Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Council

WEDNESDAY, 14 JUNE 1899

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

Australasian Federation [14 JUNE.] Enabling Bill. 425

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

WEDNESDAY, 14 JUNE, 1899.

The PRESIDEN~' took the chair at half-past 3 o'clock.

QUI~STION. SPECIMEN MARBLES FOR MUREUM.

The HoN. A. NORTON asked the PoHt­master-General-

V\Tith reference to a pa;..e of specimen marbles f;pecially selected for the Qnecnslnnd }.Juseum by the Pcntc­liconl\:Iarhle Company in Italy and received in Brisbane early in 1898-

(a.) By whom or by \vhosc authority Vi'ns the rase opened before being sent to the museum P

(b.) By whom or by whose authority "~ere a number of specimens removed from the case, and how we1·c they disposed of?

(a.) "\Vill the Government eau.::;e strict in<tniry to he made into the circumstances conncctecl w·ith the removal of the specimens from the case, and take such action as will compel any persons in whose possession they are to hand them over to the museum ?

The POSTMAST~~R-GENERAL replied-A package containing thirty-hvo specimens of marble,

presented by the Pentclicon l\Iarhle Clompany to the Queensland Government, 'vas received 1Jy the Chief Secretary from ~1essrs. \Vill~ and Oo., of Port Said, in l\Iarch la.'lt year, and was fonvarded to the DPpartmcnt of Agriculture, on the understanding that the contents woulU be cxhibitell in the Te('hnologiral :)fnscmm.

The case, whirh contained two separate packages, one of polished and the other of rough antique ~IJPCi­men~. was opened in the Department of A:,:riculture, a.nd a number of duplicate polished spedmens. prE,·-:.ented by the manager of the Pentelicon Company to the Honour­able 'r. J. B~Tnc.;;, were forwartlPd to the late Prime lVIitlistrr, the rough sped mens being :;;ent to the Curator of the Queensland ~1m·:::eum.

No :;;pecimens other than tho~w forwarded to the late Honourable r_r. J. ByrneR were dispoRcd of, and the remaining polished specimens were, until rpcently. in the posse.,sion of the Department of Agriculture. They have now been forw~rded to tile (~ueensland ::nusenm.

No fnrther inquiry into the matter appears necl~ssary.

LEAVE Oli' ABSENCE. The HoN. \V. APL1N, in moving-That leave of abseneo be grant.f'U to the Honourn.hle

John Dcane for the remainrler of the se~sion·-said : I should like to say a word in justification of this motion. Before leaving the North I saw l\fr. Dean<c, and he then t'xpre'"ed his dPsire and intention to be present at this session of Parlia­ment to take part in the debate on the question coming on for consideration to-day. But at the last moment I got a telfgram from him saying it was impossible for him to leave. I know he is engaged on very urgent private business, and that that business requires his own personal supervision.

Question put and passed.

ACDITIONAL SI'I'TIXG DAY. The POSTMASTER-G I~NEHAL, in moving­That, nnle~s otherwise ordered, the Conneil will meet

for the de"' patch of busint: ~sat 3 o'clock p.m. on F1·idavin each w-eek, in addition to the days already prmnded· for by Se,,sional Order-said : n moving this motion I need hardly say that we have busines• before us now, and that my desire is to occnpy and utili~e every hour we possibly can until we finish that business.

Question put and passed.

AUSTitALASIAN FEDER.\.TION ENABLING BILL.

SECOND READING. The POSTMASTER-GENERAL: In rising

to move the second reading of this Bill to provide for the accept<tnce and enactment of a Feder<>l Constitution for Australasia, I would ask hon. members' indulgence for a while to enable me to exp1'iin the provisions of the Enabling B1ll itself.

The preamble sets out the circumstances under which this Bill is presented for your considera­tion. It recites the fact of the holding of the Con­vention in Melbourne in March of last year, when all the colonies except Queensland were represented, and a certain draft Bill to constitute a Commonwealth of Australia was adopted. Later on a Conference of Premiers was held in February of this year, at which some amendments, to which I shall refer later on, were agreed to in the dmft Bill of the Conven­tion, 'ind that Bill, as amended by the Premiers, is the Bill which forms the 2nd schedule of the Enabling Bill of which I am now movinil" the second reading. This Enabling Bill, with the Commonwealth Bill, has already been before the legislature of South Australia. It pae:sed that Parliament, and on a referendum it was, by a very large majority, accepted by the people of South Australia. It has also been before the Parliament of New South \Vales, and was passed there, and a referendum upon that passing i'l to take place, as hon. gentlenwn are aware, on Tuesday next; and upon the accept­ance or rejection of the measure by the people of New South Wales will depend its fate in (lneensland. Should it happen that the Bill shouH be rejected by the electors of New South \Vales, of course our Dill comes to nothing. No­thing further can be done, became, un!t•,sB New South \Vales joins with us, federation, it appears to me, is impossible. But I do not th;nk that the fact of next Tuesday being referendum day in New South Wales should weigh with us in any way in deoJing with this measure. \Ve ought to make up our own minds; this House should say whether they are prepared to pass this Enabling Dill or not. Queensland should spe.1k for it,;elf, and not wait, as Home people think we ought, until Tuesday next to see whether Sew Sonth \Vales accepts the Commonwealth Bill. I think that would be a very deroga­tory position for Queensland to occnpy. I would like to see Queen,land speak for itself, and especially before that day, in order, at any rate, that this Parliament should be able to say whether it is prepared to submit this important and gr:we <Jl!estion to the electors of Queensbncl. \Vith regard to the ~;nabling Bill, I should like to explain a few of its provisions to Hhow what it means. In the first place it iH provided by the 1st clause that this Enabling Bill shall have effect in the event of the decision of a mttjority of the electors of New South \Vales upon the taking of the referendum being in favour of the accept9,nce of the draft Bill as set out in the 2nd schedule, but otherwise it shall not have any force or effect. I have already indic<1ted that; and I may as well say now that no amendment whatever, in any circumstances, c;tn be admitted in the Bill which has passed all the colonies except this one. Hon. gentlemen can very plainly see that if any amendment is made here Victoria may mttke some amendments; and Tasmania may make some amendments ; and the result would be simply chaos. \Ve have either got to accept this Bill or not. By clause 3 it is pro­vided that-

At a time to be fixed by the Governor in Council by Proclamation published in the Gazelle, nnd not sooner than the thirty-first da,y of August, one thousnnd eight hundred and ninety-nine, the question of the accept­ance or rejection of the Constitution shall be referred and submitted to the electors.

The pull is to be taken throughout Queensland as one electorate, and it is to be taken throughout Queensland on the same day. Each voter shall vote by ballot, "Yes" or " No," on the question in accordance with the direction on the ballot paper. No person shall vote morP than once, notwithstanding his name may be on more than one electoral roll, and any person who does so

Australasian lJ'ederation [COUNCIL.] Enabling Bill.

vote will render himself liable to the penaltie~ provirled for in that clause. Then, under 'ub­section 3 of the 4th clause, it is pmvided that-

Ever.Y returning officer appointed und._er the last­mentioned Act~ :~hall be nn a~sistant returninF; offict;r for the pprposes of thi~ Act, antl i.n aclctition to the powrrs and dutic, vested in n.nd imposed upon him by this Act, shall hrtvc such of the powers and .!-1hall perforrn s1wh of the duties veRted in and. impos.:cl upon a n~tnt·uing offic.:lr under the last-mentioned Acts as are neec-·-;ary for carrying into efl'ect the provisions of this Act.

The ohject is simply to apply the general law as to elections in this colony tu the referendum to take place under this Bill, and that is carried out alw by clause 5. By clause G it is provided that-~otwithstnnding anything- to the contrary rontftined

in Lhe provisions of the l~Ieetions Act,:;, 188'5 to 1898, on the first Tuesday in the month of July, one thousand eight hnndrrd and ninety-nine, a registration eourt sllall sit at every place a.vpointed for holding a conrt for any elc>ctoraJ <listrict for the 1nn·po'1c of adjucli­eating npon claims to registration c.n Lhe o1ectoral li~t of such distr-ict i and Hll the provisions of those Aets with resprnL to a bi-monthly rrgb:tration court and tlle procceUing.-; to be talwn with respcrt to names rP;~h.tered thereat shall am,ly to the conl't so hehl in the month of July:

Provided that the hi-monthlv r>Jgistration court to be hclfl in the month of 1.ugtl. ,~ next following xhall revis.e the list of names regi"'tt~red at the court HO held in the month of .Tnly.

A fnrthf,r proviso "''w adde<l to that later on in these words-

Provided furthor th~t thr court ~CJ held in the month of .Tuly, and every ohjeetion again:-;t a.nv pen;on wlw~e name is l'egisten'il tb,~rcat, f;eut to t e ~ele(~tnr;Jl re..;i"­trar, an<l snch person. :,,h:tll he decme 1 1 o be dnlv hel~l nntl sent._. ~1.ot withstmuling a~1y f~tilnre to enmpl}· with the }n'OVI'<IOns of the sai(l Act~ rda.ting to the time for giving notiet~ of the ltoltllug of the court awl for send­ing- sneh objection.

The object nf th:tt pr.,vi,ion i~ to enable persons who ore n•lt now on the rull to get on the roll, and the Government are desirous of enah!ing everY: peroon who is entitled to ;;e!o on the roll, and IS not on the roll, to he register<•d as an electqr for the pnrpose of voting on this cpwstion. In vi .. w of tlw >lhortlH "'of the time which will bo availahle for th<tt pnrpoke, I think it is only ri~ht t hott I should read a memorandum on the >1nbject vvhich has been sent to me by th<> l'r<emier, an·l which of course will nppe:tr in FlanS((r<l. It is as follows :-

In order to enable every person who mn..y he qunlificfl under the existing electoral law as a a eleetor to vote at tllc proposed referendum, an anwndment was intro­duced in tlle AssemlJly providing for a !-<peeial re.g·i-.:trn,­tion court to be held on the first 'ruesd<ty in ,July (to which the provi~io11s of the Electornl Acts rol··ting to bi-I?onthly n·gistration eourt~ are to apply), the mua.:.;; reg1sten•d at whieh are to be revised at the ortlinary bi-monthly eonrt in August. As the l'eforendnm is not to be held befol'e the 31:4t of ..\. ngust, all persons rt~gis­tercd at thi.:, court will, if tlnly <1ualified, be able to vote on the ll_nest.ion of federation.

By the }acct.ions Ants it hl p1·ovidcd thnt fourteen tlays' notice of the f;itt.ing of Pver.Y regi~lration court shall be given by the electoral regist.ntr bY advertise­m rut in some newspaper circulating in the (u .. trict. It is also prescribed that a copy of the list of names ~:eg-is­tered at each bi-monthl~' conrt shall be published :in like manner not late1· than fonrteen days after the sitting thereof, and that objE<~tions · to names appearing on the list must be sent to the electoral registrar and to the pct·son objectf,d to fourteen days before the day appointed for holding the next subsequent court. In virw of the improb:t­bility of the Bill passing Pal'liament in time to enal1le fotn·t.een days' not.if'e of the special court to be given, and having regard to the impossibUHy of strictly complying with the provisioJJS as to publication of list and notice of objections, it is necessary to insert in the Enabling Bill a provision that the specinl court to be held in July, and every objection ag inst auy pP,rson whose name is registered therea t, shall be de.emed to be held and :::ent, notwithsb.nrling any fmlure to comply with the provisions of the said Acts relating to the time for giving notice of the holding or the court and fo1· sending such objections.

Kotwithstanding tl1is special provision, it. is of !1ara­monnt imvortance that the nf'cc::;sary instructions for the holding of the special re,.;istration court should be issned to elPetol'al registrars, and that notice of the court ~honla be ynhlishcd with the ntmo~t df'"•Patch, e~pccially ia view of the fact that in the remote dh;tliets of the colony ~ome of the eleetoralrf•gistrars are beyond the ruwh of the telegrn.ph, and even if the Bill is passed. by the pnd of the current vmek, it will only be with considerable tliffienlty that directions can be commnni­ented to them as tO the dutie~ imposcU upon them. Until the H1easu1·e is finally vassed it i~. of course, impossil)Je to take nny action in tlle matter. 'rhat is the princijJal reason I had yesterday in asking hon. gentlemen to give me all the time and attPntion they pos,ibly could this WPek-so that we should exhaustively di,muss this Bill. I do not want in any way to curtail discussion, but I wish to utilise Pyery hour possible for the pur­pose of dAaling with the Bill which is now under our consideration. There are only one or two m<l!'e clauses tu which I wish to draw attention. Clause 7 pro\ id As that notwithstanding the jJl'O·

visions of the Elections Acts, 1885 to 1889, an assistant ret.urning of!icer or other p1·esiding offic~r may, if he thinks fit, put to any person the questiOns as to whether he is the person whose name appears on the roll, and whether he has already voted there or elsewhere· at the pre,,ent poll. Of course, there are the usual cori~eqlwncf>s if a pPrson attemptR to vote in contravention of the provisions of the Bill. By elause 9 it is <lechtrt•d that the total number of votes given for the acceptance of the Consti­tution and the totltl number of votes given for the rejection of the Constitution shall be endorsed upon the writ by the re-turning officer and sent to the Governor. The ]Htblictttion of the result of the poll in the Gazette is to be con­clusive evidence of the result of such poll. Olause 11 i:-) au ilnportant provi:·iiotJ, because in that clause it is stated that if two of the colonie,·-of wh:ch New South \Vale., shall be one, in addition to Q,ueensland-accept the C:o1wLitution the Legislative Couueil and the Legislative A''""mhly may adopt addresses to thP QneeH praying that the Constitution may !JP sulm1itl'ed for enacLment by the l'arlianH·nt (,f Lhe Utlited I{ingtlom of ch·eat Britr..,in ancl Ireland, fubject t<l tlw n<lnption of similar addre>SL>l bv the Parlittments of such two colonieB. 1"ha.t 1 ~roviHion lH'e!-;erves to l)ttrlia­m< nt the po\\81' to deal with ·thi.s qne;t.ion not­withstandiug the referendum. Supposing the result nf the rPferendum should, in thA opinion of l'arliament, he in any way unsatisfactory­supposing there should be a majority of only one in favour of the acceptance of the Consitution, and there might, be many other suppositwns which would make the result of the poll tmsati,factory to I'arliament, then Parliament still reserves to itsel£ the power of dealing with the matter in the acldresses to Her lHajesty. So !hat whethur the people accept the Connnon­wealth Bill or not, the result of the poll will still be subject tu the revision of ParliamPnt. I think nothing fairer could hP devised than th:tt. Schedule 1 contains thE' question to be put to the electors on the b:tllot-paper, and reads as follows:-

Are you in favour of the proposed Federal Constitu­tiou Bill;

YES. :vo.

[If you Rre in favour of the Bill 'll"ike out the word XO.] [If you are against the Bill strike out the word YES.] The 2nd sehedule is the Constitution Bill which was adopted by the Convention of 1S98, amencled lw the Premiers, and which has heen adopted by the l'arliament and the people of South Australia, and by the Parliament of New South \Vales, where a referendum is to take phce n~xt Tuesday. B~fore I pass on to deal with the question of federation itself,

Australasian Ferler"ation [i4 JUNE.] Enabling Bilt. 427

I wish to say that I hope that hon. gentlemen­whatever may be their ideas as to whether federation is a good thing or not-will come to the conclueion that the question should be relegaterl to the people. If, after the question had been relegated to the people, we had no further soy in the m.ttter, that would be a dif­ferent thing; but I do not think a better scherr,fl could be devised than to refer the Bill to the people, and then to critic!se their opinion after­wards.

The Hon, B. D. MoREHEAll: Dispute the endorsement after referring it to the people?

The POSTMAS1'ER-GENERAL: No. I do not soy dispute the endorsement. I say keep within the parliamentary powers the ]lOWer to revise, to rlism1ss, to criticise, and to deci<le a" to what should be done after the refert·ndum has been taken, I£, as in S011th Australia, a large majority should he found in favour of the Bill, I am quite sure no hnn. gentleman would meddle with that decioion. In South Australia they ha<l a majority of over 30,000infavonr of the Bill, and if we shoul<l have a large majority in Queensland, I do not think any hon. gent!eman would interfere with 'mch a verdict. T ha,·ennly pointed nut clause 11 for the purpose of enabling hrm. gentlemen to see that they will still hltve powers <mtskh• tbe referendum. Notwithstanding that the Address in Reply did notrequi1 e that we should go into the Hnbject of federation, it wa~ gune into, and some exhaustive speech<"< have been deliverecl for and agrcinst the question. 'fhat has cleared the g-round to a large r·xtent for us; and perhaps those who have Rpnken at great length will not rpquire on the occaHion of thix BilJ now cmning before us to speak at such length; but I have no doubt that ev• ry hnn, g<'ntleman will feel that it is necessary for him on a qur·stion of this kind to give his views to the country, in order that the country should be ussis~ed in making up their minds aR to how they Rh•mld vote. It is a very good education for eleetors who have not ha:l the opportunity WP ha.vl' had of going into thi'< question, and of considning car(·fnlly as to whethHr it i;; likely to benefit (lnt•<m,,lancl Cll' not; it will have an edueative tendfmcy towards enabling them to m:,ke np their milllls to rc.td the speeches which will appear in Hansard llhowing the vh>ws of hon; members of thiR Council. They have already ha!] an opportunity of rearling the speeches which have been de­livered on the Address in Reply, and in like manner I am sure they will be equally inte­rc·Rted in reading the speeches which will be delivered on the present occasion. I know that there are hon. gentlemen who think thatHansarcl iR not so 0·densively read. At the same time, I think that when men's business, when their occupations, and the existence, as it were, 0f the colony, for better or worse, nre under considera­tion, thAy will lake the very greatest interest in the question,_ and will read everything thnt they can lay therr handH upon hearing upon it. I must say they have ample opportunity, for I never open a newspaper of any kind that I do not find arguments for or against federation. If the people of Queensland cannot be educ:1trd on the qnc>tion in that way, they car1not be edu­cated on it at all. I am not going to detain hon. gentlemen any longer than I can possibly help; but it is necessary to lightly glance at the growth of federation so far as it hn,s affected Qneens­]n,nd. I shn,ll begin by referring to the J<'ederal Council, which came iuto existence by the pa' sing o£ the -Federal Council Bill thr•mgh the Par­liament of the United Kingdom in 1881\. 'rhe first Council was held in Hobart in 1886, and from that time up to the sitting in February, 1899, Queensland has always taken a very heart­felt and intense interest in the proceedings of the

Council. The first Council was presided over by the l:tte Mr. J ames Service, of Victoria, and subsequently SirS. vV. Griffith, our present Chief .Justice, and our then Prewier, presided over its deliberations. Very ,great interest has alwflys been exhibited by Queensland members in con­nection with the business that came before this Council, and several Acts of practical utility have been passed by the Council. But, unfortu­nately, the failure nf this Cmmcil is to be laid entirely to New South "\Vales. New South "\Vales ne\'er would join. 'fhey would nnt co-ope­rate with us in that Council in any way, and I attribute the failure of the Council first to New South "\Vales not joining, and again to the fact that it had no powers of taxation. They could not possibly do any­thing else but do as we do in this House­introduce Bills which did not inYolve taxation. That could never be carried on with any success, cnnsequently the Federa' Council really-to use a vulgarism-fizzled out. It received its death­blow when South Australia retired in 1889. Very little has been done since that date ; so that we can consider that the I<'edeml Council­notwithstanding th11t we had great hopes nf its expansion, and although we m;sed the number of memheril and in other ways endeavoured to make it of some utility-has died " natural death. So mnch so tlH>t when the represen­t:ttivcs who were entitled to atten<l the Council met in :Melbourne in February last, they detPr-1Ylin~d, in view of the greater federation which was evidently coming, that they would do no busme•s. TberBfore we may look upon the J<'ederal Council as being defunct. Following thll retirement of South Australia in 1H89 came a movement which was of g-reat importance to the whole of _\_us­tralia. General :Ed wardes, who was c 1lled upon to report upon the defencE'"'' of Austmlia, in a historical document pointed out that it was quite impossible for us to do anything in connection with federal defence unle~s we harl a Federal Government. \Vhether or not that stimulated Air Henry Parkp·; to take the lead in t'1lling a Conference of repre,entatives from th<' colonies to C<msider the nu>tter, or wlwther hfl thon~ht that the time had arrived wlum something ought to be done in that direction, I do n<>t know. At any rate, a c.mfemnce was called in J\felbourne, and the result of that Conference was the calling of the colonies_ to :·Iect representatives, and to form a national Australasian Convention. At that Convention every colony was repre­sented, and by the best men who could be chosen. Onr colony was r0presented by some of our leading men-Sir Samuel Griffith, Sir Thomas Mcilwraith, Mr. John Donaldso'1, Mr. .Macroe"an, l\fr. Thynne, and Mr. Macdonald-Paterson. At that Convention a scheme was adopted, and the basis laid for federal union that hail never since lost its importance. And that Bill is almost the same Bill which we have before us to-day, as I will show you later on. At any rate, the whole question of federal union was considt>red at that Convention, with an intPlligcnce and determination to endeavour to bring the colonies together that could not be excellPd, and a document was prepnred and passed which showed that the delegatu paid the very greatest attention to the framing of" Cnnstitution which would be most suitable to Australia. They had all the necessary material to go upon. They had before them the Constitutions of the United St.atec, Canada, anrl :Switzerland ; they took the best out of everyonP of those Constitutions, and modelled it down so as to agree with onr ret,re­sentative institutions. From that time to the present th<> Constitution then drafted has been very well criticiser]. Now there is nothing like criticism. J<'rom 1891 to 1897 there has been

428 Australasian Federation [COUNCIL.] Enabling Bill.

nothing but criticism of that Bill. The conse­quence was that when the delegates met in 1897, at Adelaide, for the purpose of perfecting the Constitution, they evolved the Bill which i" now before us. I would like to remind hon. gentle­men also that the Bill of '18!J7 was prepared at the instance of delegates elected by the whole of the people of Australia, with the exception of this colony. It is not a bit of use regretting that we were not repreFented on that occasion. \V e were not represented, although there were Beveral attempts matle to obtain representation. No leJs than three attempts were made. A Bill was introduced in 18DG in another place to secure the representation of {lueensland at that Conventi•m to frame a Federal Constitution, \vith a vie\V of electing ten re]Jresentative.s for each colony. That paRsed its third reading in .July, 1896. It came to the Council, hut in consequence of the Legislative Assembly having proposed that th<me ten.,repre,entat;ves should be elected from their body, and that this House should be ahslllutely ignored, this House, on the motion of the Hon. Mr. Buzacott, I think very prope.rly, declined to have anything to do with it. Conse­quently an amendment was pas"ed by this Chamber on his motion that this Council would not consent to the measure. It went down below, and the result was that the Bill was withdrawn. That was one attempt. Then in 1897 Sir Horace Tozer bronght in a Bill to en­deavour to do the srtme thing. That was defe<ttecl in another pl:lce IJy 3!i votes to 28, and the Bill was eventually withdrawn. Then there was the Enahling Bill No. 2 introduced for the reprc,en­tat.ion of Queensland at the Convention in Melhourne in 18H8 hy the election of ten dele­gates from this colony elected on the "'me princi­ple as the repn·sentati ves from the otlwr colonies. \Vhat was the result of that measure? There was an amendment moved in another place, that the Bill should be withdrawn, and it was Ci1rried by 21 votes to 19. Advocates of separation, anti-billites, and all those who were opposed to federation, joined together and defeated the nwasure, and the consequence waR that we vvPrenot represented at all. 'I'hen they met in Adelaide in 1R97, and snbseqnently in Sydney and Mel­bourne, and passed the Bill referred to in the preamble. That Bill was afterwards ~ulJinitted to the Parliaments of Victoria, Routh Austmlia, Tasmania, \Vestern Australia, and New South \Vales. Every Parliament in Australia accepted the Bill, exce[Jt that of {lueenslaud ; but inN ew South \Vales a minimum vote crept in through the action of the Legislative Council, and it was provided that 80,000 votes should be polled in favour of the Constitution before it could be accepted. That minimum was never reacherl, the number of votes polled being, I think, 71,600, and the Bill was Jo,t. The consequence was that all the other colonies which had pa··~ed the Bill refused to federate without New South \V ales. New South IV ales must lead the way-must ac­cept the Constitution-before the other c"lonies, and especially Queensland, cnuld see that it is to their interest to federate. I would like to give hon. gentlemen the votes which were polled at the referendums held upon the Constitut.ion in the other colonies. In Victoria, 100,520 perwns voted for the Bill and 22,0911 against it; in South AuFtralia, 35,800 for and 17,320 against; in Tasmania, 11,/97 for and 2,716 against; in New South \V ales. 71,59:) for and GG,2:l8 ag:tinst. There not being the statutory majority in the mother colony, of course the thing fell through. Well, after that came the Conference of Premiers. Queensland was asked to come down and consult, so that we might finally decide what would suit the whole of the colonies the b<'st.. The Premier of this colony went down, and at that Conference certain modifications on the

Bill were agreed to, and the 2nd sche<lule of this Bill contains those amendments. I hope I am not unduly detaining or wearying hon. gentlemen.

HoNOURABLE 1\lE"IBERS: No, no! The POSTMASTER-GENERAL: It is an

important matter, and on the second reading I think hon. gentlemen are entitled to all ihe information that can be placed before them.

HoNOUH.I.BLE l\IEil!l3ERS: Hear, hear! The J'OSTMAST~~H-GJ<~NERAL: I would

like to draw the attention of hon. members to a very short explanation of the difference between the 1891 Bill and the Bill which is before them; because alchough I have read a great m~tny of the debates which httve taken place and also Press notices, I have not seen this referred to; therefore I hltve no hesitation in pointing it out. The 1899 J~ill is a much less expensive Bill than the 1801 Bill in many "ays. It was pro­posed by the 1K91 Bill that there should he 181 nHomhers at £500 a year. That comes to £90,500 per annum. \Vhen it was revised by the later Convention, they come to the conclu­sion that £400 a year was sufficient and that 108 was a Fnfficient number of members. That cornes to £43,200 per annum, 1naking a saving of £47,300 per annum. I say that shows that the reconsidrm;tion of the matter by the subsequent Convention was beneficial on the score of economy. In the 1891 Bill, there were to be eight senatrJTs for e:1ch State; in the Bill before us there are to be only six, which is a reduction, and that shows how thfy considered tlwse economies at that time. \V hen Canada started, they were a great deal more extravagant than onr people. They started wtth 2G3 members of both Houses ; 011r" will be only 108. ThPn we come to the Governor-General. By the 18()1 Bill his salary was to be" not less than £10,000 a year," so as t0 give the l<'ederal Parliament an opportunity, if they chose, of making it £20,000, But the last Convention said-" No, we will make it £10,000 certain, so that during his tenure nf office it shall not be lP"S. \Ve will have it fixed." Then ther•' are thre judges. In the 1891 Bill therP wpre to be at least five federal judges; in the 1899 Bill the numllet' is red need to three-there is a saving there. Then with regard to the Customs dutieH: In the 1801 Bill there was no limit to the power of the Cmnn<onwealth to expend Customs duties, hut in the 1SH9 Bill there is the limit of one· fourth. They need not exvend the quarter, hut the three-quarters are to be returned to the States. That is a very important matter. ThPn

1 with regard to the capital; it is important to Queensland that the capital should be as near as po•,sible to our border, and the rivalry betwc"n New South \Vales and Victoria cau>ed

i the matter to be carefully considered. Victoria, of course, was very anxious that the capital should not be Sydney, and New South \Vales was anxious thac it should not be in Victoria; so they struck a happy medium in declaring that the cajJital should be not less than lOO miles from Sydney. I think we shall benefit by that arrangement. Now, I will take hrm. gentlemen right. to the 51st clause of the Commonwealth of Australia Bill, where it is declared that certain legislative powers should be given to the Parliament of the federation. I ask hon. gentlemen to look down the whole list, and say which of them you could leavA out as being not of common concern to the whole of Australia. If we are to have federation ; if we are to a·,k a Federal Parliament to legislate upon certain matt<ers, surely the matters contained in these thirty-nine articles-about which there is an ecclesiastical tone certainly, but they are thirty-lhne all the same-I will a>'k you whether there are any of them you cnnld say are not of common concern? And if they are matters of common concern,

Australasian Federation [14 JUNE.] Enabling Bill. 429

why should we not have a Parliament devoted to matters of that kind, because they are all highly important? I have looked through the 189U llill and its prerlecessor to see wlmt is the difference in the numb0r of mattero referred to the ]'eder>tl Legislature by the earlier Bill and by the ]'resent Bill, and I find very little difference. Fur instance, in the 189() Bill we find astroeomical and meteorological ob;..;ervations; we find in~nrance, St~tte im;urance, old age pensions, and cnnciliation and arbitration when disputes extend beyond oue State. Those are very minor rrmtters; but they are, with one or two excevtions, the only mnt.ters that were considered as worthy of being added to the matters proviued for by the 1891 Bill. The point I want to make in connection with this is that in 1891 we were represented, and thttt we were not represented on the Bill now before \IS;

and the matters which are left to the Fefleml Parliament to settle are 'o in,ignific>tnt that it shows that if we had been represented we should have been no better off, The alteration,, when we come to look at them, are ab"olutely trhial. For instance, in the 1891 Bill we have "po,tal and telegrn,ph service~," and in this Bill it s.tys "postal, teleg-raJ,hic, telephonic, and other like services." I should like to know what difference there is there. In the 18lll Bill, section 14, there was "J3anking," which wa .. sup[Jnsed to include everything; but tbe1HB9 people thought it would be better to say, " Banking other than State banking; also State banking extending beyond the limits of the State concerned, the incorporation of b:mks, and the i>'lne of paper n1oney." Another irnprovetnent, f~uppr,sed to he, is "Insurance other th'm State insurance ; also State insurance extending beyond the limits of the State concerned." And there is "foreign corporations, and trading or financial corpora­tions formed within the limits of the Common­wealth." In the old Bill it was "marria:;e and divorcA ;" in this Bill they hrtve made two sectjon~ of it. Section 21 is "rnarriage," and section 22 H divorce and 1natrimonial ea. use::;, and in relation thereto ]Jarental rights and the custody and gnardi>tnship of infants." There is not very much difference there. And so with old age pensions ; and going rlown the whole of the"e thirty-nine articles, I find there are about t<evan extra numbers which are very good and proper additions. At the same time they are not so very important as to !eau us to think that if we hac! been represented at this Conference we should have been verv much better off, A good deal has been said with regard to the Senate. I want to submit to the Council that the St.ate rights are as safe in the hands of a Senate elected by thE State voting as one electorate as in the hands of a Senate elected in any other way. In the 1891 Bill the senat<>rs were to be elected-I think I am right in saying-by the Parliaments themselves, That h'as been altered by the Con vent ion to an election by the whole of the people o£ the State, I think that is a distinct improvement, for two reasons : One is that it has been tried in the United St"tes-election by Parliaments-cmd what has been the result? A gre,tt mttny Par­liaments cou!<1 not make up their minds as to whom to send. They neglected to elect, and allowed the States to be unrepresented because of the great jealousies that existed amongst the members. There can be nothing of that sort where the senators are elected by the whole of the electors of the State. Look at the result of the election of members to the C<mvention! It was a most singnlar thing, and an obj~ct lec.son to the colony, that the very best men that could have been thought of by the people of Aus­tralia somehow or other came to the top, In nearly every colony-except Queensland, which was not represented-the men th11t were

best known, the men who were most pro­minent and most capable, were elected. I think that is a matter of very great importance to us, and one that should lead us to feel that the election of senators by the electors of Queens­bud is boLmd to be, and will be, the very best method of election that could possibly be devised. An<Jther thing I would point out in connection with the election of senators is that the mode of election by which the people have to elect both Hou'e, is entirely different. The election of members of the House of Representatives is done by section~ ; each member is elected for a particular locality; whereas the election for the Senate is an election for the whole colony. The s"na.tors, therefore, will be placed in a very different 1 osition from that of members elected by a cormtituency. The old feeling of luy.tll y to a constituency will still hold good with regard to elections for the House of Repre­sentative,,, but a senatnr would feel that he was elected by his State for the purpose of uon~erving State rigbts, and not for the pur­l"'"e of pleasing his particular constituents. I think that is a very important matter, and that is the reason why I feel thoroughly ,,atistied that although at first blush it seemed singular that both Houses should be elect,ed on the sawe franchise, still when it come3 to be worked out it will be f<>und that the men who go for the Senate will be a different class altogether from those who go for the House of Representatives. I feel perfectly s.ttisfied that the constitution of the two Houses will be so distinct and different in their character that it will bring about a state of things which wiil enable them t') work in such a way that the interests of the smaller States will be so conserved by the Senate as to make them perfectly safe. There are peculiar ideas about the Senate. Some people say it will be a f>eilure; that it will not work; that it will uot be able to stand the assaults of the House of Re]'rebenttttives. Bnt I think it will bt• just the other way, that it will, for the reasons I have given, be strong, and will be able to assert its own rights and privileges. It cannot alter money Bills, but it eau reject them, and it can sngge,,t-as in South Australia-any alterations that it thinks should be made in money Bills. 'What more do you want? If we are to have responsible government you cannot have everything. If you want a hard-and-fast Constitution like that of the United :States you must take it as it is; bnt if you want the respon­sible goYernrnent that we are used to, and agree with, and live under, you mnst have something of the kind sugg·csted and carried out in this Bill. Yon cannot work in any other way. It has been pointed out in this House that the Federal Premier can- simply snap his fingers at the Senate, that he nN'd not mind what they say. I do not think that is likely to happen. 'rhe Senate, a.s I have remarked, will be a strong power, and the Fed<oral Premier, whoever he may he, will ha Ye to take the Senr1te into considera­tion in anything he does; because if the Senate disagrees with his measures be must go to the people, and a Premier is alw.tys very careful in his actions lest he should be turned out by the people, who know very well what cu!lht to be done and are instincti,ely alive to pubhc questions. I do not wish to detain the Council unduly, and I hardly think it is neces-,ary to refer at any length to tlto'e various industries that federation is saitl to be likely to put an end to. But I may my that with regard to farming there is a very great difference of opinion. We find a great number of intelligent farmers who say they are not afraid of federation. They grow their crops earli~r here than in the south. They can send down their maize in January, and statistics show that at the time when the southern colonies want

430 Australasian Federation [COUNCIL.] Enabling Bill.

maize very large quantities of it go thither from Queensbnd. And, as is often the case, when we ha Ye a drought and are hard up for products of that kind we get Pxports from the other colonies. \Vith freetrttde between the colonies, why should we not give ttnct take-export ttnd import­just nd the occa,ion demands? \Vherever the denmml is, there will be the supply. If we have a uni~ed Aus~ralia, you may depend UP!•ll 1t that w1th freecmcle between the columc·s whett:~ver tlH l'P it~ a de1nand~-not only fur atrri­cultural pnductions but for everythh;g else you can conceive-there will he the supply. I am told that the firm of \Valhrs, Limited, in l\IarylJorough m·e not afraid to federate. They belwve that under federation they will bo able to snpply, not only this colony, hut New South \Valc·s and other portions of Australia, with tJ,eir nl~tnnfacture~. .Al.Hl why nob? The ~an1v thing­Wlll apply, I beheve, in every walk of life. \Vhat does l\Ir. Baclger stty-and he is, I think, the most up-to-chtte man I know ? He says that queensland oug:1t not to. be >tfr_aid of competi­tion, as, to lns great surpn~~'2, he 1s ab!e to obtrdn his carriages and other things he required as c!L·aply, if m>t cheaper, here than he can «et thenl in the other C(1lunies.

0

The Hon. P. MACPHilHWN: He is not afr,tid. He has got a Jn<mopoly.

The POST:\IASTl~R-GENEltAL: A.nother thing- he finds is that in Queensland the workman is very smart; is very quick to pick up new ideas. And that is ex>tctly what will result under fEderation-it will make the people in each colony feel that they are one peopl<> in the fedPration. I am quite certain that the result of thi;; will be that we shall have a new life altog-ether in Australia. Anoth<·r thing we must remember-and especially herP-is· that there are thou• mds of our pnpnhtion who are native-born .. A.n~tra.Hnns, who know no other country but this. 'l'ltey feel that they cnwht to ha.ve a country of their own; that they ought to be Australian.s, n<•t Victorians, South Australi:ms, and so on. I make these ren1rirks with ,some trepidation, becmu;e thi.-; sort of thing- is said so often that it mrty lo,,k like repetition ; but in the consideration of such a question \Ve c·tntwt help clr:twing attention to snch matters. I say you will have to consider that, and count upon it-that votes will be given in favour of Australian federati•m by these who are determined to have federation and for that reason r believe that on Tuesda~ n•~xt New S.nrth \Vales will accept the Biil placed hdore it.

Th~' Hon. B. D. :\IoRJmgAD: That b only surnn·:e.

'l'he POSTMASTER-GENERAL: I can only give 1ny 0\\llopinwn a,nrl conviction .... ..\.~I have said, memlwrs of thig House and of the cmn­munity [,ave a 1 'Prfect right to have their own opinion~, ntHl the-y c~tn vote for or against thi:-; nw:tmre as 1 hey tbiok either course will be be,,t in the interests of the colony. JYfemhers c•f this House can expres' thernsel ves in anv way they like, and ''hen they go to the l.mllZ>t-box they will cast their vot,•s for or against the Bill j nst as auy tnewher 1jf the general cotntnunity will do. \Ve a rH told there iH n. ,strong feeling a.gainl)t coloured Lcl>onr in th0 other colonies, and that will re ult in the loss of th·tt labour which is re<tuired in the sugar industry here. I dn not think it at all likely that th>tt will be brm1,;ht abont, becau\e the su"ar in­dustry is d just as much importance to th~ other colonies as it is to this. :-lugar is a great pro­duction of Queensland, but the other colonies need it just as much as we do. They have not interfered in the portion of New South \Vales where this labour is used, and I do not think

they are at all likely to interfere with us when they see that it is necessary for the cultivation of sugar. I do not think there is any cause fur alarm in tb,,t respect.

The Hon. B. D. MonEHEAn: Still there is an element of doubt.

The POSTMA:-ITER-GJ<~NBRAL: Thc•re is nlways an element of doubt in all human affairs, am1 there a! ways will be.

The Hc>n. D. D. J\Iom;HEA!l: ~o, nut so far as de<tth is conccorned. ·

The POSTMAS'l'l<~lt-GENJ<~RAL: There is a reference to this feeling in the south which is ~:;uppotied to mnanate fro1u politicians who get up a cry, whether there is anything in it or not. I think there is Yery little in this, and that it won't hurt Queensland. Another thing is 'that according to thi" Constitution wo will carry on as we ar<' until the :Federal Parliament "other­wise provicks "; nnd I say that the l<'ederal Parliament is not likely to otherwise provide in any such way ae to injure an industry of such great in1portance aH the sugar industry i, to Queensland. Arwther matter which has been referred t.o in this House is with respect to the great ccxpenditnre which is likely to follow upon the federation. \Ve are told tbnt it is very likely that we shall have a very heavy ltmn for the purpose of building the public build­ings necessary for tlw Commonwealth. Of course it will be necessary to have a house for the Governor-General and public offices for the federal officers, but I do not think it is going to run into such a very 1argP. a.1nount as is suggeHted. In the case of Canac1a the public offices cost less than £1,000,000, and if the economies already referred to are likely to be exercised, it is not likely that there will be any very great extravagance in this direction. \Vhetber there is or not, it must be remembered that we shall only have to pay our proportion acc:,rding to population. Anotlwrthillgthat must be corwidered is that there will be 100 miles square given for nothing to the Conunou'A ealth fur the purl""es of the federal city, and after a certain portion of that. is taken for federal building" lwn. gentlemen will see that the balance will be otJen for l'urchase by the puhlie, and most likely the am,punt that will be received from the ''ties of land within the Uommon­wultb area will pay for the capital-I think I may r·all it t.he capital-and any other public buildings that may be neeessary. So that I do not think there is >tnything to f<ear in that matter. \Vit,b regard to the Senate sitting as States, it muot not be ""snmed that New tlouLh ,V,des and Vict.oria are always going to act togethnr. On the contrary, they have \oepn rivals up to the pre··.ent time, aml perhaps they will continue to be rivals hereafter. I think it is more likely that the smalle1· States will join together to overcome any de>ire there may be on the part uf Victoria or New South \Vales. I have no fFor whatever that New tlonth ·wales ancl Victoria are going to swamp the Senate by their votes; I think it is more likely it will be the other way. Depend upon it, the contests in the Seno.te, whatever they m11y be, will not be between Stale and State, but will be on the old party lines with which we are all familiar; there will be Radicals and Conservative~, Labour men, and "'ll sorts-· just as we have them here. I find that I haYe got notes on a great many "ubjects, but I am afl·aicl that if I continued I might occupy too much of your time, and perhaps weary hon. gentlemen.

HoNOUHABLE MEMBERS: No, no!

The POST:\IASTER-GE~ERAL: But I do not think the matters I have -brought before you

AustJ•alasian Federation [H JUNE.] Enablin,q Bill. 431

are uninteresting, and I have endeavoured to the best of my ability to place before you some observations which may assist you in this debate. There are a great many other mattere, such a,; the alt.eration of the Constitution and other.s, which are exceedingly interesting; hut I do not think I can adtl very much to wlmt ha,,; nlrPady been said on tho,,e ,,ubject,;. I undPrstoorl my hon. friend, Mr. Gregory, when speaking on the AddrPSB in Ueply, to say thttt it would be well to have a minimntn vote in the En<1b1ing Dill, and I should like to say a word on that point. r~ehe Ininillllltll vote in the New t)(Juth \Vn,k~ Enabling Bill led to the tejection of thn Cent· stitntion in that colony, and I bc:ieve the bun. gentlenutn reff'rred to a n1inimnn1 vote soine­thing like that in New South \Vales.

The Hon. A. C. ChmGOIW: And in Taomanin, Victoria, and South Australia.

The POSTMASTE!t-GE~ERAL : Then I must say that I disagree wi~h the hon. :~entleman in that, because~ ns I poiuted out on a previom;; occn.sion, it robs Parliament of the privilPge of sitting, as it were, upon the vote which will Le given by the electorcJ. If you have a minimum vote, a few votes might turn the scale, and then you would be absolutely without the power of reviewing that vote. Suppo:->e you said there must be a minimum of, say, 80,000, as tfwre was in New South \Vales, and 80,001 votes were C'tst in favour of acce} >ting the Dill, Parliament would then be in the position that, having said that there should not be less than 80,000, they would have to accept the result of the poll, even though they did not coneider 80,001 sufficient. I do nut want hon. gentlemen to be placed in that position. Let us have a majority vote, and then when the matter comes before us on the Address to Her 1\Tajesty we can review the poll and s,ty whether the re,mH is satisfactory or not. 1 think that io the better arrangmnen t.

The Hon. B. D. ::\IormHJ<JAD: You appeal unto Cce~ar, a.nd dun't accept his verrliet.

The POST~IASTJ<~H.-GJ<JNERAL: I do not think it is '1uite that way. At any rate, Caesar is dead. I only want to mention one other matter, and t.hat is with r<'ference tn a11 oboer· vation that fell from the Hon. A. C. Gregory, when he saicl that the Oovemment were endea­vouring to prevent discuo,;ion on the Bill, and had put the measure befor<>, the Houoe in a form which they must well know ic< unf.Lir and unjust, not only to Parliament, but also to the people. I do not think the hon. gentleman was S<orious when he matle that statement, becaus'" no Government could place the matter any hirer before Parliament and the people of the col<~ny than the preoent Government have done. The Government say, "Here is a Uonotitutirm which has been passed by all the col.,nics except ours; you know why we were not represented at the Convention, but notwithstanding that we were not there, we al'e of opinion th<Lt, the altera­tions which have been made in the Bill of 1C:D1 are not of such a serious character as to prevent us fron1 recommending you to accept the Con· stitution. vVe bring the Commonwealth l\ill before you, and ask yon to consider it c11refully and say whetlwr you will accept it or not." I have already shown that the Bill ha-< run the gauntlet in the other colonie8. It has also heen considererl very carpfully and exhaustively de· b11ted in another pl11ce, and it now comes before m for our constderation. Upon us rests the responsibility of deciding whether it shall be suhmitted to the people. I do not think any hon. gentleman in this Chamber can p"ssibly feel that he will he doing wrong in allowing it to go to the people, and I think it ought to be allowed to g.l to the people. I should not like to take the re3prmsibility of giving a vote which said that in my opinion that

should not be done. 'When the Bill oays t.hat the matter should be referred to the people of Queensland, includingourselvr·•, I think it ought to be referred to the people ; and I hope that the people of Queensland will exerci"'' their vote in such a way as will not only settle the question, but settle it to the best advantage of the colony. \Vith regard to another Convention and another Bill, I >hall ren.d an extract from th? London :l'zrnes, which alway::; s~ys the right thing a.t the right time. The. extract is us f,,llows :-

Opposition to tl:e Bill, however much it may be tllco­retiC'all v tmnpured by declarations of sympathy with the principlPs of feclt~ratiou, is for all practical pnrpnses oppo~ition to federation. . . . . 'I'ho::-;e who now refn~e to accept, the Bill ean cherish no reasonalJle hope that another and better Bill \Vill be offered for their crm­sideration. . . . The compromise \Vllich ouc man olJjceL•to n'lW might he ehan:,:cd for a compromise which anotlwr man would object to then; but if the Commnn­'vealth Bill were to be recast a hundred times, compro­mise would st.illremaiu e·;st:'ntial to the acceptance of a schenlc which is to affect the affairs of six .states and upwards of three millionH of persons.

The Hon. B. D. i\Ioi<EHEAl': Do }OU take that as an autlwritathe statement?

The POST:\IASTEl~ G1£NEUAL: I take it as the opinion of the greate,,t. journal in the worlrl; a; the opinion of a journal whose opinions havn alwttys been received with respect by the British nation. It is the opinion of a journal v,rhose cditorrPgards thi,"question from a distance, anrl is not influenced hy local prejudicPs. Here is a Constitution vitich it is proposed to submit to the people. As our worthy I'resident and others have ,,aid, it bas breen dmfted and dis· cmsed by at lea:;t fifty of thA most capable men in the whole of Australia, and it has berm thoronghly thrashed out dnring the last ttm years l1y the Pre"s ottrd hy the people of Anotralia, and all that is a,ked HOW is thitt we should nlluw it to go to the people in order that they nHt.y ~ay "Yes" or" No" as to its accept~ ance. In that sr>irit I now commend it to the members of this ·non""' and I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second t hue.

HoNOUI<ABLE 11E'rm:m;: Hear, hear! The Ho:'<. A. C Glt:F~GORY: We are now

dt'aling with a ~nbject which perhaps is thP most important we have ev·er had to deal with in this colony. If the Bill or Constitution sot forth in the sche<lule is adopted a~ our Constitution, the whole of the colonies will collapse, and W<> shall simply come under on~ central Government. It will not be fc'dPration, bnt it will be annexation. Now, it will be fur nw to show why I am of thi" opii\jon. A good tlr.al b!l.< b en said about how the Bill originah'd ; bnt we have only been given tho~e parts of the '1ue.:tiun which suit one s1de of it. If we t>eke the bi,tory of the whole question, it comes to thio: I hnvejust taken notes from the va.riou-.; docnTnPnt~, R-r•d fror11 the official reports of the l<'edeml Conventions. In February, lf\!JO, tlle seYeral colonies of New South \Vales, Vic­toria, South An~tra1ia, T::t!-'lnania, QneenKland~ \Vestern Anstr.;lia, and New Ze>tland appointed dt=>legateR to repre~ent tho sev;:-rnl C1)lnnieH at a Cunvention for the considenction of fedemtion. Thctt conference m>lt in l\felbonrne, and paRsed rewlntiuns to the effect that it was expedient to federate the spverai Au,tralian colonies. In j\brch, 1801, the de!Pgates appointed by the Goverrnnent~ of the varion~ colonies tnPt in Syrluey, :;nd, after di,cussing the general prin­ciples of federation, aJ•pointc-d a committ<·e to prepore a Bill according-ly. Sir Samuel Griffith was the chairman uf that committee, and the draft Bill wh 1ch was prepared was adnptrd by the C'mvent.ion. As e1ents have sub,equently proved, there has been no man engaged in the consideration of federation who has shown such vDst ability and ndaptability for drafting the legal parts of a Bill us SirS. W. Griffith. In fact, he has

432 Australasian Federation [COUNCIL.] Enabling Bill.

always been known for his eminent ability in that direction. But a mnsf; singular circumstance attends that p>trticubr ability which he possesses, and that is thrtt he has been remarkably unsucceesful in the a<lrninistrati ve p 1.rts of the Bills he has d,awn. No doubt the Bill of 1891 was admirahly drafted so far as it went. Bat it did not toach upon those points which were really f;ir the mnst important factors--adminis­tration, and how federation was to be carried out with equity and justice to the various parties who were expected to join in it. The Conven­tion must have been perfectly well aware of the enonnou:::: anwnnt of interet-lt \vhich \Vas involvect in the very heavy debts which were incurred by the various eolonies for their public works. Neither in 18~)1 nor at any future time has any­thing been said "ith regard to any armngemcnt for the adju"tment of those debts and how the public creditor was to be secured. However, that draft Bill came to nothing in consequence of New South \Vales declining to take any further part in the conference. No further action wns taken till 1890. Then in 1897 delegates were electerl by the people of New South \Vales, Victoria, South Australi", Tasmanin, and \Vestern Aus­tralia, and t.hey met in Ar!ehtide. The Con­vention appointed committees to preprtre a draft Federation Bill, and after debate pas ... ed the Bill and adjourned till September of the same year. Now, in preparing that dmft Bill, it v-as first of all suggested that they should take the Bill of 1891 as a basis, bnt that was strongly objected to, "'nd it was decided that they should start de novo, and prepare a new Bill entirely, according to their own views of the subject. :Mr. Barton moved certain resolutions, which were to he submitted to the committees ap­pointed to prepare the BilL Re said that there was very little change being rnarie, hut the resolutions were to be an instruct inn to the committe•'" that the Senate wae not to be appointed l1y the Parliaments. No provision was marle otherwise for the representation of the Statee. In the Bill of 18!)1 the "Paeliarnents were rer1resenterl, and therefore the States would have had some voice in the central Government. That principl" was removed, and they proceeded to make the Bill-as lVIr. Barton state<l-more liberal. He 'lid, "I am making the Bill much more liberal than it wa; heforP." The matter was referred to the connnitteeR, and the cmn~ mittees brought np their report. \Vhen the report was brought np :\Ir. Barton-who was the principal choirman of the committees-said : "Now the Bill we have prepared i,; the ~nost lil,eralBill that ever was framed for the govern­ment of any people. In fact, therH is only one word to he nltered, and we shall be exactly like the repnhlieon States of South America.'' There i.:; a grand recorrnnendation ! Can you imagine nwh a thing as that? lf you want to know what the state of the South A meri<•<n republics is I c::m give you an illustration. A brother-in-law of mine wns earning out a large railway contract in one of the S·>uth American StatPs. I think one president was shot by another, and one of the results wae that my rela­tive was paid for hi< work, not in dollars or gold, -because gold w"s at :WO pBr cent. premium­but he was paid in telegraph poles. That is what we nre told we m;ty look forward to under this Constitution. \Vhat a grand thing it would be if we could pay our creditors in, perhaps, uncut telegraph poles !

The PosnfASTER-GK!\'ERAL: I wonder who is the Postma,ter-General there?

The Ho:s. A. C. GREGORY: I have not heard the name of the hon. gentleman. How­ever, that was one of the in<lucements offered by 1\Ir. Barton. He s"id the Bill had been framed in such a form that it was only neces··cary to strike

out the one word "Queen " and put in the word "people," and the "painter" would be cut. Now we know the kind of individual who had the working out of this draft Constitution. \Vhen the Constitution was finally adopted by the Convention, it was very properly under the J<~nabling Act submitted to all the Parliaments of the colonies who sent delegates to the Conven­tion, and each of the Parliaments considered various amendments. Then the Constitution, according to the Enabling Act, would have simply come b~ck tu the Convention for the consideration of the amendments of the l'arliamPnts. Those amendments were considered, hut in almost eVPry i1mttmce they were pooh-poohed and set aRide. In one case the amendments were pro­perly considered, hut having done that the Con­vention proceeded to do whnt was contrary to its powers-making alterations in the Constitntion, and without reporting them to the Parliaments, who ought to have had the power of revising them, they were submitted to the people. The people, no donbt, derived their knowledge of what was in the Bill from the debates which took place in the Parliaments, but this is a totally different Bill, and one which involves some Yery important amendments. Of couroe, I do not think that this rea.]]y touches the present Bill, because whatever illeg,.liti"s occurred the whole of them have come to a ter­mination, and we are dealing now with rtuite a new subject. I would not have adverted to the subject had it not been already stated that the Bill contained in the 2nd schedule to this Bill is practicallv the Constitution of 1891, with very little modification. The question has arisen as to what should he the minimum vote on this Bill. In various colonies it was fixed at varions amounts except in South Australia. In South Australia one-quarter of the number of electors was fixed as the rninimun1 vote, because it was considered that there should he a substantial vote in favour of the Constitution to show that the people took a real interest in the question; otherwise, by an accidental circumstance a majority might be obtained in favour of or against the Bill. Provision was therefore made that a certain nnmber of affirmative votes should he recorder! in each colony before the Constitution could be accepted. 'J'asmania required 6,000 affirmath·e votes. Victoria placed the number at 50,000, there being ahont 200,000 electors in that colony; and New South \V ales also originally fixed the number at 50,000, but, in 1398, passed a new Bill to enlarge the minimum to 80,000, the Govern­ment contending that as that colony was the most populous, and had a larger number of elector", it was only fair to have a higher minimum. Now, that is one point that we shall have to carefully consider, and I think ourquotawill he about 25,000 electors. \Ve have close upon GOO,OOO inhabitants, with about 100,000 electors, and consequently, if we adopt the same proportion as the other eolonies, we should reqnire a minimum vote of 25,000. No doabt in New South \Vales when the Bill was defeated the Premier was very anxious to push the matter forward, as he has announced his intention of becoming Premier of the federation.

The PosTMASTER-G ENERAT,: A very laudable atnbitinn. ,

'l'hc HoN. A. C. GREGORY: Yes, a very laudable ambitiPn. \Vhen you are clirn hing up a tree continue to climb, but take care that none of the branches break. So far as that question goes, I think there ought to be a minimum vote to carry the Constitution. But there is a far more important matter than that. The people who are to be asked to accept this Constitution have not heen informed as to the true results that will accrue. The first thing we ought to consider is the financial phase of the subject.

.Aust1·alasian Federation [14 JUNE.] Enabling Bill . 433

The present condition of things is this : 'Ve are spending something like £1,000,000 a year on public works, and we have a revenue which just covers our expenditure. If federation comes about, we have, in the first instance, to make our contribution to the central Government. That will reduce considerably the amount of our revenue, and will involve considerable increased taxation. As matters have been arranged, all our excise and Customs duties are to be t"'ken, but not more than one-fourth is to be used by the Federal Government. l\bny people say that we will get back a greatde,lmore than three­fourths, because the central Government will not want a fourth of our revenue. But I would remind hon. gentlemen that from the moment a Treasurer gets hold of the money it is wonderful • how difficult it is to get it back again, 'rhe cessation of loan expenditure will at once throw thousands of people out of work in this colony. We know th"'t a large amount of work is carried on yearly in connection with our railways, har­bours, large public buildings, and our contribu­tions to loans to local authorities. All this expenditure, which is now paid out of loan, will cease, as the I!'ederal Government will take over the power of raising loans on the security of our revenue, and we shall have no security whatever to give to the public creditor for any further loans. Then we shall be reduced to working simply upon our ordinary revenue and expenditure. The withdrawal of £1,000,000 from circulation will certainly cut down any possibilities of in· crease of revenue. ~ It will certainly be the very reverse ; it will be a decrease. But, even admitting that it remains the same, we shall have to contribute to the cost of the central Government an amount which has been vari­ously stated at from £100,000 to £1,000,000 a year, and which is much more likely to be nearer £1,000,000 than £100,000-these amounts will have to be contributed by the various colonies to the central Government. Our quarter of the excise and Customs duties would amount to about £333,000. The balance we should not get back at once, and we should be in the awkward posi­tion of having a deficit in our public revenue as regards our expenditure. 'Vhat are we to do then? Are we to impose further taxation? We find that almost every possible source of taxation is already monopolised by the Federal Govern­ment, because though some of the clauses of the Constitution are supposed to leave the States to carry on their existing laws, and continue their government just the same as heretofore, still as one-half of their Civil Service will be managed by the central Government, mixed up with the i::ltate Government, and a great number of those Civil servants will certainly be thrown out of employment when the serv1ces are transferred; and as power will be given to the Federal Govern­ment to pass any laws which will override our State laws, we shall be left in a helpless condition, so that there will be next to nothing to raise revenue upon. Some may say we have wonderfully rich I'{Oldfields and mines; but the whole of the net revenue derived from our goldfields and mines is under £2,000 a year. \Ne might put on a land tax, but the lands are pretty heavily taxed now by the heavy rents which are put on. As to property and income taxes, they are already in existence in New South Wales, and the Federal Government may most certainly extend that over Queensland. If they do not, the result will be that they will have to let them remain in the hands of the State, and there is not sufficient excise revenue in New South 'Vales to cover much more than the amount we raise in Queensland. Victoria has the highest amount of excise and Customs, Queensland is next, and New South Wales, on account of its free· trade policy, has a comparatively small amount·

1899-2E

of revenue from Customs and excise. So that in the beginning Victoria and Queensland would have to contribute the main part of the sums for expenditure. The St1bsequent adjustments may come, goodness knows when, especially as there is a little clause providing that the central Government may retain any part of the excise and Customs for the purpose of paying interest on the debts of the States. What will become of the States? It will follow of necessity that Queensland will not have sufficient revenue to pay its expenditure, Then the expenditure must be cut down. But where is it to be cnt down? Must we start with the Civil Service? ·will a tax be put upon the gold miner? You will find that not very easy to collect. A land tax will produce very little, unless it is put upon all the small holders as well as those whom it is generally proposed to tax. In fact, if any private firm was to adopt a policy of makiqg away with its most important income and leaving itself in a condition of insolvency, it would get such a verdict in the court that the individual certainly would not approve of. It so happens that a State will not be in a position to be incarcerated for contempt of court, but the receivers may come in and take possession of the revenues in order to pay the public creditor. Our debt amounts to about £32,000,000, and we are paying about £1,300,000 a year upon that, Some say that will all be converted into debentures bearing a much lower rate of interest. But the shortest run any of onr debentures has is fifteen years. That is only one set; most of them run away to terms of forty-seven years. Can they be converted? Certainly not, be­cause anyone who knows anything about dealings with public securities will know that you can hardly choose a worse position in order to change your debt to a lower rate of interest than when the rates of interest are falling, and the value of debentures rising and you can only purchase them in the market at a serions disadvantage. We are cut out from any chance of amendment in that line. How, then, we are to carry on it is impossible to say, unless we do what is provided in clause 110 of the Bill -go to the Federal Government, and say, "Please take our State, take our territory, take our debt~, and give us a clearance." But they still retain the power of saying, "Yes, we will take you over, but you will have to put a local tax upon your State of so much a head in order to assist and help us out of the difficulty; other­wise you must go on, not to the insolvent court, but you must fall into the hands of those who will seize your revenues and administer them for you." And it is that particular view that has been taken and publicly stated by the Premier of New South Wales as his view of the way of reducing the cost of !{Overnment. He has stated publicly, not once but frequently, that the cost of one Federal Government will be much less than having so many small ones. As soon as there is a central 'Federal Govern­menh established, the States must all collapse. He is perfectly well aware that such must be th9 case ; in fact, finance forces it ; it cannot be avoided, and the result will be that we shall have to throw in our territory to the central Government and give up our birthright. We should then certainly cease to be Queenslanders, which seems to be the one great object of thrs Bill. But what should we become? We should become defaulters. So much for the general question of finance. One-fourth of our Customs and excise is to be taken by the Federal Government for its expenditure, and in that way Queensland will lose at least £330,000 of its annual revenue. The Federal Government have power to raise loans on the security of the revenues of the whole of the federated area, and to impose

Australasian Federation [COUNCIL.] Enabling Bill.

taxation of any kind to pay the interest on such loans or to meet ordinary expenditure. That is pretty sweeping. It will preclude Queensland from raising any future loans for the construction of railways, the improvement of harbours and rivers, and other permanent public works, because our securities for the payment of either the principal or the interest will have been pre­viously hypothecated to the :Federal Government.

The Hon. C. H. BvzACOT'r : \Vhat nonsense! The HoN. A. 0. GREGORY: It may be in

the view of some people, but not when you come to look at the actual business transaction. The securities will be withdrawn on which only loans can be obtained, and that will mean the discon-· tinuance of all railway extension, harbour improvements, and oLher public works ; and t.he taking away of one-fourth of our present dis­bursements must seriously prejudice our com­merce, injure our agriculturists and manufac­turers, and throw some thousands of workmen out of employment. At present Customs and excise amount to £1,300,000 a year, which· is only sufficient to cover the interest on the public debt of £34,000,000. If one-foarth the Customs and excise, £330,000, is taken by the :Federal Government there will be that deficiency in the revenue proper. Taking the figures for the financial year 1897 -8-the last for which we have the official statement-we find that the net revenue was £3,768,000. Deducting £330,000 from that will leave only a revenue available of £3,438,000; and, as the expenditure was £3,747,000, there would be a deficiency of £309,000. This amount will be enlarged in the future, because both revenue and expenditure are on the increase rather than on the decrease. Queensland could not continue an expenditure so much in excess of income ; there­fore a reduction of expenditure would be inevit­able. And though this may be partially effected through the decrease in the number and salaries of Civil servants, there must also he a cessation of subsidies to local authorities and assistance to important industries. Everything of the kind must suffer through the discontinuance of loan expenditure. I may also point ouu that our revenue and expenditure have only been made to babnce by the transfer of money raised by loan towards sundry works not of a permanent cha­racter. Going over the estimates of revenue and expenditure for 1897-8 I find that there was about £400,000 taken from the loan fund and transferred, not to public works, but to what I may call temporary services. Look at tbe amounts which have been expended from that fund for other than permanent works ! Land defence, £16,000, of which £10,000 went for ammunition to be fired away. That cannot be considered a permanent work. Immigration, £6,000 ; that is scarcely an item to be charged to loan. Marine Department, harbour works, £5,000. Buildings, £56,000; most of these are not permanent buildings but merely temporary structures. Salaries for waterworks, £2,000 ; artesian water, £17,000; loans to local bodies, £103,000. Those loans to local bodies are in a very pecaliar position. The Government have been compelled to find a certain amount of endowment for local bodies because they have allowed them to borrow such large sums that they could not balance up their books unless they got this money to pay their interest and instal­ments of principal. Had it not been for that the local bodies would not have been receiving endowment now. But a very large proportion of what is voted as endowment has to corr,e back in refunding the debts they owe. Then we have loans for sugar production, £103,000; co-operative agriculture, £10,000; mines, deep sinking, .£10,000; general establishment for railways apart from construction, £28,000; general ex pen-

diture on the railway department, £133,000-besides the cost, which might properly be char!!ed to loan, of supervieion of permanent construc­tion-and the Postmaster-General for his tele­grams, .£"10,000 making altogether some £430,000. Of course some of these items are open to argument, but it only shows that we have been devoting a large amount of loan money to what may be termed annual services which certainly cannot be called suitable subjects to be charged to loan. Indeed the loan fund has been a very nice mUch cow to make up the balance between revenue and expenditure. I have not touched upon the peculiar position in which our trust funds and our savings bank funds are involved in the federation question,

·but when we come to work the thing out prac­tically we shall find some exceedh;gly awkward circumstances develop in connection with the securities for those funds. No doubt the whole of the accounts are correct and have been care­fully audited, but the policy of working out questions between loan fund and a,ctual revem1e have not been such as I think would meet the approval of any financier having to deal with the revenue and expenditure of any State. In fact any private body carrying on business under the same scheme would be placing themselves in the very awkward position of not having made due provision for the payment of their debts. Although the present state of affairs is such that if we involve ourselves in federation we shall undoubtedly discover that we cannot meet our liabilities, and must eventually surrender our States over to the central Government; still if we were to remain for a few years as we are, Queensland, with its vast capabilities, and with its more rapidly in­creasing population than any of the other States, would in a few years be in a position to command any terms-any reasonable terms whatever­from the central Government. vV e have an estate that is twice the size of New South \Vales and Victoria put together, the quality of that country is superior to theirs, and there is a larger amount of it actually available; and that is the reason why, with our sparse population of only a fourth of what those two colonies possess, they are so very anxious to exploit our territory. Nothing would please them better ; in fact, it would be the most excellent policy on their part to endeavour to bring our territory under their control. I am not finding fault with them for making the best they can of it if they see we are so unwise as to put ourselves in their possession, and if anyone should ask why-

H Come into my parlour," says the spider to the fly, "And when I've had my breakfast, you will know the

reason why." That exactly shows the position in which we are placed, and we should enjoy our prosperity while we can. There is not the smallest doubt that in a few years-because Queensland has only been in existence about a third of the time the other colonies have existed-in a very few years she may be able to dictate any terms what­soever· she may wish. Then we come to the question as to what advantages we are to get by federation. Oh yes, you shall call yourselves " Australians" ! That is something grand ! You will be part of an immense and powerful State. Yes, but as someone has suggested, you will be but a. drop in the ocean. Any political power wa shall possess will be exceedingly small, except in so far as we are members of the most powerful nation in the world. We are already federated under that power, and in that way already possess all the advantages that can possibly be brought about by federation; though, on account of that one word, we shall not, as Mr. Barton has said, have all the advantages of the South American States. We know what

· sort of reputation the South American l;tepublics

.A11stralasian Fede·ration· [14 JUNE.] Enabling Bill . 435

have as regards any political position in the world, although their States are so much larger than the whole of Australia put together. Setting aside all questions of minor argument, we will undoubtedly have to pay for the central Government as well as our own. Though a variety of p·Jwers are taken from it, our own Government will be just as costly as it is now, because we Rhall pay the co"t just the same of the departments taken over. It is curious that while almost tbe whole of the departments of the State will be taken over by the central Government there is one particular department that tbey have left out. And that is the railways-and for a very good reason. The railways are all of them over­burdened with debt. (lueensland actually possesses more railways pC?' capita than any other State or country in the world. South Australia comes nearly up, but, with the exception cif South Australia, Queensland has about 30 per cent. more railways for each individual in the State than any other country or State in the whole of the world. Very fe,w l'ersons quite realise that position. No doubt those railways are necessary and useful, and as a rule they have been carefully selected in order to encourage our traffic and settlement .. Now, if in our position of extreme weakness as regards population, we give up the whole of our large territory, which is worth per individual ~even times as much as any of the other colonies, the consequence will be that we shall be practically rubbed out-the name of Queensland will be blotted out from Australia. \Vhen we come to consider the Constitution in other respects we have to deal with the Senate. Originally, the Senate under the Bill of 1891 was a very reasonable one, because it was given its proper representation, as in the United States of America. In the United States of America, the Parliament of each State appnints the senators to protect their interestH, and the whole of the people vote numerically, over the whole of the States for the members of the Congress or House of Representatives. The consequence is that whatever little defects may have arisen-and all human institutions have some defects-they have been able to carry out their business for over 100, years, and have come to be amongst the most pros­perous governing institutions in the world. If the Senate is to be appointed by the people, and is to be liable to be set aside by a dissolution at any time, and it is to be required to go to a joint vote with the House of Representatives, the proposal is really absurd and childish, and I 'was surprised that our Premier should have been so weak as to concur in the reduction of the majority that was to prevail in the joint vote of the two Houses from three-fifths to a bare majority. It seems to me that he could scarcely have realised what that alteration meant, because it was practically throwing Queensland away. Queensland is a rich State, and baYing only a small amount of representation in the more numerous assembly, she would require more especially to be protected by the Senate than the larger States, which have already got such a powerful majority in the House of Representa­tives.

The PosTMASTER-GENERAL : But he was only one among many.

The HoN. A. C. GREGORY : That is just the re:tson why the Queen~land Premier had a very good excuse for not coming to a conclusion. He was not compelled to agree to that amend­ment, but he did agree to it, and it is a disability which presses more particularly upon Queensland than upon any other State. However, I suppose we have all made mistakes in our lives, and that we must extend forgiveness to the hon. gentleman, provided there is repentance, but that has not yet

arrived. Hon. members must remember that if we federate we shall be in the position that we can. not pass any laws on many subjects that may not be abrogated by the l<'ederal Parliament ; we can­not borrow money, and we cannot have taxation except of a very limited class, something like that of a divisional board. If we give somebody else absolute control over our finances, and supreme power in expenditure and legislation, what will remain to ns? if you read the pro­visions of the Commonwealth Bill you will see how completely the federal laws can override our laws ; a t:-\tate can make any law it likes, but the Federal Government may pass laws to abrogate those laws. Then with regard to loans, it has been interjected that we can raise loans. No doubt we can ask people to lend us money, but can we get them to lend it? Certainly not. \Vhat security shall we have to give them ? J<Jven the return of three-fourths of the revenue !rom Customs and excise would be useless. But the Federal Government will have a prior right to use that money in other ways if it thinks fit, and even if we got it back the l<'ederal Parliament could impose other taxation, so that we should not have sufficient revenue to cover our expenditure. If the Federal Parliament carry out the Yiews enunciated by the Postmaster-General we had far better become one unity, and not a federa­tion. That would be far better, and we should not then have a lot of this nonsense which has to a large extent been promulgated for the purpose of obtaining the votes of a certain class of people for what is termed an exceedingly liberal measure. The w0rd "liberal" has become per­verted in the present day; it is used for things which are anything but liberal ; liberality now is in many instances tyranny over the most numerous class. I was very glad to hear the Postmaster-General say that if we pass this Bill we shall not in the slightest degree bind our­selves to any particular legislation on the subject.

The PosTMASTER-GENERAL: \Ve can vote as we like.

The HoN. A. C. GREGORY : Somewhere else they have been told something dif· ferent, but I think we ought to take advantage of what has been suggested, and in committee I shall certainly suggest some modifications of the me&sure to carry out the view enunciated by the Postmaster-General. \Ve ought to make due provision for a minimum vote, because otherwise a small number of the people only may vote, and a majority of that small number, who may be excited just for the moment, may be very far from a real majority of the people, and their decision should have no weight. It is far better that we should require a sufficient number to vote, so that we may know that we have a real vote of the people as the people, and not merely a small number of the people. We have seen the effect of the minimum vote in New South Wales, where so little interest was felt in the matter-because it was considered that New So nth Wales would not gain much by federation -that they could not get a majority of one· fourth of the number of the electors on the roll. It is only reasonable that we should fix a minimum vote, because we should have such an expression of opinion from the electors as will guarantee our placing confidence in the result of this proposed referendum, otherwise we might come to the conclusion that as not one­tenth of the electors had voted, we should not further bother our heads about the matter. One very important defect in the Constitution before us is that it contains no provision for tbe payment of the debts of the various States, except a very curious sort of clause which was put in at a later time. This clause says that the l<'ederal Government may make arrangements

436 Australasian Federation LCOUNOIL.] Enabling Bill.

for helping any States which may be in difficul­ties by granting them subsidies. "\V ell, that is rather a dangerous power to give them, because it will not be the l!'ederal Government, but the other States, that are lending the money to the States which are supposed to be impe­cunious, and which have to come forward and get the hat carried round for them. That will be really the very best position to take up among the States, because they will then have a chance of getting something. When the "bust up" comes, there will be a clean whitewashing for the whole lot. This may be put in homely language, but, nevertheless, it is a straight­forward fact. But although assistance is to be afforded to States that are in difficultie.-, that assistance must be provided by the other State''· If the money is raised by way of loan, the loan must be raised upon the security of the revenue, and whatever revenue is derived from the peopl~ is contributed by the people of the States. There is also a total want of any provision for com­munication between the States and the central Government. For instance, supposing we go in as a State, and wish to send some very important communication to the central Government with regard to what we consider some vital question amongst ourselves, we have no possible means of communication unless we send a petition or a deputation. And we know what petitions and deputations come to : "Yes, your petition will receive our serious consideration, and we will endeavour to ascertain how far we can concur" -and there the matter will end. Now in the American system there is a proper representation of the States, and if on some few occasions they have quarrelled-as I have been told by the Postmaster-General-and would not appoint senators, that was their own fault. In the same way the electors of a district might refuse to send their representatives. The whole question of finance is left out, and the only thing that is shadowed forth is that as soon as the States have run into sufficient debt they will have to surrender their territory, in order that the Federal Govern­ment may take over the assets and liabilities. There is no other possible chance for them. It is nonsense to say that the States still retain their powers, when the central Government may take away any part of those powers, or may alter or override them. It just comes to this: That we shall be reduced to the condition of muni­cipalities. In fact, that is what ha" been stated in New South Wales by various leading men, who show what will be the ultimate result· of the whole business. People talk about the expenses -how much less they will be under this Bill than under the Bill of 1891. Possibly the amount may be Esomewhat different, but in con­sidering the cost of a central Government the fact is overlooked that for the first five or six years a very heavy rent will have to be paid to Victoria for her Parliament House, and to Sydney for the use of her public buildings. There is no other course open than to take possession of the public buildings, and the ques­tion of rent is provided for. I believe the rent alone will come to nothing less than £50,000 a year, apart from providing a residence for the Governor-General, who is to.be a sort of itinerant governor or relieving magistrate. The initial cost will no doubt be very great, and the moment you begin to build a federal capital there will be still further expense. That possibly may be done by loan, but you must remember that every million borrowed will cost £30,000 or more likely £35,000 a year in interest. Then it is said that all the necessary land is to be handed over by the State Government to the Federal Govern­ment without charge; and I do not see how any site for a federal capital is to be found unless we adopt the suggestion of Lord Brassey, and which

is very much to the point, that we should go to the great sanatorium of Australia-Mount Kos­ciusco-for a federal capital site. The land there is certainly still in the hands of the Government, and may be had for nothing, but I do not think it would suit the views of the various States Governments to contribute towards the neces­sary rail ways to such a place. I think the suggestion was rather a joke on the part of Lord Brassey, although it was taken by those present as something grand that we should be citizens of such a wonderful place. Of course the Consti­tution itself can be much better discussed clause by clause in committee, although we are told that we have no power to amend it. I am afraid that it comes to this : That if we try to amend it, if we wish to make the measure in any way practical, we would have to entirely re­cast it from beginning to end. It is said that the Bills of 1891 and 1898 are only slightly different, but in my opinion they are diametri­cally opposite to one another both in principle and arrangement. The· only similitude is that in certain necessary formal clauoes the same form of words have been adhered to, the last Convention being too indolent· to do other than adopt the form introduced by Sir Samuel Griffith in his original Bill. The Bill of 1898 is formed upon totally different principles to that of 1891. Then comes the illegality, that after it was submitted to the Parliaments the Convention had no power to do anything more than consider the amendments and adopt such of them as they thought fit. They, however, went much further by putting many things into the Bill which had not been there before, and handed it over to the people without the Parliaments having even seen or heard of those amendments. It is said that the amendments are only slight ones, made at the instance of New South \Vales. But why, I ask, .should we not have the same right to amend the measure as that colony? \Ve are equally entitled with them to exercise that right. They amended a Bill passed by a ]!'ederal Con­vention. \Vhy should we also not take a Bill passed by a Federal Convention and amend it as we see fit? It is quite sufficient to read the speeches of the members of the last Convention to see how completely it was dominated by just a few individuals, who insisted upon their views being carried into effect, and who overrode all the other members of the Convention. It was the fault of those who submitted, no doubt, but there were these two or three persons who did the whole of the work, and who introduced conditions' which when they are put into practice will simply result in the destruction of the States. However, if the States choose to put their necks into the noose it will not be without warning, and the matter must rest in their hands. As to the particular point with regard to what the effect of our vote will be, as the Postmaster­General has said, the Bill we are now discussing ought not to tie our hands with regard to the future-when we come to consider the question after the referendum has been taken ; and the only thing that is wanted is something to accentuate and give distinctness to the verbal statement of the Postmaster-General which, unfortunately, differs considerably from what is said to have been stated in another place. When the proper time comes I shall make suggestions that will make matters much clearer than they are now. I am not opposed to the people having a chance of expressing their opinion on this question, but I think they are being treated very unfairly by having put before them a compli­cated measure which it is not possible for the masses to understand. In fact, from the inter­jections I have heard in this Chamber, I am afraid it is not quite understood by some men

Australasian Federation (14 JUNE.] Enabling Bill. 437

with business knowledge ; and we should remember that all these matters are questions of business. It is all very well to talk about sentiment, but in dealing with this question we must protect ourselves when the time comes for the discussion of any question of modification of the proposed Constitution, because we should not forget the good old rule-

That they should take who have the power, And they should keep who can.

In this Parliament we cannot bind any future Parliament, but we can accentuate our meaning by putting the proper words into the Enabling Bill to record wha.t we really mean, and not leave any ambiguity as has been done in the past, so that other inter­pretations may be found to apply. I do not think it is necessary for me to keep the House any longer. I could go on drawing atten­tion to many defects in the Bill, but I think the Commonwealth Bill can be better discussed clause by clause in committee. Though we cannot amend it, we can put forward its real meaning, so that people may understand what it is they are asked to vote upon. I hop~ the people will prove themselves intelligent in dealing with this question, and not, as has unfortunately happened on previous occasions, simply follow a few leaders whether those leaders are leading them right or wrong. People are apt to follow after something that is useless, merely because it posse.sses the fascina­tion of novelty, rather than something which has only cold, hard, solid business to recommend it. Under the circumstances I must leave the matter now to those gentlemen whose business it is to carefully conserve the rights both of this House and the people for whom they are legislating.

HoNOURABLE JI.'[E}IBERS: Hear, hear! The HoN. C. H. BUZACOTT : It was not

my intention to rise at so early a period of the debate ; indeed, it was my desire to escape taking any part in the discussion of the Bill in this House. As some hon. merr.bers may know, I have been discussing it outside the House a good deal, and I should have pre­ferred to hear hon. gentlemen of this House, who have no doubt studied the question during the last three or four months, and who have formed very definite conclusions with respect to the measure. I must express my extreme disappointment at the speech delivered by my venerable friend, Mr. Gregory. He rose directing the attention of the House to the extreme importance of this question, and I ask you whether the hon. gentleman's speech, and the temper displayed by the hon. gentleman towards the Bill, gave you the impression that he was dealing with an all-important question? I regret very deeply that he has been, as I think, trifling with the question, and I regret as much that he seemed to obtain a good deal of sympathy from his auditor~. That was the thing that struck me with the greatest wonder. I thought when 1 came down to this House that I should find members in a state of extreme tension lest this Commonwealth Bill should encroach upon their privileges, but I find the hon. gentle­man who has just spoken in opposition to the Bill has dealt very lightly indeed with that phase of the question. I am sure that if that hon. gentleman brought his skill, his research, and his powers of expression to develop the arguments on that phase of the question-that is, the way in which the Commonwealth Bill trenches and en­croaches on the privileges of this Chamber-he might have made a very much more effecti vespeech than he has made. What was the burden of his speech? That the two Commonwealth Bills did not at all resemble one another; that thev were vitally different; that all sorts of motives" entered into

their preparation ; that they were put together in an improper way, and that the Bill, if sanc­tioned, would introduce financial chaos and ruin not only to Queensland, but every one of the States, and land us we know not where. Do you think that that was the kind of argument to offer to this House ? If he had said, " Here is the Commonwealth Bill that has been prepared after years and years of discussion ; here is a Bill that the brightest intellects of Aus­tralia have exhausted themselves upon for years and years. Compare this !Bill with the Constitntions of other States; compare it with the United States Constitution, with the Constitution of the Dominion of Can.ada; compare it with the Constitution of the mother country." Then he should have shown wherein the Bill was deficient, wherein it was calculated to destroy all the vested interests of Australia and to introduce financial chaos. There was not a word said in proof of this. But we were told that if we federated we should lose £1,000,000 a year, that our public works would be stopped, that loans to local bodies would cease, that the working men would be thrown out of employ­ment, and that there would be universal ruin. I ask you-I ask the hen. gentleman himself­whether it is not derogatory to the Council to make assertion~ and introduce arguments of that sort on a vital measure like this, which we, as a tribunal of representative met~, although we are not chosen by the constituencies, are called together to pronounce upon? The hon. gentle­man referred to some one in New South Wales, I think, who said the Bill contains the liberal provisions of the Constitutions of the South American Republics. But does he think that we, who have inherited the genius of constitu­tional government from our forefathers, shall plunge into all the excesses and absurdities of the half-breeds of South America? They have got very good Constitutions, but, as the hon .. gentleman says, they are always in a state of revolution. They never abide by their Constitutions. Do we love revolution? Is there any apprehension that the people of Australia will, if they accept this Commonwealth Bill, commence to rave against it and to intro­duce financial and legislative chaos? I ask you, as reasonable men, whether this is the kind of argument that should be offered to us on an important question of this sort? Then the hon. gentleman referred to the American Constitution. I did not quita catch his obser­vations, but I understood him to say that if we did this, that, and the other, which the Americans had done, how much better off we should be. Well, the American Constitution may be a very grand one, but the American Constitution was devised more than 100 years ago, when the people were not so well informed, nor had had so much experience of constitutional government as to-day. But the American Constitution is very defective, and it would be a sad reflection upon the genius of the statesmen of Australia if they could not have made some improvement on the Constitu­tion of the United States. The rigidity of the American Constitution is a moet serious evil. It cannot be amended unless two-thirds of the Senate, two-thirds of the House of Representa­tives, and three-fourths of the legislatures of the States approve of it. At first, when there were only thirteen States, it was not very difficult, perhaps, to get thirteen States to agree to an amendment. Now that there are forty-five States, amendment is found almost impossible. Would it have been wise or reasonable for our representatives at the Convention to haTe introduced a Constitution of the rigidity of that of the United States? I say it would have been monstrous, and the people of Australia

438 Australa8ian Federation [COUNCIL.] Enabling Bill.

would never have accepted it. Bear in mind that the British Constitution is the most elastic under the sun. As I said at a meeting the other night, if the Crown, the Lords, and the Commons determined to abolish the limited monarchy, and to convert the United Kingdom into a republic ~her~ is nothing in the Constitution to prevent 1t bemg done. They can repeal every provision of that Constitution. If King, Lords, and Commons agree, they can do anything they like. So with us. vVe have a Constitution prepared by the Conventions. It is a written Constitution; but it is an expression, so far as it could possibly be, of t~e spirit and practice of the British Constitution in so far as it can be applied to a federation of States instead of to a unified Government. I think it is a perfect exemplifica­tion of genius the way in which the Conven­tion has incorporated our traditional system of responsible government upon the J<'ederal Government,, I may say, of the United States. If the hon. t:rentleman had shown where the Constitution was defective, no one would be more anxious than myself to give due weight to his argument and, if I could not refute it, to admit that he was right. But when the hon. gentleman stands up and makes bald assertions without a particle of proof, I think it 1s presuming a great deal too much upon the credulity of the House. The hon. gentleman in giving us the history of the Convention Bill, has pointed out the extra­ordinary way in which the Bill has been amended. He says the 1899 Bill is as different almost as light from darkness from the Bill of 1891. I do not stop to argue that. I ad m it that although the filling-up of the Bill is very much altered and improved in the 1899 Bill· but the point on which the hon. gentleman iaid great stress was that when the draft Bill came from the Convention and was submitted to the legis­latures of the various colonies, those legislatures made a number of amendments, that the Con­vention again sat to consider those amend­ments, which they treated as so much waste paper, and put into the waste-paper basket. I do not know whether yon have read the proceedings at that Convention, or whether you recollect that when those amendments made by five different Parliaments, came befor~ the Convention, and were formulated and placed side by side, they were found to be so mutually destructive that it was impossible to follow any of them. The colony of New South Wales alone had a schedule of amendments fr,>m each House. One schedule the Premier of that colony supported, which came from his own Chamber of Representatives. The other schedule he asked the Convention to give little heed to. We have to look at things in a practical way. The Convention had got those amend­ments remitted to them. What could they do but compare and contrast them and sift them? In doing so, they found them to be so m'.l~ually des~ructive that they could not be ut1hsed; and 1t was a very improper reflection on the Cm;vention to say that they did not give due attentton to the amendments of the various Parliaments. I read with admiration the way in which those amendments were treated and think the Convention in that matter ex~elled themselves. But they did take advantage of a }!Umbe~ o~ suggestions which, in their opinion -and 1t Is worth more than mine or, I ven­ture to say, of any member of this Council­would be an improvement to the Bill. What then becomes of the hon. gentleman's tale about the disrespect shown to the amendments of the Parliaments? Then I see he wants a minimum vote. The hon. gentleman did not say whether he wanted a minimum affirmative vote or a mini!llumnm~ber of votes polled ; but I understood h1m to WlSh to have a· minimum

number of votes polled. Well, supposing it ·was fixed at 30,000, and the opponents of the Bill said, "\Ve suspect we are only 10,000 to 20,000 on the other side. We will all abstain from voting." In that case-and I only submit it for the sake of argument - yon would have an affirmative vote of 20,000, and no negative vote at all. That is a course the opponents of the Bill could take to frustrate the decision of the majority. Can hon. gentlemen, who have watched the pro­ceedings of those who may be called our adversaries, say that they would not take advantage of this method of warfare if we gave them the opportunity? I take it that not even at the persuasion of so venerated a member as the Hon. Mr. Gregory would this House accept a minimum number of votes polled. The House, if it approved of this matter at all, would require to have a minimum affirma­tive vote.

The Hon. A. C. GREGORY : Hear, hear ! That is what I meant.

The HoN. C.' H. BUZACOTT: The hon. gentleman says that is what he intended. I am very pleased that it is so. There is some reason in that, but there is not very much in it. vV e have seen that in New South vVales, where they fixed a minimum affirmative vote of 80,000, though they polled a majority of nearly 5,600 for the Bill, the effect of that statutory minimum was to leave the whole of Australia in a state of tnrmoil for twelve months. Had the will of the majority been taken-as it ought in any British community-at the poll on the 9th of June, I think, of last year, it would have settled the ques­tion, and we should have had federation in full swing by this time. vVhat has been gained by all the agitation and turmoiJ, and evil-speaking and personalities, which have been provoked by the contests of the last twelve months resulting from that refusal to Jet the majority have their way ? And the evil was intensified and aggra­vatf'd by the fact that in the other colonies the majority was exceedingly large-I will not repeat what the Postmaster-General has stated­but in the other colonies the majority was so exceedingly large as to settle the question beyond all dispute. If the New South Wales majority had been allowed to have its proper weight the federation would have been fo~:med, but Queens­land, perhaps, would not have been in the advan­tageouspositionsheisinnow. Although it perhaps has not been a good thing for Australia, it has per­haps been no disadvantage to Queensland. I hold it to be an extremely important thing that Queensland should go into the federation as an original State, and that it should have a share in forming the uniform tariff. That is a very important thing. As the Hon. Mr. Gregory has shown you, the financial part of the Bill is most important. It may be said to be funda­mental, because if finance breaks down, whether in a Government or in a private business, the best Constitution, or the hest rules and regula­tions you may have for self-government, are not of the slightest ~alnP. If then the financial part of the Bill be hopeles3ly unsound we ought to vote against it.

The Hon. A. C. GREGORY: Hear, hear!

The HoN. C. H. BUZACOTT : But when the hon. ge.ntleman makes a number of asser­tions, entirely unfounded, as to the effect it will have, I think we are entitled to demand from him some proof. Take the case of Brad­don's guarantee-I will not call it "Braddon's blot," because it was pnt in not to give the Federal Parliament an opportunity of victimis­ing the States, but as a safeguard for the States.

.Australasian Federation [14 JUNE.] Enabling Bill. 439

Many in the Convention insisted that it was not necessary that there should be this provision, that not more than one-fourth of the Customs revenues should be retn.ined by the Com­monwealth, but it wn,s put in as a com­promise. I do not believe any member of the Convention ever thought one-fourth would be the sum that would be required, but it was fixed as the outside maximum of expense they believed the Federal Parliament would require to incur. There have been all kinds of estimates made­and there can be no more thn.n estimates made -of the expenditure of the Commonwealth. It must depend entirely upon the services with which the Commonwealth is charged. The esti­mates made have ranged from £250,000 up to £1,250,000, Ithink. The Statistician of N ewSouth Wales, 1\Ir. Ooghlan, first made an estimate. Then there was a committee of financiers-promi­nent men in New South Wales, Mr. Bruce Smith, Mr. French, and Dr. McLaurin-appointed to make an estimate. They made an estimate, and then the Premier of New South Wales, Mr. Reid, got an estimate pr8prtred departmentally. I think at present it is admitted all over Australia that the maximum new expenditure of the Federal Parliament will not exceed £500,000. I do not think anyone who has m1tde the random assertions about £1,000,000 and £1,250,000 being the amount of the new expenditure-! do not think anyone with any responsibility is prepared to repeat that assertion now.

The Hon. A. NOR TON : You are referring to annual expenditure.

The HoN. C. H. BUZACOTT : Yes, the new annual expenditure; I think it may be safely said that £500,000 a year will be the maximum. I put it in this way for illustration, as there are no absolute figures to go upon, and no man, no matter how conversant he may be with figures, and no matter how skilled he may be in their use, can m<tke any more than an esttmftte. If you takethepopulationof Qneensland to be notmore than one-tenth of the whole population of Austra­lia and divide the £500,000 by ten, you will get £50,000 as Queensland's share of expenditure. In the Assembly the other night the Treasurer spoke on the question ; he is-having the assist­ance of the officer,; of his department-the man who is in a better position than any other man in the colony to make a true estimate, and he has told the country from his place in Parliament that, so far as he can discover, Queensland's contribution to the new expenditure of the Commonwealth cannot exceed £70,000 a year. \Vhat does this mean after all? After defray­ing every charge, after paying interest upon the public debt, and after pn.ying every account that can be presented by the 30th J unb next, there will be a surplus this year in Queens­lan:l of from £125,000 to £150,000. There have been surpluses two or three years in succession. My own estimate is that the surplus this year will be £120,000 ; bull put it at one-half that sum, and I ask, cannot Queensland afford to devote of its surplus of £60,000 to the introduc­tion of a system which will give us a Govern­ment worthy of the dignity and importance of a great nation, which will give the most eminent men of Australia an opportunity of seeking the suffrages of the constituencies of the whole of Australia and of legislating on all matters of common interest-men who will bring the highest skill, and penetration, and knowledge, and experi­ence to bear, so as to make that legislation as perfect as possible? Is that not better than h::cving six Parlimnents, each with two Houses, dealing inde­pendently and severally with those great questions which touch everyone of us, and applying equ::clly to a resident of \Vestern Anstmlia, ::cnd a resident

of Thursday Island, and a resident of Sydney, Melbourne, or Brisbane? Such matters as the banking laws, currency, the m21rriage laws, divorce-the whole of the thirty-nine subjects rr.entioned in the Bill-can be better dealt with by a Parliament consisting of the best men chosen by the whole of the people of Australia than by six different Parliaments acting independently, and composed to a large extent of men who are mere parochial representatives, and who cannot see a yard beyond their municipality, their division, or the border of the colony. Unfortunately we have too many of those men in the Parliaments of Australia. I feel confident that if this Constitu­tion comes in to force we shall have a legislature in Australia which will compare with any legis­lature in any British-speaking community. I cannot conceive of Canada, with its mixed races, its French element, its religious difficulties, and the immense extent of country over which the Government exercise authority, having a legis­lature composed of as capable and ::cs good men as the legislature of Australia. I cannot con­ceive of the legislature of the United States being equal to the legislature of Australia. The United States Constitution needs amend­ing, and the people know it; but owing to its rigidity it cannot be amended. I say that this Bill, which has the great merit of incorporating the responsible system of government which we practice here, and which has the most complete provision for its own amendment, will produce the best and most capable Parliament in the world, and I do not think I am exaggerating the probabilities in coming to that conclusion. The Hon. Mr. Gregory spoke about the constitu­tion of the Senate, which is to be an elec­tive Chamber. Under the 1801 Bill the Senate was to be chosen by the legislatures of the different States. That was a fatal defect in th::ct Bill. A legislature is appointed to legis­late, to make bws, and do the work of the coun­try, and not to choose representatives. It is not the business of the logislatnre to choose representatives; it is the duty ::cnd responsibility of the people, who hold the qu::clifications pre­scribed by law and are enrolled as electors, to choose their representatives. Turn to the history of New South \Vales and you will find that in the second session of responsible government in that colony there was a in paragraph in the Gover­nor's Speech a statement to the effect that it h::cving been determined by a large majority of the representative Chamber that every legislative body ought to be elected ·by the people, Parlia­ment will be invited to consider the question of the reform of the Legislative Council. That was within two years after their Constitution came into operation. Then it seems to have been admitted all nund that what the country wanted w~s that every legislative body should be elected by the people. I do not know whether the hon. gentleman lays stress on the fact that the Senate is to be elected by the same persons as the House of Representatives. However, I do not think that counts for much. You appoint the same men to choose the members of both Houses, one House to protect and ad vacate the interests of the States, and the other House to protect and advocate the interests oft he whole body of the people. Cannot the constituencies be entrusted with this duty? If the constituencies are fit parties to choose the members of the House of Representatives, cannot the con­stituencies be trusted to have the discernment to choose the members of the Senate? They will select for the Senate the most intelligent and the moRt skilful men in the community; and they will elect for the representative Chamber younger men, men who have got any amount of go and energy, and who are perhaps less ex­perienced than the members of the other House,

440 .Austr-alasian Federation [COUNCIL.] Enabling Bill.

but still men who will reflect the feelings, the sentiments, and the wishes of the community in perhaps a more direct degree than the senators. I trust the people to choose the men they want for a particular duty, and on that ground I think the provision of the Bill which charges the same constituencies, though perhaps arranged differently, with the duty of electing the members of both Houses, is a most valuable and judicious one. The hon. gentleman said also it would be doing a great injus­tice to the people to require them to vote on a Bill which they knew little about. Is that true? I was really astonished that my hon. friend did not know more about the Bill himself than his speech betrayed, and I confeHs that when he exhibits so little appreciation of the measure there may be something in his argument that the people generally do not understand it. But I have met many intelligent men outside who understand the Bill as well as I do-and I have given a great deal of study to it-and the two months which will elapse between the day that this House gives its assent to the ];uabling Bill and the holding of the referendum will afford ample opportunity for the education of the people on the question in such a way as will enable them to give an intelligent vote. This has a connection with the affirmative minimum vote. The hon. gentleman thought it would be a calamity if the Bill should be ratified by a comparatively insignificant number of people. I interjected that if very few people voted for the Bill the vote would carry no weight, and when it came back to this House and to the Assembly, does it not stand to reason that each House would exercise its own discretion on behalf ofthe vast number of people who did not vote, and decline to transmit the Bill to the Queen ? Both Houses might be trusted to exercise reasonable discretion and judgment in a matter of that sort. If you fix an arbitrary minimum, you may pro­duce a fictitious excitement; you may cause people to be brought to the poll who will vote because they are driven there like sheep. The advocates of federation, perhaps, would resort to all sorts of extraordinary measures to bring people to the poll. But if there is no minimum, and if it is left to the people spontaneously to record their votes for or against the Bill we shall be in a m!lch ~ette!' position afterw~rds to gauge pubhc feelmg m the country-to gauge it at its true value, and to deal with it when we come to debate the Address to the Queen sending the Bill to the Imperial Parliament. There is another point: I cannot for the life of me see why Parliament, in sending this Bill home to the Queen, should not incorporate in its mes­sage suggestions for amendments by the Im­perial Parliament. When the North American Constitutio!l Act of 1867 went home, two promi­nentCanadran public men were· sent to confer with the Imperial authorities and with Parliament as the Bill was going through, and that Consticution was amended in material points in its passn,ge through the British Parliament. And as to this Common wealth Bill, I am doubtful w hetherin some points the Imperial Government will not reserve some of the powers which the Bill asks to be conferred upon the federal autl:ority. In some things I think the Bill asks rather more from the Queen than she, as Sovereign, can concede. Depend upon it that when the Bill goes before the British Parliament there will be a change made in that respect. If so, what is to prevent this House, in its respectful Address to Her Majesty, asking that certain amendments shall be made? It will not be a furtive, a secret process. It will be done in Parliament; all the other colonies will know what we are doing, and they will be able to do the same thing if they think fit. It will be open

to any Parliament in Australia, in remit­ting the Bill for approval, to suggest amend­ments, and probably ,they will do it. At the same time, I believe that the patriotism and good sense of the various legislatures will lead them to make as few suggestions for amendments as possible for this reason-that the Bill contains within its four corners ample provisions for amendment. It is as flexible as could be desired. I had not the slightest idea of speaking when I came to this House, but, after I heard the Hon. Mr. Gregory speak as he did, I felt bound to rise, as no other hon. member seemed disposed to do so. I appeal to hon. members to-night to throw aside all these vague rumours and bald assertions, and look at the Bill for themselves, and, if they think, after consideration, that it will be for the benefit of the colony, that they will send the Bill to the constituencies.

HoNOURABLE MEMBERS : Hear, hear !

The HoN. \V. ALLAN : I also had no wish to speak to-night. I have listened with great interest to the debate so far as it has gone, and I have also read the debate that took place on the Address in Reply, and I think that the speeches compare very favourably with those in similar Houses elsewhere. They have been as exhaustive, as able, and as calm and cool as they should be in the l>~"aceful time at which we are consid~ring this important question. It must be admitted by everyone of us that ere long federation must come about in these colonies. ·whether we join it or not, the other colonies will federate. \Ve may look upon that as a foregone conclusion. The question therefore that rests with us is this : Are we to federate under this Bill, or are we not to federate at all? For it is, as far as I can see, unalterable. \V e must either take it as it stands or keep out altogether. Are we prepared to refuse to let this Bill go to the people to say whether they wish that this Bill should come into operation or not? I, for one, am not pre­pared to take that course. I feel that every­thing must either retrogress or progress. \Ve cannot stand still, and this colony ought n'?t to stand still. If we are to progre>Js, I take rt we must join this federation, and under this Bill. Not that I consider the Bill is without fault. I can see grave faults in it, and I suppose we all can more or less-at all events we can see matters in the Bill that, had we been represented, might have been to some extent altered so as to meet the peculiar require­ments of this colony. But it is not the fault of the other colonies that Queensland has not been represented at the Conventions. They have held out their right hand to us to join them over and over again. \Vhere the fault lies that we have not joined them it is, perh9.ps, no use troubling about now. The fact is that we did not join them, and very much we have to regret it. It is needless now to try and blame ar1yone. The fact remains that we were not represented. 'l'hrough our not being there, doubtless some clauseg have been altered to our disadvantage, bnt the question is now, whether we will gain or Jose most by standing out of the federation? I hold that we will gain much more by accepting the Bill as it stands. I regret, with the Hon. Mr. Gregory, the unauthorised course_ t~ken b_y the Premiers when they reduced the mm unum m the Senate from three-fifths to one-half. I think that was a mistake; it took away a large portion of the strength which this colony would have had in the Senate. I •hould have liked tohaveseen the Senate constituted somewhat differently, but in that no doubt! should be in a minority. I do think, however, that con~idering the Senate is elected by the people on the same suffrage as the House of Representatives, it should have had much more power given to it. Because these Chambers are

Australasian Federation (14 JUNE.] Enabling Bill. 441

called "the Senate" and "the House of Repre­sentatives" it is only because there are no other names. The Senate will be just as much a House of Representatives as the so-called House of Representatives, and, that being so, I think the two Houses should be more equal; that the Senate ought at least to have the right of revision of the details of money Bills. However, every­thing of this sort is a matter of corn promise. Every Constitution ever framed in the world has been the result of compromise, and this no doubt must be subject to the same rule. I think, however, that the country will eventually come to my conclusion-that the Senate should have more power either in the initia· tion of money Bills or in the power to amend their details. I listened with certainly a great amount of surprise to some of the remarks of the Hon. Mr. Gregory, and noted the very pessi­mistic way in which he referred to this colony being absolutely wiped out and done away with ; to its having no power to borrow money or do anything else if we once entered this federation. But the hon, gentleman's own remarks contra­dict him to a great extent. I took the trouble to get a copy of a few remarks of his on this very federation matter, and it appears from them that we will be in an absolutely magnificent position so far as borrowing is concerned. \V e have in this colony what the other colonies have not. In Victoria all the public lands are gone. In New South \Valee the best of the public lands are alienated, but here we have something like 90 per cent. of our lands still in our own hands. Surely that is a matter of which we should be proud ! It is an asset upon which any capitalist would be only too glad to lend us money. Then, again, the mining industry of the colony is only in its infancy. Is that not an asset of some value ? I take it that the time is not far distant when this colony of Queensland will take a more prominent place in the world as a mining community than even the Transvaal, Nevada,- or \V estern Australia. The more we explore the country the more wonderful our mining resources are niade to appear. But to come back to what the Hon. Mr. Gregory said with'regard to the lands of the colony, which he quoted against our joining the federation. This is what I find the hon. gentleman said on a former occasion-

We have such enormous resources in the way of our undeveloped land and minerals that we certainly have every prospect not only of being able to continue to raise the necessary funds for our development, but also of effectually raising the country into a condition quite able to pay all its liabilities and to maintain its prosperity to the fun degree. . . . . We have a larger area of country than New South '\Vales and Yictoria put together; our area is more than double that of those two colonies jointly. I speak from personal experience when I say that the proportion of valuable country within Queensland is greater than you will find in etther of those two southern colonies which are genei·ally considered the very pick of Australia.

The hon. gentleman is perhaps better able to give an opinion on that matter than any other man in Australia, and I thank him for his opinion. I think it is a very good argument to show the grand asset we will have to fall back upon, with even one-fourth of our Customs and excise revenue taken from us. The Hon. Mr. Buzacott has referred to the expense of carrying on the Federal Government. I have seen several calculations in reference to that matter. One made by Sir John Downer, of South Australia, and which goes a good deal into detail, estimates the cost at .£260,000 a year. Another made by our respected Chief Justice, Sir Samuel Griffith, estimates the cost at .£400,000 a year, and a third made by the finance committee which satin Sydney estimates the cost at £500,000ayear.

Accepting the last estimate as the correct one, I would point out that this colony contains about one-eighth of the population of Australia, and that our share of the expense~ would therefore be somewhere between .£60, 000 and £70,000 a year­and much of that would come back to us again. The expense of collecting this revenue, it will be noted, is taken off our hands by the Federal Government, and those who are thrown out of employment here will, no doubt, obtain employ­ment under the Federal Government. Then, again, all the absurd friction arising out of border duties-treating one another like ~trang-ers and aliens, stopping people at the border to take a few pence from one and a few pounds from another-will be done away with. If there is a race of people in the world more homogeneous than the people of Australia, I do not know of them. It was mentioned by the Hon. Mr. Buza­cott that one of the chief troubles that arose in the framing of other Constitutions was the differences of race among the population. That difference is very pronounced in almost every case where a Constitution has been framed, but here we are all of one race, one language, and almost the same laws, except those absurd ones which we have set up against one another on our borders. \Vhat was the position of America when she became one in 1787 ? Though they were English-speaking people mostly, still they had a large number of negroes, both free and slaves. Then there is Switzerland, which has a most extraordinary mixture-60 per cent. Germans, 35 per cent. French, and the rest Italians-all speaking their own lan­guages, and mixed up in twenty-two cantons, each canton having a Constitution of its own. Yet those people have been a most admirable success, and their Constitution has been a most admirable success.

The Hon. W. D. Box: Where do the Swiss come in?

The HoN. \V. ALLAN: The Swiss speak all those different languages themselves. They are the Swiss. They are a mixture of Germans, French, and Italians, but they are none the less Swiss, though they speak German, French, and Italian. Take Canada. She had only 3,000,000 people when she federated, and now she has a population of 5,000,000, of whom 1,500,000 speak French. These are some of the disa­bilities those countries had when they federated, and all these we are clear from. It has been said that we want more time, more population, more education, before we undertake federation. \Vhen America federated with thirteen States she h:>d only a little over 3, 000,000 people, and far less wealth than we have. Switzerland now has not 3,000,000 people. Canada had only about 3,000,000 when she federated. We are in a better position ; we have more wealth than they had; and surely we are as well able to look after our­selves as they were!' And I fail to see that any one of those confederacies regrets having federated, but very much the contrary ; neither do I see any sign of disintegration. All have prospered rapidly since federation, and no doubt the same will be the case with us after federation. I read with some interest a letter in the Telegraph from Mr. Knox, the chairman of the Colonial Sugar Refinery Company. He is a man of very large information, well respected, and knows what he speaks about. He showed incontestably to the growers of New South \Vales that if Queensland came into this federation it would burst them up, and do a great deal of harm to New South Wales. He also pointed out how very wrong it was- how unjust it was to New South Wales-that Queensland should have as many senators as that colony­how it would go very much against the New South \Vales people. I can hardly see how that

442 Australasian Federation fCOUNCIL.] Enabling Bill.

comes in as an argument against federation in Queensland. I have read a great many argu­ments in New South Wales showing that it would be a dreadful thing for New South \Vales to federate, because she would be wiped out by Queenshnd. I do not think she will, and I do not think Queensland will be wiped out by New South \Vales, as has frequently been asserted. I think they will work hand in hand for the mutual advantage of each other. I have read with interest the able speech which our worthy President made on the Address in Reply, in which he dealt with this question to some extent ; and even he, I noticed, spoke in by no means a very strongly antagonistic way. I notice he says about the Bill, previous to the Premiers touching it-

This is to be a democr:ttic Constitution, and we must accept it on that basis. It is the product of a Conven~ tiou elected directly by the people, and that was tlw great feature of it, the feature tha.t was to commend it to the notice of all the people of Australia. They were to draft a Constitution for the people, and having been elected by the people for that very purpose they did so. With the members of that Convention I do not think anyone can find fault. Some people talk about :tnother Convention, but of this I am perfectly satisfied that if we had another elected on tbe same principle we should never get a better one than the one ~e have already had. It was composed of the most capable men and the most enlightened statesmen that Australia has produced. Unfortunately, no Queensland statesman was there; but although that was entirely our own fault, I doubt very much whethPr if any had been there it would have made much difference. I hardly think it would. That comes frnm as good an authority as there is in the colony as to what the Bill was previous to the slight alterations which the Premiers introduced into it; and it is very much my own opinion, too. A good deal has been said about the effect federation would have on the farming industry. I have had a good deal to do with the farming industry. I live on the Darling Downs, and have done so for twenty years. I had the honour of representing a part of that country twelve or thirteen years in the other Chamber. I take a gr~eat deal of interest in the farming industry, especially in regard to the growth of cereals-I do not know much about sugar-but I have not the slightest doubt that the farming industry will not suffer in the slightest degree from federation. The effect will be very much the contrary. I took the trouble to look up some statistics for the year 1897 in connection with wheat-growing on the Downs. Until recently we have been very backward in regard to that industry. It is only lately that the industry has been taken up in a serious manner, and the farmers who have gone in for wheat-growing are doing extremely well. In 1889 there were only 7,500 acres under wheat in Queensland; in 1897 there were 57,000 acres under wheat; in 1889 the produce was 134,000 bushels; in 1897 it was over 1,000,000 bushels. That is to say, that in nine years it has increased over 700 per cent. Mr. Kates, the member for Cunningham, the district I used to represent, stated twice in the other Chamber-on the Address in Reply and in the debate on this Bill -that he had gone carefully into the matter, that he knew there was now 100,000 acres under wheat, and than judging from the extraordinary good start wheat had got this year the return would be about 20 bushels to the acre-an average that would give 2,000,000 bushels of wheat this year in Queenslanct. Now, as we only want 3,000,000 bushels altogether for our present requirements, we are within very measurable distance of being able to supply ourselves with breadstuffs. We know what the Agricultural Lands Purchase Act has done on the Darling Downs. It IS settling an enormous number of people on the land, and agriculture

is going ahead by leaps and bounds in my dis­trict. I have no hesitation in saying if it goes on even an the rate it has been going on for the last seven years-and it is going on much (\nicker-that by the time federation comes into operation and the tariff is done away with, we shall not only be able to supply onrsel ves with breadstuffs, but we shall have a quantity for ex­port. I take it that even if we pass this Bill it will be eighteen months or two years before the Federal Parliament will get into proper opera­tion. After that we have still two years before the tariff is taken off, so that we have from three and a-half to four years to bring about that dPsir­able result. As the Hon. Mr. Gregory has said, we have far more good land and cheaper than any of the other colonies. Numbers of good men with money in their pockets are coming from the south to settle and farm in Queensland. None of them are going away, and it is certain that none of our farmers are going to the other colonieg, We have the land, we have the climate, and we can grow every­thing in that climate from a banana to a cherry, and from rice to oats. There is plenty of room for agriculturists of every kind from all parts of the world to grow their own particular speciali­ties in one pttrt of the colony or another. There is another thing I may remark. ·when we get this federation, and this tariff taken off, we shall be protected a;:ainst the two countries from which we have most to fear-California and New Zea­land. Both those places send enormous quan­tities of produce into our market, and as we shall have intereolonial freetrade and protec­tion against the outside world, we shall be able to supply ourselves and be protected agaimt those from whom we have most to fear. The question has often been asked if there is "any business" in this federation? Speaking on belutlf of the pastoml industry, with which I am more intimately connecter!, I may say that as far as that industry is concerned there is a goon deal of business in it. We all know the disabili­ties under which the pastoral tenant of the Crown labours from causes quite beyond his control. When dronghts come and WiP.e his stock out he has to put up with it; and wh"en he has a decent season, and has stock, he cannot get his stock to tho•e countries that want it withnnt having to pay enormous duties which are almost prohibitive. I have drawn up a table showing the duties on live stock and dead and preserved meat going into Victoria, South Australia, Tas­mania, and Western Australia:-

.,_,.

"" "'"' Cattle Sheep ,_

"' :>1o ~~ per per 0

Head. Head. ""'"" ~~ "''" "" AP< p.,

------ --- ---£ 8. d. s. d. s. d. s. d.

Victoria 1 10 0 2 0 7 0 0 3 South Australia ... 1 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 2* Tasmania ... 2 0 0 2 0 8 4 10 p.c.

ad. val. 1\r estern Australia 1 10 0 6 12 6 0 OH

* Preserved meat, equal to £6 13s. 4d. on an 800-lb.' bullock.

t Dead meat, equal to £5 per head on an 800-lb. bullock.

To get those duties removed is "lmsiness," I take it. And those countries have to get our cattle; it is not a question of whether they will or won't. We have in this colony as many-cattle as all the rest of Australia, including New Zealand, put together. There are over 6,000,000 cattle in Queensland. I will now give a table showing the imports from Queensland during

.ti.,ustralasian Federation [14 JuNE.] :Enabling Eitl . 443

1897 into the colonies alre•dy mentioned of cattle, sheep, and dead meat, together with their average values-

~ ~-----lci--"'---~....il---

l'"'""i C'l "" 0

~ ~~~ 2~~ ,.,

'l'hese colomes cannot supply their own wants. We can supply their wants, and more th"'n supply them, and doing away with those inter­colonial duties will allow us to get the benefit of all that ; our stock will be worth so much more, and we will be so much the better able to meet our liabilities. That, I think, does away with the statement that there is "no business" in federation. Probably when the Bill gets into committee I will have a good deal more to Ray. There are so many matters to tonch upon, and the one that deserves most to be touched upoh is the defenGe of the colonies. It certainly cannot be dealt with in anything like a proper manner if we remain a lot of disintegrated units, each with its own little fad and its own little army, and which, if we keep up these border frictions of ours, we may some day have to use against each other instead of against an outside enemy. I have no doubt whatever that we will have our experience of war, the same as every other nation in the world. There is no reason why we should be exempt fr,,m what every ofher nation has had to bear. We are the richest people-according to population-on the face of the earth, and the greatest prize for any of the nations, who are now trying to colonise, to get hold of if they can. We know of another federation, a very great federation, that has gone ahead-though perhaps not on the lines that British people would like-but we know that ever since they have been federated the great Germanic power has become an important factor in the world. She is a great coloniser, and if unfortunately we should get into trouble with her or with any other nation, I fancy we would have to federate in a very great hurry indeed-not as we may do now in these peaceful times, but in a higgledy-piggledy fashion, and we would be quite unprepared to meet the troubles that would come upon us.

HoNOURABLE Jl.fEMBERS: HPar, hear! Mr. ALLAN: I know that if we are federated,

with the people we have and the race we have

sprung from, there is not a man from twenty to sixty who would not be ready to do all he could to uphold patriotically the flag under which he lives. vVe are training up youngsters in our boys' schools, and breaking them in as cadets. We are giving them education for nothing, and there is no reason to think they will not in return come forward and take their stand for their country, and everyone bear a musket to defend his own hearth and home. I know they will; but if we are dieintegrated as we are now we can do nothing. vVhile speaking of the beginning of this movement the Hon. Mr. \Vilson did not seem to know exactly how it started, but I can go back to 1876, when Sir Hercules Robinson was speaking on federation. Years after that, in 1890,-General Edwardes was sent out here to report upon the defences of the colonies, and he reported, I think to Mr. Gillies, who was then Premier of Victoria. Mr. Gillies wrote to Sir Henry Parkes to suggest that under their Constitutions as then existing they should federate for defence purposes. Sir Henry Parkes wrote back at once to say that under their Constitutions, as then existing, it was not sufficiently clear that they would allow them to federate for defence purposes as sug­gested by General Edwardes. Then it was­in the same letter-that Sir Henry Parkes proposed that the colonies should federate­that they should send so many men to a Conven­tion to frame a Constitution. That was the beginning of the Convention of 1891. The Hon. Ivir. Gregory spoke of Lord Brassey having made some mention in one of his speeches of the subject of federation. I shall read one short paragraph from an article he wrote for the April number of the Nineteenth Century on the subject of Aus­tralian federation. This was after the meeting of Premiers. Lord Brassey says-

The successful conclusion or the Conference of Premiers has been hailed on all sides with marks of satisfaction. The popular feeling of the native-born in Australia-and they are nearly eight-tenths ofthe popu­lation-is earnest for the building up or one powerful nationality. While the present division into petty States subsists, Australia cannot contribute worthily to the strength of the British Empire, nor make that honourable name among the nations to which its citizens aspire. Federation, it is felt, will give a higher quality, a wider interest, and a higher distinction to the public lile. It will put the work of government-upon a higher plane. It has been sneered at a good deal-we have had it even in this House-this sneering at sentiment, this sneering at "one flag, one destiny." I do not know that we have not got that sentiment in every walk of life in which we may move.

HONOURABLE ME~IBERS: Hear, hear! The HoN. W. ALLAN: It would be a great

pity if we were not influenced by sentiment. I know I am not ashamed-! am proud to call myself as an Australian, and to take my place in the world as an Australian-as one of a great nation. I trust I shall yet. I have no sneers for "one flag, one destiny." I think it a very solemn thing, and one that we should be very patriotically proud of. Then, it is continually said, "Give us more time; let us educate the people." Surely those who say that must think the people extremely dense, very stupid and very foolish ! More than one said that when it was proposed to elect the men to be sent to the Convention from New South "\Vales. And what sort of men did they send? It has been already said that they sent the very pick and cream of the best men to be found in Australia. If they were educated enough to do that, wha.t more do they want? They will do the same thing here, no doubt. They have been educated fnr nearly forty years. I can refer you to the time when Sir Hercules Robinson, that great states­man and most excellent Governor, went along

Australasian Federation [COUNCIL.] Enabling Bill.

with Mr. Leckey, who was then Minister for Works in New South Wales, and Sir George Bo~en, then Governor of Victoria, to Albury, whwh was even then called "the federal citv " and talked of federation. That was in Octobe~ 1876, and there had been a good deal of talk abont federation before that. People have been born and died since then, who were educated-in federation, and surely it is time we gave up this talk about waiting until we have educated the people a little more ! They might want some little education in the particular provisions of this Bill. I am not certain that I understand the whole of it yet, but I am quite satisfied to leave it to the good sense and patriotism of the men who will have the handling of it. I am sure none of them will take those petty mean advantages which have been suggested. "\Vhat will become of all the money we will send to them 1 What will they do with it 1" we are asked, But are_ our representatives, when sent down there, to s1t down and twiddle their hands 1 Not much! \Y_e are not made in that way. To show how httle we have gone ahead since that time I shall read a few extracts from a speech delivered by Sir Hercules Robinson on the 31st of October, 1876. It was an after­dinner speech, and only occupied about half an hour in delivery, but it really leaves very little for u~ to say on the subject of federation. Speakmg to the people of Albury Sir Hercules Robinson said- '

But, looking at the river, the thouO'ht more than once obtruded itself upon me, Wby bas A! bury been called the federal city? I presume, because, on the lucus a non lucendo principJe, it presents a strikinCT illustration of the absence of federation, and of the il~convenience and loss arising from running an arbitrary line of com­mercial demarcation through a country peopled by the sa1ne race, and marked by no physical differences. The corn and wine of this district are thus debarred from ~ccess to their. natura~ market by a prohibitory tax Imposed by a neighbouring colony, and the social com­merce and exchanges of communities, separated only by a stream, are hampered by all the obstructions and restrictions which a Customs barrier and different fiscal systems impose.

Previous to that they had tried to do away with the border Customs between Victoria and New South Wales, by each colony giving to the other a lum~ snm for what they thought might be col­lected m Customs, but that broke down, princi­pally because New South Wales began to grow tobacco, and send it over the border. After referring to that matter, Sir Hercules went on to say-

Thus, as I have shown. all the expedients which have from time t~ time been suggested or attempted to mitigate the niconvenie;ICe to which you are exposed on the border have failed, as I maintain they were bound to do, for such inconveniences are merely the natu~al consequences of dividing a country physically one Into separate autonomous sections by means of mere. arbitrary geographical lines of demarcation. The case.1~ one wJ:icJ; cannot be satisfactorily met by any empmcal pallmtwn. It admits of but one effectual and permanent cure-namely, the blottin 0' out alto­gether of the_ artificia~ unnatural boundarY line-in a wor~, fed~rat10n. It I.s, I think, well that you should reah.se this here,. a~d mste~d of wasting your time in lookmg for palhat1ves, which must prove ineffectual seek rather for the total eradication of the evil by th~ adoptio~ of the simp~e a:'-d natt~ral remedy-a remedy ~~~i~~~1nment of which Is, I believe, merely a question

The population of Australia then was only about 2,000,000, or about one-half what it is now. Further on that gentleman says-

Take, for example, the question of defence Any danger to Australia must come from without. An attack on any part would affect the whole and like a chain, the strength of the whole is' no 'greater than that of_ the :weakest link. The true policy, under such conditwns, IS as obvious here now as it was in England in ~he time of the Heptarchy-namely, the snbst1tut10n for petty isolated schemes of de­fence of a union which will facilitate the concen-

tration, upon the shortest possible notice, of the whole fighting force of the country upon any threatened point. Look again at the recent growth of questions affecting external as wen as internal interests-such as the various mail services, ocean telegraphs, the exploration and settlement of conterminons territory, general immigration, and the introduction of Chinese. These, and similar subjects of a general character, wili assuredly, before long, need to be considered and treated from a continental rather than from provincial points of view. So, too, as regards the important matter of internal transit.

He did not leave very much for us to ta.lk about in this House. In conclusion, he said-

These and similar considm·ations can scarcely fail to attain greater prominence as the several provinces advance in dcvelopn1ent, until at length a general con­currence of feeling will be brought n.bout as to the necessity for joint action in matters of federal concern. Meanwhile the statesman should always be looking forward. Like a man riding well to hounds, he should keep his eye overhead, with a view to avoiding, or, if need be, surmounting the difilculties which lie before him. All legis­lation and administration should be viewed, there­fore, not only in reference to their applicability to the p1·esent, but also with regard to their adaptability to the probable circumstances of the future. Surely such a prospect of future greatness must suga-est the necessity of now laying broad and deep the foundations for the development of this vast country, and for its corresponding advancement in civihsatwn. It is, indeed, a prospect which may well enkindle a fiame of Australian, as distinguished from provincial, yatriotism; whilst it assuredly offers a noble field for the exercise of the highest capacity for statesmanship.

I do not apologise for reading those words, though they were uttered twenty-three years ago, because the subject was then sounded from one end of Australia to the other, yet we talk now about giving time for the eel neation of the people. l think we have hung off long enough. This question bas been before us several times, and we have never yet submitted it to the people. The question should be referred to the people, and I believe that if it is there will be a very large majority who will say they would far sooner federate into one great nation, than continue to have this continent governed by six or seven different Parliaments. \Ve shall lose nothing of our power by federating ; our provincial ad van­tages will be maintained, and the general good will be infinitely better looked after by a Federal Parliament than it would be with six or seven separate Governments and our present lines of demaraction.

HoNOURABLE MEMBERS: Hear, hear! The HoN. F. T. BRENTNALL: I beg to move

the adjournment of the debate. Question put and passed ; and resumption

of debate made an Order of the Day for to­morrow~

Question put and passed; and the House ad­journed at 2 minutes to 9 o'clock.