Senate
24 August 1910

4^th Parliament · 1^st Session

QUESTION
- MOLASSES
QUESTION
- STATUTORY RULES
QUESTION
- CENSUS QUESTIONS
QUESTION
- MAP OF AUSTRALIA
PAPERS
NAVIGATION BILL
COMMONWEALTH CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION BILL
QUESTION
- CABLE NEWS SUBSIDY
ADJOURNMENT
- Conduct of Business

Senator FINDLEY:
Minister (without portfolio) · VICTORIA · ALP

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

The majority of the questions ere specified in section 6 of the Census and Statistics Act, passed by the Federal Parliament. The form to be used will be prescribed by regulation, which will be laid on the table of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

page 1903

QUESTION

MAP OF AUSTRALIA

Senator KEATING:

asked the Minister representing the Minister of Home Affairs, upon notice -

If he will supply this Senate with information as to the present state of progress in the preparation of the official map of the Commonwealth?

Senator FINDLEY:
ALP

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

Owing to difficulties which had arisen and were delaying the progress of the work, it wasfound desirable to send an officer to the various States of the Commonwealth to explain exactly what was required and prevent any superfluous, work being done. This officer has completed his visits, and the map is now being proceeded with as expeditiously as possible ; but the nature of the work is at present such that it cannot be advanced very rapidly. Three draftsmen are now engaged. This number will be increased to fourin the near future, and at a later date it will be possible to employ extra draftsmen on the work.

page 1903

PAPERS

MINISTERS laid upon the table thefollowing papers -

Reports by the Director of Fisheries on. Cruises of F.I.S. Endeavour in Queensland waters for the periods 6th to 19th July, 1910,, and 26th July to 9th August, 1910.

Lands -Acquisition Act 1906. - Richmond, New South Wales : Field Ambulance Depdt. - Notification of the Acquisition of Land for Site.

Defence Acts 1903-1904. - Financial and Allowance Regulations for the Military Forces of the Commonwealth. - New Regulation 88 (b) (Provisional). - Statutory Rules 1910, No. 73.

Regulations (Provisional) for the Military Forces of the Commonwealth -

Amendment of Regulations 143, 151, 170,. 188, 196, 302, and 469.- Statutory Rules 1910, No. 74.

Amendments of Regulation 199. - Statutory Rules 1910, No. 76.

Amendment of Regulation 141. - Statutory Rules 1910, No. 77.’

Public Service Act 1902. - Documents in connexion with the promotion of Mr. Herbert Siddons Norris to the position of Clerk, 3rd Class, Clerical Division, ‘Accounts Branch, Department, of Defence, Sydney. - Documents in connexion with the promotion ‘of Mr. Ernest Pringle Ramsay to the position of. Inspector, 3rd Class, Clerical Division. Relieving, Postmaster. General’s Department; New South Wales.

page 1903

NAVIGATION BILL

Bill presented by Senator Pearce, and read a first time.

page 1903

COMMONWEALTH CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION BILL

Message received from the House of Representatives stating that it had agreed to the Senate’s amendment No.1 and disagreed to amendment No. 2.

Motion (by Senator Pearce) agreed to -

That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent Message No. 9of the House of Representatives, in reference to the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Bill, being at once considered and all consequent action taken.

In Committee :

Clause 7 -

Section twenty-seven of the principal Act is amended -

by omitting therefrom the words “ or by leave of the President,” and by inserting after the words “counsel or solicitor “ the words “ or paid agent.”

Senate’s Amendment. - At the end of clause add- “and

House of Representatives’ Message.-

Amendment disagreed to.

Senator PEARCE:
Minister of Defence · Western Australia · ALP

– I move -

That the Committee does not insist on the amendment.

Senator Lt.-Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD (New South Wales) [3.15].- Tt is quite refreshing to find the Minister of Defence executing such a volte face. I would point out that this proviso was not inserted at the instance of the Opposition or of a Government supporter, but was proposed by the Vice-President of the Executive Council, and the Government now tell us very coolly that they have discovered that it was wrong to take that step. Of course, they have attempted to show that what they want has been provided for. I ask honorable senators to realize how carelessly our legislation is prepared, and to reflect upon the slipshod methods which are resorted to by the Government. The amendment which we are now asked not to insist upon was not suddenly proposed at the long sitting which we had on Thursday last, but was placed on the contingent notice-paper after having received much consideration and thought ; and with the approval of the Government, it was adopted. Two or three days later, however, the Minister of. Defence very coolly tells us that the Government have reconsidered the position, and do..not think the proviso is necessary.

Senator de Largie:

– It may have been slipshod when it was proposed, but it cannot be that now.

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

– It is just as likely to be slipshod now as it was then. On the third reading of the Bill, on Friday last, it waspointed out very strongly from this side what the effect of the amendment would be.

Senator Needham:

– Are not second thoughts often best?

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

– Very, often, and, apparently, the Minister of Defence thinks so in this case. At the instance of the other House, and without offering any cogent or sufficient reasons, the Government have asked honorable senators opposite to swallow all that they did two or three days ago. The other day we pointed out what the effect of the proviso would be. They said then that they would not allow counsel to appear on behalf of any organization, even with the leave of the President of the Court, but they now say that that was a little too stringent, and they will make provision so that any members of unions, although they may happen to be in the legal profession, shall be able to appear on their behalf before the Court. It was stated the other day that, unless a man was a bond fide member of a union, that is to say, a worker, he could not appear before the Court, but, I point out that the rules can allow any person to become a member of an organization. The Registrar has no power to disallow a rule of that character. He can only disallow a rule which is shown to be contrary to the law. I congratulate the Government upon the way in which they have dealt with the Senate in connexion with this Bill. In the first instance, they asked for one thing, and now they ask for another. I should like to know what reasons, if any, were advanced in the other House against our amendment? Did any section of that House propose an amendment, by means of which persons, who might take advantage of the proviso, would not be able to get special remuneration for their services ? Was such a proposal made as would have enabled a secretary of a union, as one did some little time ago, to charge ^5 5s. a day for time spent in attending the Arbitration Court during the hearing of a matter of interest to his union? Was it pointed out that secretaries of unions getting a salary of ^3 per week, as I understand is paid to the secretary of an important union in New South Wales for devoting the whole of his time to its interests, might receive additional remuneration for attendance at the Arbitration Court?

Senator Findley:

– The honorable sena.lOt is taking up a strange attitude; he did not approve of this proviso before.

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

.- I wish to show now the inconsistency of the Government. If the proviso was a good one a few days ago, it ought to be a good one to-day.

Senator Findley:

– The honorable senator did not think it a good one a few days ago. Why is he objecting to the motion t

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

– I do not consider it a good proviso now; but I am directing attention to the way in which trie business of the Senate is being conducted. It is calculated to make us a laughing-stock to people outside. The Minister of Defence says that upon reconsideration the Government find that clause 7 and the original section will be all right without this proviso. Section 27 of the existing Act reads -

On the hearing or determination of any industrial dispute an organization may be represented by a member or officer of any organization, and any party not being an organization may be represented by an employe of that party ; but no party shall (except by consent of all the parties or by leave of the President) be represented by counsel or solicitor.

In clause 7 of this Bill, the section was amended by the omission of the words ‘ ‘ or by leave of the President,” and by the addition of the words “ paid agent.” So that no organization could be represented by counsel, solicitor, or paid agent, except by consent of all the parties. We added the proviso to which the House of Representatives has disagreed, and we are now told that the clause will be all right without it. If a gentleman occupying a high Ministerial position happens to be a member or officer of an organization, he is to be in a position to appear in the Arbitration Court for that organization, although he may be a counsel or solicitor.

Senator Guthrie:

– The same applies to the other side.

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

– A party not being an organization may be represented by an employe of the party, even though he should happen to be a counsel or solicitor, and it is assumed that a counsel or solicitor who is a member of an organization, or an employ^ of a party appearing before the Court, shall not come within the prohibition of section 27, as amended by clause 7 of this Bill, and shall not be considered to be a counsel or solicitor. I ask the Government whether this is the way in which legislation should be passed? We shall have other Bills presented to us during the session; amendments upon them submitted by the Government will be accepted in good faith by the phalanx behind them, and a few days later they will be told that they are unnecessary and undesirable, when no doubt they will say that they are quite satisfied. The Government will have given them a dose of physic, and a day or two later will administer an emetic to get rid of its possible effects.

Senator Story:

– Is it not a good thing occasionally to take a dose of physic?

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

– Not if it is necessary to take an emetic afterwards to avert its effects. If a man takes a dose of poison, an emetic taken immediately afterwards is very useful. Honorable senators opposite were invited to swallow a dose of poison, and lest injury should be sustained by them, or the organizations they represent, the Government today administer an emetic. Are we to have in the position of Ministers of the Crown men who will give so little care and attention to the business of Parliament as to lead honorable senators into undesirable positions from which it becomes necessary to extricate them later? If this is the way in which legislation is to be carried on by a Labour Government, people may well say, “ God protect the country from this kind of administration and leadership !”

Senator VARDON:
South Australia

– I think the Minister of Defence ought to have paid a well deserved compliment to the Opposition in this matter, because they pointed out the futility of the proviso upon which we are now asked not to insist. Notwithstanding that the Government determined to have it inserted in the Bill, in another place, the good sense of the Opposition in the Senate has been recognised, and honorable senators opposite are now asked to go back upon their previous action. I regard the motion as a compliment to the Opposition, and am glad that the Minister of Defence has moved that the Committee do not insist upon its amendment.

Senator SAYERS:
Queensland

– I also have much pleasure in supporting the motion to rescind the amendment which we made in this Bill at the instance of Ministers. The Government kept us up all night in forcing us to agree to it. Honorable senators will recollect that the VicePresident of the Executive Council stated distinctly that he would accept no amendments upon the proposals of the Government. I am pleased to learn that it is now acknowledged that the contention of the Opposition in this matter was right.

Motion agreed to.

Resolution reported and adopted.

page 1906

QUESTION

CABLE NEWS SUBSIDY

Senator PEARCE:
Western AustraliaMinister of Defence · ALP

– In the absence of the Vice-President of the Executive Council, through illness, and at his request, I move -

That, in the opinion of this Senate, it is desirable, in order to improve and increase the supply of European and other oversea cable news to the Australian press, that Government assistance should be given in the form of a subsidy.
That the subsidy should amount to £6,000, payable - £2,500 for1st year. £2,000 for 2nd year. £1,500 for 3rd year.
That any Association applying for such subsidy must be prepared to supply at least 6,000 cabled words per week, to be sent viâ Pacific, and to permit any newspaper proprietary in the Commonwealth to become a subscriber for its cable service at rates which shall not exceed a scale approved by the Government.
That the Government should, in granting such subsidy, impose such conditions as may be necessary to secure that the public shall obtain the fullest possible benefit from the subsidized service.

– Mail contracts, as Senator Fraser knows well, are made subject to ratification by Parliament. What is proposed is a subsidy of £2,500 for the first year, . £2,000 for the second year, and £1,500 for the third year, to be payable on compliance with the following conditions, to one existing Australian Cable Press Association, having articles of association or rules for its management which are approved by the Minister. These are the conditions -

The Association must supply to its sub scribers a cable service in accordance with these conditions at rates not exceeding the maximum charges set out in Schedule A.

This is the schedule -

Maximum Annual Charge in respect of Metropolitan Newspapers : -

Maximum annual charge in respect of newspapers in the chief provisional cities, £200.

Maximum annual charge in respect of newspapers in minor cities and towns, £50.

The charges set out in this Schedule are in addition to any cost involved in transmission charges incurred within the Commonwealth.

These are the other conditions which must be complied with -

The cable service to consist of items of news electrically transmitted from oversea to the Association in Australia, the minimum number of words to be so transmitted to be 6,000 words per week.
At least 6,000 words of the cable, service are to be transmitted in each week from Europe or America to Australia by way of the Pacific Cable, unless that cable is broken down, in which case the words may be transmitted by some other route, but only so long as the breakdown continues.
The proprietor of any newspaper in the Commonwealth shall be entitled to become a subscriber to the Association for the cable service on payment of the annual rate applicable under Schedule A.
A subscriber shall not be liable to any penalty or disability at the instance of the Association by reason that he receives and publishes in his newspaper cables or other electrically transmitted matter received from some source other than the Association.
Subscribers, in respect of newspapers, shall, under the articles or rules of the Association, have a right to elect one of the Directors of the Association, and the Director so elected shall have powers similar in all respects to those of the other Directors.
The Association must transmit to Australia by cable and . supply to its subscribers any information on matters of Australian interest supplied to it or its agent in London by the High Commissioner, but the Association shall be entitled to charge the Commonwealth Government Press rates in respect of the matter so transmitted.
The subsidy shall be payable quarterly on proof, to the satisfaction of the Minister that these conditions have been complied with on the part of the Association.

– In private enterprise competition is certainly better than monopoly. No honorable senator on this side has ever contended otherwise. We have always contended, and still contend, that the only safe monopoly is a State monopoly. Under a State monopoly, the rights of the community are safeguarded, whereas under a private monopoly it is the interests of those who control it that are safeguarded, whilst the interests of the people are exploited. The Senate last year appointed a Select Committee to investigate this question. I had the honour to be Chairman of that Committee. We were regaled with some very interesting evidence, but we found that whenever an attempt is made to investigate the proceedings of a monopoly, a number of people who will give information in the privacy of one’s office do not dare to give the same information to a Select Committee or a Royal Commission. We were, however, fortunate enough to be able to examine some gentlemen who had been the victims of this cable monopoly, but who had gone out of the newspaper business. I am going to quote from the evidence of one of them, Mr. James Bell, who was, until lately, the proprietor of the Geelong Times. His evidence will be found on page 41 of the report. He stated that he was proprietor of the Geelong Times until June, 1909. The newspaper referred to is a daily morning journal. Mr. Bell said -

I became connected with the Geelong Times newspaper, and remained its proprietor until June of this year . . . covering a period of some twenty-three years.

So that this cannot be said to be ancient history. It is very modern -

In 1885and 1886, and previously to those years, ….

There was competition then - the charge for cable service was £128 per annum. This was at the time when the press cabling was at the rate of either 3s. 6d. or 4s. a word. The £128 fee prevailed, I think, until 1888, when it was reduced to £100 per annum

Competition still prevailed - in the meantime, the Cable Company had reduced their charge to about 2s. 3d. a word for press messages. Of course, I am speaking from memory. In about the year1900, when press messages were only required to pay1s. 4d. per word, the telegraphic cable service to us was increased to £125 per annum.

The monopoly was now coming on the scene.

Senator Chataway:

– Was the monopoly on the scene then?

Senator PEARCE:

– It was coming -

It remained at that until about three years ago, when we were made to pay an extra £50 a year- or in all £175- although the Cable Company had reduced their charge in 1902 to 1s. per word. It will thus be seen that, notwithstanding the lowering of press messages by cable by over 400 per cent., the charge to us was increased by 75 per cent.

Senator Walker:

– How could the charge be reduced by over 400 per cent. ?

Senator PEARCE:

– It was reduced from 4s. to1s. a word.

Senator Walker:

– That is not 400, but 75, per cent.

Senator PEARCE:

– The witness went on -

It has been stated before your Committee that the Association’s service includes Inter-State items. That is perfectly correct ; but so paltry and insignificant were these items that a newspaper proprietor would hardly place value on them at all. In my own case I rarely used the matter supplied -

That is to say the monopoly brought forward as an excuse for their treatment of country newspapers that in addition to the cable service they were supplying InterState news, which this newspaper proprietor says he did not want at all -

It my own case, I rarely used the matter supplied, and when I did so it was only done in order to fill up. Newspaper proprietors throughout the Commonwealth stand in the not very enviable position of being completely under the control of the- “ Combine,” a capitalistic monopoly which has the power either to raise the price for the service to such an exorbitant extent, or refuse to sell the service ; and therefore it follows that the Association could crush out of existence any desired journal. It is no argument to say that the power has never been used. The fact still remains - it could be done. It exists. It puts a dangerous power in the hands of a monopoly such as the United Cable Service Company is. With such a possibility hanging over their heads it will be difficult for your Committee to get newspaper proprietors to give evidence for fear of reprisals.

The witness was further examined as follows : -

Had you continued to be a newspaper proprietor should you have been willing to come forward ? - I should have hesitated. Perhaps I should have had to pay for it if I did. That is my opinion.

You had personal knowledge of the matters to which you had been referring, while you were proprietor of the newspaper? - I was owner, manager, and editor. The paper was under my own control for twenty-two years.

One of the methods by which this monopoly exercises this power is contained ir. Article 9. of its Articles of Association, which I will read -

That no messages shall be supplied to the proprietary of any newspaper published either in Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, or Brisbane other than in respect of the newspapers mentioned in this agreement without the unanimous consent of the parties hereto.

Senator Lt Colonel Sir Albert Gould:

That provision is no longer in existence.

There is only one other matter I desire to ask a question on. When you were giving evidence you made a statement in regard to the agreement which is the basis of the Australian Press Association, and you promised to put in a copy of that agreement, which you afterwards did, but you said the clause requiring the unanimous consent of the Press Association for the starting of a new daily paper in capital cities had by mutual consent been waived.

Mr. Mackinnon said

That is so. We agreed mutually. That agreement, of course, comes to an end next year, and we are now negotiating for a further agreement. In that further agreement there is no stipulation of that nature. So far as the present agreement is concerned we have agreed mutually to waive that clause. Therefore if I was dealing with a new paper applying for the service tomorrow, that clause would be inoperative. We are not taking the legal standing. That is absolutely agreed to between the members of the Association.

Then I asked-

So far as any legal document is concerned it is still in existence?

Mr. Mackinnon replied

That old agreement will cease to exist when the new agreement is signed.

I therefore -point out that, so far as the legal agreement is concerned, it continues to exist. No person has yet publicly produced the new agreement. What has happened under the agreement at present in force? We had the evidence of Lt.Colonel Reay, who is the managing editor of the Melbourne Herald, a newspaper which is the customer of the Association. He was examined (Question 738) as follows : - ‘

– I regret that Senator Millen is absent through. ill health; and so is unable to follow Senator Pearce’s interesting speech. I do not feel called upon to defend the Press Cable Association. That is their business; and they can defend themselves if they feel aggrieved. I think that Senator Pearce did not treat them altogether fairly when he stated that it was no argument to say that certain conditions in the contract have not been enforced. We have had a similar statement from the other side. When we have mentioned certain rules of trade unions we have been told that they have never been enforced. That is not altogether a fair way of treating the Association. Of all the witnesses who were examined by the Select

Cornmittee, the Minister has quoted the evidence of practically only one, and that is a gentleman who, for twenty-two years, was manager or editor of the Geelong Times, and who summed up the horrors of his position after years of trouble with the statement that when he left the newspaper he had to pay £175 a year to the Association.

Senator Story:

– The others were afraid to speak.-

Senator CHATAWAY:

– They may have been. Now that the scale has been reduced the maximum of £200 could be charged. Surely Geelong is not going to be put down as a small provincial town. It is a matter of regret that this proposal is submitted in this form. The Senate is asked to carry a motion, and on a separate slip’ we find a number of conditions which we are. told will be embodied in any contract which may be made. I want to know whether, before it becomes effective, the contract will be submitted to Parliament for approval. If that course is not taken, it cannot be compared with the shipping subsidy contract to which the Minister alluded. There arc so many details in the motion, and in the conditions laid down on a separate paper, that I think, it would be very much better that the question should be discussed, if necessary, in the Parliament, instead of a secret contract being made between the Government and a Cable Association. I venture to say that the evidence which was collected by the Select Committee rather surprised the gentleman who moved for its appointment. I think it will be found that there is not sufficient evidence to show that the Government should take a new line of action, that we should go out of our way to subsidize a private trading concern, an association which will have the right to sell its goods, and, so far as I can see, is going to sell them in some cases under cost price, when the public will have to find the money to enable them to do so.

Senator Rae:

– Just now, the honorable senator said that they were going to charge more.

Senator CHATAWAY:

-I said that, in some cases, they would. Take, for instance, the case of a metropolitan daily. According . to Mr. Wynne, the Sydney Daily Telegraph pays £1,300 a year for about 5,000 words per week. It is now suggested that if that newspaper likes to go to the new Association and take the news which they will supply, it will be able to get 6,000 words per week for £1,000.

As regards the provincial press, evidence was given before the Select Committee that the Ballarat and Bendigo newspapers pay £200 a year. That is what is proposed in the new scheme. The smaller provincial newspapers are to be charged a maximum of £50 a year. The evidence given before the Select Committee, in half-a-dozen places, was that the usual charge to such newspapers was from £4 to £50, according to the number of limes they published during the week. If the real desire is, as is stated in one document, to supply a greater amount of news to the city and provincial press, then I say that what we ought to do is first to render some assistance to the provincial press. A letter was addressed by the Select Committee to numerous newspapers throughout Australia, and a large number of replies were received. According to the replies, nine newspapers definitely complained of ‘the transmission charges. A number of other newspapers complained of the cost of the cable service, and said it was necessary to have a reduction in the rates. A typical reply came from the Barrier Miner, of Broken Hill, which was summarized, by a sub-committee, in these terms -

Thinks charge merely nominal and cable service efficient. Cost of cables not nearly 2½ per cent, of our total cost, and it costs us three or four limes as much to get cables from Sydney to broken Hill as for London service. If rates abolished, if doubled amount so small we would notice no difference.

A newspaper called the Macleay Chronicle, and published at Kempsey, in New South Wales, replied -

Lately contemplated direct supply from Reuter, but abandoned idea owing to uncertainty of telegraphic service from Sydney, which is too slow. If telegraphic service improved, thinks almost every country journal go in for direct service if cable rate reduced.

The Daily Telegraph, of Launceston, in Tasmania, said -

Service a very good one, and think very little Home news of interest available to Tasmanian people not cabled from London. We do not think reduction in cost likely to induce only country newspaper published in Tasmania which does not now receive cables to take them ; nor do we think reduction lead to establishment of other newspapers. Agreement of T.P.A. with A.P.A. precludes cable monopoly in Tasmania.

These are typical of the replies which came from a large number of newspapers, whose main complaint was against the excessive land cost.

Senator Givens:

– Those three replies are not typical. The honorable senator has taken the three most extreme replies which he could find in the evidence.

Senator CHATAWAY:

– I took the fullest replies on the subject, and I hold that they are typical of the complaints made by a large number of newspapers. The honorable senator elicited evidence from one gentleman to the effect that the land charges were a very serious imposition on the country press. Mr. Shakespeare gave evidence that the land charges represented 65 per cent, of the cost of the cable and telegraphic service to the newspaper. Again, Mr. Waddell, who is manager of the Victorian Country Press Co-operative Company, said, in reply to Senator Neild - 899. Then I understand, from your point of view, the country press is not very keenly interested in the matter of cables, as first of all a great deal of the news cabled is not of interest to their readers. Is that so? - That is so. goo. Secondly, the cost of the cables per se is of less moment to the country press than the cost of transmission of the news in question over the land lines? - That is so. 901. Those are the two leading features that affect the wish for or against cable news in the country papers? - That is so.

Senator O’Keefe:

– The land charges cover a large volume of Inter-State news, which has nothing whatever to do with cables.

Senator CHATAWAY:

– Surely these gentlemen knew their own business. Mr. Shakespeare, who is secretary of the New South Wales Country Press Association, gave this evidence in reply to myself - 1055. What proportion of the 1,000 provincial newspapers which you mentioned would be prepared to pay the land charges to get through cable messages from Sydney or wherever the news was landed in Australia? - They would all be prepared to have some look in at the service, some of them taking 100 and some 200 words; but very few would do so at present rates. . In New Zealand the charge is 6d. per 100 words. The result is that cable messages get into the smallest paper. It is 6d. for every twenty-five here, with is. 6d. for the first 100. That shows a vast difference. Our people have to take in a lot of State and Inter-State news, and the terminal charges is certainly a big handicap in the dissemination of information.

Previously 1 tried to ascertain from Mr. Shakespeare the proportion which the transmission charges bore to the agency charges - 102 1. Do you know of your own knowledge what provincial papers have to pay who take the cable news? - At the time I speak of I was conducting a newspaper at Condobolin, in this State, when Reuter sent along the letter to which I referred, asking me £10 a year for a 200-words message once a week. Their present rate is £6 to £10 for a weekly service, up to £52 for a daily service to far inland papers. I have never known any paper in New South Wales to receive a separate cable service for £4 per annum. That may be the case in Victoria, but I do not think it is in New South Wales. Anyway, I could not get it. 1022. Does that service include Inter-State? - No. I make bold to say that no office receiving cables first hand with Inter-State charge, would supply the news for £4 a year. I think in the evidence they said they give them the published cables and Inter-State. That might be. No thanks to them. They are of no value. But I say I do not think any paper in Australasia receives cables first-hand at £4 a year. 1023. What is your opinion of the charges from £10 to £$2 a year for the service they receive? - Our people do not grumble at them. At the present time I have a heap of letters from people in the country in reference to the questions submitted by the Chairman of this Committee. In every case they have asked me to attend to them. They did not care to answer the Committee’s inquiry, through fear of being drawn into it. If they expressed any satisfaction whatever it might have the effect of increasing their charges. Their trouble is that two papers come out each morning with the same news.

The evidence which I propose to quote from other witnesses is to show that they complained not so much of the prices, for it is not seriously argued that the country press are complaining so much of the agency charges as of the heavy transmission charges. I pointed out just now that, under the proposed arrangement, the provincial press in small cities and towns, which, I take it, will include hamlets, are not to be charged more than £50 a year, which is practically what they are now charged. Newspapers in large provincial cities are to be charged £200 a year, and no Inter-State news is to be supplied for that sum. Before the Select Committee, Mr. Mackinnon, manager of the Melbourne

Argus, gave the following evidence in reply to the Chairman - 334. I notice that your Association charges the Ballarat Courier and the Bendigo Independent £200 per annum? - That is Reuter’s arrangement.

In each State the principal agent of the Association supplies the daily press all over the State, and another body in Queensland, called the Provincial Press Agency, supplies all the smaller newspapers. Consequently, if the proprietor of a small provincial newspaper asks the Brisbane Courier to supply him with a cable and Inter-State service, he is told to go to the Provincial Press Agency. During the inquiry by the Select Committee, a case cropped up where a man stated that he- had been refused a cable service by the Press Cable Association, and told to go to Reuter. He said that it was of no use for him to go there, because Reuter was only the agent of the Press Cable Association. 335. Under that agreement? - Yes. May I add, because it is important that this should be impressed upon the Committee, that that payment is not for the cable news only, but covers the whole of the Inter-State news supplied to those papers. 336. Mr. Collins explained that? - But it is important to bring strongly before the Committee the fact thatReuter’s are assisted to get those papers that information by having the whole of the Argus Inter-State news placed at their disposal.

Of course, Mr. Bell said that the InterState news was such rot that he did not feel inclined to publish it. That is, I think, very much a matter of opinion.

Senator Pearce:

– He did not use those words.

Senator CHATAWAY:

– No, he said that the items were of so little interest that they were worthless. It was the same thing in other words. As I have pointed out, so far as the actual charges proposed are concerned, the provincial press and small newspapers will not get their news any cheaper under this proposal than they have been able to get it before, whilst the big citv dailies will be able to get something like 20 per cent, more news for 25 per cent, less money.

Senator Rae:

– No. they cannot do so, thev are under a bond.

Senator CHATAWAY:

– They could break the bond if they thought they could get a better service. Reference has been madeto the Canadian suhsidy, and it is suggested that we have in that a precedent for this proposal. Mr. Shakespeare on that point gave the following evidence -

You can say nothing of the conditions as regards sale which the Canadian Government lays down in return for their subsidy? - There is only one provision as far as I know, and that is, the news they subsidize must be Empire pews.

You used the words “ Empire news,” and then began to talk about foreign countries. Would that not be foreign news, or does Empire news mean really to Great Britain and her dependencies? - Yes; they do not subsidize news from foreign countries.

If there is anything in this proposal, the intention is to subsidize news from America and other foreign countries. If this subsidy were confined to Empire news I might be more inclined to support it, and the Minister would have less cause, or shall I say more justification, to gibe at the daily newspapers who look upon the news paper business as a business concern, and not as a means of strengthening the silken bonds we were told about. Mr. Waddell, manager for the Country Press Association, was asked -

What is your opinion ? - Supposing another Association were started to send news from England to here, the news must come from the one source, and so far as I can see, the cable news is very full at the present time, sir. In fact I know a good deal of the news cabled is of very little interest to the ordinary country newspaper man. They only want matters of extreme public interest, such as what has transpired lately in the Imperial Parliament, the disaster in Jamaica, or any wreck.

Mr. Shakespeare, in reply to Senator Findley, gave this evidence -

You also say, “ By taking up any London paper on a given day and comparing the news with that cabled out, it will at once be seen how much of really first-class news is missed, and what class of matter is invariably chosen.” What kind of news is missed ? - All the minor events of England are missed.

That is the evidence of the representative of the Country Press Association of New South Wales, who gave the Committee a lot of valuable information. He had made inquiries, and probably knew as much of the working of the London office as any witness who came before the Committee. I am not going to accuse the Government of subsidizing a Labour Association at all. I leave that to persons possessed of a more vitriolic tongue than I have, but I do say that if we are going to subsidize a Press Association solely and entirely to get news of “minor events” transpiring in England, we shall be paying Very dearly for our whistle.

Senator Rae:

– Is that all Mr Shakespeare said on that point?

Senator CHATAWAY:

– Yes. We had a most interesting and amusing incident during the proceedings of the Select Committee; and this is one of the cases in connexion with which Mr. Shakespeare’s evidence was not so valuable. He described how the Press Cable Association and big newspapers often missed news. He reminded us that there was a time when the Sunday Times of Sydney ran its own cable service. He told us perfectly seriously that cables upon most important events during the South African war appeared in the Sunday Times before they were published in any other newspaper in Australia. He mentioned the relief of Mafeking, the news of which he said appeared in the Sunday Times something like eight days before it appeared in any other Australian newspaper. He mentioned also the Boxer rising, and one or two other important events. From his statements it did appear that it was absolutely necessary to have a service a little faster than that supplied by the apparently effete and slow combination which is supposed to be a monopoly.

Senator Guthrie:

– There was a member of the Opposition on the Sunday Times at that time.

Senator CHATAWAY:

– I do not know whether there was or not, but I know that a Mr. Cornford was on it, and he gave evidence before the Select Committee. He had been on the Sunday Times for a number of years, and he was asked about the matters referred to by Mr. Shakespeare. He gave the following evidence on the subject -

It has been stated, for instance, that your paper had news of the relief of Mafeking several days before the daily newspapers? - I do not think that was so. I do not remember it. 1 ask honorable senators to say whether any newspaper man who had managed to get such a “ scoop “ as the news of the relief of Mafeking before the Argus. Age, Sydney Daily Telegraph, and Sydney Morning Herald would be likely to forget the circumstance in a few years. He would remember it to his dying day. Mr. Cornford gave this further evidence -

And the same with regard to the murder of the German “Consul at Pekin? - We had that news first because it happened to arrive at London in time for our man to despatch it. We received the news on a ‘ Sunday morning while the daily papers did not get it till Monday.

Do they receive their cables on Monday? - I think so. .

Evidence has been given that they did not receive that news till a considerable number of days after your paper published it? - I hardly imagine that is correct. It was a very important thing.

Still your recollection is that on several occasions you got news earlier, even allowing for Sunday ? - Yea. 1 have read this to illustrate the way in which every possible effort was made to rake up evidence to show that the present service is inefficient and slow. No serious effort was made to prove that it is biased. I may relate a little personal experience of my own in the matter. For a number of years, and until I came here to attend this Parliament, I received regularly Canadian, Demerara, and South African papers, and I failed to find, with the exception of a large amount of news of only local interest, anything in the way of foreign news which could not be seen iti the Australian newspapers. To-day I had a look at the T Monto Globe in the

Library. It is a weekly newspaper, but it publishes what are alleged to be columns of cablegrams to which the initials S.C.P.A. are attached. I presume that the reference is to “ Subsidized Canadian Press Association.” I read them ‘ through, and except for a little padding and a little extra information as to the doings of the Imperial Parliament, I should say that, in respect of world-wide news, the Toronto Globe is not anything like as good as newspapers published in Austrafia. Mr. Cornford was asked this question -

Speaking as a pressman, ouside the combination, would it be of any advantage to you if another service were subsidized by the Government? - and his reply was -

Very little indeed. I think it would lead’ to duplication, and an expense which I do not think the country should be called upon to bear.

In the lace ot this evidence one might have expected that the Minister would give the. Senate some idea of the kind of news that is going begging all over the world, and which the combine declines to send to Australia.

Senator Rae:

– If the witness to whom the honorable senator has referred did not believe in an independent service, why did his- company have an independent service?

Senator CHATAWAY:

– I do not know. They had an independent service for five years, and evidently they then found it cheaper and better to subscribe to the combine. An extraordinary effort was made t<-< show that the work done in the collection of news was very inferior under the combine, and a Mr.’ Fitzgerald was induced to come along. Some years ago, how many I do not know, but I think it was about a quarter of a century ago, Mr. Fitzgerald was locum tenens for two or three weeks in the London office, and on the strength of the. experience he gained in that time he was called to tell the Committee how the London office was run, to explain that the officers there worked only from 3 to 5 every day, and that they received, I think it was, £600 a year each, He gave this evidence - 1748. By Senator Chataway. - Generally, you are of opinion that the service now is not as good as when you were in London? - It seems to be no belter than it was then.

– If - the honorable senator was so keen about the matter, he might have procured his discharge from the Committee in order that he might give evidence. Evidence was given to show that some- reason other than the operations of the combine operated to prevent the establishment of newspapers. On this subject, I quote the following from the evidence given by Mr. Shakespeare-

Is it not a fact it was proposed to establish a certain daily press at that time? - Yes.

Could you say why that fell through? -I would prefer Mr. Deakin to state that.

You cannot say as a fact they did not start, or were prevented from starting, because you could not get the.present press cable service? -

They never negotiated for it ; they considered it was absolutely useless.

As towhether it was absolutely useless you cannot say?- I can only say that I know the directors met and conferred on that very point, and considered that a new evening paper started in Sydney and Melbourne would be a feature of it. Having accommodation arranged in the London Times office, they would have first cut at all their news.

Then you do. know why they did not start it? -Yes.

You would prefer the Committee asking Mr. Deakin? - Yes ; certain members of his Cabinet could tell you why.

I should prefer to ask you why? - They could not put up enough “ brass.”

We have had sworn evidence that a reasonable service, such a.s would be required by an evening newspaper, could be supplied for about £6,000. Yet we are invited to believe that the Sydney Bulletin Company and the proprietors of the thousand provincial newspapers in Australia could not raise £6,000 to start an independent service. Lt.-Colonel Reay, when examined in reference to Mr. Mackinnon’s statement that the running cf a Press Cable Association was a business concern, gave the following evidence in answer, I think, to Senator Pearce -

He distinctly said that it was purely a matter of business. You say that in your opinion a new combination for cabling purposes could he formed. But is it not the case that it would he practically impossible to give effect to such an idea owing to the fact that the agreements of the newspapers with the Press Association expire on different dates?

That is one of the strong points which Senator Pearce tried to make. Lt.-Colonel Reay replied -

T have already expressed the opinion that it is practicable to give effect to the idea. I will now go further, and say that if we sent a cable message to our agent in London, and also a message to our bankers we should be furnished with another service in twenty-four hours.

Of course, Lt.-Colonel Reay is only a newspaper man, and, therefore, in the opinion of honorable members opposite, knows nothing about the subject. Those who have never been in a daily newspaper office in their lives can explain the subject thoroughly. In the report of the Select Committee the statement is made that -

Whilst the full power of the monopoly has not been used, it is there, and there is at present no check upon its use. There are none of the elements of free bargaining in the present position, and a dissatisfied newspaper has no recourse but to submit.

What element of free bargaining is there in this proposal?

Senator Rae:

– There will be a choice between two associations, instead of there being only one.

Senator CHATAWAY:

– Would the honorable senator say that we ought to split up employers and employes, and let each person bargain for himself? That is the last opinion that I would have expected from him.

Senator Rae:

– That is the honorable senator’s doctrine of freedom of contract.

Senator CHATAWAY:

Senator O’KEEFE:
Tasmania

– One can hardly understand why honorable senators opposite are objecting to this small expenditure of £6,000. Surely they recognise the fact that Australia is already subsidizing private enterprise to a much larger degree. Wall it be contended for a moment that the amount which the Commonwealth receives for the transmission of newspaper messages over the land wires represents anything like the cost of sending those messages? Surely not. Therefore, the Australian taxpayer is already subsidizing newspapers which are receiving a large volume of telegraphic business from all parts of the country. Furthermore, some of the States subsidize newspapers to a greater or less extent in regard to the free carriage of the journals on the trains. A newspaper that gets a message of, say, 2,000 words from some other part of Australia gets that message at the rate of1s. per 100 words. Will any one contend that1s. per 100 represents the actual cost of sending a press message from one part of Australia to another? As a matter of fact, the taxpayers are contributing out of the revenue of every State a large amount of money in’ subsidizing newspapers. I am not objecting to that practice, but honorable senators opposite should object to it if they apply their own arguments. I say that it is a good thing to subsidize newspapers to this extent, if by so doing we can disseminate among the people of Australia the news they want, and which is useful to them. It has been contended that the existing Press Cable

Association is not a monopoly. But surely it must be adrnitted by candid people that it is. It may be a justifiable monopoly. No one has any right to say to the gentlemen forming the present Association, “ You are doing a very wrong thing.” They have every right, as business men, to form a monopoly for such a purpose. It is a business arrangement. But it is a monopoly all the same, and as’ it is worked it prevents other newspapers from coming into existence. The effect of the agreement has been to prevent other newspapers from forming an association. A small monopoly has grown out of the bigger one. Senator Chataway cited the evidence given by the manager, or the proprietor, of the Daily Telegraph, in Launceston - it seemed to be on the side of the present Association - in rebuttal of arguments used by Senator Pearce. Probably he does not know that a small monopoly, called the Tasmanian Press Association, has grown out of the Press Cable Association. A certain number of newspaper proprietors there combined to form an association, and the effect of that small combination has been to prevent other newspapers from being started in the State, because they would not supply cable news to a new journal. So long as the Tasmanian Association was getting a certain quantity of news the original syndicate would not supply news to other newspapers. The direct effect of that arrangement was that, for a long time, a second daily newspaper, although the capital had been arranged for, was not started. Is there not a bigger question at issue than that of whether there is a monopoly in Australia, or whether that monopoly is doing something unfair? If we, in making this trifling grant of £6,000, have only the semblance of a chance of getting a cable service, the people of Australia will have a service which will not be coloured, and which will give two sides of a question. Surely it will be money well spent.

Senator Fraser:

– How does the honorable senator know that the present service is coloured ?

Senator O’KEEFE:

– Will any honorable senator tell me that our present service is not coloured? It is marvellous the number of readers who do not know that practically every cablegram published in Australia comes from one source. Of course, there may be a little difference in the wording of the published cablegrams.

The pressmen who are engaged upon the padding-work may colour the messages according to the political ideals of their proprietary. If, for an outlay of £6,000, it is made possible for the people to get an improved cable service, surely the motion should command the support of every honorable senator?

Senator Lt Colonel Sir Albert Gould:

– The new service may not be any -better than the present one.

Senator O’KEEFE:

– That is possible. I admit- that, apart from their political ideals, Australia has reason to be very proud of its magnificent journals. One has only to compare American and Australian newspapers to be satisfied on that point. I have heard visitors from America and Canada speak in the most glowing terms of Australian newspapers. Will any one seriously say that there is not a possibility of our getting a still better cable service than we have, if we grant this subsidy?’ I feel sure that honorable senators have often shaken their heads after they have read a large quantity of the cable news, and remarked, “ Why should we have to pay for this stuff? Of what interest is it to us to know that a duke’s wife has run away with a coachman?” Cable news of that description is frequently published. The messages have been transmitted from the other side of the world, and the people have had to pay a share of the land charges.

Senator Vardon:

– Who is to control the cable news which is to come over the Pacific line? Is there to be a censor appointed?

Senator O’KEEFE:

– Paragraph 4 of the motion reads -

That the Government should, in granting such subsidy, impose such conditions as may be necessary to secure that the public shall obtain the fullest possible benefit from the subsidized service.

Senator GUTHRIE:
South Australia

– I think that every honorable senator is prepared to admit that the newspaper education of the people should be made as free as possible. We are brought face to face with the fact that persons who have attempted to establish newspapers in Australia have been refused a service of cable news obtained from England at rates which gave the Press Cable Association an advantage over the general public. I have some knowledge of this matter. I conducted negotiations with the syndicate to secure cables foc some newspapers which were to be established. Honorable senators are aware that the whole of the correspondence which passed between the newspapers for which I was negotiating and the syndicate has already appeared in Hansard, and it shows that there was an absolute refusal to supply the cables. Senator Chataway told us that he was connected with a newspaper, and that there were two combines which came together. They came to an agreement, of which this was one of the provisions -

That the total maximum cost for such cable messages as aforesaid shall be the sum of £1 2,000 per annum.

Senator RAE:

– I did not know that there was more than one independent Press Cable Association.

Senator Lt Colonel Sir Albert Gould:

W7hat papers receive their news?

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

– The honorable senator should remember that an organization that has the Government behind it is placed in a position of great advantage. Here is another matter upon which I should like to have some information. The seventh of the conditions proposed reads -

The Association must transmit to Australia by cable and supply to its subscribers any information on matters of Australian interest supplied to it or its agent in London by the High Commissioner, but the Association shall be entitled to charge the Commonwealth Government press rates in respect of the matter so transmitted.

– I thank the honorable senator ; but I have a right to make a speech without his consent. Senator Pulsford, who was a member of the Select Committee, sent in a dissent from the report which was signed by the Chairman. It was not signed by any other members of the Committee, but I assume that they agreed with it, or they would have dissented.

Senator Givens:

– Senator Pulsford refused to discuss the report. He would not give the Committee the benefit of his opinion upon it.

Senator VARDON:

– This is what Senator Pulsford says in his dissent -

As to whether the news supplied is “ garbled and inaccurate “ no evidence in support thereof was given, nor, indeed, was it seriously sought. In fact, this portion of the attack on the Press Cable Service may be said to have been abandoned.

Senator Story:

– If true, do they not justify the present proposal ?

Senator VARDON:

– We have first to consider whether the evidence taken by the

Committee justifies the objection and the adoption of the remedy now proposed for the existing state of things.

Senator Givens:

– One honorable senator on the other side agreed that the grounds stated were sufficient, and that the action proposed was necessary.

Senator VARDON:

– Honorable senators on this side have a right to express their opinion. They are not gagged in any way. I do not know what the practice followed on the other side may be, but an expression of opinion by Senator Gould, for instance, does notbind me in any way. I want to discuss the question whether the evidence taken by the Select Committee justifies the objections stated in the report against the present system. The first witness called before the Committee, Mr. H. M. Collins, at that time general manager in Australasia of Reuter’s Telegram Company, gave a good deal of evidence with regard to this matter. He stated that Reuter’s, in London, receives cable messages from 261 principal agencies in all parts of the world. These , messages are made available to the representatives of the Australian Press Association in London, who select from them items of news which are transmitted by cable to Australia. In return, Reuter’s receives Australian news, which is sent back to London. Mr. Collins said that the Australian Press Association did not interfere in any way with the terms made by Reuter’s, and that the net profit from the sale of cables to the country press was divided between Reuter’s and the Association.

Senator Givens:

– A nice, happy family arrangement !

Senator VARDON:

– Well, we all try to get into nice, happy arrangements when we can. We are all very much alike in that respect. Mr. Collins was examined by the Chairman as follows -

Can you supply an unlimited number of newspapers, or is there a limit in any part of Australia? - Legally we can sell to whom we please.

But actually can you? - There is absolutely no obligation on our part not to sell the news to whom we please, and if we declined to sell it would be solely from business considerations. If a better offer came along we should give it business consideration.

Senator Guthrie:

– But the agreement made with the Cable Association provided that no messages shall be supplied by Reuter’s to any newspaper published in Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide, or Brisbane.

Senator VARDON:

– We have to take Mr. Collins’ evidence as given. The next question was -

Is there any limit as to the price at which you shall sell to the newspapers? - No, that is a matter which has been left entirely to our company to fix. Speaking generally, we raised the subscription four or five years ago.

Further on, Mr. Collins was examined as follows -

Under the agreement would you be at liberty to supply the press cables to another Association if formed? - There is no stipulation that we are not to supply whom we please. As I said before, it is a business consideration only.

Again, in reply to another question by the chairman, the witness said -

In fact, the interest taken by the country press in cable news, except on special occasions, is very small indeed. That will account for the extremely limited number of newspapers that we have on our roll.

Further on, Mr. Collins told the Committee that out of 230 provincial newspapers in Victoria, only 41 contributed to the cable service. He showed that there was a reason for that, namely, the heavy wiring charges from Melbourne, which proved crushing to country newspapers. He- did not allege that the charges were unfair. But he stated that any country newspaper that took the full service would, unless it were within telephonic communication, be compelled to pay a very heavy sum indeed. In reply to the question, “ What is the daily average?” Mr. Collins said - 1 had the number of inches occupied by a daily country newspaper here last week taken out, and dividing the year by fifty-two, we found that they paid for their cable and Inter-State service, embracing all parts of Australasia, 5s. per column.

By the Chairman. - That is, after the expander had been at work? - That is so, but let me say that it is legitimate expansion. The public at large are uninitiated, and you must have cables expanded in a proper and educative manner. You have frequently to refer to previous incidents in order to make the cables intelligible at all. The space I mentioned includes, not only the expanded telegrams, but also the Inter-State news. These figures were taken out haphazard during last week. You will find that a newspaper like the Ballarat Star, or the Bendigo Advertiser, or the Geelong Times pays for its cable and Inter-State service 5s. per column. In other words, it pays for five cable words to fill a column of its space.

That does not seem to be a very extravagant price to pay. Again, the witness said -

Only yesterday I was waited upon by a gentleman from the country who has a bi-weekly newspaper. He was anxious to publish cables, which, so far, he has not been able to do. I quoted him the ridiculous sum of £6 per year for the right of copying them, but he could not pay it because of the wiring charges.

Once more -

In Victoria, of 230 provincial papers, only forty-one contribute to the press service, of which eleven are daily newspapers. The remaining thirty journals contribute £261, or about £& 14s. each. The eleven daily newspapers pay an average of ;£’20 10s. each per annum.

Further on. the witness was examined as follows -

I understood you to say that the cost of the service is £4,364 per annum, and that the revenue received is £2,481? - I do not wish you to understand that Reuter pays £4,364. We do not pay for this cable service; we only pay the copying fee. The cost of the service is paid by the Association.

Then in question 160, Mr. Collins’ evidence proceeded -

Can a country newspaper get from you a selection of cables ; for instance, in time of war, can a newspaper say, “ We only want from you the cables referring to the war”? - Certainly. In such a case we should make a selection to the best of our ability.

From what you have told me, I now believe that most, if not all, of your arrangements are fair, but would you think it right for the Government to stand by and see all the rich papers of the Commonwealth coming together in a combine to get these expensive cables and then refusing to sell them to competitors, except at a very exorbitant price ? - Mav I put it another way.’ Would it be fair for the Government to say to us, “ You get those cables out, and you must supply them to anybody who asks for them at such and such a price.”

Senator Givens, at question 399, examined the witness, as follows -

You told the Chairman that there was no restriction on any country paper. You emphasized the word “ country,” implying that there was some restriction on metropolitan newspapers? - In the agreement, as handed in, the supply of cables to any metropolitan paper in Melbourne, Sydney, or Adelaide depended on the unanimous decision of the Association.

That restriction is now removed ? - Yes.

There is now no restriction, except such as may be contained in the terms to be arranged ? - Exactly.

Is it not possible to impose a very severe restriction ia those terms? - If it rested with me personally, it would not be so.

But it is possible? - Yes.

You supply to an Association in Queensland ? - We supply to the Brisbane Courier, Telegraph, and Daily Mail.

Would those papers be able to veto your supplying another paper if it were started in Brisbane ? - No.

They would have absolutely no say ? - They have none, as is shown by the fact that we recently supplied the Daily Mail.

Then if another metropolitan paper were started there, it would be simply a question of the terms to be arranged ? - Exactly.

Again Senator Givens examined the witness as follows -

If an independent paper started a cable service of its own, would it get from the Eastern Extension Company the same priority over their lines as your Association gets? - We get no priority. All private messages take priority of our cable messages. If a message for another paper were handed in at 10 o’clock, and our message at one minute past 10, the former would go through to Australia first.

But might not priority be arranged ? - I have never tried it on. I know we have none now.

Perhaps there has been no necessity for it so far? - We could not get it. The regulations of the Cable Company would prevent it.

The following is a further extract from the evidence, the first question being asked bySenator Pulsford - 462. But according to the evidence given by Mr. Collins it appears that the bulk of the country press of Australia use your cables without payment? - That is so. 463. Do you confirm Mr. Collins’ -statement that in Victoria 189 papers pay nothing for the cable news? - I believe that to be perfectly correct. 464. Do you also confirm his statement that in New South Wales 221 out of 240 papers paynothing for the cables? - Yes. 465. By the Chairman. - But do they take the cables? - They take them, but they do not pay Reuters or the Press Association for them. 466. By Senator Guthrie. - But those are mostly weeklies, are they not? - They include a good many dailies which are able to get the news from the early morning papers.

This is by the Chairman - 471. But Mr. Collins does not say that the provincial newspapers, which do not contribute to the press cable service, get the cables for nothing? - But they do. They take them for nothing. 472. Where are your common law rights? - We have never exercised them.

At a later stage of the inquiry Mr. Mackinnon was recalled, and gave evidence with regard to the receipts and the expenditure of the Press Cable Association, and the figures supplied by Sir Robert Scott. The first question is by the Chairman - 1776. Well, Mr. Mackinnon, what would you be prepared to say is the gross income? - Will that meet the views of the Committee?

Well, speaking for myself, it would. [The Chairman asks each member in turn.]

Senator Givens:

– I should like to get a little more detailed information, but I do not want to embarrass Mr. Mackinnon by unduly pressing a view which he does not seem inclined to accede to.

Senator Findley:

– Yes.

Senator Pulsford:

– I am more than content.

Witness. - I think, Mr. Chairman, I gave you the expenses for three and a half years, 1906, 1907,1908, and 1909. 1777. By the Chairman. - Yes, in 1906 the expenditure was £13,467, in 1907 it was £14,915, in 1908 it was , £14,614, and during the first half of the present year it was , £8,790? - £8,7go. That made a total of , £51,786 for the three and a half years. The receipts for that three and a half years were £30,805, leaving close on £21,000 to be made up by the members nf the Cable Association. 1782. By Senator Dobson. - Do I understand the receipts are £30,805, leaving a debit for the three and a half years of £21,000?

The Chairman:

– That is about it. 1783. By Senator Dobson. - Leaving £7,000 a year to be made up? - By the members of the Association.

Later the witness said, in reply to the Chairman -

There are certain figures put in by Sir Robert Scott which I think the Committee has accepted as official. Now, I cannot compare Sir Robert Scott’s figures with my own, because his year goes from different periods, that is, from June to June, while my figures are given from December to December. The figures that I put in before, I want to assure the Committee, are absolutely from the records of the messages as received in my office, and Sir Robert Scott’s certainly do not show a fair basis. Mine are absolute records, the messages are entered into a book every day, and the number of words are entered, and there can be no possible mistake about the returns, so that if the Committee are . accepting Sir Robert Scott’s figures as official, I beg to say that they do not accord with the official records of the Cable Association, and I would like to put in the correct figures.

Senator Givens:

– Which would the honorable senator accept now - the figures from a private individual, or the figures from a Government Department?

Senator VARDON:

– I think that, after all, there was something to be said from his point of view - 1809. By Senator Givens. - Who is to decide which are the correct figures? - Sir Robert Scott has said, to begin with, there are a certain number of messages that come to the office as fully paid messages. They do not come as press messages. Sir Robert Scott would not be able to tell what they were. Further, he says the returns from New South Wales show different from those of Victoria, but as New South Wales gets exactly the same messages as Victoria, there must be some mistake there. If I could have compared the figures, I would have liked to compare them ; but these I am prepared to make an affidavit are correct from our records. . I can show the records.

I think that later, when he was recalled. Sir Robert Scott admitted that there were some fully-paid messages which he could not distinguish from the others.

Senator Pearce:

– His later figures made the discrepancy even worse for the combine, showing that they were making more profit than they had stated.

Senator VARDON:

-It showed that there was a difference in regard to the figures, but it does not seem to me to prove anything, one way or the other.

Senator Givens:

– Another question came in which complicated the matter.

SenatorVARDON.- I think that Sir Robert Scott modified his statement when he came before the Select Committee on a later occasion.

Senator Pearce:

– The press messages’ are kept entirely distinct from the others and charged a separate rate. The figures which Sir Robert Scott prepared related to press messages only.

Senator VARDON:

– I think he said that there were some fully-paid-up messages, which he did not take into account. Tt was said that a good deal of injustice had been meted out to Mr. Hugh Mahon, of Western Australia, and much evidence on the subject was taken from Mr. Mahon, and Mr. Mackinnon. On page 33 Mr. Mahon gave the following evidence : - 631. By the Chairman. - Turning from that matter, as a one-time proprietor of a country newspaper, what was your experience of the business of getting a cable service? - It proved a very bitter experience. 632. Was there any other method by which you could have got cables? - Absolutely none. 633. Did you make full inquiry? - I knew it before ; I knew very well there was only one cable agency in Australia. 634. Outside of that, you had no hope of getting cables? - No hope whatever; and in their contract they bound me not to publish any cablegrams from any other source. 635. What contract was that? - The contract I entered into under duress in the middle of 1S98. 636. Do you think you could get a copy of that contract? - This contract is amongst the documents for which I have sent to Menzies, and it may be in existence. 637. If you want a cable service, there is no question of competition? - Absolutely none. 63S. They can fix any terms they wish? - Yes, and the fact that they” fixed £150 a year for a little town in a remote part of Western Australia, and only ^200 for a paper like the Bendigo Advertiser, in a place with a population of 30,000 or 40,000, shows how they desired to take advantage of the unfortunate position in which i stood at the time. 639. How often was your paper published ? - livery day, but it was only a four-page paper, with a circulation of about 700 copies. 640. You found it impossible to pay the amount they asked? - Absolutely impossible, as shown in my letter, which I am glad Mr. Mackinnon read here. 658. By Senator Givens. - Is it not a fact that no newspaper in Australia could, under the conditions which prevail in Australia, afford to have a separate correspondent and service from England ? - It is absolutely impossible to compete with the Press Association. There are seven or eight newspapers in the combine, and it cost each a little over id. a word, whereas a single competitor would have to pay the full gd. 669. You think it is all nonsense to say that there is no combine or monopoly? - Not merely is there a monopoly, but absolutely the most dangerous monopoly in Australia. Other monopolies do not seek to get political power as this one does. 673. Is it not a fact that, owing to this Press Association, there is only one news-collecting agency in Australia for Great Britain? - Quite so. 674. Do you not think that we should have a better selection of news if there were a little competition? - I think that the public would profit by competition, and that the news would be more reliable ; one service would act as a check on the other. 675. Now we get only what the Association chooses to send? - What some individual in London chooses to send at the dictation of somebody at this end. 676. Is there any possibility that the messages may be coloured by party or partisan feeling? - I think it is a matter of common knowledge that they have been. 677. Whether that be so or not, they are absolutely dependent on this service? - Yes. 703. By Senator Dobson. - Can you make any suggestion to the Committee whereby a larger supply of cables can be obtained, with a wider distribution throughout Australia? - Only after he manner Sir Sandford Fleming suggested ; that the matter should be taken up by the Imperial, the Australian, and the New Zealand

Governments and a certain amount of free cable news distributed throughout the Empire. 704. By Senator Givens. - How would you suggest that the news he collected at the other end? -That is a matter of detail, I should imagine. 705. By Senator Dobson. - Would you leave the Press Association alone, or modify or amend its methods? - Their contention is that it is a private business, with which there is no right to interfere. 706. But if it is a private business carried on with the aid of public concessions, and with public property, and we have the right to have some voice in the control, can you make any suggestion? - I can see nothing except, perhaps, that you might insist on their paying a larger fee for the use of the land lines - that is to say, the sum per word that comes to the Commonwealth now from the cables.

One of the principal witnesses before the Select Committee was Mr. Thomas Mitchell Shakespeare, whose evidence dealt largely with the possibility of establishing a rival Press Cable Association and the affairs of the present Association. On page 46 he gives this evidence - 955. By the Chairman. - What is your official position? - I am secretary of the Australasian Provincial Press Association, and also of the New South Wales Country Press Association. 957. Is your Association fairly representative nf the provincial press of New South Wales? - Yes. In this State there are 238 provincial papers outside a radius of 10 miles of Sydney, and of that number 210 are members of our Association. 1 1 12. By Senator Guthrie. - What are the objects of the Australasian Press Association? - It is a Federal Council of the State Associations. But the outstanding feature, which brought it into existence, was to enable the different Associations to come together and commence a satisfactory cable service, to allow the possibility of united action to bear upon a question which was beyond State power. 1 113. One of the objects was to bring about a new cable service? - Yes.

A statement which Mr. Shakespeare read at the beginning of his evidence included the following passage : -

My own personal opinion is that in view of the high rates for press cable messages (gd. per word), plus considerable administration charges, no new cable service, likely to satisfy the reading public and national ideals, can be established without the aid of at least four metropolitan daily papers, in addition to the provincial press. The chance of obtaining this support is rendered difficult from the fact that contracts made by the present Press Cable Syndicate prohibit subscribers from publishing press cables from any other source on the one hand, while such contracts have been made with the papers for different periods and expire on different dates, thus precluding the possibility of several falling into line on a given date and supporting a rival service. The only hope of seeing a second service consummated lies in the Pacific Cable Board further reducing press rates, or in the Federal Government (1) following the precedent of the Canadian Government in subsidizing a second service until it becomes self-supporting, say for five years, or (2) of establishing a reciprocal service of its own between Great Britain and Australia, such as was suggested at the Melbourne conference of the Australasian Provincial Press Association last year, and of supplying the cables received here at a nominal cost to the press of Australasia. 970. By the Chairman. - What is your opinion of the present methods of the Australian Press Association, which you describe as the “ syndicate “ ? - I think they are good business people, and are running their concern on business lines, and very satisfactorily. It is a commercial concern, and no one can fault it. 971. From what point of view is it satisfactory? - From their own point of view. It is necessary, while press cables are received as at present, that there should be an arrangement for a combination. I do not think any one newspaper could afford to pay gd. per word for cables and the heavy upkeep in London, and produce a service quite independent of any other service. It therefore means combination. The present syndicate have taken that in hand. Prior to the present arrangement, as Mr. Mackinnon pointed out in his evidence, there were two services, and in bringing it down to one they made their contracts so that no rival service could start against it. 972. And you consider that good from a commercial stand-point? - Yes; I consider it a sagacious arrangement. 1 think that most business men will agree with Mr. Shakespeare that it was a very sagacious arrangement, so far as those who were associated with the Press Cable Service were concerned. The following is a further quotation from this gentleman’s evidence, the questioner being the Chairman - 1 02 1. Do you know of your own knowledge what provincial papers have to pay who take the cable news? - At the time I speak of I was conducting a newspaper at Condobolin, in this State, when Reuters sent along the letter to which I referred, asking me £10 a year for a 200-words message once a week. Their present rate is £6 to £10 for a weekly service, up to £52 for a daily service to far inland papers. I have never known any paper in New South Wales to receive a separate cable service for £4 per annum. That may be the case in Victoria, but I do not think it is in New South Wales. Anyway, I could not get it. 1022. Does that- service include Inter-State? - No. I make bold to say that no office receiving cables first hand with Inter-State charge, would supply the news for £4 a year. I think in the evidence they said they give them the published cables and Inter-State. That might be. No thanks to them. They are of no value. But I say I do not think any paper in Australasia receives cables first-hand at £4 a year. 1023. What is your opinion of the charges from £10 to £52 a year for the service they receive? - Our people do not grumble at them. 1063. By Senator Chataway - I understand tout real trouble is the quality of the news? - Yes. 1064. You think if a second agency were established you would get out a lot of news of quite a different character? - Yes, we know that we would.

In answer to Senator Givens. Mr. Shakespeare gave this evidence -

Do you think the news at present received is of such a character that people do not get a fair opportunity of judging public questions on the fairest merits?- I do. There are many published opinions not adequately stated here.

Do you think they give a sufficiently accurate view, and the fairest, of public events in Great Britain to enable us to form a just opinion? - I really could not answer that.

Questioned by Senator Pulsford, we have this -

I take it this is your general position : The present price of the cable service, looked at all round, is not unsatisfactory ? - That is true.

But a second service, which you would like to see, would give a greater diversity of news? - Yes.

We have it in evidence that_ in the last thirteen years the average words increased from 1,500 to nearly 5,000. Does that not show the extreme enterprise of the press, and what they have saved in cable moneys they have more than expended in getting an enlarged service? - Yes. It is patent the service has increased right along the line.

In answer to Senator Dobson there is this further evidence -

Do I understand you to say you would prefer the new service quite apart from the Government? - Yes. I meant to say that, in running a service, we would prefer to have one without what I mentioned as a tag.

There is a good deal of other evidence I should like to have quoted, but I think I have given sufficient to show that the objections set out in the report of the Select Committee were not justified by the evidence.

Senator Guthrie:

– The honorable senator has not read it all, and the Committee had the whole of the evidence before them.

Senator VARDON:

– I am quite aware of that; but the Select Committee were good enough to publish the whole of the evidence, and we have all had an opportunity to read it. There is other interesting evidence to which I should like to have referred to show that the Committee heard nothing from the witnesses to warrant the objections stated in their report, or to warrant them in making some of the somewhat drastic recommendations they did make. It has been said over and over again that the country press is altogether dissatisfied with the Press Cable Association. I was somewhat surprised to find that this was not in any way borne out by the evidence submitted to the Select Committee. There is no reference to the matter in the Committee’s report; but in his dissent, Senator Pulsford does make a reference to it. He says -

The Committee, on its formation, at once sent out to the Australian press a circular letter inviting information and suggestions as to the operations of the Association, and generally, as to the objects of the Committee. The circular was sent to every daily and weekly paper in the Commonwealth. The number so sent exceeded 800, but these elicited only about 90 replies, and of these 90, not one-fourth expressed dissatisfaction.

Senator Rae:

– They were frightened.

Senator VARDON:

– The honorable senator must have a very poor opinion of the spirit of the proprietors of the country press. There is proof that only twenty out of 800 country newspaper proprietors communicated with expressed any dissatisfaction with the service supplied by the Press Cable Association. That has not been contradicted in any way. With regard to the cost to country newspapers, it should be remembered that the cost of the cables is not their difficulty. I quoted the evidence of Mr. Collins, to the effect that he offered the cables to the proprietor of one country newspaper for£6 a year, and the man said that he could not take them at that ridiculous price because the wiring charges were so heavy. Senator Pulsford, in his dissent, makes a reference to this point. He says -

The most marked, and probably the most useful, point brought out by the inquiry, is that the cost of telegrams over Australian, wires is more burdensome to the country press, and probably to the metropolitan press as well, than the sum that would be charged for the supply of oversea cable messages. Evidence in this direction was given by representatives of both the Victorian and New South Wales Associations. Reuter’s manager, Mr. Collins, said - “ It is the heavy wiring charges which prove crushing to a country newspaper.” He further said - “ Only yesterday I was waited upon by a gentleman from the country who has a bi-weekly newspaper. He was anxious to publish cables, which, so far, he has not been able to do. I quoted him the ridiculous sum of £6 per year for the right of copying them, but he could not pay it on account of the wiring charges.”

– Will that be without charge?

Senator Guthrie:

– It will be without any land charge.

Senator VARDON:

Senator Sayers:

– What is the fault?

Senator KEATING:

– I suppose the fault is largely due to commercial reasons. Senator Pearce clearly indicated that when he referred to the evidence given by Mr.

Mackinnon, and to the way in which one of the strongest Imperialists we ever had in the Federal Parliament, ex-Senator Dobson, was shocked when Mr. Mackinnon said, in effect, “ We are not out to promoteImperialism; we are out for profit.”

Senator Sayers:

– Will not the other combine be out for profit also ?

Senator KEATING:

– Exactly. My point is that, in the past, we have not been furnished with that class of information which we might naturally have expected from a highly-developed organization such as that which at presents exists, and of which, from what we hear, the managing director of the Argus is the head, the front, the back, the centre, and indeed the whole body. This organization, he tells us, is avowedly “ out for profit,” and for nothing else.

Senator Givens:

– Yet they pretend to be great patriots 1

Senator KEATING:

– I do not think so. I do not go so far as Senator Givens does.. I believe that they are not to be blamed! for being out for profit. Let me show how the cable service supplied to the Australian press strikes an intelligent foreigner. My honorable friends from New South Wales, may remember that a few years ago, there was in Sydney, representing the Republic of France, Monsieur Biard D’Aunet. No doubt Senator Gould knew him well. This gentleman, during the course of his residence in Australia, contributed many articles; of serious import and very great interest to the Revue des Deux Mondes. In thecourse of one of these articles, which havesince been published in book form under the title L’Aurore Australe, Monsieur D’Aunet quoted an extract from Le Courrier Australian, which professed to represent the manner in which news was cabled to Australia. I will try to translate the passage, which I think will be amusing to the Senate -

Scene : London. - The scene represents a bureau lighted by electricity. Tables covered with small sheets of paper of various colours; the tick-tack of an instrument is to be heard. Messengers frequently enter and leave.

Mr. Black and Mr. Brown are half reclining on a bench smoking and drinking whisky and soda. Mr. Black informs his friend about his. visit to the ballet at the Empire. Mr. Brown, is quietly smiling approval. Mr. White is seated near one of the large tables working a typewriter.

Mr. Brown rises and says: “Well, it is Australia that you are doing to-day, is it MrWhite ?”

Mr. White, Yes, but there is really nothing at all to dg.

Mr. BROWN. There is the cricket match.

Mr. White. I have already sent 140 words about the cricket match, 40 about the football, 30 about the swimming, 12 about the fight between Bob and Tom at Coney’s Island. By the way, Bob had three teeth broken.

Mr. Brown. Ah well, that is quite enough for Australia. Three teeth broken ! You will not find anything more interesting than that?

The word “ lines “ is used. I think it should be “ words.”

Mr. White. I want another fifty lines. Mr. Smith wishes us to send political news. But I ask you, Mr. Brown, what is the good of sending that to Australia. What do they want with political news?

Mr. Brown. Mr. Smith sometimes has singular ideas it is true. But still he understands the service. It is a tradition to send political news to Australia, and (gravely) tradition has made the power of England. (A short but solemn silence.) However, one of my friends who has come from Coolgardie has assured me that there are really some people down there in Australia who read our telegrams.

Mr. Black. (Interposing.) Oh, I doubt that.

Mr. Brown. I doubt it very much. However, I am glad to realize that Mr. Smith has so much tact in the selection of messages. You are right in saying he knows the service.

Enter Mr. Smith.

Here follows a description of his personality -

Mr. Smith. I am late, gentlemen ; but I see you have not lost any time. (To Mr. Brown) - New York gone, eh?

Mr. Brown. Yes, sir.

Mr. Smith. And was there anything particular?

Mr. Brown. Nothing. Same old thing. Kinship Crimson thread Blood thicker than water English speaking Dreyfus, and Sarah Bernhardt.

Mr. Smith. Splendid. Go on just as you are. Above all - No news about the Philippines? It is bad taste to tell one’s friends disagreeable news. It is said that they are going to lay a cable across the Pacific for the express purpose of communicating with them direct. It is a magnificent idea. Ah ! gentlemen, they are a great people, whose inspirations are never anything but magnificent. And so this idea of being connected with the Philippines.

. But I was forgetting - (to Mr. Black) - You have got Hong Kong, Shanghai?

Mr. Black. Yes, sir; that is done.

Mr. Smith. And good?

Mr. Black. Very little very little. His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales the Duchess of York Saxe-Coburg Epsom the Marquis of Lorne Dreyfus and Sarah Bernhardt

Mr. Smith. Good ; anything about Mr. Chamberlain ?

Mr. Black. Mr. Cecil Rhodes prefers that nobody says too much about him just now. I have thought -

Mr. Smith. Very good. You are right. It is necessary to be careful, very careful, for our responsibility is tremendous. . . . You smile, Mr. White? By the way, Mr. White, what have you been doing to-day?

Mr. White. (Of handedly and lightly) Australia.

Mr. Smith. That’s easy.

Mr. White. I have got “the Cricket match, the Football match, the Swimming, little Rowing contest, Pugilism in America, Dreyfus, and Sarah Bernhardt. I still want sixty lines.

Mr. Smith. We’ll do that together. Let us see ! Is there anything about Major Marchand ?

Mr. White. There’s a message not, too clear saying that the Government has refused him leave to go to his people in the country. That’s of very little interest.

Mr. Smith. Any one can see that you are new in the service, White. Mention the refusal of leave and add that the French Government wish to have Commandant Marchand at hand in order to obviate political demonstrations.

Mr. White (re reads the message). I beg pardon. I made a mistake. The Government has given leave to the Commandant to go -

Mr. White. In that case state that leave has been given. It’s necessary to be exact and never to alter news. Add that the French Government wishes to get Commandant Marchand out of the way in order to obviate political demonstrations. You have nothing about Deroulede ?

Mr. White. Nothing at all.

Mr. Smith. He has made no movement, no speech?

Mr. White. Apparently not. The Times says that the attitude of M. Deroulede is causing the Government uneasiness.

Mr. Smith. I can well believe it. It is not the usual thing. This absence of any movement is more than a movement itself. Put down that M. Henry de Blowitz, correspondent of the Times at Paris. . . . You write : “M. Blowitz.” It’s necessary to put prefixes and titles always. That gives weight to news, and pleases the Eastern telegraph. Let us say, then, that M. Henry de Blowitz, correspondent of the Times at Paris, refers to the probable existence of a conspiracy of which M. Deroulede will be the chief. Some of the. most prominent personalities will probably be compromised. Serious eventualities are anticipated.

Mr. White. There’s a message from Germany saying that the Emperor is unwell.

Mr. Smith. You can put that in also. What - do the French papers say about it?

Mr. White. They reprint the news without comment.

Mr. Smith. Add, that the silence of the French press on the subject of Emperor William’s illness is regarded at Berlin as far from friendly in the light of recent developments. Well, Mr. White, is that enough?

Mr. White. Oh, about eight or ten lines wanted.

Mr. Brown (Mopping himself with his handkerchief). Oh, Lord; isn’t it hot?

Mr. Smith. Put down that it is hot in London.

Mr. White. That is well already cabled that yesterday.

Mr. Smith.

– We all have to pay for it.

Senator SAYERS:

– The honorable senator only pays when he buys a newspaper. Under this agreement, the Commonwealth would have to pay whether the news was what we wanted or not. Already there is another combine in the field. The Press Cable Association cannot be very powerful. In Australia there are about 800 newspapers, and surely they can get news without going cap in hand to the proprietor of the Argus. That has been the gist of the cry raised here this evening. In various States I have asked the proprietors and the editors of newspapers why they did not give more news from the other States, and in several States I have asked why they did not give more Queensland news. “ The people of this State,” I was told, “ are not interested in what takes place in another State. We give the news which we think our readers require. There is another newspaper next door, and if we are not giving the news which they require, they can subscribe to it, and perhaps get different news. But we find that the news which we get and pay for is that which the people require.” In these circumstances, I think it is hardly fair to ask the public to subscribe £6,000 to subsidize a cable news service. I do not intend to dwell too long on the subject, because it has been fairly threshed out. My attention was arrested by the following paragraph, on page 15 of the report : -

The Committee, on its formation, at once sent out to the Australian press a circular letter inviting information and suggestions as to the operations of the Association, and generally, as to the objects of the Committee. The circular was sent to every daily and weekly paper in the Commonwealth. The number so sent exceeded 800, but these elicited only about 90 replies, and of these go, not one-fourth expressed dissatisfaction.

As regards the extent to which the cable service was availed of, I find the following paragraph on page 10: -

Victoria seems fairly divided in opinion, though the provincial dailies appear to be dissatisfied generally.

Queensland and Tasmanian Country Press, with a few exceptions, seem fairly well satisfied with present arrangements.

ANTI-SOCIALIST FUND.

London, 31st October.

The Anti-Socialist Union Fund, inaugurated early this week by the Standard to pay the election expenses of unionist working men, already totals 57,000s. The movement is showing great activity, and promises to be an important factor at the general elections.

The South Australian Register of the same date published the same item in the following form -

ANTI-SOCIALIST FUND.

Important Election Factor.

London, 31st October.

The Anti-Socialist Fund now amounts to 57,000 shillings, and is showing great activity. The movement promises to be an important factor at the forthcoming general elections.

I said to Mr. Mackinnon -

You will observe that in the Advertiser cable the words “ union “ and “ inaugurated early this week bv the Standard to pay the election expenses of unionist workmen” appear, and that they do not appear in the Register. Would those cables come from the same source?

His reply was, “Absolutely.” That was the truth. The only explanation is that one of the cables was garbled. One had more padding put into it than the other. In other words, one had imparted to it a little colouring for local consumption.

Senator Chataway:

– And the Advertiser was one of the supporters of the Labour party !

Senator PEARCE:

– I advise the honorable senator to look up the file of the Advertiser at about the time of the last elections. He will then see whether it supported the Labour party. There are one or two other points upon which I had intended to comment, but 1 shall be brief. Senator - Gould objects to the subsidy proposed, but says nothing about the subsidy granted by the Government of which he was an earnest supporter - a subsidy which, as I have pointed out, has enabled them to effect a great saving, and to secure increased profit to the extent of £15 per week. The honorable senator ‘ never made any objection to that subsidy - a subsidy of which no other Association was offered a share, and which it was not possible for any other Association to have a chance to share. The granting of it was, I say again, altogether wrong ; because it meant using the State cable merely as a lever to put money into private pockets, and, incidentally, to squeeze the Eastern Extension Company. I have before me various journals from which I intended to quote; but I shall forbear, the hour, being rather late. One ‘ is the Colonial Office Journal, edited by W. H. Mercer. I should like my honorable friends opposite to look at it. It contains an article on the question of press cables, and it is interesting to observe how our situation in this respect strikes a writer in what is certainly not a Labour journal. Indeed, this is rather a journal of a Conservative type. The writer speaks with some scorn of the fact that Australia is content to get its news from one source only. I also have before me the National Review, for May, 1910. This is by no means a Labour organ. A writer in it sets out the facts regarding our cable service, and says -

You, I said, may be surprised to hear this. But you will not be one quarter as surprised as would be 99 per cent, of the people in Sydney and Melbourne. For though the service is in working order and available on very easy terms for any newspaper in Australia-

Senator Chataway:

– Hear, hear !

Senator PEARCE:

– I was waiting for that “Hear, hear!” The writer is, how ever, referring to the new independent Press Cable Association ! He goes on -

Not a metropolitan paper dares use it. Bathurst and Ipswich get their news now-a-days eighteen hours before Sydney and Brisbane - get a good deal of news that Sydney and Brisbane do not get at all. Brisbane merchants I know are studying the Ipswich papers to get information which will put them well ahead of their rivals in Sydney and Melbourne. That sounds almost impossible probably. Can you imagine a Londoner having to subscribe to the Uxbridge Guardian in order to get foreign news not to be found in the Times, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, Standard or Chronicle) It is a fact, and here is the explanation of it.

Then the writer quotes that article in the agreement insisted upon by Mr. Mackinnon’s syndicate, which binds subscribers not to take cablednews from any other concern. The preliminary remarks of the writer of the article I purposely left out, in the hope of eliciting a “Hear, hear!” from some honorable member opposite. They refer, however, to the independent Press Cable Service, which has at last enabled the people of Australia to get news from other sources. By setting up competition between these two concerns, it has enabled us to get something near the truth as to what is going on outside this country. I trust that the Senate will agree to the motion.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 1948

ADJOURNMENT

Conduct of Business

Motion (by Senator Pearce) proposed -

That the Senate do now adjourn.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

– I cannot see why we should adjourn at this hour. As there is still so much business to proceed with, we ought to sit a little longer. The Government have many notices on the business-paper. Why cannot we do something more to-night?

Senator Pearce:

– The other House took two days to pass the motion which has been disposed of by the Senate in one.

Senator RAE:

– I protest against coming from the other side of the continent to sit only a few hours. Of course, the Government must conduct the business in their own way ; but if we do not proceed with measures more expeditiously, the result will be that, at the tail end of the session, there will either be a slaughter of innocents, or Bills will be passed very hurriedly.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 10.9.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 24 August 1910, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1910/19100824_senate_4_56/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate24 August 1910

QUESTION

MOLASSES

Senator CHATAWAY:QUEENSLAND

Senator PEARCE:Minister for Defence · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

QUESTION

STATUTORY RULES

Senator KEATING:TASMANIA

Senator PEARCE:ALP

QUESTION

CENSUS QUESTIONS

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:for Senator Millen

Senator FINDLEY:Minister (without portfolio) · VICTORIA · ALP

QUESTION

MAP OF AUSTRALIA

Senator KEATING:

Senator FINDLEY:ALP

PAPERS

NAVIGATION BILL

COMMONWEALTH CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION BILL

Senator PEARCE:Minister of Defence · Western Australia · ALP

Senator Givens:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Stewart:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Stewart:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator de Largie:

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

Senator Needham:

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

Senator Findley:

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

Senator Findley:

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

Senator Guthrie:

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

Senator Story:

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:

Senator VARDON:South Australia

Senator SAYERS:Queensland

QUESTION

CABLE NEWS SUBSIDY

Senator PEARCE:Western AustraliaMinister of Defence · ALP

Senator Vardon:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Vardon:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Chataway:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Vardon:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Lt Colonel Sir Albert Gould:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Fraser:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Fraser:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Vardon:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator E J RUSSELL:VICTORIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Vardon:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Chataway:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Walker:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Walker:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Lt Colonel Sir Albert Gould:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Chataway:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Givens:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Givens:

Senator PEARCE:

Senator Walker:

Senator PEARCE:

Senate
24 August 1910

Senator CHATAWAY:
QUEENSLAND

Senator PEARCE:
Minister for Defence · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · ALP

Senator KEATING:
TASMANIA

Senator PEARCE:
ALP

Senator Lt Colonel Sir ALBERT GOULD:
for Senator Millen

Senator FINDLEY:
Minister (without portfolio) · VICTORIA · ALP

Senator FINDLEY:
ALP

Senator PEARCE:
Minister of Defence · Western Australia · ALP

Senator VARDON:
South Australia

Senator SAYERS:
Queensland

Senator PEARCE:
Western AustraliaMinister of Defence · ALP

Senator E J RUSSELL:
VICTORIA · ALP; NAT from 1917

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

Senator CHATAWAY:
Queensland

Senator O’KEEFE:
Tasmania