Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

TUESDAY, 4 AUGUST 1903

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

lGO "ASSE::\IJ3LY.' A.drl!'fss m RepT,IJ.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.

TUESDAY, -± AUGUST, 1903.

The SPEAKER (Hon. Arthur Morgan, Warwick)· took the chair at half-past 3 o'clock.

ADDRESS IS REPLY. \VA~T oF Co:sFIDE~rE MoTION-REsu"rPTroN

OF DEBA'I'E. On this Order of the Day being called, :Yir. P. J. LEAHY ( 1Vrungo) eaid: I think

it is generally conceded that the leader of the Opposition on this occasion made a singularly weak and ineffective speech. (Opposition laughter.) Now, that may be owing to several causes. It may be owing to the fact that the hon. member may not be able to make a good speech, and I shall have something to say on that aspect of the question presently; it may be that the hon. member is so much in love with the le,1der of the Government-for we know they are very great friends-that his heart is not in this, that he purposely made such a weak attack ; or it may be owing to the fact-and I think this is the real reason-that the hon. member had a very bad case. Before I had the honour of sitting in this Chamber, I listened to m"ny speeches of the hon. member, both inside this Chamber and out­side, and knowing that the hon. member can make a goo1 speech when he likes, it is only rea­sonable to come to the conclu"-ion that he had on this occasion an exceedingly bad case. [The PliE}lllm: He made it with extreme regret.} Yes, and I think it is pertinent to ask : \Vhat is the object of this amendment? Did the hon. member think it would be carried, and that he would thereupon take :c seat on the front Treasury benches? If he had any such idea, I would like to know why it was that when the hon. member for Rockharnpton, ::I'Ir. Kidston, some months ago, st::trted the idea of a coalition, the leader of the Opposition said at Croydon that he thought it would be necessary for him to jump on the hon. member for Hock­hampton? I do not know that those arc the exact. words the hon. member for Croydon used ; but at any rate they were to the effect that he would have to take strong measures with regard to the hon. member for Rockhampton. If the hon. member for Rockhampton had the ambition -a very laudable ambition-to get on to the Treasury benches, and if his leader possesses that same ambition now-and if he has not, his conduct is open to the gravest censure, because he wasted the time of the House­why did he denounce the hon. member for Rockhampton and condemn him for what he is himself doing now? I wish to say that, in addition to his being a politician, the· hon, member for Rockhampton is a poet

Address in Reply. [4 AUGUST.] Add1•ess in Reply. 161

-and we have several poets in this House. A few years ago he hoped to gain immor­tality by writing a great piece known a.s "The Passing of Glassey." \Vben the hon. member was flirting with the Independent Oppo­sition some months ago, it was suggested that Glassey should revenge himself by writing a piece entitled "The Passing of Kidston." But I believe that Glassey was too magnanimous to do that; but through the instructions of the Trades Hall, it was arranged that the hon. member for Bowen-who is also a poet-should write a piece on the subject, but two months ago that was discontinued for two reasons-first, because the hon. member for Bow en desired time to prepare his speech on the Address in Reply, and another was that the hon. member for Rock­hampton had shown some signs of repentance, and it was decided that he should be brought under a political Offenders Probation Act, so to speak, It was clearly understood that if the hon. mem­ber for Rockhampton showed any signs of attempting to coquette with the Independent Opposition, the member for Bowen would finish the poem, and nothing is more likely to keep the hon. member for Rockhampton straight than the fear of being the subject of the hon. member for Bowen's muse. A good deal was said by the leader of the Oppositi<,n to which it is not neces­sary to reply. but there were some statements made by him to which I think it 1s my duty to reply very emphatically. He told us that hon. members on this side were afraid to address their electors in connection with the poll tax ; he mentioned that only two or three members supporting the Government were game to do that. \V 8ll, I visited my electorate during the recess ; I went there when there was a race meeting on. I was not in the least afraid of addressing the electors, and was perfectly prepared to do ~o ; but I found that my supporter,;, to a man, were thoroughly satis­fied with my actions. If the so-called poll tax-­which is a n1isnmuer, because it is the 111inin1un1 amount uavable under the income tax-were before the House to-morrow I would take exactly the same stan·i as I took on the last occcasion. I have not altered my mind on the question, ~tnd I am prepared at any time, either inside or out­side the House, to vindicate my ~ction, if neces­sary. [Mr. \V. HA1!ILTOX: \Ve'll take your word.l You can do so ; I am not in the habit of telling lies. The leader of the Opposition told us-and I quite agree with him-that the proper object of an Address in Reply is to review the actions of the Government during the recess and discuss the leghlation foreshadowed in the Governor's Speech. If that is the case, I would like to know in what position he and his followers stand. Have they contented themselves with criticising the actions of the Government during the recess and the legislation foreshadowed in the Speech? Nothing of the kind. They have gone back a number of years to incidents that happened before the general election-things upon which the verdict of the country was given over twelve months ago in favour of the Government; and if han. members cannot bring forward anything new-if they can only bring forward things with respect to which the country has said the Government were right­then there is no justification in moving the amendment moved by the leader of the Opposi­tion. Suppose an investigation was held with regard to the action of a man, and a competent tribunal decided that there was no charge against him, what would be thought of a person who brought up the very same thing against him again? Thatisexactlythecase of the Opposition. I don't know why it is they have been going into ancient history to such a large extent, except it is in the belief that if they repeat a thing often

1903-Jof

enough some credulous persons will at length believe them. [:\Ir. GRAXT : What did the Secretary for Railways do in his speech?] \Vhatever else may be said about his remarks, there was no repetition; and I presume hon. members opposite are not particularly anxious for repetition of that kind. If hon. members opposite went in for repetition in the belief that some persons would believe them, it would not be the first time in the history of the world that things have been believed by being repeated often enough. I think it was George IV.-I am not much of an admirer of the Georges, and I cannot say for certain which of them it was-I believe it was George IY. who so often made the statement that he was present at the battle of Waterloo that he got to believe it himself at last. The leader of the Opposition quoted from Macaulay, and I think it is a pity some other members on the other side are not students of Macaulay. It was Macaulay who mentioned the case of a Brahmin who decided to offer a valuable sheep as a sacrifice to the gods. A couple of rogues became aware of his intention, and decided to "take him down.'' As he was going along he met one of them carrying a bag. The man asked him if he wanted to buy a sheep, and the Brahmin said he did. \Vhen the bag was opened out jumped a dog. The Brahmin protested. .Just thEm the accomplice came along, and it was decided to leave it to him to ,.ay whether the animal was a sheep or a dog. He said, as he drew near, "Oh, what a lovely sheep!" The Brahmin purchased the dog, believing it was a sheep, and offered it to the gods, who were so annoyed that they afflicted him with a loathsome disease, (Laughter.) That has a bearing on the question before the House. Hon. members opposite want us to doubt the evidence of our own senses, :wd if the people of the country are so foolish as to do so, and believe hon. members opposite, they will pay for their folly and credulity. [Mr. KmsTOX: Is the moral of the story that you really are sheep on that side and not dogs?] If the hon. member for Rockhampton wants me to explain something that does not require explana­tion, I shall have to recast my opinion of him. One of the charges against the Govern­ment is that their present economy is proof of former extravagance. I confess that at first sight the argument looks engaging from the point of view of hon. members opposite ; but when it is analysed there is as little in it as in the other charges. Economy is sometimes a good thing, and sometimes a bad thing·. Sometimes economy is forced upon us by the exigencies of the situation, and that is the position of the Government. If things are fairly prosperous, it is the duty of the Government to spend money reasonably on the services of the country as long as they have the money ; but when stern necessity compels them to economise they are bound to do it. The leader of the Opposition also told us that every class, and, in particular, the pastoral districts, were against the Gcwernment, as was proved by the fact that nearly all those districts were repre­sented by Labour members-or, at least, by men who were opposed to the Government, which comes to pretty much the same thing. Xow, what are the facts? Carpentaria is almost exclusively a pastoral district, and it is repre­sented by Mr. :Forsyth. Bnlloo is exclusively a pastoral district, and it is represented by the Secretary for Railways. Balonne is a large pastoral district, and it is represented by :Mr. Story. Warrego is represented by myself. [Mr. TuRNER: Misrepresented.] That is a matter of opinion. lf you ask me, I think that members on the other side live upon misrepresentation.

The SPEAKER: Order!

162 AddTess in Repl,y. [ASSEMBI,Y.] AcldTess m Reply.

J\Ir. P. J. LEAHY: I mean that they do not properly represent the people whom they are sent here to represent. In addition to the pastoral districts I have mentioned, Maranoa is represented hy the Attorney-General. Then there is Cook. I think that is a pastoral district. Is it not? [Honourable members : It is a mining district.] Well, I said it was a pastoral district advisedly, becau'e the other day, when somebody on thi' side referred to it as a ruining district, hon. n1e1ubers opposite were emphatic in their statement that it was a pastoral district, so that I am taking them at their own word. Now let us come to the pastor::tl districts represented by Labour. There is Gregory, represented -and worthily in some ways-by Mr. \V. Hamilton. There is Flinders, represented by Mr. _.\jrey. There is Barcoo, represented by iYir. Kerr, and Leichhardt, represented by Mr. Hardacre. I do not think I have omitted any. [l\1r. \V. HAmLTON: Clermont is ''big pastoral district.] I should hardly say that it is purely pastoral. Besides, I would not say that Clermont was represented. (Laughter.) There is another district, and I hardly know what to call it. There is the Mitchell district, and I understand that the leader of the Opposition claims the representative of that district as a I,abour man. [Mr. \V. HA}!ILTON: \Ve never claimed him, but you did.] \Yell, from his sweeping indictment the other day, I concluded he d;d. I did not say that the hon. member, with whom I am very friendly, is a Labour man. [Mr. \V. HA}IILTON: You can't sott-soap him.] The hon. member for Mitchell knows that is a thing I never do, either publicly or privately. (Opposition laughter.) At any rate I do not think that the public will believe that the hon. member is a Labour man, and I am convinced that, though he stood as an opponent of the Government, he received a very large number of votes from Go.-ernment supporters, whether because they liked him more or that they liked the other man less I am not prepared to say. [Mr. CooPER: Fifteen votes Ministerialists gave in my electorate.] Then I would like to know what happened to all the other votes that in the previous election were recorded in favour of the Government candi­date. [Mr. CooPER: They lost by 500 votes.] I am not saying one word against the hon. member. I am simply controverting the argu­ments of the leader of the Opposition, and show­ing that the hon. member is not a Labour man. I think I have shown that at least two-thirds of the pastoral districts are with the Govern­ment, and in those cases where they are against the Government, it is not the vote of the settled population of the districts that has put in Labour members, but a certain float· ing vote-the railway and other men-that has put them in. [Mr. CoOPER: Send in your resignation and I will stand for the Mitchell against you at any time.] If the hon. member is so anxious for a contest, perhaps if he would send in his resignation his former opponent might accommodate him. I go on to deal with the comparisons that have been made between theN elson and Philp Governments during certain periods, and it will probably be a relief to hon. members to know that I shall be very brief in any figures I may quote, although I m::ty say that it is at some self-sacrifice that I do not refer to the matter fully, as I like figures. In this connection I would like to mention certain remarks made by the hon. member for Flinders with reference to the hon. member for Carpen­taria. Of course we know that the hon. member for Flinders in making those remarks was really not giving us his own ideas at all, because it was an open secret that he had been

in consultation with the hon. member for Rockhampton. Mr. Kidston, and that he was making that hon. member's reply to the hon. member for Carpentaria. I trust I am not doing him an injustiCe in saying that, because I believe it is the fact. The hon. member for Flinders quoted, or professed to quote, from the speech of the hon. member for Carpentaria. The hon. member for Flinders said that the hon. member for Carpentaria stated-" If anyone reads the Rockhampton Bulletin of 18th February, he will find that the hon. member states that the revenue of the colony in 1900-1 was £4,225,287." Now, I find that what the hon. member for Carpentaria actually did say was this-" If anyone reads the Rocklutmpton Bulletin of 18th February, he will find that the hon. member states that the revenue of the colony in 1900-1 was £4,425,000 odd." [Mr. I<'oRSYTH: l<'or 1901-2.] These, no doubt, are the yeftrs the hon. men,ber for Carpentaria meant, but I am quoting exactly from Hansard. The hon. member for l<'linders, although professing to quote the hon. member for Carpentaria, made him make a statement that the revenue was £200,000 less than the hon. member for Carpen­taria said the hon. member for Rockhampton had stated it was. The hon. member for Rockhampton said that the revenue was £4,425,000, and the hon. member for Carpen taria quoted the hon. member correctly. But it suited the hon. member for Flinders to give an incorrect quotation. It is probable that

I should not have referred to this [4 p.m.] matter if the hon. member for

Flinders had not referred to the hon. member for Carpentariain very severe, and, as I think, uncalled-for terms. \Vhat I parti­cularly object to is that th~ hon. n;ember f<_>r Flinders made the hon. member for Car,Jentana say that "the increased revenue for 1901-2, as compared with 1896-7, was £812,000.'' The hon. member for Carpentaria said nothing of the kind. \Vhat the hon. member for Carpentaria did say-I have read Hansard carefully on the subject-was, that according to the letter of the hon. member for Rockhampton, published in the Rockhampton Bulletin of the 18th of :February, the increase in revenue for that period would amount to £812,000. The hon. member for Oarpentaria had previously pointed out that there were two sets of tables in the letter written by the hon. member for Rockhampton. As a matter of fact, the figures in one of those tables were wrong, and they were proved by the hon. member for Carpentaria to be wrong. But the hon. member for Carpentaria further said that even if the figures were correctly given, the deductions of the hon. member for Rockhampton were wrong, inasmuch as the revenue for 1901-2 was £4,425,000 odd­according to the hon. member for Rockhampton -and the correct revenue for 189G-7 was £3,i:i13,000 odd. If you deduct the one from the other you will find that there was an increase of £812,000, according to the hon. member for Rock­hampton. But the hon. member for Flinders was disingenuous enough to make the hon. member for Carpentaria say that the increase was £812,000, whereas as a matter of fact what the hon. member for Carpentaria did say was that the hon. member for Rockhampton said the increase was £812,000. Some of the language used by the hon. member for Carpentaria was not, perhaps, as clear as it might be, but the context shows that that was the meaning of the hon. member; he was referring to the figures of the hon. member for Rockhampton, and not to his own figures. [Mr. FoRSYTH: And he knows it.] The hon. member for Flinders waxed very wrath because the hon. member for Carpentaria pointed out certain errors in the figures quoted by the

Addnss in Reply. [4 AUGUST.] Address in Reply. 163

·hon. member for Rockhampton, and stated that he drew the attention of the hon. member for Rockhampton to those errors. It has been ttlleged that those errors were of a typov;raphical character, and that the hon. member for Carpentaria knew that, but that in order to score a party triumph he took advantage of that fact to show that the hon. member for Rockhampton had no knowledge of figures. \V hat are the facts? The hon. member for Carpentaria stated-and the hon. member for Rockhampton was present and did not contra­dict the statement, so I presume it was true­he told the hon. member fur Rockhampton that the figrrres were incorrect, and it appears that up to that time the hon. member for Rnckhamp­ton did not know that they were incorrect. [:\Ir. Bt:RRO\\"$: ·what about the second column?] The hon. member was present, and did not con­tradicL the hon. member for Carpentaria. But suppm,e there was a typov;raphical error, and the hon. member for Rockhampton did not know of it, is it to be wondered that the hon. member for Oarpentaria did not know of it Assuming that there was a typographi-

error, is the hon. member for Oarpen­to be blamed for quoting those figure'?

submit that it is shown clearly that the hon. member for On,rpentaria acted in per­feet good faith. Of course it may be contended, on the other hand, that the hon. member for Rockhampton, who professes to have a great knowledge of figures, and who is always q noted by hon. members opposite as a great expert in figures, knew of that mistake. If that is so, what opinion :.are we to form of a man who knew of a mistake of that kind, and deli­berately allowed the public to be deceived? I do not say that the hon. member for Rockhampton did know of the mistake ; but if he did not know of it, we cannot blame the hon. member for Carpentaria for not knowing of the typographi­cal error. If the hon. member for Rockhampton did know, then he deserves severe censure for allowing the public to be deceived. I have only a few more remarks to make in reply to the hon. member for J<'linders. \Vhen the leader of the Op· position was dealing with certain figures the hon. member for Carpentaria nterjected some­:;;hing, and the leader of the Opposition at once admitted that he was somewhat in error That is a candid admission, which does the hon. member credit; and it would be to the credit of hon. members on both sides of the House if all errors were honestly admitted. It would, perhaps, be too much to expect the hon. member for Flinders to follow the example set by the leader of the Opposition, but he would not lose in the estima­tion of this Chamber by doing so. As I have already pointed out, he was particularly severe with the hon. member for Oarpentaria, and I think I have said enough to show that his stric­tures were totally undeserved, and that the only person who acted in this matter in an unfair way, at least in a way we cannot approve of-who attempted to juggle with figures­was the hon. member for Flinders himself. That hon. member went in for a great deal of juggling, and it would not surprise me if we had some more "rotten eggs," with the consequences which the hon. member for Carpentaria so graphically pointed out a few days ago. I was on the question of the com­parison which has been made between the Philp and Nelson Governments when I branched off for a moment to deal with the statements made by the hon. member for Flinders. The great charge against the present Government is that they spent very much more money than the Nelson Government. It has been stated that they received a much larger revenue, and spent it. It is a proper thing to ask in what way this

revenue was spent. I think the increased revenue was, in round figures, so mew here about £1,000,000 per year. Something like £320,000 extra per annum was spent for four years on one service alone-on the railways-out of revenur·, and not out of loan money. vVe know also that there has been a large increase in connec­tion with education and other services. [Mr. WooDs : Some out of loan. too.] ThE sum of £320,000 per year that I speak of was spent out of revenue, so that if in four years there was £1,280,000 spent from revenue as com­pared with the amount spent during the Nelson Administration, I ask whether the Government were justified or not in spending that amount of money? I think most decidedly they WPre, and I will show you why. During the period of severe economy exercised by the Nelson Adminis­tration, the railways and other departments were simply starv~ed. Accidents were happening, and complaints were continually being made in the public Press about the condition of the rolling­stock. If hon. members opposite do not like to take that fact from me, I would like to read them some extracts from Hansard which may be convincing to them, although they may not like them. \V e find that Mr. \Vilkinson, member for l\Ioreton, and a mPmber of the Labour party, speaking in 18D4, used these words

There is a feeling among the wage-earners in the service that while the retrenchment, as it affects the civil servants, is only from year to year, their retrench­ment is to be a permanent one.

I may po~nt out that the Government restored those salaries. [Mr. \VooDs: Only a portion of them.] \V ell, they re,tored a large portion of them. Then he goes on to say -

In my opening speech in this Chamber I expressed the opinion that the retrenchment was carried out at the cost of efficiency, and I hold that opinion still. I believe it lean be shown that the public assets have been depreciated in value considerably bec-J~,use or the dras­tic retrenchment of large numbers of men. It l;tas come to my knowledge that not only i8 the permanent 'vay on our railways suffering, but onr bridges are not being cared for as they should be to secure safety, the rolling­stock is getting out of repair, and tires are being run on the wheels that aTe on the verge of being unsafe. After they are run down to a certain extent they become unf.lafe, and you do not know the day when an accident may occur from their use.

There is the statement of Mr. \Vilkinson, and I ask hon. members opposite if it is not trust­worthy? If they are not satisfied with that, I will give them something more. Hon. members will remember that Mr. Glassey was at one time leader of the Labour ~party, and a very good leader, too. I am aware that at the present time he is at somewhat of a discount with his late colleagues, but at all events it may be of interest to know what he said in 1895. Here it is-

Xo'v I come to the railwayts, where a large reduction has been made in the wages of poorly-paid men. On the 28th July, 1891~ the then Secretary for Railways said the Estimates for that year showed a reduction of £17,896 in wages alone, and that in 1892 the saving would be £26,411. Tile reduction in wages, emoluments, etc., for the last three years cannot ha-ve been less than about £50.000 a year. According to the report of the committee that inquired into the dispute amongst the Railway Commissioners, the lengthsmeus' wages have been reduced by £30,000 per annum. Not only that, but while the mens' wages have been reduced 15 per cent. their work has been increased by 25 per cent. Therefore, when they take credit for the sound financial condition of the country, that credit is largely disc01:nted in COli­sequence of the imposition of extra taxatiOn, and the large reduction made in the wages and salaries of the most poorly-paid men in the ~ervice.

And he goes on then to deal with figures, and shows that there was a very large deficit, which jumped up to about £1,200,000. Yet the hon. member for Rockhampton wants this House and the country to believe thll>t this is the first

164, Address ~n Repl,y. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply.

occasion in recent years when we have had a large deficit. But Mr. Glassey refers to another matter to which sufficient attention has not hitherto been devoted. He says-

Of course we have Treasury bills to the amount of £1,400,000, and we have nearlv £400,000, the proceeds from the sale of land under the Special Sales of Lm1d Act.

~ow, in recent years we have not sold any land worth speaking about ; but if we had sold it to the same extent that previous Govurnments did, I venture to say that we would have had no deficit at all. Is it a good or bad thing for us that we ha Ye that land still? I understand that it is one of the forty-four planks of the platform of hon. members opposite-planks of which they are so proud-that the Government should sell no land; but now, the GoYernment having re­tained the land, baYing clone the very thing which hon. members opposite say they should do, which fact has in itself created the deficit, they turn round and denounce us. I am bound to say that I do not admire the consistency of hon. members. :\Ir. Gla,sey goes on to speak of the unemployed difficultv, and I mention this because the leader of the Opposition told us there were a great many unemployed-

J . .t Lowood, on the llth ::\larch, I said, in reply to a. question, that the first th1ng to be donew as to find work for 30,000 unemployed, arld thereby aSisist those who wished to dispose of their produce, which must neces­:-:.arily give an impetus to trade generally. I ha.ve arrived at the conclusion that there cannot be less than 50,000 or 60,000 idle persons in Queensland. I never said at any time, nor do I say now, that they are all men, but I contend that, taking into consideration the increa.;;e inlJO}Jnlation, the number of arrivals as com­pared with the departures, and the number of young persons who have grown to ~uch an age that they are capable of following some avocation and ought to be at work, the numbers I have n1entioned are in no sense exaggerated.

Compare the number of unemployed ut that time with the number to-day! If we had 50,000 or 60,000 unemployed to-day, there might be some rr-.ason for moving a vote of censure upon the Government. Everything in life is comparative. I admit there is a certain num­ber of unemployed at the pre;,ent time, but, compared with the number which :Hr. Glassey asserted there were at that time, the number is comparatively small; and the reason that it is so small is owing to the wise policy carried out by the Government in ende<1vouring to carry on public works anu find work for the unems played. I want to convince hon. member­opposite, and I shall have to g-ive them a little more from Hansa1·rl. The extracts I have read were from speeches delivered in 1894-5. I will now read from speeches made in 1899. The retrenchment continued during the intervening period, and the mil ways con­tinued to be starved, because m en in 1899 language was used quite as strong as was used in 1894-5. It will be admitted that Mr. Turley was a pretty straight Labour man. \Vhat he said carried considerable weight with his party, and in 1899 he is reported in Hrmsard as saying, in reply to a query by the Secretary for Rail way·s, "Who was responsible" ?-

I think the fact that the Government have been starving our railways is responsible for the accidents that have happened. . . . They [the locomotive branch of tho service] have not been able to get the necessary amount of money to carry out the works which have been absolutelv necessary . ... The complaint is tHat the railways have been practically starved for years. . . . It has often been said in the old country that you will only get railway reform if you place a railway director in front of an engine ; and it is very much the same here. There must be an explosion, or a .:\!linister or somebody else killed, before we get any reforms in connection with our railway system.

1Ir. J enkinson also delivered a speech in 1:>99,. to be found in volume lxxxii., page G31, of Hun­sard, and this is what he said-

During the last ten years, as far as I can gather from the reports, the Government have been pressed to proYille new rail way \vorkshops to enable the necessary repairs to he executed quickly. . . But at the present time, although tlie Secretary for Railways must be fully aC{lUainted with the fact.s [as to insufficient rolling­stock, lack of accommodation for repairs, etC'.~. very little is being done, aud I think it rlght that the aaen­tion of Parliament and the eonntry should be drawn to the matter.

And, again, on the same page, after quoting freely from the report of the Boiler Commission, Mr. J enkinson said-

Yet we are told the department 1s not siarYecl, that it application had been made for the money it would have been found. . . They have been in a position to find funds for other purposes not so legitimate as this. Mr. Lesina, in debate on Supj>ly in 1809 (HanNanl, page 1471), referring to the appoint­ment of Mr. Nisbet, said-

He believed the appointment \Vas made to eover np the negligence of the Government in starving the department for the last eig:ht or ten years, and that the evidence showed the department was responsible for the explosions and not :.\Ir. llorniblow, \Yho had fre.J_uently protested against the :o:tarYing of tlte department. J\[r. J\IcDonnell, on the same page, contended that-

The whole difficulty in the Railway Department was the result of the starvation initiated by Mr. J\Iathie~on.

1Ir. Kerr, al"o on same page, referred to-The dangerous condition of some of the loeomotives

on the Central line, and expressed the opinion that if the Commission of In{luiry on Boiler J<~xplosions 1lad followed np their conclusions, they would ha Ye put the blame for the condition of the rol1ing-~tock on ::.\linh:ters by whom the department had lleen starved.

And Mr. Stewart, now Senator Stewart, on the same page, said-

The rolling-stock had been allowed to get into a dis­graceful condition. . . lie would like the railwaYs to be managed as nearly as possible on tl1e same prinCiple a~ private lines, beeanse he did not desire that the State railways should be a failure.

And yet, notwithstanding these strttements, when an attempt is made to run them on better lines the Labour Opposition say they should not be run on the same lines as private companies would run them-that they should not be run on commercial lines, and with an attempt to make them pay. I think I have shown con­clusively that during the fours years of the Nelson Administration, in regard to which we have had a surfeit of figures, economy was effected by starving the services. I am endeavouring to show why the Philp Govern­ment was compelled to spend more money, and I am condemning the other side out of their friends' remarks. If it be admitted-as I think it is-that the railway and other services wt'fe starved during the :Nelson period, what were the Philp Government gomg to do? The very fact that theN elson Government had economised was the very reason why the Philp Government could not do so. [Mr. WooDs: That is not so with regard to the railways. J If the hon. member

1 for \Voothakata were to economise by wearing all his clothes out this year, how could he manage to effect the same economy next year? [J\Ir. Woons : The railways were never starved so much as they are to-day.] 'l'hat is perfect nonsense. Everybody knows that at present the rolling-stock, for instance, is in excellent con­dition. If this drastic retrenchment resulted in starving the service, as I think it did, the plain duty of the Philp Government was to put the service in a state of efficiency. And

Address in Reply. [4 AuGusT.] Address in Repl,y. 165

'how was that to be done without money? The Philp Government had a large increase of revenue and they spent it-and very wisely spent it­in connection with the administration of the different services, and particularlv of the railway service. There is another thing l may mention : The Government cannot spend money without this House voting it. All the money spent was v?t~d from time to time by the House. Why d1d not hon. members on the other side get up at the time and say to the Government they ought not tu spend the money? They did not raise a 'ingle protest against it. In fact, as long as the money is spent, they are not particular from what source it comb, I say that, even assuming for the sake of argument only, that there was mure money Apent than there ought to have been, still the fact that this House voted the money is ample warrant for the action of the ·Government. The hon. member for Rockhamp· ·ton is sometimes anmsing, although it is rather difficult to associate the idea of amusement with him. He actually told us we ought not to have any more loans, while at the same time he and 'his friends tell us we must find work for the unemployed, and do this, that, and the other­things which are actually impossible without loan money. Although, as I am disposed to think, all the States have in the past spent too much loan money, still, if hon. members will clamour for certain things to be done, they must be prepared to face the facts and pay the money like men, and not throw the blame on the Govern­ment when, if there is any blame, they themselves ;,honld bear it. That hon. member took a very pe,simistic view of the condition of the colony, as compared with the mover of the Address in Reply, a prominent business man, who took rather an optimistic ''iew. I myself, who have been a considerable time in the colony, and kno-.v a good deal about its condition, certainly take a hopeful view, and my opinion is that there is nothing in the present position of the colony to warrant the pessimistic foreuodings of the hon. member for Rockhampton. The hon. member told us it was onl~, a question of a few years until we should have repudiation. I presume he was going on the fallaciou" basis of per capit" indebtedness. \Vel!, we have 400,000,000 acres of land, and if we were to sell that at the exceed­ingly low average price of 2s. per acre, it would wipe off all our debt, and leave us with our rail­ways and other assets to the good. And yet the hon. member says Queensland is almost bankrupt, and it is only a question of time until we shall have repudiation. Is it any wonder that state­ments of that kind damage our credit in the London money market? I question whethPr even J\Ir. \Vilson has done onr credit more damage in that respect than have statements made from the other side of the House. But t?e hon. member is not satisfied with having the hovernment bankrupt. He tells us that onr business men are only hanging on by "the skin of their teeth." I am fairly well in touch with the C·.'ffimercial community, and I may tell him that the traders of Brisbane and of Queensland generally are on a very sound footing indeed. There is no likelihood of their going insol­vent, and there is every prospect that their position will be improved in the near future. ::\ ow, the hem, member for Rockhampton actually made a charge of dishonesty against the present Government. The leader of the Opposition did not make a charge of dishonesty against the Go­vernment in this House; but he did almost the same thing in Croydon. \Vhen the hon. member

for Rockhampton was referring to [-1'30 p.m.] the hon. member who seconded the

, Address in Reply, who had said, ·'Let the dead past bury its dead," the hon. member for Rockhampton replied, " Nonsense ;

why should we let the 'dead past bury its dead?' " '!'hen he actually drew a comparison between this side and a dishonest bookkeeper, and, if what he said was not a plain charge of diBhonesty against the Government, I do not know what is. Now, the leader of the Oppo­sition said at Croydon a few months ago that if his party were to come into power, they would do so with clean hands. [An honourable member: So they would.] That mi~ht be possible after they had used a good deal of soap ; at any rate, the hon. member said they would come m with clean hands, clearly inferring that the Govern­ment had not clean hands. The hon. member for Hockhampton compared this Government with a dishonest bookkeeper, and the leader of the Opposition, by inference, said that this Go­vernment had not clean hands ; and yet hon. members opposite wonder why some of us on this side sometimes hit back. \Vhy, we would not be human if we did not. Do hon. members opposite suppose that they ought to have a monopoly of that kind of thing? The marvel is that we did not hit back sooner. 'When hon. members opposite make reckless, damaging, and nncal18d-for statf\ments, do they suppose that we on this side are going to sit still and make no reply? [Mr. CowAP : They did not make them against men who are not here to defend them­selves.] Yes, they do sometimes. But the hon. member for Rockhampton in one place was really complimentary to the Government, and I do not know how he managed to do it. He may say that it was the fault of the Hansard reporters, or it was a printer's error, but he is reported to have said that he did not blame the Go· vernment for the drought. He was magnani­mous enough to say that; and when you consider that the drought was one of the main factors that brought about the present deficit, surely it must be admitted that that hon. member gave a most corcplete vindication of the action of the Government! If he had said straight out that he did not blame the Govern­ment for the deficit, he would ha,-e been logical and stated the truth, because there is no doubt that the drought is largely responsible for the enormous loss in connection with the railways. :i'\ow, what does the hon. member advocate himself? Has he suggested any scheme to improve the position? I think it is the dutv of people who make charges against the Government, and who wish to take the places of the members of the Government, to tell u'f.in what. way they would impr_ove the conditwn of thmgs. The same questwn was asked la:;t year, and the hon. member for Rock­hampton suggested nothing, but when pressed by interjections he suggested a Royal Com­mission, and a reduction of £500,000 in the salaries of civil servant'.. That was the manner in which he would try and get over our diffi­culties. [Mr. Tl'RNElt: He did not suggest the cutting down of the salaries of public servants, he said "the expenses of government."] I will take it that way; I am speaking from memory. The hon. member suggested a Royal Commission and the cutting down of the expenses of government by £500,000; but I feel snre tha~ if th:1.t rednc· tion, or any other large reductwn, were made the Government employees would have to bear the greater part of the burden. I think it is right that, when an hon. member makes charges against the policy of the Government, he should be prepared to suggest a policy. There_ was once a great statesman-John Bright-posstbly some hon. members opposite have heard of him-­[::VIr. JENKINSON: He was a member of this House on one occasion, but never took his seat.} If we had some men of his stamp in this House, it would be all the better for the House and the country. [Mr. JENKII'<SON: Your side

166 AddPess in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply.

would be the better for it.] Tbe other side would be a great deal better, too, if it had men of his stamp amongst them. In 1858, that great statesman, when condemmng a certain Bill, was not satisfied to merely give his opinion; he outlined an elaborate policy. ~ow, why do not hon. members on the other side tell us what they would <lo to save the country ? They simply tell us that everything is wrong, but will suggest nothing to put things right. Their ability is all in the critical line. That is an exceedingly low form of ability, and generally indicates the absence of the construc­tive faculty. They have not constructive ability enough to suggest anything, and yet they ask members to vote with them on this amendment. The idea is monstrous. [Mr. LESINA: \Vhy do we pay the £1,000 a year?] You don't pay anything towards that; you don't pay much more than the poll tax ; you are exempt. [Mr. LEKINA: I have paid mine.] I had not intended to refer to the hoo. member for Clermont, but now that he has interjected, I promise him that I will have a word or two to sav about him. [Mr. LESINA: I shall be pleased to hear you.] It seems to me that this deficit is the main charge against the Government, and I have already pointed out that the drought is largely respon­sible for that. \V e also know that federation has had a great deal to do with it, and I want to say here that I am not one of those people who consider federation an unmixed evil. \Vhilst I am very disappointed with some of the things that the Federal Government h,we done, I think that in course of time, when a minority ceases to rule, and the true feeling of Australia finds expression in a strong Government, federa­tion will benefit all the States. For our present position federation is largely responsible, as is also the deficiency in connection with our rail­ways. Then, another matter is that the Labour party, by their conduct in this HousP and in the country, have discouraged private enterprise to such an extent that a large amount of capital has been kept out of the country, and conse­quently a large number of men have swelled the ranks of the unemployed. So I contend that the Labour party is one of the factors-and not the least important-in the matter of bringing about the present condition of the country. And yet hon. members opposite have the audacity to turn round and blame hon. mem­bers on this side for the very things they themselves are largely responsible for. I find it difficult to treat this an,endment seriously. I would not like to think that the leade'!l of the Opposition would be guilty of doing anything frivolous in this Hous~; yet he has moved an amendment which was still-born. Hon. mem­bers have wasted a week or two in discussing it; and the Government employees are waiting for their salaries in order that hon. members may have an opportunity of airing their eloquence. Mr. W. HA1IILTO~ : You are talking over an

hour.] I very seldom sin in making long speeches. The only long speech I made was when I occupied forty-five minutes on the Land Bill, and then I was followed by the hon. mem­ber for Gregory with a speech that occupied two hours. On this occasion I intend to say exactly what I have to sa.y before I sit down. Another aspect of the question to be considered is the fact that if hon. members opposite got on the Treasnry benches they would not be free agents, but w:mld be tied down to the cast-iron platform of forty-four planks drawn up by the Labour convention. The last convention sat on the 6th July, 1901. \Vas that convention dominated by members of the Parliamentary Labour party? Not at all. An irrespon~ible body outside frames the platform, which hon. members on the other side must follow. The

bon. member for Rockhampton referred to the· hon. member for ::\Iusgrave, and said he was prepared to "go it blind," but members of the Labour party must swallow those forty-four planks whether they like them or not; and we would be doing something subversive of repre­sentative govemment if we were to put into power a party that would not be allowed to exercise their own judgment in the conduct of public affairs. The thing has only to be mentioned to show its utter absurdity. I do not intend to refer to the hon. member for Clermont to any considerable extent, but he made one or two statements which I do not wish to let go unchallenged. I do not know that it is very necessary that I should attempt to correct any­thing he says, because he is pretty well known from Charters Towers to New South \Vales, and I question whether anything he says, either inside or outside the House, would do anyone much harm. It has been well said that the praise of some persons is tantamount to censure, and conversely their censure is tantamount to praise ; and, as long as the hon. member does not praise me, I shall not bring an action for slander against him. I think there is a regrettable tendency in Australia, particularly in Queensland, to defame our public men ; and, generally speaking, our best public men are attacked by the lowest class. I presume they go on the principle that, as Lord Bacon says, the fairest characters are like the purest crystals­the slightest speck is discernible on them. This is whv such men throw mud. I think it is an exceedingly regrettable tendency. \Ve know that in America it has the effect of keeping some of the best men out of public life; and if it is continued in Australia it will have prejudicial results. It may be that those people think they are elevating themselves by attempting to pull down others. I am aware that if a man occupies any high position he is sure to be the target for these attacks-

He who surpasses or subdue" mankintl ~Iust look down on the hate of those below.

and it IS perfectly natural for the man who cm­not rise to the level of other men to attempt to drag them down to his level. I think reference was made on \V ednesday to the destruction of some union books with the object of covering up some defalcations, and the hon. member for Clermont the following day used these words, referring to the Secretary for Railways-

! would like to refer to another aspect of the criminal list which the hon. gentleman read out last night. I recently went through very carefully the Auditor­General's report for last year. . . . And by the wa,\·, I am reminded that certain books in connection with the Thargomindah Divisional Board disappeared very mysteriously in a fire on the hon. gentleman1s premises there. [Mr. P. J. LEAIIY: That is absolutely untrue. They are there,, and have always been there.j It is very pleasing for me to hear they still exist, but I thiuk their whereabouts is still a matter of considerable interest.

\Vhat are the facts? I would not so much object to an hon. member making such a statf'­ment if he did not know it was not truE:, but the hon. member made that statement knowing it was untrue.

The SPEAKER : Order ! Mr. P. J. LEAHY: I am prepared to give·

my proofs. It will be in the recollection of the House that last year the hon. member asked a question of the then Home Secretary as to whether certain books, the property of the Bulloo Divisional Board, had been destroyed in a fire at Thargomindah. The fire in question did not occur in premises belonging to the Secretary for Railways, as the hon. member suggested. It occurred in a portion of premises belonging to a company in which I hold a large number o£

.Address in Reply. [4 AUGUST.) .Address in Repl,y . 167

shares-P .• T. Leahy and Co., Ltd. I may say that only a portion of the premiseB were burned, and we were exceedingly heavy suf­ferers. A room in the building was used by the Bnlloo Divisional Board as an office, and they had a safe in which they kept their books. All the safes-those of my company and that of the divisional board- were remarkably good safes, and not one single book belonging to the Bulloo Divisional Board or to the company was destroyed. I happened to meet the hon. member for Clermont in the billiard-room last year, soon after he asked the question, and told him he was altogether at sea, and that the books were not burnt at all. He never had any warrant for the statement that the books were burnt ; it was simply a product of his fertile imagination. I told the hon. member months ago that the books were in existence; yet he had the effrontery and the ·audacity to get up here and say those books bad disappeared. But I am not done with this matter yet. I happened to go into a hotel a day or two ago on some business. I may say, in passing, that I do not often go into hotels ; but I went on this occasion. 'rhere was nothing more n::ttural than that I should meet the hon. member for Clermont there. (Laughter.) The hon. member reminds me of certain vessels that one sees in eastern countries with invisible writing on them, which only becomes visible when liquor is poured into them. (Laughter.) At any rate, I met the hon. member in that hotel. I was accompanied by ::\Ir. \Vhitman, of Thargomindah, rmd a con­versation arose over this incorrect statement of the hon. member for Clermont in regard to these books. I mentioned in the presence of Mr. \Vhitman that I had told the hon. member last year that the books were not burned, and the only excuse the hon. member had to offer was, " Oh, well, I did not see any reference to them in the -"'-uditor'»-General's report." Xow, it is well known that, in the back country, an officer of the Auditor-General does not pay a visit for perhaps two years, and are we to assume that books that have not been reported upon by an audit inspector for a period of two or three years have been burned or have mysteriously dis­appeared? But :i\Ir. \Vhitman went further, and said, "I was out there a fe\Y months ago, and the books were never burned. flince the date of the fire they were audited by my manager, and, not only were they not burned, but there was not an undecipherable entry in those books, or in any of the books that were in the safes at the fire." [Mr. LESINA : \V ere they not in the safe when the fire took place?] They were in the safe. [Mr. LESI!S"A: \V ere they not charred?] I do not know-possibly. [Mr. LESINA: I know they were.] Possibly they might have been charred, but I say they were not destroyed, and every entry in them was perfectly legible. [Mr. LESINA: I did not say anything about the entries.] I want to say something more about the hon. member, although I really think I am wasting my time, because everyone in the House k1,1ows what the hon. memberis. [Government members : Hear, hear!] \Vhen the hon. member was speaking at Clermont some time ago, he is reported to have used these words with regard to Hansnrd-

Speakiil-g of Hansard, }lr. Lesina complained that the reporting was not fair. :\:Iinisters got long reports­some longer than others. •rhere would be a fnll report of a speech by a }linisterialist~}-lr. Fors:yth, for instance-and a magniJicent reply by :\Ir. Kidston occupying 1 inch.

That is a very strong indictment, and the hon. member cannot deny that he made that state­ment. I ask what we are to think when an hon. member, who knows that the reporting is abso­lutely impartial, will deliberately mislead the

electors in a matter of that kind? I have gh·en proof of two instances in which the hon. member made statements that were untrue.

The SPEAKER : Order ! Mr. P .• J. LEAHY: I would ask what value

we are to attach to other statements made by the hon. member? \Vhy, the hon. member relies npon his imagination for his facts, just the same as he does upon his memory for his jests. (Laughter.) I do not desire to occupy any more time with regard to the hon member. I do_not touch upon his shortcomings with any feelmgs of pleasure, but because he invited it. I look upon him with feeling~ of pity rather than of anger. I regard him ae largely a cre::tture of circumstances. If his environment had been different, he might have been a very different man ''nd I leave him with a feeling of relief similar to V.:hat a man experiences when he leaves some noisome habitation and breathes once more the pure atmosphere. I want to deal with just one other question before passing on to the Governor's Speech. The only thing that the Labour party cares about is to have money spent. The Labour p>'trty is an extrava~ant party, not nnly in Qut>ens­land, but in all Australia. I think it will be ad­mitted by both sides of the House that the Syd­ney Bulletin is a pretty fair exponent of advanced democracy, and what does it say of the Labour party ? It refers particularly _to the Labm;tr party of New South \Vales, but 1t also refers m the same strain to the Labour party in Queens­land in ll'lst week's issue, in an article entitled "The Queensland Loan and the Labour Party." I shall rel'td a portion ofth::tt article for the benefit of hon. members opposite-

The only people who hav-e, for some ~·ears past, bE:en lending us money to any great extent, it is announced, refuse to lend any more. Assuming this story to be true, several of the Parliamentary Labour parties are in a bad position. They lutve hardly made the least attempt at promotmg solvency and honest nuance~ There have, in consequence, been deficits, against which the Labour party mnde no prot,est; and while there are deficits there must be eithm· borrowing or repudiation of debts. \Yhen we can't borrow there \Yill be a burst of blind fury against those who have brought the country to this pass. Just because the Labour party has been to so great an extent allied with extrava­gance, and ha!-; ~hown so little regard for the tlue.:;tion where the money was to come from, the peovle will naturally turn to the opponents of that party when it is necessary to pursue a new policy. That happened in Yietoria: and the consequences were disastrous to the \Vorkers and the poor and aged. The Labour party's part;cular bnsh-,ess js to protect these people; yet for the severe trouble t.bat ca1ne upon them the Labour party was in this way very largely responsible.

That article proves up to the hilt that the Labour party is an extravagant party, and that, as long as there is plenty of money to spend and high wages are paid, they do not care where the money comes from or who pays the interest. Labour is one and indivisible all over Aw,tralia, and are we to put a party of that kind on the Treasury benches? Large as is the deficit at the present time, it would assume alarming proportions if that party were in office. I wish now to make one or two remarks with regard to certain things mentioned in the Governor's Speech. \Ve are told that it is intended that there shnulrl be a rednction in the number of members. That is a thing that I thoroughly believe in. If fact, I think the number should come down to about fifty. But I cannot quite agree with one thing in the Governor's flpeech, and that is that representation should be based more largely than at present upon a population basis. I have given as whole-hE'utP.d a support to the Government as any member in the House, because

I believed they deserved it. But let [5 p.m.] me say, in passing, that while mem­

bers on this side generally ::tgree with the Government, they exercise their own

168 Adcl?·ess ~n Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply.

judgment in a manner that hon. members opposite do not. 'fhis only indicates the freedom of hon. members on this side of the House. \Ve may differ from the Government in regard to details, but on all the main points we are in per­fect sympathy with the Government. I am not altogether in love with the idea of basing representation more largely on a population basis. But I confess that I cannot see how hon. members opposite can object to the princirJle. They b6lieve in one man one vote, and the corollary of it is one vote one value. If I believed in one man one vote, I should vote for a measure which gave the same value to each vote. [i\Ir. CowAP: Don't you believe in one man one vote?] No, I do not. I would give some men two vote". 'fo a good married citizen like the hon. member for Leich­hardt, for instance, I would give two votes. But I cannot see how hon. members opposite can consistently oppose such a measure if they are going to be logical. But, from what we know of them, how can we expect them to be logical? My view i_s that large centres of popu­latiOn do not reqmre the same representation according to population as large districts which are sparsely populated. I honestly believe that if Brisbane had no members in tbis House Brikbane would suffer no injustice. And while I intend to support this Bill and all the other Bills mentioned in the Governor's Speech, I do trust that when it gets into committee the Government will not insist upon having representation on a population basis. [Mr. i\Ic:'lfASTER: Why not?] I have given my reasons. Though I believe in giving every man a vote, I think married men should have two votes. If I believed in one man one vote, I should support one vote one value. There is another question in connection with the subject of representation, which need not be referred to at length, aud that is woman's fran­chise. At this date there is no need to say much about the granting of the franchise to women beyond this: that we shall have no re<tson to regret having done so. I have always been in favour of woman's franchise, and I never could understand the logic of denying a vote to a respectable woman and giving it to a low-class man. I certainly think that all women shonlcl have votes, :md shall give this propoq~l my hearty support. 'l'here is one matter which is not mentioned in the Governor's Speech, but has been referred to by the hon. member for Bowen. The· hon. member told us that the Government are going to introduce a Land Bill. I sincerely hope that the bon. member is in the confidence of the Government, and that a Lanu Bill will be introduced, because there are se,·eml small m.ttters in connection with our land legislation which require attention. The Government deserve the very greatest credit for the Land Act which was passed last year. I am glad to have this opportunity of saying that it is a very broad, comprehensive, and liberal measure, and that it has fairly met the exigencies of the situation. [Mr. FoGARTY: It is an infamous Act.] It 1s not an in. fam:ms Act. Hon. members have said that it is an Actin favour of the pastoralists. But to prove that it is not I ha,-e only to mention that if the Act is not amended nearly i50 per ce.nt. of the pas­torallessees will not come under it. They have not done so yet. [Mr. HARDACRE: Not 30 per cent.] \V ell, a very large percentage, anyhow. 'There are several rertsons for that. The Act of last year struck out the provision which existed in the 1886 Act with regard to a maximum rent, and al.<o did away with the right of appeal to the Supreme Court. Those things were in the law previously, but were not re-enacted ; and to the omission of these the pastoralists object. The Act of last year was, a" hon. members

know, passed somewhat hurriedly, and under those circumstances certain little errors were bound to creep into " comprehensive measure of that kind. There is tbP. provision with regard to runs which are netted. 11any hon. members know that certain men who fenced their runs with wire netting got an extension of their lease for seven years, and all that they were bound to do prior to the passing of the last Act was to keep the netting in repair until the end of the term of their lease. But under last year's Act they are compelled to keep the fences in repair for the whole term of the new lease, even if a very large area of country is selected, and we did not give them any corres­ponding advantage for that condition. The only advantage we gave them at all was that in certain cases they might get four years' extra lease. But where the maximum lease was given, the man who had netted his run would get no more than the man who had not. I think it is very de;irablB to amend the Act in that respect. Then there is another point deserving of attention. It is well known that the losses of stock have been exceedingly heavy, and that a large number of pastoralists will be unable to pay their rents un the 30th of September next. [Mr. HARDACRE : Hear, hear !] I am glad to hear the hem. member for Leichhardt say "Hear, hear!" [Mr. HARDACRE: And selectors, too.] \Ve have made some provision for selectors, because last year's Act extended the time for the payment of all back rents over a number of years. Except in a few cases selectors had to pay the year's rent duP on the 31st of March last, but the payment of all back rents was spread over a number of years. There are a number of_ cases in which it would be better to do somethmg· of that kinO. rather than dispossess the pastoralists. I am fullv aware of the difficulties the Treasur~­is in, but, notwith,tanding those difficulties, I should \ ery much like to see this matter dealt with on the lines I have indicated. If somethine; of the kind is not done, a number of old and deserving colonists will have to leave their homes. [:\Ir. H.\ltDACRE: Something of the kind is \ery neces,ary.] I am glad to hear the hon. member for Leichhardt say that it is very necessary. The matters which I have men­tioned should be of a non-contentions character, and if they are of a non-ccmtentious character, as we may infer that they are from the fact that the hon. member for Leichhardt is in general agreement with me on the subject, a short measure should pass very quickly. If it were going to be a big Bill it probably would not pass this session, but it need only be a small Biil, and it is very desirable that this relief should be aiven. It has alwavs been the practice in Queensland, and, I think, in most other States, that when a pastoral lessee cannot pay his rent the Crown simply forfeits his lease. In no instance that I am aware of has the Crown done anything more than forfeit in Queensland. I think we are justified in ':easol_l­ing from past actions of the Governments Ill th1s State that they do not intend to do anything more than that. If the Crown does not act on the law of recourse, and is satisfied with forfei­ture, why not say so at once? 'fhe Crown would not iose anything, while, un the other hand, th_ere are persons with financial institutions behmd them who, so long as they know that th~y are liable for rent for the whole term will not come nnder the Act of last year. There are also one or two matters in which eelec­tors are concerned, and I am just as much in sympathy with the selector as with the large pastoralist. At one time-I believe under the 1884 Act-there was a minimum rent of ~d. per acre for grazing farms. That was subse­quently reduced to ~d. an acre. There are

[4 AUGUST.] Addi'€88 in Repl1J. 169

numerous cases in which grazing farmers are paying double the rent paid by the pastoral tenant, and I contend that there is no adequate rea,on why that should be so. Under the exist­ing law they are eompelled to pay it becau"e the Land Court cannot go below ~d. an acre, but if there is no maximum for the grazing farmr, I do not see why there should be a minimum. I think, therefore, it would be desirable to sweep it away. [l'dr. \V. HA:IfiLTOX: You very seldom hear of htncl being thrown open at the mini­mum.] I !mow of several instances in which the Land Court have fixed the minimum rent at ~d. an acre simply because they could ·not go any lower, and in a number of instances that minimum compels men to pay more than the land is worth. Now, we have heard a great rleal from hon. members opposite in regard to settling people on the land. I am as anxious as anyone to settle people on the land. \Ve have been told that, on the one hand, the Government are selling large areas of good land at 10s. an acre, and, on the other hand, paying £3 and £4 an acre for land which is no better. I t-hink the policy of repurchasing these estates has been fully justified by results, and I think that a great deal of the unalienated Crown land is not fit for cul­tivation owing to the fact that the rainfall is so -irregular and that the country is not suitable for agricultural settlement. At the same time, I will admit that there is a considerable portion of country in the Burnett and else­where that could be sold at a low figure in fair-sized are~s, and which is fairly suitable for settlement. I admit that our present land law is liberal up to a certain point. \Ve sell a man 160 acres of land at 2s. lid. an acre, on certain conditions, but in many of the places where dairying is combined with a~ricul­ture, 1(j0 acres is not enough. If these men are going to make a success of settlement, we must give them 300 or l, 000 acre,, and at a much smaller price than we are asking. I blame hon. members opposite for the het that there is not more settlement on the land than there is, and I will endeavour to show why. Last year when the Land Bill was introduced, there was a vro­vision under which grazing farmers could acquire their freeholds at lOs. an acre, and hon. mem­bers opposite objected to reducing the minimum. Owing to strung· opposition the clause was struck out. My contention was that it would be an excellent thing if the minimum was reduced considerably. \Ve ha,-e an alto~ether exag~erated idea of the value of our land, and there are no people in the House or country who have such an exaggerated idea of its value as bon. members opposite. For some of our land we ha\e been asking £1 and £1 10s. an :.,ere, when it would have been true policy to have sold it at lOs. or 7s. 6d. an acre. [Mr. HARDACRE : \Vould it not be better to lower the rent?] I believe in selling land, because I believe it will then be put to \to best use, and after we have sold it there will be an opportunity for hon. members opuo~ite. when they come into power in the remote futtire, to put on a land tax. If you do not sell the land, you cannot tax it. I think the party opposite are to a great extent responsible for the exaggerated idea there i,; of the value of our lands, and I am convinced that if we sell in fairly large areas, so that people can combine dairying with agriculture, we will get more and " better class of settlement. I would like to say more, but I feel that I have occnp1ed a fair amount of time, although I have by no means exhausted all I could say upon the Governor's Speech. In conclusion, I would like to go back to the amendment for one moment. I submit that no case whatever has been made out against the Government. I sub­mit that it is as good a Go,·ornment as we have

· ever had in this country. {Opposition laughter.) Hon. members opposite say it 1s a bad Govern­ment, but what do they mean? They set np an ideal cctttndardofperfection. Do they think the Go­vernment should be angels; that theyshonldhave wings? We have to get a standard of comparison, and I ':w, comparing this Government with past Governmente, and present Go1·ernments in other States, the present G·onrnment will come out of the comparison triumphantly. But if this Government were bqd, if it were e'erything hon. members opposite say it is, I should still vote against the amendment, because I consider that if hon. members opposite took control of the Treasury benches, it would be nothing less than a national calamity. It is because I think the present Government is good, and because I think the party opposite, ancl their aims and objects, are bad, that I intend to give my vote against the amendment. [Government members : Hear, hear!)

Mr. MuLCAHY (U>n;!pie): I have a few remarks to make on the" Address in Reply, but I will endeavour not to occupy two honrs, as the hon. member who has just sat clown has done; with what object-to keep the civil servants' pay back for another week or two. I would like to refer to a speech delivered here the other evening by a Minister of the Crown. That was the Secretary for Railways. That hon. gentleman told us in the plainest language that we were the nominees and representatives of the thieves and vagabonds of Queensland. In the name of the 1,440 men who voted for me at the la.st election I enter my protest against that statewent. I maintain that those 1,440 men are not thieves and vagabonds. Yet, becanse those men differ politically from the hon. gentleman and his colleague>, they must be branded as thieves and vagabonds. I need only "aY that as long as I remain a member of this House I shall never brand men as thieves and vagabonds and the representatives of thieves and vagabonds because they differ from me politically. There will always be differences of opinion on political matters as long as human nature remains as it is, and we should all agree to differ. I do not believe in many o± the views held by hon. members on the other side, but I should be the last man to stand up here and, under the cover of privilege, say something I dared not say outside the Chamber. It is beneath contempt to take advantage of the ptivilege a member of the House possesse.>, and libel men who are. honour­able in every way, although they lmay differ in opinions on questions of politics. They have their families behind them, and they are doing their best according to their lights. Do yon think they are actuated by no better motives than to brand their fellow-men as thieves and vagabonds? As an Australir,n, I hope not, [Mr. MoMASTER: You say they are all thieves oYer here.] Never, during the time I have been in the House, have I said -anything of the kind, [Mr. McMASTER: Kot you personally, but your party.] There was no qualification whatever made the other night. It was hurled over at us, without any qnalification, that we were all in that blae;k categorv. [Mr. LESINA: Ancl the Minister has had 8,000 copies of Hanscml sent out to circulate his perjury thronghout the State.] If we were to inquire how often the laws of the colony have been broken, perhaps by close friends cif hon. members on the other side, we might, perhaps, find an equally black record. But, I would ask, where would this thing end if we are to bring up and place on record in Hansruli every crime that has been committed at different times in Queensland? How should we feel if we were to do such a thing? [.Mr. BRO>VXE: \Ve ~hould be as big cowards as the man who did it.] Ko doubt

170 Add1•ess in Repl;IJ· I ASSEMBLY.] Address w Repl;1f.

there are black sheep in every flock, and many families would not escape if we were to run baok their history; but I shall never be one to abuse my privileges as the Secretary for Rail­ways did the other night. After all, perhaps, we should not attach too much importance to the remarks of that hon. gentleman. He has branded us as representing the thieves and vagabonds of (~ueensland. For political ends the hon. gentleman has never shrunk; he goes "the whole hog." In the Btisbnne Coul'iei' of 16th September, 1902, the hon. gentleman is reported to have said at a public meeting, referring to his own countryrnen, " There were sotue ruffians in the middle of the century who thought indepen­dence could be obtained b'· force." That is as much as to say that men who loved their country more than their lives and their liberty-men like Robert Emmett, \Volfe Tone, ~Iitchell, and, to come nearer our own times, Sir Charles Gavan Duffy, and Dr. O'Doherty, a late member of our own Legislative Council, were ruffians. [The SECRETARY POR AGRICCLTCRE: ::\othing of the sort.] He says it in the plainest of plain language. Certainly, no one would call Robert Emmett a ruffian but the Secretary for Rail ways; and as to the late Sir Charles Gavan Duffy, he was a man whom her late Gracious .Majesty the Queen thought, notwithstanding that he had been a rebel, was good enough to receive a title at her hands, and to conduct the a!l'airs of the colony of Victoria. Of course it suited the hon. gentleman's purpose at the time, as it did the other night; but I am proud to be a dt>scen­dant of one of those Irish" ruffians," although far removed. [The SECRETARY FOR AGRIOCLTCRE: The Secretary for Railway has as much respect for patriotic Irishmen as you have.] He does not show it when he calls them "ruffians." [.Mr. CoOPER: He has never been on the right side.] There is no fear of his being on the right side, be~ause he has no sense of justice. I will say this, and not refer again to that gentleman : Supposing a secretary of a mining or other com­pany was to Ievant with a sum of money, as h>1S been the case in many instances all overtbecolony, are all the shareholders in that particular mine to be called thieves and vagabonds? [The SECRE· 'l'ARY FOR AGRICCLTCRE: They would be victims. You can call yourselYes villains if you like.] I can safely say, with regard to the bon. gentle­man's department, that notwithstanding that

.there are Government auditors, and [5·30 p.m.] there is a very close scrutiny of

· books, there are times when men there get away with certain sums of money. A':d is the ban. gentleman a representative of th1eves and vagabonds? Y on might as well say that ::\Ir. Thallon is a representative of thieves and vagabonds; but I say, "No." There is no connection whatever in such cases. These men who have levanted have been amenable to the laws of the State, and they have paid the penalty for their crimes. It is the indi­vidual who suffers, and who has to pay the penalty. [::\.Ir. JENKIXSON: It is simply a question of misplaced trust.] Yes, but there is no justification for branding the whole of these representatives as thieves and vagabonds. I feel very strongly on this matter, and I say that the 1,440 men who returned me are just as honourable as the 400 or 300 who returned the :Ylinister for Railway;-[An honourable mem­ber: 265.]-265, or whatever number it was. Just reviewing some of the principal utterances of the Minister for Railways within the last year or two, I have come to the conclusion that the hon. gentleman will never scruple to try to make political capital out of anything. Although the hon. member for Herbert, ::\.Ir. Cowley, and myself are opposed politically on various matters, I shall always look upon him with a

certain amount of reverence, because he had" the courage to say in this House that the methods adopted by the Minister for Railways and the words he used were not fit to be placed on the records of the Hou,;e. And I consider it was a great sJa,p in the face for the Hon. Minister for Railways when the whole of the member,; of this House said " Hear, hear ! " in chorus. I admire the manhood and sense of justice of the hon. mAmber for Herbert to those little children who have yet to mttke their way in the world, notwithstanding that the ::\.[inister for Railways wishes to put his cloven hoof down on them and cruc,h their manhood out, by brandinll,' them tts the offspsing of criminals. I say that i,; not worthy of a man possessing anything like manhood at all. Now 1 wish to give some reasons why I am supporting the motion of want of confidence. Hon. members on the other side know that we on this side are free as air; we do just what we like. \Ve are not tied up by any political combination. (Hear, hear! and Govern­ment laughter.) I wish now to say a word or two with regard to the mining industry, ttnd I will preface my remarks by paying the head of the Government a compliment. I believe the inten­tions of the Premier as JYI:inister of ::-.lines are right enough, but the result is nil. Last year we find that gold and minerals--the baser metals, such as tin, copper, etc -yielded a product to the State of £3,310,000. ·Therefore we can claim this as being, if not the first, the second industry in the colony, ancl I ask: \Vhat has been done by the Government to fo"ter this industry'? [Mr. JENKIXSOX: Take the number of men employed.] Yes; I thank the hon. member for that interjection, but we have also to look at the waaes they receive. If you hke the amount that ha"s been produced and the dividends, you will see that in comparison the men are not asked to live on "'hat you may call the "smell of an oil-rag"; they get what I consider is a living wage. But what has been done by the Government to foster this industry? I said, by way of interjection the other evening, that nothing had been done, aml I say so still. p,Ir. HARDACRR: Only £2,000 was voted for prospecting.] Yes, and I totally disagree with the Under Secretary for :\lines when he says that this vote should be done away with. The question has suggested itself to me: \Vas this suggestion of the Under Secretary inspired, or was it the reasoning of the Under Secretary himself? This industry produces £3,310,000 a year, and yet it is said that £2,000 a year is enough to put on the Estimates in order to assist the industry. [Mr. BROWXE: Only £HOO of that has been spent.] There are only two conclusions that I must come to-fitst, that the suggestion of the Under Secretary was inspired; or, second, that the present Minister for :Mine> is ·not alive to the importance of this industry. He can take whichever horn of the dilemma he pleases. I hope this vote will be increased rather than decreased. It may be asked : \Vhat are we to do in order to fodter this industry? It has been said that we want all the industries to lean up against the Government. I do nctbing of the kind ; but I say that in a private business or any other business, where a company or private people are concerned, a great deal uf attention, thought, and consideration should be given to the best branch of the business. I have bePn a close student of the methods adopted in Victoria in the years gone by, and latterly .in \V estern Australia, and I find that they g1ve a great deal of consideration and help to the mining indmtry there. And for what reason? Not that this industry should lean up against the Government, but that the Govern· ment should lean up against the industry.

Address in Repl,IJ. [4 AUGUST.] Address m Repl,IJ. 171

If the Government could place thousands of men -which I believe they could-on our goldfields by assisting the industry to some extent, I believe they would actually make '' profit, and not a loss I think, some time ago, the Brisbnne ConriC1' had some very able articles on this sub­ject. In Western Australia they had a great number of State batteries. When they balance up at the end of the year they find very little loss indeed ; and, against that small loss, they have settled thousands of people, and attracted thousands of people from other States to \Ve•tern Australia. The people that leave this State for \Vestern Australia are some of our best men, physically, and they take a certain amount of capital away with them. That is a dead loFS to Queensland, which has snch vast mineral resources waiting to be developed. The hon. member for }'assifern, some time ago, introduced a :Yiining on Private Property Bill. I£ the Go­vernment were to pass a Bill of that kind instead of a Coupon Bill there would be more sense in it. [Opposition members: Hear, hear!] Such a measure would be of very great ad vantage to the mining industry. I rion't want to accuse the Government of being insincere, but when the Bill was introduced by a private member they rather "jumped the claim," and said they would introduce the Bill. Then they dropped it over the side, and steamed ahead with the Coupon Bill. I think the Premier is perhaps sincere as regards mining. Last year he introduced a Bill owing to certain representations-perhaps I should say "misrepresentations"-from the con­stituency which I have the honour to represent. It was pointed out at the time that it was absolutely necessary that some addition should be made to the Drainage Act. I pointed out at the time that it was altogether unnecessary. The hon. gentleman accused me of trying to block the Bill for certain reasons. I sai:l at the time that this pumping machinery was altogether unnecessary, and subsequent events have shown that I was quite right. At a meeting of mine­owners called to consider the matter on the 30th of January this year-we were told that the mine­owners urged on the Premier tha,t it was necessary to go in for certain pumping machinery-the whole thing was condemned. They said it was not what was wanted at alL :\Ir. ,James Brown, manager of No. 4 North Phmnix, and president of the Mining Managers' ~-\s<ociation, Gympie, said-" As regards water for surface drainage they could take it out themselves ; more­over, he did not believe in pumps, but thought bailing the best method of getting rid of the water. It would be time enough to procure machinery when it was found to be needed." That is precisely what I said. Mr. \Villiam Davies, a very large mining speculator, said-" The feeling of the meeting was evidently that the board should not go in for expensive plant unless it was found that the present one was not good enough." Precisely what I said, repre­senting not only the miner but the mineowner. The chairman was the only man at the meeting that wanted this expensive machinery Bill, but he got no support. \V e have had a good deal of rain ; there have been some freshes, but just the one shift has been able to bale all the water-showing conclusively that this machinery was not necessary. [An honourable member: The Bill was a waste of time.J It was a waste of the time of the House, but it was not a waste of time as far as the astute lawyers were concerned. The drainage board 1 assessed the \V est of Scotland, a company doing good work on Gympie, and about sixteen or seventeen other companies. They appealed. Some of those Scottish companies sent home for instructions as to whether they shuuld oppose this-the managers knowing as common-

sen•e men that it was necessary to oppose it, because they were not within 1!,; miles in some cases of the workings in the drainag-e area. The companies opposed the assessment. Proceed­ings commenced on the 1st April-a very good day to commence such proceedings-and, after going on till some time in May, the drainage board was non suited, as far as the \V est of Scotland and many of those other companies were concerned. But you see the astuteness of the thing. There were hundreds of pounds lost in law, and it was a real good harvest for any astute lawyer who could induce the Premier to introduce this Bill. From Jst April well on into May, what fine fat fees they got! You can't beat them! I admirf' them f0r bringing grist to their milL But that is not the worst feature of it. These assess­ments are made annually, and there is nothing to prevent those men fron> trying the same thing ag-ain. That is the sort of legislation that we get in the interests of miners. I am not here as a lecturer of the Government ; but I would like to say that, if the Premier is really sincere in trying to assist the mining industry, if he will not pay any attention to the hon. members who represent mining constituencies, let him make intelligent inquiries from practical mineowners on the field-such men as :\fr. J ames Brown, the manager of No. -l North Phoenix, and president of the ::\line ::\Ianagers' Associa­tion, and :\Ir. \Vm. Davieo-or let him make inquiries through his warden. [The PREMIER : 'Who elects the drainage board?] I may say that, owin" to the legislation that the hon. gentleman introduced last year, there was a radical change in the drainage board this year. The hon. member is encouraging litigation instead of trying to prevent it. [The PREMIER : Quite the reverse.] The remark was made to me in a jocular way by one man, and in a serious way by another, "\Vel!, I must give the Secre­tary for Mines this credit : that he has ne·;er afforded a better opportunity to mine managers for one to swear one thing, and another to swear another." [Mr. BROWNE : And the mining representative in the other Oba.mber is a lawyer, and not a mining man at all.] If the hon. gentle­man will make inquiries from men who know something about it, we shall not have another exhibition such as we had last year, or see the chairman of the drainage board standing alone in a meeting of mineowners in his assertion that this work was necessary. I have a paper here which I will hand to the hon. gentleman for his perusal when I have finished with it. Now, if there is one thiniT more than another that wrll prevent forei~n ~apital coming here, it is that companies like the \Vest of Scotland and other Scottish companies are asked to contribute to something from which they derive no benefit, and are put to the trouble and expense of litigation. If they find thay are put to t~at inconvenience and expense throngh our mm­ing laws and regulations, it will discourag:e the introduction of capitaL We on thrs sHe do not discourage capital in any way \Vhat we do wish to discourage is a lot of con­cession hunters. [Opposition members : Hear, hear !] I would like to refer to some remarks made by the Premier in Croydon which are reported in the CI'Oydon Record of 22nd May. The hon. gentleman said it was a very reliable paper, and that is why I make this quo~atioJ?, because on this side of the House we believe m reliable authorities. 'l'he hon. gentleman is reported to have said, referring to legislation which we passed in connection with some Scottish syndicate concessions in Gympie last year-

It seemed that the conditions imposed were too hard in respect of these cvncessious, and what promised for development was damped in its infancy.

172 Address in Repf.1J· [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Rep1.1J.

[The PREWER: Read the whole quotation. Those are not my words at all; they are your words.] Does the hon. gentleman say that these are not his words? [The PREmER : Read the quotation. That is not the quotation.] The ctuotation is this-

It seemed that the conditions imposed were too hard in 1·espect of these concessions, ana what promised for deyelopment was damped in its infancy.

Does the hon. gentleman deny the quotation? J\ ow, what I want to know from the hon. gentle­man is this : \V ere the conditions imposed of such a nature that they were hard and unfair? The only condition that we imposed, as far as I know, was the condition agreed to by the hon. gentleman himself-to make them put up a deposit within a certain time to carry on the working or development of the ground. Another condition was proposed by my hon. friend, the member for Charters Towers, and was approved

by this House, and that was with [7 p.m.] reference to the sinking of a second

shaft, but that was wiped out in the Upper House, so that there was only the one con­dition imposed by the Premier himself. I have referred to this matter because the impression may go abroad and reach the old country that our laws in relation to mining affairs are of such a nature that they do not give capitalists in the old country a fair show. That is not so. I maintain that our mining laws are very liberal indeed, and to show that such is the ca'le, I need only refer to the fact that the \Vest of Scotland have gone clown 3, 000 feet, and that other companies, believing that our laws are good enough, are going on proving that eastern ground. 1 said at the time that the proposed operations of the Scottish syn­dicate on their 200-acre leases were contingent upon the developments which would take place in the \V est of i:'cotland and other claims. As a matter of fact, there has been nothing done by them, and I predicted that there would be nothing done unless the other claims turned out something in the way of gold. I do not wish to i\ay anything against this syndicate or any other syndicate that will go in for legitimate working. It has been the policy of this party to encourage, in a legitimate way, capital to come to this country; but, whilst doing that, it is theirbounden duty to the public to expose and prevent anything in the nature of "wild cat" busines<, or any attempt to gull the public of Great Britain. The Governm~nt and members of this House should always endeavour to encourage capital to come to the country, and give capitalists every facility for developing our mineral resources, but they should not make any distinction. If our mining laws are not liberal enough, we should amend them. \Ve should not have one set of laws for foreign capitalists. and another set for our own people. If an:,' men in this State are prepared to put £10,000 into mining, they should be put on precisely the same level as people outside the State, or outside of Australia alto­gether. I should now like to say a few words on some of the Bills that are to come before us for consideration. There is a Bill described as a Gold-dealer:< or a Gold-stealers Bill. It has been said in another place that any man who is opposed to this Bill is in favour of, or in sympathy with, gold-stealing. At Charters Towers, speaking to a deputation that waited upon him in connection with a measure of this nature, the Premier said-I will give him the credit of saying that I believe he was under a misapprehension-that a great deal of the gold, instead of finding it way into the pockets of the mineowners in the way of dividends, found its way into the pockets of the miners -in other words, that the miners were stealing

a great quantity of gold. I do not believe anything of the kind. I think it is a very small amount of gold that finds its way into the pockets of the miners in that way, or in any other way than by legitimate wa~es. No donbt the information that the Premier hm; been supplied with has induced him to come to this conclusion, but I say that information is not correct. \Vhilst I am prepared to support a Gold-dealers Bill that is fair and reasonable, I take exception to such a proposal as was con­tained in the Bill of last yeu', which is contrary to our boasted principle that under British law a man is innocent until he is proven guilty. The onus of proof is thrown on the prosecution, but under the Bill to which I am referring the onus was thrown on the man who was accused. A man had to prove himself innocent. I say that is not fair, and as far as my voice am! vote will go, if it is a Bill similar to the one placed before us last year, I shall oppose it through thick and thin. I do not propos<O to go into the various clauses, but there are clauses 10 and 40 of last year's Bill which I shall certainly oppose in the mterests of the honest miner. \Yith reference to the old age allowance, while I thoroughly appreciate any efforts that may be made in the direction of preventing fraud, or of men or women getting relief improperly, and would punish those people, ztill I do not think that because the Minister happens to find two or three, or even a dozen, cases of fraud that is a good and sufficient reason why the whole of the applic:1uts should be placed on the same footing. (The SECRETARY FOR PCBLIC \VORKfl: \Vho told you they were?] I can only arrive at that conclusion by the statement made by the Secretary for \Vorks the other night. [The SEC­RETARY FOR PUBLIC \VORKS: He Qaicl nothing of the kind.] He said if one man was found guilty the whole lot should be found guilty. [The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC \VORK'';: J\o such thing.] I noticed the other day the following report in the CollriC?', from \Yarwick, headed "A Sad Case"-

Thomas Dixon. an oltl man, ·was this morning .sen­tenced to a month'~ imprisonment for Yagranc~,. His c-;lse is a safl one. He was discharged from the hospital on Tuesday, and an a1Jplication for his admission to Dnnwich was refused. Dixon is suffering from C'tncer. and since leaYing tile hospital has been camping in one of the }Jal'ks, and when taken in charge by the police was starving.

Notwithstanding that there may be some wealthy man in Brisbane who, through influential friends, has been able to get an allowance of 5s. a week, I do not think an unfortunate man like Dixon should be allowed to starve. I do not think that is a humane way of treating a man. \V e appre­ciate the efforts of the hon. gentleman in trying to weed out the fraud~ ; still we do not want all men to be treated as if they were committing fraud. The hon. gentleman knows that since he has taken over that department there are very few men who have got relief outside of Dunwich. [The SECRETARY FOil PcnLIC \VORKS: Oh, nonsense!] Then he must be making a distinction, because in my electorate, where there are li\,000 people, if any appli­cations have been made for the old age allow­ance, the applicants have been told that they can go to Dunwich. Of course the hon. gentle­man may be drawing a distinction between that electorate and his own. LThe SECHETARY FOR Pcnuc \VoRKS: There is not a single man or woman in my electorate getting that allow­ance.] \Veil, there are very few men in the hon. gentleman's electorate. I repeat that old men getting relief in a fraudulent way desene punishment ; but, on the other hand, legiti­mate cases deserve consideration. and_ should not suffer because there are a few 'frauds. [The

Address in Rep1.1J. [4 AUGUST.] Addros in Repl,IJ. 173

SECRETARY FOR PcBLIC \VoRKS : l'\ o person is suffering unle's he has got sons to support him, or means of subsistence.] If the hon. gentleman will only mix a little of the milk of human kindness with that great backbone which h(, is supposed to have, and which I think is merely supposition, it would be all the better. [The SECRETAUY FOU PCBLIC \VORKS: He knows what he is doing, and will not take directions from you.] That is always the way with men who are so wrapt up in their own opinions that they think they can never make a mistake. \V e on this side are not like that; we are always amenable to common sense. There is another practice the hon. gentleman has ;;one in for in the way of reform. In the past it has always been the custom to allow police magistrates a certain discretionary power as to granting rail way passes to men who have secured work at a distance from their homes, but I understand that under instructions from the Secretary for Railways the custom has been altered. [The SECRE'l'AUY FOH PcBLIC \VOUKS : I am going to stop that.] If a man represents that he has a family dependent upon him, and can secure work 40 or 50 miles away if he gets a railway pass, it is a direct gain to the StatA if that man is taken over the railways and put to work, because if his children are without food >tnd he goes to the police magistrate, he can get rations for them; but surely it is infinitely pre­ferable that he should get work instead of supplying him with rations. The Government must place confidence in some of their officers. vVe are not always going to have a Ozar of Russia, in the person of the hon. g-entleman, at the head of the department. He is only like a temporary cloud over the sun. I think it is only right and reasonable that the police magistrates should have that discretionary power. They are in a much better position to find out the facts than the hon. gentleman is; and in the name of common sense how iF the .Minister, to whom reference has to be made, to know whether a. case is a deserving case or not? To whom can he refer but to his officers ? I hope this state of affairs will be altered. [The SECRETARY ~'01\ RAILWAYS: It will not.] The hon. gentleman is only there temporarily, and I need only say, "How long, oh, Lord ! how long?" 'l'here is one more matter I will touch upon before ,;i.tting down. It is in connection with the cutting of sleepers along the :i'\ orth Coast line. Several people along the line made application to get something to do in the way of cutting sleepers. Circulars were •cnt out by the department notifying that only vond ficle settlers in the district would be allowed to euL sleeper's, anU they were to cut 100 or 200, as the case may be. Acting on that, a number of settlers in my own electorate, men who had gone through that severe drought, cut 100, and after they had cut them they got a notice stating that the department did not require any further sleepers. That was very hard on those poor unfortunate people after going to all that trouble. I do not blame the :Minister for not taking more sleepers than he required. vVhat I do blame him, or the depart· ment, for is that he practically misled those men. [The SEORETAitY l:'OH RAILWAYS: You are entirely wrong.] Documentary evidence is VRry strong. [The 8ECUETAHY FOH RAILWAYS: You cannot produce any.] I had occasion some short time ago to go to the department, and one of the hon. gentleman's own officers told me he would look into the case I mentioned. I have the men's documentary evidence here. It is a common thing, and I venture to say the hon. member for \Vide Bay knows something about it in connection with his own electorate. [The SECUETARY l!'OU RAILWAYS: If you can show me

any case where a man had any authority to cnt ,,leepers I will t!l.ke them.] They might not have authority in so many words, but it was said settlers would be allowed to cut so many, although the department did not say-" You cut 100 and we will pay you." They were misled; because it is not likely that men, struggling through a severe drought, would cut 100 or 200 sleepers for the sheer fun of the thing. [The SECHE'L,UY FOR RAILW,US: Very likely you told them.] 'rhe hon. gentleman is too fond of making those interjections and trying to throw the blame on other people. I will conclude by saying that I am going to vote for the amendment moved by the l~ader of the Opposition for many reasons. First of all, because I do not believe the Government at the present moment have the confidence of the people of the country. I am doubly iinre of that, provided the people of the country had an opportunity of giving an expression of their opinion. Another reason why I shall vote for it is that they have done nothing for the mininf;· industry, nor made any honest endeavour to settle the people on the lands of the colony.

:Ur. W. HA:\liLTON (Gregory): The Go­Yernment and the members on the other side who have spoken have been trying- to put the responsibility ou members of this side for the delay in the public servants being paid their salaries, and also of delaying the public busi­ness. I say it is the Government who are responsible for that, because previous to the meeting of Parliament the leader of this side met the Premier and gave him timely notice that he was going to move a motion of want of confidence. If the Premier wanted to have a Bill put through to provide for the pay of the public servants, he had plenty of time to do it before the Address in Reply was moved. So that we are nnt responsible for the public Hervants not getting their pay. At the beginning- of every session, when members on thi" side have got up to expre·"S theh' views, they have been told they were delaying public business. Two or three years ago, when the same charge was made, only about three members on this side spoke, and the Address went through in a very short time. The Government then found themselves in a fog. They had nothing to go on with, and had to adjourn for a day or two, when they brought in the Criminal Code to fill up spare time for the :cext two or three weeks. And I dare say that if there had been no motion of want of confidence moved on this occasion, and the Address had gone through, the Government would have been in a similar hole. Hear what one of the Government papers-the Figaro-·-says. The editor of Figaro is a gentleman who has a vast knowledge of parliamentary proceedings and the tactics of parliamentarians, and how business is conducted. He says--

It is more than hinted that this debate has been deliberately kept going because the Government is not ready to go on with the real business of Parliament. It is said that none of the Bills are ready, and that the Cabinet have not ynt discussed the outlines of several matters upon which legislation has been foreshadowed.

Before dealing with the main question before the House, I am going to do as the hon. member for Olermont did-pass a few casual remarks on the Secretary for Railw;tys. Every hon. mem­ber will remember what took place here the other night-the accusations made against mem­bers on this side. I do not care what anyone says about me. If I am not man enough to take my own part inside or outside the House, I will put up with it. But when those who sent

me here are insulted and maligned, [7'30 p.m.] and called thieves and rogues, it is

my duty here to defend them. I say that those who have sent me here, who voted

174 Address m Repl.?f. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply.

for me, arejust as honest as the people who have· voted to put the Minister for Rail ways here, and I say it was a cowardly--

The SPEAKER : Order ! Mr. W. HAMILTON: \Yell, the tactics

adopted by the Hon. the Minister for Ra !l ways to try and bring discredit on members on this side were not creditable to him, nor creditable to the Government that he is associated with. I do not suppose there is any member sitting on that side whose views are wider apart than those of the hon. member for Herbert and my own, but I give him credit for the manly action he did the other night in getting up and moving that these names be expunged from HansMd. [The SECRETARY ~'OR RAILWAYS: He did nothing of the kind. He asked me if I agreed to it. He made no motion.] He did. There was actually a motion curied in this House that these namfq should b6 expunged from Hansard-[The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: 1\ot at all.j-and I say that when a motion like this i,; carried it is practically a vote of censure on the Minister for Railways. I think if hB had any political honour left he would leave the Government, and I say the Governmen£ should not have a colleague like that in the CaLinet. [The SECHE­TAHY FOR RAII,WAYS: 'rhere was no motion carried-it was only done with my consent.] The hon. gentleman could not help it being carried, and he was that ashamed, and other hon. members were that ashamed of him later on, that they were only too glad it was carried. If these names had been omitted from Hansa1'd, and had not gone forth to the country, I would not have dragged the thing up again; I would have let it drop ; but I believe that previous to the motion being carried there had been a lot of Hansa1·ds circulated in the country with these unfortunate men's names in them. And I notice that 8,000 copies of Hansard containing the speech of the Minister for \Vorks have been ordered from the Government Printing Office for circulation throughout the colony. If I did not know such things I should have let such a thing as this drop, but, in j nstice to the men who are maligned, I am not going to let it drop, because I have been for years a member of the bush unions, ttnd I say there is not a better class of men in Australia or in the world than the bushmen. [Opposition members: Hear, hear!] Although the hon. gentlemen said we might understand hon. mem­bers on the other side taking seats on the Treasury benches if the men who sent them here were "loyal or honest," I say they are as loyal and honest men as any in Australia or the world. When they wanted men to go to fight our battles in South Africa, they did not call them disloyal and dishonest. K o, the bush­men were honest, and everything they desired when they wanted a Bush men's Contingent; and I hope that those who did go to South Africa will remember the words of the Minister for vVorks. The hon. gentleman, when he started off, sneered and ridiculed the methods adopted by the politi­callabour organisations. He said they had got such a thing as a plebiscite to get nominations, and all sort of things. That was ours, but it is not ours now; they have aclopted it. It was to these methods that they attributed our suc­cess at the federal election, and we find that at the last election they took a leaf out of our book, and adopted the same method as we do of choosing our candidates-by a plebiscite, and I guarantee that they will be taking a plebiscite themselves, for all his ridicule. Then the hon. gentleman said that the secretaries of these labour organisations were a lot of rogues and vagabonds who had been pnrloining and pilfering the funds of the unions. I say we have men who haYe been for the last

fourteen or fifteen years secretaries of our trade organisations, who are there to-day, and not a breath of scandal has been said against them; and when the hon. gentleman rakes back fourteen or fifteen years to get the names of a few indi vi­duals who embezzled funds, and dealt with them in a very wholesale manner, I hurl the accusa­tions back again, and I say that they ttre far more honest and have a far cleaner reputation than the hon. gentleman himself. [Opposition members : Hear, hear!]

The SPEAKER : Order ! Mr. \V. HAMILTON : The hon. gentleman

did as much as to say that we are the nominees of thieves and rogues. You can place no other construction on his words. He said that if the people who sent us here were honest and loyal, he could understand us taking possession of the Treasury 'benches ; but I say the men he attempted to disparage are the men he made his money out of when he ran hi.9 back-block shebeen in Thargomindab.

The SPEAKER : Order ! ~lr. 'IV. HAMILTON: There were, I will

admit, the names mentioned of men who had absconded with funds, but most of those men-­[The SF.Cl\ETARY !'OH RAILWAYS: You can't deny tt single word I said.] I can and I will. The hon. gentleman dragged in the names of men who never had the slightest breath of suspicion against them. He spoke about a certain man who absconded with funds from Hughenden, and said, "He is like the 'Flying Dutchman,' flying yet." Now, we want to know why that m;tn was not arrested? \Vhy, I met that yery man walking across the Victoria Bridge some time ago, and the hon. member for Flinders met him on Spring Hill. Other people have seen him on Charters Towers, and we want to know why was he not arrested? The police would not arrest him. I don't know whether they got instructions not to arrest him, but he can walk about the cities of Queensland, although he has committed certain defalcations. \V e want him arrested, and then you will see whether we will compound felonies. The hon. gentleman said that this man was associated with J\i(r. Lesina on the Towers, on the Ea[llc. I say that that is a distinct untruth, whether the hon. gentleman knows it or not.

TheSP EA KER : Order, order! :M:~- W. HAMILTON: The gentleman who

wa; Msociated with Mr. Lesina on the Eagle is in Charters Towers to-day, and is a respect­able citizen and a married man with a family, yet the hon. gentleman has made out that he has committed defalcations-a man who before long you will vAry likely see on the floor of this House, occupying the same position tts the hon. gentleman did when he first came into the House. There was another man men­tioned here, who was a secretary at Hughenden. I don't know what he committed there, and the hon. gentleman does not know either. There was no prosecution fur the reason, as the hon. gentleman knows, that the union was not registered ; but the hon. gentleman goes back to 1891, and says that this man was caught burning books at Springsure. Now, that is a distinct untruth. This man held his position ten years after, and nothing was ever found against him. [The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: He was caught burning strike books.] No, he was not, and the person who gave the hon. gentleman the infor­mation, if he had done his duty, should have had him arrested, for he is walking about the streets of Brisbane ; but, instead of that, he went fishing up garbage for the hon. gentleman, acting as "pimp" for him. Then there are things that the hon. gentleman said that he would not say outside. [The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: That is often done in this House.]

Address in Repl_ij. [4 AUGUST.] Address in Rep(y. 175

I dare say that there are many thinge said in this House which would not be said outside it. The hon. gentleman said things that night of such a character that, if he said them outside, he could be made to pay pretty well for them. He was very careful to omit th<> name of another organiser of the union who got away with some fund,. \Vhy? Because the fnnds he got away with he dr".nk at the bar of the hon. gentleman'•

pub. at Thargornindah. [The :'JECRETAI<Y FOR RAILWAYS: Absolutely nntrue.] Perfectly true. The tnan had been a teetotaller for years, and he was doing his duty as organiser honestly ~md well until he happened to strike Thar­gomindah. [The SECHETARY FOR RAILWAYS: You are entirely wrong.] I am not. It was there that he drank the funds of the union, for which he had to pay the penalty. [The SECRJ;~TARY l<'OR RAILWAYS: I had left the bnsi­ness two years before.] It was at the shebeen the hon. gentleman used to run that, not only the man's own funds, bnt the funds of the union went over the bar.

The SPEAKER : Order ! ::\Ir. W. HAMILTOX: He say' the trades

unionists have always condoned crime. I think if we liked to do as the hon. gentleman did -get access to the police records and search for garbage-we c"uld rake up a lot of men who have supported members on the other side and have been guilty of defalcations and other crimes. (The SECRETARY !'OR RAILWAYS: Xot officers.] Yes. There was another man who made away with the funds of a labour organisation. It was found out. I believe the funds were made good. It is a wonder he was never mentioned. X o, because he is now secretary to the N.L.U. in a certain town in Queensland. [Opposition members: Hear, hear! and laughter.] He has been secretary . for the Government candidate. He escorted one of the Government candidates all round the country at the last federal election. [The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: That only ·c.hows that he has turned out an honest man.] I say we have never compounded felony. ['rhe SECRETARY ~'OR RAILWAYS: \Vhat about the Glassev fund?] That man offered to pay the money. back. I don't know whether he has done so or not. All over the colony there were men collecting money for the Glassey fund ; and when only £7 or £8 out of £800 was missing it says a lot for the honesty of the men throughout Queensland. I never knew the man until the hon. gentleman mentioned his name. Of course the hon. gentleman did that to injure his political opponents. He could not defend the policy of the Government or their administration, but he took this method of attacking us. It must have taken days to compile that official document from the police records. It was not done on the spur of the moment or in secret. There were others who knew this was going to be produced, because, as usual when anything good is expected, there were crowded benches. It was done deliberately, and 8,000 copies of the Hansard, containing the hon. gentleman's speech, were ordered for the purpose of distribution. ::'{ ot only that, but he said there was a man at Oharters Towers who was caught gambling at 12 o'clock at night-a man who was made a justice of the peace by Mr. Dawson. The Secre­tary for Rail ways is a nice gentleman to assume the position of censor of public morals in Queens­land.

The SPEAKER: Order ! . Mr. W. HAMILTON : Did the hon. gentle­

man never do any gambling at 12 o'clock at night ? I could tell him of a few instances of gambling that took place in certain places after 12 o'clock. I remember a certain town in <c2ueensland where an old bushman came in, and it was known that he had money. There was a

little party to meet him-a game of "ante-up" and a pack of cards rigged up. He was to hold three aces and a king, and they were to hold the four queens. £200 was put down, and somehow or other the old man happened to get the four aces, and the biters were bitten. 'l'hat was not in the Gregory electorate, but very close to it. If I liked to rake up things about the hon. gentleman I could show that he is the last man in the world that should a"sume the position of censor of public morals. 'l'he hon. gentleman had a reputation at one time of being clever in finding the little queen.

The SPEAKER: Order! I trust the hon. member will refrain from indulging in personali­ties.

Mr. W. HAJYIILTOX: I think we got a pretty good lot of per"onalities the other night.

The SPEAKER: Order! ~Ir. W. HA::\IILTOJ'\: I think we are pretty

safe in leaving it in the hands of the hon. mem­ber for Clermont, hecause that hon. member dealt out pretty nearly as good as he got. The Secretary for Rail ways was squirming in his seat like a toad in a ,J an nary sun while the hon. member for Clermont was speaking. I could mention a lot of little actions about people who support gentlemen of the other side. \Vhen it comes to talking about people compounding felonies, I know a man who got seven years taken off hie sentence in St. Helena because he promised to show certain gentlemen a goldmine. He took these gentlemen to the place, but they could not find the goldmine, and he got into St. Helena again. He was let out again not long ago to show another party where this goldmine is. [An honourable mem­ber: Not correct.] I can give the man's name. [An honourable member: Give the name.] I will not. He is now leading an expedition near Eidsvold. In dealing with political oppo­nents we often say something sharp, but I do not think, during the time I have been a member of this House, I have heard such degrading tactics--

The SPEAKER : Order ! ·Mr. W. HAMILTON : To belittle a political

opponent as were adopted the other night. [The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: \Vhat did the hon. member for Bowen do; did not he commence it?] He did not. He did not get down to such dis­gusting personalities.

The SPEAKER: Order ! Mr. W. HAMILTOX: I really believe that it

is due to the speech made by the Secretary for Rail ways that the debate has been so prolonged. [The SECRETAllY FOR R.'HLWAYS: Just as well to have it out.] Yes, we will have it out. The hon. gentleman will find that there are men on this side of the House who can hold their own with him in any discussion. On the want of con­fidence motion every member who has spoken on either side has been either apologetic or con­demnatory of the administration of the present Government, and the hon. member for M:ary­borough, Dr. Garde, made the most con­demnatory speech during the debate, and yet he says he is going to support the Government. The Premier said he had been travelling all over the country, and found everybody contented to let things slide. [The PREii!IER : I never said, "Let things slide."] Those are the words used by the hon. gentle­man. \Vel!, if he travelled over Queensland, he would find the people were not willing to let things slide. Hon. members on this side have a far better knowledge of the opinions of the people in the country than any hon. member on the other side. How many of them have faced the electors, even their own electorates ~ Very

176 .Add!'ess in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply •

few of them. [The SECRETARY FOR AGRICCL­TURE: Most of them.] I do not think there are half a dozen whn have faced even their own con­stituents. The people are seething with discon­tent wherever I have been. The hon. member who seconded the Address in Reply, consider­ing the material he had to handle, did very well with it. It was like giving a cook a Jot of bones to make a stew out of ; but he got up his electioneering speech, and it came in handy. I do not "ee how anyone can support the Government any longer. Not only is the country full of unemployed-in spite of the assertions made by hon. members opposite-but it is full of starving people. \Vhen I was in Townsville with the leader of the Opposition, we met the hon. member for Toowoornba, who said he knew of a place where he could get employ­ment for 200 men. The hon. member for Croy­don said, "Tell me where it is, and I will ¥et them in five minutes" ; but the hon. mem­ber could not tell him. \Vherever I have been-and I h<1 ve tra veiled the country since the House rose last session-there has been unemployed ; and I say the Government should do something to find work for these people. \Vhy, in the Kangaroo Point clepclt, after all the people who have been struck off the list, they have to acknowledge that there are still about 1,800 people who are receiving food. That is a scandal for a country like this ; and yet they say that there is no misery or suffering in the colony ! It seems we have nothing but deficits and desola­tion. \V e are told that there is no money in the Treasury, and that they are not going on with any more public works. They might as well stop alto­gether as go on as they are doing with whatever public works are going on, such as railways, where the men are working for starvation and sweating wages. They may thank the Secretary for Rail­ways for bringing wrcges down, and making men delve in railway cuttings for 4s. ljd. a clay. The hon. gentleman ought to be proud of his work. [11r. PETRIE: Some of them are not worth more than that.] That is about the average wage. The hon. gentleman wants to get out of it by saying that they average from -ls. to Ss. a day. There are very few getting Ss. a day. [The SECRETAHY FOR RAIL \I' AYS : The standard navvies are getting navvy's wage~.] The regular navvies are not getting t\s. a day on the Hughenden line. Some of them are not getting 5s. a day, and living is very dear out there, and it is a very hot climate to work in in the summer time. [Mr. AIREY: Ah, but they are kept sober.] Yes, and the iYiinister says he is going to keep them sober; but that is because the unfortunate men get hardly enough from him to buy food, let alone buy drink. As far as the Governor's Speech is concerned, we have very little to look forward to. The Speech has been described as a "flabby production," and it is a flabby produc­tion. vV e have throughout the colony starving people who have nowhere to get a day's work, and they have been looking forward to the Government to start some work so that they will be able to get enough money to buy food, and not get it as relief ; and this is the sort of thing the Government are going to give them-a Slaughtering Bill ; a Diseases in Sheep Bill ; a Prevention of Gold-stealing Bill ; a Pre­vention of the Sale of Sunday Newspapers Bill; a Bill relating to certain duties; and a Bill relating to the Sale of Coupons, and so on. \Vill that help to provide work, or to fill people's stomachs? If ever there was a Government that came for­ward in a time of distress like this with a weaker programme than the present Government, I do not know of it. And yet hon. members opposite stand up and say that they see nothing in the Government or in their programme to make them discontented. Well, I would like to ask

them how much further they want the Govern-~ ment to go before they become discontented with them? [The SECRETAHY FOR RAIL \V A YS : All your people say we borrow too much.] We will just see some of their efforts of statesmanship to restore the finances. Increased railway rates imposed at a time of drought, when everyone's stock was dying, and when it was almost im­possible for people to live in the We.,t. That is the time when the hon. gentleman tries to assist them by raising thP rail way rates ! [The SECRETARY FOR RAU.WAYS: I did not. I reduced the rates for starving stock. J These are the statesrnanlike methods adopted by the Go­vernment to reduce the great deficit and restore the finances of the country. They come down with a reduced endowment to hospitals, and what has been the effect of it? That a lot of hospitals throughout the country have had to close. 'l'he one in the hon. gentleman's own district has had to close, and so has the one in my district. [The SECRETARY FOR R\ILWAYS: You are entirely wrong. There is none in my district that has had to close.] The Thargo­minclah Hospital has had to close. [The SECRE­TARY J;'OR RAILWAYS: It has not.] I saw where it passed a resolution tbe other day that, if they did not get further assistance, they would have to close. If they can g-et additional assistance, I do not see why otber hospitals should not get the same. [The SECRETARY FOR RAIL"'AY;,;: They did not get additional assistance, and they did not close.] However, whether the Thargo­mindah Hospital has closed or not, others have had to close, and others have had to adopt all sorts of shifts in order to raise funds to keep going. [l'he SECRETARY FOH RAILWAYS: That is because the class that uses them will not contribute to support them.] The class that I belong to always do support hospitals. It is the "scabs" and· ''blacklegs" who have been brought into the country by men of the kidney· of the hon. gentleman who refuse to contribute to the hospitals out \Vest. They come from the other colonies, and they get all the work and all the money, and then they say they contribute to hospitals down South, ctnd refuse to contribute to hospitals here, and they take the money away. [The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS : I see the lists, and I know all about it.] Then there is re­duced endowment to local authorities. That has caused a lot of our local authorities to dis­charge hands and curtail expenditure, thus throwing large numbers of men out of work. All the8e methods have been adopted to restore our finances. \Vhy, a blackfellow could have done it ! The Government are to blame for not starting to economise earlier. They should have started in 1900; but what did they do? In that year there was a deficit of about £500,000, and yet our expenditure went up another £80,000. There was a falling off in our exports that year of £2,000,000, but the Government did not see fit then to economise. No ; they kept on, till the lftst moment, and then they came down with a scheme of retrenchment and economy which caused nothing but suffering, and which caused thousands of men to be unemployed throughout the country, whereas, if they had· started earlier, they might have saved a vast amount of money without entailing one-half the hardship they have inflicted upon the people. But no; they did not do so. They went on spending money "holesale. In order to divert the at ten· tion of the people from themselves and the way they were carrying on, they spent thousands of pounds in sending contingents to South Africa­money which we could not afford to spend. As far as the retrenchment scheme of the Government is concerned, it has been what was described by the hon. member for Ipswich on one occasion as a "flannel shirt and moleskin" retrenchment,_

Address in Repl,IJ. [4 AuausT.] Address in Reply. 177

It has been the flannel shirt and moleskin brigade who have suffered all the

[ll p.m.] retrenchment. The Government came down to the House last y< ar

rtncl said, "\V e dibcharged so many men in high positions who were getting such-and-such salaries." But you can see those men back in the service to-clay as supernumeraries. There is none of them who has political influtnce but has got back into the civil service. But the unfor­tunate man who has got to wear a flannel shirt and moleskin pants has been retrenched. [The :SECRETARY POR RAILWAYS: Can you tell me some of the men who have been put back into the service?] I can do so privately, but I am not going to mention names here. One retrenched officer, the Inspector of Charities, has been appointed. What is the relationship between her "nd the Secretary for Rail ways? Answer that question. [The SECRETARY l<'OR RAILWAYS: There is no lady put on.] Yes, there was a woman put on, and she is there yet-[The SECRETARY J<'OR RAn. WAYS: She was put on for four weeks to do certain work]-a niece of the :Minister for Rail­ways; she is there yet. \Vhen members of the Government go about the country vi>.itingpastoral and agricultural shows, instead of defending the administration of the Government they abuse the JJabour party. At a meeting of the Chamber of Commerce at Toowoomba, the Secretary for Hail­ways said that members of the Labour party were always running after :Nlinisters to get billets for their brothers-in-law. If anv m<>mber of this party has ever asked that JYiinisterfor a billet for his brother-in-law, let him divulge the name now. I challenge him to do so. The hon. gentle­man should be· the last man in the world to talk about brothers-in-law in the Government ,;ervice. [The SECRETARY J<'OR RAILWAY,;: I have only one brother-in-law in the Government service, and he has been there for twenty years.l Has not the hon. gentleman a brother-in-law who is timekeeper on the Goondiwindi exten­;-ion? And did he not bring him clown to Bris­bane on a first class railway pass" [The flECllETARY FOH RAILWAYS: :1\o, I did not.] He was brought clown on a first class rail­way pass. [The SECRET.\H¥ FOR RAIL\1'.\YS: He was not. He paid his own fare.] In spite of what the hon. gentleman says, I sav he did receive a first class railway pass from \Vinton.

The SPEAKER: Order! The hon. member must accept the denial of tbe hon. gentleman.

Mr. W. HA::\IILTO.:\: i\nw I shall leave the Secretary for Railways. The bon. member for Clermont dealt very trenchantly with the hon, gentleman. [The SECRETARY FOR RAIL­WAYS: I arn qnit.e pleased.] The hon. gentleman is not pleased. He did not have a very ple'lsecl look on his face that night when the hon. mem­ber for Clermont was speaking. The hon. mernbm~ for Bri~bane North, ,vhen speaking the other night, said he did not blame the Go­vernment for extravagance. I do not think the hon. member has any reason to blame the Government for extravagance, because neo.rly all the money that has been spent recklesilly has been spent in Brisbane in hard times. \Ve have the dredges and the public buildings. I do not think the hon. member for Brisbane ::'\orth has any reason to be dissatisfied with the Go­vernment. But if this Government or any other Government carry on the policy which the present Government have adopted and carried out in the past-if they neglect the producing industries of the State, and bolster up distributing centres like Brisbane and other coastal towns-if they rake in all the money they can from the country districts and spend it in Brisbane-they will not further the best interests of the State. There have been a lot of cliffer,,nt factors blamed for the deficit. The Government

1903-N

have blamed the drought, the Labour party, Kingston, Bar ton, federation, Providence; they ha Ye laid the blame on anybody or anything but their own incapacity and maladministration. The only way L1 which they can answer the charge of malaclministration is by going about the country and trying their best to belittle their political opponents. I do not wish to speak at any ver.", great length on this matter. The chances are that I and some other mem­bers would not have spoken had it not been for certain events which took place the other night. I want, ho~.vever, to say something vdth reg-nrJ to the land administration, as that par­ticu!,rly affecte the district which I represent. I thought that the hon. member for \Varrego would have dealt with this question a little more fullv, and that, being a member of the selectors' executive, he would have spoken on behalf of the selectors. But the bon. member spoke only of the pastoral lessees. All hi~ sympathies went out to those gentlemen. \Vh1le he was speak­ing, the Premier interjected that we passed a very good Land Act last session. 'l'he country does not think it is a very good Land Act. The grazing selectors throughout the State are not satisfied with t~e Land Act of last year. There was very little relief given to the grazing tJe!ectors-in fact, none at all to some ; and the grazing R8lectors want to know why there tJhoulcl be two different systems of fixing the rentals-wby they should pay four times the rental that is paid by the big pastoral lessees. The whole system of our land adminis­tration wants reviewing. Not only our present land laws and present administration, but the land laws and the administration for many years past. It is over forty years since we had responsible government in this Statf", and we have had forty-two or forty-three Land Bills, all passed with the prufes,secl intent.ion of placing people on the land. How much has the passing of those Acts accomplished? How many people have we settled on the land? L 3t anyone tra ver',e this State from one end to the other, and he will see a little settlement in one portion of the State, and then another 10() miles or so further on another little portion of settlement. vVe have got 400,000,000 Bcres of land in Queensland, and we have got only 500,000 acres cultivatp,J. The land laws have not concluced to the settlement of people on the land. \Vhile we have the sealed tender system, we shall never have what I call tJettlement in the \Vestern country. vYhen that sealed tender 'ystem was introduced by the present Mi;nister for Lands, I beli,we it. was v·ith the intention of putting down dummying, but it has not had the effect of putting down dummying, for it is jnst as rife and rampant to-clay as it was under the old ballot system. The only advantage it possesses is that it iR an instrun1ent to rack~ rent the selectors. Om land laws should be framed more for settlement than revenue. But nearly all of our land laws, as far as selectors are concerned, have been framed for the purpose of raking in revenue, and they have not had the effect of settling people on the laud. You can hardly take up a newspaper without reading in it some account of people of the southern State& coming here and finding that they are unable to get suitable agricultural land. Only the other day I read about some people going from Aus­tralia to Canada to see if they could not get land there to settle people upon. In Queensland we could absorb the whole surplus population of Australia, and I believe of Great Britain, too, but· yet we find that our people are leaving our shores. Every clay we read of people leaving these· colonies, so that our old system of land laws and administration wants reviewing. [The SECRETARY FO!\ RAILWAYS: It is not the land

178 Lldd1·ess in Repl,y. [ASSEMBLY.] .Address in Repl,y.

laws, but the Labour party.] It is not the Labour party. The only liberal portion of the .Land Act of last year was that put. in by the Labour party and Opposition. The Bill, aK introduced, was all in favour of the mort­g>Lge institutions and big pr.storal !e'·Sees. The only relief offered to the gra"in,: farmer was that he wao to be allowed to make a freehold of his land at 10s. an acte, and the hon. member for Warreg·o, who is one of the executive of the G-razing :Farmers' Association, said that was all the selectors nquired. [The SEORE1'ARY ~·oR RAILWAYS: He said nothing of the kind.] Yes, he did say so. l'< ow the revision of the rentals is going <•n, and the grazing farmers, I consider, should be placed in the same position as the pastoral lessees. If we want to encourage that clasa of men to settle on the land, we must alter the Act we passed last year, and allow them to have the land on the samP terms as the bigger pastor,,! lessees. \V e say to them at present that we will restrict them in the area: they shall have not more than 20,000 or 40,000 acres ; that they have to fulfil certain conditions and make certain improvements within a c,_,rtain time, in addition to performing residential quali­fications. On the other hand, the pastoral lessee can take up 4,000 Equare miles, and is not asked to spend a penny upon it, I say that is wrong, and we should not ask these men to perform conditions which other people are not expected to perform. Smne grazing farmers are paying far too much for their land, while some pastoral lessees are paying much too little in portions of the colony where the land is superior. Then there is another factor connected with the Land Act which is a great hardship upon the grazing farmer, and which ought to be altered. A clause was inserted that no grazing farmer under three years' standing should be allowed to come under the Bill. He could not get a revision of rental or any extension of lease, and I say that this is a hardship that will crush a lot of them out. JYien who have held their selections through the drought, who have paid their rent, and who very likely will ha,·e to pay two or three years' more rent before they get any return, are as much entitled to consideration as the people for whom we made special provision. I repeat that the sealed tender system should be done a\<·ay with as early as possible. I do not think it is a fair system, and has not served the purpose for which it was intended. It has not put down dummying, and the only effect it bas had is a rack-renting one. I think the least tbe Government can do is to bring in an amending Bill this year and liberal­ise the existing law in the direction I have indi­cated. Certainly I consider the hon. member for \V arrego, who is so intimately connected with the selectors' association, should have taken the matter up and not have left it to an out­sider like myself, Another mattH in con­nection with land administration deserving con­sideration is the tactics of the Government in selling resumptions. \Vhen last year's Bill was going through, every hon. member on the other side who spoke upon it quoted figures to show the amount of land in the shape of resumption.~ there was available for settlement. Yet what do we find? The practice which we repeatedly called attention to last yeM is going on still, and when the Government make re­oumptions they immediately turn round and sell them. I took up a paver the other clay and found that on Barcaldine station they were offering 50,242 acres. That land is within 40 miles of a railway, and alongside the railway lines is the place we want people to settle. Otherwise, what do we run our railways out into the West for? The lessees of Barcaldine station have purchased the very hearts out of their

various properties. They purchased 50,000 acres at Bimer:t and Peak Downs, and now they are allowed to ''peacock" Home Creek and Barcal­dine. ['I' be t:\ECHE'rAHY I•'OH RAILWAYS: \\"e will sell the lot if they will buy.] I quite believe that. I contend, ho\\·ever, that when these resumptions are made for the purpose of inducing settlement, they should be put to their legiti­lnate use, and should be thrown open as grazing­farms. They were never intended to be repurchased by the lessees. [The SECRETARY Jo'Ol\ RAILWAYS: There is a lot more than that going to be sold.] Yes, and I believe if the hon. gentleman had his way he would sell the rail­ways. In fact, I do not know what the hon. gentleman would not sell. Again, at Home Creek, the Government have got fiO,OOO acres which they are putting up for sale. Is that encouraging settlement? \Vhat was that land resumed for but to he thrown open to selection? Yet the Government talk about wanting to encourage settlement in the IV est, On Coreena resumption they threw open, and put up at a minimnm of l~d. per acre, a lot of land, when there is not a squatter in the country paying lcl. per acre. ['l'he SECHETARY FOR RAJL\\'AYS: \Ve will sell that to anyone who will buy.] Yes, I know the hon. gentleman would sell it. He has got a penchant for selling things, yet I lwlieve the only land that ha.· been sold in the \Vestern district that has been purchased by anyone outside of the lessees. was the Saltern Creek land purchased by Mr. Foy. The hon. membet' for Dalby was speaking on the land question the other night, and it would puzzle anyone to know what his policy is. At one time he is in favour of the selector, and at another of the squatter. His policy is of such a nondescript character that I cannot make it out. He says he does not believe in cheap land-that squatting is not close settlement, and that cheap land does not mean close settlement. A number of hon. members have pointed out that the secret of success in Canada consists of the cheapness of the land and facilities of trans­port. On the other band, we have agricultural land thrown open in the Burnett at £1 5s. and £1 10s. an acre. There are any number of people who want to go on the land, yet have not the money to pay that price for it. In throwing open land for settlement we should not take revenue as the first consideration, but it should be thrown open on such terms that people with moderate capital can take it up and settle npon it, Then the hon. member for Dalby trots out the land tax. He always points ont that members on this side are in favour of a land tax, and he want' to make out that the farmers would have to pay a land tax and an income tax as well. I do not know any country where there is a land tax and an income tax co·existent where income derived from land is taxed. It is not so in the old country nor in New Zealand. In those countries where they have a land tax and an income tax, all income derived from lanrl is free frmn income tax. rrhe farmers pay incon1e tax now, and if they had to pay a land tax they would not have to pay an income tax. But the monopolists who hold those big estates on the Downs would have to pay a little more than they do. And the hon. member for Dalby, when summing up, seemed to be dead against the Go­vernment. He said, " If we forgive you for the past, we do not give you absolution for the future.,_ Indeed, several members on the other side, especially the hon. member for Maryborough, Dr. Garde, I do not see how they can consistently vote against this amendment. I intend to vote for it. I would never vote for any Government that has the Secretary for Railways in its ranks. I say this: that if the hon. gentleman has any sense of political honour, after the implied vote of

Adch·ess in Repl,y. [4 AuGUST.] Address in Reply. 179

c:en~ure passed upon him, he would retire from the .:\Iinistry, or the Premier himself should tell him to retire. If he does not, it is only a matter ol time when the Secretary for Railways will mr.ke the Premier retire. ·

.:\Ir. B.LAIR (Ipswich) : I am not so fond as to imagine that anything I m>ty say will alter a 'ingle Yote, but there are two reasons why I think no one, no matter on what side he is sitting, should remain silent on an ocr11Sion of this kind. The first is that it is due to those whorn a member represents for the tin1e being to disclose the views which regulate the vote he intends to give. The second is, that I conceive it to be my duty to put forward, in as succinct •,nd explicit a manner as is possible with the language at my command, the reasons why on this occaswn I shall vote against the Govern­ment. The Governor's Speech is one which I rend with attentive interest. I am glad to

that we have here, as the representative our 1nost gracious King, a 1nan who takes

a keen interest in the welfare of the State which for the time being he is administering. I am glad to see that he is not content simply to live a life of luxurious ease, but has gone about, at no little inconvenience and perhaps hardshir1, tu n1ake himself personally acr1uainted with th8 resources of this State. He has gone to the ::'\ orth, he has gone to the Centre, and he indicates in his Speech that he will make a complete tour of the State, and I feel that from a man of that kind who is ready and willing to assist institutions, to preside at various functions, and to give of his best, that we shall get ideas which may broaden and perhaps liberalise the somewhat parochial notions which at present exist. He has given us strong proof of his interest in the State ; hon. members Ni!l know to what I allude. But with regard to the Speech, there is too much of hope­fulness. \V e know that " Hope springs eternal in the human breast." \V e are also reminded that '' Hope deferred maketh the heart sick." But I am sorry-and I wish to say that what I am speaking to-night is what I honestly believe to be the true "tate of affairs-there is no room for thi" hopefulness. There is no ground whatever for saying that the State ;., at present in that glowing condition of prosperity which I am sure hon. members on both sides would willingly believe. It is not the slightest use closing our eyes to these facts, which are so patent that "He who runs may read" them. There is abroad a feeling of dio­quiet, a feeling of unrest. It may be more or Ies;, indefinite ; iL may be vague; but go where you will, spertk to anybody you may casually meet, and you find a sensg of unrest, a feel­ing of want of confidence in those who for the time being hold the reins of this State. iA.n honourable member: All over Australia.] Yes, and presumably fur the same reason. [~\Ir. J\IonL\RTER: Especially against tbe Federal Government.] The hon. member interjects something about federation. There is no man more ready than I am to deal fairly with friend or foe. I admit fully and freely that we h;rce to a ]a.rge extent to face a dislocation of finance that has been brought about by fed­eration ; that is a corollary to a change of this magnitude. But what of the members who pre1·iously went about speaking in favour of federation, doing all they possibly could to bring ;;bout this uni versa! brotherhood, to bring about this Commonwealth of which we are all so proud? _.;.ne] I say, personally, that I am proud of it, proud to be a citizen of the Common wealth; and I hope the time will come when it will be equally as proud a hoast to say Ci1·is A ustralicnsis surn as it was in the old days to say Civis Romanus sum. \Vhat, I was asking,

is the position of those men who lured you on to federation, in hopes which they now say are belied; those men in whom was reposed the trust and confidence of the people ? I never understood so thoroughly before the saying that "Memory is a hell" until I heard men who had urged us to federati:m with all their eloquence, regretting having done that which they could well wish were left undone. There has been a certain tone imported into this debate which I, for one, do not intend to folio"'· I intend to set out, in as calm and fair a manner as possible, my reasons for taking the stand I have taken. I wish to "extenuate nothing, nor to set down >wght in malice." It is always well to be very careful in endeavouring to find a reliable basis on which to go. I may say at once that this motion of want of confi­dence is, in 1ny opinion, misconceived and

premature. Its only effect will be [8 ·so p. m.] to solidify and bring about cohesion

on the other side, when, if you listened to what has fal!Pn from lips on the other side, you would be ready to believe that cohesion did not exsist there. [Opposition members: Hear, hear!] But I faucy~and I say it with »11 due defer,'nce to those who are older and who have had iireater parliamentary experience than myself, and whose minds are more matured~ that it would have been wiser to have moved this motion 0£ want of confidence on the Financial Statement in a way which would test the feeling of the House better-such as to move that the poll-tax clauses be eliminated from the Income Tax Act; and I purpose, if no member of greater experience than myself does not do that, to move it myself-[Opposition members: Hear, hear! ]-and give the House an opportunity of going to a vote upon it. But although this vote of want of confidence may be premature, no matter at what time such a motion comes on I am afraid that the House, as it is at present con­stituted, will consider it in the manner in which this motion will be treated. I have no sympathy with those people-they are familiar to us all~who button-hole you in the corridors or in the lobbies, and, with many mysterious mntterings and waggingo of the head, tell us that the country is going " to the dogs," and that the Cabinet are merely a set of Ministerial Micawbers. Judging by these expressions of opinion, that is the class of indiYiduals you would expect to find fighting on your side. Yet you find them voting solidly for the men they condemn, or they are conspicuous by what I may call their convenient absence. That is not an enviable position to be in. If I were sitting behind a Government I should be inclined to say: "I arn for'' or "I am against you"; there would he 110 half-halting place. I ohould say, "He that is not with us is against us." I should take a definite stand and let the Government know exactly how I stood, so that they could say, "\Ye rely on you; you are not tri1nming to suit your constituents." Now, this is a vote of want of confidence motion, and I will treat it relevantly. It. affects the Cabinet and those behind the Government who sup­port them. The Cabinet may be considered either from the persollal point of view or the political point of view. Personally, I haw not one word to say against the members of the Cabinet. There are members of the Cabinet who I am proud to number amongst my friends-men whose worth, integ-rity, and business ability I admit, and from that point of view I have nothing to say. But when you come to deal with them as an entity in whose hands the destinies of this State are placed, I yield to them what I think may fairly be given, and that is that they have had an unprecedented drought to stand up against and the dislocation caused by federation of

180 Address m Rep1,1J. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Repl,y.

which I have spoken. They have had a series of forces against which it would be difficult for any Mini"try to stand up against, and l say that, whoever occupy thB Treasury benches, !lOw or in the future, will have no enviable task-a task any fair-minded man ebould be inclined to assist them in. These people, for the time being, are in that pusition, and they ask us to keep them in that position by not voting adversely to them. The want of confidence motion goes right to the ro"t of the whole matter. The question is, Are those people sufficiently worthy of our trust, or must we, as honest men, true to our con vicLions, vote for the formation of a new Ministry or a dissolution? The chief charge made against them is that of extravagance, and taking the apologists for the Govern­ment, I think the Government may weli say, "Save me from my friends." \Vhen a charge is levelled againot a man he h3s two courses opan­either tn dPny the charge in toto or admit it and try to justify his course of action. ::\' ow, can any hon. member houeRtly say that he heard any hon. member on the other side deny that the Government have been extravagant? [The SECRE'rARY FOR AumccLTcHE: The charge has been assumed entirely, not proven.] [The SECRE­TARY 1•'0R RAILWAYS: Yes; theTrea"urerdenied that, and challenged anyone to point out where the extravagance came in.] The ::\Iinister for Agri­culture says that the charge is assumed, so I t>tke it that he denies they have been extravagant. [The SECRETARY l<'OR -~GHICcLTum;: Of course.] [The PREMIER : You show us where the extravag­ance comes in.] Well, it is a matter of ancient history that I did not wish to go into, and I did not think it would be denied, became hon. mem­bers will remember that in the Governor's i:lpeech there IS a very significant paragraph in which he expressed the hope "that members would assist the Government in resisting unreasonable demands." That, to my mind, indic<ttes that unreasonable demands have been made in the past and led to extravagance. [The PR;;1l!ER : 'rhey are constantly being made-made to-clay.] [ grant that, and in speaking of extravagance there should be some discrimination between legitimate expenditure and expenditure incurred to soothe recalcitmnt suppcwters. You may look at the pn,ragraph in that way and see that it refers to clamorous politiral vagrants. On that point I haYe practically nothing to : say. I hope I shall be forgiven when I sa:;· that it was most amusing to listen to the hon. member for North Brisbane referring to the dredges. He said they were a most valuable plant, and there is no doubt that the value went 1

to :Mr. Bates, and the plant went to the city. (Hear, heu! and laughter.) Talk about assuming· the evidences of extravagance! \Vhy, some of the C'lrdinal points of the extravagance on the psrt of tr.e Government may be enumerated in the build­inf; ot the new Central Railway Station, the buildingo~ the new L mds Office, and the building >f post offices and courthouses in various parts A the State. [The SECRETARY lWR AGRICuL· 'l'GRE: What about the new Ipswich workshops?] I will deal with them, and I hope the Ministerfor Agriculture will not say that that was extrava­g-ance-(laughter)-because if hed<les, then he has been a party to the extravagance which he a little while ago denied. I will leave thehon. gentle­man on whichever horn of the dilemma he chooses. It is useless for me to allude to what is ancient history. You could go on multiplying instances of proof positive of the extravagance of the Government-the appointment of experts, the appointment of commissions which yielded no practical result--but I won't waste time. I honestly believe that the charge of extravagance is proved. ['T'he PREMIER : We say no.] Of course I take the hon. gentleman's denial ; but if

the hon. gentleman will not admit the metra· vagance in the f~tce of proof, he will admit noth­ing. Apologists for the Government have .·aid there has been extravagance in the past, but the Cabinet were forced into it. \Vhat do you think of the po"ition of people who, after having spent n1oney in a vvay which is not lAgititnate. _:-:ay they are forcEd into 1t? [The PREilliER: \Yho said that?] I am alluding to hon. members who mentioned it, and to the Opening Speech, in which we are told that members can assist the l'viinistry by not making unre.asonable demand.-. Unreasonable demands may have bren made in the past, and because of importunity the Govern­ment may have been led into extravagance. If they have, the defence is "\Ve were forcFCd into it." The Cabinet is the trustee of the funds of the State. If people go to an ordinary truotee and ask him to expend money in a way which would not only not benefit the other beneficiariEs. but would prejudice them, what position wonld. he take up? Would he not, if he were worthy of the trust, refuse the demand? If the Government had not refused these exorbitant demande, they ha Ye shown that they are not worthy of their trust. I have heard members cav, "\Vhat would you suggest as an alternative?. And they say that became we cannot suggest an altemati\·e of which they approve, it is a question of choosing between two eYils, and they will choose the least. \Vhat is the position of a Government, or of any body of men, that relies on its position for a vote based on this : "\V e support you because you are the lesser of two evils." I don't envy Ministers the support of people who base their confidence on a thing of that kind. Will any hon. mem­ber say that hon. members have got up on that side and spoken with implicit confidence-with a whole-souled confidence-in the Govern­ment? Do we not recollect the utterance>< of the senior member for Drayton and Too­woomba, the hon. member for Dalby, and the· hon. member for 2.1aryborough '? Can anyone with an atom of common sense come to the conclusion that they are whole-smiled in their support of the present Administration • I think there can be only one answer. \Vhen a person accuses another, unless he sheets the charge home, the other is entitled to the benefit of the doubt--[Government members: Hear, hear !]-and I say that the support the GoYem­nlent are getting is a benefit of the doubt majority; and I do not envy them. (Laughter.) Those who support the Government say-

Better to bear the ills we have than to fly to others that we knmv not of.

That is the logical position of members to whose speeches I have listened here; and I honestly say I do not think a Government worthy of the name would be proud of support of that kind. [Opposition members: Hear, hear!] If they ask for a vote on this side, surely we are entitled to know on what they base their claim for the vote. Is it financial admini,tration? [An honourable member : vVhat. do you know of finance?] Very little, and I am now amr;ng my peers. (Opposition laughter.) L,,t us t"ke what would appeal to a man of ordinary intelligence. We have a deficit of £191,000, and it seem' that some of us are proud of it. How is it that the deficit is so little? First of all, we got more from the income tax than we thought we would; we got more from the .Federal Treasurer than we thought we would. [ThePREMEIR: No; £'i,OOOless.] I believe the estimate was corrected. Then we have the Treasury bills which were practically floated last year in such a way as not to necessitate a second flotation this year, and which went to make the deficit less. [The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: No.] Two mistakes and the interposition of Divine Providence

Address in Repl,y. [4 AUGUST.] Address in Repl_y. 181

cre,nlt in a deficit of £191,000. ls there any. thing in that to show financial administration on which the Government might ask us to support them? I believe honest attempts have been made to economise and retrench, and that in the Railway Department particularly a tremendous saving has been effected, and I say all honour to the man who effects that saving. [itlr. BuRiwws : At the expense of efficiency.] The hon. member says it may be at the expense of efficiency, and when he speaks he may deal with that phase of the question. I sav all honour to the man w~o honourably retrenches and brings ahout a savmg. In what other departwent has there been a saving? [The PRE)IJER: In e,·ery department.] Then I say that means there has been exceosiYe expenditure previously. [An honourable member: No.] I think it IS idle to quibhle with the position in that way. If it is honest retrenchment, if it is not a sacrifice of efficiency, if it is a saving of money which wg,, spent previously, surely I am right in saying that previously there was too much expenditure. [The SECRETARY FOR Acmr­CULTURE: If the traffic on the railways falls off, you do not want the same staff.] If traffic on the railways fallB off, in my humble judgment it is not a proper way to increase traffic by raising ratPs. I would rather see trains running full at lower rates than practically empty at higher rates. [Opposition members : Hear. hear !J On a que,tion of this kind, if it is not a question of financial administration, if they do not appeal to r,eople who would, perhaps, willingly assist them by showing something on which they could base their vote•, on that score, on what are we to rely? Is it on the measures that are submitted in the Govmnor's Speech? K ow, those measmes are, first of all, a Bill to reduce the nmnber of members to be elected to the Legislative As,embly and a Bill to amend the Elections Act. K o doubt that will effect :t saving. It will effect a saving which is but a drop in the ocean~a saving of something like £4,000 per year. If the Bill to >'edcwe the number of members comes before this House I will support it. I am perfectly willing to see the number of members in this place reduced. I believe the country largely get;c on in spite of Parliaments, not with the _._,sistance nf them. But I would like to see the :Electoral Bill introduced first, and I think it is due to hrm. members that the franchise should be one adult one vote, without anything attached to it to blind the issue or to beg the ques­tion. \Ye should have a clear i~sue of a redistribution of seats on a one adult one vote ba,-is. [Opposition members : Hear, hear !J If that is so, it will have my support. There Is another matter that I think should be introdncoc::l as welL If there is to be a redistri­bution, the different electorates should be mapped out, and a map of the redistribution shonltl be attached as a schedule to the Act, and it should not be left to a commissioner appointed afterwards to make the division. The House should be in full possession of the way in which the electorates arE to be mapped out, and should have a,n opportunity to vote for new n1en1bers or for the new House. [The PREmER: That has always been the case in this colony.] I am glad to beo.r the Premier say that, because I think it is a fair thing, [Opposition members : Hear, hear !l I believe the Premier will deal with the matter fairly, anr! that he will show ns in what WRY he intends to divide the State, and how the electorate·, are to be mapped out, and I believe, if he had his way, he would give us one adult one vote. There are certain other mu~ mes here. There i;; a Bill for the more effectual prevention of gold·stealing, and <me for the more effectual prevention of stock-

stealing. It is speaking to a gr•·lt extent in the region of conjecture. \Ye do not know wha,t the details of those Bills are, but, if the principle is to shift the onus of proof, if it is to outrage the fnndamental principle of British law that a man is innocent until he is proved guilty, I say hon. members on both sides should earnestly study those n1easures, and record their votes against the infringement of a principle of which we are all proud [Oppositio!l members: Hear, hear !] There is a Bill to consolidate and amend the law relating to jurie··., a Bill to amend the Small Debts Act, a Bill to amend the Bills of Sale Act, a Bill to preYent the use of trading stamps or coupons. I am justified in referring to these measures by their position, but their position in the Speech is not justified by the state of this colony at the present time. Bills of that kind should be relegated to the obscurity from which they should neYer ha Ye emerged at. a juncture like this. There is a Bill to take a referendum on the question of religious teaching in State schools. There can be no q ue·,tion that at some time that quec,tion will haYe to be solved. I belie,-e that "The voice e>f the people is the voice of God." If it is to be settled, it should be settled by a referBndnm ; but my opinion with regard to education is that the present settlement of it is one that we should support. [Opposition members: Hear, hear !] I was asked the ques­tion when I stood before my constituents, and I said I believed in it as it was~free, secular, and compuhory. [Opposition members: Hear, hear!] If there is to be any altera.tion, it can only be by a referendum; and, for that reason, a inatter of that kind is well included in the Governor's Speech. I am sorry to find that in the Bills that are promised to this House, there is r.o mention of anything which would indicate a grasp of affairs. I wish to make perfectly clear what I mean. There is nothing here which will bring in any revenue. Personally, I should be glad to see some measure by which the land of this State, of which we have so many acres, could be given away to a desirable class of immig-rants under proper conditiom, [Opposition members: He:1r, heo,r !] I should be very pleased indeed to see a Bill of that kind included; bnt, ala", it is conspicnous by its al>sence. I should .be !{lad to see some­thing with regard to irr~gati·Jn and the con­servation of water. Durmg the late drought we were taught terrible leosons of that kind, and I fear the lessons are to be forgotten. Are we to allow a thing of that kind to "" without taking the lessons from it that we ~hould? [Mr. C,DrPuEI.L: \Yhere is the money to come from ?l It mav be possible to devise a scheme by wliich the people who are genu!nely in support of such a measure would contrcbute as is done in reg"rd to stock assessments. [The SECRETAHY J<'OR RAILWAYS: \Ye have that law in force now.] At any rate, there is nothing to suggest-and I am surry that it is so~that a lively interest is being taken by. t~e Government in measures of that kind, and It IS on measures of that kind that much of the prosperity of this State will depend. 'rhere is a matter I would like to mAntion, and I commend this to the. con­sideration of those who have morP experrence than I ha,-e, and I mention it more in the way of getting ttn expn ssion of opinion upon it than in the way of ad\ocating it myself. I shoul~ be very pleased to see the Treasurers of the variOus States holrl a conference to see if it be possible to get the Commonwealth to take over the State debts. LThe PrmmER: That has been done already.] The Commonwealth has a large revenue now, and if they take o':er our debts we might possibly get better terms If the Common­wealth were to borrow. At all events, it would be one way by which the Ministry would be

182 Address in Reply. [ASSE::YIBLY.J Add1•ess in Repl,y.

enabled to resist the importunate and unreawn­able demands of those who yield them a most qualified support. 'fhere are other things to which I could allud" in a speech of this kind, but I think I have occupied the attention of the House sufficiently now. I wbh to say, in conclusion, that I am not pessimistic with· regard to the future of Queensland. I believe it will have a very bright future. [Honourable members: Hear, hear !] But it requires an honest effort; it requires a putting of the shoulder to the wheel in order to bring about that consummation devoutly to be wished for. I belie,·e it will prove one of the brightest jewels in that cluster of gems which now fmm the Australian Common­wealth. [Honourable members: Hear, hear!] I do not wish to resume my seat before alluding to the kindly manner in which His Excellency and members on both sicles of the House have spoken of the loss sustained by the great Christian church of which Pope Leo XIII. was the sovereign head. He was a man, great in peace, of whom it might be said-

His life was gentle: And the elements so mixed up in him, That :\"ature might stand up and ~av To all the world, "This was a man.''

If expressions. of that kind will lead to a burying of that accursed spirit of sectarianism, I wel­come them. If they herald an era when we will fight onr fights in a broad-minded and liberal way, and banish all things of that kind, then I say in God's name let us welcome them. I can­not close without alluding to the death of the late Secretary for Lands, the Hon. \Villiam Bligh O'Connell, who was a man tma,suming and kindly, and a man who will need no monument. He will live in the memory of those who hrwe

profited by his many <1cts of kindness [9 p.m.] and of love. Standing this after-

noon by the graveside of the bishop of my own church, I could not help but regret that these expressions come only when the icy hand of death has sealed the lips of the recipients for ever. It would be well if we could more generously yield a tribute to the drtues and good qualities of those people in life, and not wait until we attempt the half-articulate cry-

For the touch of a vanished hand, And the ~onnd of a YOi('e that is still.

[Honourable members: Hear, hear!]

Mr. BURRO'vVS (Charters Tmcen): I have listened with great interest to the various speeches whic~ have been made by hon. members on the other stde-to some I have listened with an1usement in s:ln1e respects~ and to one, I am sorry to say, wtth deep regret. However, it appears to me that both the motion and the amendment have been lost sight of during the debate. The amendment has been moved because members on this side believe that the country has no confidence in the Government. We charge the Government with incompetence and with maladministration, and we naturally expected that their supporters would have attempted to defend their administration under which, instead oft he fin,tncial year closi~g with a surplus of £9,000, we have a deficit of £191,000. But, as a matter of fact, they have absolutely sheered off the question altogether; they have not attempted to justify the position of the Go­vernment, and have done their. level best to evade the question at issue. \V hat is the condi­tion of the country tn-day? Farmers are dis­satisfied with the maladministration of the Go­vernment, miners arA dissatisfied and the workinlj classes generally are groaning under the oppresswn of the poll ta,x. \Vhat justification or excuse have the Government to offel' for these things? I juin with the members on this side who have stated that the members on the other

side who have so far spoken have in every in­stance shown that they have not confidence in the Government. They do not say that they are absolutely without confidence in enry respect, but they have given evidence that in many respects they lack confidence in the Government. 'l'he ~\linistry, instead of defending themselves, have attacked the Oppnsitioni~t~ for their speeches during the recess. The Premier, the hon. member for Carpenta,ria, the Secretary for Railways, the hon. member for Toowoomba, and the hon. member for \Varrego, referred to speeches delivered by members on this side during the recess. These are the tactics of individuals who dare not face the electors themselves, who have not the moral courage to go to the country, not even in their own electorates, with the excer­tion of the Premier, and he got a nice time of it. He had to admit that he got a better hearing in the constituency of the leader of the Oppo­sition than he got in his own electorate. [l\lr, ·wooDs: That was at a banquet.] No, it was at a public meeting in Townsville. That is the only time he addressed a public meeting during the whole of his tour. Instead of replying to the charges made by this side of the House in the House, they get off on a side issue by juggling with figures that have been used by members on this side at meetin;:s outside the House. The hon, member for 'vVarrego reiterated the cry that was first ginn by the Premier-that the speech of the leader of the Opposition was weak. If the speech were so weak, and the speeches that followed werP so weak, it is a very peculiar thing that the Pre­mier himself took nearly as long to reply to that speech as the leader of the Opposition did to make it. After that we had the big guns on the other side getting up time after time, and the Minister for Railways occupying two and a-holf hours in replying to that and other speech e.,. It is ridicubu,. fot· members on the other side to evade the question by saying that there was nothing to reply to. If there was nothing to reply to, why did they occupy such a large amount of time? The hon. m em her for \Varregowasted about half an hour in dealing with the figures that hP alleged had been used by the hon, member for Carpentaria, the hon. member for Rockhampton, and the hem. member ior Flinders. He got them all JUmbled np. He did not know where he was, and he had to appeal to the hon, memb~r for Carpentaria on several occa,ions. I think he was V8ry glad when he had finished with them, for I do not think any member in this House understood what he wished to convey. He stated that the Government were justified in their extravagant expenditure, and urged as a sort of excuse that certain necessary expenditure which should have been incurred during the regime of the X elson ~linistry had to be in­curred by the Philp Governml-lnt. He qnoted the speech of J\lr. Glassey, who, he said, complained that wages had decreased iiO per cent. and work increased 23 per cent. We have to complain now that wages have been reduced 10 per Ct·nt. and work has been increased 40 per cent. \'{ e have the same complaint to make now as the hon. member for vV arrego alleges was made in 1899-HlOO-that the Government starved the rail­ways. I say that the same thing is being clone to-day, On the Northern line the rolling·•tnck is now in a worse condition than ever it was, and drivers and firemen are in constant fear of being blown into eternity. True of the Government, they have effected certain economies, but they have reduced at the wrong end. They have taken ls, a day off the men who were earning only fis. or 7s. a day. But what have they done besirles: There are three men on the Korthern railwa>·s who have hacl their salary increased by £100 p.er year each. The1·e is .£300 gone, and how mnch

Add!'ess in RepTy.

does that represent? How many men would have to be reduced to make up for that extrava­gance? [Mr. ·woons: They are men who are already getting .£iJOO a year.] There are ut her 1

things which the Minister has done there that I do not approve of-the practice of introrlucing men from the Ipswich workshops, and inducing then; to work for lower wages than are being paicl np i\orth. \Ve all know that up ~orth, as a rule, wages are higher than here, and I am sorry to see that the ::\Iinister for Rail ways has ador,ted this practice in order to lower the ruling rate of wages in the ]'\ orth. It has been said on more than one occasion that if the Government are to be blamed for this large expenditure of money, members on this side must also take their share of the blame, and it has been asserted and reasserted by several Government members that whatever money has been E''<pended has been sanctioned by this House. That is untrue, and they know it. How many hundreds and thousands of pounds have bee.1 passed by thig side of the House after it bad been expended without the authority of Parliament? This is what we have been com­plaining of year after year--that the Govern­ment are not content with spending the money Yoted by Parliam~nt, but are continually exceed­ing that amount; and then they bring down to us their Supplementary Estimates to have the amount they have expended ratified. \Vhat else could we do under those circum­stances? We protest every time, but we are compelled practically to pass it. Now, with regard to another statement the Minister made-that this party do not blame the drought, and he states that the drought cctu,;ed the deficit on the railways. \Vhat an absurdity for an hon. member to make that assertion in face nf the fact that, in the worst year of the Philp Government, when thev had this £500,000 deficit, they had over .£1)00,000 more than the best year of theN elson Ministry, when they had a sm·plns! The :Minister, when he was speaking, referred to civil servants waiting for their salarie.,, and hinted, of course, that members on this side of the House were in a measure respon­sible. I claim that members on this side of the Hm1se are absolutely in no way rer•ponsible. The Premier could, if he wished, have introduced an Appropriation Bill prior to this discussion, and could have had everything passed before now. So far as the debate has yet gone, I think the members on the other side of the House have occupied their share of the time; :md, as was mentioned by the hon. member for ( hegory, the opinion of people who are generally eupposed to be in the contidence of the Govern­ment is to the effect that the Government is not prepared to go on with any of the measures that they have foreshadowed, and are purposely spinning out this debate. The member !or \Varrego referred to the fact that a convention is held at certain times by the Labour people ; that at that convention the platform is dis­cussed, and he hinted that we on this side of the House were bound in shackles. As a matter of fact. the hon. gentleman knows as well as I that thf:re is no member on this siclA of thP House shackled or bound in any wa,,- except by his conscience. Each member "sees that plat­form ; he has to read it and digest it, and if he thoroughly agrees with it he will sign it; if he does not agree with it he shuuld noG ,;ign it. If he signs thing hA does not agree with, what do you term him? Certainly not an honourable man. \Vhat is the position on the other_ side? The Labour party repre:c'nt the workmg· classes throughcut the State ; the ! bun­sands of workerf> in the political organisations of Queensland are rApresented by these clele­gate>. By whom is tb" platform of the (Jovern­rnent brought up~ Those who drew up the

Add1•ess in Reply. 183

platform, if we may call it such, that is con­tained in the Governor's Speech, you can name on the fingers of one hand, and they are shackled. They mav not have been shackled until that memorable trip on the "Lucinda"; but it appears that, eince that caucus meeting was held, members, although expressing di<·approYal of the action of the Government, art prepared to Yote for them. I maintain that the L>~hour party are trying their leYel best to 111ake representative govern­ment what it ought to be, by getting the people to state their opini.ms, and formulating a plat­form for the acceptance of men who wish to rel'resent the people. The Government haYe never yet adopted that method of procedure. They have never yet come before the country with a well-defined platform. A few individuals forming the Cabinet issue a platform or order of hn,iness, and those sitting behind the Govern­ment follow them meekly. Now, regarding this one vote one value. I an• in favour of one adult one Yote, but what do they mean by one vote one ,-alue? The member for \Varrego does not understand the position of affairs. He said that members on this side who approve of one adult one vote must necessarily support a proposal which will give one vote one value by giving representation in proportion to population. To show how little he grasps the situation, he immediately afterwards told us that Brisbane need have no members, and would suffer no in­justice thereby. \Ve have complained all along that Brisbane is vver represented; that down here the Government can be interviewed as often as people like; that people within 100 miles radius. can run down to Brisbane at any time and inten-iew members and :i\lini>ters on both sides. But what. about the people in the vVest? \Vhat about the people in my electorate? They cetnnot travel 800 or 1,000 miles down here every day or two. Therefore, I contend that the hon. member for \Varrego himself supplied a very good reason why, if a. redistribution of seats is­made, it should not be in proportion to popula­ti.,n. Now, the member for \Varrego, in dealing with the speech of the member for Bowen, mentions the fact that the member for Bowen said he was given to understand that a Land Bill would be introduced, and he twitted him with being in t.he confidence of the Government. He app»rently was in accord with what the member for Bowen said, and he gave a reawn why such a Bill should be introduced, but it is not mentioned in the Governor's Speech. Ho gave us to underst>md that it was absolutely nec~ssary that such a Bill shonld be introduced, and as it has not been even promised he must have lost a certain amount of confidence in the Government. But one cannot expect too much from the hon. member for \Varrego. He said that even if ali the charges alleged against the Government were praYed, he would still vote for them. \Ve do not \VOndel' at that because his brother--

The SPEAKER: Order!

::\Ir. BURROWS: The Secretary for Rail­ways, in that mixeJ metaphor for which he is nwre rernarkable tban good taste or generosity, said hon. mernbel's on this side were like a cuttle-fish c.,,·ering up its tmcks. Jnst fancy a cuttle-fish covering up tracks it is supposed to make in the water ! However, the simile of the cuttle-fish cannot be applied to any member on this side. It can, however, be appliect to the Govern­ment, and with m or,~ particular force to the Secretary for Railways. A cuttle-fish, though reported to be very strong-I believe one of less than 12 stone wonld crush :cny of the old inmates of Dunwich, or the indigent, who are getting ?is. a wc>ek, and mangle them and suck their life­blood--is not a brave fish. \Vhen attacked, instead of hcing its antagonist, it discharges a

184 Address in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Repl_y.

Xo wonder that with such a Minister the Govern­ment are in the hole they are. However, I will let the :Yiinister for Railways alone for the present. The Treasurer denied the statement made Ly the leader of the Opposition, that the Treasurer had received £!J5, 000 more than he expected from the :Federal GO\ ernment; but what is the use of denyin..r that? He admitted tha-t the Treasmer had received £300,000 less than he expected from the various departments. This was acknowledged in the Telcnraph of the 30th July last, but the whole thing is self­evident. I was surprised to note that the Treasurer referred to the fact that be had been approached hymen who wished to purchase our

d>trk, filthy, objectionable matter, and, thus screening iteelf, scuttles awa,·. (Opposition laughter.) The department of the :Secretary for Railways returned £20!1,000 less than was estimated. Instead of bravely being the situation, and attempting to justify his posi­tion, hA discharged a streak of objectionable matter, hoping thereb)' to escape himself. He was told last yc-u by the hon. member for \Voothakata-who has forgotten more than the Minister ever knew about railways-that be would not get the revenue he expected. I am glad to see that his tactics were so repugnant to J\linisterial supporte-rs even, that bv a unanimous resolution some of the objectionable matter was -expungPd from the records of the House. It is nnt any m>•mber of the Opposition, but the l\[inister himself, who is the cuttle-fish, other­wise known :>s the dPvil-fisb. As Antony in:mi­·cally said in his omtion over the dead body of Oresa.r, "And Brntw;;; was an honourable n1an." The ::\linister for Railways attempted to assassi­nate the reputations of hon. members on this side of the House, yet we, when referring to him, must say, "the honourable member for Bulloo," _ ·or "the Honourable Minister for Railways." 1

Or, to slightly alter a further portion of the same oration, we might say that yesterday the Secre­tary for Rail ways stood before the world as the champion debater of the Government-

1

raihvttys. :Yo\v, cannot any 1nan who can see ' through g-la,s, or is not stone blind, see through

the whole thing? Doee it not prove clearly that this syndinte which was prepared to buy our railways knew that they could run them at a profit, and that the individual ho would

! purchase them had no confidence in the Govern-

:Xow lies he there, And none so poor to do him reverence.

(Laughter.) Became, without one dissentient voice, somP of the vile insinuations he made were ordered to be expunged from the records of the House. The hon. gentleman did not mention any member on this side as having been guilty of mi,&ppropriation of mor.ey. He could not do so, and, therefore, he attacker] people outside the Chamber who could not defend themselves. If the hon. member, .i'IIr. McJ\Iaster, were here I would ask him wonld it Le fair, if a member on his nwn side of the House had robbed him or "diddled" him out of £400 or £iJ00, if he accu,ed eYery individual member on that oide of being a thief. :For that was what was practically said by the Secretary for Hailwaye. \Ybenever he speaks, this same bumptious individual takes a delight in trying to n,ake other hon. members appear small, but unhappily, or happily, he "Ldls in the soup" every Lirne. He was referring to the increase of railway rates, having been increat:>ed first by :13 per cent. and afterwards by another f>O per cent., aLd he said it was beyond the capacity of the hon. member for Bowen to calcu­late how mucb the actual increase was. He said it was R3 per cent., and evidentl~T thought it was so. As a matter of fact, it is 99!,- per cent. I will just give an example. Sup[J8sing the original ratt of lOO.s. for a gjyen dista.nce was increased by 33 per cent. That would be 133s. ; .)0 per cent. on top of that would be 199~. That is an increase of 99~ per cent. To sho"' that the individual who con!pilecl these

fJg·nr1 -s fo'r thtJ l\lini~t2r for Rail M

[0·30 p.m.J w<.ty;; knew what he was about, I will make another quctc.tion from

the speech of that hon. gentlen1an. I-!e said- 1

rnw first rise i_n the rates to BO\YCU from Tfang:nratta was:; per cent., afterward~ there 'ints a 1lse o£ :JO per cent., wbieh makes fl7 per eent. as against the llon. 1nember's 83 ller cent.

And I will further prow the incapacity of the 1\Iinister, or the absurdity of his arithmetic. Alluding to the statement of the hon. member for Bow en, that a n1an "\Vns a n1en1ber of a family of six, two brothers and three sisters," he said that, according- to the hrm. merr:her for Bow en, two and three made six instead of five. N0w, if a n1an i~ a member of a f:tn1ily of two brothers lLlld three sisters, he must be one of the family, and that would rnake six in the family.

ment? Undoubtedly so. You don't find syndi­cates putting their money into concerns and running them at a loss of, say, £209,000. No; they wish to make money out of them ; and they felt confident that if they had our railways they could and would make them pay; and I am surprised at the Treasurer placing that fact before the House, for it only tells against him­self. Then the Treasurer ennmerated the delJt per head of the various States, and he bad to admit that Queensland was the heaviest indebted -owing chiefly to the extra\ agance of the present Government. Against that he sets our rail ways ; but, most astonishing to relate, the hon. member who spoke shortly after him, and who said he was going to support the Govern­ment, said that onr railways belonged to the mortgagees. And the hon. member-Dr. Garde-was quite right; and he further said that if they were in the bands of sensible men that they would pay, and no doubt they would. I regret that the hon. member is not here now, for if he were I would ask him to vote for this amendment, which, if carried, will be the means of gi.ving us a chance to get sensible 1nen to run our railways at a profit. Instead of replying to arguments, the Treasurer claimed that he had been absolved at the last election from all that had been done before, nnd he also claimed that no charge could be made c•xcept in connection with what had nccurred since the last election. But what sort of an election was it? How many voted ? vVe find that no less than 30,000 males were disfranchised in this Stttte, as well as everv fen1ale. So what sort of a representative Gov~rnment are they? They don't represent the people at all. As a matter of fact; their return is accounted for by the fact that some men had two Yotes, and one man had no less than seventeen votes, and be recorded them all in favour of the Ministerial candidatPs. I have been very much snrprisEd at the attitude of hon. members oppo­site, but Ctt nothing so much as the attitude and remarks of the hon. member for Dalby. That hon. member has stated on more than one occasion that he disapproves of land being alienated from the State-that he believes that the land is the property of the people-and yet he tells us that he disapproves of a land tax. It is hard to think that any individual who believes that the land is the property of the people could make such,, mistake. \Ve on this side approve of a land tax for good reasons. The hon. member for Dalby kn~ws perfectly well that it is thr- expenditure of public money and the increase of population that adds to the value of land, and it follows that he must naturally support a land tax if he is honest enough to say so, because it means taking a portion of that which the robber takes from the people. 'i'hat is the bogey raised for the

[4 AUGUST.] Addi'ess in Rep1y. 185

edific>ction or obfuscation of the farmer; but I dun't think it willla'•t much longe:·. \\'hen they see that if they had a land tax they would not have to pay an incorne tax on inconte'" derived from the land, but that the largest part of the tax would be clrawn from the more valuable properties in the State-for instance, the Com·ier block-they will regard the land tax as a boon-hail it as a relief from the income tax. But I have some excu,;e to make for the hon. member for Dalby. The hon. member, as a matter of fact, told us that he did not have ·confidence in the present Government. K ow, there have been many :Premiers in this House who would scorn to accept the support of an indiddual of that kind; hut the Go­vernment of to-day are in the position that they must accept the support of ev·ery indi­vidual by hook or crook, or they will find them,elves "cast out into outer darkness." The hon. member for Bulimba complained about the timher industry havin,; been neglected through federal legislation, and I arn sorry that the bon. member for JHoreton is not hem to give us his views to-night. I would like to hear him on the timber industry. And is the hon. member for Bulirnba aware of the fact that a man in the employ of the Government has done more to injure the timber industry of this State than any legislation has? [An honourable member: And he is doing it yet.] Yes ; he is doing it yet, and there is a man who has had ten times more experience than this Government employee has, who is better qualified to speak on the timber industry, and he says that Queensland timbers are equal to any in the world. If he complains of the injury done to the timber industry, he has cause of complaint against the Government, and should vote for the amendment moved by the leader of the Opposition. The hon. member also complained that the Govern­ment did not educate the people to grow ducks. [Mr. B~\RNES: That is not correct.] He stated that, in his opinion, the hen and the egg should go hand in hand. No doubt, barns and chickens should go together. The hon. member is vv-ell qualified to speak on a matter of ·that kind, and I hope he will vote with us on the amend­ment. ['\Ir. BARNES: I would not he on any side you are on. I would be careful to avoid that.] If th9 hon. member came to our oide he would be on the side of rig-hteousne,:s, and would be trying to do something to develop the resomces of the country, and put the ihunces straight. The Premier stated that when he was at places where His ExcRllency was present he could not talk politics, but made a few jocular remarks. I was present at one of those places, and in order to make sure of what the hon. g·entleman said I turned up the columns of the lY<wthcrn llfincJ'. I find that the few jocular remarks occupy two and a-half columns. and they consisted of politics from beginning to end. At the luncheon he told the people of Charters Towers that they had two excellent representatives in the Upper Hnuse-:\[r. ,J. Deane and 1\Ir. E. D. Miles. [J\Ir. BARNES: Hear, hear!] The hon. member knows very well that they do nut represent Charters Towers, and if they were to go before tne electors they would be rejected. [Mr. B.~RXES: You had a pretty tight run last time.] I ~ad more of a majority than the Secretary for Railways scored altogether. VVhen the .Premier said they had such men to represent them in the Up]Jer Houoe. he was stating· what he knew was not true.

The Sl:'EAKER: Order ! :\Ir. BURHOIVS : They never represented

Charters Towers in any portion of this Parlia­ment. They represent the Government; and the people of Charters Towers hav-e refused

repeatedly to accept their nominees. The hon. member for Toowong also indulged in a little oratory, and during the couroe of his remarks he said, speaking of the Local Authorities Act, it was owing to the action of the representatives from the goldfields, that the valuation clauses were pasQ.ed, 1\'[r. Miles's aniendn1ent coming too late in the session to make an alteration possible. l am sorry the hon. member is not present, hecanse I would like to refresh his memory. Regarding the valuation clauses, we were respoi1~ ·-ible to a certain extent for a portion of them, but only some portions of our proposals were acceptd, and other proposalR were accepted which, to a great extent, nullified the effect of our proposals. Mr. Miles absolutely moved no amendment at all on the Bill, but he did speak on an amendment. He "aid a great deal of time had been spent over the Bill, and the result had been to make it a very good Bill, indeed. He agreed to the clause, and said he trusted the Government would bring in an amendment this session.

The SPEAKER : Order ! Mr. BURROWS: I was astonished to find

that the Premier claimed the votes at Charters Towers which were cast for our opponents. It is a pecnliar fact that prior to the last election the Premier said there were only two parties in this House-the straight-out Ministerialist and the straight-out Labour party. The Northe1·n iWiner, of the 12th March, has a report of the declaration of the roll at Charters Towers, and gives the figures for each candidate and the interest in which each candidate stood, and if hon. members. look at that paper they will see this: "Burrows (Labour), Dunsford (Labour), Paul (Independent), St. Ledger (Independent)." The Premier claims those independent votes, but m the Northe;·n N!ine1· those candidates were not even said to bP Independent Ministerialists. \Vhat are we to infer but that the electors on that occasion-a large number of them-were deluded into .-oting for men they thought were opposed to the Government? The Premier also said that when he was at Croydon he spoke like a supporter of 1\lr. Browne's. l\7 hat sort of attitude is that to adopt? Is that not deluding the people? Can the hon. gentleman say the leader of the Opposition ever went about speak­ing on a public platform like a supporter of the leader of the Government~ l\ ever. He never attempted to delnde the puhlic in any way ; he always said he wa; oppcsecl to the Government. \Vhen we go about the country we speak honestly and say exactly what we mean. \I. e do not say we are going to snpport the Premier; we say we are going to :;upport measures we believe will have fnr their object the advancement of Queensland, and usually such measures are not introduced by the Government. The Premier also said he saw no unemployed. I will not 'ay that he was deluding the people with the intention of deceiving them, because l do not know whether he sow them or not, bnt to say that there are not large numbers of unem­ployed in the K orth is to delude the people. As a matter of fact. when on the Towers thP Premier said that at Crovdon there were not sufficient miners on the field, and they were in need of more. Now, we got a telegram from Croydon immediately afterwards contradicting that, and saying that there were more miners there than there v, a• .. work for, and advising miners from Charters Towers not to come over. Of course the Premier may be excused to some extent, 1Jecause during the whole of his tour he tonk the very greatest care not to address the el8ctors on a public platform except in his own electorate, and then he was very sorry for it. His knowledge of the state of the coun­try was gained at mayoral receptions, at a time

186 Address tn Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] AddJ•ess in Reply.

when champagne was on, and we do not find unemployed coming up with £1 for a ticket for a banquet. If the hon. member wished to find the unemployed he could have found them. I have found any amount on Charters Towers, and any amount in •rownsville. At the time the hon. member was speaking there were hundreds in Tuwnsville getting State relief. That is one of the rh1Wns why I have no confidence in this Government. l would like to thank the Premier, however, for the action he took, in conjunction with the ban. member for Herbert, to tm\ e excised from Hcmsard those objection­able remad<s, or a portion of them, that were made by the Secretary for Hail ways. \V hen the Premier Wild at Cairns, I find, if the Press -reports are correct, th:l.t he was inj ndicious enough to offer £60,000 to the people there if they would bring Chinamen to grow cane. [The PREo!IER: That is noG true.] Well, the papers say so. They claim they had a shorthand writer present-and thP only shorthand reporter present -and that the report is correct. I hope the hou. gentleman did not say so, and I accept his denial. But there .is another thing- I would like to ask the hon. gentleman, or he can deny it if he thinks tit. It is about that famous "bun struggle" that was held in the Centennial Hall, when the bon. gentleman told the publin that he would rather support Reid than Barton. Now, what sort of a p01sition would the sugar industry occupy then ? [Mr. LERINA : It wonld be no better off.] X o better off. Why, .Mr. Re id said he would rather see wallabies in the canefields than kanakas. If the Premier takes up that attitude, it means that he would rather damn the sugar industry than have white men there. [The PRR}I!ER: I never said so.] Again the papers are wrong. ::\Ir. Reid would give no snbsidy to the sugar industry, and the hon. gentleman knows that. \Veil. here is another thing that I would like to hear the Premier deny. In the paper it was stated that the Yote for :Ministerial elections last ye"r was £50,000. [The PRE}!IER: I never said so. \V here is that reported?] It is in the Co,,rier. LMr. KERR : That appeared in the Courie~·, but I think it is a misprint. He was speaking of the number of votes cast.] I was thinking that if it were so they cost over £1 a vote, and that was rather a large price to pay. I am glad to hear that is not su. \V ell, here is a thing that is not a printer's error---a thing that cannot be denied. :For a number of years the t+overnment have pursued a volicy of patronis­ing those pap8rs which snpport them. [The PnEllliER: They support all the papers.] :Xow, lately instructions have been issued that certain papers only are to get Government advertise­ments, and those papers are the papers which continually support the Government; and the papers which have the moral courag-e to denounce the Government a re not to get a "bob's" worth of Government advertisements. \Vbat is that but political patronage? \Vhat is that but using money out of the Treasury to placate or snhoidise their supporters ? Is that a fair or an honest thing? If a man came to me anc! said, "\V ill you support me and I will give you £100 worth of advertisements?" I should say it was bribery and corruptinn. [The l'REmEl\: That statement is inc~rrc~ct alsu.] Do I undm·,tand the bon. gentleman to ''ay that it is incorrect? [The PRE~!IER: I say the Government has given no such instructions.] [:\Ir. LEsiXA : \Vhat about the C"irns and Trinit,l/ Ti,;es '] [Mr. BARBER: \Vbat about the Ban<labe1'[! S'nr !] And what et bout the l.Iaryhorough papers? The officers there say they have received such notices. [Labour members: Hear, hear!] It is very strange that now the hon. gentleman should deny this. Like the hon. member for Carpen-

taria, who, when juggling with figm·es, said that they could be made to prove anything-, and then tried tu prove that black was white, and, of course, he failed. [i\Ir. BAHXES: Y uu cannot upset his figures.] They do not require any more upsetting than they have got already. I should think that. after the speech of the hon. member for Flinders, the hon. member for Carpentaria is ashamed of his figllres-as much ashamed almost as the Secretm·y for Rail ways .,f his speech. Here is" mcttter that I have occasion to ha,-e a modest growl oYer. In this Speech, after His };xcellency's preliminaries~and I think it is as well that I should say here that I have a great regard for that individmtl. I feel a greater regard for the preqent Governor than I had for any of bi,, predecessors. I do not suppose he cares much about that, and I do not suppo2e his predecesRors care much either. But I care sufficient to acknowledge that he has done his bAst, in my opinion, to make himself coversant with the needs of the community, and he has, moreover, shown himself to be a man. I shall never forg-et the courtesy w hi eh he showed to a member on this side when he was ill. Speaking of oversea mail steamers the Speech says--

::\Iy advism<. are resolved to spare no efforts to have Brisbane made a port of cz~ll.

This is a national thing. Everything with respect to Brisbane is a national

[10 p.m.] thing. The GovPrument seem to regard Brisbane as Queensland.

[An honoumble membex : Do you want steamers to call at Charters Towers~] They might gr> to RockhampGon or Townsville. I remembe1· with regard to this particular port of Bri;bane, which is regarded as the hub of the universe by the Government, that last session the Govern­ment stated that they were going to introduce a measure to raise £10,000 by the imposition of more equitable port dues ; but they did not do it. \Vhy '? Because the traders of Brisb.tne did not like it, and they told the Government not to do it, and they did not do it. Thus they lost £10,000, the amount contributed by 20,000 poll-taxers. Twenty thousand poor individuals have been robbed, possibly of the last 10 " bob" they p~ssessed, in order to relieve the Brisbane merchants of more equitable port due.,. I hrwe lost confidence in the Government, owing to their methods of bolstering- up Brisbane and the South at tbe expens0 of thr North. At one time the Premier himself objented to that •·•)rt of thing, and he stated on one occasion that he thought the North Lad been robbed to sub­sidise the South. It is the same now: if ':tnything, it is worse, and that is one reason \vhy I am going- to vote for the amendment. The Speech goes on to s .y that "in spite of the increased taxation imposed last session . . . our revenue still falls below our expenditure." I "m afraid it always will fall below expen­diture so long as the present party occupy the Treasury benches. X otwithstanding the fact that the Government have poll-taxed the destitute, the reyenue still falls below expenditure. But what have they done in regard to themselves·~ They ha Ye taxed the poor unfortunate indi,·idnal who, perhap>, doe· not earn 10 "bob" in a year, and compelled him to pay the tax, even if he hits to pawn some article of furniture to do so; but they have arranged with the Commissioner that members of the Ministry and members of the Legisla­ture shall be exempt from the" tax. \Vhen my colleague and I g-ot back to Charters Towers, we found that there was an array of experts under this poll tax Act, and that they were charging­lOo. tid., £2 2s., and£:) 3s. for filling up forms. \Vhat was the reason~ The reason was that.

Arldress in Repl;y. [4 AUGUST.] Address Ln Reply. 187

the forms were so complicated that men could not understand them, and they had to emJ?loy expert assistance and pay high fees for their service. Many persons came to my colleague and myself, and we were kept going for a long time, doing our best to alleviate the distress. Oue individual asked us if we would fill up a form for a Chinaman, but we referred him to an expert. But we never refused a white man. \V e filled up all the forms that were brought to us. ::Yiany men explained to us how it was they could not pay the poll tax, and I think if the ::\Iinister had heard them he would have removed such an objectionable and iniquitous clause from the Act. This poll tax has been hedged around with objectionable provisions and obnoxious regulations for the purpose of making the poll tax stink in the nostrils of the people. They want to get the people disgusted with the income tax. The Government did not intend to bring in a workable income tax, but they brought in an objectionable measure because the Labour party have a platform which includes an income tax, and hedged it around with all sorts of vexatious and inquisitorial provisions. The hon. member for Moreton, speaking in Brisbane some little time ago, said-

The effeet of the present tax would be that the imposi­tion of the jncome tax proper would be }Jostponecl tor ten or twenty years. "What does that mean? Does not that conclu­sively prove my assertion that this was a deliberate attempt to make this measure as objec~ionabl~ as possible, in order to get the people drsgusted with the tax? It reminds me of an old Chinaman once in Victoria. He started dairying. He had a cow in the bail to milk, and tied her tail to the fence. During the milking operat10ns the cow bolted and broke half her tail off. The Chinaman was fined, and he excused himself by saying, " Him tail too lotten." The ::\Iinistry have provided that the Act shall end just prior to the general election. Then they can go before the electors and say, "This is not our. Act, this is what the I,abour party had in their platform ; we will sling it out, 'him tail too lotten,' we are not going to introduce it this year." That is the reason they made it so ohjectionable ; tbat is one reason w by I have no confidence in this Government. The rotten part is the poll tax provision. 'l'he allegory is a good one. \Vhat is the poll tax but a device for milking the people, and what is a bail but a clevice to extract milk from the cow. Here is a surprising thing. The Speech Rays :'there is no reason to doubt that our strengtl~ IS more than equal to onr burden." If that is so, where is the reason for this poll tax, and where the reason for the Secretary for Hail ways to penalise those poor old individuals who are on the verge of starvation, and take awav their paltry iis. a week? Here is another gem from t.he Sp.eech .: "\1~e have reason to hope that the tinancral difficulties brought about by a variety •Jf canses, will, at no distant date, be removed." \V ell, I hope they will. 'l'he variety of cames which have brought about these difficulties are the variety of indi:riduals sitting on the Trc e,sury benches, and I smcerely hope that they will be removed very quickly. \Ve are asked to assist the Goverument in opposing all unreason­able demand.s made upon them. \Veil, if this e"mendment is carried, I will do my best in that direction. I will assist them in resisting the demands of the hon. member for Brisbane X orth in getting another £600 000 sunk in the Brisbane River, and many other demands of a similar character. \Ve are told that among other proposals will be one which will require mnch patriotic self.sacritice on tbe part of hon. members, and that is a Bill to diminish the number of members. I think the member-

ship of this Assembly might well be reduced, provided it wa,; the number of city members who were reduced. l agree with the hon. member for \V arrego that Brisbane and electorates dose to the seat of Government and Parliament could do \Vithout rnernbers and tJuffer no inconvenience. They could get their Wdllto attended to and their wrongs redressed without the ;Lid of a member. The Government say another reasou fur this Bill is econo1ny. If we can point out other ways in which they can saYe a great deal more money, would it not be acceptaule to the Government? I may mention the travelling expenses of the judges, which amount to nearly as much as their salaries. 'l'hat £18,000 a year might be reduced to £0,000, and that alone would save more money than a reduction in the number of members. In addition to that, there are numuers of other ecunomies that have been enumerated. \Vhat has caused the Government to come to the conclusion that the number of member., should be-reduced? 'l'hcy say that the Customs, Defence, and Post and Telegraph departments have been taken over by the Federal Government, but when we come to legislation affecting those departments we find, ao; pointed out by the mernber for Bowen, that it averag-ed in five years only one measure. I think it would be more advisable if this House brought itself up to date. \Ve are a long way behind in industrial leg-islation and measnres of domestic legislation. \Vhy should we not make up lost ground? "With respect to the redistribution of seats in proportion to popula­tion, I will admit there are some anomalies, but who is re>ponsible for them? \Vho is responsible but the party at present in power? Here is Mackay, represented by two Ministerialists, with 2, 13fi voters, while W oolloongabba, a Labour constituency, has 2, Hl-1 electors, or fifty-eight more, and only one member. Ipswich has two members, who until recently were always J\iinis­terialists, ,.nd the Government did thmr bPst to "nobble" the new member. It was the Govern­ment's own action which lost them that seat. At the time the electomtes were made up, both those seats were .Hinisterial. Tha-.. constituency has 2,262 voters, while :Fitzroy, a Labour consti­tuency with 2,3158 ,·oters, or lOii more, has only one IneJnOer. One Labour 1nen1ber represents more v~tes than two J\linisterialsts. I do not wish it to be inferred from that that I think representation should be in pm portion to popula­tion. The hou. member for Oxley said he was in fa·:our of a reduction of !Eembers, and to prove it he quoted a lot of figures to show clearly and conclusively that, as population increased, so had the number of members increased, and he advanced that as a reason why our numbers should be reduced. It was an argu­ment that might be used hy an individnal opposed to a reduction of members. \Vith regard to the measure to extend the duration of P:1rliaments, I do not wonder at the Government wishing to do this. They do not like facing the electors or Parliament. \Ve have evidence of that every year. Every recesc. they fly to their homes; they do not go upon the public platform and explain cheir actions, and they delay meeting Parliament a.s long as they can. I shall op[J08e that measure very strongly. \Vith regard to the propo,al to confer the franchise on women, they say it has be8n postponed in the belief that they did not desire it. I am reminded of a srmile given by Mr. Miller the other night at a meeting in the Trades Hall. He said Ministers were like a bov who had a lot of appl~' and did not wish to be called greedy. He said he would give some to any who wanted them, but he also said those who asked should not. >:ret them, and those who did not ask did not want them. That i;; the position of the Govern­ment with regard to the women of this State.

188 Address in Rep1y. [ASSEMBLY.] .Acld·ress tn Rep1p.

Although 37,000 of them are in favour of female Huffrage, they did not grant it because they believed the women did not clesire it. I am pleased to notice in the Speech the statement that this innovation is likely to "have beneficial results when exercised directly in the sphere of good." Tha,t is what we on this side have been con~ tending for for yettro, but we c'>uid never induce the Government to come round to our way of thinking. The light now begins to break through the da,rkness, and their vi~ion iR becoming son1e~ what clearer. Having occupied more time than I intenrled, I will touch very briefly on one or t\vo other n1atters. 'fhe untnerited neglect of mining by the Government still continues. The increase of IJroduction last vear was not owing to any special efforts put ·forth by the Government. There are many things the Go­vernment might do for the miner. \Ve had an instance the other day of a miner falling down :1 shaft, being pulled off by a telephone wire. That man lost his life. \Ve have an inspector conducting the case. I think the inspector should be on his trial. He should have seen that the wire was safe. This occurred through a bucket spinning. In the report of last year Mr. :Fryar published :1 cut showing a device to prevent the spinning of buckets. At Charters Towers, mines 2,500 feet deep are worked hy a bucket, and I think the inspector should he instructed to compel the owners either to use safety-cages or a safety device. The hon. mem­ber for Cook questioned the accuracy of the statement of the hon. member for }'itzroy that certain men held 40,000 acres of coal-bearing country in the Central district, and said they did not hold a solitary foot of land. K ow, in the Rockhampton Bulletin of 1st .July, there is published the half-yearly report of the Mammoth Anthracite Coal tleam Company, in which it is ~tated that the directors have acc1uired country, 2 miles south of the Central Railway, 33 miles long by 4 miles wide, "nd aggregating about 40,000 acres. 'fhose people are trying to float this mine in London. If it is true, as the bon. member for Cook said, that they have not a soli­tary foot of land---[Mr. J. HA3IILT01'1: I said they only occupy it temporarily for prospecting.] I want to draw the attention of the Secretary for Mine.- to this. The directors of this com­pany say they have a man in London trying to float the mine, and that they have every prospect of a very successful flotation before m~,nY months. I ask the ban. gentleman to see that investors are not swindled by men who, according to the hon. member for Cook, do not hold a 'olitary foot of ground except for temporary purposes. [Mr. ,T. HAilllLTOX: They will haw a preferential claim for a lease.] I .>hould like to say a word or two with regard to the Bill for the prevention of gohl­stealing. I notice tbat an hon. member in another Chamber, speaking on the subject, said, "I do not ]mow whether hon. members realise what the facilities are for gold-stealing." Anyone who knows anything at all about how goldmining operations are c.trried on, especially in btrge companies, will know that it is practically impmsible to steal golcl. JYien going out of a mine have to change every stitch, and wear different clothes home from those they use undergTound. I am going to oppose that Bill all I know. It is admitted that under the existing law there are provisions under which a man can be arrested and called to account for any property in his pos>"",sion. But they are not satisfied "ith that,

and one hon. rnen1ber in ''another [10'30 p.m.] place," who spoke in support of this

measnre the other day, was in favour of voting for doing· away with trial by jury and giving magistrates summary jurisdiction. I will strongly oppose the passing of a Bill

of that kind. 'Vith regard to this Coupon Bill which has been promised, I m''Y say that there are three different Bills intro­duced on behalf of the trading community in Brisbane, some of the members of whieh were so ably exposed by the ban. member for Clermont the other night, especially with re>(ard to adulteration. Now, this Uoupon Bill simply means an invalidating Bill. Last session we had two or three validating· Bills -Bills to legalise certain illegal actions which had been taken by vo.rions persons in and around Brisbane. Now we find that certain members of the trading community have entered into an agreement with the Coupon Uom­panv, and, finding that they are not getting the 'benefit they expected, they ask the Govern­ment to pass this Act. I have no sympathy with coupon companies; I regard them as parasites on the trading community and on the consumer ; but the remedy was in their own bands. It almost serves them right. In Charters Towers, when this company came there we exposed them and hunted theno from the place, and now the merchants have their own coupons, and give 5 per cent. discount. Daking, Smith, and Co. give a coupon for every 6d. spent with them. The same with Carse and Co., and Foxlee, and these two firms exchange each other's coupons and redeem them, and I say that is unfair to these people who do business in that fashion, because people in Brisbane have bern so foolish as to run their necks into a noose. However, I shall con­sider the matter when the Bill comPs before the House if this vote is not carried. 'Vith regard to the referendum for the Bible in State schools, I find that those who were instrumental in agi­tating for thiB some time ago are absolutely opposed to it now. I could quote the words of a 1fethodist parson in Charters Towers, who says he will work all he can against it. The hon. member for Oxley says that be is in favour of the referendum, and I am in favour of the referendum, but not on such a question as this at election times, for it. will onl)l serve to stir up religious animosities. I believe that is the re, son wby it will be introduced-~to stir up religious animosities at election time. I will give some instances where the Government would do well to take a referendum-a referendum on the question of reducing the judges' travelling expenses; for the abolition of the "Lncinda"; for the abolition of the Upper House; and on the question of one adult one vote, with this proviso: that tbe definition of "residence" should be the same as in the Fedeml Act. These are measures that I recommend the Government to take a referendum on, and if they do they will ha\·e my support and the support of many hon. members on this side. The Speech says-

Everything depends on the industry and enterprise ot the people, seconded hy the ·wise legislation it is i.n your pO\\"er to ado-pt and the judiciou~ as~istance it 1s in your povrcr to atrorrl

As we cannot expect wiee legislation from this Government, that is another reason why I shall have great pleasure in tinpportingthe amendn1ent.

.i\:Ir. CAMP BELL (11Ioreton) : I regret exceed­ingly the late hour at which 1 ha\·e to make some remarks with regard to the nuestwn before the House, and I intend to be as brief as possible. I would like to say at the outset that I regard this motion of the leader of the Opposition as sheer waste of valuable time. He must know, if he is credited with that common sense that is attributed to him, that there is no hope of carrying this motion against the Government ; so what h the nse of prolong­ing the debate to such an extent and causing· trouble outside? Nevertheless, I do not think I can blame myself very much if I take this opportunity, which everyone else seems to

Ad,!ress in Repl,y. [4 AUGUST.] Addl'ess in RPp(y. 18[}

avail themselves of, and have a little to say on ~everal points. [Honourable members: Hear, hear!] As far as the Go,·ernment are concerned, I see my way to support them, because I believe that they are doing all that possibly can be done under the r.dverse circumstances to brino- the State out of its difficulties, and I believe that it is owing to the courage and the strength they have manifested that the country will be with them from 'this right out. I think the most effective answer to the general critici,m has been the opinion publicly expressed by the hon. me.mber for Clermont. At Clermont aml at Gympie he told the people that it was a very good job that the Labour party or the Tr ,,des Hall, or whate,·er you lik<> to call it, were not in power, for they would have to do exactly what the Government had done. [Government mem­bers : Hear, hear!] There was no other course for them to take. Criticism of that kind is 'luite refreshing, and carries the conviction to one's mind that the hon. member for Cler­mont, if he feels inclined to be serious-and he is not often that way inclined--possesses ability and perspicacity of no mean order. I will skip over some introductory matter and get to the question that affects me most-with regard to the trade of the 8t'lte. I do not hold with the pessimistic and calamity-howling speech that the bon. member for Rockhampton rr>ade the other night in supporting the leadu of the Opposition, in which he said there: had been great extravagance, and pointed out that this State was on the verge of repudiation-that we would be unabl~ to pay our intereot bill, and so forth. I take 1t that the assets of the State in the shape of our railways, are sufficient' of themselves to pay the whole of the national debt-[ An honourable member: \Vhen pro­perly managed.]-and they would pay much better if they were in the hands of pri­vate individuals. [An honourable member: You say sell them, then?] Yes, sell them. [An honourable member: Then that shows that you h,we no confidence in the Government. J ::'<ot at all. No man can deny that the admini­stration of the railways through a Commis­sioner is not on the same plane as it would be if in the hands of private individuals; for every one of the seventy-t;vo members here is prepared to try and compel hun to do somethinu for desti­tute men. I have done it myself, wher: I thought men had been badly treated. The Commissioner cannot really do his duty while this is going on; no man can when he is in a po::.jtion where political pre'8ure is brouo;ht to bear on him. I think the common sense of the country will be with me in a matter of that kind. I am sorry for the unfortunate Commissioner, because I know what members of Parliament will he pre­pared to do for their constituents. Several hon. members intimate that they had ne,·er tried to influence the Commissioner in the interests of constituents. I can only say I have :seen a great n1:1ny me m be rH at the Con1mit<sioner's office. The main point I wish to reach is the timber industry. Some little time ago the Courier did a useful public service in drawino­attention to the fact that a certain quantity of timber was being imported fr'Jm America for the ostensible reason that Queensland was n'ot able to p~oduce timber good enongh to build railway carnages or even trucks. Last se,sion I asked the Secretary for Rail ways a series of questions with regard to the importation of a lot of teak from India. They will be found on page 254 of "Votes and Proceedings" for 1U02. I will read the questions and the replies given-

1. Is it true that Indian teak and American pitch pine are being imported for use in the railway work­shops_? I11~ian t_eak is being imported, but, so far, American p1tch pme has not been imported.

2. ·what qnantity of each ha-; been ortlered, on wlws.e r~·rotnmcndi-ition. ana on whose nnthor\ty? (a) 6~.:300 ~uper1icial fpet of teak : (l,) Obief Mechanicall·~llginPer's l'econunendation; (C') Commissioner's authority.

8. "'hn.t vnrpose,, are they required for? Por car­riage hn1ldin~.

-.1. "\Vh~- was matnretl, properly seasoned local timher not used for the·-e pnrpo::-es :- Because it is uot so suitable for the purpose.

5. For how wa.nv \'ears l1as unseasoned local timber been mat le to ser\Te the purpose hitherto~ Xo un­seasoned locnl timber has been hitherto used for tllis pUl'pOSC.

6. 'Yhat w1ll teak and pitch pine cost landed at lp:o;wich in the sizes in which it h; being imported, per 100 l'eet; also the total cost of each lot? Teak costs about £214s. 7d. per lOO supjjrficialfeet. The total cost of each lot is not :yet availablP-.

7. "\Yhat will it cost to resaw, and what is the r.;:;ti­mated perc::ntage of loss in resawing? 'reak, about ;3s. 6<1. per lOO :snvcrficial feet; Ios:-; in resawing, abont 15 per eent.

b. \Yill he cause prompt inquiry to he made from rompetent anthorities, outside of the Railway Depart­ment, as to the suitability or properly matured an<i seasoned local timbers for ·1ll the pm·pose::; of the department~ I haxe made inquiries, and find the pr~u~­tice_is the same in the otl1er States as here with regard to tne u~e of teak in the eonstrnction of railway car­riages.

In asking these questions I had the ebject of stopping any further importation. I harl heard about American pitch pine, which has since been imported, that it was on order. ::'\otwithstand­ing· the care taken, the order did go for this pitch pine. I wish to emphasise the high importance to (tneensland that our timbt<l' industry should have the greatest possible hPlp at the hands of the Government. [Honourable members : Hear hear!] The Railway Department is the largest using department we have for timber in the State. They have it in their hands to help materially, or damn effectively, the chancPs we have of an export trade for our timbers. In the year 1901 I went on a mission to Melbourne \vith the object of getting ''duty put on timber reaching _\ustrali<t from outside. I returned from that mission thinking I had succeeded ; but, unfortunately, those hopes were not fulfilled. One hon. member, who pledged himself to it, "ratted" on the proposal, and by one vote it was lost. Now we have the spectacle of Xew Ze:l­land, that dared to .stand out of the federation, having an open door to every port in Australia while_ he_r duty agai:>st us is outrageously high: and It IS not possible to send timber to that country. [An honourable member : \Vill our timber serve the same purposes as the New Zea­land-butt<>r-boxes, for instance.] Yes ; ours is betterfor butter-boxes. Here is something from the BrisiJ(tnC Courier of the 2oth -Tune which I would lik" to read. It is more important than a great de.tl of the matter that has been spoken the last few nights on this particular question. There are 20,000 adults depending on eh is indus­try, and their livelihood is menaced by the notion of the Railway Department--

It has been found that on the 22nd of 1Iay last, the H.ailwa,y Department cleared at the Customs, ex "Jes­seric," from X ew York, 35,000 ~uperficia.l feet of Georu-ia, .i:Jiteh pine. "'

A reprt'''entative of the Col1 ,·ir:~· waited yesterday upon the Oommi:;:~ioner for Hailways,}Ir. J. F. Thallon. tO ask for information on the snbject. As usual, :.\Ir. Thal1on was perfectly candid. and yery courteously set about giving particulars of t.be transaction. The tiinhcr was ordered in October last for use in carrirtge building at the Ipswich workshops, the price being, laucle(l in Brisbane, £14 12s. 6d. per 1,000 superficial feet. :Jlr. Tballon, speaking in a general way, said that the Americun pine was imported for special vurposes, and was used in conjunction with Queensland woods. How~ ever, so that more detailed information might be given he sent tor Mr. Xutt, Chief :Mechanical J<;ngineer of the Railway Department, and a general conversation followed.

190 Address m Repl_y. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Rep(y.

:.Wr. Nutt, like :lh. Thallon, said that the American material was for a special purpose, and he added that some of the Queensland timber which hacl been used in carriage work had not 1lroved :satisfactory. The unsatis­factory result. Yir. rhallon explained. was not be('ause of any inherent inferiority of the Queensland wood, but because it had been put into work without being properly seasoned.

Our repre~entative suggested that that \YOUl!lmean dbhonest contractors and inefileient Government inspectors. Surely specifieation::: ior the construction of the carriages would provide fnr the use of timber properly seasoned.

:Jir. 'l'hallon said the implication \Vas not correct, inasmuch as the use of un!:'t:\1Soned timber was tlle 1·nle in Queensland, and its Hse in the railway work was in no way unusual. :So far as :Hr. Thallou's state­ments went, however, there was tlnality to this extent: r:t'hat Queensland timber had been employed largely in carriage building : that for certain portions of the carriages i.t was found nnsati$-i'a('tory on account of lack of durability and a t{~ndency to warp: that unseasoned timber w0uld not be sath•frwtory and would ha Ye the tendencies which he named : arid that the {~ueen~lanU timber used was never properly seasoned.

}Ir. Xutt then made the following statement :~-The American pine is importert. for u::;e 111 railway cul'j_-iages for special purposes (which he enumerated.). "The difference between it and Qneenslanrl pine," he said, "js that it is much h<·.lvier, more durable, and less lhtble to rot. Queensland pine i~ a soft white wooct, and this is a hard reddish wood fn1l of resin, and 1s often used for piles. It is qni.te diilerent from Qncenslanrl pine. \Ye have it for special purpose:::, ar.d it i~ used all over the \Yorldfor those purposes. :\at only that, but our experience of Queensland pine is that it rots and \Vill not stand. X early e\·er~· carriage we have taken into the shops we have had to rebuild. The Queens­land wood which might be used instead of the American is spotted gum, red gum, or iron bark, but the Queens­land hardwood twists nud warps. It is not reliable. I have not hatl a very lllng experienee of it, onl~r t\YO years, hut that is what I have found. We have carriages built by the Ashbury Company, ::nanchester, thirty years ago, and tlH ... wood in them is a~ l-'Onnd as it was then-that is teak. It bears ont my experience that there is no better wood for carriage bnilfting than teak."

}Ir. Xutt was nsked was he n1vare whether the hard­'vood of which he spoke as twisting and warping had been prope1·Iy seasoned before Ui<e, or had merely been 11ut to use in a green state? Upon that point he had no infm·mation. He added that in the workshops they made use ,)f cedar, silky oak, beau tree, and had latelr found a new wood-crows-foot elm. The American timber was in 40-feet lengths, and it was difficult here to get woods of that special size. It wax used for bottom sides. and Queensland hardwood had been tried. •· I can do nothing with the stuff.'' :.\Ir. Xutt said. "So donbt it is due to the \'i<:ty it is handled: it is not seasoned. We are getting a larg-e stock of timber at the Ipswich shops, which is being properly seasoned."

'i\ow, Y[r. 'i\utt practically admits that he is a newchum, and that he has only had some two years' experience in thiR colony, At the time the first order went "way for teak he could not have been more than twelve months here, so that then he was absolutely a newchum, and I want to say to-night, that our strong -Minister has not "hown the consideration for this vital industry that he should have done. I do not know the routine of the department, or whether these things wonld come under his notice. [Mr. GHANT : Has not the Minister control of all contracts·:] Yee, but it is a question whether these are contracte, or whether they are simply indent' sent away for timber. However, I take it that it only requires the attention of the Government to be called to the matter for them to make it impossible for :\Ir. ::'{ utt or any other person in the employ of the Government to commit a like mistake, because it is a Yerv serious mistake. The state­ment has been published to the whole worlct that we are unable in this colony to prodnce timber fit for purposes for which it has been used for the last thirty-five years. It has been left for Mr. 'i\utt to discmer, within twelve months of his arrival here, that our timber is absolutely useless for this purpose, and I submit it is a libel on our timbers. This colony has the very best

timber in the world for the purpose, and all that it wants is decent treatment. The trouble in the past has been that the department has tried to force down the prices at which they could buy, so that the timber which was growing in the tree last week is rushed through the sawmill this week, and is used next week in the work for which it was wanted. If Mr. l\utt had given the timber that he is condemnin,; the same oppor­tunity of seao;oning that he is giving the timber that hei., importing, it would be all right, bemtu,eit takes many months to get here, and I suppose it is prPtty well seasoned before it is put on board the ship. The Courier report' that he said that our pine has been used in a position similar to that in which he intends to use this imported pine, and that it had rotted there, but I say that it never has been used in ,nch a position. \Vhether ::\Ir. ::"rutt knows it or not, or whether he has been correctly reported or not, I say the thing is not true. The men who preceded Mr. Kutt in the department would not use pine in the under-structure of carri,ges. Hard wood would be used there. It is probable that the timber used has not been the timber that was specified, and some of it may have rotted or shown signs of deterioration; but I am quite certain that, if the Chief Mechanical ];ngineer had taken the trouble to keep his timber long enough beforehand and to see that he got the proper kind of timber, he would have only the highest encomiums to pass on our Queensland timbers. In support of that staten1ent, the Courie1· followed this up by interviewing the ,,ecretary of the Brisbane Tramways Company, by whom they were referred to the fore­man who has charge of this particular de­partment. Summed up, that article amounts to this: that they have discovered that our Queensland timbers are better for the pur­poses of tramcar construction than anythin;:; they can import. Now, is it not extra­ordinary that a new and privJ.te company, sotc speak, which has taken all sorts of care to find out what we have got, should discover that our timber is better than the imported article? The imported pine has rotted, and they ba ve taken it out and replaced it with Queensland kanri pine, than which there is no better timber in the world. A man who has been only two years in the colony, like Mr. Nutt, has no right to pass an opinion upon our timber. He knows nothing about it, but he supposes that it has not been properly seasoned. That is his only excuse, and it is no excuse under the circumstances. I submit that the experience of the Tramways Company is of great value in this connection, and it will tend to minimise the injury done by the unfortunate publicity that has been given to Mr. Kutt's opinion. PeopleoutsideQneensland will know that this is the oninion of the Chief Mechanical Engineer of the Railwa)' Depart­ment, and will not inquire as to whether he has only been here a month or two or many years. His statement goes forth to the world that our timber is not good enough, and he has been allowed to make that statement. That is mv complaint-that he has not been checked or ~topped bv anybody in authority, and we have this trouble to face and work down. \Vhat are we going to do to work it down? [Mr. B!:RHOWS : You ought to be on this side.] This does not amount to "cmt of confidence on my part in the Go,-ernment. I do not believe that because a man sits on this side he has no right to say any­thing at all. I am certain that the Secretary for Rail ways is very glad that I am referring to this matter. [The SECHETAHY Jo'OR RAIL­WAYS: I am very glad the hon. member has called attention to it. I will inquirE into it, and, if· I can put it right, I will.] \Ye have a lot of timbers which are invaluable

Address in Rep1,1j.

for the purposes for which they are wanted by the dEpartment, and it is desirable

[11 p.m.] that Mr. Nutt's attention should be drawn to them. This imported teak

is costing the country £4 per 100 feet, and all the department are paying for timber grown in thi,; State thac. could take the place of tha1· teak is J -1<. per lOO feet. The pine which is now irllported costs £1 \Js. per 100 feet. I do not say that our pine would be used in the place of that pine, rmt our yellow wood and ironh>trk could be used, and there would be no warp­ing, twisting, or deterioration if the t.irn ber were f>tllen at the proper time of the year, and were properly cared for in proper sheds. li'rorn e.-ery voint of view it is an unfortunate thing for the State that such a report as that to which I have alluded should have got abroad. I refer to this matter because I am the only timber representative in the House, and I should J]l)t be doing my cluty to this important industry if I did not point out '"here mattPrs in connection with it are going wrong. I suppose the Government are fully :t!ive to the importance of the industry, and do not quPstion what I have been urging in that connection. \Vith regard to export, the people intere,ted in thetimher industry have been trying for a considerable time past to work up fill export trade for all our timbers, particularly for onr pine, nnd they are now approaching the (ciovernment to aee if they cannot get some a;sistance in different ways. If an export trade is once established, a great deal of additional traffic will come to our railwnys. As a mutter of fact, very little timber is being exported yet. \Ve have to face the competition of Kew Zealand, against whom we have no protection whatever, as her timber is allowed to enter the ports of this State free of duty. The timber in that colony grows much more handy to their ports than our timber does in Queensland. Under Sir Thomas Mcilwraith's tariff a great many sawmills were started in this State. A grmt many people took up timber DO<mtry; men of small means took up country, and, using their tenms for drawing the timber, went into the industry 1.mder the encouragement given by that tariff. But the Cornmonwe.alth tariff practically 0pens the door to competition from a colony quite close to Queensland, and bits upon the head those who did go into the industry. The Government should encourage, hy every means in their power, the earning capacity of their ra.ilways. [An honourable member: \Vhat about the increased rate~?] I have always looked upon the increased fares and freights as a mistaken policy, but I wa, bound to defer final judgment until I saw how it would "pan out." I do not know how it is "panning out" now, but I urn inclined to think that it is not "panning out" well. As far as my eleotomte is concerned, I know that the people living· at Pine :Kiver do m1t use the railway at all, owing to the increased fares. [Mr. KllJc.TOK : Does that not shake your confidence in the ::\Iinistry ?] No ; I am disposed to give the thing a fair trial. But, adverting again to the timber industry, I would point out that there is any amount of hardwood timber within 60 or 70 miles of Brisbane, and this could be brought to Brisbane over the railways if carried under the conditions I have suggested. A great deal of our timber as it reaches maturity becomes hollow, the pipes having rotted, and the timber is charged for by the RRilway Depart­ment as full weight. A log that is perfectly sound and flawless is not charged for at a higher rate than hollow logs, and the result is that the unfortunate timber-getter cannot afford to send the latter to market. I believe that the Govern­ment would be hauling 50 per cent. more timber

Address w Reply. 191

than they are doing now on the rail ways if we could only get the export trade to Sydney and Melbourne. That would be a grFat ad­vantage to the Government, because the trains have to run at the present time, and it would be much more profitable to have them carrying· full train loads. By c.trrying the timber at reasonable rates the Government would increase the 10arning· power of the rail­ways, and help along an industry upon which a great number of people are dependen~ for a living. [The SECRETARY POR RAILWAYS: Timber is carried cheaper on our rail ways than on those in any other State, except New Zealand.] That is not true. [Mr. J EKKIKSOK: That is not so, and I will prove it when I get up.] ·while on the timber question, 1 wish to say a word to the Minister abont the sawmill they are starting at Ipswich in connection with the workshops there. They have a sawmill there which thcv expect to cut a lot of tim her. As a matter of fact, the.v have called for tenders for the supply of a lot of timber in the log, and I suf)pose they hu.-e accepted a contract by this time. [The SECRETARY FOH RAIL­\VAYC>: J'\o, there has been no contract let.] I want the :Minister to promise, in connection with that sawmill, that he will cause strict accounts to be kept, because I say in all serious­ness that the mill is going to be a big loss to the Government. You cannot put your hand on a miller in the State who has made mnney out of the business, with the exception per baps of \Vilson, Hart, and Co., who had the timber at their very door years ago. [An honourable member: \Vhat about Gympie?] There are two mills in Gympie, and they ha.-e a union there and it is working all right; that is why they are making money. The loos on the timber which the GoYPrnment will cut you will find will be very con,,iderable. I am talking, of couroe, of hard­wood, because pine they <an buy cheaper than they could cut it for themselves. The de­partment is under the impression that it is going to "ave money by sawmilling, when it can buy sawn hardwood at 14s. per 100. I submit that the loss on the log measurements will be from 33~ to 40 per cent., and as they require very special sizes in hard wood, they will not be able to get more than 20 per cent. suitabiP. of the timber they cut. I want to ask what they are going to do with the balance-the waste that doeo not suit them? Are they going into com­petition with the other sawmillers? I am afraid there is going to be a crushing loss, and I want the ::\Iinister to have close Recounts kept of what goes into the mill in the log, what is cut, the till1ber they are able to use, and that which is set aside as useless for their purposes. In that way we will get to see how this thing is going to ''pan out," and I am sure it will "pan out" a serious lo,;s. [The SECRETARY l•'OR RAILWAYS: I do not know that we will use it in log-cutting at all.] T hope the day of the importation of experts has practically ended. (Hear, hear!) I submit that in tbis State we have ability of as good order as you can get anywhere else, and we have experienced men thoroughly acquainted with all the surrounding circum­stances. (Hear, hear!) ·what is the advantage of bringing a man like Mr. Nutt from the old country? I submit that it is an absolute loss to the country. That is my opinion. I will give a little evidence of that. A short time ago a contract was let to Shillito and Co., of Ipswich, for 100 trucks. They were what were called H trucks, to carry 20 tons. It was found after the first few were delivered that they were altogether too heavy; that a great deal of cargo which they should be carrying was in the shape of wood in the trucks themselves. Then an alteration was made, and the much

192 Addrus in RepTp. [A8SEMBLY.J A1{journment.

maligned pine that :i\lr. X utt has been talking about was substituted. It was eut U]J from etbsolutely green logs, painted on both sides, and then taken over by the Governrm.nt. I undertake to say that that pine will be abso­lutely rotten within ei~hteen months, because the sap is painted into the timber on both sides. I cannot hold the ::\Iinister responsible, because he does not know of these thing,. [Mr. H,\HDACRE: He is responsible.] If I were in charge of the department, how could I know every little thing that was going on ? I blame i'!Ir. Nutt for it, because he is the man who is the responsible head. [:\lr. KmsTON: If a man made a mistake at your mill you would know :t!l about it.] At all event,, I charge it as a mistake, and a rnist:tke gbowing sir. ::'-futt's incompetence. [Mr. H,\RDACRE: Do you not think it a bit me.m to pass over the :\linister who is responsible, and attack a man who cannot reply?] 1Ir. Nutt has been challenged on this subject, and I told him there was going to be a warm time over it, but it did not seem to trouble him very much. ::\ow, with regard to the se :lO-ton trucks, they were sup­posed to c:ontain produce, and they were built 111

such a way that when thP dom'S were let down they touched the ground, and the truck could not be moved; in addition to that, the doors were so heavy that no man alive could lift them up into position. :\lore than that, the trucks then>selves are a gre"tt deal too big. :No single farmer can load 20 tons himself. There are generally ten or twelve consignees, and to save cost the 'consignor sells the goods by sample from the truck ; they are not taken out of the truck. I am informed, on very competent authority, that this practice cannot be pursued with these trucks, owing to their size and the quantity of stuff in them. The labour of getting at the stuff in the trucks kills all chance of ·doing business. [1Ir. LESIXA : The new horse trucks have the same mistake.] I know nothing about them. I keep myself strictly to facts within my own knowledge, and I have taken all sorts of care to get the real facts about the matters I have spoken on. I am the last man to wi,h to do another harm, hut it is time the Government knew what was going on, and the fact that the intere.sts of the depart­ment are being damaged. The work turned out has been turned out absolutely bad by a man who oug-ht to have been able to teach us something-coming across the seas with the flourish of trumpets that he did. As far as his knowledge of timber goes, he knows nothing, >tnd, worse than that, he has taken no trouble to find out. If he had taken the same trouble that the Tramway Company took, no difficulties would have arisen. I do not intend to touch upon anything- else to-night. [Mr. LESINA: You have missed your train, and are being fully reported. J 1 hope the hon. member heard what I said about him. [Mr. LESINA: No, I did not.] I passed the hon. member a complimentfor being so candid as to tell his constituents that it was a lucky or go:Jd thing that the Labour party were not in power to·day, because they would have to do exactly what the Government did. I give the hon. member credit for being candid, and I believe that when he chooses to be serious he can display abilities not less, at any rate, than any other hon. member on that 'ide of the House. Unfortun:ttely, he is not inclined to be serious very ofteu. I welcomed his speech, because it was c:tndid, refreshing, and bore the impress of truth. But he must know that it would be impo"sible for the Labour party to carry out all the promises they have dangled before the country. 'What power have they to do anything more than the present Go­vernment have? \Vhere are they to get

the money from? They can no more carry on without monLy than the present GO\-ern­ment can. J, at any rate, prefer the devil I know to the devil I don't know. (:\Ir. GHA:\T: Do you not think the :Minister should have known these things himself instead of being told them from outside?] I do not know. Many things occur in a m:tn's hou,ehold that every body knows about but the unfortunate man himself. I do not see how 1t is possible for the lYiinister to know anything about detaik [The SECRETAHY J<'OR RAILWAYS: I amuot an expert, in any casA.] I have called attention to the facts now. The Minister is to this extent blameable: Last yeo,r I called attention to the fact that tim­ber was being imported, and asked for an inquiry to be rr1ade int(• its S!'asoned condi· tion. I got an answer that those trucks had always been built of seasoned materiah.. But }fr. Thallon says they have never been built of seasoned materials ; the practice has been to build them of unseasoned materials. I submit that the proper thing, in the interests of the St:tte, is to see that this industry is safeguarded in every jJOssible way, and, more than that, that it should be helped in every possiLlA way if you wish to have good results, for a great deal of extra revenue might be derived in that way. I will not occupy mere time, ::tnd I thank hon. members for having listened so patiently to me.

1Ir. KERH (B((?·coo) : I beg to move the adjournment of the debate.

question put and pa'csed ; and the resumption of the debate made an Order of the Day for to~ morrow.

PAPER.

The following paper, laid on the table, was ordered to be printed :-:'<ineteeuth Report on the Creation, Inscription, and Issue of Stock under the provisions of the Queensland Stock Inscription Act.

.\J).J 0 lTR::'<i::\IENT.

The PHE::\IIER: I move that the House d•> now adjourn. I mean to sit to-morrow until this debate ic; finished. I understand the Upper House will sit on Thursday. Every hon. mem­ber must see that we ought to pass :tn Appro­priation Bill this week in order that the civil servants may get paid. This debate has now been going un for nearly three weeks. I will make an effort to keep the members on our side of the House within bounds to-morrow, and I confidently hope t-he leader of the Opposition will assist me in doing the same in regard to hon. members on th:tt side.

:VIr. BRO\VNE : As I told the hon. gentle­man last week, I h:tve always been prep:tred to sit on. As far as keAping hon. members on his own side within bounds, we have had one or two examples during the debate that he does not seem to have very much influence over them when they feel inclined to talk. At the same time, I am quite prepared-and every hon. m em· her on this side is quite prepared-to sit on to­morrow until the debate is finished. I should like the hon. gentleman to tell us when we are likely to get the Auditor.General's report, so that we can have it before the Treasurer makes his Financial Statement.

The PREMIER: I cannot say at present, hut it is generally here as soon as the Estimates are tabled.

Question put and passed.

The House adjourned at twenty-seven minutes. past 11 o'clock.