House of Representatives
18 September 1913

5th Parliament · 1st Session



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

page 1316

QUESTION

RECEPTION OF THE FLEET

Mr CHARLTON:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I wish to know from the Prime Minister if it is a fact that fifty members of Parliament have signifiedtheir intention of visiting Sydney to take part in the forthcoming welcome to the Fleet, and that a special train for their accommodation has been arranged for to leave Melbourne on Friday night. If that arrangement is contemplated, I ask the honorable gentleman to take into consideration the possibility of the train arriving in. Sydney too late for the function. Will he think over the advisability of permitting members to leave on Thursday night, so that they may spend some time in Sydney before the function takes place?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
Minister for Home Affairs · PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · LP

– My honorable friends opposite are fertile in suggestions of adjournment.

Mr Fenton:

– This is a national occasion.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– I am afraid that the holiday habit is becoming chronic with them. I stated last night that at least fifty members had signified their desire to visit Sydney to welcome the Fleet, and we hope that the special train arranged for will arrive in ample time: for the celebrations. We shall do our best to prevent anything from happening which would interfere with that. I cannot say more at the present time.

page 1316

QUESTION

GOVERNMENT BUSINESS

Mr HIGGS:
CAPRICORNIA, QUEENSLAND

– Referring to what the honorable gentleman has said about adjournments, I ask him . whether he could not have introduced in another place a number of the measures mentioned in the memorandum which he laid on the table on the 13th August. Had he done that it would not have been necessary for the Senate to adjourn for want of. business from the 11th to the 24th of this month?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

– My honorable friends opposite have given full notice of their determination not to do business. They have told us that repeatedly.

Mr Higgs:

– That is quite wrong. Who has said that?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– I hear it many times, almost every week. »

Mr Fenton:

– We helped to put the Audit Bill through.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– Honorable members took three days to deal with a Bill which should have been dealt with in thirteen minutes. The Government is taking the course thai it thinks most likely to ultimately conduce to the despatch of public business.

Mr HIGGS:

– I desire to ask the Prime Minister, without notice, a question arising out of his answer concerning another place. The Prime Minister said that lie had been repeatedly informed that it was the intention of this party not to allow the Government and the parly opposite to do any business. I should like to know who is the gentleman who has informed the Prime Minister that it is the intention of this party not to allow the Government to do any business, and whether he has obtained information on that subject from the Leader of this party in this House?

Mr Kelly:

– Which Leader? That is the point.

Mr HIGGS:

– These frivolous interjections are not at all relevant.

Mr McDonald:

– The remark was insulting.

Mr HIGGS:

– It was insulting, too. I wish to know whether the Prime Minister lias heard from the Leader of this party in this House, or from the Leader of the party in the Senate, at any time, that it is the intention of the party to prevent him and his Government from carrying on any business?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– I have not heard any such statement from the Leader of the party opposite. I do not expect to do so. I think he has more sense than to make a statement of that sort.

Mr Fisher:

– What authority had you for making such a statement?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– I had this authority among others - that actions speak louder than words.

page 1317

QUESTION

SMALL-POX OUTBREAK

Mr WEST:
EAST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– Does the Government in tend to take notice of a communication Bent by the Premier of New South Wales conveying a resolution passed by the New South Wales Board of Health affirming the opinion that quarantine restrictions should be removed from the metropolitan area of Sydney? If so, will the Prime Minister, at the earliest opportunity, let the House and the public know what it intends to do in the matter ?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

– I understood that the subject would be discussed this afternoon. I hope that my honorable friends will facilitate the consideration of the. motion of which the honorable member for Gwydir has given notice.

Mr Riley:

– Will the honorable member offer any objection to that motion being brought on?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– I have no control of private members’ business, but the Government will offer no objection to any course that will facilitate the discussion of that motion.

Mr HUGHES:
WEST SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES

– A report appeared in the press yesterday to the effect that the health authorities of New South Wales had communicated to the Premier of that State the opinion that the disease now epidemic in Sydney is not true small-pox. I desire to ask the Minister of Trade and Customs, without notice, whether he has received information to that effect; and if so, what action the Federal quarantine authorities intend to take in respect of the matter? As this is a very important subject I wish to ask the Minister for an authoritative statement.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– The whole matter is to be discussed presently.

Mr HUGHES:

– I know that; but I am asking quite a different question. T wish to know whether the Minister will lay an authoritative statement before the House from the Director of Quarantine, Dr. Cumpston, respecting the disease, as to whether it is, in his opinion, true small-pox or not. I think the public have a right to know, and he is the only authority to whom we can look in the matter.

Mr GROOM:
Minister for Trade and Customs · DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND · LP

– I think that the honorable member for West Sydney has been misinformed as to .the opinion of the health authorities of New South Wales that the disease in question is not true small-pox. Their opinion is -

The Board is satisfied, from such experience, that the disease now prevalent in Sydney is an exceedingly modified form of small-pox, mild in its nature, with no tendency to change its type and become more virulent.

They do not say that it is not small-pox, but that it is small-pox of a mild type.

Mr Hughes:

– I did not gather that they said that.

Mr GROOM:

– I think the honorable member’s question suggested that the disease was “ not true small-pox.”

Mr Hughes:

– Yes.

Mr GROOM:

– The honorablemember has asked for an authoritative opinion from the Director of Quarantine. I will communicate with Dr. Cumpston, and obtain his opinion at once.

Mr WEBSTER:
MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister of Trade and Customs,upon notice -

In view of the admission of the Minister that all contacts with small-pox patients have not been isolated -

Will he inform the House -

What proportion of contacts have been isolated ? and

What proportion have been allowed to be at large?

Is it a fact that vaccination has been generally substituted for isolation in connexion with small-pox contacts?

Mr GROOM:

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

  1. This Department is not in possession of the information. The State authorities have control of such details.
  2. Both forms of protection have been used.

page 1318

QUESTION

ABORIGINALS

Treatment of Prisoners : Death Penalty

Mr J H CATTS:
COOK, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I ask the Minister of External Affairs whether he has read the account which appears in this morning’s newspapers of the trial for murder in the Northern Territory of some aboriginals, who have been convicted and sentenced to death, and if he has read the report of Professor Baldwin Spencer, which has just been circulated among members, dealing with the unfair treatment of aboriginal prisoners compared with that of white prisoners? In view of the circumstances disclosed by the newspaper reports, will the honorable gentleman see that no steps are taken to carry out the penalty imposed until he himself has hadan opportunity to thoroughly investigate the case ?

Mr GLYNN:
Minister for External Affairs · ANGAS, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

– I have not yet had a chance to go into the case, having been occupied this morning with a deputation; but, of course, all cases in which the death penalty is imposed are carefully investigated by the Minister, who reads all relevant documents. Recently, when two aboriginals were convicted of manslaughter, I sent to the Northern Terri tory for all the documents connected with the case, including the Judge’s notes, so that I might read them myself before making any recommendation to the Cabinet, andI shall follow the same course in this case. As to Professor Baldwin Spencer’s report, I shall study it carefully, and see what should be done in the matter referred to.

Mr BRENNAN:
BATMAN, VICTORIA

– The question of the honorable member for Cook covers, in part, a question that I had intended to address to the Minister. I should also like to ask him if he will take into consideration the advisability of giving the House an opportunity to express an opinion on the infliction of the death penalty upon uncivilized natives of the Northern Territory, or of any other part of Australia under Federal control ?

Mr GLYNN:

– I cannot promise to ask the opinion of the House in every case in which the death penalty is imposed, but I assure honorable members that the same caution and deliberation that are observed in connexion with the imposition of the death penalty on white persons are observed when aboriginals are affected. Both the last Government and this most carefully considered the case of a native who was one of two convicted for the murder of a Chinaman in the Northern Territory, and it was only under a sense of imperative necessity that his execution was resolved upon. The question whether the other man should be executed is still under consideration, and cannot be decided until all the notes in connexion with the case have been considered by me and a recommendation made to the Executive. Four months must elapse between the sentence and the execution.

page 1318

QUESTION

SUGAR EXCISE

Mr TUDOR:
YARRA, VICTORIA

– Over a week ago I asked the Prime Minister a question relating to the amount of sugar in bond at the date of the proclamation of the repeal of the Sugar Excise Act? I also asked for the names of the persons interested, and the quantity of sugar they had in bond on that date; and for copies of any correspondence which had passed between the parties and the Department. The Prime Minister informed me that the information was being obtained. I now desire to ask the Minister of Trade and Customs when we are likely to get it ?

Mr GROOM:
LP

– The honorable member will obtain the information almost immediately. Some of it has already been obtained. The remainder will be procured as soon as possible.

page 1319

QUESTION

TASMANIAN FRUIT IN SYDNEY

Mr McWILLIAMS:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA · REV TAR; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917; CP from 1920; IND from 1928

– I desire to ask the Prime Minister, without notice, whether he has obtained any further information with regard to the holding up of Tasmanian fruit on Sydney wharfs?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

– A reply has been received from Sydney from the Collector of Customs to the effect that the company’s employes and the fruit merchants themselves are discharging cargoes, and that everything is proceeding expeditiously. The fruit is in good condition, and apparently no harm has resulted.

page 1319

QUESTION

DISLOYAL UTTERANCES

Mr MATHEWS:
MELBOURNE PORTS, VICTORIA

– I desire to ask the Prime Minister, without notice, whether he has observed reports of several disloyal utterances made yesterday in the State of Victoria ? One case occurred at Port Melbourne, where a citizen is reported to have said -

When they were sufficiently strong and struck the blow, landlords, instead of singing “ God gave the King,” as is fashionable nowadays, will sing “God savethe rent!”

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! The honorable member is not in order. The Government have nothing to do with the private opinions of citizens.

Mr MATHEWS:

– I think, sir, that if you will hear me out you will see that I am inorder. At another meeting, that of the Protestant Defence Association, Dr. Leeper is reported to have said that he was willing to aid and abet-

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! The honorable member must resume his seat. I have pointed out on several occasions that questions put to Ministers must have reference to the administration of the Departments of which they have charge, or to public affairs with which they are connected. The honorable member is now asking Ministers a question in regard to the utterances of private citizens, which have no connexion with their Departments. The question is absolutely out of order.

Mr MATHEWS:

– I want to know whether the Prime Minister will take action-

Mr SPEAKER:

– The honorable member must not traverse my ruling. The question is out of order, and cannot be put.

Mr MATHEWS:

– On a point of order - how can you possibly say that my question is not in order when you have not heard me ? This is a constitutional point.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order ! The honorable member must not argue the point with the Chair. There is only one way in which a ruling can be objected to, and that is provided for in the Standing Orders. It is within the province of the Speaker to decide whether a question is permissible or not. It is not for the House even to decide that. It is a matter entirely within the province of the Speaker. The honorable member’s question has already been ruled out of order.

Mr MATHEWS:

– What I wish to do is to ask the Prime Minister whether he will advise the Governor-General to approach the State Governor with a view to getting him to interfere and put a stop to such disloyal utterances? Dr. Leeper talked about arming, organizing, and drilling, and about fighting England.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order !

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

– I can undertake to do no such thing.

Mr SPEAKER:

– I have already ruled the question out of order, and, if a question is not in order, the answer is also not in order.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– I think we had better mind our own business.

Mr Mathews:

– Are we to allow disloyalty of that sort?

page 1319

INTER-STATE COMMISSION

Mr GROOM:
LP

– I promised the honorable member for Yarra that I would lay upon the table information asked for concerning the forms relating to Tariff matters issued by the Inter-State Commission. Copies of these papers have been sent to each honorable member, and I now formally lay them upon the table.

Mr TUDOR:

– Will the Minister move that the papers be printed? They should be preserved amongst the parliamentary papers. Otherwise they will get out of the hands of honorable members, and we shall not be able to turn back to them.

Mr GROOM:

– Certainly. I move-

That the papers be printed.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 1320

QUESTION

INSPECTOR OF LIGHTHOUSES

Mr RILEY:

– I desire to ask the Minister of Trade and Customs the reason why it took him one month to produce the papers relating to the appointment of an Inspector of Lighthouses, and also whether all the papers in connexion with that matter have been laid upon the table of the Library?

Mr GROOM:
LP

– The reason why the papers were not produced immediately is that at the time they were asked for the motion of censure was under consideration. The debate upon that motion terminated whilst I was absent from this State. Immediately on my return I procured the papers and put the honorable member in possession of them. All the papers have been laid upon the table of the Library.

page 1320

ELECTORAL BILL: SECRECY OF BALLOT

Mr J H CATTS:

– I wish to ask the Prime Minister whether he has any mandate from the people for harking back nearly 100 years, and now seeking to abolish the secrecy of the ballot under the Electoral Bill, which is before the House ?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

– I emphatically say that no such intention is in the mind of the Government. We are intent only on one thing, namely, to provide for the secrecy of the ballot, while at the same time affording further facilities for voting to the people of this country.

Mr J H CATTS:

– I would like to ask the Prime Minister whether the words which he himself used in replying to a question put by the honorable member for Capricornia a few moments ago are not applicable to him - “ Do not actions speak louder than words?”

Mr Joseph Cook:

– I hope they do.

Mr J H Catts:

– I rise to a point of order. Is the Prime Minister in order in failing to rise when answering a question put by an honorable member ?

Mr SPEAKER:

– If the Prime Minister did make a serious answer to the honorable member’s question, he was not in order in failing to rise from his seat. But I took his answer as a sotto voce interjection.

Mr JOSEPH COOK:

– I would not do anything to hurt the feelings of my honorable friend. I hope they do.

page 1320

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH BANK

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:
EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I desire to ask the Treasurer what profits have been made by the Commonwealth Bank since its establishment?

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

– The accounts of the Bank are published quarterly. If the honorable member will give notice of his question, I think that I shall be able to give him the information which he desires to-morrow.

Mr FALKINER:
RIVERINA, NEW SOUTH WALES

– I wish to ask the Treasurer whether he will see that the Governor of the Commonwealth Bank does publish quarterly returns so that the position of the Bank may be understood?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– The law requires that to be done, and I believe that it is being done.

Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN:

– I wish to ask the Treasurer whether he is aware that the Governor of the Commonwealth Bank is charging the farmers 2 per cent. more than he is charging persons who live in the city centres, and if the right honorable gentleman has the power, will he alter that condition of affairs?

Sir JOHN FORREST:

– I shall be obliged if the honorable member will give notice of his question. I do not think that I have any power to interfere with the Governor of the Bank in this respect.

page 1320

BUDGET

Mr HIGGS:

– Can the Treasurer state when he proposes to deliver his Budget?

Sir JOHN FORREST:
LP

– I shallbe glad to make an announcement to the House on that subject at the earliest possible moment. 1 hope that I shall be able to deliver the Budget statement very soon.

page 1320

QUESTION

POSTAGE ON LETTERS AND CIRCULARS

Mr FENTON:

– The other day I asked the Postmaster-General a question relating to the postage charged on letters and circulars. I pointed out that suburban business men and secretaries of organizations were compelled to come into the General Post Office, Melbourne, in order to secure the advantage of a cheaper postage rate on such mail matter, and I asked if the Postmaster- General would draft a new by-law with a view to giving suburban residents the same privilege as is enjoyed by business men in Melbourne.

Mr AGAR WYNNE:
Postmaster-General · BALACLAVA, VICTORIA · LP

– The concession to which the honorable member refers was granted to persons posting large quantities of matter, and to obviate the purchase by them of stamps. If we made the concession in respect of every post office, however, the work of the officials would be enormously increased, and the cost would be excessive. I do not think that very much inconvenience is involved in requiring persons to forward such matter to the Central Office.

page 1321

QUESTION

PREFERENTIAL TRADE TREATIES

Mr HIGGS:

asked the Minister of Trade and Customs, upon notice -

Whether, in any preferential trade treaty between the Commonwealth and any country, the Government will provide that only those goods manufactured or produced by workers receiving the Australian standard rate of wages shall be allowed to come into Australia under preferential rates of duty ?

Mr GROOM:
LP

– It is doubtful whether any trade treaty could be concluded upon the terms suggested by the honorable member.

page 1321

QUESTION

ELECTORAL ACT

Incapacitated or Illiterate Voters - Mr. Herbert Brookes : Expenditure on Recent Elections.

Mr GREGORY:
DAMPIER, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister of Home Affairs, upon notice -

Under what section of the Electoral Act is Regulation, page 17, No. 5, dealing with “ physically incapacitated or illiterate electors voting before an electoral registrar “ framed ?

Mr KELLY:
LP

– Sections 139 and 210 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1902- 1911.

Mr THOMAS:
BARRIER, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister of Home Affairs, upon notice -

In view of the statement made by Mr. Herbert Brookes in the presence of Senator McColl, at Brunswick, that he had sent money to a Member for political purposes, has the Chief Electoral Officer requested Mr. Herbert Brookes to make a return in accordance with sub-section (8) of section 172a of the Electoral Act, showing all moneys expended, or expense incurred by him, in connexion with the recent elections?

Mr JOSEPH COOK:
LP

– No. The period within which returns are required to be lodged has not yet expired in respect of the elections as a whole or the referendums.

page 1321

QUESTION

PUBLIC SERVICE: TEMPORARY EMPLOYES

Mr BRENNAN:

asked the PostmasterGeneral, upon notice -

  1. What is the number of persons or employes in the Public Service, outside the Postal Department, who are temporary employes or exempt from the provisions of the Public Service Act, and what are the periods (substantially, in convenient groups) for which they have been so employed ?
  2. What is the number of such persons em ployed in the Post and Telegraph Department?
Mr AGAR WYNNE:
LP

– I ask the honorable member to withdraw these questions for the present. I will endeavour to get him as much information as possible, but I would point out that if the whole of the returns which he seeks have to be compiled, several months will elapse before the work is completed. There are a large number of persons in the Public Service who are employed, it may be, for several days, or for a week, or for a fortnight at a time, and to get a return which would embrace them would be a long and tedious undertaking.

page 1321

QUESTION

STABLES: MOORE PARK

Mr WEST:

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

  1. Is it the intention of the Defence Department to erect stables on the Moore Park site, abutting on the Park-road?
  2. If so, will he take steps to prevent this as being injurious to the health of the residents?
Mr KELLY:
LP

– The answers to the honorable members questions are -

  1. Yes.
  2. It is not considered that the erection of these stables will be in any way injurious to the health of residents. The sanitation will be on the most modern lines.

page 1321

QUESTION

OLD-AGE PENSIONS: PROPERTY OF CLAIMANTS

Mr SINCLAIR:
MORETON, QUEENSLAND

asked the Treasurer, upon notice -

Whether it is usual, when computing the amount to be paid to a claimant for an old-age pension, to debit the claim with 10 per cent. of the net value of property held by the claimant, and also with rent obtained for the same property ?

Sir JOHN FORREST:
LP

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

The full pension of £26 per annum is reduced by £1 for every £10 by which the value of the property exceeds£50. If the income, including rents from property, exceeds £26 per annum, the amount of the “pension is reduced by the amount of the excess. This deduction is made both in respect of capital value and income.

page 1322

PAPERS

MINISTERS laid upon the table the following papers : -

Inter-State Commission - Forms re Applications for Tariff Investigation.

Ordered to be printed.

Lands Acquisition Act - Land Acquired under, at-

Albany, Western Australia - For Defence purposes.

Bombala, New South Wales - For Postal purposes.

Port Adelaide, South Australia - For Postal purposes.

Public Service Act - Appointment of J. S. C. Elkington as Chief Quarantine Officer, Queensland, Department of Trade and Customs.

page 1322

GENERAL ELECTION : VOTES RECORDED

Motion (by Mr. Hughes) agreed to -

That a return be laid upon the table showing

page 1322

POSTAL VOTING

Mr SPEAKER:

– I would call the attention of the honorable member for Eden-Monaro to the fact that the notice of motion which he has upon the paper, relating to postal voting, asks for provision to be made which is already made and is being dealt with in a Bill now before the House. Unless he withdraws it, I shall have no option but to rule it out of order.

Mr Austin Chapman:

– Is it possible, sir, under the rules of the House to take a division without a discussion?

Mr SPEAKER:

– If the notice of motion is out of order, and cannot be moved, obviously it is not possible to take a division.

Notice of motion withdrawn.

page 1322

SMALL-POX OUTBREAK

Quarantine Area : Sydney

Mr WEBSTER:
Gwydir

.- I do not know that I have ever felt a greater responsibility in submitting a proposal, either in this House or any other, than I feel to-day in moving -

That - with a view to putting an end to the suffering, sacrifice of human life, and the commercial, industrial, and domestic stagnation in the State of New South Wales, resulting from the proclamation and administration of the laws governing small-pox epidemics - this House is of the opinion that the proclamation should be cancelled, and that isolation, combined with sanitary reform, the true enemy of small-pox, should be substituted for the present injurious methods.

The motion strikes at the very heart of the health of the community. It is the first step that has been taken to deal with the subject since the Federal Government took over the quarantine of contagious diseases. No doubt it is essential in a Parliament of this kind for honorable members to see, firstly, that any steps that may be taken may be effective for the intended purpose, and, secondly, that they may not be injurious to the people, whilst not giving any benefit in return. This subject bristleswith difficulties and complexity of opinions. Undoubtedly, it requires a great amount of study and attention, which, with all due respect to the Minister of Trade and Customs, I fear he did not give to it before the proclamation was issued. In dealing with a malady of this kind - it is a national, and not a parochial question - one ought to be able to look into the very recesses of experience to find out what has been done by other countries. It strikes me that three or four very essential points require to be elucidated in order to understand the problem. First, vaccination is an operation which has been in vogue for very many years. The medical fraternity have assessed the method, not always at one value, but at varying values, as experience has taught them the wisdom of it, or otherwise. Vaccination consists of injecting, practically into the blood of the human, poisonous matter in the shape of vaccine virus, taken from one of the most repulsive sources it is possible to contemplate. As the subject cannot be properly dealt with in an hour, I intend to show as quickly as possible the various phases which, in my opinion, are worthy of consideration. It is held by the advocates of vaccination that it is a remedy for small-pox - that is, that it renders immune those who have not got it from contact with those who have already contracted it. Further, it is said that the lymph itself - the vaccine - is of a pure character; that it is so clearly analyzed by the authorities as not to convey to the system many of the evils which are charged to it. What is the lymph that is used, for the purpose of vaccination t It is undoubtedly one of the most repulsive of all poisons that have yet been introduced into the human system. Dr. Jenner got his name recorded as the originator of vaccination, but he was not entitled to that -credit, because vaccination, or inoculation, had long been in existence in Turkey, perpetrated by a number of old women, who inoculated people from those persons who were suffering from the disease. From that primitive method, which was introduced into Turkey, Dr. Jenner seems to have got his inspiration. He proclaimed over a hundred years ago that vaccination gave a lifelong immunity from small-pox. That theory has long since been exploded. Dr. Jenner took the lymph from the greasy heels of a diseased horse. A horse suffering from grease is alleged by the best of our veterinary surgeons to be in a state of consumption, and horse grease formed the basis of the vaccine or lymph. Next it passed from horse grease pure to horse grease, then to cow-pox, taken from a cow through the grease of the horse ; and then spontaneous cow-pox followed. Next, with cow-pox, they produced small-pox inoculation. Then came the stage when they introduced the lymph from the calf. Having inoculated a monkey from a diseased person, they took the disease from ihe monkey to the calf, and then from the calf to the human. Then came the system of arm-to-arm inoculation, which was one of the greatest sources of trouble in the Old Country when I was a little boy; so much so that the lives of hundreds of thousands of children were sacrificed to that objectionable and impure method. Next came monkey lymph, and finally the lymph was taken from a corpse. Authorities reckon that the purest lymph - the lymph which is least injurious to the human - is that which is taken immediately after death from the corpse of a person who has suffered from the disease iri a developed form, Such are the sources from which we are inoculating the people of this country to-day, quite unnecessarily, while the action of the Government-for which I am not blanking them - has been given a certain support by the press, which has ever been behind the medical men who have recommended vaccination. Through these sources we are forcing thousands of people, indeed, hundreds of thousands in Sydney and suburbs, under a most objectionable system. Every day paragraphs appear in the newspapers urging on the people that vaccination presents the one and only escape from small-pox. We know that the disease, if small-pox at all, is only a modified form; and yet, as a result of the action of Dr. Cumpston, backed up by the Health authorities and the press, I know, in my own experience, though I have not moved about much - of more than twenty people between the ages of ten and forty who to-day are in their graves. Those twenty people are not a tithe of those who have gone under, or who will go under, in consequence of the deadly impurities which have been injected into the human blood, and which, developing slowly but surely, will show their effects in years to come. As a matter of fact, the medical authorities know little of the disease, and not one can tell what the virus of small-pox is. The tetanus virus, the tuberculosis germs* and the germs of almost every other disease can be detected by the microscope, but those of small-pox or of vaccinia have never yet been identified by any scientific authority, medical or otherwise. Since the medical authorities fail to identify the germs of vaccinia and of small-pox, they have no means of comparing or eliminating the inrjurious germs which are introduced into the human system by means of vaccination; and it is not maintained that it is possible to secure vaccination without the risk of conveying other and more serious diseases than smallpox to human kind. In regard to vaccination, authorities hold that there are two essentials, namely, pure lymph and its proper insertion. In the first place, for the reasons I have given, no certificate of pure lymph can he issued, and, as to the inserting aright of the vaccine, what are the opinions of the great authorities? If honorable members are inclined to treat this matter lightly or with hilarity it is just as well that the suffering people should know. As to the proper insertion of the vaccine, Dr. Curschman, a German authority, holds that there should not be less than twelve vesicles, six on each arm, to constitute proper inoculation. Dr. Bond, secretary to the Jenner Society, maintains that the more vesicles the better; that is to say, the more vesicles there are the more certain one can be of immunity from small-pox. Of course, one might carry that argument to an absurd conclusion, and declare that if a man had vesicles all over him he would be sure to be immune; though, of course, such a man would not live very long. Dr. Drysdale says that one vesicle is sufficient, while Dr. Adams, of Liverpool, declares for two, Dr. Greenhalgh, of London, for three, Dr. Sandwith for five, Dr. Debenham for six, and so on. Here we have a divergence of opinion ranging from one vesicle to six, while the secretary of the Jenner Institute says that the more vesicles there are the better. Under the circumstances a layman may hesitate to form any conclusion as to the efficacy of vaccination. It is alleged that lymph is capable of analysis, so that any injurious matter may be detected; but on this point the Lancet, in 1902, declared that, after investigating various lymphs, it had to pronounce them nearly all alive with innumerable extraneous organisms.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– Is the Lancet against vaccination?

Mr WEBSTER:

– I do not know, but that is not the point at present.

Mr Groom:

– Does the Lancet say what is the nature of the organisms?

Mr WEBSTER:

– No; but the fact that the organisms are present is quite sufficient for my argument now. The Lancet is the recognised medical authority in the British Empire, and we have that serious statement from it in regard to lymph. Further, we are informed that the lymph which came twelfth on the list, in order of purity, was that furnished by the Jenner Institute, which has grown up from the Jenner period to be the great authority on vaccination. When the institute, which makes this their sole business, cannot produce lymph free from innumerable living organisms, we see the immense possibilities of those organisms entering the human system in the general practice of vaccination. It has been contended that glycerine is the preservative of lymph, but the highest authorities have shown that glycerinated lymph is not free from these foreign bodies. Prom time to time various serums have been advocated, such as the enteric serum, which was introduced into South Africa, at the time of the war, as a preventive against enteric fever. And yet three soldiers died from enteric fever to every one who died from wounds received in battle. This shows that the serum which was introduced to prevent an outbreak of enteric among the troops had the same disastrous effects as vaccine has when used in connexion with small-pox. Then we have the Haffkine plague serum, which is generally used in India, and plague has been raging there ever since its introduction amongst the protected inhabitants of that country. The more they have been inoculated with the serum the greater has been the growth of the trouble.

Mr Higgs:

– To be logical, one should be vaccinated for a thousand and one diseases.

Mr WEBSTER:

– Quite so. If we accepted the advice of some medical authorities, human beings would be vaccinated from their infancy until, I was going to say, old age was reached; but people vaccinated in this way would never live to an old age. No one could undergo such treatment and live. Those who are opposed to vaccination have also to contend with misleading statistics, which, in relation to this question, are glaringly inaccurate. I guarantee that scarcely one of the certificates given by doctors in Sydney as to the causes of the death of persons who have become diseased as the result of vaccination indicated that death was brought about in that way. I know of the case of a young man who had never had a day’s illness in his life. He was vaccinated at a public depot, and a week later retired to rest apparently in good health save for a pain in his arm ; but in the night his wife, to whom he had been married only a few months, failed to rouse him, and, on striking a light, found that he was dead. He suffered from one of the after-effects of vaccination. It is acknowledged by eminent medical authorities that such diseases as apoplexy and paralysis are rapidly developed after the germ has been introduced. I knew of another gentleman, who was in an insurance office, and enjoyed good health until he was vaccinated. Two or three days after his vaccination his mind became unhinged. A night or two afterwards his people missed him from his room, and finally found him lying where the dog used to sleep, under the house, which was built on piers. He was totally demented. Two days after his removal to the hospital he died, and was buried amid the grief and regrets of those who loved him. I could quote case after case in which death has occurred as the result of vaccination.

Mr Boyd:

– Did the medical certificates state that these deaths were the result of vaccination ?

Mr WEBSTER:

– 1 do not know what the medical certificates say; but if the honorable member looks through the files of the Sydney newspapers he will be struck by the number of deaths of persons between the age of ten years and forty-five years since the outbreak of small-pox and the resort to vaccination. He will understand then something of the sacrifice of human life that has been brought about as the result of the action of the Federal and State health authorities.

Mr Boyd:

– But that would not be conclusive evidence.

Mr WEBSTER:

– -Doctors hesitate to give a certificate of death from vaccination. In such cases, the certificate usually gives the cause of death as heart failure, paralysis, apoplexy, meningitis, or one of the other diseases culminating from vaccination. Eminent authorities have denounced the medical profession time and again during the last sixty years for their dishonesty in failing to give certificates of death in accordance with the whole of the facts leading up to the deaths of the persons concerned. As showing what the medical men know of lymph, let me quote Dr. Elgin, one of the greatest authorities who is in favour of vaccination, and who, when examined before the British Royal

Commission, said, in reply to the question “ What is vaccine?” “ I would like to know.” Here we have a doctor who advises the public to be inoculated with vaccine the composition of which he says he “would like to know.” Is there any disease which would be treated in such an irresponsible manner as is small-pox by men who do not understand the nature of the remedies they are employing? Dr. Elgin was further asked, “ What is the original source of the strain or strains of the virus you use?” His answer was, “ I do not know.” Medical men know neither the source of the virus nor its composition. It is because of that lack of knowledge, I suppose, that they recommend the people to be vaccinated with calf lymph. Most of the authorities shirk the issue. Dr. Bolton, in his treatise on diseases, can find space for only nineteen lines in regard to small-pox and vaccination, although his book contains 466 pages altogether. He is a modern authority, and one would expect him to be up to date in his knowledge of small-pox and its treatment by vaccination. Yet we find him writing practically nothing about it in his treatise. This, I take it, is an indication that medcal men prefer not to offer opinions on questions which they do not understand. Another great authority, Dr. Citron, devotes only twentyseven lines in his work on Immunity to the discussion of this question. These modern authorities shirk the responsibility of trying to put before the people the dangers of vaccination and small-pox. I propose to refer very briefly to some of the living germs which, as reported in the Lancet, are found from time to time in lymph. In England, some time ago, a circular was issued to 4,000 medical men asking for their experience as to the diseases introduced into the human system by vaccination. Only three hundred and seventy furnished replies; but they enumerated more than forty different diseases which had been introduced into the human system in the desire to make it immune from one disease. Forty diseases were mentioned, including 126 cases of erysipelas, sixty-four cases of eczema, fifty-three cases of syphilis, twenty-two cases of erythema, and nine cases of scrofula, in addition to cases of cancer, convulsions, abscesses, blindness, paralysis, tuberculosis, meningitis, diseased bones, and many other diseases. The returns, of course, include only cases in which the mischief has followed directly and obviously on vaccination, and show only a small proportion of the total evil wrought. Every authority on the question lays it down that the information obtained from the medical fraternity as to the diseases arising from vaccination covers only a small proportion of such diseases, because the true facts are hidden. Syphilis is one of the most horrible and deadly of diseases. If I had to choose between running the risk of small-pox or being attacked by syphilis consequent upon vaccination, I would say, “ God preserve me from vaccination ! “ I would a thousand times sooner take the chance of falling ill of small-pox.

Mr Conroy:

– The honorable member would not argue that the one thing is consequent upon the other?

Mr WEBSTER:

– I am not arguing; I am giving authority. One writer says -

There is much evidence as to the ease and frequency with which such cases escape notice. In one of the cases of syphilitic epidemic after vaccination (of which Dr. Creighton has recorded a score in the Encyclopedia Britannica), which was tracked out from an accidental clue by an independent medical investigator, it was found that the eleven cases in question were entirely unknown either to the general practitioners or public vaccinator in whose district they resided.

Syphilis, the worst and vilest of diseases, can be conveyed to your children and other members of your family by vaccination. When I last spoke on this subject, the press said that I was theorizing, and therefore I now quote the opinions of some of the highest authorities on vaccination. Dr. Collins, having in mind the danger of syphilis, moved at the London Medical Animal Vaccination Conference in 1879-

That, having regard to the fact that vaccination has in no way mitigated the severity nor lessened the frequency of small-pox epidemics; and, further, that it has on several occasions been the means of extensively propagating syphilis, as shown by Drs. Warlomont and Cameron - Resolved : That this Conference condemns the present system of vaccination as mischievous in its results, and inoperative as a prophylactic against the disease it is designed to suppress.

I could quote three or four more authorities on this aspect of the case, but my time will not permit me to do so. Let me deal now with that most terrible of diseases, tuberculosis, which to-day is claiming hundreds for every individual taken with small-pox. No disease is more fatal to the human race than the white plague, and from no source can it be conveyed more readily to the human system than from the calf. Go to any abattoirs, and you will find that calves are infected with tuberculosis, and the lymph taken from such calves may convey the disease to the human system. Thus, in the attempt to avoid small-pox, we risk spreading a disease a thousand times more dangerous.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– Before lymph is used the calf from which it was taken is killed and tested to find out whether it was tuberculous.

Mr WEBSTER:

– They cannot eliminate the tuberculosis.

Mr Groom:

– Lymph taken from a beast found to be diseased is not used.

Mr WEBSTER:

– They cannot positively detect the disease.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– I have been told that there is nothing easier than the defection of tuberculosis.

Mr WEBSTER:

– I have here authorities who say that it cannot be detected.

Mr Conroy:

– Koch distinguished the bacillus as far back as 1885.

Mr WEBSTER:

– Authorities agree that the facts relating to tuberculosis in Great Britain and Germany are sufficient to justify a warning against vaccination. In Germany, where the population is vaccinated three times before arriving at manhood, that nation being according to authority the best vaccinated in the world, there are three cases of tuberculosis to every one case in Great Britain, where compulsory vaccination has practically ceased, having fallen greatly into disuse for the last quarter of a century.

Mr Conroy:

– That is one of the grossest exaggerations I have heard of. The statistics show that the statement is not true.

Mr WEBSTER:

– I have the statistics, and they prove the statement. The honorable member professes to be opposed to vaccination, but he is trying to help the Government by a side wind. Heis trying to save the position by misrepresenting the case.

Mr Conroy:

– The case is quite strong enough without misrepresentation.

Mr WEBSTER:

– The same facts have been noticed in other countries. An eminent authority in San Francisco has put forward an opinion which tends to show that we are doing the wrong thingby trying to stamp out small-pox. It is urged by a writer in the American

Medical Liberty News, published in San Francisco, that every person who has suffered from small-pox is immune from tuberculosis and any scrofulous disease. If that be so, we are doing the country a great injury in trying to prevent smallpox by vaccination.

Mr Groom:

– Does the honorable member accept that opinion)

Mr WEBSTER:

– It has been published in an authoritative journal. The medical profession is divided in regard to vaccination, but there is this to be said in favour of those who are opposed to compulsory vaccination, that they have no pecuniary interest to serve, their opinions being diametrically opposed to their financial interests. On” the other hand, those who urge vaccination are biased in the first place, and, in the second place, influenced by material considerations, and, generally speaking, they do not give a fair representation of the facts that come within their experience. It is held by authorities that the germ of cancer may be contained in lymph, and that it can scarcely be detected when the lymph is examined. It is a strange thing that the country that has been longest under compulsory vaccination has the largest number of cancer sufferers, and the country in which vaccination has been most recently introduced has the smallest number. The inference is that by vaccination we convey from the cow to the human system a disease a thousand times worse than small-pox. Then, in a work, Recrudescence of Leprosy, and Its Causation, published in London by Swan, Sonnenschien and Company, an authority says -

In India, the West Indies, South America, South Africa, and the Sandwich Islands, vaccination is a prolific cause of leprosy, the most loathsome, incurable, and repulsive disease which affects the human race.

Thus by vaccination we run the risk of introducing into the human system consumption, cancer, leprosy, blood poisoning, convulsions, eczema, erysipelas, and a number of other diseases.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– I shall have to get mine undone after this !

Mr WEBSTER:

– I am afraid that the Prime Minister cannot. He, like anybody else, may get over the immediate effects of vaccination, but no man can say when he has got over the ultimate effects. “One can never be sure. He does not know what germs may remain latent in his blood, waiting for an opportunity to become virulent and to penalize him for the operation that has been performed.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– I hope that next time the honorable member is attacking me on the platform, he will remember tha t, and let me down lightly !

Mr WEBSTER:

– I may say “ ditto “ to the Prime Minister. Good authorities in Germany have declared that, not only are these terrible diseases likely to supervene upon vaccination, but that they are the actual outcome of it. One authority states that in Germany defective teeth and eyesight have become notoriously common since compulsory vaccination was instituted.

Mr Groom:

– Is it stated that vaccination is a cause ?

Mr WEBSTER:

– Yes; since vaccination has been imposed defective teeth and eyesight have become common.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– Who says that?

Mr WEBSTER:

– The authority is Mr. Herbert Spencer, who, I think it will be admitted, did not talk about what he did not understand. To put a case in point, I may quote the following passage, which happens to be the evidence of an undertaker - who applied to Mr. Lane,- in October, 1902, for a certificate of exemption. He based his objection on the knowledge of the dangers of vaccination which he had acquired in the course of his business. He .said he had placed many children in their coffins who had suffered terribly from vaccination, and mentioned incidentally that, of his own nine children, only the two unvaccinated had preserved sound teeth.

That gentleman had had opportunities in the course of his business of learning what the effects of vaccination were, and he did not hesitate to declare that the teeth and eyes of the community were threatened by this idiotic policy of forcing vaccination on the people. Another remarkable fact is that statistics show that before vaccination was compulsorily imposed in England and Germany, there were few cases of measles and influenza. Those diseases were enumerated in the vital statistics to a very slight extent; but since vaccination has become common it is found that there is a growing increase of measles and influenza, and that the risk of death from them, is greater than was formerly the case. Dr. Knaggs and Dr. Curtis Bennett, two London physicians, submitted to be fined rather than subscribe to vaccination. Dr. Knaggs was fined at the Marylebone Police Court in 1903, and he defended himself by saying that -

Cow-pox and a certain loathsome disease are so much alike as to be difficult to distinguish.

He is not the only authority who alleges that there is practically no difference between cow-pox and syphilitic disease. In any case, it is difficult to distinguish between the virus of the one and the germof the other.

Mr Joseph Cook:

– Apparently, the honorable member is against vaccination under any circumstances.

Mr WEBSTER:

– Any man who had seen what I have seen, read what I have read, and knows what has happened lately as the outcome of vaccination, would be indeed fit for some other place than Parliament - for a place where he would not be free - if he were to support vaccination. I cannot conceive of any sane man supporting vaccination if he knows anything about the history of it, and the results from it, throughout the civilized world. I have dealt with the effects of vaccination. The next question that arises is - Does it give immunity from small-pox? Does it secure what we are after? Let me cite the history of Leicester, a town in England, in reference to this matter. At a time when 90 per cent, of the inhabitants of the town were vaccinated, the deaths from small-pox were twenty-seven per thousand. But, in 1889, when the proportion of persons vaccinated had sunk to 5 per cent., the death-rate fell to 17.5; and, in 1901, it sank to 16; one of the lowest death-rates in the United Kingdom, despite the disadvantages of soil and situation. The National Vaccine Establishment in England has published statistics intended to support the theory of vaccination, but when these statistics were investigated independently, it was found that they had been multiplied by six, in order to make out the very worst case possible against non- vaccination. The experience of India tells strongly against vaccination. The policy has not allayed endemics or reduced the number of deaths. On the contrary, deaths from small-pox have increased since vaccination was introduced. In the north-west provinces, the disease has practically decimated the people in spite of vaccination.

Mr Groom:

– Can the honorable member quote the number of deaths amongst vaccinated persons in India?

Mr WEBSTER:

– The authority before me states -

In India, where small-pox is endemic, and where vaccination has therefore a rich field in which to exhibit its potency, its influence is thus appraised by the Punjab Army Commission of 1879 : - “ Vaccination in the Punjab, as elsewhere in India, has no power, apparently, over the force of an endemic. The whole Indian experience points in one direction - that to the general sanitary condition of the towns and villages must we look for the mitigation of small-pox, as of cholera and fever.” Similarly, in the report for 1884-5 on North-west Provinces and Oude : - “We are brought face to face with the fact that, notwithstanding the existence of an active vaccination service, small-pox swept over the Provinces just as if there had been none.” Later still, the resolution of the Bengal Government on the report of the Sanitary Commission on Vaccination in 1902, yields this striking excerpt : - “The Lieutenan’t-Governor would be glad if the Sanitary Commission could arrange to adduce some more direct evidence than is at present furnished of the efficacy of the vaccination in warding off the disease or mitigating its severity.”

In other words, the report was against vaccination, and ‘ the Governor of Bengal wanted to obtain a more favorable reportTake the facts about Sheffield in regard to this question of immunity. In wellvaccinated Sheffield, the death rate per 10,000 was 192, whilst in ill-vaccinated Dewsbury the death rate per 10,000 was only sixty-three. So that there was a higher death rate amongst the vaccinated than amongst the unvaccinated. Then we have the case of Gloucester, as tx> which the facts are quite clear. The writer of the pamphlet before me says -

I call Dr. Hadwen to witness, because, as a town councillor of that village and a man of brilliant professional qualifications, who, unprotected by vaccination, was in close attendance on the endemic all the time it lasted, he ought to know all the facts rather better than the ingenious fictionists who have perverted them to the use of vaccination. He affirms that, bisecting Gloucester east and west, the southernhalf contained 1,700 out of the 1,900 cases, although the ‘ halves were equal in respect of vaccination. The differentiation, of course, was in matters sanitary. The worst area presents the usual features - a preponderance of narrow streets, small houses, and bad drainage.

Dr. Hadwen, as the result of his Gloucester experience, declared vaccination to be- the most gigantic piece of quackery ever imposed among a civilized people.

I would further point out that, in England and Wales, where there are millions of persons unvaccinated, small-pox is, practically speaking, absent. Does not that imply that something more than vaccination is required to remove the danger of small-pox? Occasionally, this disease is brought from well-vaccinated localities in the Old Land to localities where the people have not been vaccinated, and the latter then contract it. But it soon dies down, because it is essentially a tropical disease, and will not flourish unless it can find a lodgment in dirt. I repeat that, owing to the complete sanitary and hygienic conditions which obtain in England, the disease dies out rapidly and does not flourish as of yore. But what is the position in Germany, which the Minister has held up to us as a bright example of the efficacy of vaccination 1 It is true that, up till 1869, vaccination appeared to benefit Germany. But, if the Minister had extended his research to a later period, he would have found that, in Prussia, the best vaccinated country in the world, there were, in 1872, no less than 124,000 deaths from small-pox. It is clear, therefore, that tho man who points to Germany for the purpose of showing the efficacy of vaccination takes up an utterly untenable position. Even with triple vaccination that country, in 1872, was bowed down with an epidemic which carried no less than 124,000 victims to untimely graves. Over- vaccination in that country culminated in a worse attack of the disease than has ever been known elsewhere. It is well worth noting that, whereas in Prussia, during the years 1907, 1908, and 1909, the deaths from smallpox amounted to 41 per 10,000, 43 per 10,000, and 62 per 10,000 respectively, in England, where vaccination has practically fallen into disuse, the number of deaths recorded during the same years was only 21 per 10,000, 10 per 10,000, and 12 per 10,000 respectively. lt is apparent, therefore, that in Germany the deaths from this disease were two to six times as many as the deaths from it in England, the home of the Jenner Institute, which was founded by the father of vaccination. If time permitted, I could quote equally corroborative proof from other countries of the inefficiency of vaccination as a preventive of small-pox. I appeal to the Minister, as the father of a family, and a representative of the people, to remove the embargo which is now injuring the citizens of Sydney, to use his influence to induce the State authorities to lift the restrictions which are at pre sent imposed there, and to substitute for them local isolation and improved sanitation, which are the only cure for this dire disease.

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

. -I have no intention, either of supporting or opposing this motion. I desire to use it, however, as a peg upon which to hang one or two observations by way of an elaboration of the questions which I put to the Minister of Trade and Customs the other day. Upon that occasion, I asked him whether he had considered the advisableness of limiting the embargo which has been placed on this disease in New South Wales to much more restricted areas than the whole of the city and metropolis of Sydney. No less than 650,000 persons have been subjected to this embargo, and any one of these who wishes to enter any other State is bound to undergo the very much-debated operation of vaccination. I say very muchdebated, because I will not offer any opinion either upon its efficacy or its dangers. I have lived long enough to recognise that in every department of life is to be found expert knowledge, and I do not like to “ rush in where angels fear to tread,” in discussing a question of this character, upon which whole volumes have been written. I will not express an opinion upon the subject of whether the disease prevalent in New South Wales at the present time is virulent small-pox. But one cannot shut one’s eyes to the fact that though this disease has been in existence there for some months, there has not been a single death from it; while, on the other hand, there have been a number of deaths from what medical men term “ heart failure “ - deaths which have been attributed by medical men to vaccination. I am satisfied from my reading that originally vaccination was a very satisfactory means of rendering people immune from different diseases, and we all know that in cases of diphtheria antitoxin is to-day recognised as an almost invaluable preventive. I do not think that any one of us - I do not care how wise he may be - unless he has given his life to a study of medicine, ought to speak with confidence on any of the aspects of this question.

Mr Higgs:

– But an honorable member can present the views of experts.

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– I do not wish any honorable member to lay down the law on this subject as if he were an expert. There are parts of this motion which are distinctly hysterical, just as there were parts of the speech of the honorable member for Gwydir, which were distinctly hysterical. This is a question which requires to be handled with a good deal of coolness and hesitation. Until a quarter of a century ago, at most, it was generally understood that the condition of a living organism was some proof of its real condition. That is to say, that if an animal or a man or an insect were found to be immune on the surface from any particular disease, it was thought that one could safely conclude that there were no germs of that disease in that organism. But medical men have demonstrated that very often diseases lie unobserved in a body for generations, and do not develop till later. The opinion of scientific men is that very frequently an animal from which lymph is taken may contain the undeveloped germs of a disease which existed in its progenitor very many generations before. Therefore, scientific men are beginning to doubt whether it is safe to take the lymph from an animal merely because it appears to be healthy to-day. When I hear a man talking law confidently I know that he knows nothing about it; and when I hear a man talking medicine confidently, I conclude that he knows very little about it.

Mr Higgs:

– That is how the honorable member repays research. His remarks animadvert on an honorable member who has spent a lot of time in reading up this question.

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– When men undertake great research they become very modest in their expressions of opinion; and for that reason, when men are loud-mouthed, I conclude that they have the proverbial little knowledge which is dangerous.

Mr Webster:

– The honorable member is positively insulting.

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– The honorable member may fit the cap on if he chooses to do so. I have not said that he was confident. I merely wish to show why I arn not confident. The honorable member is thin-skinned if he assumes, because I have denounced confidence on this matter, that I was referring to him. I think his speech was a most modest one.

Mr Higgs:

– Then what . is all this thunder about?

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– There is nothunder. The point to which I wish chiefly to direct attention is that, in my opinion, because an average of seven or eight cases of small-pox occur daily in. Sydney, there is no reason why the wholearea embraced in that city and itssuburbs should be placed under quarantine. In the case of plague, which is an infinitely more virulent and dangerous disease, we know very well that the practice adopted was to fence in a small area round the houses in which the plague existed. A yellow flag was exhibited as a, warning to the public not to go near;-, policemen were watching, and the people of Sydney and its suburbs were held frees to do as they liked so long as they did, not trespass within those narrow limits.. We have to-day a much less virulent disease, yet every man, woman, and child1 out of the 650,000 people in Sydneyis forced to undergo this much-debated, operation of vaccination before they can. enter another State, because they come-, from within an extensive area of quarantine. I quite approve of the Minister’sdesire to rid Australia of the disease, but I put it to him that his purpose would1 be just as well served if he would limit, the quarantine to small portions of that city, because if he leaves these areas unmarked he enables persons to go into the - infected smaller areas, and to move from< time to time into other suburbs and sospread the disease.

Mr Groom:

– Do you mean that in Sydney we should not allow people to» go from one suburb to another’?

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– Yes; I do not think they should be interfered . with so long as they do not go into the limited : areas which have been marked as diseased. If half-a-dozen cases existed in . Sydney in, say, half-a-dozen streets, those streets, or parts of those streets, would ‘be cut off, . as it were, from the rest of the community, and people would ‘ be guarded ‘ and cautioned not to go within thoselimited areas, but they- would be perfectly free in other parts of Sydney and ‘ its suburbs.

Mr Webster:

– That is isolation.

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– That is a very good word, and notwithstanding my honorable friend’s suspicion of me, I accept his phraseology. If that isolation of the limited areas were adopted, the embargo with regard to other States would I bat lifted, and people coming from Sydney would be treated as if they were entitled to go all over the Commonwealth so long as they had not gone within the small limited areas such as were adopted in the case of small-pox.

Mr Groom:

– Will you illustrate a case?

Mr BRUCE SMITH:
PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917

– Suppose that two cases have occurred at Darling Point, one at Woollahra, and one at Paddington. There are four cases. If those localities were marked off as limited areas, it would not affect the people of the other suburbs. The public would be cautioned not to go within those areas, however they were limited, and the people in the rest of Sydney and its suburbs would be as free as the people of Victoria are to-day. Now, we must not forget that Victoria is acting somewhat in this way with regard to diphtheria. I have the authority of the honorable member for Werriwa for saying that in this State, during last month, there were no less than eleven deaths from diphtheria. That is recognised, notwithstanding anti-toxin, in its normal condition, as a more virulent disease than is smail-pox, yet there is no attempt to quarantine the whole of Melbourne and say that no man .from Melbourne and its suburbs shall go to New South Wales. Suppose that the people of New South Wales said, “ We want the Minister to quarantine the whole of Melbourne and its suburbs, because there have been eleven deaths from diphtheria, whereas we have had none from small -pox.” Melbourne people would cry out at once, “ Why do you not1 isolate your cases so that the people of Melbourne and its suburbs may be free to go, if they like, about the Commonwealth so long as they had not gone within those limited areas?” It would be if the honorable member in charge of this motion will allow me to say so, an extension of his great anxiety for the community, because it would restrict the people of the healthy suburbs of Sydney from going into the limited areas in which this disease is known to exist. I think that to extend the quarantine area over the whole of Sydney and its suburbs, and put an embargo on 650,000 people because of that disease, was an excessive precaution. The Minister, I am quite sure, could get a better effect, and one which would be more pleasing to the people of Sydney, if he adopted limited areas, be cause it is a fact, as the honorable member states in his motion, that this quarantine is most seriously affecting, not only commerce and trade, but the restaurants, the places of amusement, and, generally, many of the money-earning occupations of the people of Sydney. I know from my own observation that there is a sort of lull in that city. Many timid people are afraid to go into public places lest there should be a danger of contamination. That could all be obviated, because, if the smaller places were limited, or fenced off, as was done in the case of small-pox there, they would say, “ Going into a theatre or a concert hall does not matter, because it is not within an infected area.” I suggest, therefore, to the Minister that he should consider the propriety of adopting an altered policy with regard to Sydney.

Mr HIGGS:
Capricornia

.- I do not desire to speak at any very great length. I thought it rather ungenerous of the honorable member for Parke’s to refer in nearly the whole of his speech in what I considered disparaging terms to the mover of this motion, who has, without a doubt, given a very great deal of attention to the subject. I am sure that he does not set up for a moment as an expert, but he, like any other honorable member, is quite entitled to read what experts have to say, and form his opinions on the views expressed by those experts, both for and against vaccination. If Australia had to wait until we got experts into this House some cases would never be considered at all - some questions would never be discussed. We are very much like newspaper men. A newspaper man has to know something about everything; he is able to form an opinion on most subjects, because he reads books and studies questions. To that extent we are like newspaper men. I think that the honorable member for Parkes was not fair to the honorable member in charge of this motion. I am very thankful to the latter, I may say, because I am opposed to vaccination - indeed, so opposed that in Victoria I have been fined a sum of £2 because I would not allow my youngster to be vaccinated. I do not believe in the system on what I consider to be logical grounds. If the Almighty considered itnecessary for us to be vaccinated for any disease, all our time would be occupied in being vaccinated for all complaints - from toothache to tuberculosis. I think the

Minister will have to alter his view. I believe there is a great deal in what the honorable member for Gwydir has said, that it is wrong to quarantine such a large area as that which is comprised within a radius of 15 miles of Sydney. I can well believe that where a number of persons are vaccinated with calf lymph and develop a fever it is quite possible, as they get better from the disease - because it is really a disease with which they are afflicted by vaccination - they give off, so to speak, the disease to persons with whom they come in contact. The system that ought to be adopted is the one which was adopted in 1883, when there were isolated cases of small-pox in Sydney. As I went along a certain street - Liverpool-street was one, I know - I would see a house barricaded with gum saplings tied to posts, and a yellow flag hoisted. One was not supposed to enter the house, and if he did he was likely to be kept there. The persons so isolated were supposed not to go out of the house. That plan was adopted in several places throughout Sydney. Persons were able to move about freely. They walked through Liverpool-street, Oxford-street, and various streets, and were not affected at all. It was not very long before the disease was stamped out, although it was a pretty virulent attack. I support the motion, which I sincerely hope will be carried. I trust that if it is not carried the Government will so alter the system of quarantine that the moment a case of small-pox is discovered in a house in Sydney the house will be isolated, and the occupants kept from contact with the general public. In my opinion, that would meet the case. I honestly believe that the sooner that plan is adopted the sooner we shall get rid of the disease which is now afflicting the city of Sydney.

Mr CONROY:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES · FT; LP from 1913

.- I think it was on the 8th July - some two or three days after the proclamation of quarantine had been declared in Sydney - that I spoke in this House, and pointed out that never before in the world had such a large area been declared a quarantine area, and that the system of compulsory vaccination it would lead to was not in accord with the best medical knowledge of to-day.

Mr Burns:

– I think, sir, that we ought to have a quorum. I do not con sider that this question ought to be discussed in a thin House. [Quorum formed.]

Mr CONROY:

– Ten weeks ago I pointed out to the House that the proclamation of such a large quarantine area as that of Sydney was quite unknown before to the civilized world; that we ought to pay attention to the true quarantine laws, which assert that the greater the area the less effective the quarantine, and that a mistake was made by the Minister’s proclamation. Of course, the Minister acted on the advice of his responsible medical officers, and, therefore, it is not the action of the Government itself that I wish to challenge.

Mr West:

– Surely the Government are responsible for the issue of the proclamation ?

Mr CONROY:

– The proclamation was issued on the advice of a medical man, who was, in the first instance, recommended for his present position by the Labour party.

Mr Burns:

– That has been denied.

Mr CONROY:

– It is absolutely correct.

Mr McWilliams:

– The State Government of New South Wales compelled all the Hawkesbury College students to be vaccinated before they would allow them to return to the State.

Mr CONROY:

– That was solely in consequence of the proclamation issued by the Federal Government. However, the point is that there is no instance in the world of a similar proclamation of a city. During the last twenty or thirty years, the advice of medical authorities has been to the effect that isolation is the chief factor in preventing epidemics. When I last addressed the House on this question, I quoted Sir James Simpson as holding that isolation was the chief measure for stamping out small-pox, and I also directed attention to various expressions of opinion on the subject. Sir James Simpson, Dr. E. C. Seaton, and others, agree that panic vaccination can never be relied on to check an epidemic; and I quoted the experience of the Sanitary Commission in India, where smallpox sometimes means the loss of 150,000 lives in one year. In the report of the sanitary measures adopted in India in 1879-80, page 142, it is pointed out that small-pox is not a disease that can be controlled by vaccination in the sense that vaccination is a specific, although everything possible had been done to vaccinate every soul in the country. In the report of the Army Commission for the Pun.jaub, page 186, I find these serious words -

Vaccination in the Punjaub, as elsewhere in India, has no power over the course of an epidemic. The severity of an epidemic is more closely connected with sanitary defects than is usually imagined.

That is the opinion of doctors who have made a full inquiry into the subject. In a report of 1884-5, page 203, regarding Oude and the North-West Provinces, it is stated that “notwithstanding the existence of an active vaccination service, small-pox swept over the district just as if there had been no vaccination.” Then I brought the experience down to Leicester of to-day, where Dr. Millard, the well-known medical officer there, who is himself a pro-vaccinationist, has asserted that it is, very probably, much easier to deal with small-pox when there is no vaccination, because, when people are vaccinated, the operation, while not preventing the epidemic, yet modifies the disease to such an extent that it is not so easily recognisable. I regret to think that the vaccination performed in Sydney has been, in many cases, riot of the type we should desire. Vaccination under such circumstances is utterly valueless, except as a relief to the mind of the person vaccinated, and would not pass in Germany, where the authorities insist on such a destruction of the cellular tissue as to leave scars covering at least 1 inch by inch. When any large number of people are vaccinated, there is risk of contamination of the lymph, such as I am afraid took place in Sydney, when it had to be hastily prepared, and was likely to give rise to diseases, not due to the operation itself, but to the impurities in the lymph. We may take it for granted that vaccination is, in fact, small-pox modified by transmission through a bovine animal. It is because of this fact that some authorities in Germany insist on, at least, a dozen marks before vaccination is considered efficacious. These authorities regard the vaccination as practised in England, and as experienced in Sydney, as utterly valueless; and, under the circumstances, the action of the Government in instituting compulsory vaccination is not advisable. It would have been better, in my opinion, for the Commonwealth Go vernment to have acted in conjunction with the State authorities in insisting on thorough isolation and the disinfection of the houses, clothing, and so forth, keeping all contacts under observation for successive days. Small-pox, we are told, and we may take this as representing the bulk of medical opinion, becomes contagious only some few days after the eruption has appeared ; and, of late, there has grown up a conviction amongst medical men that vaccination is not necessary to combat the disease. Sir Victor Horsley, who a short time ago was VicePresident of the Compulsory Vaccination League, spoke as follows, as late as April last -

We can now stamp out small-pox by sanitary laws, and the sanitary method of dealing with small-pox renders vaccination unnecessary. This in no way impugns my belief in the prophylactic effect of vaccination.

Here we have a very eminent medical man, while still holding the belief that vaccination is efficacious, declaring that sanitary methods can stamp out the disease. This view of the matter is, no doubt, created by a feeling that it is undesirable to disturb the integrity of the healthy body if that can possibly be avoided. The power of vaccination is not denied, but in view of the dangers consequent on vaccination, it is felt that in many cases, owing to the better treatment of to-day, and to the improved sanitary laws and administration, a better effect can be obtained by allowing the few people to run the risk of the disease than by vaccinating a whole population - that by vaccination the system is so disturbed as to render people more open to the attack of other diseases than they previously were. The anti-vaccinationists have an extremely strong case on this point, a case that I personally consider unanswerable. Those who are vaccinated might claim that they run no danger, while the small-pox will kill off all the unvaccinated people, thus leading, in other words, to the propagation of the mentally fit as against the mentally unfit. However that may be, “there is no question that immunity from the disease is only gained at the expense of a vital modification of the cellular elements; and, therefore, it becomes clear to even the feeblest mind that there are many circumstances under which we should not submit to vaccination of any kind. It astonishes me that medical men, who ought to keep abreast of bacteriological knowledge, have not recognised the soundness of this objection against compulsory vaccination. The question is whether we are not likely to suffer more by vaccination, and passing everybody through a modified form of small-pox. Of course, if those who are vaccinated do get a form of small-pox, I should say they are not safeguarded properly vaccinated. When I hear of persons who have not suffered from vaccination, I know that they are not immune.

Mr McWilliams:

– Every one suffers more or less from vaccination.

Mr CONROY:

– But many suffer so slightly that they cannot be considered to be safeguarded. I take it that unless a vaccinated person suffers from pains in the loins and back, and has a temperature at least three or four degrees above normal, the operation cannot be said to be successful. I am glad that the medical faculty have changed their opinion as to the length of time during which vaccination confers immunity. If immunity were conferred for life, it is clear to me that the modifications of the cellular elements would continue throughout life, and that, therefore, there would be no hope of regaining the biological tone which existed when the person treated was in good health. It is good to learn that, in many cases, the introduction of the virus has conferred immunity for only a certain time, because the shorter the time in respect of which the immunity is conferred, the better the chance of the individual to regain his former healthy conditions. This fact is so well recognised in regard to the treatment of diphtheria, that, although there is a well-known antitoxin with which many medical men were at first inoculated, its use has, to a large extent, been dropped, not because any doctor disbelieves in its efficacy, but simply because certain results have been observed to follow upon its use. It was observed that previously healthy people were deranged to such an extent that it took many of them months to recover their former state of health. Although we know all about the anti-toxin, and medical men say that, as a prophylactic it has a greater value than has vaccine, the authorities do not recommend it, owing to their observation of the serious effects which have followed its use in many cases. The position is the same in regard to the introduction of the enteric serum. That serum was largely used in South Africa for a while, but it was found that in many cases those into whose system it had been introduced became supersensitive - became much more sensitive to the disease of enteric than they were before. One of the difficulties in regard to vaccination and the introduction of most serums is that, in a certain percentage of cases, reasoning on the analogy of the results obtained from the inoculation of cattle against anthrax, the persons treated become supersensitive. It has been found that about 11 per cent. of the cattle inoculated even for anthrax become supersensitive.

Mr Fleming:

– That, I am afraid, is a misstatement.

Mr CONROY:

– I am giving the figures quoted in regard to experiences abroad, although I cannot say that I have noticed the same results in Australia.

Mr Fleming:

– I have done a lot of it, and find there is not 1 per cent.

Mr CONROY:

– The honorable member is speaking of the deaths from anthrax among animals which have been inoculated, whilst I have been referring to the supersensitiveness resulting from inoculation. The supersensitiveness manifests itself in this way : that, in the case of a second outbreak, many of the cattle previously inoculated become more liable to contract the disease than before. The fatalities, however, are nothing like as heavy as where therehas been no inoculation.

Mr Fleming:

– The liability to contract the disease is also not as great.

Mr CONROY:

– The percentage I have referred to is quoted as the result of observations in the treatment of over a million and a half of cattle.

Mr Fleming:

– Where was this?

Mr CONROY:

– All through Poland, Austria, and in parts of Prussia. It has been found that a certain proportion of those treated become supersensitive, and, reasoning from that analogy, we may justifiably believe that a certain proportion of human beings vaccinated against smallpox become supersensitive. If we had the same results in respect of vaccination as have been experienced in connexion with the inoculation of cattle, we should have 10 per cent. of the persons so treated becoming supersensitive. But it is not necessary for the purposes of my argument to suppose that there is more than 1 per cent. The moment we agree to that assumption we get an explanation of the cases of generalized vaccinia that have occurred in Sydney. There seems to be a tendency for the vaccinia, after its introduction to the human system in some people, to return largely to its original severity. The subject treated becomes supersensitive and an active cause of contagion. In fact, such persons are able to distribute the contagion. Consequently, where we have a community only partially vaccinated, there is an absolute tendency to spread the disease of vaccinia, which is indistinguishable from small-pox. The disease is spread in a form which is indistinguishable from small-pox save by the mildness of the eruption. We have had a good deal of that in Sydney. Two and a-half months ago I pointed out, in this House the danger that was likely to arise in this respect. I said that the medical men in charge of the arrangements for the suppression of the outbreak did not seem to have given sufficient weight to that side of the question. It is quite clear that many people when vaccinated become a source of contagion to others. We all know that lymph can be transferred directly from one person to another, but the contagion may also be indirectly spread. In at least 3.3 per cent. of the cases of vaccinia observed by an authority, quoted in the Medical Times last year, the disease became exanthematous, and, therefore, owing to the eruptive nature of the attack, these persons who had been vaccinated became capable of conveying the contagion by the skin just as it may be spread in cases of true smallpox. There is a great likelihood of unvaccinated persons catching from those who have been vaccinated, not the true small-pox, but vaccinia. Such cases, under present circumstances, would be reported as cases of small-pox, and would be quarantined accordingly. I suggest that the Minister should obtain reports from one or two medical men on the question of whether it is not advisable to consider the outbreak which has taken place in Sydney as an outbreak, not of true variola, but of vaccinia. In other words, as in times past what were called epidemics of cow-pox occurred, although they were chiefly local, so, I think, the present outbreak in Sydney is one of cow- pox, and, as such, is absolutely undistinguishable from true variola. Very few of the patients are scarred, but even as the result of vaccination pitting can take place. Honorable members who have been vaccinated recently have only to look at their own arms to see that this is so. Pitting can occur as the result of vaccinia - particularly when the eruption spreads all over the body - as well as from small-pox.

Mr McWilliams:

– Does cow-pox cause pitting?

Mr CONROY:

– Many persons have been pitted about the arms and body after vaccination. In a standard work, to which I have recently referred, there are given photographs of pitting from true small-pox, as well as from generalized vaccinia, and it is impossible to distinguish the one from the other. Honorable members must have come in contact with persons who have two or three thousand little pits on their bodies as the result of vaccination. Judge Murray, who had been vaccinated in Sydney, became what is known as a generalized case, and, on returning to Port Moresby, he would have been quarantined as one suffering from small-pox if it had not been known that he had been vaccinated. I very much deprecate the language which has been used by the medical men in charge of the Quarantine Department, both here and in Sydney. They have declared that small-pox is the most highly contagious of all diseases; that it has wiped out whole populations; and that whoever comes in contact with it is likely to suffer death. The people of Melbourne and Sydney run a greater risk from diphtheria than from small-pox. In Melbourne alone during the last ten weeks there have been 1,474 cases of diphtheria, with fifty-four deaths. Change the name from diphtheria to small-pox, and what a scare we should have. There is a well-known anti-toxin or vaccination against diphtheria, but no one says that inoculation should be compulsory because diphtheria is prevalent. I am afraid it is rather hard for some medical men to dissociate themselves entirely from the monetary point of view of this question. Medical men in Sydney have collected at least half a million for attendances upon patients, and it is rather difficult, in such circumstances, to obtain a disinterested opinion on the question of small-pox and vaccination. I am glad to say, however, that I have had opinions from medical men in Sydney strongly deprecating the great fuss that has been made over the outbreak, and stating that, in their opinion, an entirely wrong practice has been followed.

Mr Pigott:

– Does not the honorable member think that we shall have more deaths from small-pox in the summer mouths f

Mr CONROY:

– The experience of all cold countries is that small-pox invariably diminishes as the summer comes round. It is a singular thing that a great many epidemics of small-pox have occurred in the twos and the threes. There was a great epidemic in England in 1872-3, and there were epidemics in 1892-3 and 1902-3. Every one of them raged during the winter months, but at the approach of summer began to disappear.

Mr Pigott:

– Does not the honorable member think .that the movements of population during the summer months will spread the contagion ?

Mr CONROY:

– Quite so; but I do not think that the danger in this regard is as great as some people imagine. In the Lancet, volume II., page 205, there is reported the case of a labourer who, while in a highly eruptive state, slept in a van with thirty other persons, none of whom contracted the disease. Dr. Millard also reports the case of a woman suffering from the disease who sat with about 100 patients in the waiting-room of an infirmary, yet the only person who contracted the disease from her was one who had been vaccinated in infancy and who sat near her. That was a case in which a vaccinated person had become supersensitive, and, therefore, more liable to contract the disease than she might have been if she had not been vaccinated. With regard to the quarantine which was declared, I propose to quote from a report of the Local Government Board in England. As far back as 1901 it issued a memorandum stating that there is no need for the quarantining of contacts, provided that their clothing is disinfected and an observation kept upon them. Referring to this, the Lancet, volume II., page 253, said -

Experience and judgment indicate this course as far preferable to quarantine, although it seems to have been practised in Australia.

Altogether apart from the useless expenditure it entails, it becomes impracticable directly an epidemic reaches any magnitude. The names of all contacts should be taken, and, to these, closest attention paid.

Dr. Sedgwick, in his Principles of Sanitary Science, points out that the comparative immunity of most civilized peoples to small-pox is due to greater cleanliness and the improvement of sanitary conditions; and Dr. Angelo Celli, Professor of Hygiene, of Rome, says -

Isolation and disinfection are the prime defences against small-pox, and vaccination at best is only of value as an auxiliary means to guard those who are most exposed to contagion.

He does not say that he does not believe in vaccination under certain circumstances. During the small-pox epidemic in Sicily in 1888-9, over 100,000 persons were attacked, and some 12,611 died. In Vittoria, where the entire population had been vaccinated and re-vaccinated, nearly the whole population - 26,000 - was attacked by the disease in some form or other - a confirmation of the opinion of medical men that vaccination does not check the spread of the disease, but only mitigates its severity. In Butera, however, where prompt isolation was resorted to, there were nineteen cases introduced, and only seven others followed. One of the doctors there believed in, and insisted on, isolation rather than vaccination. Professor Crookshank said - the authorities whom I have quoted are all what might be called pro-vaccinists -

Where isolation and vaccination have been carried out in the face of an epidemic, it is isolation which has been instrumental in staying the outbreak, though vaccination has received the credit.

Although Germany, in 1872, was probably the most highly vaccinated country in the world, over 125,000 persons died then in Prussia alone; but of the money received from France, some £10,000,000 was spent in improving the drainage and sanitation of Berlin and other cities, and the death rate from small-pox fell immediately. The whole credit for this has been given to vaccination; but isolation has also had a great deal to do with it. In Germany, they require a terrible reaction, it being necessary that the scars should be of a definite size -

Efficient vaccination, so as to afford fair primary protection against small-pox, means three or four proper vesicles with resulting scars of a definite size. The total sum of these must not be less than half a square inch. , .

In Germany, all children under twelve months of age must be vaccinated. It occurred to me to try to find out whether the death rate among the children who had to undergo this vaccination was greater than the death rate among children in England, where vaccination is light, and in many cases not resorted to at all, and I am sorry to find that, taking the five-year period from 1881, the death rate has ranged from sixty-eight to fiftyone per 1,000, higher in Germany than in England. That is a very heavy price to pay, and is a higher death rate than that from small-pox in some unvaccinated countries.

Mr Burns:

– The honorable member agrees with the honorable member for Gwydir then?

Mr CONROY:

– The reasoning of the honorable member was different. He made the extraordinary assertion that vaccination is no good. Then he said it is a disease, and that it has no effect in modifying attacks of small-pox. At the same time, he stated that it introduced a virus. Surely he should allow that it confers some sort of immunity of the kind conferred by an attack of small-pox itself. He should have pointed out, too. that the troubles that have followed vaccination have been due, not to the vaccine, but to objectionable organisms in the lymph, it being rather difficult to obtain pure lymph. In Sydney, a great many deaths have arisen from vaccination. I know of seven. In at least six out of those seven cases the death was directly attributable to vaccination. In three cases the death was due to heart failure, the relatives of the deceased insisting that the heart failure was consequent upon the vaccination.

Mr Burns:

– Some persons have lost their arms.

Mr CONROY:

– I have tried to discover such cases, but excepting one or two that I have not completely investigated, I have found that there has been gross exaggeration in the matter. What we wish to arrive at is the truth. Apparently the lymph which was distributed was so full of pus-producing organisms that in some cases persons lost their lives through being vaccinated. I have here a letter from a medical man, who says -

The lymph the Federal people are sending up here is perfectly disgraceful. I got some and vaccinated 200 straight off. At the same time I made a bacteriological examination, and, to my horror, I found that when the growth came up it was full of pus-producing organisms. I am now wondering how many cases of cellulitis and septicaemia I shall have on my hands. The stuff had never been sterilized. I was down at the Board of Health, and the arms that came along were a disgrace to a civilized community. This is not surprising in view of what I found in the lymph. This matter is very serious, because you might just as well have the tetanus or other deadly bacillus in the lymph as the ordinary pus formers in view of the carelessness apparently exhibited.

We know, too, that Dr. Tebbutt, of the Prince Alfred Hospital has said almost the same thing in regard to the lymph. It must be remembered that there was a rush for lymph due to the panic fear caused by the wild statements that were published, and it became almost impossible for the Department to sterilize it in the time allowed. It seems, too, that the care which should have been taken was not taken. Thus, a grievous harm was done to the community, because in many cases persons were practically compelled to be vaccinated. In view of what has been said by medical men about the tremendous decrease in small-pox being due to vaccination, I have looked up the English statistics, and I find that the death rate in the five years 1871 to 1§75, when vaccination was much more practised than it is now, was 410.8 per million, but that in the five years, 1906 to 1910, when vaccination had tremendously decreased, the death rate was only 0.2 per million. Of course, I do not attribute the falling off in the death rate to the abandoning of vaccination. It is attributable’ largely to the improvement in sanitation, and a similar falling off has occurred in the death rate from typhus, which has dropped from 81.4 to .02, and from scarlet fever, which has dropped from 758.6 to 86.2 per million. Vaccination, of course, had nothing to do with the decrease in connexion with those diseases. The decrease in the death rate from all these diseases must be put down chiefly to improved methods of treatment and better sanitation.

Mr Patten:

– And in the case of smallpox to immunity arising from vaccination.

Mr CONROY:

– A good many authorities assert that immunity can not be claimed for more than ten years, and our authorities make the period five years.

The English death rate per million forquennial periods covering the last forty the diseases I have mentioned, for quin- years, is shown in the following table - **Dr. Guy** says that it is generally admitted that, in all epidemics, vaccination tends to diffuse rather than to arrest the disease, and **Dr.** Gayton, who was at the London metropolitan hospital, puts down the period of protection conferred by vaccination as a very short one. He points out that in the hospital there were 1,306 cases of children under ten, all of whom had been vaccinated, and 137 resulting deaths, or nearly eleven deaths per cent. In Japan, after the population had been vaccinated, re-vaccinated, and, in many cases, vaccinated a third time, a great visitation of small-pox occurred in 1908. There were 18,000 cases, with nearly 6,000 deaths, a death rate of over 32 per cent. Nearly every one of those persons had been vaccinated. I am not quoting that as an argument against vaccination, because, in my opinion, the majority of the persons never were properly vaccinated. In any case, vaccination is only a fleeting protection - so fleeting, indeed, as, in some cases, to last only about six months. I am glad of that, because I hope soon to get rid of the effects of it myself. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr Higgs: -- What is the honorable member's own opinion about vaccination ? {: .speaker-K4E} ##### Mr CONROY: -- My own opinion is so strong that I would no more dream of asking people to submit to vaccination than I would ask them to fly over the moon. But an individual opinion ought to have no weight in this matter. The point is that unvaccinated people should have no danger to apprehend from vaccinated people, and that vaccinated people, if vaccination is efficacious, should have nothing to fear from unvaccinated people. Therefore, I would not force on people who object to vaccination the risks attendant upon the operation. It is a remarkable thing that whilst formerly tuberculosis was not very prevalent in Japan, an eminent Japanese doctor recently told a medical conference in America that he regretted to say there had been an enormous increase in the number of deaths from tuberculosis in. his country, and that this fact would, seem to bear out the hypothesis that probably vaccination had something to do> with it. I admit that it is difficult to identify the tubercular germ in lymph. In England, 2 per cent, of the beast? from which lymph has . been extracted have been found to be entirely tubercular, and the lymph from them has had to be destroyed. Under no circumstances ought lymph to be used for five or six week* after it has been made. I very much regret that during the recent scare the health authorities permitted persons to be vaccinated in an indiscriminate manner from freshly -made lymph. I have no hesitation in saying that many young women will hereafter suffer severely from what was done. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- The Japanese will not use lymph that is more than a month old. {: .speaker-K4E} ##### Mr CONROY: -- There is a difference of opinion among experts even on that subject. Some say that lymph should not be used until it is six weeks old. It has to be remembered that small-pox germs are not discoverable under the microscope, and that they are filterable. Small-pox has been defined as " the assexual reproduction of an amoeboid organism in the protoplasm of the cells of the rete mucosum." I hope that that phrase conveys a tremendous amount of information to honorable members. I must say that when an honorable member who preceded me was speaking about the question of whether lymph was pure or not, I felt inclined to break in and ask him whether, in his opinion, it was the staphylococcus pyogenes aureus, or the staphylococcus pyogenes albus, that was, in his opinion, the irritant that caused the greatest amount of trouble in Sydney. There can be no doubt that the evil effects following upon indiscriminate vaccination in Sydney have been very great, and are likely to make (heir presence felt -still more in the future. Personally, I felt very ill after vaccination, and I know of many who were laid up for several days and could not attend to their avocations. I have no hesitation in saying that, according to the best authorities -I have been able to consult, the indiscriminate vaccination that was practically forced upon the people by the unfortunate proclamation issued, and the equally unfortunate advice given by the Government, will be productive of very serious results to many young women. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- The Board of Health in Sydney advocated the vaccination. {: .speaker-K4E} ##### Mr CONROY: -- Of course, there is no compulsory vaccination in New South Wales, although vaccination became general in consequence of the scare. I am sorry to say that people followed the advice of the Federal authorities, and that the issue of the proclamation induced many to become vaccinated. I have no objection to medical men expressing their own opinions as to the efficacy of vaccination, but I do point out that there is a decided tendency for a bacteriologist to consider that these particular bacteria are more important than any other bacteria, and ought, therefore, to be particularly guarded against. I can quite imagine an enthusiastic bacteriologist, if he were allowed to have his own way, causing a whole city to be depopulated by starvation, and then congratulating himself on the fact that not one of them died from small-pox. I am afraid that it was a want of relative judgment in regard to these matters that caused a good deal of the trouble that occurred. If the advice of some other authorities had been taken, I have no doubt that a different state of affairs would have resulted . It must not be thought that there has not been a marked change of opinion on this subject, even in England. **Dr. Bond,** the secretary of the Jennerian , Society, has admitted that it is not necessary to vaccinate children .until they reach the school age. What is more, the pressure of medical opinion in England is such that to-day the postal authorities do not compel the whole of their employes to be vaccinated as they formerly did, but will accept a declaration from any man who wishes to enter the service to the effect that he objects to vaccination. Again, the English Public Service Commissioners, not more than ten months ago, issued an announcement, through their Under-Secretary, to the effect that in future they were perfectly prepared to accept any candidate for the Civil Service without vaccination, provided he made a declaration that, in his opinion, it was likely to be injurious to him. That is as great a climb down as could be expected to be made. Medical opinion throughout the world is changing on this matter to such a degree that it is particularly regrettable that we in this country should have gone back, and that so large an area should have been quarantined as to make the quarantine itself ineffectual. {: .speaker-KR8} ##### Mr Sharpe: -- Does the honorable member hold **Dr. Cumpston** responsible for the area quarantined in Sydney *1* {: .speaker-K4E} ##### Mr CONROY: -- To be perfectly fair, I must say that I should expect any body of men like Ministers, who cannot pretend to be experts, to follow the medical advice given to them. But, nevertheless, I certainly think that it would have been better had they supplemented the official advice with advice from outside. They could then have balanced the two. They could have balanced the commercial with the medical side of the question, and could have seen whether there was not some other mode of coping with the difficulty. I have not the slightest doubt that the mode which they adopted was not the right one. I do not think that the doctors who gave the advice which was acted upon were sufficiently cognisant of the far-reaching affairs of a great city. Of course, I do not impute the smallest wrong motives, but it is regrettable nevertheless that other advice was not taken. I do not think that the quarantining of a large area should have been recommended. It 'would have been preferable to adopt isolation and disinfection. If that plan had been adopted, we should have saved ourselves a tremendous amount of loss of trade, and I also believe that we should have saved a number of lives. {: .speaker-KXU} ##### Mr Patten: -- Does the honorable member know what the consensus of opinion of the medical faculty in Sydney is on this matter? {: .speaker-K4E} ##### Mr CONROY: -- I know of one medical man who, in spite of the fact that he admitted that he had made £2,000 out of the small-pox scare, has said that while it is an ill wind that blows no one any good, he was certainly of opinion that it was inadvisable to follow the procedure that was pursued. I may add that I have consulted many medical men, ali of whom approve of the policy of isolation and disinfection, and who regret that the State and Federal authorities did not work better together. It has been pointed out to me by half-a-dozen medical men that never, in any circumstances, would they recommend vaccination during an epidemic, because, as they say, it is impossible under such circumstances to exercise proper care in regard to the lymph used. I am satisfied that if an inquiry were held the evidence would cause such a shock throughout the civilized world that it would do infinite harm. Medical men have told me that. One medical man said that, although he vaccinated many people, he was particularly careful to introduce very little lymph in order that, if the vaccination took, it might do as little damage as possible, because, as he said, " I was not sure of the quality of the lymph which I was using." **Dr. Tebbutt** pointed out the imperfect nature of the lymph. Whilst it is quite true that medical men as a whole are not against vaccination, they are at one in the belief that there should be no vaccination during an epidemic of small-pox. It has been well put by Stephenson and Murphy - The direction in which vaccination acts as a controlling agent in the severity and fatality of small-pox is chiefly in modifying the eruption. It will thus be seen that vaccination makes small-pox a very much less loathsome disease than it otherwise would be. Indeed, it would be strange if it did not have that effect in the great majority of cases. But the chief objection to vaccination lies in the fact that it is considered undesirable, in view of present knowledge, to disturb the integrity of a healthy body by the introduction of any serum unless the person to be vaccinated runs a greater risk of contracting disease in his daily avocation than he would run as the result of the introduction of the serum into his body. {: .speaker-JNV} ##### Mr Bamford: -- How is that going to be found out? {: .speaker-K4E} ##### Mr CONROY: -- If the honorable member were a doctor in attendance upon small-pox patients, it would be advisable for him to be vaccinated, although there are cases upon record in which doctors have contracted small-pox within six months of their being vaccinated. In the army and navy of Japan, as a matter of fact, the men are vaccinated every six months. The proposition may, therefore, be laid down that vaccination never con trolled an epidemic in the sense of preventing small-pox. A great many medical men assert that the outbreak in Sydney is not one of small-pox, but of vaccinia.If it be not vaccinia, one or two of the best medical men whom I know are unable to explain why there have been no fatalities. In this connexion, we must recollect that in a great many cases vaccinia would exhibit exactly the symptoms which are exhibited in the Sydney outbreak to-day. There would be the same eruption, the same skin disease - in fact, the two diseases would be absolutely indistinguishable under the microscope. Even if an attempt were made subsequently to vaccinate a patient with a view to determining whether the disease was small-pox, there would be the same resistance in the case of vaccinia as there would be in the case of small-pox. As the outbreak in Sydney is of such an extremely mild type, it is very possible that it is vaccinia, and not small-pox. {: #subdebate-21-0-s5 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- Order ! The honorable member's time has expired. {: #subdebate-21-0-s6 .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM:
Minister of Trade and Customs · Darling Downs · LP .- The honorable member who has moved this motion-- {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- **Mr. Speaker,** I rose before the Minister, anyhow. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- I extended to two honorable members the courtesy of speaking before me-- {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- I am going to speak. I claim my right to do so. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- Order ! Will the honorable member for East Sydney resume his seat It is the right of the Speaker to call upon any honorable member, and I called upon the Minister of Trade and Customs when he rose, in accordance with the customary courtesy of the House, to give Ministers when they rise preaudience of private members. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- Why not follow the usual custom ? {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- My speech will not close the debate. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- But why not follow the usual practice? I have been waiting to speak all the afternoon. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- If the honorable member for East Sydney persists in disregarding the authority of the Chair, I shall have to name him. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- I am being unjustly dealt with. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- I name the honorable member for East Sydney for disregarding the authority of the Chair. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- Withdraw. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- I will not. I have been waiting all the afternoon to speak, and I have given way to other honorable members. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- I have no desire to take an extreme course with the honorable member, and I will give him an opportunity to apologize. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- Well, I have been here all the afternoon. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- It is one of the grossest forms of disorder for the honorable member to interrupt when the Speaker is on his feet. I must ask the honorable member to apologize. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- He is playing up every day. It is time that he was dealt with. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- I have no wish to take an extreme course. The honorable member for East Sydney knows the rules of the House. The Speaker must be allowed the right to call upon any honorable member in his discretion, and it is the custom when a Minister rises to give him preaudience. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- I am only asserting what I think is my right. I have been waiting here all the afternoon. I gave way to the honorable member for Parkes, who wanted to get home- {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- The honorable member is now making a speech. He must withdraw, and apologize. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- I think that I had a right to the call. I saw the Minister of Trade and Customs look at you- {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- The honorable member is continuing to disregard the authority of the Chair. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- If it is likely to cause me to be punished and put in the cells, I withdraw it. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- I have no desire that the honorable member shall be punished in any way. All that I desire is to conduct the business of the House in accordance with the Standing Orders, and it is my duty to see that those Standing Orders are observed. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- I apologize. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- I regret the unpleasant incident which has just closed. Out of courtesy to honorable members, I abstained from speaking earlier. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- The Minister had a motive for that. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- That is not correct. The mover of this motion practically asks for the cancellation of the present proclamation. That obviously takes us back to the cause of the issue of that proclamation. Of the tone of the utterance of the honorable member for Gwydir I make no complaint, because, although his motion is strongly worded, his remarks were temperate, and he put his case forcibly and with authority from his own point of view. I take it that the discussion of a matter involving the public health is altogether above party considerations. Honorable members are imbued with only one desire, namely, to preserve as far as possible the health of the community. In this particular instance the preservation of the public health of Australia from an Inter-State aspect is a duty which devolves upon the Commonwealth. The facts are that early in July of the present year an outbreak of small-pox occurred in Sydney. The Commonwealth Government took action on the advice which was tendered to them, and for that action I take my full share of responsibility. Our idea was, and is, that the Commonwealth and State authorities should act in complete co-operation. The obligation to prevent the spread of the disease within the borders of New South Wales devolves upon the Public Health Department of that State. The prevention of its spread to other States is an obligation which rests upon this Government and this Parliament. What are the facts *1* An outbreak of disease occurred in New South Wales, the exact nature of which was unknown. The medical officer of New South Wales was attending a conference in this city at the time. He hurried to Sydney, investigated the outbreak, and declared it to be one of true smallpox. {: .speaker-JPC} ##### Sir Robert Best: -- Who did? {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: **- Dr. Paton.** The New South Wales Board of Health declared the disease to be small-pox, and that before any Federal action was taken. At that time, nobody could tell what was the precise nature of the disease, whether mild or virulent. Our own adviser, however, was of the opinion that the outbreak would spread. I repeat that at that time nobody could tell whether the disease was going to be of a virulent character or otherwise. The action taken by the Government was not - as the honorable member for Gwydir suggested - precipitate. It was carefully considered. The Director of Quarantine visited Sydney, where he consulted the health officers of some of the States, and action was taken. A proclamation was issued by the Commonwealth, and it has remained in force ever since. I wish honorable members to realize that the regulations have no reference whatever to goods of any description. So far as any Federal regulations are concerned, goods are passing to and from Sydneywithout let or hindrance. {: .speaker-KR8} ##### Mr Sharpe: -- That is nonsense. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- The Federal regulations apply only to persons. They require that persons coming from, or passing through, the area which has been defined as a quarantine area shall be successfully vaccinated. That is the whole extent of the Federal requirements. The disease has continued to spread in New South Wales. Over 700 cases have occurred in the city of Sydney alone, and the disease is still spreading. During that period, the prevention of its spread in Sydney has been under the control of the State Health authorities. As regards the Federal obligation, the duty devolves upon the Commonwealth of preventing the spread of the disease to other States and the happening in other States of that loss and injury which is being sustained by Sydney itself. The question has been raised this afternoon as to whether it is a case of true small-pox or not. Obviously, on that matter, it is for trained scientists to speak. We have some evidence, however, as regards the nature of the disease. In July last, the New South Wales Board of Health declared the disease to be small-pox. Further, the New South Wales branch of the British Medical Association have declared the disease, in the city of Sydney itself, to be small-pox. Other medical men who have been consulted have definitely diagnosed the disease as small-pox. In addition, the ordinary tests show that it is small-pox. The vaccination test itself is specific. It has been uniformly and consistently negative, and each patient does not re-act to vaccination. Again, the New South Wales Board of Health, in a resolution which was received by the Prime Minister yesterday, declare the disease to be - an exceedingly modified form of small-pox, mild in its nature, and with no tendency to change its type and become more virulent. Obviously, the authorities point to the fact - take the New South Wales authorities alone - that it is a case of true smallpox. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- In a very mild form. There was no necessity to quarantine the city. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- We are all glad, I am sure, that the disease is mild in its form, and we all sincerely hope that that mildness will continue. At the same time, it is highly undesirable that the disease should spread to the other States. I am sure that the State authorities will agree that it is an obligation cast upon themselves to see that the disease does not spread beyond Sydney, and that it is exterminated at the earliest possible date. As I said, over 700 cases have occurred in the city. The suggestion has been made that the disease is only confined to specific areas in Sydney. I have here a list of over eighty centres in the city, with the number of cases for each month. I want, at this stage, to deal with the suggestion of the honorable member for Parkes that it might be possible to limit the quarantine to definite centres of Sydney. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- There has been nothing to prevent that during the last three months. The State will not do it. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- No. That matter, so far as the Federal Government are concerned, has been submitted to and discussed with the Director of Quarantine. Take the case of Sydney alone. In the city proper, in July, there were 24 cases; in August, 4; in September, 9. The city is an organic whole. One section of the city could not be cut off from another so far as the Federal position is concerned. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- They did so in 1883. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- Does the honorable member suggest that the authorities should put a bar round the city area, and say that nobody shall be allowed to go into or out of that area unless he is vaccinated ? {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- No; and that is not suggested. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- The leading business establishments are in the heart of the city; the residents are scattered throughout the suburbs, and the transport, the tramway system, and officials generally, go over the whole of the metropolitan area. So far as the Commonwealth is concerned, each of the persons in that specific area, if he goes into any of those other centres, may become a carrier of the disease into other parts of Australia, should he leave the metropolitan area without undergoing vaccination. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- It was the same in 1883. {: .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -- Order ! {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- I did not interject once during the speech of the honorable member. This is a matter affecting the public health of Australia, and I do think that I am entitled to put the case fairly. {: .speaker-KXO} ##### Mr Page: -- It affects more than the public health; it affects the lives of the people. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- Exactly. All that I ask of honorable members is to listen patiently. The Department is only too pleased to get reasonable criticism. Every human being is likely to err; and if honorable members bring pointed criticism to bear to show that our actions are not adequate, we are glad to get such criticism. I have explained the methods of the Department, and am now justifying its action. To-day honorable members have suggested that we should repeal the proclamation, and in its place substitute what they call isolation. So far, the Commonwealth and the State have been acting in co-operation, the former dealing with the matter from the Federal stand-point, and the latter dealing with it from the State standpoint. By isolation is it meant that the Commonwealth should stay its hand, revoke the proclamation, and leave the State only to deal with the disease? The State has all along in its own territory been dealing with the disease. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- Under direction. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- No; the honorable member is quite wrong. The State has had control, and the whole of the course of action in the city has been directed by the Sydney Board of Health. The Federal Government made arrangements with the Board by which the hospital in our area was made available for them to isolate their patients ; but, notwithstanding that isolation, day after day the disease is spreading. From the Federal standpoint, would that isolation alone have prevented the carriage of the disease into other States? Obviously not. Notwithstanding the isolation which has been practised, the disease seems to have got a hold of the city, and is breaking out in different parts of it at the present time. If our regulations were removed, and the persons living in those parts could freely go to other parts of Australia, they might, if unvaccinated, be carriers of the disease. What power can the Commonwealth exercise to prevent the disease being carried beyond New South Wales? There is only one way by which it can be done. We know by experience, and the advice that is given to us, that if persons are successfully vaccinated before they leave the quarantine area, the chances of carrying the disease to other parts of Australia are tremendously reduced. What can the Commonwealth do to prevent its spread ? Obviously, there is only one way, and that is to insist that persons going from Sydney to other States should first be vaccinated. Those who are immediate contacts may possibly be dealt with; but owing to the way in which the disease has been breaking out, persons have been developing it in the city whom one could not possibly suggest as being immediate contacts. That is the difficulty we have in dealing with the case from the Federal aspect. It has been suggested that we should revoke the proclamation. On what ground would we be justified in taking that step? Only on the ground that those persons in responsible positions, who ask us to lift the proclamation, satisfy us, and the rest of Australia, that the steps they have taken for preventing the spread of the disease into other parts are at least as good as those adopted by the Commonwealth. {: .speaker-JUV} ##### Mr McWilliams: -- My boy, who is a student at Hawkesbury College, was at home for the mid-winter holidays, and the New South Wales authorities compelled him to be vaccinated inHobart before they would let him go back to Sydney. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- Exactly. We have received from the State Government a communication, in which the Sydney Board of Health admit they believe in vaccination as a means of prevention of the spread of the disease. It reads - >That the Board has, by its strong advocacy of the effectiveness of vaccination as a protective measure, succeeded in inducing more than onehalf of the population of Sydney and suburbs to protect themselves in this manner. That is clearly an admission that vaccination is a method of preventing the spread of the disease. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- That is their opinion. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- That is their opinion. Further, the State Premier has announced his intention to introduce a Bill to provide for vaccination, whereby the authorities may cope with an outbreak of the disease by quarantining specific areas. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- He said three months ago that that was to be his first measure, but he has not touched it. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- Yes. The Premier states that the measure is to give such power as will render Federal action superfluous. When its provisions are in operation, and when we can satisfy ourselves that the steps taken are equivalent to those now in force for preventing the spread of the disease to other parts, we shall then be in a position to consider the question of removing the regulation. This disease has been prevalent in Sydney for nearly three months, and it is liable, unless some steps are taken, to spread throughout Australia in the same way as it has spread in other parts of the world. An epidemic exactly similar to the present one, and, indeed, in all probability the direct progenitor of the present outbreak, occurred in Trinidad between 1901 and 1904. According to the report of the Royal Society of Medicine for May, 1908 - >It had been imported to that island from Venezuela, and seems to have been in existence in the West Indies for some years, at any rate, before this, and to have remained throughout of the same type. During the epidemic in Trinidad over 5,000 persons were attacked, of whom twentyeight died. From the West Indies the disease travelled up through the United States, where mild epidemics have occurred at intervals during the last ten years, to Canada. We know that it has been epidemic in Western Canada for at least the last two years. The public health authorities in the United States refer to the matter in several of their reports. For instance, the annual report on small-pox in the United States says - >One of the most notable features of the smallpox which has been more or less prevalent in the United States for at least ten years is its extreme mildness and the small number of deaths which it has caused ; but, notwithstanding this, there were recorded eleven localities in which small-pox carried a high death rate. The Ontario annual report for 1911 contains this statement - >Since the beginning of the year, small-pox, mostly of the milder type, has been reported from numerous places. The annual report of the United States Public Health Service for 1909 says - >The number of cases reported in 1909 was, therefore, a little less than half of that of 1902, whereas the number of deaths was- approximately i-25th as great. The marked decrease in the mortality of the disease is of the greatest interest and importance. It means that while there are many cases of small-pox occurring at present at various parts of the United States, few are fatal. The disease has assumed a very mild form, less serious in its results than many of the commoner diseases that usually attract little attention. > >The conclusion must not be drawn, however, that the disease has lost its importance from a public health stand-point, for at times in isolated outbreaks it takes on a virulent form with a high death rate, meriting all the dread with which communities have been accustomed to look upon it. The cause of this occasional change from a mild to a highly fatal disease is not known, nor can it be foretold whether the general mild type existing at present may not at some time change to the more usual fatal form. Then is given a specific instance of the disease continuing in a mild form from March right up to October, and then breaking out in a malignant form. On page 186 of the United States Public Health report for 1912, we are told - >The malignant type of the disease appeared in Los Angeles, California, in November, 1911 The mild form of the disease had been present in the city from March to the end of October. During November and December the disease appeared in virulent form, and out of twenty-five cases reported during these two months, six ended fatally. In the light of this experience, it is somewhat premature to speak confidently of the nature of this disease. I do not intend to multiply the quotations, but those I have given show that in the United States and Canada the disease, after running in a mild form, has, in some instances, presented a malignant aspect calling for prompt action. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- Is that the only case of malignity? {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- I mention this to show that, so far as Australia is concerned, the disease may spread over the whole continent if we are not careful, in the same way as it spread through the United States to Canada. The next question is the nature of the regulations issued by this Government. The regulations practically require vaccination; and I have here a United States report for 1911 showing that, in order to prevent the introduction of small-pox to the Alaskan territory, it was required that all crews and passengers should be vaccinated, or show evidence of recent vaccination, or prove non-exposure to the disease for the preceding fourteen days. At the present time, New Zealand is directing against Sydney exactly the same regulations that are in force in the Commonwealth, while in Fiji, in addition to these restrictions, quarantine is imposed. In the United States, the regulation as to Inter-State quarantine is as follows - >In the event of the prevalence of small-pox, all persons exposed to the infection, who are not protected by vaccination or a previous attack of the disease, shall be at once vaccinated or isolated for a period of fourteen days. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- That does not refer to vaccination within five years, but to vaccination at any time. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- -The honorable member is against vaccination of any description. In regard to the regulations as to overland quarantine on the Mexican and Canadian borders, it is required that - >Persons coming from localities where smallpox is prevailing shall not be allowed entry without vaccination, unless they are protected by a previous attack of the disease or a recent successful vaccination. In regard to Canada, the regulation is - >Every passenger shall be required to furnish evidence, to the satisfaction of the quarantine officer, of having been vaccinated, or of having had the small-pox. > >Every person not showing satisfactory evidence of having been vaccinated, or of having had small-pox, shall be vaccinated by a quarantine officer or detained under observation. It is rather interesting to see how the Australian States acted when there was an outbreak at Launceston in 1903. In that year, the Premier of New South Wales telegraphed to the Premier of Tasmania as follows - . . the Board of Health had decided that passengers able, on arrival, to show signs of successful vaccination done immediately before leaving Tasmania, would be admitted after inspection, provided that they had not, within fifteen days prior to sailing, been in Launceston or any other infected place. All persons from Launceston, or those who, within fifteen days, had visited there or any other infected place, would be detained in quarantine for twenty-one days, or if re-vaccinated before leaving for fifteen days from the date of the successful vaccination. The Victorian Government took similar action. Instructions were given by the Chairman of the Board of Health to officers boarding vessels that - . . any passenger who was not vaccinated more than fourteen days and less than three years had to be quarantined; all passengers vaccinated as above to be released under surveillance. {: .speaker-JUV} ##### Mr McWilliams: -- Similar restrictions were made against Hobart, though there was no case of small-pox in that city. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- Quite so. Now that the Commonwealth has got control of quarantine the Government are taking exactly similar action so far as Inter-State travellers are concerned. The honorable member for Gwydir will, I think, frankly admit that the case he presented was against vaccination altogether. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- The Minister does not propose to deal with that matter ? {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- I do not, more than to say that the consensus of opinion amongst medical authorities is undoubtedly against the honorable member for Gwydir. Mr.Webster. - Nothing of the kind; the consensus of opinion is the other way. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- A layman may not be competent to form an opinion on a scientific question of the kind; and, therefore, he has to be guided by the best medical advice obtainable; and, undoubtedly, the authorities prescribe vaccination as the proper course. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- Medical men have absolutely failed to maintain their case. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- Honorable members need not go so far back as the seventies for opinions, because there is that excellent article that appeared in the *Argus* on the 23rd July, from the pen of Professor Berry, of the Melbourne University. I quote this opinion of an eminent authority outside the Department. Professor Berry dealt with each of the objections to which the honorable member has referred, and showed them to be invalid. His final conclusion is - {: type="1" start="1"} 0. Small-pox is one of the greatest scourges of mankind. It can only be cured by prevention. 1. Australia, geographically and physically, is favorably situated for a most serious epidemic of small-pox, the chances of which are greatly increased by the large number of unvaccinated persons in her midst, every one of whom is a source of danger to his fellows. 2. Small-pox can be wiped out by uniform laws, compelling infantile vaccination, with compulsory revaccination. Without such laws the community is defenceless. 3. To delay until the enemy is within our gates is to add to the danger. The Government thoroughly sympathize with the people of Sydney, and regard the position of that city at the present time with profound regret. We sincerely hope that the State authorities may be able to cope with the disease; and, perhaps, some of the suggestions made here to-day may assist them. The desire of the Government is to have the proclamation raised at the earliest date at which that can be done in the interests of Australia. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr Higgs: -- Cannot the Government alter the form of quarantine ? {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr GROOM: -- Not at present. In the meantime, there is nothing to prevent the State authorities, through their Board of Health and Parliament, taking action to prevent the spread of the disease; and in the future, as in the past, the Federal agencies will be at their disposal. {: #subdebate-21-0-s7 .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST:
East Sydney .- This afternoon, I may have appeared a little obstreperous, but 1 really thought my rights as a member of the House were being interfered with. I can quite understand, **Mr. Speaker,** your ruling against me in favour of the Minister; but I did not think there was a Minister in Australia so mean as to deprive a member of the opportunity of speaking. {: .speaker-KFK} ##### Mr Groom: -- That is very ungenerous ! This is what we get for being courteous ! {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- The latter part of the motion of the honorable member for Gwydir I regard as the most important, and I thoroughly indorse what is therein stated. I do not wish to discuss the question of vaccination generally. It is a question on which there is great difference of opinion, and some of the authorities quoted are worthy of consideration. I must refer to the utter incompetency of the Minister of Trade and Customs in placing Sydney under quarantine. When **Dr. Cumpston** left Sydney after his visit there, neither the members of the Board of Health nor the State Ministers were aware that it was contemplated to take the drastic steps subsequently approved by the Commonwealth Government. The Board of Health is composed of men of great ability and experience, and they have been called upon to deal with quarantine questions on the occasion of a previous outbreak. Those who are acquainted with New South Wales and with Sydney know that there is no possibility of a dirty disease like smallpox spreading in any virulent form. Sanitation and ventilation will prevent dirt diseases, and small-pox is certainly preventible. The New South Wales Board of Health has a better knowledge of Sydney and its sanitation than has **Dr. Cumpston.** The Federal Director of Quarantine is a young man, of whom I have no desire to speak disrespectfully; but I do not think he has had that business training, and that experience in the control of a large Department, which would justify the Minister in determining, upon his advice alone, to take such a drastic step as he did in proclaiming Sydney a quarantined area. I do not think that the Minister himself realized what he was doing. Had he given a moment's thought to what must inevitably be the consequences of placing Sydney, with its population of nearly threequarters of a million, under quarantine, he would not have acted as he did. He would not have issued a proclamation under which people living on one side of a street in Parramatta are declared to be within a quarantined area, while those living on the other side of the street are free to move about a3 they please. I do not think any experienced officer would have advised the Minister to issue such a proclamation. **Dr. Cumpston** was only a few hours in Syd.ney before this action was taken. I am not familiar with Cabinet secrets, nor do I desire to elicit any; but it seems to me that the Minister of Trade and Customs could not have sought the advice of his colleagues before he issued the proclamation. Had the matter been considered by the Cabinet, I am sure that it would have been decided to seek other advice. Ministers would not have felt justified in taking this step on the recommendation of a young officer who had just entered the service, and who is admitted by those who know him to be an absolute crank on vaccination. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr Higgs: -- Is he a young man? {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- I should say that he is about thirty-six years of age. He is an enthusiastic specialist, and believes so strongly in vaccination that, I dare say, he would advise a man who had lost one of his toes that vaccination would cause it to grow again. I do not think that there is any disease under the sun which, in the opinion of **Dr. Cumpston,** could not be cured by vaccination. The New South Wales Board of Health did not urge the Minister to declare Sydney a quarantined area. **Dr. Cumpston,** in acting as he did, showed that he was a very hasty man. He was hardly a fit person to advise the young Minister of Trade and Customs, who had just come 'into office, and was, I suppose, excited over his appointment. In order to show what was in the minds of leading medical men at the time, I shall quote from a report presented by **Dr. Reid** and **Dr. Hull. Dr. Hull** is a man of wide practice, and **Dr. Reid** is Chief Quarantine Officer in Sydney. Whilst **Dr. Cumpston** was in Sydney, these medical men issued a report concerning the outbreak, in which they stated that - >The infective power is very low, seeing that this epidemic has prevailed since April 12th, and, so far, not more than sixty cases could be traced, the majority of which have been of so slight a nature that no medical aid has been called in by those affected, and this in a practically unvaccina'ted community. These gentlemen thought that there was no necessity for drastic action. Sixty cases had been traced in which the persons infected had been cured without medical assistance. They were suffering from a form of skin disease, and I hold that the present epidemic is not one of true smallpox. If **-Dr. Cumpston** would seek the advice of men like **Dr. Paton** and the members of the Board of Health of New {:#subdebate-21-1} #### South Wales- {: #subdebate-21-1-s0 .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- Nothing of the kind. {: .speaker-KYV} ##### Mr Riley: -- The Prime Minister has been misled. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- **Dr. Paton** said there was no necessity for the drastic action taken by the Commonwealth Government. {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- What is the New South Wales Government doing? {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- The present New South Wales Government is a bugbear to the honorable member, so that I do not take any notice of what he says concerning it. The Kew South Wales Board of Health is presided over by J. Ashburton Thomson, M.D., D.P.H., and the other members of the Board are - **Sir** Normand Maclaurin, M.D., LL.D., M.L.C.; the Hon. C. R. MacKellar, M.D., M.L.C.; Edmund Fosbery, M.L.C., O.M.G.; **Dr. Joseph** Foreman; E. J. Flynn; Prof. Anderson Stuart, M.D. ; A. F. Robinson, President of the Chamber of Commerce; the Lord Mayor of Sydney; R. I. Paton, F.R.O.S., L.R.C.P. Edin., M.D.; G. S. Willis, M.B., D.P.H.; {: type="A" start="F"} 0. M. Sucking, M.B., D.P.H.; W. G. Armstrong, M.D., D.P.H.; and T. W. Sinclair, M.B., D.P.H. The Board has also a highly competent staff. Can it be believed that these gentlemen would allow the people of Sydney, and of New South Wales generally, to run the risk of death and disaster from small-pox without taking drastic steps to prevent its spread if they thought that the epidemic was a serious one? **Dr. Paton,** whom I have seen on several occasions, stated, in regard to the issue of the Federal proclamation - >This proclamation comes to me as a great surprise. **Dr. Cumpston,** the newly-appointed Director of Quarantine, was here yesterday, and also **Dr. Robertson,** Chief Medical Officer of Victoria. **Dr. Cumpston** gave no hint whatever that the drastic action which has now been taken was contemplated. In view of all the circumstances, have I not been fully justified in pressing this question before the House, and in following the Minister of Trade and Customs even to his own office, with the object of inducing him to remedy the mistake he made in proclaiming Sydney a quarantined area on the recommendation of **Dr. Cumpston** without seeking other expert advice? As a representative of Sydney I should have failed in my duty if I had not pointed out the injustice that has thus been done to its citizens. I must give the Minister this much credit, that, directly I pointed out to him the stupidity of his action, he modified the quarantine arrangements. Had **Dr.** Cumpston's idea of what quarantine means been adopted, we should have had an even more disastrous experience. We should have had more deaths and much more suffering and loss but for my representations to the Minister. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- Does the honorable member say that the Kew South Wales Board of Health has been against this quarantine? {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- I do not say that, but I do say that if there had been any circumstances warranting such action on the part of the Federal authorities, the Board of Health would have been the first to bring them under the notice of the Minister. As the time allotted to private members' business has almost expired, I ask leave to continue my remarks at a later date. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- I should like to moke a statement on this question. {: .speaker-KHE} ##### Mr Higgs: -- The debate will be continued on a future date. {: #subdebate-21-1-s1 .speaker-10000} ##### Mr SPEAKER: -Is it the pleasure of the House that the honorable member for East Sydney have leave to continue his remarks at a future date? Honorable Members. - Hear, hear ! Leave granted; debate adjourned. *Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 7.45 p.m.* {: .page-start } page 1348 {:#debate-22} ### ELECTORAL BILL {:#subdebate-22-0} #### Second Reading Debate resumed from 17th September *(vide* page 1315), on motion by **Mr. Kelly** - >That this Bill be now read a second time. {: #subdebate-22-0-s0 .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON:
Maribyrnong -- When the debate was adjourned last night, I was dealing with the now notorious Coleraine case, in which a justice of the peace very much abused his position, doing acts for . which he was heavily fined by the Courts of his country. I do not wish to say anything more regarding his violation of the law than that it proves that when witnesses of a certain kind are allowed to traffic in postal votes things are done that are not creditable to a British community. In that case, it was abundantly proved that, days before the poll on the referenda was taken, this man, in his own town, and among folk over whom he had a considerable influence, canvassed healthy young women and others, urging them by word of mouth - in some cases paying two visits to them -to vote by post instead of in the polling booth. When cases of that kind are exposed, the thing should be looked into. Notwithstanding the assertions of honorable members opposite, I do not think that any man on this side wishes to deprive any person of the right to vote, if that right can be exercised in a legitimate and legal way, without intervention by an outsider. I do not think that any member on this side wishes to deprive any person, sick or well, of the right to exercise the franchise. -The last Government made every effort to allow those who were confined within the walls of certain institutions an opportunity to record their votes, and I hope that before the Bill has passed from us, we shall be able to insert a clause providing - I do not say for voting by post - but for some system of vot ing under which electors debarred by sickness or accident from going to the polling booths may record their votes in a proper and legitimate manner, without the interference of any partisan. For the 1910 elections, according to the electoral returns which were subsequently presented, 36,820 postal ballot-papers were issued, and 29,249 postal votes were recorded. Of the balance, about 2,000 came to hand, but too late, leaving over 5,000 unaccounted for. Under Part X. of the old Act which was repealed during last Parliament, trafficking in postal votes was possible, and, in my opinion, a number of the 5,0D0 postal ballot-papers that, were unaccounted for did not reach the ballot-box because the persons to whom they were intrusted for posting did not perform their duty, the way in which the votes were cast probably being known to them. If, by putting our heads together, we can evolve a scheme whereby those who are prevented by sickness from going to the polling booth can safely record their votes, members on this side will be ready to render every assistance. In order to achieve this end, I should not be particular about the expense, because every one, so far as is possible, should be permitted to record his vote. If an expenditure of some thousands of pounds would have to be incurred to provide for this, I should be prepared to vote for it. I think that we might have polling booths in the hospitals, and provide other facilities for voting. As to the proposal that Saturday shall no longer be a polling day, I judge it, as I judge many other things, by results, and the splendid percentage of votes polled on the 31st May last proves conclusively to me, as I believe to other thinking men and women, that it is desirable that the polling shall take place on Saturdays. I shall make every effort I can to prevent the alteration of the present arrangement. The Bill provides also for the repeal of a provision in the existing law requiring the signing of newspaper articles commenting on elections published between the date of the issue and the date of the return of the writs. I was not greatly in love with that provision when introduced, but the experience we have had of the signing of articles makes me think that it is desirable to retain it. Indeed, I would go so far as to require, if this Parliament had the power to do so, the signing of all leading articles, not merely the signing of articles commenting on elections published during an electoral campaign. I have discovered, from an examination of some of the leading magazines of the world, that in what might be called high journalism the men and women who write articles of such educational value that politicians and statesmen all over the world are glad to refer to them to glean the latest and best information respecting movements in industry, commerce, economics, politics, and other matters, sign their work. These are a few, in a list that might be prolonged almost indefinitely, of the magazines whose articles are signed or the name of the writer printed at the head - The *British Review,* the *National Review,* the *Contemporary Review,* the *Quarterly Review,* the *Fortnightly Review,* the *Atlantic Monthly,* the *North American Review,* the *Hibbert Journal,* and the *Political Science Quarterly.* If the writers of articles in those journals are prepared to publish their names, why should the writers in our daily press hide behind anonymity! The leading journalists of the world are only too ready to connect their names with their articles, and I see no reason why the writers to our daily press should not do the same. Those who have had anything to do with country or provincial journalism are aware that practically every reading man or woman in a town of even fairly large size knows exactly who has written each leading article that appears in the local newspaper. {: .speaker-JUV} ##### Mr McWilliams: -- Any one who studies the leading articles of the metropolitan journals can tell who writes them. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON: -- Every writer has a peculiar style of his own, and one accustomed to reading leading articles can tell from a few sentences who the writer is, but I see no reason why these articles should not be signed. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- Signing would make a market for the brains of writers. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON: -- Yes. During my electoral campaign I cameinto contact with quite a number of persons differing from me in politics - business and commercial men, eminent journalists, and others - and it was the general opinion that the compelling of the signing of articles was a most desirable reform. I believe that if a vote of the people were taken on the subject, the verdict would be overwhelm ingly in favour of the retention of the provision in the electoral law requiring articles to be signed. Personally, I think that every trained journalist should get credit for his literary compositions. In the short time at my disposal I cannot deal with all of the many provisions of the Bill, although I hope to speak at greater length on some in Committee; but I wish to say a word now regarding the proposal that a Judge of the High Court or of the Supreme Court of a State shall fix the boundaries of our electoral divisions. {: .speaker-KYV} ##### Mr Riley: -- It is one of the worst proposals in the Bill. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON: -- It will certainly receive considerable opposition from me. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- It would bring about mere office distributions. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON: -- Yes. A Judge might be ever so eminent in the law, but he would be dependent on the SurveyorGeneral for expert advice regarding boundaries, and on the electoral officials for information on electoral matters, such as community of interest and other questions. I do not say that the "three-commissioner" system is the best that could be devised, but the last Victorian Commission, composed, as it was, of the Chief Electoral Officers of the Commonwealth and the State and the Victorian Surveyor-General, was above suspicion, and discharged its duties faithfully and well. Such a Commission could be trusted by both parties, and could do the work better than any Judge. I understand that it is proposed that after Parliament has once reviewed a proposed redistribution recommended by a Judge, and has referred it back, it shall have no second opportunity of review. Although members of Parliament may be regarded as interested parties in this matter, I shall be slow to forfeit my right of review in the manner proposed. I claim that I should be allowed to discuss every phase of a proposed electoral distribution. Whilst the" three-commissioner ' ' system may not be the best possible, it is certainly preferable to giving the determination of the matter to one individual. {: .speaker-KFC} ##### Mr Fleming: -- A system of that kind worked very well in New South Wales under Judge Murray. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- It did not work very well for us ! {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON: -- We want the assistance of the practical man who knows something about survey, of the man of the world who knows something about community of interest, and of the man who knows something about the electoral system. These different elements are required to be taken into consideration for the proper redistribution into electorates of any country. This proposal will meet with my stern opposition, and I trust that we shall receive assistance from honorable members opposite in endeavouring to frame an Electoral Bill that will be creditable to this House. I am sure that if the Bill were to pass into law in its present shape, most thinking men and women in Australia would be of opinion that the Federal Parliament had taken leave of its senses. I trust that honorable members opposite will take part in the discussion on the Bill, and will no longer suffer from tongue-tiedness. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- They are all Caucus-bound. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON: -- Such an exhibition as has been given in the conspiracy of silence maintained on the Government benches has rarely been seen in a Parliament. I do not believe that honorable members opposite approve of this Bill in its entirety. To believe so would be to give credence to a libel on their common sense. I hope, therefore, that they will be no longer "gagged," but will give the electors an opportunity of knowing their opinions. I wonder what their constituents are thinking of them. In my opinion, they will be judged very severely indeed for remaining silent when such an important Bill is before Parliament. {: .speaker-KES} ##### Mr Falkiner: -- We are trembling. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON: -- The honorable member will tremble like an aspen leaf when the next election approaches, and will then regret that he did not take part in the debate on so important a measure. It is all the more necessary that we should hear the opinion of the supporters of the Bill, because the Minister who introduced it furnished such meagre information in respect to its fundamental principles. We ought to hear from some other Minister before we read the Bill a second time. Even if Ministers, wishing to maintain Cabinet secrecy, are silent, surely the more independent spirited of honorable members opposite will stand up and show the people that they are not being " gagged." {: .speaker-KES} ##### Mr Falkiner: -- There is plenty of time. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr FENTON: -- I should like to see honorable members on both sides following each other alternately throughout the debate. Even the Minister of Home Affairs, who is officially responsible for this bantling, keeps out of the chamber most of the time. Apparently, he is ashamed of it himself, and does not seem to care about fathering the measure. Whenever honorable members on this side have spoken in a straightforward manner regarding the Bill, they see nothing but shamefaced expressions opposite to them. We are called upon to pass the second reading when only one mouth has been opened in support of the Bill. Finally, I have to say that the measure is to be condemned because it opens the door to bad practices, will violate the secrecy of the ballot, and will disfranchise thousands of electors. These defects, which stand on the face of the Bill, ought to be wiped out. We claim the support of honorable members opposite in eradicating them. The measure ought to be supported by some better arguments than were advanced in the foolish party appeal made by the Honorary Minister. By furnishing such arguments, if they can, honorable members opposite will be carrying out the high national duties for which they were sent to this House. {: #subdebate-22-0-s1 .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr HUGHES:
West Sydney .- We may well ask ourselves why this Bill has been introduced. As far as I know, there is no precedent for a Government to introduce a Bill to reform the electoral machinery necessary for ascertaining the will of the people, as their first measure, except the case of **Sir George** Reid, who, in his short-lived and ill-fated Ministry, mentioned in a Governor-General's Speech only one measure, and that a proposal for a redistribution preceding an immediate appeal to the people. It is perfectly well known that **Sir George** Reid's Government's position in this House was, as a result of a projected defection of his supporters, perfectly hopeless. But this Government is in quite another case. They have a majority. They have come here, so Ministers constantly avow, to get on with a policy. Every week end we are treated to dissertations upon the intent of the Government during the coming week to get on with their policy. They avow their resolute determination to go on with their policy. There is nothing to stop them from getting on with it. They have a majority. The Government are able, whenever they bend their efforts determinedly to the work, to get their legislation through this Chamber, whatever fate may await it elsewhere. They know this perfectly well. Yet the first measure of the Government is one to reform the electoral machinery. It is not pretended for a moment that this is part of the Government policy. Since this House met, the Government have put a policy - such as it is - before us. This is not part of a policy for this Parliament at all. It is a means for ascertaining at a future election the will of the people in respect of the composition of the next Parliament. But there is a policy to be given effect to in this Parliament. Where is it? Why does the Government not go on with its policy? We have a right to ask that question in such a case, where a Government, as the result of an appeal to the people, have been returned with a majority to this House, returned to do certain definite things, where they have the means of putting their business on the notice-paper in the order they please. This policy is alleged to be urgently needed. But this Government have deliberately decided to bring forward measures which have no relation to its policy at all. What is the reason why the Government have introduced this measure? It is perfectly clear that they have introduced it for the purpose of fooling the electors. They have introduced lt for the purpose of endeavouring to make the electors believe that they are feverishly anxious to get on with their policy, but that, owing to the obstructive tactics of this party, they are unable to do so. Therefore, there is no alternative but to prepare for another election. That is their object. To that they direct every effort. But there is not one fact that justifies their attitude. Their policy, such as it is, can be introduced. It ought to have been introduced long ago. The only measures that have been introduced are this Bill and the Audit Bill. The one is a Bill to enable the Government to appeal to the electors at the close of this Parliament, .and the other is a Bill to enable them to prolong the recess. There is a method in the madness of this Government that must strike every elector who looks at it fairly. Here we have a Government bringing down a Bill, the very nature of which makes its introduction at this stage a most suspicious circumstance, and one which demands explanation. But not only do we obtain no explanation for the introduction of electoral reform legislation at the very beginning of a new Parliament, but we get no explanation of the Bill itself. It is true that the Minister who introduced it said a great deal. But one may say a very great deal without explaining anything. It is true that he abused the party to which I belong. It is true that he attempted to couple us, by an insinuation which he was not courageous enough to maintain, with the criminal classes of this country. But he did in no way attempt to explain this Bill. We have it thrown on the table, and now, in the second day of its discussion, we have heard not one word from anybody except the Minister who introduced it, saving a few remarks, disjointed and disgruntled, from the Prime Minister. A more petulant and childish display it has never been my lot to witness. It would have been quite inexcusable in anybody. It was absolutely inexcusable in the Prime Minister of this country. Whether it is his vanity that has quite overbalanced his reason, whether he is blown out with his own conceit till he thinks he is not as other men, I do not pretend to say. But I wish to say to him a few words in season. I would like to prick the bladder of his egotism by telling him that he is the honorable member for Parramatta although he is Prime Minister. In other words, he is our equal, and we expect him to behave as a man to other men, and not as a child in a kindergarten. I come now to the Bill, unassisted by that very necessary explanation of its provisions which is due to the House and the country. What is the policy of this measure? Before I answer that question, let rae ask another. What ought to be the basic principles of any electoral machinery which seeks to give effect to democratic government? I think that the basic principles of democratic electoral law are these: There must be an opportunity afforded to every sane adult man or woman, other than criminals undergoing sentence, to exercise a vote ; there must be ample facilities offered to all adults for enrolment, and when enrolled to record their votes. And, lastly, measures must be taken to insure at once the 'purity and secrecy of the ballot. These are the three basic principles. How long mankind in general, and our race in particular, have been fighting to achieve these, history can tell us. I am convinced that the people of this country will not allow an inroad to be made upon any one of these principles. Every step that we have gained has been gained as the result of a determined and persistent struggle, and we shall do well therefore to hold it with all our strength. Let us now look at the Bill. It purports to be a Bill to reform the electoral machinery now in existence. It is introduced at this stage ostensibly because there were grave irregularities - wholesale impersonations - at the last elections. It is alleged that those irregularities practically prevented the true will of the electors from being expressed. We were told this in effect again last evening by the Prime Minister. It was on this ground he sought to justify his present attitude. This charge of impersonation and fraud is a recrudescence of the charges that were made soon after the recent elections - wild, baseless, wicked accusations without an atom of justification, and unsupported by a solitary fact. After three and a half months of office, with all the machinery of the law at their backs, these gentlemen have been unable to substantiate any one of them. The country then ought to know that it is not because the present electoral machinery has broken down - not because it permitted of wholesale fraud at the last elections - that this measure has been introduced. On the other hand, one thing is abundantly clear : the present electoral machinery - and all institutions must be judged by results - has given better results than any other ever used in this country. Both in the aggregate, and in the percentage of votes recorded, there was, at the last election, an enormous increase. I submit that actual experience is the best possible test to which any institution or legislation can be subjected. Judged by that test, the present electoral machinery is admirably adapted to ascertain the will of the people. Yet we are asked to believe that the existing condition of things is such that not a moment must be lost in introducing amending legislation. Before dealing with the Bill itself, I wish to remind the House and the country of what the results of the last election actually show, because my honorable friends opposite have exhibited a most regrettable condition of political myopia, being apparently quite unable to read facts which are as plain as holy writ. They have been going about this country as men who have been choused out of their constitutional right to a majority by some cunning wholesale frauds. They ought to have a great majority in this Chamber, but by some *hocus* *pocus* it has not manifested itself here to the extent that it ought to have done, and the electoral machinery is to blame. They have asserted over and over again that they had a majority of the electors behind them. I shall show from the returns which have been supplied by the Chief Electoral Officer, and I have taken the trouble to work out the results of the voting at the last election, both for the Senate and for this House, that this is not so. They have not a majority of the people behind them. The actual figures are very instructive. The result of the Senate poll upon the general count is: - Liberal, 958,122; Labour, 948,168. In South Australia there was a fourth Liberal candidate in the person of **Sir Josiah** Symon. Conceding that the votes recorded in his favour were all Liberal votes, and allowing one-third of them to the highest Liberal, the Liberal Senate vote in South Australia would be advanced to 88,829 instead of 82,829. But in New South Wales there were three candidates for the Senate in what was termed the Socialist interest. The highest of these candidates polled 21,817 votes. It has to be conceded that these votes, at any rate, were cast against the Liberals. In New South Wales, the contests, both for the Senate and for the House of Representatives, showed that invariably the Senate Labour vote was inferior to the Representative Labour vote by, approximately, the votes there polled by the Senate Socialist candidates. A few instances of this may be given. In the electorate of Hunter, 12,884 votes were cast for the Labour candidate for the House of Representatives, 10,956 for Labour candidates for the Senate, and 1,099 for Socialist candidates for the Senate. In Newcastle, 17,865 votes were cast for the Labour candidate for the House of Representatives, 16,015 votes for Labour candidates for the Senate, and 1,582 votes foi Socialist candidates for the Senate. In Richmond, 7,286 votes were recorded for Labour for the House of Representatives, 6,778 votes for Labour for the Senate, and 1,077 votes for Socialist candidates for the Senate. In the division of Robertson, 10,143 votes were cast for Labour for the House of Representatives, 9,061 votes for Labour for the Senate, and 600 votes for Socialist candidates for the Senate. In West Sydney, 17,658 votes were recorded in favour of Labour for the House of Representatives, 15,584 votes for Labour for the Senate, and 1,168 votes for Socialist candidates for the Senate. Crediting, therefore, these 21,817 votes, which were undoubtedly cast against the Liberal party, to the Labour total, and the additional 6,000 votes on behalf of **Sir Josiah** Symon to the Liberals, the Senate figures stand thus: Liberal, 964,122; Labour, 969,985. So much for the Senate vote; now for the House of Representatives' .vote. The results in all the States, omitting " independent " results, were - Labour, 921,099; Liberal, 929,620. But these figures do not include the votes cast against Liberals in the Hume, which numbered 11,236 for the House of Representatives, and 9,382 for the Senate; in Gippsland, where they numbered 12,671 for the House of Representatives, and 10,738 for the Senate; and in Kooyong, where they numbered 11,540 for the House of Representatives, and 10,229 for the Senate, nor against Labour in Melbourne, where they numbered 7,320 for the House of Representatives, and 8,557 for the Senate. Taking the Senate figures for these constituencies, and crediting them in their proper order, the results stand - Labour, 951,448; Liberal, 938,177. Even then there are unaccounted for the uncontested seats of Hindmarsh, Kalgoorlie, and Angas. The views of the electors may be fairly taken from the highest Senate figures in those divisions, allowing in Angas an increment of one-third, owing to the presence of a fourth Liberal candidate in the person of **Sir Josiah** Symon. The figures thus obtained read - Arriving thus at a complete and final result of the House of Representatives elections, all things being considered, we get the following: - Labour, 998,919; Liberal, 964,943. These figures, I venture to say, will withstand all the criticism which my honorable friends opposite are able to bestow upon them. I submit that they show exactly where we are to-day, so far as the majority of the electors is concerned. But my honorable friends have a majority of members in this House, and they are entitled and expected to bring forward their policy. They have not done so. They have deliberately chosen to introduce a measure useful only for the purpose of testing the opinion of the people at the next elections, and couched it in terms which compel us, and were intended to compel us, to regard it as a gage of battle. This measure was introduced in such a way as to accentuate its obvious purpose to a point that, happily, is not usually reached in this House. The Bill itself contains ample proof that it is in no sense of the word to be regarded as a legitimate and *bond fide'* effort to reform the electoral machinery of this country. Let us look at it. In it the Government propose, broadly speaking, to do five things. They propose to abolish Saturday polling, to close the roll one month before the issue of the writ - that is, one month before it is closed under the present law - to compel each elector to sign his name to his ballotpaper ; to restore the postal vote and the " freedom of the press." In the first place, let us inquire whether the Bill is calculated to extend the opportunities of the people for registering their opinions and expressing their will. If it is, I say, emphatically,, that we ought to adopt it. If it is not,: we ought to reject it. I think that the electors will be guided entirely by the. answer which is given to that question.. In my opinion this Bill does not extend the opportunities of the electors of the country. Under the pretence of extending the franchise the Bill restricts it, and under the pretence of preventing fraud the Bill encourages it. Let us look at the facts. The Government propose to abolish Saturday polling. I suppose that at least 1,000,000 out of the 2,000,000 electors on the roll, male and female, fmd on Saturday their greatest opportunities for leisure; that is beyond question. On that day their week's work is done. They have before them leisure and respite from their daily toil. On that day they can freely exercise their franchise. On that day they are as free as their employers. I admit it is a feeble argument to advance to a party that is indifferent to those whose only opportunities for leisure are on a Saturday, but to the people of Australia, it will, I think, appeal rather strongly. There is no day on which the worker can vote so readily as on Saturday. Until the last election there never was an opportunity given to him when he could be absolutely free from any influence which his employer could possibly bring upon him. Although the law says that the employer must give the employe two hours away, there are wheels within wheels, and ways by which the employer can make his influence felt, and it was not until the last election that a man could vote absolutely free from influence, and no matter what his employer thought or did. This measure, introduced on the specious pretext that it is to extend the franchise, begins by deliberately taking away the best opportunity open to the people to exercise the franchise. That is their idea of extending the franchise. This is a restriction that affects not 77,000 sick persons, but 1,000,000 healthy ones. That is their first great reform. Then they propose to close the roll one month before it is now closed. I take it that the proof that the extension of the period during which persons can put their names on the roll is perfectly justified is furnished by the rolls themselves. It is proved by the fact that more people were enrolled at the last election than ever before. My honorable friends may say that there were more people on the roll than were entitled to be enrolled. The Chief Electoral Officer has explained how that is, and he entertains no doubt at all that in the overwhelming majority of cases such duplications were perfectly explicable and perfectly regular. I asked to-day for some figures in connexion with this matter. One of the things I do complain of - and I think that we all have a right to complain - is that although this measure depends for its justification on facts, we have no facts before us. I asked to-day how many persons were put on the roll within one month before the issue of the writ. If we had the information we should know how many electors the proposed amendment is going to cut off. 1 venture to say that many thousands of persons got on the roll within one month of the prescribed time. It is of no use to talk about what electors ought to do, to say that they ought to be sleeplessly vigilant. They ought, but they are not, and honorable members on the other side should thank God for it. During the greater part of the time people take very little interest in politics, but they wake up with feverish anxiety a few weeks or days before the election, and go about-' trying to make up for lost time. Just before the last election they came in their thousands to try to get on the -roll. One of the most inexcusable and most unjustifiable acts that the present Government are committing under cover of introducing this " reform " amendment of the electoral law is to prevent tens of thousands of persons from having an opportunity to record their votes. I will not read the report of the Chief Electoral Officer. The Minister, perhaps, ought to place a copy of it on the table. It setsforth the views of the Chief Electoral Officer on the allegation that there were many more people on the roll than there were people in the country. One of the best things the exMinister of Home Affairs did was to make a provision under which people could get on the roll up to the date of the issue of the writs. I know, of my own knowledge, of hundreds of people in my own district who did not get on the roll, *in* spite of compulsory enrolment, until then. Those are two of the Government's electoral "reforms." They will assuredly disfranchise thousands of the people of this country. One prevents the electors from voting on Saturday, which is their best day; the other denies opportunity *to* thousands of getting on the roll. And they call these things electoral reforms ! Then they propose another ingenious scheme. It is that every elector shall sign his name before he records his vote. Nothing in the history of reactionary legislation ever equalled such a proposal. These honorable gentlemen propose to dothis in the face of experience which would be sufficient to convince any ordinary man. What was the complaint at the last election? That sufficient facilities were not afforded to electors to record their votes. There is a gentleman now lodging a petition against an honorable member because there was such a congestion in the polling booth that there was no opportunity for the people to record their votes. In the face of this fact, which is generally known, it is deliberately proposed to prevent a man from voting until he signs his name. Imagine the state of 'things that must result. As everybody knows, the average elector, when he goes into a polling booth, is easily flustered. It is very difficult to get an orderly and rapid procession through the polling booth in any circumstances. The signing of names, which must be done in the presence of officers, will cause such a block as must inevitably prevent a rapid and effective poll being taken. It is, in short, such a proposal as will make a fair representation of the opinion of the electors impossible. These three things the Government have done in this Bill. The Honorary Minister, in that spirit of kindly Christian courtesy which always distinguishes him, said, the other night, that there was a connexion between the criminal classes and ourselves. That insult may be allowed to pass. Coming from where it did, it will not hurt us, whomever it hurts. But there is a connexion between us and the workers of this country, and we are able to say that a great many of those who vote for us will find this embargo press more heavily upon them than upon the supporters of the party on the other side. The workers of this country, perhaps, are not as facile penmen as some gentlemen who sit in high places, but they are men, and as electors they ought not to be prevented from recording their votes by any absurd, reactionary and medieval proposal such as this. That is what the Government propose to do for the people of this country. {: .speaker-JPC} ##### Sir Robert Best: -- There is no provision in the Bill which says that a man cannot record his vote on Saturday. See proposed section 88a. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr HUGHES: -- The honorable member means that the Bill does not provide that the poll shall not be taken on Saturday? {: .speaker-JPC} ##### Sir Robert Best: -- Yes. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr HUGHES: -- I do not say that; but I ask why is the alteration proposed if it is not intended to take away this right ? What is the matter with Saturday ? It is the people's day. It is the very best possible day on which the elector could exercise his franchise. If they do not mean to destroy Saturday polling, why alter the law? What would the honorable member say if it were proposed to strike out the prohibition against Sunday trading? Would he not say that that was a blow at religion and the practice of Christianity in this country? What would he say if those who sought to do this thing said that to remove the prohibition against Sunday trading "did not make Sunday trading imperative? The Bill proposes to keep electors off the roll, and to prevent them voting if they get on. That is what the Government propose to do for the people of the country. What do they propose to do for their friends? What is their placard in the front window? There is the restoration of the postal vote, and the "freedom of the press." The postal vote is their trump card. During the election we heard a great deal about the postal vote, and we have heard a great deal about it since. It is the palladium of liberty - it is going to ring down to the ages as the achievement of this Ministry. Let us look at the matter. The other night the Honorary Minister said that 77,000 of the sick and suffering were prevented from voting, and that the vote was going to be restored to them. The statistics on which the honorable gentleman relies are those of **Mr. Knibbs,** who, as a statistician, occupies a very distinguished place, not only in this country, but throughout the civilized world. I am bound to say, however, that the Government do not always accept **Mr. Knibbs'** statistics. A little while ago, when **Mr. Knibbs** issued a table to show that vaccination, as a matter of fact, is not a preventive of small-pox, the Government apparently had an interview with him. Anyhow, the next morning **Mr. Knibbs'** recantation appeared, in the press, with a declaration that his statistics did not mean that at all. Now we have the statement that **Mr. Knibbs** says there are 77,000 people who might come under this clause. How are these statistics obtained? We are not told. Of course, the man in the street is asked to believe that, as a fact, 77,000 people are disfranchised because of the abolition of the postal vote. There is not one atom of truth in that statement. First of all, a very large proportion of those persons voted at the last election, although there was no postal vote. The Honorary Minister himself said that they had. to parade their infirmities before the public; and they cannot do that and at the same time be prevented from voting. Then, of course, there are quite a number of persons too sick to go to the poll; for when a person is really sick, he does not bother about politics - he cannot be very sick when politics have such a stimulating and attractive interest for him. The 77,000 is melting rapidly away. The Honorary Minister and his friends rely particularly on the women of Australia - it is to them that this great, inexcusable, and cowardly injustice has been done. This is their story. Is it a fact that the women of Australia have been prevented from voting? Is it a fact that this proposal is intended to restore the vote to them ? Let us see what the postal vote did before, because, after all, one can only judge of the future by the past. At the election of 1910 there were 36,820 postal vote papers issued, and, of these, 29,000 were used. The remainder, some 6,000, went astray, and from that day to this no one has been able to trace them. It is in this way that the Government propose to introduce a system in which there is no possibility for fraud, by which everybody will be able to vote free from any influence, and which, in short, will maintain the secrecy of the ballot. It is asserted that the very corner-stone of this postal vote edifice is the wrong that is done to the women - to the mothers of our children. Let us examine this statement. Happily, the mothers of our children are not confined to any one spot, but are fairly evenly distributed all over the Commonwealth. Children are not the peculiar prerogative of the women in any one State; and yet the returns of the results of the postal voting would lead one to that conclusion. At the election of 1910, there were more postal votes cast in Kooyong than in the whole of Western Australia, and there were as many postal votes cast in Victoria as in, practically, all the other States put together. So far from there being any coincidence between the birth-rate and the number of postal votes - and there ought to be if there is anything in their argument - the State in which the birthrate is the lowest, namely, Victoria - where the flag of Liberalism has never been pulled down - showed more postal votes than did Tasmania, where the birth-rate is the highest. The postal vote is supposed to be a convenience for the people in the widely-scattered districts; but the returns show that it was in the fashionable suburb of Kooyong, and throughout Victoria, where the settlement is closer than in any other State, that postal votes were most used, while in the wide open spaces of Western Australia, and the prolific orchard districts of Tasmania, there were hardly any. What a miserable, hypocritical, canting cry this is that the postal vote is introduced for the sake of the women - for the sake of the mothers of our future children. The figures I have quoted are official, and cannot be denied. Are they not a clear exposure of the hollowness and absolute rottenness of the foundation on which this case rests? The postal vote was useful in Kooyong, not because there are more mothers there than at any other place- {: .speaker-KFJ} ##### Sir John Forrest: -- I suppose there are some people who are ill ? {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr HUGHES: -- I am not looking at the question from a physiological standpoint, and I am not going to be drawn off the track. It must be known, and it shall be known, to the people that, while the Labour party are ready, willing, and anxious that every sick man and every sick woman in the country shall vote and have the opportunity to vote, they are not willing, and will not permit the power of money, and . the influence of money, to violate the secrecy of the ballot. That the Labour party will not permit. Democracy itself rests on the ballot-box. Take the ballot-box away and what remains? A desperate conflict between the classes that must continue on the basis of physical force. Violate the secrecy and purity of the ballot and the people will lose faith in it and sweep government, laws, and Legislature on one side. What does the Commonwealth rest on ? On an absolute faith by the people in the purity and secrecy of the ballot. What is this postal voting? Is it not open voting? When I look at the black-letter insertions in the Bill, and see the precautions there taken to conserve the secrecy of the ballot I find that even by the Ministry there is a recognition of the fact that that secrecy is in danger. But in the booth there is no danger; there the secrecy of the ballot is safe. There is an independent officer, and a compartment into which one voter goes at a time. There is no friend, no earnest and enthusiastic dropper-in, to suggest which way the elector shall vote. We do not hear, 1 ' My dear, I do not wish to tell you which way to vote, but Jones is such a fine man; vote for him." Canvassing is not allowed in the booth, nor may an elector be influenced on his way to the booth. I give honorable gentlemen opposite as much credit as I give to anybody else in this matter, but they do not appear to realize the danger of this proposal, or that the fight of the people has all along been against oven voting. When voting was open, although the people had votes, they used them in the way wealth desired ; and it is only since the ballot has been secret that wealth has been a little foiled. Secrecy is the very essence of our electoral system ; destroy that, and you destroy the system. We provide that votes shall not be counted on a station where there is a booth, because the squatter would then know which way the electors had voted. We provide that votes shall not be counted in a workshop where there is a booth, and for the same reason. We should be taking a reactionary step if we permitted postal voting - a system which undermines the secrecy of the ballot. I am not opposed to, but, on the contrary, heartily in favour of, some means being devised whereby the sick shall be able to vote. At every hospital there ought to be a booth. This would cover a large percentage of lying-in cases as well as other cases, because, as every medical man knows, the percentage of persons who use lying-in hospitals is increasing every day. An officer could attend at the hospitals, and thus obviate the necessity of any woman leaving her bed. If this can be done, I do not see why it ought not to be done. So far as the sick generally are concerned, they ought to have a vote, and I desire that they should; but I do not propose to allow the machinery proposed in this Bill to be put in motion. Under cover of this Bill, it will not be the sick in bed, or the women in bed, who will vote, but those who, in one way or other, come under the influence, and cannot get away from- the influence, of those in high places. The power of money to-day cannot be exaggerated. Not for one moment do I suggest that there is any such vulgar thing as open bribery - that is utterly beside the question - but there is that insidious influence that is so effective and so hard to resist. Everybody knows that it exists, and I say deliberately that not one member of the party opposite would suggest that, in respect of the elections generally, open voting should be substituted for the secret ballot. Leaving this matter, I come now to the question of the " freedom " of the press. Freedom is going to be restored to the press. The press "gag" is to be taken off. What the people are asked to believe is that by some law the press has been restrained, freedom of speech denied, and criticism stifled. What utter nonsense it is to say anything of the kind ! What was there that the press could have said before the last general election that it did not say? To what length could it have gone that it did not go?- I have just been reading in the Library some of those admirable articles which appeared in the *Age* and the *Argus.* I cannot see how they could have been improved for the purpose for which they were written. There was nothing they could suggest which they did not suggest. There was nothing they should have said, from the stand-point of their party, that they did not say. 'Every suggestion calculated to turn the voter away from the Labour party was made. There was no kind of criticism to which they did not resort. They said everything they desired to say, and the only condition imposed upon them by the law was that they should, at the foot of each article, publish the name of the writer. As they became case-hardened, it was their ingenious custom to write two or three names at the foot of each article. And so we learned that So-and-So and So-and-So, " in consultation," had written these articles to express the views of the proprietor of the *Age* or the *Argus,* as the case might be. This was a doubtfully legal practice, but it was not without its humorous side. I do not suppose any one took very great exception to it. I certainly did not. But the point which I wish to emphasize is that the press said everything it could have said; that it had absolute freedom to say whatever it liked, and that all that was asked of it was that the writer of an article dealing with political matters should sign his name to it. Even that was not done, because three men could hardly be the authors of one article. The press had full liberty. But what was, and is, the position of our party ? In New South Wales, the press gave me every freedom. I was allowed to say what I wished to say. So far as I know, I have never had one word cut out of any communication I have made to the press in New South Wales. But I have never been able to say that of the press of Victoria. It seems to be the idea of the Victorian press that they are to determine not only whether views shall be expressed at all, but if they are to be expressed, to what extent they should be subject to their censorship. The press has liberty. It is we who are gagged. These, however, are the two proposals which our honorable friends opposite are going to carry out. They are going to restore the postal vote and the freedom of the press. These are great boons, for which the people of Australia will be profoundly grateful. When our friends opposite were before the country, the high cost of living was their great cry. They were going to reduce it. The man in the street, who has to pay a little more now than he had to pay then, may say, " Well, what are the Government going to do ? " to which his friend, Bill, will reply, " The Government are going to restore the freedom of the press." " But," says the nian in the street, " What about preference to unionists *1* Are they not going to abolish it?" Bill shakes his head doubtfully, and says - "They are going to restore the postal vote." These are indeed stones for bread. This is the manner in which this Government carries out its policy. This is the way in which it introduces machinery for reforming the electoral laws of the Commonwealth. It takes away the real privileges and the real means by which the people are able to express their opinions - and did express them at the last election - and in their place it restores the postal vote and the freedom of the press. The postal vote cry is a hollow sham ! The people cry for bread and it gives them a stone. So far as the statement that women alone make use of the postal vote system is concerned, it is worth noting that one-half of those who voted by post at the general election in 1910 were men. The present Minister of Trade and Customs, as quoted the other day by the Leader of the Opposition, signed the following report as chairman of a Select Committee, and thus gave expression to an opinion which I trust will have some weight with his colleagues - >The evidence justifies your Committee in finding that many persons who voted by post had not reason to believe they would be more than five miles from their polling place on the day of election, and were on that day within the limit. It would appear that the voting facilities provided have been used contrary to the intention of the Act. The Committee went on in its report to unreservedly condemn postal voting. The Government now propose to reintroduce the system. They say, however, that they are introducing it with precautions and safeguards. That those safeguards are likely to be effective I do not think for a moment. Unless this Government propose to introduce such safeguards as will really confine the system to the use of sick persons, and take such steps as will prevent the violation of the secrecy of the ballot - and that, I take it, can hardly be done unless an officer attends each person voting by post - I shall certainly not support their proposal. In conclusion, I wish only to say of this measure that, although we have .every right to complain of the time at which it has been introduced, and of the maimer in which it has been introduced, it is still a matter of concern to the people, and we ought not in any way to allow the manner of its introduction to prejudice its consideration in the House. We are here to do what is right for the people irrespective of all other considerations, and therefore, speaking for myself, I shall give to this Bill the consideration I would give to it if it were introduced by my own party. I shall vote for those provisions in which I believe, and against those in which I do not believe. I do not for one moment set myself against postal voting as such. But I do set my face rigidly against any attempt to violate the secrecy of the ballot. I set myself against any attempt to enable the able-bodied elector who can go to the poll to cast his vote by post. Whatever is to be done under cover of doing something for the sick must be done in such a way that it will be confined to the sick, and the sick alone. As for the other proposals in the Bill, they must be treated on their merits. The measure, as it stands, appeals to me as an utter sham. I am prepared to make it a real reform. In my opinion it has been introduced, not for the purpose of reforming the electoral machinery, but to fool the people. But it will not fool them. The elector is becoming wiser and wiser each day. He will understand why it is that the Government introduced this Electoral Bill instead of bringing forward their substantive policy. He will want to know why it is that something is not done by way of introducing legislation acceptable to both sides. He will ask himself why a Government, situated as the present Government is, does not introduce measures that both sides can consider. He will want to know all these things, and no wild vaporings will save this Government from the inevitable condemnation which must come to them for their actions in respect of tin's and other matters. I regret that the Government have introduced this Bill. My attitude towards this measure will be as I have said. I do not believe that it is a *bond fide* attempt to amend the law; I do believe that it is a mere posturing to the gallery. I shall endeavour, however, since we are here to do our duty to the people, to make iti a real and effective amendment of the electoral machinery of the Commonwealth, which, at - the same time, is more perfect now than ever it was - machinery which, at the last election, was the means whereby a larger number of electors recorded their votes than at any previous election, and which stands to-day the most up-to-date piece of electoral legislation in the world. {: #subdebate-22-0-s2 .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
AttorneyGeneral · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I do not intend to occupy the attention of the House very long at this stage. As has already been pointed out by the Prime Minister, this Bill, with the exception of two or three broad matters of principle embodied in it, and which have been debated already to a considerable extent, deals mainly with the machinery" of our electoral law, and, therefore, essentially consists of necessarily disconnected amendments of a piece of legislative machinery which, unlike the last speaker, I do not consider is at all perfect. I shall not attempt to follow the honorable member for West Sydney an his language, which was strong, and sometimes almost abusive of the Government for introducing this Bill. The honorable member impugned our motives. I would remind him that for our motives, as well as our measures, we are ultimately responsible to the electors. I do not propose to say anything in defence of those motives except what is pertinent to the discussion of the measure now before the House. The honorable member, in launching his speech, asked why the Government did not bring in its policy - why it had interpolated this measure before the policy which it had put before the country and the House. I would remind him that that policy was set out in a document which was laid on the table of this House, containing twenty paragraphs dealing with different matters, and that the first of these twenty paragraphs is as follows: - >The Government, holding that an efficient Electoral Law is the real foundation of a sound Parliamentary system, will introduce a Bill to restore the postal vote, to modify the provisions in respect to absent voting, to remove unnecessary restrictions on public discussion of public questions, and to make other necessary alterations. Of what has the honorable member to complain? The first measure brought before the House is a measure to give effect to the first plank in the policy of the Government. I can assure the honorable member for West Sydney that if he and his colleagues will give us reasonable assistance in passing this measure, they will find that we shall proceed with the utmost expedition to the next planks, and give the House an opportunity to deal with them. We have had from a great many honorable members opposite the cry perpetually reiterated that we are by this Bill making an attack on the secrecy of the ballot. There is not a provision in it which makes any attack on the secrecy of the ballot. Some honorable members seem to think that the secrecy of the ballot involves an elector not telling any one for whom he is going to vote ; that anything in the Bill enabling an elector to inform those with whom he is in contact how he intends to vote is an infringement of the secrecy of the ballot. It is of the essence of freedom in the exercise of the franchise that every citizen shall have the fullest opportunity, if he so desires, to say for whom he is going to vote, and to persuade others to vote in the same way. Every citizen should have the right to exercise his powers of persuasion to the utmost to cause other citizens to vote as he is going to vote. Will any honorable member opposite say that he has not occasionally tried to influence persons to vote for particular candidates? The secrecy of the ballot, as I have always understood it, means, not that electors shall not have the fullest liberty to say for whom they are going to vote, and to induce others to vote for the same persons, but that they shall have the right, if they so desire, to conceal from the world their intentions in regard to voting. That is the meaning of the secrecy of the ballot, and there is nothing in the Bill that impugns it. Of course, it will be excellent political capital if my honorable friends opposite can succeed in making it appear that the Bill is an attack on the secrecy of the ballot. By doing that, they would forge for themselves a weapon of great value. But there is nothing in the Bill to justify such a statement regarding it. The restoration of the postal vote was not only one of the most important planks of the Liberal party of Australia, but is, in my opinion, absolutely necessary to do justice to a considerable section of the people. There is hardly a member on the other side who has attacked the provision for establishing the postal vote who has not proclaimed himself in favour of giving an opportunity to the sick and infirm to record their votes. But what are the alternatives they propose? The honorable member for West Sydney has said that he would open a polling booth in every hospital. I have no objection to that, but it would go but a short way to meet the case. Other honorable members opposite, when asked what they would propose, have made the suggestion that a poll clerk, or Returning Officer, with scrutineers, and the whole electoral paraphernalia, should travel around the country recording the votes of the sick and the infirm in their own homes. We know that that is impracticable in a country like ours. One of the main objects of the Bill is to obtain a pure and clean roll. All honorable members will admit that to be desirable, if it can be done. To the question, Is there need for an amendment of the law for this purpose? I reply yes. _ Is the roll at present pure or perfect? Will any honorable member opposite say that it is? {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr Fenton: -No; and it never will be perfect. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- It is impossible, for reasons that I shall give in a moment or two, to obtain a perfect roll; our population fluctuates and moves about so much. But those charged with the responsibility of administering the electoral law say that the roll is at present swollen beyond all measure. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- Is that a condemnation of the system or of the administration? {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I am not going to condemn the administration. Administration fails sometimes because of those who are administering, and at other times because of defects in the system ; I am speaking of defects in the system. We have this extraordinary. discrepancy that, whereas, according to the Commonwealth Statistician, the number of persons eligible for enrolment is 2,585,000, the number of names on the certified list, which is a very much reduced roll, is 2,760,000, or 175,000 more than the estimated number eligible for enrolment. Yet the honorable member for West Sydney says that he knows of hundreds, and even thousands, within his electorate whose names should be on the roll but are not there. That emphasizes the need for a rigid review of the position. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- I say that, throughout the Commonwealth, thousands of persons were, prevented from voting because their names were not on the roll, or appeared there incorrectly. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I am not able to verify the statement, but, accepting it for the purposes of my argument, I say that those thousands must be added to the present excess of 175,000, which emphasizes the need for a clean roll. On the authority of the Chief Electoral Officer, let me tell the House what are the main reasons why the roll is so largely swollen. I do not say for a moment that the cause is fraudulent practices, or even to any great extent fraudulent practices. We have no means of estimating to what extent fraud or carelessness, or other such causes, are responsible for the position. But one cause is the inefficient mode of ascertaining the names of those who, having died, should be removed from the roll. The certificates of death are forwarded once in three months to the Electoral Department, but, as the electoral officers complain, and with justice, in a large number of cases it is impossible for them to identify the names on the certificates with names on the rolls. They get notice, for example, that John Richards has died in the Melbourne Hospital, and they may find twenty persons of that name on the roll, and, of course, cannot proceed on such information to strike off any of them. On the other hand, the death may have been recorded under such circumstances as to make it very likely that the John Richards who has died was a particular John Richards; but it is only when they are certain that the officials strike off any name. {: .speaker-KR8} ##### Mr Sharpe: -- How does the Bill provide for this? {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The matter is not dealt with in the Bill, because it cannot be so dealt with, except indirectly. Inefficiency in the matter of recording transfers is another great cause why the roll is swollen. It seemed to be astounding, but I have it on the authority of the Electoral Registrar himself, based on information from the Statistician, that, on the average, some 500,000 persons change their place of residence every twelve months -in this country. That is one of the great difficulties of the position. Unfortunately, the law in regard to the registration of transfer is not carried out by these persons - I do not say fraudulently or with evil intention, but from carelessness or ignorance. In the large proportion of cases they, after making a change of residence, send in an original claim for enrolment. They are entitled to be enrolled immediately on making this claim, and their cards are then sent to the metropolis of the State, to be compared with the other cards that are kept in the office there. If it is found that any person thus claiming enrolment is already enrolled for another subdivision, steps are taken to remove his name from the roll for that subdivision. But this machinery for the amendment of the rolls is not perfect, even at the best of times, depending as it does entirely on the identification of names, which is very difficult. And it becomes unworkable on the approach of a general election. There is then an enormous increase in the claims for enrolment. All the associations and organizations of both sides in politics are stirred into unusual activity, with the result that claims for enrolment and transfer are multiplied enormously. So much so. that the officers of the Department are quite incapable of dealing with them, and the machinery breaks down. I will give an example. I did not intend to speak to-night, or I should have had the papers here. I made inquiries myself of the electoral officers in Victoria shortly after the last election, wishing to obtain information concerning a number of claims which had passed through the ordeal and been tested, or left untested, at the time when the certified roll was issued. The officers were unable to tell me. But, three or four weeks later, they made an estimate; and they informed me that, in the State of Victoria, not fewer than 50,000 claims were put through within a few weeks after the certified rolls were issued. Those claims had not been tested. The officers estimated that there were at least 25,000 cases in Victoria alone which represented actual duplications existing at the time. Honorable members may be sure that the officers would not over-estimate, in a matter of this kind, so as to minimize the efficiency of their own system. Under a system like that, it cannot be said that the machinery is at all perfected for the purpose of obtaining a reasonably accurate roll. How is that defect to be cured *t* First, as to the undue swelling of the roll from the enormous number of applications made just prior to an election, there seem to be two ways of coping with the difficulty. One is to provide that nobody shall be entitled to have his name entered on the roll merely by putting in a claim, but that his claim must pass through a test before his name is placed on the roll. The other method is the provision adopted in this Bill, which I will explain more fully in a moment. The first method is undoubtedly, in many respects, the most scientific way of attaining the object in view - that a man must establish his right to get on the roll. If he leaves it till so late that, in consequence of the accumulation of thousands of cases, the electoral officers cannot investigate his claim, and that renders it impossible for him to get on the roll, it is his own fault But the difficulty about that method is that it would, I think, lead to considerable objections, because it would place in the hands of the electoral officers a responsibility which I, for one, do not think they would fail in honestly endeavouring to perform ; but, still, it would enable them to deal with particular cases, to choose their own order of dealing with cases, and that would mean that certain persons would be placed on the roll before others. I am sure that the House would not approve of any system which would leave it to those charged with the examination of this accumulation of cases to pick and choose as to who should be put through first and who last. But, still, if the House thinks that such a system would be free from danger, the Government are quite prepared to accept a modification of it. It would, on the whole, be more effective than the present proposal. I admit that. But, after full consideration, and upon the advice of the Chief Electoral Officer himself, it was decided to adopt the system that is embodied in this Bill. That system I will explain. In order to give time to the electoral officers who are working the card system to make, as nearly completely as possible, a scrutiny of the enormous number of claims that come in just before an election, it was said that we must close down on claims for one month before the issue of the writ. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr Fenton: -- We should disfranchise thousands of people by doing that. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Not long ago the system in vogue in most British communities - and, I think, speaking from recollection, in most of the Australian States - provided for a yearly, and in some cases a biennial, revision of rolls. {: .speaker-KNH} ##### Mr Mathews: -- That was done to keep people off the rolls. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I am not dealing with why it was done. There is nothing easier than to attribute motives, and to say that things of this kind were done with the desire to disfranchise people. That, I say, was the ordinary method. It was recognised that you must have some examination of those who claimed to be entitled to be on the voting list: and that was the method adopted. This Parliament has gradually extended - and very properly extended - the system, so as to give an opportunity of voting to those who are not on the roll at the time it is printed, but who come of age afterwards, or, for some other reason, become entitled to vote. I am not arguing whether the system adopted was a good one or not. The present system has that great advantage. I do not believe thai honorable members on either side would think it wise or safe to alter tlie system to one under which you would have names added up to the very last day, so that many thousands, and tens of thousands, of claims could be put in at the last moment without any scrutiny or examination at all. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr Fenton: -- Put on a few more officers, and the Department will get through. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- It is quite impossible to do it. If this card system is to be worked - and I, for one, am not a particular advocate of the system - it is a mere mechanical device- {: .speaker-KLM} ##### Dr Maloney: -- It is the best up to date. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Perhaps it is the best mechanical system that could be adopted. At any rate, it is the one that has been adopted. But to work this system it is essential that you should have officers who are thoroughly trained. The Chief Electoral Officer will tell you that it has taken him years to train the staff to the proper mechanical working of the system. It is impossible to put on casually extra nien before an election, and trust them to do the work properly, even though their honesty, in a political sense, might bo above suspicion. They would not be trained to the work. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- It is better to have more officers than that some electors should be kept off the roll. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- It would be impossible to achieve the object by having more officers. You could not do it if you doubled, or trebled, or even quadrupled the number. You must have officers who are trained for the purpose. You can only work such a system by means of thoroughly trained officers. That is the opinion of those who are engaged in the working of the card system. The officers say that the only way in which they can do the work properly is by one of the two methods which I have explained - either to say that Ave will not put on the certified rolls at all the names of any persons making any claims that have not been first examined, or else to allow at least a month before the issue of the writ for persons to send in their claims, in order to give time for the work of examination to bc properly done. {: .speaker-JLY} ##### Mr Anstey: -- Could not the work be done by stopping transfers for a month before an election? That would get rid of a large part of the work. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- That would not meet the difficulty. It is not caused by those who come forward in a regular manner and say, " I want to transfer my right to vote from the electorate where I formerly lived to the one where I live at present." The difficulty is with the many thousands who ought to have put in claims for transfer, but, instead of doing that, put in claims for original enrolment. {: .speaker-KXO} ##### Mr Page: -- We all know why they do rhat. It is because those who put in claims for transfer are generally left off the roll. That is my experience. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Why ? {: .speaker-KXO} ##### Mr Page: -- I do not know why. They are neither on the old roll nor the new one. {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- That occurs frequently. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I do not see how that can be so, because, unless I. am misinformed, a man who desires to obtain a transfer, under the provisions of the Act, signs his card, and gets on the roll for the electorate to which he has transferred; and unless his name be subsequently removed for some good reason, he remains on the roll, and his name will be included in the certified roll. The roll is printed usually at the beginning of the year. Suppose that an election comes, as it did this year, in May. What takes place is this: Every electoral registrar throughout Australia has his printed roll in the form of a book. On one side is printed the list of names; on the other side is a blank sheet. A man comes in and claims to get a transfer. His name is written on the blank, and that adds his name to the roll. The corresponding duty on the other side is performed when the officer gets a notice from the Chief Electoral Officer of. a State after the card scrutiny that that same name should bc removed from the roll where it is printed. The officer then draws his pen through it. From that document, remodelled and altered from day to day, the certified rolls are printed. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- The trouble is that plenty of persons who see the printed roll think they are still on it, though their names may be struck off the certified roll. Plenty of persons have been struck off the certified roll who thought that their names were properly on the roll, and they have never had notice from the Department that they were objected to. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I have heard complaints of that kind, but to what extent what the honorable member complains of has occurred I do not know. {: .speaker-KXO} ##### Mr Page: -- There are scores of such cases. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- It may- be so, but we must have some machinery to enable the officers to strike off names. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- There were 5,000 cases in East Sydney. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- Admittedly it is a very difficult problem. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- It is. All that I desire is that honorable members will at least give us credit for an honest attempt to meet the difficulty. If they can show us a better way than that which we have chosen, we are quite prepared to adopt it. The actual swelling of the roll is caused by the names that ought to have been removed remaining on the roll, and by the great number of transfers which remain uninvestigated for a considerable time. Apart altogether from fraud - there is no reason to suppose that, except in a few cases, there has been fraud - the system has undoubtedly given us a roll that has been swelled to a considerable extent. The question is: How are yon going to remedy it? {: .speaker-KXK} ##### Mr Webster: -- The swelling of the roll was clue to the novelty of the system, I think. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Partly. The system is getting into better working order. There is no doubt about that. But yet there is that great defect in it - that immediately before an election great numbers of claims are made. In order to rectify the difficulty, the officers .point out, with a good deal of justice, that their powers only go a certain length. They cannot themselves examine into the facts of cases outside. They can only go by their own records. Beyond that, whether a man has left a particular division, whether he ought any longer to be on the roll for that division, and, if not, what, other roll he ought to be on, are questions of fact which the ordinary machinery of the Electoral Department cannot deal with at all. At present the Department has to rely entirely upon the police, who are supposed to .make inquiries. It is not part of the ordinary duty of the police. They are not the servants of the Commonwealth. They are not directly responsible to us. The duty which they perform in this regard is performed more as a matter of grace by the State authorities for the Federal authorities than anything else. They are not specially paid for this work, and we cannot expect that they will completely or accurately perform their duty in this connexion. As a matter of fact, they do not. {: .speaker-KWL} ##### Mr Tudor: -- They do splendid work. {: #subdebate-22-0-s3 .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I am not saying anything at all against the police. They are a very useful force. But we can hardly expect a Department whose members have other duties to perform to take up this irksome task - which does not fall directly within their functions - and to render thoroughly efficient service. The result is that their slight inefficiency causes a gradually accumulating excess of persons on the rolls whose names ought not to be there. On account of a public utterance of mine, the accusation has been levelled against me that in inviting political associations to aid the Department in this process of cleansing the rolls I was doing something wrong. I desire to say now that political associations and bodies which take the keenest interest in politics can alone help the Department in cleansing the rolls. {: .speaker-L0P} ##### Mr Sampson: -- They have been of the greatest help to the Government of New Zealand. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- It is not as if we were introducing something which is new. {: .speaker-KXO} ##### Mr Page: -- That is the unfortunate part of it. We have experienced it before. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I do not think that the honorable member fully understands my point. The present law provides that any person may object to the name of another person appearing on the rolls, but that he must first lodge a deposit of 5s. What is a still more serious bar, he incurs the possibility of having, to pay £5 costs if some Returning Officer who is not a judicial officer should, in the exercise of his discretion, decide that his objection is frivolous. The result is that objections by the public generally are absolutely unknown. Thus the cleansing of the roll has not been carried out. One provision in this Bill which will be a most valuable aid to the purification of the rolls is the abolition of the 5s. deposit, and of the possibility I have mentioned. Several Honorable Members. - Oh, oh ! {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Honorable members opposite seem to think that the right to lodge an objection to any name which appears on the roll is tantamount to a right to get that name removed from the roll. It is nothing of the kind. It is merely an intimation to the Department that there is a case which requires to be looked into. No Department would strike a name off the roll merely because it received an objection from any man, either with or without the 5s. deposit. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- What is the procedure adopted *1* {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The objectors notify the Department that there are a number of cases which require to be inquired into. It then becomes the duty of the Department to specifically direct the police to make inquiries into those cases. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- That work ought to be done by a departmental officer, no matter at what cost, and not by a political partisan. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The honorable member says that that work ought to be done by a departmental officer, no matter at what cost. If it can be done by a departmental officer it ought to be done by him, and I would remind the honorable member that in this Bill we take power for such an officer to do it, because one of its most important provisions relates to the appointment of electoral inspectors for the purpose of undertaking this very work. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- The Government would nol have struck out the provision providing for a deposit of 5s. if they had intended to employ inspectors for that purpose. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -I can assure the honorable member that inspectors are tobe appointed for that very purpose. But the honorable member does not suppose that we will appoint an army of electoral inspectors, equal in number to the police, in order to relieve the latter of their duty. We propose to appoint responsible electoral inspectors in relation to each electoral division, and sometimes, if necessary, to portions of divisions. These officers will be charged with the responsibility of seeing that that work is done. What more can we do? If anything more can be suggested, and it is not beyond the means of the Treasurer, we are willing to undertake it. {: .speaker-KEV} ##### Mr Fenton: -- Why should the cost be considered ? We should make every effort to get a pure roll. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I quite agree with the honorable member. But we ought nOt to appoint an army of inspectors. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- I understand that information oan be lodged now by any person, without that person being called upon to pay anything. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- But that would not be a formal objection under the Act. The Chief Electoral Officer of the Commonwealth, and the Chief Electoral Officer in each State, are high officials charged with a serious responsibility, and they must be allowed to exercise some discretion. I say that they ought to be able to receive information from any source whatever as to defects in the roll. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- Are the inquiries in reference to objections to be held in open Court ? {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- No. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- How is a person to whose name objection is taken to be notified of that objection? {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- He will be notified by communicating with the address which is given on the roll. How else can it be done? {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- What notice is to be given to him? {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- He will be notified that his name is to be removed from the roll, but he will be given an opportunity to show cause why it should not be so removed. If we have high officials, we ought to intrust them with the responsibility of removing names from the roll, subject to an opportunity being afforded to the persons affected to show why their names should not be removed. An additional facility for purifying the roll is provided in this Bill. It has frequently been a subject of complaint that, no matter how active one may be, it is impossible to satisfy oneself that a man has left the electoral division for which he is enrolled. One may know that he has left an electoral subdivision, but in the very large areas embraced in our electoral divisions it is impossible to assure oneself that he has left his division. Consequently, we have provided in the Bill that any person may lodge an objection to a man's name appearing on the roll on the ground that he has left the subdivision for which he is enrolled. {: .speaker-KYV} ##### Mr Riley: -- Is it proposed to notify the person to whose name objection is taken ? {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Certainly. I come now to the other argument which has been adduced, namely, that the proposal in this Bill constitutes an attack on the secrecy of the ballot. This contention is mainly based on the provision which requires that the butts of ballotpapers must be numbered and signed. Under the law as it now stands, it is impossible to set aside an election on the ground of fraud or personation, no matter how close the voting may have been, unless it can be shown that personation has been indulged in to an extent which has rendered it impossible for that election to be a true reflex of the will of the people. It has been put forward by the Department - and I think with a good deal of reason - that it is desirable in any perfect system of electoral law that the Court of Disputed Returns, which has ultimately to determine whether or not an election has been properly conducted, should be afforded an opportunity of identifying the votes which are alleged to have been the subject of personation. Honorable members opposite may think there is too much danger in that. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- Potentially, every vote will be made open to inspection. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- " Potentially " is a very wide word. I wish to show how very small is the possibility. Before the House rejects such a useful provision, and it is one which in some form or other exists in many countries, including some of the Australian States, such as Queensland {: .speaker-KXO} ##### Mr Page: -- The electors do not sign their names there. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Whether the particular method which we have adopted in this Bill, after the fullest consultation with our responsible officers, is the best that can be devised is a matter for free and open consideration in Committee. {: .speaker-JWO} ##### Mr J H Catts: -- It is a very good job that the Government are climbing down. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- This proposal is absolutely free from any danger if it be properly administered. The only real difficulty about it is that it may cause considerable delay. It may make the conduct of elections somewhat more lengthy than it otherwise would be. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr West: -- It is impossible to carry out. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The honorable member is always prepared to pronounce judgment before he has heard the evidence. {: .speaker-JWO} ##### Mr J H Catts: -- Under it, any scrutineer could track a vote. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- If that be so, it is an absolute condemnation of the proposal. But I venture to think that it is not so. {: .speaker-JWO} ##### Mr J H Catts: -- If a scrutineer watches the person signing the butt, takes the number of the ballot-paper, and watches for that number when the votes are being counted, he cannot avoid knowing how the elector voted. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- There is no necessity for the number to be put on the front of the ballot-paper. Honorable members will see that this is a matter for regulation. {: #subdebate-22-0-s4 .speaker-JTI} ##### Mr BURNS: -- That is worse still. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Some honorable members seem to think that every regulation framed by the Government will be framed with the intention of allowing fraud to be committed. {: .speaker-K5D} ##### Mr King O'Malley: -- There are 70,000 people in Australia who cannot write. None of these would vote under this Bill, because they would not care to exhibit their ignorance. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I do not propose to enter into a detailed discussion of that clause at the present time. Every word of it, no doubt, will be made the subject of discussion in Committee, when honorable members will probably be full of suggestions. If they can suggest any better way of carrying out this necessary principle, again, I say, we are prepared to consider it and accept it, but I do not think that they will find any better way. It has been very carefully thought out, with the view of securing the necessary advantage of a possible identification by the Court of Disputed Returns, while, at the same time, preventing the possibility of identification by scrutineers or other persons. The Minister himself has intimated that the object is to print the corresponding numbers on the back of the butt, and the ballot-paper, so that they may not be seen by any person. That is not expressly provided for in the Bill, but if that is a safe thing to do, and will still secure identification, there is no reason why it should not be done. In Queensland, I believe, the method is adopted of turning down the portion of the ballotpaper on which the identifying number is, and gum ming it. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- Even so, there is an objection to the delay, the congestion in the booth, the necessary hindrance to free voting. It will take some time to write one's name. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I have already intimated that that is not at all a reasonable objection to raise to any such provision. The question is whether the time which will be taken is not fully justified by the additional security you have for an absolutely clean vote, and for an effective scrutiny, and the necessary identification for that purpose. We shall have the fullest opportunity of discussing all these matters in Committee. So far as I can judge from the general tone of the debate, honorable members on the other side are looking for every evil motive that they can possibly impute to the Government in bringing in this measure. Their criticisms with regard to principles of policy involved in the Bill are criticisms to which nobody on this side can take exception; but where they point at every little clause and say there is in it an indication of fraud on the part of the Government, an indication of a desire to act corruptly, to do something wrong, that is a kind of argument which we cannot meet. {: .speaker-DQC} ##### Mr Hughes: -- We had no explanation of the Bill at all from the Honorary Minister. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Tlie principle of postal voting is one which has been attacked on grounds which one does not like to characterize as insincere, but which certainly are entirely insufficient. It has been claimed that postal voting opens the door to fraud, and that there has been an abundance of proof of fraud having been perpetrated during the years in which the postal vote was in existence. That claim is ludicrous when one looks at the cases. The only instances which have been brought forward can be counted on the fingers of one's two hands, some not being proved, and others being of such a trifling character that they are not worth regarding when we consider the tens of thousands of people who have from time to time exercised the franchise in that way. Yet, when we venture to suggest that there have been cases of personation in connexion with the absent-voting system, which gives the fullest opportunities foi fraud, whether exercised or not, the very honorable members who have brough forward those cases say, " You are accusing the whole people of Australia of fraud." The position is an absurd one. I do not intend to take up any more time at this stage. The whole of these matters will be debated in Committee, and I hope that when that time comes, I shall have an opportunity of dealing with some of the objections which have been brought forward by interjection. {: #subdebate-22-0-s5 .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST:
East Sydney .- I feel confident that honorable members generally will agree with me that no more important piece of legislation could be brought before the House than an Electoral Bill. 1 honestly believe that honorable members on the other side have brought forward this Bill as a challenge to honorable members on this side with a view of trying to make it a test question at the next election. The Honorary Minister, in his introductory speech, gave us no grounds for the proposed alterations in the law, and the Attorney-General, I suppose, regards the measure as the greatest freak he has ever seen introduced into a Parliament. On all the main issues, on all those principles which are dear to honorable members on this side, the honorable and learned gentleman was very silent. It seems to me to be a piece of humour to ask honorable gentlemen on the other side to introduce a liberal Electoral Bill. I remember the days when I had to use the stump and the tar barrel for the purpose of getting adult suffrage in New South Wales, and when, in my boyhood, I assisted the Democrats in Hyde Park, London, in trying to get the lodgers' vote. I know how each of those reforms was complicated with technicalities. According to my reading of the history of the Conservative party, there are only four things which they think are essential to the progress of the country, namely, the Navy, the Military, the Police, and the Constitution. Having obtained those four things, the Conservatives think that they have done all that is necessary for the people. The right of the Democrats to the franchise, the improvement of industrial conditions, the factories law, the housing law, the educational law, have had to be fought for, and our opponents who sit on the opposite side represent those we had to fight. To suggest that we are likely to get from them a liberal election law is, I think, one of the greatest pieces of humour it is possible for a man to utter. We all know the history of the struggle to obtain the' secret ballot - the greatest blessing that has ever been conferred on mankind. {: .speaker-JTI} ##### Mr Burns: -- I draw attention to the state of the House. *[Quorum, formed.]* {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- I am trying to impress upon the House what a piece of humour it is to expect from the honorable gentlemen who sit on the other side a liberal franchise, or an opportunity for the Democrats of Australia to fully and freely record their votes. Our opponents do not want the Democracy to have control of Australia. Why did they fight us so bitterly at the last election ? Because the Democracy had got control of the reins of government, and had done something in the interests of the masses, and vested interests had not got that service which was expected. If that was not the whole object of the Liberal party, what was there in the contest? Their whole aim was shown in a determined effort to eradicate the national sentiment, which ran through every act and deed of the Labour Government. In their efforts to remove that Government from office, the Liberals went so far as to tell deliberate falsehoods. I do not say that they were liars, but I do assert that they said that which was not the truth. The first contentious measure which the Liberal Government brought down to this House was this measure to alter the electoral law. Under the existing Act, at the last election, in some cases, 75 per cent, of the people voted, while in other cases 80 per cent, voted. What was wrong with that? At each succeeding Federal election, the percentage of voters has risen. When such a fine result is obtained, surely the Government have some other object in altering the electoral law than has been put before the House by the Honorary Minister ! He told us that under the present Act there are possibilities of fraud. The Attorney-General did not tell us that fraud had been committed. What Ministers want to make out is that there were possibilities for fraud. There is a possibility of honorable members on the other side being nothing else but frauds. I have as much right to make that remark as a Minister has to say that, under the present electoral system, there are possibilities of fraud. In introducing the Bill the Honorary Minister told us that 144,000 persons in Australia committed some misdemeanour or offence under the Electoral Act. He said that a large number of persons were brought up on charges of drunkenness, and that it ought to be worth their while to give an extra vote, or give a vote, and do their best for the Labour party. His remark aroused my anger, and *I* did, sir, that which perhaps was unruly, and caused you to rise from your chair, and use rather strong language to me. How could a Democrat like myself, representing Democrats as I do, sit down under the stigma that the persons said to have been under the influence of drink were amongst those who voted for the Labour party? However, I am not much worried about that accusation, because I honestly believe that those unfortunate brothers and sisters who have fallen by the way, and need a Christian to help them, will naturally turn to members of my party. {: .speaker-KYV} ##### Mr Riley: -- I beg to call attention to the state of the House. *[Quorum, formed.']* {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- When the Government announced this Bill it was thought that they would propose some improvements in the electoral law. As a matter of fact, the Bill is simply a challenge to the Opposition. In Great Britain, when there is a change of Government, the new Government recognise that their predecessors have been put in power.by the voice of the people, and that their legislation is entitled l.o respect. This Government, however, with its magnificent majority of one, -take upon themselves to challenge the Opposition on principles that we deem vital. The present Government have no mandate to make the proposed radical alteration in the legislation of their predecessors. As a Democrat I, of course, desire that every one entitled to a vote shall have every facility afforded him to exercise that vote, and urge that the cost should be no impediment. And if the people are to vote, then, in the name of the Supreme Being, let the secrecy of the ballot be observed. Any electoral law that violates that secrecy cannot meet with the approval of an Australian Democrat; it is entirely at variance with the aims and ideas of those who exercise the franchise. I have had considerable experience during the last thirty or forty years in the work of an " election agent, and, in my opinion, all the double-voting and other abuses we hear so much about are a mere myth. To indulge in such offences does not pay, and, therefore, they are not indulged in. I remember once " having a lark " by impersonating *v.* mayor of Sydney, a man who was much more popular than myself, but who was hardly known to any one. No harm was done in that case, because the mayor exercised his vote all right, but the next day the *Sydney Morning Herald* came out with a great story about the occurrence. Where are the abuses to justify 'he proposals of the Government? The Attorney-General pointed out that there was a larger number of persons on the roll than there should be. As a matter of fact, the roll which I obtained for the purposes of ' my election were fourteen months old, and were not accurate. We advised every person whose name did not appear to send in a card, whether they had done so previously or not, and the result was that 6,000 persons became entitled to vote. Under our present system the excess of names cannot be avoided, but omissions may be rectified up to the last day. I may inform honorable members that in the two months from the 31st May to the 31st July last, while the scrutiny was going on, I made inquiries as to the changes which had taken place in that period, and in one subdivision I found that out cf ninety-one hotels twenty-three had changed hands, and the original owners had left the district. In Blighstreet, where the Union Club is situated, there were not more than 270 votes, and yet we found that twenty-five of the electors had removed. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- Did their names remain on the roll? {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- Yes. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- There could not be a better proof of the necessity for investigation. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- I am as anxious as anybody that the rolls should be perfect, but the proposals of the Government are likely to cause injury. I think the AttorneyGeneral will agree that it is better that a man's name should appear twice on the roll than that he should not have a vote as all. {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- I quite agree with that. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- The Attorney-General tells us that there are 500,000 changes of residence in Australia each year, and we ought not to pass a measure which will have the effect of assisting and keeping those persons off the roll. As to the deposit of 5s. on making an objection, I do not desire to be offensive in referring to honorable me cabers opposite and their organisation, but- {: .speaker-KJE} ##### Mr W H IRVINE:
FLINDERS, VICTORIA · ANTI-SOC; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917 -- The result of retaining the provision for that deposit would mean that only rich people could lodge an objection. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- This is lovely ! I do not blame the representatives of the Liberal League for going round and endeavouring to get votes ; but if they find that a person has moved from one street to another they lodge an objection. The electorhas no opportunity of knowing that an objection is lodged, and it is no use sending a notice to his address, for, while Australian electors do not shoot their landlords, they sometimes ' ' shoot the moon." That is, they do a moonlight flitting. Another objection I have is that canvassers go round and mark the . roll. I saw the roll marked by one of the scrutineers appointed by the Assistant Minister of Home Affairs, and it was marked just as the roll was marked by my scrutineer. Many people object to a name on the roll without being able to assign any reason for their objection, and I think that the provision in the existing law, that a sum of 5s. shall be deposited in respect of each objection, is a very wise one. It prevents many frivolous objections from being lodged. The power to lodge wholesale objections is a dangerous one when placed in the hands of an unscrupulous person. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -Under this Bill an objection must be signed before a highlyplaced official ; and any person other than an official who, without reasonable cause, signs an objection, is liable to a penalty of £5. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- I am quite aware of that; but it is too late to take action after the election has been held. What we need to do is so to frame our electoral machinery as to give no opportunity to designing persons to prevent electors from rightfully exercising the franchise. In that little cellar in Pitt-street, of which honorable members opposite know, some very funny things are dona. Some of the greatest humbugs and the biggest political rascals in the world are to be found there. The Honorary Minister knows to whom I am referring. I am given to understand that the Prime Minister will agree to leave being granted me to continue my remarks to-morrow. {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- It is too early yet to adjourn. {: .speaker-JX9} ##### Mr Frazer: -- Then I think we ought to have a quorum. [Quorum *formed.]* {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- I have been trying ever since I saw this Bill to learn what motive actuates the Government in endeavouring to prevent a general election taking place on a Saturday. We had no explanation of this matter from either the Assistant Minister of Home Affairs or the AttorneyGeneral. Saturday is a suitable and convenient day for all persons to go to the polling booth. A man and a woman with a family cannot leave home together to record their votes ; but Saturday, being a universal half-holiday, a husband is able, after recording his vote, to take a turn at looking" after the little ones while the wife exercises the franchise. It is all very well for those who have servants and motor-cars, and all the opportunities that wealth provides, to say that any day of the week will do; but it seems to me that this proposal on the part of the Government is one of those darts with which they wish to stab honorable members on this side of the House. {: .speaker-L1R} ##### Mr Agar Wynne: -- When the election takes place on a Saturday, it spoils the attendance at all our football matches. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- I am a keen lover of sport, and, if I could afford it, I, like the Postmaster-General, would go to the races; but I cannot. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Does not the honorable member see that the Saturday provision to which he refers offends the susceptibilities of quite a number of persons in his electorate? {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- I am glad that the honorable member has referred to that matter. My initials are " J.E.W.," and I presume that the honorable member is alluding to the Jewish section of the community. Iwould remind him, however, that the Jewish Sabbath closes at 6 p.m., and that it was to meet the convenience of the Jewish section of the community that the hours of polling were extended until 8 p.m. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Why give a Jew only two hours in which to vote, while the rest of the community have twelve? {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- I think a good many of my Jewish friends are patriotic enough, if necessary, to vote earlier in the day. If the Government could prove that Saturday is an undesirable day- {: .speaker-F4S} ##### Mr Joseph Cook: -- The trouble is that we cannot prove anything to the satisfaction of honorable members opposite. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- The Government cannot prove that they are any good. I think that we ought to have a quorum. [Quorum *formed.]* The holding of the last general election on a Saturday proved both convenient and satisfactory. Saturday is set apart as polling day in South Australia, and I am sure that the Minister of External Affairs does not object to it. I am at a loss to account for the action of the Government in this respect. Coming to the question of the freedom of the press, I do not think that the Ministry are really sincere in their statements regarding the press " gag." Those who read the daily press must admit that during the last general election they had every facility for publishing electoral news and articles bearing on the election. All that the existing law requires is that during the progress of an election any article dealing with political questions shall be signed by the writer. Any person writing in the publicpress on matters reflecting upon any party ought to be prepared to sign his name; and an article to which a man does not care to append his signature because, perhaps, it is a fabrication or a distortion of facts, ought not to be published in a reputable journal. The daily newspapers gave the Liberal party very great support. In Great Britain the *Times,* the *Morning Post,* the *Daily News,* and like journals, always give the largest amount of space to the reports of speeches of members of the Government, no matter to what party they belong, because they look upon the Government as being responsible for the administration of the affairs of the country, and the Opposition, being irresponsible, gets less space. But what do we find here ? Let me takeas an example the issues of the Sydney *Daily Telegraph* from the 12th to the 31st May. In that period, the leaders of the Government party were given 36 ft. 10 in. of space, and members of the then Opposition got 133 ft. 6 in., or 350 per cent. more. What is true of the *Daily Telegraph* may be said of all theother daily newspapers in Australia. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- Will the honorable member confess that the Labour newspapers did not print a single speech delivered by a Libera] ? {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- The Labour newspapers are very small sheets, limited in their circulation. I trust that the day will come when both sides will have their views properly reported in journals of their own. In no other part of the world where parties are bo evenly divided as they are here are all the daily newspapers on the one side. {: .speaker-KMC} ##### Mr Orchard: -- Would the *Worker* give space to a special article contributed by a Liberal ? {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- The *Worker* is a weekly sheet, which goes to members of the association. It cannot be compared with a daily newspaper. {: .speaker-KEA} ##### Mr Kelly: -- If it ceased to be so partisan it would get a bigger circulation. {: .speaker-KZA} ##### Mr WEST: -- It would do the honorable member no harm to read it. But, with leave of the House, I shall continue my speech when the Bill is next before us. Leave granted; debate adjourned. House adjourned at 10.48 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 18 September 1913, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1913/19130918_reps_5_70/>.