. Adjournment.
(1
JULY,
that when the vote is taken-though I
have not great hopes on that score-it
will be seen that this country, governed
well and judiciously, as it has been in the
past, will be rid by that vote of one of the
most objectionable, one o£ the most politically corrupt administrations that ever
held place and power inN ew South Wales.
Debate adjourned.
ADJOURNMENT.
Motion (by Mr. FEGAN) proposed :
That this Honse do now adjourn.
Mr. CRICK: It is the intention of the
Government to finish the debate to-morrow
evening.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
House adjourned. at 12·36 a.m. (Wednesday).
1Legi~latHH
Qtountit
Wednesday, 1 July, 1903.
Special Adjournment.
The PRESIDENT took the chair.
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT.
Resolved (on motio~ by !.he Ron. Colonel
MACKAY) with concurrence:
That iu consegnence of certain action still
pending in the other branch of the legislature,
this House at its rising do adjourn until vVednesday next at 4 o'clock.
House :tdjourned at 4·32 p.m.
1Legi~latine ~s~embl1!.
Wednesday, 1 July, 1903.
Goulburn Roman Catholic Church Land Sale Bill-Petitions-Papers-Public Works Comtnittee-Committee
of Elections and Qualifications-Governor's Speech :
Address in Reply-Order of Business-Supply~Ways
and Means-Sessional Committees-Special Adjournment-Adjournment.
Mr. SPEAKER took the chair.
GOULBURN ROMAN CATHOLIC LAND
SALE BILL.
Proceedings resumed under Standing
Order 409.
Bill referred to select oommittee.
p
•
1903.]
Papers.
38!)
PETITIONS.
The following petitions, praying the
House to pass into law the amending
Liquor Bill, brought in by the State Treasurer, with the following amendments : (1) Eadier hours of closing ; ( 2) extension
of the local option law; ( 3) liquor sold in
clubs; (4) elimination of the clause which
proposes to license oyster saloons; (5) nonemployment of barmaids,-were presented.
by the members named(1.) By Mr. McFarlane-From A. McPhee,
junior, chairman of a meeting of the "Record'
R.~ign " Lodge of the Independent Order of Good
Templars at King's Creek.
(2.) By Mr. Moxham-From Ocie Hughes,·
chairm~,n of a meeting of the "Evening Star,.
Lodge of the Independent Order of Good TempJars at Parramatta.
(3.) By Mr. Perry-From Charles J. Costello,
chairman of a meeting of the " Path of Safety ,.
Lodge of the Independent Order of Good Temp-Jars at McLean's Ridges, Richmond River.
(4.) By Mr. Haynes-From E. M. Broom,
chairman of a meeting of the Women's Christian
Temperance Union at 'Vellington.
(5.) By Mr. Haynes-From C. Ward Harrison,
president of the Methodist Band of Hope Society•
at vV ellington.
Petitions received.
PAPERS.
M~·. PERRY laid upon the table the following papers, which were referred to thePrinting Committee : Report of the Minister of Public Instruction,
-for the year 1902.
Report of the trustees of the Australian·
Museum for the year 1902.
Report of the Senate of the University ofSydney for the year 1902.
Report of the trustees of the Public Library··
for the year 1902.
Report of the trustees of the National Art.Gallery for the year 1902.
Report of the trustees of the Sydney Grammar
School for the year 1902.
Report of the Superintendent of the Industrial
School for Girls, Parramatta, for the year 1902.
Report of the Superintendent of the Carpenterian Reformatory for the year 1902.
Report of the Nautical School-ship "Sobraon"
for the year ended 30th April, 1902.
Report of theN autical School-ship "Sobraon ""
for the year ended 30th April, 1903.
Regulation under the Public Instruction Act,.
1880.
Amended regulation under the Public In-struction Act, 1880.
Amended by-laws of the University of Sydney..
Amended by-law of the University of Sydney..
Additional by-law under the Library and Art:
G~llery Act, 1899.
.
Notification of resumption of land, under the
Public 'Vorks Act, 1900, for public school pur·
poses at Pearson, Cullendore, Federal Park,
390
Public Works Committee.
[ ASSEJYIBLY. J
Bald Nob, Gum· Holes, Central Macdonald,
Strathmore, McDonald's Creek, Baker's Creek,
Belmore River (Upper.), Waddi South, Calvert,
Bunaloo, J\!Iulla Creek, Bagawa, Mogong, Acacia Creek, Shaking Bog, Yarrandale, North
Belmore, Swan Peak, Midway (Rock Vale),
Thym, Pelaw Main, Stanford Merthyr, Connorgie.
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE.
Mr. McFARLANE laid on the table
JTeports from the Parliamentary Standing
·Committee on Public vVorks on the folllowing proposals :-The construction of a
;graving-dock at Newcastle; the construction of a breakwater at Bermagui j and
the construction of works to mitigate the
·effect of floods on the Hunter River.
COMMITTEE OF ELECTIONS AND
QUALIFICATIONS.
Mr. Hogue was sworn as a member of
··the Committee.
-GOVERNOR'S SPEECH : ADDRESS IN
REPLY.
.
· Debate resumed (from 30th June, vide
page 389) on motion by Mr. Quinn:
That the following address in reply to the
Governor's opening speech, as read by the
Acting Clerk, be now adopted by this House:To his Excellency Sir HARRY HoLDSWORTH
RAWSON, Vice-Admi1·al in the Royal Navy,
Knight Commander of the Most Honorable
Order of the Bath, Governo1· of the State of
New South Wales and its Dependencies, in
the Commonwealth of A ustmlia.
May it please your Excellency,-·
·We, his Majesty's loyal and dutiful subjects,
the members of the Legislative Assembly of
New South Wales, in Parliament assembled,
desire to express our thanks .for your Excellency's speech, and to assure you of our unfeigned attachment to his Most Gracious
l\'fajesty's throne and person.
We desire to assure your Excellency that the
various measures indicated in your Excellency's
speech shall receive our earnest consideration,
anct the necessary provision for' the public service will be made·in due course.
vVe join your Excellency in the hope that,
under Divine Providence, onr labours may prove
of benefit to all classes of the people.
Upon whiqh Mr. Carruthers had moved:
That the address in reply be amended by
leaving out the second paragraph, and inserting instead thereof the following words : " \V e desire respectfully to inform your Excellency that this House does not repose confidence
in your present advisers, especially in view of
their evasive and inconsistent attitude on the
question of reduction of members, and in view
also of their general mismanagement of· public
affairs."
Governor's Speech.
Mr. MAcDONELL (Cobar) l4·44 J: I
do not propose to deal with all the items
contained in the Governor's speech. There
is one particular paragraph, No. 20, to
which I propose chiefly to confine my attention. Some remarks have been made
with regard to the proposal to modify in
some way the law as it now stands as the
result of the Taff Vale decision. Reference was made to the subject by the hon.
member for Petersham and the hon. member for Tamworth. I think it was the
bon. member for Tamworth who said he
was inclined to think, although he di~ not
say so straight out, that the fact that that
subject found a place in the Governor's
speech was the result of pressure brought
to bear by the labour party. r wish at
once to disabuse his mind, and the minds
of other hon. members of any such idea.
As a matter of fact, the political labour
league, which held its conference in J anuary last, and at which 100 delegates were
present, unanimously carried a resolution
asking for an alteration of the law in that
respect. As a result of that, practically
all the bodies of employees now registered
under the Industrial Arbitration Act .were
represented on a deputation to the Prime
Minister which asked him to bring about
some remedial legislation. I think it goes
without saying that those bodies have the
same right to deputationise the Prime
Minister as the hcensed victuallers, the
local optionists, or any other such body.
They did it in a perfectly open way, and
the Prime l\,'Iinister was convinced by their
represe:>tations that some alteration was
desirable, and he gave a promise to that
extent. But, as far as the labour party
are concerned, they had absolutely nothing
to do with it.
Mr. J.· HuRLEY: What was the date of
that deputation 7
Mr. MAcDONELL : Six weeks or two
months ago. .r cannot tell the exact date,
but it was immediately after the AttorneyGeneral returned from the mother country. There is a great deaJ. said about the
Taff Vale decision, and one would almost.
think, from the way in which the hon.
member for Tamworth dealt with the question, that it was a sort of eleventh commandment, and that any attempt to whittle
away in any respect the law as established
by the House of Lords would lead to
social disaster, that the bottom would fall
Governor's Speech:
[1
JULY,
out of society if such a thing took place;
The matter has only to be considered to
S!=Je that there is no ground for such an
idea. This Taff Vale decision was given
in 1901. For nearly 100 years before that
date we had combinations of labour in England. England, I think, may fairly claim the
honor of being the first country in the world
to introduce the principle of combination,
and Great Britain bas carried it to a greater
length than any other nation in the civilised world. For a long number of years
these trades combinations existed in spite
of the law. There were the most odious
conspiracy laws established for the express
purpose of crushing the combination of
workmen. But, as a consequence of the
changes brought about by the introduction of machinery, combination was absolutely essential, and those combinations of
workmen lived and prospered in spite of
the conspiracy laws. Some of the conspiracy laws were ·abolished, but not until
187·1 were the combinations of workmen
recognised by Jaw. Prior to the legislation
of 1871, many of the leaders of unions in
England held the opinion that once they
became corporate bodies the.v would form
a tempting mark for ,litigation, and that
all their funds might be frittered away in
expensive legal actions. They were, therefore, opposed to any incorporation, or even
to any legislation which would lega.lise
them. But they were assured by the public men of that time that they would not
be put in that position. From 1871 right
up to 1901 the law left the unions absolutely free from any liability as corporate
bodies. I do not know that even without
the Taff Vale decision the general public
would have been in any· worse position
than they are now, because the people
always had this safeguard-that whoever
took part in anything which was against
the law were always liable under the law.
No man could ever diYest himself of that
responsibility. Therefore, there was that
safeguard against any wrong-doing on the
part of these corporations. I want to
impre~s upon hon. members that the
trade-unions do not want to escape any
fair liability. What we do say is : we
have an Arbitration Court established, that
makes us an incorporated body. Under
that act itself, society is further protected,
and all the liability that can be fairly
attached to any organisation is attached
1903.]
Ad(lress. in Reply.
391
to the industrial unions, and greater
protection is given under that act than is
given under the Trade-Unions Act of
England. I inter:jected when the hon.
and learned member for Tamworth was
speaking as to whether he did not. realise
that the unions in New South Wales were
in a worse position than the unions in
England as a result df the passing of the
Arbitration Act, and he Raid he did not
see that there was any difference. I want
to point out that there is a difference. I
can readily understand that he would not
be bound by an opinion given off-hand.
The Trades-Union Act does not allow any
organisation to own more than 7 acres of
land. Section 7 of thtJ Arbitration Act
gives unlimited powers to unions with
regard to the holding of real and personal
property. They can hold as much real
and personal property as they can honestly
come by. Section 4 of the T~·ades-U nion
Act, sub·section 2, says :
Nothing in this act "shall enable any court to
entertain any
.
.
.
agreement for
the payment by any person oi any subscription
or penalty to a trade·union.
In England at present, if a verdict is
given against a union the funds are liable
of course. But there is no indiv<idual
liability as far as members are concerned.
They can divest themselves of their liability by leaving the organisation. But
under the Arbitration Act of this state
the position is entirely different. Under
that act there is absolutely no limit as to
the property which an organisation may
possess, and no man who has once become
a member can escape liability. Before he
can leave the organisation he must give
tnree months' notice, and he must discharge
his pt'oportion of all the liabilities which
the union has incurred whilst he was a mem"
ber of it. There is, therefore, that wiCl.
distinction between the two cases. Our act
goes further and says, that for any breach
of an award under the act not only are all
the funds of the organisation liable, but
the members are individually liable up to
the sum of £10 as well. As we stand
under the present law we are infinitely
worse off than the organisations in England. Not only. are all our funds liable,
but each individual member cannot possibly escape any liabilities which an organisation has incurred whilst .he was a
member of it. we think it is one of the.
Eighth night,
:392
Governm·'s Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.]
·most reasonable things possible to say that
the law should be altered in view of this.
A union is formed for certain definite
objects. As long as the officers of a union
are properly authorised, if they do anything which is in contravention of the
law the funds of the organisation should
be liable_; but we say that it is altogether
unfair to have a condition of things in
which the funds of that organisation
would be liable for unauthorised acts of
.servants or agents. As the law stands
now it is in an entirely nebulous condition. Eminent lawyers differ as to what
the law is. There was a case showing
that as the law stands now a master can
.do things which the men may not do.
That w:;,s the case of a steamship company-an association that went under the
name of McGregor's Company-engaged
in a large way in ~hipping in the China
trade. They wanted to secure a monopoly
.and the Great Mogul Company tried to
-<mt into the tradfl. McGregor & Co. then
started 0ffering rebates of a very substantial character to those who would ship
with them. They notified their agents that
if they had anything to do with any other
shipping company they would dismiss
them. They also issued a circular stating
-that they would refuse to give rebates to
.anyone who dealt with the Great Mogul
-Steamship Company. The Great Mogul
·Company then brought an action against
them' for conspiracy; but the court held
-that they were acting in furtherance of
trade, and were justified in the line of
.action they were taking, that an association
-of persons could do what an individual
.could do, and that it was not actionable.
Next year another case occurred in connection with an association of · tradeunionists who, finding that a man was
employing non-unionists, went to the man
who was supplying him with building
materials, and endeavoured to induce him
to refuse to supply the other with any
more building materials, and threatened
that if he did not do so they would call his
workmen out. He refused. They then appealed to other men, and used pressure in
that way to induce some to break contracts,
.and others to refuse to enter into contracts with him. The court held that they
were wrong in both cases. Not merely in
trying to induce men to break contracts,
wl1ich we can all understand but also in
r~Mr. MacDonell
Address in Reply.
bringing pressure to bear to induce men
not to enter into contracts. It goes without saying, that those individuals going to
people and saying : "We think you should
not enter into contracts with a certain
individual," is practically the same thing as
McGregor & Co. going to people and saying : "You must have nothing to do with
the Great Mogul Steamship Company."
There is the case of Allan ve1·sus Flood,
which seemed to set that aside for a time;
but, in the case Quin versus Leathem, referred to by the bon. and learned member
for Tamworth, the Templeton versus Russell decision was re-established. Here is
a statement of the position summarised
by the English railway unions as to their
position, defined by the Taff Vale decision.
I do not presume to say that the whole of
it is right, but the decisions I have seen
bear out what is stated in what I am
about to read. The following was published in the Bulletin on the 21st March:
It is illegal for unionists to ask persons not to
trade with or work for certain firms.
Employers can, and do, ask each other not to
trade with or employ certain workmen or deal
with certain unions.
It is illegal for unionists to strike to make
men join a union.
Employers may, and do, lock out men to
make them leave a union, or discharge them for
joining one .
It is illegal for unionists to ask a person not
to supply materials to or handle the materials
of certain employers during a .dispute.
Employers may, and do, request each other
not to supply employment or engage certain
men concerned in a dispute.
It is illegal, during a dispute, to peacefully
persuade a ma,n not to take the side of an employer"by taking another man's place .
Employers may, and do, persuade and entice
persons to help them, and often, by threats of
dismissal, force some to take others' places in a
dispute.
It is illegal to pnblish and use lists of obje((·
tionable persons with a view to assisting tradeunion objects.
Employers use lists of trade-unionists they
object to, and, by communicating with each
other, persecute men, and keep them out of
work.
It is illegal to watch or picket a shop during
a dispute with a view to quietly preventing
men's places being taken.
• ,
Employers may, and do, send their agents
and advertisements anywhere to secure men,
and offer bribes and inducements to those who
will serve their purpose.
If every line of that is not correct, unquestionably it gives what is practically
the position at the present time. I would
Governor's Speech:
r1
JULY,
. ask any fair-minded person, no matter
what side of the Honse he belongs to,
whether he considers that a condition of
things like that is a fair one, and if it is
not, will he assist to bring about some
remedy for it? I conttmd that no one can
justify it, and that we are in duty bound
to make some alteration of the law. Here
. we are living under a Master and Servants
Act which gives the employers a big advantage over the workers.
If n man
even negligently destroys any property
belonging to his employer, he is liable
to fourteen days' imprisonment. For
some of the offences under the act, he is
liable to three months' imprisonment. The
article destroyed may be only worth £1,
. or less; still he' is liable to a penalty of
fourteen days' imprisonment. The em·. player can practically defraud him of his
wages to the extent of ·£50, and the
utmcst penalty which could be imposed
upon him under the act would be fourteen
. days. Under the act any man who goes
in the most peaceful way, and does anything to induce another who has entered
into a contract to break that contract, is
liable to a fine of £10 or fourteen days'
imprisonment.
Of course, we have to
realise the validity of contraqts ; and it
would be a bad condition of society if
. people could break contracts at will. I
hold, however, that there should be the
same penalty upon the master who unfairly
entices a man into making a contract as
there would be upon the man who, after
having made the contract, breaks it, or
upon any other man who induces him to
break it. The section to which I refer is
section 12, paragraph b, of the consolidation act :
Any person whosoever causes, induces, or
persuades any servant by words, or by any other
means whatsoever, to violate, or attempt to
violate, any agreement, whether in writing or
. not, which he has entered into to serve with any
·master, shall be, for every such offence, liable to
· a penalty not exceeding ten pounds.
Mr. vVoon: The bon. member must not
lose sight of the fact that all these offe1~ces
are open to the interpretation of the court!
Mr. MAcDONELL: I admit that. I a,m
pointing out the character of the penalty,
and all I ask is that the employer should be
liable to a similar penalty also fixed at the
discretion of the court. I am not saying that
we should fix a minimum p~nalty of £10
·on employers, and allow the courts to ex-
1903.]
Address i~ Reply.
3!)3
ercise discretion in the case of the employees.
All I say is that if one man
trades upon another man's ignorance, or
persuades him, on account of his necessity, to enter into a contract by means of
a bribe or anything of that sort, he should
be liable to fine or imprisonment just the
same as the man who breaks -a contract
once he makes it. That is all I desire to
say on that point.
Mr. FERGUSON: What the hon. member
asks for is really freedom of contract !
Mr. MAcDONELL : No, I do not. I
recognise that under the Arbitration Act
we cannot have freedom of contract. I
think that some of the greatest evils that
have occurred in industi'ial life have been
brought about under the mistaken guise
of freedom of contract. The House of
Commons-the mother of parliamentsrecognises that an alteration of the law is
necessary in this respect. A bill was submitted to it three months ago from which
I will quote one clause :
An action shall not be brought against a trade·
union or other association aforesaid for the recovery of damage sustained by any person or
persons by reason of the action of a member or
members of such trade-union or other association aforesaid, unless it be proved that such
member or members of such trade-union acted
with the directly expressed sanction or authority
of the rnles of such trade-union or other association aforesaiu.
An agreement or combination by two or more
persons to do or procure to be done any act in
contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute
shall not be a ground for such action, if such
action when done by one person is not a ground
for such action, and no action shall be brought
against any newspaper, periodical, or other publication which deals with the circumstances of
such trade dispute ; provided nothing in this
section shall exempt such newspaper, periodical,
or other publication from liability on any other
ground.
An amendment was carried to that, by
246 to 226, referring the question to a
commission, which has to enter into the
whole matter and bring up a report, with
a view to legislation to carry- out the principles laid down in the report. I might
state that such eminent men as Mr.
• Asqui~h, the late Home Secretary, Mr.
Haldane, one of the leading English barristerR, were amongst those in the minority,
and who wished to make· that act stand,
as it was then drafted, the law of England. Ron. members will thus see that
movement in the direction of altering the
law, in the way I have indicated, is not
Eighth night.
394:
Ga'IMt'fW'r's Speech :
lASSEMBLY.J
confined to this state alone, but applies to
wherever trade-unionism exists to-day. I
think it will be quite clear, therefore, that
all the unionists of this state ask for is
reasonable_; and I think we can fairly
look to all sections of the House for support in bringing about the desired legislation. The Arbitration Act, as it stands
now, whilst it undoubtedly has done a
considerable amount of good, contains
grave defects.
Mr. HAYNES : It is doing heaps of evil!
Mr. MAcDONELL : And we want to
amend the act in some· respects, and
amend it speedily, to give it a chance of
doing the good, which, under other circumstances, it would do. I think that,
"\Vith an amendment on certain lines, the
act will do even greater good than it is
doing at present. It is one of those acts
which, above all others, depends for its
success upon its administration. I will
admit at once that I am only voicing the
strong feeling of trade-unionists throughout
the state when I say that it is a mistake
to have ever allowed lawyers-with all
due respect to those gentlemen-to appear
before the court at all. The court will
never be the suecess it ought to be as
long as lawyers are allowed to appear before it.
Mr. HAYNES : A perpetual burden !
Mr. MAcDONELL: Those who were,
:first of all, instrumental in supporting the
agitation in recent years for the establishment of an arbitration courL, believed in
a court where there would be a complete
absence of the formality which now
characterises it, where men would come
together and state their case, and where
the court, without going into legal
technicalities, would simply deal with
the merits of a case and give its de·
cision.
As it exists, however, there
is an attitude of stiff formality about it.
There is a judge in his wig, and all the
imposing ceremony of the Supreme Court.
The result is that when witnesses are
called they are thrown off their centre, so
that they cannot tell the plain, straight-•
forward tale they would tell under other
circumstances. In the New Zealand court
a judge, with t'wo associate judges, sits at
a table. There is none of this wig business or other formality, and the result is
that there is far less delay in getting
through the business, that the salient fea[ Mr. MacDonell.
Address in Reply.
tures of a case are brought out to a greater
extent than is done here, and, generally
speaking, not only is there far less expense, but, in my opinion, the merits of
disputes are arrived at better than is the
case when lawyers are allowed to'appear.
One party must be in the wrong. Naturally the party in the wrong will obtain the
ablest barrister available to state his case.
The barrister will go to the court to do
his dnty by his client. He will strive to
present the best case he can for him, irrespective of whether that is or is net the best
thing for the state. That is not his business. His business is simply to uo the
best thing he can for his client, and it pays
him to do it. I might f;>tate that a decision has recently been given by the rPgistrar of the court, in connection with an
application of the· Australian W' orkers'
Union for the cancellation of the Machine
Shearers' Union, which, in my opinion,
is a most extraordinary one. It is absolutely essential that an early alteration of the act should be effected with
the view of giving the right of appeal
against the decision of the registrar.
The position as it stands now is unparalleled in any court in the world. The rule,
in connection with all other courts, is that
all the lower court may do is to say that
a primd facie case has been made out.
Then the whole matter goes forward to
the higher court and is fought out there.
Here you have to fight a case twice; you
have to fight the whole case before the
registrar, and after you have done that
you go to the court-t.hat is supposing
he recommends cancellation, but if he
refuse to recommend cancellation your
hands are tied; you can do absolutely
nothing. The registrar sits in what the
legal gentlemen call an unappealable jurisdiction. He sits in a star-chamber, the
press are not admitted :to the proceedings.
He says this is because there is no room
for them. I do not think that the Government, notwithstanding all the drought
and the bad condition of affairs, are so
poor that they could not hire a decent
hall that would accommodate the press if
the registrar required it. The registrar sits
·in his office and excludes the press, and,
under the act as it stands, ·he has no
authority to go properly into the questions that cpme before him for determition. · One of the essentials of a court
Governor's Speech:
[1 JULY, 1903.]
is. that it shall have power to compel the
attendance of witnesses and to order the
production of books, if there is any dispute-that it shall have all the powers
. necessary to get H.t the facts required for
a proper determination of the matter.
The registrar has absolutely no power to
s11~_mon anyone to produce books or to
give evidence before him, although those
are really the most valuable powers to
enable our ·courts to arrive at a proper
determination on any important matter.
If it were not for that power there would
be, unquestionably, many cases of mis·
carriage of justice; for there are people
who can work things in such a way that
they can hide important facts, and you
c~nnot get proof of them on the surface,
and it is only- by putting witnesses in the
box, where they have to undergo the
scrutiny of cross-examination and run the
risk of a long period of imprisonment if
they are found to be swearing falsely,
that you can arrive at the truth. In the
case to which I refer, one of the charges
made was that the organisation, the cancellation of whose registration. was sought,
was a bogus concern. The only way to
properly arrive at a right determination
in such a case is to give the court power
to compel the attendance of all persons
connected with thfl matter, and to order
the production of all books. But the registrar, without having any of those powers
and not being able to get all the evidence
necessary for a proper determination, can
absolutely prevent the case from going to
a court that has the powers necessary to
arrive at a proper determination.
Mr. FERGUSON : There ought to be an
appeal from the decision of the registrar
to the court !
Mr. MAcDONELL: Unquestionably.
I desire to point out the most extraordinary conduct of the registrar throughout
these proceedings. I consider that I am
entitled to deal with this matter at some
length owing to the prominence it receives
at the hands of the press, and the importance of the industry concerned. It deals
with the pastoral industry, which is the
most important industry in the Austra.lian state><, and will unquestionably for a
long time. continue to be so-an industry
which we hope to see growing in importance ·every year. In the first instance,
the registrar registered the Machine
Address in Reply.
.3.95
Shearers' Union. The matter was dealt
with quite secretly ; in fact, nothing was
known of the proceedings until some days
afterwards-until the registration had
been effected; but he could not have been
ignorant of the fact that big interests
were at stake, for he knew the importance
of the industry, and the solicitor for the
applicant union wrote a long letter setting
forth the reasons why they claimed registration, and aftflr a fortnight's consideration he registered them.
Then an application was made for cancellation of the
registration.
Mr. ScOBIE : Was any notice sent to
the Australian Workers' Union ?
Mr. MAcDONELL : No. They knew
nothing of the proceedings until after the
registration had been effected and announced in the press. In May last year
application was made for cancellation of
the rPgistration, and the registrar gave
the following judgment :
Having regard to the objects to effect which
the act was framed, and looking at the particular
provisions of that act, it appears to me that the
intention of the legislature was that separate
registration should not be allowed to two tradeunions representing the same industrial interests
and composed of members following the same
occupation within the same area.
It has been very strongly urged upon me that
the fact that the constitution of the Australian
Workers' Union contains rules which are objectionable to the members of the Machine
Shearers and Shed Employees' Union is a .good
reason why the members of the latter union
cannot belong to the former union, and why
they are consequently entitled to registration as
a separate union. The rules to which exception
are taken are rules providing for assistance from
a political fund established by the union to the
selected candidate of the Political Labour League
approved of by the union (the expenditure for
this purpose by a branch being authorised by at
least a two-thirds majority of the· members of
the branch) ; rules prohibiting a labour member
of the union acting against the. solidarity of the
labour party; rules prohibiting, under a penalty,
members voting against or workirig against the
selected candidate of the union ; and rules providing for the establishment and support of a
newspaper called the Worker. Other rules also
taken objection to are rules prohibiting members
working for shearing contractors or working
with machines other than those of employers.
Objectionable as these rules are to the members of the Machine Rhearers and Shed Employees' Union Industrial Union the registration
of another union with the same industrial interestg in the state appears to me to be against the
policy of the act.
That was the registrar's view twelve
months ago.
Although what he calls
Eighth night.
Governor's Speeclb:
[ASSEMBLY.]
those "objectionable rules "-some of
which, I admit, are very objectionablewere incorporated in the constitution at
that time, the registrar was prepared to
cancel the registration of the Machine
Shearers' Union. Then the matter went
before Mr. Justice ·Cohen. There were
certain rules-rules 32 (section d), 57,
and 146-which he considered· so objec-.
tionable that he said that, while they remained as part of the constitution of the
Australian Workers' Union, he could not
see his way to cancel the registration of the
Machine Shearers' Union. After pointing
out those objectionable rules, he, in giving
judgment, said:
Finally, I recognise that the policy of the act
is not to have two unions if it is convenient
that one alone should exist, and that, therefore,
a" give-and-take principle" must be applied,
for it would, no doubt, be absolutely impossible
to get two bodies of men following the same
occu·pation in absolute agreement as to the terms
and condHions upon which they should be employed. The two unions concerned in this
application embrace the same classes of industry
and workers, and so far as this state is involved
cover the same geographical area, so that on
those general grounds it appears to me that
they could conveniently unite within the meaning of the act ; but the special considerations on
which I have dwelt are impediments too strong
for my mind, after full and anxious consideration, to overcome.
I am of opinion, therefore, that this application should be refused, without prejudice, however, to any application that may hereafter be
made. No order made as to costs.
In another part of his judgment he pointed
out that there were certain rules in the
constitution of that body which prevented
them from. altering the rules until the
next succeeding conference, which was
held last January; but, practically-as far
as any judge could fairly do it-he said
pla~nly that it is against the policy of the
act to have two such unions-that really
goes without saying-and that the whole
idea of Parliament in framing the act was
that the employers, on the one band, would
band themselves together in an organisation, and that the employees would band
themselves together in another organisation, and that each side would do the best
it could to put forward the strongest possible case for their particular class, and
that the court, knowing the most that
could be said on each side, should be there
to hold the scales of justice and decide
as fairly as it could between the two rival,
claims.
[Mr. MacDonell.
Address in Reply.
Mr. SuLLIVAN: The registrar encourages multiplicity of unions !
Mr. MAcDONELL : The act not only ·
provided for the grouping together in one
union of ail the people following a particular occupation, but it actually provided
for the mustering together in one organisation of a number of unions-that is, a
union of unions. The very preamble of
the act provides for a number of unions
being grouped together as one industrial
union. The idea was a common-sense one :
that they wanted to have as few cases as
possible before the court, and that instead
of allowing Tom, Dick, aml Harry to
occupy the whole time of the court in
litigation, each side, representing a particular class, should come before the court.
And under the principle of the common
rule, whatever the award would be, it
would be w.ithin the power of the court to
make it apply to the whole state. That
would save litigation and be for the general
good. Another proof that that was so is
this: the Industrial Arbitration Act provides for industrial agreements ; that is,
if an employer and employees come to an
understanding they may, instead of spending their money and taking up their time
and the time of the court in litigation,
simply have a conference and draw up
what seems to them the best agreement
they can agree upon. That would be filed
with the court, and would have all the
validity that would attach to an order of
the court. Another section of the act says
. that under the principle of the common
rule the court has authority to make the
common rule apply to the whole state.
Hon. members will see that there are only
the interests of the employers and employees to consider, the employers wishing
to get as much labour as they can for
their money, and the employees to get
as much money · as they can for their
labour. There are not three parties
intereste-1. But, as the case stands now,
it would appear that the Machine Shearers'
Union has entered into an agreement with
the Pastoralists' Union, and filed an agreement with the court. Supposing that the
otherorganisation, the Australian \-Yorkers'
Union, brought their case before the
Arbitration Court, got an awu,rd, and
applied for the application of the common
rule. And supposing that the provisions
of the court award were different to the·
Governor's Speech :
[1 JULY, 1903.]
provisions of the agreement filed in the
case of Machine Shearers' Union, then
either the industrial agreement filed in the
court would have to go by the board, or
the common rule would have to go by the·
hoard. It was thought that the two
organisations of empl9yers and employed
would meet and come to an 9-greement. It
was never dreamt that there would be
three organisations where there were only
two interests in existence. The judge
realised that that was the position, and
that it was against the policy of the act to
have·two organisations covering the same
area and dealing with the same interests,
so long as the rules of the one organisation
were such as to treat fairly any persons
who were at that time-outside of it. U nquestionably that was a fair judgment.
But the registrar in his present .attitude
is breaking entirely new ground. I have
just read what his judgment was last year.
After that judgm\c)nt was disposed of, the
Australian Workers' Union altered the
rules to which the court took exception,
arrd renewed their application.
Mr. McGowEN·: Did they alter them in
every case 1
Mr. .!\'I:AcDONELL : Yes, in every
case. Every rule to which the court took
exception was excised. They then made
a second application, but the registrar
held that it had not been made legally,
and as the matter was, in his language, res
judicata, the court decided that, in view
of the objectionable rules, cancellation
could not take place ; that, though the
union had practically altered them, still it
had not done so legally.· Therefore, the
court refused the application. When the
next conference took place, the Australian
Workers' Union altered every rule to
which the court took exception. They did
all they could to respect the wishes of the
court, and to bring themselves into line
with the conditions laid down by· the
court. Then they renewed their application. In my opinion, there was absolutely nothing for the registrar to do in
the case but to refer the matter to that
body which was the only authoritative body
that could properly hear and determine it.
Mr. WILLIAMS: Because the obstacles
were all removed !
,
Mr. MAcDONELL : Every obstacle to
which exception could be taken was reEvery obstacle to which the
moved.
Address in Reply.
397
court took exception had been removed.
But we now find the registrar breaking
new ground. He takes up the position of
censor of the conduct of the nnions
throughout the whole state, and that is a
position which no one in his place should
beallowed to occupy. In my opinion, an
action for conspiracy would lie against the
people who have been instrumental in
forming the other union-which is a
fraud against the Arbitration .Actbecause their action prevents a settlement
of the conditions of labour in the most
important industry of the state.
The
Attorney-General, in an article which he
wrote in the lfational Review for August
last, stated, without hesitation, that the
other union is a bogus umon. The registrar prevented the matter from going to
tl<le court that might have tried it, and
that would have elicited evidence which
would make convincingly clear tlle lack of
bond .fides on the part of the other organisation. It was proved before him that there
was a squatter named Heffernan, of Olear
Hills station, who had thirteen or fourteen
shearers. He told the men that none of
them would be allowed to shear unless
they joined this organisation an,d allowed
him to deduct the money for their tickets
from their earnings. Half a dozen of these
men signed affidavits to that effect. There
was another case in the north-west, in
connection with a Mr. Chase, of Llanillo,
who has been one of the bitterest opponents
the union has ever had. The Llanillo strike
of 1888 is a sort of historical affair in the
back country. He has issued tickets for
the other union. We find that Mr. Watt,
of Goonal station, near Moree, is issuing
tickets of this organisation. Numbers
of men .have received such tickets, and
have sworn that they got them without
any payment on their part. The idea· was
to get as many men into the union as they
could. Pastoralists will find means to provide the money so long as they can get the
men. The Trades-Unions Act requires
balance-sheets to be handed in by the 31st
May; but, if an earlier date had been fixed,
other facts would have been laid before the
cour~. These people are supposed to hand
in their annual report and balance-sheet
on the 31st May. They handed the balancesheet in, if you can call it a balance-sheet,
on the 2nd June; but there was no report, although there was a statement
Eighth night.
398
Governor's Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.]
attached to the balance-sheet to the effect
that it must be considered in connection
with the report. Before I read the balancesheet, I will read· what the registrar said
on the first application :
It is said further that the fact that the
Machine Shearers and Shed Employees' Union
has had apparently to spend more money in repelling the attacks made upon it hy the Australian Vi'orkers' Union, and in extending itself
through the state, than could be obtained from
its ordinary subscribers, is a ground for showing
its want of bona-fide8, as indicating that it has
received monetary aid from other persons-probably persons in the pastoralist interest.
There is, however, no evidence of payment of
any money by outsiders, and I cannot, on suspicion, hold that the union is supported by pastoralists in these or in any previous proceedings.
When the case was first hefore the court
there were less than 350 men in the
organisat.ion. The subscription was 2s. 6d.,
and this would amount, roughly speaking, to· £40 odd, if the whole of the
members had paid up their subscriptions.
In an application before the Supreme
Court they engaged an eminent King's
Counsel like Mr. Want, who would swallow
up, I suppose, in one day, and certainly
in two days, more in tpe shape of fees
than the annual contributions -..vould come
to. But the registrar found on that
occasion that there was no proof. To
show the absolute Jack of bona-fides on
the part of this organisation, I will read
the alleged balance-sheet as now in the
possession of the trade-union registrar.
"Donations and levies, £1,057 7s. 6d.; subscriptions, £226 5s." I have explained
that the annual subscription was 2s. 6d.
They struck a levy of 5s. for shearers and
2s. 6d. for labourers. But in the balancesheet there is the one item, " donations
and levies, £1,057 7s. 6d." At 2s. 6d.
the total subscriptions received represents
1,809 members, supposing they all paid up.
We have proof that a number of them did
not pay up, but that other people put the
money in. But suppose they all paid up,
and suppose all were shearers, which they
were not, as has been proved ; and suppose all of them paid their levy· of 5s.-and
there is no organisation for carrying out
a business like that, spread over the country as this organisation is, that can
possibly reach all the members and get
them all to pay-but even if they did
that, it would only total a sum of £67815s.,
which would mean that there was a
[Mr. MacDonell.
Addretrs in Reply.
deficiency of £604 17s. 6d. made up by
some good Santa Claus outside. Attached
to the balance-sheet. is a report by Mr.
Douglas H. Gilfillan. He is a public
accountant and auditor. I understand he
is connected with Dalgety & Co., and it
goes without saying that an organisation
like this, which is getting all this money
from outside sources, would try to select
an auditor who was most likely to be as
reasonable as possible with them. But
this gentleman has .a reputation to maintain, and there are some things he cannot
pass. He says this :
Dear Sirs,-In connection with my auditorial
certificate of this date attached to the statement of the receipts and expenditure of your
union for the year epded 31st December, 1902,
I desire to report as follows :
Subscriptions, £226 5s. On phecking the used
receipt butts, held in the office, I find that the
total amount shown thereby under this heading
amounts to £199 lOs. A sum of £226 5s. is
shown in the statement of receipts and expenditure, being £26 15s. in excess of the amount
shown by the butts. The secretary informs me
that in numerous instances remittances have
been sent to· him, together with lists of members; but the receipt b.utts have not been
returned to him. A surplus of £1 12s. 4d. is
also accounted for in the books in excess ·o:fi
amount shown by levy receipt-butts.
He then goes on to say :
I would strongly advise that a .systematic
check be kept in future on the receipts, even if
additional clerical .assistance is necessary to
. ensure same.
He also says :
Donations : No receipts have been issued 'for
donations, the amounts having been contributed
anonymously.
Last year we had the registrar saying
that there was no proof that this organisation had received any money from
outside sources, and implying in the
plainest possible manner that if it were so,
that fact would at once prove lack of
bona-fides. But here we find a statement,
under the hand of Mr. Douglas H.
Gilfillan, that no receipts had been issued
for donations.
Whether it was only
£604, or the whole sum of £1,257 that
was paid in, we do not know. We only
know that the organisation has been receiving money from these good Samaritans outside, and has been giving no
receipts, and if that is not a proof of lack
of bona-fides, I do not know what proof
people would require. Mr. Gilfillan says :
I enclose list of vouchers which have not been
presented to me. I note that a number of items
GoV6NWr's Speech:
[1
JULY,
of receipts and disbursements have not been
passed through the union's banking accountThey do not. want anything that people
can traceand would strongly advise that in future all.
moneys received be banked, and all payments
made by cheque, one of the rules of your union
specially dealing with this matter.
Here we find that this money is coming
from outside sources, and it is not going
through the bank at all, but they are
·taking each other's word. We find that
one of the leadin~ men in this organisation was a man who was acting secretary
of the Pastoralists' Union for a. considerable period. We find that another officer
of the council was a man who was a
jackeroo on a station in the west, and who
was connected with pastoralists. Everybody ~vho knows anything about station
life knows that if there is one man more
bitter against miions than another it is
the jackeroo on a station-the fellow who
thinks he owns the top wire of the fence.
Deal with the boss, and you generally get
fair treatment, but deal with the jackeroo,
and he talks of ".our property," and" We
will do this, and we will do that, and the
other thing." vVe find that a man of this
description, as well as the one-time secretary of the Pastoralists' Union, leading
members of the council of this organisation,
and we find that, even according to the
figures put in, at least £604 has been
handed in to help to " down " the
only legitimate labour organisation dealing with this particular industry. In his
judgment, the registrar takes upon himself
to be the censor of the union. He states
the grounds advanced by the Australian
Workers' Union, asking for the cancellation of the other union. He says :
To this it is answered by the respondent union
that (stating the grounds shortly) the present
constitution of the applicant union is not one to
which the members of the respondent union can
conveniently belong, as that constitution contains certain objectionable provisions which prevent the rnem hers of the respondent union from
becoming members of the applicant union.
It will be understood at once that there is a
wide differenc~ between the rules of a union
and the conduct of the officers of that union.
Possibly the offi~ers of that union may be,
every one of them, scoundrels, but there is
a wide diilerence between the conduct of
an officer of an organisation and the constitution of the union. The members of the
1903.]
Address in Reply.
399
'
Oppo~ition might have a very strong objection to the Government, b"\lt they do not
on that ground object to parliamentary
aovernment. In the same way I, as an
honorary officer of this organisation, might
be the worst man in the world, and all the
other officers might be of the same character, but the fact remains that the constitution, so far as the court is concerned,
has been held to be unobjectionable, or,
rather, the objections made when the
matter was before the court have been
removed. Therefore, no reasonable objection can be taken to the constitution, and
the conduct of any officer cannot be advanced as a reaRon for refusing to carry
out what is admittedly the policy of the
act. The registrar goes on to say :
That the latterunionisa political and aggressive
organisation which prevents the proper repre·
sentation of industrial interests in the Court of
Arbitration, and is otherwise prejudicial. •
The judge had already held that it was
quite lawful for the union to take up the
work of politics as well as to establish a
paper. I have not the text of the judgment
before me; but the judge held, when the
matter waH before him, that it was quite
right for any organisation to Pstablish and
conduct a newspaper just in the same way
as it was competent for that organisation
to take up political work. He held that
just as any organisation could send out a
circular, it could also send out a newspaper. If the newspaper publishes anything libellous or defamatory; there is the
common law of the country to deal with
it. The fact of publishing a newspaper is .
no valid objection.
The fact that the
organi~ation concerns itself with politics
is no objection. It is, indeed, as a result
of the p;litical action of unions that we
have an arbitration act. In days gone by,
unfortunately, very unhappy things took
place.
Unionists comprised men of all
sorts and conditions ; there were some very
bad men as well as many good. Unlawful
things took place, and a lot of trouble resulted. But in spite of all that, we were
told that, instead of trying to redress trade
grievances by the old weapon of a strike,
we should do so by means of the ballotbox and the Constitution. We were taught
that lesson by the conservatives. We have
learnt that lesson, and, perhaps, we have
learnt it too well for some people. Unionists will go on studying that lesson until
Eighth .night.
400
(}overnor' s Speech :
[ASSEMBLY.]
they bring about more remedial legislation
than we have had in the past. The conference which was held in J anuarv last was
attended by over one hundred delegates,
and over seventy of them represented tradeunions directly; the balance of the delegates
represented the Political Labour League.
This Parliament passed the Arbitration
Act with its eyes open as to the constitution of the unions as they exist at present
in this country. The idea that because
an organisation took up political as well
as industrial work that should be a bar to
registration, is too ridiculous, and that is
really what the judge held. For instance, as
the result of the agitation'·bn the part of the
Australian Workers' Union, certain facts
were first brought before the Reid Government when the hon. member for Glebe
was in office, and, to his credit be it said,
he decided to bring in the Shearers' Accommodation Bill. The present Government brought that measure to completion.
Mr. HoGUE : The act is virtually the
same as the bill I drew up !
Mr. MAcDONELL : Yes; it is practically the same.
While giving every
credit to the present Minister of Public
Instruction for bringing forward the bill,
I also recognise the good work which the
hon. member for Glebe did in that direction. What I wish to point out particularly is that that measure confers a benefit
which is general in its application. It is
a benefit to every member of the Machine
Shearers' Union. That is a strong argu- ·
ment in favour of constitutional action on
the part of unions. Whatever is done in
that way is really in the interests of the
whole community, and not merely for the
benefit of one class of men, let alone one
section of that class. Another ground they
took was that the management of the Australian Workers' Union had committed
a.cts of an illegal and lawless character,
a.nd that the executive of the union had
acted in defiance of all law and order. In
a.nswer to that I would say that it is not
a tenable ground of objection. If a member of this or any other union broke the
law they could be punished. We must
assume that, if they broke the law, they
have been punished. That has absolutely
nothing to do with the que'stion whether
it is against the policy of the act for the
two unions to stand. A further ground
was that an industrial agreement had been
[ .ilfr. MacDonell.
·Address in Reply.
entered into between the Pastoralists''
Union and the Machine Shearers' Union,
and that it bad been registered under.this
act. Unquestionably an industrial agreement was entered into between those two
bodies, but it is also true that on the 30th
April last the Machine Shearers' Union had
less than 350 members, and there were
more than 350 members in the Pastoralists'
Union. There are nearly 0,000 pastoralists altogether, so that there were not
enough workers to provide one shearer for
every pastoralist in their union, let alone
to supply them with full teams of shearers.
The Machine Shearers' Union did not have
the power to carry out the agreement.
They did not have a sufficient number, aml
they have not enough members no1v to have
the shearing done in the proper time. To
say that the fact of a bogus body like that
framing an agreement which they cou.Jd not
carry out is not a reason for cancellation
is utterly absurd, yet we find the registrar
saying:
It appears to me that if I find that any one of
these objections is one that affords an answer to
the application for cancellation, and is further
substantiated by evidence, I should decline to
apply for cancellation.
Subsequently he says :
It is necessary, then, to inquire into the character of that union, and I will first consider the
question as to the mode of conduct of its operations as an industrial union.
That is a thing that calls for the severest
censure.
The idea of a man whom we
have appointed simply to carry out the
machinery of the act taking upon himself
to inquire into the character of the conduct of these organisations in New South
Wales is the most absurd position I have
ever heard of. There is absolutely no warrant in the act to do such a thing. He
goes on to find that the conduct of this
union has been altogether bad and illegal,
and he bases his judgment upon a judgment given by Mr. Justice Walker in the
Equity Court last December. I want to
point out what that judgment is. The
lawyers appearing for the Australian
\V orkers' Union asked that the registrar
should shut this matter out, and contended
that he had absolutely no right to take into
account a judgment in any other court between different parties. No court would
allow the Machine Shearers' Union to put,
in evidence the judgment given by Mr.
Governor's Speech :
[l
JULY,
Justice Walker in the case of Keogh
versns the Australian Workers' Union.
But the registrar allowed that to come in,
and he based his judgment, in refusing
cancellation, upon Mr. Justice Walker's
judgment. That is certainly bad law, and
it was absolutely wrong for the judge to
allow such evidence, let alone to prnctically base his judgment upon it. I wish
to show, also, that the judgment Mr.
Justice Walker gave was a most unusual
one, for which no precedent can be found
in English law. The motion before him
was an interlocutory motion. The matter
came before the court on affidavit. If
either party refuses to have a case tried on
affidavit, he has the right to insist that the
case shall go forward for hearing, so that,
instead of trusting to affidavits, theycould
put the witnesses in the box, so as to test
their credibility. Mr. Jnstice Walker
could not refuse that, but what he did was
to say that he would allow costs to Mr.
Keogh, and that is a thing for which there
is no precedent in the English law. There
is no case in England where a judge has
given costs at that stage. The judge had
it in his power, if he thought the Australian Workers' Union was not dealing
fairly but only trying to embarrass the
plaintiff, to make an order that would
have secured him; but what he did was
unprecedented in English law, because,
giving costs at that stage, meant that
immediately the plaintiff got his costs
there was nothing to prevent him from
abandoning his suit, and that was what
actually took place. There was a case before the present Chief Justice in Equity
in which the judge did give costs at the
interlocutory stage, but when the matter
went for hearing it w·as decided . against
the plaintiff. The position was reversed.
That in itself should induce caution on the
part of a judge with regard to allowing
costs at that stage. This is what Mr.
Justice Walker said :
It does not appear from the report that the
question of costs was discussed, and having
regard to the fact (as appears from Kemp v.
Palmer, page 134 of the same volume) that the
suit when it went to a hearing was dismissed
with costs, the case, no doubt, affords a caution
against lightly awarding to a plaintiff costs of an
interlocutory motion. The true view, I take it,
is that where the court is clear on evidence not
really in controversy, that the plaintiff is entitled
to succeed, and there is substantially no question
to go 'to a hearing.
1903.]
.Address in Reply.
401
That was the view taken by the judge, who
reckoned that as long as you could find
the facts not clearly in controversy he would
be justified in givingcostsat that stage. He
went on then to state the case. He said:
The whole district was in a state that miglrt
fairly be described as a state of war ; certain of
the pastoralists, including the plaintiff, declining
to recogr.ise the Australian Vvorkers' Union
terms, and the union endeavouring to prevent·
shearing on any other terms. One of the two·
belligerents had established "strike camps ,(the term is a misnomer, for there was no strike),
and particularly a camp on the outskirts of the·
township of Coonamble, which latter camp was
formed about the 31st July.
He states there explicitly that the purpose '
of the campaign was to prevent the pastoralists from getting men to shear, and
he subsequently bases his entirejudgment..
on that. He said :
Applying m1ttntis mutandis the observations·
of Lord JJJsher, M.R., in Dye1· v ..Munday, and
of Farwell, J., in the 'l'a.ff V ctle Case, I am of
opinion that if the union established a camp for
the purpose of preventing the plaintiff from ob·
taining shearers except at union rates, and, with
a view of making the camp effective for that.
purpose, called into it not only its own members.
but others who, though not members, were'
sympathisers, then if any of those men, whether·
officials or members of the union or not, but.
acting in furtherance of the pllrposes of the
camp, committed illegal acts for the benefit of
the union, the union itself is liable to anyone·
who suffers damage from those acts.
·
He says first that he is only finding;
against the union on the facts that are not
in controversy, then he says, as a fact not
in controversy, that the union had established camps to prevent the pastoralists:'"
from getting shearers . upon other than ·
union terms. I know it would be unreasonable for me to set my word against
that of Mr. Justice vValker, and what I
propose to do is shortly to read one or two•
paragraphs from the affidavits showing
that it was not so.
[JJfr. Speaker left the Ohair at 6 p.m.
Hou.se resumed at 7 p.m.]
The:
Mr. MAcDONELL : I was proposing to.
show that the judge put the view that he
was simply deciding the Keogh case upon
facts which were not in controversy. Healso stated that one of the matters not in
controversy was the one that the union
· estab1ished camps for the purpose of prevtmting pastoralists from getting on with.
their shearing upon other than union terms.
It would be presumptuous to set up my
word against that of the judge. He says..
Eighth night.
402
Governor's Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.]
Address in Reply.
that a certain matter is not i.n controversv, the law which was committed was comand I propose, instead of giving my me~e mitted by other than an officer or agent of
word, to quote a couple of paragraphs the union. The judge in this case really
which will show that such a statement is pushed the Ta:tf Vale decision infinitely
not warranted by the facts. This is the further than was the case there. In theTaff
affidavit of William Johnston, the chair- Vale case the officers of the union called a
man of the central branch of the Aus· mass meeting to deal with the question
tralian Workers' Union. He says:
which was in dispute. They called it for
It is not true, as stated in paragraph 13 of the
a day on which, if the men attended, they
affidavit of John Leahy, sworn on the 26th day
would have to leave their work to do so;
of August last past, paragraph 4 of the affidavit
of Alexander vVilson, sworn on the 29th day of but the very fact of calling a meeting like
that, seeing that the men, in order to
August last past, and paragraph l l of the affi.davit of the plaintiff, sworn on the lst day of attend, would have to break their' con:September instant and filed herein, that the
tracts, was a proof that the officers had
·Object of forming strike camps is to prevent
really taken a hand in breaking the law.
.men engaged by station proprietors from entering into employment with them, and for no But there were other instances also in which
·Other purpose and not as a means or with any the general secretary of the organisation
hope of, the men themselves procuring employ- personally conducted strike proceedings.
ment by quietly waiting for work.
The officers of that organisation really
The next paragraph states :
t_ook a hand in directing the strug~le, and
I have had considerable experience in the there was this cardinal difference between
management of union affairs. The establishment
the two cases-that the rail way men had
.of camps is necessary, when a disagreement as
really been working under a certain agreeto the terms of employment exists, for the purpose of providing food and shelter to men wait- ment; but in the case of the Australian
•ing for work, many of whom have travelled Workers' Union they had not started
hundreds of miles to engage in the work of
.shearing or shed labour. The stations are, as a work at all. A strike, according to the
definition of our Industrial Arbitration
rule, some distance from townships or stores,
.and shearers, when seeking for employment,
Act, is a cessation of work. Those men
have to depend upon the pastoralists for their never started work at all, and therefore
supplies. In times of dispute, the pastoralists
refuse to sell provisions to the shearers unless were perfectly within their legal rights in
they agree to their terms. Invariably, when refusing to take employment on terms
disputes have arisen between pastoralists and other than those which suited them.
shearers, the latter are ordered off the station, It is also clear that if the union has a
and they then camp in the neighbourhood, hoping
that the dispute will be settled and that the sufficiency of .money to maintain its men
services of the men in camp will be availed of in camp, and if the men .remain loyal to
by the station employers. I know of numerous the organisation, they must win a great
instances in strike times where the men have majority of sheds without infringing the
camped near the stations, and, after the disputes
have been settled, the men in the strikers' camps law. Unfortunately, there has been a big
have been employed by the station owners ad- falling-off in the num her of sheep in N.ew
jacent to the camps ..
South Wales. There have been occasions
That may or may p.ot be a tissue of .false- when we have had as many as 65,000,000
hoods ; but the fact remains that it was sheep here. We could understand at once
sworn in evidence before the judge. That that the Machine Shearers' Union, which
controverts the statement of the other side is composed of men in other states as well
'that camps were established for a certain -there are even on the roll registered in
purpose, and, therefore, the £tatement that the office here . over 500 men from other
the judge finds upon evidence which is not states-could not possibly, even if they
in controversy is really not warranted by sheared all the year round, take the wool
the facts of the case. It will be seen that · off the sheep in New South Wales if it
that is t.he e~sential fact upon which the were fully stocked. As long as the members of the Australian Workers' Union
question whether camps are formed for a
lawful or unlawful purpose depends. There remained loyal, and as long as th:J union
had been no proof that any officer or agent had money to maintain them in the camps,
of the union had in any way violated the they must have W()n a great number of the
law. On the other hand, it was shown in sheds, because the wool could not be t'aken
evidence that these officers had exhorted off in a season without their assistance.
the men ~o obey the law, and any breach of We know that years ago we were told by
· [.Mr.· .!lfacDonell.
Governor's Speech:
(1 JuLY, 1903.]
banks and syndicates that were controlling things, that if the wool was not taken
off on their terms, they would allow it to
re1pain on the sheep's back ; bnt we know
that a threat like that is idle-that it is
absolutely essential that when the wool
season comes round the wool shall be
taken off the sheep's backs ; therefore,
different from the Taff Vale case, these
men were acting within their legal rights
in refusing to start work, and there was
absolutely no occasion to resort to any
breach of the law to win the great bulk of
the sheds, and, consequently, the Australian
Workers' Union never at any time dreamt
of effecting its purpose by establishing
camps in the· way the judge has stated.
There have been times when it has actn~lly
endeavoured to try to carry out its purpose
by keeping its members at home; but the
trouble has been that the great majority of
the members had no homes to stay at., and,
therefore, they had to go to the camps. They
could not stay on the station lands or _get
food supplies therfl, and, therefore, they had
to go to reserves and commons near townships, where they would have the right to
camp and get the wherewithal from the
storekeepers of the township. So there
are no grounds for the judge's presumption
that the camps were formed for the purpose mentioned.
Here is an affidavit
sworn before the judge, controverting in
the strongest manner the statement of the
other side, that the camps were formed for
that purpose. Therefore, it is incorrect
for the judge to say that his judgment
was arrived at on facts that were not in
controversy. This case was dealt with
on affidavits. It was not really decided.
All that was done was to give an interim
judgment. The matter could not be decided until it went to .the hearing, and it
has neverreached that stage,andnever can,·
because the plaint.iff has moved for and obtained a dismissal of his own suit with costs
against himself. That means that the Australian Workers' Union is mulcted in costs
to the extent of .£1,400 or .£1,500, whilst
he, on the other hand, having based his
claim on affidavits that could not be substantiated, has moved to dismiss his own
suit and has to pay the Australian Workers'
Union costs, perhaps £50 in all. Bee the
extreme unfairness of the position. The
judge has done what no judge ever did
in England, and what no judge has ever
Address in Reply.
403 .·
done here except in the case I cited
before, in which a decision was reversed
when the matter did go to a hearing ; and
he has done that on affidavits upon which
there was no opportunity to cross-examine
the people who had sworn them.
The
chief of the affidavits upon which the
matter was decided were obtained from
men outside the court's jurisdiction. A
dozen unions could not bring those men
before the court. They could not be
put in the witness-box or subjected to
cross - examination to show how untruthful and untrustworthy they were.
His Honor's interim judgment was delivered on affidavits of that character. I
will briefly point out how those affidavits
were procueed.
The solicitor for the
plaintiff would t'urn out a certain number
of affidavits as from a factory. Half a
dozen would be rolled off at a time, and
would be sent to the country, and men
would be asked to swear to affidavits which
were really made in the city, and sent
round in that way-a most unusual thing.
"' e ought all to have some reasonable idea
of the sanctity of an oath, and it was
almost inconceivable that any man, just
knowing certain of the principal facts of
the casP, could draft an affidavit and send
it to a man at Coonamble, and. that he
could reasonably be expected to swear
it. Here are affidavits that different men
swore, and there is not a single word of
· difference in any of them. Not only that,
but the witnesses testified all in the same
way in certain affidavits, and what they
stated the defendant union clearly proved
could not have been the case. The plaintiff's solicitor then sent along a copy of an
affidavit with suggestions as to what would
be necessary to meet that objection, and also
so that that witness should not incriminate
himself sent him a copy of his original
depositions ; and, mind you, these were
things which, wf1en brought before the
taxing-master, were taxed right off, a bill
of costs running into .£1,591 being taxed
down to £872. Roughly speaking, .£720
was kp.ocked off, and a great deal of that
amount was made up of charges of that
description. Here is one charge, for instance, in regard to the affidavit of a man
named Griffiths ;
Instructions for affidavit of Tho~as Griffiths,
in reply special reference to be made to the
different affidavits in chief.
Eighth night.
Governor's
Speecl~
:
(ASSEMBLY.]
Drawing in part affidavit in reply of Thomas
Griffiths, or with notes as to the statements
the same should contain, if deponents were
able to make the same, such statements being
.the statements I had reason to believe the depo·
.nents would make, thirty folios-£2 5s.
Copy affidavit in chief of Thomas Griffiths,
·of lst September, to accompany, sixteen folios.
'There is a whole string of affidavits such
.as those.
An HoN. MEMBER : Whose bill was
•that 1
Mr. MAcDONELL: ItisMr. DeLissa's
bill. Many of those affidavits, upon which
A;he interim judgment was based, were
made by men outside the state, and not
.subject to the jurisdiction of the court.
We know that, unfortunately, there are
.any number of men, both in and out of
· this country, who will swear anything so
:long as it is made worth their while to do
.so and they can escape the legal consequences of such perjury. This interim
judgment, upon which the registrar based
his decision, and upon which he said the
Australian Workers' Union was of such a
bad character that he could not reasonably ask any men to belong to it, was
based upon such evidence as that.
First
.-of all, the judge gave his interim judgment-he has not finally decided the
matter; it has never gone to the hearing
-and he based that judgment upon
__allegations that were controverted in the
strongest manner; and he decide~ upon
affidavits, many of which were made by
men outside the state. It would he the
.height of unfairness to say that the Australian Workers' Union should be desig-nated an unlawful combination by re>tson
.()f such statements. As I have already
pointed out, no com·t of law would dream
()fallowing this matter of Keogh versns the
Australian Workers' Union to be introduced as the registrar has done. It was
most unfair. The decision as· it stood was
this : the judge held that if certain objectionable rules wera eliminated from the
.constitution of the Australian Workers'
Union, the policy of the act being that
there should not be two unions covering
the same field, the policy of the act would
·:be observed, the cancellation of the registration of the Machine Shearers' Union
.effected. After all, this would not be
· unfair to the members of that organisation. It is clear that, so long as you have
-<>ne workers' organisation doing the best
[.Mr. MacDonell.
Address in Reply.
it can for its particular class, it will do
more good from every point of view than
if you have two workers' organisations
fighting one against the other ; for in the
latter case you are really carrying out the
policy that capital has pursued all along
-dividing workmen against each other,
and bringing about conflict. It is wrong
to assume, as the registrar did, that the
men would be denied work if they did not
choose to join thi<S organisation. That
rests entirely with the court. Supposing
that the cancellation v.'ere effected tomorrow, the Australian \Vorkers' Union
would come forward and ask for an award,
and put forward a claim for 'preference of
employment, and if the judge thought that
their rules were harsh, and that the
union was not conducted as it should be,
he would have t.he right to say, "I refuse
to give you any preference of employment."
That would mean that the men outside
the organisation would be better off than
the men inside. There would not be such
a thing as. a strike ; they would not have
to make any payments to their organisation as the members of the union do. The
fair employer would give them as fair a
chance as he would the unionists, and the
unfair employet·s-and there are unfair
employers as well as unfair employeeswould also give them the preference. So
they would really get 111oro work than the
average unionist. They would get the rate
of wages which the unionist by his organisation has brought about, and they would
get all those advantages wiLhout making
any monetary sa0rifice. So it is idle to say
that they would be put to a disadvantage,
· or that any hardship would be entailed
upon them if the policy of the act were
carried out. The registrar has referred to
the sequestration order made by the judge.
The judge held that the injunction of the
court had been disobeyed. The facts were
these, according to his own statement : An
ex parte injunction had been granted.
That was wired to Ooonamble between 5
o'clock and 9 o'clock in the evening, and
the next morning it was claimed that a
breach of the injunction had taken place
It was the first time that the injunction
weapon had ever been used in these
states. A number of the men knew
nothing about it. There was not an opportunity of making the matter even widely
known when the alleged breach took place.
Governor's Speech;
[1 Juz.Y, 1903.]
And wnether the breach did take place or
not was strongly controverted. It seems
to me that the fair way to act in such a
case, when the affidavits were so conflicting, would have been to say, " I will bold
this matter over until the bearing of the
·case on the injunction matter"-and, practically, the same affidavits were in question in both motions-" and when that is
decided, I shall have a better opportunity
of judging whether the injunction has
been disobeyed or not." It was not a
matter in which the plaintiff could be pr.ejudiced, if there was a breach of the injunction ; it was a matter between the
court and the alleged offending body. So
it could have been held over uritil the
opportunity was availed of for getting the
facts of the case. However, the judge gave
the order. l say that it was one of the
most unreasonable orders that could be
imagined, because the judge himself bad
subsequently to alter it, •as it contravened
. a principle of British law. •The order he
gave was tlaat, until the costs of the injunction motion were paid, the sequestration would continue. If this body of men
had offended against the law, the court
· conld fix the measure of the punishment.
But it is absurd to say that the prosecutor
should fix the mPasure of the punishment.
That, however, would have been the case.
There is no machinery in the law by which
a plaintiff can be forced to hasten the taxation of his costs. We know that usually
when it comes to a question of costs, a
man sends his bill as soon as he can. But
there is no machinery in the law by which
that process can be hastened. As you
cannot force a man to hasten the proceedings, it would mean that they would take
possession of the union newspaper, shut it
down, break all the contracts the paper
had entered into with its subscribers and
advertisers, and with others who had. had
business relations with them; and, until
the costs were taxed, the union would
have to suffer all these disabilities, and
would not be able to get any redress.
Really, the prosecntor would have it in his
power to fix the measure of punishment
instead of the judge doing it. An application was subsequently made to his
Honor asking him to vary the decision.
He saw the unreasonableness of his
()riginal order, and he varied it conditionally upon the organisation putting up
Ad,b·ess in .Reply.
405
£1,400. He made an order of a chara'cter
that he afterwards had to reverse. Supposing the organisatibn had committed the
illegal acts attributed to it, that had
nothing to do with the policy of the act.
It is not the conduct of the union that can
be called into question. The only thing
thao can be called into question is the constitution of the union. lf at any time the
officers do not do what they ought to do,
the Arbitration Court provides a way of
dealing with them. There is one other
point I wish to touch -upon. The registrar,
in his judgment, says the Australian
Workers' Union, if aggrieved, can seek
relief under section 37 of the act. I want
to show that that is entirely illusory. He
says:
The suggestion that the existence of the
respondent union constitutes a bar to an application to the court appears to me to throw some
doubt on the bona fide.~ of these proceedings;
for, under section 37 of the act, the court, upon
hearing on a reference, would haYe power to
cancel the registration of the respondent union;
but no such reference has been sought.
That is misleading. The court would never
·dream of exercising such a power. Section
37 says:
In any proceeding before it the court may do
all or any of the following things with a view to
the enforcement of its award, order, or direction.
One of the things which they may order
is the cancellation of the registration of
an industrial union. That is only with a
view to the enforcement of its award,
order, or direction. An organisation goes
before the court, and the court makes an
award. If the organisation does not carry
out the award, the court has authority to
cancel it altogether. But it was never
dreamed that another question, such as
the question of cancelling the registration
of another union, could be brought before
the court in that left-handed fashion. The
court would say, " There is one door by
which you can reach us on the question of
cancellation, and that is the door that
opens thro.ugh the registrar. \V e object
to any of this left-handed business. If
you cannot come through th9,t door, you
cannot reach us at all." The court would
scout any such proposal. There is absolutely nothing in the col!tention that was
put forward in such a left-handed way.
It is clearly intended by section 37 that
that shall be a power only to be enforced
in the event of any organisation not faithEighth night.
406
G;overnor's
Spe~ch:
(ASSEMBLY.]
Address in Reply.
fully carrying out the obligations which with every twopenny-halfpenny case that
is presented. It has a right to have an
the court imposes upon it. However, I
shall not take up any more of the time of assurance that there is some reasonable
the House. There are other important grounds foJ" bringing a case before it. The
matters contained in the Governor's speech duty of the registrar should be simply to
see that a reasonable case is made out,
I should like to say a word upon, but I
realise that I have already trespassed con- and when that reasonable case is made
out, then let it go to the body which
siderably on the time of the House, and I
do not propose to trespass at any greater alone_ is competent to deal with it. Belength. The views of my party upon this fore the Industrial Arbitration Act we
question are pretty well known, and I not had a body of unions which, after all,
only loyally accept them, but I quite ap~ faithfully represented the aims and aspirations of its pat·ticular class. These
prove of the action my party are taking.
I recognise that I have taken up a good unions may have done at times things
deal of the time of thE\ House, but it seems ":hich · no one would attempt to defend.
to me that this is a most imp:>rtant matter.
But on the whole they did a wonderful
We are dealing with a measure in which amount of good. I speak feelingly on this
I still have every faith. I believe it has matter, for I know what it is to have to
done a lot of good, and that in the future tramp round this country looking for shearit will do still more good. Every year we . ing; and I know this too: that while I
shall be adding to our store of knowledge, am glad to say I have met many very fair
and showing employers and employees employers, who would never dream of
that there must be mutual compromise, wronging men, I• have met some who would
and that industrial peace is infinitely employ men ·shearing at starvation rates.
bettet· than industrial war. I feel con- I have known in another state a station
fident that the only way in which we can shearing at a rate as low as Ss. a hundred,
get· industrial peace is by having each and I have known in this state an emorganised into its own particular union, ployer who would have a right, under an
the members of one class, the pastoralists, agreement, to raddle any sheep and refuse
banded together in theit· organisation, and to pay, and if a man left before cornplet·
the workers following pastoralist occupa- ing his shearing-he might have shorn
tions banded together in theirs. In ask- 5,000 sheep-he had a s~gned agreement
ing for an amendment of the act to give for a second price, and instead of £1 a
the right of appeal against the decision of hundred, would pay 17s. 6d. ·and ii} some
the registrar, I feel that I am asking for cases 15s. He would also charge extravawhat no one can reasonably object to. gant rates for rations, and do many other
When we were appointing a registrar 3;nd things like that. Many did these things,
giving him authority under the act, we and the trouble was that we were dealing
ne\·er dreamed that he was going to use the with a position of affairs in which large
authority which he is now exercising. I do companies owning big areas of land had
not mean to say that he is usurping power. managers in charge·. If the managers were
I dare say he is acting quite honestly though dealing with their own stations, things
mistakenly in exercising the authority he would have been different. But where a
has done ; but, when the bill was going neighbouring manager or owner had arethrough the House, it was never intended duction in rates, if the manager did not
that he should be clothed with such get his sheep shorn at those reduc11d rate.<;
power. It is absurd to say that we should also, and get other similar conditions, he
have a man sitting, as it were, in a star would be sent about his business. The
chamber with an unappealable jurisdiction. result was that the managers had to reduce·
It means that in that respect he is in a rates and impose unfair conditions, and
higher position than a judge of the very often_:_owing to the press of comp~ti­
Supreme Court-in a higher position than tion, owing to the fact that the fair emthe Chief .T ustice of the country. What ployer had to sell his wool and sheep in the
we want is that the registrar should same mark11t as the unfair employers-it
simply see that a prima facie case is made meant that managers had of necessity often
out before the matter goes to the court. to do things of which they did not approve.
The time of the court cannot be taken up This led to the establishment of the-Aus-
[Mr. MacDonell.
Governor's Speech:
[l
JULY,
tralian Workers'Union, and that combination has unquestionably done an immense
amount of go9d in abolishing all the evils
of which I have spoken. Still we hoped
that under the Arbitration Act wage rates
and labour conditions would be settled in
a calm and rational way, and the one way
to deal with the matter is to see that you
have genuine organisations on both sides,
to make it quite clear that the act is such
that none but organisations that fairly and
fittingly represent their class will have a
footing in courts. We prosecute for conspiracy where we have infinitely less reason
than against a body organised like the Machine Shearers' Union, and where evidence
of what is practical conspiracy was so manifest. I hope the amendments I have indicated will be carried into law as soon as
possible, so that the various industries in
the state will be carried on under the fairest
and most peaceful conditions po~sible.
1\'Ir. 1\'IOOHE (Bingara) [7·35]: I will
not follow the bon. gentleman who has
just resumed his sen.t in the remarks be
has made in regard to the necessity for an
amendment of tho Arbitration Act. J
believe the bon. member to be an earnest
and conscientious advocate of the cause he
espouses. It may be doubted whether the
hon. member has gained very much by
the remarks he has made to-night in dealing so fully and so much in detail with
the question; that, howevGr, is a matter
of which he is himself the best judge.
Of one thing he can be assured-that when
this matter comes before Parliament,
whenever it may be, the House will be
ready and willing to listen to the arguments put forward by the bon. gentleman
and .other bon. members who are entitled
to speak on these questions ; and Parliamflnt will be always ready and willing to
redress any legitimate grievances. I compliment the hon. member, at all events,
upon the method and the manner in which
he has stated his case to-night. The hon.
member puts his case in a logical, calm,
and temperate way, and does not feel it
necessary to launch out into abuse of·
everybody who happens to disagree with
him. I regret that I cannot say the same
. of other hon. members who have spoken
during the courRe of this debate. I quite .
realise that at this late stage of the debate
it is almost impossible tO introduce any
fresh matter, or to say anything new .. The
1903.]
.Address in Reply.
407
indictment fwm the Opposition standpoint
has been stated forcibly and ably by the
leader of the Opposition and other bon.
members on this side of the ·House, and
we have had some able speeches froru
bon. members on the Government side of
the House. ·when I speak of the Government side, of course, I include the labour
party. ln a question of this kind, and
when the fate of the Government is
at stake, there are not three or four
parties in the House·; there are only
two parties-hon. members are either for
or against the Government. · I do not
mean to be offensive when I say that the
main issues have not been met by the hon.
gentlemen who have Rpoken from the
Govermnent side of the House.
The
essentials of the indictment which the ·
Opposition has levelled against the Government remain unshaken; and, while
one or two bon. members speaking ft·om
the Government side of the House have
endeavoured to argue the matter fairly in
defence of the policy of the Government,
I have been surprised at the course which
several hon. members have taken-not in
attacking the Opposition; we have no
right to claim immunity from attack.
We have no right to expect we will
not be attacked if we attack. We must
not be prepared to hit unless we are
prepared to accept-all we get. But what
I find fault with, and what has surprised
me, is that in the course of this· debate
some bon. members have thought it necessary to try to misrepresent the Opposition
before the country. I take the hon. member for Waratah, who spoke the other
night. The latter part of his speech was
unobjectionable, and, from his point of
view, it was able. He argued ably in support of certain principles; but the first part
of his speech consi~ted chiefly .of insulting
remarks to members of the Opposition.
However, I will let that pass. What I
wan.t to show is the kind of argument
some hon. members feel it necessary to
indulge in during this debate. Reasonable men will, to some extent, estimate
the strength or weakness of a cause by
the line of defence which hon. members
adopt. The hon. member for W aratah
defended the Government..
Let it be
remembered that at present the Government is being attacked, and I h::>pe we
attack the Government fairly. If anyone
.Eighth nigl~t.
408
Governor's Speech :
[ASSEMBLY. j
on our side attacks the Government unfairly, I am not going t~ justify it. We
may disagree on matters of public policy,
and yet be the best of friends. We can
state our opinions, and bring a strong indictment againsu the Government. They
may answer it to the best of their ·ability,
and there need be no personalities or anything to cause ill-feeling between the two
parties. The bon. member for Waratah
quoted from some platform or other-I
think he said it was the Employers' Union
platform, or a mixture of two or three
platforms. However, it was not the platform that the Opposition is identified
with. That is what I complain of. I
want to know on what principle of fair
play any member of this House can bring
forward some platform, and quote planks
of that platform, when it is not the platform of the Opposition 1 It is not the
platform of what is known as the Liberal
and Reform Party. The bon. member,
amongst other things, referred to the
question of Upper House reform. He
tried to make it appear that the Opposition
is not in favour of reform of the Upper
House. I venture to. say that if there is
one member of this House who makes
himself acquainted with the platforms of
the various political organisations, whose
especial duty it is to make himself
acquainted with those platforms, it should
be the hon. member for Waratah. I
reason from the fact that he occupies an
official position in h~s party, second m
importance only to that of the leader. If
there is any man whose special duty it is
to make himself acquainted with those
platforms, it is the bon. member for
W aratah. I undertake to say that the
bon. member for W aratah knows the
planks of our platform as well as we do
ourselves, yet he stood. up here, and with
the coolest effrontery, quoted a number of
planks which have no.more to do with us
than they have to do with his party. I
regret that kind of argument. I regret
that anybody should try to mislead or to
misrepresent anything. Whilst I regret
it, I am glad to be enlightened, at all
events, as to the tactics which some hon.
mem hers are prepared to adopt. If that .
is to be the method of attack, and the way
in which the war is to be carried on, it is
well for us to know, because to be forewarned is to be forearmed.
[Mr ..llfoore.
Address in Reply.
Sir JOHN SEE : What war 1
Mr. MOORE: We are going to have a
political battle sooner or later, but I do
not know when-it may be in a few weeks
or months, or it may be in twelve months.
Mr. CRICK : I thought the bon. member
was referring to the intended stone-wall !
Mr. MOORE: I did not say "wall."
I said "war." I am not inclined to
quarrel much with the hon. member for
Boorowa, because in some matters I agree
with him. I agree for the most part with
his land policy and mining poHcy. But
what did that hon. member lay himself
out to do 1 He tried to show, during a
great part of his speech, which he devoted
to the Opposition, that the Reid Government pandered to the labour party, and
he went on to describe, as well· as he ·
could, how the Reid party pandered to the
labour party. But he was not here then.
He was away in some other part of the
country, and he knew nothing of what
was taking place. We must ask the
leader of the labour party, and his friends,
who were here at that time, what took
place 1 Their opinions carry some weight.
Mr. NIELSEN: Does not the hon. member think that the records of Parliament
are available to me as well as to any
other member 1
Mr. MOOH.E: I am not referring to
the records, but to what the hon. member
said the other night. He said the Reid
Government pand~red more to the labour
party than this Government ever did.
Whether it be so or not, the hon. member
is not the judge. He was not here, and
he knew nothing at all about it.
Mr. NIELSEN: Ihavethe records to go on t
Mr. MOORE : Because, recently, in
Victoria there was a cry for reform which
resulted in reform, and because there is a
cry for reform in this state, members opposite have assiduously tried to show that
the reform, which was attempted in Victoria, or that was carried out, is exactly
what we intend to accomplish here; and
that because the 'civil servants were disfranchised in Victoria, that that is exaC'tly
what we are aiming at here. I defy any
bon. member to point to one utterance of
any bon. member on this side of the
House that gives even a colour for such
an assertion.
Mr. CRICK : The leader of the Opposition!
Govenwr's Speech :
[1 JULY, 1903.]
Mr. MOORE: I defy the Secretary for
Lands to point to a single utterance of the
leader of the Opposition which justifies that
statement. He is as liberal, progressive,
and democratic a member as the Secretary
for Lands is, and I should say more so. The
leader of the Opposition has been more
identified with liberal and democratic legislation than the Secretary for Lands has
ever dreamt of. The leader of the labour
party, who is respected by everybody in
this House on whichever side he may sit, is
most entitled to speak on this question.
What did l1e say, after his party had a fair
trial of the party led by Mr. Reid, of whom
the leader of the Opposition was the first
lieutenant, and one of the leading members, as everybody in this House knows 7·
The labour party had a trial of the Reid
party for five years, and surely that was
a sufficiently long trial. \Vhat did the
leader of the labour party say of that Administration, of which the leader of the
Opposition and those associated with him
are the successors 7
Mr. EDDEN : He said that the Reid
Government wanted 3d. tea duty, and
they only got 1d. !
Mr. MOORE : The hon. member made
a good resolution last night, and he kept
it for a short time. He should try to keep
it now. When the labour party decided
to support the motion of censure against
the 11eid Government; the hon. member
for Redfern said :
In taking up the position we do on this occasion, every member of our party feels a certain
pang of regret. We know that the Government
against whom we are going to vote to-day have
given effect to some progressive legislation, and
we give them credit for it. . . . But there
is something I desire publicly to refer to in connection with the Government that is even beyond
their progressive legislation, and that is the progressive administration of the Government.. The
Premier does no.t claim too much when he refers
to the fact that by the day-labour system, which
he has had the courage to introduce, he has found
work for 6,000 of our artisans, who have gi,len
the very best kind of work to the taxpuyers of
the country.
He concludes with these words :
Perhaps another government will come in that
will give even more progressive legislation than
this Government have given. The tendency of
the day goes to show that any government to hold
its seat in the future must give this progressive
legislation. But even when more progressive
legislation is given by administrations that will
follow the present one, still I have no hesitation
in saying that the administration ,of this Govern-
Address in Reply.
409
ment in the directions I have indicated will live
even long after their p~ogressive legislation is
overshadowed by something J;l10re advanced. I
desire to emphasise what the Premier said. In
the position I have the honor to hold in the
labour party, I must say the right bon. gentleman has stated publicly here what is absolutely
true. There never wus any arrangement made
by the labour party with the Prime Minister.
~t no time was the~e even a ~ucit armngement
m regard to what kmd of legislation he should
bring in or what he should do for us. I give
the hon. gentleman this meed of praise, because
I thmk he deserves it, und in order to justify
myself and my party in having supported him
for the last fi,-e years. I only hope that the
successors of the present Government will be
able to give the same amount of e<ttisfaction to
the people who sent us into Parliament us the
present Government have done.
I think that is a complete answer to what
the hon. member for Boorowa said the
other night.
Mr. NrBLSEN: I would ask the hon.
member one question. "What about the
tea duty 7"
Mr. NORTON : It is a singular thing that
they should have kicked J;he Government
out of office after all that !
Mr. MOORE: There is no doubt about
that. I never could understand, and cannot understand now, how a party who
always placed pri;nciple above everything
who huve stated that they have never
swerved from the path of principle, a
party who could not stand the action of
the Prime Minister on that occasion in
paying £350 for the expenses of Mr.
Neild in connection with his investigation
into the old-age pensions question, how
the party that could not do that has since
seen its way-when a question was
brought before the House of upholding
one of the greatest principles of democratic government-trial by jury - RoN.· MEMBBRS: Hear, hear!
Mr. MOORE: I do not want to go into
the details of that question, At the same
time, I am quite satisfied that in making
reference to that, I strike a chord which
finds an echo in the minds of some
of the labour party. I know the views I·
hold on this question are held by a great
many members of the labour party. There
is not a man either in or outside of this
House who believes that the labour party
would have indorsed the action of the
Attorney-General in regard to that case if
the fate of the Government had not been
involved.
Eighth night.
0
'410
Governor's Speech. :
[AS_SEMBLY.J
An HoN. MEMBER: The hon. member
is speaking at random!
Mr. MOORE: If I speak at random, I
am sf>eaking to intelligent mfln. The hon.
member may rest assured of one thingthat neither he nor I will be judged, when
the time comes, by what we say in regard
to each other, but by our actions in this
House. I am speaking in defence of the
party with which I have the honor to be
associated.
There is another thing to
, which I have to reply, and it surely must
show that there is weakness in the cause
which the party opposite have to defend
when we find them resorting to this sort
of ,thing-asking whether we are going to
abolish the Old-age Pensions Act. Who
passed the Old-age Pensions Act 1 Never
mind who happened to be the Government
to put it through. No government cari
pass a measurfl unless it has the support
of members of this House. We supported
that bill-we supported it heartily ; and I
would tell hon. members what more we
did. Some of us have tried t() liberalise
that measure. That is the position to-day.
"\>Vhere have been the protests of· hon.
members in connection with that act 1
1'11embers who claim to specially represent
those who have to fall- back on old-age
pensions. Where are those champions of
the-aged poor in this House? We have
not heard one word durin~ this debate in
regard to the position of many old men
and womfln in the country. who are by
every principle of right and equity as much
entitled to consideration as, and even more
than, those who are receiving pensions today. Some hon. mern bers ask whether we
are going to abolish the Old-age Pensions
Act; but it would be better if they would
lift up their voices on behalf of old men
and women who- have been forty or fifty
y-ears in the country, but who happened
by some little technicality to be disqualified from receiving pensions. Only the
other day I walked into a hospital in a
country town, and there I saw a man 75
years of age, who has been fifty-six years
in the state, but who happened to have
b-een absent two years and three months,
and is consequently disqualified. That is
• a typical case. That act ought to be carried out on principles of equity and justice; and if it co~ts more we must pay it,
because we ought to be just. , If we profess to have an Old-age Pensions Act,
[Mr. Moore.
Address in Reply.
surely we can carry it out on lines of justice and equity 1 There are lots of cases
of that kind-cases of men who have been
fifty years in the state. Men who, in other
words, have served the state for fifty years,
but are not entitled to receive old-age pensions becau$e they have been absent, say,
for two years and three months. Other
men who had been twenty-five years in the
state, and absent one year and nine or ten
months, are fully qualified to receive oldage pensions. I say these are the blots upon
an otherwise noble measure whiqh it is our
duty as representatives of the people to
remedy. [ do not object to an:y fair fighting for political objects; but members have
made statements which could have no other
object than the misrepresentation of the
Opposition. They ask, what do these men
want 1 Do they want to abolish old-age
pensions 1 In answer to that question, I
say "no"-a thousand times "no." Neither
have we any intention of taking up any
retrograde legislation. I believe in what
the leader of the labour party said-that
what.ever party is in power must .keep
abreast of the progressive spirit of the
times; and whichever side the Government
is formed from, they have to be liberal,
progressive, and democratic in their legislation. The Treasurer-and no one is
more entitled to speak on these subjects
than he-stated the other night, calmly
and deliberately, with. reference to the
question of old-age pensions-! will quote
his exact words, so as not to mi'srepresent
him:
·
After the most, careful consideration of the
whole >t(atter, I feel' bound, as the Minister
especially entrusted with· the control of the
finances, to say ~hat for several years to come
the utmost that can be afiorded for this good
object will be about £400,000.
Now it is £400,000, instead of £580,000.
Mr. WADDELL: £530,000 !
1\ir. MOORE : Then the hon. member
is £50,000 out in his estimate. I am not
blaming him for it. Here is his speech in
which he tells us that the amount required
for the year was £581,000.
Mr. WADDELL : I think the hon. member is including the expense of administration-about £17,000.
Mr. MOO HE : It mally does not matter
whether that is or is not included. The
expenses of administration have to be provided for in a.ny case.
Governor's Speech:
(1
JULY,
1903.]
Address in Reply.
411
Mr. WAD DELL : The cost of administra- come from the Opposition side of the
tion under the new bill, will, of course be House. Hon. members can laugh, but
very little !
the facts speak for themselves. Above
Mr. MOORE : I do not know whether all things, let it not be forgotten that the
the hon. memb~r is going to exercise a very foundation of labour legislation;--the
keener control than he has done hitherto, shifting of the burden of taxation from
but 1 fancy that the cost of administration the shoulders of those who are least
will not be much less, but, perhaps, a able to bear it, and placing it on the
little more. The act has been passed, and shoulders of those who are best able to
under its w~rking an expenditure of bear it-was carried out 'Qy the Opposi£550,000 has been incurred. The Trea- tion ~ide of the House. Hon. members
surer now says that, after the most care- may disagree as to that, but they will not
ful consideration, he considers it will be disagree as to this : that the policy of
impossible to devote more than £400,000 direct taxation which enabled a legitimate
to this oqject. How is he going to save the and equitable land-tax to be placed on the
lands of the country came from the Oppo£150,0001
Mr. N Olt'l'ON : Thousands are receiving sition side of the House. I feel justified
the pension who are not entitled to it!
in saying that so far as the labour party
. Mr. MOORE : It is an easy matter for and the Reid Government were concerned,
the bon. member to interject 1ike that,· · as compared with the relations existing
but I should like to ask him to work it between the labour party and the present
· out and show how it can be done. I ven- Government, there was more in common
ture to say that, when the Government between the labour party and the Reid
start to amend the Old-age Pensions Act, Government, so far as defined principles
with a view to making a saving of £150,000 are concerned, than there is between the
per annum, they will land themselves in labour party and the Government of todismal failure. The claims of those to day. That is, I take it, really the differwhom I have been very briefly referring- ence. The hon. mem her for \V aratah said
the claims of the aged poor who have' . the other night, "We believe in compulbeen twice as long in this state as some of sory arbitration; so do the Government;
those who are receiving the pension to- we go together. We believe in earlyclosing; so do the Government; we go
day-Mr. vV ADDELL : The cases the hon.
together." That is true as far as it goes,
member has mentioned are provided for but it is not the whole truth. The bon.
member might have gone further, but he
in the new bill !
Mr. MOORE: I am delighted to hear dare not do that, and that is where to ry1y
it, and the hon. member will receive mind the essential difference comes :in.
nothing but support from the Opposition There was an agreement on defined prinif he proposes to legislate on those lines. ciples between the labour party and the
I repeat that if the hon. member intends Reid Government, and that is how it was
to do that, it will be impossible for him to that those two parties were associated.
make any amendment of the Old-age Do the labour party and the present GoPensions Act which will effect legitimately vernment agree on the question of reducthe saving which he indicates to bring the tion of membP.rs 1 Hon. members know
that, so far as the Government are conamount down to £400,000.
Mr. NORTON: Many people are receiving cerned, they took their own course as free
men. They said "~We place the question
the pension improperly!
Mr. EsTELL : And hundreds are not of reduction of members in the forefront
of our programme." They need not have
receiving it who should receive it !
Mr. MOORE : The record of the party said that if they had not chosen, but they
the reason why they said it:
with which I am associated speaks for give
itself.
Believing this will advance public business,
und effect a proper economy in public expendiSir JoHN SEE: Hear, hear!
Mr. MOORE: Yes, it speaks for itself. ture.
The liberalising of our land laws has come That was the reason for it. Why have
from the Opposition side of the House. they not carried it out 1 I need not give·
The liberalising of our mining laws has the answer. Everyone knows why they
us
E-ighth nigM.
412
Governor's Speech:
[ASSEMELY.J
have not carried it out, or attempted to members and who is opposed to it; but I
· .do so. I suppose the Government think say that every bon. member knows that
that they had sufficient reason : that the he is fully authorised to speak on behalf
labour party were opposed to it. I suppose of his constituents.upon the question, and
they thought that they had not much therefore it is the mere'st subterfuge and
chance of getting it through, and there- nothing but an evasion of a distinct pledge
fore they put it off. But will anyone tell made to the electors to say that this quesme that if there had been an agreement tion should be sent to a referendum.
Sir JOHN SEE : The hon. member's
on that question, they would not have introduced legislation to deal with it straight party promised to reconstruct the Upper
away 1 We should have heard nothing House, and .also to bring in a local governabout any referendum then. Why was ment bill, but they did not do either !
not there a referendum on the great quesMr. MOORE : I, and I think the
tion of conferring votes upon the women majority of hon. members, believe that
·of the country-doubling the voting power a reduction of members will have to be
of the country 1 The question of reduc- brought about. We may put it off, but
tion of members was placed more to the it must come about in time, and we might
front and was a more live question at the as well deal with it at once. I will point
last general election than the question of out one great advantage of dealing with
women's suffb:tge ever was. Every hon. it at once. If we set to work and pass
member knows that the fact of the labour an act for reduction of members, then,
party being in favour of women's suffrage insteaci of the country being put to the
was the reason why the Government, in- expense of two elections, one election will
stead of havi~g a referendum and asking serve the purpose.
If a reduction of
the women themselves if they wanted a
members' bill is not passed during the life
·vote, did not have a referendum on the of this Parliament, I will· undertake to
question.
The representatives of the say that it will be passed during the life
people here took upon themselves to legis- of the next Parliament ; and the moment
late on that great question, and I say that that the measure is passed, the number of
if it were not for the opposition of the- merube,rs is reduced, a redistribution of
labour party the Government would ask seats take place, and the electorates are
us to legi~late exactly in the same way on rearranged, Parlia.ment must be dissolved,
the question of reduction of m'"mbers. It and a new parliament elected on the new
is nothing but the opposition of the labour franchise. Therefore, I say it is better to
party that. bas caused the Government to legislate on the question now, and instead
evade this question. The charge that the of having two elections have only one,
Opposition make, that the Government and thus save an additional expense of an
are evading the question, is a fair and election which, now that we have women's
legitimate one. Hav~> they not evaded the franchise, I suppose would come to bequestion? Are not hon. members prepared tween £30,000 and £50,000. It is the
to say "yes" or "no" to the. question of bounden duty of Parliament to deal with
reduction of members? Are we not fully the question, and even if the labour party
authorised to deal with the question 1 are opposed to reduction of members they
The bon. member for Bligh Division the shonld see that the Government keep faith
other night referred to some organisations · with the people of the country. I do not
outside, some reform leagues, and said that want to say much as regards the finances.
bon. members are not going to be in- They have been dealt with pretty fully as
fluenced by any gentlemen sitting behind well as ably by bon. membe:r:s on this side
desks in the city and forming branches of of the House. We have a statement publeagues. That is the merest quibble. The lished to-day of the revenue and expendiquestion is: are we or are we not pledged · ture for the year just ended, and hon.
to reduction of members 1 The labour members know what the figures are. Of
party said straight out at the last election, course we cannot make an accurate estiand have consistently adhered to the asser- mate of things until we get further details;
. tion, that they are opposed to reduction of but a simple fact that we must face is that
members. I am not debating the ques- for the year ended yesterday the Go,·erntion as to who is in favour of reduction of ment of this country have had the largest
[Mr. Moore.
Governor's Speeclt :
[1 JULY, 1903.]
revenue that any government in Australia
ever had-a revenue of something like
£13,000,000-that is, taking into account
the revenue from the transferred services.
Their own figures show that they have
had an actual revenue of £11,500,000,
and the revenue from the transferred services comes to about £1,200,000, and, in
addition to the revenue they have had,
they have spent about £250,000. That
is according t3 the estimate. What remained unpaid on 30th June, we do not
know. The cash system is all ve.ry well
as far as it goes. It shows the aci<ual
amount received and the actual amount
spent; but it does not show what is owing
on any particular date, and we do not
know what were the outstanding liabilities
on the 30th June. We ought to know
all that in order to enable us to arrive
at a proper estimate of the state of the
finances.
Mr. WAD DELL : You will have that later
on; you will have the same information
as you bad last year !
Mr. MOORE : Notwithstanding that
we have had this enormous revenue-a
revenue of about £300,000 in excess of
what the Colonial Treasurer estimated last
September-and notwithstanding that the
bon. gentleman estimated that we would
have a surplus on the year's transactions,
yet we come out on the year's transactions
with a cash deficit of very nearly £500,000.
To be fair, and so that no one may misunderstand me, I should say that that cash
deficit is made up of the actual deficit on
the year's transactions together with the
deficit that stood over from the previous
year, namely, £236,000, which, together
with£248,000, makes altogether £484,000.
That was the actual cash deficit on the
30th June, a)though the Colonial Treasurer had had the largest revenue that any
treasurer in this country ever had-over
£300,000 in excess of his own estimate
last September.
Mr. WAD DELL : No human being could
have kllown that the drought would con. tinue all the year and would cause so
much extra expenditure !
Mr. MOORE : It would be interesting
to know what expenditure the drought
has caused 1 I should like the Colonial
Treasurer, or any other bon. member sitting on that side of the House, to answer
the question : What has happened since
Address in Reply. ·
413
the Colonial Treasurer delivered his financial statement last September which could
not have been reasonably foreseen then~
Everyone knew that it was necessary to
go slowly, and that the Government could
not be too careful. The. drought was sure
to produce bad results, and the full effects.
of it are yet to be felt. Every caution was
given, and every warning that the Government ehould handle the finances carefully,
and yet we were called calamity howlers.
lf the Government had handled the
finances carefully, then, instead of ·our
having to face a deficit, as the bon. mem-.
ber for Sturt said, we should have had a,.
substantial surplus at a ti~e when we
needed something to fall back upon. What
is the position 1 Those to whom we have
to apply for the funds that we require to
develop our country-and it is not developed yet by a very long way-have the
means and have adopted those means to.
make themselves thoroughly acquainted
with the state of our finances. It is all
very well for the Treasurer to appeal to
our patriotism not to say anything that
might affect the credit of the state. I say
that nothing that we have said could
affect the credit of the state more than the
statements made hy the reBponsible Secretary for Public \Vorks when he alleged
that, but for his policy of expenditure,
there would have been a financial crisis,
and that the expenditure was required to
keep things going, not only now, but for
the next two or three years. Is that the
sort of thing to make our credit stand high
in the markets of the world 1 Is not that .
rather the sort of thing to bring our credit
down 1 There ~s nothing which can give·
~tability to a state or strengthen its credit.
so much as the knowledge that that state
·is being wisely, prudently, firmly, and
patriotically governed. And it is because,.
rightly or wrongly-we believe rightly- .
the impres'tlion abroad is thaG the state is
not being wisely and prudently governed,
that its credit is at such a low ebb.
Mt·. KELLY: Would the bon. member·
allow the population to starve for the sake
of saving expenditure 1
Mr. MOORE : What is the use of ask-.
ing a question like that 1 The Treasurer
has told us to look at the ·enormous extra
expenditure the Government have had to
incur. But every time they say that, we
tell them that they have had a, great deal
Eighth night.
414
Governor's Speech:
l ASSEMBLY.]
. of. extra revenue.
I ask the Treasurer-'! do not want to challenge him-to place
before the House and the country a full
and true statement showing all the extraordinary expenditure that has been thrown
upon him, and, alongside those figures, all
the extraordinary revenue the Government
have had to meet that expenditure. I
undertake to say that, if that is shown,
tqe people will see that there is something
loose somewhere. I do not speak from
experience, but I can understand that it·
is a difficult thing to keep a tight hold on
the finances.
The Secretary for Public
Works is a large-hearted man. Everyone who knows him knows that.
We
.know that if he had the wealth of Crresus,
and if the country belonged to him, he
would not be niggardly in spending his
millions. But, whilst it is a very easy
thing to keep a loose rein on the finances
of the country-and the very root of good·
government is a sound financial policyand thus gain popularity, it is a most
difficult thing for ministers, a thing that
calls forth all their firmness and patriotism
to say, "No," and put their foot down
when they feel that, as trustees, they
have to manage the affairs of the country
in a way that will be satisfactory to the
people.
Mr. AN:nERSON: What item of expenditure does the,hon. mem her object to 1
Mr. MOORE: That is another old gag.
However, I do not want to shirk any
reasonable question put to me, and I reply
to the hon. gentleman that it is a very
difficult thing for us to know what sho~1ld
be objected to. How can we tell~ If• a
committee of the House, composed of bon.
members from different sides of the House,
were appointed, with full permission to go
into all the expenditure that has been in- ·
curred during the last twelve months,
then we should be prepared to make suggestions as to what ought to be·cut down.
It is truly surprising that a benevolent
man like the Secretary for Public Works,
who, I am sure, wants to be fair, could
make the speeches in country places that
he has made, and give a list of the Ihoney
that has been expended in electo.rates
represented by members of the Opposition.
I£ the hon. member wants to be quite fair,
if he wants to tell the truth, and not a
part of it, why not give a complete list of
such expenditure 1
[Mr ..Moore.
Address in Reply.
. Mr. O'SuLTJIVAN: I did that last session
on the motion of the hon. member for
Fitzroy Division!
.
. Mr. MOORE : Whenever reference is
made to expenditure in electorates represented by Opposition members, we want
a complete statement furnished of the
whole expendiLure. I take it that. nobody on this side of the House who advocates care and prudence in the management of our. finances, so that we shall
make ends meet and live within our income, says that hi~ electorate must be
punished by getting nothing. Is that the
doctrine 7 Has it come to this that, if a
man raises his voice in the House, and
ur:ges members to be prudent and careful
in the administration of the finances, he
must either forever hold his peace, or his
electorate will be practically disfranchised.
My electorate is as much entitled to consideration as the electorate of the strongest
supporter of the Govemment. And if, in
administering the finances of this country,
it is necessary to cut down expenditure,
my electorate must suffer, but other electorates must suffer too. Nothing could
be fairer than that. Let them all suffer,
and be treated on equitable lines; and, if
that is done no one can complain. Then
the House, and the Minister, and the Government would stand in a strong position.
What is the inevitable result of loose
financing 7 I beg to remind the House very
briefly that when the federation hattie was
going on there were great differences of
opinion as to whether we ought to accept
federation under the bill or not. The
country was torn asunder from one end to
the other upon the question; but there
was one point upon which everyone. was
agreed, and that was that by the very
exigencies of the case, New South Wales
would get from the Federal Government
a large surplus. Nobody disputed that.
Have not those anticipations been fully
realised 1 What else took place 1 Everybody was making suggestions as to what
was to be done with that surplus. Some
people said-and I think very likely the
h,on. member for Kahibah amongst others
- " I f once you get that revenue into the
Treasury out of the pockets of the people,
they will never get it ba~k again."
Mr. EnnEN : I did !
Mr. MOORE : Other again said, "Oh,
no. It will be all right. We are going
Governor's Speech:
[1
JULY,
to relieve the people: We will apply
that large sum-between £1,000,000 and
· £1,500,000, as variously estimated-in
reduction of the railway freights, so as to
give the inland producers, who are now
suffering from so many disadvantages,
better facilities to get to the markets of
the world witb their produce." Others
again said, "We will apply this large surplus towards the creation of a sinking fund
for the gradual reduction and ultimate
extinction of the public debt"; and other.
suggestions were made as to what was to
be done with the surplus. Where is the
surplus to-day 1 The anticipations in regard to the huge sum to be returned by
the ·Federal Government have been fully
realised. We got all that money back
again. I ask, where is it to-day~ Every
penny of it is spent. Not only so, but
according to the statement which has come
out to-day, all that huge revenue has been
spent, and about £250,000 on top of it
for the year, to be added to last year's
deficit, making a cash deficit to-day in
round numbers of £500,000. Surely hon.
members will see that this sort of thing
cannot go on. We must come to the
length of our tether. Already the effects
of this policy are being felt. We find that
the roads maintenance men are being dismissed-one of the last things one would
think that would be done, one of the last
channels in which retrenchment would be
effected. The roads of the country should
be kept in something like decent order.
Then there is another illustration in the
parks vote. Parliament voted on the last
estimates a sum of £19,000 for public
. parks and recreation grounds. For the
previous year. the vote was £10,000 more;
last year it was cut down by about£10,000.
· If the Government came to the conclusion
that, in the interests of economy and retrenchment, not one penny of that vote
should be spent, although Parliament had
voted it, I should be one to· stand by them,
and say, "You know best, and if it is
necessary to save the money I will support
you in doing so." If they have acted upon
that principle, I shall have no more to
say; but if S·)me electorates have had expenditure from this vote and others have
not, then I shall have something more to
say about the matter. I shall not detain
the House much longer. I am glad the
Secretary fot• Lands is here, because, if I
1903.]
Address in Reply.
415
have anything to say about him, I like to
say it to his face, and I have a little to
say in regard to lands administration.
The hon. member who moved the address
in reply referred to Canada as a country
offering great inducements to settlers, and
he spoke of the special inducements which
the Canadian Government had been holding out to immigrants to go and settle
in that country. I want to know if we
have not in this country of ours also
opportunities for men to settle upon the
land; and, if the inducements are not
sufficient, I want to know why we cannot
offer better inducements for people to
s_ettle here~ Anybody would think that
our country was already settled. Anybody would think that all the lands available for settlement had already been occllpied. But hon .. members know that this
. very day there are hundreds of thousands
of acres of. land, suitable for settlement,
kepL back from settlement, whilst our own
Rons, or own young men, are going out of
the country to find homes elsewhere, and,
in many cases, some of them are not even
allowed the privilege of balloting for a
_
holding.
Mr., CRICK : Did the hon. gentleman
ever ask me to keep any lands back until
the drought broke~
Mr. MOORE: I never asked the bon.
membe• to keep one speck back until· the
drought broke. The hon. meniber has, I
suppose, only put that out as a little
feeler. I give the House my assurance
that I never asked the bon. member to
keep a single acre back. I admit it is
easier ~o criticise than to create or administer. I know the hon. member has
to administer the land law in a way that
will not serve one class only, but promote
the public interest. · But I say there is
nothing more important in this country
-it overshadows and overrides everything else-than the work of promoting
bona fide settlement. And what is our
land policy, what.is the policy everybody
in this Houses recognises ~ That whilst
we can allow large areas of country to be
occupied for grazing purposes, yet, as the
need for settlement arises, as the advancing tide of settlement comes, the
occupation of lands for grazing and other
purposes must give way-everything must
give way before the advancing march of
bona jidll settlement. That is our policy,
Eighth night~
416
Governor's Speech j
[ASSEMBLY.]
Address in Reply.
and it is a policy which not only had the or other as a factor in their dissatisfaction with
approYal of Parliament,, but was the de· this country. But Mr. Larke is not there to
t~lk politics with them.
Other reasons they
.liberate intent and design of Parliament; give have relation to the uncertainty of the
and whilst the Secretary for Lands, I have seasons, and the difficulty in getting land.
no doubt, can give good reasons for a o-reat I will give one quotation in conclusion.
many of his actions-and there is"' one Mr. Larke is asked :
thing, at all events, for which I 0aive him
po you think our people are doing the right
credit, and that is that he has the courage thmg
in quitting their own country for Canada?
·of his opinions at any rate,-I am here to
Mr.
Larke
says :
say that, in my judgment lands have been
I think the. resources-the agricultural rekept back from bpnd fide settlement to sources-of
this country have ·scarcely yet been
the injury of this country, whilst our· tapped.
young men have been going away from it.
Mr. WILLIS: In Canada they sell really
Rather than allow that we ought to have
good wheat land at 4s. an acre, but we
made :1ny sacrifice.
want £4 an acre for it!
.An HoN.MEMBER: What is the remedy7
Mr. MOORE: All I have to say is that
Mr. MOORE: Has the hon. member
been listening to me: or has he only just if it is necessary, in order to promote settlecome in7 I say that the remedy is to ment upon the lands of this country-and
the greatest need of this country to-day is
make lands available for settlement.
the want of settlers upon the lands-if it is
Mr. CRICK : To make 'rain !
Mr. MOORE: The hon. member cannot necessary in order to get bona fide settlemake rain, but he can make lands avail- ment upon our land to give them the land
able for settlement. [ am not objecting for nothing, it would pay the country one
to the resumption of land; I am not hundred times over to give it to them.
··opposed to anything that will promote But these men are not asking you to give
bond fide settlement.
But whilst you them the land ; they are asking for an
are talking about the resumption of land, opportunity to take up the land and bealways put one thing in front, and do not come producers and useful citizens instead
let the resumption ·of land get in front of ?f swell~ng the ranks of the unemployed
that and obscure it, and it is that whilst m the 01ty.
Mr. CRICK: Give them the land and
. you have Crown lands that are suitable
'
.
for settlement, you ought to deal with then finance them !
Mr.
MOORE
:
The
hon.
member
will
th0se lands before you talk about resuming private lands. What does Mr. J. S. have his say by-and-bye.
Mr. CRICK : I do not intend to say
Larke, t~e Commissioner for Canada, say
anything!
·about th1s 1 He says :
Mr.. MQORE: I. should_ like to say
· Of course, the Government of Canada is not
offer_ing any special facilities to encourage immisomethmg else on tlns questwn, while the
grati<?n from Australia, and it is no part of my
hon. member is here, which is of a most
functiOns to encourage it; but when numbers.of
important bearing. We have prodded by'
young men come to me and say they are ··'full
law, and we have expressly stipulated,
up" of Australia, and are determined to leave
it, and ask me, " vVhat about Canada?" I tell
that lands are not to be let under improvethm;n candidly ~hat if they must go from Aus- . ~ent leases--are not to be locked up under
tralia, Canada IS, at the present time, the best
Improvement leases for a longer period
country to go to.
than twenty-eight years. No lands are to
He says:
be locked up under improvement lease
The great majority of those who apply to me
unless those lands are unsuitable for settleare young men of good type, and a number of
ment, or can only be rendered suitable for
them admit the possession of capital of from
settlement by a large expenditure. That
£500 to £3,000. Although the inquiries include,
not only men from the bush, but also artisans
is the law.
and othe~s of the city, the object of almost all
Mr. CRICK : No, it is not !
of them IS to settle on the lands in Canada and
Mr. MOORE: I sav it is the law.
occupy themselves in farming grazing, or
Mr. CRICK : Then· the hon. member
fruit-growing.
'
knows more than I do !
The article goes on to say :
Mr. MOORE : The chances nre that I
It is Mr. La;ke's experience that nearly every
do not. The hon. member is not only
. one of them gives some po1itical consideration
[Mr. Moore.
Governor's Speech:
[1
,JULY,
Secretary for Lands, but he is also a·very
able lawyer; but I make the assertion,
and if I am wrong I will have to be responsible for it. I say the law gives the
Governor power to grant lands UJtder
improvement leases, which, for various
reasoi1s, are not suitable for settlement,
and can only be rendered suitable by the
expenditure of large sums.
Mr. ORICK : That is not what the bon.
member said before!
1\'fr. MOORE: I am trying to give the
.spirit of the law. I do not profess to give
it word for word, but I appeal to those
listening to me, if that is not substantially
what I said first. What is the position 1
Lands which are actually suitable for
·settlement, and which the people of the
·district are wanting for settleiJ?.ent, are
being locked up under improvement leases.
That is a distinct bar to settlement.
Whilst this House is dealing with other
questions of great importance-and I
admit we have some great questions to
deal with-I say there is nothing more
important, and there is no question to
which the House can devote its attention
with more benefit to the country than this
question of settling a suitable class of
people upon the lands. Somebody interjected that they want help. We legislate
so as to make it, difficult for settlers to
part with their holdings. That is our recognised policy. If we make conditions
so as to render it easy to mortgage their
holdings, we will make it so much the
easier for them to lose their holdings
altogether. Therefore, to prevent settlers
. from parting with their holdings, so that
they might go to swell the big estates, we
make it difficult for them to mortgage.
Under those circumstances what is the
obligation of the state 1 The real solution
·is what the hon. member for Argyle ha_s
been fighting for, and what I believe a
majority in this House are in favour ofthat is a proper land bank. If we will
not allow our settlers to mortgage their
holdings in order to develop them, the
duty devolves upon the state, on .the
security of its own lands by means of a
land bank, to enable settlers to obtain the
capital necessary to develop their holdings. I would like to say a word or two
more on another question.
We have
heard speeches from hon. members representing mining districts. The hon. mem-
1903.]
Address in Reply.
417
ber for Grenfell said that most of the time
of Parliament was spent in discussing
matters of technique. He said we should
not do that, and that we were here to deal
with the problems that affect the life of
the community. He represents a mining
constitu!Jncy, but there was not one word
of protest from him that this Governor's
speech makes no reference ~hatever to
the great mining industry.
Mr. KELLY: That is not his fault!
Mr. MOORE: I do not say it. is, but
he omitted to speak on the subject. He
spent a great deal of time in discussing
the action of memb-ers on this side, and it
is only courtesy to refer to what he said.
Whilst he was about it, he might have
referred to the fact that the Government
thought so little of the importance of the
mining industry that it is not noticed in
tha Governor's speech. I say that they
have failed to show a -proper appreciation
of the importance of this industry. The
Government Statistician tells us tbat the
discovery of gold made Australia a nation.
Everybody knows that a good gold-field in
this country would do more than anything
else, perhaps, not to lasting settlement, but
as far as immediate results are concerned,
to bring about the prosperity of the
country. Nothing does that more quickly
than the opening up of mining fields.
Those best able to judge tell us that we
have only just touched our vast mineral
wealth. If that is the case, surely the
industry is of so much importance that
Parliament ought to devote some attention to it, and by legislation or administration do everything possible to encourage, foster, and promote the development of this great industry. I say that
if you satisfactorily solve these questionsthe land question and the mining questionyou will have no unemployed in either
the city or the country.
Mr. F~lGAN: The hon. member knows
that the bill is on the table waiting for
the conclusion of the debate on this motion
of censure!
Mr. MOORE : I know nothing about
it. Why not have put it in the Governor's
speech~
How should I know that it was
on the table~
Mr. FEGAN : It was there last session !
Mr. MOORE: The hon. member knows
that· on whatever side of the House I sit,
when a bill is brought forward .I never
Eighth night.
418
Govenwr's Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.]
deal with it in any captious spirit. If I
approve of the measure I give it what
support I can. I have endeavoured, very
briefly, to state the position from the
Opposition standpoint, and I think that
whatever the results of this debate may
be, the people of the country, whom we
serve, will come to the conclusion that the
sooner there is a change of government
the hetter for the country; and let me say
in conclusion, that if the leader of the
Opposition forms a government and that
government fails to fulfil its pledges, the
sincerest hope I have is that that government will be kicked out of office as soon
as possible.
.
Mr. O'SULLIVAN (Queanbeyan),
Secretary for Public Works [8·53]: A
very noteworthy feature about the last
speech, andaboutseveral delivered by members of the Opposition, is the almost tctal
absehce of any reference to the financial
question. What has become of that bald
statement that we took £12,000,000 from
the trust funds, and that equ11Jly reckless.
assertion that the Public 'vV orks Department had spent about £17,000,000 on
public works7 Have they at last discovered
that we onlytook£1,000,000of trust funds,
and that I have only spent £7,000,000
instead of £17,000,000 7 In spite of all
the reckless leading articles in newspapers
which favoured the Opposition tothateffect,
the assertions made here during the last
twelve ·months were either gross displays
of- ignorance or downright wicked falsehoods. It is of no use mincing matters.
Some of those assertions were one of two
things. Either exhibitions of gross ignorance on the part of those who made them,
or else they were downright wicked falsehoodH. I prefer to think that they were
the former, because I cannot understand
why any politician, whether .swayed by a
desire for office or not, would resort to
such a wicked means of defaming the
credit of the ·country in order to bring the
Government into discredit. I say it is a
pleasing thing to me to know at last that
even the papers that opposed us so bitterly
have to back down and admit that the
Premier and the Colonial Treasurer have
shattered their case into atoms. I am not
called upon to defend the administration of
the Works Department from a financial
standpoint. That is very clear. But I
should like to make some remarks in refer-
[Mr. Moore.
Address in Reply.
ence to the assertions of the hon. member
who has just resumed his seat. The hon.
member made a kind of ad mise1·icordiam
appeal for the Oppositiop. to be considered
the liberal party, and he referred to one
or two little things which they had done in
the past, and he quoted from a speech of
the leader of the labour party who, at the
moment of bidding farewell to the Reid
Government, said some nice things about
Mr. \Reid, and quite right too. But where
is the record of the Reid Government, and
where is the record of the party now sitting
opposite 7
Mr. JESSEP: On the statute-book !
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: Let us see what
it consists of. It consists of the land and
income tax, a public service bill; a public
lands bill, advances to settlers bill, a factories and shops act.
Mr. MooRE : Is the hon. member not
going to mention any more?
Mr. O'SU LLIV:AN : I am speaking of
the important ineasures. The only one of
those which I have mentioned which might
be called a debatable measure is the Land
and J ncome Tax Act. All the others were
undebatable measures, which the House
approved of. Therefore the House, as the
hon. memher claimed here to·night with
regard to our programme, was as much
entitled to the· credit of passing those
measures as the Government. I should
just like to read out a list showing a comparison between the measures passed by
the Opposition and those passed by this
Government.
Mr. MooRE: The J,and Act of 18~15!
Mr. OmcK : A nice thing it is !
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : The Land Act of
1895 is of very ·little assistance to the
settler. It does not allow the settler to
borrow a penny. I am going to show what
the Reid Government did not do. With
regard to the old-age pensions, the Reid
Government did nothing except send Mr.
Neild on a semi-Government mission to
Europe, which, unfortunately for them,
brought them trouble. The Lyne-See Go.vernment introduced that measure and
passed it, and it is now the law of the
land. The Lyne-Sec Government, aided
by the labour party, made the Old-age
Pensions Bill law, the Reid Government
did nothing.. The Early-closing Bill was
introduced by the Reid Government, and
dropped.
The Lyne- See Government
Governor's Speech:
[1. JULY, 1903.]
Address in Reply.
419
brought that bill in, and it is now the law', the Land Act, the Audit Act, Fisheries
of the land. With rega!7d to the Miners' Act, the Factories Act, the Shearers'
Acciqent Relief Bill, the h,:id Government Accommodation Act, a free registry office
did nothing. The Lyne,See Government for females; and instead of the paltry 5s.
introduced a bill, which was passed and is a day in the country and 6s. in the city,
now Jaw. The Reid Government passed
we. have paid labourers 7s. per day; .and
the Navigation Act Amendment Bill those who are skilled artisans have the
through the Assembly only. The Lyne- gratification of rec{living the same rate of
See Government passed it through the wages that is imposed by the trade-unions
Council 'as well as through the Assembly, on private employers. For the first time
and it is now law. The Reid Government in human history, a government had the
did nothing in reference to the Gold and courage to establish trade-union rates as
Mineral Dredging Bill, but the Lyne-See the standard of the rates of pay by t4at
Government brought in the bill, and it government.
became law. The Reid Government did
Mr. HoGUE: How much for stonenot pass the Municipalities Act ; the breaking 1
Lyne-See Government made two attewpts
Mr. KELLY: And how much for sandto pass a comprehensive bill, and the shifting?
second bill last session was met with such
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: Twice as much
a fiood of talk from bon. members oppo- for stone-breaking P"s they got for sandsite that it had to be postponed. ·The shifting from the Government supported
:E:'riendly Societies Amendment Bill was by the hon. member for Glebe.
~
introduced by the Reid Government, and
An HoN. MEMBER;: And· what about
read the first and second time, but nothing the Appraisement Bill1
further was done about it. The Lyne-See
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : The appraisement
Go\·er~ment took np tbe measure, and that
of selections was considered to be a dream
also has become law. With rega.rd to the by selectors and farmers; but it is law toMining Leases Further Amendn,,mt Bill,
day, thanks to the Secretary for Lands.
the Reid Government did nothing. The
The western lands problem, which baffied
Lyne-See Government introduced the bill, every other government, bas also been
and it passed through the Assembly; but settled by ns in a statesmanlike manner.
the second reading was negatived in the
And yet this is the Government which
Leg~slative Council.
The Reid Govern- the bon. membez· for Sturt the other day
ment did nothing with regard to the Eightdeserted. I should like to emphasise the
h-ours Mining Bill. The Lyne-See Go- word "deserted."
vernment passed the bill through the
Mr. NORTON : Why?
Assembly; but the motion for the second
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: Well, someone
reading was defeated in the Legislative
may know why hy-and-by.
Council. I will read out a few 6f the meaMr. JESSEP: The bon. member for Sturt '
sures that the Opposition have blocked. I
nevet· got any compliments from the Secput these forward as a proof that the party
retary for Public Works!
sitting on these benches is the party that
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: I do not care
has passed more democratic legislation whether he did or not. I say that his
during the last fc:;w years than any other desertion is absolutely a public scandal.
party that ever held power in NFJw South He has had no provocation to desert.
Wales. First, the Dibbs party, of whom
Mr. J. 0. L. FITZPATRICK : I should
we are the descendants, gave the country
one man one vote. They also gave them like to know, Mr. Speaker, whether the
the first law to legalise mining on private Minister is in order in using intemperate
property,· a very contentious question. language of that kind when speaking of
Since this party came into power, we have the bon. member for Sturt?
Mr. NORTON : Ohair ! Tbe hon. mempassed the Early-closing Act, the Industrial Compulsory Arbitration Act., the ber is not rising to a point of order !
Mr. J. 0. L. FITZPATHICK : Will the
women's franchise, old-age pensions, eight
hours for railway men, appeal court for · hon. member for Northumberland keep
railway men, Miners' Accident Fund Bill, his mouth shut?
Mr. NORTON : I rise to order !
harbour resumptions, Marine Board Act,
Eighth .night.
420
Governor's Speech :_
[ASSEMBLY.]
Mr. SPRAKER: Order. The hon. member has no right to interrupt.
Mr. NORTON : But the bon. member for
Rylstone has not raised a point of order!
Mr. SPEAKER : Order. The hon. member for Northumberland has been interrupting all night.
· Mr. J. C. L. FITZPA~RICK : I object to
be interrupted by the hon. member for
Northumberland. I direct your attention,
Mr. Speaker, to the objectionable language
used by the Secretary for Public vV orks,
aud I take exception to it, because the
hon. member for SLurt, to whom the reference was made, happens to be absent.
The Minister said, amongst other things,
in characterising what he alleges to be the
desertion of the hon. member for Sturt
·from the labour party, that that desertion
amounted to a public scandal.
Mr .. SPEAKER : The Minister had no
right to use an expression of that kind in
regard to anc;>ther bon. member, and- he
must withdraw it.
·
Mr. O'SUL Ll.V A:N : If you so rule,
Mr. Speaker, I must withdraw. Speaking
of the matter as mildly as I can, I woqld
say : here is a gentleman elected to represent the workPrs of this country. He
owes everyt,hing to them. But for them
he would never have seen the inside of
this Chamber. Without any just provocation whatever, from a political standpoinl;, he has left the side which elected
him, and has now joined-as I will show
directly--a combination of reactionary
forces. I will show exactly what is meant
by the programme of hon. members opposite ; and I will show the bon. member for
Sturt exactly where he is steering to. He
seemed to me like a man in a boat upon
the ocean, without either compass or
rudder, who was swayed by his own prejudices about something which will come
out some day. It is no fault of mine that
he is not present to-night. I was here
last night when he attacked me, and he
should have been here to-night to have
taken his gruel. The bon. member has
come forward with the childish statement
that one of the reasons why he has joined
the ranks of the reactionary forces in the
country is because of my inaction with
regard to the Yanco Glen scheme. That
is to say, he blamed me for the water
famine at Broken Hill. Why the thing
is an absurdity upon the face of it 1 I
Address in Reply.
submitted a resolution last session, and
obtained the approval of the House, to .
carry out a scheme at Yanco Glen, because there was a threatened water-famine
at that time. Parliament had scarcely
prorogued when I obtained a report from
my chief engineer, who warned me that I
was making a great mistake in taking up
the Yanco Glen scheme. Here is part of
his report:
The Stephens Creek scheme has proved itself
deficient in catchment area and in depth of
reservoir. The storage is shallow and consequently impure. The only way in which this
scheme could be improved would be by annexing part of the Y anco catchment to it. The
catchment at present is 200 square miles in area ..
The portion of the Yanco catchment which can
be attached is only 30 square miles. The
Stephens Creek Company estimate the cost of
this proposal at £30,000, and it is quite plain
that the improvement would be almost .insignificant.
'l'he concession expires in fifteen
years.
That is to say, that in fifteen years the
Government will take possession of the
Stephens Creek scheme.
Yet the shares are quoted to-day at ISs. to
£1, so that its resumption would cost the country £200,000 at present share values, the only
basis of valuation at present available. The
Y anco scheme has a catchment in no way
superior to Stephens Creek, and only 12.') square
miles in area. The grave defects of these catchments is that the hills are·on the boundaries, so
that the rainfall has to traverse long fiats of absorbent country before reaching the reservoirs.
The Yanco reservoir would be shallow.· It
would probably breed organic life as easily as
the Stephens Creek reservoir has done, and the
supply would, therefore, be equally as impure.
The coal for the pumping machinery would have
to be hauled 40 miles further than from the
Umberumberka scheme. The Umberumberka
scheme is the best from all points of view. The
catchment is 150 squ:tre miles, and the hills are
around the reservoir, so that it will be an effective catchment. The reservoir will be 70 feet
deep, so that the supply will keep itself pure.
The cost is estimated at £200,000, and the Silverton tram is only 3 miles from the pumping
station.
·
This and either reports came to me from
the engineer, who at first was inclined to
go for the Yanco Glen scheme. I read
his :report, and knowing that I would be
confronted by about £30,000 worth of
claims for compensation from the owners
of certain leases, it occurred to me that I
could not possibly·go on with the scheme,
because it would involve an expenditure
of mnch more than £20,000, and it therefore would have been illegal for me to
proceed with it. I, therefore, adopted the
[Mr. O'Sullivan.
,·
Governor's. Speech:
[I Jut¥, 1903.]
engineer's report, in favour of what he has
shown to be the better scheme at Umberumberka. A month or two went by,and we
were not able to start the scheme as early
as we had hoped; but for the hon. member to tell us, after six months have elapsed,
that that mistake is the cause of the water
famine at Broken Hill, is, as I have already
stated, a childish absurdity. I took the
pains to-day to obtain a report from the
Government Astronomer to find out how
much rain has fallen upon the Broken
Hill area during the last three months.
The contention of the hon. member for
Stuart was that I promised to have this
work carried out in three months. I am
not quite certain whether I stated that,
but no doubt it could have been done .by
working night and day. But, supposing I
had done so, ei'Cn then it would not have
been in time to stave off this famine, for,
according to the report of the Government
Astronomer, not more than about 1 inch
and 43 points of rain have fallen there
during the last three months. How could
you fill a reservoir with a rainfall of
1 inch and 43 points 1 The thing is absurd.
If the reservoir had been constmcted last
year in a time of such a small rainfall, it
would not have prevented the present
famine at Broken Hill. That is my reply
to the hon. member for Sturt, who has
fallen back on this paltry excuse for
changing sides in the Hous!l. He might
easily have said he did it for some higher
and nobler reason, even if he·had chosen
to invent it; but he has changed his opinion
for a reason that the whole House knows,
and it is not necessary for me to tell hon.
members what is the true reason why the
hon. member has changed his opinion any
more than I need tell them whv the hon.
member for Argyle changed his. Hon.
members all know the reason, and they
know that it is not of the high order
of things.
Mr. JESSEP: We do not know anything
discreditable to the hon. member for
Sturt!
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: I think the House
can well understand the real reason.
Mr. JESSEP: That is a cowardly thing
to say!
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: The hon. member
had nothing to say last night when the
hon. member for Sturt was attacking me
in an unfair way as being the cause of
Q
Addre8s in Reply.
421
the water famine at Broken Hill-a charge
which he must have known was utterly.
baseless. I say distinctly that the hon.
member did not give the true reason last
night for his change of opinion. There
is not a member of the House that does
not know it.
Mr. NORTON : How many thousand
shares have been put aside 1
Mr. SPEAKER : I insist that these inter-·
ruptions mtist cease.
While the hon.
member for Bingara was speaking the
Secretary for Public Works did not interrupt once, and I insist that he be heard
without interruption. Whether it is relevant or otherwise, it is out of order tomake an interjection.
M~. NoRTON: I. wish to make a personal explanation, sir, with your permission. I was going to ask the Minister'&
permission to put two or three questionsto him.
Mr. SPEAKER : That is not in order.
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : To show that the"
Government have been alive to the great·
question of water conservation, not only
at Broken Hill but all over the state, I
will read a short list of works that h~~ove
been carried out since we took office:
Large diversions and other water. conservation
works, 20; minor towns water supplies, 53;
artesian wells and bores, 24 ; public watering
places-bores, 22; public watering places-tanks
and wells, 129.
'That makes a total of 248 new watering'
places and other works we have given to
New South Wales since we have had the
honor of holding office :
Put in hand since the passing of the \Yaterand Drainage Act, six months ago : Large diversions and other water conservation works, 8 ;:
minor towns ·water supplies, 18; artesian wellsand bores, 8 ; public watering places-bores, 3 ;.
public watering places-tanks and wells, 29 ; ..
total, 66.
Add those ~o 248, and you will see what
the Government have done in the way of"
water conservation. When we took office,.
to talk of water conservation inN ew South
Wales was to talk about a dream to some
of the politicians who had previouslyreigned upon the Treasury benches; and·. ·
I well remember discovering the fact that·
there was a sum of £94,000 standing to·
my credit for water conservation, and that.
it had been unspent for three years. 1i.
need not say that it was all spent in four
months, and here is the resu~t. ·.No better
Eighth night.
Governor's Speech:
Address in Reply.
[ASSEMBLY.)
work could be. done in any part of New
South vVales · than water conservation,
whether on the coast, in the central division, or in the western division. The old
fad of our not being able to conserve water
was shown by the fact that £94,000 for
that purpose was lying in the Treasury
'unspent for several yeats. • Nature has
given us many opportunities for showing
our skill and courage in carrying out water
conservation; but I am sorry to say that
for many years it was looked· upon as a
dream that would never be realised. Well,
it is no longer a dream. Not only have
we carried out all those works, but Parliament has sanctioned the expenditure of
£200,000 a year for five years, making altogether £1,000,000, to carry out these
magnificent works; and depend upon it,
that so long as I occupy the position I
hold, that work will be carried out. I
want to show the hon. mem her for Sturt
exactly whither he is steering, because he
does not seem to be quite alone. This is
a quotation from the speech of the leader
of the Opposition at BUt·wood :
who was convicted on thirty-two charges'
of defrauding the Customs in Queensland ..
That is the outcome of the Kyabram
movement, and that is the harbour of
refuge to which the bon. member for
Sturt is steering. The first effort of the
reform party in Victoria resulted. in
those two dirty escapades of so-called respectable reform. It is all very well for
the bon. mem her for Bingara to say
"you must not charge us with all these
naughty things because we are seen in the
company of those men." But the Spaniards
have a proverb that says, "Tell me your
companions, and I will tell you your
character " ; and when you find these
reformers walking about with men like
Mr. Walpole, from Victoria, and with
members of the Taxpayers' U nien - Mr. CRICK : Tax-dodgers' union ! ·
1\'lr. O'SUI.LIV AN: Yes, that is the
right name; and when you see them
mixing up with contractors and other reactionary people, all of whom have their
own ends to serve, you can, as the
Spaniards say, judge their character:
They were saying that they wanted an Irvine
in this state. . He could tell them that he had
just as good a back and just as stiff a spine
as ever Irvine had. And there was no party in
the state which would bend him to its purpose.
He would speak plainly, and if the people he
was referring to did not like it they would have
to get somebody else. He was not in the least
bit anxious to lead the Government of this
country .. Let the men who were not with him
range themselves in opposition to him. He did
not want half-measures of support. He did not
want men behind him professing to be his friends
and quibbling and undermining him. No man
could carry on honest government on terms like
that.
This Mr. ·walpole receives a salary of £1,000
per annum as secretary of the Victorian Employers' Association ; and for this high salary
he has to show results. To give him credit, he
,has done full justice to his employers, as the
results of the late Victorian elections and the
performances of the Irvine Government show.
Speaking atLilydale, in Victoria, on the Factories
Act, Mr. Walpole is reported as follows :
Well, what was the Kyabram movement 1
What did it result in? A dastardly attemp~ t_o take away the right of men to
vote.
An RoN. MEMBER : N othipg of the
kind!
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : I do not want a
representative of the Contractors' Association to enlighten me on what is the
current talk of the day. The Kyabram
movement resulted in an attempt to take
away the right of men to vote and to prevent them from joining any trade-union
organisation. It resulted also in the
Minister for Lands being expelled from
Parliament for )lis dishonesty, and in the
exposure of the Minister of Education,
. [Mr. O'Sullivan.
M~rriage
was a lu·xury to the workers -
Think of it !
workers.
Marriage is a luxury to the
as were also" long sleevers," attending theatres a.nd the
like, and it was not fair to compel employers to pay for
such things.
Such things as marriage! This was the
talk of the South American planters to
their slaves before the war of liberation ;
and it is the talk of men who would make
the men of this country slaves, if they
dare, and could get the chance of coming
here to carry out theit• nefarious designs.
They mean all this if they only get the
opportunity, but I do not think it will be
within the next twenty-one years.
Let us interpret these words :
If men would but remain single they would have no
wife or children to support, consequently they could work
for lower wages. Therefore, if they marry they should
not look for higher wages, as it would not be fair to the
employer to have to pay for this luxury.
It is idle for men like the bon. member
for Hartley-who seems to be always r-eechoing tory sentiments, and never voices
..
Governor's Speech:
[1
JULY,
the sentiments of those who are fighting
for the workers and producers of the country-to be always saying something on
behalf of those who hold the views of Mr.
Walpole. The hon. gentleman's days will
be numbered when this House is dissolved.
The hon. member is a phonograph of the
reactionary forces of New South Wales.
Anyhow, here we have the sentiments
expressed by the secretary who receives
£1,000 a year, and who would not be
likely to throw. away his billet by making
a wrong statement. The statement he
makes is that marriage is a luxury ; that
the working men of the country should
not marry, because if they remain single
they can work for lower wages, not having
a family to keep. As the paper points
out, that is tlHl logical deduction from the
statement made by Mr. Walpole. I am
glad to SE'e that some regard for the truth
is spreading.
All newspapers, especially
.those in the country districts, are not on
the side of the tories. There are one or
two that speak out honestly, and this is
an extract ft·om one of them :
For some time past the public have had,
under cover, drummed into their ears the old
song, "It's time you were out and I in." The
See Government have had all sorts of charges
le\·elled at them, and that has been about all,
for up to the present not a solitary one of any
consequence has been proven home to them by
their accusers. True, the pr'"sent Government
have done things previous governments would
not in all probability have done : created repro·
ductive public work~ with the object of providing the starving wo~king class with a sufficiency
of the bare necessaries of life to keep body and
soul together. In addition to this, they made
lauclable pro,·ision for the aged and helpless who
spent'their lives in building up an Australia, in
the form of an old-age pension, which stands in
danger of being wrecked should the Opposition
s.ucceed in replacing the Government.
An RoN. :MEMBER : Is that taken from
the /l'reeman's Jo;1.rnal?
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: No; it is from.
the Protestant Banner, the old recognised
organ. It is not that mushroom that
jumped up recently, and sometimes gives
misleading statements about the Government. This is a paper that has had a long
career, and is run by men who, no doubt,
have their own opinions about religion-!
do not quarrel with them about thatbut, at all events, they have the fair?ess to
say something in favour of the Government
that are justly endeavouring to do their
duty to the people of New South Wales.
1903.]
: Address in Reply.
423
During the debate some remarks were
made about contract vouchers not being
paid.
Of course, I take a note of everything that is said affecting my department, and inquire into the matter ·the
next day. I do not care where an hon.
member sits, he will get the information
he requires. My inquiries amongst my·
officers have elicited that there are only a
few recent cases of such vouchers, as
follows:1. H. Brooks & Co.-Contract for the supply
of opa.lit.e tiles, Prince Alfred Hospital.
2 .. R, L~ Scrutton & Co.-Wrought-icon,
steel, and gun-metal work, Sewerage Construction Branch (contract 200).
3. Robert Saunders-Sandstone metal, Central Railway Station.
4. O'Neill and Goldsmith--Supply of timber,
Temora to \Vyalong railway.
. 5. R. B. Smith-Broken Hill Post-office.
6. Charles West--l!'inal payment, Ballina
Post-office.
7. Mudgee Post-office.
And two cff these are federal matters. I
am assured by the responsible officer who
supplied the information, with regard to
the statements made by the hon. member
for Sturt, to the effect that a number .of
vouchers were delayed because we had not
the money to pay them, that there are not
more than five or six ; ahd now that we
have turned the corner into th~ lst July
I daresay they will all be paid if the parties
present the vouchers. It is not a nice
thing that such a statement as that made
by the hon. member should go forth. In
the first place, it is not true, because the
money can always· be found to pay the
vouchers if they are ready, but sometimes
they are not. Often a question has to be
decided after the vouchers come in, and
that is sometimes the cause of delay. They
have to go through five or six different.
hands, and sometimes there may be a.
month, six weeks, or two months of delay;:
but, as a rule, any voucher can be paid if
application is made to have it put through.
I should like to make some remarks in.
reference to the statement by the hon ..
member for Sturt concerning day labour.
It is a bad sign when we find a democrat
rounding on democratic principles. And
although the hon. member tried to show
that day labour was all right, but had
been badly administered, I will tell the
hon. member, and the pres~, and the public
that in seventy casE's in a hundred day
labour is a success. There have been
Eighth nigltt.
424
Governors Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.]
failures, and I have never hesitated to
.admit them. There is no use in trying to
.conceal them; but if a failure is pointed
out to mP., I am willing to admit it. On
the other hand, however, there has been a
;much greater measure of success. I think
:that what I say is correct, that 70 per
·.cent. of the work can be best done by day
!abour, while the other 30 per cent. can be
best done under the contract system. It
was rather a belated suggestion which the
hon. member for Sturt made the other
_night when he proposed that I should call
for tenders upon each occasion when I had
work to do, and if the department's estimate were lower than the contractor's
· i;ender, the department should get the
work; but if the contractor's tender were
lower, he should get it. I have been doing
.that for months past. Only yesterday
.morning there was an illustration of it in the
Daily 1'elegraph. The superintendent of
-Cockatoo Dock got a contract iri opposition
·to all the contractors who tendered for the
work. I admit there have been failures,
but they have not been personal blunders
-on my part, because I cannot be everywhere; still, I take the full responsibility
·for them. I£ an engineer or other officer
makes a mistake, I have to take the responsibility, and I do so.
.
Mr. EDDEN : I do not see why the hon.
member should !
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : Because I am a
responsible Minister. Anyhow, in 70 per
cent. of the cases it has been found that
day labour will beat contracting any time
when the conditions are equal. I will read
one or two extracts to show that that is
.so. This .is the opinion of the Chief
Engineer for Harbours and Rivers. I can.not give the whole of the opinion, but
-will give a few sentences from it.
Mr. FALLICK: Just as far as it suits
-the hon. member!
· Mr. O'SULLIVAN : Well, I will read
the lot if the hon. member can stand it.
The Chief Engineer for Harbours and
Rivers says :
I have to state that, so far as the larger harbour works are concerned, I have no doubt
whatever that the best -results in every way are
obtained uuder the day-labour system.
All these opinions have been published in
the daily press ; but I have never had a
.satisfactory reply to them from the con.tractors. I have had a lot of suggestions,
[Mr. O'Sullivan.
Address in Reply.
innuendoes, and suspicions ; but the contr~ctors have never given a satisfactory
reply to tbe statements made by the
engineers. The Chief Engineer for Rail•
way Construction says:
As regards railway works, quite a large number have been carried out by the day-labour
method, and several others are under consideration. In the country the system has, so far,
; Since the introbeen a success.
.
.
duction of the day-labour system, and especially
during the last couple of years, certain classes of
wages have gone up, and prices of timber and
sleepers have increased considerably. In spite of
these drawbacks, and the fact that the process of
obtaining plant and stores 'is very cumbersome
compared with what a contractor can do, I consider that work has been carried out at considerably less cost than under the contract system.
There is no question that upon railway
lines, where all the work is straightforward and of an easy character, the daylabour system has been a great success.
I can show one work alone of a simple
character, or at least of a uniform character, the telephone tunnels, upon which
there was a saving of .£29,000. That is
to say, the work was done for .£29,000.
less than the estimate of the first section
by contract. The Engineer for Water
Supply gives an opinion pt·etty well to the
same effect ; but he says he wants a free
hand in control. Well, there I am with
him. So long as you have two thi~gs­
good and honest overseering and an absence of political interference, you can
make the day-labour system a success. I
am willing to admit that1 prompted, I suppose, by good nature, I did for a time put
on men at the request of members of Parliament when possibly I should have made
further inquiries. I did it as an act of
charity, because at that time there was
great distress in the city, and I had either
to put the men on these works or sta1t
relief works for' them. I have no doubt
that in the case of some of those works it
will be found by-and-by that they did not
pay. But all that has been stopped, and
members cannot and do not come down
now and ask me to put men on.
An RoN. MEMBER: How long has that
been stopped 7
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: Well, some time.
Mr. EnnEN : If it has not been stopped
we have the matter in our own hands, and
we can stop it !
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : I want to show
the other side. We only hear from the
Governor's Speech:
[1 JuLY, 1903.]
.press the one side against day labour. Do
we not remember well the terrible com-pensation cases some years ago under the
contract system 1 Have we forgotten, the
1\IcSharry case, which is only a type of
many others 1 If I had the full list of
cases here in which compensation has been
obtained by contractors for so-called extras
it would simply alarm the members who
represent the people of this country. But
. here are a few :
Cootamundra to Gundagai railway, McSharry
& Co. (award and costs), £82,495.
That i.~ an amount outside the contract.
Mr. WOOD : A court award, I presume !
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : It was an award
.by a board of arbitration, on which gentlemen got .£3,000, .£4,000, .£5,000, .£6,000,
and .£7,000 each.
Mr. WooD: They are court awards, all
the same!
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: .But why should
these costs be incurred at'all? The glory
.of the day-labour system· is that there is
no award and there are no extras. Then
I find these cases:
Murrumburrah to Young- O'Rourke and
· McSharry (award and costs), £12,000; Marrickville to Burwood Road-Proudfoot & Co.,
£5,600 ; Molong, Parkes, and Forbes-Baxter
and Saddler, £12,651 ; Narrabri to Moree.Smith and Finlayson, £5,083 ; St. Leonarda to
Milson's Point-0. M 'Master, £10,000.
These are all charges outside the ordinary
payments to the contractor, and t.he point
I want to make is this : there may, no
.doubt, have been some reason for some of
these charges.
Mr. WooD: They are all .equitable
·awards for work done, presumably !
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : If the bon. member has had much experience in ·building
matters he must know that contractors
look a good deal to extras to give them
their: profits. That is a fact well known
to all contractors.
Mr. WooD: If those awards had been
made by ministers, or by the departments,
wjthout the matter going to court., then the
hon. gentleman's argument might be good !
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: The argument I
ain trying to make is this : that under the
day-labour system there is no danger of
awards of .£80,000.
When you have
finished the job you have done with it. You
have sound and honest work. There is no
.arbitration and you are free from all these
excessive costs. I have no hesitation in
Address in ReplfJ·
425
saying that a thorough inquiry into the
day-labour system by a royal commission
would demonstrate this fact-and I am
not a bit afraid of it-that although there
may have been some blunders, which I
candidly admit have occurred, on the
whole about 70 per cent. of the daylabour system has been a success. I do
not care what body takes up the inquiry
so long as they do it on sworn evidence
and take both sides. I shall be able to
shmv such an array of compensations and
charges that will far more than counterbalance any weakness displayed by the
day-labour system. Sometimes you will
find a man who has been absent from
work and who has been put back after
having been discharged, and there is a
tremendous outcry in the papers at once.
But directly you get the report out you
will find that on the whole the .system
comes out all right. The hon. member for
Sturt, who knows little or nothing about
the operations of day labour, ought, as a
democrat, to have been one of the very
last to impugn it. It raises the suspicion
that the hon. gentleman is playing into
the hands of this reactionary combination
that is going on all over Australia. It
began in Queensland, it extended to
West Australia, it then got to Victoria,
. and they are trying now to work it out
in New South Wales, but they are not
going to succeed. This motion will be
defeated badly, and I venture to say that
when you appeal to the men and women
of the country, as you will do at no distant
date, I presume when the women are
properly enrolled, the women ~;ts well as
the men will see that those who fought
for their cause are not going to he put
·down by the mere wild and reckless statements of the Sydney newspapers. Some
statement has been made to the effect that
I have been unfair to hon. members of the
Opposition in my distribution of the road
vote. · I am very glad to hear an hon.
member opposite say "Hear, hear," because I can quote twenty men sitting on
my side who say I have been too kind to
hon. gentlemen opposite and too cruel to
them. The fact that I am blamed on .both
sides is the best evidence you can have
that I have been just. I will read out a
few figures-and this appliPs to the hon.
member for Yass as well as to others, because he has not been so badly treated by
·Eighth night.
426
Governor's Speech :
[ASSEMBLY.]
· me as he made out, and I tell him that
nearly all the figures he quoted about my ·
electorate were absolutely wrong.
Let
us take Ballina, represented by my colleague, the Minister of Public Instruction.
· He only got last year £3,572. Bingara,
represented by Mr. l\Ioore, got £9,070;
· Eden-Bombala £9,195.
Mr. WOOD : When was this 7
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : Last year. Hartley got £7,054; Macquarie West, represented by my colleague, the Secretary
for Lands, got £2,951; Queanbeyan, my
electorate, got about £8,356-that is less
than Eden-Bombala.
Mr. WooD: To what does that expendi. ture relate 1
·
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : I can assure the
hon. gentleman that these figures are made
up by an official in the office.
Mr. WooD: What does it cover 7
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : It covers all ex. penditnre. For instance, the hon. member had a wharf built in his electorate
last year, and a bridge costing about
£600. It is no use disputing these figures.
They were not drawn up by me, but by an
official of the department. All I have to
do is to produce them, and bon. members
may be sure I would not do so if I could
help it, because they show that my two
colleagues have been so badly treated by me.
Mr. WooD: Will the hon. gentleman
quote the figures for Northumberland'!
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : They are printed
here. There are two electorates-Sherbrooke and Northumberland. · When I
have to find work for the unemployed on
roads I have to carry out the work somewhere near Sydney, because these men
cannot afford to go a way from home. If
you send them along the railway line their
earnings are almost swallowed up by their
payments. I have to find work for these
men somewhere near Sydney, so that all
their earnings will not be swallowed up
in railway fares. Sherbrooke, which is
near Sydney, got about £16,000 last year;
and Northumberland, which is also near
Sydney, got about £21,000. That is largely
accounted for, however, by the construction of a bridge, which I opened last Saturday. This year I suppose Northumberland will get about £6,000 or £7,000 less.
What I state is the absolute truth. The
expenditure has been mainly on road work
in Sherbrooke and Northumberland.
[Mr. O'Sullivan.
. Address in Reply.
Mr. EDDEN: How much ~1as Kahiba.h
got 7
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : It has done very
wall. I do not intend to go into ~~:ny
figures about the revenue, because the
Prime Minister and the Treasurer have
absolutely exploded all the fallacies put
. forward by hon. gentlemen opposite. Last
night, the hon. member for Sturt was very
sarcastic as to what we did with all this
money, and how much better it might
have been spent. I will read out what I
have done with the money. I have given
it before; but I now wish to place it on
record in Hansard. It is as follows : Seventeen railways, costing £1,789,602; 29
tramways, costing £457,606; 107 harbour and
river works, costing £1,137,658; 2,061 buildings
erected or repaired, at a cost of £890,972; 121
sewerage works, costing £517,247 ; 342 water
conservation works, artesian bores, and public
watering-places, at a rost of £307,741; 91 roads
and bridges, chargeable to loans, at a cost of
£412,032; and 11,317 do., chargeable to revenue,
at a cost of £1,441,530; 12 works for clearing
Crown lands, at a cost of £23,371 ; 1 pneumatic
tube, £4,340 ; ll telephone tunnels, £45,453; 2
flood channels, £803 ; 49 country towns and
water supplies, £141,992; and :Sydney water
supply and improvements, five in number,
£40,742.
.
I think it will be seen from that list that,
at all events, we have something tangible
to show for the expenditure. While I
have been in office I have spent about
· £7,000,000, and we can show good results
for that expenditure. You cannot lay
your hand on one work in that list which
is not either reproductive or absolutely
essential. Therefore, there has been no
waste of money .. Instead of all these wild
reckless statements being correct as to
£17,000,000 being spent, when the expenditure is analysed, it is shown that
my department during the last. three and
a half years, instead of being extravagant,
has not even risen to the level of some of
our predecessors.
Mr. J. HuRLEY: Is the Manly tramway
reproductive 7
Mr. O'SULLIVAN : I have no doubt
it will be when completed. One should
not look at a thing when it is only half
done, and the bon. member is himself not
yet quite complete. I ask bon. members
to reply to this question : What would
have happened to New South Wales
during the last three and a half years,
during the culmination of a drought, when
we were in the midst of all troubles about
Governor's Speech:
[1. JULY, 1903.]
the plague and other expenditure which
we were ·forced to incur, if we had not .
carried out abold and vigorous policy of
public works 1 I know I have been
charged with saying something to-night
which is shocking, and which will frighten
the investors in London.
It will do
nothing of the kind. The investors in'
London are pretty well posted. up. in what
is going on in New South Wales. They
know almost to a let;ter everything we do.
There is no use denying that we have had
a drought iduring the last eight years. It
culminated during the last three or four
years. Thousands of men were discharged
from the stations, the farms, the'orchards,
the mines, and the factories, because
there was no occupation for them. Directly and indirectly, there was a great
shrinkage of commerce, industry, and
trade. We started our public works
policy, not with the object of giving employment, or to stave off a famine, but my
contention a! ways has been that coincident with all this trouble and distress,
our public works were in full progress.
They did give employment; they circulated wages which generated a prosperous
trade and kept things going which otherwise would have stopped. That is all my
contention. I do not say that we started
the public works to give employment;
they were started to develop the resources
of the country, to give better accommodation to people in the country and in the
city, and it so happened that it was done
at a time when there was distress everywhere owing to the drought.
These
works came to the rescue, and by circulating wages they 'staved off a financial
and industrial panic.
I am not the only
man who holds that opinion. I have
been informed by men in business, that
my statement is absolutely correct.
During the recess I ·have been subjected
to a good deal of misrepresentation concerning the resumptions for the rail waystation. I thought it was only right to
put all the facts on paper, so that a true
statement should go before the public.
The facts set out there are taken from
official documents. There was one case in
particular in which I was charged by a
newspaper hqlding very strong sectarian
views, with having unduly favoured a
Roman Catholic institution, and with not
having shown the same consideration to
A.ddress in Reply.
427
Protestant institutions. Now, I will read
out the true facts, and leave them to the
justice of hon. members to say whet.her
there is any foundation for the charges
made against me. The statement is as
follows:-CE:<"TRAL RAILWAY A~D OTHER CoMPENSATION
CLAIMS.
As some gro&sly misleading statements have
been made concerning my action ·as Minister for
'\Vorks in dealing with the resumptions of the
Good Samaritan Convent property-one to the
effect that I had unduly favoured the Catholic
Church, because I am a member of that denomition-I will give the whole case concerning
these and other resumptions, and when I have
finished I think it will become abundantly clear
that I have treated all religious communities
fairly and generously. Fin,t, let me append a
list of the amounts paid in compensation for the
buildings removed to make room for the new
Central Railway Station, with the area of each
property, and the reason for delay in paying the
compensation money. Sums of money were
added to the amounts in order to allow the representatives of the Refuge, Convent, and other
properties to buy new sites.
Eightlt night.
428
Governor's Speech :
[.A.SSEMBLY.]
The total, exclusive ·of Presbyterian Church
-a later addition-is £140,235. With the addit(ion of the Presbyterian Church, £23,980 more.
In reference to other resumed church property, I acted as follows with regard to some
that was resumed on what is known as " The
Rocks":
Church of England Property Trust-Cathedral
Fund. Property fronting George and Globe
Streets.
In this case the full fair market value, plus
the customary allowance for forced sale, was
estimated by the valuers at £17,600. Being dissatisfied with this valuation, the trustees, including Mr. Russell French, of the Bank of New
South Wales, and the Archbishop, waited,upon
me, pointing out the disabilities under which the
trust laboured in the matter of re-investment,
and I thereupon referred the case to the valuers
for reconsideration, with instructions that if
they could see any aspect that had been overlooked in the pr.,vious estimate, remembering
that all eleemosynary and religious institutions
should, in my judgment, be dealt with orr a
liberal scale, I should be glad to know whether
any increase could be recommended, or not. I
s-ubsequently received the papers back with a
suggestion that, although the full market value
had, in the valuers' opinion, been awarded, the
trustees, through Mr. Russell French, felt that
£20,000 would be a reasonable amount, and I
ultimately consented to an increase to this sum,
bearing in mind all the circumstances the property trust were labouring under.
Church of England Par.<onage.
\Vith regard to this property, which was resumed at the Haymarket in connection with the
Central Railway 8tation, an offer of £8,800 was
made, and still awaits acceptance. I approved
of a conference being held with the trustees with
a Yiew to an amicable settlement being arranged.
A settlement ha• since been arrived at.
Then in the matter of Trinity Church .Parsonage and a trust held by the Rev. J.D. Langley,
wherein the valuers had given the full fair market
·value, the same principles were applied.
In dealing with these cases I did not approach
them in the spirit of a pawnbroker who wishes
to make a cheap bargain. I recognised the fact
that the institutions were of a religious or charitable character, and that they had been doing
splendid service for the people of New South
VI' ales for generations past. Take the case of
the Benevolent Society. For ninety years that
institution has been relieving the Government of
• expenditure by helping the poor. The Sydney
Female Refuge had been reclaiming fallen
women; and for nearly fifty years the Sistera of
the Good Samarit"n Order were doing the same
at their convent in Pitt-street. Will anyone
tell me . that, under these circumstances, the
trustees or managers of these institutions should
not receive a generous consideration? Ought
they to have been treated like shopkeepers who
had been running a business for fifty years for
their own personal profit? I declined to take
such a view of religious or charitable bodies,
and, therefore, am prepared to defend my action
on' broad and liberal grounds. Let it be borne
[.Mr. O'Sullivan.
Address in Reply.
in mind that these trustees had virtually acquired possessory titles by long occupation, and
being reputable men and women, their claims
should be treated in a just, and not in a rigidly
legal manner. It must also be remembered that
the trustees or managers of theRe .churches or.
institutions had been put to considerable expense
by our forced resumptions. In the case of the
Haymarket Presbyterian Church, for example,
the congregation was broken up twice-once by
our resumption of the church, and, secondly, by
the fact that a serious disease broke out in the
vicinity of the new hall to which they had removed, pending the erection of a new church.
Can it be justly said that, under such circumstances, we ought not to have given them it little
extra? Let it also be remembered that the
historic buildings resttmed, upon which very
large sums of money had been expenrled, have
been demolished, an:i their scholastic connections broken up. It was, therefore, _under these
circumstances that I awarded fair payments to
the trustees or managers of all these institutions.
The total amount awarded was a clo~e approximation of the amount stated by me in Parliament when moving the bill to empower the cons.truction of the Central Rail way Stationnamely, £140,000. This total amount was also
mentioned in a report of the Public Works Committee, which dealt with the same subject. The
Attorney-General, when moving the Central
Railway Sta~ion Bill in the Legislative Council,
on the 4th December, 1900, distinctly stated
thatthetotalamount of compensation (£140,600)
included that·for land. \Ye have resumed the
properties for amounts less than that for which
parliamentary sanction was given. \V e have
also obtained some of the properties for far less
than the amount at first claimed by the
trustees or managers. For example, the amount
first askedforthe Conventof the Good Samaritan
was £35,000; we obtained it for £21,750. In
the face of all these facts, which can be substantiated by public documents, if necessary,
what becomes of all the slanderous statements
about my: bias and prejudice in favour of the
Good Samaritan Convent? It will be seen that
all denominations have been treated fairly and
generously by me, and that I have made no dis:
tinction between the various creeds concerned.
It is insulting to the intelligence of a free and
educated people to have to state these matters,
hut it has become necessary owing to gross misrepresentations which have been published concerning my action r!'lgarding them.
L did not feel myself in any way bound by the·
decision of a Minister many years ago in reference to some of these properties, but went into
all the resumption cases with a free and open
mind, and a determination to do justice to all
concerned. I believe if the trustees or managers
of the various properties were asked their opinion on these matters, they could conscientiously
say that I have been just, if not generous, to
them all. As to the ownership of tho properties, here is the opinion of Mr. Henry Deane,
l<Jngineer-in-Chief for Railway Construction, one
of the ablest and most conscientious men in
the public service :-Questions 81 and 82 of the
report of the Public Works Committee on the
subject of the Central Railway Station :-By
Governor's Speech:
.
[1
JULY,
·Mr. Shepherd: "Question 81. There is £140,600
for resumptions. What resumptions are they?
It is the value of the Benevolent Asylum, the
· Christ Church parsonage, the police barracks
and a residence, and the Female Refuge of. the
Good Samaritan." "Question 82-With the
exception of the. ·Good Samaritan, all that is
Government property, is it not? Yes. I have
here the book of reference, which I put iu.
There is a Friends' Meeting Honse on the sitethat is one part of the cemetery. The Cemetery
and Benevolent Asylum are Crown property.
The Christ Church parsonage is in the hands of
trustees, and is virtually private property. The
· cottage and grounds in connection with the
police barracks are Crown property, and also
the police barracks. The Convent of the Good
Samaritan is in the hands of trustees. The
tramway yards and sheds are in the hands of the
Railway Commissioners." There is the statement of a laigh and responsible public officer,
' and I leave it to the good sense and justice of
the hon. members to say whether these gross
slanders about my action in these matters are
justifiable or not. As to the cost of the new
police buildings (or barracks), the resumption of
the old buildings being nil, that will be more
than compensated for by the resumption of the
.Presbyterian church and ·school, which was
extra to the original amount, and came to about
£24,380. It will thus be seen that \\ e have not,
in reality, exceeded the total amount voted by
Parliament for resumptions, as at first under·
stood, namely, £140,600.
That is a true history of all those resumptions, and bon. members, if they like, can
see the documents for themselves. There
is nothing to conceal. I have honestly
tried to do my duty to all denominations.
I laid down the principle that we ought
not to deal with those institutions in the
huckstering spirit of a pawnbroker. If
some of them have no really clear title,
they have been there for ninety years, and
during that time they had been helping
the poor, the sick, and the needy of the
city of Sydney, and they, had saved the
government so much per annum. I felt
bound to treat them all upon one plane.
The first claim made on behalf of. the convent was £35,000, but eventually I got it
down to £21,750, although the real value
was somewhat below that. I know that
a great deal of misconception has prevailed
about this matter, but I do not complain
as long as criticism is just and right; and
if gentlemen who speak about these matters
would come to me and get the true facts,
they would not, as they have done, make
statements that are absolutely misleading. In conclusion, I would say that I
know th'at the gentlemen opposite occupy
a very important position in regard to the
1903.]
7lddress in Reply.
429
affairs of this country. As an opposition,
they l1ave their duty to perform. I do,
not complain at all about their criticism,
as long as it is not of a malicious and personal character. They can say what they
please about me and about the Government, and it is quite within their right to
do so; but whilst we are fighting, let us
fight on something like fair lines. It is
all a question of the confidence of the
people. If we have the confidence of the
people, we ought to remain in office. 1f
we have not the confidence of the people,
we ought to be thrown out of office. I
think we have the confidence of the people.
I have travelled the country from end to
end, and I have gone to every part of New
South Wales, except Mount Brown and
Wentworth.
·
An RoN. MEMBER: Tamworth!
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: I went to Tamworth, and came back with a minority
member. It is a lucky thing for him that
there was more than one candidate opposing him. I travelled from end to end of
the country in: pursuance of my duties as
Secretary for Public Works, only desiring
to do what is right and just, having no
personal end to serve. I am a poorer man
to-day than I was on the day that I took
office. That is absolutely correct. Those
who think there is money in a portfolio
will find out their mistake as soon as they
get one. Any minister will tell you that.
I want to do, as I have said, what is right
n.nd just to every man. We are here to
do our duty. We are carrying out the
policy upon which we were elected, and
we are honestly adhering to it.
Mr. HAYNES: To that portion of it
which is safe !
·Mr. O'SULLIVAN : The other will
come by instalments. We are honestly
endeavouring to carry out the policy upon
which we were elected, and if we are
doing that, instead of being harassed and
unfairly criticised as we are by the press,
we ought, at all events, to receive fair
play. If hon. members can get up a
cry to put us out of office, we shall have
to bow to the inevitable; but I· do not
think that they will do that this session,
nor do I think they will do it next session,
nor do I think they will do it when we
go before the women of the country. I
think that the salvation of the democratic
party lies with the women of New South
Eighth n,ight•.
430
Governor's Speech:
(ASSEMBLY.]
Wales. I would rather trust manywomen
that I know than some men that I know;
and I am willing to leave the fate of the
Government and their policy in the hands
of the women of New South Wales when
we go to the ballot-box. I know that just
as the manhood of the country were at our
backs last election-and that is undeniable, for we had a majority of fortythree on that occasion-we shall have the
womanhood of the country at our backs
next election, because every mother, sister,
and sweetheart will support us. We are not
in the least afraid tQ appeal to thosewhowill
be not only our masters but our mistresses,
and when the time comes we shall be able to
put before them such a programme as will
justify them in continuing us in office.
We have now been in office nearly four
years, and I think, at all. events, we have
left our footprints on the sands of time.
Notwithstanding what hon. members opposite may say in debate, we have done a
good deal of good work, and the recor~ls
of it are on the statute-book as well as m
the archives of each department. Our
work is there. You cannot undo it, and
the best thing you can do is to accept the
inevitable, let the session proceed, and
some good progressive legislation be carried
out, and then :fight the matter out before
the women of New South \Vales.
Mr. HOGUE (Glebe) [10·3]: The Secretary for Public Works has exhibited
some of the characteristic flights of fancy
which he-, for a long time, has imposed
upon a great number of simple-minded
people. He began with the roar of a lion,
and sat down with the mildness of a lamb.
He began with a savage attack on the
late Reid Ministry, and resumed his seat
with a plea for fair play all round. I
think his attack upon the bon. member
for Sturt was in anything but good taste.
It would have come with better grace from
the hon. member if he had made that
attack last night, when the bon. member
for Sturt resumed his seat. I think he
has treated the hon. member for SLurt
with gross unfairness. I make no apology
for the hon. member because he happened
to be out of the House at the time. I
noticed, however, that the Minister was
very uncomfortable during the assault
which was made upon him last night. The
unfairness of the attack on the bon. member for Sturt consisted of the fact that the
[Mr. O'Sullivan.
. Address in Reply.
Minister pictured him as an opponent of
the day-labour system. That was grossly
unfair to that bon. member. What the bon.
m~:mber said, as I understood him, _)VaS
that . the Minister was r.uining the daylabour system and bringing it into discredit.
Mr. FERGUSON : That is true l
Mr. HOGUE : A great deal of ground
has been covered during the debate, and I
am not at all surprised at it. If the
debate has been extt>nded to an inordinate
length, the Government alone are to
blame. On the face of things it looks as
if the debate were simply provoked, and
provoked by the terms of the extraordinary inflammatory speech which was delivered at the opening of the session. I
want to say at the outset that I regard
that speech, delivered by his Excellency
the Governor, as a splendid example of
what a speech from the throne ought _not
to be. It is an example of a speech which
ought not to be followed. It struck me
as being a . speech which was original_Jy
intended as an electioneering placard or
manifesto, and that at the last moment
ministers could not agree to the speech
they intended to put into the mouth of
his Ex~ellency, and, therefore, dished up
an electioneering manifesto in its place.
A governor's opening speech, above all
things, ought to be calm and temperate,
and ought not to enter upon controversial
matters. The opening speech was eminently calculated to inflame the minds of
bon. members on the Opposition side, and
to introduce controYersial subjects in a way
in which they ought not to be introduced.
The speech is one wh!ch almost drags the
representative of the Sovereign into the
arena of controversial politics. The speech
itself contains statements which are obviously and deliberately untrue. Let us
' see some of ·those statements. The statement is made that a bill conferring the
franchise on women only passed through
Parliament on the 19th December last.
That measure was passed in the previous
August, nearlytwel vemonths ago. Another
statement is in connection with the carriage
of newspapers, which is untrue.
Representations have been made for some
time past with great urgency and pertinacity by
the representatives of three Sydney daily newspapers, to revive, in one form or another, the
arrangements by which newspapers were carried
free upon the railways, at the expense of the
taxpayers of this state. ·
...
Governor's Speech:
[1
JULY,
That is simply incorrect. That is the
mildest term in which I can characterise
that statement. There are also other statements in this remarkable document which
naturally challenge the attention of bon.
mem hers of the Opposition, because they
are obviously aimed at them. The lQth
paragraph says-and this is addressed specifically to the members of the Legislative
Assembly:
Some persons have used the occasion of our
passing difficulties to speak in grossly exaggerated terms of the state of our finances, and have
thus (whether they intended this result or not)
depreciated the credit of the state.
If that had been a statement coming from
ministers, it would have been taken for
'what it was worth, and it would have been
answered; but coming from the mouth of
the representative of the Sovereign it is
utterly unjustifiable, because there can be
no doubt whatever that that statement
was intended to apply to members of the
Opposition who criticised the financial
policy of the Government both inside and
outside the House. That is a departure
in connection with vice-regal speeches
which I hope will never be regarded as a
precedent.
Mr. HAYNES: We should have statesmen instead of soldiers as governors !
Mr. HOGUE: I have no wish whatever to bring into the arena th8 name of
the representative of the Sovereign. It
would be grossly improper; but the impropriety of the whole thing is that we have
been provoked to take some notice of it.
I do not allude m~rely to its extraordinary
length ; but I suppose that it is the longest
governor's speech on record, and being so, .
it cannot be surprising if this debate is
the longest on record. It contains so many
controversial statements in connection with
the finances that hon. mem hers on this side
of the House are justified in taking particular notice of it and entering their emphatic protest against anything of the
kind in future. The Secretary for Public
Works asked what would have happened
if we had not had a .vigorous public works
policy during the drought 1 He defended
the extravagant administration of his department by saying that it was very much
bettertospend the money hehadand putitin
circulation, because all classes of the people
benefited by it. I will quote against him
his own colleague,_ the Colonial Treasurer.
1903.]
Address in Reply.
431
The Secretary for Public Works claims
that a time of distress, drought, and famine
is the time in which to spend public money
freely. The Colonial Treasurer takes the
opposite view, and says that the time to
spend money liberally is a time of plenty,
but that the time in which to be cautious
in the expenditure is a time of drought.
I have no doubt that every hon. member
will say that the Colonial Treasurer is
right and that the Secretary for Public
Works is wrong. I will now quote an
authority against the Secretary for Public
Works' extravagant policy, which I am
sure he will hold in the greatest respect.
I will quote against him, himself. It is
only a few years since the Secretary for
Public Works was the acknowledged leader
oi what was called at the time the retrenchment party, and he was thundering
in and out of the House and writing letters
to the paper in every way condemning the
extravagant policy of the ministers of the
day, and contending exactly as the Opposition are now cor.tending, namely, that
there ought to be ecorromy in the administration of public affairs, and that an end
ought to be put to the extravagant waste
of public money. The bon. gentleman, writing to the Sydney Mornin_g Herald at that
time, said : ·
it is simply impossible for New South Wales
to cantinue spending the enormous amount she
does every year upon her Government, for the
simple reason that another five years of this in
dulgence will land us in national bankruptcy.
That is precisely the same argument as
has been advanced from this side of the
House ever since the bon. member has
been in office. He went on1 to say : •
The politician who would discountenance a
scheme of retrenchment under existing circumstances ought to be scouted from public life as an
enemy of the people.
According to his own showing, the Secretary for Public Works ought to be scouted
from public life as an enemy of the people.
He further said :
·
Time and depression fight on the other side.
Here is where the hon. member turns
completely round upon himself. At that
time he uttered sentiments which have
been advanced by the Opposition e-ver
since he has been in office. Then, again,
what has become of his spirited public
works policy 7 [House counted.] The Secretary for Public Works .was good enough
Eighth night.
432
Governor's Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.]
to refer to the legislation passed by the
present Administration. I do not propose
to follow· him in anything of that kind.
But I should like to say that he did not
do justice to the legislation that was
passed by the administration of Mr. Reid.
He made no reference to the alteration of
the fiscal policy of this country which relieved thepoorerclassesofN ewSouth Wales
of the burden of taxation and placed it on
the shoulders of those best able to bear it.
He also forgot his strongsympathywith the
federal party which has placed a burden of
nearly £4,000,000 extra on the shoulders of
the taxpayers of New South.Wales. What
has become of the hon. member's spirited
pu blicworks policy-his unemployed policy~
How is it that, with all the enormous rAveuue received by the Government, the
unemployed have increased ~ The hon. gentleman gibed at the Reid Government for
giving relief work to the unemployed Itt a
small rate of wages ; but he himself is reduced to the necessity of setting men to
work at the hardest description of manual
labour you could deviRe-that is, stonebreaking-and men engaged in that occupation cannot earn more than lOs. or 12s.
a week. I think that is a little above the
avera.ge the men get in that occupation.
\<Vhat becomes of the hon . .zentleman's 7s.
a day~ He boasted that~ he raised the
rate of wages from 6s. to 7s. a day; but
he is paying men less than 3s. a day at
the present time. There are thousands of
men engaged in stone-breaking, the very
hardest kind of graft, and none of them can
earn more than 12s. or 15s. a week. Some
of them are not fully employed. They
find that their hands blister so much that
thev cannot continue to work. The Secret~ry for Public Works is the gentleman
• who, forsooth, gibed at Mr. Reid for putting a number of men on relief work at a
small rate of wage. I think it does not
lie in the mouth of the hon. member to
say anything at all about the policy of.
Mr. Reid in that respect. The Secretary ·
for Public Works also said that no member on this side of the House had made
any reply to the defence of the Prime
Minister and Colonial Treasurer in connection with the finances. We have today, in the public newspapers, on the 1st
of the month, the very best reply that
could be made to those hon. gentlemen.
The public revenue for the last year was
[Mr. Hogue.
Address in Reply.
not less than £11,532,133, which is undoubtedly the largest amount ever received
in any state of Australia. In the face of'
that, and in the face of being relieved of
over £1,200,000 by the transfer of services, the bon. gentleman in control of the
Treasury has to announce to-day a deficit
of nearly £500,000, and this notwithstanding the enormous increase in the loan
expenditure. The revenue received from
customs has amounted to no less than
£3,053,000. The estimated revenue was
£2,475,000-that is to say, the Colonial
Treasurer has receiYed £57 8,000 more
than he estimated. What they have done
with it, it is hard to say ; but in the face
of that they still have to announce a deficit of nearly £500,000. If that does not
bear ou.t to the full the charge of extravagant administration, I do not know how
far those gentlemen would go before they
could be convicted of extravagance. One
excuse that the Prime Minister and the
Colonial Treasurer made for the extraordinary decline l.n the credit of this country was that the British credit had declined-that the price of consols had been
lowered. I say the price of consols is in
no respect an indication of British revenue. The price of consols is governed
very largely by the state of the money
market throughout the world, and as showing that the British credit has not in the
slightest degree suffered by the South
African war, we have the fact that recently a loan of £30,000,000, at 3 per.
cent., was called for by the British Government for the Transvaal, and that an
offer was made of £1·,000,000,000. Can
anybody say that the British credit has declined in consequence of the war 1 Though
the price of consols, no doubt, is lower, here
was a sum of about £1,000,000,000 offered
for a loan of £30,000;000 at 3 per cent.
That loan had a currency of fifty years,
with the option of being redeemed in
twenty years. The deposits accompanying
the applications for that £30,000,000 loan,
representing 3 per cent. of the amount
tendered for, reached no less a sum than
£27,000,000-that is to say, there was
£27,000,000 floating about on the London
market, in the form of preliminary applications, for investment at 3 per cent. Will
anyone say, under those circumstances, that
the money market was unfavourable~ The
plea put forward by the Treasurer and
Governor's
Speecl~:
[1 JuLY, 1903.]
Address in Reply.
the Prime Minister is that the money there was nothing in the proceedings of
market is unfavourable, but I say it is the committee to justify that remark of.
not. The price of consols or the state of the hon. gentleman. That hon. gentle~
the British market does not affect the man went on to that committee with a
public credit of this state; it is. simply very strong bias, and I will prove it.
the extravagance of the present Adminis- The hon. member for Botany, who took
tration, and that has been proved right a strong interest in the matter, made
up to the hilt. [House counted. J I should these observations on the 4th June,
now like to refer to the extraordinary 1902:
delay that has taken place in getting the
Now, is there any legal right to take theseroyal assent to the Women's Franchise papers on the trains ? The law officers of the•
Bill. How is it that, although the bill Crown in this state say it is not 1egaJ. That.means in other words that these men have•
was passed twelve months ago, the royal knowingly taken part in robbing the public·.
assent has not yet been proclaimed in this coffers of tl1is state for the last fifteen years.
state 1 Women are practically disfranchised, although twelve months ago they That was a very serious accusation to·
rejoiced over the fact that they had the make against the conductors of those··
franchise. The delay that has taken place newspapers; but to give the hon. member ·
is unpardonable. As a matter of fact, the credit, he has had the manliness to with-Governor of the state was .advised to give draw it fully. However, he went on to·
his assent to the bill, but the Crown law the committee with that bias. And the··
officers ought to have known that the hon. member for Waratah, as chairman,,
Governor's assent to that bill was utterly indorsed every word which the hon. memvalueless. I suppose, however, the delay ber for Botany had said. The hon. memserved a purpose. They discovered after- ber for Botany also said :
'There are far more honorable men in Darling.-· ·
wards that it was necessary to send the bill
home to get the royal assent.
ewere told hurst.
that it was assented to on the 20th May ; The hon. member for Waratah indorsed{
but it is not yet the law of the land, and the that statement, and went on to the com-·
women are kept out of their votes, because mittee with a bias in his mind. No one·
of the great delay in bringing the law could be unaware of that fact. I do not ..
into operation. I pass on to some of the think that he is one who should make uncharges that were made in connection with
complimentary observations with regard to·
the question of newspaper postage. I
his fellow members of the committee. I.
cannot understand why so much attention know, as far as I am concerned, that I
has been given to the matter in the pre- went on to the committee as free from bias ..
sent debate. I should have thought that as anyone could be. It might be assumed:
a more appropriate time would be when that I would be in sympathy with the·
the report of the committee came up for newspapers on account of my long connec-·adoption.
But member after member, tion with them; but if I had any such
especially members of the labour party, sympathy it was unconscious on my part,
and those -who were connected with the and it was only fair that someone concommittee of inquiry, have occupied the nected with the newspapers should be on
time of the House in giving their opinion the committee. The hon. member for·
about the newspapers, and the manner in W aratah stated in the House that he·
which the conductors of the newspapers never had a rougher time than on theacted in this matter. The member for committee, and he would have liked to··
W aratah made some rather serious state- exercise his power to expel some of thements. He said that he would very much members. That is grossly unfair. What ..
have liked to exercise his authority as I complain of is that the hon. member ·
chairman, to expel from the committee
himself has misrepresented the aims oC
some of the members who, I presume, he
the newspaper proprietors all throngh ..
thought he could not keep in order. But Will it be believed that that gentleman,.
I say that, on the 'whole, the proceedings with that bias, was compelled, although
were conducted in an orderly manner.
he has not yet withdrawn his accusation
There were one or two occasions when against the newspaper conductors, to
strong differences of opinion occurred, but admit in the report that he was in error '!:
Eighth nigl~t.
''r
434
Governor's Speecl£.:
[ASSEMBLY.]
Address in Reply.
ing the newspapers from the offices to the
railway station to be carried by the
railway trains all that· extra work was
The cabinet arrangement above referred to
avoided. There was no justification for
was a perfectly reasonable aad honorable one,
imposing an extra railway rate on newsbut carried with it no sort of vested interest,
papers when Parliament itself, as a matter
and could be terminated at any time by the
of public policy, had declared in an act
Government without giving to anyone a just
cause of complaint.
that the papers ought to be carried
free. That is pretty well a summary of
Further on, he says :
the history of this matter.
But the
This committee considers that, had the proprietaries of the Sydney 1Jf01·ning He1·ald and
complaint now is that a heavier charge
Daily 'l'elegmph been aware of the facts stated in
is being made for the carriage of newsparagraph 1, their admitted attempts to obtain
papers than is justifiable under the law,
from the Commonwealth Government a continuand a heavier charge than should be made.
ance of the carriage of their non-posted goods at
the public expense, their action would have been
As a matter of fact, and here is the
most improper; but the members of this comserious complexion that is put upon it, the
mittee are unanimously of opinion that the
whole thing latterly has been made a polimanagers of the abovenamed papers believed
tical question: It has been taken out of
that the arrangement referred to was made
under the provisions of the Newspaper Postage
the hands of the Railway Commissioners
Act, and, Rcting bonafide under this misconby the Cabinet. The Railway Commisception, they were justified in endeavouring to
sioners themselves frame a fair and reason· obtain a continuance of the concession till such
able tariff for the caniage of newspapers
time as the Postage Rates Act, by which the
abovenamed act is repealed, should come into
within the spirit of the law, imposing a
operation.
charge amounting to about the same as
That is a complete vindication from the would have to be paid if the newspapers
hand of the accusing member himself of went through the post. Was there anything
the aims, objects, and general conduct of unfair in that 1 But what the Government
the newspaper proprietors. It comes with did was to take the matter entirely out of
very bad grace from the bon. member for the hands of the Railway Commissioners,
W aratah to attack those gentlemen in the the first time anything of the kind has
way he has attacked them. As a matter been done; and it is a very extraordinary
of fact, so far from their having tried 'to circumstance that this has been done at a
get any undue advantage, they simply time when the Sydney newspapers have
acted within the law. The Newspaper felt themselves constrained to criticise
Postage Act was a~:?olished many years very severely the policy of the present
Government. It is an extraordinary cirago. It came into force in January, 187 4,
and under it the Railway Commissioners cumstance-call it a coincidence if you
made a simple arrangement with the Postal like, but it seems something niore than
Department by which they took the papers that to me-that at the very time these
straight from the office· to the railway- newspapers have found it necessary to
station. That was simply carrying out the criticise in strong terms the conduct of the
spirit of the act which abolished postage on Government, the Government themselves
newspapers. The contention all through has take out of the hands of the Railway Combeen that the railways ought not to have. missioners a pure matter of business which
carried the newspapers without a sufficient the Parliament had declared should be in
charge. But if they had not done so the the hands of the Rail way Commissioners.
newspapers would have had to be carried Why have they selected newspapers as the
through the post. They would have had. only commodity for which they should
to be posted at the posii. office and sent strike a rate 1 Why do they not allow the
from there to the railway train, and then Railway Commissioners a free hand in
we should have had to carry them all the connection with the carriage of newspapers,
same. Cannot anyone see that newspapers as they do in connection with the carriage
posted in the ordinary way at the post of passengers, and all descriptions of other
office would have been free of postage, goods 7 That is a strorig ground of comwhile the post office would have bad an plaint against the Government-that they.
enormous burden of extra w.ork to per- have practically taken .out of the hands of
form. By the simple arrangement of send- the Railway Commissioners a matter of
He was chairman, and drew up the report,
and this is one of the paragraphs which
he wrote:
[ Mr. Hogue.
Governor's Speech:
[1 JuLY, 1903.]
business, which is entirely their own. Why
do they not interfere with the Public Service Board 1 I suppose if some civil servants committed a wrong act, they might
just as well interfere with the Public Service Board and dismiss them without
reference to that body. I say it is a gross
impropriety to single out this one species
of goods, and it is a breach of the spirit of
·the Railways Act that the Government
should take this matter into their own
hands.
Mr. NoRTON: What about Parliament1
Mr. HOGUE: The spirit of the law
that Parliament passed is embodied in the
Railways Act and the Postal Rates Act,
· and until the Postal Rates Act is passed
by the Commonwealth Parliament the
newspaper proprietors are fairly entitled
to consider that they should have the
same privileges as they enjoyed beforeor the s9.me rights under the law.
Mr. SuLLIVAN: The hon. gentleman
cited an instance about the carrying· of
passengers. If the Railway Commissioners
carried some passengers at one rate and
other passengers at another rate, would not
the Government have a right to step in~
Mr. HOGUE: It is preposterous to
supposE: that the Railway Commissioners
would discriminate between passengers,
except first and second class. It is wrong
for the Government to select any pnrticular description of merchandise, and to
take the matter out of the hands of the
Railway Commissioners and practically
strike the rate. That is what they did ;
because the Railway Commissioners passed
a regulation determining what the rate
should be-a reasonable rate. The Cabinet
refuse to sanction that regulation, and the
matter was taken out of the hands of the
Railway Commissioners in an improper
way. One effect of this is that the newspapers published in Sydney are at a great
disadvantage all through the Riverina
districts as compared with the newspapers
of Victoria. The Melbourne Government
carry by rail copies of the Melbourne
papers, 3 lb. in weight, for the small
charge of l!d. from Melbourne to Albury,
and from Melbourne to W agga the Melbourne newspaper proprietors can have
their paper's carried at the small rate of
3d. for 3 lb. weight.
Mr. NORTON : What has that to do with
us 1
Address in Reply.
'435
Mr. HOGUE: Everything. ·But the
Sydney papers cannot be carried from
Sydney to Albury at a rate less than 8d.
for 3 lb. weight. Is that a fair thing 1 It
is calculated to diminish the circulation of
the N ewSouth Wales papers inN ew South
Wales country districts. The chief reason
why the Government were urged to run
an early morning train to carry newspapers to the Riverina district was that
the Sydney papers hardly ever circulated
there, and consequently only the Mell:>ourne papers were read by the people in
that district, and very little business was
transacted from Sydney; because business
people did not see· the advertisements in
the Sydney papers, and they transacted all
their business with Melbourne. I am now
stating what was given in evidence by the
railway authorities themselves.
They
stated that they approved of the arrangement, because it would tend to increase
the circulation of Sydney newspapers ·in
the Riverina district, and bring more
business to Sydney, and increase the business of the railway line. If anyone cares
to look at the evidence, they will see that,
this is proved up to the hilt from the
mouths of the railway officers themselves,
and that a large increase of business followed on the railway-line in consequence
of the circulation of the Sydney papers in
those districts. That was some justification
for the policy followed by Parliament and
ministers in giving the utmost facility for
the carriage of Sydney newspapers by train.
Mr. N OR'l'ON : Charity l
Mr. HOGUE : It is not a matter of
charity at all; it i;; a mere matter of
business. I do not know whether I
should labour this thing at any greater
length. It is very late, and I know that
this debate has extended an inordinate
length. · I see how difficult it is after the
serio-comic speech of the Secretary for
Public Works to keep a House. I know
members are weary of this debate. It
is a foregone conclusion, and it is like
beating a dead horse. There is no chance
of reviving any interest in it, and no
chance of influencing any votE;Js; but I say
there never was a time in the history of this
country when hon. members, sitting on any
sid·e of the House, were more required to
give their serious attention to the condition
of public affairs.
With all the enormous
revenue which the Government has had it
Eighth night.
436
Governor's Speech :
[ASSEMBLY.]
is still landing us. in further difficulties,
.and we are. getting deeper and deeper into
the mire. The credit of the state is being
.destroyed. Over £4;000,000 of taxation
has been put upon the-shoulders of the
people. This revenue is all squandered.
The loan money has all been squandered.
There is no possibility of reviving our
credit under 'the present regime, notwithstanding the princely revenues we receive.
It is time hon. members paid some little
attention to the financial affairs of the
country, and did what they could to set
things right. The credit of this state will
never be restored until a change takes
place such as that proposed to be brought
.a.bout by the amendment to the address in
.reply. I will not occupy the time of the
House any longer. I need not say I shall
-feel it my duty to record my vote in
favour of the amendment.
. Dr. ROSS (Molong) [10·40]: Promo·<twn is granted by seniority. I came in
here over twenty-three years ago, and if
..any man in this Chamber ought to have a
say on a question- of this kind, it should
be one of the senior members. It is ·de·,grading for those who have already spoken
· to cry out "Divide." They should go and
.divide in the hotel and not here. This is
tl).e place for the redress of public grievances, and those who have not spoken
. should not be precluded from stating their
views. I do not care whom I please or
. offend; I shall give my vote like a man,
-and I do not care whether I ever come
here again or not. I shall exercise the
_judgment which God bas endowed me
with, and the rights which the electors
have placed in my bands.
We have bad
..oa governor's speech submitted to us.
When I telllwn. members one thing, they,
,perhaps, will not believe me, but I had
-<the honor in London to draft an address
which was read by the late Queen
"Victoria. I would not demean myself by
-.,putting into his Excellency the Gover•illor's mouth such a speech as wa::; submitted to us at the opening of Parliament.
:It is a degradation to the public and to
the intelligence of the people of New
South Wales. A r;chool-boy would have
prepared a better speech. If we take the
£rst paragraph, it is an incomplete· sen:tence to begin with. It says :
After a recess of considerable duration, I have
...:ailed you together in order that you may
IMr.
Hogue.
· Address in Reply.
crown the labours which have already made this
Parliament notable in the history of this state by
adding to the statute-book more measures ~f a
useful and progressive character .
Why did they not put in the words" more
measures than were passed by any other
government that ever held office" 1 They
were afraid to do so. In. paragraph 9 we
find these words :
I rejoice that I am able to congratulate you
upon the break-up of the most severe drought
which has ever scourged this state.
These are pretty words to put in the
mouth of his Excellency ! It is a reflection on the Almighty. Who brought this
scou~·ge upon the country~
It is owing to
our Ignorance of the noble laws of God :
We have ringbarked and destroyed our
trees. I have resided in this country for
nearly half a century, and I am sorry that
I am as old. as I am, otherwise I would
sell out :wd leave the country. I am a
man of observation and a student of the
laws of nature: I have never been, and
never will be afraid to give expression
to my opinions either in the press or on
the floor of this House. I defy any man
to challenge any statement which I have
made. The Sydney papers of late have
not been so liberal to me as they have
b;-en in the past. In the past they have
gtven me three or four columns of space,
where I now only get three or four inches .
What is the cause of that 7 Are· my
faculties decaying 7 They ought to be
more mature and practical. But I can
get my letters published in the English
newspapers, in spite of the newspapers
here.
Mr. NORTON : In Truth !
Dr. ROSS : A better paper than Truth
there is not in New South Wales. It is
an outspoken paper. I appeal to hon
n~embers to read the opening speech by
h1s Excellency. I do not wish to brinO'
in the name of his Excellency the Gove~
nor. I respect the representative of the
Crown, but at the same time we must
take notice of what he presents to us.
There are twenty-three paragraphs in the
Governor's speech, but do you find in it a
single item with reference to the public
health 7 Within a few days, we have lost
two of our best and bright"est and most
respected civil servants-the late Mr
Critchett Walker and Dr. Manning, yet
no reference is made in this speech to the
Governur's Speech:
[1 JutY, 1903.]
vital question of public health. I stand
here in a most anomalous position. I am
the only medical man in this House, and
I claim to represent the question of health.
Hon. members are all laymen. Since I
have been in this House, I have urged
upon every ministry which has been in
office that they should bring in a public
health bill. In 1892, a public health bill
was brought in which ought to have been
consigned to the hangman; it is utterly
unworkable. I am not a representative
of a city constituency ; I wish I were ; I
would not be a dummy; I would have my
say on the floor of this House if I had to
move the adjournment every day. In
1871, we constructed a Sydney sewer 8
feet square. Will anyone tell me that
such a sewer is sufficient to carry away
all the refuse from a city of 600,000 inhabitants 1 Let anyone, on a wet day,
go along Elizabeth-street, Market-street,
Castlereagh-street, and Pitt-street, and
what will he find 1 The fact is our
sewers are so small that they cannot carry
away the surface water, and it runs
down the r;treets. I ask any hon. member
whether he has ever seen any documents
about the Sydney sewers 1 I tried to get
some from the Prime Minister, but all he
did was to send me a large map which I
did not know what to do with. I want a
written description of that sewer. In
London I saw hundreds attacked with
Asiatic cholera, many of whom, in half-anhour, were carried to their graves. You
talk about the officer who manages the
affairs for the corporation ! When I went
to see him about a garbage box for my
dwelling he was too uncivil to give me
an answer; and that is the man who
came out to teach us municipal government. I wish he v;ere back at Whitechapel. We have a Water and Sewerage
Board with a medical officer. We have a
corporation who have a medical officer.
We have the Public Health Board with
three medical officers, and yet our affairs
are mismanaged.
Mr. NoRTON: Many of them do not
know the difference between a spice box
:and a. dirt box!
Dr. ROSS: The hon. member is quite
right. They do not understand anything
about these matters.
When Mr. John
Harris was Mayor of Sydney I offered him
my services for six months for nothing as
Address in Reply.
437
sanitary inspector of the city of Sydney,
but he would not appoint me. Talk about
unemployed; there would be plenty of
employment if I had my way. I would
condemn all the dirty dens of the city of
Sydney-the centres of disease such as
Goulburn-street. Look at the state of Waterloo and Botany. I have visited the
plague patients at the quarantine ground,
and I have been at Little Bay Hospital. I
spent twodaysamongst the patients at those
places, and I say that those who sent the1p
there ought to be imprisoned in Darlinghurst Gaol. When smallpox broke out in
1882, I told Sir Henry Parkes, who was
then Prime Minister, and who was sending
the p:ttients down to tllll North Head in
an old open boat at midnight, that he
ought nDt to sit here, but he ought to be
put in Darlinghurst Gaol and tried for
wilful and deliberate murder. I said: "I
will go and get evidence against you. You
are killing those people by sending them
down there." What do we find in regard
to the plague 7 We find there is a great
deal of hubbub about it, and it only shows
the ignorance that prevails in reference
to the treatment of infectious diseases. I
say that if the Lyne Government had
done their duty they would have appointed
a royal commisRion during the time of
the plague to take the opinions of other
medical men besides those in the public
service. Tt1ey did not take my opinion.
The Government want my vote, but I tell
them they will not get it. If I could p'ut
them out of office I would. They have
been too long there. I have been a faithful and loyal supporter of the principles
of protection, but these men to whom I
have been so true and loyal are my wicked
enemies. If I never return to the House
I will give my vote like a man to bundle
them out of office. I ha\'e here a bottle
which contains a sample of the water
which is supposed to have caused the outbreak of typhoid at Balmain. I say that
we ought to sweep the Water and Sewerage Board out of existence. This bottle
of water was sP.nt to me by the Mayor of
Balmain, and I say that the Mayor of
Balmain deserves t!Je thanks of the community for the noble stand he has rri<tde
against the Board of Health.
'.Mr. J. STOREY: Did not the bon. member tell the people that the water would
not poison them 7
,Eighth night.
'.438
Governor's Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.]
Address in Reply.
Dr. ROSS : Two samples of water were Sir William Lyne never occupied a posi·
sent to me. One was a sample of clear tion in this House, and, fool that I was, I
water which I said I did not think would supported him. The Government have
be injurious. Does the bon. member think . been very liberal in sending twenty nurses
I should be fool enough to recommend and medical officers to CJoonamble in conpeople to. drink such water as is con- nection with the recent outbreak of
tained in the bottle which I have here 1 typhoid fever. · I have asked the Prime
I would rather drink the pipe-clay Minister over and over again to furnish
water used on the diggings than that. me with a report on that outbreak, but he
The expenditure on the plague was one has not done so. The Government treat
of the most extravagant ever undertaken me with incivility and contempt, and I
,by a government. It cost us £200,000 will treat them in the same way.
to clear up various landlords' back yards.
Sir JOHN SEE : I have not got the reWhere were the aldermen of the city 1 Is port!
Dr. ROSS : Does the Minister know
there no law to punish ·people who keep
dirty premises 1 · Now the corporation anything about sanitary law. Did he
wants to take the matter out of the hands appoint me the other day as a member of
of the Government, and a pretty mess the Board of Health 1 No, but he appointhey would make of it if they did. When ted Dr. Mackellar. Has that gentleman
I was in London, and occupied a position as much experience as I have of sanitary
as a sanitary inspector, I did not do what laws 1 I have been treated with contempt.
· th~ sanitary inspectors do here. Who The Government want my vote, but they
pays for the sanitary inspectors 1 The will not get it. I have not to answer to
Government.
We · can be very liberal the House for that, but to my constituents,
with the money of other people. Will and if they say I have been too long in
the Government display the same· liberality Parliament I will bow: to their decision.
in regard to sanitary inspectors at Molong, The other day I went to Waterloo and
Forbes, and other townships of the in- Botany. God help the people who live
terior as they do to sanitary inspectors there! I would not live there for £1,000
here,. where they are paid £3 per week. a year. The newspapers have stated alIn London the sanitary inspectors are most every day that there has been no
appointed by the Poor Law Commissioners. fresh outbreak of plague at Waterloo. We
'Here, however, we have one Jack-in-office hear that rats and mice have got the
dictating to another. Why did not the plague. The next thing we shall hear is
medical officer of the Water and Sewerage that the cats and dogs have got it. I
Board deal with the question of the Bal- respect the Prime Minister from the botmain water supply 1 It was left to an tom of my heart. If the Government ship
inferior officer, who knew nothing about were sinking I would go down with him
sanitary laws. The Government ought like a man, but when I know that he has
never to have resumed the plague area of such a crew as he has supporting him,
the " Rocks " and Darling Harbour. It never. The Secretary for Public Works
was a blunder, a public scandal, and a has starved my district, and has done all
disgrace to incur an expenditure of in his power to oust me from my position
£4,000,000 on the resumption, and another as a representative of the people. Can I,
of £200,000 to stamp out what is termed as an independent member, stand a man
the plague. I hold that there was never who would sneak behind my back to
any plague. I know that in France, on do a thing of that kind 7 Who was it
one occasion, the people had to live upon who assailed the Government of which Mr.
rats. They were not considered a plague Copeland was a member when Mr. Redthen, and they were quite as good as mond carne out to this country 1 I was
rabbits. Is it any wonder that our credit the member for Molong, and fearlessly
· is bad in England when we borrowed and undauntedly, with a courage that
£4,000,000 1 For what 1 For assisting would face a lion, I challenged them,
in cleaning the dirty premises of landlords. when Mr. Copeland issued a free pass to
I enter my protest against the iniquitous Mr. Redmond, enabling him to travel on
. resumption of the "Rocks" and Darling our railways, and Mr: Goodchap, his subHarbour. A more incompetent man than ordinate officer, would not allow it, unless
[.Dr. Ross.
Governor's Speec/,:
[1 JuLY,
he got a certificate from him. What is
the Agent-General doing now 1 He is
worse than a tyrant, worse than the Czar
of Russia, he is a despot of the highest
character. He, whilst in London, dictates the Prime Minister's policy. He
has supported the preferential tariff of
Mr. Chamberlain. Did the Prime Minister authorise him .to do that 1 Did he
authorise him to write to the papers about
the financial condition of the country 1
Are we to sit here and be dictated to by
the Agent-General 7 I decline. I know
more about the Agent-General than the
Prime Minister might give me credit for.
I know a lot about him. When the Colonial Treasurer went to Cowra, did he not
say that we were going to have retrenchment 1 Why did not the Prime Minister
put the gag tm him before he went to
Cowra? WhentheColonial Treasurerintroduced his amending liquor bill, did not
the Secretary for Lands say that he would
vote against it if it were n~t thrown under
the table 1
Mr. CRICK : Something like that !
Dr. ROSS : I think that all the measures should be dealt with by the Prime
Minister, and that his colleague·s ought to
show him more respect. . They do not
show him that respect to which the holder
of such a high responsible office is entitled.
They treat him with contempt. I would
not treat him with contempt; I reverence
him from the bottom of my heart. I
came in here with him and the hon. member for East Maitland twenty-two years
ago, and I have never had an angry word
with him, and I would not now, but the
question is not a personal, it is a political
one. The district· I represent has been
starved by the Secretary for Public \V orks,
and he treats me with contempt. I was
at a banquet at Parkes, at which that
hon. gentleman was actuapy addressed as
the Prime Minister. He went to Forbes
and spoke against me behind my back.
He said that the railway ought never to
have gone to Molong, but to Cowra. He
is a nice man to ask me to support the
Government when he will betray me behind my back ! He wrote me a letter of
apology. I want none of his apology, but
only the solemn truth. I care not what any
hon. member may say of me here. I will
answer him on the floor of the House. I am
not a coward; I am not afraid to express my
1903.~
Address in Reply.
. 439
opm10ns ; I never was and never will be.
There is a matter that gentlemen who do
not belong to the legal profession, perhaps,
do not take any interest in ; I am sorry to
say so. I have passed fifty-five years of my
life in the practice of medicine, and having
had over half a century's experience, I
think that my word ought to. have weight
with hon. members. Could anything be
more wicked than to sell milk and butter
and other things which poor, helpless little
children have to consume, with abominable,
disgusting preservatives in them. What is
the Board of Health doing 1 Butter is impregl!ated with preservatives; for instance,
boracic acid, 35 grains to tbe lb. I, as a
medical man, say that the Board of Health
ought to be brought up for allowing such
adulterated butter to be sold and consumed
by children and other people. If they
want boracic acid, let them go to a medical man or a dispensary for it; but men
should not be allowed for their own pecuniary ad vantage to put boracic acid in butter. I have seen butter made by my
mother without preservatives as fresh
twelve months afterwards as it was on the
day upon which it was made; and yet, in
this country, butter is saturated with preservatives. Is it not the duty of the
Government to protect the public health 1
I have made a study of my profession, and
am a student to"day the same as I was
when at the Glasgow University ; and I
say that a more accursed system than food
and liquor adulteration was never propounded by the brain of any man. And.
why the Board of Health should allow
such a state-of things to exist to the injury
of the public health surprises me. If I
were on the Board of Health, I would -not
allow such adulterated foods to go into
consumption.
Why do we have butter
with colouring matter or boracic acid or
salicylie acid added to it ~ I would not use··
butter that contained either of those
acids. I have been through every Chinese
garden at Botany, and from that day
to this I have never had any of their
vegetables, because they have a large
boiler filled with soup and bouilli, composed, among other things, of mangy dogs,
which is used in the garden as a fertiliser.
We have what is called a commercial
agent, an upstart who is supposed to be
an expert, and who has given his opinion
to the Prime Minister.. What is the latest
Eighth night.
440
Gowrnor's Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.]
with regard to milk 1 That it must be
impregnated with oxygen and carbonic
acid. vVhere are we going to end in this
matter of food adulteration 1 No wonder
that youngsters are dying at such a rate.
I can tell hon. members· how to make
plenty of honey without the aid of bees,
and I can also give them a recipe for
making 30 gallons of gin for 4s. 6d., but I
will not guarantee that it will be whole·
some. \Ve have here a board of health,
a water and sewerage board, and a government statistician ; but on which of
them can vie rely for a truthful statement 1 We get a report from the medical officer of the Water and Sewerage
Board, another from the City Council,
another from the Public Health Board,
and another from the Government Statistician. Which of these four reports are
we to believe, as one is diametrically opposed to the othe.r 7 There should be only
one report for the guidance of the people.
There ought to be a public health officer
as there is in London. To-night the hon.
member for The Barwon showed his ignorance in the matter of agriculture. He
has many acres of land, but he knows
nothing about the chemistry of agriculture. I can tell thehon. member that wheat
does not grow on the bla'Ck soil. Straw
will grow on it, but black soil will never
produce wheat. You must grow wheat
on sandy soil and loam. I know that from
my chemical knowledge, and I may say
that I am very well up in agricultural
chemistry. I am not going to deal with
the question of our finances. That has
already been ably dealt with by other hon.
members. There ,v-m be another opportunity during the discussion of the Supply
Bill to discuss the finances at greater
length. The Treasurer, in reply to the
hon. member for ·Goulburn, referred him
to a certain act passed last session. It is
stated in that act that, where there are disputes about the finances, the matter must
be referred to the parliamentary committee. Instead of passing an act such as
the one I have referred to, it would be
better if the Auditor-General and the
Treasurer were to inake a statutory declaration that their accounts, as submitted
to Parliament, are correct. When a person makes a return of his stock he has to
do that, and if his returns are not correct
he is liable to punishment. The Secretary
-LlJr. Ross.
Address in Re]Jly.
for Public Works has not told the Rouse·
how much he has spent in the district of
Molong ; but I can tell bon. members that
it was the sum of £75. I might refer to
the case of a poor old woman who, through
the action of the Secretary for Public
Works, was worried to death. She is now
lying in her grave beyond any wicked
action on .the part of the Secretary for
Public Works. The Minister resumed 70
acres of the poor widow's land at Macquarie Fields in order to make a road.
The bon. member for Camden knows that
every word I say· is true. The late proprietor of the Macquarie :Fields Bstate,
Mr. Ashcroft, built the Macquarie Fields
platform at his own expense, and there
are now three stations on that estate-·
Macquarie Fields, Glenfield, and Ingleburn. The district surveJor, the road
superintendent, and the Liverpool Council
all ignored the action of the Secretary
for Public Works, of the 1 previous minister, and also of the bon. member
for St. George. • A couple of years ago
I moved the adjournment of the Rouse
on this subject, and I think the Minister
said he would go and look at the land.
Is this the kind of man we have to depend
upon 1 Are we to take his statement
against the statements of his own officers~
The road superintendent in the Liverpool
municipality ignored the resumption of
this road, but the Minister had it surveyed and pegged out. The owner of the
property got an injunction against the
Minister in the Equity Court, and he was
put to the expense of a few hundred
pounds. In defiance of that injunction, the
Minister constructed the road which his
own officers reported there was no necessity
for. This unfortunate wjdow being dead,
the present owner of the property applied
for another injunction to.stop the Minister, and he go~ that injunction. These
two injunctions cost a lot of money, and
the Minister resumed 70 acres of land,
which will cost a great deal more inoney ;
yet his own officers reported that an expenditure of only .£40 was required to put
the road in repair. The Secretary for
Public Works ought to be in Russia, and
not among intelligent people. This incident alone is enough to prove to me the
truth of the charges against the Minister
of wasteful and extravagant expenditure.
of public money. The Minister got a rap
Governor'sSpeecl6:
[1
,JULY,
over the knuckles last night from the hon.
member for Sturt, and he deserved it. I
was pleased to hear the hon. member for
Sturt speak out as he did in the interests
of his constituents. I am also here to
defend the interests of my constituents,
who have reposed their confidence in me
for twenty-two years. I ani never afraid
to express my opinion in their interests.
A more wicke~, reckless government than
the present one was never in office. Not
only are the living attacked, but ;what
about the dead 1 Many people now living
have buried the bones of their relatives
in the Devonshire-street· Cemetery. The
bones of some of our dearest and most respected friends have been removed from
that cemetery in order to, construct a railway. I wish to God that I had voted for
the construction of the railway into Hyde
Park rather than desecrate the ashes of the
dead. I never saw such a thing. done in
any country in which I have ever lived.
I desire to draw attention to the condition
of the sewers which are killing people
wholesale. Sydney is the most unhealthy
city that I have ever lived in, and I
attribute it to those unsightly air-shafts
that we see about the town. I wish to
draw the attention of the Government to
a sewerage system, which if the Government adopted it, would render the name
of the Prime Minister immortal. I refer
to the Liernur pneumatic system. That
system requir!ls no ventilation at all. It
is worked on the same system as the
Westinghouse brake used on the railway.
Hygiene ought to be taught in our public
schools. It is the neglect of sanitary laws
and the adulteration of food that is causing
so many diseases amongst the people. It isa well-known fact that year in and year
out I have done my best for the rising
generation by trying to get a bill passed
to prevent juvenile smoking. But what
chance have I to get that bill passed 1 A
very able · teacher at the teachers' conference the other day, referred to the injury
arising from cigarette smoking by boys.
I have received a report of the debate
in the Canadian Parliament on a bill
to provide for the suppression of the
manufacture and sale of cigarettes in
that country. My bill, however drastic it
may be, does not propose anything like
that. I do not attempt to prevent the
manufacture or importation of cigarettes,
1903.~!
.Add1·ess in Reply.
441·
but I endeavour to prevent little children
from using cigarettes, which I know are
injurious to their health. The matter is
now before the House, and I hope that
when the debate on this motion has been
concluded, hon. mem hers will help me to
pass that bill. I have here a pamphlet
on the su~iect of the pneumatic system of'
sewerage from a member of the Upper·
House, Mr. Backhouse, who has for fifteen
weary years been advocating the system.
The late Sir James Martin was a great
-advoc~te of the Liernur system of drainage. It is a system that can easily be
adapted to a city like Sydney, hills and
hollows being no obstacle to its free
operation. All you have to do is to turn
a valve and the material is carried away,
consequently there is no pumping and
churning as there is under the present
system. At present the ;;ewerage is discharged through the Bondi sewer into the
sea, and of course the fish naturally live
on it. . Will any man tell me that fish
caught at Bondi, and which have been fed
on sewage can be good for human consumption 1 The adoption of the system .
which I advocate would do away with all
that. The sewage is contained in a hermetically sealed tube. It would involve a
great saving, because of there being no
necessity under that system to flush the
sewers with water. Gases cannot escape
which would be deleterious to health.
The gas which escapes through the present ventilators must be injurious to the
public health, and the sooner those ventilators are done away with the better it.
will be for the people in the city. Another ad vantage is that there can be no
soakage, because nothing can get out of
the pipe, consequently there will be no·
dangerous exhalations from the soil. The
Government had better borrow a few
million pounds and carry out this system.
It has been adopted on the continent of
Europe and it has· become a popular system. I will mention a few places where
it has been adopted :_:_Coblenz, with &
population of 30,000; Mayence, 48,000;
Darmstadt, 37,000; Offenbach, 26,000;
Hainaut, 22,000; Murmelier, 45,000;
Braunschweig, 69,000; Cologne, 130,000;
Leipzig, 120,000; Stettin, 80,000; Erfurt,
48,000; Posen, 60,000; Kaiserstanten,
20,000; Munich, 190,000. I think it is
time the Works Department set about
Eighth night.
442
Governor's Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.]
Address in Reply.
obtaining the latest sewerage improve- method of a referendum to the people. vVe
ments without delay. I feel positive that should give our votes on the floor of the
the. time must come when they will have House, and then appeal to our constituents
to adopt a new system, and the sooner as to whether we have done right or wrong.
Mr. J. STOREY : The hon. member will
they adopt the pneumatic system the
better. I have never had an oppor- have a larger electorate when he is on the .
tunity of justifying the vote I gave in other side!
Dr. ROSS : The hon. member is a
connection with the Friedman case until
now. I voted with the Government on young man, and I may tell him that. many
that occasion. I must confess that I did . years ago one member represented the
not like to interfere with the functions of whole of the western interior-the late
George Lord. It was Sir Henry Parkes
a jury. Those fu~ctions are sacred. I
have been a magistrate for the last thirty . who brought in a bill to subdivide the
or forty years, and I have some know- country electorates, and that is why
ledge of the administration of justice. If Molong was made a separate constituency.
twenty prisoners were liberated from gaol I. am not going to give my vote to ask the
in the same way as Friedman was, I would people, by means of the referendum, to
still vote as I did-with the Government.
say whether we shall have 100, 80, or
When a juryman is placed in the box, the . any less number of members. It is the duty
oath is administered to him with great of Parliament to deal with the matter. If ·
solemnity. The oath states: "You shall Parliament cannot frame laws for the wellwell and truly try and true deliverance being of the ·people, we have no right to .
make between our sovereign lord the King say that we have responsible government.
and the prisonAr at the bar, and a true ver- I have no fault to find with the Old-age
dict give according to the evidence." The Pensions Act which wa~ passed last ses-,
latter part of the oath is the part which sion ; bnt I think that the Early-closing
justifies my vote. No doubt the FriE'dman Act is a very harsh measure. It prevents
case was a miscarriage of justice. If the many poor people from getting a living
judge and the Crown prosecutor had not after 6 o'clock, and is very inconvenient,
ordered the goods, which were alleged to. especially in the remote parts of the in
have been stolen, to be taken into the . terior. If the driver of a bullock-team or
jury. room to be examined, I certainly horse-team .should happen to comeintotown ·
would have given my vote with the Oppo- after 6 o'clock, he cannot purchase even a .
sition.
pound of tea, a loaf of bread, a chop, or a ·
Mr. WILLIA~IS : And so should I. That steak. I think that is cruel. I have no
is why I gave the Government my vote!
fault to find with the Arbitration Act. It
Dr. ROSS: The jury had no right to is a very humane measure, an<l was passed
unpack in the jury-room the goods alleged for a good purpose-to do away with
to have been stolen. They should have strikes. It is a very good thing to avoid .
been unpacked before the jury in court, . strikes by an appeal to the Arbitration
and evidence should have been given that Qourt. I respect the labour party, but
they were the goods which were supposed they say they support the Government
to have been stolen. · The unpacking of because they get concessions.
What
the goods in the jury-room was illegal, does that mean 7 If I have any knowand a miscarriage of justice.
During ledge of the English language, a concesthe last election I told my constituents sion means a bribe. I do not get many
that I had no objection to ~ reduction of concessions granted to Molong; I do not
members, but I stated that that reduction get many bribes. I do not know why that
must be in connection with Sydney and is. There is no man I esteem more than .
suburbs. Sydney is over-represented. The the Secretary for Lands. He is one of the
country electorates are already large best secretaries for lands that ever held
-enough. The electorate of Molong is from
office. I have always found him to be cour- ·
teous and attentive to his duty. The de\60 to 70 miles square, and it takes me a
month to go over it. In Sydney you can cision given by the Privy Council the other
go from one end of an electorate. to another day in the case of Keefe versu~ Malone,
and address the whole of the electors in a
was a staggerer to me. Is it to be sup- ·
day. I protest against the unconstitutional posed that people 16,000 miles away from
[Dr. Ross..
GovernoYs Speech:
[1
JULY,
Australia know more about Australi;tn
·laws than we do ourselves 1 I think it
was a disgrace that those poor men, the
Malones, should be put to such enormous
expense. We talk about settling people
'on the land. But if land matters are dealt
with by the Privy Council in such a loose
haphazard way, it would be better that
. they should be finally· dealt with by our
own courts. I do not agree with the decision of the Privy Council in that case.
The land board gave a decision, and the
land court referred the case back to the
land board, and subsequently it came before the Secretary for Lands who gave a
decision revoking the matter. The poor
men then appealed to the Privy Council,
and the case went against them. In regard to another matter I received this
letter this morning, to which I am sure
the Minister will give his attention. I
will read the letter to the House and then
hand it to the Minister.
Mr. SPEAKER : The bon. member cannot read it!
Dr. ROSS : I will state the purport of
the letter. It is from the mother of a
soldier named Robinson who went to the
South African war. He was a selector at
Eugowra. He left his father and mother.
His father was fulfilling the conditions of
residence by virtue of the authority of the
Secretary for Lands. The father died, and
the son is now on his way back from
Africa to take possession of the homestead
for the benefit of· his mother and sister.
The poor unfortunate mother writes to me
stating that the conditions not having
been complied wi~h, the selection has been
forfeited. If that is not a cruel thing, I
do not know where to find one. 1 am sure
the !Secretary for Lands would not allow
the forfeiture of the selection under the
circumstances. I will hand the letter to
him, and I hope that he will look into the
matter; and if the selection has been forfeited, I trust that he will withdraw the
forfeiture.
Mr. CmcK : I will undertake to say that
it is not forfeited !
Dr. ROSS: I shall always give my vote
for measures, not. for men. I have been
too long wedded to a party. They do not
treat me with that courtesy and attention
hey ought to show.
Mr. CRICK: Give us another chance!
1903.]
Address in Reply.
443
Dr. ROSS: I will not give you another
chance. We are not ruled by the Prime
Minister, but by the Secretary for Public
Works. He is the Gog and Magog of the·
Ministry. I have arrived at the age of
discretion, and I know that if I do a
wrong to my constituents they know what
to do. When they go to the ballot-box
they can draw the pencil through my
name. The other day the hon. member
for Botany was criticising the newspapers.
I would not oppress the newspapers; I am
a believer in a free press. If I had my
way, the newspapers should be carried free
from one end of the state to another. The
press is the biggest educational institution
we have. In the Western Highlands of
Scotland there was such little communication some years ago that a clergyman
actually prayed for King William when
he had been dead for some weeks. The
more you, circulate the newspapers the
better for the people. The hon. member
for Botany complained about milk being
carried on the railway to the metropolis
from the south coast at too low a rate.
I ain proud to see the Railway Commissioners granting concessions to the dairymen. I do not know how many children
the hon. member for Botany has; but I
hope that he uses milk that comes from
the south coast.
Mr. DACEY : No; the milk produced at
Botany is superior !
Dr. ROSS: I have seen the mews in
London, and I know that the milk sent
out from them is not fit for people to
drink; but the milk of cows fed on native
grasses in an open paddock ought to be
nutritious. The press has lately shown me
an amount of courteous treatment.
Mr. DACEY: The hon. member will be
all right after to-night !
.
Dr. ROSS: I cannot be shut out from the
press, because I can write to the English
and Scotch newspapers, i.f necessary. It
seems to me a cruel thing to try to handicap
the newspapers in going to the country districts. If we tax them, we restrict their
being sent into 'parts of the interior wherE>
people only get a paper once a week. If
papers were sent free, it would be a better
means· of educating the people. The people
would then have an opportunity of studying the debates in Parliament. Plenty of
people give up a paper, beoause they will
not pay the extra postage. I may mention
.Eighth night.
Governor's Speech :
[ASSE:\IBLY.]
Adcb·ess in Reply.
·that recently I received a couple of post· ''human energies." But still les·s is it true of
·.cards from Edinburgh. One was sent for labour when understood to mean muscle power
alone. Mind is the prime mover in all work and
ld., and simply had on it the phrase,
wealth. This is a fact, not an opinion. Let it
"Sister is dead" ; but on the other, which be fully understood and really '• taken in," and
then much light will come.
was a penny. post-card, r.· had to pay 3d.
''Capital" is the "storage of labour," and is
That is one of the fruits of federation.
purely the work of mind in the past, and its
Thank God I did not vote for it. The great weapon in the future. Let this also be
time will come when it will lead to blood- taken in as a fact, not as an opinion ; it is so,
shed between the different states. Talk and no politician ought to be allowed to obscure
·about our finances. It may stagger hon. . these all-important facts. The common antithesis exhibited in every newspaper every daymembers when I tell them that the gold
" capital and labour "-is a false antithesis-a
which has been dug out of the bowels of fallacy of the worst kind. .Every ''labourer."
Australia amounts to £800,000,000 in is also a "capitalist" when he saves a sixpence,
value.
What bas become of that and still more a capitalist when he uses it as a
means of getting another sixpence. Every capi·. £800,000,000 1 For many. years past we talist
is also a labourer when he exercises forehave been collecting custom duties, and thought in storing income, and still more a
labourer
when.he risks his savings or his storage
what has become of that money 1 On the
question of postage, and to show how in any commercial ·enterprise.
When the muscle labourer• is asleep, minds
people in the country districts a·re handi- around
him are constantly saving and planning
. capped, I might mention that the residents for the employment of savings upon Bervices
of Sydney can send a telegr-am for ()d., and useful to the world. When the niuscle labourer
a letter for ld. ; but unfortunate people in aw<tkes he may find some "great work " projected or begun on which his special kind of labour
the country have to pay 2d. on a letter.
can find a very highly paid employment. He
The day will come when we shall have has had no share in the saving i10r in the plans
universal penny postage. I have here a for the spending of it. He has had no share in
letter, which I desire to read, giving the the spirit of enterprise nor in the ingenuity
these plans involve.. He has no share in
opinion of the Duke of Argyll with regard which
the risk. He has been passive and inert. Yet
to the labour party in the old country. I
the politicians tell him that he " created" all
think it is a very valuable letter, and the the results, that all wealth ccmes from his
labour party ought to take it to heart muscles. I have no confidence in the ultimate
rationality or reasonableness of the human race.
· seriously.
But we are all liable to "strong delusions that
Some time ago Mr. John Ogilvy, Secretary
()f the Dundee Hadical Association, wrote to the
Duke of Argyll asking his opinion as a social
and economic thinker, regarding the desirability
()f labour representation in parliame·nt, the
necessity for the reduction of the hours of
labour, and the probable result-baneful or
beneficial-from a scientific attitude, of " The
New Unionism," alias" The Labour Question."
His Grace sent the following reply to Mr.
Ogih·y:
London, May 19, iS91.
Sir,-You ask my opinion on "the labour question," and you express a strong opinion against
«politicians " as men who grapple vaguely
with the subject in mere party interests, and
not on "ethical principles." Allow·me to point
()Ut in the first place that the phrase ... the
labour question" is one so vague and wide that
Jit may inean anything or everything connected
with the constitution of human society. vVe
must define what we mean by "labour'' before
we can solve any question concerning it. Do we
mean manual labour alone or principally? Do
we mean to exclude from "labour" all "brain
work " and all "brain workers?" If we do we
.are imposing an artificial meaning on the word
"labour." Hence comes the notion commonly
impressed npon the wage-earning classes by the
politicians you refer to, that they are the "creators of all wealth." This is not true of
« labour " even in its proper sense-of all
[Dr. Ross.
we should believe in lies ;" and such delusions
have been often lasting and often disastrous.
Hence the imm0nse responsibility of the "politicians" who do not speak in a spirit of absolute
loyalty to facts and to truth.
The wage-earning classes are full of very high
qualities. Look at the noble courage and
humanity constantly shown by miners when
accidents occur to their fellows-a courage so
noble and pathetic in many cases that the courage of the soldier in battle pales before it in the
scale' of human virtue. But the wage-earning
classes are not pre-eminently reflective, and
when more highly educated men tell them what
is not true as to the function of manual labour
in. the world it is only natural that they should
often be deceived. If they can believe that they
are the creators of all wealth, it is only natural
that they should he discontented until all wealth
belongs to them. If they can only see that this
doctrine is a gross delusion, then they will see
that the trne "dignity of labour" lies in recognising the fact, which is, that mind, in all its
manifestations, and not muscle, is the great
factor in all human progress. This will teach
them to put its true value on their own skill,
whatever it inay be ; it will incite to exerciRe
mind themselves in thrift and in storing, and in
the good use of the storages they may succeed
in making.
All "organisations of labour " ought to be regarded from this point of view-as means to an
Gove:nor:'s Speech :
[1
.JULY,
(lnd-the great end of disciplining and educat,
ing mind in all the energies of foresight and of
enterprise-through which alone anything can
be done in the way of attaining permanent success in the higher aims of industrial life. ,
These are general principles-nothing more.
Questions of infinite variety may arise as regards
the application of them. But they are sound in
themselves ; and they are sufficient to condemn
much popular teaching and a good deal of popular action. It. cannot be right or reasonable
that mere muscular labour should seek to take
out of the hands of mental labour the whole control of enterprises in which muscle has had only
a very Aubordinate- share. Yet this has been, so
far as I can understand it, the spirit and the
aim of the "New Unionism."
If these remarks should be of any use I shall
be Yery glad. But this subject is immense-far
too large to be dealt with in correspondence.
i am sorry that I have occupied the House
for so long a time. I did not intend to do
s'o. On this censure motion I have gi\•en
my reasons why 1 decline to support the
Government. Owing to their reckless extravagancE', I feel it my bounden duty to
vote for the a.mendment of the leader of
the Opposition.
Mr. T. FITZPATRICK (The Murrumhidgee)[I2·23a.m.J: I amverysorryto.have
to follow an hon. gentleman who has ruade
so long and exhaustive a speech. I am also
sorry to see that that bon. gentleman has
gone back on the traditions of his political
life. As he has so often told us, he has
been in this chamber for twenty-two years,
and now he is not going to vote with the
Government which he has hitherto supported. The hon. member is respected on
all sides, and was always looked upon as
a strong supporter of this Government.
He still sits on the bench behind them,
but after the speech he has jnst delivered,
his proper place is a seat behind the leader
of the Opposition.
Dr. Ross : I did not say that I would
support the Opposition in everything, but
on this occasion I shall be bound to vote
with them!
Mr. T. FITZPATRICK: The hon.
member for Molong is one of my oldest
and most esteemed friends, and I regret that
now, in our old age, we should part compamy. I have always been glad to sit on
the same side as the bon. member for Molong, and my heart is now almost broken.
The leader of the Opposition was perfectly
within his rights in moving this amendment. At the commencement of a session, after a long recess, it is always.con-
1903.]
Address in Reply.
445
sidered to be a proper thing for the sense
of the House to be taken as to whether or
not the Government is worthy of support.
I am glad that the leader of the Opposition has moved this amendment, because
it will clear the political atmosphere ; and
when it is over we shall be able to set ourselves to work upon honest legislation,
and to transact the bnsiness that we. were
sent here to .do, instead of frittering away
the time of the House iR fruitless contention betweE>n the ins and the outs. With
regard to reduction of members, I must
say that I am not in. favour of it. We
know that in 1891, when the Parkes Government were in office, we had a parliament of 141 members. If the act then in
force had not been repealed, we should
have numbered 150 or 200 by this time.
Seeing that. we. now have women voters,
and the voting power is almost doubled, I
do not thirik we are at all too numerous
in this House. New South Wales is a.
very large country.
Mr. ARTHUR GRIFFITH : The bon. member's elE>ctorate is large enough !
Mr. T. FITZPATRICK : Yes, it islarge enoqgh for anyone to look after.,
We should not disturb the harmonywhicq·
now exists. We have as much to do now
as we had before federation. The Federal.
Government has taken over only a few
departments. We hear a great deal about
the financial position of the country; but.
we must bear in mind that we have had
terrible times to go through. It is ma,r:
vellous that we have not been bankrupt
long ago. Unfortunately, a great many
people on the land are bankrupt, and more
is the pity. That is .not owing to any
fault of their own, but owing to many
hardships and failures of crops. We cannot blame this Ministry ; they could not.
prevent the drought. Probably, if they had
looked out in time, they might have found.
a few Dr. McCarthys who could produce
rain. I do not believe in a referendum
on the question of a reduction of members.
We can leave that to be dealt with by the
electors at the next general election. Of
course, we know there are a lot of agitator&
and reformers abroad, who always want
reform when they are not on- the Government benches. It is wonderful, when they·
are in Opposition, ho!V keen they are for
certain reforms; but when they get on
the Government benches they always,
Eighth night.
446
Governor's Speecl•:
(ASSEMBLY.]
Address in Reply.
··~
want to postpone the evil day. Locat age Pensions Act has been grossly abused,·
government should precede reduction of and the sooner it is amended the better.
members. My electorate is quite large In Sydney a man was pointed out to me
enough, as the hon.·member for Waratah who goes and draws his pension money
has remarked.
I get £300 a year for and then puts it in the bank. I am told
representing that large constituency, and that that man has a good deal of property
it is one of the best in the state. At in Sydney. I know men who are able to
the same time I work very hard for ·do a day's work that are getting old-age
that £300, and I do not think my con- pensions and spending the money at the
stituents begrudge the money. In the 9th public-house. I know other cases in which
paragraph of his speech the Governor says, very old people have been refused pensions.
" I am able to congratulate you on the I know an old woman, eighty years of age,
breaking up of the drought." We are all who has not been able to get a pPnsion,
pleased that it is so. No doubt it is only whilst men sixty-five, who were well able
a partial break up, but I think we are at to work, are receiving pensions. I believe
the end of the drought, and I hope it will in the pension system, bnt I think it wants
be a long time before we experience any- remodelling. An amending bill ought to
thing of the sort again. The railways we be brought in very soon to put an end to
are told have been run at n dead loss existing abuses. I would ask the hon.
owing to the necessity of carrying starv- member for Goulburn whether it is a. fact
ing stock and fodder. Fancy a 6-ton that Captain Rossi is drawing an old-age
truck being run from one end of the state pension I
to the other for lOs. Then again the state
JY[r. AsHTON: I have heard that it is so!
has lost through the remission of interest
Mr. 'l'. FITZPATRICK : Is it not a
something like £250,000. Paragraph 16 disgrace 1 Is it not a fact that Captain
of the speech speaks of the necessity for a .Rossi made over all his property to.his
better and a more systematic method of wife, and that he drives in a carriage with
dealing with neglected children. I think her 1
it is desirable that we should have a
Mr. AsHTON: I have :never seen him in
better system of dealing with neglected a carriage!
children, and whh the children of widowed
Mr. T. FITZPATRICK: Is it a fact
mothers. I have known several cases in that he is drawing an old-age pension 7
which widows have endeavoured to get
Mr. AsHTON: I could not say. I have
children boarded out with them, and all heard so. He is a constituent of the hon.
that the department will allow them is member for King Division now!
2s. for each child, though they pay 5s.
Mr. T. FITZPATRICK: In the early
each when they board them out to days many foreigners .came to our goldstrangers, some of whom treat the child- fields, and some of them are now old men
ren in a most disgraceful manner. Why who, after spending forty or fifty years in
should not the state pay a lit.tle more helping to build up Australia, having
when boarding out state children with their failed to become naturalised, are unable to
mothers 1 Surely they can afford to pay obtain old-age pensions.
That is not
4s. for a child living with its mother when right. I think that a man who has spent
they pay 5s. to a stranger 7 Paragraph 17 fifty years in Australia, no matter where
of the speech says :
he came from, has earned an old-age pension. We are told in paragraph 18 of the
While no reduction will be made in the
weekly sum now allowed by the state as an oldspeech that an amending land bill is to be
age pension, nor any increase in the age at
introduced ; but we do not want a new
which an applicant is entitled to receive the
land bill so much as the proper adminissame, a measure will be brought forward, at the
tration of the old act. I can show that.
earliest possible date, to so amend the administration of the act as to abolish the abuses which
On the 5th of N ovem her last I questioned
now hamper its operation, and thus effect very
the Minister about a large area of land
large economies.
close to Ganmain, in my electorate. I
I strongly advocated on more than one asked what was the area, and the reply
occasion the old-ag~ pensions principle, was that it was 37,418 acres. It fell into
and I believe in it as strongly now as I
the hands of the Crown on the lOth June,
did then; but, to my knowledge, the Old- 1902. I asked whether that land would .
[Mr. T. Fitzpatrick.
Governor's Speech:
[1
JULY,
1903.]
Address in Reply.
44'T
be made available for selection, 'and the living, and not to send them away to the
Minister replied that as soon as certain back country. When we have such a big
exchanges were put through, the land area as 40,000 acres of Crown land availwould be made available; but that land is able, why not utilise it before we go in for
still unavailable. I wish the Minister were closer settlement 1
Mr. CLARA : Is that 40,000 acres fit for
here, because I want to tell him a little of
my mind about that area of land. The closer settlement 1
Mr. T. FITZPATRICK : It is ; and it
exchange proposed is some land belonging
to a company called the Australian and is only 2 miles from a railway-station. A
·Scottish Investment Company, who pro- good deal has been said about the' Police
pose to surrender to the Crown 4,417!z Superannuation Fund. There are many
acres in exchange for an equal area in police who would be very glad to leave
another place. They want a piece of land the service if they could get back the
close to the township of Ganmain, a piece money they have paid into that fund. It
of the best land in the district. 'They is an unfair thing that men should pay
want to get a piece of land that is twice into a fund of that description, and then
the value of that which they offer for it. find, when they require their money, that
'l'he local land board twice refused the it is insolvent. Many civil servants have
application, then the company appealed to been paying into the superannuation fund
the Land Court from the decision of men for many years. In the electorate I reprewho know more about the land than these sent, not long ago a certain official, after
gentlem.en who come from Sydney, and having contributed to the fund for twentywho have never seen it. I wish hon. mem- two years, died. He left )::tis widow and
bers-to bear in mind that the Secretary six young children almost destitute. His
for Lands says there have been no ex- widow had a house, and because of that
fact she was unable to obtain any of the
changes.
Mr. AsHTON : It does not matter much money he had paid into the fund. The
Civil Service Board informed me that so
how you speak so long as you do not vote.
That is all that the Secretary for I-ands long as she had a house valued at £200
· she could obtain nothing. It is only fair
cares about !
Mr. T. ·FITZPATRICK : The papers that we should return to that woman the
in regard to those lands are now lying in amount of money .which her husband had
the Lands Office awaiting the Minister's paid into the fund whilst in the service of
yes or no. Is the Minister game to say the state. The board admittf'd that the
" ves " 1 If he does, he will raise such a case was a very hard one ; but they said
storm about his ears that he will never that they could not go beyonu the act.
forget it. I do not think the Minister The act requires amendment. The man
·would do such a' treacherous thing. Here was fool enough to die before he retired,
are 37,000 acres of land. locked up, and and the consequence was that his wife was
.yet it is the best land I have ever seen. unable to obtain any of the money he had
Hon. members should not tolerate that paid into the fund. That is a great injusstate of things.
tice. We have hoard a great deal about
Mr. E. M. CLARK : The Government the extravagance of the Government. I
suppose I am no better nor worse than the
are deaf to the hon. member's criticism !
Mr. T. FITZPATRICK : No doubt, average member of Parliament, but ·I
when the new land bill is introduced, it know that I aru,unable to get half enough
will be found to be a very liberal one. out of them. I am at them every day
People are looking for it. They look upon trying to get more money; but I cannot get
the Secretary for Lands as a heaven-born it. I suppose that other hon. members are
Minister. I hope he will keep up his just as badly served as I am, and no doubt
reputation. If he only exercises his bril. those who talk so much against the Goliant brain, and frames a good and liberal vernment and want to oust them, because,
measure, his name will go down to pos- . they say, they are extravagant and wasteful,
terity as a model secretary for lands. We are the worst offl'>nders. In connection.with
hear a good deal about the Closer Settle- . the distress caused by the drought, we have
ment Act. It would be a very good thing had a Lord Mayor's Fund in this pros·to settle the people where they can get a perous city of Sydney; but I believe that
-Eighth night.
Governor's Speech:
(ASSEMBLY.]
the starting of that fund has done more
to injure our credit in England than anything else. I would rather see a good
system of relief works carried out. ·when
I say "relief works," I mean works of a
· beneficial and reproductive character, such
as road works, ·works of water conservation, which would be a great boon and not
a waste of money, and light lines of railway. I do not want to pauperise the
people, but to give them ·legitimate employment upon works, which, in the near
future, will be reproductive. We do not
want to throw money away in sand-shifting, as was done in the time of Mr. Reid.
Mr. E. M~ CLARK : What do the
O'Sullivan metal-breakers earn 1
:M:r. T. FITZPATRICK: I do not believe in that kind of employment. I believe in profitable work being carried out,
-:and I do not like to see men pauperised.
I would make the men work, and give
them a fair day's wage for a fair day's
work of a proper n11ture. For instance,
I would employ them in constructing approved railwa.ys, and in carrying out works
-Qf water conservation. Some hon. members do not know the great value of water
·in a dry country. It is one of the greatest
:boons that could be bestowed, and too
much money could not be expended on a
1arge system of waterr conservation. I
may mention one personal incident. Upon
my own estate I never allow a drop of
water to go off the ground, but impound
every drop. I have tanks and dams at
·every outlet. I think that that might
be done on a large scale throughout the
·state. A good many hon. members talk
glibly of financing, and say that our
finances are in a very low condition. In
my opinion, when hon.members do nothing
:but abuse somebody else, it is a very ungentlemanly way of carrying on debate.
"'When yon have a bad case, abuse the
other side " is a. very oJd adage of the
legal profession ; but "abuse is no argument." I heard hon. members on the
Qther side of the House twitting the
Prime Minister, and saying that he has
-done this, that, and the other, and it goes
.forth to the country people that he should
have had the duty taken off fodder. If
:hon. members knew anything abou-t finan·.cing or the tariff, they would have known
. that it would have been playing into the
,hands of the importers to have taken the
[Mr. T. Fitzpatrick.
Address in Reply.
duty off fodder. The importers have voted
against protection, because they would get
the benefit of. free-trade; they would be
the first thieves; they would take the first
half of the profit, and the middleman would
take another portion of it, whilst the consumer would have to pay both of them.
An HoN. ME~IBER : That is a free-trade
principle !
Mr. T. FITZPATRICK: It is a freetrade principle that will not stand investigation. I came into the House a moderate
protectionist, and I think that we might
now let the question of free-trade and protection alone, because it is dealt with by
nnoiher legislature.' The hon. member for
Rylstone made a nasty sneering remark in
regard to the Prime Minister. Hon. members who go into the bush will always find
little black ants there. If one of these
ants get on to you, it will bite you, and
then you squash it. Hon. members who
sneeringly refer to a man supremely above
them, both in intellect and every other
way, belong to insect life.
Mr. SPEAKER : Order!
Mr. T. FITZPATRICK: I shall vote
for the Government, until they prove unworthy of my confidence. I do not go
about "ratting," but I am consistent, and
as long as I am returned, I shall do my
duty to the best of my ability to the state
and to my constituents.
Mr.EDENGEORGE(Sydney-Belmore)
[12·57 a:m.J: I am glad an opportunity
has come at last for me to explain my
position. I am going to preface rriy remarks by replying to a few hon. members who have gone out of their way to
grossly insult me during this debate..
Although the Prime Minister has stated
that he deprecated the attempts to lielittle members, still his supporters, and
even one of his coll-eagues, have gone
almost to extremes to produce exaspera"
tion on my part by making remarks concerning my transition from their party
to this side of the House. I will first of
all deal with the remarks of the Secretary
for Public Works. That bon. gentleman,
in opening a bridge the other day, in the
electorate of the hon. member for Northumberland, made a statement which, I
say, degrades his position as a minister ;
for i,t is degrading for a minister to try to
belittle members of the House by making
the statement he did. In referring .to
Governor's Speech:
[1
JULY,
1903.]
Add1·ess in Reply.
449
those who have seen fit to leave his side in his speeches, and attempted to ridicule
of the House, he hinted at ::;omething me. I fail to see why this hpn. member
almost worse than corruption, and told should exhibit such personal feelings tothe pnblic in plain language that each one wards me. I almost thought that he let
of those members had some selfish and the cat out of the bag the other night. I
private interests in view, and he specially am one of those unfortunate persons who
dwelt on that to-night; in fact until he own racehorses, and there is a lot of miserwas pulled up, he was making a most able people who come to an owner on a
gross charge against one of the latest con- racecourse, and ask for information which
verts-I mean the hon. member for Sturt. the owner gives in an honest way. They
I intend to show what my position is. think that your horse is going to win, and
The hon. member for Northumberland also they put 5s. on it. This gentleman put 5s.
·made a gross attack upon me. I have on my horse, and lost, and I have not yet
defied any of them to quote any speeches heard the last of it; but if he had come out
of mine which would show inconsistency or last Saturday he might have been able to
change of opinion on policy. I have defied get even. These gross attacks made upon
the~ to show any shady transaction of
me are totally undeserved, because I have
mine. They did not take up that challenge, done nothing to this bon. gentleman.
but they spoke of me in conjunction with Surely there ought to be a certain amount
the hori. member for Argyle, when detail- of brotherly feeling between bon. members,
ing something that occurred, or which is even if we do differ in our opinions. An
supposed to have occurred in connection bon. member should not come here and
with that·gentleman-atransaction which, impute corruptness to another hon. mem'if the statement of the hon. member for ber, and call him a "rat." Must an hon.
Northumberland were true, I myself member sit here and listen to such names?
would not defend. It imputed corruption Deplorable as the scene was that took
of the grossest kind-that because the place the other evening, I may say that I
hon. member could not get a billet with a have beeri so exasperated at not having a
salary of £600 a year he had come over chance to reply to these men that I have
to this side of the House. What could be hardly been able to keep within bounds.
a grosser imputation than that 1 I know Flesh and blood can only stand a certain
nothing of that bon. gentleman's case ; he amount, and "'hen a man goes beyond the
has answered for himself. But if the ordinary rules of debate to defame anaccusations in his case are as true as those other's character, although that other
that have been hurled at me, I am inclined ·member may be honest in going to the
to believe the hon. member for Argyle. other side of the House, he can exaRperate
The bon. member for Northumberland him almost beyond control, When that
·not knowing anything of that sort to unfortunate scene took place the whole of
impute against me, coupled my name with my sympathies went out to the man who
·<that of the hon. member for Argyle, and had to defend himself even with his fists.
said, "That is the class of men that have There are certain limits beyond which no
gone over to your side." I refuse to have man should go. Some men hold their
·my coming from that side of the House to character dearer than the seat they
.this associated with any other member's occupy. A man has his wife and family
changing from one party to another. to think of, and wishes to leave a fair
Each man must stand on his own basis. name behind him. The privileges of
He has come over here either honestly or Parliament may restrain him to a cerdishonestly, and if an imputation can be tain extent, but no one would be en·made against one member that is no reason titled to blame him if he resented such
why we should class every man's change accusations and insults. Before I go into
of policy alike. Then there is the hon. the question as to what induced me to
member for Wilcannia. I do not pay come over here, let me show whether my
much attention to that hon. gentleman, action is consistent or not. I have heard
'because, unfortunately, some men seem to something eaid about the leader of the Opbe imbued with a personal grievance position getting hold of me, but I ask that
against a member, and this hon. member hon. gentleman or any member of his
nas before this session grossly attacked me party to speak out. Let me assure hon ..
Eighth· night.
450
Goverrwr's Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.)
members tl1at, I did not consult any member of this Parliament as to whether I
should make a change. I did not consult·
anything but my own personal honor and
feelings. My original letter was written
in my office at Manly. I went into the
question very seriously as to whether I
should resign. I went back to the days
when protection and free-trade divided the
House, when there was a clear line of demarcation between parties,and.when there
was a greater responsibility on the pat't of
a man to keep to his party, because the
fiscal policy of a country is a dominating
policy. It is the greatest policy that a
man can be elected or rejected upon. In
the olden days a man was selected as a
candidate on the main question of whether
he was a free-trader or a protectionist.
The protectionist party would only ask
him that question; they would not ask
him whether he believed in old-age pensions, or this or that question. And the
party that sat on that side of the House
would be 11.ll protectionists, and those who
sat on this side of the House would be
free-traders.
Mr. CRICK : The proper side for freetraders!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Let it be so.
I am not a free-trader, and do not desert
my principles. I find that even in those
days men left parties when they found they .
were not sincere. They even left their
own party which they were elected to
support. They voted against it and put
it out of.office_ when they found their party
was not sincere. And I find that in those
days there was no paym~nt of members. I
for one say that it was an unfortunate incident in the history of this state that payment of members was introduced, because
it protects Parliament largely from a dissolution. The best evidence of t-hat is to
be found by turning to the history of the
state. I have lived now some forty years
and have looked into history. I have been
acquainted with the older public mim of
this state, and I have found that a parliament rarely existed its full life in those
days. It was nothing to see a general
election held almost twice in a year.
Mr. HoLLIS :. Was that any benefit 1
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Of course,itwas
a benefit. It showed that men had not'the
consideration of £300 a year before them.
Mr. EnnEN : That is a nice imputation!
. [Mr. Eden George.
Address in Reply.
Mr. WILLIS : It is a cowardly thing to
say, anyhow !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: There are some
men in the labour party that I admire as
good, outspoken, honest men. J admire
the hon. member for Kahibah; so much so,
that at the time the Arbitration Court
was being formed, and a man had to be
elected for the employees, I, speaking at
Belmore. Division,. told the workmen they
would make a mistake if they did not select
him to represent them.
Mr. EsTELL: Why is the bon. member
getting on to the labour members 1
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Matters have
not been minced in my case, and I am
going to state the truth-cost whit it
will. I am not going to toady to any
man. I am not now speaking disrespectfully' of any man, but I am going to show
where the labour party are wrong, and,I
invite them to a serious consideration of
my remarks. I cannot hope to be always
in the right, but I am going to give my
opinions, and I trust the labour party will
take them to heart for what they are
worth. The hon. gentleman last night
did me a great injustice. I have rarely
seen such an attack 'made by the hon.
member. He coupled my coming over
here with that of the hon. member for
King Division. He read from Hansard
a speech of that hon. member, in which
the bon. member made out a splendid case,
and said that the Opposition were responsible for the chaos in the finances. The
hon. member couples me with, the hon.
member for King Division, and says :
"These are the men you would be glad _to
kick out of your place." I have got to
stand all this, and I am not to have any
personal instincts. I am to swallow insults and say nothing againRt the labour
party. I shall say what I think of them.
I am honest in my belief, and I am not
going to say anything through ill-feeling.
Mr. EnnEN : Then I did not speak
honestly~
Mr·. EDEN GEORGE : I have always
in this Parliament studied the law of
courtesy under which I was brought up)
but when I am surrounded by men who
break through all bounds of courtesy I will
express my opinion about them. I have
lived here for forty years; I have a wife
and family, and for their sake and mine I
shall show whether these men's conscienceE!
Governor's Speech:
[1
JULY,
might not be looked into. I now invite
hon. members to consider my actions to
see whether there is any ground for imputing corruption to me. That is to say
that, in coming to this side of the House,
some personal gain was to be attached to
it.
Mr. EDDEN : Who said that 1
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: It has been imputed.
Did not the hon. member for
Wilcannia and the hon. member for Northumberland say it, and did not even the
Secretary for Public Works say it 1 It
was imputed last night.
Mr. EDDEN : I rise to order. The hon.
member is now charging me with imputing
corruption to him in my remarks. I say
that during my remarks last night I never
mentioned the hon. member's narue, and
in the whole speech, corruption was never
mentioned by me !
·
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I accept the
hon. member's denial, but I certainly
thought last night that the hon. mP.m her
was indorsing the direct remarks made by
the hon. mem her for Northum berland and
the Secr.etary fol' Public Works. 1 accept
the bon. member's denial, but I was utterly
surprised; knowing his character, that he
should impute improper motives. The
hon. member, when making out, perhaps
a good case against another man of glaring
inconsistency, classed me with him,. and
said : "These are the men you would be
glad to kick out." If I had the indelicacy
to say that about the hon. member, he
would almost want me to meet him out- •
side.
Mr. EDDEN : Does the bon. member say
that I made such a statement 1
Mr. EDEN GEORGE : I think the
bon. member heard the hon. member for
Northumberland say so, and the Secretary
for Public Works, in opening the Norton
bridge-a nice name for a bridge, and I
think they will change it afterwards-referred by name to members, who, he said,
had deserted the ranks of their party.
Traitors he called them. Then he said,
" We will show that those men have not
deserted with honest motives, but for a .
selfish interest." Is not that a charge of
corruption ?
Mr. EDDEN: The bon. member cannot
blame me for that !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I thought the
hon. member indorsed those remarks last
1903.]
~Address in Reply.
451.
night, but now that he says he did not, r
accept the explanation. The Secretary for
Lands the other nigpt used an expression
which he withdrew in parlialllentary terms,
but he backs his opinion. He is not carrying out what the PrimP. Minister stated.
Mr. ORICK : What did I say 1
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: The hon. member called me a rat, and another member
a thief. He immediately apologised, but
he was obliged to do -so. Such a state-.
ment published in the newspapers must
tell against me in private life as well as
in public life, and my private character is
dearer to me than public life.
Mr. ORICK : If the hon. gentleman goes
to the law courts, I shall not claim privilege .7
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: The bon. member is an able lawyer, and he knows that
as much as that and morl! can be said
about a public man and damages cannot
be obtained. If the hon. member called •
me a thief, it might be different; but to
say that a man is a political rat would not
entitle him to claim damages. If a man
enters public life, you can go fifty times
further in the way of slander than you
could with regard to a private individual.
I draw attention to this fact-and I do
not wish to be personal-but it is evident
that, in the administration of this Government, the Secretary for Public Works is
really Prime Minister, and the Prime
Minister does not take up his proper position as Prime Minister. I am only referring to administration. If a man is weak,
or does not take up his position properly
and assert himself as prime minister, it is
quite right to call attention to it. I am
not imputing personal corruption. If I
thought there was such a thing I would
state it in this Chamber. The Prime Minister implored members to put aside personalities. He userl words to this effect :
"I do abhor this belittling of members."
Now, as Prime Minister, he should interfere and check his ministers.
Sir JOHN SEE : What is the bon. member doing when he says that the Secretary
for Public Works' is the Prime Minister !
Mr. EDEN G l£0RG E : I have said that
when I find the bonds of courtesy have
been broken with regard to myself, and
when my character is attacked, I am going
to turn the sword and use the same
weapons upon those who use them to me.
Eighth night.
452
Governor's Speech :
(ASSEMBLY.l
Address in Reply.
The Prime ~1inister made a remark on but I want other men to pay the same re-that occasion which was creditable to his spect to me. If motives are imputed to
position ; but he shoul.d have made it man- me, I will not use the same weapons, bedatory on his ministers to carry out his cause I will not make charges against any
views. When they made such remarks as man's character ; but where I can prove
I have quoted, and when the Secretary for what, in my opinion, is bad administration,
Public Works made remarks here with re- I will give it to them up to the hilt, and I.
gard to the hon. member 'for Sturt for will not spare them one iota. Now I come
which he was called to order, the Prime to my own action in the past. For nearly
Minister should have asserted his position, ten years I have b.;,en connected with the •
and should not allow these ministers to protectionist party, and it is only some five
impute corruption to any member who or six years ago that I became a candidate
at Wickham against Mr. Fegan. I think I
comes over .to this side.
Mr. FERGUSON : The Minister was not. should have won the seat but for the action.
game to do it when I was here. It was a of another p.erson. I have never regretted
that I did not win the seat, because M_r.
lie!
- Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I have pon- Fegan, who is now a member of the Go-,
dered over in my mind how it is that the vernment, I think is one of the most honormembers of this Government_always assail able men in this House. At the last general
every man's character if he comes over to election they still expected me tq stand,
this side. It must seem strange to the and, to show that I have some strength in
public that every man who leaves their Newcastle, I may mention that at the sena,side should be accused of corruption. It torial elections at Newcastle I polled 1,000·
is not merely one or two; we have seen votes more than 1\fr. R. E. O'Connor, and
six or eight come . over, and every one of 2,000 more than any other senator. I think
them is charged with corruption. I can I can. show, therefore, that I have a little
only ascribe it to one object. When I was support at Wickham. At Tighe's Hill I
in the Ministerial ranks, I knew the ter- actually topped the poll for the Senate.
Mr. EDDEN: The bon. member would
rible dissatisfaction that existed there with
regard to the Government. I expected get about fifty votes there !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I want to show
when I came over, from conversations with
other members, that at least ten of them that I owe nothing to the Government,
but the Government are under obligations
would follow. Their speeches proved it.
The speech . of the last hon. member who to me. Before th<J elections came on it
addressed the House attacked the Govern- was generally expected that I should
ment land administration, and several mem- stand for Wickham, but in the meantime
. hers have delivered opposition speeches. .Mr. Fegan had come over to our, side .
And why should a mem her who crosses the The labour party went over too, but I do
floor be subject to such insults as we have not say that there was any ratting. In my
had to endure 1 The only explanation is opinion there was no ratting. If they bethat the Government part.ywantto frighten lieved that they were doing right, they
members. If a member comes over here, were justified in changing sides. No one
he is to be termed a political rat, to have then called out that they should go to the
his name written all over the walls of the country. I went to the meeting that Mr.
city as that of a traitor to his party. It is Fegan was addressing, and said that I
coming to a pretty pass when the public wanted them to know that I belonged to
life of the state is to be carried on in that the protectionist party, that Mr. :Fegan
way, when men cannot differ honestly and had come over to that party, and that I
be treated with respect by their opponents. was not going to oppose him. The general
If ministers take part in actions so belit- election came on, and I was acting with the
tling to the public life of the state, I look selection committee. I did not want to beforward to the future with a feeling of come a candidate. I fought for the party
great regret as to what this Parliament before, and I maintain that my action won,
will dwindle into. I give every credit to them two seats, that for Phillip Division,
and that which Mr. Taylor obtained from
any man who honestly differs fl'Om me. I
Mr. Smith on petition. The party knew
do not look upon him as a fool, because I
think that our differences produce wisdom; that I did not wish to stand, and the Secre·
[Mr .. Eden George.
Governor's
Speecl~:
[1
JULY,
tary for Public Works took me to his office,
where he kept me till 12 o'clock, begging
of me to stand for Belmore Division. The
reason was that we recognised that Dr.
Graham was a strong man, and we wanted
to keep him in his place so that he would
not be able to go round to the other electorates. That was what brought me to
Belmore Division. The Attorney-General
at that time was very unpopular with
the labour party. My electorate is the
smallest in the state. It is so small that
a cricketer could throw a ball from one
end of it to the other. Within that area
there are thousands of people, and in many
cases three or four families li•;e in one
house. The Town Clerk in visiting the
district said that some parts of it were
worse than the blackest slums of London.
In addressing the electors I said that there
did not appear to be much difference between the policies of the two parties. At
that time it was notorious that their manifestoes were almost identical. I said :
1903.]
Address in Reply.
of existence. I am going to show where
I think the Government has been at
fault, and how I experienced strain
after strain, until at lengtl1 I felt that
I could support them no longer.
I
will ask bon. members, at the conclusion
of my speech, to say whether, holding the
opinions I do, I was justified in walking
across the chamber. Before doing so, I
wish to draw attention to a matter which
has, perhaps, escaped attention. I know
that, when Tamwortlf was lost, there was
a general feeling that the Government
were going down. I had held my hand
for a certain reason, namely, that the
leader of the Opposition had not staLed his
policy. I must say that, in common with
other people, I wondered. what he was
going to do. It is one thing to be dissatisfied with the people you are with, and
it is another thing to know where you are
going to if you leave them. When, however, the leader of the Opposition went to
Tamworth and delivered his famous speech,
and laid down such a clearly defined policy,
I have been allied with this party so long
that I determined to give them every oppor·
I at once said " That is my man; it does
tunity to carry out their policy.
not need another day's delay on my part.
I referred to arbitration and other subjects.
Delay means that if I wait .until after the
I could speak in .reference to these mat- Tamworth election, people will say that I
wanted to see which way the cat jumped;"
ters because I had lived in N e"' Zealand.
Mr. ARCHER : They say the lion. mem-. I defy any man to honestly say that he
knew how the election would go. It was
ber was a perfect nuisance there !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Such a public a toss up. In fact, in one of the newsnuisance that men who once defamed me papers, in opposition to the Government,
now give me credit for my work. I was it was predicted that the Government canelected on a certain platform. The very didate would have a small majority. My
essence of my election and of my speeches resignation was in three or four days bewas to this effect: I said, "Now we have fore the polling took place.
federation, an_d the main portiort of our
Mr. ARCHER: That is .very different;
services has been taken over by the Federal from what the bon. member told me!
Government, but there is one great work
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I never told
before Parliament, and that is the work of anyone anything different. The dates are
economy and reduction of members." I
to be seen.
was very emphatic about that. I pointed
Mr. ARCHER: The hon. member told
out that that was the first part of the me that it was because his brother did not
Government programme. I was elected in get £3,000 for his lease!
respect of measures, not in respect of men.
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I never told
Policy is your first consideration; party is
the
bon. member any such thing ; it is
your second consideration.
An RoN. MEMBER : Then why does not absolutely untrue.
Mr. SPEAKER : I hope the bon. member
the bon. member join the labour party 1
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Because I do for Burwood will cease interrupting !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE : I am going to
not believe in them. I have always opposed
them, and I always will under their pre- refer to the correspondence which •took
sent system. I abhor to hear men butter- place. In giving the reasons for my withing and .flattering the labour party, when drawal, I spoke about the resumptions at
I know they would like to wipe them out the railway-station.
Eighth night.
R
454
Governor's Speech :
(ASSEMBLY.]
Address in Reply.
Mr. ARCHER: No, the bon. member did does not know when to remO\·e. At this
··time he happened to obtain an offer of
not ; it was in this House !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: For heaven's good premises.
sake hold your tongue !
.
An RoN. MEMBER:. Why did he not go 1
Mr. SPEAKER : I will not warn the hon.
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: The Governmember for Burwood any more !
ment simr ly took up the position of a landMr. EDEN GEORGE: I am in a posi- lord. My brother is a lessee with a ten
tion which is made delicate by these in- years' lease. He was told "You will get
sinuations. I· never feared opposition, but no compensation if you go out of your own
as I had to sit silently and listen to gross accord."
attacks, surely I may be allowed to deliver
Mr. WILLIS: The Government told him
some collected thoughts. In writing out to go out and he would not go !
my withdrawal, I could not enter into the
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: The Governdetails of Government mismanagement; ment did not tell him to go out. He was
but I stated certain things with reference told the place had been resumed. He is a
to the resumptions, and if anything can man. in businP.ss, with a ten years' lease of
proved to be incorrect I am prepared the premises from the landlord, and he gets
to resign my seat and not to enter Par- notice of resumption from the Government.
liament again. Certain resumptions were He knows that when the street is made 'he
made on account of the railway-station. .will have to remove, because his place is
I practically and inferentially charged the where the street would be. . When is he
Government with rushing into resumptions to remove 1
Mr. WILLIS: 'When the street is made!
without first seeing whether they had the
.funds to pay for them. I myself do not
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: That is the
blame them for that work. I think that point. I say that the Government should
'.eventually it will be a good work, but we extend every consideration to a business
should not resume properties when we have man and say, "We will not want to make
.not the money to pay for them. I happened that street for twelve months. Hyou like
to quote some humbugging which was togo out of your premises within six months
going on, and perhaps that was unfortu- you can do so, and it will not affect your
nate. A man who has no dishonest motive claim for compensation." But imagine a
:may easily fall into a trap and give unscru- man going out bf the premises when he is
pulous opponents an opportunity of perse- practically in a house belonging to the
..cuting him. I happened to mention a Government, and they take up the position
brother of mine who has a claim there, of landlord. Perhaps I was unfortunate,
but I can assure hon. members I do not I believe I was, in mentioning my own
1mow:wbat it is. I simply know that he and brother's casP, because there was really no
-several others came to me stating that need for me to mention it. I might have
they had go~ notice of resumption, and mentioned others. The Prime Minister,
-that they had to remove. My brother as a rule, conducts the business of his
.hafl been a dentist in that neighbourhood office in a highly honorable way, but he
for about twenty years, and he was suddenly certainly did go out of his way in that
told that his business premises were re- case, and made a sneering remark about
sumed. A professional man has to obtain its being my brother's. On the following
proper premises and to transfer his prac- .day I quo.ted the case of a draper in the
tice. I know that at one time he was almost same neighbourhood. The Prime Minister
ruined. We had to assist him through a in his remarks published in the papers said
Temoval. In this instance he asked when that I quoted the case of a dt·aper who had
he had to remove, but got no answer.· :i:Ie not received his money. I said that I chal.could get no satisfaction at all. I told him lenged him to show that any private firm
to write to Mr. Fell, the agent, and get had received any money. I gave that open
him to adjust his claim. I do not know challenge to the Prime Minister in the
what his claim is, but I know that he had papers. I may say that originally the
obtained no satisfaction, and that no at- son-in-law of the man who owned the.
tempt has been made to deal with it. He premises conducted the business, and there
has never been told that his claim is too was an agreement arrived at .as to the
high. He has been left in a dilemma, and amount of rent to be paid ; but imme-
be
.[Mr. Eden·George.
Governor's Speech:
ll
JULY,
dia·tely after the son-in-law went iuto possession of the premises, extra rent was demanded by the Government. They increased his rent by £1 per week, which
made the rent a very big one for him to
.pay, so much so that he left his private·
house and went to live with his fa mil v
over the business, in order to pay the G~­
·vernment the extra £1 pe1· week. I had
the papers in my possession, showing that
the Government wrote to him and sent
him an account for arrears of rent covering a period of three months before he got
notice of increase of rent.
vVhen he
brought the notice to me, I said "Do not
.take any notice of it. They have no
claim against you ~n that way." They did
not afterwards put the claim in legal
form, but they sent a letter, which I also
have, stating, "If this claim for arrears is
not paid you will get notice to quit." He
was told that if he did not pay an extraordinary amount, which no hon. member would say he could be legally called
upon to pay, he would get notice to quit.
I ask the hon. gentleman at the head of
the Government if that is not the fact 1
Sir Jon:'< SEE : From whom was the
notice 7
Mr. EDEN GEORGE·: From the resumption officers.
Sir J OH:'< SEE : Wl10 were they 7
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Thehon. member knows the proper officers. I will
undertake to show the Prime Minister all
the papers if he wishes to see them.
Sir JOHN SEE : I do not want to see
them ; but did the notice come from the
Government 7
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: It came from
the resumption board.
Sir JOHN SEE : This is a paltry sort of
thing to bring up here l
Mr. EDEN GliJORGE: It is not paltry.
If this were the only case I would not
mind, but I could mention case after case
of the same kind. It seems that all the
officers, whether from instruction or not,
are squeezing all the money possible out
of people, so as to give the Government a
surplus or to reduce the deficit. I said
six months ago that the Government were
galloping to a deficiency, and I can see
now that my remarks were, unfortunately,
only too true. The Prime Minister .is a
man of great commercial ability. I have
had .some considerable transactions, but
1903.]
~
Address in Reply.
455
nothing ever astounded me more than the
bon; gentleman's statement published in
the newspapers in answer to me. As
an excuse for the Government's treat-.
ment of this man the Prime Minister
said it was understood that there was
a verbal agreement. between the father
and son-in-law that the latter should
pay a rent of £5·a week, and that on this
verbal agreement the amount of compensation was fixed and paid. I challenged the
Prime Minister the next day. Both those
men deny that any such arrangement .was
made between them. I have only their
word, but is not the balance of evidence
on their side 7 ·will the Prime Minister
admit that the Government are so lax in
their administration that they pay compensation on a verbal agreement between
a father and son-in-law 7 What a gross
absurdity in business l It gives weight to
these men's assertions that no such agreement was made. I say the matter should
not have been arranged on that basis, and
that if it were, that alone should be sufficient to warrant a vote of censure on the
Government. I do not wish to refer to
those hon. members who have recently
changed their seats in the House, nor to
those who changed their party when Mr.
Reid was in office. One of the most respected members, the hori. member for
Goulburn, then saw fit to· vote against his
party. vVhen we see man after man coming
over to this side, there must be something
radically wrong in the handling of the state
ship. Let me ask the Secretary o£ Works,
who hurled the charge of selfish inter('lst
against us, what he has to say of that
white-haired old gentleman, .whose character is as white as his hair, and who
announced that after twenty-two years, he
is forced to leave the party to-night~ That
should be evidence to any man that it is
an honest move to take. It is far more
honest to do so than to give a vote to a
party that you feel is throwing aside all
its promises.
Mr. KELLY: They have a good sheetanchor, and that is all they want !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE : They have,
unfortunately. I now come to the question of reduction of members,. which _is in
the forefront of their programme. ~twas
in the Government manifesto on a previous occasion, and the Government did
me the honor to ask me to move the
Eighth night.
456
Governor's Speech :
[ASSEMBLY.]
. address in reply to the Governor's speech
delivered in the first session of Parliament.
There are some who hold that this question
was not before the electors at the hst
election, and that it ~hould be referred to
the. people. I maintain that it was submitted to the electors. One mem her of
the Ministry was against it, and that was
the Secretary for Lands. I remember a
speech the hon. member delivered in
Blayney in which he said he was against
reduction of members. I drew the attention of the Minister to this inconsistency,
and I said that the Government should
stop the Minister from speaking in that
way, because the matter might be seized
hold of by the Opposition. I wish to draw
attention to a paragraph in the Governor's
speech that I was asked to reply to. The
Government asked me to pledge myself to
their measures. If I had found them to be
opposed to the programme I put before
the electors in my electorate, I should
have refused to reply; but I found that
theit· programme was consonant with the
views I expressed. Paragraph 10 of the
Governor's speech was as follows :
Another consequence of federation is that it
has become necessary to reduce the numbers of
the State Parliament, and to consider ,whether
other changes ought not. to be made in the Constitution, with a view to its more economical
and efficient working. My advisers will accordingly submit to you a measure for a reduction
in the number of members of Parliament and
certain proposals which are designed to further
lessen the cost of government, and to give the
people an opportunity of determining, by means
of an elected convention, what alterations in the
Constitution are desired.
Mr. KELLY: That is a referendum in
another way !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: There is no suggestion of a referendum in that. Not only
was reduction of members referred to, but
other economies, and they were preached
during the elections by the Prime Ministe1·.
I preached that economy to my constituents, and am responsible to them. Nothing
was done about reduction of members in
the first session. I challenge the Prime
Minister to deny that, early in that session,
and throughout the session, I showed a
feeling of anxiety as to the way in which
he was putting measures before the House,
and e:;ctravagant proposals. And although
the hon. member for Wilcannia has imputed want of courtesy to me, I may say
that I neve_r went with the Prime Minister
[Mr. Eden George.
Address in Reply.
unless 'be asked me. Many times when he
asked me upstairs, I have over and over
again begged of him to submit ~ measure
providing for reduction of members, and
other economies. I ask the bon. member to
deny it if that is not the case. On the most
essential question of politic.«, that is, economical administration, it will be remembered that during that session, when the
estimates were before the House, there was
a proposal to in'crease the salary of an officer, who was already receiving £650, to
£900. The Prime Minister could give no
reason for the increase. The officer had
been promoted to a higher position for no
great reason, and I, although a Government
supporter, moved an amendment that the
amount of the increase be cut down by
£150. I admitted that the man might be
deserving of an iccrease, but that unless he
had some special qualifications .£100 a year
was a sufficient increase. On the question
of reduction of members, I say that the
House is too 'large and unwieldy. I have
spoken on this question before. I had
almost flattered myself that I was going to
carry an amendment against the Government, because this was not the only item of
extravagance. I invited the attention .of
bon. members .to the fact that increases
were only proposed to the big officers. I
refer now to the case of the President of
the Board of Water Supply and .Sewerage,
who got an increase. I said: "Where
are the poor men who are getting .£2 a
week, men such as policemen ~ These
men go on from year to year without an
increase."
There is one man in my
electorate who has been ten years in the
service without an increase, and who is
getting a miserable sum of .£2 4s. per
week. The small men do not get the increases ; it is the big salaries which are
increased. My amendment .was defeated,
I think, by seven votes, but that was because hon. mem hers were not in the
chamber. When they came in from the
other rooms, after the division bell rang,
they did not know what the question
was, but many of them walked on to the
Government side,' and you could hear
them when they were in division, as is
often the case in the House, asking what
was the question.
It is time that this
Parliament was reduced in numberR.
Time after time, when big salaries were
proposed, I got up to oppose them~
I
Governor's Speech:
(1
JULY,
was rio dumb dog or wet-nurse of the
Government, as I have been termed.
Mr. KELLY: What about the £500 to
the Railway Commissioners 7
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I was not here
then.
Mr. CHAPMAN: The hon. member was
upstairs!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I think I was
in England. There is one item I might
refer to, in order to show that I am not a
truckling follower of a party. If a party
will try to keep to its pledges honestly, I
will not be too exacting. What is put
in the Governm·'s speech is a] ways regarded
as a matter of vital policy. This was a
question of vital policy on which I secured
my election. In the first session I moved
an amendment on the estimateB, and if I
had carried it I would have gone right
through proposing reductions in the estimates, but after we tried a couple of
items we found it was no use, and then
we let them all go througl1.
Then we
had railways after railways, some of them
referred to the Public Works Committee,
which could not be carried out for forty
·years. The Ministry claimed that these
proposals were not even divided upon;
but it was no use doing so. We knew
it was absolutely hopeless to carry anything. If we debated the proposals and
fought them all night we would be charged
with obstruction. Now, coming to the
second session, I found several proposals
made involving great extravagance. During the session I went home to England,
and I missed some of the business, but I
regularly received the papers. When I
came back and investigated matters I was
very much disturbed in my mind. The
Treasurer knows that I spoke frequently
to him .about the finances, and I spoke
to minister after minister on the subject.
Last session I did take a stand on one
proposal-;-a grossly extravagant one-to
establish a fisheries commis,.ion. I do
not think that the Government knew
what that measure would have cost the
country. . If that commission, with all its
great machinery to control the fisheries,
had been established, it would have cost
£30,000 per annum. Having gone carefully into the subject, I know that that is
a fact. I went to one of the ministers! think it was the Secretary for Public
Works-and said, "I cannot vote for this
1903.]
· Address in Reply.
457
measure." When the bill was brought in,
I moved an amendment to strike out the
word "commissioner," which altered the
whole purport of the bill. I spoke against
this extravagant attempt to set up another
expensive commission. I was so successful that the House was going to carry
my amendment, and the Minister said,
"If you will withdraw your amendment
we will withdraw the bill and recast it."
I originated the opposition to the bill. It
was recast, and it will now be administered
for £500 or £1,000 a year instead of
£30,000 a year. I could mt>ntion several
other matters where I attempted to impress
on the Government the necessity for economy, but all to no purpose. How could
I consistently support them 1 It would
be better to retire into private life than
prostitute my position by giving votes
against my convictions. I repeatedly urged
the Prime Minister to go on witli the reduction of members. A most extraordinary
course was pursued. At the end of the
session a bill was introduced proposing a
reduction to ninety-three. I do not call
that a reduction. If I had my way I
would cut down this House to fifty members. I will go so far as to say that if the
House passes that, I will not put up for
election again; I will sacrifice myself. That
might not be much to the Secretary for
Lands, and it would not be much to me.
I often wonder why some of us enter public
life ; but it has some fascination that one
cannot resist. I will read a short extract
from the Prime Minister's speech when he
introduced that bill. Their action on this
question of vital principle is so frivolous
that no man can get at what they mean.
When introducing the bill the Prime
Minister said :
Comment has been made from time to time
that we were not sincere in our desire to carry
out the promises put before the country in our
programme relating to the Government policy.
That programme, of course, embraced a number
of reforms, many of which we have been able to
carry out; but it was never contemplated by
the. Government-and I am sure bon. members
will agree with me in this-that it would be possible to carry out in one session all that was
contained in the programme put before the country. I can only say that, so far as the Government are concerned, they have honestly endeavoured to carry out their promises.
He went on to say that now they had introduced the bill, any minister who did not
support it would no longer be a colleague
Eighth nigh.t.
458
Governor's Speech :
[ASSEMBLY.]
of his. In answer to an interjection of
the bon. member for The Tweed, who
.said "what is the idea of the Government
with regard to a reduction of the numerical
strength of the House~" the Prime Minister replied, "about one-fourth. That is
what I said when I placed the matter before
the country in my speech at the Town
Hall." Yet now they tell us tha~ it was
not before the country. Now look at the
latest proposal made by the Government.
They know full well that if they put a bill
before Parliament the labour party will
vote against it. They have said openly that
they are against the reduction of members.
A time will come to prove whether the
public will indorse their views or not.
Suffice it to say that this bill has not been
introduced, because the labour party are
opposed to it. Will the Premier give some
rea..'!on why he has not brought in a proposal for reduction of members, when he
stated at the Town Hall that he would do
it, and put it in the Governor's speech 1
He i~;: now trying to introduce the referendum. The hon. member for Northumberland, who is going to support the Government., says there will be no referendum.
That is assuming that one man is going to
run the whole show. That bon. member
gets a .great many things for his electomte,
and he has more power than we have. He
says that the referendum will not come,
and I do not think it will. It is a miserable evasion of the question.
After the
Government had announced their policy
in their speeches, and in the Governor's
speech, they say, " Let the public decide
·the question as to whether there ·should
be any reduction of members." I suppose
they propose to submit an alternative
number, 93 or 84 ; and if such referendum were to be submitted, I would make
a strenuou'!. fight to have 50 put· in, and I
would stake my existence that 50 would
be carried by the ptlblic hy a large majority. If they take a vote of the people,
how are they going to deal with it afterwards? Suppose that 20,000 people vote,
and 10,000 are in favour of 50 memberR, and the rest vote for other numbers, it will then be said that there
is an absolute majority against the number
being reduCf>d to 50. What a fine excuse
there will then be for bon. members to
again shuffie, and say, "We are not going
to make the majority subservient to the
[Mr. Eden George.
Address in Reply.
will of a minority." I do not believe in
the referendum, except in such a case as
that of the adoption of the Fed era~ Constitution, where there was no great authority
in existence that could deal with the question. In that case, it was simply a ques•
tion of " Yes " or " No" ; and unless you
can confine your referendum to that, it
will always be a failure, and not expressive
of the people's opinion. We find that the .
greatest condemnation of the referendum
was uttered by the Attorney-General three
or four years ago; and were he to-night to
deliver that speech here, it would be a
more telling indictment than has yet been
delivered against the Government. It is
a speech that must appeal to ever.Y man on
the Government side of the House-a
speech that deserves to go down in history
as the utterance of a statesman. He said
that the referendum, if int.roduced into the
Constitution, would be like introducing a
subtle po:son. In that he was quite right.
He seemed to forestall the present position of afi'airs. He said, "It will enable
a weak, irresponsible ministry, who will
not take the responsibility of their own
measures, when they see that votes on
the question are divided, to shuffie off
their responsibility and to put the matter
to the electors by way of a mferendum."
Here is a government afraid to carry out
its policy, shirking its responsibility, and
wishing to throw it on to the electors,
because they are not certain of the vote
that will be cast in favour of their measure.
I remember Sir Henry Parkes and Sir
John Robertson-men whom I, as an
Australian, admire, and whose names will
long be fresh as far as my mind is concerned. Fancy them sitting here and
bringing in measure after measure, and
when they met with criticism 'throwing
those measures under the table ! That has
been done time after time by this Govern•
ment. I have had to sit there in tnortification, and see the Governmen~ measures
introduced and then .practically thrown
under the table. I have appealed to them
to withdraw measures, because there was
no chance of passing them, and no deter"
mination could force them through. I
might refer to the Liquor Bill and the
Municipal Bill. When the Government
wish to bring a debate to a conclusion
they know how to do it.
They say,
"We shall finish this debate to.night1"
Governor's Speech.:
[1
JULY,
and they make the House sit out. In
the old days, if a ministry wanted to
carry a .measure, they would stake their
existence on it, and make bon. members
either pass or reject it. I say that the
Government's treatment of this question
in regard to the referendum is unsatisfactory. They are endeavouring to put off the·
question in order that it may wait until
next Parliament. They cannot get their
l'eferendum through and be prepared for
the next general election. It is proposed
that next December the referendum shall
be t~ken, and when it has been taken
there is to Lea short session of Parliament.
I suppose that will be in thA beginning of
January. We know that hon. members
do not want a reduction, and that there is
great divergencA of opinion on the subject.
Parliament could not pass a bill under a
month, and if the Women's Franchise had
to go to England for the royal assent,
would not this changA in the Constitution
have to be dealt with in the same way 1·
The Premier says that the redistribution of
seats will take six months, and that will
bring us up to June. Then will come the
revision of the rolls, and Parliament will
expire before that has been accomplished.
I challenge the Government to show how it
is possible to carry out their programme.
It seems to me that they have only one
idea in view, and that is to have another
parliament with the same numb.er of members. I am not making charges which are
not borne out by evidence. I only quote
the Prime Minister in regard to the Redistribution Bill when I say it will take six
months to redistribute the electorates. A
referendum is impossible. Even the bon.
member for Northumberland, who· does
not always vote for the Government, will
oppose them with regard to it, and when
they feel that opposition and other opposition which will be offered-! shall oppose
it uncompromisingly myself.-thf)re will be
no referendum. I ask the Government
before it is too late to introduce a bill providing for a radical reduction of members.
In the country it is the main question
dominating the 1uinds of the people. Now
that we have federation this House and its
great expenses should be cut down. I am
confident that when the next election
comes there will be an overwhelming majority in favour of reduction, and that the
man who opposes reduction-not a paltry
1903.]
.Addlress in Reply.
459
reduction to 93-will have a. very hard time
to get back to the Chamber.
Mr. McLAURIN : The hon. member will'
be with them !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I can tell the
bon. member that I am quite as capable of
winning my seat as I was before. I want·to
speak a few moments upon the much-talkedof press question. In years gone by Parliament agreed to free postage for newspapers.
I remember at the time that I thought it
rather a strange policy, and I wondered·
what it was for. The statesmen of the day
held that it was necessary for people all
over the state to read newspapers as much
as possible, because they kept them in
touch with the history of the world, and
were an educational influence which could
not be found in any school. This. policy
was indorsed by government after government, and free postage became an institution in the state. The corollary of free
postage is a free railway to carry the newspapers into the country. I have travelled
into the back-blocks. I was born right in
the centre of Australia, and I know that a
newspaper there is a perfect luxury. We
must remember that·men who settle in such
places as Parkes, For·bes, and Condobolin,
rob themselves of half the enjoyments'
they obtain in the city. We have a right:
to consider them, and to give them their
literature as cheaply as possible. Certain•
charges have been made against the proprietors of the newspapers which I am·
glad to say have been unreservedly withdrawn by the hon. member for Botany,..
who showed his manliness in withdrawing··
them. The question arises : What should
the newspapers pay for carriage 1 We··
have a railways act, and the whole of'
the matter is left to the Rai.J way Commissioners. I maintain that that act is otr
such a nature that no ministry should
exerci:;e their power to interfere with the
rates fixed by the Railway Commissioners,·
unless there is something preposterous or·
fraudulent about them. Parliamentcreatedl
the Railway Commissioners for the purpose of relieving the Railway Department
of political influence. There is no part of"
the world where railways can compete with.
ours in the way of management. One bon ..
member, whilst the hon. member for
Glebe was speaking, asked, " Suppose they
made differences in fares~" Well they do
make differences in fares. A member of
Eighth night.
460
Govern01·'s Speech :
(ASSEMBLY.]
l,tickards' or Williamson's theatrical company can obbin a return ticket at single
rates. A man, however, who does business say with Melbourne, and who goes
there nineteen or twenty times a year can
obtain no concession. He pays £6 ls. 6d.
for his ticket and 12s. 6d. for a sleeping
berth. But let a passenger come from.
New Zealand, a mere globe-trotter, with.
plenty of money, and he will be carried
from Sydney to Melbourne first class for
£2 14s. I mention this to show that there
are other matters which might be attacked
as well as the matter of the free carriage
of newspapers. It is not for rue to say
whether it is right or wrong that the
newspapers should pay quarter or half
rates. We should be proud of the press
of this state. we should be proud of the
two morning papers published in this city.
It is .surprising that papers like Saturday's
Herald and J.'elegraph, containing such a
large amount of good literary matter can be
printed and placed on one's breakfast table
for one penny, and credit given even for that.
I shall always lift up my voice against any
restricLions on the liberty of the press,
because these gentleman have seen fit, in
their journalistic capacity, to exercise a
right that has belonged to them for ages
past-a right that is admitted by the
greatest writers in the old cot1ntry and in
other parts of the world. But because
they dare to assert their rights and to
write down the Government, when they
see as I have seen, that there has been
gross extravagance and mismanagement
on their part, the Government cry out
about unfairness, and the Secretary for
Lands threatens to make the newspapers
pay. It is all very well to prate now
about the charge. But how is it that so
many years have been allowed to lapse
without the labour party, who are so wroth
against the newspapers, or the Government opening their mouths on the subject 1
· They have one excuse-a very small one
-namely, that we had a select committee
to inquire into the whole system. That
committee's report has not been dealt with
by Parliament, and if the old policy that
was inculcated by previous statesmen is
not to be pursued, but is to be changed
from free distribution of literature as
educational matter into viewing newspapers
. only as commercial concerns, and loading
them with asmucl.1 taxation as possible, it is
[Mr. Eden George.
.Address
in Reply.
for Parliament, and not merely the Ministry'
to say so. Before the Government took
action, they ought to have consulted hon.
members, whose vote counts as much
as that of ministers, and whose opinions
should weigh as much on any question
before the House. The Ministry are not
actually the governing body, they are the
administrators of the laws, and are simply
in office to carry out the wishes of Parliament. For them, on their own initiative,.
to destroy a policy that has existed for
years, at a time when they are being
opposed by the ·newspapers, mvours· of a
very bad odour indeed, and looks nothing
but retaliation. I cannot get away from
the belief that the Government's action
is simply an attempt to strike a blow at
the liberty of the press; who are accused
of unfairness, misreporting, and brevity in
reporting. We have speeches night after
night on the same matter, and I think the
Ministry have been given a fair show.
One morning we see column after column
reporting the leader of the Opposition, and
next morning the Prime Minister is very
cat·efully reported, whereas if the newspapers were unscrupulous partisans they
would not report the utterances of ~fin­
isters as correctly as they do. The quotat,ions in the Evening News the other day,
little tit-bits from Ministers' spE>eches,
were all against the Opposition. They
have been very fair. But the Prime Minister wants his speeches to be reported in
full. Of course, I do not hold the same
position as the bon. gentleman does, and it
would be utterly ridiculous for me to expect even a long paragraph in a newspaper
about mvself. The hon. member for North-.
umberla~d publishes full reports in 'J'ruth
of what he calls suppressed speeches. I do
no!, know whether the Ministry are going
to pay for it. It would be a nice thing if
he tried to report all of us in the same way.
He is giving the "suppressed" speeches on
the other side, which he thinks will tickle
the people's ears. I sincerely regret that
the bon. member for Northumberland,
although he does not like to be attacked
himself, takes it upon himself to grossly
attack other people. I am going to defend a man who is not here to defend
himself-! mean Mr. Walsh, the late
member for Tamworth. I do not know
whether tlie statement made against him
is true-I do not believe it. When we
(Joverrwr's Speech:
[1
JULY,
point to the Tamworth election as an
e_vidence that the people want a reduction
of members, and that there is a great
awakening _against the caucus system of
the labour party, then the bon. member
for Northumberland turns round and tries
to excuse it by dragging this man through
the mud, and say'ing that it was a case of
a sober man versus a drunken man. I
call my brother members to witness that,
sp far as I saw Mr. Walsh when he was
in this House, he was a credit to the
Chamber, so far as his personal habits were
concerned. I ne\'er saw a more gentlemanly fellow in the Chamber. He bore a
good character here ; ,and yet we are told
by the bon. member for Northumberland
that he was drunk all the time he was
here. I have spoken to many members
who were at the Tamworth election, but
I nev~r heard that accusation made against
Mr. Walsh before.
Mr. WILLIS: He was drunk four or
five weeks before the election, and they
had to ~traighten him up for it!
Mr. JESSEP: And yet the Government
s.upported him l
. Mr. EDEN GEORGE : Yes. And
more disgrace to the Government and
their party for_supporting him.
Mr. WILLIS: I told them so at the
time!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Mr. Walsh is
not here to defend himself, and I refuse
to believe that that sort of thing
occurred, I knowing that he never misconducted himself here. But if it is true,
I say more shame to these people who
would support such a man and endeavour
to foist a drunken individual on this Parliament. Now I come to the question of
the caucus of the labour party; It has
been said by members of the labour party,
"You hold your caucus, why should we
not hold ours 1" Certainly that argument bears a complexion of fairness ; but
the traditions and practice of Parliament
prove that only two parties can exist in
Parliament, othet·wise bad government is
sure to ensue.
Two of the old cries
of the labour party were " One man one
vote" and "majority rule."
But they
are destroying one of the earliest planks
of their platform.
As a caucus and
handcuffed party they are destroying
majority rule, because on one side of
the House. you ~nd a majority' in~
1903.)
·.Address in fleply.
461
favour of a certain measure ; on this
side we find a minority, but when the
other party gets together, they may, by a
bare majority, elect to support this side,
and so t.hey come over and swamp the
benches here and oust the Government
from office. The way in which they destroy majority rule is that in the caucul:
the question may, perhaps, have been.
carried by one, although on the side of
the minority there might be an intelligent
man who, because of the caucus, is bound
to go with the others. No parliament
can exist ahd pass measures unless there
are two parties, and no more, a government
and an opposition. It was truly said by
the bon. member for Phillip Division the
other night that there is no third party.
I am not opposed to labour men coming
into the House. I have assisted men to
come here, but it means destruction to
their independence to handcuff themselves
through the medium of this pledge. I
wish to see men of the labour ranks come
into Parliament as is the case in New
Zealand. There they have no pledge;
they go in as honest free men, and every
man exercises his individual opinion. Why
should ten men get together, and two men
with more intelligence, or keenness, or
cunning, perhaps, sway the rest in the
way they should vote. Did we not see
on the occasion of the last want of confidence vote, that one member of the labour
party delivered a speech against the Government, and afterward~>, not thinking
at the time that there would be a caucus,
he had to vote against his own speech.
Mr. EsTELL: Name the hon. member!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: It was the bon.
member for Balmain South, who ultimately
resigned. He said so the ot4er night.
But is it not possible that such a thing
would occur 1
Mr. EsTELL': No !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: In the labour·
party, as with the othPr parties, there are
men who will shine above all the othersif they are allowed to do so, but i£, they
have to vOte according to the caucus their
manhood will be destroyed. There is no
denying . that the labour party have the·
House in the palm of their hands. Is that
a proper thing 1 Are they not to submit
to the majority 1 Are my electors not to
be consulted as well as theirs 1 I speak
out str.onglywith regard to the labour party
· Eigl~th. nig'/l,t.
462.
Governor'.s Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.
and do not mince matters. While they
tie themselves up in a caucus, I will unJ:>eat any man that I can.
Mr. EsTELL: The hon. member has not
a chance to unseat any of them ! •
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: The bon. member has brought me to a knowledge of
what I have already done. I have always
fought the full strength of the labour party·
and have beaten them. I did it because
of my hostility to the caucus. I knew
the bon. member for Phillip Division as a
public man, and I went to him. to request
him to stand. At Pyrmont he polled only·
from twenty-five to thirty votes. I told
him that I was going to fight the labour
party, that they were going to put up Mr.
J,Iollis as a candidate-an excellent man
if not tied by the caucus-and I said that
I would fight any one of them until the
party dropped the caucus system. The
Secretary for Lands will tell bon. members
that I defeated Mr. Hollis. The bon.
member for Redfern and most of the labour
members spoke in the constituency. I
<)Ould not get any ministers to come except
the .Secretary for Lands, because they were
afraid of offending the labour party; ·but
the Secretary for Lands came down at ·
once. 1 have never truckled to the labour
party. There is not an electorate where
more poor men live than my electorate;
but they put up a labour man with the
seal of the Trades Council on him, and he
got forty-three votes. I showed that they
were sending men in to oppose the very
principle they ought to protect-that is,
majority rule. I said that while they were
in a minority, they should range themselves
on either one side or the othet·, and that
there should not be more than two parties.
Mr. WILLIS : There are three in the
British House of Commons.
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: But do they
range themselves together· on all questions
like this 1 Not at all. There is the Irish
party, who simply vote together on Irish
questions. So here there might be a city
party. Members naturally stand together
on matters that affect the interests of their
constituencies. I submit that the labour
party should be a labour party. They
should not accept all sorts of nominations
for entry into their ranks. I believe that
they would lla ve greater success with genuine labour men like the hon. member for
Kahibah and the hon. member for Balmain
[Mr. Eden. George.
J
'Addre.ss {n Reply.
North representing them; but when they
take into their ranks professional men,
who by. their employment and learning
are different from them, they make a
mistake. Anyone who likes to sign the
pledge can come in. Take another case,
and I am not now speaking with any
personal disrespect. wJ.:at astounded me
more than anything last election was to
see ·the President of the Licensed Victuallers' Association signing the pledge.
Was anything more ludicrous ever heard
of 1 When I knew of it, .I felt sure that
the nomination would be thrown out. I
said, " Here is a man representing the
wealthiest industry i.n the country ; he is
almost sure to f_all foul of the labour
party." One of the planks of. the party is ·
opposed to the liquor trade. Yet the president of this association joined the labour
platform. The hon. member for Denison
Division, who is a splendid fellow,. implored.
me to sign the labour pledge, but I said I
would not sign it to enter twenty parliaments. · The members of the labour party.
ought to be consistent. In New Zealand
they will not admit any man unless he is·
a real labour man. They will not admit
any man whose business or employment is
opposed to their sympathies. That is one·
thing which casts odium. on the labour
party here. They wish to gain numbers
at any price.·. If they came in as independent members, as labour men, nominating only true labour men, they would
find their numbers very much increased in
this House, and I would be one to assist
them. The writing is on the wall, and it
is for the labour party to consider their
position. Although I had pa~ents, I ran
away and went into the world, and had
to, work very hard. I worked in the back·
blocks for 6s. a week.
An RoN. MEMBER : Where 1
Mr. EDEN GEORGE:, On the mountains; and for one of the old members of
narliament. I had to work ·fourteen hours
~day. If I have been successful, I do not·
turn my back on these men. I have been
able in my time· to entertain, and have
been with some of ·the best men, but I can •
enjoy my tea in a miner's hut just as well
as I can enjoy myself •at the table of the·
best governor we have ever had. I never·
toadied to people in position and I never
will. If you want to uplift the labour
peopl~ and become a power, respected in
. Governor's Speech:
(1 JULY, 1903.]
this country by the newspapers and by the
people, you must come in here as free men.
-An HoN. MEMBER : We are not going
to take the bon. member's advice!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Then the writing is on the wall.
The labour party
nominated Mr. Thrower -at Tamworth.
They had an excellrmt chance, but with
the whole strength of their party, they
failed miserably. Mr. Thrower was a good
man, and the hon. member for Northumberland could not say of him, as he did of
another cat1didate, that he was a drunkard. He is honorably associated with the
cause of labour. The labour party took
him up to Tamworth and poured out their
eloquence from hotel balconies in his support; but what was the result 1 160 votes.
Then there was the election of the hon ..
member for Balmain South. Th:tt was the
first downfall. That is a large workingman's electorate.
Mr. WILLIS: Sectarianism !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Sectarianism
or not, he went over there and beat the
labour party. I believe that sectarianism
will rul!:', even at the next election.
Mr. WILLIS: It should not!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Sometimes it
ought to. If one party goes in for it, the
other party must fight. Any man who
wonld allow sectarianism to dominate his
politics should almost have his vote taken
·away from him. To say that any election
is guided solely by sectariani~m is to strain
the thing too much. We have had two
experiences with regard to the labour
party. I fought against the labour party
before I came into this House. I never
truckled to them, and said they were doing
right .. I always opposed the caucm1 system.
I delivered a· speech on the subject six
years ago against the caucus system, and
the hon. member for Quirindi came and
congratulated me upon it. Holding these
views, it is my duty to unseat any labour
member if I can. I cannot do much, but
I shall deem it my duty to go into one of
these men's electorates at next election.
An HoN. MEMBER: Come along to my
electorate!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Hon. members are very ready at inviting me now,
but they will find when T put my hand to
the wheel, it will be very hard to defeat
_me. I feel it my duty to go in and fight
one of the city members. 1 know that the
:. Address in Reply.
463
Government of which the leader of the
Opposition was a member were supported
for five years by the labour party, but the
leadet· of the Opposition has said in the
most manly way that he will not take office
until he has sufficient direct support at his
back. That is another reason why I should
give him my support in view of the opinions.
which I have just expressed with regard
to the labour party.
Mr. WILLIS: Why did not the hon.
member take up the challenge of the hon.
member for Northumberland 1
.M:r. EDEN GEORGE: Let that hon.
member come into my electorate, and I will
fight him. His challenge was an extraordinary one. · He says that he has just
had £20,000 spent in his electorate, and
that he has had a bridge erected there.
What would it mean to go into his electorate under those circumstances 1 Let
him come into mine.
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: The bon. member is
having a railway built in his electorate
which will cost £1,000,000.
Mr. .EDEN GEORGE: Six pairs of
,blankets represent all that has been spent
inmyelectorate, and I have more poverty in
my electorate than there is in any other.
I opposed the labour party before I came
into this House, and I openly tell them
that I shall fight against their system,
because I think it defeats the best principles of parliamentary government. The
labour party act very inconsistently in
many matters. I cannot understand some
of their actions. A short time ago a deputllltion from the labour party waited upon a
member of the Government to oppose the
introduction of the linotype and monoline
into the Governme.nt Printing Office. It
was intended to get one or two of those
machines into the Printing Office, and the
labour party protested against it; but I
see a glaring inconsistency in their own
conduct. The Minister asked them whether'
it was not a fact that they were using the
linotype in the office of the Wor·ker, a.
newspaper, and they had to admit that it
was so. If the labour party are going tofight for the interests of their fellow-men,
for heaven's sake let them be consistent.
One of the greatest problems for future
.statesmen to solve will be that of finding
employment for people who are displaced
by machinery. That is a matter to which
.anyone who takes part in the affairs of the-
.
Eighth niglot.
464
Governor's Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.]
~
Address in Reply.
country must devote his attention. I want I say, " Quite right; put down your platthe labour party to be consistent in another form of social reform; but do not forget
matter. We hear them speak of one man finance." He said, "We are not going to
one billet. · That is a very proper cry. I
take up the question of financial adminispoint out that the Government have given tration ; we are here for social reforms."
extra appointments to men already hold- I tell him, as I told him last night, that
ing good billets. You must clean your if two or three of his bt·other members
own stable before you can attempt to clean follow a business career which takes them
other people's. It is .a notorious fact that amongst figures, they ou~rht to be deputed
the secretary of a labour union gets £3 per by the party to deal with financial ques.week until' he gets into Parliament, and I
tions and instruct the rest of the party.
.say that, once one of those men comes here The success of social measures depends on
-to be true to his principles-he ought the economic administration of the affairs
to give up his billet of secretary, and let of the country. A man who will shut his
some other man get it. I do not blame eyes to economical administration knows
them for taking all they can get, but it is not the basis of parliamentary governobjectionable on the ground of inconsis- ment. Will they keep in office a ministry
tency. I am anxious to see true labour .who will wreck the success of their meamen come into this House from labour .sures by its extravagance 1 The labour
ranks, not bound by any pledge, but I
party say, "We do not care what the
want them to be consistent. Here we finances are ; so long as we get the mea:find that a man who gets £3 per week as , sures we want, blow the cost ! " When
secret'ary of a labour organisation gets they say that, they place their measures
into Parliament, where he.receives £6 per in danger. The greatest economist in the
week. I say that he ought not to keep world is the greatest statesman, and not
that secretary's billet. A member of the the man who brings forward measures
Federal Parliament, whom I admired for dealing with arbitration, old-age pensions,
his ability, is. getting £8 per week in the and the woinen's franchise. I do not
Federal Parliament, a salary which he desire to go into unnecessary details; but
never got before, and he is drawing a I will state the position as it occurs tO me
salary as secretary of a labour organisa- in regard to the finances of the state.
Roughly speaking, the Goverm;nent will
tion.
Mr. NIELBEN: He gets absolutely no this year have about £3,000,000 more
payment from the wharf labourers !
than Mr. Reid had the last year he
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I challenge the was in offic(-l. In ·addition to that, they
bon. mem her to prove that it is not a fact have about £1,000,000 less expenditure
that he is drawing payment every week than the Reid Government had in th~
from a labour organisation.
shape of transferred services. That means
Mr. NIELSEN: I say it is not a fact!
£4,000,000. What have been their exMr. EDEN GEORGE: There are men penses 1 They cmdeavour, in the Goin this House doing it.. I say to members .vernor's speech, to show that there has
that they should do nothing to tarnish been extraordinary expenditure. I will
their fair fame. Let them be ·consistent. admit it. We know that the expenditure
Do not let people be able to say, "You in connection with the drought could not
advocate one thing, but you practise be avoided. If the Government had spent
another ; " because, as surely as they do twice as much in the relief of distress in
that, _they will injure the principles they the country, I would not have found fault
are endeavouring to uphold, and the with them. All these items added together,
country in which they live. Now,.I wish however, do not amount to £1,000,000.
to touch on the question of finance. There That still leaves the Government with
.are two or three phases of this question. a credit of £3,000,000 which they have
The labour party do not seem to attach to account for. They had, of course, an exmuch importance to finance. I have great traordinary expenditure of about£500,000
respect for the hon. member for Boorowa. in connection with old-age pensions. That
Last night he admitted that he came into leaves them with £2,500,000 over and
Parliament for certain reforms, in refer- above what the Reid Government had.
ence to which all the party were agreed.
Cut that dvwn by £500,000 in order to
[Mr. Eden George.
·Governor's ,Ppeech :
(1 JULY, 1903.]
' Address in Reply.
give them credit for anything else, and we six q1onths I have had to send men to th:e
find they have had £2,000,000 more, and bon. member for Denison Division to get
yet we know we are going to be landed them on, because he could get them on when
with a deficit of £500,000. And not only I could not. I have to thank him for doing
are we going to have this deficit, but me a favour for getting work for poor
·works have been stopped· all over the devils in my electorate for whom I could
place, because the whole money market ·not get work. Are the labour party going
is paralysed. Thousands of men are seek- to shut their eyes to finance, ·for that is
ing for employment. Men must sink to what has producer! the present chaos and
·the verge of starvation before they will pressure 1 Our finances are in a state df
crack stones. The other day I endeavoured chaos-so much so that we are unable to
to get work for a man who for two or borrow money at home. In connection
with the £1,000,000 I have mentioned,
three months of the year is in the hospital.
the Government say that a large number
It is hard to know what to do in such a
case. I found that he would have to do of contracts were handed over to them
Were it not for their which had been let by their predecessors,
stone-breaking.
wives and families some men would rather hut I should like to ask the Secretary for
starve .than do such work. The labour Public Works, supposing the Government
party ought to beware of supporting a go- were. to go out of office to day, how would
vernment which wiU employ men on such that liability compare with the liability
work. · Whilst the system prevails of ob- tliat they would leave to their successors'~
In the c::tse of the present Government
taining grants of money for an electorate,
or getting men employed on public works, the liability would be· something like six
even although you do not believe in it, times the amount. Whenever a new goyou will be doing wrong if you do not ob- vernment comes into office they have cer·tain your share of what is to .be obtained tain contracts to complete, and they always
under that system. I havesucceeded in get- put them down against their predecessors,
but they do not think of how much they
ting men work on the new railway-station.
will leave their successors to com'plete.
I ask the Minister to turn up the names,
and I say that nine out of ten only got When an appeal is made to the people,
6s. per day, though they were good able- I am satisfi.ed what their verdict will be.
I am coming to an important point on
bodied workmen.
which the Opposition has been challenged.
Mr. O'SuLLIVAN: What nonsense! I
say distinctly that the hon. member's I say there has been grossly extravagant
statement is incorrect. Everv man em- administration. Ron. members have said
ployed upon ordinary works i~ paid 7s. ; that the Opposition have not given a
it is only on relief works that the men get single instance of this. It is a diffi6s. a day each !
cult matter. An hon. member might
know of something in his own electorate
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Surely the hon.
gentleman does not call the railway-station ·but through being the representative of
relief work.
·
that constituency he might not like to say
th[l,t there was any extravagance, because
Mt·. O'SULLIVAN: No!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Does the bon. a certain section of the people wanted the·
member call the Manly tram relief work 1 work. When Mr. Walsh was seeking reelection at Tamwor;th he claimed it, as he
Mr. O'SuLLIVAN : No !
Mi:. EDEN GEORGE: Well, men that said, "Because I got three large works
I have sent to work there got only 6s. pet carried out which were totally unnecesday. I saw an order to the engineer in sary." I will give the inost glaring incharge, stating that he was to put the men stances that could be put on record. If it
is a type of the work that has been going
on at 6s. a day.
on under .the present Administration it is
Mr. HoLLIS : How long ago ~
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I think six or time it was stopped. I refer to the l\ianly
n_ine months.
tram, a tram laid from Manly to Curl
Mr. WILLIAMS: I have got men put on Curl.. One or two persons !Vho had land
at 7s.! ·
down that way agitated for it, but I know
Mr. EDEN GEORGE': Well, the bon. people living along the route of the trammember is very lucky. During the last line who said before the tram began to run
Eighth night.
466
Gopernor's Speech:
tASSEMBLY.J
. that the construction of the line was a
wicked waste of public money. I say so,
too. That tram runs only to the convent
. gates, and consequently it is a miserable
failure. I said it would be a miserable
failure, and I could not understand its
. construction, instead of a proper tram advocated by the bon. member for the district-from the Spit to Manly.
Any
capitalist would construct that tramway
to-morrow, if he could get permission to
do so. If the Minister started to put
that tram down, notwithstanding all the
depression, I guarantee that if be had to
pay 6 per cent. interest for. the money the
line would pay from the day it was opened.
There is a tram from North Shore to the
Spit, but from there you cannot go by
tram to Manly. The way in whic!:t the
boats to Manly are crowded on Sundays
and holidays must have struck the public
mind. People living there have by deputation urged on the Minister the construction of a tramway from the Spit to Manly
-not like the Manly tram which goes to
nowhere, and which was a wicked waste
of public money, costing£11,000, exclusive
of plant.
Mr. O'SuLLIVAN: What nonsense the
hon. member is talking 1 Everything he is
saying was contradicted the other day by
the Engineer-in-Chief !
Me. EDEN GEORGE :·I do not applaud the Minister for throwing the
odium of everything on his officers. When
I attack the Labour Bureau he gets Mr.
Schey to make a lame defence, and he
blames other officers in other cases. It is
unfair for him to cast the blame on his
officers. The bon. member for Warringah
said that there had been gross extravagance
and waste of money, and the Manly people
say that he was quite right. I can assure
the hon. member for \Varringah that he
has gained more support from his action in
that matter than from anything he ever
did in Manly. In a rash moment I believe
he said that it Mst £13,000. The chief
engineer made the sum £10,000; hut he
has not contradicted any other statement.
The hon. member for \Varringah also said
that an unnecessary amount of 'metal had
been put underneath the rails, and this
the chief engineer contradicted. Even if
all the other' contradictions be correct, the
chief engineer did not contradict that the
tram cost over £10,000, exclusive of plant.
[Mr. Eden George.
. Addre.ss in Reply.
The hon. member for \V arringah has held
the position of Mayor of Manly, and he
declared that the construction of the tram
was a gross piece of extravagance. I say
it was a wicked waste of public money.
The line has been open three or four
months, and there is an average of about
three passengers per tram. I see by thi&
morning's papers also that it is proposed
to take the engines off and put on horses.
Let the Minister deny that. This is coming back to the old bullock-dray system.
I thought we were advancing towards an
era of trams; but now we arE) giving up
the engines and going back to the bullockdrays. The Minister should have the line
torn up, stop the tram running, leave the
construction of it for years to come, and
then make a tramway ·from the Spit to
Manly.
Mr. O'SuLLIVAN: This is only the first
section of a 10-mile tramway!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: If it goes the
10 miles it will mean another waste of
public n1oney.
Not• can he deny that
they are going to use horses in the trams.
Mr. O'SuLLIVAN: I know nothing about
it!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: And while the
Government are trying to stop the leakage
they find fault with the commissioners. I
ask the labour party to consider the financial question.
Mr. EsTELL : The labour party can look
after themselves!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: A man that
attempted to look after them made the
most miserable exhibition that was ever
made in this Parliament. He used figures
that were utterly ridiculous to any man
understanding figures. I am referring to.
the secretary of the labour party. He
may be a clever schoolmaster, but I know
that in some schools they cram you with
a very fine education, but when you go
into an office you do not know the difference between debit and credit. It is one
of the faults of ~ur system of education
that book-keeping is not taught. I know
that the hon. member was once a Grammar
School master - Mr. SPEAKER : Order ! The occupation
of any hon. member cannot be 'alluded to.
Mr. "EDRN GEORGE: I was speaking in a congratulatory way of the bon.
member. He produced figures and quoted
the Government Statistician in support of
Governor's Speech ~
[1
J.ULY,
his contention. I know that the hon.
member believes in his figures. The hon.
gentleman looked at me when quoting
trhem, and asked me whether I did not
believe them, and the hon. member for
Randwick, thinking that he was being
.addressed, said "no." Then the hon.
member for Waratah said, "You pettifogging l~atter." So it appears that a
member of the labour party looks down
upon a hatter. The Secretary for Public
Works may not be a financier, but he is
dev~r enough to know that the figures are
wrong.
The hon. member Wfmt down to
open the Norton Bridge, and said that the
secretary of the labour party showed the
Opposition up in their true colours. Well,
he was either wilfully misleading, or he is so
ignorant of figures, that he ought to leave
them alone.' No doubt the hon. member
for W aratah believed in the figures which
he worked out from some figures supplied
by the Government Statistician, but I
look to somebody to give an explanation
in the interests of the Government Statistician. I was glad to see that the Evening News published that officer's figures,·
which showed that instead of there being
.a decrease of interest there was an in<:rease. Some hon. members say openly
that they do not care anything about the
finance so long as they get <:ertain measures passed, but no Government measure
will be a.success unless there is economical
administration. Now I wish to touch
upon the old-age pensions, which is a .very
warm subject. The leader of the labour
party d.elivered a courteous speech, which
was a credit to him, and should be a good
example to other hon members. He
asked, " What is the Opposition going to
do 1 What retrenchment are they going
to carry out 1 Are they going to touch
the old-age pensions 1 They dare not lay
a finger 11pon that." I will prove th1tt if
there is any .sincerity about the Government they are the only persons who propose to touch the old-age pensions, ·and
they are doing so now. 'fhey are actually:
trying to make their finances better by
taking away pensions which are justly
due. They say that that is on account of.
there being so much fraud, but that·may
be made an excuse. I admit that there
are cases where pensions should be taken
away, and where there is fraud it should
be severely punishedj Any man who
1903.]
:Address in Reply,
467
would endanger such a humane statute by
committing fraud should have his goods
confiscated, and should be sent to gaol.
One man came to me and complained that
his pension was taken away because he
said he had only been convicted four times
of drunkenness. I told him that that was
a very serious matter, and I will support
the Government in takii?g away pensions
in such cases. I however intend to cite
one case where a woman has been un,iustly
deprived of her pension, and there are
many other cases of the same kind. When
the act came into force she put in her
claim and proved it to the satisfaction of
the board. She has been drawing it ever
since, but it has now been unwarrantably
cancelled.
Mr. O'SuLLIVAN: That is done by the
board!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: These boards
act at the instigation of the Government.
The board would not withJraw pensions.
unless they had instructions.
Mr. WADDELL ; They have never had
any instructions!
..
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I will state the
facts. I have always found the Treasurer
very honest in his transactions, and I wish
the other Ministers were like him. All I
wal).t him to do is to stick to what he says.
This case touches my J1eart. This woman
has a family of two or three. She proved
her age when the act came into force, and
she has received the pension ever since,
but suddenly it has been stopped. She
came to me and I wanted to commit the
department to put down in writing what
was the reason. I did not write myself,
because I thought I might not get the full
reason stated. This letter was written
and the department was pinned down by
it. They said that the proof of age was
insufficient. I have gone into the proof of·
age, and it consists of this. The woman
was born in the back-blocks of this colony
many years ago, before a proper register'
of births was kept. She married, and she
has her marriage lines. She waf! marri8d
when she was 19 years of age, and she has
grandchildren and great grandchildren
living in Sydney. I have a letter from a·
resident stating that there is not a shadow·
of doubt but what she says is true; bm,
the department have cancelled the pension,
and the poor woman has to do without'it.
The department, however, is on the horns
Eighth- night.
468
(lovernor' s Speech :
f ASSEMBLY.]
of a dilemma. They accepted the proof of
age two or three years ago, and then
about three years after,. when the woman
has added those years to her age, they say
that they have not sufficient proof as to
}).er age. They say to the Opposition, "Are
you going to touch the old-age pensions~"
~ut the fact is you cannot shift the old~ge pensions any more than you can shift
manhood suffrage. Such a prqposition was
never hinted at on the part of the Opposi-.
tion. The Ministerial members may drag
in the Victorian reform party if they like,
but if one of the Opposition party committed a dishonorable act, would it be right
to condemn the lot1 The Colonial Trea"
surer, in his famous Oowra speech, made·
certain financial proposals. I have a personal admiration for that gentleman. I
think that he should have been in a mini!'try long ago. If we selected more men of.
his stamp for office, we should have better.
government. No doubt he saw that the
Secretary for Public Works was going too
fast, and that the colony was being run
into extravagance, and the delivery of.
his speech~ at Oowra was a consequence.
There is no doubt about its effect upon
business people. I know many large places
of business that were making a great deal
of money last year which are not doing it
this ~ear. I flatter ,myself that I caused
the Colonial Treasurer to deliver that
Oowra speech.· I believe that if I had not
made the shot that I did, that speech
would not have been delivered. That
speech was made as a feeler. I view with
great dissatisfaction the fact that the position of Colonial Treasurer is not held by
the Prime Minister.
The position of
Colonial Treasurer should be superior to
that of any other in the Cabinet. The
Colonial Treasurer should not be' a subordinate. If the Colonial Treasurer does
not dominate the position, he cannot be
responsible for the expenditure. I now
come to the question of his policy. One
gentleman, whom hon. gentlemen will take
particular,notice of, said that the country
qould uot afford more than £400,000 a
year for old-age pensions. Is it not a fact
t,hat that is the only outspoken statement
emanating from any party with regard to
~he cutting down of the expenses 1 The.
Colonial Treasurer said that we must cut
qown the expenditure to £400,000. The
~ime is coming for the pe?ple to take the
[Mr. Eden George. ·
·
~e!'
.j!ddress in Reply.
matter in lland, especially 1\'hen the Colo-·
~ial Treasurer delivers one speech, and
the Prime Minister stands on another
platform, and enunciates a different policy.
Like the Governor's speech such a .spectacle
as that is unheard of in this state, and if
this sort of thing is continued, it'will bring
parliamentary government into ridicule.
The Treasurer ha:s done a manly thing.
J;;et bon. members stigmatise him as they
have stigmatised me-as a r!l-t, if they like.
Some hon. members do not know what to
do now. They cannot throw insults of that
nature against a man like the bon. member
for Molong. The House could not stand
an insult to a man who has sat here for
twenty-two years. Some hon. members,
however, are '!'ery ready at throwing insults at new members, with a view to stopping others from coming over to the
Opposition. Those insults will recoil on
those who have given them when bon.
members go to the country, and let the
people know that old-age pensions are to
be cut down to £400,000 a year. The
· l~tbour party have only heard one utterance on that question, and that from the
man who is in a position to _make it,
namely, the Ooloni!ll Treasurer. In the
face of that, and without any denial from
the Prime Minister, they are going to vote
for the Government. Their position will
not hold water for one moment. They
have dared. the Government to lay a finger
on old-age pensions, and the man who
has t?ld them that he is going to do so is
the Colonial Treasurer.
·
Mr. EsTELL: Did he not say that he
would bring in an amendment of the act
t.o meet various cases 1
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Yes, in order
to get out of what he sa,id at Oowra. The
Treasurer st<tted that we must have reduction, from the judges downwards, and the
Prime Minister has never said that it is
not necessary. The Colonial Treasurer is
most courteous when he delivers· his financial statement. He has shown that he is
a man of honor. If the Government do
not carry out the policy he enunciated at
Cowra, his political career is damned. If,
however, he comes out like a man, he will
be looked upon as a leader of parties, and
a,s a man who ought to be seized upon for
4is honesty of purpose.
. Mr. ORICK : Why does not the bon.
~embe_r go out !
Gover·iwr' s Spee-ch:
[1 JULY, 1903.]
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: The hon. member talks about going out. Did he talk
about going- out when he got the hon.
member for Wickham to move an amendment which brought about the downfall
of the Reid Government~
Mr.. Reid
fought for the bon. member in connection
with his election, and spoke for him at
Wickham. The hon. member for Wickham has done more than I have ever done.
He moved an amendment which ousted
his chief from political life. And what
was it all about 1 Simply because Mr.
Neild robbed the labour party of kudos in
obtaining information about the old-age
pensions.
Mr. FEGAN : It is not true that Mr.
Reid came to fight for me!
1\lr. EDEN GEORGE: Does the bon.
member mean to say that Mr. Reid never
went· into his electorate 1
Mr. FEGAN : He was not requested to
do so. He carne to Newcastle !
Mr. MILLER: He has been telling lies
all the time !
Mr. JESSEP: I draw your attention,
Mr. Speaker, to the disorderly remark of
the hon. member for Manaro, that the
bon. member for Belmore Division has
been telling lies all the time.
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. member must
withdraw the expression.
Mr. MILLER: I withdraw it !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I am sorry tl1e
Secretary for Public Works is not present,
because I am going to deal with a serious
matter, and I am not going to smooth
over anything which wants inquiring into.
The Minister has referred to a charge
which has been made regarding the payment of extravagant sums in connec·
tion with church properties in Sydney.
I hav.e never mixed up in sectarian fights,
but if I have grounds for suspecting that
a ministry is doing anything in favour of
a sectarian body wrongly, my religious
and sectarian rights are stirred up to the
uttermost. 1 I am going to 'ask for a further expranation of this affair. I do not
care whether the payment was made to a
protestant church or to a catholic church.·
If this payment had .been made under
similar · circumstances to : a protestant
church, I should equally have defended
our finances against gross extravagance
and waste of public money.. The Minister
to-night mentioned certain payments,· and
'·Address in Reply.
469
quoted a statement from one of his officers.
He seems always to get his officers to
defend him. That is very unfair, because
they would not condemn him·. In this
statement. were given the amounts paid to
different churches. About £22,000 was
paid to the people. connected with the
Good Samaritan Convent for land t.o which
they had no title. I noticed to-night that
the Minister spoke about a possessory
title. That might accrue under ordinary
conditions, but there are extraordinary
conditions in this case which rob these
people of the right to a possessory title.
If a. man wants a piece of land in the
country upon which to erect a shop, and
it is not fenced and is vacant, and he
cannot find the owner, then, if he cares· to
take the risk, he can erect a shop upon it.
If no owner comes along, he pays the
rates, and in about twenty years he can
claim the land as his owri under a possessory title.
That is under ordinary
conditions, but in this case there are
extraordinary conditions. There are two
problems thn.t defeat any right to pay
these people for land which they do not
legally possess. The first is that they
cannot claim land against the Crown in
that way, and the second is that, this.land
was granted to them for use only. If the
Minister desires to be absolutely fair and
above board he ought, without asking, to
lay the whole of the papers, including the
original papers, on the table of the House,
because until the matter is cleared up the
public mind will not rest. As far as this
case goes, it is not a question of reli~ion.
If the Government had paid the £22,000
to a protesta,nt church without any
title, it would not have been a matter of
liberality but of gross extravagance in
throwing awn.y public money. The Minister spoke of £1,500 .he had to give to
some English church, because they .had
two moves. They moved to a certain
place, but disease broke out in the.neighbourhood and they were ordered to move
to another place, and the Minister
said, "For that we gave them £1,500." .
We applaud him for that, but this case is
not the payment of £1,500 but of the
payment of £22,000, and we know what
was the value of the buildings. If the
circumstances are as stated-that these
people got the land on the express condi- ·
tion that they should merely have the use
Eighth nigltt.
470
Governor's Speech:
[ASSEMBLY.]
of it until it was wanted for public purposes,
and that then they should be paid for the
improvements only, I say with a knowledge
of the value of the land there, that they
have been paid the full value of the land.
Mr. CRICK: Based on the hon. member's brother's claim !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I do not know
what his claim is. I have not seen him
for three months. If I had been dishonest
I would not have mentioned his case, but
it was in honestly working for the people
in that neighbourhobd, who had been kept
out of their compensation and humbugged
by the Government that I incidentally men
tioned his case. When a man is dishonest,
he will not fall into a trap like that.
Mr. LEVIEN: Not when he is cunning!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: This matter
mul:!t be inquired into. If they have no
title to the land these people cannot have
a possessory title, because that was stipulated against in the agreement. They
tried to get a deed and they say that a
promise of one was made to them, but
there is no record of such a promise, and
you cannot go by anything except documents in a matter of this kind. If the
Government could have given me a good
explanation I would have been satisfied,
but when the accusation made against
them is left unanswered, I would rather
sink into a political grave than vote
against my conscience in the matter.
The Minister thought it very necessary
to defend .himself to-night. Let him put
upon the table all the papers, not
only in connection with this property,
but also in connection with other ehurch
properties. I do not know what titles
they had. I ask hon. members to dismiss
from their mind any feeling of sectarianism
and to view the matter with an open mind·
and deal with it merely as a transaction
between man and man. If the accusation
is proved, I say it is a very sorry thing
indeed. The Minister, just before I began
to speak, gave the different amounts paid.
The Church of England got £8,800 for 2
·roods and 17 perches, and the Con vent of
the Good Samaritan got £21,750 for 2
roods and 29 perches. There is something
radically wrong. If members will shut
their eyes to this sort of thing, they will
be prepared to see anything go wrong.· If
I were one of the Ministers, and if charges
·of gross extravagance were made against
[Mr. Eden George.
Address in Reply.
the Government, I would ask for the
appointment of a select committee to
inquire into them.
Mr.J. F. SllliTH: The hon. member ought
to have done that twelve months ago?
Mr. EDEN GEORGE : I assure the
hon. member that up to the end of last
session I did not know that the Government had paid that. sum, nor did I know
any particulars. Some men, including
my brother, came to me about resumptions for which they had never been paid,
and it was then that I commenced to get
the facts of the other case. Now I come
to the question of the soldiers, because
there is a good number of rt>turned soldiers in my electorate. I asked the Government why they would not pay these
men. It is a miserable subterfuge for the
Government to go to court and put in the
plea that the men cannot sue the Crown.
vVhat· becomes of all the boasting before
the men went to the war 1 I11 the first
speech which the Goverhment put in my
hands 'to reply to, what was said as to
what would be done to these men if they
came back 1 Was it not said that if they
fell in bonorad graves their children would
not be allowed to starve, and, that if they
were spared to come back, it would be to
come to a grateful country. But what do we
find now 1 There are two men at Forbes
terribly maimed for life, absolutely beyond
work, and what can they get? There are
innumerable cases of that sort. I would
not blame the Government for trying to
defeat a dishonest claim; but if they have
a legal claim, let them tight it out properly.The judges have practically said that these
men have an honest claim. But for the
Government, with a cunning that is only
fit to be employed by the lower class of
business men, to try to bar these men from
their claims, is an action which redounds to
the discredit of Government and Parliament. Are the labour members going to
stand that 1 Who are the soldiers 1 If I
took an oath of loyalty to my ~overeign, I
would remain loyal; and, if I felt that I
could not support my country in any war
she was engaged in, then I would not stop
in this Parliament.
Mr. KELLY: The hon. member would
not go to the war ; he would go to the
railway-station and see the soldiers off!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Probably there
would be plenty of volunteers without me.
Governor's Speech :
[1
JULY,
1903.J
Address in Reply.
4il
I am sorry that I have had to take np so will not 'be completed within ten years.
much time; but this is not an ordinary· If you can show that any of my stateoccasion ; it is an extraordinary occasion.
ments are incorrect I will resign and neve:r
Another matter in the Governor's speech put up again. The hon. member for
which I wish to mention has reference Sturt, in his speech last night, displayed
to persons making statements about the great ability and reasoning powers. He
finances. I think it is a bad record for gave a proper explanation of his action in
the history of this Parliament that such a changing sides.
Some of our greatest
statement was put into the Governor's statesmen, in times gone by, changed their
speech. Let Ministers make that state- opinions and became great reformers. The
ment from one end of the country to the
whole nation of Englishmen have changed
other; but to make a gentleman who holds within the hst century. It is barely a
the impartial position the Governor is century ago since the working man was
supposed to hold, and who is supposed to merely an abject slave. . I have often
retain the respect of both sides of the. tried to trace out the era when the change
House, utter such words, is an insult to took place. I ascribe it to the man who
the Opposition.
Those words are un- wrote under the name of " Junius," and
paralleled. The Prime Minister tried to who, if discovered, would inevitably have
justify them by reading two previous go- suffered death. Men of that kind graduvernor's speeohes ; but there is no parallel. ally forced the world to recognise that "A
This is a distinct case of putting argu- man 's a man for a' that." The process of
mentative and insulting matter into the reform to·day ill the evolution which then
Governor's speech. One passage insulted began. Even if the labour party never
members of the Upper House for not lived, that progress would have been the
passing a measure which they had a right S!lme. Hon. members talk about capitato throw out; and in another (>assage the· . lists. They think that because a man has
Opposition was grossly insulted by in- ;money he has no sympathy. I sometimes
ference. I have noticed some reference find that the most genuine sympathiser is
to the using of £12,000,000 of trust funds.
the man with money. Last year the lea,der
There was a great controversy about the of the labour party made a proposal that
mat.ter. I understood the charge against the Government should start ironworks.
the Government to be that they left no It was stated that there was a syndicate.
reserve. It is a very foolish thing to have· from England ready to invest £250,000
£10,000 standing at your account in busi- or £500,000 at once, and eventually.
ness. A good business man would not let £3,000,000 in the iron industry. Ron.
that amount lie idls ; he would employ members strangled that enterprise. You
some of it in his business. If he employed cannot develop such· industries without
every penny of it, and left nothing for his capital. In America where trusts dominate,
current account or to meet a sudden obli- the working man's lot is never so bad as it is
gation, he might find himself in a very here. In England where there are trusts,
queer position ; but if he took £8,000 the working man is a king compared with
and left £2,000 to operate upon, he would what he is here. Mr. Tom .Mann, who is
do wisely. The gravamen of the charge paid a good salary to organise the labour
by the Opposition is not that the Govern- forces, said the other day that when he
ment used the money-because it would be came out to Australia he thought with our
foolish to suppose that they would pay democratic laws that he was coming out to·
3 to 4 per cent. to depositors and let the a democratic country where the condition.
money lie in the vaults-but that they of the working man would be verymuch
should not have a certain amount in re- a hove that of the toiler in the mother counserve in bullion. But, if the Minister in- try. But he declared that he found the.
vests the money in anything like the workin~ man in a much worse condition
Manly tram, there will not be much here than in England. My advice is to get
profit.
The tram, when completed, is all the capital we can into this country.
supposed to go to Narrabeen; but the The larger the scale of operations the better
other section will pay worse than thig it is for the working men. It is the small
one, because there is a poorer popula- employer who does the sweating. Does the
tion there, and, in any case, the tramway brickmaking tr.ust here pay low wages~
Eighth night.
4 -')
·~
Gove1·no·f.'s Speech:
[ASSEMBLY. J
In America you do not see men going about ters. We are filling the country with men·
unemployed. Working men there get £1 ·who cannot do a job properly. I do not
pAr day, and they have struck for more. impute i1ny disgrace to the poor when I
The total sum which the millionaires of speak of poverty. An honest man may be
America gave to charities last yenr was poor. Last -year the labour party asked
£40,000,000. .Yon may find a man with for free education. I hold that if we want
capital who does e~·erything he can to take to give stability to the nation that will
everybody down. But we ought not to depend upon the treatment of our young.
condemn a whole class for that.
Of course, it may be true that those brought
An RoN. MEMBER : How do they make up as newsboys may be able to make
the money?
a position in life. But what do such boys
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: A man can learn usually in their vocation? · They
make money honestly, though he may learn pitch and toss, and generally get
start in a small way. I£. a company is into bad habits. ·we ought to have them
making £50,000 a year, does it necessarily educated, and make tradesmen of them.
follow that they are not doing it honestly? Some of our great men have admitted that
It is a mistake to try to drag them down they commenced life as newsboys.. Our
because they have• capital. The labour boys should be brought up first in school,
party, being entrusted with the represen- and not in the streets. They should be
tion of labour, ought to study these ques- properly apprenticed and turned out real
tions out. If bon. members study the tradesmen. Another case is mentioned in
history of the colony, they will find that the papers this morning which shows the
labour is safer under big trusts, and in big unsatisfactory nature of our policy_ The
undertakings than it is in small ones. heading is, " Harassed hy labour legislaTake the Railway Department. That is a lation." I do not join exactly in the
big concern, and it would be impossible for opinions expressed ; but I say that I hold
the Government to sweat labour in con-. that arbitration is the correct policy.
nection with it. Take the railways in If a man who is supporting the Reform
England, which are large undertakings,· Association ~ays he wishes to do away
and see how the men nre treated there. I
with it, I am not with him. Here is a
wish hon. member·s would read the case in which theN epean Scouring Works
opinions of a man in America who has are being dosed, and 100 men 'thrown out
amassed wealth, and who thoroughly under- 'of work. Are not the labour party seized
stands all sides of thG question. He says with the seriousness of the position? There
that trusts will, sooner or later, have to is no personal feeling in the ~1atter. I
agree to share a portion of the profits believe the labour party are on the wrong
with the men. That is what the trusts track, and I invite them to state their
are coming to. They are sharing from 25 opinions. It may be unsavoury to them to
to 30 per cent. with their men. What is have their opinions attacked in an outspoken
the consequence? They have grand co- manner, but as I give them honor as men
operative concerns, in which each man they must also give me honor as a man. I
works as if he owned the business. I ask have spoken before their faces and not.
bon. members to look into this question, behind their backs. • I believe that if they
because it is a matter of the gravest con- come into Parliament free and unfettered
cern that they should be on the right track. they will have better support, and a
There are men in great poverty around us bright future, and will be of great assist- I have met a man whose only means of ance to the party they represent. I have
providing his family with meals was by to thank the House for listening to my
getting a drink in a hotel and taking home long address. I have tried to make my
some of the counter lunch in his pocket. position cons~stent, and I believe I have
If we could get the unions to agree to a succeeded. It has been absolutely necesproper system of apprenticeship, we should sary for me to thrash this question out. I
be able to make our youths proper trades- know that I have taken a stand against.
men. The trouble to-day is that the boys the lab0ur party which I have not seen
are not taught properly. You can get taken here before. I believe there are
half a dozen carpenters, but they are only more n)en of my opinion. One or two bon.
wood-spoilers ; they are not proper carperi- members have gone out of their way to
[ Mr.· Eclen Geprge.
Governor's Spee1:h :
[1
JULY,
insult me, but I do not thinkthat sort of
thing is re-echoed by the labour party. I
would to God that men would dissociate
personal feeling with any part of my speech.
i have tried to prove where 'the labour
party's methods are wrong, and if I have
incurred the displeasure of some bon. members who cannot listen to an outspoken
utterance I am very sorry for them, I ask
hon. members to view my speech as I have
delivered it from my heart, with an honest
desire to benefit the country and to assist
in rescuing it from its present difficulties.
The Secretary for Public Works knows
that anything I have stated to-night I
have stated openly. I have made no
charge· of corruption. If my words have
conveyed anything of that sort, I am.
sorry for having uttered them. I have
not tried by any back-door methods to
stab the Ministry or the labour party. I
have not heard a word of explanation as
to why the labour party are satisfied with
the existing state of things. Every man
knows that the Labour Bureau has been
administered in a way which has brought
discredit on the Jay-labour system. I ·
challenge the Secretary for Public Works
to say whether I have not appealed to him
to alter his policy in that regard.
Mr. O'SuLLIVAN : I know the hon.
member tried to run a dozen men in on.
one occasion !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I am going to
do it still, so long as the existing system
is allowed to prevail. I claim that I haye
more right than any other hon. member
to Government work, because in the electorate I represent there is a greater percentage of unskilled labour than there is
in any other part of the state. I have
never had 6d. spent on a bridge. The
only gratuity I have e\'er obtained has
been six pairs of blankets for poor people.
An HoN. ME~1BER : Whose fault is that~
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: It is because I
am not a labour man.
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: Why should the hon.
member be able to get men work when
others have been refused.
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Idonotcomplain,
but whilst there is any political patronage
going I intend to have my share. I told the
men it was of no use my going to the Minister. The hon. gentleman sent a circular
round, and if he had stuck to it, it would
1903.]
..Address in Reply•.
4.73.
have lifted the men up from their present
positi,on. They do not want to truckle to a
member of Parliament; but they want to
get work when it is available according to
their ability. Now, however, everything
is done by political influence. The Minister may have acted with a big heart. Of
course, when he has a large sum of money
belonging to the country, and men come
to him with a long tale of poverty, he,
with his big heart, sends them to work ..
When the bon. gentleman sent that circular round, I tried to assist him by telling the men, " It is of no use your coming
to me since the circular was issued, you
will have to apply to the Labour Bureau,
and will be taken on in proper rotation."
That system was utterly broken down by
the :Minister himself, and the Chief Labour
Commissioner, in acting as the hon. gentleman's. apologist, says, " 1\fr. George knows
nothing about it ; but it is true that in
our report we complained of this political
influence." I say it has gone on ever since.
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: That statement is
absolutely incorrect!
.
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: As the hon.
gentleman say!l that, I will mention names.
I say that Larry Foley could put men on
there when members of ParliamenL could
not put them on; and the Minister told me
to make a friend of that man, and then I
could get men put on,and Ideclinedto do it.
Mr. O'SuLLIVAN : · That statement is
absolutely incorrect!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE : I went to
Larry Foley, and he put on two or three
men. He has my letters, which he cannot
read. I found that the man in charge of
the works was the Minister's bosom friend.
The hon. member said, "Larry Foley is a
first-class fellow, and if you make a friend
of him you can get anything done."
Mr. O'SuLLIVAN: That statement is
absolutely incorrect .1
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Perhapsthehon ..
gentleman will say that he never broke
down his own Rystem; but to show how·
completely the system has broken down, I
may mention the hon. member for Denison
Division very generously offered to look
after my electorate whilst I was away-·-Mr. O'SULLIVAN: And now the hon.
gentleman has "split" on him !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE : Does the hon.
gentleman think that I am going to stand
by and see a big railway-station being
Eighth night.
474:
@overnor's Speech :
[ASSEMBLY.]
constructed in my electorate, and a number
of men getting work there, when I eannot
get any men put on. "When I could get
some men put on there I did so.
Mr. WILLIS: The bon. member is spoiling his speech !
Mr. O'SuLLIVAN: The bon. member is
just proving what a mean soul he has by
making all these statements !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: The bon. gentleman is good enough to say that I am
showing what a mean soul I have. But
does the bon. g~ntleman think that I am
going to stand by and see other bon. members getting men employment on works
near me-members representing electorates far away-when my own constituents
are coming to me starving and trying to
get employment 7
Mr. O'SuLLIVAN: They are not getting
them put on at all!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Well, they
were. I challenge the bon. gentleman to
produce the names of those I got on eventually, and see how long they were kept
on. One great fighting man was kept on
for a very long, indefinite period, but my
men were only kept on for· a month or
two, and then off they would go, and I
would see more favoured individuals working there right through. If I d-o expose
the present system, it is not an improper
and mean thing for me to do.
· Mr. O'SULLIVAN :I say that the hon. gentleman's statements are utterly incorrect !
· Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Surelythehon.
gentleman does not say that he had to put
those men on for me, and not for others !
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: Tam not aware that
I put on a single man for the bon. member during the last twelve months, and it
will be another twelve years before he
will get another man put on !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I know that
since I went over t0 the Opposition I have
not got a single man put on, except at
stone-breaking. As regards severe critic~~m, I will not do what has been done to
me. I will remember a man's family and
will not attack him pArsonally. I l1ave
been attacked personally. The Secretary
for Public Works, in speaking the other·
night of some of us, said that there was
something at the bottom of it, and that it.
was selfish interest. Ministers have no
respect for my character, nor for my
brothers and sisters. It is not manly for
rMr. Eden-George.
Address
~n
Reply.
them to hurl such a charge against me, as
the only member of a family who has a
seat in Parliament. No Minister shoulddescend to, such tactics. Let the bon.
member for Northumberland descend to
them if he likes; but when a man occupies·
a ministerial position, some respect is due
to his office, even if he has no respect for
himself. If he has no feeling for other
men, he should remem her he occupies·
that position and that his words and acctions are written on the pages of the history of the state, and that what he says
or does may degrade the Government and
the state. I am here and I defy the
whole Ministry to put me out. l challenge them· to come into my electorate·
and fight me. There are too many, breaka ways from the Government party to at-·
tribute them all to personal motives. Th~
climax came to-night, when the hon. mem'ber for Molong came over. Surely the
Minister will not put that han. member
in the category in which he attempted to
put us. The Ministry have not treated
many of us in a manly way. They have
'in"ade the assertion that because I wanted
to be called to the U ppcr House and was
not called, I came over here. If I wanted
to be dishGmest, I would have denied such
a statement, but what I said is very different to what the Minister stated. To twist
truth is worse than to tell an untruth
straight out, and I say that the truth of
that statement has been utterly twisted.
I say that the Government are pandering.
to the labour party, and I shall prove it.
in one instance. Last session a member
of the Opposition moved an amendment
in connection with the question of the
fodder duties. It was an amendment thatwe all felt bound to vote for, hut thePrime Minister ·said he would take it as
a vote of want of confidence if it were
carried. I said to the Minister, " You
might have accepted it, because it is only
a resolution." When a member was about
to move that a certain hon. member be no
further heard, I said, "Do not, or we shall
all be beaten," and I drew np an amendment on the amendment of the hon. member for St. George. I took it to the Prime
Minister and showed it to him, and he
approved of it. He said," Go down and
move it as soon as you can." I saw the
leader of the labour party, who said that
his party would have to vote with the leader
fiovernor's Speech.:
[l
JULY,
of the Opposition, and he went up to see
the Prime Minister. The Prime M.inister
asked me to send the Secretary for Public
Works to ask Mr. Speake!;' to call on me
next, and the Secretary for Public Works
went to Mr. Speaker for that purpose.
l\Ir. LEVIEN : This is all tattling !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Who began the
tattling 7 Who brought up the conversation 1 It was the Prime Minister, who
repeated a private conversation.
Mr. SPEAKER : Order !
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: If one man has
a certain conversation in a room, and goes
out and divulges it, and twists it, as the
Government have done in this matter, to
make out an improper motive on my part,
I do not think there is discredit in my
coming out with the whole conversation,
The Prime Minister has stated that at an
interview I wanted to be called to the
Upper House, and because I was not called
I came over to this side. That occurred
at the interview on this matter. I came
down to j_;he Chamber, and saw the Secretary for Public Wol'ks ~o to you, Mr.
Speaker. Then he said to me, "It is a
member o£ the Government who is speaking now;· but it is for a member of the
Opposition to speak next."
Mr. KELLY: This is a nice conspiracy!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: It was your
Government that did it. Let the Minister
deny it. I waited, and presently the
Minister came outside, and said, " Let me
have your motion." I handed it to him,
thinking he was going to look at it to see
that it was all in form. He took it; and
was away ten minutes. The speeches were ·
still going on. Then I saw him go to you,
Mr. Speaker, again. He then came to me
and said, "I want you to sacrifice yourself ; we want the labour party to move
this." At the time I felt very much hurt,
as the Minister remembers.
Mr. O'SuLLIVAN: I have no recollection
of it!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: The hon. gentleman will remember that when he came to
me I felt hurt, because I thought that he
depreciated me in Mr. Speaker's mind. I
thought that his action wonld do me great
injury in Mr. Speaker's eyes. It was the
bon. member for l\ioree who was to move
the amendment. He came into the Chamber, followed by his party, and moved my
motion ; and in the morning papers there
1903.]
Address in Reply.
4i5
was half· a column in which it was stated
that the amendment was moved by the
labour party. I can mention other things
also if I am to be charged with coming
over to to this side with other than honest
intentions. I shall have to be put to the
necessity of defending myself by bringing
out the true state of the facts.
Mr~ O'SuLLIVAN : I am willing to leave
this matter with the hon. member for
Moree. The bon. member for Moree had
his own resolution, and· I ~ery properly
tore up that of the bon. member for Belmore Division and pitched it into the fire!
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: If Mr. Speaker's
mouth was not sealed, he could tell.a tale.
I will show what followed. The next
night the Prime Minister sent for me, and
it .was on that night that he asked me to
come into his room. I left the House a
minute or two after, and the hon. member
for Wilcannia was there. The interview
in which the Upper House was mentioned,
occurred in this way : One day I received
at my office, a telephone message that the
Prime Minister wished to see me. I came
in, not knowing what it was for, and proceeded to his office. I would a!lk the
Ministers to say whether I have been in
the habit of haunting their offices 7 I had
only once before that bePn at the Prime
Minister's office. When I arrived at the
Colonial Secretary's Department I sent in
my card, and although there were two or
three members hanging round the door,
and several other gentlemen, I got a
message to go round to a side door
and into the anteroom. The Prime Minis·
ter did not keep me waiting, and what
astounded me was that he said, " I want
to thank you on behalf of the l\linistry
for the work you did for us during the
session." I said, "What a ridiculous
thing to send for me for that !" The
Prime Minister said that the Ministry
could not forget my advice. I was sent
for for that. I honestly did not want to
put up at the last general election, because
for the last eight or nine years I have had
indifferent health, and I think the late
night work in Parliament may be injuriious. The Prime Minister said, "I intend,
as a rflcognition of your work, to send you
a present, which it is only in the power of
the Ministry to send. I am going to make
you a present of the records of the colony."
He said that that was a special presen'i
Eighth ni9ht.
476
Governors Speech.:
'[ASSEMBLY.]
·.Address in Reply;
that only the Prime Minister could give; desire, and not a dishonest one, on tlie
and that it was worth £40. I was as- part of a man who wishes to get there. I
tounded that he should send for me. He have still that ambition. I still feel that
told me that the Ministry would always if my health breaks down again this Parbear me in mind. I do not think there liament will have to see me no more, as
was anything dishonorable in that. I said far as the Lower Chamber is concerned.
to Sir John See, " I think I told you, in I may be over-sensitive.
Mr. Hor,LIS: Oh !
the early part of my career that I had no
great ambition for office; I can do without
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Perhaps the
it." I would not be a member of the Public hon. member is not over-sensitive. The
Works Committee, because I do not be- hon. member went to Melbourne in conlieve in it. I said, " Well, there is one nection with the recent strike, arid for two
thing, Sir John, I am really getting sick days we read in the newspapers telegrams
of the House, and at a later stage when from him to the effect that the men were
you are making appointments to the Upper never so determined, and that the strike
House, I may ask you to call me to that was bound to be a success. Two days
place." I afterwards visited the Secretary afterwards the whole thing proved to be a
failure. I pity the poot· men who went
for Lands at his house.
Mr. CRICK : - on strike. They were practically led to
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: The hon. mem- give up situations which they had held for
ber then told me that I ought to bein the. years. It is time the labour unions got
men to stop that sort of thing. I admired
Upper House.
Mr. CRICK : I would sooner put my the hon. member for Cobar last night
puppy dog there. I do not think the hon. when he told us that he had over and
member was ever in my house !
over again urged men to keep from striking
Mr. EDEN GEORGE: Yes. I went until the last thing. That is the sort of
there with Tom Taylor, after.his election. man who is wanted at the head of unions.
I said, at a later stage, " If you are con- I have always been a great supporter of
sidering appointment~:~ to the Upper House, unions. I have a good ·record from
I might like to be called there; but," I
unionists in connection with my position
said, " I do not think the public would as Mayor of Christchurch. As the hon.
stand any nominations to the Upper House member for Cobar stated last night, a
at present, because of the demand for re- strike is the last thing in the world to be
trenchment."
undertaken. I have no doubt that if the
, Mr. CRICK : The Pri.me Minister was hon. member had been in Melbourne he
not Sir John then !
would not have urged the men to lose
· Mr. EDEN GEORGE: I was speaking their situations. Seeing that there was a
of an interview which occurred two or danger of failure he would have exercised
three weeks before my coming over to this ·discretion. The Melbourne strike was
side of the House. I have told other carried out in a hurry. Some men are
Ministers, in conversation, how utterly such frantic unionists that they commit
dissatisfied I am with their policy. I have wrong actions, such as leaving theit• engines
told it to the hon. member for The Murray, on the points. These men, of course,
and many others. I should have allowed never got back to w01·k again. Many of
the matter to drop if I had been let alone. them who had entered into engagements
I have spoiled some of my speeches in try- to purchase a house on time-payment have
ing to be over-courteous ; but when I find found that all their savings have gone. I
odium and personal abuse is cast upon me ask members of the labour party to take
I must reply to it. Is it dishonorable to heart the words of ad vice of the hon.
for a man to suggest such a thing to the member for Cobar. Thank God that havPrime Minister unaccompanied by threat ing got an Arbitration Act we are not
or suggestion 1 I hold that it is a laud- likely to have any more strikes in this
able thing for a man to seek to occupy a country. I remember the strike of some
seat in the highest House in the country. years ago, which spread from this state
I maintain that nine out of ten men in even to New Zealand. On that occasion
the Upper House got there from their own some men, when they felt the pinch of
initiation and suggestion. It is a laudable poverty, deserted their wives and left
[Mr. Eden George.
Governor's Speech :
(1 JULY, 1903.]
them to be supported by the state. If
to-night I have set hon. members thinking, and have roused the labour party
to a consideration of the situation, my
speech will not have been in vain.
I care not what may become of myself. I
have been sent here by my constituents,
not only to speak on their behalf, but also
to give the best of my abilities to the service of my country. I have expressed my
views with an honest desire to persuade
the labour party. to give up its caucus and
handcuffs. When they come here as freemen I will assist therri to increase their
numbers, and raise them to such a position
as the labour party occupies in New Zealand. If my speech will set them thinking, and will bring about an alteration of
their programme in the direction I have
indicated, and if in the end it will tend also
to bring about a better state of things generally, or even if it will bring home to the
Government some pf their evil doings and
bad administration, and cause them in the
future to act more consistently and in accordance with the well-known attributes
belonging to ministerial capacity,-! say
that if my speech has that effect, then my
little effort to-night will not have been in
vam.
Mr. KELLY: I move :
That the question be now put.
Question-That the question be now
put-put. The House divided :
Ayes, 53; noes, 51; majority, 2.
AYES.
Anderson, G.
Archer, W.
Barnes, J. F.
Bennett, W.
Briner, G. S.
Campbell, Alexander
Chapman, A. E.
Clarke, H.
Crick, W. P.
Davis, Vi'. W.
Dight, U. H.
Donaldson, R. T.
.l!;stell, J.
Evans, J. G.
Fegan, J. L.
Fitzpatrick, T.
Gillies, J.
Griffith, T. H.
Hall, B.
Hall, D. R.
Holman, W. A.
Hurley, W. ]'.
Jones, G. A.
Kelly, A. J.
Kidd, J.
Levien, R. H.
MacDonell, D.
MacMahon, M. J.
McFarlane, J.
McNeill, J.
Meagher, R. D.
Miller, G. T. C.
Nelson, A. D.
Nicholson, J. B.
Norton, J.
O'Sullivan, E. W.
Perry, J.
}'ower, J. J.
Quinn, P. E.
Richards, E .
Scobie, R.
See, Sir John
Sleath, R.
Smith, J. F.
Smith, T. R.
Storey, J.
Thomson, J.
Waddell, T.
Williams, W. J.
Willis, W. N.
Young, W. W.
Tellers,
Dacey, J. R.
McLaurin, G. R.
.Address in Reply.
477
NOES.
Ashton, J.
Broughton, E. C. V.
Brunker, J. N.
Burgess, G. A.
Carroll, J. G.
Carruthers, J. H.
Clara, P. J.
Clark, E. M.
Coleman, J. W.
Collins, A. E.
Dick, W. T.
Eddeu, A.
l!'allick, J.
Ferguson, \V. J.
Fitzpatrick, J. C. L.
Fleming, W. M.
Garland, J.
George, Eden
Gilbert, 0:
Gormly, J.
Griffith, A.
Hawthorne, J. S.
Haynes, J.
Hogue, J. A.
Hollis, R.
·Hurley, J.
Jessep, T.
Latimer, W. 1!'.
Law, S. J.
Levy, D.
Mackenzie, T. F. H.
Mahony, W. H.
McCoy, R. W. W. ·
Millard, W.
Moore, S. W.
Morton, M. F.
Moxham, T. R.
Newman, H. W.
Nobbs, J.
Oakes, C. W.
O'Connor, D.
O'Conor, B. B.
Phillips, S.
Price, R. A.
Quirk, E. W.
Rose, T.
Ross, Dr.. A.
Storey, D.
Wood, W. H.
1'ellers
Cohen, J.
Nielsen, N. R. W.
J
Question so resolved in the affirmative.
Question-That the words proposed to
be omitted stand part of the questionput. The House divided:
·
In division :
Mr. QUINN: Mr. Speaker--·
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. member cannot
reply at present.
Ayes, 65 ; noes, 42 ; majority, 23.
AYES.
Anderson, G.
Archer, "'·
Barnes, J. F.
Bennett,'W.
Briner, G. S.
Burgess, G. A.
Campbell, Alexander
Cann, J. H.
Chapman, A. E.
Clara, P. J.
Clarke, H.
Collins, A. E.
Crick, W. P.
Dacey, ,J. R.
Davis, W. W.
Dight, C. H.
Donaldson, R. T.
Edden, A.
Estell, J.
Evans, ,J. G.
Fegan, J. L.
Fitzpatrick, T.
Gillies, J.
Gormly, J.
Griffith, Arthur
Griffith, T. H.
Hall, B.
Hall, D. R.
Hollis, R.
Holman, W. A.
Hurley, W. F.
Jones, G. A.
Kidd, J.
Levien, R. H.
Macdonald, H.
MacDonell, D.
MacMahon, M. J.
McGowen, J. S. T.
McLaurin, G. R.
McNeill, J.
Meagher, R. D.
Miller, G. T. C.
Nelson, A. D.
Nicholson, J. B.
Nielsen, N. R. ·w.
Norton, J.
O'Sullivan, E. W.
Perry, J.
!'ower, J. J.
Quinn, P. E.
Quirk, E. W.
Richards, E.
Scobie, R.
See, Sir John
Sleath, R.
Smith, J. F.
Smith, T. R.
Storey, J.
Thomson, J.
Waddell, T.
Williams, W. J.
Willis, W. N.
Young, W. W.
'l'ellers, .
Kelly, A. J.
McFarlane, J.
478
Governor's Speech.
[ASSK\B3LY.]
NoEs.
Ashton, J.
Broughton, E. C. V.
Brunker, J. N.
Carroll, J. G.
Carruthers, J. H.
Clark, E. M.
Cohen, J .•T.
Coleman, J. W.
Dick, W. T.
Fallick, J.
Ferguson, ,,-. J.
Fitzpatrick,·J. C. L.
Fleming, W. M.
Garland, J.
George, Eden
Gilbert, 0.
Hawthorne, J. S.
Hogue, J. A.
Hurley, J.
J essep, T.
Latimer, 'N. F.
Levy, D.
Mr. J. C. L. FITZPATRICK: Mr. Speaker,
1 move.:
Mackenzie, T. F. H.
Mahony, W. H.
McCoy, R. W. W.
Millard, W.
Moore, S. W.
Morton, M. F.
Moxham, T. R.
Newman, H. "\V.
Nobbs, J.
Oakes, C. W.
O'Connor, D.
O'Conor, B. B.
Phillips, S.
Price, R. A.
Rose, T.
Ross, Dr. A.
Storey, D.
Wood, W. H.
That the hon. member be not further heard.
Tellers,
Haynes, J.
Law, S. J.
Question so resolved in the affirmative.
[1lfr. Speake1·le.ft the chair at 6'10 a.m.
House 1·esumed at 6··30 a.m.]
Slipply.
The
l\'lr. JESSEP (Waverley) [6·32 a.m.]:
Recognising the heavy strain;M.r. Speaker,
which has been put on you and the officers
of the House, I have not the slightest desire,
after such a lengthy sitting as we have had,
to trespass on the time of the House, and
I am quite prepared to waive my right to
speak, provided that I have the assurance
of bon. members opposite that they will
not occupy further time.
Mr. QUINN (Sydney-Bligh) [6·33 a.m.]
in reply : I take it that, of cou'rse, the
stipulation of the bon, member for Waver·
ley will not exclude the short reply which
I shall endeavour to make?
HoN..MEMBERS: Yes! Yes!
Mr. QUINN : I think the mover of the
resolution stands in a somewhat different
position from other hon. members in a case
of this sort. I do not intend to take up
much time. I would not do it out of consideration to the House.
Mr. AsHTON : I move :
That the hon. member be no further heard.
HoN.:MEMBERS: "Hear,hear!"and "No,
no!"
Mr. AsHTON : I will not press my motion!
Mr. QU.INN : Considering the length
of the speech of the hon. member who last
addressed the House, I think the motion
of the hon. member for Goulburn is one
that would do him very little credit.
l\'J:r. SPEAKER : I understand that the
hon. memberfor Bligh Division only wants
to make an explanation.
Mr. J. C. L. FITZPATRICK : He need not
be insulting.
·
.
Mr. SPEAKER: I understand the hon.
member wishes to make an explanation,
and I wish ·he would do so.
Mr. QUINN: You see, Mr. Speaker,
that I have very little chance to make an
explanation. under the circumstances
the reply which I have to make is one
which I think would have been, at any
rate from my point of view, of considerable importance. The space which has
been covered in the debate has been very
large, and although the constitutional
aspect of the referendum which I have
put forward has not been answered, still
there are many matters-Mr. DICK : I move :
That the hon. member be not further heard.
Mr. QUINN:-Mr. NoRTON: I think everybody ought
to abide by the compact which was made.
RoN. MEMBERS : Hear, hear !
Mr.· QUINN: Under the circumstances,
Mr. Speaker, if I may be allowed to put
my explanation in my own language, I do
not propose to continue the debate at any
further length ; but there will arise an
opportunity to deal with the subject-matter
before the House, and I trust that when
that opportunity occurs no such .anxiety
will be displayed to sandbag my sentiments as are apparent now.
Original question put, and resolved in
affirmative.
Sir JOHN .SEE : I beg to an·nounce that
his Excellency the Governor will receive
the address iu reply to his opening speech
on Tuesday next at 4·30 p.m.
ORDER OF BUSINESS.
Sir JOHN SEE : I think that if we deal
with the sessional orders, it will be as well
to adjourn until Tuesday next.
SUPPLY.
Resolved (on motion by Mr. WAD DELL) ·
That the House will on its next sitting-da;~
reeolve itself into the committee of supply.
Ways and Means.
[1 JULY, 1903.]
WAYS AND MEANS.
Resolved (on motion by Mr. -w·ADDELL):
That the House will on its next sitting-day
resolve itself into the committee of ways and
means.
SESSIONAL COMMITTEES.
Sessional Committees.
479
to sit during any adjournment, and authority to
apt in matters of mutual concernment with any
committee appointed for similar purposes by the
Legislative Council.
PRINTING COMMITTEE.
:Motion (by Sir JoHN SEE) proposea:
(l.) That the Printing Committee for the
present session consist of Mr. Gormly, Mr.
Motion (by Sir Jo:HN SEE) proposed:
Willis, Mr. Macdonald, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Gillies,
Mr. Nicholson, Mr. Millard, Mr. Coleman, Mr.
That the Standing Orders Committee for the
present session .consist of Mr. Speaker, Mr.
Davis, and the mover, to whom are l1ereby reCarruthers, Mr. Crick, Mr. Meagher, Mr. Dight,
ferred all papers (except such as the standing
Mr. McGowen, Mr. Ashton, Mr. Holman, Mr.
orders direct shall be printed, reports from select
committees on private bills, Estimates of Ex:
Moore, and the mover, with leave to sit during
any adjournment, to report in any matter or
penditure and Estimates of Vl'ays and Means),
which may be laid upon the table of the House.
thing refetred to or pending before the said
committee, and to confer upon subjects of mutual ,It shall be the duty of such committee to report,
concernment with any committee appointed for
from time to time, which of the papers referred
similar purposes by the Legislative Council, and . to them ought, in their opinion, to be printed,
that Mr. Speaker be empowered to convene
and whether in full or in abstract; and it shall
meetings of the committee.
be in the power of the committee to order such
papers, or abstracts thereof, to be prepared for
Mr. CARROLL_: No doubtmanymem- press
by the clerk in attendance upon such combers of the Standing Orders Committee mittee, and such papers or abstracts shall be
will sympathise with myself and other printed. unless the House otherwise order.
(2.) That the clerk of the Hous~ shall cause
country members who wished to say a few
to be printed, as a matter of course, all reports
words before the debate on the address in from
the Printing Committee.
STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE.
reply closed. I was about to suggest that.
Mr.J.C.L. FITZPATRICK (Rylstone)
the standing orders should be altered so
that members might not be shut. out from [6.50 a.m:]: In connection with this comtheir right to speak in the House on an mittee, which has to deal with technical
matters, I should like to know why it is
important occasion like that.
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. member cannot that it is not constituted on an altogether
debate that matter now. It is a matter different basis. I contend that it is absowhich can only be referred to the commit- lutely essential in the interests of the taxpayers that the members of the committee
tee by resolution.
should
possess some technical knowledge
Mr. AsHTON: I have heard discussions
take place in connection with the appoint- with regard to the probable cost of printing
·doenments brought before· the committee,
ment of the Refreshment Committee.
Mr. SPEAKER : That committee is on a and which it may not order to be printed.
.Mr. PEnRY : Any member of the comdifferent footing. Matters can only be
referred to the Standing Orders Commit- mittee ought to be a judge of that matter !
Mr. J.- C. L. FITZPATRICK: The
tee by resolution of the House.
hon. member for Manaro and other hon.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
members connected with the printing
LIBRARY COMMITTEE.
trade know that when a heap of bulky
Resolved (on motion by Sir JoHN SEE): documents is brought before a man who
That the Library Committee for the present has no knowledge of the business, it is
session consist of Mr. Speaker, Mr. Wright,
impossible for him to determine what the
Mr. Quinn, Dr. Ross, Mr. Hogue, f.-lr. Ferguson,
cost of the printing will be.
Mr. Carruthers, Mr. Alexander Campbell, Mr.
Sir JOHN SEE: The committee can send
Arthur Griffith, and the mover, with leave to
sit during any adjournment, and authority and
to the Government Printer whenever they
power to act jointly with the Library Committee
wish, and get the fullest information !
of the Legislative Council, in accordance with
:Mr. J. C. L. FITZPATRICK: I adtheAssembly'sresolution of the 6th August, 1862.
mit that. There are two hon. members
REFRESHMENT COMMITTEE.
on the committee-the hon. members for
Resolved (on motion by Sir JOHN SEE): West Maitland and Coonamble-who have
That the Refreshment Committee for the ·some knowledge of the printing business.
present session consist of Mr. Speaker, Mr.
Mr. SLEATH : Why should they be on
Anderson, Mr. Dacey, Mr. Levien, Mr. Sleath,
the committee, when they have personal
Mr. Henry Clarke, Mr. Frank Farnell, Mr.
interests to serve~
Oakes, Mr. Archer, and the mover, with leave
480
Sessional Committees.
l ASSEMBLY.]
Mr. J. C. L. FITZPATRICK: They
cannot have any personal interests to
serve as members of the committee, because they cannot derive any personal
advantage from being on the committee.
The chairman of the committee, the hon.
member for W agga W agga, is always willing to consult the, wishes of hon. members
of the committee, but it cannot be contended that he possosses any practical
knowledge with regard to the cost of printing documents. I do not wish to insinuate
that the Goverment have carried into
effect any desire to prevent a proper repreRentation of the Opposition on the committee, but I would point out that seven
of the nine members of thfl committee are
supporters of the Government, and that
only two members of the Opposition have
been placed on the committee.
Sir JOHN SEE : I am quite willing to
retire and place the hon. member on the
committee instead of myself !
Mr. J. C. L. FITZPATRICK: I do not
want to be on the committee.
Mr. CRICK : Well, suggest a name !
Mr. J. C. L. FITZPATRICK: I would
not like to suggest that any of the present
names should be excised, but I say that
the committee should be constituted according to the number of members of the
various parties in the House ; and as there
are seven supporters of the Government,
end only two members of the Opposition
on the committee, I think that is a rPasonable ground for some complaint on my
part.
Mr. DICK (Newcastle East) (6-54 a.m.]:
I do not rise for the purpose of takin"' exception to th~ exceedingly crude g~am­
matical construction of the motion, or to
the very bad printing that characterises
it, but I should like to draw the attention
of the Prime Minister to the fact that on
the last Printing Committee there was a
member of the House who attt>nded more
frequently to the business of the committee than did ariy other member. Irefer to the hon. member for Dubbo, and
seeing that he attended to the business of
the committee so well, it seems to me to
be a reflection on that hon. gentleman that
he should he left off the committee now.
I move:
That the question be amended by omitting
"Mr. Willis" and inserting in lieu thereof the
words " Mr. Phillips."
[Mr. J. C. L. Fitzpat1·iclc.
.Adjournment.
I do this to mark the appreciation of
-the House of the services that gentleman
has already rendered on the Printina Committee.
"
Amendment agreed to.
Question as amended resolved in the
affirmative.
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT.
Motion (by Sir JOHN SEE) agreed to:
That this House at its rising this day do
adjourn until Tuesday next.
ADJOURNMENT.
REGISTRATION OF FIRMS-THE VICTORIAN RAILWAY STRIKE-BROKEN HILL WATER SUPPLYDISTRESS IN COUNTRY DISTRICTS-COBAR TO
WILCANNIA RAILWAY-'VATER. CONSERVATION
WORK AT WENTWORTH-.BLACKWATTLE BAY.
Motion (by Sir JoHN SEE) proposed:
That this House do now adjourn.
Mr. ~ESSEP (Waverley) [6·58 a.m.]:
In the mterests of the public, and particularly of the trading public, I desire to call
attention to what is generally regarded as
a departure from the conditions of an act
pass~d by this House and afl'ecting those
tradmg under the designation of firms.
The act has been so interpreted as to demand the payment of an additional tax
from every person trading under his own
n.ame, under which, according to his own
Signature, he has been trading year in and
year out, and that pressure is now bein"'
put upon struggling poor men and wome~
wh~ ~nd it almost impossible to pay this
additional tax. I hope the Prime Minister
will take cognisance of the matter and see
that the act . shall be properly enforced,
and that this oppression shall not be
inhflicted on .the poor trading portion of
t e commumty. It was never intended
to impose additional taxation in the manner in w:hich it is now being imposed by
the Regtstrar-General. I feel sure that in
the interests of the public the Prime
Minister will take the necessary steps to
have the matter properly attended to.
Mr. H 0 L LIS (Newtown-Erskine)
[7 a.m.] : I regret that I was prevented
from sayin5 anything in the debate on the
address in reply, and I think I ought not
to let this opportunity pass without referring to the remarks of the hon. member
for Belmore Division, who practically said
that I was the cause of the Victorian strike.
I ~erely want to say that I was always
agamst the men in Victoria striking.
Adjournment.
[1 JuLY, 1903.]
Registration of Firms, &c.
481
Mr. WILLIAMS (Alma) [7 a.m.]: I This matter deserves the attention of the
wish t.o know what t.he Prime Minister pro- Prime Minister, because at present a large'
poses to do with regard to the water supply number of people who are not obliged to
at Broken Hill between now and Tuesday 1 register are being made to register by the
Mr. LEVY (Sydney-Fitzroy) [7 ·1 a.m.] : Registrar-General, and made to pay the
I desire to invite the Prime Minister's at- fee of 5s. Considering the large number
tention to the manner in which the Regis- of poor shopkeepers who have been called·
tration of Firms Act is being administered. upon to register, this matter ought to
We all know that the best acts of Parlia- receive the immediate attention of the
ment can be made instruments of tyranny Prime Minister, and he should take some
by a rigid interpretation or harsh construc- steps toconsultwith the Registrar-General,
tion of their language. The Registrar- so as to ascertain whether that officer has
General is compelling a large number of not made a mistake.
persons to register their names who are not
Mr. CLARA (Condoublin) [7·5 a.m.]: I'
obliged to register under the act. These should like to draw .the Prime Minister's'
people have no means of finding out attention to a very important matter. It
what the law is. They cannot read the has reference to the distress that now ex. act for themselves. They seP passages in ists in and around Condoublin. The rain
the newspapers inserted on the authority has not yet satisfied the requirements of
of the Registrar-General, and they think tbe people in that particular part. I
that they are bound to register. In the should like to see the Secretary for Public
first place, I would call the attention of Works show a stronger ba~kbone and
the Prime Minister to the fact that a fee have certain works constructed which he
of 5s. has been imposed upon all people directed to be carried out outside the
who registet· under the act. That fee has municipality of Condobolin where a subnot been fixed by the act itself, but by the sidy- would be of no use. I trust the hon.
Executive. It is an altogether excessive member will help the sleeper-getters, as he
charge. The act was never intended to has promised to do. It is in the interests
provide a source of revenue to the Govern- of these people that something should be
ment. It was intended to be a means by done immediately.
which people could ascertain the real
Mr. SLEATH (Wilcannia) [7·6 a.m.]:
names of the members of the firms with Although this House and the other House
which they were trading. I purposely ab- have agreed to the construction of the
stained from fixing any fee in the act,. '· Cobar to Wilcannia railway, the Treasurer
because I thought that that might well be had the impudence the other day to say
left to the discretion of the Executive. It that it would not be carried out, because
is easy to increase or decrease. the fee, and Mr. Oliver, the Chief Commissioner for
I believe in leaving such details to the Railways, suggested it should not be
discretion of the Government. They made done.
a g1;eat mistake in fixing the fee as high
Mr. WADDELL : I never made such a
as 5s. In the second place 1 would point statement!
out that in many cases where people have
Mr. SLEATH: Yes, tht- hon. member
been tradiv.g under their usual names, but
did.
perhaps not their full namPs, the RegistrarMr. SPEAKER : Order. The hon. memGeneral has been warning them to register.
ber
must accept the hon. mem her's stateSuppose a man's name is Edward Jones,
·
and he has been trading as E. Jones ; the ment.
Mr.
SLEA.TH:
1
will;
but I know to
name is outside his door, and he signs his
cheques " E. Jones," yet he is told by the the contrary. And if the. Government is
Registrar-General that he must register. going to please certain city members by
If hon. members will look at the act they providing work here and leave undone
will find that where a person trades in his works which have been passed by Parliausual name, whether it is hi~> full name or ment, and for which the money has been
not, he is not obliged to register. The voted, it is about time that they considered
where they are. The other day the Treainterpretation clause says :
surer said he had received a letter from
The usual name includes the signature habituthe Chief Commissioner for Railways, who
ally used for business purposes.
s
,
48:!
Adjournment.
[A~SEMBLY. J Registration of Firms, &:c.
said that this rail way should not be carried
out, and on that account the Treasurer said
it would have to wait.
An RoN. MEMBER: Who is Mr. Oliver1
Mr. SLEATH: I do not know, but I
think he was a clerk somewhere a year or
two ago. He got bumped up by some of
his parliamentary friends from £500 a
year to £3,500 a year, and he is now a
man of importance. I consider he is one
of the greatest humbugs. I challenge the
Treasurer to produce the letter and lay it
on the table of the House. I know that
the Treasurer accepts the Chief Commissioner's opinion against that of Parliament. The bon. member wonld accept
even a messenger's opinion against that
of Parliament, and would make use of
it.
Mr. AsHTON : I think there is a better
reason than that!
Mr. SLEATH: I do not know anything about the hon. member's better
reason. The reason alleged is that the
Chief Railway Commissioner objects to it.
If the Chief Commissioner for Railways
is going to control the two Houses of
Parliament, there is an end of it. The
Treasurer has not enough backbone to do
anything. Vve all know what he is; we
have seen him here before.
Mr. FERGUSON : The hon. member votes
for him !
Mr. SLEATH: And I may vote for
him again, though it may be much against
my inclination. The hon. member is trying
~o be on both sides, and he has just about
got into deep water.
Mr. FERGUSON: There is no "Yes-No"
about him!
Mr. SLEATH: Yes, he is always
"Yes-No," and he has always been. He
goes and tells the hon. member for Alma,
"We will not go on with that, because
the Chief Commissioner for Railways
objects to it"-after Parliament has passed
it. We voted the money for it, but the
Government will not go on with it because
the Chief Commissioner objects to it. I
say, with all due respect to the Treasurer,
that if he is going tci be the little humbug
of the Railway Commissioners, and to do
as they tell him, ignoring the decision of
this House, it is about time he 'valked
out and let somebody else sit over there.
Because the Chief Commissioner oqjects
[Mr. Sleath.
to this work the Treasurer said he would
do all sorts of things to prevent it from
being carried out.
Mr. SCOBIE (Wentworth) [7·13 a.m.]:
I wish to say a few words about a certain
public work which is urgently wanted in my
electorate, and for which £2,000 was put
aside by Parliament. I am not going into
all the details at present. I understand
that one reason for not carrying out the
work after the money was voted was that
horse-feed could not be procured. When
the river rose, and horsefeed could bP
procured,. the horse-feed which had been
previously purchased was sold, and it was
decided that the work could not he gone on
with, because a few people met in Sydney,
who knew nothing about the circumstances
of the people out there, and decided that
the work ought not to be gone on with, because of some federal concern. Now, I hear,
and I believe it is correct, that owing to the
state of affairs at Broken Hill, it is intended
to carry out this work at Wentworth to provide relief for the unemployed of Broken
Hill. I feel pleased that it may be a means of
giving work to the unemployed of Broken
Hill. I heartily rejoice that some work can
be found for those people. What I wish to
draw the attention of the House to is this,
that whilst the work was promised, and a
show made of the money being devoted to
the purpose of carrying on this work, had ·
that work been carried out the water which
rose in the river Darling recently would
have entered that ana-branch, and the
peop'le whos.e stock was dying would have
been saved. The stock in that district has
been steadily dying during the eight years
of drought, and the few that the people have
managed to keep alive are perishing now
for want of water. Gardens which have
been half a century in existence are drying
up, because there is no water coming down
the anabranch. This is a matter which I
have pressed on the attention of the Government ever since I came to Parliament.
Whilst I have received every consideration that such an electorate in its droughtstricken condition. could expect from the
Prime Minister and other members of the
present Ministry, I wish to say here and
now that I have had no recognition at all
from the Secretary for Public Works. I
feel very bitterly on the matter, so bitterly
that I really think I had better sit down
instead of saying any more.
Adjournment.
[1 JuLY, 1903.]
Mr.HOGUE(Glebe)[7·17a.m.l: I desire
to draw the attention of the Government,
and especially of the Secretary for Public
Works, to a very important and necessary
work. Yesterday a very important work
was opened by the Government, namely,
the Glebe Island Bridge. I should like to
point ont that another important work
should be performed by the Works Department, namely, the dredging out of
Blackwattle Bay, adjoining the. bridge.
That is a matter affecting the lives and
health of a great number of people. The
bay is in such a condition that it is a perfect scandal that the Government should
have allowed it to continue in its present
state so long. I asked the Secretary for Public Works to visit the place, which he did,
and was shown the condition of the bay.
We ·have had an official report on the subject, and we have had now and then a
dredge at work in the bay, but unfortunately, there is scarcely any money available for the service. The health of thousands of people surrounding that locality is
affected, and that is a matter of great con. sidel'ation. I wish to impress upon the
Prime Minister and the Secretary for Public
Works that the work should be attended
to at once. Not another day should go by
without a dredge being set to work there.
I have had a promise from the Minister
that a dredge would be used there during
the winter months, the winter being the
proper season for such a work. The work
is of very great importance, not only to
my constituents, but also to the residents of the Denison electorate, Pyrmont,
Ultimo, Forest Lodge and Darlington. Of
course it may be considered a matter for
the Harbour Trust, but the Harbour Trust
can do nothing unless funds are voted by
Parliament for the purpose. I earnestly
urge the Secretary for Public Works to
take this matter up at once, and not to
lose sight of it until that bay is properly
dredged, and the menace to the lives of
the people is removed.
Mr. CARROLL (The Lachlan) [7·20
a.m.]: I am sorry to say that the electorate
I represent is in a. similar condition to the
Wentworth and Condoublin electorates.
Unless the Government can do somflthing
for the people in the shape of finding work
they will have td ask them to remove them
from that part of the country. I have a
telegram from the electorate which states;
Registratwn o; Firms, &c.
483
" For God's sake, get us something to do ;
we are starving." I hope to wait upon the
Prime Minister this afternoon and talk
the matter over with him.
Sir JOHN SEE (Grafton), Colonial
Secretary [7 ·21 a.m.], in reply : I shall be
delighted to see the hon. member. I can
assure the bon. member for Alma that the
Government will do everything they can to
minimise the effect of the misfortune which
has arisen. I look upon this as ::me of the
most serious things which has happened to
the state for a long time. I am fully impressed with the magnitude of the suffering which will exist if rain does not
speedily fall. Anything the Government
can do will be done. Hon. members will
admit that the Government took prompt
steps to provide the people with water for
domestic purposes. l was very much surprised when I learned how short was the
supply of water at Broken Hill. We
were told that there was a supply for ten
days, not only fo·r domestic use, but also
for the mines, and then, within twenty-.
four hours, these mines suspended work.
The Government have sent one of their
most responsible officers to the place tosee that any cases of distress are promptly
dealt with. With regard to the Registration of Firms Act, I do not know much
beyond what I have seen in the newspapers. There has been a great rush to
get names registered. I will sec the
At~orney-General with a view to getting
the work expedited.
I do not think
people ought to be inconvenienced, and
they certainly ought not to be penalised.
What has been said about the electorate of Condoublin may be said about
other portions of the state. The Government have been most anxious to iind work
so far as their means will allow. Hon.
membPrs will know that we have had
great difficulty in finding money to meet
all demands made upon us. In fact the ·
chief condemnation against the Government has been that we have not spent
enough money to meet those demands. I
have been put on my trial for the last
three weeks, and have been denounced
because of reckless and extravagant expenditure. What has that expenditure done ~
It has found work for people who had
been thrown. out of work by the drought.
I do not deny that the Government have
had difficulty in getting money. The
484
Adjournment.
[ASSEMBLY.]
money market is dearer than it has heen
for some time. I do not want the Government to become a defaulter, nor will it if
I can prevent it. So soon as the Government can see their way to finance works
authorised by Parliament, notwithstanding what may be said about it, they will
be financed.
' Mr. PowER: What about stone-breaking?
Sir JOHN SEE : That was only intended as relief work. It was only intended
for those who wanted assistance, and who
preferred to work for their food than to
receive food without working for it. As
soon as possible public works will be carried out. I will remind the Secretary for
Public Works of the remarks of the bon.
member for Wentworth. I do not know
what has been done in connection with
Blackwattle Bay, but I should say that if
the non-clearing of it is a menace to the
health of the people, the work ought to
be carried out as soon as possible.
Mr. PowER: Give the Sydney Harbour
'Trust the funds to do it.
. Sir JOHN SEE: If I were to give
them all they wanted they would take
inore than I could afford them at the
present time. I have the utmost con:fidence in the Harbour Trust, and anything I can do to assist them in carrying
out the work will be done. As I have
already stated, I shall be very pleased to
see the hon. member for The Lachlan this
afternoon, and if I can give him any
consolation for the serious misfortune
which overtook him this morning, I shall
be happy to do it.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
House adjourned at 7·30 a.m. (Thursday).
~15%tmbl1!.
Tnesday, 7 July, 1903.
1Ltgi%latHH
.:Answer to Address in Reply-Personal ExplanationsQuestions with Notice-Petitions-Papers-Public Ac·
counts Committee-Questions without Notice-Cape
Hawke Harbour In1provements-Juvenile Smoking
Suppression Biii:.....Assent to Bills-Chairman of Com·
mittees-Preferential Trade Proposals-Adjournment
(Arbitration Court : Appointment of Shorthand·
writer).
Mr. SPEAKER took the chair.
[Sir John See.
Old-age Pensions.
ANSWER TO ADDRESS IN REPLY.
The House proceeded to the State Government House, there to present to his
Excellency the address in reply to the
Governor's speech.
The House being returned,
Mr. SPEAKER reported that the address
in reply to the Governor's opening speech
had been presented, and that his Excellency
had been pleased to make the following
answer:
State Government House,
Sydney, 7 July, 1903 ..
Mr. Speaker and Gentlemen of the Legislative
Assembly,! thank you for the loyal expressions contained in the address you have now presented
to me.
I am very pleased to know that I can rely
with confidence on your earnest consideration
of the several important measures to be submitted to you, and that the necessary provision
for the public service will be made in due course.
HARRY H. RAWSON,
Governor.
PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS.
Dr. Ross : I desire, with the permission
of the House, to make a short per~onal
explanation. In the division on the motion
of censure, I voted inadvertently, having
paired with the hon. member for The
Richmond. At the time I was under the
impression that the pair was off, but I
found subsequently that I had made a
mistake, for which I now apologise. It
is the first mistake of the kind I have
made.
Mr. SuLLIVAN : I desire also to make a
personal explanation. I went to sleep
during the debate on the motion of censure, and arranged to be called, but unfortunately I was not in time to vote in
the division. If I had been, I should
have. voted on the side of good governc
ment ~Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. member cannot
make a personal explanation with regard
to his absence from the House under the
circumstances mentioned.
OLD-AGE PENSIONS.
Mr. CANN (for Mr. NIELSEN) asked
the CoLONIAr, TREASURER,-(1.) Has any
reciprocity arrangement in connection with
the Old-age Pensions Act been made with
the State of Victoria, as 'promised by the
Colonial Treasurer in answer to question
asked by Mr. Nielsen on 2nd July, 1902 ~