Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

THURSDAY, 23 OCTOBER 1902

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

Questions. l23 OcTOBER.] Cost qf Stren,qthenin,q B1id,qes. 933

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.

THURSDAY, 23 OCTOBER, 1902.

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

QUESTIONS. HARBOUR BOARD FOR CAJRNll.

Mr. LYONS (Cairns) asked the Treasurer­Is it the intention o! the Government to introduce a

.Bill to constitute a. harbour board for Cairns this session, as stated in the Opening Speech; if so, when will it be introduced?

The TREASURER (Hon. T. B. Cribb Ipswich) replied-

Yes.

ALLEGED SHOOTING Ol<' ABORIGINES.

Mr. DUNSFORD (Charters Tou·e1'S) aeked the Home Recretary-

1. Has he received from }fr. Parry-Okeden any report re the alleged outrage on blacks 111 Xortbern Queens­land?

2. If so, will he place such report on the table of the House?

3. Will he place on the table of the House all con·es­ponde_nce in connection with the alleged burning and shootmg of aborigines in North Queensland~

The HOME SECRETARY (Hon. J. F. G. Foxton, Carnarvon) replied·-

1. Xo. The only communication I have received from :Mr. Parry-Okeden ~ince the holdin" of the mao-is­terial inquiry is a private letter in which some refere~ce is made to the subject-matter of the inquiry. As

already stated by me in the Hou~:o;e, the deposition~ and magistrates' certificate have presumably been for­warded to the Attorney-General by }1r. rarry-Okeden_

2. Yes.

SALARY OF LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR.

Mr. DIBLEY ( Woolloonqabba) asked the Prernier-

1. Did Sir Samnel Walker Griflith claim half the salary attaching to the position of Governor in addition to his salary of £3,500 while he was Lieutenant­Governor from the departure of J1ord Lamingtrm to the arrival of Governor Chermsitle ~

2. Did the Government allow the claim, or did the~" pay him any money in addition to his salary as Chief Justice for the term he was Lieutenant-Governor ; and if so, hO\V much ?

3. Will the :\linister lay all the correspondence relating thereto on the table of the House?

The PREMIER (Hon. R. Philp, Townsville) replied--

Some time before the departure of Lord Lamington the quesUon was mooted of the amount of remuneration to which the LienteuHnt-Governor, being also Chief .Justice. was by law entitled. Different opinions were expressed on the snbjPct. The Chief Justice, while acting as Lieutenant-Governor, received half the salary of the Governor and half that of the Chief Justice. His right to receive this remuneration has never been questioned. He has not made a claim for further pay­ment.

ADDITIONAl, SITTING DAYS.

Mr. PLUNKET'l' (A!IJert) asked the Premier, without notice-

When he proposerl that the House should sit on Fridays and ::\1ondays?

The PREMIER (Hon. R. Pbilp) replied-! hope we will commence next \\'eek to sit on the

Fridays.

LAND ACT OF 1807 AMENDMENT BILL,

On the motion of 'l'he SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS (Hon. W. B. H. O'Cuunell, 11111-'!Jrave) it was formally resolved-

That ttte House will, at its next sitting, resolvP itself into a Committee of the ':Yhole to consider of the desir­ableness of introducing a Bill to Amend the Land Act of 1897, and for other purposes.

C08T OF STRENGTHEKING RAILWAY BRIDGES.

Mr. WOODS ( Woothakrxta), in moving-rrhat there be laid upon the table of the House a

return showing the cost of strengthening the railways between l{risbane and Ip~wich an1t between Brisbane and Sandgate, ]nclnding bridges, since the advent of the tank engines-

said: In moving this motion I cannot under­stand why the Mini:;ter for Railways has called "Not formal" to it_ (The SECRETARY ~'OR RAIL­WAYS: I w1ll tell you.] In all probability the hon. gentleman will tell us ; he is always able to tell us something we don't want to hear. [The 8EORETARY ~'OR RAILWAYS: Hear, hear! and Government laughter.] The hon. gentleman laughs, but, as I pointed out on previous occa­sions, whenever I get up to speak, especially on railway matters, tlle hon. gentlerr,an lays him­self out for the purpose of interjecting, and, as I have already pointed out, he very often interjects about something he knows nutbing whatever ahnut_ I do not intend to delay the House, because, although 1 understand that the Minister for Rail ways is a good hand in talkmg matters out, I don't think he will talk this out if he thinks he has sufficient support to wipe the motion off the paper. This matter will, in all probability, crop up when the hon. gentleman's Estimates are before

934 Cost qf Strengtltening [ASSEMBLY.:; Railwa,y Bridges.

this Chamber, when it c:1n be better considered. The present ::VIinister for Railways was not the occupant of that office when this serious blunder was made, and the inference is th>tt he is now taking upon himself the bl>tme of the blunder made by his predecessor, or by thuse !•er,ons placed in positions by his predece,sors. That is the view taken by right-thinking people. This blunder i• responsible for more than half the deficit now standing a~;aimt this colony. There is no getting away from that, and I defy the hon. gentleman to contradict it. It has been stated by the present Minister for Railways that these tank engines were loe·mtiful models of machinery. So they are-provided we do not want to use them. 'l'be .:\finister went further, and stnted, as a proof of th<·' superiority of these locomuti ves, that they are fitted with steam reversing g-ear.

The SPEAKER: Order, order !

Mr. ·woODS: From the information I have received, I find that the cost of strengthening the roads between Brisbane and Ipswich and Brisbane and Sandg>tte, including bridges, amounts to something like £150 000 and the work is n'.'t fini,hed yet. They 'are' not only strengt.henmg the road between Ipswich and Brisbane, but also the road right on to Toowoomba; bnt these t>tnk engineH will never run to Toowoomba. [J\!Ir. TOLliiiE: Does not that; road want strengthening?] Yes; but not for tank engines, fllr the:v will never run there. [An honourable member : \V l>Y ?] Because they will not take the curves. As a matter of fact these .t>:nk engines are d_ebarred from going int~ any shiingR between Bnsbane and Ipswich and Brisbane and Sandgate.

The SPEAKER : Order, order !

Mr. \VOODS: A general order was issued to that effect. Hon. members know that there is a double-spanned iron bridge across Countess­street ; that has had to be reconstructed and the Indo,lroopilly Bridge has vet to be de~lt with for these tank engines. [The l'RE~IIEH : That i~ all rif(ht.] It is not all right, and the hon. gentleman knows that as well as I do, and I know as well as the Chief Mechanical Engineer does, or probably better. [Government mem­bers : Oh, oh ~] Because I have had colonial experience; I have served mv time on the Queensland railways, 1>nd tne CI:iief Mech"rlical ~~ugir~etr did. IJ(lt. He is not in a position to gtve 1nformatwn a.bont this part.icu]ar matter because he is not a practical m1>n. He may be ~ good riraftsm(:l,n, .r\._ g~--nt1P-wan wat-~ iutroduced into thi.-; co:ony hy the Government who was snpposed to bA on • xpert., and what lms that gentlAman done for the colony? These tank engines were c(ln~tructed under that gentleman's decigns, and are ncow being- altered at the cost of the colon~·. One of these tank engines c"me out this morning, and is now booked unfit for pas­Senger traffic.

The SPEAKER: Order, order!

1\lr. WOODS: It used 50 pin·s of oil between Bri'b"ne and Ipswich anrl hack, while the ordi­nary engines only u~e 4 pints for the same distance.

The SPEAKER: Order, order! .:\Ir. \VOODS : This is not a party question

and I hn.ve not introduced it as such · hut I hav~ introduced it because l think the p~ople of the colony should know what these engines have cost the colony. As" matter of fact, 1 he cnst is not yet kn_myn, fr:r alterations ar<;' still going on. If the Munster 1s prepared to ~1ve the informotion to the House, I am prepared to withdraw the motion, but otherwi"• I maintain that a division should be taken on the matter, so that the public may know how the Government money is being

expended. \Ve had an exhibition the other night whereby one hon. member was put out of this Chamber.

The SPEAKER: Order, order ! Mr. \VOODS: The strengthetting of the

railway line is not the only question to be con­sidered. It is a well-known fact that every platform between Brisbane and Ipswich and Bnsbane and Sandgate has had to be altered, and every sidmg in the Roma-street yard has had to be alteted, so as to allow these tank engines to go t.hrough. Only this morning one of these beauLiful models muuntecl two roads. These engines can only go on two sidings in the whole of the ljJswich yards, and they c.mnot enter the engine-shed. It puts me in mind of a man who built a model piect> of machinery, and he had to pull down the shed to get it out_ There is no getting behind the fact; and the late Chief Engineer for Railways pointed out when the design was placed in front of him--

The SPEAKER: The hon. gentleman will permic me to dmw his attention to the terms of his motion. His remarks appear to me to be irrelevant.

Mr. WOODS : I beg pardon, being a new men1ber, and on accour.tt of continual interjec­tions. I was trying to show th1>t the reason for this expense is the fact that the engines were built before the line wae; built for the engines. I do not represent a railway constituency, so it cannot be said that I am electioneering in bring· iog this matter forward. 1 take this stand simply because I know a mistake i• being made, and ttJe gendemau at the head of the railways is trying to hood wink that mistake and cover it UjJ.

The SPEAKER: Order, order ! Mr. WOODS: I hope every member of this

Chamber will express an opinion as to whether the pnblic of Queensland should know what has been the cost of strengthening the roads for the purpose of running tank engines over them, when the engim·s won't go over the roads after they are strengthened. The Minister for Rail­ways, in reply to a question I put to him the other day, said there were three of the tank engines laid up, and the cost of repairs was about £60.

The SPEAKER: Order! Mr. WOODS : The hem. gentleman knows

very well that there are nine out of twenty laid ·up at the Ipswich work.,hof)s. I think it is absolutely necessary that. I should have an oppor­tunity of dealing with the reasons t~,at led up to the screngthning of the roads.

The SPEAKER: Th:tt does not come within the terms of the hon. member's motion. The motion refer-s to the cost of streugthening the railways between Brisbane and Ipswich, >cad between Brisbane and Sandgate, since the advent of the tank engines, and he must confine himself to that. He will have an opportunity ou another occasion uf discussing the matter he is now rai~ing.

Mr. WOuDS: I bow to your ruling, 2\lr. Speaker. In conclusion, I would iike the Mini.,ter to give ~m1ne ·reason for 1naking this rnotion "Not formal.)'

The SIWRETARY :FOR RAILWAYS (H<>n. J. Leahy, Bulloo) : There are many reasons why "Not formal" is called to motions . The principal reason is that the hon. member who put the moti•m on tbe paper shonld give rea,ons showing the necessity for !JUtting the country to the expense of preparing returns, which sometimes are very voluminous. The reason I call8d " Nut for111al" to this motiou is bec.,use it is nut sul£ciently definite fur me to give him the information. The wording is "since th,, advent ut the tank engines." Is that since the tir<t engine began to run, or since the last one was completed? Between those

Cost qf Strengtlwning [::!3 OcTOBER.] Railwa,y Bridges. 935

times there was a period of over two years. If the hon. member was not so self-suffi­cient and bumptious, and had come to me, I would have told him what form to put it in, or got the officers of the department to put 1t in such a form a" to enable him to put it before the House in the proper form. There is a great deal of information which cannot be given under this particular motion. Several of our lines have to be strengthened every year, whatever class of engines run over them. Does the hon. gentleman want to differentiate between the strengthening that is ordinarily neJessary and the strengthening ne.:ossary by reason of the introduction of tank engines? [:Mr. vVoons: That is not the point at issue.] I want to know what the hon. gentleman wants. This bald re>1son does not supply me with sufficient data. As far as I know, the Advent comes about four weeks before Christmas, and is connected with fasting or something of that kind. The hon. member's devotional ideas appe>1r to be conflicting with his political ideas, and he should make them clear. If he will give me a particular date-I don't care what the dtite is-if he will fix it two years n,go, or the 30th .June last, or the 30th June before, or the end of the year­betw~en any two dates-I will be glad to give the information-any information he likes. [Mr. \Voons: It is since ttle arrival of the first tank engine.] ThE' motion does not say so. I want to know what he means by "advent." [Mr. \VooDS : Since the intt·oduction of the first engme.] I will be glad to supply him with the information he is asking for since th, first tank engine began to run. All I want is to do for ths hon. member what he cannot do for himself. I will take no ad vantage of the in­formality or want of explicitness of the motion, and if the hon. member will tell me between what particular dates he requires this informa­tion, I shall be glad to give it to him. \Vith regard to the strengthening of the railways, I should like to point out that if there were never any tank engines introduced it would be necessary to strengthen the railways in a great many respects. \Ve h~ve bridges at the present time wlucb are capable of taking- the tank engines, but which are not capable of taking the new goods wagons that are being

constructed. In most places we are [4 p.m.] reducing the grades and making

the curves of larger diameter, and as a consequence engines are able to haul greater loans than they could draw previously. In all ,countries tbPy are now building stronger wagons, and instead of having wagons which will carry 4 tons they are made to carry 8 or 10 tons, and a great deal more weight will come on the bridg,s, not from the engines, but from the loaded wagons. \Vhere the bridges are Ktrengthened it is desirable that they should be so strengthened that they will not require any further strengthening during the next few years, and for that reasor1 many of the bridges which are being strengthened now are strengthened to a far larger extent than if< required for present purposes. [Mr. Woons: Is it not a fact that Mr. Stanley, the late Chief Engineer of Rail­ways, objected to the tank engines because t.be railways would not carry them?] I do not wish to drag in the name of an officer who has left the service, but I may tell the hon. member that Mr. Stanley promised to have the railways ready before the engines were built, but he has not done it. There are fifty factors, besides the tank engines, which come into the consideration of the question of strengthening- the railways. The tank engines are the immediate occasion for strengthen­ing some portion of the roads, but they are not re•ponsible for the whole of the strengthening ',that is going on. For instance, the cntting

down of grades was going on before any tank engine was run. This is not the place or the time to discuss the merits or demerits oi the tank engines, but in any case I am not respon­sible for them, as they were introduced bE'fore my time; if they are a great succese, I can claim no credit for that; and if they are a failure, which is not the case, I am not to blame. I do not wish to keep anything back in this matter, and if the hon. member will give me the dates for which he requires the information, I will supply what he wants. [Mr. vVoons: That is only a quibble.] It is no quibble. As I have pointed out, a very large portion of the expense of strengthening the railways was incurred b&fore the ad vent of the tank engines- before the first tank engine arrived. The hon. member has ex­plained, by way of interjection, that be wants this information from the dat.e of the arri va,l uf the first tank engine. I will find out tb>tt date, and give him the information from then up to yesterday, or a fortnight ago, or up to the present date. I hope the House will be &ati'­fied with that information, and not put the country to the expense of having a further return prepared showing the cost of strengthen­ing the railways before the advent of the first tank engine. I presume that wb>1t is wanted is the cost of strengtbeni ng the roads from the date of the ad vent of the first tank engine. [Mr. Woons: That is exactly what I want.] Very well, I will get that information for the hon. member. But as the motion is worded it was not possible for me to understand what informa­tion the hon. member wanted, and when I tried to assiBt him in the matter he abused me in the most unparliamentary form. However, I shall say no more on the suhject. I have no objection whatever to the motion.

Mr. LESI:i{ A ( Cler11wnt) : I rise to support the motion. The Secretary for Railways has one objection to tabling the information, and that is that he cannot give it unless dates are definitely stated. It appears to me that the hon. gentleman, having a,t his command and nod scores of clerks who can prepare the report, there can be no difficulty in the way. There is a good reason why the information should be placed before the House, because the hon. gentleman's Estimates are coming on shortly, and we will then have an opportunity of plac­ing the whole facts before the public. [Mr_ AR}ISTHONG: The JHinister says he has no ob­jecr.ion r.o the motion.] Then why did he call "Not formai "? If the hem. gentleman is in favour of placing the information before the House, then I express my gratitude to him. I listened very carefully to the hon. gentleman, who quibbled, and backed, and dived, and retrea,ted in such a v~triety of ways that it is difficult to understand what he promised. vVhen we read Hansard we may find that he has promised to do another thing ah.ogether. If he has promised to lay these papers on the table, I am satisfied that it will be worth the cost. There is a demand throughout the country to find out what this huge blunder has cost, and we will be in a better position to check the alleged business capacity of this alleged bm;iness Minister if we have these figures before u,. I am very glad that the l'IIinister has determined, after the heckling that the hon. member for Woothakata has given him, to place the in­formation in the hands of the House. It is very fortunate that we have someone who can heckle the hon. gentleman and induce this strong Sandow-like Minister to give information to the House.

Mr. BELL (Dalby): I understand the Mini.<ter i has undertaken to give the House the informa­

tion in regard to cost of strengthening the lines and bridges caused by the introduction of the

936 Cost Cf! Stl'engthening [ASSEMBLY.] Rail~cay Bridges.

tank engines, and has stated that if the hon. member for vVoothakata will alter his motion he will be very glad to supply ail information. I think if the word "since" is omitted and the w01d "through" is inserted, that will meet the case. I am just as much interested as anyone else in g-etting this information, and I therefore move, by way of amendment, that the word "oince " be omitted and the word "through " inserted. That will put the motion in the form desired by the Secretary for Railvt ays. I move that amendment from a different standpoint to that which the hon. member for vVoothakata takes. I am very much disposed to think that the introduction of these tank engines h~s been on the whole a success, and that we shall find that probably they are the forerunner of an improved type of locomotive in this colony. At all events, whether they are a success or not, we should like to know the cost of strength6ning the bridges and permanent way through their introduction.

Mr. vVOODS : I accept the amendment of the hon. member for Dalby.

.:Yir. ARMSTROXG (Lockycr) : I think the acceptance of that amendment would preclude the moving of any other amendment, and I should like to aHk the hon. members for \Voo­tbakata and Dalby to consider whether the specification of the motion should not be enlarged. The Minister distinctly Haid he was willing to give the fullest information. I join with the hon. members for \Voothakata and Dalby in desiring to see the information furnished, because I think when it is laid on the table we shall find that one of the bogies hon. members opposite use against the Government will be knocked from under them. Will the substitution of the word " through " for the word " since" give us the infurmation we want? I say distinctly it will not do so, and I sugg-est the insertion of the words "in connection with." That will cover the whole thing. The hon. member for Woo­tbakata did not give the Minister credit for the calm way in which he discussed the matter. He pointed out that according to the terms of the motion the whole cost would not be laid before the I

House; so that something like the suggestion of the hon. member for Dalby should be inserted. If the motion is paso,ed with the elimination of the word ."_since," the House will not be in any better positiOn, as far as what this House wants to secure. I hope that this resolution will be so altered that the return will give us the whole of the information we want, and not in dribs and drabs.

Mr. ,JACKSOK (Kennedy): I think the substitution of the word "through " gets over the difficulty raised by the Minister for Rail- 1

ways; but at the same time I recognise th~tt possibly this information may not be satisfac· tory. I understood the Minister to argue that the bridgee have been strengthened, not because of the introduction of the tank engines done, but also becan'e of the extra loads which the wag.m.s carry. [The SECI\ETAl\Y l''Ol\ RAILWAYS: That is so.] If the Railway Department takes that view, I think the return will be unsati,fac- ' torv. I agree with the bon. member for Lockyer that the motion should be made wider t.han it is. [The SEOl\ETAl\Y l''Ol\ RAIL­WAYS: Make it as broad as you like.] We want to obtain the whole of the exvenditure incurred in connection with strengthening the bridges, and also with regard to the alterations and repairs t.o these tank Pngine:;;. [The SECl\ETAl\Y FOil RAILWAYS: That is ,-ery small.] That is satisfactory; and I take it that this information will be better obtained when the Railway Esti­mates come on. I am in ~tccord with the hon. member who moved this motion, and I think it

is pretty well understood what the hon. member means by it, but the Minister ta,kes txception to the verbiag-e of it. [The SECl\ETAl\Y l'"Ol\ RAIL­WAYS: No.] The hon. menlber for vVoothalmta wants the expense since the running of the first tank engine, and be also wants the expense incurred before the introduction of the tank engines. [The SECl\l';TAl\Y ]'01\ RAILWAYS: I know what he wants.] That may be. I take it that when it was intended to mtroduce these tank engines the Railway Department must have foreseen that the bridges would have to be strengthened, and that certain alterations would have to be made. If the Minister understands the motion, we shall probably get the informa­tion. [The 8ECl\ETAl\Y ]'01\ RAILWAYS: I shall understand jnst what the House orders.] I take it that the House will order this return to be laid on the table of the House, for there seems to be a unanimity of opinion on that-- even among hon. members on the other side-and rightly so. I can see something in what the Minister has contended for. I do not wiRh to debate the que,tion at any length, and I hope­the House will allow the motion to go .

Mr. ]'ORSYTH (Carpenta1·ia): I cannot see that the information which the hon. member for \Voothakata has a'ked for, in the manner in which he has asked for it, will be of any use to thie House. Every hon. member is anxious to get this information, but I think there will be some difficnlty in arriving at a conclusion as to the cost caused by the 10-ton trucks :.nd the cost caused by the tank engines respectively. If the Minister can give this iiJformation, then it is all' right; but I think the matter will be com­plicated very much, because it is quite possible that thousand,J of pounds may have been spent prior to the running of the first tank engine.

Mr. KIDSTO::'\ (Rockhampton) : It has been said that members of the Opposition

[4'30 p.m.] have to a large extent used the matter of the tank engines as a

political lever against t.be Government. If that is so, might it not be wise, when the House is going to be furnished with somewhat fuller information than we have had hitherto, to give m the whole of the information? [The SECI\Jm'Al\Y ]'Ol\ HAILWAYS: \Vhat information?] Not only what the tank engines have cost, but what the advantage to the country is likely to represent. Presumably there is somE' offset against the larg-e cost incurred : and if there is, the Government have a right to get the credit- for it. If fnll information is given, we shall be in a P"sition to appreciate the wisdom or the unwisdom of the introduction of these tank engines.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: I have no objection whatever to an:v information at all that can be of any assistance in connection with this busine>s. All I wish the House to do is to put into an intelligible shape the request for the information it wants, so that there may be no mistake about it afterwards. I don't want to shirk giving any information in connec­tion with the matter at all. Some timo ago I gave instructions to prepare this information for myself. I believe this is a very wise exp.?ndi· ture. It brings us into line to a large extent with the other State". It is tbe exact type of engine they have in New South Wales and in all the British colonies, and if it has been a success in other 8tates I don't see anything in the climate or conditions in Queensland to make it un"uccess­ful here. At the present time a great many of our engines are frequently in the shnps as a result of bad water. This expenditure is nece,si­tated mainly by something that occurred in this House four years ago, after some engine.s burst. 'rh is House was then unanimous that we should> have expert., from outside, and we got an expert-

Cost qf Strengthening [23 OcTOBER.] Railwa,y Bridges. 937

Mr. ~isbet. He laid down that it would be necessary to have certain alterations made on our lines--

The SPEAKER: Order, order! The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: I

am dealing with the curves and bridges just now. l8 this an amendment before the House? The amendment I don't think alters the original question very much. But this was the outcome of the action of this House. You cannot make sweeping alterations without "pending money, and it a question of the balance of advantage. It is nothing to do with me--it was before my time. Hon. members won't charge me with being extravagant. I would be a great deal more extravag-ant if I were to do half the things they want me to do. I know exactly what hon. members want, and I promise the House that I will give the fullest inforn,ation on the subject. [Mr. KmsTOtil: That's fair all round.]

::\Ir. KATES (Cunningharn): I am very glad the hon. member has moved this motion, because during the last general election this matter gave me more trouble than any other question. We were told that the country ]o,t £90,000 by these tank engines, and I am glad the motion has been introduced to give the Minister an opportunity of giving us correct information. I hope the motion will be carried.

Mr. HARDACRE (Leichhardt) : I also am verv glad that this motion has been introduced,

·and I hope that the fullest information as to the cost incurred in consequence of these tank engines having been ordered by the Government will be given, as promised by the Minister. The 1:-lecretary for Rail ways is not to blame in this matter, because he was not in office at the time the engines were ordered. [The SECRETARY l!"OR RAILWAYS: There is nobody to blame.] There is someone to blame. This is one of the big blun­ders for which the GoYernment are responsible. The Minister said the expert was responsible for it, and that this House wanted an expert from outside. This House never asked for an expert to be appointed from outside the State. A large number nf hon. members desired that an expert should be appointed from within Australia-an expert who knew the conditions under which our rail ways were constructed. I am of opinion that the whole of these tank engines are entirely a mistake. The cost incurred in strengthening the roads has not been rendered necessary by the tmffic. \Ve have not a large volume of traffic, and we could do with even smaller engine~.

The SPEAKER: Order, order ! ;y1r. HARDACRE : \Vith reg:wd to the

amendment of the hon. member for Dalby, I do not think there will be a great deal of difficulty in differentiating between the expense incurred in consequence of the advent of the tank engines, and that rendered neces~ary through the building of larger trucks. The original motion was rather vague, and the amendment is an impnve· ment.

;\Ir. TOLMIE (Drayton and Toowoornba): Like other hon. members, I am very pleased that this motion has been brought forward, in order that the country may form some idea of what has really been the cost incurred hy the introduction of these tank engines. But I should very much have preferred to have seen the scope of the motion widened, so as to include the cost of strengtheuing the railway as far as Toowoomba, because I understand it is the intention of the department to run these tank engines to Toowoomba. The hon. member for W oothakata said they would never be run to Toowoomba, but I think that is a mistake. [The SECR]<]TARY E'OR RAILWAYS: That is all bnnkum; they go there now.] [:\fr. \VooDs: They do

nothing of the kind.] A great deal of expensE> ha> been incurred in strengthening the line on the Main Range. and in toking out curves, and this was rendered necessary on account of the traffic which has taken place during the past few years over that particular portion of the railway. I believe that the same neceRsity has arisen for strengtheningthe line between Brisbane and Ipswich, and between Brisbane and Sand-· gate, and that had these tank engines not been introduced it would still have been necessary to have incurred a large exp<'n"e in making the railways secure for people who travel over them. I am sure it is the desire of every member of this House that the lines should be as strong and as safe as pos•ible. Last session hon. members talked hour after hour, informing the House that a certain line was not in an efficient state, and the Government had endeavoured to put that particular rail way in good order. Thtre are many sections of the railways over which people travel every hour of thf' day, and it is. absolutely necessary that those particular port10ns of the lines should be strengthened. To make the return asked for of value to the House and country a careful discrimination should be ma<;Je between the cost that has been necessary m consequence of the advent of the tank engines and tr,e cost that would have been absolutely necessary had not those tank eng-ines been intro­duced, and I hope Lhe return will be of such a charactPr a.;; to give that information.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE (Hon. D. H. Dalrymple, lvfackay) : I rise to poinr. out that the calling of " Not fc,rmal" to this motion seems to have been amply justified. The hon. member for 'Woothakata, with that affection probably which parents have for their own children, could not see anything short of perfection in his motion as introduced. Yet the hon. member for Dalby has proposed an amend­ment on it, and the hon. member for Lockyer thinks it would be improved if the words "in connection with" were inserted before "ad vent." The hon. member for Leichhardt also states that the motion aH originally brought forward was vague, which m'·ans that it wab decidedly imper­fect, while the leader of the Opposition says that the return should show the advantages derived from the introduction of t:>nk engines as well :>s the expense connected with the strengthening of the railways, and the last speaker, the hon. member for Drayton and Toowoomha, finds that if the motion were altered in another way an enormous improvement would ensue. Singular to say, while the hon. member for \Voothakata, who has not had much experience in these matters, believe\,, in a charmingly sirn pie manner, that his motion is so perfect that it cannot be improved upon, yet not one hon. mem­ber who has spoken has been entirely satisfied with it, a11d has desired to :>mend it in a variety of ways. Into the merits of the case I am not anxious to go, b:1t I think it is certain, after all, that the motion was capable of much im­provement, because, as pointed out by previous speakers, the motion as originally worded would not have gained for the hon. mernb?r the information he required. He should, therefore, be under a debt of gratitude to the Minister for calling it "Not formal," and thus enable the House to bring to bear upon it its concentrated wisdom. Nothing is more clear than that the supplying of the information as to the extra cost involved through the advent of the tank engines will be left tn the j ndgment of the rail way officials. It is they alone who can say how much additional expense has been involved. Strengthening of bridges and lines has been necessary in any case in conseq nences of the ravages of white ants and time, and the officials alone can say how much of the cost is directly

938 Cost qf Strengthening [ASSEMBLY.! Railway Bridges.

attributable to these new engines. I am satisfied with the motion in its amended form, and I am quite content to support the amendment moved by the hon. member for Dalby.

Mr. DUNSFORD: I was somewhat surprised to hear thA Secretary for Railways interject that the extra cost caused by the tank engines would be found comp\trati vely small. That is not the general impression outside. [The 8ECRETARY ~'OR RAIL\VAYS: I will get a report from the Chief Mechanical Engineer on the subject.] It is generally understood out,ide that the State has made a mistake in purchasing some twenty of these tank engines. [The SECRETARY ~·oR RAILWAYS: There is no mistake about it.] That is thE' general impression. As a matter of fact, the lines had to be built to the engines, instead of the engines to the lines. These engines cost some £70,000, and we want th" fullest information in connection with.them-not. only the cost of strengthening the hues and bndges, but the total cost in con. nection with the whole matter. As the hon. member for Rockhampton said, if there is any way of getting at the advantages which are ·derived from the possession of these engines, I hope the Minister will mention them. [The SECRETARY ~'OR RAILWAYS: vVould you like a return of the disadvantages':] )ro ; hut when the Minister's Estimates come on I believe he is fair-minded man enough to tell us the disad­vantages, if there are any. I hope the amend­ment will be accepted, and that the motion will go through.

;yrr. DENHAM (Oxley): It seems peculiar parliamentary procedure that almost every motion that is introduced ha8 to be amended. I do not know that the amendment substituting the word "through" is any improvement on the original motion. It seems to me that the better expression is, "in cotu:;equence of." If we sought to obtain from the Treasurer information as to the cost to which the State had been put through the establishment of the Commonwealth of Au8tralia, I woncter which would be the better way to put it-" since the ad vent of the G•mmonwealth"? or "through the advent of the Commonwealth"? or "in consequence of the advent of the Commonwealth"? It seems pretty much like hair-splitting. I think the hon. member who introduced the motion is about as grammatic»lly correct and as clear in his defi­nition in using the word "since" as the hon. mem­ber for Dalby in ueing the word "through," and I am disposed to favour the motion as it stood ·originally. No doubt good will arise from venti­htting this suoject, and it seems to me to bring up a greater question-that is, as to what our experts

have. cost this colony altogeLher. [5 p.m.] Outside the Railway Department

we have experts in nearly every department, and their cost has been enorrr,nus to the State, with a doubtful quid pro quo. If :Yir. Hornihlow was in charge of the engines, and so forth, before the House went into hysterics and demanded the introduction of experts, if he had the control of as much money as the experts have had, I think we would have had the railwav engines in as good a condition as now. [Mr. WooDs: With the same power?] Yes. [The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: l think so, too.) This everlasting desire to go outside this colony for experts is to be deprecated. [Honourable mem­bers : Hear, hear!) And this House has shown no better wisdom than iu declining to go far afield to get a Railway Commissioner, when there is a man on the ground who understands all our requirements, and wLo can di,charge the functions in a highly creditable fashion. I think if the motion of the hon. member has n" other effect than of calling attention to this ever-

lasting desire to go further afield to get strangers who know nothing about our requirements, and so put the country to great expense, I think he has s13rved a good purpose.

The SPEAKER : Order ! :VIr. DEN HAM: As we have these machines,

I think it was the proper thing to put the bridges into such a state as to carry these machines, and the public are now getting the ber.efit of more ready transit, because these engines draw heavier loads. \Ve know that at certain hours of the day the Railway Com­missioner has bad to divide trains in order to carry passengers to their homes. I hope the good in this direction will continue.

The SPEAKEH : Ord"r ! Mr. DENHAM: I cannotsupporttheamend­

ment, because it makes no improvement, and I shall be prepared to move an amendment later on.

Mr. MACARTNEY (Too1vong): I think that the Jwn. member who has just §poken is mis. taken in assuming that the amendment proposed by the hon. membet for Dalby is not an improve­ment, and I did not think that the hon. member who moved the motion would have "upported the proposition. It is only necessary to look at the respective words to see that, if this return is supplied in the manner asked for by the original motion, it will not necessarily follow that the increased expenditure is due tu the advent of the tank engines. The point is whether, as a matter of fact, tbe word proposed hy the hon. member for Dalby wi!l ensure the necessary information being given which will show that the extra expen­diture is due to the advent of the tank engines. That seems to be the distinction. I shall sup­port the amendment for those reasons.

Mr. LESIJ'\A: Every hon. member who has spoken favonre the passage of this motion, and it is remarkable that hon. members who say they are very anxious to get this information are propos­ing amendments that practically com·ey the same meaning as the wording of the original motion. So I am beginning to be suspicious as to the uona fide" of these hon. members in their desire to get. this information. The whole of the movement in this Chamber now seems to be to prevent this motion going through-to talk on it till (j o'clock. I trust that hon. members who are anxious to see this motion passed will agree to Lhe amendment of the hon. member for J)alby, for it is a very eensible one. [The SECHETARY POR RAILWAYS: Don't. alarm your­self; f will give the information all right.]

Question-That the word "since," proposed to be omitted, stand part of the question--put and negatived.

Mr. DENHAM: Mr. Speaker,--The SPEAKER: The hon. member has

already spoken. Mr. ARMSTRONG : Mr. Spea.ker,--The SPEAKER: The hon. member also has

spoken. The HOME SECRETARY: I beg to move

that the words "in connection with " be inserted.

The 8PEAKER : Order ! The original amendment was the ormsswn of the word "since," with the view of in~erting in itR place the worrl "through." The House having decided that the word "since" be omitted, a hlank has been created, and I now propose to put the question-being part of the original amend­ment-that. the blank be filled by the insertion of the word "through." The question is that the word "through," propo;ed to be inserted, be so inserted. Until the House has decidPd that question, any other amendment will be out of order.

Inquiry into Charges [23 OCTOBER.] against Guard Hall. 939

Question-That the word "through," proposed to be inserted, be so inserted-put; and the House divided :-

An;s, 34. :Mr. Airey ).Ir. Kenna , Barber , Kerr , Belt Kidston , Blair P. J. Leahy , Holes Lesina , Browne LindlE.?y , Burrows ).:Iacartney ,, Cowap }lartin , Dalrymple }1axwell , Dunsford ::\lulcahy , l..,ogarty :>.: orman ., Forsyth Plnnkett , Grant Ryland ,. J. Hamilton Summerville , W. Hamilton Tolmie , Hardacre Turner ,. Jackson ·woods

Te/le,·s: )Ir. Kerr and Mr. Maxwell.

XOE'•, 22. ~fr. Armstrong Jfr .. T. Leahy ., Bridges , Yfackintosh ,. Campbell , Mc1Iaster , J. C. Cribb :Moorc ,. Denham ,. O'Connell , Fox ,. Paget

Foxton , Philp , IIanran Sir A. Rntledge , Kates 2\Ir. Stephens

Kent , Stodart Lamont , Story

Tellers: 1\Ir. Paget and }lr. Step hens. Resolved in the affirmative.

Question, as amendeo, put and passed.

INQUIRY INTO CHARGES AGAINST GUARD HALL.

::\fr. LESINA (Clermont), in moving-That there be laid upon the table of the House the

whole of lhe papers, l'Orresponden<~e. documents, and -depositioo~R in connection with a recent railway departn:ental inquiry held into eertain charges and :tllegations of immorality levelled against a railway employee, a guard named 1Villiam Hall~

said: The facts of this caHe are pretty well public property, and the matter has caused conHiderable di"cussion not only amongst the geueral public but in the Railway Department. I had the opportunity some time ogo of taking a hurried glance at the papers, and I saw sufficient to justify me in concluding that this man is no longer fit to holrl a position in the public service. There is too much star-chamber busine's about matters of this kmd, and I think it is better that the papers should be laid on the table so that the public may know all the facts. As it is, the outside public get to know a little, and that little gerH'rally leaks out in such a form as to miBlead t.he general public. Every hon. mem­ber should hav.e a chance of reading these papers carefully, and understanding tbe reason the department has for retaining the services of the man Hall, though t',ey have taken him from the position he held in charge of a ]Mssenger train an-i put him in ch,,rge of a goods train, so that he should have no relations with female passengrcr,. I feel satisfied that there has been some peculiar influence exercised on his behalf tu keep him in the department. Finding- that I could n"t get an admiHsion from the Minister that the man would be deprived of his position after the mquirv that was held into the matter, I thought; the be,t thing to do was to get the papers laid on the table, so that hon. members may rearl them, and then inquire, when the Rail­way l<Jstimates come on, why be has not been drummed out of the department. Those are my reasons fur moving the motion.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS (Hon .. J. L.oa.hy, Bulloo): As far as the Govern­ment are concerned, they have no objection whatever, from a Government point of view, to laying those papers on the table of the House, but it is for members of the House generally to consider whether they v. ill agree to this mL•tion or not. The first I knew of this matter was fr<•m some questions asked in this House by the hon. member for Cltrmont. I think he gave notice of a motion on the subject on a former occasion, and I called "X ot formal." 'I'here is a certain class of motions to which I think" .:"rot formal" should be called, so that hon. members should give their reasons, as briefly as possible, why certain expenditure should be incurred, and why certain things should be done. The hon. member has not given any particular reason on this occasion why these papers should be laid on the table. I do not think this motion should come before the Chamber. Althuugh on a former occasion I called "Not formal'' to a t-in1ilar tnotion, yet, afterwards, when the hon. member tvld me privately that there was something in the matter, I said if he would come up to the Railway Department I would show him the whole of the papers, and that if there was anything in it I would not be a party to smothering anything. I was at Thargo~ mindah when the inquiry was held, and though I have since read the report of the board I have not read the whole of the evidence. The man to whom the motion refere is a strong political opponent of the hon. member for Clermont, but I do not say that that is the reason why the motion is brought forward. [Mr. HARDACl!E: I know the man, !tnd I do not think he is a politi­cal opponent of the hon. member.] '\Vel!, I am told so, at all events. A charge was made by son:e parents some time ago against this guard, who was on the line from Brisbane to Enoggera, where thPre is not a minute between two stations on the road. Some girls along the line go to school, and travel by train, and they were seeing who could kick the hir,hest. That i' becoming a science now-a­days, but I do not know whether it forms part of the school curriculum. The guard apparently interfered in some way, and a charge w"s sub­sef]uently made agaiust him. A board of inquiry was appointed to rept,rt on the matter, and after hearing the evidence 'hey bX<nterated the guard from the charge. I believe tl>ey gave him some kind of check or mild rebuke, but they did not recommer•d that he should Le dis­nli::3sed frunt the service. There was Bon1e old woman, aOout seventy years of age, who gave evidence, and said that something happened between her and this man fi ,-e ye•rs ago. Of course thi< kind of litereture is very interest­in~ to some members of the House and to some persons in the C1mntry, and a great deal of filthy stuff can be founded on it. [Mr. LESINA : '\Vby keep filthy men in the service?] Why keep them in the House? [Mr. LESINA : In the service?] The hon. member can answer his own question. I see no object in bringing- fo ·ward a motion of this kind, rwr can I see that it will serve a11y nseful purpose. I gave the hem. member the papers tu look at, and if he had wanted any fnrt.her information he had only tu speak LO me and he would have got it. Bnt that would not give snfticienL pub­licity to it to suit the hon. member. He must have it ad' ertised t.hr,ug h Hnnsard that the hon. member for Clemwnt bad found out a scandal which would make interestin!:: tc;ading for sum~ portion of the cummunity. Personally, I have no object.ion to the motinn, and if the House likes to make itsRlf the medium for dissemi­nating 8candalous stuff of this kind through the country, it can take the responsibility of doing ,o.

940 .Inquiry into Charges [ASSEMBLY.] a,qainst Guard Hall.

Mr. HARD ACRE: I think it is best for the person implicated that these papers should be laid on the table of the House, seeing that the matter has been referred to in the Press. The man himself, I unders\and, solicited an inquiry. [The SECRETARY l'OR RAILWAYS: Yes, and he was exonerated.] There is more than one factor in this matter. Not only did the old lady give evidence against the rnan, but a certain inspector was very act.ive in trying to bring an accusation of this kind against him. At any rate, after the inquiry was held, the man was asked if he would go away to another part of the State, and he refused to do so, saying that he bad done nothing wrong and nothing to be ashamed of. Under the circumotances l think it would be best for all parties that these papers should be laid on the tab]~ of the House •o that we may get at the facts. [The SECRETARY l'OR RAILWAYS: Is this House to override the decision of an official board of inquiry?] No ; but the matter bus been referred to in the Press, and a great de:tl uf prejudice has been created against this particular perorm, which the publicity of the facts might remove. Personally, I am inclined to think that there is nothing in the accusation, and I believe the h<m. member for Olermont is of that opinion. [The tlECRETARY b'OR RAnWAYS: He says there i•, and he read the p:>per.•.] 'Well, there has been so much noise made about the matter in the Press and elsewhere that I think it is well that we should know the facts. [Mr. LESINA: The board said the man was not fit to remain in the service.]

Mr. J. HAMILTON (Cook): When the hon. member for Leichhardt was asked by the Secretary for Rail ways did he mean thut this House should override thA decision of the hoard, the hon. member said, "No, but because the Press had made cert ... in statements the papers should be laid on the tablf'," and that was about the only reason he gave for passing this motion. It is a strange coincidence that the h<m. member who has brought this matter forwurd is a strong political opponent of the person concerned in thb charge. At any rate, we all believe in

British justice, and it is generally [r>·:;o p.m.] considered thut when a man has

ueen tried and found innocenr. there should he an end of the matter. This man has been tried by a responsible board. I have not heard anyone state that that board was incompetent, and they have decided unanimously to exonerate him. Why shoPld we wallow in a lot of filthy statements when we are told the man has beEn exonerated? \Vhy should we, as the Secretary for Hail ways says, make this House the medium for disseminating filth throughout the colony? [:Mr. LESIXA: There must tuwe been some filthy evidence•, then?] I do not know what the charge was. [Mr. LESINA: What are you making that statement for n The Secretary for Railv.aysmade the statement, and it is made in this motion. A serious charge of immorality has been made upon the character of an individual, and he has been proved innocent. [Mr. LESINA : Have you seen the papers?] On the strength of the statement that the mun was exonerated, and I say it is contrary to British justice that the man should be retried. ·

Mr. MACARTNEY: I intend to support this motion. So much has been said about this case, both in the Press and in the Hou;e, that I think it is only n, fair thing that the papers ehould be laid oo the table, in order that we may sero if there is any reasonable foundation whatever for the gross charge levelled at the man whose name has been mentioned. I may say that he is a resident in the electorate which I represent, but whether he is a political supporter of mine or not I am

unable to say, though the Secretaay for Rail­ways seems to have some knowledge on that. particular subject. l am in the habit of doing what I am asked to do, if the requ<e>t is a reawnable one, whether it emanate" from a political supporter or opponent, and I may say thut the guard, whose name is mentioned, waited upon me some little time after the elec­tion and told me the trouble which was at that time going on. He told me that he had been asked to go to some other part of the colony, and it was in consequence of the un­founded nature of the charges made ag,1inst him that he refused. He asked me if I would make it my business to see the depositions and see that 11e got fair play, I did make it my busi­ness to see the depositions, but I found that the Commissioner had finally dealt with the matter· before I arrived there, and had decided that the man should be reduced to the goods service for some time. Notwithstanding the fact that he had come tr) a deci:sion, the Uomrnis.-lioner was good enough to go through the papers with me, and give me reasons for his decision. I went carefully through the depositions, and formed the opinion on the information furnished to me by the guard, which was supported by the· depositions, that the charge was absolutely unfounded, and that it was one which could not be supported in a court of law. No justice or jury could ever come to a verdict of guilty on the evidence, and l expressed my opinion to that effect to the Commissioner. I told him that I was only concernerl in seeing that he gave the matter the fullest consideration, not only from the C•lmplainant's point of view, but from the point of view of the guard. He told me he had done so, and I said that if be could not fairly see his way to alter his decision I wa' not there· to ask him to do so. On a previous occasion the hon. member for Clermont threw out the insinua­tion that the decision had been arrived at owing to the interventio:t of a legal member of the House. I took it that the insinuation was. levelled a.gainst me. I have made it absolutely

' clear that I did not even see Mr. Thallon, or dis­cuss the matter with him, until after he had come to his decision; and it is not my habit to ask "ny officer of the public service or any Minister to do anything which he, ufter having gone into the

, facts, cannot fairly see his way to do. The only thing I ask a man to do is to see that he has the whole of the facts uefore him, in order to enable him to come to a fair decision. It is only fair to myself that I should gi 1·e that explanation, because of the insinuation, whether intentional

: or otherwise, levelled against me. The hon. mem­ber has said that the guard was not game to take the matter into a law court. That statement wants explanation. He probably mean-. that, as the man's name was pro­nrinently mentioned in a certain newspaper, combined with tbe most groRs ch:trge of im­morality, the wonder is thal; he did not sue that paper for libel. All I can say is, that if every­budy who is libelled in that particular paper commences a libel action, 'here would not be· very much left of the paper, and there would. be nothing but libel actions tried in the law courts. It b well known that statements made in that papsr are as a rule q nite nn worthy of credence, and it <loes a person more harm than good to take notice of them. I trust, the papers in con­nection with this case will be placed on the table at the earliest opportunity, and that bon. members will be able to see for themselves that therE' is no foundation whatever for the insinua­tions levelled against this man.

The SECRE'rARY FOR AGRICULTURE:. I am very glad that the House has been addressed by the hon. member for Toowong •.

Inquiry into Charges [23 OCTOBER.] against Guard I-Iall. 941

The hon. member for Clermont has brought a ·charge of immorality against a man who has been tried by a. tribunal.

::IIr. LESIN A: By way of explanation, I wish to •ay that I brom;ht no charge of immorality against anyone. My motion refers to allegations of immorality.

The SECRETARY FOR AGl~lCULTURE: I do not wish to bandy words with the hon. member. I will read his moti<J<l. [Motion read.] There is a roundabout manner of doing these things which people who like to have a back door to sneak ont uf are very much addicted to. That motion bring;; out the fact before the world that a charge of immorality h~s been made against a certain person, but the hon. member has omitted all mention of the fact that the man has been tried and acquitted of the charge. The hon. tnerr1ber, in moving for the paperr", said be d1d so because the mau was unfit to be retained in the public service, although he bad read the same papers which the hon. member for Toowong -a gentleman who is a lawyer and a man uf honourable reputation-says satisfied him that tht>re was no truth at all in the allegatiom. It has t.een said that "the world is like a looking­glass : man sees his own face in it." That is undoubtedly true of societv. An honourable man whose minrl is not full of evil would, on reading the charges, probably acquit the person charged, but the man who is familiar with crime, and who is alway" thinking the worct of his fellow-ereat.ures, instantly says, " The man is guilty ; it's what I would rlo myself.'' I think there is a great deal of that in this nmLter, as the hon. member for 'l'oowong has pointed out. He has read the papers, and be has pointed out that this unfortunate ml>n has been tried and has been traduced in low papers which live by pandering to the worst passions of human nature-jHtpers that appeal to all envy, nu­charitableness, and malice, and which I am told that an honourable member-I wili say of the House of Rtrataria-is connected with. If I am informed that it woulr1 be in the interests of justice in order to defend a man against whom slanderous imputations have been made, I would say it would be better for the papers to be laid on the table, and I accept th<> opinion of the hon. member for Toowong and not the opinion of the hon. member for Clermont. Let the papers be produced if that is necessary to get at the truth of the matter and to defend this man, who has been trie'l and acquitted and traduced here. I do not think it is desirable to bring papers which revel in filth here to satisfy the curiosity of any hon. member who delights in that sort of thing. Assuming that the production of these papers will have a good result and may lead to the vindication of an innocent man's character, let ·them be produced by all means. I must say I do not like to read the de_t<tils of charges of im­morality; I would rather leave them on one side. Itisagoodmaximtoknow: "Sweetstotbesweet." One objection I have is to any form of trial conducted by a House which is composed of politicians who are eminently biassed. If this particular man is a bitter opponent of the hon. member for Clermout--[Mr. LESINA: I have never seen him in my life.] He may or may not ; but if he is all I can say is : God help the man if he is tried by the hon. memoer for Clermont. Any impartial person will admit that, wherever political feelings exist, nothing can be more fatal to justice than that a man's trial should be conducted by human beings so situated. This is no slander against this Hou8e. It is quite evident that people whose strong feelings may be aroused, are not good judges. If a man is sitting on a bench, and someone points out that the man being tried is a friend

or a second cousin of his, if he has any sense of self-respect, he will leave the bench. In regard to this matter, it is absurd to endeavour to question the results of any inquiry which has been ccmdncted in a business-like manner hy persons who are perfectly disprtssionate, and to substitute for it another i10qniry of an entirely different nature. The Minister for Rail ways stated that he was perfectly satisfied to leave the matter in the hands of the Hou,e. [Mr. LESINA : This man came into the Houqe just now and asked us not tu ask for the pmduction of these pap<"rs. Do you know that ?] That is moHt extraordinary. [nfr. LESINA : He does not want them produced.] If I have to choose between the lwn. member for Clerrnont and the hon. member for Toowong-l am not going to give my opinion as to which I believe, because if I did that I should probably he pulled up by the Speaker. I will retain my opinion.

Mr. P. J. LEAHY (Warrego): Ihavl' \ery grave doubts whether this House is jnstified in supporting anything that emanates from the hon. member for Clermont. I certainly have a very strong inclination to support this motion, and it is very probable that I shall do so, more in the interests of the man named than for anv other reason. But whil't I may give my vote in support of this motion, I think there is a great deal to be said against moti••ns of this kind; and I think we bave to con,ider the motives of the men who introduce such motions. It is quite refreshing to hec.~· the hon. member for Clermont posing as a champion of morality. [.M:r. LESINA: I h<tve 11ever done so.] I am very pleased to

hear tiJat, and I trust that the hon. member will on all occasions live up to the example he has set up this afternoon. [Mr. LEHINA: I will do as I like.) I trust the hon. mer11ber will endeavour to do the right thing, any how. One que·,,tion is : \.Yill any good come if this motion is carried? I think it is very pos,ible that this man, who has been acquitted by an impartial tribunal--[ Mr. LESINA: No.) It has been said by several hon. members that he has been acquitted, and I ba,·e no hesitation in <;aying that my feelings are against tbe hon. member for Clerrnont. [Mr. LESIXA : Read the papers.] Possibly I may agree with the hon. mem­ber for Clerrnont after I have read the papers. Even more imposGible things than that may happen. Whilst I think that the pas"age of this motion may do good, it may resuh in injury to this man. \Ve know that in the minds of most people a mere accusation is very often synonomnus with conviction. They think that because a man is accused he must be guilty. Three out of four people may take notice of an accut,ation, but they may never read the verdict subsequently given. \Ve see that ilbstrated every day. Some of the great unthinking public run away with ·the idea that a ma,n is guilty at once; l>nd it is just poHsible that these papers will be produced and published by a cer­tain class of papers which make a living by publishing prurient literature-they will not be published by reputable, respectable journals-they will publish the impure matter; they may only pn blish one side of the question, and many of the public who rf-ad such papers may run awa.y with a wrong idea. Reference was made by the hon. member for Clerrnout to the fact that this man had not gone to law in regard to certain statements made in a newspaper--probably some newspaper with which the hou. member himself was connected. Is a man to go to law merely because some newspaper-or apology for a newspaper-makes a statement about him? Possibly it may be that his poverty prevents him. [The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: Or the poverty of the paper.]

942 Ohar_qes against Guard Hall. [ASSEMBLY.] Railwa;ljs Acts, Etc., Bill.

Yes, in many cases the poverty of the paper prevents a man from going to Jaw, because if he did get a judgment probably that is all he would get. It is extraordinary to me that any hon. member on the other side should give the fact that a nwn does not go to law as a reason that he has a had case. Those hon. members are never tired of telling us about poor individuals who have no money, yet we have the brilliant meteoric member for Clermont actually wanting us to believe ~hat poverty is synonymous with crime. [Mr. LESINA : He is not a po<>r man. He is a property-owner.] There are property. owners who have not got anything at all, be ea use very of ten the money they spend on their property i< more than the property is worth. Even if a man has money, is he going to incur the cost necessary for an action of this kind merely for the purpose of proceeding against a man of straw? Even if he were a man of subs: ance and the man won his case, he would probably be a loser, because there is not an instance where a man has obtair.ed the full amount of his loss. To be abused by some papers is the highest sort of praise, and I think the con­verse holds true also. If the hon. member for Clermont praised me, I would regard it as tanta­mount to censure, or a libel on my character. I think we have too much "scandal, and gossip, and spite" in connection with these matters. It is p<JS"ible that there may be some justification for brin~ing forward this motion ; but probably there is no justification. I won't go so far as to say I will not vote for the motion ; possibly I may, though as a general rule I consider motions of this kind are reprehensible.

Mr. DENHAM: The hon. member for Cler­mont, in speaking to the motion, was unusually brief, but he was also very vehement. Clearly enough in his view the person named in the motion has been guilty of a serious wrong. We know this becau<e he states that after read­ing the documents he is satisfied of the guilt of the person. On the other hand, we find that an hon. gentleman who has also read the evidence is equally clear that the person is not guilty. Then, again, we have the tribunal before whom the person appeared. They had the advantage of hearing all the evidence of witnesses face to face, and knowing all the conditions and cir­cumstances; and they say the man is exonerated. [Mr. LESINA : They did not say anything of the sort. They say he is not fit to remain in the service.] He is still in the service. [Mr. LESINA: They shifted him from passenger traffic to goods traffic, so that he should not meet women and children.] Those before whom he appeared are in the same service and are jealous of its reputation. If there was the faintest doubt about this man's guilt, the officers before whom he appeared would have sent him out of the serYice absolutely. They are jealous that the service shall be abo\e suspicion, and a charge of this nature, if allowed to go unnoted, would be a serious hindrance to the popularity and well-being of the service. Not only that, but subsequently the Commissioner, after read­ing the findings, is satiRfied that the man is not guilty. Now, is it in the interest of the public, after all these findings, that the documents should be laid on the table of the House and disseminated broadcast by certain organs? I say that the public interest is not served by these documents being laid on the table and dis­seminated throughout the country. I cannot, therefore, vote for the motion. All hon. mem­bers have access to the papers. We have had the benefit of the opinion• of two hon. members this afternoon-one who approached the subjecr with a biassed mind, and the other who went through the papers calmly.

At 7 o'clock the House, in accordance with Sessional o,·de?·, p,-oceeded with Gove1·nrnent business.

TRUSTEES AND EXECUTORS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

COMMITTEE.

Clause 1-'· Short title"-put and passed.

On clause 2-" Power to postpone sale and conversion in certain cases"-

Mr. HAWTHORN (Enoggem): In practice it has been found that the court has no power to

grant an executor or administrator, [7 p.m.] carrying on a business a s:tlary,

which, especially in the case of hotel properties, had worked an injustice, and, in order to meet that, he moved that the following new sub­clause be inserted after subclause (2. ), namely-

iS.) If any such trustee is now or hereafter shall be authorised to carry on any business or undertaking as aforesaid, the court may, either in lieu of or in addition to the commission mentioned in section fifty-five of the principal Act, allow to the trustee such salary or remuneration as the court shall think fit for his pains and trouble in carrying on such business or under­taking.

::\fr. MACARTNEY recognised that the amendment met a want which was considerably felt. It practically gave additional discretion to the court, and he did not see any objection to the amendment.

Amendment agreed to; and clause, as amended, put and passed.

The House resumed ; and the CHAIRMAN reported the Bill with an amendment.

The third reading of the Bill was made an order for Tuesday next.

RAILWAYS ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.

CoMMITTEE-COUNCIL's :iYIESSAGE, No. 3.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS (Hon .• J. Leahy, Bulloo): The question for the Committee to consider was clause 7, upon the omission of which the Council further insisted. He did not. propose to agree to the amendment of the Council, but to ask the Committee to send it hack with an additional reason. If that were done, he had reason to believe that the Council would agree to the clause. He moved that the Committee further insist upon their disagreement to the Council's amendment omitting clau•e 7, and on the amendment of the said clause in which the concurrence of the Council was invited by mesba.ge of the 16th instant.

Question put and passed.

The House resumed ; and the CHAIR;IfAN re­ported that the Committee further insisted upon their disagreement to the Council's amendment omitting clause 7, and on the amendment of the the said clause in which the concurrence of the Council was invited by message of the 16th instant.

On the motion of the SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS, the Bill was orrlered to be re­turned to the Council, intimating that the As;embly insisted upon their disagreement for the reasons already advanced, and for the further reason that since the Bill had been before Parlia­ment there had been no protest either through the Press, by deputation, or by any other form of public objection.

Local Autlwrities Bill. [23 OcTOBER.] Local AuthoJ'ifies Bill. 9J3

LOCAL AUTHORITIES BILL. Co~mrT~'EE.

Clauses 1 to 3, inclusive, put and passed. On clause 4-" Repeal"-The HOME SECRETARY (Hon. J. :F. G.

Fox ton, Carnarvon): That was a clau"e on which the committee had made a recommenda­tion. He moved the omission of the words on lines 25 and 27, " subject to the provision~ hereinafter contained," with a view of insertino­at the end of the clause, after "place "the word~ "bnt suc;h by-laws may be repealed 'or amended under thrs Act."

Amendment agreed to. On the motion of the HOME SECRETARY

the clause was further amended by the insertion; after the word " place," on line 29, of the words "but su~h by-laws may be repealed or amended under thrs Act."

Clause, as further amended, put and passed. On clause 5-" Existing municipalities and

divisions"-Mr. KEN!\' A (Bowen): Subsection 5 of this

clause gave the Governor in Council power to "alter the boundaries of any area or of >tny ward, or the number of wards, or the number of aldermen assigned to each ward;" but it did not em power the Governor in Council, in the event of a Gre>tter Brisbane scheme beino- brought about, to increase the total number of ~ldermen in the Brisbane municipality. He moved that the worde " or increase the total number of aldermen" be added after "ward " un line 7 page 5. [Mr. STEPHJms : Clause 9 deals with that.] If the Committee were satisfied that the matter was provided for later on, he would withdraw the amendment.

Ho:\. E. B. FORREST (Brisbane North) thought there was something- in the contention of the boo. member for Bowen, and he would like to be sure whether this was the proper place to move this amendment or not. He understood that it was desired to give the Governor in Council power to increaHe the number of members of the Brisbane munici­pality, and there was some reference to the matter here.

The HOME SECR~TARY: This matter had been fully considered by the Committee, and the hon. member for Enoggera, who was a mem­ber of the executive of the Local Authorities' Association, had given notice of an amendment to deal with the matter referred to in the proper place.

Clause put and passed. On the motion of the HOME SECRETARY

clause 6 was amended by the insertion in line 17 of the words, "or any powers, authorities, privi­leges, duties, or obligations conferred or imposed upon any person, company, or corporation under the provi•ions thereof," and agreed to.

On clause 7-" Interpretation"-Mr. HAWTHORN : He had given notice of

an amendment to insert, in line 26, "dogs" after the word "goats." Provision was

[7•30 p.m.] made in the by-laws' >Chedule for the registration of dogs and goats

and he thought it would be better to includ~ dogo, as well as goats, in the definition of "animal.l'

The HO::VIE SECRETARY : The animals included in the definition were those which were dealt with under the impounding clauses. They we:e ·:,cattle, horses, camels, sheep, goats, and swme. If the hon. member could show that the word " animals" was usP.d in any part of the Bill under such circumstances as to render the inclusion of the word "dogs" in the definition desirable, he could understand the reason for the

amendment, but at present he could not. [Mr. HAWTHORN: I cannot point out an instance at present.]

Amendment put and negatived. Mr. KENNA drew attention to the loose

definition of the term "building." It was defined as a structure, and later on in the clause a structure was defined as a building. It was possible that a person who wished to evade the building clauses might take off the roof of his establishment-it might be a blacksmith's shop -and defy the local authority.

The HOME SECRETARY: If the hon. member could show any part of the Bill where the definition wa.' likely to lead to any difficulty. he would be obliged. It was intended to dis­tinguish between buildings and structures. A building must have a roof, and was in that way distinguished from a structure, which included "any building. wall, fence, or other structure or anything affixed to or projecting from any building." The distinction was drawn for the purposes of the building clauses.

Mr. KENNA: As the clause stood, a struc­ture was a building, and a building must con­tain a roof. Therefore, any four walls without a roof was not a building, and if it was not a building it was not a structure.

HoN. A. MORGAN (Wancick) asked the Minister when he thought would be the most convenient time to raise the question as to rate­payers who should vote. The question of the dummy votP-r was one of very great importance to local govermng budies in outside districts >tnd it was daily be0oming of more serious im: portance, threatening, in Rome cases, he believed the efficiency of the local government eystem: He thought the question might be raised on the definition of "ratepayer," but should like the Minister to intimate where he considered it would be most convenient to discuss the matter.

The HOME SECR~TARY: It all depended upon the nature of the amendment which it was intended to propose. He thought that the portion of the Bill dealing with the making up of the rolls would be the proper place to discuss the subject. The only way the committee, to whom the measure was referred, thought the matter could be remedied was by putting an additional question to a man when he went to vote.

Mr. TOLMIE : To meet the objection raised by the hon. member for \V arwick, the committee proposed to insert, on line 25 of clause 2\J of the third schedule, the words, "And are you now truly entitled to vote as such owner or occupier?"

The HOME SECRETARY moved that the definition of "improved land " be amended by adding at the end thereof the words " and any land under cultivation." '

Amendment agreed to. ~r .. P AG ET (11fackay) ~oved, on line 13, the

om'"swn of the words Home Secretary or other."

The HOME SECRETARY did not see the object of the amendment. The Officials in Parliament Act provided for the adjustment of duties of Ministers, and in the meantime the Home Secretary administered the Loc.•l Govern­ment Act ; and it was not necessary, so long as he contmued to do so, to show that any procla­mation had been issued under that Act definina what Minister was administering it. "

Mr. PAGET, with the consent of the Com­mittee, withdrew the amendment.

The HOME SECRETARY moved on line 15 the insertion of the following new definition:-'

u Naturalised Subject"-A person who has been naturalised ~n England or in Queensland, or in any State to wh1ch the Act of the Federal Council of

944 Local Authorities Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Local Authorities Bill.

Australasia. intituled "The Australasin,n ::\1"aturalisation Act, 1897," extends, or in any State in pursuance of any Act of the Commonwealth of .d..nstralia.

Mr. HARDACRI~: lt appeared to him that the definition would lead to some trouble. It gave a number of Acts nnder which a person might be considered naturalised, but an Act which might be passed by the Commonwealth Parliament rni:<ht be inclusive of the definitions under which a person bad been naturalised. [The HmiE SECRETARY: Then it would prevail.] A Commonwealth Act which might in future be passed might be contradictory of the other Acts. He granted that such an Act would over-ride everything so far as the Commonwealth was concerned, but it would not over-ride anything done under that particular clause. ". The HO:\IE SECRETARY: In answer to the hon. member for Leichhardt, he would say that even after the passing of a federal :0: aturalisation Act any previous naturalisation in Queensland would still hold good. A man who was once naturalised was naturalised fur all time.

iiir. KIDS TON said he would like to see the words "the United Kingdom" substituted for the word" Englanri."

The HO::\IE SECRETARY h~d no objection to tbe altemtion, but he preferrerl that. tbe hrm. membr~r sfJOnld move it. That was thr· defini­tion which vas to be found in all etatute~ at tbe present time, and it seemed to have worked all right. It was desirable to lmve uniformity.

Mr. KIDSTON : If those were the words used in all Acts at the present time, then they showed a want of geographic:~l knowledge on the part of lep;islatori3. l-Ie rnoved the u1nission of the word "l<~ngland," with a view of inserting "the United Kingdom."

Amendment put and negatived; and original amendrnent agreed to.

The HOJIIIE SECHETARY moved the inser­tion of the following word;; on line

[8 p.m.] 33, after "thereof":-'rhe term include::; anyle!:'isee from the Crown holding

under a longer tenure than a tenancy from year to year, and any superintendent, overtleer, or manager for such lessee residing on the holding. aud in the ease of a goldfield or mineral field also includes the holder of a mining lease and the lawful oecnpicr of a business area or residence area under the laws for the time being in force relating to mining.

He thought the amendment was a very good one. Mr. RYLAND (G_ympie) thought the words

"'and the lawful occupier of" were untH"cessary, because under the :Mines Act the holder of a residence area, or any other mining tenement, was considered the owner.

The HO:VIE SECRETAHY explained that the words were neces,ary, because although the holder of a residence area rented it to someone else, he was still the lawful occupibr as against the Crown.

Mr. ,J ACKSON : He would be glad if the Home Secret:try would explain why the amend­ment was limited to mining leases, bu•iness areas and residence areas, seeing that there were' other kinds of "reas on goldfields. [The HOME SECRETARY : Surely they are included in the other definitions, are they not?]

Mr. RYLAND thought the difficulty might be got over bv inserting "or other mimng tene­ment" after"" residence area."

'l'he HOME SECRETARY understood it was specially requested by the hon. members for Charters Towers and Gym pie that it should be limite':l in t.his way, and should not include the others on account of their temporary nature.

Mr. HARD ACRE agreed with the contention that other areas should be inoluded.

Mr. TOLMIE: The committee in dealing with this clause left it as largely as possible to the mining representatives; and the definition as it stood in the amendment was, »s far as he remembered, the expression of their opinion.

Mr. TURNER (Rockhampton North) : He thought the c<tse would be met by adopt,ing the suggestion of the hon. member for Gym pie.

The HOME SECRETARY: That would never do, becaus>l they were defining what was an owner, not what was an occupier. He might point out that unless the dews of the committee were going to be accepted in matters on which they agreed, he was afraid that the committee would not h&ve effected much in the way of saving tirrte.

Mr. RYLAND said there were a gcod many valuable tenures still not included in the defini­tion. There was the consolidated noiner's right, for instance.

Amendment agreed to; and clause, as ar11ended, put and passed.

Clauses 8 to 11, inclusive, put and passed. On clause 12-" Constitution of local authori­

ties"-Mr. HA vVTHORN : The clause fixed the

maximum number of councillors at twelve. If the Greater Brisbane scheme was carried out, they should certainly have more than twelve councillors in that case, and he therefore moved that the word "twelve" be omitted with the view of inserting "twenty-four."

l\Ir. KENNA suggested that, with the view of avoiding deadlocks, the hem. member should make the number odd.

Mr. FOGARTY (DJ'ayton aad Tomcoomba) thonght that if the nHmber wa" increased it would make a council unworkable. His ex­perience was that a numerically small body worked _nwre satisfactori!y than a large one, a.nd he shuuld vote a~~ain~t the atnt:>ndment.

Thn HOMJ!: SECRETARY could sc'1rcely support the a1nendment, UecauRe there \Vas only one instance in which it would be likely that that number would be required. That was under the Greater Brisbane scheme, and it would be quite impossible to establish any satis­factory scheme of that kind without special legi"lation, and in that special legislation the number of councillors could be fixed.

Mr. NORMAN (ftfaryborouyh): They were now passing a Local Government Bill which should be suitable for the whole of the State, and were not making special provision for Brisbane. If Brisbane was extended in the way suggested, then a special Act would have to be passed, and the number of members could be specified in that Act.

Mr. :MACARTNEY agreed with the Home Secretary that special legislation would be necessary to give effect to a Greater BriRbane scheme, and under those circumstances he did not think it necessary to amend the clause as proposed.

Amendment put and negatived. Mr. RYLAND did not see any necessity for

fixing the number of members for each ward at three. It might be found convenient to divide a town into two wards only, and possibly to give a larger proportion of representation to one on account of its pofJulation. He therefore moved that the word "three" ou line 25 be omitted.

'l'he HOME SECRETARY suilgested that if the hon. member wanted to move

[8'30 p.m.] an amendment it should be in the form of omitting the word "three,"

with the view of inserting the words "the nnmber of."

Mr. RYLAND said he would move his amendment as indicated by the Home Secretary.

Local Authorities Bill. [23 OcToBER.] Local Authorities Bill. 945

Mr. BARNES (Bulimbo.) hoped the amend­ment would not he agreed tu. It would be quite certain to lead to a large amount of ahnse in small dist.rictR, and would create much ill-feeling.

Mr. DUNSFORD thought the amendment would be an improvement. There might be cir­cumstances under which a town desired to be divided into two equal parrs instead of three, and they should make provision for such cases.

Mr. NORMAN felt inc!in,·d to support the clause as it stood, for the reason that if a munici­pality had nine mernoers it would be impos:;ible to apportion them equally.

Mr. FOG ARTY we,s inclined to agree with the hon. member for Bulimba that the alteration would be the reverse of an improvement. He was not aware that any particular objection had been raised to the clause in the past, and they should let well alone.

Amendment put and negatived. Mr. LINDLEY (Wide Bay) moved that the

words on lines 35 and 36, "and need not be the same for eoch division," be omitted. As far as the outside districts were concerned, he felt satisfied 1t was in the interests of the good work­ing of the. shires that there should be equal representatiOn.

Mr. STEP HENS (Brisbane South): There were some places where it would work very harshly to have the same amount of represen­tation. Southport was an instance of that, where the divisions were represented respec­tively by four, three, and two members. It was as well to keep together those portions of a district which had common intereets, and it would be most unfair that a little district worth £1,000 should have the same number of votes as one worth £5,000. He belie' ed in the clause as it stood, which had worked very well.

The HOME SECRETARY: There were only one or two othes c tses beside, South port where there were different number.s for the different divisions. For the most part the divisions were all equally re •• resented, and it might be taken for granted the,t unless very good cause was shown the Governor in Council would in every case make the representation equal.

Mr. BARNES: In Coorparoo they had three members for each ward, and tl.e present arrange­ment worked splendidly. One of the wards was represented by the "'me number as the other wardr·, although it w:.' a very much more important ward; and yet there had never been any friction. He thought they would do much better by having equal representation.

HoN. A. S. COWL:H:Y (Herbert): As a mem­ber of the committee, his reason for voting for the clause was simply because it allowed matters tn remain as they were. He did not think the Home Secretary or any Government would dif­ferentiate between the members of the different subdivisions unless such a request was made hy the people themselves.

Mr. STORY (Balonne) pointed out that there need not be the same repreHentation in Pach di vi­sion, but it was contemplated to allow the matter to remain as it was, as by doin~ s,, they were not upsetting present arrangements, neither would they do any injustice, nor would there be any possibility of an injustice being done in the future.

Mr. KATES (Ounningham) agreed with the hon. member for Toowoomba, Mr. Fogarty. For twenty or thirty years the present system had worked very well, and there was n0 neces­sity to make any alteration in it.

Mr. HAWTHORN also thought it would be unfortunate to e,lter the present arrangements, especially as he had not heard of any complaint about the present system. The matter should be left to the ratepayers.

1902-3 N

Mr. LINDLEY nsked leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The HOME SECRETARY moved the inser­tion of the word "seven," on line 38, after the word "five." If he was not mistaken, this had been unanimously agreed to by the committee, although the clause itself was agreed to on divi­sion by 9 to 1.

Amendment agreed to; and clause, as amended, put and passed.

Clause 13 put and passed. On clause 14-" Qualification of member"­

The HOME SECRETARY: Before any amendment was moved he wished to make a su~gestion. This mised the question of alder­women, and he would su:,gest that they should do what tbcy did on the committee. He was sure that no amount of discu•sion in this Charn her would alter the views of hnn. members on thiB matter, for everyone had very decided views on it. He would suggest, in the interests of time, that the discussion be left in the hands of a. limited number of members, and that they should go to a division as 8oon as possible.

Mr. RYLAND did not think it was necesmry to talk t1t any great length on this matter. He moved that the word "male," on the 1st line of the clause, be omitted. He thought that. women should have all the rights and privileges. of citizenship with men, and that they should have the right to become aldermen and ma.yorB in connection with local government. That> was only in keeping with the spirit of the times. In New Zealand they had had a woman mayor. , Tbey also enjoyed the right in England and in Ireland. It was his privilege to attend a confer­ence in the 1\Iansion Huuse, Duolin, which included ladies. It was a conference represent­ing local bodies in all parts of Ireland, and it was packed from floor t·' ceiliug. (Laughter.) vVomen took part in the adrnini"tration of hospitals, and did excellent work. And how did the late Queen fill her office? No one would dare to question that it was filled with the best ability, and with credit to herself and to the Empire. And when a woman could fill the highest position in the Empire, surely she could take a position on a shire council or a municipal council. He hoped to see women in the Federal Parliament before long. Was there anything against the character of women that they should be excluded from local government? In his. opinion the only thing that should prevent them from becoming members of local governing bocties or members of Parliament was simply that they could not get enough votes. If women could not get enough votes to make them shire· councillors or mu oicipal councillors, they would have to stop outside, but being women should not debar them. The males in dailv attendance in our prisons last year numbered 1·79 per thou­sand, while the women only numbered 0'23 per thou•and. That showed that the women were· more tlian seven times better than the men. [Honourable members: Hear, hear!] Then why shonld they be debarred by this word of four letters from the rights of citizenship? Again, if they Wbnt to the churches, where they found higher culture, the women were in much larger· attendance than the men. .

The CHAIR:\IAN: I think the hon. member is going too far into a comparison of the sexes.

Mr. RYLt\ND: He thought it very likely· that some members needed to be converted. He supposed every hon. member had received letters' in connection with the franchise. There was a Bill' before the Assembly which prevented women from

946 Local Authm·ities Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Local Authorities Bill.

being members of Parliament, and he received a connnnnica'ion frorn representatives of a large secti<~n of the community protesting against this indignity being cast on the women of the State. He wus proud to receive that letter, because women had been deba~ed for years, and it was only when they asserted their rights that tht·y were likely to get them. He hoped the Com­mittee would admit all women to tbe full rights of citizenship under the clause. (Hear, hear!)

Mr. FOGARTY was perfectly in sympathy with the amendment. It was nothing new as far as Aus·rulasia was concerned. 'l'hey all knew the case in New Z':ealand where that distin­guished lady, Mrs. Y ates, occupied tha highest office in a certain municipal council. They also knew that ladies formed the committees of bene­volent societies subsidi,ed by the Government, and carried out their duties in an eminently

satisfactory manner. He was in­[9 p. m.] clined to think that some of the

local bodies had got into such a hopeless muddle tlmt they required the counsel of ladies to extricate them frum their position. Women h~td to pay rates as well as men, they were equally as intelligent and resourceful, and th~y should have the same rights of citizenship. Mrs. Yate< perform eel the duties of the high posi­tion Wttich she held with grpat ability, and he was sorry to say that she was not treated hirly by the oppo,ite sex. She had, however, sufficient force of character and intelligence to repel the feeble attacks made upon her by puny man. He ventured to say that. even the most experienced member of this House, if he expressed his opinion of the treatment Mrs. Yates experi­enced--

The CHAIRMAN: Order! I really cannot see that the eX[JHieuce of Mrs. Yates has any­thing to do with the question that the word "male" should be omitted from this clause, and I regret to ""Y that I feel it my duty to intimate to the hon. member that his remarks are irrelevant.

Mr. FOG ARTY: With all respect to th~ Chairman's ruling, he was of opinion that his rem,,rk;; were quite relevant to the question before the C.mmittee. He would, however, refrain from spe;tking any further on that point. (Mr. Mc:ViASTER: Hear, hear!] It was quite possible th "t the hon. gent le man who interjected had not sufficient cnnr"ge to express his opinion for or against the amendment. He hoped the amendment mnved by the hon. memb<;r for Gympie, Mr. Ryland, would be acce[Jted. He wa' quite "atisfied that the ladie' who menaged the different benevolent societies throughout the colony spent money very judicim1sly, and care­fully considered ev,'ry p ·nny before they d<s­posed of it. He was oorry te> say this had not been characteri;;< ic of municipal councill<~rs in the p;.;st in s<.me ca-es. It was v~ry well known that they were extravagant, and when a local borly was subdivided there was a good deal of "jeah,nsy in the spending of money. .A council of ladies would epproach the expendi­ture of money in a much broader spirit than that displayed in the past by men, and the chances were that all parts would be considered on their merits. 'rhat was not so at present. It was known 1hat combinations were formed with a view of having money spent in some particular locality, although the demand was much greater for it to be spent in some other direc· tion, and thus other people would remain regretting the admir,istration of their local aff;;ir.;. If a local authority consisted of three subdivision,, and the ratepayers saw fit to elect a lady for each subdivision, he ventured to say tl;tat they would have a purifying effect, and a

very g-ood influence upon the other six members. The brawle that were characteristic of munici­palities, especially in Brisbane, would not take place if a lady had the honour of a seat in the council. If the amendment were not earl ied, he W<·nld be extremely sorry. He intended to vote for it.

Mr. KIDSTON : He was surprised that the Minbter for Agriculture had not something to say about the amendment. [The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE : I do not want to stonewall the measure.] " Open confession was good for the soul." There were two questions to be consi­dered. 'l'he first was the right of the electors. If the clause passed as it stood, they would be inflicting an. unnecessary and unjustifiable restriction on the ladies of Queensland ; they would be limi 1 ing the rights of electors in the va1ious local government areas, and preventing them from electing any woman to represent them ou the local government body, no matter how much they might be convinced that a particu­lar woman would serve their purpose better than any man tbey had availal:le. This was a matter that should be left to the good sense of the electors of the area themselves. It would be improper to debar them from e"ercis­ing their own judgment in the matter. He had not heard any g.)>,d argument inside the H• use or outside of it why this amendment should not be carried-" hy women shnuld not be placed on an equal footing with men in this matter. The experience they had had, and the experience in other countries, as a result of extending this right or privilege to women, showed that the thing worked admirably-that it was an advan­tage to the community, more particularly as women had a special a]Jtitude for <erving the public in this capacity. He had recently come across a gentleman from New Zealand \\ h" had told him that the lady mayor of One­hunga was the best man in the crowd-in the council-(laughter)-and he aosured hm1 (Mr. Kidston) that their experience had certainly j nstified the choice of the electors iu electing that lady to that high office. In many small local gm·erning bodies alreody in Queensbnd, ladi•s admini,ten d their affairs- benevolent societies, and that sort of thing--and he was not aware that the general management of th,se insti>utions was so h1d--[Mr. AmJSTRONG: They should have the full control of th< se institu­tions.] He was glad to hear the hon. men1ber for Lockyer say that. It was support coming from an unexpected quarter, and he hoped the hon. member would vote for the am,nd­ment. [Mr. ARMSTRONG: That is a horse of anot.ber colour.] He was aware that a long debate would not aff,ct the voles, and it was very desirable that tbe Bill should be pudhed on. To those who were disposed to vote against the amendment he would point out that it the amendm~nt was carried it \\Onld not compel women to stand for election, and if any woman st .. od for aldermanship it would not compel any elector to vote for her. All the an1endment W<<nld do would be to give a fair field a.nd no favuur to men and women alike in matt,.rs in "hich they were equally C<>ncerned. He thought it was a step in the right direction, and he had much pleasure in supporting the amendment.

Mr. McMASTRR (F01·titude Valley): Though hem. U'embers on the other side wanted to allow women to become members nf local authorities, when the leader of the Opposition introduced an Elections Bill he excluded women from becom­ing members of Parliament. [Mr. RYLAND: He thought the dose mi~ht be too strong.] No; the hon. member thought the women might take the seats of some hon. members on that side and

Local Autlwrities Bill. [23 OCTOBER.] Local Authorities Bill. 947

get their salary. He was satisfied that women exercised their votes a. well as many men, if not better. He had always got their votes in the Valley when he wanted them, but he had never heard that they were desirous of becoming aldermen. They tried the experiment once in New Zealand, where they had a lady mayor in a certain town, but they did not repeat it. He thought it would be time to give women the right to become members of local bodies when they asked for the right.

Mr. NORMAN: He did not look at the matter from any sentimental point of view. He knew there were tiendish women as well as fiendish men; but as long as women were ratepayers they should have all the privileges .appertaining to ratepayers. When the Federal Parliament had passed an Elections Bill which ,did not exclude women from the Federal Par­liament, he did not think it would be wise to -exclude them from becoming members of local authorities. He intended to support the amend­ment.

Mr. MoDONNELL (Fortitude Valley): He intended to support the amendment, becau·e he believed that the advent of women to our local governing bodies would have a very beneficial effect. In several p"rts of the United States women were doing good work in connection with local government, and there were women in ,Queensland quite as intelligent and competent as men to deal with questions transacted by Iocal bodies. H<> believed a great improvement would be found in connection with local ,government, if we had some smart anrl intelli­gent women as members, and there would not be so nmch nece~sity for epidemic boarde and cleansing gangs as there bad been for some years past. If women had no desire to become members of local bodies, they h<td their choice; but if there were smart women who would be an acquisition to local bndh"', he thought an opportunity sh<~uld be offered to them to become candidates. Some hon. mem­"bers had criticised the leader of the Opp<hdtion for introducing a Bill which gave the fra.nchise to women, but deb,.rred them from l>ein>r mem­bers of Parliament. He hoped they would show the courage of 'heir convictions, and vote for this motion, which would enable women to become members of local boards.

Mr. TURNElt intended to vote for the amendment. He saw no reason why women ratepayers should not be eligible as members of local bodies if the ratepayers chose to elect them.

Mr. J ACKSON : The bon. member for Fortitude V alley, Mr. McMaster, said that an

Electoral Bill, introduced by the [9·30 p.m.] bon. member for Rockh>~mpton, did

not !Jrovide that women silonld be allowed to become members of Parliament, and that if the hon. member in charge ot that measura believed in the principle now advocated by some hon. membere, such a provision should have been inserted in that BilL The reason why <mcb a provision was not inserted in that measme was that it waH thought it would not be accepted by the Houtie. The proputial now made to admit women to seats on municipal and shire councils wae going one step at a time, and if it was adopted, the next step would be to permit them to be elected to Parliament. He was in favour of allowing women to become members of local authorities, if elected ·by the ratepayers. He was not going to eulogise women in the way that some hon. members had done. Though he had always been an enthusiastic ad vacate of woman suffrage, yet he recognised that the bulk of the work

in the world-social and political-would have to be done by men. Still, that was no reason why woman should not be given the full rights of citizenship; and bebarrmg her from being elected to a municipal or shire council was certainly debarring her from the full rights of citizenship. While women might not be as broadminded as men, not having had the ex­perience that men had had in conducting the business of the world, yet they had some very excellent qualifications, both for members of Parliament and members of local authorities. For instance, they had fluency of expression. He remembered reading in a work by Havelock Ellie, that in Paris, when a hushand went to a lawyer in connection with a case, the lawyer generally said, "Send your wife along,''• it having been found that the woman could state the case better than the husband. If it was found that an experiment of this sort was not succesRful, or that it did not work well, there would be no damage done. But he did not see why it should not be a success. Seeing that women bad proved successful as members of school boa.rds and in the manage­ment of benevolent asylums in the old country, he thought this Committee might go a step higher and permit them to be elected to muni­cipal or shire conncils in this State. He had much pleasure in supporting the amendment.

Mr. MACARTNEY: The hon. member for Gym pie, in the eloquent appeal he had made to hon. memher< on this question, said that women were eligible as candidates for the Federal Pltr!iament. He (Mr. Macartney) was not exactly in a P''sition to contradict the hon. member, but he had been looking up the Federal Electoral Act, and, as far as he conld see, it did not interfere with the provisions of the Common­wealth Constitution Act. The Federal Electoral Act provided that-

To entitle a person t.o be nominated as a senatm· or a member of the House of Repre~entatives he must be qualified under the Constitution to be elected as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.

The Commonwealth Constitution Act provided, section 34-·

Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the qualifi­cations of a member of the House of Representatives shall be as follows:-

(i) He must be of the full age of twenty-one years1

and mu~t be an eh-ctor entitled to vote at the election of members of the House of Repre­sentatives. or a person qualitiPd to bpcome such elector, ~tnd must lmvc bt·Pn for three yearR at the least a residPnt 'vithin the limit~ of the Commonwealth as existing at the time when he is chosen.

Of course there was a Ferleral Acts Shortening Act, but that would not effect the it terp· etation of the Con•titutiun. Any Interpretation Act wh eh wonld applv to th,, Constimtion must be found among the Imperial statutes, and it there­fore became imp,rtant to ,ee what was the interpretation of those words under the :Engli"h law. There was a case in connec•ion with the London County Council, under a SPction in which the W!lrding W<JS ''every per~uu," etc. Lady Henry Someroet sought to be a c"nd1date, and was rejected. She then took pruceedmgs, and the caseultimatelyfound its way t•ltbe House of Lords, where it was determined that the context excluded females. As the interpretation the bon. member p'aced upon the F.deral Electoral Act was one of the str<mgest argu­ments which be advanced to induce members of tt,e Cumrnittee to support the amendment, he thought the bon. memb•r was called upun to go a little further and prove that what he said was correct.

948 Local Authorities Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Local A.utho1'ities Bill.

Question-That the word "mak" proposed to be omitted (llfr. R;yland's amendment) stand part of the clause-put; and the Committee divided:-

AYES, 28, Mr. Arm~trong )fr. J. Leahy

"Barnes , P. J. Leahy Boles Lyons Bridges :'. ::\facartney Oameton :!\iackmtosh

, Cowley , .:\'lc.J:Ia~ter , T. B. Cribb l\'Ioore ,. Dalrymple 0'Connel1 , Denham , Ph,Hp ,, Forrest Sir A. Rulledge

F01·svth Mr. Stepbens Foxt.On ,, Story

, J. Hamilton , Summerville , Hanran .. Tolmie

Tellers: Mr. Boles and Mr. Tolmie.

Mr. Airey Barber Blair Browne Burrows

, Cowap Dunsford

, Fogarty Grant

NoEs, 29.

W. Hamilton Hard acre Hawthorn Jackson Kates

, Kenna

Mr. Kerr Kidston Larnont L.:·sina

, Lindley )Iartin Maxwell ~IcDonnell

, :Mulcahy N01·man Plunkett Ryland Turner 1\~oods

Tellers: :Ur. Cowap and Mr. Ryland.

PAIR.

Aye-Mr. J. C. Cribb. No-:Ur. Hodge. Resolved in the negative. (Cheers and counter­

cheers.) l\Ir. RYLAND moved a consequential amend­

mBnt on liue 1, page 11, omitting the wurd "1nale."

Question-That the word "male" proposed to be omitted stand part of the clause-put; and the Committee divided:-

AYES, 30. Mr. Arrnstrong )fr. J. Leahy , Barnes , P. J. Leaby

Boles I(rons , Bridges ., :Jiacartney

Cameron , :J.iackintosh Cowlev , :M:c:\laster 'l'. B. (;ribb MoorP

, Dalrymple O'Connell , Denlmm , Philp , Fonest Sir A. Rutledge , Forsyth Mr. Stephens , Fox , Stoda.rt u }'oxton ., ~ tory ,. J. Hamilton , Summerville ,, Hanran , 'l'ohr..ie

Tellers: Mr. ~ioore a11d Mr. Stephens.

Mr. Airey , Barber

Bla.ir , Browne , Burrows , Cowap

Dun-.ford , Fogarty , Grant

W.l!amilton , Hardacre

Hawthorn , Jackson , Kates ,, Kenna

NOES, 2s:l. Mr. Kerr

Kidston Lamont Lesina Lindkv l\iartiii 1\'Iaxwell

, McDnnnell ~lulcahy Norman Plunkett Ryland Turner Woods

Tellers: Mr. Airey and Mr. W. Hamilton.

PAIR.

Aye-Mr. J. C. Cribb. No-Mr. Hodge. Question resolved in the affirmative. (Cheers

and counter-cheers.)

Clause 14, as amended, put and passed. Clau'e 15 put and passed. On clause Hi-" Payment of rates"-

On the motion of the HO:V1R SE2RETARY, the word "alone," on line 37, after the word "he," was ornitted.

Mr. RYLAND thought that the time, thirty days, mentioned in this clause was altogether too limited. He moved that the word "thirty," be omitted with a view of inserting the word "sixty."

Amendment put and negatived. Clause, as amended, put and passed. Clause 17 put and passed. On clatme 18-" Part of local auth0rity t<>

retire annnally"-Mr. RYLAND : He thought that the number

who should retire every year should be as near as pos,ible equal to half of t'•e local authnrity. He therefore moved the omi si on of "three," with a view of inserting ''four."

Amendment put and negatived. Clause 18 put 11ntl passed. Clauses 19 to 24 put and passed. On clause 25-"Voters"-

The HO;v1E SECRETARY line 10, after the

[10 p.m.] the words "who born or naturalised

Majesty and" be inserted. Amendment agreed to.

moved that in word ''years,"

is a na'ural subject of His

Mr. RYLAND moved the insertion of the word "one" before the wonl "vote," on line 12. That would practically mean that every ratepayer should have only one vote. It was quite in keeping with the spirit d the times that Mammon worship should be abar,doned, and that they should reco.nise citizenship. [The SEORETAllY FOR RAILWAYS: In that case you should make it one cittzen one vote. That is what they do in America, and they are suffering for it now.] If the hon. gentleman W<•Uld as,ist him, he was quite prepa•ed in the proiJer place to move an ameudrnent placing the franchise on the same basis aH in i\ew Zealand, wh~::re every ad11lt person over twenty-one years ~>f age, Whl}

had res:ded w;thin the area for three months, coulcl get on the roll and vote for the election of aldermen. In Ireland they had one ratepayer one vote. In fact, they went further than that, and provided that any person registererl as a free man in a parliamentary borough should be Pntitled to vote as a local governrnent elector. They all admitted that J•roperry had its rights; but in restricting- the man with pro!Jerty to one vole they did not deprive him of the other powers which he pos;e,sed as tbe owner or that pro­pmty. Pr<,bably he was a m"n of bettPr educa­tion and h d more influence than other voters, and would carry far m ,re weight on election day; and that was quite enough without giving him a multiplicitv of votes.

Mr. DUNSFO RD: As the clause stood, if a company ownecl a piece of property in each ward of the city of Brisbane worth £1,000, that com­pany wouiJ be able to CtJSt forty·tive votes; if an indvidual hel i a piece of [•r<>[>erty wt>rth £1,000 in each of the five wards of the city, he would he entitled b fifteen votes. This rnulti­plicati"n of votes had the effect of putting it in the power of two or three leaning property­owners to elect whom they would. The 11uni­cipal Franchi•e Reform Act of New ZeH!and, passed in 1898, clause 14, stated definitely that every persutt enrolled on the burghers' roll by any qualification ~hould have one vote, and no more, at any poll at which he was entitled to vote. The bon. member for Gympie asked for something less than ''one ratepayer one vote," but the amendment was good as far as it went.

Local Authorities Bill. [23 OCTOBER,] Local Authorities Bill. 949

The HOME SECRETARY: He hoped hon. members understood that it was not from any want of courtesy that he had not spoken on the amendment before. [Honuurable members: Hear, hear!] The matter had been considered by the informal committee, and he did not think it necessary to go over the arguments. The leading argument against the amendment was that all this taxation, or very nearly all, was in regard to property. The hon. member men­tioned, when the matter was considered by the committee, that there was a tendency to throw larger duties on local authorities; but, after all, most of thosa duties, if not all, had direct relation to property.

Question--That the word " one" proposed to be inserted (.~Ir. By/and's amendment) be so inserted-put; and the Comn1ittee divided :-

AYES, 24. Mr. Airey Mr. Kerr ., Barber , Kidston

Blair Lesina. , Browne ,\tartin , Burrowt5 ·uaxwell ., Cowap , 2.\fcDonnell

Dunsford , l\lulC'ahy , Grant Norman , \.V. I.Iamilton , Plnnkett , Hardaere ,. Ryland , J ackson Tnrner , Kenna , "\Yoods

Tellers: Mr. Hardacre and 1\ir. Kerr.

Mr. Armstrong B~trnes

, Boles· , Bridgt·i , Cameron ,. Cooper , Cowley , T. B. Cribb , Dalrymple , Denham , Forrest ., Forsyth

Fox , Poxton , J. Hamilton ,, IIanran ., Hawthorn , Kates

NoEs, 35. 3:Ir. Lamont , J. J.eahy

P. J. Leahy Lindlcy Lyons JHacartney :J.Iackintosh Me :Master ::'lloore

,, O'Connell , Paget , Philp

Sir A. Rutledge Mr. Stevhens

, Stodart Story

;,· Tolmie

'Tellers: }1r. Armstrong and :Mr. r~amont.

PAIR.

Aye-Mr. Hodge. No-Mr. J. C. Cribb. Resolved in the negative.

The HOME SECRETARY moved the omis­sion of all the words on lines 24, 25, anct 26.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. HAWTHORN moved that the word "December," on line 31, be omitted with a view of inserting "November." Experience had shown that the great volume of rates came in in October, the 1st November being fixed as the last day on which rates could be paid so as to entitle ratep,.yers to a vote. He thought it would be injudicious to defer the time for paying rates until December, thereby putting off for a month the making up of t.he voters' list.

Mr. STEPHENS pointed out that at present if people omitted to pay their rates until the 2nd November they were not able to get on the roll for twelve months. 'J'he new provision, which allowed local authorities to give discount, "ould have the effect of getting in a lot of extra money. Extending the time for payment of rates was a step in the right direction, and he would support the clause as it stood.

Mr. KA TES quite agreed with the hon. member for Brisbane South. In the country districts an extension of time would be a great boon to ratepayers. He should support the clause as printed.

Mr. BARN:B~S: The provision extending the time fvr payment of rates would simply add to the trouble of divisions and shires in financing. He agreed with the hon. member for Enoggera that it was much better to retain November as the month in which rates must be paid to entitle ratepayers to vote.

Mr. Mc:\lASTER thought they would find that if the boards allowed discount, the money would come in freely. That was the experience of tile Board of 'N aterworks, who for years had allowed discount for prompt payment of rates. If local authorities had power to allow as high as 10 per cent. discount, he was I]Uite sure that the ratepayers would take ad_vantage of the privilege. The extension o~ tu~e would b~ a great benefit, and when electiOn time was commg on many people would take care to get on the roll by paying tbeir rates.

Mr. RYLAND: He had a previous amend­ment to that of the hon. member for Enoggera. He wanted to move the omission of the whole subsecti;m and he would ask the hon. member to tempor~rily withdraw his amendment to give him an opportunity of doing so.

Mr. HAWTHORN: ~With the permission of the Committee, he would withdraw his amend­ment for the present.

Amendment withdrawn. Mr. RYLAND: He had given notice of an

amendment to omit lines 27 to 35, but as that would include the word "December," it would, if carried, preclude the hon. member for l'~noggera from moving his . amendment. His object could be obtained If he moved the omission of the first two words-" No person." If that were carried, the whole paragraph would go. His object was to prevent the dis­franchisement of ratepayers through non-pay­ment of rat<> for, perhaps, two or three clays. [ c\1r. Tor.l\!IE : ~What if they do not pay their rates at all?] The local authorities have had power to see th~t the rates were paid from the property, and with interes~. L!'st :y

1ear .they

passed an Act, embodied m tlns BJ.!, g1vmg local authorities power to sell land after seven years for the recovery of overdue rates. If necessary, they could make the perio~ two years, if the present law was not strmgent enough. According to the Act passed last year, interest cot~menced on t~e 1st January. They could provide that the mterest should

· commence sixty or thirty days from (10"30 p.m.] the time when the rates became due.

A proposal had been made by t!;e informal committee that any ratepayer who paid his rates within thirty days might be allowed discount up to 10 per cent., and where discount was allowed f0r prompt payment that practically amounted to charging interest to those who did not pay up within the time speci~ed: More­over if the rat~s were not paid withm a cer­tain' defined period the land could be sold hy the local authority, so that a property­owner could not escape from his liability. Therefore, no injustice would he done to any other ratepayer by allowing the owner of a property to vote even if he had n_?t paid his rates. \Vhy should a ~an. be dis­franchiserl because he had not paid hts rates, when those rates with interest, would eventually be recovered? There might have been some justification for such a provision as t~a.t which he pr.,posed to omit when local authorities had no power to sell land with the view of recovming overdue rates but in the present state of the law it had no ju~tification. He moved his amend­ment, and hoped it would be accepted by the Committee. * The HOME SECRETARY could not accept the amendment. The hon. member had talked about a man being in arrears with his rates for

950 Local Authorities Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Local Authorities Bill.

two or three days. What about a man who was in arrears for. five or six years, and who occupied property wInch was owned by another p@rson who allowed that property to be encumbered with an accumulation of rates, and all the while exercised the franchise ? [Mr. RYLAND : The landlord would get the rent all the time.] Yes; and he would assume that the rates were being paid.

Mr. DUNSFORD was in sympathy with the amer;dment. A man who was called upon to pay mterest on overdue rate,, and who at the same time . ran the risk of losing his property, was .P!"nah~ed sufficiently, without having his mumCipal nghts taken from him. He held that every man living in a municip,lity was really a ratepayer, and should be entitled to vote, and certainly the owner of property should be entitled t? vote, even if he did not pay his rates at the t1me they were due, bec8.use pnyment was abso­lut~ly secured to the local authority. A rate whiCh had to be paid sooner or later should carry representation with it.

Mr. HARDACRE bad known cases where a similar provision to that which it was now pro­posed to omit had led to the disfranchisement of a large portio a of the ratepayers, Him ply because the clerk of the divi,ional board had not sent out rate n?tice!':, and the rates in cqnsequence were not paid. [The HOME SECRETARY : l think that is impossible.] It was perfectly true. The clerk never sent out valuation or rate notices and the men did r;ot pay their rates, and were therefore disfranchised. [The HOME SECRETARY : There were no rates due if the notices were nQt sent out.] Of course there were no rates due but under snch a provision as that now unde; dis­cussion the ratepayers were disfranchised, and there was a great outcry when the election occnrred. In the particular instance to which he referred, there had been no election for many y~a;s_, and when the residents of one part of the div1_wm ronsed themselves and created a public feeling on the matter and demanded an election they found on the day of the election that they had no votes. ·

Amendment put and negatived. Mr. HA W'rHORN : In order to get an

expression of opinion on what he had sugg-ested, he moved that the word "December "on line 30 be omitted, with a view of inserti~g "Novem~ her." It was considered by many people that the 1st November was quite late enough.

Question-That the word "December" pro­posed to be omitted, stand part of the clause­put; and the Committee divided.

The CHAIRMAN: As there are insufficient tellers for the "Noes," I declare the question resolved in the affirmative.

On the motion of the HOME SECRETARY the word "alone," on line 34, was omitted. '

Mr. DUNSFORD: He intended to move the ~.mission of_ s_uhclause 5, because it gave corpora­.lOns and Jnmt stock companies larger voting powers than was given to individuals. It enabled three of the directors of a joint stock company to record three votes each in each divis!on, ~o that a i?int stock company owning­say, m Br~sbane-£,J,000 worth of property could record forty-five votes for that pr·Jperty. Such an aggregatiOn of votes was an outrage on those _who believed in anything like equal franchise. It was unfair to individnal rate­payers, for it was not based on an equal­ity of votes according to payment. It c<;mld not be contended it was fair to record nme votes for .£1, 000 worth of property in one ware! when one individual for the same amount of pr?perty was only allowed one vote. Why the difference? If hon. members were with him,

he hoped they would stick to the original portion of the Bill, which limite•l the votes that any one individual could give to three in any area. ·They should deal with corporations in the same way as they dealt with individuals. If that were done, the interests of in vi duals would be conserved as much as the interests of joint stock companies.

The HOME SECRETARY explained that this clause had been recommended by the Royal Commission, and had been adopted by the informal committee, though not unanimously.

Mr. RYLAND: This clause had been reservei for the consideration of the Chamber, and its effect should be very seriously considered. Why should a syndicate or a company be entitled to as many as forty-five votes in respect of pro­perty in any area? There was no equity in that ; because these companies could control the destinh·s of a place like Brisbane if this clause were passed. [Mr. McMASTER : Do you find any companies having property in each of the wards?] A good many companies had, and even if they had property in only one ward they would still have nine votes, and he did not think that was right. vVhy should a company have such greater voting power than an individual? That was the question. Each of the three persons should have the option of taking one vote each, or else one of them might take the whole three votes. Certainly companies should not have greater voting power than private individuals. It had been argued that a ratepayer should have more votes because he paid more rates, but they were deuarting from that principle on this question. 'Why should a property in the hands of a company give nine votes which, if it were in the hands of a private individual, would only give three votes? That would mean that, if there wtre five wards, that company could have forty-five votes. vVhere was the equity of such a proposal?

Mr. LAMOKT (B1·isbrrneSouth): The remarks of the hon. member on this occasion were logical and reasonable. He could not see why on& property should carry three votes whilst the property next door of the mme value carried nine votes. It was pr:>perty that gave the vote, and he did not see why that principle should b& departed from here.

Mr. STEP HENS : The case had been unfairly overstated. He never heard of a company which held sufficient property in every ward to entitle it to the maximum number of votes in each ward. If four individuals owned adjoining allotmente, for which each of them had three votes, and three of them formed a joint stock company, using those allotments in connection with their business, according to the ar"ument. of hon. members, the votes for those allotments would be cut down to three, and the other six votes would be lost. If they went to the root of the busines& and allowed a muni­cipality to be run as a joint stock company, and let every man have a number of votes proportionate to the amount he paid, there would be something in the argument; but that the man who only paid 5s. would have exactly the same voting power-if hon. members opposite had their way-as the man who paid £50-that was, one vote each-was stretching the point too far altogether. If a few people combined their properties into one, it would be unfair that all of them should be disfranchised except one. The clause bad been the law for eome time, and it had worked satisfactorily. [Opposition mem­bers: No.]

Mr. LAMONT disagreed with his colleague. [Mr. STEPHENS: You have had no experience of local government.] [Mr. BROWNE: He may have some common sense, though.] If he had a.

Railwa;lJS Acts, Etc., Bill. [28 OcTOBER.]

property valued at £1,500, he would have three votes, and, if he took in two partners, each of them would have three votes also, and that property would thus have nine votes. [Mr. STEPHENS : That is not so. You don't under­stand the Act.]

Mr. BROWN:BJ (Croydon) could not help sup­porting the amendment. If a property in Bris­bane belonged to an individual, and he had three votes for that property, and he got into diffi­culties and some joint stock company foreclosed, they would be entitled to nine votes for the same property. [The HoME SECRETARY: It must be worth £3,000.] Unless it was worth that, the original owner would not have three votes. [The HOME SECRETARY : Yes ; he would have three votes for a property v:tlucd at £1,000.] Whatever it was worth, he could not have more than three votes. In every civilised country in the world at the present moment they were fighting against the monopoly of trusts and joint stock companies, which could hold half the towns of Queensland in their power under that franchise. [Mr. STEPHENS: That is because you will not have tb.e votinr< propor­tionate to the amount of rate• paid.] Could the hon. member tell them of a single case in which a joint stock company was rated hi5her than a private individual? [The Hai\IE SECRETARY : Suppose there were three owners for property worth £3,000, they would have nine votes among them; and that is the exact number of votes that three directors of a company would have for the same property.] If property w<ts only worth three votes when it wa; in the hands of a private individual, why should it give nine votes when it was in the hands of a joint stock company?

The HOME S.ECRETARY: He understood that hon. members wished to c<ttch their traim, and as they had done very well to-night-and he was much obliged to hon. members for their assistance-he moved that the Chairman leave the cb.air, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.

Question put and passed. The House resumed ; and the Committee

obtained !ewe to sit again on Tuesday next.

ADJOURNMENT. The PREMIER : I move that this House do

now adjourn. The business on Tuesday will be the Local Authorities Bill.

Mr. BROWNE: I wish to ask the hon. gentleman whether there is any truth in the statement in the papers that we are to sit on Fridavs? I hope it is so.

The PREMIER : We intend to sit next Friday, but it has not been decided yet whether to meet in the daytime or at night.

Question put and passed. The House adjourned at one minute past 11

o'clock.

Income Tax Bill. 951