Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

WEDNESDAY, 27 JULY 1898

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

22 Questions. [ASSEMBLY.] Questions.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.

\VEDXESIJAY, 27 ,JULY, 1898.

The SPJ,AKER took the chair at half-past 3 o'clock.

Q"GESTIONS. PRIVATE CONSTm:cTION OF HAILW"HS.

:;\;lr. McDONALD asked the Chief Secre­tary--

1. Have any p~·oposals been made to the Government for the right to construct railways by pri'vate enter~ prise?

2. I1' so, will the Government lay same on the table of the House?

The CHIE:l!' SECRETARY replied-certain 'informal proposals for the construclion of

railways by private enterprise have been received but as they have been declined bv the Government it i; not com~iderecl neceFisary to lay them before the Hou.ee.

QUEENSLAND NATIONAL BANK PROSECUTIONS. Mr. McDONALD asked the Attorney­

General-1. Has the Government aban<loned the prosecutions

in connection with the Queensland ?\ational Bank P 2. If not, when are same likely to take place? 3. What has been the cost of the proceeding to date? The ATTOHNEY-G:B~NERAL replied-!. No. 2. Date not yet fixed; probably next month. 3. Impossible to say. No payment has yet been

nutde, and no vouchers or claims have been rendered.

"STREET" NEWSPAPER PROSECUTION. Mr. McDONALD asked the Attomey­

General-What was the cost of T!te Street newspaper prose<JU­

tion? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL replied-£89lls. 6d.

PRINTING 01<' "AGRICL'LTURAL JOUI\NAL." Mr. McDONALD asked the Secretary for

Agriculture-Is it the intention of the department to ha>e the

.11g'l"icttltu1"al Journal printed outside the Government Printing Office?

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE replied-

The question has been undm• consideration for the past six months, but no decision has been arrived at.

ELECTRIC POWEI\ FRml BARRON RIVER. Mr. McDONALD asked the Secretary for

Lands-Has any concession been asked for by the Chillagoe

Railway Company with regard to the l"ing of the waters o! the Barron H.iverforpower purposes?

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS replied-

An application was made by the represent:ttives of the company for a special lease on the north bank of the Barron Rh·er at the site of the falls for the purpose of utiJising tbe water power; but I have since been verbally informed by the engineer employed by tbe applicants to repo'l't on the scheme that the site indi­cated in the application would not be suitable for the }ltU'pose. :Xo steps therefore have been taken towards granting the special lease applied for.

BAI\CALDINE LAND APPEALS. :\1r. KERR •sked the Secretary for Lands­Who was responsible for the non-appearance of the

repl'esentathre of the Drown in the recent land appeal cases at Barcaldine?

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS replied-

On inquiry it is lound that the sole responsibility for the non-n.ttendance of the Land Commissioner at the court cannot fairly be placed entirely on the sb?ulders of any officer 111 particular. Through an overs1ght on the part of an officer the notification of the sittings of the court did not reach the Land Commissioner at Blackall until the day previous to that appointed for the hearing of the cases. The Land Commissioner in consequence was only able to reach Barcaldine shortly after the cases had been dealt with. It was the pmctice of the late Land Board to notify the local Land Com­missioner as well as the head omce in .Brisbane of the date of its sittings, but that ~ractice has been dis­continued by the present Land Conrt. An application fm· rehearing of these C'f.tses has been made to the conrt.

HAlLWAY Ror,LING STocK. ::\Ir. TliBLJ<;y asked the Secretary for Rail­

ways-1. Has the Government at any time this year ordered

any railway rollmg-stock to be made in the colony other than that cont.racted for by Walkers, Limited?

2. I! so, what is the description of such rolling-stock and price agreed upon, and to what firms have the orders been given?

The SECRETAUY FOR RAILWAYS re­plied-

1. Yes. 2. Three composite brake vans have been ordered

from :'IIessrs. George Agnew and eo .. <'f :\undab, at £454 16s. Sd. each, which is the contract price for three of

Sitting Days. [27 JULY.] Sitting Days. 23

same class now being built by that firm. Two first­class carriages have been ordered from Mr. James Frost, of Maryborough, at £538 each, which is the contract price for two of same class recently delivered by the same CO'ltractor. One locomotive boiler has been ordered from Messrs. Evans, Anderson, Phelan, and Co., at the same price as their 11revious contract for four-nt~mely, £369 10s.

SESSIONAL ORDER. PRINTING CoMmTTEE.

On the motion of the CHIEF SECRETARY, the following motion was formally agreed to :-

1. That, in compliance with Standing Order 304, a select committee be appointed to assist Mr. Speaker in all matters which relate to the printing to be executed by order of the House; and for the purpose of selecting, and arranging for printing, returns and papers pre~ sented in pursuance of motions made by members.

2. That such committee consist of the following mem­bers:- \1r. Speaker, Mr. Cross, Mr. Stevhenson, Mr. Sim, Mr. Stumm, ;)!r. Hoolan, Mr. Chataway, and the mover.

LAMINGTON BRIDGE. PRODUCTION OF CORRESPONDENCE

On the motion of Mr. ANNEAR, the follow­ing motion was formally agreed to :-

That there be laid upon the table of the House copies of all correspondence or papers from 1st March, 1893, to 31st December, 1897, between the Government, the Municipal Council of Yiaryborough, ancl the Mary­borough Bridge Board relating to the restoration of the Maryborough Bridge, now known as the Lamington Bridge, which crosses the 1Iary River at ::\Iaryburough.

SITTING DAYS. The PREMIER moved-'rhat, unless otherwise ordered, the House will meet

for despatch of business at 3 o'clock p.m. on Tuesd•y, Wednesday, and Thursday in each week.

Mr. BROWNE: I called "not formal" to this motion not with the object of delaying business, but because every session I and other members have requested that Friday should be made a sitting day for private members' business. There are a lot of members who cannot leave Brisbane, and who are kept here away from their homes and their own business the whole of the session. \V e have started the session very late, at the end of July, and we will be kept dangling about here three days a week, and private mem­bers will have no show of gettin~< through their business. I ask the Premier if he cannot see his way clear to insert :Friday in his motion, and devote it to private members. There are mem­bers who do not care about attending on Friday, and who take no interest in private member'a business and they need not come here, but those who do care about it should have an opportunity of coming here. I will not delay the House further than by stating that I believe this is the wish of many members of the House.

Mr. CROSS : I should like to support the statement of the hon. member for Croydon. There seems to be a sort of feeling in the House that we only come here as a species of legislative automatons, and that even then any private member who is gifted with any intelligence or industry should be discouraged, and that the Government should perform the whole duties of the Chamber. I do not agree with that. I think more time should be given to private members' business than has been given to it. Some of the germs of futme legislation have been hatched by private members. In all the Parliaments of Australia some of the best legislation that has now received commendation has been discussed originally by private members.

The PREMIER : You anticipate me in one Bill already. You will not give me a chance.

Mr. CROSS: I was not aware of that. It seems to me that the Oppo~ition can perform very useful work by discussing propositions which the Government may not see fit to take up. .There are many such propositions which the

leader of the House himself would derive much benefit from hearing discu~sed. I appeal to the hon. gentleman to consider this matter. I see by another motion that it is proposed that we should only have the usual two and a· half hours for private members' business. Really, that is so paltry that it is almost an insult to private members.

The TREASURER : You could use that all your­self.

Mr. CROSS: Yes, to very good purpose, and I hope I shall have a share of private members' time. If other private members have my experience they will get a very poox: share of time indeed and I ask that in the mterlst of progressive 'and reform legislation opport.unity shall be given to private membe~s to disc~ss the various matters they may wJSh to brmg forward.

Mr. KIDSTON: The Treasurer interjected during the speech of the ]:!on. member for Clermont when he was referrmg to two and a­half hour~ being allowed to private members, that the hon. member could use that all himself. He considered it a jocular matter. It was the spirit in which the interjection was made and taken up that made me rise. It seems to be considered that private members' business is sit:Iply the airing of fads, but hon. me.mbers opposite know quite well that what the hon. member for Clermont said was quite tr~e, ~hat some o~ the best legislation has been Imtiated by pnvate member•. Public sentiment has frequently been educated by the fads of private members, and the Government have ultimately come to take up busine•s suggested by private members. That is shown in one instance already, because the Premier interjected that the hon. member for Clermont had anticipated him in a Bill.

The PREIIIER: I anticipated him about three years ago.

Mr. KIDSTON : If I remember rightly, the hon. gentleman then poked fun at the hon. :nem­ber for Clermont. Another hon. member mter­jected that the present state of affairs was quite proper-that we were in the minorit:y, and he seemed to think it fair that the majority should dominate legisl;ttion. They _will do that i'_l apy case but while It is the functwn of the maJOrity to d~minate legislation it is not their funetion to prevent the minority from being heard. It has served a useful purpose i!l the past to giye t~e minority the means of bemg heard, and It will serve a useful purpose in the future. The hon. gentleman at the head of the Government might do much worse than llncourage private members to discuss public questions.

The PR.l<~MIER in reply: I have no desire to restrict the oppdrtunities for discussion which hon. members on both sides may wish to have. I quite admit that it is far better that hem. mem­bers should have every opportunity given them to ventilate their views on every possible subject than that they should sit in. fear that iJ?- any. way the ideas they wish to ventilate are bemg stifled. The hon. member for Olermont ver;r properly said that we may all learn from all sides, and I am prepared to admit that I have learnt a good deal-! have learnt some things to follow and a good many things to avoid, from hearing the views advanced from private mem­bers on both sides of the House. The hon. member for Rockhampton has dealt with the matter in too severe a strain altogether. If he thinks there is any idea on our part to stifle discussion, I can refer him to the a??ress I delivered on my appoint'?ent tC! the positiOn I occupy to show that there IS n?thmg.I am more solemnly pledged to than ~o. give ~nva~e mem­bers who have ideas reqmrmg legislati~e form every aid and opportunity to have them discussed and decided upon. At present I think Tuesday,

24 Sitting Days. [ ASSEMJ3LY.] Sitting Days.

Wednesday, and Thursday will be found to be quite enough. Hon. members must remember that Ministers have to attend to their d~part­ments, and have the responsibility of carrying on the Government and preparing legislation, and if they are kept sitting here almost every day in the week, the business in the House will not, I think, be done as well, and no doubt the administrative business which has to be done outside the House will get greatly in arrear. If at a subsequent period it is found that the list of nrivate members' business is so large as to reqt1ire an additional sitting day, I have no doubt the House will be willing to sit on th&t day, and I shall be per­fectly willing to do so, but we have not got to that stage yet. The hon. member for Clermont has given notice of a Bill to-day which I was going to give notice of myself, and that will be so much less of private busine.'±s. The hon. member spoke of hatching germs, but that is rather a difficult process of incubation, and in view of the sanitary condition of the House, I hope that part of the hon. member's prophecy will not be carried out. However, joking ~.part, if the House should think that the nature of the business requires an extra sitting day, I shall be only too happy to sit another day in the week.

Mr. GLASSBY: Ihaveneverbeen very much in love with four days sittings in the week ; but the Premier some time ago at \Varwick said that hon. members on this side uf the Houee had hitherto had abunda!'!ce of opportunit.y for sub­mitting their prorosals and propounding their policy. I do not think that statement was correct, and I now dPsire to call the attention of the House and the country to the fact that it is now proposed that private members shall be per­mitted to have two and a-half hour;; a week to propound their policy anll submit their proposals. I ask the hon. gentlemm1 now if he thinks the statement a fair one, that members sitting in opposition to the Government luwe in the past had abundant opportunity of submitting their propo>als and propounding their policy "ith two and a-half hours in the week? E'en supposing that Friday evening h:1s sometimes been given m addition, is that sufficient time for propound ing a policy and submitting proposals adequately before the country? The hon. gentleman knc,w:; perfectly well that it is nut. I have said that I do not favour and never have favoured Friday sittings, unless in extreme cases. My experience in this House during the last ten years has been that very little business is done on ]j'rid:>ys­tbey have generally been considered as off-days or as a sort of play-days. I must admit, of course, that when private me.mbers seriously turn their attention to work very useful and beneficial matters have from time to time been submitted by them, and it has been by discussion in that way that the mind of the country has been prepared for what has sometimes been extremely w•eful and highly beneficial legislation for the benefit of all. l admit that, but I ask hon. members on this "ide not to press this matter at the present time, and until we get more fully into the work of session. c

Mr. STEW ART : Why not? Mr. GLASSEY: I am speaking for myself,

and I do not wish to stand in the wayofhon. mem­bers sttting around me. Speaking for Mini;ters, they have their official d'1ties to attend to in their offices, and, speaking for myself, I confess that I can fairly tire myself well with three sittings a vr e<;>k; at the same time I do not wish hon. members who de,ire to >it on Friday to think that I will throw any obstacle in their way.

The TIIEASURER: We got through all the private members' business last session.

Mr. GLASSEY: Let the hon. gentleman not draw me into a controversy as to how private

members have been treated in the past. I have not many charges to make against the hon. gentleman himself, but I have a splendid cata­logue at hand to shnw how the businese of mem­bers on this side has been thwarted time after time by the interminable discussion to which it has been subjected by the present Premier and by the Secretary for Public Instruction when they have attempted to submit their proposals and proponnd their policy.

The t:lECRETARY FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION : You object to discussion, apparently.

Mr. McDONALD : l wish to say that the reason why I desire that the House should sit on Friday is not altogether be~ause of private members' busines~, because from the way in which private business has been carried on in the past I look upon it as a huge farce. The sitting given for the consideration of legislation instituted by pril·ate members has been looked upon by the House as a sort of field day on which every bon. member can have his little joke.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION : Government clays are field days for you, and you make good use of them. . .

Mr. McDON ALD : I sympathise w1th the Secretary for Public Instruction in having had to put a check upon his eloquence for so long. I feel sorry for him, and i hope he will have an opportunity to air it during the session.. I thh;k we should sit four days in the we~l.. to get on with the business, because, a~ the hon. member for Croydon has said, though there are many members living around Brisbane who can attend to their business outside, there are others who come long distances to attend the House, and are kept away from their homes and their businesses, and it is not fair that they should be kept here any longer than is absolutely necessary.

Mr. STEW ART : I have listened very patiently to the discussion so far in the hope that some one would propose an amendment, but as no one has seen fit to do so I shall take upon myself the responsibility of moving one. I beg to move that the word "and" after "\V ednesday" be omitted, and that the words "and Friday" be inserted after "Thursday." I need not go into the reawns why I move this amendment at any length; I think it will be sufficient if I state them very shortly. They are these: Here we are beginning the business of this session at any rate six weeks after the usual time. \Vhile the Premier and his friends have been junketing all over the colony we have been waiting patiently for the opportunity to do the country's business. We know perfectly well that as Christmas approaches, as the weather gets warmer, members are not very much inclined to do business. Some members do not incline that way very much at any time, bnt as the weather gets warmer their disinclination increases. We have a Yast array of measures proposed by the Go,·ernment. I do not know whether they are in earnest with regard to them-whether they wish to pass them or not--but for my own part I wish all those measures to have the fullest discussion possible. For that reason I think it is absolutely necessary that we should sit four days a week. Then there is the reason given by the hon. member for Croy­rlon that a large number of representatives come from distant parts of the colony. \Ve do not c(lmP here to amuse ourselves; we come down here to do the business of the country. It is all very good for gentlemen who ltve in Bri<;bane, or near Brisbane, who are always at bome-alwa.ys in the bosom of their families, so to speak-to sit only three days a week, bot we who come from a distance are exiles for the time being, and we want to get the business done as well and as quickly aa it is possible to do it.

Sitting Days. (27 JULY.] Appropriation Bill.

But there is another reason why we should sit four days a week. I know perfectly well that towards the end of the session the Government wHI desire to rush all their business through at racehorse speed, and I do not believe in that sort of thing. We have had that during the last two sessions, and we shall have it again. I have not the slightest doubt that the Govern­ment do not want discussiou; they simply wish to bring in their measures and have them passed into law. "\Ve were sent here to discuss the measures which the Government bring forward, and we desire-at least I do-the fullest oppor­tunity of discussing them, and that is the reason why I move this amendment.

Mr. HOOLAN: I second the amendment, and am heartily in accord with the speaker who moved it. We are here ostensibly to do busi­ness; of course, there is a great deal in this Chamber that is ostensible, and a great deal that is reaJ. Now, if we are here to do business, the sooner we do it the better for the country, and what is good for the country should certainly be good for individual members of the Assembly, for the As§embly as a whole, and for the Mini~ters in particular who have charge of the Assembly and the affairs of the country. To me it has never seemed proper in the first place that we should wait till the afternoon to commence business, and it has always seemed to me wholly improper that we should come here as workmen to do legislative work, termed brain work, and only engage in it for just half the week. We shall be kept here, as far as we can see, till the end of the year, till the heat of summer, and to those who have to face the heat of summer in a Northern climate that is not a very pleasant prospect. This is the la~t session of the present Parliament, and we are assured that the work to be done will be a very severe strain on our mental faculties. We, on this particular occa­sion, are called upon to take part in some very important legislation, which, so I learn, is to set aside the former hostilities that characterised the Assembly, and when the Assembly can come together as one individual and take into con­sideration the measures put before them for the benefit of the whole colony. That being so, the sooner we get through it the better. It may be all very well for hon. members who are always in touch with their constituents, or who can take an ordinary train and get home to their constitnents, and who are in fact, as the hon. member for Rock­hampton said, in the bosom of their families, to say that we should not have a fourth sitting day for private members' business. If private members have no business, it naturally follows that Government business would be taken on that day. Hon. members opposite have spoken of the fatigue that that would entail on Ministers of the Crown and members of the Cabinet, but that is of course a matter which concerns them­selves. They take those positions upon them­selves, and when they do so they should be the last to shirk anything attaching to them, no matter if we sit six days a week, all night included. We find that when from party opposition the hours of sitting are unduly prolonged, Ministers are always ready and always to the front-that in fact on those very trying occasions Ministers are the most active participants we have in politics. That being so, there is no reason why they should claim immunity from legislative functions for three days a week. No matter how important business may be it cannot be put through the Assembly without the usual quantity of talk, without the usual quantity of sentiment being uttered. That is quite necessary, and as this Assembly has grown for the last three or four years tongues have lengthened and jaws strengthened, both on the Ministerial side of the

House and on the side of the Opposition, and to restrict the sittings to three days a week is to P11t an undue restriction on the country. It would be for the benefit of ourselves, and for the benefit of the country if full time were allowed for discussion. We are here to do work, and we should do it.

Q1,1estion put; and the House divided:­AYES, 30.

Messrs. Byrnes, Ohataway, Foxton, Philp, Da!rymp!e, Dickson, Murray, Story, Bartholomew, Tooth, Lord, .Annear, O,Oonnell_, Stodart, Bridges. Armstrong, Cribb, Newell, Stmnm, Corfield, McGaban, Uoore, Fraser, Stepbenson, Thomas, Mc:\Iaster, Smith, Collins, G. Thorn, and Hamilton.

NoEs, 22. Messrs. Glassey, Hoolan, Keogh, Cross, l\fcDonnell,

Dun~ford, ~:1cDonald, Kerr, Dawson, King, Sim, Turley, Groom, TV. Thorn, Fogarty, Jackson, Dibley, Browne, Daniels, Maughan, Kid~ ton, and Stewart.

Resolved in the affirmative.

ORDER OF BUSINESS. The PREMIER moved-That on Tuesday, Wednesday, and after 7 o'clock

p,m. on Thursday, in each week, Government business take precedence of all other business.

Mr. McDONALD: The reason I caiJed "Not formal" to this motion was to be consistent with my objection to the previous motion which has just been carried.

Question put and pMsed.

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE. On the motion of the PREMIER, the follow­

ing amended motion was agreed to:-That the Standing Orders Committee !or the present

session consists of the following members :-Mr. Speaker, the Chairman of Committees, Mr. Drake, Mr. Jackson, llr. Leahy, Mr. W. H. Groom, Mr. G. Thorn, and the mover ; with leave to sit during any adjournment, and authority to confer upon subjects of mutual concernment with any committee appointed for similar purposes by the Legislative Council.

APPROPRIATION BILL. SUSPENSION OE' STANDING ORDERS.

The TREASURER moved-That so much o! the .Standing Orders be suspended.

for this day, as will admit of the immediate constitution of the Committees of Supvly and 1\' ays and Means, and of the reporting and adoption of resolutions therefrom, on the same day on which they shall have passed in those committees; also of the passing of an Appro­pri!ltion Bill through all its stages in oue day.

Mr. GLASSEY: I called "Not formal" to this motion for the purpose of giving the Treasurer an opportunity of stat!ng why be moved the resolution at the present time. I think it is not in accordance with practice that before the House disposes of the Address in Reply that the suspension of the Standing Orders should bP asked for with a view of passing a Supply Bill. The House is entitled to have some distinct explanation why the Premier has not called us together before this late period of the year in order that we might go on with business before the expiration of the financial year. The hon. gentleman takes a particular course to meet his own or his colleagues' convenience, and the ordinary method of carrying on business is thus thrown into con­fusion. That is manifestly unfair to the country and to members, some of whom have been expecting Parliament to meet at a much earlier period. An hon. member said awh1le ago that by-and-by the Government will be rushing business through at lightning speed, and I have no doubt that will be the case. I contend that we should continue the wholesome practice of meeting before the expiration of the financial year in order that members may have an opportunity of discussing the pros and cons of certain matters which may be of use and benefit to the country. I cannot but enter

26 Appropriation Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Appropriation B~ll.

my strong protest against the misconduct of the Chief Secretary in meeting Parliament at this late period, and then allowing his Treasurer to take thi• unusual course. However, the Treasurer only intends to ask for a limited sum; if he had asked fur a larger sum I should have felt it my duty to oppose this motion by a division. As it is, I protest in the strongest manner possible against the procedure, and I hope the Premier will be able to give some good and valid reason for calling the House together ~t so late a period of the year, a practice which IS exceptional, and which I hope will not form a precedent for future Parliaments.

The PRl!}l\1IER : I do not think the hon. m em her was altogether sel'ious in using the term "misconduct" as applied to myself for not calling Parliament together earlier. Under the circumstances it was not possible to meet the House earlier. The hon. gentleman knows very well that considerable Ministerial changes have !aken ph:tce, and that at the request of the people m n1any parts of the country-not only of those parts which return supporters of the Govern­ment, but at the request of constituencies return­ing members opposed to the Government-! travelled over a very large area of Queensland. In doing so I may have failed in my duty to the House, but at any rate I was doing my duty to the country ; and, after all, the country is something in these matters, even higher than t~e_ House. I spared myself not at all, and vtstted a great number of centres of population. I have not completed the task yet, I am sorry to say, because it involves a good deal of labour on my part, and in consequence of the number of the invitations conveyed to me I was unable to meet the House a$ early as usual. If there is blame to be attached to anyone, let it be attached to me.

Mr. KmsTON: ·what constituencies asked you to visit them?

The PREMIER : Amongst them, I am pleased to say, the constituency of Rockhampton, repre­sented by the hon. member.

Mr. McDONALD : Like the hon. member for Bundaberg, I think this is rather a new proce­dure. It is all very well for the Premier to tell us that certain constituencies asked him to visit them, and that the country is higher than the House. We are prepared to grant that, but the hon. gentleman must remember that it was only a certain section of the people who a• ked him, and if a pull was taken I question very much whether he would have been asked by some. I say that without any disrespect to the hon. gen­tleman's position, but I wish to point out that these invitations only came from a small section of the people.

The SECRETARY ~'OR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION : Do yon call l"cal authorities small ?

Mr. McDONALD: Yes, I call the average local authority very small ; and in many cases there have been a good many squabbles concern­ing the expenses connected with the Ministerial visit. So that among these different bodies the whole things was not so unanimous. I grant that the Government have a right to sus[Jend the Standing Orders if they have a majority to do so, but the motion made by the hon. gentleman is quite new in the history of this Parliament.

The TREASURER: I have seen it done. Mr. McDON ALD : The hon. gentleman could

not have seen it done. The only case in which Supply has been asked for before the debate on the Address in Re[Jiy was finishe:i was in 1883·4, bnt that was under exceptional circumstances. The hon. member nmst retl'ember that at that time owing to a vote taken in connection with the election of the Speaker the Mcllwraith ·Government tendered their resignation, and they .asked for Supplies to enable the incoming Go-

vernment to carry on. Here we have a different case altogether, because though there is nominally a change in the Government we have practically the same Government with a new head, and they have been in office for some four or five months, and are without excuse for not having called Parliament together earlier. I would just like to know where we are. Standing Order 16 in this connectio,P appears to me to be very definite, and though I am not sure that it applies to this case I would like to direct hon. members' attention to it. I shall read it for the information of the House, as it shows how the Committee of Supply is usually constituted, and now the Government propose to conduct the business of Parliament in a new form altogether by the suspension of the Standing Orders and I think that a very injudicious thing for the Govern­ment to do.

The TREASURER : It is done every year. Mr. McDONALD: It is not done every year.

I quite understand that it is the usual practice to ask for Supply in this way after the House has already constituted the Committee of Supply in the usual form, but in this case the Committee of Supply has not yet been constituted in the usual form. Standing Order 16 says-

After-and 1 wish to lay special stress on that word ~'after"-

After the Address in Reply has been agreed to, the Governor's Speech shall be ordered to be taken into consideration at the next sitting of the House. The House at the appoint<Jd day shall proceed to take the Speech into consideration, and so much of it as was addressed to the Assembly shall be again read by :llr. Speaker, and a motion shall be made that the House will on a future day resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider the Supply to be granted to Her Mttjesty. That is the usual form by which the House constitutes itself into a Committee of Supply, and I commend the leader of the House to see whether it is not necessary to consider this ques­tion very seriously if the House is not to get into such a tangle in connection with its procedure and practice that, like the hon. member for Drayton and Toowoomba, we will not know where we are. That is my principal reason for objecting, and I wish to impress on the Treasurer and the House that it is not the usual practice of the House to constitute the Committee of Supply in the manner now proposed, and, with the exception of the occasion to which I have referred, it has never before been done in the history of Queensland. Of course I recognise that a majority on the other side may carry a motion for the suspension of tha Standing Orders, and I pre­sume they can then do just as they like, but 1f this course is followed I want to be clear as to what the position will then be, and whether, after the Address in Reply has been carried, it will be in order for the hon. gentleman to move the motion constituting the Hou•e into a Com­mittee of Supply in the ordinary way.

Mr. KIDSTON: My objection to the action the Government proposes tu take on this matter is that it is a violation of a very important con­stitutional principle. This violation has taken place in the Government carrying on the affairs of the country for a month without any authority whatever either from the people of the country or the members of this House.

The SPEAKER: The hon. member will have an opportunity of raising that question on the Address in Reply. It can scarcely be debated on this motion for the suspension of the Standing Orders.

Mr. KIDS TON: You will put me right if I am wrong, Sir, but the Government are moving the suspension of the Standing Orders for the purpose of asking the House for n,uney which they have already spent.

.Approp-riation Bill. [27 JULY.] Appropriation Bill. 27

The TREASURER: No. Mr. KIDSTON: They have not paid out the

moneys but they have incurred the responsibility of spending them, and in my opinion they have had no right to incur that respon•ibility.

The HoME SECRETARY : The salaries will accrue.

Mr. KIDSTON : The principle of responsible government can only be enjoyed in that pro­portion in which the representatives of the people have direct and immediate control over the members entrusted with the executive functions, and that is the reason why the practice of granting only yearly supplies was adopted. If the executive officers have the power constitutionally to carry on the govern­ment of the country without the authority of the representatives of the people for a month, why cannot they run it for two months, for three months, or fer twelve months?

Mr. McDoNALD : There must be a session of Parliament every year.

Mr. KIDSTON: Well, they could carry on that way for eleven months quite as well as for one month. This matter affects the very prin­ciple upon which our system of government is constituted. I may just point out to hon. mem­bers on the other side that this action of the Government throws a decided insult upon them. I have no doubt the Government expected that members on this side would complain of the late calling of Parliament together.

The SPEAKER : I think the hon. member is going outside the question. I quite under­stand what he means, but I think it is not really relevant to the question now under considera­tion. He will have abundant opportunity of speaking upon the action of the Government in this respect hereafter.

Mr. KIDSTON : I understand that the Go­vernment are about to ask the House for money to defray expenditure which they have already incurred.

The SPEAKER : That is a I]Uestion which may come up later on. This is simply a motion for the suspension of the Standing Orders.

Mr. KIDSTON : Of course it is a question of the suspension of the Standing Orders for the purpose of this House voting -money that has already been spent, and I am pointing out that the Governmt-nt have no right to incur that expenditure without the authority of the House, and that in doing so they have acted unconstitu­tionally, and that is done because they know they have a servile following behind them.

The SPEAKER: Order, order ! The hon. member has not the slightest ri~ht to apply such a term to any member, or any body of members, in this House, and I must ask him to withdraw the expression.

Mr. KIDSTON: I withdraw the word "servile." I would say that they evidently assume that they have an obedient following who will endorse anything they like to do. The whole custom of inviting Parliament to meet six weeks or two months before the end of the financial year is simply for the purpose of allow­ing Parliament the right, before they endorse the financial policy of the Government, to ex­press their opinion as to its general policy, and in that way have some control over the members of the Executive. If the present procedure becomes a precedent the House will lose its control-a very healthy and legitimate control­over the members of the Executive ; and for my part I protest altogether against acting in this way-against the Government treating the mem­bers of the House, both members on this side and members on their own side, with such dis­courtesy, and taking a course which is really undermining the Constitution under which we live.

Mr. GROOM: I am as much opposed to these frequent Appropriation Bills as any member of the House, but I do not see how under our pre sent arrangements they can be avoided. Up to the year 1874 the financial year of this colony terminated on the 31st of December. Parliament generally met in the month of May, and by August or September the whole C>f the business of the country was disposed of and the Estimates passed for the current year, and there was no necessity to come down to the House and ask for temporary appropriation. And the right of criticising the Estimates was freely exercised by hon. members. But in 1874 the then Trea~urer, a new Treasurer who had never been in Parlia­ment before-I dare say my hon. friend the Rome Secretary knows him-and who knew nothing whatever of parliamentary procedure, induced the Assembly to alter the financial year from the 31st of December_to the 30th of June, and from that time up to the present these frequent Appropriation Bills have had to be passed. \V e cannot help it; it is utterly impossible for the Estimates to be passed in time, and the only way in which the ordinary government of the country can be carried on is in the manner now proposed. It is a parliamentary axiom that whatever may happen to Parliament ur to Ministers the Queen's government must be carried on, salaries pa.id, and the services of the country maintained, so that unless Parliament reverts to the old system of having the financial year end on the 31st of December, every Treasurer, whoever he may be, will have to come to the House and ask for Appropriation Bills. The financial year in Great Britain terminates on the 30th of April, the Estimates are referred to the Grand Com­mittee, who recommend whatever reductions or increases are necessary, and then they come before the Committee of Supply. That is a very different procedure from what we have in this colony. Here we have the Esti­mates sent down to the House by message from the Crown, and it may take some little time before they come down to the House. In the meantime salaries and services must be provided for, and there is no other way of providing for them than by passing an Appropriation Bill as proposed by the Treasurer. 'fhat has been done from 1874 down to the present day, and how­ever much it may interfere with the right of criticism by hon. members, I do not see how it can be avoided. I have a recollection of one Governor telling a member of the Opposition that they had abrogated their functions in allow­ing these Appropriation Bills to be passed, but the House cannot help itself •o long as the financial year closes on the 30th of June. I therefore do not see how we can offer any opposi­tion to this proposal.

The HoN. G. THORN: I do not rise for the purpose of opposing the motion. At the same time I admit that there is a great deal of force in what has been said by hon. members opposite with regard to the late meeting of Parliament. The Premier told us that the House would meet at the usual time, and if it had done so there would have been no necessity for passing this Appropriation Bill before the adoption of the Address in Reply. I may inform the hon. member for Drayton and Toowoomba that up to 1874 the House was accustomed to meet in April, and the proper time for Parliament to meet is in April or t.he beginning of May. The hon. mem­ber is mistaken with regard to the financial year in Great Britain closing in April. I may tell him that the financial year there closes on the 31st of March. I remember distinctly when the then Treasurer, Mr. Hem­mant, changed the financial year from the last day in DecPmberto the end of June, and I think it was a very good and wholesome change. I

28 Ways and Means. [ASSEMBLY.] Appropriation Bill No. 1.

trust that this is the last occasion when the House will meet so late in the year. There is no doubt that there is not that proper criticism exercised by hon. members that ought to be exercised when we meet at the end of July. and with other hon. members I strongly deprecate Parliament meeting so late in th\l year. I should like to see us revert to the wholesome plan of meeting in April, or the beginning of May.

Mr. MoDONALD: I rise to a point of order. This motion includes the constitution of the Committees of Supply and Ways and Means; and my point of order is, 'Vill it be in order for hon. members to discuss the Address in Reply after those 0,1mmittees have been established?

The SPEAKER: If the hon. member will raise that point of order when the question arises·-that is, when the motion for the:adoption of the AddreBs in Reply is called-I will then deal with it.

Question put and passed.

JOINT COMMITTEES. The SPEAKER announced the receipt of a

message from the Council, intimating-(1) That the Presidflnt, Mr. Allan, and Mr. Brentnall had been appointed members of the ,Joint Library Committee ; (2) The President, Dr. Taylor, and Mr. Box members of the Joint Committee for the management of the refresh­ment rooms; (3) The President, Mr. Gregory, and Mr. Cowlishaw members of the Joint Com­mittee for the management and superintendence of the parliamentary buildings, and requesting the Assembly to appoint a hke number of mem­bers to give effect to the 8th Joint Standing Order.

Message ordered to be taken into consideration to-morrow.

SUPPLY. OPENING Oil' COMMITTEE.

The TREASURER moved, in committee­'rhat there be granted to Her Majesty, on account of

the service of the year 1898-9, a sum not exceeding £425,000 towards defraying the expenses of the various depat·tments and services of the colony.

The HoN. G. THORN asked if the amount asked for was in accordance with the amount asked for in the previous session, as he did not think they should grant a larger amount than had then been asked for.

The TREASURER: £50,000 more was asked for from the lo:.n fund account, as it had been found that the amount then asked for was not sufficient. All the payments made would be on the basis of last year's Estimates.

Mr. GLASSEY understood from the Trea­surer that he was only asking for sufficient to defray the current expenses of July and August. That was a very reasonable proportion. If he did not consider it reasonable he would have taken a strong stand.

Question put and passed. The House resumed; tbe CHAIR)fAN reported

that the Committee had come to a resolution, which was agreed to, and the resumption of the Committee was made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

WAYS AND MEANS. The TREASURER moved-That the Speaker leave the chair, and the House

resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means. Mr. MoDONALD: My reason for rising now

is more to obtain information than for anything else. The position I wish to get at is this-Will the Committees of Supply and Ways and Means be established for the whole session by carrying this resolution? I do not know whether I ought to put it in the form of a question, or whether I

should raise a point of order. If it wilL not inconvenience you, Mr. Speaker, at the present time, I would like to ask the question I have stated.

The SPEAKER: If the hon. member rises to a point of order, I will give a ruling, but it is not customary to ask a question of the Speaker except on a point of order. However, on this occasion, as the point is of some importance, if the hon. member will allow the matter to stand over until the question of the resumption of the Committee is before the House, I will then give him an answer. It is a question that requires a little consideration, and I should like to look into it before replying.

Mr. MoDON ALD : If I may be pardoned, the reason why I ask the question now is this£ Suppose the decision that the passage of this resolution does establish these committees, there can be no debate on the Address in Reply. Of course I quite understand that it is a difficult question, and I think the Speaker should have time to look the matter np, so that we may know exactly where we are.

The SPEAKER: The hon. member must remember that the Standing Orders are sus­pended, and that the House has a perfect right to transact the business now proposed. The other question will arise later on.

Mr. CROSS : I think the point should be cleared up, because everything depends upon the decision which the Speaker may give. If the interpretation of the Speaker is that we cannot proceed "1\;ith the Address in Reply, then we are in a very peculiar position.

The TREASURER: Who would raise that point? The Government would not take up that position.

Mr. CROSS : I understand that the hon. member for Flinders will, in the interests of this Chamber, at the proper time, ask the Speaker's ruling upon the question whether the Address in Reply can proceed after certain business has been tra,nsacted. If the Speaker is going to decide that the Address in Replv cannot proceed, then we ought to know beforehand. I do not think this Chamber ought to be taken by surprise in a matter like that. It would be disastrous to the business of the House and to all dignity and decorum. I hope therefore that some steps will be taken to clear up this point.

Question put and passed. COMMITTEE.

On the motion of the TREASURER, it was resolved that towards making good the supply to be granted to Her Majesty for the service of the year 1898-H9 there be granted from the con­solidated revenue fund a sum not exceeding .£250,000, from the trust and special funds a sum not exceeding .£25,000, and from the loan fnnd accon.nt a sum not exceeding £150,000.

The House resumed ; and the resolutions were reported and received.

APPROPRIATION BILL No. 1. Fms•r READING.

The TREASURER presented the Bill, which was read a first time.

SECOND READING. The TREASURER : In moving the eecond

reading of this Bill, I may state that the only difference between it and previous Bills is that the loan fund has been inmeased by £50,000, because we found last year that the sum ·voted wa~ insufficient by £30,000.

Question put and passed. The Bill was passed through its remaining

stages without deba,te, and ordered to be for· warded to the Legisla,ti ve Council far their con­currence.

Address in Reply. [27 JuLY.] Address in Reply. 29

.ADDRESS IN REPLY. RESUMPTION OF DEBATE-POINT OF ORDER. On the Order of the Day being read for the

resumption of the debate on the .Address in Reply,

Mr. GLASSEY said : Mr. Speaker,--Mr. McDON.ALD : I rise to a point of order.

I desire to know whether, having already con­stituted the Committees of Supply and Ways a.nd Means, the hon. gentleman is now in order in discussing the .Address in Reply. I promised to bring this question before the House that we might have a fair opportunity of knowin~exactly where we are. It is absolutely necess~ry that we should have some continuity of procedure in dealing with these questions. \Ve have sus­pended the Standing Orders to get into Com­mittees of Supply and Ways and Means. The Standing Orders were suspended, I take it, for some special pmpose. In this case the special purpose was to get certain Supplies. I maintain that this was just as lawful as if it had been done in the ordinary way in which business is con­ducted in the House. There may be some other interpretation put upon it, but I have no doubt that the Committees of Supply and Ways and Means have been already constituted, and having been constituted I maintain that the Address in Reply cannot now be proceeded with. I may be wrong in taking up that position because I am not fairly clear on the matter. I quite understand that on one occa,ion the .Address in Reply was dis· cussed after Supply had been granted. That was in 1883-4, but under the peculiar circum­stances attending a change of Government. In 1888 I find that a similar resolution tu that we have just passed was carried, and committees co?stituted under it then-the same position bemg taken up then as was taken up on, I think, the lOth January, 1884, upon a change of Government. The outgoing Government on those occasions asked for Supply, that the incoming Government might have sufficient to carry on the business of thf' country. It has always been the practice for the outgoing Government to ask for Supply to enable the incoming Government to carry on with.

The PRE~IIER: That is what is being done now.

Mr. McDON.ALD: It is not a similar case, because I submrt the hon. gentleman has now held office for some three months. He cn.nnot say he has just come into office, as if he had called Parliament to!fether at the time he was appointed Premier he conld have had the whole of the Estimates passed if he had thought proper before the end of the financial year. But instead of that the hon. gentleman has taken a different course. Instead of the out­going Treasurer getting Supply for him, his own 'l'ren.snrer is asking for that Supply, which is a very different course altogether. In the cases quoted, those of 1884 and 1888, we do not find that it was the then existing 'rreasurer who asked for Supply, but the outgoin~ Treasurer. I have already admitted that Supply was granted on those occasions before the .Ad­dress in Reply was adopted, but there have been new Standing Orders since 18!l2, and the point we have now to decide is whether the proposed procedurP is in accord­ance with the pre3ent Standing Orders. To my mind Standing Order No. 16 lays it down as clearly as possible what shall be the order of procedure. I now raise the point for the guidance of the House, and I ask your ruling, Mr. Speaker, as to whether an hon. member is in order in debating the Address in Reply after the Committees of Supply and ·ways and Means have been established by the suspension of the Standing Orders ?

The PREMIER : On the particular question which has been raised by the hon. member per­haps I may be permitted to say a word or two, because I quite admit that the point is one that is worthy of being rai•ed, and worthy of being discussed. Nothing, I am sure, is more satis factory than for us to have as strict an adhesion to the rules of the House as we possibly eau. Points of order are arising, of course, from day to day, and as this raises a question of import­ance, I shall be only too happy to place my ideas on the subject before the House. Standing Order 16 lays down the method of procedure which probably will be found applicable to most of the cases that arise before Parliament. Practically it is directory, as showing what the ordinary progrebs of business is. It states that the Governor's Speech shall be taken into con­sideration on an appointed day, and that after that a motion shall be made that so-and-so shall happen. But it does not follow, although it says that the motion shall be made in that order, that motions may not be made on any other occasion. I take it that the House is perfectly competent to grant Supply whenever it thinks fit, because the greatest constitutional privilege that this House possesses is the control of Supply, and no Standing Order of that sort can limit the power of the House to grant Supply in the way it thinks fit.

Mr. GLASSEY: This is not the point. The PREMIER: That is the point The hon.

member's point is that according to this Standing Order after a certain event a certain motion shall be made, and that before that event no motion can be made.

Mr. McDONALD : That is not my point. The PREMIER : I take it that that is the hon.

member's point. The Standing Order says that after a certain thing is done a motion shall be made. It happens in this ca'e that before the Address in Reply has been adopted that motion has been made, and has been approved by the House. Now, the question is whether the hon. member is at liberty to resume the discussion on the Address in Reply. The hon. member says that because the House has previously granted Supply, therefore an hon. member is not in order in discussing the Address in Reply. I say there is nothing in the Standing Order.s to prevent that being clone. Of course, the ordinary pro­gress of events would be for tl:e .Address in Reply to be dealt with, and then for a grant of Supply to be made. But Supply has been granted in this case, and now the hon. member savs that we cannot resume the dis­cussion oti the .Addrer;s in Reply because that motion has been made. The answer to that is that first of all there is nothing in the Standing Orders to prevent it, and, secondly, we have the precedent of the House in 1888, which will be found in Hansard for that yeur. On that occasion the Governor's Speech was delivered, and a message was received from the Governor, and after that the Committees of Supply and Ways and Means were constituted. Then an .Appropriation Bill was passed just as we have clone now, and afterwards the Governor's Speech was again discussed. The House is in exactly the same position now as it was then. The question of a new Ministry can in no way alter the rights of the House. 'l'he Standing Orders know nothing about changes of JIIIinistries ; the House goes on continuous as a whole, and if it was in order in 1888 to pass Supply before the debate on the Address in Reply was finished, it is in order now.

Mr. McDoNALD: The question was not raised then.

The PltEMIER: That is perfectiy true. Mr. GLASSEY: \Vas the Standing OrderoflSSR

the same as the presen ?

30 Address zn Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] Add1•ess in Reply.

'l'he PREMIER: Practically the same. The Standing Order then in force says that-

The Speech having been read, a motion for a select committee to draw up an Address to the Governor in l'eply to His Excellency's Speech shall be made and seconded; and, being agreed to, the committee sball retire to prepare the Address. On the Address being reported by the said committee, the House will resolve to agree to tbe same with or without amendment. The Address in Reply had to be presented to the Governor, and then Standing Order 21 pro­vided-

The Governor's Speech shall be ordered to be taken into consideration at the next sitting of the House. The House at its next sitting, according to order, shall proceed to take the said Speech into consideration, and •o much of the same as was addressed to the Legislative Assembly shall be again read by )!r. Speaker; and a resolution shall be agreed to that this Ilou•e will lo~morrow, or on a future day, rp,solve itself into a CommiLtee of the Whole to consider the Supplv to be granted to Her ~l:ajesty. · The Standing Orders, as far as this point is concerned, are the same now as t.hey were in 1888, so that it would appear that the whole of the Governor's Speech has to be disposed of before the House can go into Committee of Snpply, That wa. done in 1888. As the hon. member says, we are bound by the practice of the House ; and the prac~ice of the House is really what the House has done.

Mr. TURLEY : Not if ~he question has not been raised. . Th~ PRE~IER: What the hon. member says IS qmte true 111 some respects. At any rate it shows that this practice obtainPd, and as it was permitted in the pagt, without protest on the part of the very acute constitutional jurors of the House, I snppose we may take it that the practice was not considered undesirable. But apart altogether from that, I snbmit that the true ruling which should be given in this case is that, althoug~ St!lnding Order 16 may lay down that certam thmgs shall be done, there is nothing in that Standing Order to prevent the Address in Reply being proceeded with after the House ~!!s c~osen to grant temporary Supply. The positiOn IS very clear. The House is at liberty to grant Supply whenever it thinks fit. The House can grantSupply without consenting to the Address in Heply_at all, although, as a matter of fact, the House will not ordinarily grant Supply until it hears what the Crown has to say. But the House is at perfect libPrty, without 'bearing a single word from the Crown, to say "We will give you a blank cheque for what :Uoney you want, so that the Queen's Government may be carried on.''

Mr. MoDoNALD: There are other proceedings to be g-one through before they can do that.

The PREMIER : That is true, but that pro­cedure I take it can be gone through at any stage the House thinks fit. It is quite clear that after the Address has been made the ordinary procedure would be for a motion to be made in the manner stated by Standing Order 16.

Mr. GLASSEY: I am sure the Premier will not for one moment imagine that the question raised by the hon. member for Flinders is one that ought not to have been raised. It has not been raised for the purpose of delaying business and the House is entitled to have a clear and definite ruling with respect to the point of order. I am not prepared to give my opinion with regard to points of law with the Premier but I think that this Standing Order is perfectly clear and that the Committee of Supply cannot b~ opened by the Speaker reading the portion ofihe Speech as is addressed to the Assembly until after the Address has been presented to the Governor -not prior. Of course the House, by majority can su~pe_nd the Standing Orders, and the House; by maJority, may allow the Address in Reply to

be proceeded with ; but can a motion of the House alter the Standing Orders? Then the question comes up-After the Commiotees of Supply and 'Vays and Means are formed, is it competent for the H<Juse to proceed with the Address in Reply? I would like to hear the hon. member for Toowoomha on this matter, as a very old member of this House, and as a gentleman who has occupied the position of Speaker in a previous Assembly, prior to the Speaker giving his final ruling.

The PREMIER: Supposing the debate on the Address in Reply took three months, would the Civil servants have to remain unpaid all that time?

Mr. GROOM: It appears to me that the Premier has put the matter very cl<,~rly before the House. The circumstances in 1888 were entirely different from the circumstances in which we are now placed. The Ministry that met Parliament in 1888 had been defeated at the general election. Quite contrary to ordinary practice, the then Premier thought he would open Parliament in peroon with a short Address, and after the Governor had delivered that Address, hon, member• came back to this Chamber. Then, as the gentleman who was likely to form a new Ministry was anxious to go to Melbonrne to attend the Centennial Exhibition, Sir S. W. Griffith undertook to carry a Bill through the Chamber grant­ing three months' Supply to enable him to do so, and there being no oppo•ition from either side the House consented. Then on the 2nd of August following Parliament was opened by Sir Thomas Mcllwraith, and after the Address enunciating his policy had been disposed of the ordinary business was gone on wit.h, I take it that having suspended the Standing Orders, as the Premier has pointed out, the House is at liberty during that sus­pension to carry these motions, irre"pecti ve of any proceedings which may be taken by the House under the Standing Orders when in fore". Then, when the Address in Reply has been adopted, and you, Sir, have read to the House the portion of the Governor's Speech which is addressed to this Assembly, the Treasurer can move that that portion of the Speech be referred to Committee of Supply. The Committee of Supply will then be properly constituted. Al­though it has been said that the point was raised in 188•!, it can hardly be argued wi~h any degree of force that when the Standing Orders have been suspended and the House has gone into Committee of Supply and Ways and Means for the purpose of passing a temporary appropriation that that can be considered as the Committee of Supply and Ways and Means in accordance with the Standing Orders. It would be rather straining a constitutional point if one were to say that, and more particularly if you look at the consequences which would follow. Supposing that rule be followed, then nndoubtedly -although through no fault of their t>wn-hon. members on this side would be precluded from debating the Address in Reply, and I am sure no hon. member would wish to strain the Standing Orders in such a way as to bring about such an unde•irable result. My contention is that the Committee of Supply is not duly constituted until you, Mr. Speaker, read to the House that portion of the Governor's Speech which is addressed to the Assembly. That is the opinion which I would hold were I in your place. The temporary appropriation must he passed in order to allow the Queen's Government to be carried on, and the fact that we have gone into Com­mi~tee of Supply and Ways and Means cannot be construed as having constituted those Com­mittees for the whole session in accordance with Standing Order 16,

Address in Reply. [27 JULY.] Address in Reply. 31

The SPEAKER: I have no hesitation in giving my ruling upon the point of order raised by the hon. member for Flinders-that is, whether the hon. member for Bundaberg is in order in proceeding with the debate on the Address in Reply. I certainly think he is in order in doing so. There is nothing in the Standing Orders quoted by the hon. member to prevent him. Another question has cropped up in respect to Standing Order 16-that is, whether after the adoption of the Address in Reply it will be necessary to reconstitute Com­mittee of Supply? That is a question which may arise later on, and if the point is then raised I shall have no hesitation in giving a ruling. But at present the only question brfore th~ House is the one raised by the hon. member for Flinders, and on that point my ruling is that the hon. member for Bundaberg is in order in pro­ceeding with the debate.

Mr. GLASSEY: Before proceeding to discuss the various matters contained in His Excellency's Speech, I desire to say a few words with refer­ence to another matter. I observe in to-day's paper that it is stated that the hon. m em her for Burnett was coolly received by his colleagues when introduced to the House yesterday. In justice ;to the hon. member and his colleagues, it is well to clear the matter up, and I take this opportunity of doing so, and I do so also with a view of satisfying the constituency which returned the hon. member. The matter com­plained of is that the hon. member was intro­duced by only one of his colleagues, and that he was coolly received. Now, what really happened was this : It was arranged that I, as the leader, and Mr. Browne, as the secretary of this party, should introduce the hon. member in order that he might take the usual oath. Before introducing him I took the liberty of consulting Mr. Bernays, who is always exceed­ingly anxious and willing to guide hon. members in regard to any matters upon which they are no~ clear concerning the rules of the House. Mr. Bernays informed me that it was not necessary for two members to introduce the hon. member for Bnrnett, and I then asked him if it was imperative that only one member should introduce him. Without stating de­finitely that it was, and without consulting the Standing Ordere, he 8aid he thought it was imperative. I mentioned that view of the case to my colleague Mr. Browne, and he very cordially gave way. I then introduced the hon. member for Burnett, and may say that he was cordially and heartily received by his col­leagues.

MEMBERS of the Labour party : Hear, hear! Mr. GLASSEY: And also, I am glad to say,

by members on the other side of the Chamber. While rejoicing at the return of the preRent member for Bnrnett, I may say that I deeply regret the cause which deprives us of the late member for that constituency. I am sure I am expressing the sentiments of every member on both sides of the House when I say that no man was more popular or more highly esteemed than the late member for Burnett, Mr. McCord.

HoNOURABLE MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Mr. GLAS::3EY: Pereonally, I deeply lament

the death of that hon. gentleman. He was a man for whom I had the hh;hest respect, but when the vacancy did occur I am pleased that members Ritting on this side were fav~nred with the return of my hnn. friend, Mr. Ryott Maughan. I am sure, his own constituents will be plea•ed with this explanation, and I sincerely trust the hon. member will have a long and useful career in this Assembly. I may also stat' in this con­nection that I deeply regret the death of the late President of the Legislative Council, Sir Arthur Palmer. I had not the pleasure of the hon. gentle-

man's intimate acquaintance; I do not think I ever had the opportunity of exchanging words with him, but he was a gentleman who had played a prominent part in the political history of this colony; and considering the high positions of honour Lhat he has held, it is not out of place to say at this moment that the House and the c•mntry generally will lament his decease. Before proceeding further I may refer to a paragraph which finds a place in His Excellency's Speech, and which refer~ to the death of that eminent stateslllan, vVilliam Ewart Gladstone. vVhat­ever shade of politics men may have belonged to in any country, it is no exaggeration to say that I am sure no man ever held a larger or more highly esteemed place than that right hon. gentlem:m. I have had the very great honour of listening to that statesman on many occasions, although I had not the same privilege that the head of the Government has had of having a private interdew with him. I have heard him address both small and large assemblies, and for many years I have followed his career with the warmest interest. I fully share in the senti­ments expressed concerning him in the Speech of His Excellency, and I may be pardoned if I read an extract from a letter from a friend of my own in the North of l<Jngland concerning the anticipated decease of that eminent statesman. I heheve I am correct in saying that the Chief Secretary had the pleasure of n~eeting the gentleman to whom I refer-Dr. Robert Spencer "\Vatson, of Newcastle-npon-Tyne-and he will agree with me that the doctor is most highly esteemed in that part of the world.

The PRE>IIER : Hear, hear ! Mr. GLASSEY: Dr. "\Vatson is a man of

eminence and ability, a man of high character and int~grity, who was intimately acquainted with Mr. Gladstone, and he writes in most mournful terms concerning the anticipated death of the late hon. gentleman. He refers to various matters, but in answer to frequent inquiries of my own with reference to the health and general condition of that eminent tnan, he says--

I hear occasionally l"rom members of Mr. Gladstone's family, or otherwise directly, abou_t him. ~e is not suffering so much now, but there IS somethmg really heroic and exceedingly pa1 hetic about the way in which the dark shadow is coming upon him. It is touching, too, to see how all men now recognise his real grandeur. I am specially moved by articles in the French and German newspapers, and by resolutions passed at gatherings of Tories. '11here is som~thing to me simple, natural, and good ~bout these t?ings, and thev help to give me more faith and hope m the future of the world than perhaps otherwise I should have had. I refer to this paragraph merely to emphasise the statement I have made as to my own attachment to the late Mr. Gladstone, a gentleman who led a great party for many years with the greatest possible ability that could almost be shown by any man. ]'urther, I do not feel ashamed to say I took some little share while in the old country in endeavouring to further the interests of that great party prior to my coming to this colony. I may no IV refer to some of the items which find a place in His Excellency's Soeech, and I propose to deal with the first fe~ paragraphs as briefly as pos­sible. I have a g<>od deal to say concern­ing some portion' of the Speech, notably in connection with those in which such extravagant expressicns are used concerning the exceptionally prosperous conditiOn of the country. I am now about to assume my mual pessimistic attitn<le. I dare s''Y that may be said, but whether it is said or not, I propose to refer to these matters at considerable length, not merely from theory but from facts, at any rate, so far as I have been able to gather them from the only sources of information at my command.

:32 .Add1'ess in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] .Adibress in Reply.

Whether those sources of information are correct or not is not for me to determine ; it is sufficient for me to say from what sources I derived my information. I see that the Government pro­pose to deal with the question of defence. That s a question of some importance, and no doubt it

will receive every care and attention from members on both sides, and members on this side will not fail to consider every detail in connection with the matter, but I am not to be driven into any false position by any false notes of warning and alarm that may be raised to suggest that at an early date we are likely to have war on these hitherto peaceful shores. I am not to be driven into any unnecessarily large expense in connec· tion with this matter through any such cause. I have said on previous occasions in addressing myself to this question that if it be necessary to strengthen various points of our large coastline we are bound to take or provide reasonable facilities for guarding our shores in the most com­plete form possible and in conjunction with the other colonies. I ehall not be slow to give assist­ance in that direction, but I am not prepared at this junctnre-nutwithstanding how thi-:Jk the war clouds may have gathered in some parts of the world, and notwithstanding the unfortunate operations taking place between Spain and the United States of America-I am not prepared, in consequence of a fictitious cry or alarm being raised, to admit that the time has come when we should rush into a !ariSe expenditure in consequence of the operatiOns unfortunately going on in Cuba at the present time. But what I think we ought to do, so far as this question of defence, so important to every one of tbe colonies, is concerned, is that, in addition to making the necessary provision for defending our own coastline, so far as our resources will go, we should have a closer union of one colony with another, more particularly with regard to national defence. I may have something to say further on with regard to federation itself ; but in this matter federal action is, I think, absolutely necessary. I am sure the Premier will acquit me of undervaluing the necessity for defence, because I value it as fully and completely as himself ; but I remember that in 1885, shortly after I came to the colony, a war scare was raised, and Sir Samuel Griffith, then at the head of the Government, was compelled, whether reluctantly or not, to rush into considerable and i~1 my judgment unnecessary expense at that time. Unfortunately the other colonies took similar action at the time. I say, then, that while it is necessary to consider this question with the utmost fulness, it deserves to be con­sideredalso with theutmo,;tcalmness, and it would be unwise and highly injurious to the country if we were in consequence of this scare to be driven by mere clamour into a large expenditure on defence which the country cannot bear, and which I think the people would be slow to engage in were they consulted. So far, then, as defence ia concerned, I think it essential that federal action should be taken. If that is done, the expenditure in the aggregate will not be so great as if the colonies take individual action in the matter. I hope the House will calmly consider the matter, and will be slow indeed in rushing into unnecessary expenditure or in incurring larger liabilities than our means or the neces­sities of the case would warrant, tecause this paragraph finds a place in His Excellency's Speech. There are some persons who in my judgment are unnecessarily alarmed with regard to federation. Some of my own colleagues seem to be a little alarmed that something de>perate is likely to happen if federation is brought abont, more par­ticularly to the agricultural districts. I do not, and never coukl, share any such fears, but some of the gentlemen who represent agricultural

districts, and some who represent manufactur­ing districts-if I may be permitted to say that we have manuhctnring districts-seem to me to be unnecessarily alarmed as to the injury their districts would receive in the event of federation being established. Doubtless in the district represented by the hon. gentleman at the head of the Government the feeling is pretty widespread that agriculture is likely to suffer by the federation of tbe different colonies. I believe there is no colony in the group-and I have uot come to this conclusion hastily, but after the fullest investigation and on the fullest information I have had at my disposal-that has so much to gain from federation as Qneensland. I know that my hon. friend, the member for Rose wood, is unnecess<trily alarmed with regard to federation, but in my opinion agriculture has nothing to fear frora a union of the colonies. Doubtless the matter is yet in the distance to some extent, but perhaps it may be nearer than some of us imagine or anticipate. It may be said that I have come to the conclusion I have expressed because I represent a sugar district, and that I have been urged to it by the zeal of the planters on the question, but I may say that I am not by any means unnecessarily influenced by the demands of the planters, although I represent a district which will to a considerable extent be benefited by federation. Apart from that altogether, I say that federation is by no means to be feared so far as the agricultural and manu­facturing districts are concerned; and although a great amount of matter may be printed and circulated to the effect that we are likely to go to the dogs if federation is brought about, I certainly do not share that opinion. I must confess that in the Governor's Bpeech the Premier is very guarded as to what attitude his Government is likely to assume on the ques­tion of federation. It is a waiting and not a courageous attitude. It certainly is not a courageous thing to say, " Wait until we see what our neighbours are going to do." If the Government have made up their minds on the question, and are in earnest in the matter, why should tlH'Y wait on New South vV ales, or South Australia, or any other colony ? The clear duty of a man at the head of affairs is to have the courage of his convrctions. If the Premier believes in federation let him say so, and not wait to see what action New South Wales will ta,ke in the matter. I find that tho closest approach to progress, if it can be called progress, to be found in these colonies during the last ten years is to be found in Tasmania. Now, I come to the paragraph in His Excellency's Speech with regard to the establishment of local wool sales and finding markets for our meats. I dare say there is a good deal to be said in favour of establishing local wool sales, and my astonishment is that this matter was not attended to a considerable time ago, considering that, with the exception of New South Wales, Queensland is the greatest producer of wool in Australia. Yet it is a matter of some moment that the Government is paying some attention to this question-not merely for the benefit of the squatters, although that is not a matter to be overlooked, but because I believe that the result of the establishment of this market, and also the finding of new markets for our meat, will be of great benefit to the whole of the colony. Then we come to another matter of great moment. We are promised a Mines Bill. I hope that that Bill will be, as the Speech says, of a large and comprehensive character, and that it will not deal merely with one branch of mining. I share to the tullest extent the sentiments expressed by the mover of this Address, that the coal-mining industry will not be overlooked, and that the

Address in Reply. (27 JULY.] .Address in Reply. 33

fullest protection will be given to those engaged in that industry. Then we come to another matter, a matter which is likely to entail considerable expenditure-namely, the establishment of a university. This subject will doubtless receive ample consideration. This question has not come up for discussion very often since I became a member of this House, but I believe that on every occasion when it has come before us I have ali'Vays supported the project; but, taking into account the numerous proposals foreshadowed in the Speech which are likelv to entail considemble expenditure, I ask whether the head of the Government is justified, a few months prior to :1 g-eneral t•lection, und when he himself ha" recei v;•cl nu rlistinct mandate from the people on the "nbject-whether he is justified in submitting this-to say the least of it -rather elaborate scheme of expenditure, for the establishment of a university and other matters already referred to in the Speech? I deny that the present head of th<' Government enjoy" the confidenco of the people, therefore he has no right to incur th,, expenditure. The three Plections which have taken place in '\Vitle Bn,y, Murilla, and Burnett in no way indicate that he possesses that confidence, but they most emphatically indicate that he does not enjoy that confidence, and I there­fore ask the House if it is justified, just on the verge of a general election, in approv­ing of the programme which the hon. gentlmnan has submitted to us, and the vory considerable e::cpenditure which it entails, without affording the people an opportunity of s'wing " Yea" or "Nay" to it? It would have been a graceful act, prior to the bon. gentlemun assuming the posi­tion he now occupies, if he had given the people an opportunity. of saying whether they were favourable to h1s becoming the head of the Go­vernment. Personally I have not the slightest objection to the hon. gentleman occupying that position, but I say the time has come when the electors of (2ueensland, and not the few persons who happen for the time being to hold office as Ministers of the Crown-und more particularly the retiring head of the· Government-should say who is to become the h,ad of the Government. '\Vhy should the Premier be allowed to say to one of his colleagues, "I want you to take "up this position. I have done very well, and I hope you will do as well?" '\Vby should any man, when he finds a new and softer position with better pay, be allowed to do this?

Mr. HoOLAN : Thn,t is true mateship. Mr. GLASSEY: That may be so, but it is

time that this species of mateship was at an end. '\Ve have a very elaborate programme placed in our hands. I do not think it fair and reasonable to ask this House to commit itself to such a large expenditure without first going before the elec­tors, and not only the present electors, but I hope the Premier will increase the number of those who are electors, and give those who un­fortunately find no plRce on the electoral rolls an opportunity of s~yin'< "Yea" or "Nay" to these proposals. So far as this university scheme is con. cerned, I by no lH',tns nndervalue the necessity for higher education, hut at this particular time the people should have some say in the matter. I do not say that this should Le made a distinct election cry, but the question should be submitted to the people. JYforeover, there is another educa­tional lllatter which has a prior claim on our considemtiun, and that is, what is to be dnne with the large nnrr;ber of boys and girls who are being turned out every year from our schools? I see the hon. gentleman laughs at this. I believe he has sneererl at it previously in another part of the colonv, but it is no laughing or sneering matter. It is a matter which deserves very serious consideration. I believe that some

1898-D

scheme can be devised for overcoming this diffi­culty. It is possible to give them technical instruction in various branches. I was pleased when in South Australia some little while ago to visit a large institution where some 950 boys were on the roll, and where they were receiving technical instrnction in a variety of subjects. That is a matter of far greater moment than the estahlishment of a university. The establishment of a university will merely benefit those who are in a position to give their children a higher education in some other part of the world, and unless the hon. gentleman intends to place its advantages within the reach of the poorest child in the colony the measure will not go through, BO far as I am concerned, with­out strenuous opposition and severe criticism. In my opening remarks I referred to that por­tion (,f the Speech which relates to the prosperity of the colony. I wish I could join to the full in agreeing with that statement. I am sorry I cannot. '\Ve have been told that we have been gradually getting round the corner, and, accord­ing to the Speech this year, we are now on the high road to prosperity. The mover and seconder of the motion laid great emphasis on the prosperous condition of Queensland. 'rhe mover is a journalist, and ought t() have some experience and information on the matter, and I ask him whether the farmers in the district of West Moreton are prosperous? If I can get no satis­factory information from him I will have to appeai to the hon. members for Hose wood, Fassi­fern, and Lockyer, and will ask them whether they can endorse what has been said by the hon. member for Ipswich? I certainly have some little information about the condition of the agricultural districts in various parts of the colony, and although I am free to admit that the colony is not so bad as it was some few years ago -and I will give reasons for that by-and-by-­yet I am not prepared to endorse the statement that the colony is in a prosperous condition. The hon. member for Logan, Mr. Stodart, who seconded the Address in Reply, is a merchant, and ought certainly to have some know­ledge regarding- the prosperous condition of the colony, but I should like to ask the hon. member if hh. constituents are prepared to endorse his statements about that part of the colony. I have been in the Logan only a short time ago, and from the information I have gathered I c:>.nnot bear out the hon. member's statements. And now I ask the representatives of the p11storal industry whether that industry is in a prosperous condition ?

The PREMIER : Wool is going up and rents are going down.

Mr. GLASSEY: It is not a great time ago since application was made to the Premier with a view of having rents reduced.

The PREMIER: Rent is being wiped out now. Mr. GLAS8EY: If the pastoral industry is

in a flourishing condition there is certainly no room for a reduction in rents, but there is room for increase of them. Then, I ask, is· the sugar industry in a prosperous condition? I happen to know something about that industry. '\Ve are told there is g-oing to be a larger crop this year, and I admit it, but does that prove that the industry is prosperous? Not by any means. I do not remember a time when complaints were so numerous, m· when prices promised to be so low. I admit that in consequence of the exces­sively large cc·op there is more hopefulness, but I affirm that neither the pastoral, agricultural, manufacturing, or sugar industries are in a pros­perous condition.

The PREMIER : They are working day and night in a lot of the foundriei;.

Mr. GLASSEY: I admit that there is a little boom on at present, especially at Gympie.

34 Address in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] Add1•ess in Reply.

The PREMIER : And Tuowoomba also. Mr. GLASSEY: Yes; but con it be said

that in consequence of this boom ohe colony is in a prosperous condition ? I will try to produce some evidence th..tt it is nob so. I ask the hon. member for Ipswich if the manufacturing indus­tries of Ipswich are in a prosperous condition? I think the hon. member for Rosewood can give some information in regard to that matter. Is the woollen industry of Ipswich prosperous?

The PREMIER : Yes. MJ'. GLASSEY: I am very glad indeed to

bear it, and hope the employees will share to some extent in the prosperity. Is the coal industry prosperous? That is a branch of minine; that cannot be overlooked, and I >ay it is by no means 1 'rosperous.

The PRE]fiER : Is the coal industry anywhere pro~ pernnR ?

Mr. GLASSEY: \Ve are now speaking of this colony. Then, again, take the one little cotoon mill in the colony. It is lyinu idle. Is the cotton industry prosperous? The hen. the senior member for Ipswich, Mr. Crihb, IHade a pathetic appeal to the head of the Government on his recPnt visit to Ipswich. Although he deprecated rabid socialism, he was not slow to aHk that that indu"try might not be overlookfld. Not­withstanding all that ·has been said, I think there is somA room for improvement in the prosperity of all our indu·otries. Let us see how far we are prosperuus or otherwise, as can be gathered from the revenuA derived from Customs during the last few years. Most public men have taken this as some standard of· measurement. of the prosperity of a people. Unless serious reductions in duties have been made, and that has not been done during the last few years here, the returns through the Customs would show a considerable increase if we are in the happy and pros­perous condition stated in this Speech. \Vhat are the facts? Going right away back to 1887-8, and coming up to date--to the close of the last financial year-what do we find? We find that the aggregate amount collected through the Cu<toms in 1887 was £1,178,331.

Mr. AR}!STRONG: How much luan money was corr.ing in in that year?

Mr. GLASSEY: Take again1888-9, when, by the revenue tariff introduced by Sir T. Moll­wraith, the revenue from Customs was increased by about .£260,000, and yet we find that from 1887-8 to the present time the increase of revenue through the Cuetoms has been extremely small. For 1896-7 it was only £1,199,187--a very slight increctss, notwir_hstanding the en,,rmous increa~e derival,le from the tariff of 1888-9 and other changes which have taken place fNm time to time since through the action of the present Govern!llent in increasing the duties through the Customs. Taking the Customs revenue, then, as a standard of meas~rement, it does not in any way show the prospent~' we are told of in the Gover­nor's Speech. Agam, take the return for the htst financh1l year as shown in the Gazette of the 12th July, and we find it is .£1,207,884, which is but a slight increase upon what it was eleven years ago, notwithstandin(l' we have had a very large increase of population. 1f these returns are to be taken as a re:•sonable standard of measurement for the pro<perity of the peop;e and their purchasing power, then so far as we have evidence it does not by any means pnt us in the favourahle light referred to in the Speech. The Premier, when sp 'a king at \Varwick some ti1nP agn, and referring to the prospt rous con­dition of the colony, "aid the true test of the prosperity of a country was to be found in the record of its popul_ation and its wealth. I am going to deal with that matter, I hope not unfairly, but at any rate from the information I

have culled from the pnhlic records. He lays con· siderable stress on the increase of population in Queensland as compared, I presume, with the increase in the other colonies. I have taken exception to that on two previous occasions, and I take exception to it now, and 'ay that although there is a slight increase in Queensland, as compared with the other colonies, there is nothing at all to boast of. 'l'he Premier asked the people of the country to gauge its prosperity from a period about five years ago. Of course he lays considerable stress on the increaoe of population and wealth, assum­ing that it has been largely due to the administration and legislation of the Govern­ment of which he has been a member during the past eight years. I do not say the " present Government," because I make no distinction between the Government of 1890 and the Government of to-day, because, though there is a different gentleman at the head of affairs, it is practically the same Govern­ment. I am going hack to 1890, when the coalition Government was formed, and what do we find? The population of New South Wales at that time was 1,121,860, of Victoria 1,133,266, of Queensland 3!JH, 26fi, and of South Australia 319,145. \Vestern Australia, of course, can scarcely be taken as a criterion, inasmuch as the conditions there are by no means normal; but in 'rasmauia, oned the oldest colonies, and, as I ha\·e said before, that which most closely approaches to Queensland, so far as conservati ;·e legislation and want of 1 'rogress are concerned, the popula­tion then was 145,290, and the population of New Zealand was then 625,508. Now come to the pre<ent time, and taking the latest returns, which I have been able to procure through the kmrlness and courtesy of the New South \Vales Statistician, .Mr. Coghlan, I find he estimates the populations to be as follows in 1897 :-New South \Vales, 1,323,460; Victoria, 1,176,238; Queensland, a considerable increa><e I admit, 484,700; South Australia, 362,0-14; Tasmania 171,718; and New Zealand, aconsiderableincrease, 729,056.

Th8 PnEmER: Not a higher percentage than Queensland.

Mr. GLASSEY: Not a higher percentage, I admit. I am going to deai with that aspect of the question, and to show how far we have increased in wealth per head of the population during the same period, and I shall ask the hon. gentleman how much the legislation and adminis­tration of his Government in the past has done to increase the wealth per head of the pnpnlation, an•i whether it has not really retarded the pro­gres• of the c •lony during the last few ye.<r<. Now let ns take the percentage of increase in population from 1890 to 1897. In New South Wales, which is the oldest c,,lony of the group, the percentage was 15'66, in Victoria only 3'67, while the increase in Queensland, of which we have heard so much, was 18'27. In Sonth Aus­tralia, which is an old colony, and poor in resources as compared with Queensland, the increase was 12'87. New Zealand was nearly up to our own standard, the figure" being 14"17; and in 'l'asmania, with all its drawbacks-a mere patch of hnd as compared with this great country, and its resources a mere bagatelle com­pared with our own-the increase was 14'33 per cent. of the population. The Premier haR told us that the true standard of the progress of a country i;; its increase in population and wealth, and I am going to test the condition of the country from that standpoint. I shall now show hnw much per head has been the increase of wealth in Queensland during the last few years, so far as we are able to gauge it from the savings of the people as indicated by the returns of the savings bank.

Address in Reply. [27 .JuLY.] Address in Reply. 35

Mr. LEAHY : That is not the only one. Mr. GLASSEY : It is not the only one, but it

is a very important one when we take into account the small amount of confidence mani­fested, and justly manifested, in some of our banking institutions. Considering that matter 1t is a far better standard of measurement than some others that might be adopted. Well, what do we find? That notwithstanding the consider­able increase of population to which I have alluded, we had on the 31st December, 189G, only 58,226 depositors in our savings bank.

The PREMIER : That is a very good proportion. Mr. GLASSEY: 1t is nothing like the pro­

portion in the other colonies; it is 12'33 per cent. of the po]JU!ation. In New South Wales the number of depositors is 213,608, or 16·45 per cent. of the population; in Victoria 345,474, or 29'46 per cent. ; in South Am,tralia, which has a population of 100,000 less than Queensbnd, the number is 102,891, or 28·5(} per cent. of the population. There is nn enormous increase in "\V estern Australia, but I am not taking that colony. In Ta,mania the number of depositors is 32,803, or Hl'74 per cent. nf the popnlation, and in New Zealand the nnmber is 175,173, or 24'52 per cent. of the popnlaLion; so that we have c,ven 'fasmania, an old established community, with few and pour resources as compared with ours, actually a long way ahead of us so br as the proportion of depositors in the savings bank to population is concerned.

The PREMIER: "\Ve invest our money, and spend it here ; we do not put it in a stocking.

Mr. GLASSEY: Now, I come to another point, the increase in the deposits per head of population. ::Yir. Coghlan has heen good enough to furnish me with a retum on this subject. In New South \Vales the amount par head of the population in 1890 was £4 4s. 7d., and in 1896 it was £6 lls. 4d., or an increase of £2 6s. 9d. In Victoria the amount was £4 18s. 9d. per head in 1890, and £G Ss. in 180(), an increase of .£1 9s. 3d. Qutensland comes next with .£4 4s. lOci. per head in 1890, and £4 18s. Sd. in 189G-a wonderful increase of 13s. 10d., notwith­standing that the people have been withdrawing their money from the different. banking in­stitutions and placing it in their own bank during the last few years in consequence of the want of confidence they have in the banking institutions of the colony. Then take Tasmania, our competitor in legislation which is cert>inly not of a progressive character. In 1Sfl0 the amount per bead was £3 lls. 9d., and in 1896 it waa £4 3". 2cl., or '1n increase of lls. 5d. Now, take New Zealand, a country which has been blessed with democratic government during the last few years, and what do we find? That the amount per head in 1R!JO was £5Os. 3d., and in 18!lo it was £7 Is. lOLl., an increase of .£2 6s. 7d. I have thus taken the Premier on his own ground so far as the increase in population and wealth is concerned, nnd we find that, with the exception of Tasmania, all the other colonies have made greater advances than Queensland. I must deal with another aspect of the question­the taxation through the Customs per head of population in the various colonies. Let us see how far this en!L;htened Govemment has ligh_tened or increased the burdens of the people durmg the la't few years. I give the fi:.:nres from Coghlan for 1895-6, as I have been uoahle to get any later returns. In New South \Vales the taxation through the Custorr.s per head at that particular time-it is a little less now-was £18s. 7d.; in Victo~ia, J;!19:'· 4d. We have always been told that Vtctorla, m consequence of its protective tariff, taxed its people unnecessarily heavily, hut that does not turn out to he a fact. Queensland taxes its people per head £2 16s. 1d.

-that is the highest in the group-South Australia, .£110s. lld.; Tasmania, .£1 18s. 3d.; and New Zealand comes nearest to Queens­land with £2 7s. 5d. per hearl, show­ing that, so far as Customs taxation is con­cerned, we stand in a far worse position than the other col0nies. New Zealand undoubtedly comes next to us, but then it must be borne in mind that year after year since 1890 in that colony there have been large surpluses. Omitting hundreds, the surplns in New Zealand in 1890 was £126,000; in 1891, £10,000 only ; in 18fl2, £165,000 ; in 1893, £283,000; in 1804, .£290,000; in 1895, £180,000; in 1896, £25,000 ; and in 18fl7, £354,000, or a total during the period named of £1,626,035. \Ve shall be told-in fact we have been told it in the Speech, with a flourish of trumpets, and as an evidence of the prosperity of Queensland--that this year we have a surplus of £20,000. 'l'he Government has derived from the increased excise duties imposed last year £48,000, and gives the people back £20,000. "What wonderful financiers they are~ Just contrast that with the enormous savings I have just quoted in New Zealand. Let us now dPal with the question of indebtednes,. "\V e are told by the Premier that our stan.Jard of prosperity is the increase in population an cl wealth. I hope I ha vc dealt fully with that. Let us s"e om indebtedness. According to Coghlan for 1895-6, the indebted­ness per head of population in New South \Vales was £48 5s. 6d. ; in Victoria, £40 9s. 2d. ; in Queensland, £69 6s. 7d.-the highest of any colony in the group; in South Australia, £67 10s. 10d. ; in 'l'asmania, £52 4s. lOd. ; and in New Zealand, £614s. 2d.

The Pm•mmR : \Vhat about our Crown lands­our as~ets?

Nrr. GLASSEY: If we go into that question, the Premier will come out none too well. I shall take an opportunity of discussing that in connection with the 'l'reasurer's Budget Speech, and if the Premier will go into the matter fully. he will find that he will come out very badly compared with some of the other colonies. Let us now see how much this so-called enlightened and progressive administration has increased our national debt since they took office in I890. In 1890 our aggregate indebtedness amounted to £28,105,(i84, and at the end of the last financial year it stood at £33,498,414, or an increase of .£5,392, 730. "\V e are the largest debtors per head of any of the Australian colonies by a considerable extent, and yet we are invited by the Premier to measure our prosperity by our increase of population and wealth. I wish no1v to read a pamgraph-not from a Lahonr journal, but from a journal which the Premier will recognise as a journal of some weight-I refer to the Brisbane Telegraph. I am sure the hem. gentleman will by no means disagree with me that that is a paper of some authority, and that what it states is a matter of some importance. On 1.'ith July last, when di,<cussing "State Aid to Charity," that paper said in a leading article-

It is very clear that although we have not the special demonstrations of unemployed which take place in the southern metropolises, Lhere is undoubtedly a considerable amount of real distres:S in our midst.

How doeR that tally with the statement in the Governor's Speech wit.h reference to our pros perou'' conriit.ion, and how doeR it tally with the statement of the Premier in that ruanifesto of his issued at\\' arwick some little time "14"; and, further, how does it tally wit,b his statement at Ipswic:1 a few da.ys ago-that the colony to-day is in a most prosveroug condition ; in as pros­perous a condition, and more so, than it has been in previous years ? I am now stating what I found in a Brisbane paper, and I by no means

36 .Address in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] .Address tn Reply.

disagree with the paragraph to which I have alluded. Then Mr. Dickson, speaking a little while ago, said-

At the present time Dunwich was crowded tu such a degree as called for additional accommodation. The numbers applying for admission were daily increasing. Does the Home Secretary agree with the state­ment in this Speech as to the prosperous condition of the colony? I leave him and the Premier to adjust that matter between themselves.

The HoME SECRETARY : There will always be destitute and aged persons.

Mr. GLASSEY: I said I proposed to show some of the reasons which had brought about an improved condition of things, and I admit there have been improvements. I find that the expendi­ture from the loan fund has had something to do with it.

The SECRE1'ARY FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIO!\' ; Far less than it used to.

Mr. GLASSEY : I admit that, but I will give a few facts to show that this expenditure has been a considerable factor in bringing about chang·es for the better. In the three yearg 1892-3, 1893-4, and 189.1-5 there was expended on various works £1,034,468, hLlt during the next three vear• there was a wonderful increase. In 1893-6; 1896-7 and 1897-8 there was expended no less a sum than £2,G77,5G5, and yet we are asked to beheve that the bencfieial changes which have been Ll·nugbt about are due to the legislative and administrative ability of the gentlemen who have had ch:trge of the country's affairs for a number of years past. I could go into other matters to show how this expenditure has broug-ht about changeH. Take the ~ugar \Vorks Guarantee Act. The Government have expended half a million in establishing central sugar-mills, which of course have given a considerable impetus to the growth of sugar, and hence we are told in the Speech that there will probably be such an inerease in the output that we shall not be able to find a market in Australia and shall have to look else­wherJ. I admit that in other branches of agri­culture, particularly in wheat-growing, there has been considerable extension, and I am glad to say that the wheat farmers are in a better position than they were a few years ago. Then we are told by the Premier and the leading journal of this colony that I am rather of a pessimistic turn of mind,

The PHEMIER: Surely not! Never! Mr. GLASSEY : He said also that I

attempted to injure the colony, and he made numbers of other statements equally ridiculou~. I hope that no one will attempt mnre than I to injure the colony. I have always tried to further what I thought were its be,t interests, but I can show that the credit and honour of the colony have been injured by gent.lemen who have been at the head of affairs for a number of years. I d' ny that I ever attempted to injure the colony. Why should I attempt it even if I were capable of it? It is my business a~ a public man to further its interest>, and I think I have contri­buted my share in a humble way in that direc­tion. But because I dare to differ from the hon. gentlemall at the head of affairs, and those with whom he has been assooiated, I am injuring the credit of the colony. I say there is no man in the colnny who has a higher opinion of its future greatnes' than I have. I have some knowledge d its resources, I ha Ye travell<d many thonsands of miles over it, and I believe thoroughly in the future greatness of Queensland. But I am convinced, and have been for many years, that it is impossible for this country to make the progress which it otherwise should, considering its vast resources, so long as we have a set of gentlemen at the head e>f affairs who,

so far as their action in the past is concerned, have shown themselves utterly incapable of making progre"s in the direction which would induce this country to advance as it ought. I say this advisedly, and not because I have the slightest peroonal antipathy to the hon. gen­tleman at the head of affairs or to his colleagues. I do not say it with a prejudiced mind at all, and I appeal to any unbiased person to say whether, considering onr resources, this country has made the progress during the last few years which it should have made, and whether if we had had a change of administrators, men at any rate with a wish to go forward, and men of a progressive turn of mind, we would not have been in ani nfinitely better position than we are to-day, with the present gentlemen at the head of affairs? I now come to the consideration of a few matters which I think have really done an injury to Queensland in the past few years, and I need only mention one or two facts to substan­tiate what I say. \Ve have had men at the head of affairs during the last eight years, coming to Parliament and asking for power to float a certain loan in the London market with a view to carrying out certain public works, well and clearly defined in an Act of Parliament, and instearl of appropri­ating the money to the particular use for which ParliatnAnt oanctioned the expenditure of it, they have appropriated it for othH pm·poses, and for purposes in which some of themselves were dee!J]y interested. I ask whether or not in that they have not injured Queensland in the past? I think they have. I have here an Act of Parlia­ment autborismg the borrowing of certain moneys in the year 1890, and I am going to call the attention of the House and the country to the question a~ to whether that money was appropriated for the purpose for which it was voted or not. I am going to put this matter very plainly, but I hope without anger, before the country. In 1890 an Act was passed to enable the Government to raise a sum not exceeding £3,704,800, required for certain pur­poses-that is to say : For public works of certain kinds ; for the payment of certain loans, £422,850; to discharge debentures issued under the Government; Loan Act of 1866 fall­ing due in 1801, £1,170,950-not a mention in this Loan Act of 1890 that the sum of £1,050,191 was to be borrowed for the purpose of going into the Queensland National Bank, instead of being expended in its legitimate way. Yet, what are the facts? 'l'he facts are that in the early part of 1893, when the present Premier became Attorney-General-having been Solicitor­General prior to that, and one of Sir Samuel Griffith's colleagues-Sir Samuel Griffith had in the meantime left office, in 1893, when the balan3e of the loan was floated. For what was it flt•ated? ]'or the purpose of carrying out the works for which the borrowing of the money was authorised? No, but for the purpose of going into that institution until such time as the elections in 1893 were over; for the purpose of enabling those gentlemen to get a new lease of power; for the pnrpose of flaunting in the face of the people of Queensland that the members sitting on this side of the House, and constituting the Labour party, and some of the Lahour advocates outside, desired to injure that great institution. I say a greater fraud w:ts never perpetrated on any free people, or upon any people calling themselves free, than was perpetrated upon the electors at that time. Instead of being appropriated to the legitimate use and purpose for which it had been sanctioned by this Home, it was appropriated in the way I have mentioned, and that too with the full cognisance of the hon. gentleman now at the head of affairs. The hon. gentleman may attempt to throw this matter off with a laugh, but I say that he and those acting with him at

Address in Reply. [27 .JuLY.] Address in Reply. 37

that time-I think they include none of the present Ministrv but him;elf-will be held responsible for this.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION : You were yourself a great eupporter of Sir Samuel Griffi ,h.

Mr. G LASSEY: Yes; and he is by no means relieved of responsibility in the mattet·, for having a full knowledge of the condition of affairs at the time he kept that knowledge from Parliament and from the country, and then gracefully retired to the lucrative position he occupies to-day. I ask whether, in view of this transaction and others, the hon. gentleman or anyone c-:tn say that this sort of work has not done infinite mischief to the credit of the colony?

The PREMIER: The people of Queensland do not think so, for they have kept us in office ever since.

Mr. GLASSEY: Let the people of Queens­land, when the facts come before them, as they certainly shall, s:1y whether the hon. gentleman shall come back.

The PREliiiER : I am perfectly willing. Mr. G LASSEY: Let us see then whether the

hon. gentleman will come back with a majority or not.

HoNOURABLE ME~IBERS: Hear, hear! Mr. GLASSEY: I say the hon. gentlelllan, if

he appeals to the country on legitimate lines, which unquestionably he will ha Ye to do, will see whether the people of the country are prepared to keep him and his colleagues in office any longer.

'l'he PREiiiiER: You have been saying that for eight years, you know.

Mr. GLASSEY: I say this money was deli­berately obtained under false pretences. I ask whether it is an honourable transaction for the gentlemen at the head of affairs to go to London and ask the people there to lend them sums of money for W@!l-defined and specified purposes, and then appropriate the money for entirely different purposes, though they obtained it at an enormous cost to the people of the country? What did that loan cost the people? Instead of being charged to the purposes for which it was borrowed it has been charged to the people of Queensland, and it cost them upwards of £168,167. And now we are told by the Premier that the people do not think that tranoaction dishonourable as they have kept him in power during the last few years. I sht>ll be very much surprised if the people keep him in otlice very mnch longer,_and I say that hon. gentleman is not g'tme to dissolve the Chamber to-morrow and go to the country.

The l'RE}!lER : Yon would not like it. Mr. G LASSEY : I would like it, ttnd if my

vote could put the hon. gentleman and his col­leagues out, depend upon it that vote would be cast. I deny that the hon. gentleman and his colleagues have the confidence of the people of the country. The hon. gentleman, when re­ferring to this bank transaction during a vi•it which he made to Bundaberg some little time ago, said I was hitting below the belt, and endeavour­ing to cast a stigm:1 on him which he was not entitled to bear. I do not know that I can be legitimately charged with trying to hit below the belt; I have always endeavoured to strike fairly and honourably, but if the hon. gentleman wishes to pose as an innocent before the people of Queensland, and shirk, or attempt to shirk, his re;ponsibility in connection with these trans· actions, then I tell him that he never made a greater mistake in his life. He will have to bear his full and legitimate share of the re~ponsibility of those matters, because so sure as time goes rour,d they will be put in the plainest possible terms before the people of Queensland, who will

be asked whether they are prepared to endorse these and other transactions, which I shall not n1ention at the present moment. Whatever the Premier's other defects may be, I had always regarded him as a fairly brave man. I believe that on one occasion he laid claim to come from a nation of warrior'. I happen to come from the same nation, but I have always been prepared, whether I come from a nation of warriors or fr"m a nation of other peroons of a more peaceful turn of mind, to bear my full share of responsibility, and to meet difficulties, whatever they may be. The hon. gentleman at the head of the Govern­ment, however, is extremely anxious to shirk hi; share of responsibility in this matter. Hear what he said at Warwick when speaking on this subject. He said-

But I say her,e plainly that in dealing with this ques­tion at present and in the future the Government of which I am the head will claim, and rightly so, too, as the future will show, an originality ttnd individuality of its own. Then he goes on to say-

Rut how does all this affect me-\Vhat a state of innocence ! How in the world is this matter going to affect the hon. gentleman, the poor innocent ! He has only been in office for eight years, for which he has been remark­ably and handsomely paid. But he goes on-

But how does all this affect me in 1ny position as the leader of a Government for which I claim, as I said before, an individuality and originality of action of its own? It would be most unfair, I think, viewing the part that I have publicly and privately enacted in this connection, that. I shoulcl be saddled with burdens not legitimately my own. I distinctly decline to accept that position in any shape or form.

Is that the utterance of a brave man? Notwith­standing his full knowledge of what bad been going on he says, " But how does all this affect me?" Had he full knowledge of the transactions which were then taking place? If he had not, then he was culpably negligent in not endeavour­ing to obt11in the fullegt information. If he had full knowledge, then he is more than culpably negligent; he is criminally negligent to the last degree. Yet he says, how does it affect me? 'l'he poor innocent who has been there for the last eight years, and yet sought to make people believe that he knew nothing about the matter! He is not going to shirk his full share of responsibility in this matter. He and those connected with him will be held fairly guilty of full knowledge and cogni­sance of the transaction. Of course it is con­venient to endeavour to appear innocent, and shirk re,ponsibility, but, as I said before, such conduct is not the 'conduct of a brave man, and certainly it is acting disloyally to his colleagues who were eng-aged in the transaction. Then we are told of the good things provided by the pre­sent Administration. :&'irst we are told what splendid things the past Government, as it is described, have done for the country, with the view, of course, of inducing the electors to give those gentlemen a new lease of power. They lay claim to being the only persons capable of successfully administering the affairs of the country, and they go on to show what they have done to justify a renewal of confi­dence. Then the Premier said that this was a new Government, that we should not mind what had taken place in the past, but judge them by their actions during the present session, and by their actions in the future. I am going to ehow what this Government has done for the people during the last few year~, and that instead of prt>viding good things, as the hon. gentleman at the head of the Govern­ment said tlwy had as compared with their predecessors, they have been a long way short in meeting the growing requirements of the

38 Adrl-ress in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.]

people, at any rate a long way short of providing means for the development of some of our resources. The hon. gentleman says "vV e have done our hest to improve our harbours." I am going to show what their best has been compared with their predecessors, and I am going to put this matter clearly before the country, so that the people may see how far the state­ment of the .Premier is borne out by facts. I have a return from the Marine Department showing the expenditure for the last fourteen years-taking the seven years prior to the assumption of office by the coalition Govern· ment-and the expenditure during its term of office. In the seven years prior to 1890-when we had a much smaller population than we have now-the expenditure on account of harbour improvements was £1,013,101, whilst during the seven years since 1890 it has amounted to £458,603-or only a difference of £554,498. Yet we are told what the Government have done for our harbours ! I leave the people to judge. I want to know where these extraordinary impro\"ements come in when we have over £500,000 less expenditure. Was this curtailment of expenditure caused because the wants and requirements of the colony had been served? No. It was to save the expenditnre of loan money and keep it in that institution to which I alluded a little while ago-the Queens­land National Bank. That was one of the reasons. And further, to show what the Govern­ment have done for our harbours, he mentions that they have handed over a number of pnrts to harbour boards. I shall say nothing with regard to that change, but I contend that the improve­ments for which the Government claim credit are not justified by facts. He also tells us­" vVe have aided local authorities in the form of roads and other channels of communication." That statement is just about as accurate as the previous one, as I shall show from figures culled from State documents which are pre3ented I presume, in such a form as to be relied up~n. From 1883-4 to 1890 the expenditure from revenue on roads and bridges amounted to £97,000, while since 1890 it has been £41,965, or only a difference-just a little difference you know-of £55,73!J. Then take the expenditnre from loan fund. For the first veriod it was £94,177, and for the second period- only £18 905 -or a difference of £75,272 ; or, if we take' the gross decrease for the latter period of expendi­ture from both revenue and loan, we have a dif­ference of £131,010. So much, then, for the roads and bridges and other channels of com· munication which the hon. gentleman says they have provided for the use of the settlers and selectors in the different parts of the colony.

The PREMIER : Take the three bridges-Vic­toria, Lamington, and Burnett.

Mr. GLASSEY: Let us now see what this wonderful Administration has done in aiding the local authorities. :B'or the seven years prior to 1890, with the limited population we then had, we aided thP local authorities to the extent of £1,565,H28. To what extent has this wonderful C-overnzneut provid<;:d rneanR of com1nnnicatiou? From 1890 to 189/ they gave in air! to the local authorities £699,803-or a decrease of no les~ thttn £865,82i5'"··or an average decrBase per year of £123,789. How in the wurld does that tally with th() claim put forth by the hon. gentleman? Every statement he ha" made, so far as regards th.e beneficial act~ of his Governm~nt as compared wrth those of hrs predeceosors, rs substantially groundless when opposed by facts.

The PREMIER : You always opposed their predecessors, too.

Mr. GLASSEY: I challenge the hon. gentle­man to contradict me when I say that during

the period I have been in Parliament I have by voice or vote on all occasions endeavoured to assist land settlement.

The PRE~IIER: Y on opposed the Agricultural Lands Purchase Bill.

Mr. GLASSEY : I challenge the hon. gentle­man to produce facts with regard to my assisting to curtail the endowment to local authorities, and I challenge him further to cite one instance in which I have acted detrimentally to the agricultural interests in this colony.

The SECRE'£Al\Y l.'OH PUBLIC INSTRUCTION : Hundreds!

The PREMIER: \\'by die! yun oppose> the Agri­cultural Lands l'nrchase Ac~?

Mr. GLASSEY: I gave my reasons at the time, and I am ]'repared to deal with the ques­tion later on. Then the hon. gentleman also said: "The mining industry has shared in the ad,·antages of increased railway communication." \Vhere?

The PREMIEI\: l\hny places. Mount Morgan to begin with.

Mr. GLASSEY: Mount Mm·gan, forsooth! A railway only now in course of construction! It has not benefited mining in the slightest degree, and yet the hon. gentleman tells us 1\tount Morgan ! What a fearful hole he has dropped into. I ask the hon. gentleman to give us another instance?

The PREMIER : Well, Chillagoe is coming. You opposed that.

:Mr. GLASSEY: Let the hon. gentleman look up my votes and speeches from time to time. But now l invite him to tell the country where the mining centres have been benefited by rail­wav communication. Two and a-half miles of railway -the little Tivoli line-has been constructed. That is the sum total of their a&distance tu mining enterprise by the construc­tion of rail ways. And yet the mining industry has been benefited by the construction of rail­ways ! \Vhat a statement for a responsible man at the bead of affairs to make, while nut a single ym·d of raii'"~Y beyond what I have mentioned has been constructed towards a mining centre during seven years! These are the sort of state­ments that go to the country to induce the electors to give them a further lease of power in consequence of the great things they have done. I am p:eased to have this opportunity of putting the other side of the case for the purpose of showing the people how they have been deluded and gulled by false statements. Let us take another audacious statement that has been made here-" We have largely reduced railway freights.'

The PREMIER : Are you so ignorant that you do not know it?

Mr. GLASSJ<JY: I know exactly. I know that when they took office in 1890 one of the first things they did was to increase railway freights on agricultural produce, and when compelled by force of circumstances and under pressure, con­tributed to largely, I am glad to say, by myself, they were compelled to reduce t),ose freights. Th(,y increa>ed them for four years, and during t h:tt timt• they extracted from the pockets of the farmers 1w lesR than £70,000.

The SECRETARY ~'Oil PUBI.IC INSTRUCTION : W bat years? Give us the dates.

Mr. GLASSEY: It was during four years of the present administration. I am not far out in my facts generally. And now I will deal with another matter referred to by the hon. gentleman in tbis famous speech at \V arwick. He says the Government have adjusted the finances and put them on a sound footing. I am going to show the country how. He makes an appeal on the subject as if the members of the Government WBre entitled to some special reward, a special badge or medal that they mrght wear on their

Address in Reply. [27 JULY.] Alirl1•ess in Reply. 39

breasts like the old gentleman at the foot of . the staircase, as a special mark of distinguished service. \Vhen the c•Jalition Ministry came into office in 1890 they had a deficit of about £1,230,000. They passed an Act of Par!h>ment giving them­selves power to sell3,000,000 acres of land at 10s. an acre to wipe off the debt. They sold neC1rly 1,000,000 of acres, realising about .£500,000, but instead of putting it to a trust fund to wipe off the deficit, they put it int.J the Treasury. Then they levied fresh taxation. They regulated the finances by means of further borrowing. In 1894 they passed a Loan Bill to borrow .£2,500,000, and they paid off an old loan of .£765,000. They wiped off the deficit-it was a floating debt-by maldng it a permanent one to the extent of .£1,250,000. \Vhat financiers ! It iR simply splendid the way they behaved, and they deserve special consideration and reward.

Mr. HoaLAN : Thev are getting it. Mr. GLASSEY: They did nut regulate thf'

finances by adjusting taxation and putting the burden on those best able to bear it. Tnat is the policy of this side, hut it was never the policy of those who sit on the oppo,ite benches. In seven years, from 1890 to 1897, new duties were imposed and levied to the extent of £708,138; special sales of land produced £432,924, the dividend duty--

The PmmrER: You supported it. Mr. GLASSI<JY: The dividend duty pro­

duced .£338,339; postage on newspapers was imposed for the first time to the extent of £76,000; railway freights, to which I have alluded, produced .£70,000-or extra charges amounting altogether to .£1,675,401. N"w we come to the reduction of expenditure, some of which I by no means disagree with, particularly where it affected those in the Civil Service who were able to bear it, but unfortunately many of the higher officials escaped altogether. Then we have the local bodies suffering in the shape of reduced endowment to the extent of .£86,825; railway men's wages were rednced in four years to the extent of .£200,000, and Civil servants suffered reductions to the extent of .£1,675,401. Or taking the increased duties, the moneys derived from special sales of land, the dividend tax, newspaper postage, railway freights, and also the lessened expenditure due in many instances to mauife&tly unfair reductions upon small salaries in the Ci vi! Service, and upon wages in the Railway Depart­mt-nt, the Government ha,·e saved and withheld £3,091,226. And that is the way they have regu­lated their finances and put them on a sound basis ! As I have mentioned, they deserve some special consideration and rew'lrd for that. I come now to refer briefly to some other subjects dealt with by the Premier in his manifesto. He refers to con,titutional reform, mentioning one man one ,·ote, and to another matter which is probably referred to in the Gover-nor's Speech as something ·we will have to deal with when the Elections Bill comes on-one vote one value.

The PREMIER : You don't like it. Mr. G LA8SEY : Is the hon. gentleman

serious in this matter? I can only tell him that it will be discussed on its merits when it comes before the Housa, but if he, in order to get the people off the scent and to lessen their demands for real reform, wishes to burke the question by raising a sort of side issue-on which he has been advised by the leading newspaper of the country -I can tell him that his Bill will h,we an extremely rough passage through this Assembly. Of course one vote one value is very plausible and looks beautiful.

The PREMIE!t : The TVorke1· says so. Mr. GLASS~~y: The Worker speaks for

itself; but I am here to speak for myself and those I represent, and I can tell the hon. gentle-

man that if he thinks that by a sidewind he can prevent the people from facing the r'·al question he will be wonderfully mistaken. T!wn · he comes to the referenrlum. He says now that in order to give the people facilities to settle thi< question, machinery i" to be provided by Parlia­ment to have it decided at a gen.-ral ehc;iou. The hon. gentleman is extremely cunnillg in talking about the referen<ium for the "ettle· ment of this question. He wants to toy and ulay with the question aud pass it abng to another day, when he says he will settle this matter by means of the referendum. vVhy, if there is one question more than another that is absolutely ripe for settlement and full snlution it is the question of electoral reform, and it has been so for many years in this colony. The hon. gentleman say-s we have in­creased our population largely in the last few years, but I will show that though we have in­creased the population we certainly h'we not increased the number of electors-and why? In conRequence of that Act, which the hon. gentle­man had something to do with, which passed this Parliament in 1892, and which threw every poshi ble obstacle in the way of those persons legitimately entitled to be on the electoral rolls getting there. Now, the hnn. gentle­man, in order to delay the settlement of the que,tion, says, "vVe will provide machinery, if Parliament will agree, to settle this ques· tion by means of a referendum at a general election." Yes, he puts everything off tu a general election, and says, " Allow me to have a show; for God's sake keep me in office for this session ; allow me to have full play to show what I am capable of doing, and judge me not by what has taken place in the past or is taking place, but upon what I am likely to do in the future." Does the hon. gentleman think we oan't see through his little game? I think we can. Some of us are quite old enough in political affairs to be quite able to see the man am vres of the hon. gentleman to pass along and defer any matter likely to cause any disruption iu his party to another season, and to allow him to have full play during this session. I hope the question will be settled this session, and that if any question is to be referred to a referendum of the people it will be to the large~t number of persons capable of voting-, men and women, that they may be able to decide who shall he their representatives in future, and not to the mere handful, comparatively bpeaking, that we have on the rolls at the pre,ent time. Let me now give tbe House and the country a few facts as to the number of personR on the electoral rolls in the colonies. In Queens­land in 1890, when this wonderful Government came into office, with a population of 422, 77(;, we had an aggregate of electors on the rolls of 84,530, and on the 31st December, 1897, with a popula­tion of 484,700, we had only 81,872 electors on the rolls, or about 3,000 less than in 1890.

The SEcmJTA!tY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: The rolls have been purged.

Mr. GLASSEY: The rolls have been purged ! But when the census was taken in 1891 we had 126,000 male adults.

The PREMIER: I think the numbers are over­stated. I believe there are only 260,000 males altogether.

Mr. GLASSEY: I am speaking from memory, but I have taken the census returns made out and completed in 1891. But now we have only 81,872 electors on the roll, including plural voters, and I have always regarded them as a consider­able number. Is it any wonder that we have so few on the rolls, considering the obstacles placed in the way of persons being enrolled-when in the outstdP districts it is almost impo~sible, in

40 A.ild?•ess in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply.

many instances, to get an official competent to attest the claims lJ:S required by law? In New South Wales, w1th a population in 18DO of 1,~21,860, they had 290,314 on the rolls, and m 1896 they had a population of 1,2?7,640, and [266,371 on the rolls. In Vic­tona the population in 1890 was 1,133,26G, and the number of electors on the roll was 254,862, while in 1896 the population was 1,174,944: the returns of the number of electors en the roll are_ not lJ:Vai!able for this year. In South ~ustraha, whiCh has a very much smaller popula tlon than our own, the population in 1890 was 319,145, and the number of electors on the roll for the Assembly -they have two rolls there one for the Council and one for the Assembly_:_ was 69,921, while in 1896 the population was 360,220, and the number of electors on the roll138,344. Of course, as my friend, the hon. member for Rosewood reminds me the women there have votes. I wish the 'women here had votes, but the members on the other si~e do not wish that. They do not even WISh the men to have votes • they wish to have the fewest possible numb~r of persons on the roll, believing that their chances of success are S?perior with a small enrolment than they ~re,;v1th a l~rg~' one. They believe, of course, m Bu!cockmg the rolls to the largest possible extent. In _New Zeal~nd, where they alter the rolls every t1me there 1s a g-eneral election the population in 1890 was 625,508, and the nu~ber of elet;tors on the roll 183,171. Mark the enor­n;wus mcrecoso on the rolls in lHDii ! The popula­twn was then 714,162, and the numhor of electors on the rolls 339,230. '.rhose are a few of the inc~e;cses that h:we taken place in the other colonw,, and certamly the decrease in the num_ber of electors in Queensland is nat very cred1table to the Administration, more especially to those persons who helped to pas•J the J~lections Ac~ of 1892, which I opposed very strongly, and whwh I am sm:ry t~> say ~ was not in a position to defeat. As tnne 1s _gett~n!S short, I only wish to say ~hat I do ~10t behove m the present Adminis­tratwn, and mdeod never did nnd whenever the opportunity occurs they ,,'m certainly, as far as I am concerned, have a c;hort lease of power. But as the session progresses, if it does pro,-ress, whatever good may be in their measures I w~ll support, unless, of course, I see an oppor­tumty to defeat them, in whioh case they will certa~nly be def, ated. But so long as they r~mam. there, . nnd we have an opportunity ,;f discussmg their measures in detail-of shaping them, and putting th~m in order for the good of the country-whatever is good in them I shall support, _as I have done ~~ the past, according to. my h&"hts and my ab1hty. Before leaving thiS mamfesto of the Premier I should like to deal briefly with a pa~ao-raph which !s worthy ~f a !?lace in Hansa~d, and that 1s the one m winch he macle his wonderful appeal for support to the people of the country. I. have taken some share in public life in niy ti.me, and read the utterances of 1mhlic men in different parts of the world. I have somFltimes read pn.thetic and eloquent appeals made to the supporters of leading men, but I think-shall I say for political audacity ?-nt any rate for assurance and special pleading to '" body of people f<?r support, the paragraph I am going to read c!'rrws the p~lm. I am sorry the hon. gentle­man 1s not 111 h1s place at present but he will have. an opportunity of ren,diug wh~t I have to say m Hansard to-morrow. 8peaking to the men of Warwick, he said-

Two years ago, when all seemed darkest in the politic~l skies above 1ne, you 1nen of 1Varwick-you men, hke true men-like the true men vou ·were and are, gave m_e the consolation of your enthusiastic sup­port. To-mght I ask you, a,, I asked yon then, and I

ask those behind and beyondyou-tlle people of Queens­lane!-I ask you to answer me this appeal: Where I am prepared to lead, will you not be ready to follow alsor That appeal certainly does not lack for a want of assurance. Is it not wondetfnl that a man should ask, not onlv the people of ·warwick but the people of the whole country, to sign a blank cheque, and allow him to fill it up from time to time, just as he pleases. In effect he snid : ""Wherever I may go, hither or thither, east, west, north, or south-whatever my proposals may be, I ask you to follow me." 'If time per­mitted I could give some good reaRons why he should not he followed. The hon. gentle­man has told us in distinct terms that on matters of general policy his mind is not made up ; he is waiLing for developments. He is waiting to he told how people are likely to receive this proposal or that proposal; in the meantime his mind is not made up. He is an opportunist waiting for develop­ments. ""When I think it safe to go for­ward, then," says !te, "I will go forward, and when I think it safe to go backward, then I will go backward." I think it was a leading states­man of France, Gambetta, who first coined the term "opportunist," but I know of no public man in the country who so thoroughly deserves that epithet being applied to him as the present Prime Minister of (-lueensland. He is waiting for events and opportunities before he is prepared to go on. He is not prepared to take a side in a controversy ; that would he a very hazardous thing to do. "It might burst up my party-I might be driven from office. I am inclined to goon smoothly nnd quietly if the House will allow me. I am not to be judged by my past but by my future." Then he mnkes this wonderful appeal to the men of "\V arwick and the people of Queens­land. I am not prepnred to respond to that appeal, and I believe that the majority of the people are not by any means prepared to respond to it. T should be very sorry if they did. Before concluding I wish to make a few observations regarding the New Guinea trans­action. I saw a very strong and pertinent letter which was addressed to the present Premier by Sir George Turner on this subject. I think Sir George sounded a very prudent key­note when he said that if this matter is settled favourably to the syndicate the probability is that Victoria will have to consider whether she i" likely to contribute her quota to the cost of administration in these islands in the future. I should be sorry if any act on the part of this colony gave umbrage or annoyance to the southern colonies, which have contributed their share manfully in the past ; and before a trans­action of such magnitude as that mentioned in the correspondence and stipulated in the Ordi­nance which has passed the legislature of New Guinea-and I am sorry to say which has been endorsed by the late Premier, and certainly not without the knowledge of the present Premier­because Sir Hugh Nelson, in his reply to the appeal of the hon. gentleman to make a report concerning this tmnsnction, stales most distinctly tbat the present Premier had full knowledge of it, as the matter had been cli~cussed with him in London.

'.rhe Prm;mmt : "\Vhat does he say?

Mr. GLASSEY: SirHughin his letter says­'rhe correspondence begins with a letter dated the

28th of :Uay, 1897, addressed to me in r.ondon by the 8ccretary of State for the Colonies. This letter was submitted by me to the Premiers o! :New South Wales ancl Victoria, as well as to yourself--

The PrtEl\!IER : Yes. Mr. GLASSEY:

and Sir Henry \Y. :Norman was also consulted respect~ ing it, although quite unoflicial!y. To the best of my

Address in Reply. [27 JuLY.] Address in Reply. 41

recollection. :ll:r. Reid took little interest in the subject, but suggestions made by Sir George Turner, Sir Henry Norman, and yourself are embodied in my reply daterl the 7th July.

The PREMIER: Yes; you see the suggestions I made.

Mr. GLASSEY: 1Ve were all of one opiniou-th:1t the matler, while

worthy of consideration, was one to be dealt with by the Administrator of the Possession, and after several personal intervwws with the promoters of the syndicate, at ooe of which you were present, I sent to the Sec­retary of State the reply dated the 7th of July. In that letter you will observe that I stated--

The PREliiiER: Just read what he stated in that letter. Don't stop short. You will find it on page 31 of the correspondence-No. 49.

Mr. GLASSEY: I must have the wrong document.

The PREnfiER : It is a Parliamentary paper. Mr. GLASSEY : At any rate Sir Hugh

makes the statement, and Mr. Lowles further makes the same statement, that the present Premier was present.

The PREl\IIEII : That I was consulted. Mr. GLASSEY : I take this clipping from

the Courier of 25th July, 1898-0ur London correspondent sends the following letters,

which appeared in the DailJJ Chronicle of 13th and 14th June, from the pen of 1lr. John Lowles, JYI.P. :-

* * * * * * 'When I further say that, prior to my departu-re from

England, the matter was submitted to the Colonial Secretary, by him referred to the Premier of Queensland -then in London-that the present Premier, Mr. Byrnes {then Attorney-General) was also consulte l.

The PrtE~IIER: He does not say what advice I gave.

Mr. GLASSEY : I say that if these state· ments are true-I do not by any means say they are true-then the present Premier is by no means blameless over this transaction. If the hon. gentleman was fully cognisant of this trans­action, and permitted it to go until there was no way of drawing back out of this huge transac­tion-one that may have dire results in the future-then he is worthy of blame. And more especially so when it is stipulated in the Ordi­nance that not only are the syndicate to have the surface, but all that is below the surface, and that for gold and silver they are t-l pay a paltry 2~ per cent. Notwithstanding the apparent completeness of the transaction, I sincerely trust that it has not gone so far that it cannot be annulled. This is not the last we shall hear of this matter during the present session, and I may say in conclusion that I should deeply regret if any action on the part of our public men should have the effect of injuring us in the eyes of the world in regard to our treatment of the people of the Pacific Islands-although they may be a savage race-or which would disturb the union which has existed between the various colonies regard­ing the administration of New Guinea and the contributions towards its cost. I fear I have spoken longer than I intended, and I sincerely thank hon. members for their patience and attention. I hope I have said nothing which may be considered personally offensive towards the hon. gentleman at the head of the Govern­m~nt. I hope he will accept what has been said in the spirit in which it was intended, and not with any view of wishing to insult him.

The PREMIER : You called me a criminal­that's all.

Mr. GLASSEY: I hope my remarks will be taken in the proper spirit-the spirit of generosity and fair play as between man and man. At the same time I wish to assure the hon. gentleman that, notwithstanding the good things he pro· mises, I have no faith in his administration, and I certainly think before he commits himself to the large expenditure_involved in the many matters

dealt with in the Speech, those matters should receive the endorsement or otherwise of the constituencies.

The HoN. G-. THORN: I do not like to see the debate closed to-night, and as I have a few observations to make I may as well make them now. I regret I cannot congratulate the hon. gentleman at the head of the Government on the composition of his Cabinet, but before dealing with that matter I will call attention to what has recently taken place in New Guinea. I consider the present would bE' an excellent opportunity­supposing the Ordinance fails -to . found. a socialistic colony in New Guinea. It 1s superiOr to Paraguay in that it is under the British flag, and I think the hon. m~n:be_r for Bunda­bero- mio-ht found a socJahstiC place of abode there for some of his friends. I am one of the few who are not op1:osed altogether to the proposals of Mr. Lowles and Sir Somers Vine, because the colonisation of New Guinea requires capital; but I seriously commend my idea to the hon. member for Bundaberg in the event of the other scheme falling to the ground. Now with regard to the formation of the Go­vernment, I must congratulate the head of the Government on his position, although I cannot altogether chip in with him on the formation of the Cabinet. There is altogether too much of the black labour element about it. I do not speak entirely for myself, but for my constituency and other constituencies in the South. People tell me that some of the members of the Cabinet are not in touch with the people. It is very wrong for members of the Government not to be in touch with the people, and I regret to think there 'is a lot of truth in the statement. The Cabinet ought to be made in touch with the people if the Premier expects tu successfully appeal to the people at the general election. Talking about the kanaka element i1_1 the G?­vernment, I noticed recently an advert1sem~nt m the aazette calling for tenders for the erectwn of baths and bathrooms for the school teachers at Mackay. I presume they want pxtra ba;ths in consequence of the number of bl:1cks m the district. I have been wondering how it was that in my electorate there were so many school teachers in opposition to the Government, and I have discovered that it is in consequence of the partiality shown by the Government towards these black men. I am afraid that m<tny sup­porters of the Government will lose their seats in consequence of certain members of the Go­vernment not being in touch with the people. With regard to the Government programme, I would ask the hon. gentleman where the money is to c<_>me from to car_ry on the s~o~. Our revenue lS not too elast1c, though 1t IS a little better than it was this time last year, but it is not sufficient to perform half or even 20 per cent. of the works promised in the Speech, unless resort is had to fresh taxation. The Treasurer stated at one meeting, when going about with the Premier, that the Government did not propose to impose any fresh taxation, .but if the Premier is to carry out the proposals m the Speech, he must resor~ to fresh taxation, ~n the land, I presume, or else he must go m for wholesale selling by auction of the public lands. Those are the only two ways in which the deficit can be met if this programme is to be carried out. vVhy, defence alone will take the increased revenue shown on the last financial year. Our defences will cost more than that if we are to defend ourselves in conjunction with the other colonies, and I may say I am a fe?-er~I­ist on the question of defence. After the md!s­creet speech made by a certain gen~leman in the House of Commons, known, I believe, as " Holy J oe," these colonies and England must he prepared to maintain a better fleet than. we have at present.

42 Address in Reply [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply.

Talking about fleets, the depised .Japanese will at the end of thiB year have a better fleet than any power in Europe, bar England, and they are the only aliies England has got tu meet the triple alliauce formed in China bv Russia, France and Germany, who have been it1-duced by t:mt speech made in the House of Com1nons to increase tb(:.ir naval outlay. l~ng­land mnst keep pace with them, and we know that one cruiser would be sufficient to blow the Australian fleet out of the water in half an hour. The time has arriYed when we should have an increase of the flee' in Au·.tralian waters, and we should have ve"sels of a better clas8 than we have at the pre3ent time, otherwise our com­merce and our h .,arths and home" will be in gre:>t clanger. That will be so unless we go actwely to work and "shell out" liherally. I have said the mvenue is not sufficient for defence purposes, to say nothing of the other measures promised in the Speech. l see the hon. gentle­man is going in for a university. That will be an­other expense, and though I would prize a uni­versity as much as a.nyone else I think we may wait another year or two for it. \V e are to get an increase in R1tilway Commi.ssioners, in having one for the North, and that means more expense. 'l'hen we are to have an Under Secretary for the Chief Secretary, when the whole of the work might be taken by the Home Secretary, as we know the Chief Secretary has only to attend to Imperial despatches; and if the Prime Minister wants a secretary he ought to pay for it out of his own pocket as was done in the pa8t. \V e know that as Attorney-General he has got least of all to do. He doe" not prosecute, as former Attorney-Generals did, but pays someone else to do the work. Again, this Speech proposes another extravagance in the shape of a mail service, without cargo, toTownsville, though why Cooktownshould not be included I do not know, But I do know that 1f you are to get a mftil senice without the right to carry cargo the country will h<tve to pay the piper to the extent of £40,000 or £50,000 a year. I do not think it. will m,lke the slightest differ­ence to ninet,v-five people out of lOO in Towns­ville to get their mo.ils in th" morning instead of in the afternoon, and the prop JSed accelerated mail service will only mean th<tt. There are only a few business people asking for this, and they can use the wires if they want quicker communication. Townsville is n<hV well served by three lines of steo.mers in addition to the .Tapanese mail steamers, but from Townwille on to the Gulf ports there might be subsidy paid for mails. In the oldpn days of the C•Jlony "teamers ran only once a week, but now they run almost daily. "iVhy should we ba saddled with ti1P expense of subsidising a line of steamero; which will not carry goods'? It will mean fresh taxation, and I wish the Government luck of the scheme. The Premier <tlso promises us an increased endow­ment to divisional boards and municipal councils. Is there any warrant for 'ohe Premier to talk about that in the Speech, unless he is going in for further taxation? I am as anxious as the hon. gentleman that local bodies should receive additional endowment, but I sa.y it ts distinctly impossible to give them an increased t>ndowment and fulfil all the rest of the promises in thi8 Speech without resorting to increased taxation. Talking about endowments, I have a scheme myself which the hon. gentleman at the !wad of the Govern­ment can take if he likes. My scheme would, I believe, get the colony out of its difficulties, and raise the value of properties to something like what it was in former years-a thing that we all want to see effected. There are properties about Brisbane and other towns in the colony which are not worth as many shillings to-clay a" they were pounds years ago. I have paid as many pounds for properties as I could only get pennies

for to-day, and there is only one way of in­creasing the V>tlue of the properties of the colony. Uoes the hon. gentleman at the head of the Government know the reason why the pres~nt depression in ~alues exists ? The papers have never said a word about it. All members of this House are <tnxious to see properties return to their old values-I do not say to the b<>nm values which they had a:t the time of the £10,000,000 loan--but to a h1gher value than they have at the present time. If that is brought about, then wages will increase, and theL·e will be more employment for the peopiP. The scheme I suggest is that the Govemm,·nt should consolidate all the debts owing by municipalities, divisions, and shires, and give them a clean sheet. They only amount to about £750,000, and the Government could borrow the money for that purpose, and then transfer the surpluses <tS a credit against that loan. \Ve have already had four years' surpluses, and those and subsequent surpluses could be applied to the extinction of the debt. 'rhen I would not allow local bodies to borrow money to the extent of more than the value of six or, at the outside, twelve months' ra.te' either from the banks or the Government. Then, all bridges on main roads should be provided for by a vote of this House. That is the case in Victoria, where every yea1· a vote for bridges comes before the House. The Brisbane bridge I would include in that, for the people in and around Brisbane ought no more to be taxed for that bridge than the pc:ople in ot~er parts of the colon:y. It was no action of thetrs that caused the bndge to be destroyed; it was the fault vf the engineer who constructed the bridge, for it ought not to have been carried away lly a flood. But all such bridges are·national highways, and should be pro­vided for by Parliament, leaving the loc<tl bodies to manage their own affairs. Adopt my scheme, and clip the wings of local authorities as much as you like, and you will see properties boom again. I know municipalities which, when valuations are reduced, stick on additional rates in the form of special loan rates or drainage rates, and so bring up their rates to a higher amount than it was before the people appealed against the valua­tions. Certainly if the present system is con­tinued it will end in confusion. There are several municipalities in the colony that are bankrupt, and a good many more that should become bankrupt, because they are still fleecing the people to an extent greater than they can bear. I know places that are rated to an amount that is equal to from 25 to 55 per cent. on the renta.l. Where <tre the expenses for repairs and insurances to con1e from when that is the case? I sav clip the wings of councillors, who are only- in for a short time, and make clucka and drakes of the money. If the Local GoYernrnent Bill is not introduced this session we certainly ought to have a Hating Bill. I hope the Government will carry out the scheme I have suggested, and take over all the debts, which, after <tll, are a mere bagatelle. Then you will have property boom again up to its accustomed pnces before the boom time, and we shall not hear of the unemployed. I am grieved to think that among certain people there is a de~ire for further taxation. I bear some people askmg for "' further land tax. I object to that altoget.her. If we are to have a land tax, let us have a land tax, but not through division<tl boards. I w<ts a! ways opposed to the Divisional 1loards Act, and I do not think the colony is ripe for it yet. I hope that this Government, or sm_ne other Government, will take my adviCe a bout consolidating the d~bts of local a.uthorities, and clipping their wings, so that they cannot go on borrowing indiscriminately. ·where is the money to come from? Our revenue

Address in lleply. [27 JuLY.] Address in lleply. 43

is not elastic enough to carry out a public works policy, and I expect that when the Treasurer makes his Financial Statement he will ask for some further taxation. \V e have heard a great deal lately about the manufacturing industries of the colony, and on this question I hold the same views as the Labour party. I h>lve always maintained that all our railway rolling-stock should be manufactured in the State workshops. If I had remained a little longer in the Govern­ment that would have been done, and instead of two towns in the colony having 15,000 inhabitants they would now have had 25,000 each.

Mr. ANNEAR: "What towns't ThA HoN. G. THORN : The to·wn the hon.

member represents-Maryborough-is one, and the town at the head of the Bremer is the other. My reason for holding the view that all the rolling-stock should be manufactured in the State shops is that there is better supervision in those establishments, and in addition to that the timber kept in stock is always seasoned. I have known trucks and carriages which have been made oatside those shops which, after running for two or three months, have had to be taken to pieces, and put together again on account of the unseasoned timber put into them, which increased the cost by 30 or 40 per cent. I believe the Premier is anxious to make all material in the colony, and I hope to see him resort to the State-shop systetn in preference to calling for tenders outside. I deprecate the action of the Government-not the action of the Secretary for Railways-the other day in giving the preference to Walkers, Limited, Maryborough. That is a most serious charge to have to make against the Government, but all the members of the Government were equally guilty-in fact, the other members were more guilty than the Secretary for Railways, who is only a young Minister. I know that he is an honest man who would do nothing wrong, and I exculpate him almost entirely over this loco­motive business. To say the least of this job, it savours a good deal of corruption. If the Go­vernment had given "\Valkers, Limited, an order for half-a-dozen locomotives at the same price as they had paid previously it would not have mattered mucn, but to give an increase of nearly .£300 per engine savours of corrup­tion of the worst kind. Hon. gentlemen who would have been guilty of such a thing in the early days of the colony would not only have been hounded ont of public life, but would have been hounded out of the colony. The only way to condone the offence is to give the other foundries half-a-dozen engines each to make at the same price. I know of my own knowledge that Evans, Anderson, and Phelan can turn out engines equally as good as thoso turned out by "\Valkers, Limited. Then there is the Phcenix foundry, the Toowoomba one, which can do good work. I am not a greedy man, and I like to see people make a little more than their bread and butter, and I would therefore suggest that the Government might make it a condition that these foundries I have mentioned should share their profits on the enginPs with their work­men. I· regret to have to say anything about Walkers, Limited, because they are an excellent lot of gentlemen who are connected with that foundry. 'Ihe Premier does not yet understand politics as well as older politicians. All the world is ruled by political villainy, and I understand all that is going on in foreign places just as well as I understand the villainy which is taking place amongst our own handful of people. "\V e shall have to go back to the kind of government that was practised in this. colony in the early days. In those days there was none of this corruption practised. Honesty ruled supreme, and I should like to see it rule supreme

again. At the same time I should like to see all people and all towns and all districts benefited by the manufacture of our own material. i\Iy views are those of the extreme protectionist, and I believe the .l:'remier is as great a protectionist as myself, although I believe he has trimmed a bit lately-I presume to please the Cou1·ier. I do not suppose the Conrie1· would give him their snppor;, if he did not make himself out a federalist, but I still believe that he is as anxious for the indus­tries of the colony to f!onriBh as I am. And here I may observe that the hon. member for Bnnda­berg asked what our boys and girls are to do? The only thing to do with them is to put them on the land, or encourage them to engage in industries, and the only way we can do that is by a judicious system of protection. I regret that a majority of the members are against such a system, owing to the strong Northern element in the House, although there is a majority of Southern members in favour of it. '.rhe hon. member for Bnnclaberg does not appear to understand the question of protection and freetrade. He seems to "run with the hare and hnnt with the hounfls " on this particular question. That is his game. I notice that it is not a plank in the platform of the Labour party. It ought to be an important plank. It is the only thing that divides parties in Anstralia-freetrade and protection-but it does not appear to divide parties here. Of course all the sugar men are freetraders. They are under the impression that when federation comes their sugar will go free into the other colonies, but I think they are making a great mistake. Federation will not pay the sugar­growers of Queensland a.s well as they think. Mr. Reid will not discriminate between sugar grown in the vVestindiesand that grown on the Herbert River or at Bundaberg. Talking about the sugar question, I have come to the conclusion that sugar-growing in Queensland is clone. At the present price of sngar it is impossible to make it profitable with either white or black labour. It cannot compete against the bounty-fed sugar, and the sooner it is chucked UJJ and the Sugar Works Guarantee Act is repealed the better. There has been a lot of money spent under that Act, and the people will be asking for. more, bnt we have experimented long enough, and the quicker we shnt up shop and ship all the kanakas back to the islands the better for all concerned. I will no longer be an ad vacate for black labour.

Mr. KEOGH: Or .Japanese? The HoN. G. THORN, The Japs are a

different people. They are nextdoor neighbours and can enforce their demands at the point of the bayonet. 'When the Sugar Worl<s Guarantee Act was passed it was intended for the encourage­ment of small men, but now we find they can get along no better than the large growers. Who is going to pay these loans back to the Govern­ment? Are the members of the Government tc, l.>e prosecuted for losing the country's money? They have as much right to be prosecuted for taking insufficient security as other persons we hear of as likely to be prosecuted. In my mind the Government have com­mitted a grave misdemeanour in this matter, and I hope, for the sake of the country, that the Act will not be allowed to remain on the statute­book. I could suggest for the North another industry which would pay far better than sugar, and which could be carried on exclusively by white labour, but I do not think I am justified in mentioning it here, although I might inform some of my friends in my own electorate. I notice a great deal has been said in the Speech about railways, and I thought we would have had something about a border railway from "\Varwick--the first link in the t'irt recta. Some

Address in Repl,y. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply.

people cavil over the starting-point, but it was settled long ago that it should start from \V arwick. I can only account for the Premier not bringing the nmtter on by the fact that he has not alt. gether made his pe:>ee with the editor of the Courwr. The C'm(1•icr does not want railways along the border. The Co·urier editor might imagine that it might have some effect on federation, an•:! I know the hon. gentle­man at the head of the Government wants to placate the J?OWerful.metropolita.n daily morning paper. A httle while ago Mr. Stanley went to the old world and America to devise a scheme for the construction of cheap farmers' lines, and I have heard the Home Secretary make three similar speeches on that one subject. There was not time to do it last session, but he prumised that this session there would be brought in a scheme for the construction of light lines in the farming centres. I tell the Government that the farming industry depends upon cheap railway communication, and I am astonished that this House has not heard mnre of the promised scheme. I think the Home Secretary should be requested to state why we have not had a few of these promised lines mentioned in the Governor's Speech, in order tha.t the best of our population may be kept on the land, and that settlement may be made profitable. I could point out districts where there is land that would employ 'thousands where hundreds are not employed now, because they could not get their produce to market without cheap railway communication of some kind.

An HONOURABLE ME~IBEH : They can give a guarantee.

The Hm;-. G. THORN :There need be no guar· antee, and even with a guarantee there is no word of such a proposal in the Speech. I ask the Government what has become of this policy? The farmers in my district and in other districts expect it. There is one district in \V est Moreton in the upper valley of the Brisbane with the finest land in Australia, hut how are the farmers there going to live without cheap railways? We want a line of r!"ilway to tap that country and to tap the agriCultural land at N anango, which will produce as fine a crop of wheat as any land on the D:wling Downs, I want to know what the Government are going to do for that district. Are they going to let the people starve or drive them off the land, because off the land they must go, as it will be impossible for them to succeed upon it unless they have cheap railway commumcation pro­vided for them? I hope it is not even now too late for the Premier or the Home Secretary to come down with some light railway scheme for the farming districts. 'l'hat will do them more good than anything else promised in the i:'lpeech, including cheap money.

Mr. GLASSJ<JY: And they have stolen that frum the Labour platform.

The HoN. G. THORK: I was always inf:wour of it. They have not stolen anything from me. You cannot steal anything from me. I regret to think with the hon. member for Cler­mont that many of these people are mortgaged up to the hilt. But I can say there is no need for the Government to find the money now, as with good security it can be got now at 5 and 6 per cent.

Mr. GLASSEY: Where? Give us an instance. I am interested, and I want to kn0w.

The HoN. G. THORN: Show me good securicy and I can get you the money for as long as you like to pay the interest. And if you have got bad security you will not get the money from a Government institution any more than from any other. We know what has been done in New South ·wales, and the amount owing by people in that way there is something enormous.

I believe nothing of that kind would be likely to take place in Queensland, as I am sure the Pre· mier, if he proposed a measure by which the Government might lend money to farmers, would take precious good care that proper men were ttppointed in connection with the institution to safeguard the interests of the State, and only those in want of a little assi5tance--not too much -would be benefited.

Mr. LEAHY: You were asking just now where the money was to come from.

The HoN. G. THORN: They could borrow the money for that. If they can borrow money under the Sugar Works Guarantee Act for the benefit of sugar-growers they can borrow it for small farmers in the same way, and with, say, £1,000,000 borrowed at 3 per cent. there is no reason why the scheme should not be self-sup· porting, and they could find out how i~ was going to work. I trust the Government Will see their way to deal with this matter at once. I am sure that with the experience gained under the i:'lugar \Vorks Guarantee Act better security would be required for the money and it would not be loaned recklessly. Another matter re­ferred to is the Mining Bill, and no person is more anxious than I am to see a proper Mining Bill passed, and one that will en­courage capital to our shores. The hon. member for Burke knows well that it is impossible for mining districts to get along without capital. No doubt a great impetus has lately been given to mining for copper and the baser metals by the Chillagoe Railway Bill passed last year, and I am proud to think I am one of those who sup· ported that Bill. I trust copper will always keep up its present value, but hon. members must remember that the baser metals are liable to come down in value. I remember when the Mount Perry line was projected copper wa• worth .£89 a ton. That line was offered to be made by private enterprise, but I was one of the greedy ones at that time, and said that if the company could afford to ma_ke ~h~ line the State could afford to doit,anrl I thmk1t IS about the only mistake I ever made, for by the time the line was finished copper had dropped from .£8!) a ton to £41 :tnd .£39 a ton. What took place then may take place again, but I hope copper will never come down again to that figure, and that those gentlemen who have taken up the Ohillagoe rail way will succeed. I wish them luck with it, and I trust we will see them or someone else come forward and propose to finish the line to Georgetown. There would be no danger in making that line, as I look upon the Georgetown field as one which will eventually be the best field in the colony as it is the biggest. It is impossible to· work it at present with the prices of provisions and labour and carriage,. and we must get capital to go there. I would not object to see Croydon connected with the east coast, and I am sure that ninety people out of every 100 there are in favour of such a line being built by private enterprise, in the same manner a,s the Chillagoe line. I also wish to see the Cloncurry line constructed, because there are copper deposits there equal to those at Chillagoe. 1 saw them in the old times, and I am sure "" line built there would be a paying speculation. I have seen blocks of almost pure copper ore cut out ; and although the Labour party are opposed to private railways, I can assure those hon. membero that the only chance there is of having that district developed is by that means. If such a line is brought for­ward it will have my hearty support, and I would deal with the promoters even more liberally than the Chillagoe syndicate were dealt with. Although I do not wish to go into the details of this Speech, there are some points I should like to touch upon, one of them being the question

Appropriation Bill No. l. [28 JuLY.]

of holding wool sales. In connection with that I should like to ask the Premier if it never struck him that the bulk of our wool is not produced at the back of Brisbane? It is pro­duced at the back of Rockhampton, and I think there is as much produced at the back of Towns­ville as there is at the back of Brisbane. I do not object to having wool sales here, but if they are established here they will have to be estab­lished at the two other places I have mentioned, becausetherearesteamers trading to the Northern port• that do not belong to Queensland, and they conYey the wool to Sydney for next to nothing. Besides that, I think the Premier will bring a hornet's-nest about his ears, because the Rock­hampton people are always like the horse-leech­they want a second edition of everything that Brisbane has. They have been very well treated by what they call the "cormorant South," but they will want wool sales there, and I think they will be entitled to that consideration, The only way in which the Government will be able to work the affair will be to connect the Southern line with the Central line, and bring the wool here, so thP.t the Central growers will be on a par with the growers in the South. I hope the Premier will not give these people another oppor­tunity to talk about Southern greeil and Southern rapacity; but it is my desire that these sales should be successful here as they are in New South Wales. In regard to federation I have not heard the last returns, but I have no doubt that the parties will be evenly balanced.

Mr. STEW AUT: The majority is against it at preBent.

The HoN. G. THORN: I know Rockhampton is anxious for federation, but I am not anxious for it on the lines of Mr. Barton's Bill. However, if Mr. Reid gets in we shall hear no more about it, and the Premier will be able to go back to 'Warwick and tell the people there that he is still a provincialist, which will please them, because all the farmers in the district are against federation. The Premier has promised a great deal of legislation in this Speech, and I hope that more of it will be carried out than has been the rule in the past. I congratulate the GoYern­ment upon the Premier's accession to office, beca,use I am sure that he will safeguard the interests of the colony, even if the Federal party get into power in New South Wales. We have a lot to lose by federation, ani! I am sure the Premier will not see the colony injured in any way. I shall support the motion.

Mr. KIDSTON: I move the adjournment of the debate.

Question put and passed ; and the resumption of the debate was made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

APPROPRIATION BILL No. 1. The SPEAKER announced the receipt of ~,

message from the Council, returning this Bill without amendm€nt.

The House adjourned at half-past 10 o'clock.

Questions. 45