Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Council

TUESDAY, 20 OCTOBER 1914

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

13.38 Adjournment. [OO'C'NCIL.] Fri•Adly Societi~8, Etc., Bill.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

Tt.:EBD.\.Y, 20 0CTOB!:::, 1914.

The PRE~mmo CHAIR}IA::\ (Han. '\Y. F. Taylor) took the chair at half-pu;t 3 o'clock.

ArDITOH-GE:--;ERAL'~ REPORT. Pt:BLrc Accon;Ts.

The PRESIDI:\G CI-IAIR:\1A:::\ announced tiw n•ceipt from the Auditor-General of his report upon the puUic account-< for the financial year 1913-14, together \vith a st-ate­ment 'huwing the public debt of the State am! other financial information to 30th Juno, 1914.

Ordered to be printed.

PAPERS.

The following papero, laid on the table, were ordered to be printed:-

De: patch <:om·cying His :11ajest: 's asc.ent to Act passed during session of 1914.

Report of the Agent-Genera 1 of Queens­land for 1913.

St:SPE:--;SIO:::\ OF STA:::\DIXG Rl!LES A:::\D ORDERS.

Hox. A. H. HARLO\Y, by leave, moved, .,, ithout nutic:e-~

"Timt n much of the Standing Rules and Orders be suspend< d a \coul-d other­wi><• preclude the ]Jassing of Appropria­tion Bill ::\' o. 3 through all its stages in one Jay.''

Que: ,.fion Jitlt and pa· "t' -L

TOOWOO:\IE"\ PATRIOTIC' FF:::\D BILL. THIRD RE.\:ll::\G.

On t\w motion of Hox. A. II. this Bill \Yas r -:~.d ,a, tl1i1 ~l tinw. ortlc'rt ,l ro hf_' returned tu tlil'

n1e~:::agc iu thP u.~:1ul fo1·~ 1.

R\l1LO\Y. and

by

LOCAL A t:nTORITIE;.; l'ATRIOTIC CO:\TRIBCTIO:::\t\ BILL.

THIRD RE.\DIXG.

On the motion of Ho::i". A. H. BAHLO\Y. thi~ Bill \Y[l_s re :~.d a. third tialP, 1 \a::-.:cd. and c.:_ clC'rP.cl to be roturrwd to the As:-;enl bl v hY n10:3- ,ag(' in tlu~ u:,ual f{Wlll. < ~

FRIE:::\DLY SOCIETIES AC'T .-nm:--;D. ME:::\T BILL OF 1914.

THIRD READIXG.

On the motion of Hox. c\. II. llAHLOW. thi:" Bill \\as read a third t:ult'. pa:-: •d. and ordL•n·d to }Jp rcturn~'d '~-o tlw A ·~t>mbh: bv Ine.,sagc in the usual for.:m. " "

Liquor Act [20 OcTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 1359

LIQCOR -'\CT A:\1E"'D:\IE~T BILL.

SE:·oxD READIXG.

II ox. A. II. BARLOW: '.rhis is a Com­mitt•·•: Bill, aml I w~ll just run through the 1uParu11g of the Yanous cl.an.~>:~s. Clause 2 l',"ises tho st <~ndard of alcoholic stren<>'th of Au~tralian wi1y~· fron1 32 per cpnt. to 4o 11er eent. Th.ere ~s no clear definition why the standard 1s ra1,ed from 32 to 40 pPr cent. but I h(•lit·Yu it i:c. to eonforn1 to the Cotn~uon­wealth standard, and that appears to be tlw only explanation that was given in the other House. Hon. members are a" are that an . owner, not being the licensee of prenuses, has to register himself for certain purposes of the Act to escape cer­tain liabilities. and he pavs a fcc of 5s ClaH'•l' 3 is imerted to rolic,:c him from th~ !J.erpdual payment of an annual registra­bon f• ' ~o long as 110 chango has taken plah· . in ~he ownership of tho premises. That 1s fa1r and :ust. Clau•e 4 deals with caS<'~ where a raihva:v is in the cour&3 of c'?mtm• tion. and the sale of liquor is pro­lnbJted. As the Act now stands, billiards and bagatelle playmg are also prohibited. It 1s !bought that if tho liquor i5 cut off tl!P~o JS no harm m men having tho use of btlhanl' and bagatelle tables to amuse them­splves in their leisure hours. Clause 5 a.b­solut ely debars any person under the ago of t:Yonty,()ne year;s from holding a license. { !au'--' b deals \nth the qu<cstion of providin"' a spaeo of 1,oor: cubic feet in hotel bedroom; Effcrts ':ere made, I believe, to mitigat~ the >evcnty. of. that provision as far as pos­sJbl,·. and tt 1s now to be enacted that it sha.ll only b~ necessary to provide that space "}"'r<• ]H'<'nnses a~:e erected after the pa."'ing or the _\ct .. It wdl.not be nocescary to pull <low- bmldmgs \YhJch were erected before t~1,·1t tnne. The nf'xt claus~ is consequential. Clan--·- 8 maku tlw n•m•v. al of th<e licen"' date irom the granting of the license and not ~r•Hn the applicarion. That semns. 'to be a, fa,I_r propc~-al. Cla.usc 9 1nakcs the '· ncg­lu.:t quc:~t_Ion l'luch clean·r. Clause 10 -amcHds .-.---chon 36 of _the principal _\ct, and mak<·s a transfer posstble direct to the owner <Jf tlt<• premises. and not to the licensee or tenant. Claus<' 11 enables a transfer of the hcen·" for a limited time to bo made in a rturry from one """"l to another; there will by no nec~ssi!y to go through all the formali­tK, now reqmred. At tho prPsent time liquor <'~mr:et be Bold on Sunday. Good FridaY, or C~n·I.;:;.tJnas Da:~. on a stea1uer going to 'RPd­<·hff.e, nor c.an It be :sold on a steamer going to Towm;n!lo. Tlne clause proYide8 that a~ L

1 ,. a.c< tlto,ra!e of liquor on Sunday. Good

f l'H. · ,Y: _o~· Chnstmas Day is concerned, the IJJ:nndntion shall not appl:v t) any y0s&Ol

dunntS .th\ &Chlr l pnssagP thPrc~of fro~n anv p~~~·t. w1~lun QuePn}an~l to an:v other po1:t ;\ lt lun (lue;msland. Clause 12 protects the nitPrE·~t~ 0! t.he VPndors of billiard tables :' hu l:a/t reg1strrP~l tlwmseh·es. At present 1[ n h-en~c·: ~on1nut~ an offenC'e against the ,.,c:· the l_>llhard table or bagatdlo table, nlthong-h 1t may belong to somebodv 0l ·" althnng~l ~on1e other })Prson n1a"',- 1-laYe -~ l;.1~rwJ!eial jntcrpst in it. n1a~,~ be Seized :1.n~l <U:,JHJ"·l'~l of. .1~nder thi~ proyi~ion, jf snch a P<:r• on 1s rcgistC'red a:; the O\Yner, his interf'>,t \nll be protl•dcd. Clause 13 deal·, with the UI..;;f' Hl wlll('h a vouth is sent to an hotel and providl's th~t both the youth ancl tlw p~r: ''•1ll who ,nnt hun shall bA punished. Clause 14 ab<olutPly prohibits a minor-that is a PP!'~on_ n nde1~ hvent} -one years of age-fron1 lJPJng m the oar of an hotel. At present such

a person is prohibit,,d fron1 beiug thC'rE' for any purpose prohibitPtl by the Act. but after the pa ,-sing of thi·, rneasurc h(~ n1ust not go into t!w bar for any purpo:'"· The elausC' goc., on to sa~· that it does not apply to the n1Pn1ber'> of tho fan1il \ or mnp;ovPcs of thu licensee under t\YCntv-oi:u~ years cf a~"·e. Clau~-·~~ 15 deab with local" optio'n polis. There wps so1n0 trouble \Ylth rl'~- · .. :rj to the .: losing of hotels on a polling-day, and it is now 1)1'0-

poscd to provide tha-t on a Sundav, Good Friday, Christm'ls Day, or a !JO!ling-da~·, a P'Tf>Jn 1na:T get a drink or drinks with a meal betwPen ha-lf-past 12 and half-past 2 o ·clock in the afternoon if he is a resident in an hotel, or satisfies the licensee that lw intends to lodge :1t the, premicces on the night of thL> day of h1s arrn·al. :\'o p0rson is to ht• de('n1Pc1 to be a bont'L fide lodt_~l'r nult'S·'-' the plac0 where h" lodged the preyious night i3 at least 20 miles distant from the hoteL and unlpss he has travdlc•d 20 mi:cs within t~e twc_nty-four hom:s immediately prccPding h1s arnYal at the hccnw"d ]Jremi.·A'S. If lw misrepresents himsc,lf ,,s a. bona fide lodger. he will be liable to a fine not oxc•eecling £50 and not less than £20. (;lanse 16 is anothl'r provision dPaling -.:-ith the local option !Joll. The law savs that or. L>lection day hotels. are to be clo'srcl during Ci'rtain !tmu1 , but It appears that that proyision lw.s le_d to ·"o1ue confusio1_1, and this clause pro­ndes that hot0ls w1Il lta ve to be closed during tlw \vhole of th' time that a local option poll i, being taken. Claus<' 17 inserts the words "the offender," instead of the rigmarole of words in the nhra•c "anv ;;uclt person a~ after afore~aicl." .._ ThP U)lla })\,~ of the St~~nate <nving to a doub:e dissoluti-on upset th<e whole of tlw arrangement with ~ep:ard to local option polls. rrhl' ('0l1f·C'QUP11Ct'

1s that the lc~al option r.::>ll which wa;; to have been held in 1916 has to be nut on a :-·ear, and will not take phoe till 1917. Th;e fina.l poll in 1925 will re:nain as ·it is. but each of tho three polls before that will lw pur forward a veur. Those n1atter-s are d0alt with in clau.r.' 18. Clause 19 is introducecl to curl' a clifli :tlh- which has arie-'n. It aplwa.rs that under· the present la,.- L licens­ing n1ngistrate cannot den1and entran,.,C" into an J:otP! fm thr pm·po,,e of in,pc cting it ae1rl finding out \\'hat is ''Tong, hut that he· 1nav clcl"gate that power to somrhoch· dse. Thi's cla1ne is int('ndecl to rPnle(h~ dint anonlah-. The Bill if' purely a CorriinitteL' lll(~a~nr'e. and I beg to moYe tfHlt it be, now read a l"econtl tinw.

Hox. P. ML:RPHY: ":'he l<'ader of the Council expressed the opinion that this is a Committt ' Bill, and I quite a"'ree with the hon. gentleman. I do not int~nd to speak at any length upon the measure, but I should like' to call tlw attention of hon. gcntlPHlC'l1 t:) the fact that at the time the Liquor Act was go1ng through, in 1912. tht- principal anH'lH1-ments proposed in this Bill were advocated by me. I think I can claim that mv words on t)lat occasion ~ere to some extent pro­phetJc, . I then said that scarcely a ,,cssion of Parlwment \vould. be hP!d for a good many year· ":·hen we snould not ha;'o brought before us Bllls to amend tho L1quor Act. \V o now find that in tho second vear after the passin ·:( of the orig·inal Act ntiwndmcnts arc submitted to this House. I am in favom· of most of the e,mendments '.\hich art' pro­JlOs~cl, and I ehall ""-Y nothing· furthe-r at present, eYCept to add that I think this is not tho only amendment of the Act of 1912 that this House will have to consider,

Han. P. Jiurphy.]

1360 Liquor Act [COUNCIL.] Amendm< at B~U.

" Hox. G. S. CCRTIS: I cornp:iment tho Government upon having introduced this Biil. \Yhen speaking· on the Addre-ss in Heply at the opening of Parliament, I ex­)Jl'•!ssod tiLl opinion that this was one of the moe sures mentioned in the programme that rc,,uired consideration. \Vhile I congratu­late tho Government upon having introduced tlJ~_• It'',a.sure. I re;;;Tct that they hay,,- not t;one further in the direction of relaxing legisla­tion in regard to the sale of liquor on Sun­days and other days. IV c should bear in mind that \Hl are not living in a cold coun­tr:.· like Now Zealand, but in a hot country, where it is very noce.,,ary that people should be able to get refreshment in moderation when they require it. I am aware that re­strictions are placed on the sale of liquor in every country, but I think that in a hot country like Queensland the regulations should not be as 'tringent as they arc in the Liquor Act of 1912. This measure proposes to modify the Act with regard to the sale of liquor 011 Sundays, Good Friday, or Christ­mas Day, and in regard to bona fide travel­lers, but it "eems to me that the amend­ments proposed are somewhat inconsistent, absurd, and illogical. Clause 15 provides that-

" Liquor may be served to any bona fide traveller on the licensed premises, Pxcept in the bar, on Sunday, Good Fri­day, Christmas Day, or polling-day, with a meal between the hours of half-past t"·elve and half-past two o'clock in the afternoon,''..--

I think the clause should stop there, but it goes on to say-

•' if he sati,fies the licensee of the prem­ises that he intends to lodge at the premises on the night of the day of his arrival thereat."

A large number of persons travel down from :Haunt ::Vlor·gan on Sundays to Y eppoon, a distance of fifty or sixty miles, some of them intendmg to return home the same evening, and others, perhaps, to remain at Yeppoon till the next morning. According to the pro­vision I have just road, a person who in­tended to remain until the next morning could get a drink at an hotel, but a person returning home the same evening would not be able to get a drink. That seems to me absurd. The person making the journey down and back on the same day is just as much in need of a drink as the penon who stays at Yeppoon all night. The lattBr part of the clause should be struck out, and I feel very much inclined to move, when the Bill goes into Committee, that those words be omitted. I was speaking recently to a grazier who has an intimatB knowledge of the vV estern interior of Queensland, and he told me that the Act was a farce as far as the IY estern interior was concerned-that people out there drink on Sundays more than they -did before the Act was passed. Know­ing that they are not able to get liquor on Sunday, they provide themselves with a supply on Saturday and take it home or into their room, and drink a great deal more than thev did under the old svstem. Take the case 'of a man who travels the necessary distance on Sunday morning and arrives at an hotel at 12 or 1 o'clock, but intends to pro­ceed with his journey later in the day. He

will not be able to get anything [4 p.m.l to drink; but if he dwoces to

- stop until the next dav, he will be able to get something to drink.· I submit

[Han. G. S. Curtis.

that is an anomaly and an absurdity that requires alteration. It has been said that it }~, irupo~~iLll' to rnake people sCJtJt'; by ~..\ct of Parliament, and it is impos-ible for any Gover:rment to prevent people getting· liquor if they r0quire it. If they cannot get it in one way they will get it in another ; and it would be far more in the interest,, of the country if the rutrictions on the sale of liquor were more reasonable. If the law is such that j)cople will not tolerate it and will try to evade it, it tends to bring the law into contempt. :\'o law can be respected unless it is supported by the sentiment of tlw people, and I am perfoct1y certain that the great majority of tho people of Queensland are opposed to these very stringent l'C znlations wi~h regard to the sale of liquor on Sunday. I do not see why any person shonH not be alJ!e to r-t·t a drink on Bunda:,~ ~ ichin CPI"­

t·:tiu hour', \"'~,-hothC'l' hf' js. a tl'i.l' ~·llcr or 11ot n tra,·L·llt ~·. If you thro\v tht' l't ·pon-ibilitY on t"ll(' landlord as to \:ht th· r or

not a· so-called traveller intends to remain on his premic,,s until the following morning, you open the door to great abu,, .. ,, and, no doubt, that provision wiil be grc.ttly abused if it is passed. A bona fide traveller ·who intends to continue his journey in the after­noon or tht! PYPuing is ju:-.t \',. n1uch c nitlf'(l to consideration as the man who intends to stay on the licensed premises all night. \V e are not legislating for a cold country like New Zealand. I have felt for some time that the Act requires amendment in the direction I have indicated, and that we should afford Teasonabb facilities to people \vho require drink on Sundav to obtain it rather than impose restrictions which cannot be enforced. \Yith the;:;;c few r<'lnarks. I beg to sn:;_1porr tht~ second reading of the Bill.

Hox. A. H. WHITTINGHA:\I: I would like to support the Han. l\Ir. Curtis to a great extent in \\'hat he said kith rec\·ard to the Sunda;· drinking clause. That i:-- a rnat ter on which I had a good deal to y when tho Liquor Bill was before us in 1912. The an1cndn1cnts here proposed arc Yery good in their way, but they really only deal v:ith thP metropolis. l:nfortunatcly. our l.:gisla· tion is the ~amc for the metropoli-< as it is for the country, and, in mv opinion, that is not right. I do not agree with the grazier friend of the Han. ::\Ir. Curtis when he s:tys that tlwre is more drinking now in the vVest than there was before tho Act was passed. At the ~a.nw tirne, I know, and CVE'l' .. one dH~ knows, that in the Centre and other parts of Quecmland the Liquor Act ha-; dono no good at all. It is more honoured in the breach than in tho obsenance. Afte_· :: man has travelled a rcrtain distance on Sundav he should be allowed to haYe rea'·O!labJe re· frcshmPnt~. and an arncnd1nent ~n t:Oac dil'(~('­tion would be very \Yisc; but to 1( ,tV2 it with the proprietor of an hotel to --ay that a tra wller has told him he is going :o st" y the night at the hotel will open the do·Jr to all sorts of trouble. The man mav sav. "I am going to say here the night." ·clll!' after haYing dinnf-"1' and a dri-nk he n1ay :-c.1y, "I am going off now." \Yc want to ,tap that sort of thin.~·. I have been asked to nwntion one point in connection with packPt ]icenfH'8 on coastal stean1ers. So1nc of the ste·anrship rompanics pay consirlerable sun1s for 1icen::K'3 on our coast, and thev seem to think th0v are badly treated. On(, company, in n lette-r addres,ed to me, states-

" \Yhat we should like embodied in the amended Liquor Bill is permission to-

Liquor Act [20 OcToBER.] Amendment Bill. l3(H

supply pa•,seng~rs on boa_rd during their stay in port With what hquor they may require. and also that the bar may be opened for the sale of all liquids one hour before sailing time. We should also like to know why the oversea stt>1mers on the Queen,land coast are allowed to sell liquor without a packet license, while the coasters must have a license. If our bars in Queensland ports must bo elm od almost entirely, \\ e can­not sc-" why we should take out licen,,es."

The company which has asked rne to mention the matter has to pay £155 per annum at prc·:,ent in licenses "bHsides innumerable fees for regiotratiei, tntn ,ftl'', &c., which is a good r.mnd sum for practiully nothing. I think some lcr;-ichtion might be brought in to dPal with this matter, as well as with the other m ~ttcr I have mentioned.

lim;. y,·. V. BROIYX: I think it would be an impro\ ~ment to the Bill if tho words ref, reed to b-- the Hon. • ~\Ir. Curtis wero struck out. If a man has tr "dled 20 mikJ, th. t should b·: quite sufficient to prove that he i a bou.: fid-. tm elier v.-ithout compelling him to satisfv the liceE-ee that he is going to stop i11 th~· hJtel thD folluwinrr night. lf an Ullll'L·lr ... 1e11t i; 1110 _cl iu that direction, I hall be Y<'TY lHtPPc h mpport it.

I-Im;. A. A. 1J.\ V:CY: I thin:c thew amend­nH:nL~ \\ill bo an inllH'O\T ·--P ... lt in the _\ct. It i8 not long since w...: discus~.ecl tho Liquor Bill at consilkrablc lPngth, and thjnk the Council is pretty wdl in of or}inions of a rnu:nbcr of hon. n1c found thcm,e!Ye_ in a minority on that Dill. On< c· th·t 'VG a'h·oc.tnd w; !hat \Yhich bu 1 it fidr_~ y;~ c were ' , urc n b,- the ·nt. tbl'on·-·h its repro '~r~a'rive, --.... rrt hat we .nskcd for '' onh1 be nbus-· J to such an cxt .... nt that t;1f~~· da.rc• nDt admit illto the Bill. •;\..-e \Yh0 oppo~;;d the v :._·y dras}1c proyi-. ion-~ of th~ Bill v;ere cn•.phatic, in dci \<1r~ng tbut thi·~ leg-islation vn1s not in acc·wda1H f~ with thn public sentinwnt in this State, and personally I an1 of o··i~=-ion t~1at tha 1: is thr, position no··. The GoY~rnm ··1t <!ppar.-_ntly haYe come to the conclusion that th· v made a Ini~ta~.:c in pa;-,ing the A:->t in its vpn:--ent form. The dausc in this Bill which pro­Yidrs for giYing a bonf~ fide tnt.Yoller rc­frc-.-hmcnt- is bn eel upon •uch an absurd <;'cndition ihat it surpl iscs one that it tc -,1,] have teen put into the Bill at 11. If "­person , :;~ i;;:fics the licensee of thf- ~;rc.rlist-c:i that he int- n .ls to lodge on t.he lli'l ni oa the nip-ht of the da:v on which he trayc]s, he can be ··xpplicd with drink during c0rtain hours. He will sim,,]y tell tlw lic<'nse<> tt:1t ho int-•nd:-1 to rta,· there, and he c.cn plc -o him ,'lf whether h<:> doc srav or not. Tlw n1ar' 1nny chango his rnind ~aft-,r,,·ards and lroaYe. but so long as the liccl1f,,-=-J r'an s--::r that he he·.- c.-,ti-fied him-elf that the man intends to c,tay there on the following- night, that is all that is required. If I mig-ht bo pardoned for sa~·ing so, that ~-oms abcurd, and it muet h -ve been put in with the obj cct of finding some rort of excnse for supplying a rcasoml blo demand e-n the port of the t.rnv0lling public. It is very piumsil7 done, and is too thin <dtogether. \Vhat the Eon. ~,lr. Curtis has suggested would be a verv gr<'·lt improvement. It is not to be sup]JosC'd ~hat the p<>rson who tra,:els. the required d1qtance, but has to return, Is hk<'ly to be less in need of a drink than one who

1914-4 p

is going to stay at th: hot_el for the n_igJ:t. In fact the one who IS gomg to remam 1n the hotel is not likely to be so thirsty M the man who has travelled the 20 miles and has to return another 20 miles. I shall be very pleased to support the amendr~1ent sug­gested by the hon. member. It IS ra;tJ;er absurd to attempt to enforce the provisiOn dealing with travelling on the high sea' on Sundav where ,-ou hayo no policeman at hand. "'rn fact, "r should think it was not sinccrclv expected by thoee .,., ho y;ore re·-PO':'-· sible £,';r its inclusion in the Act that It \Yould ever be faithfully observed. It has not been faithfullv observed, nor is it li'.ely to be so that the- amendment in that direc­tion is desirable, if onlv that it ,,jlJ bring the Act a little more c!,;'scly into con£ormity with public sentiment, and in that rcJpect it \Yill be ·welco1no. There are a nu1nber of other equal!:; necessary . amendments. that could be suggested. I thmk the pu 'Ing of the Liquo1· Act ha3 causec! . a m1:·Ibcr of people in the C8Lmtry to look mto the liquor question more cksrly. than the:- h: d done bdorc. The :-nduc sonmfPnry of the Act has cre:-cted a lot of op1w ition hwarc1s the party who arc responsible for iL fHl' .;a~··e. I have f'Yerv ad1niration for tho <'onra~e of the G-on~'rnnrt·~lt in t-Hckling .such a ycry difficult and knottv nur--1-iori and I <:1111 ;,·illing to· giYc them ·('n?j_Uit ~or 'sinc0rity in their action, l)ut thi~ Inot; ur0 IB a proof that tho G0Yorn­num.t are bp~jn:ninr: to rr-c'JIT;.li ., , as vn.'s '·t·-ted e.t th~ time. that it is ahs1Ed to pa•--; laws and cxncct thrm to bo ob- wd, unless thev arc in ~.accor·-1anc.·· \Ylth tLc dc--irt of th0 < maiorit:-' of r-rmt ehle citiz-'ns. When the Bill ("OC ' into Co;nmitt<'o, I shall be :very niEl,?·.,··d if J can a5. ist i~1 any ;~:ay t0 n1ake lt a bcttcl' Bill tha.n it ]s at ~lrf'--~<_lt •• _Thos~ of ps wbo Ofj!)OF~rt D1UDY Of th' St~'lll:f8lltJ proYicions of thP pr~«·; t .-\ct f~cl that_-, ·o :;ro entitled to just ~.s mu<:11 credit for Slncfrity rs th0. c who helped to p3•s the !"s WP hnY0 in~t , -:: gTC'Rt n horror CYllR

of th0 abtP,r> of driTik [l they haYe. The mllv thing is that 1ve diffE-r in opini·J:n ns to the- b•-·:t method to bring about "' very n(_ ~e~ stT~ an,'1 de ~ir<1.blo reform ..

Hm:. E. W. H. FO\YLES: As the princi­P :1 Act contai11s ~CJ s~:ctiolls. it is iP;virtble that a. ff'\'/ a1nendrncnts should ht~ :ouncl llCf'f -nr~~ <luring the A rnont~1, or.t~\"',0

th tt it has h0en .._or _o, and I ttunk is a tribute to the wisdom of both l-Ions 'B

tha~ the amending Bill contains ·:Is Iittl_e :r:nat'-~r as it doer:. It shov s that the princi­pal . .-\.~~ is in . ccmd with the :,Jirit of the pco'>ic of QueeDcland. and that it has worked f:_irlv 1ve1l. Tho fe1v amendment.::. '.":e .are ~sked to pe ,s are, aft8r all, yery trifling. The cx)H'"if'nco gflined fro.In the \vork;in1 of tl;e Act shmY.-: :hat there IS a 1;reat difference _m hr~ .tunount of i.ce done to the lar 0;e cities

t' ~· <:on1p ~\,red coun;-ry nLcz:s. The .. 4..ct, I b:'l inve, works very "·ell in the lar·c;er oentre,, of population. But tlvre are some parts of Q'.rcr· .-.land, onLi-dc th_e lar:;or centres of population, whore the J,Iqnor Act of 1912 cannot be expected to work Ycry well in eve: v dctailNl particular. Ho;vo·;er, for 400,000 'out of the 660,000 poop)e m Queens­land the Act s. ems to be w0rlnng :·cr:;· well indeed. It ha-< been said that the amendments in this measure will bring the Act closer to­public: sentiment. That way be ·,o. In any case, I welcome a large number of the a'nend­nwnts proposed, though I very mu9h ques­tion whether W<' are close to tho enlightened

Hon. E. W. H. Fowles.]

1362 Liquor Act [COUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

sentiment of the world in our present Liquor Aet. The Licensing Act which we amended in 1912 ha·d been in operation for twenty­eirrht years, and it was leaking at every point. As a matter of fact, we are very much behind our brothers in America with rPga.rd to liquor legislation, and \Ye are also behind what we term the old country. I should have liked to see in this measure an a.mendment gh·ing the Governor in Council power to restrict the hours for the sale of liquor on any special occasiun.

Han. A. A. IlAVEY: \VoulLl you like to see Sun.day openinp:? ~

Ho::;-. E. W. H. FOWLES: A fortnight ago London hotels were closed at 10 o'clock at night on ac~ount of the war.

Han. A. A. DAVEY : I referrod to the sale of liquor on Sunday.

Hox. E. \V. H. FOWLES: If the hon. memb<er refers to the question of serving liquor to bona fide lodgers, I must confess tha.t it is very difficult to frame legislation dealing with that aspect of the subject. Engl<md has tried it for thirty years, and has found it impossible to frame such legis­lation with regard to bon·a fide travellers as will not be abused. The amendment pro­posed in this Bill in that connection, although it is an improvement on the provision in the Act, cannot be con­sidered wholly satisfactory. The word " satisfies" proves that it is not satisfactory. This provision is a compromise, and an admirable compromise, but it is exceedingly difficult to draft an amendment that will catch the travelling dodger-that is, the man who simply goes about trying to evade the ~\ct and secure the privileg·es of the bona fide trav•·'ler. I do not think there is such a large influx of the population of Rock­hampton to Brisbane on Sunday mornings as would justify us in relaxing the provision with regard to Sunday trading. If those people want a special brand of whisky, they can get it at the railway refreshment­rooms. At all events, the Government are to be congratulated upon having passed two v<'ars ago an Act ·which has stood the test, not onlv of the law courts but also of public opinion:

Hon. B. FAHEY: The presence of this Bill in the House is a proof that it has not stood tho test.

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: When it is remembered that the Act of 1912 contains 209 sections. it must be admitted that the alterations now proposed are trivial.

Han. P. J LEAHY: Manv of them ar0 corrections of bhmders-trivial thin2's.

Hox. E. W. H. FOWLES: Quito so: in most instances thev are trivial amendments. Other amendment~ might have been sug· gcsted 'vhich I feel sure would commend thenFelves to the public conscience. One of thoee is a provision for taking a triennial State option poll in regard to the sale, im­portation, and manufacture of alcoholic bev0ragcs. I had alrncst looked for the in.· elusion in this meamre of the principle of majority vote. At the pre,ent time it seems to me that the only part of our legislation

[Han. E. W. H. Powles.

in which majorities are flonh'd is £Ur liquor le"'islation. I am sure the Eon. Mr. Leahy w~uld be glad to see majorities giYen their <lue influence in a local option Yote.

Han. P .. J. LE.\HY: I should be glad to see all got justicE'.

Hox. E. W. H. FO\YLES: Neither the majority nor the minority gets justi~e _in this case as the minoritv rules the maJonty in a Joe~! option poll. "r had almost hoped also that a further amendment which has been passed in at least three of the L: nited States including the State of Nobrg,ska, would' have been included in this Bill. I do not know exactly the name of the Act passed in those States, "but it ie a sort of drunkards' compensation Act. and it is working splen­didlv. It is enacted that whoever sells liqu;r shall pay all damages tha~ th_e com­munity or individuals may sustam m con­sequence of such traffic. Disorderliness has received a salutary" check, the " drunk and disorderlv" man haying disappeared. Under th"t AcL if a- publican knowingly mp­plies any liquor to a half-drunke!'- . man, and that man happens to be dnvmg a trolley, and, owing to t~e fact that. he is under the influence of hqn"1r, runs mto a motor-car and damages it, the own,;r of the motor-car can recoYer compen~a~ion frmn the driver of the troll<"v, and the driver of i he trollev can reco~'er from the publican. That is carrving out the principlP of the \Vorkers' Comp0nsation Act. and it works admirably in :"iebra~ka and other States. If a man gets drunk early in the morning, and the taking of that drink causes him to be late and to lose his job, his wife nn sue the publican who supplied him with the liquor.

Han. P. MuRPHY: Suppose he got the liquor from a sly grogshop, what would happen?

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES: The best thing in the world would happen: they would find out where the sly grogshop wa~, and that '"auld be a b~nefit to thf' publwan. Such a measure prevents publicans from sup­plving half-drunken men with liquor. The result is that in Kebraska, once a man ie "half-seas-oyer." he can get no drink He can get as much as he like'' when he is sober, but ho is preYented from getting liqum when he i.; in such a condition that the further supply would cause him to run the risk of losing his job, or becoming a firebrand and a menace to the community.

Hon. A. A. DAVEY: What about the publi­cans who supply the first, second, and 'lhird drinks?

HoN. E. W. H. FOWLES : Thev sue the man who gaYe him the last drink be­cause, after a man has had three or four

drinks, they should be in a posi­[4.30 p.m.] tion to tell that he had been

drinking. As has been stated, this is purely a Committee Bill, but there are one or two amendments proposed which it is dc•,irable to refer to at the preo,ent stage. Clause 6 deals with section 23 of the principal Act, which says that no minor shall be allowed in the bar of licensed pre­mises, and that, if any such pE'rson is found there, "the licensee must forthwith remove or cause him to be removed " from the bar or bar-room. But it doeil not sav that the minor may not be there all day, th&

Liquor Act [20 OcTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 1363

1i~~nse~ knowing nothi1w at all about it. 'Thero is a danrr~rous do,;;. for evasion open there.

Hon. A. H. BARLOW: The licensee is re­~ponsible for the whole oconduct of the house.

Hox. E. W. H. F0'1YLES: It onlv savs that the licensee shall forthwith remov;, him.

Hon. A. H. BARLOW: He mav remove him by his ag~nt-the barman or someone else.

Han. P. J. LEAHY: The licemee might be a \VOllla!L

Hox. K \Y. I-I. FOWLES: Exactly. and the n1inor might be a .steapping young fellow

·of over twenty.

Hon. B. FAHEY: How are You to know that he is a 1ninor? '

Ho:. E. \Y. II. FO\YLES: One way is to ask hun In the presence of a witne·;;s. You may take down his answer. and, if he is brought before the court and his birth certi­fica+e is producNl, and he has not told the truth, he may be punished.

Hon. B. FAHEY: That is too much trouble.

Hox. E. W. H. FO\YLES: ="ot at all; that i the most obvious way ')f doinrr it \Yith regard to the amendment of se~tio~ 166, I do not know 1d1ether the clause before us will exactly meet the case. Section 166 has these h"o lines at the end-

" but such vote may be requested on or befor<e the thirtieth da, of l'\ovember, one thousand nine hundred .and fifteen."

Is it intended to retain tho"e words, even when the date for takmg the local option roll has been postponed t!ll 1917?

Hoil. A. H. BARLOW: I suppose so. I could not ,a_v rig-ht off, but we can look into it m Committoo.

Hox. E. \Y. H. FOWLE~: It seems to mt· that those words may have to be omitt,,d. The arnerElmeuts befon) us arc verv fe,,T and verv triflin:~-, and most o: then1 a1:c such as Ina :V he cot-,mwnded to the Council. \Yith rec:;ar;l to the ttmount cf room to be provided in hotels. we ought to depend on medical advice. So far as I rerncmber, the expert advice tenclerPd to the Government on that matter "as t•ntirely different from V\ hat is proposed in this Bill. I do not know whether further Pxport advice ha-. been obtained on t l~e· suhject of ventilation, but certainlv the Gm-ornment should dt'JKnd upon their 'expert advisors. I shall han' no hesitation what­t•ver in heartily -.npporting tlw large majority of the a<tWnclments proposed in the Bill.

' Ho'i". T .. J. O'SHEA: I can endorse a good d··al of what has been said with regard to th" Btl!. It ec•ems to me that, with two or threCJ triflinft exceptions, i~· is 1nerelv ~F_. amendment of what mig-ht be termed ~lig-ht "li<!'bal errors in the original Act. Appar­ently, th!' original Bill 'vas introduced "·ithout . the cr;nsicl<?ratiDn it dcBcr :ed. and there was a sort of dt'tormination on the part of soma peoplr to stick to tho Bill as printed. How­CTCl\ hvo year:-;' experience seems to have h tel some hencfi~ial pffc-ct in bringing before the eyes of the people the fact that it was a somewh,ct crude measure, and some slight effort is now being made to amend some of the blunders that wero macle in it. So far :1~ principles ar0 concerne-d, there is not much in the Bill now before us. The most

important proposal is that the first local option poll is to be postponed for a year. There was no help for it unless the authori­ties carne to the conclusion that it would be wiso to hold a local option poll on a clay on which there waB no ele-ction taking place for either ::>tate or Commonwealth Parlia­ntents. The Legislature, in its "\visdoin, \-vhen pa,sing the L\et in 1912, considered that it was wise to have the poll taken on a sena­torial election day. Probablv recent events have rendered the possibility 'of a dissolution of the Federal Parliament for some tim•• rather remote, and in all human probability thPre will be no senatorial election until the year 1917. I suppose it was decided to take the local option poll on the senatorial election clav so that there should be a large and fai'rly representative vnte on the q~lCstion. There is rc>ally nothing in the Bill if you exclude the amendnwnt dealing \vith that question. the one alt{)l·ing the area of a bedroom in an hotel from 1,000 cubic feet to 800 cubic feet in the ca8e of houses that were licensed before the vear 1912. and the further trifling alterati01; dealing with what has been termed the bona fide traveller-but who has now been transformed into a sort of bona fide ledger-cum-traveller-that is, he must have travelled on a ~undav a distance of 20 miles and must have told the licensed victuailer that he ha·, made up hi; mind to stay in the house that night, in order to entitle him to a glass of liquor at his lunch between the hours of half-past 12 and half-past 2 o'clock. If that is to be regarded as an important amendment of the Act, I am rather surpri,ed. Perhaps it is introduced amongst a number of other triviali­ticq for the purpose of er'deavouring to supprus a little of the critical comment on the general provisions of the Act. There is no doubt it would be rathet· an irritating thing for one man who anives at an hotel at 6 o'clock in the morning to find, wheu h~ sit•- down to lunch with another man who arrived at 11 o'clock the previous night, that the latter is allowed to have a glass of lager while he is debarred from having an:~ thing. It seems to me that tlre rest of the amend­ment-s are merP trivial verl;al amendments, which, in their v. ay, are right enough. but which up to now have been cm·ed bv adminis­tration. And that brings me to 'the point that I think the administration of th• ~\ct is of far more importance than ma.nv of the provisions in the anwnding· Bill. ·so long a: the present Act is handled b~· capable officers and with clue regard to the wishes of the r:eoplc. I think there is not much ground for complaint, so far as regards any nf the provisions which it is now sought to amen d. As has been sta.h•d, the Bill is lnrgcly a Con1111ittee measur0. but I a1n ofraid that there is not very much that this Charnb0r can introduce bv wav of amencl­rncnt to the clausco, of the Bil!' that will be beneficial to the public or to the trct.dc. The amendments that WC' can introduce will bu confined purely to tho sections of the Act that are being amended bv the Bill. How­<'YCr, I am pleac-ed to think that some effort is being made to cure some of the defects in the Act. There is not verv much to critici6e in the Bill. and I will' gi.-e it :ny support.

Question-That the Bill be now re~d a second time-put and passed.

The committal of the Bill was made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

lion. T. J. O'Shea.]

1364 Rockhampton Harbour Boar.! LCO"GXCIL.J Ac:s A1wndmeut Bill.

ROCKITA:\IPTOX HARBOl'R BQ_\RD ACTS A~IEI\D:\IEI\T DILL.

CmDIITTEE.

(Hon. T. Jf. Hall in the chair.)

Clause 1-" Short title and construction of Act "--put and pa:::.sed.

On clause 2-'· Constitution of board "­In paragraph (d), as follows:--

,,One of such members shall be elected bv the councillors of the shire•. of Fitzroy ai1d LiYing-1-,tone"-- .

Has. G. S. Cl'RTIS moved tho omission of the '.' ord "councillors" ' ith the view of in .prting tho 'vord ··r,ciepavers." rrhe two shires of Livingstone a11d ~.Fitzrov wore in the immediate vicinity of Hockhampton. Since the eshblishrncnt of the harbour board sc·rne : c~u~ a~o thry hacl a h\'J..Y,·_: {'njoyed tL rat.epnyer, 1'runchi ~, and it had \t'orkPd satisfactorily. It wu.c proposed bv the Bill to dq,rivo the pn~Jle of that franchicc and to prov1do £or ·lhe -elL ;tion oi a n1en1bc:r to l'-' pre"' ~nt {he t 1.'. :J '·hif<'S by t~w c>ighteen per· on.s • ho werc> th0 < m11cillor, m tho c Rhir('s. The natbour L'oaYd, the c \an1bcr of cJnlm~·rc_' in Rockliarnpto11, and the p;·oplc' p:crWl\'ll~, ~~.Pre U!.L.nin1ou . ..:: in thf'ir drsire thrrt the franl.-:·11:-n f huulc1 re!>tain as it was in thl' original ~\ct. It \Vas \vell h.no\'\'11 that larc:o bo<li<·;; were lc-; liable to nndc·irable aml unJne :in~""cru_·L<, ·~nch a:-:. k<;-rollin::·, tb:tn email loo lees. He ''Ould noi· ':lV that the· ~·iu:hh·cn counciH(;rs '-nulcl bP ',:ubj.ect t')

mflu- nee of that kind. but thev ccr:ainlv -, ;ntld 1-:e rnore ~ubjcct +0 it than tht· <:encl't{l I-~o·l:v of ratPIH(VC'rs. Tl1c an>'1Hlmcnt he posed · ~onl·I biv·,_ gre t ."atisL.ction to COlll''l'nf;:J.

IIo:-c. A. H. BARLO\Y: He should like to be a:)le to 2.frl2P to ihe r ne;1dmc:nt. but he was ill-· tniCtc'1 that the GoYcrnr'u':lt offcr<:"d ycr,\~ RtJ;cnuous o::_)pC'-ition to t.he propo;.;nl 111 ill1Dt~· ~'l'. n~ Cl'. \\ hr ~1 he R:tid he \Yns

in~tl'uetcd to- onnc e the an1rndm0n! lw c1id n.ot. 111' an th 't, -lw would ,1pt /mything hke coc ··c1on ; hnn. r~, :;_nu~:t plu1se themsc•Jycs c··hl'fhcr t!Jey rtCC'C])tOcl the amend­lTI('llf or Hot. One of ·thr~ r;'h·,on:o:; p-~Yf",l bY ·~he Tro1.;nrcr for op]lo~in~ tho mnl ndn1r~t m another plac .' v. 1s that the preparation of rolb ould be a difficult matter. He would point out that not onh- was there a -difficult:· in rc,.,-ard to rolls,- bnt lint the ac\'ept1-nc0 of tho a1ncndtncnt v:onld mean tho intrmlnotion of polih<< into tho Ploction of mcc.1lwr·, of the barbour b~1rd. It v.·as no ,, .. n de n:,·ing the fact that eycr:y clectiyc bod~~ wn '3 now hToug·ht into partv politics, and that .th:' Yot0rs acted from 'class con­Rcion~ncss. I1.,or instance, tho \Yatrr- anc1 Scwcraf!c 13oa·· rl in Brisbane 'vas an clcct1Ye body, but tho c,nclidat0i V/m·e not elected on tlwir merit Thev wore diYidcd into two Sf'ci ;ons, and th<: Yoi:('s '"ere ca::+, accordin?.,' to the noli1' :C'. l on in ions of the RE'Yeral YOi<" He h.-d no -hesitation in saving that in such an el<>ction he 'vould not voto for tho men 'v11o \YPrP nnt up by the partv Dppor:Pd to him. Politic" y.-cre now introduced into cver~·thi'l!". and their opponents had an­nounf'~d tbPir jntr,ntion of ca~1turing evory· 0lN 'i n• hody in th0 State. \Yhcn thev got to the shires whiC'h were further awav' from the coact, it would be found that the ~omach were not ratepayer~. and that thE'ro would be a c:reat want of interest in tho el<>dion of members of the Rockhampton Harbour Board. so that men would not ride 50 or 60

[Han. G. S. Curtis.

miles in order to vote for a candidate. He· know thrrt it was contended that tho rato­r<tyer,. C'ontributcrl to the revenue of the· board. and that that 'vas a reason whv thev should han• a Yoice in the t'lection 'of it',, moml.wro. He might as well say that b,· paying his acr:ounts eYery 1nonth or cyery h. o months h'l contributed to the income· of his butcher, '<nd ought therefore to have a sav in the n1anage1nrnt of hi:-; shon. liar~ hom: boards dealt ;,-ith large sums of money contributed b,· other nconlc, anrl the in­terc'h of those ]Wople ehoufd be safeguarded. He ,-.-as ver,· ,,orry that he could not accPpt the amendment.

lim;. A. H. P A:P.::\ELL thought t 11.,.t. if the :\Iinister lookc d .t the matter from the point of Yiew from \Yhich he reg-ar-led it, the hon. gC'ntlcrnan "\YOtdd f'l'8 that a yery different cornp1cxion was pla(' _·d urJon it. 1-lo could Sf\(' no rca'-<Hl '"hv the ratonrr~:ers in tho ~hirt·" of Fitzroy and LiYing tl ~v.,; v;hirh \ ere in the -dcinit ,- of RockhannJton, should not bo ('onccdc'd 'tbc right to- elPct ·t~·ci1· 1'' lH'C~·.:.•ntat~_ycs on the harb: ur bogrd, in-,1 _·ad of gi' ingo tha·~ right to the shiro eolnlci] ::. As for the other i-hircs Y.-hi~h were at gTcater di· t •nC'l' frorn :Rockhamnt Jtl, no iTian would hnxe to ride 50 or 6Li rnil0~ ir1 or-clcr to record his YOt<', as thC' ballot­p.:J,llCl' Yro:1ld be ~2:::1t on+. n ·l n·tnrn0d bY post. There v ,,:' noth;'lg' delnocnd·i( i.< t 1 I.r propo~al to take a\v.-<y fro1n r:, ·-- ~)::yc: th.· rig'h: to elect .h:-~:r rf'lJTC'"f'nt •.t[yp, on thr­board. anU be hOned i-~18 1nc 1dn1011t wonh1 be agreed to l_-;y f-10 Conunjttc·?.

I1 ox. B. F _\ TTBY : The l\li ·is. '"'r -='0!11 .,d to haYc confn.;;l·rl thP ic··'lC ~::nn0\\"lwt. ThP hon. gC'ntl~ nH~n rcfC'rrC'cl to the .and pron·T~~ 0f clf'rno:-'r d:Y, and :-:ccnJC 1 fnd f.mlt v;iih i·_, po]i+i.cs. 'fhe c:lrmocratic P1cnH'·11t was ineYitP __ bl. finding it '~ay into CY('l'Y ~Y~t('ITI 0~ C'1'''i111('Ht in .\u-:tTalia,

t1nd 'th ~·c w.·'J in tlw phr' eolc::;·-~ of the anH)nclm0nt to ,,·onnd ~ n;: rnan's politif'~1l . uc;;ceptibi1itic·. l-1P knc" Rockha.1npton GlH1 thf' : .. nrror:ndi;1g dist ·iC'~ Y1 Pll. hnYin?" liY('ci there :-lr hn:!Jh.~ vorrr~, :tnc1 he knc;,,- thL neccs~.itv for j111~-uc)yin~ th0 'r ·ttl nc1 ner-0-·lncl ~f the R~ckho ·11pton Jiarbon1· Bo:11'(1.

For years nast the r· rnn1uniti( s intcrc'\lcci had ~('\ C'l' L0cn ;-.ble to a:;.reo n ., to it~ rwlic:Y, m:d their actio>' J hacl not cr c<.tNl con­ftdcnce in the L·indi of the general pnbli . Now that an opportunity wa oftcrc-:1 to en1arg-o Hw h1 is of repl'f'' pr.. .... ation, he thoudht that h\n. gentle1ncn .~hc-·.tl<l on1:v be too glad tr a"ist in ,.,-h,tt · onld b<e . an irnproYr'nf'nt C'n ~h0 ~tate of Gt.tair~. All that we,, propo by th•• amcndmc·:1t was that the Tatcnn•-ers, and not certain shire councils, ho\dd l: • allowed to ~!oct a c;-,rtain nnn1bcr of per.'")n to trans~ act tlJPir bnsinc•' on tho h :rbour ho:,crrl. Tht" clan·" proposed that the shi:: c·>nncils should c'oot th•"' rejwesentativoc. but it might happen that che shire <'?tmcils ':·ould. b: tlwir choice tbntt"'. tho d0s1res and mtcnhons of the rat<'c"l''"' .. That should w:t bo per­mitted. c .peciallv in tho two districts in the vicinit•' of Rookhamnton, where there would be rlo nnrluc tlclay,- ex:pcn~e. or 1ncon~ yenicnce in prC'naring eloC'toral rolk If it were proposed that the amendment should appl;c to all other sl~ire~ in Centr·:-d Qnec'l'­lnnd. he should be mclmed to support the Minister in resisting the amendment, be­cause of the clelay and expense which that would entail. This was a matter of vital im­portance to the people of Rockhampton and·

Ro;khampton Harbour, Etc., Bill. [20 OcTOBER.] Testator's, Etc. Bill. 1365

the surrounding districts, and they were very anxious that the amendment, which \Vas a Yery r<?asonable one, should be incor­porated in the Bill. He hoped that the ·innate sense of fairnlay in hon. members '"ould induce them to 'support the amend­ment.

Hol\. A. G. C. HA WTHORX felt inclined ·to support the amendment as far as the two shirn of Fitzroy and Livingstone were concerned. These shires were in the vicinity of Rockhampton, and there would be no great difficulty in taking a poll there. The 'Cairns Harbour Board district compri,ed the town of Cairns and the shires of Barron. CairC~s. HerbPrton, Tinaroo, \Valsh, and 1\'oothakata. The board consisted of nine members, and the ratepayers of that largo arPa were consulted in their election. 'Under those circumstances he thought it would be

fair thing if the ratepavcrs in this parti­oeular instance wcr<: also ~.consulted. There ,,-ere in Brisbane two boards~the Victoria Bridge Board and the Fish Board--which were elected on lines similar to those laid <:lmvn in the Bill. The members of those boards were elPcted bv the local authorities in the metl'opolitan area, and eo far the boards haYe not work0d satisfactorilv. \Vhile he thought that it would b<' moi·e satis­fe ctory if the ratepayers in the shirE's near Rockhampton were allowed to 0lect their represcntatiYes on the board. he did not think the argument would apply with equal fore<' to the ratepa0·ers in the more distant '0 S11Il'E'S,

Hox. P. J. LEAHY thought there was a ·great deal to be said in faYour of the amendment, eo far as the two shires of ~Fitzroy and Livingstone \VE.'re concerned, and he should thPrefore mp;oort the amend­ment ; but he should dec"idedly oppose a similar amendnwnt in connection with the m1orc \Vcstern shires.

Question~That the word proJ1osed to be ·omitted (Jir. Gurti,,'s am enrlm ent) stand part of the clause~put; and the Committee diYided :--

CONTENTS, 5.

:Ron. A. H. Barlow Hon. A . • T. Carter F. T. Brentnall C. F. ~Iarks W. T". Brown

Teller: Hon. W. >. Brown.

~ OT~CONTENTS, 13.

:S:on. J. Cowlishaw G. S Curtis A. Dunn B. Fahey E. W. H. Fowles H. L Groom A. G. C. Hawthorn

Ron. P. J. Leahy P. )Iurphy T .• T O'Shea A. H. Parnell \Y. Stephens A. H. Whittingham

Teller: Hon. G. S. Curtis.

HcsolYed in the negative.

Question~That the word proposed to be in,erted (Jir. G'l1'fis',, amcnr!mt uf) be SO in­·oertcd~put and passPd.

In paragraph (e), as follows:-

" Two of such members shall be elected bv the councillors of the shires of Ba­n.ana, Bauhinia, Belyando, Cal!iungal, (;lernlont. Duaringa, Enu~rald, ,t,_ld Peak Dovvns.''

IIox. G. S. CrRTIS mowd the omission ~:0£ the 'vord "councillors/' \vith a vh~\V of

inserting the word " ratepayers." The rea.­sons he had advanced in favour of the amend­ment which had just been agrc':l to appliecl equally in the present instanco.

RoN. A. H. BARLOW was always pleased when a question was decided by the voice of the CounciL whether it w0nt in his fayour or whether it went against him ; but while there might have been something to !:Je said in favour of the popular Yote in the case of the shires of Living"tone and Fitzroy, the distant shires referred to in paragraph (c) could hardly be tr<>ated in the same way. HowcYPr, he would be quite content to take the voice of the Committee on the subject.

HoN. P. J. LEAHY: They were dealing now with an entirely diff<>rent proposition to that which wa' decided a moment ago.· The shires of Livingst-me and Fitzroy were near Hockhampton, and were of compara­ti "''ly small ar<>a. and there was no great difficulty in holding an election b~- the rato­pay<'l's. The system of popular election would work therA quite as well as, if not better than, eledion by the members of the shire councils; but, in these \Vestern shires the position was entirely different. He did not desire to elaboratE' the question, but would merely say that he could not support the amendment.

Hox. B. FAHEY s.1id he was not so very ardent about thi·cr as h0 was about the last amendment, but all the same he could not help remarking that the amendment was strictly in accordance with the spirit of democracy.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: \Yhat has that to do with it?

HoN. B. FAHEY: Whatever was right proved its right to exist. That was prob­ably a principle that the hon. member did not subscribe to. Possiblv the hon. member had not yet reached tlie age of. common sense. (Laughter.) Should the amendment be lost, he would not weep o;:er it, but he certainly would support it.

Hon. P. J. LEAHY: Democracv is like charity, it covers a multitude of si"ns.

Amendment (Jir. Curtis's) put and nega­tived.

Hox. G. S. CVRTIS said that, after the last decision of the Council, he would not move the amendment of which he had given notice in the following paragraph.

Clause 2, as amended, put and passed.

Claus<' 3 and the schedule put and passed.

The Council re umed. The AcTING CHAIR-liiAX reported the Bill with an amendment, and the report was adopted.

The third reading was made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

TESTATOR'S FA~IILY ~IAI.)JTE:\"ANCE BILL.

SECOl\D READING.

HoN. A. H. BARLOW: I rather think this Bill is an old friend. It is in force, though perhaps not in the same words, in Xew ZPaland and Victoria. Its object is that where a pc1 'on di<>s l0aving a will and does not make adquate provision for the wife, husband, or children, the Supreme

Han . .A. H. Barlow.]

1366 Testator'8 Family [COUNCIL.] 1vlaintenance Bill.

Court may, in its discretion on application made withi;1 three months 'of date of the granting a probate bv or on behalf of the wife, husband, m· children, order that such proYision as it thinks fit shall be ma·de out of the estate of the testator for su<'h wife husband, or chi_J~ren. The court may attach such co11<h~wns to the order as it thinks fit. It may direct that the proYisions sh:1ll consist of the lump sum or a periodical or uthcr payment. It mav refuse to make an order in favour of a'llJ· person whose charac<:er or condu.{'t, in its opinion <lisen­titles him or her to the benefit of a~ order. The incidom·e of the payment or pa.yments ordered shall. un]e,s the court otherwise directs, fall rateably upon the whole estate of the testator, or, in cases wh0re the aut hoc ity of tlw court does not extend or cannot directly or indi reetly be made to extend to tho whole ntate. then to , o much of the estate '" is situated in Queensland. Of course, the court <. "1nnot 1nake 'fill order on an e•.tate that is outside its jurisdiction. The court may exonerate any part of the tec;tator'B estate from tho incidence of the order, after hearing the partie,. The court rnuy at any tnne fix a periodic pa:pnent or l~mp sn.~1 to be notid by any legatee or de­VIsee. \Yllc1e an application has been fi!ed on behalf of any person it may bo trEated by the cuurt as an application on behalf of all persons who might apply. An e;ecutor ma:: apply on bclnlf of any person who is an mfaut or of unmnnd mind, and the court may treat such application as un applkation on bPhal£ of such person for the purpose of avmclmg i'1e effect of limitation. Any person claiming the benefit of this measure must make application within three months from the grant of probate of the will. Upon an order being made, the portion of the estate affecc~d. thereby shall be held subject to the pronsH 'l of the order. Subsection (10) is important, as it forbids the makin~ of a n1ortgag·e, charge, or assign1nent of anY kind before '"' ordn is made bv the court or, unless >vith the permission of th8 court: after an order has been made. The object of that prm·isi0n is to prevent persons mortgaging their interests in an estate. \Vhere the court has ordered ·1eriodic pav­:nents, or has ordered a lum1) sum to be mvested for any person. it may inquire at any sub,,·r;uent date whether the party bene­fited. ~y the order has become po,1e,sed of proYlSl?D for Ius proper maintenance, and may discharg-e, .vary, or "'uspend the- order, or make such other order as is. just in the circumstances. \Vhtn an order is made by the court, all duties pa' J.ble on the trans­mi,,·.ion of the co.tate ur{der tho will of the tc:stator shall be computed as if the pro­YJ.swn~ oi the ordci' had been part of the 1nll: 111 othC'r wordc. probate and succession duties are to he pa i.d according to the relationship of the parties. The court m<tv from time to timf'. in manner provided bv th~ J udieaturC' Act. make rules of court for the purpose of carrying out this mPasure. The principle of the Bill is the question which this Housc has to consider. It mav work well in some cases. and it may require great care in admini~tration in others. I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Ho:-~. P. :urRPIIY: Probablv the inten­tion of the Government in bringing forward thi, measure is tD provide that parents shall

[Hon. A. H. Barlow.

make such provision for their children, whether they are good or bad, as will pre· vent the possibility of those children becom· ing a burden on the State or Commonwealth. If that is the object in view, it is a good one, and I approve of it, becau •e I think a parent should be compelled to make such provision for his child. even though tha1. child has been disobedient and perhaps un­worthv, as will preyent him becoming a hurdei1 on the State: but I fear that thi;o, measure goes a great deal further than that, and that it will lcacl to a g-reat deal of squabbling. expense, and -,,hat I may call the destruction of the income of an estate. I fear also that it will lead to what will he a Yerv bad thino- for young children, espeeia~II-.-,· for those

0

\Yho ar~ gro\Ying up tv manhood m1d womanhood. and that it will entirelY destl'ov the control of parents over their chi'lren.' Tho Bill i,, altogether too wide in its ,,,_ope. The first vtragraph of clause 3 sa" s-

" If any pE son (herein aft' r called 'the tc~tato_·') clic.;; lraving a will. and without 111aking therein aLle'_lUatn provi­.-:ion for th0 proper nutintenanee and "-UPllorr of the tc"rator's -.~. ife, husband. or children,"

etc. The words " adequate provi~ion" .arc much too l'·idf>. \Yhat >Yould be ''adequate 11l'OYision" in the opinion of one judge THnlld probably not be " adequate provision" in the opinion of another ju~ge.. All t~at P!'r­Iiament has a right to do m mterfermg w1th the will of a parent is to insist that he shall make such provision as will prevent his chil­dren becoming a burden on the ~tate, and the amount that should b(, apportloned to a child should be defined in the Bill. At any rate if that is not done, it should be enacted that' the parent shall provide a reasonable amount for an unworthv child who would perhaps not get anything" otherwise, and that reasonable amount should be an amount which will pre.-ent him becoming a burden on the community. Suppofe a man has !in incomB of .£5,000 a ye-ar, and he has a w1fe and a fa.milv of four children. Suppose, further. that 'the' p]d,"t bov has been a good bov all his life, that he has been obedient, that he has served his parents well and· assisted them in their business to the best of his abilitv, and that he has been a g·ood and respected. member of society. Suppose the father wills to him .£1.900 a vear, £1,000 a year to his wife, and £1.000 a year to each of his tw.) daughters, and only £100 a year to his younge't r.on, who is the yery opposite of his elder brother, who has been disobe· client all his life. who has perhaps been in disgrace, who has often made his parents angry and anxious by his conduct. and '':'ho has, in fact, been the waskr of the fam1ly, causing tronble and distress to his parents. ·would £100 a year, or, roughly, £2 per week, not be sufficient to leave the ,·ounger son in such a case? I think it would, and I do not think the State has any right to say that more than a moderate amount shall be provided in such a case. For the State to do that would be practically to destroy all paren­tal control. Such a lad as I have described would snap his fingers in his father's or mother's face and say, "I will do as I like: you will have to leave me adequately pro· vided for."

Hon. A. H. BARLOW : The court is to be· the judg3 of what is " adequate provision.".

Adjournment. [20 OCTOBER.] QuestionB. 1367

Hox. P. :MURPHY: The court ought not to be the judge of that; the parent who reared the boy is the best judge, and the court should have no right to interfere with the parent beyond compelling him to make such pro· vision for the child as shall prevent him becoming a burden on the State. The court should not interfere with the natural rights of paronte, and thus weaken their authority and control That authority and control are weak enough iu Australia as it is, and we should not do anything which will still fur­ther weaken the position of parents. I am not speaking from any per,onal interest in this matter, because my will is made, and this measure will not affect it one iota; but I say the measure c,hould have received more consideration from those who are responsible for introducing it, and that they should not interfere with the inhNent right of a parent to control his children. It will be a bad thing for those young people who are in­clined ;n their youthful days to go astray, if they know that the parent's authority is weakened by legislation. I agree that the courts generally act with diE'~retion and do what they believe is right, but if mch a measure as this is passed, a young ma,l who has bePn left very little by his fathE>r would go round among his fri< nds and tell them that the old man had died and left him prac­tically nothing. By and by he would come to one of his friends, who would sav to him, "I know a lawyer who will put thcis matter right for you." Then lhe matter would be brought before the court, and it is possible that a large portion of the estate would be wasted before the court came to a final de­cision in the matter. I read the debate on this measure in e.nother place, and found that practically the only reason given for its introduction was that it was on the statute· book in New ZE'aland. Thz,t is not a good reason for introcl"ucing the Bill in Queens­land. The Minic;ter who movE·d tho second reading of the measure in this Chamber told us that a similar Act had been in force in New Zealand for six vears, but he did not tell us how it has wo1:ked in New Zealand. The Council should require a great deal more information about thG working of that Act before passing this Bill.

Hon. A. H. BARLOW: I hope the Attorney­General will be here to·morrow, a"ld that he will give further information.

HoN. P. MURPHY: I hope that we shall have further information on the subject; but at pre•P'lt I am strongly opposed to the Bill because it unduh and unroasonabh inter­feres with the inhment rights of parents.

HoN. F T. BRENTNALL: I beg to move the adjournment of the debate.

Question put and passed.

The resumntion of tho debate waec made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

ADJOURNMENT.

HoN. A. I-I. BARLOW: We have done a very goo.d day's work, and I hope we shall do another's good day's work to-morrow. I moYe that the Council do now adjourn.

Question put and passed.

The Council . adjourned at twenty-eight minutes past 5 o'clock.