House of Representatives
26 August 1909

3^rd Parliament · 4^th Session

PAPERS
QUESTION
- POSTAL COMMISSION’S EXPENSES
QUESTION
- POTATO BLIGHT: STATE AGREEMENTS
QUESTION
- OLD-AGE PENSIONS
QUESTION
- SORTERS, GENERAL POST OFFICE, SYDNEY
QUESTION
- FEDERAL CONTROL OF MONOPOLIES
QUESTION
- TARIFF : PERMANENT BOARD
LEGITIMATION OF CHILDREN BILL
ADJOURNMENT
- Imperial Defence Conference - Additions, New Works and Buildings Estimates

Mr. Speaker took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 2651

PAPERS

The Clerk laid upon the table the following paper : -

Postmaster-General’s Department - Yearly Expenditure and Revenue Statements - Year 1907. Return to an Order of the House, dated 1st April,1908.

Ordered to be printed.

Mr. GROOM laid upon the table.

Manufactures Encouragement Act - Return of Bounty paid during year 1908-9.

page 2651

QUESTION

POSTAL COMMISSION’S EXPENSES

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · Protectionist

– On the 13th August, the honorable member for Fremantle asked for information regarding the expenses of the members of the Postal Commission.I am now able to add to the replies already given the following details: - 2. (a) Amounts claimed or paid to each member of the above-named Commission as expenses for Saturdays, Sundays, and Mondays, . whilst sitting in Melbourne during the present session : -

Dates of Saturdays, Sundays, and Mondays for which expenses were claimed : -

Senator de Largie

Saturdays - 29th May ; 26th June.

Sundays - 30th May; 27th June. Mondays - 31st May; 28th June.

Mr Storrer and Mr Webster:

–

Saturdays - 29th May; 26th June; 10th July;17th July; 31st July;7th August.

Sundays - 30th May; 27th June;11th July;18th July; 1st, 8th August.

Mondays - 31st May ; 28th June ;12th July ;19th July; 2nd, 9th August. (Expenses were paid for Sunday only when the Commission sat on both Saturday and Monday.)

DEFENCE.

Right to Criticise. - Perth High School Cadets

Mr HALL:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister of Defence, upon notice -

Referring to the newspaper report of a reunion recently held at Goulburn, at which addresses were delivered by General Gordon and Colonel Ryrie, a prospective Ministerial candidate at next election, will he have inquiries made as to whether the General did condemn the Fisher scheme and approve the Deakin scheme on the occasion referred to?
Will the Minister have it made clear to the Military Forces that every soldier in the ranks has the same rights of criticism as the General?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

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

Yes.
Standing orders 115 and 116 of the Military Forces deal with this subject. They are as follow : - 115. Officers and soldiers are forbidden to publish or communicate to the press any information, without special authority, either directly or indirectly. They will be held responsible for all statements contained in communications to their friends which may subsequently be published in the press. 116. They are not to attempt to prejudge questions under investigation by the publication, anonymously or otherwise, of their opinions, and they are not to attempt to raise a discussion in public about orders, regulations, or instructions issued by their superiors.

Mr HEDGES:
FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister of Defence, upon notice -

Is he aware that a charge of7s. per term, equal to21s. per annum, is being chargedto each cadet in the Perth High School Cadet Corps, as the cost of military instructor?
Will he state if the charge as stated is made by his Department to the Perth High School and to all other schools in Western Australia ?
Is he aware that a letter complaining nf this charge was sent to his Department on 18th June last, and -that a reply was sent on 28th June, letter No. 5959, stating that the complaint was receiving attention?
Will he state if the letter is still receiving attention ?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

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

Yes.
No, the Department has nothing whatever to do with the charge made. It appears from the reports received that the head masters of certain secondary schools in Perth, instead of accepting the services of the instructors told off for duty with the Cadet Corps established in connexion with the schools, preferred to make a private arrangement with an ex-military instructor, and, in order to meet the cost of such instructor’s salary, a charge was made by the school authorities on the parents of the boys who are cadets.
Delay occurred in obtaining replies because of the absence of the Commandant from Western Australia.
A detailed reply will be sent to the honorable member at once.

CLOTHING FACTORY.

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the PostmasterGeneral, ufon notice -

Has his attention been called to a press report of the evidence given in Sydney recently by an officer of his Department before the Postal Commission to the effect that a saving of 10 per cent. and more satisfactory work would be secured by having the Department clothing work done at the State Clothing Factory, and that it would be a good thing for the Commonwealth to have a clothing factory for its own purposes ?
Is it proposed to establish a Commonwealth Clothing Factory for such purposes, and, if so, when is it expected that such factory will be brought into existence?

Sir JOHN QUICK:
Postmaster-General · BENDIGO, VICTORIA · Protectionist

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

No, but when the official minutes of the evidence are available the statements of the witness will be perused.
No.

page 2653

QUESTION

POTATO BLIGHT: STATE AGREEMENTS

Mr LIVINGSTON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister of Externa) Affairs, upon notice -

Whether an agreement has been made with the various States allowing potatoes from clean districts to be admitted as before?

Mr GROOM:
Minister for External Affairs · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · Protectionist

– No agreement has been made in respect of this matter between the Federal and State Governments, nor has the former any official knowledge of such as between the States. It is presumed that the references that appeared in the daily press in regard to the matter are correct.

page 2653

QUESTION

OLD-AGE PENSIONS

Maitland Hospital Telephone - Claims Unpaid at Death.

Dr LIDDELL:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

Whether, seeing that the Maitland Hospital, which is supported by voluntary contributions, is compelled to provide board and lodging and treatment for old-age pensioners, free of charge (the pensioners being debarred from drawing any pension while residing in hospital), and seeing that this charitable institution receives no support from the Commonwealth in the form of subsidy, but is entirely dependent on the State Government in this respect, he can see his way to grant the use of the telephone free of charge?

Sir JOHN QUICK:
Protectionist

– The Maitland Hospital, in common with other charitable ‘institutions supported wholly or partly by public subscriptions, is, in accordance with the telephone regulations, entitled to be charged only half rates for its telephones. I cannot see my way to recommend that such telephones should be supplied free of charge, nor that exceptional treatment should be given in any particular case.

Mr SINCLAIR:
MORETON, QUEENSLAND

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

Whether any decision has been arrived at as to the method of disposing of any unpaid portion of a pensioner’s claim under the Commonwealth Old-age Pensions Act at the time of the death of such pensioner, and whether the pensioner’s friends would be entitled to collect the unpaid amount?

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Protectionist

– The regulations under the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Act provide that an undrawn instalment of a pension due at the’ date of a pensioner’s decease, if applied for within twenty-one days after such decease, may be paid to such person as, in the opinion of the Deputy Commissioner, has an equitable claim thereto, provided that no payment shall be made of any amount of pension accrued after the last pay-day preceding the pensioner’s decease.

page 2653

QUESTION

SORTERS, GENERAL POST OFFICE, SYDNEY

Mr CHANTER:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

Is it a fact that the sorters in Sydney G.P.O. work 9 and 10 hours on public holidays, including King’s and Prince of Wales’ Birthdays ?
Is this state of things existing on account of the Department allowing the newspaper proprietors to send their evening edition six hours after the closing time on public holidays?
Is it a fact that sorters on the paper staff who attend at 6 a.m. are kept sorting newspapers after 8 p.m.?
Is it a fact that sorters who attend at 6 a.m. on Saturdays are detained until 3 o’clock to deal with bulk postage matter?
Is the Minister aware that bulk matter received after 4 p.m. on Friday should not be dealt with until the following Monday?
Is he aware that the paper staff are nine men less than they were six years ago ? Why are the. vacancies not filled?
Is it a fact that the supervising staff do not .work the same hours as the sorting staff?
Is it a fact that sorters who work from 9 a.m. until 8 p.m. and later, including those on the broken staff, who work on incoming English mail days, are not’ given the refreshments allowance?
Will the Minister see that the sorters get the same allowance as those who work similar hours in other branches of the service?
Is it a fact that a number of sorters on the paper staff in the despatch room have been given a week’s notice that, unless they pass the test according to the letter system, junior sorters on the letter staff will be placed as their seniors ?
Is he aware that there are two systems of sorting in the same room, and the paper sorters would be required to memorize the two systems?
Why are these sorters not tested in the system worked by them at the present time?
Is the Minister aware that when a vacancy occurred in the mail officers’ grade a clerical officer who had left the mail branch was asked to come back and accept the position?
If so, will the Minister see that when these vacancies occur they are filled by despatching officers in the General Division, according to the Commissioner’s classification scheme?

Sir JOHN QUICK:
Protectionist

– The Deputy Postmaster General, Sydney, has supplied the following information : -

Half the newspaper staff in the Despatch Branch work from 8 hours to 9 hours on alternate holidays, including King’s and Prince of Wales’ Birthdays, but not Xmas Day and Good Friday.
Not wholly. Allowing newspaper proprietors to post their evening editions at the same hours as on week days is responsible for over two hours of the total mentioned under (1).

Time off in lieu is given for work performed on public holidays.

Yes, occasionally, when work is not completed at S p.m. ; but the detention seldom exceeds 15 to 30 minutes. On the other hand, there are occasions when the work is completed and sorters are allowed to leave before 8 p.m. These remarks apply to both letter and paper sorting’ staffs. As regards the paper staff, it might be .mentioned that they get a full day off per fortnight to make up for longer hours worked. In both cases, although the hours extend over the day from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m., officers are not continuously on duty, broken hours being necessary to meet mail arrangements in the public interests. The fortnightly hours seldom exceed the aggregate laid down by the Public Service Commissioner. In all cases where Regulation hours are exceeded, time off !is allowed or over-time paid.
When work is not completed at 2.30 p.m., paper sorters are detained, but not later than 3 p.m., to deal with second-hand matter, including bulk postings of advertising matter posted before 4 p.m., Fridays, and of newspapers. These officers are allowed a break of one hour and a quarter for a meal.
The Department does not undertake to deal with bulk postings, other than newspapers, posted after 4 p.m., on Fridays, before Monday, but, if time allows and such postings can be dealt with on Saturdays without extra strain on the sorting staff, this is done.
The paper staff is not numerically weaker than it was six years ago, but the increase in the volume of ma’il matter has rendered a larger staff necessary, and this will be supplied when additional hands provided fox on Estimates are made available.
As regards the supervising staff, mail officers work practically the same hours as the sorting staff. Supervisors and assistant supervisors who are classed in the Clerical Division, work through shifts to suit the exigencies of the branch.
The refreshment allowance depends upon the necessity for an additional meal to be had away from home through unforeseen detention. No such necessity has arisen in the case of sorters who work from 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. on incoming English mail days, and no applications for a refreshment allowance have been made by them. Any application made would be dealt with on its merits.
See answer to (8).
None of the paper staff sorters have been given such a notice. By Gazette notice , on 1st May, all General Division officers, including sorters, were notified of the test conditions governing promotion to the position of senior sorter. In case of a vacancy occurring in the senior staff- and a comparative junior negotiating the test, all those senior to him are given a week’s notice to prove their qualifications before such junior officer is promoted.
The preliminary systems of sorting on letters and newspapers differ somewhat, but arrangements are in .progress to render them uniform, as soon as the additional space now being provided foi is available. The memorizing of the preliminary letter-sorting system, in addition to that prevailing on the newspapers, is meanwhile not considered an impossible or even difficult achievement for those desirous of earning promotion to the position of senior sorter.
The preliminary system on the lettersorting has been selected as the one, proficiency in which proves the possession of the necessary qualities for efficiently filling the position of sorter or senior sorter, and the conditions laid down in the Gazette notice for the test are intended to secure the appointment of the best qualified men.
No such- question is known to have been asked.
Vacancies on the mail officers’ grade have so far always been filled by promotions of officers from the Despatching Office’s staff, and there is no knowledge of any intention to depart from this practice.

page 2654

QUESTION

FEDERAL CONTROL OF MONOPOLIES

By 270 A.D. the’ Emperor Aurelian had made unionism compulsory for life, so as to prevent the able men from withdrawing to better themselves by free work individually.

Honorable members opposite are there, fore doing nothing new. This has all been fried before, as is shown by the date given in the extract.

He also gave a wine dole, and gave bread in place of corn, to save the wastrel the trouble of baking. In the fourth century every member, and all his sons, and all his property, belonged inalienably to the trades union.

That is what the Labour party are aiming at now. They want to own the people, body, soul, business, and everything else -

By 369 A.D. all property, however acquired, belonged to the union. Yet still men would leave all they had to get out of the hateful bondage -

They did not like it in those days - and so the unpopular trades, such as the moneyers, in 380 A.D:, and the bakers in 408, were recruited by requiring that every one who married the daughter of a unionist must join his father-in-law’s business -

I suppose that is what honorable members opposite want us to come to again. The author does not mention what wages such a man received. He goes on to say - and thus the Roman Empire was an immense gaol, where all worked, not according to taste, but by force.

The only trouble I see about it is that there are numerous people running around who could not be made to work, even by force. Evidently in those days the Romans had discovered something that we know nothing about. They found out how to make men unionists, and to force them’ to work, whereas unionists nowadays will not even obey the award of an arbitration court, and I know of no means of forcing them to do so -

There was but one end possible to this accumulation of move upon move, on the false basis of compulsory trade unionism, and work under cost for the protelariat. The whole system was so destructive of character and of wealth that it ruined the Empire.

If t this sort of thing ruined the Roman Empire, so far back as that, what guarantee have we that it would not ruin the British Empire now ? Perhaps that is what honorable members opposite wish to see, as they are advocating exactly what was advocated in those days -

The one movement which grew steadily as Rome declined, and which was intimately connected with every stage of that decline, was the compulsion of labour and the maintenance of the wastrel as a burden on society.

Only a few weeks ago I pointed out in this House that unionism took the wastrel or the non-competent man by the hand, and said “.Join the union.” No inquiry is made as to his competence.

If private businesses are taken over by the Commonwealth, and run by the members of the Labour party, the same thing will happen. Men will be kept on, not because they are competent, or needed, but because they will have votes to cast at election time. The writer continues -

It was that which pulled down the greatest political organization by the crushing of initiative and character, and by the steady drain on all sorts of wealth.

That is undoubtedly true. It would be only the flourishing industries that the Labour party would seek to acquire. An industry which was hardly paying wages would be left severely alone. I commend to honorable members the concluding passage in the pamphlet from which I have quoted -

Australians should read, mark, learn, before it is too late. Fools only learn by their own experience. Wise men learn by the experience of others.

Mr Mauger:

– That is another matter.

Mr CHANTER:

Mr KELLY:

– The ex-Minister’s colleague is naturally anxious that I should not be allowed to proceed withthis matter ; but I hope he will permit me to do so. The only section of the report at which I am cavilling dealt with the hiring out of certain horses bought by the Government, and it is ridiculous to suppose that two officers of the Defence Department have any views on the business merits of a proposal of that character. The report is signed by the Hon. James Hutchison, member for Hindmarsh, and Minister in the late Labour Administration. It contains this statement -

It is proposed that no horse belonging to the Defence Department shall be hired to any person unless such person can satisfy an officer that the hirer has good stabling, good feed, and that the horse will be properly cared for. A regular inspection will be made to see that the horses are in good health, free from lameness, and in good condition.

Then comes this passage, which I particularly commend to the attention of honorable members -

Any horse showing signs of sickness or overwork will be spelled at the various depots, and a horse from a unit will take its place until the horse is fit for work.

This is an encouragement to hirers of Government horses to get as much work as possible out of the animals, because they are told that when one set is knocked up they can get a fresh relay. That is a fine business arrangement !

Mr Crouch:

– Is it provided that horses used in bakers’ carts shall not be driven faster than 4 miles an hour?

Mr KELLY:

– If there were such a provision, it would only show that the honorable member for Hindmarsh had regard to the interests of the Commonwealth in the control of its business !

Mr McDonald:

– Is the honorable member aware that Switzerland hires out its military horses?

Mr KELLY:

– I am not aware that Switzerland lets out its public horses to private individuals on the understanding that animals driven to death will be replaced with fresh horses. Noother illustration would better serve to show the absurdity of allowing honorahle members opposite to manage the business enterprises of Australia. Until information is forthcoming as to what is meant by the term “ monopoly,” on what conditions it is proposed to acquire monopolies for the Commonwealth, and what guarantees as to capacity for management can be given by honorable members opposite, the House will be wise to have nothing to do with the proposal of the honorable member for Wer- riwa. Honorable members opposite may well be allowed to win whatever applause they may by bringing forward suggestions of this kind, where such clap-trap will go down without contradiction, and where approbation may be secured from those who have not the time or ability to properly study these questions for themselves.

Mr SPENCE:
Darling

.- The speeches of the honorable members for Fremantle and Wentworth contain large admissions of the strength of the case of the honorable member for Werriwa. If nothing more can be said against the motion than they have said, the House must carry it by an enormous majority. Many of the remarks of the honorable member for Fremantle seemed to have no connexion with the subject. Had he studied the history of the Roman Empire more closely, he would know that, in its most brilliant period, its business affairs were conducted by unions, which were held responsible for the laches of their members. Still, these facts are only remotely connected with modern social conditions, and have no bearing on the proposal for the nationalization of monopolies. The shareholders and directors of our combines, trusts, and monopolies, will read with great amusement the statements of their champions. They will laugh when they hear that it has been said that their great aim is to increase employment and to better the conditions of labour, and will think the members of the House very silly persons for listening to such remarks. Every one knows that the chief object of combination is the increasing of profits by the perfection of organization. When the whisky mills of the United States fell into the hands of a combination, only twelve of the forty-nine were kept open, the industry being centralized where the largest returns could be obtained, the number of its employes being consequently lessened. We, who favour, the nationalization of monopolies, recognise that their success is due to superior organization, but if they were State-owned, they would be managed by brains similar to those which now manage them, which would be a guarantee of future success. The honorable member for Wentworth spoke flippantly, because be knows that the facts are against him. He suggested that we, on this side of the House, should personally supervise and control all State-owned industries, and he asked what business knowledge we have. Honorable members opposite associate business enterprise wholly with profit-making.

They would have a new light on the subject were they to read what the workingmen of Belgium - a very poorly-paid class of employes - have done, not with the aid of thousands or of millions of pounds of capital, but by the economical management of their pence and shillings.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

page 2666

QUESTION

TARIFF : PERMANENT BOARD

Mr MAUGER:
Maribyrnong

.- I move -

That, with a view to securing the most accurate information for Parliament in relation to anomalies in the present Tariff - the continuous watching of the operations of the Tariff as to preference, and questions relating to the effect of duties on industries - the relationship of duties, on raw material to the manufactured article - the inauguration and encouragement of new industries, or the development of natural resources for manufacturing and agricultural purposes, a permanent competent body on the lines of the British Board of Trade, which shall include representatives of the principal staple interests affected by Customs Tariff Acts, should be at once appointed by the Government.

– It never will.

Mr MAUGER:

– It never will, unless we take steps to obtain proper information, and appoint a tribunal to collect the information, which is quite possible and reasonable, and practicable, as I shall show directly.

Mr.Page. -What was the Tariff Commission appointed for but to get that information for us ?

Mr MAUGER:

– The Tariff Commission demonstrated clearly the need for a body constituted as I propose. What should we have done without the Tariff Commission? We did not altogether follow their proposals, but they certainly gave us an amount of information and guiding without which we should have been in a sorry plight. My contention is that the principle underlying the investigations and reports of the Tariff Commission should be permanent - that we should have somebody continuously at work ascertaining the benefits of the Tariff, anomalies in the Tariff, and the possibilities of establishing and encourag ing new industries. Take the vexed question of the relationship of rawmaterial to the manufactured article, which brings me to the anomaly mentioned by the honorable member for Melbourne. There hasbeen a great agitation in reference to the duties which we put upon piece goods. Our decisions were of a drag-net character. We put duties not only upon woollen piece goods used by men, and manufactured in our own factories, but on dress piece goodsthat we thought came into competition with woollen piece goods. That is said to behaving, and I believe is having, a very detrimental effect upon a number of our manufacturers.

Dr Maloney:

– It is causing more cotton goods to be made and used, and so doing our own trade an injury.

Mr MAUGER:

– At a deputation which waited upon the Minister of Customs recently, it was urged that the effect of the duty has been really, as the honorable member for Melbourne says, to prevent the better class of piece goods being used by the average working woman, and not in any way to protect the Australian manufacturer. The woollen mills declare that if there can be secured to them the manufacture of tweeds - woollen piece goods wornby men - they will have a market that they will not be likely to overtake for a considerable time unless new factories arestarted, and I believe that they offer no opposition to women’s piece goods being considerably reduced in duty, if not made free altogether. But the difficulty is in discriminating. Even the cotton piece goods are manufacturedin pattern, and style, and thickness, in such a way that it is extremely difficult to discriminate between them and the lower classes of woollen goods manufactured not only in Australia but in other parts of the world. It is a matter for expert advice, decision, and vigilance, because there is no doubt that as the result of this anomaly a very great amount of woollen goods come into Australia designated as cotton goods. The Minister of Trade and Customs, Senator Sir Robert Best, said, in reply to the deputation that waited on him -

I must confess I am very sorry to hear the rather gloomy tale told in connexion with this industry. Of course, the representations that are made are entitled to the most serious consideration. As to the statements regarding dumping, I know, from what you have said and from other inquiries I have made, that there is much room for complaint in this direction. I am sorry, indeed, if the provisions of our law at present are not sufficient to deal with the cases that have been made out.

He appears to admit that a very strong case had been made out -

It will be my duty to further take into consideration this question of dumping, wilh the object, if possible, of granting some relief. Stress has been laid on the very low prices at which the goods are invoiced, but X would point out that the duties are not necessarily charged on the prices set out in the invoices, but on what would be the real value of the goods at the port of export.

The mode of arriving at the value of goods in Australia under our Customs Act has proved inoperative and ineffective in America, where a very radical and farreaching change has just been made. These goods are exported, say, from Berlin, at the’ end of the season, when their value in Berlin is nothing like their real market value. It is on their value at the time they are exported that our Customs House has the right to base the duty. In America, as I say, a radical change has now been made, and a description of it is given in the London Times of 20th July, which contains a special supplement devoted entirely to the new American Tariff and its incidence and effects. The new provision in the American Tariff Act is as follows :-

The actual market value or wholesale price, as defined by law, qf any imported merchandise which is consigned for sale in the United States, or which is sold for exportation to the United States, and which is not actually sold or freely offered for sale in usual wholesale quantities in the open market of the country of exportation to all purchasers, shall not in any case be appraised at less than the wholesale price at which such or similar imported merchandise is actually sold or freely offered for sale in usual wholesale quantities in the United States in the open market, due allowance by deduction being made for estimated duties thereon, cost of transportation, insurance, and other necessary expenses from the place of shipment to the place of delivery, and a commission not exceeding 6 per centum, if any tas been paid or contracted to be paid.

And it is added that -

The President is authorized to appoint a Board of nine general appraisers of merchandise, the salary of each to be $9,000 (£1,800) per annum, who shall possess all the powers of a Circuit Court of the United States. To these genera] appraisers all cases of dissatisfaction with the amount and rates of duties levied by the appraisers and assistant appraisers at the various ports will be referred. This Board will exercise both judicial and inquisitorial functions. Appeal must be made by the importers to this Board within 15 days, or the original duties and charges will stand.

Mr HUME COOK:
BOURKE, VICTORIA · PROT

– That is not the point.

Mr HUTCHISON:

I have been in the trade for seventeen years, eight of which were prior to Federation, nine years of which were since the foundation of that State and under Protection. During the Government of Mr. Reid it was usual for trade to look up for the new season in August, and by September full steam might be said to be the term right on to Christmas. Work would then bc slow until the completion of stock-taking at the end of January. February would seea fresh start made in the factories’, which would continue right on until the end of May. From August to Christmas it was common to work a considerable amount of overtime; indeed, I have known men to dispute with the employer for being asked to work on Saturday afternoon. After Federation, things, from the trade point of view, seem to have been reversed. For a couple of years there was absolutely nothing. Of course, there was the drought, which no doubt affected trade. But that unpleasant condition is at an end, but yet we have not recovered as far as clothing is concerned. Last year, October was on us before trade began to get way on, and even after that men did not get full time; also after Christmas it was well on to March before men were being sought for. All this time the factories have done practically no overtime.

Yet we were told by the honorable members for Maribyrnong, Corio, and others, that the industry was languishing, and needed higher duties. My correspon dent shows that business was flourishing in New South Wales under Free Trade conditions, and that since protective duties have been applied to it, there has been a decline. He continues -

I know that there are some in the trade who will dispute this, so I have got Mr. Hine to search the evidence of an employé of a member of the Cutters and Trimmers Union, named Ford, who before the Wages Board gives similar evidence. Cross-examined by Mr. Thom, he says, in answer to the following questions : -

Were you in Sydney five years ago ? - For about 12 months.

Did you find the trade verymuch the same kind of thing, so far as conditions were concerned, five years ago? - Something the same.

How would you describe the work conditions in factories of five years ago and to-day? - About ten years ago I came over from Melbourne. I put in ten months at Wallace’s as a stock cutter; I left there and went to Finlayson’s, and then went back to Melbourne. It was even better then than now. You could get more money, and you did not have to work so hard.

Why do you think it is worse now in that way ; is it competition is keener ? - I cannot say that.

Your view is that conditions have not changed for the better? - No, they have not.

When the matter was before the Court some five years ago they granted a minimum wage of 50s. Could you give me any reason why a higher wage should be granted now than five years ago? - The purchasing power of money is less now.

Put that aside - is theTe any reason you can suggest, supposing the Court was right then, they came to the conclusion that 50s. was a fair minimum, why it should be very much more now? - I cannot say. I was not here five years ago. Things were much better ten years ago.

What money did you get then? - I got 55s. at Wallace’s, and£3 10s. at Finlayson’s. I cut under agreement.

You get £3 now? - Yes. That is what I got when I was out of my apprenticeship.

Ford is employed at the State Clothing Factory. He has been there about twelve months. In answer to Mr. Beeby, he says -

How does work pan out at the Clothing Factory ; are vou constant ? - Since I have been there I have averaged about 35s. per week. I have put in about seven months. That is as well as I can remember.

Does the work vary at all there in quantity? - They have two permanent men and a permanent trimmer there all the year round. When the rush starts they out on three extra cutters and an extra trimmer. We are only practically temporary hands. My experience has been seven months in the year.

He refers to other evidence, and concludes with the statement that -

The clothing trade in Sydney is in a worse state to-day than it was ten years ago.

As the time allotted to private members’ business has almost expired, I ask leave to continue my remarks at a later date.

Leave granted: debate adjourned.

page 2681

LEGITIMATION OF CHILDREN BILL

Motion (by Dr. Maloney) agreed to -

That leave be given to bring in a Bill for an Act for the Legitimation of Children by Registration.

Sitting suspended from 6.28 to 7.45 p.m.

SUPPLY(Formal).

Federal Capital - Western Australia : Admission of Japanese Doctor : Influx of Italians - Size of Wheat Bags - Old-age Pensions Act : Administration - Electoral Rolls and Application Forms - Post Office Clock, Corowa - Payments for Telegraph Line Repairs - State Quarantine : Potatoes - Tasmanian Mail Service : Stanley.

Question - That Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair, and that the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply - proposed.

Mr HALL:
Werriwa

– I desire to call the attention of the House to a matter which certainly affects my own constituency, but is more substantial than are most grievances which are ordinarily dealt with on this motion. I refer to the delay that has taken place in the negotiations relative to the Federal Capital. The failure to make progress with them certainly does not lie at the door of either the present Government or its predecessors. We have had laid upon the table a copy of the communications that have passed between the Commonwealth and the Government of New South Wales, and I propose to draw attention to the dates of the several letters in order to show that, whilst the negotiations on the part of the Commonwealth have proceeded with sufficient rapidity, . the Premier of New South Wales seems to be afflicted with the “tired feeling,” and to be quite unable to deal with this important and urgent question with that reasonable despatch that we might fairly expect. The first communication relative to the matter was addressed by the ex-Prime Minister to the Premier of New South Wales on 16th March last. In that letter the honorable member for Wide Bay pointed out that it was desired that there should be no further alienation of Crown lands, and no granting of long leasesof land within the area indicated by the surveyor, Mr. Scriviner. No reply was made to that communication until 30th April. It is true that the Government of New South Wales took steps to comply with the Prime Minister’s request, but, although on 31st March there was published in the State Government Gazette an order reserving from sale generally and from lease any of the lands within the proposed Federal area, the Premier did not advise the Commonwealth Government of that action until a month later. On 2nd April the ex-Prime Minister addressed a further letter to the Premier of New South Wales intimating that his Government was anxious to enter into negotiations as early as possible on this important subject, and. would be pleased to have a map showing the unalienated Crown landsin the district and the nature of the occupation, if any, of them. Save for a mere acknowledgment of its receipt, no reply to that letter was sent until 18th May, so that there was a delay of over a month.

Mr Bowden:

– It would take some time to compile a map of the kind asked for.

Mr HALL:

– If the Premier of New South Wales had realized the urgency of the matter, the map could have been prepared within considerably less time than was actually occupied. On 20th July last, the present Prime Minister wrote to the Premier of New South Wales inviting attention to the correspondence to which i have already referred, and asking for certain information upon the subject. That letter was not answered until 5th August. The delay was considerable, having regard to the fact that we have, at our disposal, but a few months within which to deal with a mass of important business, and that if the next step in regard to the establishment of the Capital be not taken within two or three months, the whole subject may have to be re-opened by the next Parliament. I admit that the letter written by the Prime Minister involved some legal considerations, but I cannot help thinking that if Mr. Wade, or any other lawyer, were requested by an important clientto furnish an opinion upon an equally difficult question, he would not ask. him to wait so long to obtain it. The reply from Mr. Wade, dated 5th August, reached Melbourne on Friday, 6th August, and on the succeeding Tuesday the Prime Minister, in answer to a question which I put, said that he had considered the communication, and that he had obtained from the Attorney-General a memorandum on the subject which would be sent to the Premier of New South Wales. In other words, the letter from the Premier of New South Wales did not reach the Prime Minister until Friday, 6th August, and on the following Tuesday a memorandum in reply was prepared and ready to be sent to him. Under the heading of “An Unopened Letter” there appears in to-day’s Age a statement in regard to that communication. Mr. Wade apparently was so busy while in Melbourne that he allowed it to remain unopened for several days. The paragraph reads -

Sidney, Wednesday.

The Premier stated in the Legislative Assembly to-day, in answer to a question as to whether anything further had transpired regarding the granting of the territory for the federal capital, that while he was in Melbourne a letter reached him from the Federal Government in regard to the matter. The letter was in reply to one from him about ten days previously, but at Melbourne he had no time to open it. To-morrow or next day it would be laid before the Cabinet.

We have a right to complain of the funereal slowness with which the Premier of New South Wales has carried on his part of the negotiations. In one of his communications he has indicated certain difficulties which, on the face of them, appear to be absurd. He points out that the Federal Parliament has not declared the precise boundaries of the territory that it desires to acquire, and expresses the fear that it may not accept the area- which the New South Wales Government surrenders, with the result that the State will be placed in a most invidious position. To use his own words -

On the other hand, the State at present is in a most anomalous position. The procedure indicated by the Constitution is for the State to surrender by virtue of section in all lands which are Crown lands. The Constitution further provides (section in) that, on surrender, such part of the State becomes subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commonwealth. The State thus is irrevocably divested of proprietorial and territorial rights in respect of lands so surrendered, and the Constitution contemplates that that land must be within boundaries which have been determined by the Parliament to be the territory within which shall be established the seat of Government.

His contention is that if New South Wales surrenders the land and we do not accept it, some shocking calamity may overtake New South Wales. If South Australia, which proposes to hand over the Northern

Territory to the Commonwealth, adopted the same attitude and said to the Commonwealth Parliament, “ You must show us the exact boundaries of the Northern Territory before we agree to hand it over to you,” we should not be any further forward with the negotiations. Of course, such a difficulty does not arise. South Australia will pass the Act surrendering the Territory to the Commonwealth, and if we do not accept, it will not matter, because South Australia will not be in any worse position. The same might very well apply to the State Government of New South Wales. The time is very short now within which to enable this Parliament to take the next step ; and there are a number of legal difficulties that may present themselves when the step is taken. A question has been raised as to whether the New South Wales Government are prepared to grant the Commonwealth power to generate electricity from the waters of the Snowy River, should it be subsequently required. A question has also been raised as to the powers of the Federal Government in erecting certain works at Jervis Bay, and making certain improvements to the harbor ; and a difficulty may easily arise as to the working of the New South Wales railways through Yass, Queanbeyan, and other places that may be affected within the Federal area. Each and all of these may become substantial questions, calculated to cause delay. If there is to be such a great deal of time occupied in preliminary skirmishes as to who shall make the first move-

Mr Bowden:

– It is like chess !

Mr HALL:

– - It is more like two silly school-girls disputing as to who shall speak first after a quarrel.

Sir John Forrest:

– What does the honorable member propose?

Mr HALL:

– I am not proposing anything, nor am I blaming the present Government in connexion with the matter. I thought that when only ,£5,000 was proposed, it was too little; but, judging by the rate at which the negotiations are being carried on, I should say that £5 for postage stamps would have been sufficient. I can conceive of no way in which we can convey our . feelings to the New South Wales Premier ; but, unless an alteration is made, and the New South Wales Parliament is prepared to act promptly, this question will certainly be locked up for years to come. The late Government were prepared to carry out the behest of this Parliament, and indicated an area they were prepared to accept. The present Government have taken a similar step ; and if the Premier of New South Wales is going to stand off, and ask this Parliament to make the next move, he is taking a course which will inevitably re-open the whole question. It is true that Mr. Wade has asked for certain other information, and he has indicated that at the back of his mind is the idea that if we do not take the first step, he may do so; and we may fairly hope that we shall hear no more of unopened letters, or have any further delay in answering correspondence. If we could see the same expedition on the part of New South Wales that has been shown by the Commonwealth, we could hope for a substantial advance towards the creation of a Federal Capital within the life of this Parliament; but, otherwise, I shall have to own with regret that the fault does not lie at the door of honorable members here. I have no doubt that there is a section of this Parliament which would be very glad to see this question postponed until after the next elections, and there is also a section of public opinion, as represented by the Melbourne newspapers, which would move heaven and earth to block the matter for a few months. The Premier of New South Wales, by his action, is playing into the hands of those people ; but I hope that our next news will be that the New South Wales Parliament has set itself to seriously consider the question.

Mr HUGHES:
West Sydney

.- This question must be regarded as one entirely of a non-party character, and one in regard’ to which this Parliament, since it has expressed an opinion, has done its duty, and is now waiting with some impatience, I hope, and much dissatisfaction, to see what the other party to the contract intends to do. In the past New South Wales has, at intervals, delivered itself of many protests, which were entirely justified/ in regard to the delay, which had become almost intolerable, on the part of the Commonwealth, but now, although tardily, we have done our duty. I am really surprised that Mr. Wade should take up an attitude which might be entirely justifiable if he were acting for a client whose interests were threatened by some action of the other side, but which, in the leader and representative . of a great State, to which we are only anxious to do what we are pledged to do under the Constitution, seems to be altogether inexplicable. Mr. Wade says - and so far as I know, it is for him an entirely new discovery - that the proper procedure is for the Commonwealth to do something, after which, he, on his part, will do something - that if he takes any step which we ought to take, it will place him in an invidious and false position. I tell Mr. Wade that if he has the interests of New South Wales at heart, he must not hesitate a day in going on with this matter; and I warn him that, if he neglects to take this chance, he will never get another. He will certainly never get a better chance, and I db not think he will get so good a one. The circumstances under which this Parliament agreed to the Yass-Canberra site were almost unique. The factors” that made for that selection may at any moment disappear.

Mr Crouch:

– Hear, hear !

Mr HUGHES:

– I am not speaking about individuals disappearing, but of the circumstances which actuated certain individuals. There may be no change in the personnel of Parliament, yet, there may be a very great change of opinions. This Parliament has no control over the next Parliament, which will enter into the performance of its duties absolutely untrammelled by any decision of ours. Mr. Wade is in danger of sacrificing the interests of New South Wales by insisting on a pettifogging interpretation of the Constitution ; his position is rather that of a police court solicitor than that of the leader of the New South Wales bar. I am very sorry that this should be so, because his attitude seems to reflect on the legal profession in general, and to give some colour to the continuous complaint that is made against an honorable, and, I hope, broadminded profession, that the members of it are unable to see in words that plain meaning which every intelligent man in the country can see. We knew what the Parliament intended, and what was meant, when we assented to the Yass-Canberra site. Mr. Wade at that time was perfectly cognisant of our intention, and ought to have been thoroughly seized of the purport of our enactment ; but, ^instead, he, at the eleventh hour - at a moment when he should be only too anxious to smooth away difficulties - raises this new point. Even if there had been any doubt as to who should make the next move, he ought not to have raised the point, because that was for counsel on the other side to do. Mr.

Wade has committed an error which, had it arisen in the exercise of his profession, would certainly not have endeared him to his client, or helped him to extend- his practice. While the present Minister of Home Affairs is in office, we may feel quite sure, though we differ from him in other matters, that he will throw no obstacles in the way of a speedy and complete settlement of this question. If diplomacy, and a sort of hesitant attitude were permissible or excusable, he is in a position in which it might be excused, but Mr. Wade, on the other hand, is showing a disposition to take something which he has said for a very long time he wants very much. This Parliament, after considerable delay, decided to do that which New . South Wales wished to be done, and it is now for New South Wales to do what is necessary, and to throw on us the onus of declining to proceed. I believe that this Parliament will not decline ; and it is for Mr. Wade to take that view which we must presume he took when the decision was made. The honorable member for Coolgardie, the exMinister of Home Affairs, knows very well that right through all the negotiations, quasi-official and official, the suggestion now made by Mr. Wade was never mentioned until the other day. I am not at all- criticising Mr. Wade’s intentions, for, no doubt, he means well enough. I simply say that he is making a mistake which threatens to be a fatal one for New South Wales. Upon that I take my stand as a representative of the State, who is very much .-interested in the matter, and wishes to see it well out of the road, because, in the hurly-burly of politics - and they threaten to be very hurly and very burly in the near future - goodness knows what may happen to a question of this sort, which is tame and domestic compared with the fierce untrammelled beasts that will walk the political earth in the near future. It is like exposing a sheep to the unfettered ferocity of the carnivora in the cages at the Zoological Gardens. I hope, therefore, that we may settle this question at once. I did hear that Mr. Wade had been so busy that he could not open the Prime Minister’s last letter. I trust he has got over that little difficulty. I do not know what the Prime Minister said in his letter, but I hope he put the view which we” took when we dealt with the matter, that it was the business of the Parliament of New South Wales to hand over to us such territory as we had indicated. The question of when the metes and bounds should be definitely fixed is one that the Department of Home Affairs might well be left to adjust with the New South Wales authorities, but I think we are entitled to receive at once from the Parliament of New South Wales authority to take within certain points as much land as is sufficient. From what I know of the Parliament of New South Wales, and the temper of the people of that State, if they had a chance tomorrow, and the question was made a nonparty one, I do not hesitate to say that the Bill would go through the Parliament at almost record rate, and that if it were submitted to the people they would adopt it without hesitation and by an enormous majority.

Mr MAHON:
Coolgardie

.- Some time ago I drew the attention of the Minister of External Affairs to the proposal to admit a Japanese doctor to practise at Broome, in Western Australia. The honorable gentleman was good enough to say then that he would defer his decision in the matter until he had received the correspondence from the district which I had promised him. Since then he has received the correspondence, and now he informs me in a letter which I received recently from his office that, “ In view of the information that the doctor to arrive appears to possess the necessary qualifications, the exemption of three years officially promised to the Japanese Consul -General in April last to enable him to enter solely for the. purpose of practising his profession at the place mentioned cannot be withheld, and will issue subject to the qualification required by the law of Western Australia being established at the earliest possible date.” I have no wish to dwell upon the circumstances under which the official promise was given by the Department to the Consul-General for Japan. I believe it was given in the absence of the late Minister of External Affairs in Papua. I do not wish to cast any reflection on the official concerned, because it must be recognised that every Minister is responsible for the actions of his subordinates ; but I contend that a grave mistake was made in this case, and the Government might have taken some means to endeavour to prevent the results which will certainly follow if this gentleman is allowed to land and practise his profession. In the first place, I may state that nearly three-fourths of the inhabitants of

– I would rather not touch on that point, because I recognise the responsibility of the Minister of the Department, although he was absent, for an) action of his subordinates. Mr. Male, the member for the district in the local Parliament, states -

As a resident of long standing in Broome, and one familiar with the pearling industry, I feel certain that the introduction of a doctor would lead to trouble between the master pearler and his crew. The master pearlers are, under agreement, responsible for providing free medical attendance to their men.

I ask the House to remember that. Mr. Male adds that satisfactory arrangements exist with the resident medical officer, who is also a Federal servant, holding the position of quarantine officer. That is another contingency that we have to take into account. If that gentleman retires from Broome, what will the Minister do? Will he confer the appointment of quarantine officer on the Japanese, or who is to represent the Department there? Steamers are continually calling at Broome from Singapore and other foreign ports, and if the Federal Government have no properly qualified quarantine officer there it will become a serious question. Mr. Male continues^ -

I cannot see that there exists any justification for the introduction of such a doctor, as the men have at all times received excellent attention, and are, when necessary, provided with beds in the hospital ; also, a special building has been erected for the treatment of .berri-berri cases. It appears to me, in granting such an exemption, the Government are committing an act for which they have no precedent, and, further, are creating a precedent of the most dangerous nature, for it stands to reason if a doctor is allowed to land then there is no logical reason why a Japanese lawyer or a Japanese priest should not also be required.

That is a point worth noticing. He points out also that there are a considerable number of Afghans located at Port Hedland, a little south of Broome, and that they and other Asiatic races wouid be justified in demanding the same consideration. And if it should be demanded, I do not see how a refusal can be logically defended after this precedent. I regret to notice that the Government attempt to throw upon the Western Australian authorities the responsibility of preventing this gentleman from practising.

Mr Groom:

– We did not impose that condition. It was imposed at the time permission was originally granted.

Mr MAHON:

– The honorable gentleman said in his letter that the permission “ will issue subject to the qualification required by the law of Western Australia being established at the earliest possible date.” That is very unfortunate, because, according to the law of Western Australia, the Medical Board would appear to have no option but to admit this gentleman as soon as he applies, if he satisfies the Board that he possesses the qualification. Section xi. of the Western Australian Medical Act provides that -

Every person (male and female) shall be entitled to be registered under this Act, who proves to the satisfaction of the Board that -

He holds any one or more of the qualifications in the Second Schedule hereto mentioned ; and that

The testimonium, diploma, licence, certificate, or other document testifying to such qualification was obtained, after due examination, from some university, college or other body duly recognised for such purpose in the country to which such university, college, or other bodv may belong ; and that

He is a person of good fame and character, and still entitled to practise under the qualification by virtue of which he applies to be so registered in the place where the same was granted.

The qualifications contained in the schedule referred to are twelve in number, and, it seems to me, do not cover Japanese certificates.

Dr Maloney:

– The Japanese diploma is a very high one.

Mr MAHON:

– It is not mentioned in the schedule, which speaks of the degrees of-

Fellow, Member, Licentiate or Extra Licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians of London.
Fellow, Member, or Licentiate of the

Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh.

Fellow or Licentiate of the King and Queen’s College of Physicians of Ireland.
Fellow or Member of the Royal College of Surgeons of England.
Fellow or Licentiate of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh.
Fellow or Licentiate of the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow.
Fellow or Licentiate of the Royal College of Surgeons of Ireland.

And several other degrees, but there is no reference to a diploma of a Japanese University.

Mr Groom:

– Is there a general recognition of the diplomas of foreign universities ?

Mr MAHON:

– No, unless it is covered by these words -

Any legally-qualified practitioner registered in the United Kingdom under any Act or Acts of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland now or hereafter in force.

Mr FOSTER:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– From a complaint I have received, it would appear that this exemption is not always allowed, and I hope that the matter will receive the attention of the right honorable gentleman.

Dr MALONEY:
Melbourne

.- In regard to the admission of a Japanese doctor at Broome, to which reference has been made by the honorable member for Coolgardie, I would point out that his commencing practice in that town, which is largely occupied by Japanese, will place the European medical officer there in a very serious position. Broome is not a large centre of population, and the resident

Government medical officer must be allowed the right of private practice to supplement his official salary. No doubt the honor able member is voicing the democratic spirit of Western Australia in bringing this matter forward; but, while we have a perfect right to refuse to allow a Japanese to land in Australia, we must not forget that the Japanese are equally entitled to refuse permission to an Australian to land in their country. Certain merchants in Sydney sought to bring pressure to bear upon the Consul-General for Japan to prevent my landing in Japan on the occasion of a visit which I paid to that country some time ago, but he courteously refused to take notice of their representations, which were made, not in the open light of day, but in a most underhand manner. Had the authorities refused to allow me to land, I should hare had to kiss my hand to the shore, and to regret that I could .not obtain a closer view of the beauties of that country. If we say that this” Japanese medical man shall not be admitted, we must not complain if the Japanese exercise their right to exclude us from their shores. As one who believes in a White Australia, I am willing to accept the risk, but I urge that we should not resort to any subterfuge. Let us say straight out that it is in the interests of a White Australia that we are determined tq take this stand. No word of insult will ever leave my lips with respect to Japan or its people. It is a great nation of clever and ingenious people, and I know that the white man could not compete on equal terms with the Japanese. It is for the latter reason that I fear their entry into Australia. The Treasurer was Premier of Western Australia when I had the privilege of practising at Albany. I must say, however, that the State Government have some strange ways of administering the Medical Act, for I know of a medical man who paid two fees, of ^£2 2s. each, to be registered there ; and, although his application was refused, did not obtain a refund. On one occasion, I, with another Melbourne medico, was sent to perform a post-mortem upon a child at Albany; but, although we did the work, we were never paid for it. The Government directed another medical man to hold the post-mortem, and paid him, although, as a matter of fact, the work had already been done, and he could not make a second post-mortem examination. I am satisfied that, unless this Japanese doctor has the diplomas .which are set forth in the schedule to the Act, he will not be permitted to practise. If he has. not, we shall find a simple way out of the difficulty. If, on the other hand, he has the requisite qualifications, and we refuse to allow him to settle in Australia, we must not complain if any Australian is forbidden to enter Japan. .

Mr WATKINS:
Newcastle

– I wish again to bring before the Treasurer the way in which the Old-age Pensions Act is being administered in New South Wales. I have before me a letter, to which I referred on the motion for the adjournment of the House last night, and which shows that some one has issued instructions which, in my judgment, are entirely contrary to the provisions of the Act. The letter, which is signed by Mr. Clegg, the head of the Old-age Pensions Department of New South Wales, contains the following statement -

I have the honour to state that the improved capital value in this case was taken on the municipal valuation, the total value, including personalty, i.e., furniture, being set down as ^93.

I do not think it was the intention of the Parliament that personal property, such as furniture, should be taken into consideration in determining the pension that should be paid in any case. In New South Wales, the municipalities impose a tax on the unimproved value of land, so that their valuations do not afford a reliable basis for ascertaining the actual value of the small cottages owned by some of the aged poor. I take it that it was not intended that the value of the few sticks of furniture in these poor people’s homes should be taken into consideration in determining the pensions payable to them.

Sir John Forrest:

– Why do they not appeal ?

Mr WATKINS:

– In the case to which I have referred a letter was written to the chief officer of the Department in New South Wales, who replied that he was instructed to do certain things.

Sir J ohn Forrest:

– The Commissioner, not -the Minister, has the settlement of such matters.

Mr WATKINS:

– The Minister should step in where the Act is being disregarded. The letter continues -

The police reported that the daughter (26 years of age), resided in the house, but was away nearly every day working, washing, &c, to earn a living, but that she did not pay anything for the accommodation received.

Here we have the case of a girl who lives with her aged father - evidently to look after him - and whose income, earned at the washtub, is taken into account, with a view of reducing the amount of the pension payable to him. Such an administration of the Act is a positive disgrace -

We are advised that in such cases, where the property is not used as the exclusive home of the applicant, but is shared by children or others, who either do, or ought to, contribute, for the accommodation they receive, a deduction of’£50 only should be made.

In other words, in such circumstances, a deduction of£50 instead of £100 is to be made from the valuation of an old man’s cottage for the purpose of determining what pension shall be payable to him.

Dr LIDDELL:
Hunter

Mr Poynton:

– The Minister was not in the Commonwealth at the time.

Mr GROOM:

Mr Hughes:

– He was out of the Commonwealth at the time.

Mr GROOM:

– That is so. The Secretary of the Department wrote to the ConsulGeneral, Mr. Uyeno, on the 30th April last, a letter, in which he said, after referring to the conversation, that exemption would be given subject to qualification. The qualification reads -

Provided that you will inform me that the doctor who is to come is a qualified medical practitioner who intends to devote his time solely to the practice of his profession.

I presume that that was the effect of the conversation that he had with the Secretary to the Consul-General. The Japanese residents of Broome naturally desired to have their own doctor.

Mr Mahon:

– They have an interpreter there.

Mr GROOM:

– -That may be so, but for a very natural reason it appears that they desire to have the services of a medical man of their own nationality.

Dr Liddell:

– Are not English residents on the south coast of France in exactly the same position?

Mr GROOM:

– I am not prepared to discuss that matter now. At present large numbers of Japanese are admitted to Broome in connexion with the pearling industry, and there is a general understanding by which the number engaged there shall be continued and permits granted from time to time.

Mr Hughes:

– Does “ duly qualified “ mean qualified under any State Act?

Mr GROOM:

– I think it means qualified according to the law in Western Australia; and that, I believe, the Japanese Consul-General understood, because, I understand, he had been in communication with the authorities of that State. I am not prepared to state what the qualification required under the law in Western Australia is, but the Premier of the State, in writing to us on the 3rd August, said -

The application for registration has not been brought before the Medical Board, but I understand that provided the qualifications of the applicant are of such a character as can be recognised by the Board, that body would not be justified in refusing to register the applicant.

Dr Liddell:

– Did the Japanese doctor ever go before the Board?

– It is extraordinary that the Secretary did not lay the matter before me.

Mr GROOM:

– The late Minister of External Affairs has explained that the Secretary was under the impression that he had mentioned the matter. After the Japanese Consul-General had been informed that permission would be granted, a telegram was received from the Premier of Western Australia informing us .that protests were raised to the admission of this Japanese doctor. On the 3rd August the ConsulGeneral wrote to the Department -

Referring to your letter of the 30th April last, on the subject of the admission to the Commonwealth of a Japanese doctor whom the Japanese residents of Broome wish to go there to practise his profession, and to my acknowledgment of the same, dated 4th May, wherein I stated that I had noticed the details which you said were essential, I now have the honour to inform you that I received a cable yesterday notifying that Dr. Mango Kitawaki, a graduate of the Medical College of the Imperial University of Kyoto, and a member of the Medical Staff of the Hospital attached to that College, will leave Japan by the s.s. Nikko Maru, which is due in Sydney on the 22nd September proximo. I shall be glad if, in the terms of your letter, you will be good enough to advise the proper officers so that the certificate of exemption for three years, which is the term of his engagement, may be ready for issue on Mr. Kitawaki’s arrival.

The Japanese Consul-General communicated at once with somebody in Japan, and the doctor was engaged for a period of three years. The question now was whether the promise that was given should be withdrawn ; and as Minister, I felt that I was bound to honour it, but no action was taken pending the arrival of the protests from Western Australia. We had no knowledge of what the protests contained, but when they did arrive from the residents, the mayor, medical officer, and others at Broome, none appeared to be sufficient to cause us to withdraw the promise officially given, accepted in good faith, and acted upon. A letter was accordingly written to the Japanese Consul-General on the 25th August, as follows -

I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 3rd inst., respecting the Japanese doctor whom the Japanese residents at Broome wish to go there to practise his profession, and to inform you that arrangements will be made for the issue at Thursday Island of a certificate of exemption for three years in favour of Dr. Kitawaki to enable him to enter as arranged solely for the purpose of practising his profession there, provided that his qualifications to practise in Western Australia he established in accordance with the law of the State at the earliest possible date after his arrival.

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

– Of course, it is. There is no question that there is a potato ring in Melbourne, and a potato ring in Sydney. There is as much Irish blight in Victoria as in Tasmania. It is to be found in several parts of Victoria and New South Wales. Since it appeared in Ireland in 1846 and 1847, no part of the world where potatoes have been grown permanently and continuously has escaped the disease. Yet New South Wales and Victoria assert that the blight exists only in Tasmania. It exists in different parts of Australia, and there was never any intention of shutting out the Tasmanian potatoes until it suited the ring to do so. I am told that potatoes are now£25 a ton in Western Australia, while they are from£9 to £10 a ton here. The poor people of Melbourne and Sydney are deprived of the opportunity of purchasing the Tasmanian red skins, and have to pay twice as much for spawns grown by Chinese on the mainland. The great States of Victoria and New South Wales are exercising an unconstitutional power to protect the Chinese growers of potatoes. Section 54, sub-section 2, of the Quarantine Act provides -

If the imported plants are found to be free from disease, and the quarantine officer is satisfied that they can be delivered to the importer without danger of introducing any disease, he may, subject to the regulations, authorize their delivery to the importer.

It is the Commonwealth quarantine officer, and not the Victorian or New South Wales quarantine officer, who has to decide. Subsection 3 of the same section provides -

If the imported plants are found not to be free from disease, or the quarantine officer is not satisfied that they can be delivered to the importer without danger of introducing some disease, he shall order the plants into quarantine.

It is the Commonwealth officer who has to do that.

Sir John Quick:

– Is the Commonwealth officer satisfied ?

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

– The States have no power to interfere in the matter.

Sir John Quick:

– I should think they had a right to be consulted.

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

– The States did not give the Commonwealth officer an opportunity to decide. In other words, the States have invaded the Commonwealth Constitution, but the Government of the Commonwealth are afraid to exercise their great powers, and to tell Victoria and New South Wales that they are violating the Constitution. Section 99 of the Constitution provides -

The Commonwealth shall not, by any law or regulation of trade, commerce, or revenue, give preference to one State or any part thereof over another State or any part thereof.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– A number of men outside want work.

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

– That is not a fair remark. The Ministerof Defence must be labouring under a multiplicity of delusions when he cannot see the necessity for helping us to do justice to the potato growers of Tasmania.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I desire to do good to men who want work.

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

– It is high time that attention was called to the violation of the Constitution by the States of Victoria and New South Wales. If Ministers look to the United States, whence most of our Constitution was derived, they will find that no such thing as Victoria and New South Wales have done would be possible there. No State in America could, by a subterfuge, raise a barrier to shut out the products of other States. Surely it will be admitted that the State of Tasmania has suffered enough already. She suffers by reason of her separation from the mainland, and from the operations of a throttling shipping ring. Let me quote a letter which I have received to-day from a business man in Melbourne. He says - 414 Flinders-lane,

Melbourne, 26th August,1909.

King O’Malley, Esq.,

House of Representatives, Melbourne.

Sir,

I am pleased to see that you are taking an interest in the action taken by the Agricultural Department here with reference to the prohibition of sound Tasmanian potatoes. I am enclosing the copy of a letter I sent to the Age yesterday, but they have not inserted it.

I hope that the Tasmanian Government can be induced to give financial assistance to the Tasmanian shipper to test the legality of the action of the Victorian Department.

Yours, &c.,

A. Layton.

The following is the letter which this gentleman sent to the Age, but which was not inserted -

The Editor, Age Office, City.

Sir,

I do not believe the heavily burdened consumer in Melbourne can be aware of the outrageous action contemplated by the Victorian Minister of Agriculture in insisting upon the destruction of some three hundred (300) tons of magnificent Tasmanian potatoes passed by his own inspectors as being absolutely free from disease. And why? To make a market for the Victorian farmer at the expense of the consumer for the purpose of putting extra money into the Victorian farmer’s pocket.

I trust, therefore, you will use your influence to prevent such a scandalous waste of good food.

Yours, &c.,

Federalist.

Melbourne, 25th August, 1909.

I have also received a letter from a farmer on the north-west coast of Tasmania. I know how these farmers have to work. In the present case, an absolute wrong is being done to thousands of them. The writer says -

Melbourne, 26th August, 1909. The Hon. K. O’Malley, M.P.,

Dear Sir,

On 12th August I had landed in Melbourne 1,140 bags of potatoes. These were inspected and passed before shipment at Stanley, Tasmania. On arrival, in Melbourne on Thursday, 12th inst., the inspectors proceeded to reinspect in which work they took up the balance of the week, it being on the following Monday when I was notified that 835 bags were condemned. During this time the market collapsed, and I had to take fully £2 10s. per ton less than I would have received had the potatoes been inspected more expeditiously. This morning I was on the wharf and found two inspectors cutting open my potato sacks, and on inquiry I was told that they were looking for samples of Irish blight for their chief. I then emptied out on the wharf two bags out of a lot of 189, two bags out of a lot of 109, two bags out of a lot of go, and the inspector who condemned them and another who accompanied him failed to find one infected potato in the three lots examined, notwithstanding that they had lain on thewharf exposed to the weather for a fortnight.

Had I received a fair inspection, I could have placed all these and other lots of potatoes now on the wharf which I know to be quite free from disease previous to the embargo being placed on them.

Yours faithfully,

Wright.

This is a serious matter, not only for the farmers of Tasmania, but for the con sumers of Australia. It is a serious matter for the miners of Western Australia, and for the thousands of industrial workers of Melbourne and other cities, who are being deprived of these splendid potatoes, just because Ministers do not insist upon the law of the Commonwealth being paramount. They are allowing the States to exercise powers which they have no right to assume. A cruel wrong is being done to the Tasmanian farmers whose potatoes were landed on the wharfs in Melbourne long before the embargo was raised. They had the assurance that their potatoes would be allowed to be distributed. But the Victorian Minister of Agriculture has now shut them out. He has exercised powers which pertain to the Commonwealth only. I wish we had but one courageous Minister, who would throttle this secession movement, this flagrant violation of the Commonwealth Constitution. We are returning to the conditions that prevailed in the old days, when trade was thwarted by political nonentities. I only wish that for two days I could be Minister of External Affairs. This matter could be quickly ventilated, and a test case would soon settle it. We have certain powers under the Constitution and the Quarantine Act, but have not the courage to exercise them. But we should not sit ona stone wall like Mr. Facing-both-ways, or be like the blank leaf between the Old and New Testaments, which belongs to neither dispensation. Sometimes I wonder whether Parliaments are not a mistake, and dictators the right thing. One may make out the best case in the world from every point of view, only to be told that there will be an inquiry, and that ends the matter. I am sure that the Minister wishes to obtain justice for the producers of Tasmania. That State joined the Federation without making any bargains, trusting that she would receive fair play. But, while the others have gained, she has lost. I wish also to bring to the notice of the Postmaster-General the following letter -

Council Chambers, Stanley, 20th August, 1909.

The Hon. King O’Malley, M.P.,

Dear Sir,

I have been directed to forward you the following resolution passed at the last meetingof the Circular Head Municipal Council : - “That this Council, as representatives of the people of Circular Head, do respectfully urge the Federal Government to have Stanley included as a port of call for the subsidized steamers carrying mails between the north-west coast and Melbourne, at least once a week, and that this resolution be forwarded to the proper authorities through the Hon. King O’Malley.”

Yours faithfully,

C. Young,

Council Clerk.

I lately presented a petition, signed by hun dreds of farmers and traders, whose prayer was of the same tenor. There are over 10,000 persons dependent for communication on steamers like the Orion, which disappeared seven or eight months ago without leaving a trace. At the present time, the boat from Melbourne to Burnie passes within 5 of 6 miles of Circular Head every trip, carrying the mail 50 miles further than it need travel. The letters have then to be brought back by coach to Stanley, and sent another 50 or 60 miles to Marrawah, and 40 miles further to Balfour. This great farming country, whose people, I am sorry to say, are still a little Conservative, though there is hope for their salvation, is almost isolated. Before the last mail contract was signed, the Flora used to go into Stanley, I have been told on good authority that the Union Steam-ship Company has a controlling interest in the smaller lines of vessels which trade to that part of the Commonwealth, or an honorable understanding with their directors. The vessels of the line are good enough for river work, but too small for the trade between Tasmania and Melbourne. While the residents of our big cities have libraries, theatres, large churches with eloquent pastors, and splendid entertainments of various kinds to enliven their leisure, those in the country districts have none of these things, and it is not too much to ask that their means of communication be improved. I hope that the PostmasterGeneral will insist, in connexion with the next mail contract, that the Oonah shall go to Stanley at least once a week, either in coming from Burnie to Melbourne or on the return journey.

Sir John Quick:

– It is a matter of cost.

Mr KING O’MALLEY:

– It would not delay the vessel half an hour to make this call, and could not increase the cost of the service very much. If the shipping company does not treat the public better, giving them the communication to which they are entitled, the seven-leagued boots of Socialism will trample them out of existence.

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– I wish to direct attention to a matter affecting the administration of the old-age pensions law. From replies recently given to questions which I asked the Treasurer, I gather that the complaints which have reached me from my State have been caused by the difference between the property allowance under the State Act and that under the Commonwealth Act which has superseded it. There is no doubt that the Federal enactment confers a very great boon upon a large section of the community, especially in the States where oldage pensions are now being paid for the first time. In a matter of this kind, we should aim at achieving uniformity, and, in this connexion, it is worthy of note that the legislation enacted by the various States differed in several very important particulars. I extract the following from Knibb’s Year-book of Australia, in reference to New South Wales -

The pension is diminished by £1 per annum for every £1 of income above £26 in the case of a separate pensioner, and for every £1 above £19 10s. in the case of husband and wife living together, and by £1 for every£15 of property owned by the pensioner in either case. In Victoria the pension is diminished by1s. per week for every shilling earned over 2s. per week, and by 6d. per week for every£10 of property, other than furniture and personal effects to the value of£25. In Queensland the pension is diminished by £1 per annum for every complete pound of annual income above £26, and also by £1 per annum for every complete £15 of net capital value of accumulated property. The maximum income that may be received, inclusive of pension, is, therefore, £52 per annum in New South Wales and Queensland, and £31 4s. per annum in Victoria, and the maximum amount of property that may be held is£389 in New South Wales, £159 in Victoria, and£259 in Queensland. In Victoria possession of money above the amount of £10 acts as a disqualification.

That passage shows that New South Wales treated her old-age pensioners very much more liberally than did the other States in the matter of their income, and of their accumulated property. The Invalid and Old-age Pensions Act passed by this Parliament provides for a deduction of £1 for every £10 of income in excess of £50. whilst in New South Wales and Queensland the law formerly sanctioned a deduction of £1 for every£15 of income. The effect of Commonwealth legislation upon this subject is that a number of pensioners upon being transferred from State to Federal control have been notified of deductions in their pensions, and naturally they cannot understand the reasonwhy those deductions are made. It would be a graceful aet on the part of the Commonwealth to fall intoline with the more progressive States by diminishing the amount of old-age pensions by only£1 for every £15 of property owned by the pensioner. In that way, a great deal of the existing friction might be removed. Some time ago the Premier of Queensland intimated that if the Commonwealth did not reduce the residential qualification of applicants from twenty-five to twenty years, so as to bring its legislation into harmony, with that which obtained in Queensland, he would see that that State provided pensions in the case of claims disallowed by the Commonwealth. It will be seen, therefore, that he recognised the justice of those claims. The matter was also brought under the notice of the Premier of New South Wales, and his recommendation was that representations be made to the Federal authorities. The Commonwealth, I am glad to say, has reduced the age limit, tout, so far, it has not effected any change in the amount of the accumulated property which1 a pensioner may possess. I would strongly urge upon the Government the desirableness of effecting a levelling up in this matter. I do not know to what extent it would involve the Commonwealth in additional expenditure, ‘ but from correspondence which has reached me from my own electorate, I gather that a considerable number of deductions have been made. Under the State regulation, if the accumulated property happened to be a deposit of £100 in a bank, the owner was allowed an exemption of £50, and on the balance a reduction was made at the rate of £1 for every £15, or he “was reduced by the amount of about £$ 6s. 8d. on the accumulated property. The interest drawn was, I understand, treated as capital. .1 am told that under the Commonwealth a different principle has been instituted, and that the deduction on account of a deposit of £100 in a bank, allowing for an exemption of £50, amounts to £5, and if £3 is received as interest, that is treated as income, so that on the £100 there is. a deduction of £8 per annum as against the pension allowance. This is a matter of very serious moment to many persons. Again, in New South Wales, it was customary to pay pensions monthly, and to meet the position of applicants as far as possible. A number of applicants were so located that it was not very convenient for them to get to the paying office, but the Department endeavoured to convenience them as far as possible, and, so far as I can gather, very little injustice was done. Under the Commonwealth, however, fortnightly payments are made. In some cases applicants would prefer to receive their payments monthly, because of the inconveniences which I have indicated. But another trouble has arisen. The payments are not made through every post-office, but only through post-offices which are authorized to issue money orders. The other day there was brought under mv notice a case in my electorate where the applicant resided 20 miles from the paying office, although there was a post-office in his near neighbourhood. He cannot draw his pay at the local postoffice, because it is not authorized to issue money orders, and he has to travel 20 miles fortnightly to’ the paying office. Not having any conveyance of his own, he is compelled to utilize the coach, ‘which means a fare, and the coach so runs that it involves the passing of a night in the town. I do not see why there should be a hard-and-fast rule laid down that payments can only be made at. post-offices which are authorized to issue money orders. I think that any postoffice should have the power to act on behalf of the Commissioner, and to make these payments. The aim of the Department should be to make it as easy as they can for unfortunate people to draw their pensions. In that way a considerable amount of convenience could be afforded. The invalid section of the Old-age Pensions Act provides that in certain cases a pension may be paid to a person under sixtyfive, but over sixty, years of age. I am told that that section is administered in such a way that practically only those persons who are physically unfit and incapable of work to an extent which a doctor can certify is permanent can secure the benefit of a pension. I do not think, that that was the intention of the Legislature. If, by reason of premature age or physical defects arising from age, any person is incapacitated from earning a living, that fact ought to be sufficient to enable him to qualifyunder the section. That was, I think, the intention. A more liberal interpretation might reasonably be given to the section, and by doing so a number of very deserving persons could be benefited. The other day I had a case brought under my notice where an aged lady was unable to earn a living because of rheumatism in her hands and arms, but because the doctor could not see his way to certify that she was physically incapable of earning a living, not only for the present, but for the rest of her life, apparently she is debarred from getting the benefit of the provision. I am told that the stringency of the administration is such that very few applications have been approved, and very few are likely to be approved while such administration is continued. I submit that the intention of the Legislature is being frustrated, and the Government are doing a grave injustice to a large number of very deserving persons, who ought to receive fairer treatment at their hands. A few nights ago I brought under the Minister’s attention the matter of the administration of his office in Sydney. I pointed out to him that, according to the information I received, the office was required to do considerable additional work, compared with what had to be done under State control. Many more applications have been put in, but no provision has been made to meet the extra demands upon the office, with the result that the officers are working overtime, and there is a danger of the Department getting into a chaotic state. The Treasurer promised to look into the matter and have it remedied. I shall be glad to know that he has done so, and that the increased staff which is necessary for the proper execution of the work will be provided at a very early date. I cannot conceive of anything more detrimental to the proper administration of this humanitarian legislation than to allow the administrative staff to get into a disorganized condition. I have no more to say on the matter, but I felt that I should not be doing justice to the aged people in the State from which I come if I did not bring their grievances before the House.

Sir John Forrest:

– Why not. bring up specific cases, which can be looked into?

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

– When specific cases are brought up, the only reply is that they are not provided for in our legislation. I hope the Minister will look into the question of administration to which I have referred, and see that the branch of the Department in Sydney is properly equipped to carry out its work in a satisfactory manner.

Question resolved in the negative.

page 2702

ADJOURNMENT

Imperial Defence Conference - Additions, New Works and Buildings Estimates

Motion (by Mr. Joseph Cook) proposed -

That the House do now adjourn.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

House adjourned at 11. 15 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 26 August 1909, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1909/19090826_reps_3_51/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

House of Representatives26 August 1909

PAPERS

QUESTION

POSTAL COMMISSION’S EXPENSES

Sir JOHN FORREST:Treasurer · SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · Protectionist

Mr Storrer and Mr Webster:

Mr HALL:WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr HEDGES:FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr JOSEPH COOK:PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr THOMAS BROWN:CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Sir JOHN QUICK:Postmaster-General · BENDIGO, VICTORIA · Protectionist

QUESTION

POTATO BLIGHT: STATE AGREEMENTS

Mr LIVINGSTON:BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr GROOM:Minister for External Affairs · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · Protectionist

QUESTION

OLD-AGE PENSIONS

Dr LIDDELL:HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Sir JOHN QUICK:Protectionist

Mr SINCLAIR:MORETON, QUEENSLAND

Sir JOHN FORREST:Protectionist

QUESTION

SORTERS, GENERAL POST OFFICE, SYDNEY

Mr CHANTER:RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Sir JOHN QUICK:Protectionist

QUESTION

FEDERAL CONTROL OF MONOPOLIES

Mr HEDGES:Fremantle

Mr THOMAS BROWN:CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr HEDGES:

Mr Mathews:

Mr HEDGES:

Mr Hutchison:

Mr HEDGES:

Mr Hall:

Mr HEDGES:

Mr Hall:

Mr HEDGES:

Mr Bamford:

Mr HEDGES:

Mr Hutchison:

Mr HEDGES:

Mr Storrer:

Mr HEDGES:

Mr SPEAKER:

Mr HEDGES:

Mr HUME COOK:BOURKE, VICTORIA · PROT

Mr Palmer:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Hedges:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Mcwilliams:

Mr Hedges:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Agar Wynne:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Mauger:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Mcwilliams:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Hutchison:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Hedges:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Mcwilliams:

Mr Hutchison:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Mcwilliams:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr JOHN THOMSON:COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · PROT; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr CHANTER:

Mr JOHN THOMSON:COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · PROT; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Mcwilliams:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Mcwilliams:

Mr CHANTER:

Mr Mcwilliams:

Mr CHANTER:

House of Representatives
26 August 1909

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Treasurer · SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA · Protectionist

Mr HALL:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr HEDGES:
FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Sir JOHN QUICK:
Postmaster-General · BENDIGO, VICTORIA · Protectionist

Mr LIVINGSTON:
BARKER, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Mr GROOM:
Minister for External Affairs · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · Protectionist

Dr LIDDELL:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

Sir JOHN QUICK:
Protectionist

Mr SINCLAIR:
MORETON, QUEENSLAND

Sir JOHN FORREST:
Protectionist

Mr CHANTER:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Sir JOHN QUICK:
Protectionist

Mr HEDGES:
Fremantle

Mr THOMAS BROWN:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr HUME COOK:
BOURKE, VICTORIA · PROT

Mr JOHN THOMSON:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · PROT; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr JOHN THOMSON:
COWPER, NEW SOUTH WALES · PROT; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

Mr KELLY:
Wentworth

Mr FOSTER:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr FOSTER:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr FOSTER:
NEW ENGLAND, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

Mr SPENCE:
Darling

Mr MAUGER:
Maribyrnong