for’ us to do,” we could .adjourn until n a.m., and continue meeting and adjourning. According to Senator McGregor’s contention, two or three adjournments to-morrow should result in our having plenty of work to do.

Senator Trenwith:

– Will Senator Fraser be here if we do meet?

Senator Fraser:

– I will. , I think such interjections are very insulting.

Senator Best:

– The honorable senator started it.

Senator FINDLEY:

– If it is decided, to meet to-morrow, all being well I shall be here, but I am not unmindful oof the fact that in the past some honorable senators who are now most anxious that , we should meet to-morrow have been strong in their condemnation of the Government for asking them to come here when there was no business for them to do. I accept the assurance 6f the Government that there will he no business for the Senate to do tomrrow, and in the- circumstances it would be unbusinesslike for us to meet merely in order to adjourn again.-

Senator GIVENS:
Queensland

– - I have been more than astonished to hear honorable senators, pleading with the VicePresident of the Executive Council to permit them to come here to-morrow and work, when all the time the remedy is in their own hands. AH that they need- do is to vote against the motion. Their action reminds me of the yarn about the senseless starling,- that continually cried to be let out,, when all the time the door of its cage was wide open.

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

– There is such a thing as courtesy practised in this chamber whenever possible. Honorable senators are aware that I have never at any time attempted to thwart their wishes or refusedto. meet their convenience. My only object in moving the motion was to meet the convenience of honorable senators.

Senator Mulcahy:

– It is not the honorable senator’s fault that the motion was too late to convenience them to-day.

Senator Findley:

– If they could have been told at 4 o’clock, when they could catch their trains, there.- would have been no objection.

Senator BEST:

– I made it my duty to ascertain, what were the prospects of the receipt of business from another place. My honorable colleague has brought me a message, after consultation with the Prime’

Minister, and also with the Treasurer, that in another place they have no hope that- the Additional Estimates will go through tonight. With that knowledge, it would have been unreasonable for me to ask the Senate to meet to-morrow. But I am not going to permit honorable senators to reproach me with trying to stop them when they wish to work. If they feel that they- are justified in hoping that we shall have ‘received some work from another place’ with which we can deal to-morrow-, I shall be only ttoo glad to accede to their wishes. It will’ be admitted that I have done everything I can te expedite the business of the Senate. In deference to the wish expressed by honorable senators, I am prepared to withdraw my motion, and if in the meantime my honorable friends will use their influence with honorable members in another place with such effect as to result in our having the Additional Estimates to deal with tomorrow, no one will be more gratified than I. It has been suggested to me that as a Parliamentary Committee will be meeting at 11 o’clock, to-morrow, we might meet at a. later hour.

Senator Clemons:

– If the hour of meeting to-morrow is to be altered, the honorable senator had better fix it for 12 o’clock.

Senator BEST:

– In view of the meeting of the Committee referred to, I think it would be advisable to do so. I therefore ask leave to amend my motion to provide that the House at its rising adjourn until 12 o’clock to-morrow.

Motion amended accordingly,’ and agreed to.

page 11323

PAPER

Senator BEST laid upon the table the following paper : - ‘

Memorandum on the establishment of an Australian Bureau of Agriculture.

Senate adjourned at 5.50 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 21 May 1908, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1908/19080521_senate_3_46/>.