2038 lYeglected Child1'en. [ASSEMBLY.] Postal Department.

a system of boards-of buffers, as I called them on a previous occasion-and this board will be a new buffer. In fact, if Parliament goes on creating these board9, it does not appear that there will be very much left for Parliament itself to do by­and-by.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT.-Oh yes, there will be plenty for Parliament to do.

The Hon. D. MEL VILLE.-'V ell , we have created a Harbour Tl'llst, a Hailway Board, a Public Service Board, and a Public Health Board already, and now we are to have n. Metropolitan Board of. Works. All these boards are spending the money of the ratepayers, and increasing the burden of taxation which the people of Victoria will find intolerable in the <lays to come.

The motion for the second reading of the Bill was agreed to.

The Bill was then read a second time and committec1JJ1'o forma.

The House adjourned at ten o'clock.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. Tuesday, Octobe1', 14,1890.

Neglected Children - Postal Department: Leave of Absence: Telegraph Opera,tors-Fire Brigades Bill­Public Instruction: Mr. H. R. Tilt - H ansard­Supply: MI'. R. T. Curr: Proposed Public Prosecutor: Additional Magistrates - Local Gove1'llment Act Amendment Bill-Railways Standing' Committee.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER took the chair at half-past four o'clock p.m.

NEGLEOTED OHILDREN.

Mr. ARMYTAGE asked the Ohief Secretary the following questions:-

"1. If his attention has been called to the earnest representation of the S,ecretary of the department of Neglected Children and Re­formatory Schools that 'the inadvisability of sending to gaol any offenders who are within the reformatory age, except for very grave offences, . . . . be urged on the attention of magistrates' ?

"2. How many of the 24 children under the age of ten, and of the 108 between the ages of ten and fifteen, who were confined in gaol in 1889, were so transferred?'"

Mr. DEAKIN said that his attention had been called to the representations re­ferred to. There were 23 children, not 24, under the age of ten received at the gaols during 1889. None of them were trans­ferred to a reformatory, and with the

exception of one, who was discharged OIl' the payment of a fine, none were convicted. On again appearing before the magistrates they were finally discharged. Of the 108 children between the ages of ten and fifteen received into the gaols, six only were trans­ferred to a reformatory. Probably very many of them were sent to gaol on remand~ but to give the particulars of each case would necessitate a lengthened and laborious search through the books of the several gaols for the year. The Inspector-General had given instructions that for the future the particulars relating to eVery juvenile offender received into a gaol should be specially reported to l1im, so that the infor­mation might be readily available at any time.

Mr. ZOX remarked that when the Oharities Oommission visited the institution at the Royal-park the other day they found some few neglected children who had been convicted of offences lodged with a number of neglected children who were untainted by crime. Would the Ohief Secretary take steps to keep the two classes of children separate in future?

Mr. DEAKIN said that it was not the practice of the department to lodge neglected children who had been convicted with ne­glected children who had not been co"nvicted. (Mr. Zox-" I can assure you we found them together when we went to Royal­park.") He would inquire into the case alluded to by the honorable member. The practice of the department was to transfer the children who had committed offences to a reformatory.

POSTAL DEPARTMENT.

Mr. PARFITT asked the Postmaster­General whether any regulation existed in his department that precluded heads of the various branches from granting leave of absence on verbal application in cases of emergency, such as that of the late Peter McKeone; and, if so, would he cause such I:egulation to be cancelled?

Mr. DEAKIN (in the absence of Mr. PATTERSON) said he had received from the Deputy Postmaster-General the. following answer to the question of the honorable member :-

"No such regulation exists. Heads of branches may, in cases of emergency, grant leave of absence to officers on verbal application. The result of the inquest held as to the cause of the death of the late Peter McKeone showed that the death could not be attributed to the fact of his having been refused leave."

Public InstTtlcti'on. [OCTOBER 14.J Mr. R. T. CWT. 2039

Mr. MURRAY asked the Postmaster­General the following questions :-

"1. 'When will the illcrements due to tele­graph operators since last November be paid?

"2. Is it a fact that operators were called upon to pass un examination in practical and theoretical telegraphy, and by whom was such examination authorized?

" 3. Have junior operators been recommended for promotion over the heads of their seniors?

"4. Why has the agreement between the Postmaster-General and the operators, viz., one·fourth of the whole number employed to be placed in the 4th class, not been carried out?"

Mr. DEAKIN (in the absence of Mr. PATTERSON) said the Deputy Postmaster­General had furnished the following answers to the questions put by the honorable member:-

"1. 'When approved of by the Public Service Board.

"2. Yes; authorized l)y the Acting Post­master-General and the Public Service Board.

"3. Yes; if they have passed the better examination.

"4. No such agreement is known to exist. The regulations of the public service provide that not more than one fourth of the whole number of operators shall be placed in the 4th class."

FIRE BRIGADES BILL.

Mr. ZOX asked the Chief Secretary when it was the intention of the Government to proceed with the Fire Brigades Bill now before Parliament?

Mr. DEAKIN stated that it was the intention of the Government to proceed with the Fire Brigades Bill on the first opportunity-he hoped as soon as the Local Government Act Amendment Bill had been dealt with.

PUBLIC INSTRUCTION.

Dr. MALONEY asked the Minister of Public Instruction if he had any objection to place on the table of the Library all papers connected with the enforced retirement of H. R. Tilt, truant officer, from the public service?

Dr. PEARSON stated that the Educa­tion department had no papers of any importance connected with the enforced retirement of the truant officer in question. A complaint against Mr. Tilt was made by the Footscray Board of Ad vice, and the papers went direct to the Public Service Board, who Ileard and decided the case. If the Premier were asked, no doubt he would obtain the papers from the board.

HANSARD. Dr. MALONEY asked the Chief Secre­

tary if he would obtain a report of the

New South Wales system of parliamentary reporting, and so facilitate by their expe­rience any alteration in the present mode of conducting Hansa1yl? He was informed that parliamentary reporting was carried on in a far more satisfactory manner in New South Wales than here, and much advantage might be gained by profiting from the experience of the sister colony.

Mr. DEAKIN said he would have pleasure in obtaining the information which the honorable member desired.

MELBOURNE GAOL.

Mr DEAKIN, in compliance with an order of the House (dated September 3),. presented a return showing the number of warders employed at the Melbourne Gaol.

NOXIOUS TRADES.

Mr. DEAKIN, in pursuance of aTh order of the House (dated September 18),. presented a return of the number of slaughter-houses, fellmongel'ies, &c., within ten miles of Melbourne, drained into the­Yarra or the Saltwater rivers.

MUNICIPAL ENDOWMENT.

Mr. GILLIES, in compliance with an order of the House (dated October 7), pre-· sented a return showing the shires which have received subsidy at the rate of £3 to £1 during the last ten years.

SUPPLY.

The resolutions passed in Committee of Supply on October 9 were taken into con­sideration.

MR. R. T. CURRo

Sir B. O'LOGHLEN called the atten-­tion of the Solicitor-General to the in­adequacy of the pension granted to l\fr. Curr, a clerk in the Attorney-General's department, on 11is retirement from the public service. According to the principle on which pensions were granted when he· (Sir B. O'Loghlen) was in office, and in the time of other Attorney-Generals, Mr. Curr was entitled to a more liberal pension ..

Mr. DEAKIN stated that the papers connected with this case came under his personal notice only a day or two ago. He found that the Attorney-General had given an opinion adverse to Mr. Curr's claim; but since then Mr. Curr had pointed out one precedent, which he urged would have materially affected the Attorney-General's decision. Rather than review the opinion

:2040 Local Gove1'1unent [_A.SSEMBL Y.] Act Amendment Bill.

of his honorable colleague, however, he -(Mr. Deakin) would prefer to wait until his return from England. The precedent pointed out by Mr. Curl' would then be brought under the notice of the Attorney­·General, who would reconsider the case.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN remarked that -some considerable time would elapse before the Attorney-General returned from Eng­land, and as the matter was a very simple -one, he would ask the Solicitor-General to deal with it in the light of the facts or pre­cedents which had been discorered by the claimant since the case was dealt with. Mr. ·Curr was now in his sixtieth year; he had been thirty years in the public service, he was in receipt of a very small pension, some £60 or £70 a year, and the point at issue involved only an additional £15 or £20 ,per year.

Mr. DUFFY said it was nothing but the modesty of the Solicitor-General that made the honorable gentleman diffident :about dealing with this case. It was a very simple matter, however, and there was only -a small amount at stake, although it was a very great consideration to Mr. Curl'. He trusted that the Solicitor-General would [ook into the facts of the case, and that if he was satisfied an injustice had been done to this old and deserving public officer, the Government would grant the increased pension which was claimed. In any case he begged the honorable gentleman to d~al with the matter at once, because speedy In­

justice in such a case was very often b.ett~r than justice delayed. It would be a pIty If this matter was set aside until the old man had passed away.

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.

Capt. TAYLOR drew attention to an item of £1 500 for a public prosecutor, and observed th'at it was asserted in the Age that no such office existed.

Mr. DEAKIN stated that it was pro­posed to create such an appointment, but it would nof be made until the Attorney­General returned to the colony.

MAGISTRATES.

Mr. L. L. SMITH inquired if the 'Government had taken into consideration the urgent necessity for the appointment of additional justices of the peace?

Mr. DEAKIN said he had called the attention of the Minister of Justice to the matter.

The resolutions were adopted.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

The debate on Mr. Anderson's motion fOL' the second reading of this Bill (ad­journed from October 8) was resumed.

Mr. BENT expressed the opinion that Parliament was now in a position to classify the shires in such a manner that, instead of the present inequitable apportionment of the subsidy, each particular shire would get the sum to which it was entitled. Take what had been called the rich city of Colling­wood. Among the people living in that city were men earning 7 s. or 89. a da.y, who had paid high prices for their land, and had now to pay high rates, and surely they were as much entitled to receive subsidy on the basis of their taxation as the people of Croajingolong. As to Footscray, there was a road from North Melbourne railway sta­tion to the Saltwater River, which must take a very large proportion of the rates to keep it in repair, and yet .the people W~lO used it did not pay a penny 111 rates. Agam, on the road from the Elsternwick Hotel to the Plough and Harrow, a distance of several miles, he did not think the rates would total £300 a year; on the road to Mordialloc, a distance of, say, ten miles, the total rates would not be £1,000 a year, and yet t.he whole of that road had to be maintained for the benefit of the traffic beyond. In such cases, instead of a subsidy on the basis set forth in the Bill, Parliament ought to provide for uniformity. As to the q.uestion of auditors, he could only say that m most of the districts the auditors were first-class officials, and there were fewer faults to be found with local government accounts than with any other public acc0un~s in Victoria. There was ample superVI­sion under the present system. The rate collector sent in his statement, the town clerk or some other responsible officer checked it, and in addition to that there was the supervision of the financ? com­mittee. He could not see the shghtest necessity, therefore, for making more Go­vernment billets. It was true that under the existing system the auditors, especially the Government auditors, "strung it out" somewhat; but if there was a good man in the Public Works department to see that those officers did a fair day's work, much vexation and trouble would be prevented. According to this Bill, twe.lve newaud.it?l's were to be appointed; but, If that prOVISIon was allowed to pass it would simply result in the appointment of many of the present

Local Government [OCTOBER 14.] A.ct Amendment Bill. 2041

men at a higher rate of salary. As to tbe voting clauses of tbis Bill, he objected altogetber to the manufacture of "pocket­handkerchief " votes. The municipal elec­tions, especially in the suburbs, were not decided by the residents, but by people from a distance who had not even a kerosene tin on their allotments, and who had not paid their rates. Plural voters could not get all over the colony at a general election of Members of Parliament, but they could get all round the suburbs to vote in municipal elections. It was more difficult for a man who was really entitled to be on the muni­cipal roll to get on than for a man who was not entitled to be on the roll. This Bill ought to be remitted to a commission who should sit during the recess,alld bring up something like a consolidating measure. Honorable members would observe a little special legis­lation in the Bill, in clause 3, which gave power to take portions of several munici­palities and constitute them a new munici­pality. That must be one of the Premier's proposals, it was so intensely political. Under that clause the fringes of several dis­tricts could be taken and made into a new district, although the interests of the various parts of the new municipality might not llave anything in common. There was a proposition, Bot very long ago, to take four pieces from as many municipalities, and make a new municipality. In one case the municipality was to be cut off near the walls of the town hall; but one of the men who so warmly ad vocated that proposal had been returned to a different council, and he was now against the project altogether. That, as he had said, was done for political pur­poses solely, and the Premier would do anything for the political faction to which he belonged. (Mr. Anderson-" It has to be done by the ratepayers themselves, if it is done at all.") The Minister of Public Works had just hazarded an interjection which showed that he knew nothing at all about the matter. It was a special case, done for the purposes of one particular district, and the same thing might occur in other districts. Another question be wanted to ask was, why, when a ward was subdivided, should all the councillors have to go out? Councillors were deterred from voting for desirable sub-divisions because it bad the effect of clearing them all out. There was nothing in the Bill to prevent that, although such a provision was promised. Tben, again, he took exception to the clause which provided that a house could not be built on a road less than 50 feet wide, no regard

whatever being paid to surrounding cir.· cumstances. A width of 33 feet was ample for a short thoroughfare. The Government could not expect to carry this Bill in its present crude shape. How was the subsidy going to be fixed? As a matter of fact,. the shires which were supposed to get £3· for every £1 would not get that amount; the £2 to £1 shires would not get £1 lOs. to £1; and altlwugh the Bill provided that subsidy was to be paid on rates up to £2,000,. no municipality would get it on more than £1,200. The Government would not be able to find the money, and within the next two or three months they would have to go­to the banks for £80,000 or £90,000. His own opinion was that they should throw out this Bill. He understood tbat the h'auer of the Opposition had moved that the­Bill be read a. second time "this day six months." (Mr. Mnnl'o-" You did not second it; no one seconded iL") Perhaps he was not in the cha.m ber at the timE'. Ho would be prepared to second such an amend­ment now. The honorable member for St. Kilda had given notice of a large number­of amendments, and no doubt they would improve the measure; but the Bill was like· the Irishman's gun-it wanted a new lock, stock, and barrel. It was not a Local Government Bill at all. He presumed that all the Minister of Public Works reallv wanted to dispose of was the question of the subsidy, because as to the rest of the Bill it was altogether so crude that it seemed like a waste of time to try to make it anything like a proper measure. He­would like to· support the Bill out of old friendship for the Minister of Public Works,. but really it was such a wretched abortion that when it came to be worked the people­would blame anyone who had anything to do with passing it.

Mr. MASON stated tbat this measure­very largely concerned the constituents whom he represented, and he might say at once that he intended to ask the House to be generous to those shires which had been receiving £3 to £1 of general rates collected, and not to deprive them of their­present means of carrying on their business. A few weeks ago, when the Country Tram­ways Committee took evidence at Traralgon,. they were informed that it would be abso­lutely impossible to carryon the system of local government under the Act unless the shires receiving £3 to £1 continued to get tbe same consideration as they were given at the present time. So far as the Bill before the House was concerned, there

2042 Local Gove1'nment [ASSE.l\IBL Y.] Act Amendment Bill.

appeared to be about four principles in it, and to his mind everyone of those principles was wrong. The only clause in which he -could see any particular benefit was clause 3. He disagreed with the honorable member for Brighton as to this clause, because it would certainly enable outskirts of districts to form themselves into municipalities, and it was well known that the outskirts of shires were the portions least thought of from a local government point of view. It would, therefore, be an advantage to them to be able to form themselves into municipalities; and carryon business for themselves. As to clause 12, referring to the appointment of certificated engineers, he would point out that when the Public Service Act was passed, Parliament recognised the .claims of all officers in the service, and they 'were classified under that Act. Now it would be a great hardship for persons who had ,been holding positions as shire engineers for 'many years for them to be deprived of their office, simply because they had been unfortu­nate enough not to have passed an exami­nation and obtained a certificate. The local -bodies in his district had perhaps the most highly qualified engineers of any local bodies in the colony, so that in this matter he was not speaking on their behalf; at the same time he thought it would be very harsh to old engineers who had rendered able service to deprive them of their position because they ·did not hold a certificate. In the country ·districts a good practical engineer was just as valuable in many instances as a highly qualified university engineer, and therefore he thought this clause would not commend itself to the House. Clause 28, relating to the auditing, appeared to him to be intended to punish poor local bodies. According to ,this Bill, the payment for auditing was to be based upon the amount of subsidy received by the local body. In the city of South Melbourne, for instance, which had a revenue ·of £50,000 a year, there would be much more auditing work than in the case of a shire whose revenue was only £5,000 or £6,000 a year; but the poor shire would, under this Bill, have to pay much more for its audit than the wealthy city. This seemed a very ·stupid system, and he thought the Govern­ment would see the necessity for recasting -the clause altogether. If the Government bad proposed to appoint the auditors, pay them a fixed salary, and deduct the amount of their salaries from the total endowment .of £450,000, he should have understood it; but he could not see the wisdom of charging

Mr. Mason.

the local bodies in proportion to the amount of subsidy they received. Clauses 46 to 49 seemed to be designed to deprive any of the public who might meet with an accident of any right to cempensation from the local body. If a man was injured in consequence of a badly-made road, an ill.-constructed bridge, or some hole or gully perhaps created by a contractor, these clauses would almost prohibit him from taking proceed­ings against the local body. They deprived a man of his common law rights. He had to give notice within a certain number or days to the local body or the kind of accident he had suffered from, and to undergo medi­cal examination by a doctor appointed by the local body. He (Mr. Mason) thought these were most improper provisions, and that if local bodies did not keep their roads and bridges in proper condition, they should be liable for any accident that occurred. (Mr. Wheeler - "They are the best clauses in the Bill.") He did not think so, and he was entirely opposed to them. Why should local bodies be pro­tected in this way against paying moneys which were justly due to any person who was injured through the default of the local body? The result or such provisions would be that the local bodies would become careless and indifferent to the public safety. For his own part, he would not only hold the local bodies responsible, but he would hold the shire engineers responsible for any accident that occurred through their neglect. Shire secretaries were to be held responsible under the Bill for keeping their accounts correctly,and why should not shire engineers be held responsible for carrying out works in a proper manner. (Mr. Keys-" Sup­pose the councils won't give them the money?") He was speaking of the care­lessness of engineers in such cases, for instance, as not putting a lamp at night on an unfinished work. It was unfair to hold the local body responsible in such cases, and allow the engineer to escape scot free. He now cameto the question of endowment. Two local bodies ·in his district had been receiving for some considerable time a sub­sidy of £3 for £1, but he might state that in the total of their receipts they had obtained far less money from the State than many of the suburban local bodies of Melbourne. He knew the House was too generous not to deal fairly with those local bodies which were struggling against great difficulties, and he had no intention of quarrelling with honorable members on the subject of the endowment which had been

Local Government [OCTOBER 14.J Act Amendment Bill. 2043

received by other municipalities. At the same time, if he went into details he could show that many local bodies-notably some in the Ministerof Public Works' own district -had drawn from £120,000 to £200,000 of the public moneys, as against £25,000 or £30,000 which had been received by the £3 to £1 shires. While the position of all the other local bodies-cities, towns, boroughs, and ordinary shires-was being improved under this Bill to a considerable extent, the position of the shires which had been receiving £3 to £1 was being injured. They were losing about one-third of the subsidy they had been in the habit of getting, and they were going to lose it suddenly. If this sudden loss of subsidy was carried out, the local bodies in Gipps­land would be very considerably injured. They had been preparing their public works schemes in accordance with the subsidy they had been receiving for several years past, and it would be a very serious thing for them to lose one-third of that subsidy immediately. The Bill was very misleading, because it gave people to understand that certain local bodies would receive £3 to £1, and others £2 to £1, whereas, as a matter of fact, the local bodies now getting £3 6s. to £1 would only get £ 1 17 s. 6d. or £1 18s., while those local bodies which had been getting £2 to £1 would only getting £1 6s. under this Bill. To show the difficulties which local bodies had to contend with in his district, he might mention that he wrote to a carrier there the other day asking what he would charge for <:onveying cert.ain material, and his reply was that he would convey it for £4 per tori for a distance of eight miles. He (Mr. Mason) knew of other cases in which it would cost £1 per ton per mile to convey produce from where it was grown to the nearest railway station. It was entirely im­possible for settlers to live in Gippsland without the extra subsidy which was now given to the municipalities. He did not blame honorable members for trying to get as much of the £450,000 for their con­stituents as they could, but he hoped they would see the fairness of not withdrawing immediately from such local bodies as those he represented one-third of the subsidy they had been receiving for the last eight or ten years. (Mr. Turner-" How do you propose to arrange it ?") He thought it would be the duty of the Government, outside tbis Bill altogether, to do justice to those dis­tricts whicb were now receiving £3 to £1. The difficulty might be got over in that

manner without int.erfering with those hon­orable members whose districts were no doubt clamouring just as much as his own for their portion of the subsidy. He did not want to interfere with those districts, but he hoped honorable members would consider tbe position bis constituents were in-many of them on selections in the midst of dense scrub, and with nothing but a narrow pack­track to travel on. Under the circum­stances, he thought it was not fair for the Government to bave made the proposal they had made. The endowment proposal was really the only feature in the Bill. As to the rest of the measure, he believed that the present system of auditing was better than that proposed. It would be utterly impossible for twelve auditors to audit the accounts of all the local bodies throughout the country, and he regarded the proposal as simply the thin end of the wedge towards increasing the public expenditure by the appoir..tment of additional auditors by-and­by. . There had been no scandals in !lonnexion wit,h municipal funds, and he Lad heard no complaints or the present system of audit. The new system would press more heavily on the poor local bodies than on the wealthy municipalities where there was five times as much auditing work to be done, while they would only have to pay one­fifthof the amount required from poor shires. He thought that an easy way out of the difficulty as to the distribution of the en­dowment would be to increase the amount of the subsidy to £500,000. This would enable the Government to meet the require­ments of the £3 to £1 shires, and also satisfy All the other local bodies. The extra £50,000 would make up the subsidy desired by the former, and then the other local bodies could get the benefit of the distribution or the whole £450,000. On the whole, he would like to vote against the second reading of the Bill, as his consti­tuents would be in a much better position by things remaining as they were; but he saw that it was hopeless to look for its rejection. He would remind honorable members that there were settlers in Gipps­land from all parts of the colony, and that it was necessary for Gippsland to flourish in the interests of the cities and towns of the colony, because a large portion of the supplies came from that district. Gippsland contained coal, tin, gold, timber, and almost every mineral; and be hoped the House would assist him in obtaining greater justice for the settlers there. The representatives of Gippsland had not objected to the

2044 Local GO'l,'e1'nment [ASSEMBL Y.] Act Amendment Bill.

expenditure on irrigation in the northern portions of the colony, although they did not require irrigation themselves, and the expenditure assisted to bring about com­petition with them in their produce. He hoped, therefore, that honorable members would see the fairness of granting greater consideration to the local bodies in Gippsland, which were urgently in need of roads, being comparatively speaking without railway communication. He did not contend that other districts were getting more than they were entitled to, but that the local bodies in his district and others similarly situated were getting less than they were entitled to, and he intended to ask the House to remedy this injustice.

Mr. LAURENS said it was not his intention to say much about the Bill at this stage. He had noticed that the interest in the Bill, as far as the debate had gone, had been centred in the question of endowment, and not improperly so, because he was not aware that there had been anything like a fixed rule applied to the distribution of the endowment since the expiration of the five years provided for in the Local Government Act of 1874. The distribution of the endow­ment had been provided for by an annual vote, which formerly amounted to £310,000, but which had now been increased to .£450,000. It was naturally a matter of great interest to determine in what manner this large amount should be distributed amongst the various municipalities through­out the colony. This was a question of moment, no matter from what point of view it was regarded-whether from the point of view of the country generally, or from the point of view of those shires which had been for some years receiving £3 to £1, without suffering any ra.teable reduction in common with the other municipalities when it had been found that the amount available would not meet the proportion which was nominally payable to the different municipalities. He desired to say a few words on this occasion in snpport of what he considered the quali­fied claims, at all events, of the municipali­ties around Melbourne. He would say very little of Melbourne proper. There was no doubt that the city corporation of Melbourne was comparatively a wealthy body, but there were municipalities around Melbourne which were not equally wealthy-wllO llad not £50,000 or £60,000 a year coming in from market dues, &c. Some honorable members had spoken as if the suburban municipalities had no manner of right to claim any share of the subsidy at all. If

it was a question, for the first time, of raising the issue as to whether the Govern­ment should assist the municipalities in the shape of an annual endowment, he would say that the metropolitan municipalities ought certainly to be the last to raise the cry or to submit a claim. But this was not the state of things. The position they had to deal with was, that it was: provided that £450,000 should be annually applied to the purpose of subsidizing the various munici­pali~ies of the colony, and, under these cir­cumstances, surely it would not be fair to exclude entirely those municipalities in and around Melbourne which, in the matter of revenue, contributed the most towards pro­viding that subsidy. And it was only the crurribs, so to speak, that those munici­palities sought. They did not seek to get £3 to £1 of rates collected, they did not; seek to get £2 to £1, and they did not seek even to get £1 to £1. Hitherto, they had been satisfied with about Is. 9d. and Is. 10d. in the £1, and he asked would it be fair, in face of the large amount con­tributed by the population of 400,000 or 500,000 people in and around Melbourne, to exclude them entirely from sharing even to the extent of the little crumbs now re­ceived by the metropolitan municipalities? What were the facts of the case? Take the shires which received £3 to £1. What had been given for the land in those shires? The bulk of it had been selected at £1 per acre, payable over twenty years. The case was very different with the land which had been purcbased from the Crown in and around Melbourne. Again, what was the average of the rating in the sllires through­out the colony? The average was Is. in the £1, whereas the municipalities around Melbourne had rated themselves on th!3 average to the extent of Is. 7d. or Is. 8d. in the £1. Honorable members heard about the wealthy municipalities around Melbourne, but if those municipalities were so wealthy and did not want anything in the shape of local improvement, how came it that they had rated themselves at nearly double what some of the shires had rated themselves at? In some shires the rate was only 9d. in the £1.' Then what about the valuations? The valuation in and around Melbourne was based upon probably a value of £10,000 or £20,000 an acre, whereas in many of the shires the valuation was only £3, £4, £5, £10, or at the most £20 per acre. In face of such facts, was it right to argue that the suburban municipalities sllOuld be

Local Government [OCTOBER 14.J Act Amendment Bill. 2045

altogether excluded from the subsidy? He said certainly not. Again, there was the poin t that in the suburbs or Mel­bourne the cottage owned by the working man was valued at a comparatively high figure and a high rate paid on that valuation, although the house brought nothing to the owner, and simply provided him with a home. On the other hand, the broad acres in the country shires, which were valued at a comparatively low figure, were supposed to produce much to their owners. Of course the more they produced the better, and he did Dot wish to be understood for a moment as desiring to undervalue the claims of the shires in the country districts. That was not his object-his object was simply to show that it would be very unfair to take up the position of entirely excluding the towns and cities around Melbourne from any part of the municipal subsidy. The revenue of the city of Melbourne itself was very large, but some of the suburban muni­cipalities were anything but wealthy. For instance there was the municipality of Footscray, which was a' poor struggling town subjecting itself to a 2s. rate. One glaring anomaly and injustice with w hieh the House had to deal was the fact that some municipalities, not far from Mel­bourne, were improperly receiving an undue share of the municipal endowment. He referred more especially to Mal vern and Caulfield. Those municipalities continued to be shires. The distinction of being a borough or a town had no attraction to them as against the £6,000 or £8,000 they received out of the municipal endowment. Malvern had an annual valuation of about £200,000. North Melbourne had an annual valuation of £174,000. Therefore, Malvern had stronger claims to be made a town than had North Melbourne, and yet North Melbourne received only £900 out of the municipal endowment, whilst Malvern re­ceived from £6,000 to £8,000. (Mr. C. Young-" Has not Malvern a much larger area than North Melbourne ?") He was not speaking of area, but of valuation. Mal­vern was inhabited by wealthy people, anu North Melbourne was a working-class district. Such districts as Malvern should not be allowed to remain shires any longer; and he trusted that a provision would be inserted in the Bill dealing with this subject. A great deal had been said about the system of auditing the accounts of the munici­palities which was proposed in the Bill. The Minister of Public Works, who was an old councillor, had probably very little to

SES. 1890.-7 F

do with the drafting of this Bill, but the honorable gentleman, mnst know that under the principal Act there were only four weeks allowed from the 30th Sep­tember, the time of closing the books, for the auditing of the accounts. (Mr. Turner-" Six weeks.") Six weeks to the annual meetings, but the principal Act pro­vided that the accounts should be published a fortnight before the annual meetings. Therefore, he was correct in !:aying that the accounts were supposed to be audited with­in a period of about four weeks. That a.p­plied to the whole of the 190 municipalities throughout the colony, and how would it be possible, if such a. provision were allowed to remain on the statute-book, to carry out the audit as proposed in this Bill during so short a space of time? It would simply be impossible. He asked the town clerk of North Melbourne that morning how the accounts of that municipality stood on the 30th September last, and his reply was that the accounts were not ready for the auditors yet. Twelve men could not possibly do the work of auditing the accounts of the whole of the municipalities in four weeks. (Mr. Turner-" That is not in­tended.") Then, what were the auditors for? (Mr. Turner-" They might begin their work at the beginning of the year.") If the auditors were to be allowed to audit the accounts of each municipality at any time that was convenient, the provision in the principal Act to which he had referred should be repealed, but this Bill diel not provide for that. With regard to the engineers, he favoured the view which had been expressed by several honorable mem­bers, that there were gentlemen connected with the municipalities who Wfre perhaps better fitted to oversee ordinary municipal work than were some professional engineers. He questioned very much whether it would be wise to make a cast-iron rule on this subject. Of course, training and education were very desirable, and the best accomplishments were not too great to be brought into the service of the municipalities. At the same time there was such a thing as practical knowledge as against mere clerical and routine knowledge. This Bill provided that. no officer of a muni­cipal council should fill the position of both treasurer and town clerIc That appeared to be a very plausible proposal, and honorable members were told that it would not involve any increased expense. The latter view was entirely erroneous. Unless each munici­pality had a treasurer, as the city of Mel­bourne had, whose time was devoted entirely

2046 Local Government [ASSEMBLY.] Act Amendment Bill.

to the duties of his office, and who received a salary or from £500 to £800 a year, such an officer would be of very little use. At one time "the North Melbourne council paid a bank manager £10 a year for acting as treasurer; but all he did was to receive the money that was brought to him, and he knew no more about the accounts than the Emperor of Russia. He could understand why the man who received the bulk of the money of, a municipality should not be treasurer; but he did Hot see any harm in a town clerk being treasurer, as was the case in North Melbourne. As far as he knew, very little mischief had arisen from the arrangement' which had hitherto been adopted by the municipalities. This Bill also provided for the making of separate drainage rates, and gave power to borrow for the purposes of drainage. He supposed that that provi­sion was a good one. At any rate, it would not affect the municipaliLy with which he was connected in the slightest degree. He did not know of any spot or place in North Melbourne which the local council could with propriety drain at the cost of any particular individual or individuals; but

,the condition of things might not be the same in some of the shires. A new feature was introduced in the Bill with regard to the privileges of the ratepayers in reference to loans. Under the law as it now stood, twenty ratepayers could demand a poll, and they could do so with compara­tive immunity tu themselves, even though they might not have the slightest chance of obtaining a majority of votes. It wa.s wise that a check should be put on the ratepayers in reference to such matters by insisting on a deposit being paid when a poll was demanded, just as candidates for election to Parliament had to pay a deposit at their nomination. About the right of an owner to appeal against valuations there was a difficulty also, and it would be right to do what this Bill proposed, namely, to place owners in a proper position. The owners were ultimately responsible for the ra t!'~, although their property was occupied by IJther persons, who ordinarily paid the rates, and it should be made clear that they had a right of appeal against valuations. With reference to the mode of paying for the audit, he had nothing to complain of, because it was favorable to the larger municipalities. (Mr. Bent-" That is not a fair view to take.") It was almost neces­sary that it should ue more favorable to the larger lllunicipalitie5, such as that with

lJIr'. Laurens.

which he was connected, because hitherto the cost of the audits to them had been somewhat oppressive. Some of the auditors had taken thirty days to audit the accounts, and they had to be paid from £3 to £4 a day. He believed that the honorable member for St. Kilda stated that it took the auditors 28 days to audit the accounts of the municipality or St. Kilda. (Mr. Turner-" Yes.") The municipal council of North Melbourne had no objection to the system proposed, because it would afford them some relief in regard to an expenditure which made a big hole in their slender resources. There was only one other point to which he wllUld refer at the present stage; that was, that it was provided in this Bill for the first time that unoccupied lands might be subjected to a valuation of only 3 per cent. He looked upon that proposal as being entirely unne­cessary. The view he took of the matter was that unoccupied lands in the cities and towns should be occupied, and that pressure should rather be brought to bear upon the owners of such lands to compel them to build upon them. He did not know what the opinion of the country members would be about the reduction of the rates in respect of unoccupied lands, but it did not appear to him that there was much merit in the proposal. To say that a property worth £100 should be valued at 5 per cent. was surely a moderate enough demand. If a property wac$ worth £1,000, the valuation at 5 pel' cent. would be £50, and if a Is. rate was struck the amount the owner would have to pay would not be a large contri­bution to the improvement of the roads in the shire or district. He would be inclined to oppose any red uction of the valuation. He did not know whether this Bill was to be referred to a select committee 01' not. (Mr. Tllrner-" That proposal has been dropped.") He was glad to hear it. He did not agree with the honorable member for Brighton, that the Bill ought to be laid aside. On the contrary, he thought it was a measure which deserved the best atten­tion of honorable members.

Mr. T., SMITH said that he must express surprise that the debate upon this Bill had not been listened to by a larger number of honorable members. It might fairly have been assumed that the question of local government would have engaged the attention of honorable members. There were a' large number of ex-councillors in the House, who had had a great deal to do with the working of the complicated Local Government Acts of the colony, and they

Local Government [OCTOBER 14.J Act Amendment Bill. 20:1:7

might have been expected to display some little interest in this measure. Up to the present time, however, that had not been the case. Remembering what local govern­ment had done in Victoria, and remember­ing that this colony was far ahead of many of the older countries of the world in regard to local government, there was reason to wonder, also, that this Bill should have been introduced at so late a stage in the session. Sucl, a measure deserved to have been considered at the beginning of the session, and not at the end of it. But this was not tIle kind of measure that honorable members had been looking for. The country had been led to expect, and had been promised, a Local Government Bill of a thoroughly comprehensive nature, and one that would have met the requirements of the colony for a few years, at any rate. But this was not a comprehensive Bill; it was a mere skeleton. If honorable mem­bers passed it as it stood, they would make a yery small ad vance indeed in the direction in which they desired to go. The Bill did not touch many important questions, and it certainly kept clear of nearly all the sugges­tions which had Leen offered by the muni­cipal conferences. (Mr. Anderson-" No.") It kept clear of most of the suggestions that had been made by the municipal con­ferences, or, at any rate, of the suggestions made by the metropolitan group conferences. For this reason, he thought that the Bill might just as weH be withdrawn. If the provisions relating to the question of the municipal endowment were taken away, the Bill would not be wanted at all. The endowment question was one that concerned a very large number of districts in the colony, and the time had come when it should be serionslyand carefully taken into consideration. Even that qnestion, how­ever, might very well be allowed to stand over for another six months, if at the end of that time Parliament could get a com­prehensive Bill, and one that would make the Local Government Act intelligible. Those gentlemen who had most ·to do with the working of the Local Government Act and of" the Public Health Act found it .extremely difficult to determine what some of the provisions of those measures really meant. Amongst the town clerks of the various municipalities were some ·of the ablest and cleverest men in the com­munity, and they stated that many o'f the sections of the Acts to which he had alluded were inexplicable. Honorable members had, therefore, a right to expect that a Bill

7F~

would have been introduced which would have made the law on this subiect clear. The proposal to refer this Bill to a select committee had apparently been dropped. The proposal was not one to which many honorable members would have taken any serious objection, but he thought that the House was the proper tribunal to consider a measure which was of so much importance. There were only a few leading clauses in the Bill. Prominence had been given by the honorable member for Brighton and the honorahle member for Creswick to the 9th clause. The House had been told that the object of that clause was to prevent the manufacture of what were called "pocket­handkerchief" votes-that was, votes which persons obtained by becoming the occupiers of small pieces of land. This was an oppor­tune time for the consideration of that ques­tion. The Minister of Public Works called special attention to the !)th clause, and he might think that it would have the desired effect. It would, however, have no effect at aU, but would leave the law as it was at present-very elastic indeed. The sections in the existing Act relating to this subject were very difficult to understand. Section 66 provided that every person of the full age of 21 years who on the 10th .June was liable to be rated should be entitled to be en­rolled if the rates had been paid, provided that no person should be entitled to be enrolled in respect of property of a less annual value than £10, unless such person was the occupier thereof, and in no case should both the occupier and owner be en:. rolled in respect of such property. The section also provided that the occupier should have the preference, and that where the rates were not paid by the lOth June he must be placed on a separate voters' list, which would enable him to vote at elections of Members of Parliament. Up to this point no serious difficulty arose, but in section G9 it was provided that where more persons than one were jointly liable to be rated in respect of any property, each of such persons, not exceeding three in all, should be aeemed to be liable to be rated, and should appear in order on the roll. This section seemed to imply that only three persons should represent a propprty muni· cipaUy, but that the names of the others should be retained on the rate-book. The section evidently presupposed that the names of a greater number of persons than three might be inserted in the rate-book, and the question had arisen, why, if four names might appear, not forty, or four

2048 Local GO~'ernment [ASSEl\IBL Y.J Act Amendment Bill.

hundred? Section 128 of the Constitution Act Amendment Act of 1890 gave the qualifications of electors, and section 135 provided-

" Every male person, not subject to any legal incapacity and being a natural-born subject of Her Majesty, who shall under the Acts now and hereafter to be in force relating to the cor­porations of the city of Melbourne and town of Geelong, and to boroughs and shires or any of such Acts, be enrolled upon the citizen or bur­gess roll of the said city or town or any ward thereof respectively, or the burgess roll of any borough or any ward thereof, or the voters' roll of any shire or any riding or subdivision thereof respectively, constituted by or under any of such Acts in respect of rateable property situated in any division of an electoral district, shall (subject to the provisions of this Act) be qualified to vote in the election of members of the Legislative Assembly for such electoral district in such division thereof." He would not have referred to this subject were it not that he was in a position to state t.hat attempts were being made at the present time, in a more systematic manner than usual, to place a large number of names on the ratepayers' rolls for the pro­perty or public companies. (An Honorable Member-" What. is the revision court for ?") The revision court was for a good purpose, but 'it had often failed in connexion with public companies. He knew that a company which had been very much in evidence latElly, and which had property in more than one district, had placed a large number of names on the roll. Another company, which was well known, had put in an application to one municipality for twenty-four names, which if they were placed on the roll would repre­sent no less than seventy-two votes for the Assembly. Strictly speaking, they should only have fifteen votes, that was three for each of the five wards in the municipn.lity. If the application was granted, there would, however, be seventy-two votes for the one property, which was a thing that was never contemplated, and that should never be done. Re knew another property which was rated at £13,500. It was argued that one name could be placed on the roll for every £10 of this valuation, and in this way no less than 1,350 votes might be obtained. Some of the gentlemen who had to do with the working of the Local Government Act thought that they could see a way out of this difficulty, but others stated that they could not refuse to enrol the names. This was an additional reason why the Govern­ment should withdraw the Bill, unless, of course, they were prepared to bring down amendments to remove this serious blot in

Mr. T. Smith.

the law. If the Government would do that, the Bill would be of value, and there would be some hope of passing it; but if they would not, honorable members would have to discuss these questions in committee, arid deal with the Bill clause by clause. A great deal could be said with regard to the appointment of audit.ors, as proposed in the Bill. There was certainly room for improvement in the present system. The present auditors had done good work in some districts, but in other districts they had occupied a very long time over the audit, and the system had not always operated to the advantage of those who had to pa.y the piper. An alteration was re­quired, but he did not think that the alteration proposed in this Bill would be satisfactory. Oertainly, twelve auditors would not be able to do the work of auditing all the accounts within the time in which the municipal councils would like it to be done. They did not desire that their accounts should lie month after month unaudited. Every municipal council that was properly managed liked to be in a position to say within a certain't time that the annual audit had taken place, and that everything was satisfactory. They could not be in that position if there were to be twelve auditors, and they were to take the whole of each year in doing the work. What was wanted was that the Govern­ment should be more particular as to who they sent to carry out the audits, and that those men should push on with the work a little more than they had done hitherto, so that the municipal councils should not have to pay extravagant charges. It was grati­fying to know that the re~mlt of the audits had in nearly every instance been satis­factory, and that no frauds had been perpe­trated. The worst that could be said was that some of the municipal councils had spent a little money in sending deputations on picnics to the metropolis. The question of the engineeers was one that appertained principally to the country municipalities. With reference to the remarks made by the honorable member for Melbourne North, he hoped that thp, Mini~ter of Public Works would provide some machinery in this Bill, whereby such wealthy shires as Malvern and Caulfield would be compelled to become either towns or boroughs, because clearly they had been getting more than they were fairly entitled to Ironl the municipal endow­ment. This should be done not in the interest of the city, but of the more distant country municipaiiti(:'s which deserved every

Railways Standing [OCTOBER 14.J Committee. 2049

consideration from Parliament. If the Bill was to be passed, he trusted that clauses would be added to it to remedy some of the defects which existed in the present law.

On the motion of Mr. GILLIES, the debate was adjourned.

RAILvVAYS STANDING COMMITTEE.

Mr. GILLIES moved-

"That the following members be appointed members of the Parliamentary Standing Com­mittee on Railways, namely:-Mr. Officer, Mr. Tucker, Mr. A. Young. Mr. Groom, Mr. Bent, Mr. McIntyre, ")11'. 'Voods, and Mr. Graham."

The honorable gentleman observed that the appointment of this committee had been a matter of serious consideration with the Go\'ernment. The Government desired to see a committee appointed by the House the members of which would not only have sufficient time to devote to tl~eir important work, but would reflect t.he general opinion of the Assembly. There were, no doubt, a great many members of the House who were emi­nently qualified to occupy the position of mcm bers of this committee, and the difficul ty lay in selecting gentlemen who would not only have ample leisure but who would also be possessed or sufficient experience to enable them to deal satisfactorily with the important questions which were bound to be brought berore the committee. In making the selection, the Government communicated with the leader of the Oppo­sition and the honorable members associated with him, in order to ascertain their views. (Sir B. O'Loghlen-" The views of honor­able members on this side or the House have not been carried ont.") He could only say that the Government had been anxious to submit to the consideration or the House the names of gentlemen who were not only able to do the work but who would reflect credit on the Assembly. The question had been raised among honorable members, and also out-of-doors, whether each side of the House would be equally represented on the committee. Honorable members on the Government side of the House had a very strong feeling that their side of the Honse was entitled to a larger representation than the other. (Several Honorable Members­H No, no.") He was only stating what he believed to be the fact.. (Sir B. O'Logh­len-" Then the Bill was· obtained under false pretences.") He did not know to what the honorable member was referring.

1'he strongly expressed feeling on the pnrt of honorable members on the Government side of the House, which he had adverted to, was not because they thought they were more willing and capable men than those on the other side of the House, but simply because there wns a larger number of mem­bers sitting on t.he right of the chair. The Government considered this question before the Bill was bwught in, and provided for twelve members of committee-five for the Council and seven for the Assembly-so that a very fair pl'Oportion would be obtained by selecting fOUl' from the Govern­ment side of the House and three from the opposite side. That would be about the nearest possible arrangement f01' a fair representation of honorable members. However, the Assembly took a different view, and wished to appoint thirteen mem­bers-eight for this House and five for the other branch of the Legislature. That made the matter a little more difficult, because, unless there was an equal division for each side of the Assembly, it, would be necessary to have five on one side and three on the other. The Governrrlent was extremely anxious to show that no party object was intended to be served by the ap­pointment of this committee, and, after a great deal of anxiety and of consideration of the views of all sections of the House, they, in order to obtain if possible a united Honse in the appointment, consented to the nomination of four from each side. In doing this the Government brought con­siderable pressure to bear on their own friends; and they said to their friends that they would make this arrangement rather than have any serious difference of opinion on the occasion of the first appointment of a committee to undertake so important a work. His object in consulting with the leader of the Opposition was to secure the appointment of the best men from each side of the House-men who would be able to devote to their duties that time and attention which were indispensably necessary for the efficient performance of the important functions in question. Some of the members spoken to in the first instance did not see their way to act, and others were selected. One gentleman selected by the leader of the Opposition he (Mr. Gillies) had not seen his way to place on this list. (Lt.­Col. Smith-" You do not select for both sides.") That gentleman was, no doubt, a member of considerable force of character. (Sir B. O'Loghlen-" Are we to be dictated

2050 Railways Standing [ASSEMBLY.] Committee.

to ?") The House was the ruler of all mem­bers. The Government was responsible for every proposal it made, and was bound to submit proposals which it believed to be not onl v in the interests of the House but of the ·country also. In saying that the Government did not see its way to include in the list the name of the gentleman re­ferred to, it was not intended as the slightest personal reflection upon that member; but the Government felt that if they includeu il~ the committee appointed to make such iinportant investigations a young member who was new to the Parliament it \V(\uld be a very serious reflection on many honorable members who, during a long career in Par­liament, had exhibited great talents, not only for debate but for in vestigation. (Mr. 'IV. T. Carter.-" 'Ye are all Members of Parliament.") Certainly, but there were members and members. He was casting no personal reflection whatever on the gentleman in question. (Sir B. O'Logh­len-" You are reflecting on the young members.") It would certainly be recog­nised by a majority of the members that the Government was not illstified in recommending that a member who was young and inexperienced in Parliament should be placed O\"er the heads of the older members. (Mr. Turner.-" 'Vhy not ?") They could not pass over the heads of a number of honorable members on the other side of the House for the purpose of selecting a junior member. "Under these circumstances the Government felt justified in substituting the name of an honorable member who had served in the Assembly for a number of years, who was highly respected, ~nd who wonld be able to do good and valuable ser­vice on the committee. He (Mr. Gillies) did not say that by way of apology, but in justification of the action of the Government in making the change. Honorable members must admit that if the proposed change was justified on the part of the Government, the public outside would be perfectly satisfied with it.

Mr. DEAKIN seconded the motion. Lt.-Col. SMITH said he had the most

profound respect for the honorable mem­ber for N umurkah, who was an old con­stituent of his, but the Opposition ]lad a right of nomination, and they were entitled to exercise it. The result was now virtually a Ministerial nomination, and the Opposition had not been asked to approve of the Ministerial choice at all. If the committee was to be an impartial one, representing both sides of the House, it

ought to consist of gentlemen who were willing to act, and in whom the House had confidence. He could say, on the part of the older members or the House, that they did not desire t.he position, which was a most invidious one. He would have nothing to do with it himself, for it was most objec­tionable to have to determine which district should have a railway and which should not, and many of the most experienced members took the same view. But he did think that the Government, after agreeing that the leader of the Opposition should nominate four members and the Government four, had no right to say now that they disappl'ovecl ot one of the nominees of the other side. (Mr. Zox-" Which is the man you object to?") He had never abused private con­fidence in his life, and he was not going to do so now. The Premier had no right to object to any member nominated on the part of the Opposition, for he had never nsked the leader of the Opposition if he objected to any of the Government nominees. The action of the Premier resulted in the Gorern­ment virtually nominating five members of the committee and the Opposition nomi­nating three.

M.r. ZOX desired to ask the leader of the Opposition to intimate to the House the names of the gentlemen nominated by him.

Mr. GILLIES stated that the name of the honorable member for Numurkah had been substituted for that of the honorable member for Donald.

Mr. 'iVEBB said he thought the diffi­culty might easily be settled by leaving it to the House to determine who should be the members of the committee. This was a very important matter, and the memhers chosen to serve on the committee should be men who had had some experience in the direction in which their work would lie. He objected to the manner in which the Government had made nominations with­out consulting members on their own side of the House. \Vhen it had be<!n deter-' mined that four members should be ~elected from each side of the House, they had n() right to object to anyone of the names ap­proved by the other side of the House. He did not say for a mo~ent that the gentle­men who had been nominated would not· fulfil their duties in the best possible and most conscientious manner, but the least the Government might have done was to. have consulted some of tl1eir supporters, in­stead of looking upon them as mere voting machines. He must also take exception t()

Railways Standing [OCTOBEll 14.J Committee. 2051

the Premier's remarks about new members. It did not follow that because a member was new to the House he was not possessed of business ability. Some new members who had gained their experience in municipal councils were as well qualified in matters of this sort as older members who had obtained their experience in the House. The Pre­mier had referred to the young members in a most sarcastic manner, saying that there were members and members. Did that refer to the particular member the honorable gentleman objected t~, or to every new member of the House? The new members of the House had been a credit to it. He would move as an amendment that the election of the committee be proceeded with by each honorable member stating verbally or in writing the eight gentlemen whom he desired to see elected-four from the Ministerial side, and four from the Opposi­tion-the eight members having the largest number of votes to be elected, and that in the event of any of them declining to act, a fresh election should take place.

Mr. ARMYTAGE seconded the amend­ment.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER.-The 3rd section ~f the Railways Standing Committee Act provides that the committee shall be appointed in a certain way. The amend­ment of the honomble member ·for Rodney (Mr. Webb) is not in order, because it is in violation of the principle contained in that clause. The committee could not be legally appointed in the way the honorable member proposes.

Mr. WEBB said he intended that the voting should be open, and not by ballot.

Mr. MASON remarked that as the amendment of the honorable member for Rodney (Mr. Webb) had been ruled out of

. order, he would move another one. The Premier was no doubt actuated bya desire to get the best men possible to ser\"e on the committee, and the House was responsible for the appointments made. He therefore thought he would be in order in moving that the committee be elected in the same manner as the Chairman of Committees or the Speaker of the House was elected, namely, that each honorable member should be voted upon individually and separately.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER.-That is perfectly in order. If it is the desire of the House, I will put the names separately.

Mr. MASON observed that the Premier had referred to the lengthened services of particular members, and there were others who had strong claims to consideration on

this score. The honorable member for Daylesford, one or the uldest and most respected members of the House, had shown great aptitude in dealing with business matters, as well as with all public questions, and he (Mr. Mason) had orten felt surprise that the honorable member had not been rewarded in other directions long ago. The honorable membel' for Gipps­land North, too, held desprvedly a most prominent place in the House. He represented the farming interest of the country, and no member was so well acquainted with the Gippsland district as he was. The method by which the Goven)­ment had gone about appointing the committee was not by any means satisfac­tory. 'Vhen the Premier said he would confer with the leader of the Opposition as to the appointment of the committee; the Government either intended to give the Opposition the right of nominating four members or they did not. The honor~ able member for Donald, one of the nominees of the Opposition, who was now objected to by the Go\'ernment, was one of the most respected and capable members of the House. The remarks of the Premier reflected unfairly upon one­third of the members or the House, for the llew members were in that propor­tion. Several of the new members were ex-mayors, who would make valuable mem­bers or the committee, and the innuendoes of the head of the Government were entirely unjustifiable. It seemed that the Govern­ment objected to some of the ablest mem­bers beca.use they had been too long in the House, and to other equally able members because they had been too short a time in the House. The honorable member for Gunbower had had experience which would make him a suitable member of the com­mittee, and the honorable member ror Bar­won was an ex-Minister, but neither of them was chosen to serve. Capable and ex­perienced men might at least have received the compliment of an imitation to serve on the committee.

Mr. TREN'VITH seconded the amend­ment. He said he believed that the method it proposed of arriving at a decision in this matter was the best one. By being com­pelled to vote for all the members of the com­mittee at once the House might be obliged to vote for a member to whom it objected. He was glad to hear an old member like the honorable member for Gippsland South take up the cudgels on behalf or the new mem­bers. The reflection cast upon the new

2052 Railways Standing [ASSEMBLY.] Oommitt~e.

members by the Premier was quite uncalled for, and altogether out of accord with the opinions of the country. At the last general election the constituencies expressed their disapproval of a. large number of old members, and showed that they believed that the new members they filleu their places with were better fitted to carry on the· business of the country. In fact, there ,never was such a clearing out of old members as at the last general elec­tion, and, judging from the almost univer­sally expressed public opinion, there would be a still larger accession of new members at the next general election to take the places of some of the old members of this House. (Mr. Staughton-" And of some DE the new members too, especially the mem­bers for Richmond.") The Premier felt in this difficulty, that if a new member was appointed on the committee from one side of tbe House, a new member or new members might be requtred by the other side of the House. Perhaps the honorable gentleman had found that the new members were not so pliable as some of the older members, and therefore, in selecting the members for nomination to this committee, he preferred to deal with men of whom he had had a somewhat lengthened experience. Of course, the Premier was within his rights in making any selection he pleased, but it was questionable taste on the part of the honorable gentleman to use words which were considered to be an insult to more than one-third of the members of this House, who had been returned instead of old mem­bers, and who, whether they possessed greater experience or not, had at least equal ability and perhaps greater integrity. (Mr. Gillies-" That is a reflection on two­thirds of Lhe members of this House.") At the beginning of this Parliament the Premier induced the House to pass certain standing orders, one of which provided ngainst interjecti0ns; but the honorable gentlema.n perhaps th~)Ught that, as· Premier, he had a prerogative to be supercilious and offensive at any time. (Mr. Gillies-" Too thin.") Honorable members knew that he (Mr. Trenwith) did not endeavour to convey the impression that the one-third or the members or this House who were new members possessed greater integrity than the other two-thirds, but simply that it was clear that the new mem­bers were selected in place or those old members who at the last election were relegated to private life for some reason or· other, at any rate, on the part of their

Mr. Trenwith.

constituents, who thought it necessary to introduce such a Jarge percentage of new blood into the House. Evidently the country felt that a considerable proportion of new members was necessary to leaven the old lump, which was found to be, to say the least of it, not so useful as it might have been, and therefore the Premier's remarks were not only an insult to the new members of the House, but also an insult to the con­stituencies who returned them. He was confidlmt that the amendment would be carried, that the House would determine to vote separately upon the names of the gentlemen proposed for membership of the committee, and that some of the names that had been submitted would have to give place to others in the interests of the country.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER.-I may state at once that if anyone member or this Assembly desires me to put the names separately I shall do so: and there is no amendment whatever required for that pur­pose, because that is the practice of Parlia­ment.

Mr. FOSTER said he did not think it was the intention of the Premier to insult any honorable member, and the rather strong language of the honorable member for Richmond (Mr. Trenwith) was hardly warranted. The Premier called attention to the fact that it was desirable to select the most experienced and most capable men in appointing a committee which would have such important work to do. He (Mr. Foster) scarcely agreed with the manner in which the members of the committee had been selected. It was understood that four members were to be selected from each side or the House, and having thus arranged matters with the leader of the Opposition, he thought that, as a matter of honour, the Pl'emier ought to have accepted the four members selected by the Opposition. If any objection was necessary, a better way of raising it might have been found. Before the list was submitted, the Premier and the leader of the Opposition should have conferred and arranged the matter without having to speak of it openly in the House, and without casting any reflections, as had been done in regard to the honorable member for Donald. It struck him as very peculiar that the honorable member for Gippsland North, who represented the country party in this House, had not been nominated as one or the members of the com­mittee. Something like 15,000 square miles of territory would have no representation

Railways Standing [OCTOBER 14.J Committee. 2053

a.t all on the committee, and a member ,representing that portion of the colony -ought to have been appointed. .No better man could be found for the position than the honorable member for Gippsland North, and he (Mr. Foster) would take the oppor­tunity of moving that the name of that honorable member should be substituted fcr the name of some other honorable mem­ber in the list submitted by the ~remier. (Mr. Langridge-" Would he take the position ?") Yes, if it were offered to him.

Mr. STUART expressed the opinion that the Premier did not intend to insult the new members of the House, although the words which the honorable gentleman used would certainly bear that interpre­tation, because he told the House that the Government wanted on this committee men of ability, experience, and integrity, thereby apparently assuming that the younger mem­bers had not any of those qualities. (Mr. Gillies-" No.") The younger members of the House were deeply grateful to the older members for their kindness during the last two sessions, because, on every occasion, the older members had taken the gr~atest . possible pains to assist the new members, and to make their task as easy and pleasant as possible. The Premier did not give the real reason for his desire to exclude one particular new member from this committee. It was an open secret that at a caucus, held in the Opposition room earlier in the after­noon, a ballot was taken, and four members were selected to represent the Opposition on this Railways Standing Committee, namely, the honorable member for Brighton, the honorable member for Stawell, the honor­able member for Donald, and the honorable member for Maldon. It would be no breach of confidence for him to say that the honor­able member for Brighton received the vote of every member in the room, and that the honorable member for Donald received the second highest number of votes. Shortly afterwards the Opposition were informed that the Premier would not accept the nomillation of the honorable member for Donald and desired that the name of the honorable member for N umur­Imh should be substituted, thus placing the leader of the Opposition in a very painful position .. The members of the Opposition felt that they must stand by the honorable members whose names were selected; and while they entertained the greatest possible respect for the honorable member for Nu­murkah, they felt constrained to insist upon the appointment of the h~norable member

for Donald. The Premier stated that the honorable member had not had experience enough, but the real reason, as the House very well knew) was that very considerable pressure had been brought to bear on the Premier by a certain section of members behind him -he challenged the honorable gentleman to deny it-against the inclu­sion of any new member on this 'com­mittee. But was it a fair thing to say that this committee should not include one or the new members, seeing that one­third of the House were new members? Many of the new members were gentlemen of mature years and ripe experience. Take the honorable member for St. Kilda as an example. During the last two sessions that gentleman had actually remodelled nearly every Government measure submitted to this House; his ad vice and ability had been of incalculable service to the House and to the country, but because he was a new member he was to be excluded from a committee of this kind. The Opposition did not claim the inclusion of the honorable member for Donald because he was a new member, but be~ause he had had great experience in re­ference to railway construction. The honor­able member had given considerable time and attention to the consideration of the subject of cheap railway construction; he possessed a good deal of evidence on the question, ana his services would be very valuable to the committee and to the country. While the Opposition would like to see the honorable member for Numurkah on this committee, they felt bound to stand by their own nominee, the honorable member for Donald, and when the proper time came he (Mr. Stuart) would move the substitution of the name of the honorable memb'er for Donald for the name of the honorable member for N umurkah. The feeling of the House, he was sure, would be entirely in favour of maintaining the nominees of each side. The Opposition had no desire to interfere with the nominations from the Government side of the House, or they might very readily do so, because the list included the name of at least one gentleman against whom there were very grave objections indeed. He would not state the reasons for those objections now, but would prefer to wait until the time of election came on.

Mr. LANG RIDGE said he quite recog­nised the difficulty which t.hp. Government had to face in regard to the formation of a committee of this kind. Evidence of that difficulty had been afforded by the present debate. It would be a great pity, however,

2054 Railways Standing [ASSEMBLY.] Committee.

if honorable members were called upon to vote against some of the gentlemen who had been nominated, and he thought that such a thing should be avoided. An under­standing was come to between the leader of the Government and the leader of the Opposition, that each side of the House should select four members for appointment on this standing committee. He must confess that he was surprised to find that the Opposition was to h:we the same num­ber of members on the committee as the members on the Ministerial side of the House, who were in the majority; he had expected t.he GO\Ternment side of the House would have the selection of five members of the committee and the Opposition three members, and the Government had acted very fairly to the Opposition in dividing the representation equally between the two sides of the House. But having gone so far, would it not be better, in order to avoid any trouble, for the Go,'ernment to give way, after the views they had heard ex­pressed, not only from the ranks of the Opposition but also from members on their own side of the House, and not persist in drawing a distinction between young and old members of the House? There was an understanding between the leader of the Government and the leader of the Opposition, and if the positions had been reversed, the Premier himself would be the most de­termined upholder of the agreement and the last to give way. He would therefore ask the honorable gentleman, as the leader of the House, to avoid any further trouble by accepting the nominations from the Opposition, and substituting the name of the honorable member for Donald for that of the honorable member for Nnmurkah. The honorable member for Donald was a very excellent member; he had won his spurs, and he was fully qualified, although a new member of the Hou~e, for appoint­ment on this committee. The Government, lle hoped, would see their way clear, under the circumstances, without feeling that they had committed any dereliction of duty, to agree to accept the nomina.tions from the Opposition side of the House.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN observed that the suggestion of the honorable member for Collingwood (Mr. Langridge) came too late, because several honorable members had very strongly declared that they felt sat upon, and it was clear that honorable mem­bers on the Ministerial side of the House did not approve of the four members selected by the Government. They objected

to one or two of the number, and he could easily understand their objection. The Government had backed out of tbe engage­ment which was made with the Opposition. vVhen he (Sir B. O'Loghlen) was address­ing the House on the Railways Standing Oommittee Bill, the Premier was told across· the table that if he would consent to the· selection of four members hy the Opposition side of the House and four members by the Ministerial side of the House, many of the objections would be removed. The Premier said he would agree to that arrange-· menta (Mr. Gillies-" Oertainly not.") Negotiations had been going on between. the Premier and the leader of the Oppo­sition ror the last two or three days, but they had finally ended in the rejection by the Premier of one of the members who· was selected by the Opposition for appoint­ment on the committee. The Government, in the first instance, agreed that four members should be selected by each side of the House, but the Premier now desired to­dictate to the Opposition as to who their­fourth member should be. The Opposition naturally resented that dictation, and he· asked honorable members on the Minis-· terial side of the House to support them in so doing, particularly in view of the ground on which that dictation was based. Dictation having been attempted, he (Sir­B. O'Loghlen) now felt that he had a free hand-a right to canvass the nomi­nations of the Government, as the Premier­had canvassed the nominations of the Opposition. The honorable member for' Dundas possessed the confidence of every member of the House, the honorable mem­ber for Grenville (Mr. A. Young) was an old member, a country member, who had very steadily attended to his duties, and the House would, no doubt, accept him un­reservedly. But the honorable member for' Fitzroy (Mr. Tucker) and the honorable· member for Gippsland West were not acceptable to the House, and for very good reasons. There was nothing personal against either of them. They were both gentlemen of ability and experience, but the House· felt, and he thought properly felt, that the­honorable member for Fitzroy had too great an interest at stake in reference to one· particular line in the Railway Oonstruction Bill-a line which was to cost three-quarters­of:it million sterling. He (Sir B. O'Loghlen} felt that if he were in the position of the· honorable member for Fitzroy (Mr. Tucker), and on the committee, he could not help. looking at that particular line, and the great

Railways Standing [OCTOBER 14.J Committee. 2055-

advantages to the country which would flow from that li/ne, through such favorable spectacles that he was afraid, even with the utmost endeavours to be impartial, he could not be so absolutely indifferent about it as he ought to be about any proposal if he were a member of the committee. Then again, the honorable member for Gippsland West had a very large interest in the Railway Construction Bill to the extent of one-tenth or one-eighth of the expenditure proposed to be incurred in the construction of new railway lines, and the House, without in any way reflecting upon the ability or those two gentlemen, felt that they must necessarily view all the proposals that came before them through such coloured spectacles that it would be far better if thev were not appointed on the committee: \Vithout desiring to say anything that would annoy or be offellsive to either of those honorable members, he thought he clearly expressed the feeling of the House when he said that honorable members would feel more satis­fied-if two other members were chosen from the Ministerial side of the Chamber. As to the honorable member for N umurkah, whose name had been substituted by the Premier for the name of the honorable member for Donald. all honorable members had known him foi- years, and thoroughly respected him. They had always found him acting up to his convictions, and standing by the party which he believed to be the right party in this House; but, as honorable members in Opposition had given their preference to the honorable member for Donald, they claimed the right to support the nomination of that gentleman as against the nomina­tion of the honorable member for N umurkah. The only objection which the Premier ]lad urged against the selection of the honorable member for Donald was that he was a new member, but one-third of the House con­sisted of new members, and it was a great reflection upon them to say that 011e of their number who had been chosen by 40 members of this House for appointment on the Railways Standing Committee, was to be told that he was debarred from taking that posit.ion because he was a new mem­ber. Was not that honorable member debarred for another reason, namely, that he had been conspicuous in the support of the movement for the introduction into this country of the system of light inex­pensive railways? (Capt. Taylor-" That is more like it.") That was no doubt the real reason, but as the honorable member for Donald had made himself an authority

on the question of light inexpensive­lines for country districts, would not his services he of great value to the com·-

- mittee, and was not that the very reason of aU others why the country members should vote for his appointment? The­farmers in the country districts wanted light and inexpensive lines to bring their­produce to market. It was not a question of speed with them, but a question of making the market accessible to them. The Prelllier had himself to blame for­having raised this discussion, because if the honorable gentleman had adopted the names of the four membere chosen from the­Opposition side of the House, whatever the views of the Opposition might have­been with regard to the members selected from the Ministerial side of the House,_ thev would l1ave been content to let the na~1es stand. The debate had clearly shown that the selection from the Ministerial side­of the -House was not the selection of honorable members on that side of the­Chamber, but of a few gentlemen who were­able to bring influence to bear upon' Ministers, and some of the members on the Ministerial side of the House had told the Premier that they felt sat upon. He trusted that those honorable members would assist the Opposition to substitute the­name of the honorable member for Donald: for the name of the honorable member for Numurkah, and if any of them moved the­substitution of the. name of any other­honorable member to take the place of the honorable member for Fitzroy or the honor­able member for Gippsland ",-rest, he(Sir B._ O'Loghlen) would certainly gi ve the proposal his hearty support.

Mr. ZOX remarked that if ever the­Opposition had reason to congratulate­themselves it was on the present o{lcasion when they heard the names submitted by the Premier for appointment on the Rail­ways Standing Committee. It had been suggested by honorable members in Opposi-­tion that the Government supporters had been consulted as to the members wh() should be nominated from the Ministerial. side of the House, but he had certainly not been consnlted, and he was not aware that the Government had consulted any of their supporters. (Mr. W. T. Carter­" Then you are treated like 'dumb driven· cattle.' ") No. (Mr. Shiels-" You are' a hero in the strife.' ") He would ask honor-­able members on the Ministerial side of the Honse if they had been consulted as to who­should be the Government nominees l

2056 Railways Standing [ASSEMBLY.] Committee.

(" No.") "And so say all of us." The Premier certainly asked the leader of the Opposition to nominate from his side ·of the House the four members he desired to have placed on the committee. (Lt.­Col. Smith-" But the Government did not .accept them.") There was no reason why the Premier should not have accepted them. What did it matter how long a man had been a member of the House, or whether he was a new or an old member? If he pos­sessed the necessary qualifications, and was .chosen for the position, he ought to be accepted. What confidence could the -<lountry be expected to have in the Railway 'Constrnction Bill if honorable members were going to cavil in the first instance us to the hOllE'sty oHhe members who were to be appointed on the standing committee, :and as to their disposition to deal with the rail way proposals in a right and straight­forward way? He believed that every honorable member who was elected on the -committee would endeavour to discharge his duties faithfully and honestly, and why should the Premier object to any of the four nominations made by the Opposition? The Opposition had shown that those hon­-orable members possessed their implicit .confidence, and what motive could the Premier have for objecting to one member .as against another? Why had the name of the honorable member for Numurkah ,been substituted for the name of the honor­.able member for Donald? It would save -endless debate if the Premier would :accede to the suggestion of the honol'able member for Collingwood (Mr. Langridge), .and accept the nominations of the Op­position in globo. If honorable members were satisfied that the gentlemen nomi­nated would act as impartial arbitrators in ;regard to the important proposals for rail­way construction which would be submitted to their consideration, he did not see the slightest objection to their appointment. There was no need for any fear as to the results. The committee would only be able to express an opinion, and what­ever considerations might influence them in making their recommendations, the House would have an opportunity of care-ully and thoroughly reviewing all the

,evidence, and of acc~pting or rejecting the recommendations of the committee. He believed that every member of the committee would do his duty, with a .due sense of the responsibility that would -rest upon him, in forming his opinion on ,every proposed new line. The Premier

M1', Zox.

ought to bring this debate to an end, by accepting the nominations from the Oppo­sition. It was casting a reflection on the younger members of the House to say that they were not equ,q,lly as conscientious, or a.s well able to discharge the important functions of members of the standing com­mittee, as the older members of the House. It was an ill bird that fouled its own nest, and honorable members would be fouling their own nest if they said that the new members -of the House would not fully realize the responsibilities, or satisfactorily discharge the duties of members of this committee. If the committee rrere going to be a supreme tribunal, if they were to be appointed to finally determine whether certain railway proposals should be carried out or no, honor­able members might view their actions with a certain amount of caution; but it should be borne in mind that they had to submit the result of their deliberations to the Assembly. If 118 had been in the position of the Premier, he would not l1ave conferred with the leader of the Opposition, or asked that honorable gentleman to select four mem­bers from his side of the House, unless he had made up his mind to accept those nominations, and as there could not be the slightest objection to any of the honorable members nominated by the leader of the Opposition, in the name of common sense why not elect them? If the House did not agree with the recommendations of the committee, those recommendations could be set aside. The continuance of the present debate would only engender ill.fee1ing,and it was a pity that on the introduction of a pro­posal of this kind, which was an absolutely new departure from all previous legislation­a departure which the coun try had indorsed­the moment the House was called upon to a.ppoint an impartial committee of investi­gation from among the representatives of the people in this Chamber, honorable mem­bers who had been nominated for appoint­ment were told, "'Ve have no confidence in you; you may do the wrong thing; you are too old or too new, or you are too much interested in the railway construction pro­posals." He would like to know whether the lender of the Opposition was under the impression, when he was called to nominate fOUl' members of the committee, that his nominees would be accepted by the Govern­ment. (Mr. Munro-" Certainly.") Then there should be some tangible reason given to the House why the Premier had ob­jected to one of the number. If this debate went on, he was afraid it would wax warm,

Railwa'!J8 Standz'ng [OCTOBER 14.J Committee. 2057

and as the Opposition were prepared to accept the nominees of the Government without contradiction, the Premier ought to accept the nominations made by the Opposition. He sincerely hoped tha.t that course would be adopted; but unless satis­factory reasons were given for excising the name of the honorable member for Donald and substituting the name of the honorable member for N umurkah, although he had the greatest regard for the latter member, who had proved his capacity as a legislator, he (Mr. Zox) would vote for the names submitted by the leader of the Opposition.

Mr. RIOHARDSON said he was as­tonished at the unreasonable request now made to the Premier, and that the honor­able member for Melbourne East (Mr. Zox) was so earnest in his solicitation that the leader of the Government should again change his mind and again" back down." The Premier must have had some reasons in his mind for nominating the honorable member for Numurkah instead of thehonor­able member for Donald; and as the Government were responsible to the House for the nominations of members to serve on this standing committee, the Opposition ought not to have interfered with the obligations resting upon the Ministry. The Premier and the leader of the Opposition had taken a departure from the right course, but what was the value of the consultation between them? The Premier had the right to accept or reject any of the names submitted to him by the leader of the Opposition, because he alone was respon­sible to the House, and honorable members had a right to express their opinions and record their votes upon the proposals he submitted to the House. All this bargaining and arranging between the two sides of the Ohamber was not calculated to secure the appointment of the best men on the committee. The Premier had been asked to accept the nomi­nations he had received from the leader of the Opposition for the sake of peace, but that was a very improper request. From the first he (Mr. Richardson) had said that the Railways Standing Oommittee Act ought to provide for the election of the committee by ballot, but as the House decided against that mode of election honorable members would be called upon to vote in open House on each name as it was submitted, and any honorable member was entitled to call for a divisioll. The Opposition had no right to nominate members of the committee because the Opposition had no responsibility in the

matter. (Mr. Mason-" Has not the House any responsibility? ") Yes; it was the duty of the Premier to nominate the mem­bers, and it was the duty of the House to, elect or reject them in a constitutional way. If the Government were defeated on this question, they ought to accept it as a vote of want of confidence and retire from their position. That was the constitutional rule~ bllt the present Government had got into the habit of not adhering to the constitu­tional rule in that respect, preferring to change their views or their course of action" a mode of procedure which was to be depre­cated. He did not want to see the Govern­ment change front on this occasion, and he only rose to point out the constitutional method of dealing with the qnestion, and the way in which honorable members could exer­cise their constitutional rights in this matter. If the Go\'erIiment would go on with their­nominations, and if honorable members­would exercise their privilege of voting against any member they pleased, they would get such a committee as the House, approved of.

Mr. T. SMITHsaid he thought theremarks· which the Premier had seen fit to make with regard to new mem bers were, to say the least,. very unhappy, and not in the usual sty Ie of the honorable gentleman. Personally he was not surprised at those remarks, having' in view the treatment which had been meted out to new members ever since this Parlia­ment commenced. He was so deeply anxious that this standing committee should get to, work that he was loth to say anything which would prevent its being appointed in ten minutes, if possible; but there was a feeling among a number of honorable members in. the Ministerial corner that members on the Governmen t side of the House had been placed at a very decided disadvantage in this matter. Honorable members opposite had been consulted; they had met and had electecl in the fairest way possible-namely, by ballot -four of their number to represent them .. In passing, he might express th~ opinion that when all was over those four gentlemen would be the foul' who would represent the Opposition side of the House. But while­the Opposition had had this opportunity honorable members on the Ministerial side­at any rate those in the Ministerial corner­had not been consulted at all, and he did not think that honorable members, as a. body, sitting immediately behind the Go\rern­ment had been consulted either. It had been dawning upon honorable members on that. (the Ministerial) side of the House for some-

:2058 R,aillcCt!J8 Standing [ASSEMBLY.] Committee.

·considerable time that the ad vantage of .being a supporter or the Government at all was a sort of unknown quantity, but it now appeared manifest that it was a very decided disadvantagl', because upon a question in which they were surely as vitally interested .as honorable members opposite they were not consulted in any shape or way. They were expected, as one honorable member had already put it, to vote like a lot of voting machines. Now he objected to be a voting machine. He had never considered himself .a voting machine, and he was not going to begin at· this late hour of the day. He would certainly exercise the privilege or voting for anyone he pleased on this -occasion. He regretted that it had been -said that new' members, by reason of being llew members, had not the necessary ,experience to sit upon this committee. He had yet to learn that the fact of one having .been a member of the House for twenty or twenty-five years gave him necessarily the .qualifications to act on this or any other -committee. In the composition of a com­mittee of this kind there should certainly be a fair percentage of members who were not ,in any way interested as to the construction ·of railway lines. He was one of the first to support the appointment of this standing -committee, and he did hope that they would .have appointed to it a number of gentlemen who would have the general support of the House, and that t.hey would be gentlemen '\vho were not interested in railway lines tosuch :a serious extent as to interfere with their impartiality, as was the case with some of the honorable members whose names had been mentioned.

Mr. W. T. CARTER observed that the Premier had declared that' the Government had taken the course they thought most calculated to secure per­fect unanimity in the election of this -committee, but the step they had taken was calculated to secure anything but 'llnanimity. And why? Simply because there were men in the House who had their ·opinions, and who would take the conse­-quences of asserting those opinions and of carrying them out. New members would know how to appreciate the insult which the Premier flung at them, and his state­ment that there were "members and mem­bers" offered a strong temptation to -criticise the honorable gentleman's own choice, and his own tastes as manifested in that choice. Remarks had been made as to the necessity of the men elected to the com­mittee being un biassed and disinterested.

Surely one or the objects of the committee was to get disinterested evidence, and surely they were appointed for the purpose of calmly and jud icially sifting the evidence before them. As to the new members, it was an undoubted reflection upon the choice of the constituencies to remark on the members who had been sent to the Assembly as they had been remarked upon. He happened to know that the Government had a peculiar weakness for very young members-they would have liked several very young members to be in the Assembly -and he happened to know also that some of the young members whom the Govern­ment looked to with great hopefulness had. disappointed them, because they had shown that they had some political backbone. He believed members on both sides would show their scorn and their detestation of a system of government which would permit the kind of "wobbling" which they had had over this and other mat-tel's. vVhat was the posi­tion in which Opposition members had been placed by this invidious distinction which the Premier had taken upon himself to make between two Opposition members? He (Mr. Uarter) had always understood that when the leader of one army negotiated with the leader of another army, the armies between whom the treaty had been made were not only hound by that treaty, but they expected that the cond.itions of the treaty would be carried out. The Premier consulted the leader of the Opposition, and the Opposition adopted their own process to give expression to their choice. He (Mr. Carter) did not vote for the whole four of the gentlemen who had been elected by the Opposition, but he was free to say that he voted for the hon­orable member for Donald. The Opposition thought they had an advantage over the "dumb driven cattle" on the other side by being allowed this opportunity to make a choice, because they guessed that the Minis­terial members were not going to be con­sulted by the Great Panjandarum as to the choice to be made on that side. The Opposi­tion took a certain process, and selected certain members. Had it been a question of the character, integrity, or even ability of the honorable member for N ~murkah, he would yield to no man in his apprecia­tion of that honorable member; but when a number of men acted together compro­!llises were necessary, and in this case four gentlemen were chosen without reference to any invidious comparisons, and when the names were announced they were greeted with acclaim. Then the Opposition came

Railways Standing [OCTOBER 14.J Committee. 2059

into the chamber expecting to have their choice ratified, but instead of that, by the bungling of the Premier, the painful neces­sity was forced upon them of appearing to make an invidious comparison and appearing to give an honorable member, for whom they all had the highest respect, a slap in the teeth. The Premier might ha ve come down and taken the responsibility of proposing certain names on the floor of the House, without any previous consultation with the Opposition; but having consulted them, he was bound to accept their choice. No language was sufficiently strong to de­nounce the action of t·he Government, which would put honorable members in the relationship to each other which the Oppo­sition had now been placed in with regard to the choice they were asked to make. Still, he (Mr. Oarter) was there to give his vote and take the consequences of it, evcn if his friend-his friend before he entered the House - the honorable member for Numurkah, should be offended. Even the ties of friendship must not prevail against the necessity of ratifying a choice which had been made. These invidious dis· tinctions came very peculiarly from a Oabinet which had the Ohief Secretary in its ranks. Was he disqualified in the Parlia­ment of Victoria for being a new member and a young mcmber? vVas vVilliam Pitt disqualified in the House of Oommons on similar grounds? vVhen such odious dis­tinctions were drawn, it becaim' necessary to point out that there wa~ scarcely a new member in this Parliament who had not filled responsible public positions. And when they arrived in the House what did they find? That new members could not' even speak at the time in a debate when they wished to speak. (Mr. vVilkinson­" They are not seen.") Like childrelJ, they were to be seen, but not heard. He wonld ask the House not to make the invidious distinction they were called upon to make­not to be put at loggerheads with each Qther through this blundering action of the Government-but to teach the Government a lesson by refusing to ratify their choice, and by simply pleasing itself as to the men it would put into this very responsible position. .

Mr. vVHEELER remarked that no doubt, as the honorable member for Oreswick bad pointed out, constitutionally the Govern­ment were responsible for this committee, but this was only nominally so, because they bad consented to allow tbe leader of the Opposition to select four members from his

side of the House. That arrangement hav­ing been made, he (Mr. \Vheeler) thought it ought not to have been disturbed; the choice of the Opposition should have been accepted without any interference whatever on the part of the Government. It was a curious thing that while the Opposition had been allowed the selection of four members and had met in caucus for the purpose of choosing them, the Government had nomi­nated four members from the Ministerial side without consulting a single one of their supporters. Surely the Government were very remiss in their duty in not calling their party together and consulting them, with the view of selecting the very best men for this important committee. lVlen~bers on the Ministerial side were just as much entitled to that courtesy and consideration as the Opposition, and he thought that if the Government had acted in this man­ner they would only have been doing justice to their own party. He was much surprised to see one name omitted from the committee, and that was the name of the honorable member for Gippsland North. He ventured to say that there was bardly a member of the House but would be delighted to see that honorable member on the com­mittee. There was no man more fit for the position, and, if he could afford the time, the Government should have honoured him before almost any other honorable member on that (the Ministerial) side of the House. If there was to be any change, he (Mr. Wheeler) certainly hoped that the honor­able member for Gippsland North would be plac~d on the committee.

Mr. LAURENS stated that the Premier had exercised his undoubted right, as a member of that Chamber, in taking excep­tion to one of the four honorable members who had been selected by the Opposition, but the Premier was too old a politician not to know that every member of the House had an equal right to take exception to the honorable gentleman's own selection. He (Mr. Laurens) was surprised to hear that the Government had not allowed to those honorable members who had so faithfully followed them the same privilege that was accorded to the Opposition. If the principle of selecting by caucus was a good one on one side of the House, surely it was equally good on the other. The Premier, in pro­posing this motion, stated that his supporters were very strollgly inclined to insist that there should be five members selected from the Ministerial side and only three from the Opposition. He

20GO RazTways Standing [ASSEMBL Y.] Committee.

(Mr. Laurens) very much regretted to hear that there had been a disposition of that kind so manifest, because it looked as if there was still an intention on the part of many honorable members to proceed on the principle of "the spoils to the victors." Now this was what he had supposed all through the debate on the Railway Bill they were endeavouring to avoid. He understood that they had decided to reverse their position, to turn from the course followed in the past with regard to railway measures, and to adopt a new course, the outcome of which would show that the whole matter had been deliberated upon entirely on impartial and non-party grounds. While the Premier took exception to the choice of the Opposition, the only explana­tion he gave as to why he objected to one of the members selected was that he was a new member. Now he (Mr. Laurens) had sat for a good many years in the Assembly, but he did not for one moment imagine that that fact qualified him beyond any other member to sit upon this committee. In fact, it was his opinion that they could :find as good a committee altogether outside the Chamber-and possibly better, every­thing cousidered-to perform the functions allotted to this committee as they could :find within the House. He held this view strongly, and if it had been possible to carry a provision under which a com· mittee for this particular purpose could llave been selected altogether out­side the political arena, that proposi­tion would have had his support. He might seem singular in expressing this view, but he was convinced that he was right. He must again express his regret that they were informed, on the anthority of the Premier, that there was a strong disposi­tion on the Ministerial side to go on the old lines-to still insist that there should be some advantage to themselves in the matter of railway construction. The principle was wrong, and he had always condemned it.

Mr. GROOM observed that, so far as he was concerned, it would afford him very great pleasure indeed, if the honorable mem­ber for Gippsland North would allow him­self to be nominated on the committee, to give way to that honorable member. He had not the slightest feeling in the matter, and he hoped the House would not think that he was forced into saying this. He stated to the Government that evening that he would be perfectly willing to stand on one side if the honorable member for Gippsland North would take his place. The

only view he (Mr. Groom) took was that it was absolutely necessary that some member representing Gippsland should be on the committee.

Mr. GRAHAM stated that he was sorry his name had been brought before the House so prominently in the matter. He wished to say that as far as he was concerned he had no desire to be on this committee at al1. On the contrary, he knew it would take up a great deal of time, which he was not very well able to give to the purpose. If honor­able members on the Opposition side desired it, he was quite willing to retire in favour of the honorable member for Donald. The oniy reason he allowed himself to be nominated at all was because there was no member on the committee representing any portion of the colony between Gippsland on the east and the far north-western corner of the colony.

Mr. LEVIEN said it was a pity that, the Premier having consulted with the leauer of the Opposition as to the nomina­tion or four gentlemen on that side or the House, those nominations had been in any way disturbed. The difficulty might be got over if the Premier would allow the original nominations to stand. Personally, he (Mr. Levien) had no exception to take to a single gell tleman who had been nominated on one side or the other, and he would have been equally pleased whether the honorable mem­ber for Donald or the honorable member for Numul'kah had been proposed. Both were eminently qualified for the posit.ion, and he believed had the entire confidence of both sides of the House. However, he thought new members need take no exception to the remarks made by the Premier when proposing the substitution of the honorable member for N ulllurkah for the honorable member· for Donald. The Premier simply put it that in connexion with positions of this kind-and he (Mr. Levien) thought 1'ightly-members who had served for some years in Parliament were entitled to a little more consideration than new mem­bers. The latter might be yery excellent members, but had hardly the same claim for nomination on a committee like this as those who had been longer in the House. In commercial bodies-boards of directors and the like-there was the same feeling, that those who had served longest were entitled to a little more consideration than others. He was sure the Premier did not intend to reflect upon the honorable member for Donald or upon any new member. The new members who had come into the House

Railwa'!J8 Standing [OCTOBER 14.J Committee. 2061

at the beginning of this Parliament would bear favorable comparison with any set of members who had been elected to any previous Parliament, and he was sure that several of them would make their mark. He hoped the Premier would see his way to accept the nominations made by the Opposition, especially after the generous statement of the honorable member for Numul'kah that he was quite willing to retire in favour of the honorable member for Donald.

Mr. TURNER observed that the hon­orable member for Barwon had endeavoured to excuse the conduct of the Premier with regard to the new members, but he (Mr. Turner) thought very few honorable mem­bers on either side of the House would be found to agree with his arguments. The honorable member rightly said that in matters of this kind the old members should have the preference, but he (Mr. Turner) would ask if when, out of a committee of eight, seven members were old members as against one new member, the old members had not a sufficiently strong preference? The old members of the House could have no complaint against such a selection, and therefore he was inclined to believe that the excuse put forward by the Premier was not the true reason for his action in this matter. There were two peculiarities in this debate. One was the almost unanimous condem­nation of the action of the Premier, the strongest condemnation, as usual, coming from the Government supporters. The other peculiarity was the fact that, after members had been running in and oat of the House for the last quarter of an hour, the two honorable members whose names were most strongly objected to had asked that they should be withdrawn. This was not a new experience in the House, as the usual course was for the Government to find out which way the wind was blowing, and then to trim their sails accordingly. It appeared as if the Premi('r, with the as­sistance, he (Mr. Turner) was sorry to say, of some of the members on the Opposition side of the House, }lad come to a com­promise, which no doubt was satisfactory to the Government. The Premier having made a fair bargain with the leader of the Opposition as to the selection of names on each side of the House, the Premier was acting unfairly when he took up the position of objecting to one of the names submitted by the Opposition, and of substituting another naTlH'. No doubt the Premier, who was a wily and astute general, thought

SES. ]890.--7 G

that by his action he would create dissatis­faction in the ranks of the Opposition, and make them less strongly united than they were now. He probably expected that a number of the older members on the

. Opposition side would naturally feel that they ought to support the honorable member for Numurkah, and that the younger members would feel they were unfairly treated by having their repre­sentative struck out, and thus division would be brought about. That the objec­tion of the Premier to the honorable member for Donald was not simply on account of his youth as a member of the House was shown by the fact that, some time ago, when it was proposed to have a select committee of the Assembly alone'to do the very same work that this standing committee was to do, the honorable member for Donald was one of the members nominated from the Opposition side, and the Premier accepted and proposed him without making the slightest objection. Long parliamentary experience gave a member a superior claim to such positions as that or Bpeaker or Ohairman of Oommittees, in which a knowledge of parliamentary practice was required, but he (Mr. Turner) did not see how the fact that a man had been five or six years in the House necessarily made him better qualified to sit on a committee to inquire into railway construction than a member who had been only two years in the House. The Premier's ostensible ob­jection to the honorable member for Donald was, in the honorable gentleman's own, language, " too thin."

Mr. MOUNTAIN remarked that, while he was pleased that the Railways Standing Oommittee Act had now become law-he believed the country would be well satisfied with having such a measure-he was not surprised at the strong expressions of dis. sent which were heard when the Premier read the names of the proposed committee, more especially when the honorable gentle­man gave his reasons for the selection. The Premier gave as one reason for the nominations that he was anxious to select gentlemen who could afford the time and attention necessary for the large amount of work the committee would have to do; but how the honorable gentleman arrived at his conclusion as to the members who were in a position to give that time he (Mr. Moun­tain) was at a loss to know, because he believed not a single member on the Ministerial side of the House, except perha,ps those selected, had been asked

2062 ll,ailways StancZz'ng [ASSEMBLY.] Committee.

whether he was willing to sit on the committee, or had been spoken to on the matter at all. Although honorable members on the Ministerial side of the House might be the" dumb driven cattle" described by one honorable member, still they liked to have a little consideration, and that had not been shown to them in this case. The honorable member for Melbourne East (Mr. Stnart) had stated that pressure was brought to bear on the Government with the object that no new member should be placed on this com­mittee. If that was the way business was conducted in the Assembly, then they were "dumb driven cattle" indeed. If it became the duty of honorable members to assist in the selection, he thougllt they should choose gentlemen who would be willing to give plenty or time to this work, and above all, members who were independent and had not too many proposed lines in their districts. He trusted that· the Government would not be altogether bound by the selection they had made. In view or the agreement come to by the Premier and the leader of the Opposition, he did not underst.and why the nominations of the leader of the Opposi­tion were not accepted. A young member, though not well acquainted wi th the usages of Parliament, might possess ability and sound common sense. The services of the honor­able member for Donald would be of great service to the standing committee, and the interest he had taken in the question of light lines afforded a further reason why he should be appointed.

Mr. MUNRO said that the question before the House had now been thoroughly thrashed out, and the debate had better be brought to a termination. The selection of the members of the standing committee was a matter or great importance, and ought to be made in such a way as would give general satisfaction. The honorable mem­ber for N umurkah and the honorable member for Gippsland "Vest had volun­tarily and in a very graceful manner agreed to retire from the nominations, and the best. plan for the Government to adopt wou:.l be to accept their retirement. The members of the standing committee would have very important work to do, and ifthey were appointed by an unanimous vote of the House they would feel that their hands \vere strengthened.

Mr. GILLIES remarked that some honorable members had fallen into certain grave misapprehensions. It had been assumed that he had pledged himself to con­sult with the leader of the Opposition, and

to accept the honorable member's nomina­tions. He had never given any such pledge. He stated deliberately that he would consult the leader of the Opposition before he took any action with regard to the constitution of the standing committee. He had done that, and the leader of the Opposition knew the spirit in which they had discussed the matter together. He ventured to assert that the leader of the Opposition would admit that he (Mr. Gillies) had done the best he could in order to make things pleasant on both sides. Could any honorable member imagine that by the remarks he had pre­viously made he intended to cast a reflection upon any honorable member si~ply because he was elected at the beginning of the present Parliament? He did not think that any honorable member, when he thought the matter over quietly, would take that view. He cast no reflection whatever upon the honorable member for Donald. He merely stated the plain truth when 11e said that, other things being equal, young members when placed in a position of respon­sibility were not likely to do so well as old members. Regret had been expressed that the honorable member for Gippsland North had not been nominated for appointment 011 the standing committee, and it was stated that his name was included in the list of members nominated for the select committee which it was in the first instance proposed to appoint.. The honorable member was asked to act on the select committee, because the honorable member for Dundas, who was chairman of the caucus and who was entitled to be appointed, absolutely declined to allow himself to be nominated. On this occasion he thought it to be his duty to first ask the honorable member for Dundas to allow himself to be nominated as a mpmber of the standing committee, and he had adopted that course. He was very anxious, as the leader of the Opposition knew, to make the best selection for both sides of the House, so that the committee should be a credit to the House, and should be able to do its duty thoroughly and impartially. He felt also that a member for Gippsland ought to be on the committee. A great deal had been said about some of the lines proposed for Gippsland; and he desired that a member for qi ppsland shoulU be on the committee, so that he might hear the evidence produced and cross-examine the witnesses so as to elicit the truth. All the Government wanted was the truth, and if the truth were ascertained the com­mittee would have no difficulty it~ reporting

Railways Standing [OCTOBER 14.J Committee. 2063

-to the House, and the House would have no difficulty in arriving at a ~decision upon their report. W hat did the House think of the opinion which had been expressed by two or three honorable members that no honorable member should be placed . upon the committee who had any interest whatever in the proposed lines? If that view were to be carried out, no committee -could be appointed, especially from the Legislative Oouncil, the members of which \fepresented such very large districts. The Government had a responsibility which no private member had. The Government were responsible not only to the House but -to the country, and they had endeavoured to form the best judgment they could as to the honorable members to be placed upon this committee. To select honorable members representing the Assembly who had no interest in any of the lines proposed would be a sheer impossibility. But was it to be supposed that because the members or the committee had an interest in some of the lines, they would not-endeavour to gire fair play all round? The committee would be expected to make a thorough and impartial investigation, and only to select such lines as in their honest judgment they could recommend Parliament to authorize. The complaint was seriously made that the Government had -not consulted honorable members on the Ministerial side or the House with regard to the selection of the -committee. If honorable members were in the position or the Government and had their responsibility, they would find that it was not always safe to consult their friends. If he had been in the position of the leader of the Opposition, and his supporters declined to accept the list of names he selected, he would have walked out of the room. There were occasions w hen the leader of the Government and the leader of the Opposition must say to their friends " You must either be with me or against­me." (Mr. vVheeler-" You did not say that.") He was constantly saying it. There were occasions when the Government must not be always calling their supporters together. The Government considered that aspect or the question, and they felt that they would be perfectly justified in carefully considering the selection of the honorable members to be placed upon this committee, and in submitting the list of nominations to the Honse. If the Govern­-ment had called their supporters together, it would not have been possible to select them all; there were only four mem bers to be

702

appointed, and the difficulty was, therefore, increased. The Government desired, as far as they could within reasonable limits, to meet the necessities of the situation, and it would not be wise of them to say to the House that they insisted upon e\'ery honor­able member they selected being appointed . If there was any occasion on which the will of Parliament was entitled to show itself, it was in the appointment for the first time of so important a committee as this. The Government, after consultation with the leader of the Opposition, submitted certain names. They selected three out of the four names proposed by the Opposition; for w hat they believed to be good reasons they did not select the fourth name, but they were quite willing that a fourth member should be appointed from the Opposition. (Mr. Turner-" You gave the Opposition only three members.") In the first instance the Government did not promise to give the Opposition fom members or three members, they simply intimated that they would endeavour to make a fair selection. The Government had made an honest effort to see that the House should be represented on (,he committee by good and experienced men. The two honorable members who pro­posed to retire from. nomination had acted in a manner that was very creditable to themselves, but he was satisfied that those two honorable members would have madp. good and faithful representatives of this Ohamber.

Mr. METHVEN stated that he must express his admiration at the style in which the Premier put a little grease on the axles when they had been heated by friction. He must, however, take exception to the reflec­tion which had been cast upon the new members of the House. What were the qualifications required in a member of the standing committee ? Was it that he should have been a member or the House for a certain number of years? (Mr. Turner­"He must have the confidence or the Premier, that is all.") That was a qualifica­tion which had not struck him at all. He contended that there was. something else required in members of the committee than that they should have been members of the House for a certain number of- years. His opinion was that honorable members who had been" rusticating" in the House for the last ten or twelve years were not so well qualified to act on this committee as honorable members who had been recently elected, and who had had the cob­webs brushed off them by contact with the

2064 . Railways Standing [ASSEMBLY.] Committte.

'outside world. He could name a dozen honorable members who, from their practical knowledge of the work to be undertaken by the committee, were better qualified for seats upon it than were several of the honorable members who had been nominated. It had been stated that this was not a party ques­tion. Why, then, should the members of the committee be selected from the one side or the other? Why should not the best men be chosen, no matter on what side of the Hause they sat? There was not, for instance; an honorable member who was better qualified, from his practical know­ledge of railway work and his intimate acquaintance with the wants of the country, to sit on the committee than the honorable member for Daylesford. Practical men of business were required on the committee. The honorable member for Gippsland West and the Premier had said that it was neces­sary that an honorable member representing Gippsland should be appointed on the com­mittee. If that were so, why should not honorable 11lembers representing other parts of the colony in which it was proposed to construct railways be appointed? It was expected that the committee would deal with every line submitted to them on its merits, and would do justice to all parts of the colony. He considered that the remark made by the honorable member for Gipps­land West and by the Premier was a reflec­tion upon the committee, and he regretted that it had been made.

Mr. DUFFY observed that it would have been a pit.y if this debate had ended in any other manner than that in which it was about to end. The Government had all along shown adisposition to "back down" in conn ex ion with the question of railway construction, and it would have been a matter for regret if they had sh9wn any inconsistency at the last moment by exhibit­ing a little firmness. After the Railway Construction Bill was read a second time, the Government said that they could pro­duce bushels of evidence which would satisfy the House and the country with regard to the merits of the lines proposed. That did not seem to satisfy the House, and the Go­vernment put up one ot their supporters to suggest that it would perhaps be better if evidence was taken at the bar ot the House. That again did not satisfy the House, and the Government, after agreeing to it, turned round and said, "Oh, no, we will have a select committee as to the cost of the lines; as to the merits, never j death, or even resignation, sooner." After a little while

the Government saw that that did not suit the House, and they intimated they would allow the merits of- the lines to be discussed by the select committee. They found that that proposal was not acceptable,and then they said-"W e will start afresh; we have heen introducing octopns Railway Bills, hut we see that that was not good for the countryr what we are aiming at is to rednee the cost of railway construction, and we, therefore, think that the whole subject should be inquired into by an independent body; the country did not know it, but that was our intention all the time." The Government then produced the Bill for the appointment of a stand­ing committee, and, after a few twists and turns, that Bill was passed. Then came the question or the constitution of the standing committee. Several honorable members objected to the personnel of the committee as proposed by the Government, a,nd the Premier, in the nice suave manner he always adopted when he saw that matters were going wrong, "backed down" again. At first the Premier said that, with the united and enthusiastic majority the Govern­ment had behind them, they ought to select five of the members of the committee and the Opposition three. However, that did not suit, and the honorable gentleman agreed that each side should have four members; but he said that he would select one of the members for the Opposition, and the Opposition could select the other three, which would be fair play. That was "too thin," and the House then took the matter in their own hands. It was really amusing to see member after member on th~ Ministerial side of the Houserise up, as they had done frequently on former occasions, and abuse the Government. It was still more amusing to see the Government, on finding that the numbers were wrong, quietly and calmly gave way again, and say, "Oh, the whole thing was a mistake; we are in the hands of the House; the nomination of the members of the committee is a mere detail, and the House can make changes in the list of names submitted if it does not suit." Perhaps what bad occurred would be a lesson to honorable members sitting behind the Government, for while the Opposition had been consulted, the supporters of the Go­vernment had been insulted. One littl", episode had occurred that night, which he might describe as the revolt of the new mem­bers. He sympathized with those honorable members. He was a new member once himself, and he was young and innocent

RailwCt!Js Standing [OCTOBER 14.] Committee. 2065

111 those days. He did not hear the speech of the Premier, but he understood the honorable gentleman said that the new members were wanting in conscience and integrity. (Mr. Gillies-" No.") If an evening Hansct1'd had been published, he might have had time to read the speech. The older a member got the harder his -conscience became. The Premier was once a young and innocent member. (" Oh ! ") vVell, he would withdraw the remark. Of course, in the turns and twists of political life an honorable member gradually got tougher, and his conscience wore better. If that were not so, the Premier would not be in the happy position he now occupied. If he (Mr. Duffy) remained a member of the House, he would have the pleasure of seeing the new members growing older and losing conscience while they gained experience. At present he was glad that there were -such a number of good new members in the House. "All's well that ends well" was a well-known play. If the Premier did not write it, he might have written it. When­-ever a storm occurred, the honorable gentleman managed to turn and twist things round until honorable members were all "as merry as a marriage bell."

The nominations of Mr. Officer, Mr. Tucker, Mr. A. Young, Mr. Bent, Mr. McIntyre, and Mr. Woods as members of -the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Rail ways were then agreed to se1'iatim.

Mr. GROOM stated that he desired to withdraw his name from nomination. He -begged to move that, in lieu of himself, the honorable member for Gippsland North be -appointed to the standing committee.

Mr. MASON seconded the amendment. Mr. vVE BB said that he would support

-the nomination of the honorable member for Gippsland North, but at the same time he must protest against no honorable member having been nominated who repre­sented the north-eastern district. The -constitution of the committee would not give satisfaction to the colony as a whole.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. GRAHAM stated that he desired

to withdraw his name from nomination, and he begged to move that, instead of his name; that of the honorable member for Donald be added to the committee. He had sufficient faith in the integrity or the committee to believe that the interests of the north·eastern .o.istrict would not be negiected.

Mr. L. L. SMITH seconded the amend­ment, which was agreed to.

The motion for the appointment of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Railways, _ as amended, was then adopted, the committee reflresenting the Legislative Assembly being constituted as fo11ows:­Mr. Officer, Mr. Tucker, Mr. A. Young, Mr. McLean, Mr. Bent, Mr. McIntyre, Mr. Woods, and Mr. Taverner.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN asked the Premier if he could give the House any information as to the order in which lines referred to the standing committee would be dealt wIth by them?

Mr. GILLIER said that it was not within the functions of the House to instruct the committee as to the order in which the lines referred to the committee should be dealt with. One branch of the Legis­lature could not instruct a joint cOlumittec, and particularly a joint committee that was appointed under the authority of an Act of Parliament.

Mr. RICHARDSON inquired whether honorable members would have an oppor­tunity of proposing that additional lines be referred to the standing committee?

Mr. GILLIES stated that it was his intention to propose, on an evening of which he would give notice, that all the lines in­cluded in the Railway Construction Bill, and the other lines recommended by the caucus, should be refen'cd to the standing committee. After that, any llOnorable member could, on giving notice, propose that additional lines be referred to the committee.

Mr. McCOLL said that he had expected that before this matter was settled some expression of opinion would have been given by the House as to the desirability of a few lines, at any rate, being dealt with bef(~re the session closed. From the information he had obtained, he was confident that unless some contracts for the constrnction of new lines were let at an early date, some hundreds, if not thousands, of men would be thrown out of employment.

Mr. GILLIES remarked that he believed every member of the standing committee was alive to the necessity of dealing with some of the proposed lines, and sending their report upon them to the House this session.

Mr. MUNRO observed that it was ab­surd for honorable members to deceive themsel ves and the country in regard to this matter, because they must know it to be utterly impossible for the committee to give attention to the questions that would be sent before them in a way that would lead

2066 Railways Standing [ASSEMBLY.] Committee.

to the adoption of any lines this session, as it was well known that when honorable members in t.he House found that the lines they were interested in were not recom­mended, they would object to one or two others beiug passed. Another difficulty was that everyone knew perfectly well that it would be quite impossible to get any money next year for the construction of new railways. At the present time the Government had not a shilling of loan money to theil' credit, they were trading upon the trust funds at their disposal, and everv one knew that a loan must be floated befo~e the Government could spend a shilling. In view of the obligations which the Government were committed to, and the conversion of the debentures which would fall due next January, it was the height of folly for honorable members to believe that anything could be done towards railway construction during the next year; and nothing could be done in the way of entering upon new railway contracts for the next eighteen mont.hs. (Mr. Gillies­"That is quite a mistake.") It would be impossible to float a railway loan next year under existing circumstances. He referred to the financial engagements of the Govern­ment, and the state of the London money market.

Mr. GILLIES stated that it was quite unnecessary to float a new loan.

Mr. RIOHARDSON remarked that there were the trust funds to fall back on.

Mr. MUNRO said there were very little of the trust funds left at the present moment. Some employment might be found for labourers if the Metropolitan Board of \V orks Bill was hUl'ried through, because the board could obtain a loan for the construction of sewers; but as far as rail way construction was concerned, the thing was hopeless, as the stock subscribed for last February was now at a discount in the London market, and a new loan could not possibly be flonted. (Mr. Gillies -"A change might come over the London market any month.") The Government would not be able to float a loan for railway purposes next year. (Mr. Gillies-" It is not neces­sary.") What was the use of talking about constructing railways when the Govel'l1ment had not got a shilling to do it with? For the reasons he had named, no Railway Construction Bill would be passed this session, and the Government knew it.

Mr. HALL remarked that he hoped that the Railways Standing Committee would not damage its reputation at the outset by

recommending a few lines before it had had' time to consider the whole of the lines sub­mitted to it. The committee would not be in a position, until it had carried out a full in vestigation of all the proposed schemes,. to know what lines it would be proper to recommend. The instruction to the com-· mittee was to report upon the whole of the proposed lines, and they could not recom­mend any line until they had fairly and honestly gone through them all.

The House adjoul'l1ed at twenty-five· minutes to eleven o'clock.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. TVednesday, October 15, 1890.

Melbourne Hydraulic Power Company's Act Amendment Bill-SubUl'ban Tramways Company Bill-Melbourne­a.nd Metropolitan Board of Works Bill-Marriage Act Amendment Bill,

The PRES !DENT took the chair at twenty minutes to five o'clock p.m., and read the prayer.

MELBOURNE HYDRAULIC POWER OOMPANY'S

ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

Mr. SE RVICE (in the absence of Mr. ZEAL) moved the second reading of this Bill. He said that the principal Act passed in 1887 authorized the incorporation of a company for the pUl'pose of bringing hydraulic power into operation in the city of Melbourne. That Act was introduced after an arrangement had been come to with the Melbourne City Council with respect to the opening up of streets, and the conditions under which the company should work. Some of the conditions had reference to the pipes used becoming the property of the corporation at the end of a certain period, and others had reference to the termf:l under which the whole of the works would ulti. mately be handed o\'cr to the city council. The present Bill amended and explained the terms and conditions under which the property was finally to fall into the hands of the city council, and the Bill was the result of a full and complete understanding be­tween the company and the city council. Practically the measure was one of little interest to the House, and it had been passed in the Assembly without discussion:

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was then read a second time, and

committed pro /01'111(1.

S1.lburban Tramways [OCTOBER 15.] CompCln!J Bill. 2067

SUBURBAN TRAMWAYS OOMPANY BILL.

The. Hon. J. M. DAVIES moved­"That standing order No. 17 (private Bills)

be suspended."

The honorable member said the standing order was as follows:-

" Tha,t every promoter of a priYa.te Bill shall, at least ten days before the same is set down for the second reading, furnish to the Clerk of the Parliaments attested copies of all plans, sections, books of reference, estimates, and subscription contracts, or declarations in lieu of subscription contracts, laid before the Legislative Assembly in pursuance of the standing orders of that House, and the Clerk of the Parliaments shall give a receipt for the same, in which the several documents shall be distinctly specified, which receipt the member having charge of the Bill shall produce to the House before the Bill is set down for the second reading. "

The plans and papers were lodged eight days ago instead of ten days ago, and a receipt was obtained the following day, so that the time was three days short of the proper time. But the object of the stand­ing order had been obtained, because notice of this motion had been given for a week, and honorable members had probably had more time to look into the plans than would have been at their command had the sns­pension of the standing order not been asked for. The plans had all previously been lodged with the Assembly, and no injury would be done by the suspension of the standing order.

The Hon. F. S. DOBSON seconded the motion, which was agreed to.

The Hon. tT. M. DAVIES then moved the second reading of the Suburban Tram­ways Oompany Bill. He remarked that the measure was constructed on lines similar to those of the Melbourne Tramway Company's Act, nearly all the clauses having been copied from that Act. The Bill authorized the construction of a tramway four miles and seven furlongs in length, commencing at the intersection of Hoddle­street extension and Queen's-parade, proceed­ing thence along Hoddle-street extension, Hoddle-street, Hoddle-street bridge and approaches (to be constructed), and Punt­road, terminating in Punt-road at or near its intersection with St. Kilda-road, in the cities of Melbourne, Oollingwood, Rich­mond, Prahran, and St. Kilda, and the parishes of Jika Jika, South Melbourne, and Prahran, or one of them. It also authorized the construction of a second tramway of the length of two miles five

furlongs, commencing at the intersection of Barldy-street and St. Kilda-road, pro­ceeding thence along Barldy-street and Elwood-road, and terminating in Elwood­road at the intersection with St. Kilda­street, in the city of St. Kilda and parish of Prabran. The measure provided in the usual way for the assent of the munici­palities affected being obtained, and for the formation or a Suburban Tramways Board to exercise similar functions to those of the board under the Melbourne Tram­ways Oompany's Act. At the end of forty years the tramways were to become the absolute property or the different corporations. Under certain conditions the different corporations had also the right or purchase at the end of 25 years, without paying anything for the good-will or future profits. Again, the municipalities were empowered to form a Trust, and construct tramways and lease them for a period to this company. Penny sections would be provided on the new lines, and not more than sixpence would be allowed to be charged for the total length of seven miles. The reports or the various municipalities interested, and the evidence given before the select committee or the Legislative Assembly on the subject, were decidedly in favour or the Bill. The Mayor of Oollingwood stated before the committee that his council were unanimouslv in favour of the Bill. The Mayor or Pr~hran said his council would approve or the Bill if a few alterations were made in it, and repre­sentatives of St. Kilc1a also gave evidence in ravour of the measure. The Melbourne Tramway Oompany and the Corporation of Melbourne, who were representcd before the select committee by counsel, gaye evidence and obtained various amendments, so t.hat the matter was very fully gO'nc into.

The Hon. F. S. DOBSON seconded the motion.

The Hon. J. M. PRATT obsen"ed that clause 15 had a very unrair bearing upon the Melbourne Tramway Oompany. It related to precautions for the protection of level crossings, and the effect of it prac­tically was that the suburban company was empowered to call upon the company whose lines they were going to cross to pay two­thirds or the expenditure incurred in a matter with which the latter company had nothing whatever to do. There was no spirit or fairness in that pro,ision, and he hoped to see it excised in committeI'.

The Hon. W. McOUL LOOH said he had much pleasure in supporting the Bill

2068 Railways Standing [COUNCIL.] Committee.

though he did not think the proposed lines would pay. The point referred to by Mr. Pratt ought to receive attention in com­mittee.

The Hon. D. MELVILLE stated that the Hous~ was entitled to receive some assurance on the part of the Government that they had looked into the subject-matter of this Bill. It was stated that penny sections were to be introduced, but there would be no gain to the public if sixpence was to be charged for the journey of seven tn:les. If penny sections on the Chicago plan were adopted, the fare for the whole seven miles would be 2~d. When the Mel­bourne Tramway Company was started evi­dence was given that penny sections could be worked in that way. It would be estab­lishing an objectionable precedent now to allow sixpence to be charged for a trip of seven miles. They ought now to turn the past experience of the older company to account.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was then read a second time, and

committed pro fonna.

RAIL'V AYS STANDING COMMITTEE.

The Hon. J. BELL moved-

"That the following members be appointed members of the Parliamentary Standing Com­mittee on Railways, namely:-The Honorables Lt.-Col. Sir F. T. Sargood, G. Young, H. Gore, N. Thornley, and S. Fraser."

The honorable gentleman said that the Go­vernment in making this selection had in view the necessity of appointing members who would be able to devote sufficient time to the important duties they would be called upon to perform. All would admit that the members named were gentlemen of ability and experience, while some of them possessed a practical knowledge of railway matters. There! were no doubt many other honorable members who were well fitted for the posi­tion, but not all of them could afford the necessary amount of time. He trust~d that the House would give its assent to the selection.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT seconded the motion.

The Hon. J. H. CONNOR remarked that he wished to know what railway lines would be referred to the committee in addition to those in the Government Rail. way Bill. He noticed that on the committee Melbourne had five or six representatives, and that Gippsland had two or three, while there was no representative at all for the

Cape Otway district. The Government appeared to have altogether neglected that part of the colony. There was no line for the Cape Otway district in the Railway Bill, and this House had no power to refer a new line to the committee.

The Hon. J. SERVICE said he was very much surprised at the remarks made by Mr. Connor, who seemed to forget alto­gether the character of the committee, which was a body appointed to take evidence upon the merits of lines wherever they might run to. If this had been a partisan committee or a committee appointed to fight for parti­cula.r lines, he could have understood the remarks of the honorable member. He congratulated the Government on the selection of names they had made. He did not say that there were not other mem­bers in the House who were equally good; but he maintained that there was not a name in the list which could be taken exception to. This committee was of a peculiar character. It had been created for the eXJ..lress purpose of doing away with the very thing which Mr. Connor wanted it to do. He (Mr. Service) would not vote for a single man proposed for the committee if he thought he could not approach the con­sideration of rail way lines withQut having his mind utterly divested of any feeling as to the desirability of ha ving a line constructed for his own or any other district. That was the spirit by which the committee was in­tended to be animated, and if it failed in that respect, its appointment would not only not be advantageous to the country-it would be a. curse to the country. The object in view was to obtain a judicial opinion on all the evidence given, as if the members of the committee were sitting on the Supreme Court bench, the issue to be tried being whether it would be to the interest of the colony to borrow money for the performance of a particular work. As Sir Frederick Sargood was a member of the committee as proposed, he was not able to take his usual place as leader of the House, and he (Mr. Service) had therefore taken the liberty of complimenting the Government on his behalf. He believed that not only every member of the House, but the country from one end to the other, would be delighted with the selection made by the Government.

The Hon. J. M. PRATT remarked that he hoped that no undue haste would be displayed by the committee in the perform­ance of its duties. It was most desirable that the investigation of the merits of different lines should be thorough and

Railways Standing [OCTOBER 15.] Committee. 2069

eomplete, and that no pressure should be allowed to induce the committee to bring up its report earlier than they otherwise would have presented it. He did not agree with Mr. Oonnor's views as to the proper quali­fication of a member of the committee. In . his opinion, the best man was the one who was not interested in any line. Such members should be appointed on the <:ommittee, because they had no interest w bat­ever to serve, and every member of the House would recognise their thorough fairness. He was not going to say that the honorable members who had been nominated as mem­bers of the committee would not act in the same spirit of fairness, but he was only urging the necessity of having, if possible, perfectly unbiased men on the committee. Parliament was now taking an important step not only with regard to the construction of railways, because they were also dealing with the question of pledging the credit of the colony, and in view of what had taken place in connexion with the railways already constructed or in course of construction, and remembering that many of the existing lines were not remunerative, and were not likely to become so for years to come, he hoped that the committee would not show any undue haste in recommending new lines. Not that he had any fear as to the future of the railways of this colony, but he felt that every new propusal should be thoroughly investigated so that, if possible, no mistake might be made.

The HOIl. T. DOWLING said he was sure the House had every confidence in the gentlemen nominated for appoint­ment by the Oouncil on the Railways Standing Oommittee, and he certainly felt that they would prove worthy of the trust reposed in them. He had all along con­tended that the best course would be to appoint a committee from outside Parlia­ment altogether, and a great mistake was made in not adopting that proposal. How­ever, he congratulated the Government on the names that had been submitted by the Minister of Defence, and he would look to those gentlemen to be above what he called human nature. He observed in the A1'g'llS

that one of the speakers at a recent public meeting stated that he was quite sure of the men appointed on this committee by the Legislative Assembly so far as the rail­ways connected with his district were con­cerned, and that showed the kind of influences which the members of the com­mittee would be called upon to resist. He sincerely trusted that the motion lVould be

agreed to, and that the gentlemen named would accept the position, because he was perfectly sure that they would act in the committee as if they were sitting on a judicial bench, and that the honour of the Oouncil and the interests of the country would be perfectly safe in their hands .

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES remarked that he also could congratulate the Honse and the country on the selection of the five honorable members who were chosen to represent the Oouncil on this committee. It would hardly have been possible to make a better selection. He was especially grati­fied that Sir Frederick Sargood had seen his way to act on the committee. Having made these remarks, he could the more freely express his opinion that the Govern­ment ought to have taken the House into their confidence before selecting the mem­bers of the committee. In the course of the debate on the second reading of the Railways Standing Oommittee Bill a qnes­tion was asked~ "In what way will the members of the committee be selected?" and it was pointed out that, in another place one-half of the members to be appointed were to be selected from the Government side of the House, and one half from the Opposition. (Mr. Bell­" There is no Opposition here.") And for that very reason the House should have had something to say in the matter; in fact, he understood the Minister of Justice to state, in the course of the debate on the second reading of the Bill, that the members of the Oouncil who were to be ap­pointed on the committee wonld be chosen in the same way as the members of standing committees.

The Hon. H. OUTHBERT observed that he did not think he said that.

The Hon. J. BELL stated that he (Mr. Bell) said that the Premier would consult with the leader of the Opposition as to the selection of members in another place, bU,t he said nothing ~t all about what would be done in this House.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES said the question was asked in this House. He merely desired to point out the unfair posi­tion in which honorable members might have been placed had a less happy selection been made. It fortunately happened that the Government had made such a wise choice that no one could say a single word against any of the honorable members chosen for appointment on the committee; but, sup­posing the Government had chosen some one who was not acceptable to the House,

2070 Railways Standing [COUNCIL.] Committee.

honorable members would have been placed in a very awkward and unfair position. In choosing the members of this committee, why was a different course adopted to that which was followed in choosing the delegates for the Federation Oonvention? On that occasion the names were considered by hon­Ot'able members in private meeting before being submitted to this House, and that would have beeu the proper way to select the members for appointment on this stand­ing committee. (Mr. Bell-" All's well that ends well." ) No doubt, and he merely rose to let the Government understand that if they did things in the way they should not do thew, their actions would not be allowed to pass without notice.

The HOll. 'V. McOULLOOH expressed the opinion that the Government were to be congratulated on the choice they had made, and honorable members who had accepted membership of the committeo deserved the thanks of the House and the country, be­cause they had undertaken a responsible work which would occupy a great amount of time. The only thing he regretted was that Mr. Zeal had not been included in the list. The selection was such a good one, however, that he did not know who could very well be asked to retire in favour of Mr. Zeal.

The Hon. D. MELVILLE observed that it would have been better for the Honse if the Government had given honorable inem­bel'S a few days to consider the per~ollnel of the committee. Until the Minister of De­fence submitted the namE'S a short time ago, he (Mr. Melville) did not know who were to be nominated for membership of the com­mittee, and if any other honorable member had been informed it was not fair. If Ministers had gOfle ronnd the House and privately named the honorable members they desired to see appointed, that was not the just and proper mode of .procedure. (Mr. Bell-" That has not been done.") It was a singular coincidence, to say the leas~ Df it, that honorable members who had invariably come to the assistance of the Government were now prDposed for membership of this committee. (Mr. Service - "I am not in the list, although you accused me of being the Sarah Gamp of the Government.") At any rate, some of the honorable members now proposed were marked by their support of Ministerial proposals. (Mr. Outhbert­"And some of them do not vote for the Government, as a rule.") The one man who invariably analyzed and criticised the pro.posals of the Government, Mr. Zeal, was not included in the list,

although he wo.uld have proved a most valuable member of the committee, and his appointment would have given satisfaction ~o the who.le co.untry. Something like three­fo.urths o.f the members of the Legislative Assembly had privately expressed to him­sell their desire to see Mr. Zeal on the com­mittee, and many members of the Oouncil would be extremely disappointed when they found that the honorable member had not been asked to take the position for which he \Vas so. well qualified by his practical knDwledge of engineering and railway con­struction, by his keen critical faculties, and by his strict impartiality. He (Mr. Mel­ville) would not pretend to believe that the members Df the committee would be above human nature. He himself was not above human nature, and he was going to give the human nature aspect of the matter. Some of the members of another place who had been appointed on the committee would have their human nature terribly tried when the proposed rail ways for their own districts came on for consideration. In certain dis­tricts it was proposed to spend at least one million sterling, and the hDnorable members representing those districts would be placed in a very invidious position when the pro­jected lines in which their districts were immediately concerned were adjudicated upon by the committee. He naturally ex­pected that the Government would. selecn men who had no. individual interest, through their constituencies, in the lines proposed in the Railway Oonstruction Bill, and it so happened that Mr. Zeal represented a dis­trict which had hardly any interest in the Government railway proposals, so that he would have been an exceedingly eligible member of the committee from that point of view. Gippsland was to be exceedingly strong on the committee. (Mr. Outh­bert-" Gippsland will have only one man· on.") He was speaking of the committee as a whole, having in mind what had been done in the Assembly. By appointing such a committee as was now proposed, Parliament would be placing the rail ways in a certai n groo.ve. (Mr . McOulloch -" No.") The honorable member would not readily take into. any concern in which he was interested an active antagonist to. his views of business management. In order that they might consider the whole bearings Df the case in the interests of the House and of the conntry, he would suggest. that the motion Df the Minister of Defence· should be postponed until Tuesday next. He had not the smallest objection to. the

Railways Standing [OCTODEll 15.J Committee. 20711

appointment of Mr. Thornley as a member of the committee, but he could not help remembering that the honorable member was Chairman of the Melbourne Harbour Trust, and Sir Frederick Sargood was another member of that trust. The House might find when it was too late that it had been expecting too much from human nature. The Railways Standing Committee would have a great deal in their power, and honor­able members knew that-

"If self the quivering balance shake, It's rarely right adjusted."

And there would be cases of that sort. Fortunately, the commit.tee was to be an open court, its proceedings would be con­ducted in full view of the public, through the medium of the press, which was un­doubtedly a great safeguard. But the Government had not acted fairly to the House in regard to the selection of members of the committee. Ministers assured them, in the first place, that the House would be asked to select the members of this Cham­ber who were to be appointed on the com­mittee, and why did the Government not take the usual course of inviting the mem­bers of the Council to meet privately in the adjoining room and discuss the whole ques­tion as to the choice of representatives of this Chamber? Of course he had had an idea that certain honorable members would be nominated for membership of the com­mittee. For instance, the extraord inary and indefatigable efforts which Mr. Fraser made on behalf of the Railways Standing Committee Bill suggested to him that they would ha\"e the valuable services of that honorable member on the committee, and he told the honorable member so at the time.

The Hon. S. FRASER rose to order. The honorable member was making a dis­graceful personal attack on him. He (Mr. :Fraser) said that in cool blood. He did not wish to be offensive to the honorable member-he liked the honornbl9 member, and would be sorry to quarrel with him­but he was not going to allow the honor­able member or other honorable members to cast on him any unjustifiable reflections. When the honorable member made a similar remark the other evening he (Mr. Fraser) thought it was made in jest; but he could not think so now, and he mnst ask tllat the remark be withdrawn. He would challenge a'ny person to fortify any statement affect­ing his honour.

The PRESIDENT.-I ask the honor­able member to withdraw his remark, which

may be construed into an implied reflection on Mr. Fraser.

The Hon. D. MELVILLE stated that he had no idea of casting the smallest reflection on Mr. Fraser, and he would with­draw the remark, as it had given offence, and as the honorable member seemed to think that it implied an imputation upon his honour. He had only referred to the extraordinary and indefatigable efforts of the honorable member in support of the Railways Standing Committee Bill. (Mr. Fraser-" That is my nature; if I believe in a Bill, I go in for it.") Then the honor­able member was not above human nature in that respect. The honorable member always stood out boldly for every cause in which he believed. (Mr. Fraser-" Ask. the Minister of Defence whether I had been invited to become a member or the com­mittee, or even spoken to about the matter up to then ?") He was not going to ask any questions of the kind. (Mr. Cuthbert­"I beg the honorable member not to go into personalities.") He was not descending to personalities, but he had a perfect right to discuss the personnel of the committee. (Mr. Cuthbert-" Of course, and to move the substitution of one name for another.") The omission of Mr. Zeal's name from: the committee would come as a surprise upon the country for various reasons. That honorable member had closely criticised the pl'Ovisions of the Railways Standing Commit.tee Bill, and pointed out certain of its more objectionable phases; he had been connected with the railways system long before some of the members of the Council came to the colony; he was a gentle­man of high professional status and attain­ments, and he had been solicited by hon0rable members all round the House to sit on the committee for the sake of the­country. (Mr. Cuthbert-" I never heard that before; you are the fil st man who states it.") (Mr. Oonnor-" But it is so.") It certainly was. Among other honorable mem-· bers who had asked Mr. Zeal to accept an appointment on the committee, Mr. C. J .. Ham spoke to the h<.ll1orable member, and asked him whether it would not be well for him to be on the committee. (Mr. Service· -" Private conversations should not be mentioned on the floor of this House.") But he had a perfect right to refer to the

. matter, and to know whether Ministers. were doing their duty, whether they were· selecting the best men, the men whom it. was desirable to select in the opinion or honorable members generally. (Mr. Service

2072 Railways Standing [COUNCIL.] Committee.

-" You have no right to relate private -conversations on the floor of this House.") The Government were getting extraordinary :support from Mr. Service. He (Mr. Mel ville) only wanted impartiality on ·the committee; he had no other object to gain. Mr. Zeal was not only an able man, but he was known throughout the country for his straightforwardness .and his sincere desire that everything the Council did should redound to its credit. He was an old member, a man -of large experience, and the only reason one could surmise for his exclusion nas the deep interest he had taken in the .question of light lines, and his well-known desire to discuss and analyze every proposal that came under his consideration. Instead of springing a mine on honorable members, as they had done this evening, the Govern­ment should have given them anopportunity -of considering who would be the very best men that the House could select for appoint­ment on this committee. In calling atten­tion to this matter, he (Mr. Melville) felt that he had only done his duty, because it was not fair to the House to submit these names suddenly, for honorable mem bers to nnd tha t some of the best men in the Council were not proposed for appointment on the committee.

The lIon. S. FRASER said that from the moment it was first mentioned he had been a thorough supporter of the proposal to appoint a Railways Standing Committee. He inspected the Dookie tramway at the re­'quest of its promoters, and in every possible way, both in and out of Parliament, he had :shown his earnest desire for the appoint­ment of the committee, so that Mr. Melville had no justification for creating the dis­agreeable impression which the honorable member lUade on the mind of the House this evening. He (Mr. Fraser) was very anxious that Parliament should pass the Railways Standing Committee Bill, because he thought that the colony was then approaching dangerously near to a financial erisis, and that there was a probability of such pressure being brought to bear on tbe Government as to cause them to borrow £20,000,000, and spend it on the construc­tion of railways, many of which could not be expected to pay, at any rate for years and years to come. He was then afraid· that the colony was likely to get into a critical position, and hence his strong .ad vocacy of the measure. He considered that it was a great piece or good luck that .the country got the Railways Standing

Committee Act in the way it did, under the circumstances.

The Hon .• J. SERVIOE remarked that what had chafed Mr. Melville more than any­thing else was an idea that the Government had given certain members a preference in the way of early information as to the pro­posed personnel of the committee; but, as far as he was concerned, h~ did not know until he heard the names submitted who were to be nominated for membership of the com­mittee, and he came to thi House with a distinct expectation that Mr. Zeal would be among the members proposed. For many reasons, he would like to see the name of that honorable member on the committee. That was one reason why, in expressing the opinion that they might have had an equal committee but no superior, he (Mr. Service) said that there was one name off and one name on the list, that, to say the least of it, he did not contemplate at all. Certainly, he had no preference over Mr. Melville or any other honorable member in the way of early information, and the Government were perfectly justified in submitting the names of the propused members of the committee without consulting privately with honorable members.

The Hon. J. BELL observed that he did not mention to any honorable member the names of the proposed members of the com­mittee now before the House, and it was only fair to Mr. Fraser that he should state that during the whole time the Railways Stand­ing Committee Bill was under consideration not one word was said to the honorable member to make him believe that he would be included in the list. (Mr. Fraser­"Hear, hear; I thank you for making the explanation.") Last evening, after dinner, he asked Mr. Fraser whether he would accept the position, and, after some talk and hesitation, the honorable member con­sented.

The Hon. W. 1. WINTER-IRVING said he congratulated the Government OIl

having made such a wise selection, but he thought it a very great pity that a practical man like Mr. Zeal had not been nominated for appointment on the committee. For twenty-five years that honorable member had been connected with railways, and had taken a very great interest in all quest-ions relating to railway constructiun; and with­out disparaging the claims of one single member on the list submitted to the House, he must say that he would have voted still more heartily for the motion if it had in­cluded the name of Mr. Zeal. Of course,

Rail~()(t?J8 Standing [OCTOBER 15.] Committee. 2073

if Mr. Zeal had been asked to serve on the committee and had refused, he could under­stand the omission; but if the honorable member had not been asked, although willing to accept the position, lIe (Mr. Winter-Irving) would be very much astonished. Mr. Zeal was a most useful member of the House, and on railways and engineering matters generally he had given very valuable assistance to honorable mem­bers and to the Government.

The Hon. J. BUOHAN AN expressed the opinion that Mr. Service and Mr. Bell 11ad furnished a very good reason why the members of this committee should not be appointed at the present sitting, namely, that nobody knew who were to be nominated until this evening. Honorable members ought to have time to consider the personnel of the committee .. It was evident that nearly every member of the House felt dis­appointed at the omission of Mr. Zeal's name from the list, because they 11ad all made up their minds that he would be one of the first to be selected to serve on the committee, for which he was eminently fitted by his great experience and his professional knowledge in connexion with railways. It would have been much better if the mem­bers of the committee had been selected by ballot, according to the standing orders. Ministers had acted unwisely in taking upon themselves the responsibility of the bestowal of this patronage. He had nut the slightest objection to any of the members now pro­posed for appointment on the committee, feeling confident that they would all do their duty to the best of their ability; but Mr. Zeal had special qualifications for the position, and ashe had evinced a keen interest in the question of railway construction, he ought not to have been overlooked. In the oUler House objection had been taken by the Government to the appointment of new members; but in this House the Government had themselves proposed new members, and mostly city members, the country districts being hardly represented. Mr. Zeal ought to be a member of the committee, and some country members should also be appointed.

. Under the circumstances, the best thing for the Government to do would be to post­pone the motion until Tuesday next, and thus enable many honorable members who were now absent to take part in the elect.ion.

Sir F. T. SARGOOD said he felt him­self placed in a very unsatisfactory position; but as this point had been raised by Mr. J. M. Davies, and spoken to by several honorable members, he thought it would

perhaps be better-at all events, he would feel more satisfied-if he dealt with the matter as he would have dealt with it had his name not been mentioned for appoint­ment on the committee. He had certainly been under the impression that the Ministry intended to call honorable members together in caucus and take ad rice in regard to these· appointments, and it would be no breach of faith for him to say that he was under that im­pression because the Minister of Justice was good enough to consult him on the subject~ He (Sir F. T. Sargood) confessed that he did not give to the notice of motion submitted by the Minister of Defence last night the­attention which it perhaps deserved, for the simple reason, no doubt, that he was endeavouring to make up his own mind as· to whether it was his duty to accept the­position of a member of the Railways Standing Oommittee or not. Personally,. he would rather the matter had been quietly discussed, as such appoilltm~nts: generally were, in caucus. It would have· been wiser to have adopted that course, and lIe was not quite sure that it would not be­wiser even now. It was due to himself and to Mr. Zeal that he should say that he­strongly urged upon the Minister of Justice­that Mr. Zeal should be appointed upon the committee; and perhaps he might be also permitted to state that, with a view of making' such a change possible, he requested the Minister of Justice to be good enough to allow him (Sir F. T. Sargood) to retire, and to appoint Mr. Zeal instead. He stil1 wished that step to be taken. (" No.") He did not deny that in accepting the position lle was impressed with a feeling of its very great responsibility, because the duties would monopolize a very large amount of time, and would demand for their efficient. discharge the most careful attention, and a. special knowledge which personally he was not quite sure that he possessed. Mr. Zeal, as they all knew, had a practical know­ledge of the subject which would be invalu­able to the committee, and therefore it was most desira.ble that he should be appointed. Honorable members would see that he (Sir F. T. Sargood) was placed in a very awk­ward situation; but in view of the position he occupied in the House, he felt it to be due to himself and to honorahle members generally to let them know what had taken place prior to this evening, and what he understood would be the course adopted on the present occasion.

The Hon. T. BRUNTON reIllarked that the Government had made a very good

2074 Railtca!J13 Standing [COllNCIL.] Cummittee.

selection, because the honorable members who had been proposed for appointment on the committee were all men of unimpeach­able honour and integrity. Still, he felt deeply disappointed at Mr. Zeal's exclusion from the list, because he would make a very valuable member of the committee. It had been stated that there was no 0 pposi tion in this House; but so far as there was, Mr. Zeal was one of the leading members of the Dpposition, and it would have been judicious -on the part of the Government to have nominated him for appointment 011 this .committee. Mr. Zeal brought to bear on his criticisms of Government proposals a large and varied practical experience, and he was actuated in everything he did by the purest motives. Another member of great practical experience, Mr. Fraser, had been selected, he was glad to see, and he Ihoped that the Minister of Defence would agree to a postponement of his proposal, :and reconsider the position, so that Mr. .Zeal might be appointed.

Sir B. BENJAMIN said he must ex­press his great surprise at the name of Mr. .Zeal being omitted. That gentleman's -name was freely mentioned the previous €vening in conversation as one of the COUl­

mittee, and he (Sir B. Benjamin) in common 'with many other honorable members re­gretted exceedingly that Mr. Zeal's name was not included. He hoped the Ministry would see their way to postpone the matter, :so that honorable members might discuss the subject among themselves, with the object of bringing down a list on which the House would be unanimous. He had nothing to say against any of the gentlemen nominated-they were all good practical .men-but certainly Mr. Zeal was a member 'who ought to be on such a committee.

The Hon. G. S. OOPPIN stated that he regretted very mnch that this dis­·cussion had taken place, because he was in hopes that the election of the com­mittee would have been carried out without .any difference of opinion being expressed. The gentlemen nominated were all so -thoroughly good that no exception could be taken to them, but at the. same time he thought there was a good deal 'in what Mr. J. M. Davies had said. In connexion with the reprePlentation of the ·Oouncil at the Federation Convention the Government did honorable members thecolll­pliment of asking them to meet and make .a selection, and he thought a similar act of .courtesy might have been carried out on the J>resentoccas~on. He (Mr.Ooppin),amongst

other honorable members, was thoroughly in favour of Mr. Zeal being appointed. He WI?s a practical man who had had a great deal of experience, more particularly in con­nexion with railways, and he was an out­spoken man who would resist anything in the shape of a conspiracy to do that which he knew to be unjust to the committee. Mr. Melville had alluded to Mr. Thornley being o hair man of the Harbour Trust, but, instead of that being a disadvantage, he (MI'. Ooppin) looked upon it asa great advantage. In addition to that, Mr. Thornley was a surveyor, and he could give good practical information to the committee, just as Mr. Zeal could give valuable assistance from his knowledge as an engineer. He would sug­gest to the Government that the election should be postponed until the following Tuesday, with a view to honorable members meeting together in the meantime and agreeing on a selection, as they did in the case of the Federation Oonvention.

The Hon. D. HAM remarked that he would be sorry to cast any reflection upon the members nominated by the Government -they were all thoroughly honorable men, and men of ability-but he knew that Mr. Zeal had been asked by members of the House within the last day or two if he would consent to be on the committee, and it would be a general disappointment to the House and to the country if he were left off the committee. He (Mr. Ham) diel not believe the Government were influenced in their choice by the fact that Mr. Zeal criticised their Bill, while Mr. Fraser strongly supported it, but it would be well not to afford any ground for suspicion in that direction.

The Hon. J. G. BEANEY observed that, judging from the tone of the House, hon­orable members were well pleased with the selection made by the Government, and the omission of Mr. Zeal's name appeared to be the only cause of dissatisfaction. He (Dr. Beaney) knew that for many days past, when he had put the question to members of another place as to who were likely to form the Oouncil's portion or the committee, Mr. Zeal's naIlle was always mentioned first. A more able man could not be placed on the committee,and he (Dr. Beaney) was certainly very much disappointed at not seeing his name in· the list. Perhaps it would be advisable, as suggested by some honorable members, to postpone the election, and to adopt the same course that was followed in the selection of delegates to the Federation Oonvention.

Railways Standing [OCTOBER 15.J Committee. 2075

The Hon. J. SERVICE said he hoped the Government would agree to this sug­gestion.

'rhe Hon. J. BELL stated that the .aifficulty was that if the election was post­poned until Tuesday there could be no meeting of the standing committee for another week. This was an important consideration, as the session was drawing to a close. (Mr. J. M. Davies-" Let us adjourn, and hold a caucus to-night.") He thought that would hardly be fair to members who were absent. ' As honorable members had admitted that they were satis­fied with the gentlemen nominated by the Government, he thought they could not do better than proceed to a vote. If the mat­ter was postponed for a week, they could scarcely expect any Railway Bill to be introduced this session. (Mr. Melville­"That idea is pretty well abandoned.") Oh, no, it was not.

The Hon. S. W. COOKE said the gen­tlemen selected by the Government had the thorough confidence of the House. At .the same time, he thought there had been some oversight, to say the least of it, in the omission of the name of Mr. Zeal, and he would therefore support the suggestion for the postponement of the matter. As to the delay of a week interfering with the introduction of a Railway Bill, surely it could not be expected that there would be .a Railway Bill at all this session. (Mr. Bell-" It ·is fully expected .") He thought it was highly improbable. In any case, the Council ought to have on the committee the men it uesired to have on it.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT stated that the Government were actuated by the desire to secure the services of the very best men obtainable in the Council, and he thought they had used discrimination in the selection of the llames of the proposed committee. As to Mr. Zeal, it seemed to the Govern­ment that that gentleman had so much private business-that his professional en­gagements were so llumerous-that he could not afford the great amount of time required for attendance on this committee. (Mr. Coppin - "Then he would not take the position.") He believed Mr. Zeal was a gentleman who would not take a position unless he could attend to the duties of it. It must be borne in mind that, after all, the proceedings of this committee would be only Df a preliminary character. Their report would be carefully scrutinized both in the Assembly and the Council, and the services Df Mr. Zeal would still be available in that

respect. If he (Mr. Cuthbert) had thought for a moment that there would be any diffi­culty about the selection, he would certainly have recommended his honorable colleague to adopt the course of convening a meeting of honorable members and having the matter discussed in caucus. (Mr. D. Ham -" It is not too late now.") He thought it would scarcely be fair to the gentlemen whose names had been sub­mitted to take that course now, as if one of the names was struck out it might seem a reflection on the honorable member omitted. (S'ir F. T. Sargood-" Oh, no; I should prefer it.. ") No doubt the honor­able member would be glad to avoid the responsibility if he could do so consistently with his position, but as one of the recog­nised leaders of the House the Government felt bound to nominate him. It would be a serious matter to postpone the election for another week, as it was fully expected that befare the end of the session the com­mitt~e would be able to bring up a report recommending the construction of five or six lines, and that there would be no diffi­culty in passing them through Parliament. (Mr. J'. M. Davies-" Why not adjourn tiil a later hour to-night ?") If honorable members desired it, in order to give them a little time for further consideration, he would move the adjournment or the debate until eight o'clock. (" Hear, hear.") Then he begged to move the adjournment of the debate.

The Hon. D. COUTTS seconded the motion for the adjournment of the debat(>. He thought it was right that honorable members should have an opportunity of considering the names of the committee, because the Act provided that the com­mittee should be elected by the House. The fault had been in the Government not consulting honorable members on the subject. If the Government went to a vote, he was prepared to support their nominations; at the same time he thought that when the House had to elect a committee, honorable members should be consulted before the nominations were made, as it was an invidious thing to make any alterations in nominations after they were proposed. The country at large expected Mr. Zeal to be a member of this committee. Ever since the committee was first mooted he was looked upon as certain to be a member of it.

The motion for the adjournment of the debate was agreed to.

The House then (at a quarter past six) adjourned until eight o'clock.

2076 Melboll1"1ze and Metl'opolitan [OOUNOIL.] Board of Worl.:s Bill.

On re-assembling, The Hon. G. YOUNG said that, in view

of the very unanimous desire expressed by honorable members that Mr. Zeal should have a seat on the standing committee­an opinion in which he cordially shared­he would withdraw his name from nomina­tion. He regretted very much that the Government did not more correctly esti­mate the opinion of the House with respect to Mr. Zeal. He, and he believed the majority of honorable members, felt that Mr. Zeal was one of the gentlemen who above all others should be placed upon the standing committee, and he (Mr. Young) was surprised that Mr. Zeal was not nominated.

The motion was amended by the omission of the name of MI'. G. Young.

The Hon. ,J. BELL moved the insertion of the name of Mr. Zeal.

The Hon. W. I. WINTER-IRVING seconded the amendment, which was agreed to.

The motion, as amended, was adopted.

MELBOURNE AND METROPOLITAN BOARD OF

WORKS BILL.

The House went into committee for the consideration of this Bill.

On clause 2, providing, intel' alia, that "after the 1st October, 1891, in all legal proceedings this Act, unless the contrary be shown, shall be deemed and taken to be in full force and effect,"

Sir F. T. SARGOOD asked why the date was fixed at the 1st October, 1891 ?

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT said that the object of fixing the date in which the measure should be deemed to be in operation for the purposes of any legal proceedings was to avoid the necessity for the pro­duction in court in every case of the Govel'nment Gazette. (Sir F. T. Sargood­"Why not make it the1st July, 1891?") It was thought advisable to allow a reasonable time for the constitution of the board. He had, however, no doubt that the board would be constituted within the next three or four months. (Mr. Service-"It would be much better to fix an earlier date.") He had no objection to the date being altered to the 1st .J uly, 1891.

Sir F. T. SAHGOOD moved that " July" be substituted for" October."

The amendment was agreed to. On clause 6, providing, intel' alia, that

the board should be a corporate body, and

should "have power to purchase, take, hold, sell, lease, or dispose of land for the purposes of this Act,"

Sir F. T. SARGOOD proposed the insertion, after the word" lease," of the word "exchange." He stated that the Railway Oommissioners had power to exchange land, and had found it to be a great convenience. The Harbour Trust, however, had not that power, and it had on more than one occasion been compelled to ask Parliament to pass special Bills to authorize exchanges of land.

The amendment was agreed to. On clause 13, providing, inte1' alia, that

the exercise by the Governor in Council of any of the powers contained in the Local Government Act 1~89 or in part 2 of the Local Government Act 1890 should not affect the seat of any person previously elected as a member of the board, ,

The Hon. S. "V. COOKE said he under­stood that the Local Government Acts had been consolidated, and that there was no Local Government. Act of 1889.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT stated that he would make a note of the point, and if necessary amend the clause at a later stage.

On clause 15, providing, inte1' alia, as follows:-

" No person shall cease to be a 111em bel' of the board by reason of being beneficially interested in any newspaper in which the board inserts ad vertisements, and no person being a share­holder or member of any joint stock company consisting of more than twenty persons shall cease to be a member of the board' by reason of any contract entered into between such com­pany and the board, or any work done by such company, "

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES proposed the substitution of "in'corporated company"­for" joint stock company." He said that the companies in the colony were all incor­porated either by the Companies Statute or by Royal charter. It would be an anomaly to except joint stock companies and not the ordinary incorporated companies.

The amendment was agreed to. On clause 24, providillg, i11tel' alia, that

the board should provide and maintain a public office within the city" at which the meetings of the board shall be held, and at which the business of the board shall be transacted ,"

Sir F. T. SARGOOD said that thig clause was contradictory of clause 26, which provided that the board might hold its meetings at such times and places as it might from time to time appoint.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT moved that "may" be substituted for "shall," and

Jfelbollrne and ]'[etl'opolitan [OCTOBER 15.J BOa1'd of Wo~'ks Bill. 2077

that the word" the" before" business" be omitted.

The amendments were agreed to. On clause 31, empowering the board to

make by-laws and regulations, and to alter and repeal by-laws in relation to the levels, dimensions, construction, maintenance, ven­tilation and cleansing of sewers, and pro­viding that no by-law relating to the construction, ventilation, or cleansing of sewers should have any force Of effect until approved by the Minister of Public Health,

Sir F. T. SARGOOD suggested that the words "alter and repeal" should be struck out.

The Hon. C. J. HAM said he thought " Governor in Council" ought to be sub­stituted for Minister of Public Health.

The Hon. J. SERVIOE remarked that he agreed with Mr. Ham. He did not think that so much power ought to be placed in the hands of a single Minister. The object of providing that by-law::! should be made subject to the approval of the Gover­nor in Oouncil was to secure an appeal from the decision of the Minister of the department. It would be an innovation to single out a Minister to approve of any by­law, and he did not see why the clause should confine the approval of the Minister of Public Health to by-laws relating to tIle construction, ventilation, and cleansing of sewers.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES suggested that the clame should be amended so as to provide that the board might make, alter, and repeal by-laws with the approval of the Governor in Oouncil. He would omit the provision that no by-law relating to tIle construction, ventilation, or cleansing of sewers should have any force or effect until approved by the Minister of Public Health.

The clause was postponed. On clause 34, providing the method by

which minutes of proceedings of the board should be kept,

Sir F. T. SARGOOD moved the omis­sion of the provision that the minutes should be signed at the meeting at which the proceedings took place, and the substi­tution of the words "at the next meeting of the board or committee, respectively, be signed by the chairman thereof." The pro­ceedings as laid down in the clause would be a most unusual one.

The amendment was agreed to, as were also consequential amendments.

On clause 35, providing, z'nt~r alia, that the books of the board should at all reasonable

SES. li90.-7 H

times be open to the examination of every creditor of the board,

Sir F. T. SARGOOD expressed the opinion that 'under this clause the board might be placed in a very undesirable posi­tion, because any contractor whose account was disputed would be able to ascertain the course proposed to be taken by the board­which would no donbt be decided upon in committee - by an examination of the minute bool" There was no such power in relation to the Melbourne Harbour Trust or the city council, and he would suggest that, in the case of creditors or the board, the account books only should he open to inspection.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT said he thought that a creditor of the board ought to have the right to look at the minute books as. well as at the acconnt books.

Sir F. T. SARGOOD remarked that it would be most undesirable to pass the clause in its present form. The point was one of great importance, because it might arise in n case involving thousands of pounds.

The clause was postponed. On clause 36, relating to contracts, and

providing, z'ntel' alz'a, that "every such con­tract shall be in writing," and that "any contract which, if made between private peri:lons, would be by law valid, although made by parol only, and not reduced into writing," might be entered into by the board,

The Hon. S. W. COOKE observed that there seemed to be a contradiction in this clause, one part providing that every con­tract must be in writing, and another part empowering the board to make contracts by parol only, and without reducing them to writing. The difficulty might be overcome by the insertion, after" every such contract," of the words "save as hereinafter ex­pressed."

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT stated that this clause was similar in language to a provision in the Local Government Act.. (Mr Service-" We must try to make this a model measure.") The Local Government Act had worked well in the past, and he therefore thought its language had better be adhered to in this clause.

The Hon. T. DOWLING moved the in­sertion, after "every such contract," of the words " save as hereinafter excepted."

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES expressed the opinion that a better amendment would be the insertion, before the word'" every," of

. the words "save as hereinafter provided."

2078 Melbow'ne and Metropolitan [COUNCIL.] Board of TtVorks Bill.

He begged to move that the clause be amended accordingly.

Mr. Davies' amendment was agreed to. On clause 37, empowering the board to

contract with other public bodies" subject to the approval of the Governor in Council,"

Sir F. T. SARGOOD said he did not see the necessity of requiring the board to obtain the approral of the Governor in Council in regard to contracts made with other public bodies. The Melbourne Harbour Trust made arrangements with local bodies without the aid of the Governor in Council.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT remarked that it was desirable that important con­tracts between the board and the local bodies should be subject to the approral of the Governor in Council.

On clause 38 providing that, except in cases of emergency, the board must give "three days' notice at the least," in two daily newspapers circulating in Melbourne, inviting tenders for any contract to the amount of £100 or upwards, and also that" the board shall accept the proposal, which, in view of all the circulUstances, appears to it to be most ad vantageous,"

The Hon. J. SERVICE expressed the opinion that three days' notice would be in­sufficient in the case of a contract involving thousands of pounds. (Mr. Cuthbert­"It is to be 'three days notice at the least'; there may be cases or emergency.") Seven days' notice would be little enough.

The Hon. C. J. HAM observed that the board might be trusted to exercise a wise discretion in matters of this kind.

The Hon. S. FRASER said it was de­sirable that ample notice of contracts should be given, because the effect of shortening the notice would be to very much increase the prices asked by persons tendering for contracts.

Sir F. T. SARGOOD moved the sub­stitution or the word " may" for the word " shall." The board should not be obliged to accept any tender, if it was not satis­fac·tory.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT stated that the Local Government Act contained a similar provision, and he had never heard of the local bodies being placed under any dis­advantage thereby.

The Hon. J. SERVICE remarked that, as the clause stood, it would prevent the board advertising again, even though the tenders received in reply to their first ad­vertisement were extravagantly high.

The amendment was agreed to.

On clause 41, providing that the same person should not be appointed both to the office of clerk and to the office of treasurer of the board,

The Hon. J. SERVICE expressed the opinion that the chief clerl{ of the board ought to be styled the secretary. He begged to move that the clause be amended by the substitution of "secretary" for" clerk."

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT said it would be necessary to amend clause 24, and pos­sibly other clauses, if such an alteration was made in this clause. (Mr. Service-" The necessary alterations could be easily made.") He would take a n~te of the suggestion, and see what alterations its adoption would involve.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES observed that the clause ought to require the clerk to devote his whole time to the service or the board. As at present framed, it appeared to contemplate the appointment of a person who had a partner, and persons in his employ.

The clause was postponed. On clause 42, providing for the imposi­

tion of penalties on any officer or servant of the board who exacted or accepted im­proper fees" other than his proper salary, wages, and allowances," and also that" no person being a shareholder of any joint stock company" should be prevented from being employed by the board by reason of any contract between such company and the board,

Sir F. T. SARGOOD expressed the opinion that clause 40 should be amended, so as make it uniform with this clause in respect of " salary, wages, and allowances." Clause 40 empowered the board to fix the "salaries and wages and gratuities," and he would like to see the word "allowances" also inserted. A gratuity was a bonus for good services; an allowance might be for travelling expenses, and not a gratuity.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT stated that the two clauses dealt with two separate things, and the varia.tion in language was necessary.

The Hon. J. SERVICE remarked that this clause was evidently intended to prevent the acceptance of" tips."

The Hon. J. M. PRATT said the ordi­nary English definition of "allowances" was" coals, candles, and washing."

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES obselTed that, if it was necessary to empower the board to give a gratuity, it was equally necessary to empower them to give an allowance, so that the word" allowances" should be in clause 40. Whatever words were put in the one

frfelbolll'ne and Jlletl'opolitan [OOTOBER 15.J Board of Works Bal. - 2079

,clause, empowering the board to give, should be put in the other clause, empowering the officers to accept.

The Hon. S. FRASER stated t.hat it was only reasonable to assume that an -officer was entitled to take what the board was empowered to give; if he took what he :hacl no right to take, that was a different matter.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES moved the substitution of the word "incol'porated" .for the words" joint stock."

The amendment was agreed to. On clause 43, requiring officers intrusted

-with money to give "security" to the board,

Sir Ji'. T. SARGOOD remarked that the -security usually taken was a guarantee. Would the word," security" convey the same legal meaning as the word "guarantee?" If not, he would move the insertion, after the word "security," of the words "or guarantee."

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT said the word " security" was the only term used in .a corresponding clause in the Melbourne Harbour Trust Act.

On clause 45, providing that any officer or servant of the board who neglected or refused to obey the order of a court of petty sessions to produce and deliver up any vouchers, receipts, books, &c., in his posses­sion belonging to the board, might by any justice" be committed to gaol for any period not exceeding six months,"

The Hon. J. SERVICE moved the substitution of the word" twelve" for the word" six." He said there might be cases in which officers would shield themselves from adequate punishment for serious de­falcations, by submitting to six months' imprisonment rather than yield up books or papers which would furnish the evidence necessary to convict them. He knew of one case in which a person had been imprisoned for nearly two years for disobedience of an Qrder of the court to deliver up certain books, which it was believed would convict him of an offence for which he would have to suffer a long term of imprisonment. Why sllOuld an officer of the board be released at the end of six months under circumstances of that kind?

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT st~ted that 1\ similar provision ran through all the legislation of the colony with regard to public bodies-in the Melbourne Harbour Trust Act and in the Railwavs Commis­sioners Act, for example. Thewboard would

7H2

also be able to bring a ci vil action to recover the value of any books, &c., from any officer who refused to deliver them up when required.

The Hon. T. DOWLING remarked that it might be not only books and papers which an officer of the board refused to give up, but also money belonging to the board, as much, perhaps, as £5,000, and there could be no harm in extending, to a period of even t\yO years, the term during which such an officer was liable to be imprisoned for refusing to deliver up what belonged to the board.

The amendment was agreed to. On clause 47, empowering the board to

appoint a committee to deal with all mat­ters relating to the officers and servants of the board, and providing, inter alia, that­" all the powers of the said committee may be exercised by any three of them,"

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES expressed the opinion that, instead of providing that all the powers of the committee in question might be exercised by any three of its members, the clam~e ought to provide that three should form a quorum.

The Hon. J. BELL observed that by clause 33 it was provided that no business should be transacted at any meeting of a committee unless the quorum of members fixed by the boad. were present, or, if no quorum had been so fixed, unless at least three members were present.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES asked why, in view of clause 33, was the provision to which he had called attention inserted at all? He would suggest that the words" All the powers of the said committee may be exercised by any three of them" should be struck out.

The Hon. S. W. COOKE said this clause contradicted clause 33, as by the former the board might fix the quorum at five, yet under the present clause three members could­exercise all the powers of the committee.

The Hon. J. SERVICE observed that the question might be raised as to whether the chairman had a casting vote at a meet­ing of this committee. He would ask the Minister to consider that point..

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT stated that he would make a nOLe of the points raised by Mr. J. M. Davies and Mr. Service.

On clause 48, providing that the board should canse its accounts to be balanced to the 31st December in every year within 28 days thereafter, and a statement of accounts

2080 lflelbourne and Metropolitan [COUNCIL.] BOC17'd of WOl'l..:s Bill.

prepared; that the statement and account should be audited by the Audit Commis­sioners; and that the board should pay a sum to be determined by the Governor in Oouncil, but not exceeding £400 per annum, for the expenses of the audit,

Sir F. T. SARGOOD stated that he doubted very much the utility of the pro­posed annual audit by the Audit Commis­sioners. The only audit he believed in was a weekly audit, as adopted by the Harbour Trust and the Melbourne City Council. He considered that the £400 proposed to be charged to the board was simply money thrown away.

The Hon. C. J. HAM expressed the opinion that it would be very much better to appoint an outside auditor at a salary of something like £250 per annum. That was the amount paid by the city of Melbourne corporation to its auditor, who could come in at aU times and make an audit. No defalcation had occurred in connexion with the accounts of the city of Melbourne cor­poration during the last twenty years.

The Hon. J. M. PRATT considered that it would be advisable 'to have as auditor an officer independent of the board, but sub­ject to the control of the Audit Commis­sioners.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT observed that this matter had received a good deal of consideration. The State was the prin­cipal creditor of the board, and it desired that the accounts of the board should be submitted to the examination of the Audit Commissioners. He thought it would be very undesirable to interfere with that pro­posal.

'rhe Hon. C. J. HAM remarked that when capitalists at home saw that the board's accounts were audited by the Go­vernment auditors it might give them greater confidence in advancing money. ' Perhaps in that aspect it might be as well to let the clause stand.

On clause 50, providing, inter alia, as follows:-

"The Governor in Council may if he shall think fit, whenever requested by any council or any twenty ratepayers in any municipal district or districts of the metropolis, and upon the deposit of such sum of money not exceeding £100 as security for costs and expenses as the Minister may require, by notice in the Govern­'lnent Gazette appoint for the board auditors, who shall be called' special auditors,'"

The flon. J. M. PRATT suggested that the number of ratepayers who could demand .3. special audit should be increased from

twenty to two hundred. Considering the large number of ratepayers within the juris­diction of the board, it would be a very easy thing for any designing man to get a requisition signed by twenty ratepayers.

The Hon. J. BELL said the ratepayers would have to deposit £100.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES pointed out that the words in the clause were "not exceeding £100." The Minister could fix any sum be pleased.

The Hon. J. SERVICE said he saw no reason why the matter should not be left altogether to the councils interested. He would suggest that the reference to rate­payers should be struck out, leaving it to any council that was dissatisfied to demand a special audit.

The Hon. H. OUTHBERT expressed the opinion that it would be a mistake to interfere with the clause. It was not likely that ratepayers would deposit £100 as security in order to obtain a special audit unless there was some real ground for believing that the funds of the board were being misapplied. (Mr. Service-" The Minister might require only £10.") In view of the expense or the audit, 'no Minister was likely to fix the deposit at less than £100. However, he (Mr. Outhbert) had no objection to the omission of the words "not exceeding," so as to fix the amount at £100.

The Hon. T. DOWLING considered that it would be monstrous to allow the the voice of a council to be overruled by twenty ratepayers. A council might decide on a certain course of action, yet, by the clause, twenty ratepayers, by depositing £100, could demand a special audit.

The Hon. D. MELVILLE said the time had arrived for reporting progress. He would ask the Minister of J llstice whether he would extend the usual courtesy of a!sisting honorable members in framing any amendments they desired to propose?

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT intimated that he would be happy to do so.

Progress was then reported.

MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

The amendment made in this Bill, in committee, was considered and adopted.

The House adjourned at five minutes past ten o'clock, until Tuesday, October 21.

P.[oad Damages. [OCTOBER 15.J Jii"ning Leases. 2081

LE'GI'SLATIVE ASSEMBLY. Wednesday, October 15, 1890.

"Yea and Mansfield Railway-Flood Damages-Exportation of Butter-Legality of Mining Leases-Taxation of A bsentees-Evidence Law Amendment Bill-:\Iagistrates -Shipping Strike,: Unconditional Conference-Right to Demand a Division-Mode of Putting Amendments: Proposed Standing 0rder-Railway Purposes Reserva­tion Bill-Mr. M. H. Foran-Melbourne Public Library, ~Iuseums, and National Gallery: Opening on Sunday­Precedence-Public Instruction; Teachers' Salaries­Railway Department ,; Caulfield Races: Excursion Trains: Cal'l'iage of Racehorses.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER took the chair at dlalf-past four o'clock p.m.

YEA AND MANSFIELD RAILvVAY.

Mr. GRAVES asked the Minister of Railways if, in view of hia promise, and the :urgency of the matter, he would cause the Yea and Mansfield line to be opened for iraffic up to Merton, to which township the rail way was now completed? He observed ,that about a mONth ago the Minister pro­,mlsed to endeavour to have the line opened. The urgency of the matter consisted in the .fact that the road on one side of the rail­way was impracticable, and if any accident happened the shire council would be l'espon­·sible.

Mr. GILLIES sa,id it was hoped that <the line would be opened to Merton on "the 1st November.

FLOOD DAMAGES.

Mr. FOSTER asked the :Minister of Public Works whether it was the intention -of the department to grant flood damages, owing to the late exceptional floods in >Gippsland East.; and when the amounts 'Would be available?

Mr. ANDERSON observed that the matter was still under consideration, and at present it was impossible to say what sum, ~f any, would be granted, but a decision would be arrived at bef0re the Additional Estimates were brought down.

.EXPORTATION OF BUTTER.

Mr. 'VILKINSON asked the Minister <>f Agriculture whether he had made in­oquiries as to the number of pounds of butter imported into Victoria, and after­wards exported, upon which the bonus had 'been, or was to be, paid, such butter not ·being Victorion produce; and, if so, what was the result of such inquiries? He ob­:served that the Chief Secretary, when acting

as Minister of Agriculture, promised to have inquiry made on this subject.

Mr. DOW stated that he had taken steps to have a full inquiry made into the matter and a report furnished.

Mr. ANDREWS asked the Minister of Agriculture the following questions:-

"1. Is it a fact that the Orient Steam Naviga,­tion Compa,ny have refused to take butter in the refrigerating r90m of their ships as per previol1s agreement?

"2. "Vhat steps are proposed to be taken in the matter?"

)ilr. DOW remarked that it was not correct to say that the Orient Company had refuseel to deal with the Government in this matter. There was a great deal of pressure on the steamers this year, in consequence of the increased frozen meat traffic. He hoped that negotiations with the Orient Company would be satisfactorily arranged the follow­ing day. Between the Orient, P. & 0., and New Zealand companies there would be allY quantity of space available for the exporta­tion of butter during the next two or three months.

MINING LEASES.

Mr. FOSTER asked tlle Minister of Mines whether, in view of the opinion lately given by the law officers of the Crown, viz., " That there is no power given in the existing laws to the department to issue a mining lease of any kind over lands held for grazing or pastoral purposes under lease or licence," he would introduce a Bill with­out delay to so amend the laws as to allow miners free entry on such lands without the expense, delay, and inconvenience of re­sumption? He observed that for some time past friction had taken place between the Lands Department and the Mining Department on the subject, and recently an opinion had been obtained from the law officers of the Crown relative to the power to issue mining leases and licences for lancl held under lease or licence under the Land Act 1884. This opinion went to show that the department had f.O right what­ever to issue mining leases in such cases, and that the only means of enabling miners to go on the land was by taking ad vantnge of the section of the Act allowing the hmd to be resumed for mining purposes. Inasmuch as Borne 5,000,000 acres had been taken up for pastoral and grazing purposes since the Land Act of 1884 came into operation, if this opinion was right it meant that an area in which was included a very large quantity of auriferous, stanniferous,

2082 ZIlagist1·ates. [ASSEMBLY.] Slt~'pping Strike.

and carboniferous land was shut out from mining purposes, unless the tedious, ex­pensive, and inconvenient course was taken of resuming the land. The opinion of the law officers of the Orown also went to invalidate the leases which had been already issued. Under these circumstances, th~ mattl'l' was a very seriou5 one, and he hoped the Government would bring down a Bill to assist miners in getting on the land, and also to validate any titles which might be defective at the present time.

Mr. D. M. DAVIES stated that the matter was now under consideration, in order to see what alterations were required in the law in the direction indicated by the honor­able member. He would take care that everything should be done that could be to facilitate the miners having access to the land.

Mr. FOSTER expressed the hope that 110 time would be lost in dealing with the matter. The opinion of the law officers of the Crown, that thp, .Mining department had no legal right to issue leases in respect of these lands, would cause a scare which would prevent capital being invested in mines in Gippsland.

TAXATION OF ABSENTEES. Dr. MALONEY asked the Premier

whether it was his intention to submit to the House early in the next session a measure providing for the taxation of absentees?

.M r. GILLIES observed that the Go­vernment was not in a position to say what would be necessary in connexion with financial matters next session, and he did not think it would be wise to express any opinion on the point at present.

PETITION. A petition was presentEd by Mr. GRA YES,

from the shires of Benalla and Oxley, and the parishes of Glenrowan, Lurg, Greta, Laceby, Moyhu, "Vhitfield, Hedi, and Car­boor, praying that the House would select (from the proposed lines to the Upper King) the route from Glenrowan to Hedi.

EVIDENCE LAW AMENDMENT BILL.

This Bill was received from the Legis­lative Council, and, on the motion of Mr. GILLIES, was read a first time •.

MAGISTRATES. Mr. FO·STER mored-" That there be laid before this House a return

~howing-l. Total number of justices of the

peace in the colony of Victoria on the 30th September, 1890. 2. Total number of jus­tices of the peace appointed to the Central Bailiwick at the said date."

Mr. J. HARRIS seconded the motion, which was agreed to.

SHIPPING STRIKE. UNCONDITIONAL COKFEIlEXCE.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN moved-"That this House deeply regl'ets that the

Employers' Union does not meet the trades unions in an unconditional conterence."

He said he trusted that the motion would be passed without discussion and unani­mously. He gave his reasons last week for proposing such a motion, and he was not going to repeat them. He would merely say that he repudiated cert.aill motives which were attributed to him in one of the .Mel­bourne journals that morning.

Mr. KIRTON seconded the motion. He believed the House should express its regret that the employers had not seen their way to meet the trades unionists in an un­conditional conference. He did not think that it woul4 be judicious to discuss the motion at length, and therefore he would content himself with formally seconding it.

Mr. GILLIES said he had over and over again expressed his opinion in the House that it was unfortunate that some· honorable members would insist on bringing this subject under the attention of the Assem­bly. Hecould assure honorable members that he had on several occasions, in a pri.vate· way, done all he could to bring about a settlement of this dispute; but he was per­fectly confident that these motions did no good to the House, and that they did no

. good to the cause which the honorable member for Port J1:airy seemed to have S()

much at heart.. He would not ask the House to negative this motion, but if it could see its way to postpone the considera­tion of it, by carrying the previous question, he really thought it would be for the benefit of all parties. It was of the utmost im­portance at this moment that there should be no attempt on the part of the Legislature to express strong opinions on one side or the other. Honorable members did enter­tain strong opinions-that went without saying-and they were entitled to express those strong opinions elsewhere; but he honestly believed that the constant bring­ing forward of this important subject in the­House did not help towards the solut.ion or the difficulty. In fact, it did a great deal of harm. He was perfectly confident that

Shipping St1'l'l;;e. [OCTOBER 15.J Shipping Stl'lle. 2083

'if they waited a little longer there must be a conference, (Mr. Peacock-" The public are suffedng.") And would this motion help to stop that? He would pass a thou­sand such resolutions if he thought that, but he was quite sure they would have no such result, and if the House intervened in a way that was likely to create more ill-feeling than there unfortunately was at the present time, instead of doing good it might do serious harm. He was sure 110 honorable member desired to do that. He honestly believed that if honorable members would stay their hand in regard to passing a resolution of this kind, they would be more likely to do good than by taking the course now suggesfed.

Lt.-Col. SMITH remarked that he depre­cated, just as much as the Premier did, the constant bringing forward oE this question in the House. But aEter such a long con­flict as had taken place, he thought the time had Come when members of the Assembly should express an opinion of some kind, One side had been constantly offering, in every fair and reasonable way, to meet the other side, and if the latter had responded in a similar spirit, he (Lt.-Col. Smith) would have been content to stand aloof, and take up the same position as the Premier had done that evening. But what were the facts? He had taken some trouble to ascertain the facts, and he was not speak­ing now beyond his own personal knowledge. All this difficulty had been created by three rival shipping firms to suit their own pur­poses. At the last great strike at Newcastle what took place? Tens oE thousands of tons of small coal, which was utterly valueless, was sent off to the market in Melbourne and the adjoining colonies at the price of the very best Newcastle coal. He had incurred so~e odium among his constituents, because he had thought that Parliament should not interfere in this struggle-that Parliament should not take sides with either party. He had thought it would be wise for Parlia­ment to stand aloof, and allow the two parties to the conflict to come to terms if l)Ossible. But how had the labour party been met? They had been met with insolence and insult. They had been asked to agree, before the meeting took place, to terms which were utterly unfair to the working classes of the colony. There­fore, as a public man, he could not stand aloof any longer and say that the employers should dictate their own terms. Whom were the employers fighting for? For three rival firms, trading with lines of

coaling ships between Melbourne and New­castle. Those firms had been in conflict, cutting each other do\vn, nnd two of those firms did this-they hoarded up all the material they possibly could, provoked a. strike, and made, he was told, from £80,000 to £100,000 out oE it. Through the closing of the collieries, and the increase in the price of coal, this colony and the adjoining colonies had been put into a state almost of revolution by the nction of two or three firms who made money out of the transaction. These were the men the employers were fighting for. Two of the gentlemen representing the labour party were invited to a meeting at the Melbourne Athenroum to meet the employers, and how were they treated? They went to a meeting called by these ri \'al ~hipping firms, who had made from £80,000 to £100,000 out of the strike, in the early part of it, by doubling the price of coal and plunging the whole of the colonies in a state oE turmoil, to suit their own pri'itlte pockets. lie was told by one of the gentlemen invited to that meeting-a mGst able advocate of the labour side, and one who when the conflict was over would be acknowledged to have been a most temperate ad vocate-that he was very glad to escape with a whole skin. The gentleman told him this at a large meeting which he (~t,-Col. Smith) had had the honour to preside over a.t Ballarat. The labour representatives \fere treated with the greatest indignity possible. The employers were the aggressors, and they refused to meet the labour party in fair conference, but insisted on their conditions being ac­cepted beforehand. (Mr. vVoods-" Can you make them ?") He would deal with that by-and-by. He had always been in favour of standing aloof, and seeing if"these rival partIes could meet on fair and reason­able terms; but when one party refused to meet on fail' terms, then he said that mem­bers oE that House had no right to stand aloof any longer. "' They wcre the represel1 ... tatiyes oE thc people of this country, and they had a right to say-and lIe was one to say it-" Yon shall meet; if you do not meet, you must take the consequences." This was not a Parliament representing the working classes as well as every other class if it did not in some way compel those who would not meet on some fair terms to do so. H t~e labour party had insisted, prior to a meeting, on any condition which he thought was unfair, much as he regarded them, he would not have moved one step to support them; but they had given every possible

2084 Shipping Btl'l'l.;e. [ ASSEMBLY.] Shipping Btl'ike.

indication of a desire to arrive at a fair set.tlement of the difficulty. He would not go into the question whether the labour party acted altogether right at. the commencement of the struggle, but being in it they were bound in honour to sustain it until they obtained a fair and reasonable settlement. Did anyone for a moment imagine, whatever might be the immediate re,sult of this struggle, that labour in this country was to be put down­that unionism was to be crushed? vVhat was every banking and monetary association but n union for the benefit of the whole of those who joined in it? The employers might as well try and put down the snn at noonday as to put down the union of labour. The union of labour could be no more put down than the union of capital. (Mr. vVilkinson-" Let them fight it out them­selves.") If both parties Lad met he would have remained neutral; but he would ask honorable members, were they to stand by and allow this ruin to go on-the credit of the whole of the colonies to be subverted ? vVould they stand by, and coolly say-" vVe have nothing to do with it," when the repre­sentatives of labour had offered every pos­sible inducement to meet the employers of labour? (lVIr. C. Yotlng-" Except going to work.") The Premier was denonnced some years ago as a man who llad no heart, and his answer was what might have been expected from him; ~.tlt he (Lt.-Col. Smith) thought the Government were takillg up a very unwise position. The House had no right to stand unmoved, when one side offered to meet in fair open conference, aud the other side said-" No, we will beat unionism; we will beat the labour party; we will not meet them unless the terms are first settled." However true it might be that five or six weeks ago a debate in the House on t.hi3 question might have in­volved serious danger, and interfered with a settlement, that could no longer be said. At first the labour party had public feeling aga inst them, but it was rapidly changing from day to day, owing to the employers refusing to meet the repre­

. sentati ves of labour on fair terms. He maintained therefore that the House should express an opinion on this question, and he, for one, would insist on a division on the motion, because it was time the representa­tives of tbe people should declare which side they were on. vVhere would the wealthiest and the richest be but for labour? The labour of to-day was the capital of to-mor­row, and capital was absolutely worthless

Lt.-Col. Smith

without the assistance of labour. He was quite prepared when this conflict was over t.o join in some legislation that should com­pel contending parties to meet and appoint representatives for the purpose of settling their disputes of this description, so t.hat the whole community should not be plunged into confusion. (Mr. Woods-"How are you going to compel them?") He was chairman of a commission, of which the Solicitor­General was also a member, which brought up a scheme on this subject, and he thought some modification of that scheme if adopted would prevent any of these complications. Both parties would appoint representatives who should settle a dispute, and in the meantime the work of the particular trade would go on. At the present time he wished it to be distinctly understood that so far as he was concerned the party which would not meet without dictating terms, that party he was against. Whether the representatives of labour acted aggressively at first in this conflict, he would not now inquire. 'N e were in the midst of a strife, which was affecting the fair fame of these colonies, and was injuring their credit throughout tIle world. The party that refused to meet on fail' grounds was the party on which Parliament should put some strain. He was extremely surprised to hear the Premier say that Par­liament should stand idly by and do nothing, with the view' of seeing that the terms offered by one side were met in a reasonable spirit by the other side. If that sort of thing was to be done, nobody could say when the strike would end, or if it were tem­porarily settled how soon the conflict would be renewed. vVhat did the stupid bunkum about consulting the Premiers of the other colonies mean? Did not it mean trifling with this question? The position taken up by the employers was perfectly untenable, unjust, a:nd dishonest, and was simply designed to serve the private ad rantage of two or three rival shipping firms trading between Melbourne and Newcastle.

Mr. SHIELS said that the honorable member for Ballarat vVest (Lt.-Col. Smith) had referred to some remarks which he (Mr. Shiels) made many years ago. Now what­ever might be said as to his heart.~ no one would deny the honorable member the possession of a. very wily head. The honorable member had graced the political stage of this country for thirty years. He (Mr. Shiels) was sure he expressed the univer:5al sentiments of honorable members when he said that there was not a more

Shipping Stl'l'l.;e. [OCTOBER 15.J Shipping Strike. 2085

consummate actor than the honorable mem­ber for Ballarat West, nor a man who knew better than he how to keep his hold on his 'Constituency. He (Mr. Shiels) waa pleased last week to see their only colonel back in his old vigorous form; but the honorable member's speech then had reminded him ·of the reversal of the old adage-" Dog ·does not eat dog." Their dear and amiable colonel last week" fired low"-very low, "laying out" an absent colonel, and meta­phorically wiping the Hoor with his corpse. Word-perfect in every part and with every gesture studied, he played his role splen­didly. But what was the reward of those magnificent histrionics? 'Was not it a warning to all would-be penitents? The following resolution had been passed by the Trades Hall Oouncil in the honorable member's own deal' constituency, on which he kept so loving a hold:-

"That as Mr. Kirton, M.L.A., is the only representative of Ballarat who has practically recognised the cause of labour in the present struggle by giving ~ donation ill ,tid of the strike fund, a vote of thanks be accorded him."

The addendum was that the motion was carried with loud applause. (Lt.-Ool. Smith-" I gave thousands of pounds to the cause of labour before my honorable colleague was born.") Then it showed how feeble was the memory of popular con­stituencies, and how readily tho people could prove ingrate to their worthiest servants. The unpleasant experience of this gracious benefactor of Ballarat in pre-historic times should be a warning to all those who now, from motives of their own, were placing peas in their shoes, donning hair shirts, and, in the sight of the House and of the country, going to the Oanossa of the Trades Hall, arid suing its Pontiffs to be pardoned and admitted to favour. Honorable members must have seen, since the discussions upon this question began, a remarkable change of front in the House, and he would warn all. who were steering this course, who were attempting to make their peace, that the experience of the honorable member for Ballarat West showed that they had better remember the Spanish proverb­"The smiles of a pretty woman are the tears of the purse." The only way in which the honorable member could get the smiles of the Trades Hall, and the removal of its interdict, was not by the mock heroics he had indulged in to­night, not by his fierce denunciations of Lt.-Ool. Price last week, but by opening his cheque-book, and signing his name for

a good round sum. (Lt.-Ool. Srnith-" If you will sign the cheque, I will make it a very large sum.") He was ~ure that the honorable member, like the true liberal he was, would make out the cheque to the amount said to have reposed in those sweet little boots of his, if only he thought he was to share in it.

Mr. KIRTON asked if the honorable member for N ormanby was in order in attributing motives to his honorable col­league in the representation of Ballarat West?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER.-There is nothing disorderly in imputing motives; the disorder lies in imputing improper motives. .

Mr. SHIELS said he was sure that the House would be pleased with the ready way in which the Deputy-Speaker had given so admirable a ruling, and had put honorable members in good humour again. The hO}10r­able member for Ballarat West (Lt.-Ool. Smith) had taken acourse of action, in speak­ing to the motion of the honorable mem­ber for Port Fairy, which he deprecated; and, in order to place the House in a proper position, he would move the previous ques­tion. (Mr. Peacock-" That is gagging.") There were certain individuals who were so framed that they had a perpetual· itch to rush into e\rery struggle, and to play the part of the peacemaker.· That was a highly honorable and beneficent part, and when undertaken with wisdom, at the right time and by the right persons and by the right means, was likely to be successful. But there was a danger that, instead of realizing the promise of the Gospel, "Blessed are the peacemakers," those who engaged in it would find that there was common sense in the couplet-

" Those who in quarrels interpose :Must often wipe a bloody nose."

He was bound to express his honest con­viction that the continual interventioil or this House in the present unfortunate variance between s~ctions of the community had not been wise, and had not conduced to peace, but, on the contrary, had. been disa.strous in prolonging the conflict, amI inflaming the animosities arising out of it. The honorable member for Port Fairy had no reason to assure the House that his motives were perfectly honest. Everyone who had the pleasure of knowing the warm Irish heart of the llOnorable mem­ber would admit that he was not attempt­ing, by the action he was taking in regard

2086 Slu'ppil1g Strike. [ASSEMBLY.] Sltipping StTilce.

to this fearful labour struggle, to either gain personal /;;lldos or to trIn,ke political capital. The honorable member felt keenly the injury that was being caused by the strike, and in his honest anxiety to promote peace he asked the Honse to adopt this motion. In the honorable and learned mem­ber's keen sympathy \lith thosc suffering, in his earnest desire to still strife, and cause the wheels of industry to run along their accllstomed channels with all their old vigour and smoothness, he had a unanimous, an undividecl House-a House from which no discordant note, no dissentient voice, would be raised. Honorable members were all willing to pay the homage of their admiration to the lawful and orderly way in which-with some exceptions­this great strike had been conducted in this colony. A tribute of deep respect was due to the labouring classes for their superb devotion to the principles of union­ism; which they felt, and had a right to feel, had achieved for them such glorious results. Honorable members must also have, as the honorable member ror Port Fairy had, a sense of deep sorrow for the sufferings which were so heroically borne by those who were out on strike, and by tlieir wives and families. To the credit of the labouring classes here, he said that those sufferings and privations were being endured in a way that won from the community universal admira­tion and applause. Up to that point the llOnorable member for Port Fairy had the sympathy of the House, but when he asked ]lOnorable members to agree with him as to the means which he had taken to put an end to this fratricidal strife which had visited the industries of this colony, then he (Mr. Shiels) must ask to be allowed to entertain gnve anxiety as to the wisdom of the course the honorable member advised the House to adopt. Every discussion which had taken place in the House on thi!:! subject had been fruitful of differences,and inflammatory in its action and influenc('. Every interposition of the House, from the time when this subject was first brought forward by the honorable member for Richmond (Mr. Trenwith), had been not only idle and fruitless, but posi­tively and irremediably mischievous. In­stead of expediting a settlement, it had retarded it; instead of conciliating, it had exasperated and hardened; instead of making the leaders on both sides willing to listen to counsels of peace, it had inflamed mutual animosities, and caused a wider gulf of estrangement to flow between them. This House had not been allowed to stand cool

Mr. Shiels.

and calm and impartial above the roar of the storm and the tumult of the battle, ready to seize any auspicious moment that might present itself, to make peace or to counsel moderation, but had been forced to rush into the arena of combat, and to mix with the dust and the smoke of the conflict. That had been done to tlle detriment of the cause honorable members had at heart, and, as he thought, to the loss of prestige and influence by the House. Members, instead of being regarded as a tribunal of im­partial judges, were, owing to the unfor­tunate motions which had been submitted,. ranked as either the friends or the foes of the employers or the employed. The influence of the House. to heal the breach had been lessened, if it was not com­pletely gone. If honorable members had to take any legislative or administrative action~ they wonld find themselves hampered and impeded at every turn by the memory of the heated discussions which had taken place, by the wide differences or opinion that prevailed amongst them, or by the supposed preferences which this side 01' that side might have shown. He said, in a speech he made in answer to the honorable member for Richmond, that it appeared to him that the duty of the Government and of the House was one that was clear and certain, that honorable members had to keep the ring clear, and not to do as the honorable member for Port Fairy now asked them to do-to cut the ropes, rush into the arena of battle, and take part against one side. This motion was distinctly a motion of censure against one of the combatants in the strife. (Mr. Peacock-" They deserve it.") He would not express his private sen­timents, which, for all the honorable member knflw, perhaps were the same as his own, be­cause,although aman had 3 righttoentertain private sentiments, he had not always the right to attempt to place them on the records of this House by a substantive motion. (Mr. Peacock-" You are ex­pressing y'our private sentiments.") He was endeavouring to avoid expressing opinions such as had fallen from' the honor­able member for Ballarat West. The hon­orable member, by the way in which he debated this motion, had sown dragon's. teeth in the HousE', and had made it neces­sary for honorable members not so much to justify the course which one or the other side in the present dispute had taken, but to­say disinctly that they would not allow motions of this kind to be submitted, which would still further inflame the bitter

Shipping Strike. [OCTOBER 15.J Shipping St1'l·ke. 208T

fee1ingR which were already sufficiently in­flamed outside the House. That would be the effect of the speech of the honorable member for Ballarat 'Vest, and he (Mr. Shiels) regretted to say that it was the iu­eribble drift and tendency of this motion, because it distinctly conveyed a censure upon one side in this calamitous and fratri­cidal strife. How could honorable members take the olle incident of the refusal of an unhampered and unconditional conference, and pass judgment upon it without look­ing into the whole of its immediate and remote antecedents? Oould one sentence be removed fronl its context ? No, and this one incident could not be removed from its antecedents. Were not honorable members, as honest judges, driven by this motion back to the whole origin of the dis­pute ? vYere they not bound to pass in review, and sit in judgment upon, each successive stage and step in it? Were they not being forced to re-call everything that had occurred? (Mr. Peucock-"You are forcing us to do that.") Did the hon­OI'able member for Olunes hear the speech of the honorable member for Ballarat West, in which the whole history of the dispute was opened up, and incidents referred to which honorable members would like to erase from the tablets of their memory? (Lt.-Ool. Smith-" No.") The honorable member's speech and this motion forced the House to recall every painful and shameful incident in the struggle-not only herE', but through­out the whole continent of Australia. It forced honorable members to bring up the origin of the strike, and to recall the scenes of lawlessness, intimidation, boycotting, and violence, which had marked its career. (Lt.-Ool. Smith-" Not here.") He had paid a warm and unstinted tribute to the labouring classes here for their conduct during the strike. He would, however, say boldly, fearless of consequences, that although Victoria had been the least sinner, still the course of the struggle in this colony had been occasionally stained by not only brutal violence, but a total disregard of the maxims of good citizenship and of law and orderly conduct. Honorable members could not shut their eyes to that fact, anci now this unhappy motion compelled them to recall all the boycotting, wrong-doing, and intimidation which had taken place, and to reflect upon the painful scene to which the Premier of New South Wales referred on the previous night, when unionism stood up defiantly and recklessly, and said that all the channels of industry should be stopped,

and that the Government, wllich was the national carrier, should be treated just as a. private employer, and that the miner should' not be allowed to hew coal for the railway srvice of the colony, upon which not only the comfort and transport, but the very food and the sustenance of the people depended •. He regretted that this motion had been sub­mitted. He prepared a rough draft of an amendment which he felt sure the House would have accepted, but when he heard the speech of the honorable member for Ballarat. 'Vest he determined that the best plan to adopt was to move the previous question, so that the House might have an opportunityof affirming its opinion that motions and discussions of this sort, which did so much harm, should not take place. He'would ask the honorable member for Port Fairy­was it wise, was it prudent, was it patriotic,. to force the House to revile a page in their history lurid with such bitter memories,. and to plunge members into a discussion which bristled with such acrimonions C011-

troversies? (Sir B. O'Loghlen-" Is it patriotic to desire to put an end to the strike ?") Yes, but it was not patriotic to take part with one or the other side in this. dispute, alld to do so in a way which forced the House to review the whole question before pronouncing a final judgment upon. it. The honorable member for Port FairY' censured the employers of Victoria for not going into an unhampered conference. Did not the honorable member know that both· the employers and the employed in Victoria .. had, whether wisely or unwisely, surrendered; a great part of their own indepmdence of" action to a federated body which had. sat ill the capital of another colony? Did. not the honorable member know that for this reason the Employers' Union, of Victoria could not of their own· motion grant an unhampered conference,. but would have to obtain the sanction of the federated bodies of Australia, and per-­baps even New Zealand? Therefor(>, before· the House could blame the employers of' Victoria, they would have to sit in judg-­ment upon the question of whether the­federation of the em ployers and of the­employed of Victoria was right or wrongr Oould the honorable member for Port Fairy blame the employers if they could not, except as a breach of loyalty, take the in­dependent action proposed? Honorable members knew that the employers of Victoria and, to their credit, the leaders of the employed of Victoria, had been far more moderate and reasQn~bl~ than those in th~

:2088 Shipping Strike. [ASSEMBLY.] Shipping Stril.:e.

other colonies. (" No.") He appealed to the honorable member for Richmond (Mr. Trenwith) to say whether it was not true that far more heat, obstinacy, and bitterness had prevailed elsewhere than in Victoria. (Lt.-Col. Smith-" That is not true.") Unless honorable members were to disbelieve €verything they had read in the Melbourne .newspa.pers, they must come to the satis­factory conclusion that more moderation had been shown by the leaders of both parties in Victoria than had been exhibited elsewhere. Expressing his own honest sentiments, he believed that but for the ·£ecleration which took place, and for the -seat of t.he whole controversy being trans­ferred to Sydney, this unhappy strife, which was so destructive in its effects, would have been settled long since. Therefore, the honorable member for Port Fairy was not justified in proposing a motion of censure upon the employers of Victoria. (Sir B. O'Loghlen-"It is not a motion of censure; it is an inducement to them to meet the repre­sentatives of the trade.") It was an induce­ment which would make the employers more obstinate. (Mr. Kirton-" They could not be more obstinate than they are now.") "Vouid it be fair or just to pass legislative censure upon the employers of Victoria when they were not solely responsible for the refusal to meet in conference? (Mr. Dunn-" vVhy did they federate; they deny the same right to the men.") This motion opened up that very question of the honorable member-the wisdom of the federation of both the employers and the employed, by which to some extent they sacrificed their own freedom of action. It also opened up the question of the manifestoes issued in Sydney and the agreements there made. It had other far-reaching, dangerous, and embittering effects, for it forced honorable members to consider whether the tactics of the trades unions in his strife could be regarded as a just and proper development of the principle of com­bination-the clear and inalienable right of men to band themselves together in order to afford mutual help and supp~rt, and 'So secure better terms and conditions for their labour-or whether the trades unions had become, as was alleged by employers, aggressive, tyrannical, and exclusive. In addition to this, the motion forced honorable members to ask themselves whether it was fair tactics in this terrible war to attem pt, by bringing out the gas stokers, to plunge this great metropolis in darkness. (Lt.-Col. Smith-"Who did that ?") He was not

Mr. Shiels.

inquiring who did it, but he said that this motion opened up the question ot whether it was wise and patriotic to attempt, by calling out the gas stokers, to plunge the city in darkness, and to give free scope to rascality and crime. And further, the motion forced honorable members to consider whether it was fair tactics to call out the shearers, to punish the union sheds and the union shearers, and to allow the non-union sheds and the non-union shearers to go scatheless and harmless. All these unfor­tunate questions were thrown down here, like the mythical apples of Greece, to be a fruithful subject of bitte'rness and ani­mosity. What could the HOl1se hope from a motIOn like this? vVas there any potency or ,irtue in it which would force a con­ference ? (Sir B. O'Loghlen-" Public opinion.") The employers might say­" Will public opinion put money into our pockets, and save us from the losses we dread?" The honorable member for Port Fairy interposed at the wrong time, and actually raised obstacles in the way of a conferencp.. vVasit dignified, he asked, forthe Legislative Assembly to discuss questions like a boys' debating society, and to exhort, to lecture, to censur~, without having power to enforce their wishes? vVas not the un­wisdom or motion~ like this shown by the discussion which had taken place, and if his interjecting friends liked, even by his (Mr. Shiels') own speech? (Mr. Peacock -" Hear, hear.") He was quite willing to take the responsibility or all that he had said. He hated the pusillanimity dis­played by men, who, finding that the opinions they had expressed or held were not acceptable to the labour leaders, tried now to make their peace. Let a ·man stand to his colours, take all the risks, and do his duty fearlessly. He had seen with disappoint­ment and pain a miserable system of kow­tow-a craven change of front which was forced upon honorable members by an ignoble fear of the power which· might be wielded against them by the Trades Hall leaders. The motion passed by the Trades Hall Council of Ballarat meant that they only recognised the gracions deed of sub­scription, that they scorned fair words with­out cash, and that the attempts now made to palm off theatrical heroics npon them instead of coin counted for nothing. He never wished to be accused of having the craven cowardly feeling which would make him sacrifice his own independence and self-respect in order to evade the punish­ment which should fall upon him. If he

Sltippi11[J St1'l'/.;e. [OCTOBER 15.J Shipping Stn'!.;e. 20Sg,

deserved punishment, he was not going to sneak out of it. He would not worship Baal, or hypocritically bow his knees to the Trades Hall,and ask for forgiveness. Many a time and often in this House, when he had thought the cause or labour to be just he had boldly expressed his sentiments in favour of it. He had neyer been opposed to labour; he had always recognised that the sons and daughters of toil needed every considera­tion, and, when he was in England recently, there was no one theme of which he spoke with greater pride to those he met than that of the happy lot of labourers in this colony. No one was more anxious 01' willing to help the cause of labour, or to assist the working classes to obtain still better .terms [01' that which was their only capital. But he was not going to kow-tow to labour, or profess that it was always right and ca.pital always wrong. He took an independent stand as a represen­tati ve of all classes and grades of the people, and he said that the House should not bave had this acrimonious discussion forced upon it by a motion which he believed to be ill-advised, and to be damaging to the very cause which the honorable member for Port Fairy had at heart,. The inevitable tendency of the motion was to harden the hearts or those who were in conflict, to in­flame their bitterness, and to widen the gulf or estrangement which now rolled between them. He objected to the House losing its influence by descending to discussions of this kind, which could have no practical effect. He objected to the valuable time of the House being taken up by discussions which were not only worse than futile, but which he believed to be absolutely and irredeemably mischievous. The blade of those high pre­rogatives with which they were" invested by the grace or their constituents ought to be kept bright and keen for their proper legis­lative work. It would be to dim its lustre and blunt its edge to un sheath it. to carry such abortive motions, or otherwise meddle officiously and vainly in matters outside their rightful domain. He asked the House to face the occasion resolutely, and boldly say that the motion submitted by the honor­able member for Port Fairy should not be allowed to be brought before the Legislature of Victoria.

Mr. C. YOUNG seconded the amend­ment.

Mr. TRENWITH observed that he regretted extremely the speech which bad been made by the honorable member for Normanby, for both the matter and the

manner of it were in very bad taste. The honorable member had referred to the honorable member for Ballarat West (Lt.-Col. Smith) as a consummate actor. But it was the honorable member for Normanby who had indulged in heroics on the present occasion. Never before had he shown so much disposition to " tear a passion to tatters" and to "split the" ears of the groundlings." The honorable­memher had not addressed his speech to the House, or he would have been argu­mentative, but to the class outside whose interests he represented, and he was indeed a consummate actor. An honorable member" who was usunlly good tempered could not" so easily get into a passion, and it was clear­that the honorable member for N ormanby had assumed a virtue, though he had it not. To deal seriously with the subject> however, the honorable member stated that the motion of the honorable member for Port Fairy was a vote of censure upon the Employers' Union. The motion said that the House deeply regretted that the Em-' ployers' Union did not meet the trades unions in an unconditional conference. How that could be called a vote of censure he was unable to understand. If the honor­able member for N ormanby had. "broken his arm while attempting to walk the tight. rope, and the House expressed its deep' regret that he had met with an accident, could that be said to be a vote of censure upon the honorable member? The fact was that the honorable member objected to an open conference, because he believed that it would lead to a settlement of the disastrous statA of affairs now existing. The honorable member had very illogically referred to acts of lawlessness which had been committed during the strike, because surely, if it were a fact that acts of lawless­ness had been committed, they ought all to deeply regret that anyone should stand in tIle way of a settlement of the dispute. The tendency of modern thought was in favour of the settlement of labour disputes by arbitration, and surely the honorable mem­ber, in his heart, deeply regretted that the­Employers' Union, or anyone else, should refuse to adopt the means which were uni­versally being recognised as the best to settle troubles of a kind which had sometimes led to bloodshed. The fact was the honorable member was thinking more of his con­stituen ts than of the words of the motion. He came to the House prepared to "fire low,'" in order to secure the approval or the electors

" of Normanby~ wllOse suffrages be hoped to

:2090 Shippill!J 8tJ'il.:e. [ASSElUBL Y.] SMpllill!J /')'tl'il.:e.

obtain again. The honorable member had stated that "he had always held that the labourer was worthy of every considera­;tion." Consideration was all that the labourer wanted in the present dispute. It was because he had not been able to get it ,that he had been compelled to fight. How did this disastrous and far-reaching quarrel commence? The marine officers in the first instance sought certain concessions, and they asked for a conference with their employers on the subject. The em­ployers thereupon said tllat they would not 'oonfer with the marine officers unless the Jatter dissociated themselves from a certain body they were connected with, and the officers, believing that stipulation to be unwarranted, refused to continue at work. At the last moment there appeared to be a [lrospect of settlement through the inter­vention of Mr. Service and Mr. Hancock. 'The marine officers again asked for a con­ference, and the employers had not even the 'courtesy to reply. He hoped the House would defeat the object sought to be ·obtained by the moving or the previous -question.

Mr. W. T. CARTER said it was a -(Jowardly act.

Mr. SHIELS remarked that the honor­able member for Williamstown did not understand the nature of the amendment.

Mr. TRENWITH observed that a con­.siderable number of honorable members did not understand the nature of the amendment. Honorable members must vote for the amend­ment, or else they would secure the end the honorable memberfor Normanby had in view. The effect of negativing the amendment would be to supersede the whole question. The Premier had asked what good could the motion accomplish? His reply to that was that the expression of public opinion was an immense factor in the settlement of disputes of this kind. There could not be a doubt that public opinion, with a very few excep­tions, was in favour of an unconditional conference, which had no precedent con­ditions, being held. All experience taught that conferences of this nature usually led to -satisfactory settlements, because, when people were shook up together, mutual concessions were easily made. The honorable mem ber for Normanby had alluded to the hunger .and misery that the strike was causing to women and children, and that was a very -strong reason why a settlement should be -speedily arrived at. No means of averting '80 serious a calamity ought to be rejected. An honorable member had asked why did

not the men go to work? Some people seemed to think that a conflict between labour and capital should always be settled by the men conceding everything. The dispute would be just as effectually settled if the employers conceded the reasonable and just demands of the workmen. The view of some people was that it wa~ better to ha.ve commerce paralyzed, and women and children starving, than that the employers should concede what they had themselves admitted to be just a.nd reasonable. The honorable member for N ol'manby said, "More shame to the men" for not going to work, though the employers had admitted that what the officers asked for in the matterof hours of work and wages was just and reasonable. In the excited and warm speech which that honorable member made that evening he had shown the strongest possible reasons why the House should express an opinion on this subject. An unanimous opinion expressed by the House of the kind desired by the honorable member for Port Fairy would have an irresistible influence in bringing about a conference. And it must be remembered that the holding of a conference bound no one to a.nything beyond talking over the matters in dispute. All must agree that it was desirable that a. conference should be held as quickly as possible. The working men had been willing and anxious for a conference from the very first, and even before the inception of the strike. The employers, while pro­testing that they were not opposed to trade unionism, appE'ared to he making a distinct attack on \hat institution. Parliament had gone out of its way to recognise trade unionism in the past, and had passed an Act to legalize it, thereby expressing the opinion that the growth of trade unionism should be fostered by the Legislature, and surely it would not now be undignified for the House to express its regret that the best means had not been taken to avert action the object of which appeared to be to stamp out trade unionism.

Mr. DUNN said he desired to ap(llogize to the honorable member for Normanby for a remark he had made, as he had mis­understood the nature of his amendment~ He wished that the motion of the honorable member for Port Fairy had been carried unanimously and without discussion, be­cause he believed it would have had the effect of bringing the two conflicting parties together, and of settling this unfortunate dispute. The employers had practically acknowledged that the men were justified in

Shipping Stl'il.:e. [OCTOBER 15.J Shipping Stl'l"/ce. 2091

their demands, and the fact ought not to be lost sight of that the United Employers' Union of the colony was endeavouring to crush unionism out of this country. The employers had met the overtures from the Trades Hall in a. manner which showed that they had no desire to enter upon a settlement of the dispute. The honorable member for Ballarat West (Lt.-Ool. Smith) was certainly entitled, as a very old member, to express his opinion, and the honorable member for Normanby had no right to object to the private actions of members of the House. He honestly trusted that the House would give a vote which would tend to a settlement or the labour difficulty.

Mr. O. YOUNG said he regarded the bringing of this matter before the House as a most ill-advised proceeding. In common with a good many honorable members, he would have allowed the thing to pass, but, after the very animated speech of the honor­able member for Ballarat West (Lt.-Ool. Smith) and the remarks of the honorable member for Richmond (Mr. Trenwith), he thought it wise that every honorable member should express his opinion. He failed to see what possible object could be attained by passing the motion. It could .do no good, and it would commit the House to taking sides with one of the parties. At the same time, he believed the honorable member for Port Fairy to be animated by the best intentions, and he agreed with the honorable member that it was the women and children who were the real sufferers by the strike. No member of the House had more sympathy with the working men than he (Mr. Young) had, and no man in the House had worked as hard in the colony as he had done. His sympathies were entirely with those who had to earn their bread by the sweat of their brow, but that {lid not make him close his eyes to the ridicu­lous position the working men now occupied. They ceased work of their own accord, and they attempted to take the law into their own hands. Asking for no assistance, they said they were perfectly able to settle this dispute in their own way. They undertook, in the first instance, to stop the gas supply, leav­ing Melbourne in the dark, and then they tried to prevent the trains from funning, a measure under which the agriculturists would not have been able to send their pro­{luce to market. The employers took no :action, and the result was that the working men were worsted in the struggle. Many of them went back to the gas works, and, after they found that the railways could be kep~

going without them, they sought an expres­sion of opinion in their favour from the Assembly. The Househad no right whatever to express an opinion on the subject one way or the other. The submission or the motion of the honorable member for Port Fairy was calculated to proven t a settle!llent of the difficulty rather than to expedite it. The honorable member for Ballarat vVest had made a very unjust attack upon the Govern­ment in this matter. The Government deserved the thanks of the House and the country for the steps they took to secure the preservation of law and order, and he (Mr. Young) would be very glad to support a proposition thanking the Government for the course they adopted w.hen the difficulties began. He begged to tender his warmest thanks to the Government for their action in this matter.

Mr. BEST remarked that, as a member of the House, he wCluld have been extremely happy to have fallen in with the wise suggestion of the honorable member for Port Fairy,· when he desired that this question should be put without discus~ion. That course of procedure, he thought, might have added dignity and importance to the motion, and possibly made it lllore effective than with the advocacy it had now gained. He was more than surprised at the speech which was delivered by the honorable member for Normanby in connexion with the question under discussion. His honor­able frienel very rightly and properly held in this House a position of respect, to which his abilities entitled him, and his speeches, as a rule, were cloSE!ly reasoned and logical; but the speech he had just delivered contained the grossest inconsistencies. The honorable melllber opened by protesting against this House dealing with the question at all, but he said that if honorable members considered it was desirable to do so, then the House shoulcl deal with the motion in the manner suggested by the honorable member for Port Fairy, and that to discuss this matter was unwise and undignified. But what did he do? He permitted his own partisan feelings to so overcome him that he took the opportunity of launching forth one of the most violent and im­passioned speeches that this Parliament had as yet had the privilege of hearing­a speech which was largely calculated to inflame the minds of the labour party and of the advocates of their cause. That was deeply to be regretted, because the House had an opportunity of passing this motion as an expression of opinion from the whole

2092 Shipping Stn·l'e. [ASSEMBLY.] Shipping St1'l'lce.

of the representatives of the people in this Chamber-an expression of opinion which he was not without 110pe would have been of considerable value under the present circumstances. But what he deemed most unworthy of. the honorable member for Normanby, and most ungenerous on his part, was that he should have had the temerity to charge honorable members who had the audacity to differ from him in opinion with cowardice. No honorable member in this House was more sensitive and indeed susceptible to the feelings and desires of his constituency than the honor­able member for Normanby. He should re­member that on one occasion in connexion with a vital issue that was before this House, namely a' proposal for the increase of the stock tax, yielding to the desires and wishes of his own constituents, but against all his previously expressed economic convictions, the honorable member saw fit to vote in favour of the increase of that tax, a tax which was strongly de­nounced as ultra-protective, and which to the minds of a great many thinking men in this community appeared to be a short­sighted and unworthy policy in connexion with the development of this great Austra­lian nation. On that occasion his honor­able friend, to adopt his own expression, saw fit to "kow-tow" to the views and wishes of his constituency, and to come out as one of the most pronounced adherents of that policy. He (Mr. Best) was not pre­pared to condemn the honorable member on that account, for while he was not ready to say that honorable -members were merely delegates in this House, he was certainly of opinion that they would be unworthy of their representative position were they de­liberately to disregard the views of their constituents on matters which vitally affected their interests. Honorable members had a representative capacity to fill. They had the right, no doubt, of individual opinion, and they.had also the right to exer­cise an unbounded and fearless discretion; but when a man in a representative position was dealing with a grave, a serious, a vital question, in which some of the most important interests of his constituents were involved, then that honorable mem­ber, with a full knowledge of the views of his constituents and of the extent to which they were likely to be affected, had not only a right to consider but to some extent, and to a large extent, to defer to the desires and wishes of his constituency. But for taking up that

Mr. Be6I.

position honorable members were to be charged with cowardice. He (Mr. Best) did not for one moment seek to ex­clude himself from the general condem­nation that the honorable member for N ormanby saw fit to launch against honor­able members in this respect. If the members of this House were entitled to be charged with cowardice in this matter, then he ventured to include himself amongst the number; but he would ask the honorable member what did he think of a man belong­ing possibly to a conservati ve profession-a man whose social and domestic ties to a large extent attached him to sympathizers with the other side-would he regard it as an act of cowardice on the part of that man to boldly step into the arena, and teU llis constituents and this colony of Victoria that he considered the interests of his constituents of param@untimportance? Theywerevitally concerned in the victory of a particular principle; was it cowardice when he ventured to assist his constituents to attain that victory? Such a charge would, in his opinion, be unjust and unfair. The honor­able member, while decrying the value of this House attempting to deal with this important issue, took the opportunity of proving himself to be an impassioned and violent partisan, for he sought to excuse what was generally regarded as a serious and unwarrantable delay on the part of the Em­ployers' Union in connexion wit,h the request of the labour party for a conference. The honorable member, in what might be possibly regarded as a piece of special pleading, declared that the Em.(>loyers' Union could not avoid the delay nor the dilatory course they had adopted, because they were allied with the employers in the othercolonies on this question, and that they would be acting dis­loyally if they acted otherwise. But honor­able members had to remember that this request on the part of the one side for a con­ference was first made upwards of a month ago, and consequently this attempt to up­hold the action of the employers, and to exonerate them from all blame in regard to their delay in granting the request of the labour party for a conference, proved the honorable member to be an undoubtell partisan. He differed from the honorable member for N ormanby in one important mattp,r. The honorable member stated that the discussion of this question involved the discussion in this House of the earlier inci­dents in connexion with the present struggle between capital and labour, and the honorable member indulged himself to the fullest

Shipping 8t1'ike. [OC'l'ODER 15.J 2093

extent in that direction. This debate, he (Mr. Best) submitted, did not necessarily involve anything of the kind. He had his own strong opinions in regard to the earlier inci­dents of this important strike imbroglio; but he felt that it would be altogether out of place to express them on the present occa­sion, or to otherwise deal with the merits or demerits of past actions. What honorable members had to recognise at this juncture was that an internecine industrial war was pending, and there had been a fair and reasonable request from the labour part.y for a conference, which request had been virtually, and indeed actually, refused. In requesting a conference the labour party act~d in accordance with precedent; and, to his mind, \yith a desire for moderation. If the labour party saw fit to endeavour to settle the present dispute by resorting to the means which had been used with the greatest suc­cess in the settlement of difficulties in the past, then he mllst say that to his (Mr. Best's) mind that was a wise and just pro­posal. (Mr. Staughton-" But they had no authority to settle.") Such a question was never raised Olil. any previous occasion wIlen there had been an attempt to settle industrial differences. The labour party might with equal fairness have questioned the authority of the Employers' Union, and aR the labour party did not attempt to do so, it was not fair or reasonable for the Employers' Union to question the authority of the labour leaders, who claimed to speak on behalf of theirown side. They might fairly be assumed to have the power to speak on behalf of the labour party in the settlement of a dispute, which, the employers con­tended, had been precipitated by those very leaders. He was simply giving expression to. his honest and earnest feelings on this subject. A man who was mixed up largely in business, as he was himself, must neces­sarily have daily observed the disastrous and indeed terrible effects of the present strike, and it was that which moved him to a very great exten t iQ his anxious hope tha t he might be able to do something that would assist in bringing about a conferenci~ between the parties which might result in a permanent settlement of the dispute, and put an end to this most lamentable strike. (Mr. 8hiels-" We all wish that.") Then he could not pardon t.he gross indiscretions of the honorable member in the inflam­matory speech which he saw fit to deliver in the course of this debate, because such langunge would not nssist the endeavour to bring about a settlement

SES. 1890.-7 I

of the struggl(>. He must admit that the value of this motion had been largely discounted by the heated feeling that had been introduced into the discussion; but it was submitted in the hope that it would be passed without debate. It had been said that if this motion was passed it would be regarded as a legislative censure on the employers, and would probably be resented by them, and would rather prolong the strife than otherwise. (Mr. Shiels-" Hear, hear.") With the greatest respect and deference to honorable members who differed from him on this point, he felt that a certain moral weight would be attached to the resolution, as embodying the deliberate opinion of this House. It must be remembered that all the leaders of thought in economic matters were at this moment engaged in trying to do what the honorable member for Port Fairy sought to do, namely, to bring about a conference. Tho Premiers of New South Wales, South Australia, and Victoria were so engaged. Their honorable and esteemed friend, Mr. Service, did not fail to take an opportunity, at an earlier stage of this struggle, to indicate his pronounced opinions in the same direction, and from the Ohief Secretary and other leaders in political matters they had had similar expressions of .opinion. Why, then, should the em­ployers be so blind, if he might be pardoned for using the word, to the requests and the desires of this community, as expressed by the leading men who had spoken out boldly on this question; why should they be unwilling to yield to those strong desires, and to so simple and reasonable a request? The Premier had urged that this subject should not be discussed, or even. dealt with at all; but notwithstanding the views of that honorable gentleman, prompted, as no doubt they were, by the best of motives, this House was justified by the action of .the Premier himself and other experienced parliamen­tarians in taking action at the present jnncture, and he (Mr. Best) deeply re­gretted-spealdng as he did against the views of a large number of employers, who were among his personal friends, and for whom he had the deepest respect-that the Employers'Union should think so poorly of the merits of their own cn,se as to be unwill­ing to meet the representatives of the labour party in conference to discuss matters of such paramount importance. Honorable members had to remember that, according to the existing economic conditions, there always would be two parties-labour and

2094 SluJ'jJil1fJ St1't'ke. [ASSEMBLY.] Shipping Stdlce.

capital. The employers claimed to be already victorious, but this might be but a temporary victory; it might provoke hostilities and exasperation on the other side, and might mean, alas! another serious struggle in the future. If they were victorious, he prayed them to be generous, so that labour and capital might go together hand in ha,nd, as they should. Both sides having now experienced the serious and disastrous con­sequences attending industrial warfare­now, above all times, an opportunity was presented of bringing about a permanent settlement, and devising a scheme whereby the barbarity of strikes and lock-outs, and similar means of asserting the rights of one or other of these two great parties, would in the future be unknown and impossible. They had got the benefit of a large and important experi~nce to guide them in connexion with this beneficent project. There was at one time a board of concilia­tion in this colony. It was possibly but a weak organization, and yet, to its credit be it said, it did some valuable work. In the north of England boards of conciliation had been dealing with industrial matters for the last twenty years, and we had the privi. lege of considering and profiting by the experience of their operations there. It was stated, on the very best authority, that in one single year, namely last year, one board of conciliation in conn ex ion with the Durham coal trade had succeeded in settling some 619 differences in trade matters. It was surely their duty, in these advanced times, to declare that the strikes from which they had suffered so much in days gone by must be made to belong only to the past. He fully recognised the diffi­culty in the way of legislatively dealing with this grave and important question, but the greater, therefore, was the reason-now that they had an opportunity of settling the differences which unhappily existed between capital and labour in this colony, and settling them on a permanent basis, now that one of the parties at least was in that framg of mind-that the opportunity should be a railed of to the fullest. In his opinion, it would be little short of a calamity if this magnificent opportunity was going to be ruthlessly cast aside. The Employers' Union had asserted that there was nothing to confer about, but, with the greatest respect, he differed from that opinion. There was a great deal to confer about, but happily there was nothing that would not be found easy of settlement. He regarded the manifesto issued by the labour party as

Mr. Best.

one of the most reasonable manifestoes that could be penned. After a close analysis of its contents, he was pleased to find that it was to a large extent a re­echo of the manifesto of the Employers' Union. All that it ventured to assert was that the privileges which the employers sought to attach to themselves should like­wise be extended to the labour party-that there should be freedom of contract on both sides. That seemed to him to be the main point at issue and, in fact, the backbone of the whole struggle. Both parties embodied their wishes and desires in a manifesto setting out the lines or basis of a con­ference, which would be expected to evolve a definite understanding on the issues of difference. The honorable member for Normanby, in the course of his reference to incidents of the strike, took occasion to refer to the intimidation and violence that had been used bv unionists. He would not do his honorable friend the injustice of thinking that he intended by that means to slander the labour party as a whole, but his words were open to that construction. They were but the excesses 01' indiscretions of a few excited and reckless people, to be found in all sections, in the course of one of the most gigantic struggles that had ever convulsed Australia; but he (Mr. Best) must say that everybody would recognise as a satisfactory reflection, in looking back upon this struggle, the fact that the law-abiding and the peace-loving instincts of the people had been so splendidly manifested. Thelabour party had shown in that respect the greatest wisdom throughout this struggle, and their conduct as a body reflected upon them the highest credit. They recognised that their interests and their honour had to be upheld by preserving a peaceable mien, and the generd bearing of the labour party as a whole, from the commencement of the strike to the present time, deserved unstinted praise. He (Mr. Best) conscientiously believed the labour party felt that the vital principle of trades unionism was more or less at stake, and likely to be crippled by this struggle. With the honorable mem ber for Normanby, he admired the heroism and sacrifice that a number of trades unionists had displayed in this struggle. For the sake of principle they had sacrificed their means of livelihood, and had shown that they. were ready to suffer poverty and privation in order that the principle of trades unionism might be upheld. There was heroism worthy of admiration in their efforts to maintain that principle. The social condition of the

Shipping Strike. [OCTOBER 15.] Shipping St1'ike. 2095

working classes in this community had fre­·quently been boasted of by its public men,and that satisfactory condition had been largely owing to the general prevalence of trades ·union principles in Victoria. The workers here had benefited by the experience of England and other nations; they had formed their trades unions for the pur­,poses of mutual protection and defence, for the purposes of obtaining and main­taining a fair remunerative standard of wages, and preserving for themselves and their wives and families a respectable 'Social standing, and in all these respects the trades unions of the colony had been fairly successful in the past. But they had {lone more than that. Perhaps one of the best features in connexion with trades unionism in this colony was that it promised fait· to relieve the country from one of the most serious and difficult questions now awaiting solution in the old country-the question of how to prevent, as far as pos­sible, the sharp and violent con trast which at present existed in England between rich and poor-a question which was regarded as a serious menace, and which was occupying the minds of some of the leaders of thought on economic questions in various parts of the civilized world. The labour parties sought to ensure that the trades unionism which they had treasured and prided them­selves upon in the past, shollld not be crippled in this particular struggle. In view of the delay of the Employers' Union in meeting their request for a conference-in view of the attitude which had been assumed by the employers of labour in the industrial warfare now going on, the trades unionists were perhaps justified in thinking that there was an effort on the part of the employers to cripple trade unionism. He trusted, for the benefit of this great colony and its future, that the trades unionists were mis­taken in that respect. He was moved to earnestness in this matter by reason of the distress which had been suffered during the past two months, and which would be in­tensified by a continuance of this policy of holding off aueterely, refusing the fair and reasonable request for a conference, and consequently delaying a permanent settle­ment of the dispute. He could not help feeling too that the ramifications involved in a continued refusal might be world-wide in their injurious effects, and when he recog­nised the industrial and commercial stag­nation which had resulted in consequence of this strife-how enterprise had been checked, how the vast industrial machinery of the

712

commllnity had been so seriously affected and brought. almost to a stand-still-he felt that these considerations were in themselves sufficient to justify the House in inter­posing at this particular juncture, after this period of delay, to assist in every possible way in bringing ab')ut that great desideratum, a permanent settlement of this painful industrial warfare.

Mr. STUART remarked that no matter how much opinions might differ as to the wisdom or otherwise of the proceedings of the Employers' Union or the action of the leaders of the Trades Hall in the earlier stages of the strike, there was at this juncture a general consensus of opinion all over the country in favour of a settlement of the present struggle between capital and labour by means of an unconditional con­ference. The demands of the employers for certain principles to be conceded before a conference was held were con trary to all ploevious practice, and were calculated to widen the breach between the two contend­ing parties,and intensify the bitter feelings in the minds of many of the working men of the colony. The employers said that the labour party was defeated, and if that was a fact it was all the more reason why the winning side should be generous, and look beyond their own immediate benefit and profit, and show some concern for the many thousands of traders, farmers, miners, shop­keepers, clerks, shop men, and the great mass of unskilled labom, both male and female, now suffering so terribly. He had hitherto been afraid of interfering, and had said before that it would be unwise for the House to interfere; but having waited a long time in the hope that the good sense of the two parties would bring them together, and lead them to a settle­ment, he found that on one side there was unfortunately not enough good sense.

. It was the employers who unfairly held back, because the leaders of the Trades Hall had long been ready to help to bring about a settlement, and it was not fair to ask them to go to the conference with their hands tied. He had much pleasure in sllppo.rting the motion, and he hoped that the House would carry it by a very large majority.

Mr. G. D. CARTER said he thought that the honorable member for Fitzroy (Mr. Best) made one or two slight omissions in the course of his eloquent and earnest speech. The honorable member said that trade unionism was established in this colony for the purpose of defence. So long as it was devoted to that purpose there was no

209'6 Shippini Strike. [ASSEMBLY.] Sldpping Strike.

stronger admirer or supporter or tr~de unionism than himself; but he would pomt out to the honorable member for Fitzroy tl1at on this occasion trade unionism passed from derence to offence, because it became the attacking instead of the defending partv and that he thought was where the lead~;s of the Trades Hall had made a mis­t;tke. There was no member of the Assem­bly who would not be delighted to see the termination or this strife, which was so in­jurious to every interest in the country. They were all of that mind, and he believed he was justified in saying that there was not a member of the House whose sympa­thies were not enlisted on the weaker side, that or the employed. They had all known the tyranny of capital, but they did not wish to substitute for the tyranny of capital the tyranny of labour, because one tyranny would be just as bad as the other. What he would endeavour to point out was that if the Legislative Asserublypassed an abstract resolution, such as that now under considera­tion, it would really make the House appear absurd in the eyes of the public, because honorable members were elected not to give advice but to legislate. Their function was a legislative and not an advising function, and it seemed to him that it would be as im­proper for them, in their position as legis­lators, to tender advice either to the one side or to the other in this dispute, as it would be for a judge to express an opinion on the one side or the other ill any case that was to come before llim for adjudication. As a legislative budy they should act on their own proper powers, and exercise the runctions for which they were elected. It was the duty of the Government to carry out the law; it was the duty of" Parliament to make the law, and it was not their duty to tender advice to anybody, more especially when they did not take steps to enforce any advice they might gi\re. What was the use of their saying they regretted that so­and-so had not happened? Would not the employers laugh at them? 'tV ould they not say, " Thank you, gentlemen; we are much obliged to you for ad vice, but we won't take it?" vVhy should honorable members pu t themsel ves in that position? He must also point out that there was a much larger question behind the question now before the House, a question which had hardly been alluded to at all. The real question at stake was the liberty of the subject. That was the question. It was not a question of employer or employe. He had no feeling one way cr the other. He was neither an employer

Mr. G. D. Carter.

, directly nor an employe; but he had a great regard for his own personal liberty, for liberty of conscience, and for liberty of the person, and he objected to any man or any body of men attempting to interfere with either the one or the other. This colony was legally, he presumed, a free country. He came here as a very young man, leaving behind him a great deal of misery he had seen in the old land, where his sympathies were entirely on the side of the people so ably represented in this colony by the honorable member for Richmond C1VIr. Trenwith). He was very glad to seethathon­orablememberbackin hisplaceagain, because during his long absence he began to fear that the honorable member had gone further, and perhaps fared worse. When he (Mr. Carter) left the old land, where the people were burdened with poor laws and poor­houses and tithes, and all sorts of troubles, which made it difficult for a poor man to live, he came to this free land, and he cer­tainly had not seen any of the tyranny to which the honorable member for Fitzroy alluded as having been exercised by em­ployers. (Mr. Best-" I never said so.") He understood the honorable member to say so. (Mr. Best-" I certainly did not.") Then he would withdraw the re­mark. If there was an earthly paradise for the workil1g man, it was to he found in Victoria. So long as trade unionism was devoted to increasing the rates of wages and reducing the hours of labour, it was one of the greatest benefits which the favoured people or this colony had received; but on this 'occasion, it seemed to him, trade unionism had been going a step beyond that. Let honorable members deal with the facts, and not with heated statements. The em­ployers, as he understood their manifesto, started by saying that this was a free country-he was not using the words of the maniresto, but speaking from memory and gi ving their practical effect. The employers said that this was a free country, where all men hadequalliberty-the men who laboured and the men who employed them-that the employe could leave the service of an em­ployer whenever he pleased, and that the employer could dismiss an employe whenever he liked. The employers claimed that every man, whether he might belong to a union or not, was at liberty to earn his living. Well, the employers were asked to meet the repre­sentatives of the labour party in a conference. He would not express any opinion as to whether the employers should have acceded to that request or not, although he thought if he

[OCTOBER 15.J 2D97

bad been in their place he certainly would llave agreed to a conference, because it could not have done any harm; but the employers, in their wisdom, said to the representatives of the labour party-H If you admit that all men have equal liberty to earn a living, that the man who does not belong to a union has a right to work for his living as well as a man who does, we can meet you; but if you start by denying that fact, it is no use our conferring; we prefer to be ruined rather than to submit to that."· That was the real bone of contention-the libertv of the subject. There was 1)0 law in this country that he was aware of which pro­vided that every man who wished to work for his living as an employe must belong to a trades unioll, and if there was no such law, what right had any body or any asso­ciation to deny the means of earning a living to a man who did not choose to belong to a trades union? If a working man arrived in this country to-morrow, was he to be denied the right of getting his living unless he belonged to a trades union? And was a man who was born in the colony to be denied the right of getting his living unless he belonged to a trades union? That would practically be the result if the employers of labour were compelled to concede the point now in dispute between them and the trades unions, because the trades unions declared that all working men must be trades unionists, or else they would be boy­cotted and not allowed to earn a living; they must starve, or become paupers dependent on the country for their subsistence. He did not think there was any law which permitted any individual, or any association or asso­ciations of individuals, to do anything which would be injurious to the national welfare. A man was not even allowed to set fire to his own house; he would be taken up for arson. But here was an association who had, through their officials, publicly announced -" We will destroy the greatest national product to the extent of eight millions of money." 'Vould any Government dare to say in the Assembly-" If we can't carry this measure we will injure an industry in the colonies to the extent of eight millions of money?" If any Government did make such a proposal, how long would it remain in office? If the Legislative Assembly were to agree to such a proposition, how many of its members would ever come back? Theil if Parliament could not do such an act, what was to be thought of a private association which contemplated such an in­justice-an injustice not aimed against the

people they were quarrelling with, but against ut.terly innocent people, who had nothing to do with the dispute? \Vhen such a power was seen growing up in the land, did it not become Parliament to say that this was a matter which must be dealt with? The motion he would support would be a pro­posal that the Governments of the Austra­lian colonies should bring in a Bill which would make it impossible for such a state of things to exist. 'V hen any body of men decided that they would do something which was detrimental to the public weal, and wantonly, and with malice aforethought, destroy £8,000,000 worth of property in these colonies, he (Mr. Carter) wanted a law that would make those men amenable to justict', and put them where they ought to be Did honorable members understand what this conduct meant? It meant that stagnation to which the honorable member for Fitzroy alluded-loss of credit from loss of confidence. Why had enterprise ceased? Why was no one embarking in any new ent.erprise? Because they were afraid. They said " No; with such forces arrayed against us as there are at present, we will not embark our capital in any undertaking whatever." And consequently the suicidal action of the misguided leaders of the Trades Hall was actually bringing about the greatest possible disaster upon the very people who put· them in their positions. He did not blame the working men of the country. Poor fellows, he was sorry for them. They were the poor sheep who fol­lowed their leaders, giving up situations with a heroism that he quite admitted. They were the sufferers ; the leaders did not suffer. There had never been a contest conducted with such utter imbecility as had been betrayed by the leaders of the Trades Hall on the present occasion. Every move­ment they had made had been a mistake, and what he r<'gretted was that, instead of the leaders being the sufferers, the masses of the working people belonging to the unions were, with their wives and children, the real sufferers. Another point was that, if the Legislative Assembly did attempt to inflict injury upon the people of this country,. they were responsible to their constituents; but to whom were the leaders of the Trad6s Hall responsible? Did they represent the people of this country? Were they elected by the people of this country? The whole nnmber of trades unionists, as compared with the population of the country, was utterly insignificant. Then, if they did not represent the people of the country, and if

2098 Shipping Stl'i1~e. [ASSEMBLY.] Shipping 8tl'i/';~.

they were not responsible, what right had they to attempt to occupy the position they had assnmed? It was the grossest assumption, the most impudent attempt to create a tyranny over a country, that he had ever read of. As Mr. V arl ey had put it, in a clever article in the Age, wllat did it matter whether the tyrant was. Alexander the Great or a number of men associated in unions; the result was the samf'. The sooner the eyes of the people were opened to the ab­surdity of the position the better it would be. "That could be more ridiculous than if he chose to join a number of other men for some particular purpose, and then said, "If you do not pass such and such a law, or do not do so and so, you shall have no more coal; we will stop all the industries or Australia ?" "Vhat right had a number of men to do that? If necessary, let the Australian Governments buy a coal mine, and use it for Government purposes. If the Government had a right to own railways, they llad an equal right to own coal mines. Let them be firm, put theil' foot down, and bring in legislation which would make it a penal offence for any person to interfere with any other person in the legal pursuit of getting his living. lTntil Parliament passed a law providing that every man in this country should be a member of a trades union or starve, he (Mr. Carter) would re­fuse to bow down the knee to Baal. As soon l1S Parliament passed such a law he was prepared to obey it or leave the country, but in the meantime he objected to any section of the community, let them be licensed victuallers, teetotalers, or trades unionists, interfering with the liberty of the subject. Mr. Harwood was recognised as a leader of the Trades Hall, and no doubt honorable members had read how he threatened the country with a repetition of the French Revolution. When that revo­lution came, he (Mr. Carter). would be prepared to take a decided stand on one side. Another leader was reported in the Hemld to have said-

" 'Ve will use persuasion, but, if this will not do, we will use physical force."

Mr. W. T. CARTER asked who said that?

Mr. G. D. CARTER regretted to say that it was another Carter, a delegate from Queensland. The same gentleman quoted an instance of how they used moral suasion in Queensland-

"If a man refused to agree with what we wanted, it would be all the same, because we

would get him in the camp, whether he liked it. Ol' not."

'Vithin the last week another example of moral suasion was seen at the Port Mel-· bourne pier, where men had their heads broken with iron bars. In America they did things better. They did not talk ahout· "laying people out," but the sheriff, when a strike was on, simply drew a cordon on the pier or wharf, and said, "any man not employed on the vessel who crosses that line will be shot," and he was shot. That simplified matters. Mr. Andrew Carnegie, an American citizen, who was recognised' ns one of the greatest democrats perhnps in the world, in addressing a meeting at Dun::lee, said that in America they alwnys. obeyed the lnw, because they made the law. That was what ought to occur here. The people of this country made the law for' good or evil, and they should obey the law, and not break people's heads with iron crow-bnrs. Mr. Carnegie said-

"Let me give you an illustration of this . . , . . In Milwaukee, which has a \'ery large population, a crowd of these people deter­mined to march whh banners and red flags, and excite and disturb the peace of law-abiding citizens. The Governor of the State came from his capital to Milwaukee, and issued his procla­mation prohibiting them from disturbing the peace. The leaders of this miguidecl people, who thought liberty meant licence, asked the Governor if that were not a free country, aud if they could not march under the Stars and Stripes. The Governor replied-'This is a free country, and, if you have any doubt upon the subject, the shortest and easiest way for you to test it is to· march when the Governor and the people tell you that you shan't march.' "Vell, but,' they said, • we march under the Stars and Stripes. Are we not free to do that?' 'Certainly you are, but. then the freedom of this country don't elld there. You are free to march, but then I am frce to· shoot. I am put there by the vote of all the people of this country, and they won't stand any nonsense. They made the laws, and they are to see them executed.' They marched, and :-JO of them fell."

At this stag~, the time for tnking priva.te· members' business having arrived,

Mr. MUNRO said he thougllt this matter ought to be got rid of if possible. He believed that private members were· willing to postpone their business until the· motion was disposed of.

Mr. GILLIE S remarked that the Govern-· ment were quite willing that the motion should be dealt with if private members· would postpone their business.

Capt. TAYLOR said he objected. The debate was then adjourned until the­

following day.

P1'l'vate ]lembe1's' Business. [OCTOBER 15.] P1'/'Z'ate Members' Business. 2000

PRIVATE ME:VIBERS' BUSINESS·

DEMANDING DIVISIONS.

Dr. MALONEY moved-

"That in view of the difficulty experienced by private ~embers in obtaining a division upon any motion before the House, it shall be com­petent for six members to rise in .their places and demand a division on the questIOn then before the House, and such division shall be thereupon taken, This order to apply only to Wednesday nights, after half-past eight o'clock."

He observed that the Government had two and a half nights every week in which to push on their measures, and yet at the end of every session there was what was known as a "slaughter of the innocents." Some of the best measures brought in never reached maturity. In the House of Commons they were trying to adopt a rule by which all Bills that reached a certain stage in one session should be taken up at the same stage next session instead of having to be introduced de novd. If the Government, with two and a half nights per week, could not get through their business, what was the position of private members, who had only half a niO'ht each week for dealing with the measure:they wished to bring forward? The time for private members' business beg~n at half-past eight o'clock, and no new busmess could be taken after half-past ten, so that there were only two hours available for private members' business each week. He therefore thought it was desirable to adopt some such proposal as he had submitted, because, under the present system, one hon­orable member, by making a long 8peech on one subject, could occupy the whole ?f ~he time available, and thus prevent the brmgmg on of other private members' business. His proposition might seem to discount the value of long speeches, but during his ex­perience in the House he had never known a case in which a speech had won a vote, anti. the N estors of the House had assured him that their experience was t,o the same effect. In some of the state legislatures of the United States there was a rule in ex­istence somewhat similiar to that which he proposed.

Mr. PEAOOOK seconded the motion. Mr. GILLIES remarked that there was

a standing order of the House which was quite opposed to this proposal, and that standing order would require to be repealed or altered if the motion was adopted. But, in addition to this, lIe would point out that the motion might 11ave a very peculiar application if carried into effect. On a

Wednesday erening an honorable member, when a motion of which he had given notice was called on, would have an oppol'. tunity of rising and making a speech­possibly making out a strong case in the minds of honorable members by a telling and forcible address in support of his proposal-and then, when he had finished, six or his friends could rise and demand that a division should take place right off, without one word having been heard on the other side. He ventured to say that there was no sur.h standing order as that in any American legislature, 01' in any Parliament in the world. No doubt standing orders had been proposed to limit the time of debate, but certainly it had been recognised that there should be a chance of debate. He quite admitted that it was not ad visable, if it could be legiti­mately prevented, that any two or three members should be able to prevent a ques­tion from being dealt with by the House by simply talking against time, but he did not think the honorable member for Melbourn~ West was taking the right way to deal with that matter. He would suggest to the honorable member that it would be wise for him to withdraw his proposal, and reconsider it.

MI'. McINTYRE said he thought the honorable member for Melbourne vVest had some idea of a proper kind with regard to this question, but it would be better to refer the matter to the Standing Orders Oom­mittee, so that they might consider it. The motion in its present form would have a different effect from what the honorable member intended, as it would be used to prevent mem bel'S from discussing a question. Honorable members were pretty well muzzled now, but under the motion they would have no chance at all. However, there could be no harm in referring the matter to the Standing Orders Oommittee.

Mr. WILLIAMS stated that he recog· nised the difficulties which had been pointed out by the Premier ill c()nnexion with the adoption or the motion, but, undoubtedly, there was a systematic attempt at "stone­walling" or talking out measures which came Ol~ on a V\T ednesday evening; and if some means could be devised by which that practice could be stopped, witho~t doing injury to parliamentary proced~re, It wO~lld be a very wise step to take. The Standmg Orders Oommittee might be asked to con­sider the matter, with the object of devising some reasonable remedy for the obstruction to priva.te members' business which existed.

2100 Amendments. [ASSEMBLY.] Amendments.

Mr. GILLIES remarked that, if the honorable member for Melbourne West would withd ra w the motion, he would under­tal\e to ask the Speaker to bring the matter under the notice or the Standing Orders Committee.

Mr. G. D. OARTER said he regretted to hear the Premier say that he intended to consider this proposal at all. The stand­ing orders of the House were already suffi­ciently stringent, and the adoption of any such propo~al as that desired by the honor­able member for Melbourne West would be introducing the "iron hand" in its most objectionable form. If the system were applied to private members' business, the Government would probably propose a similar rule in connexion with their busi­ness, and the effect might be the carrying through of most iniquitous legislation before honorable members had time to consider it.

The motion was withdrawn.

AMENDMENTS.

Mr. HALL moved-

"That the Standing Orders Committee be requested to bring up a standing order, provid­ing that, where ,1,n amendment to leave words out is put, the question shall always be put by ~Ir. Speaker in the simple £orm-' That the words proposed to be omitted be so omitted.'"

He rei::narked that, when an amendment was proposed for the addition of words, the way in which the amendment was put from the chair, was-" That the words pro­posed to be added be so added." That was simple enough,and everyoneunuerstood it. What he wanted was that the same principle should be applied to amendments proposing the omission of words-that the question put in such a case should be­" That the words proposed to be omitted be so omitted." Instead of this, however, the Speaker or the Chairman, as the case might be, put the question in the form­., That the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question." This frequently caused confusion and misunderstanding, as honorable members must have noticed them­selves. He admitted that in the House of Commons amendments were put in the same way, but this was a democratic com­munity, and he did not see why questions should not he put from the chair in such a clear and distinct manner that there could be no mistake.

Mr. G RAHAl\{ seconded the motion. Mr. GILLIES observed that, if the

honorable member for Shepparton had sub­mitted a motion for obtaining the opinion

of the Standing Orders Committee on the present mode of putting amendments, it might perhaps have been allowed to pass, but this motion practically ordered the Standing Orders Committee to bring up a new standing order altering a system which had been in force, he might say, for centuries. He thought that was a little too much. The standing order to which the honorable member objected was a great ad \Tantage in many respects, and he ventured to think that it would be a great mistake to change it. One advantage of the present system was this. Suppose the Government, or a private member, proposed a motion or a Bill, and an honorable member proposed, as an amendment, that certain words in the motion, or in a clause of the Bill, be omitted. The question was then put-" That the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question," and if the Government or the honorable member in charge of the original proposal opposed the amendment, they were not called upon to change theil' seats; it devolved upon those who wanted the alteration to cross the floor. The practice of Parliament for many years had been found to be very convenient in this respect, and, in his judgment, it would be a great mistake to instruct the Standing Orders Committee, without any further consideration whatever, to bring up a new standing order in this matter. There might be something to say for the motion if the honorable member merely desired to remit the question to the Standing Orders Committee for theil' consideration, but he (Mr. Gillies) had never known a case in which any standing order which had been in existence for a great number of years was suddenly ordered to be changed without the careful consideration of the Standing Orders Committee, which was appointed expressly for the purpose of considering the necessity of making any alterations in the standing: orders.

Capt. TAYLOR stated that he could quite understand the Premier's objection to the alteration of the standing order in ques­tion. It was sometimes very convenient for the Government to tie members np in a corner by the technical way in which the voting took place. But he believed that, if the opinion of the House generally was asked, not only new members but old mem­bers would say that questions should be put from the chair in as simple a manner as possible. When an amendment was moved that certain words be omitted, surely the simplest way of putting the question was

Amendments. [OCTOBEH 15.J Amendments. 2101

-" that the words be omitted," and not" that the words proposed to be omitted stand part -of the question." Simplification above all was the thing they wanted to arrive at. Both the Imperial Parliament and this Parliament had for many years past shown iheir desire to arrive at simplicity in regard to legal matters, so that the court should have before them as simply as possible the issue to be tried. A similar principle should be adopted in the mode of putting questions instead of their being put before the House in a delusive way, which was likely to mis­lead.

Mr. RICHARDSON remarked that., if the honorable member for Shepparton had simply asked that the Standing Orders Committee should have their attention called to this matter, that would have been sufficient. There were several strong reasons why a motion of this kind should not be passed, and why the standing order should not be interfered with until the matter had been fully discussed by those honorable mem­bers who had given their special attention to questions of this kind. At the beginning of this PArliament the House attempted to make some fresh standing orders, and it did not succeed verv well. Some of the new standing orders "had proved very irritating ever since they werc adopted. He did not see any complexity about the mode of put­ting amendments to which the honorable member for Shepparton objected. The difference between the two methods was only the difference between dealing with the affirmative and the negative, and, if the matter was looked at from that aspect, the one way was as simple as the other. He would suggest that the honorable mem bel' should withdraw the motion on the under­standing. that the Premier or the Speaker would refer the matter to the Standing Orders Committee.

Mr. GILLIES said the Speaker would do that.

Mr. MUNRO suggested that the motion should be amended by substituting for the words" bring up" the words" consider the question of bringing up." The matter would then be referred to the committee for their consideration, without giving them any direction regarding it.

Mr. HALL said he was quite prepared to accept the amendment. He might state, however, that a member of the Standing Orders Committee had just told him that he did not approve of altering the standing order, so that he (Mr. Hall) was afraid there was little hope, if the matter was

simply referred to the committee, that any alteration would be made. There was no doubt that the present mode of putting amendments, for the omission of words, caused confusion nine times out of ten.

The motion was amended as suggested by Mr. Munro, and was then agreed to.

RAIL WAY PURPOSES RESERVATION BILL.

Mr. GARDINER moved for leave to introduce a Bill to reserve for railway and station purposes all that area of land on which is erected the Melbourne Gaol, the Public Library, and the Melbourne Hospi­tal, within the following boundaries :-On the north, Victoria-street; on the south, Lonsdale-street; on the east., Russell-street; and on the west, Bowen and Swanston streets. He said that at the first blush this question might appear to be a gigantic one. It was, however, proposed to remove the Melbourne Hospital from its present site, and it was intended that at some future time the Melbourne GAol should be removed also. The best use to which the land on which these two institutions stood could be put was the establishment of a central railway station for the accommodation of the people of the northern district. The civic authorities desired to obtain the hospital site for the erection of a new Town Hall. Speaking on the question of railway construction in 1882, he made the following statement, as reported by Ilansard :--

"If the traffic, both of the railways and streets, was to be concentrated, as it would be by the connexion of the two principal streets in the city, the streets in the vicinity of the con­necting viaduct would become almost impass­able. The proper remedy for the difficulties at present met with was to be found in distributing the traffic, rather than confining it to a small space. Why should the whole traffic of the railways have its starting point in the south of the city? He maintained that as railways were extending in a northerly direction, a station should have been erected at the north end of the city, where passengers would not be so much inconvenienced as they were at present."

If the Government had adhered strictly to thelRailway Construct.ion Bill, he would have been loyal to them, but when they accepted part of the proposals of the caucus, and intimated their intention to refer the lines in the Bill to a committee, he felt that an opportunitY,had arrived for the introduction of this question. If the proposal he had to make was carried out, it would be the means of saving thousands of pounds to the colony.

2102 Railway Pm'poses [ASSEMBLY.] Reservation Bill.

When the O'Loghlen Government intro­duced their Railwav Construction Bill, he objected to what wc·re known as the Fitzroy and Collingwood cockspurs. He felt that those two extensions would be of no use to the people they were intended to serve, and that they would not pay working expenses. That opinion proved to ba corrcct. The Collingwood and Fitzroy lines, as proposed in the present Railway Construction Bill, would cost the country something like £1,500,000. He considered that so large an expenditure was unnecessary, and should not be inclll'l'ed in connexion with such short lines. Two lines could be constructed over a different route, which would serve North Fitzroy, a portion of Collingwood, the new extension to 'tVhittlesea, and the whole of the north-eastern districts-the Brunswick and Coburg line being now joinell on to the north-eastern system at Somerton - for about one-quarter of the expenditure proposed by the Government. All the traffic would be brought to the gaol site.

Mr. MUNRO asked whetheJ', now that the Railways Standing Committee Act had become law, an honorable member could in­troduce a Bill to provide for the construction of a railway?

Mr. GILLIES remarked that the Bill which the honorable member for Carlton proposed to introduce provided only for a reservation of land.

Mr. MUNRO stated that the point was an important one, and he would like to know if the honorable member for Carlton was in order? .

The DEPUTY SPEAKER. - The honorable member for Carlton is in order. I understand that the Bill he proposes to introduce does not provide for the construc­tion of a railway.

Mr. GARDINER said that the. land 11e proposed should be reserved belonged to the people. There had been rumours of attempts to float a syndicate to pur­chase the Melbourne Hospital site, and it behoved the House to take care that that land was turned to good account for the benefit of the people. The railway traffic was developing so rapidly that eventually Spencer-street and Flinders­street stations would not accommodate the whole of it. The people in the outlying districts, also, had a right to demand that they should be landed in the city proper, and not be taken to Spencer-street or Flinders-street. Honorable members had

been complaining for years about Spencer­street station being at the western end or the city, and passengers arriving there­having to travel a considerable distance by them before they reachea the city proper. Yet it was proposed in the Railway Con­struction Bill to take passengers from the ,\Vhittlesea district round by Collingwood and the Yarra Park, and to land them at Flinders-street, although under his scheme they could be brought to the centre of the city at about one-third the cost. He was convinced that if the Railways Standing Committee would take the trouble to· inspect this land they would at once recognise the advantages or his scheme. In the year 1887 the cost or the Fitz­roy lines was estimated at £500,000,. and or the Collingwood extension at £49G,000. Since then a large number or expensive buildings had been erected along the routes mapped out by the Railway department, and the cost would in conse­quence be immensely increased. In addi­tion to that, strong objection had been taken to the proposal or the Government by pprsons residing in close proximity to. the Melbourne Cricket Ground, who com­plained that their property would be injured~ The principal objection offered to his scheme was that it would damage the Public Library. Starting from the Hos­pital site, at the intersection or Swanston­street and Lonsdale street, and going up on the western side of Russell-street, there was not from that point up to Victoria .. street a single piece of land which would have to be purchased. It all belonged to the Government, and was at present vested in trustees. A new site had already been spoken of for the hospital, and witIl regard to the gaol aU that was required. in the city was a small receiving-place for pri­soners. Space would be wanted for abol1t four lines of rails, and between the old Supreme Court site, at the intersection of Russell-street and La Trobe-street, and the VV"" orking Men's College there was room for a sufficient number of lines to receive the whole of the traffic. ,\Vhen he gave notice of this motion it was thought that it was his intention that the 'Vorldng Men's College should be removed. He did not contemplate anything of the kind. All he desired there was the site on which the old Supreme Court stood. From Vic­toria-street to Queensberry-street and from Grattan-street right down to the Fitzroy and Collingwood extensions it would not be necessary to purchase one single piece of

Railway Plwposes [OCTOBEIt 15.J Reservation Bill. 2103:

land, as the whole or the land that would be required belonged to the Governm.ent. The Oollingwood line .crossed. the Re~lly­street drain, and the FItzroy 11l1e went Into close proximity to it. His opinion was ~hat the whole of the land occupied by the ReIlly­street drain should be utilized so as to bring the "Vhittlesea line into Nicholson-street. If the proposals of the Government were carried out land would have to be purchased on which ;ery valuable buildings had been erected. For the Fitzroy line it would be necessary to construct a tunnel from Oharles-street under the Fitzroy Gardens to the Richmond-road. Hardly a single person living between ~harles-street and Jolimont would use the hne. What, there­fore was the use of the statistics which had bee~ furnished by the Railway de'partme~t? The line was really to be made III the 1ll­

terest of the people residing at \V hittlesea and at the intermediate stations between that and the Merri Oreek. The Oolling­wood line was strongly objected to by the city council because it would destroy ~he beauty of the Yarra-park, through whICh it was to pass. He would not occupy the time of the House longer, but he would ask llOnorable members to consider whether the land which he proposed should be reserved should be handed over to a syndicate, or be retained by the State and be used for the benefit or the people.

Mr. LEONARD seconded the motion. The question raised by the honol'a?le m~m .. her for Oarlton was worthy of conSIderatIOn. If the scheme suggested was carried out, the district he (Mr. Leonard) repre:ented would obtain one great benefit III the removal of the Melbourne Gaol. When Mr. (now Sir Graham) Berry was in power he promised that he would have the gaol removed, and the present Gove~nment had said almost as much, but nothmg had yet been done.

Mr. ZOX stated tha.t the Oharities Oommission would be prepared, in a wee.k or ten dnys, to present a report to Hls Excellency the Governor which would c?n­taill a reference to the Melbourne HospItal site, and that report might be of some assistance to the honorable member for Oarlton. He (Mr. Zox) had always thoug?t that the Melbourne Gaol should not be In

its present position, and ~e would be glad to use his influence to get It removed.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was then brought in and read a

first time.

MR. M. H. FORAN.

Oapt. TAYLOR moved-

"That a select committee be appointed to. inquire into the dismissal of M. H. Foran from the Education department."

He stated that so much had been said about this question that he would not delay the House by discussing it fully now. He de-· sired the House to consider not whether Foran was guilty or not guilty, but having' regard to the peculiar circurr,tstances of the case whether a select commIttee should be· app~inted to inquire into the ground of his dismissal. "Vhen the case was before the· Supreme Court, Mr. Justice Holroyd said-

"But Parliament subsequently passed the Act 1024, by the 4th section whereof it is. enacted that any two members of the hoard shall have and from the time of the coming into force ~f the principal Act (i. e., No. 7~3) shall he deemed to have had power to exerclse· any of the duti~s of th~ bo~rd. l'he result o,f this retrospective leglslatlOn was that Ml. Foran lost the opportunity of defending him­self before a duly constituted board."

In that statement lay the gist of the matter. Foran had lost the opportunity of defending himself and what the House had now to conside~' was whether it was right that he· should be condemned without a trial. That was the whole issue, and it was upon that question that he now asked honorable members to vote. The appointment of a. select committee would not create a prece­dent, because this was a perfectly unique case and no similar case could come before­the House again. Was that House, which was a strong body, to condemn a man simply upon the statements .made b~ ~he Minister of Education, and WIthout glvmg him a trial? If a select committee were­appointed! and one half of what was alleged against Foran was proved, he would get a very short shrift indeed from him (Oapt. Taylor) ; but the House would have the satisfaction of knowing that the man had. been tried by a competent tribunal.

Dr. PE ARSON said that he \"as glad: to be able to agree with the honorable­member for Hawthorn in one remark he· made and that was that this wa.s a unique· case.' He trusted that the House woul.d· never again have. a case brough~ before It in which a man had been foul' tImes con­demned on the best possible evidence, and in which it was sought to upset the whole of those proceedings by the appointment of a select committee. (Oapt. Taylor-"Upon what proof l1as he been condemned ?") He had submitted the judgments to the

,2104 J.vl1-. J.11. H. Fol'Ctn. [ASSEMBLY.] J.ll1'. 111. If. Foran.

House, but the honorable member for Haw­thorn had not even taken the trouble to examine them. Foran was reduced by the classifiers for indiscreet conduct to female pupils; he was fined by a police court in ·Gippsland for disorderly conduct; he was ·convicted on three counts by the Public Service Board at the first trial, and he was

. declared to be unworthy to remain in the service at the second trial. There was no reason why Foran should not have defended himself at the second trial, and allowed the objection raised by his legal adviser to be reserved .. The' honorable member for Haw­thorn, in asking that there should be another trial, proposed to go into matters five years

-old, and to hunt up witnesses from Gipps­land. Supposing that witnesses were want­ing, or had been spirited away, and asked not to testify against the man but t.o give him a chance of re-establishing his charac­ter, and the charges were not proved, was it inteBded that Foran should be reinstated, or that the Government should be required to pay him compensation? Surely, there must be finality somewhere; and surely, if ever there was a case in which the Education department were justified in straining every :nerve to get rid of an unworthy servant, it was this one.

Mr. DUFFY remarked that he did not ;'know whether Foran was guilty or innocent ·of the charges made against him, and he did not care. He understood that Foran brought his case before the Supreme Court, and that while it was pending this House inadvertently passed retrospective legisla­tion which prevented Foran from get.ting a trial. As far as he knew, such a thing had llever oceurred before in the history of British legislation, and it was repugnant to one's instincts of fair play and justice. The House owed it to itself, if an injustice had been done inadvertently, to see that it was ·set right. It was not necessary that charges which were five years old should be inquired into, but simply that Foran should be placed in the position he would have ()ccupied if the retrospective legislation of last session had not been passed. He was .·quite sure that the House would not have agreed to that legislation if it had known that Foran's case was at the time pend­ing in the Supreme Court', and that it was intended to have the effect of stopping the trial. (Mr. Gillies-" That statement is without foundation.") He was glad to :heal' it. He understood, however, that by -retrospective legislation Foran was pre­'vented from getting a fair trial, and such a

proceeding was unfair and dangerous to the liberties of the people. Bad cases made bad law, and what was done to-day in a bad case might be done to-morrow by an un­scrupulous Government in a case in which gross injustice would be inflicted. If the matter could be set right by the appoint­ment of a select committee, the Government should agree to this motion.

Mr. WILLIAMS observed that he took much the same view as the Government of Foran's case. He felt a prejudice against Foran, but he must recognise the fact that if any man showed that he had a grievance, t.his House was the final tribunal to which he could appeal for redress, and the House ought to hear him. .J ustice should not be denied to the humblest individual in the community. He did not say that injustice had been done to Foran, but if there was any reason for thinking that injustice had been done, the House should give the man an opportunity of vindicating his character.

The motion was negatived.

PUBLIC LIBRARY, MUSEUMS, AND NATIONAL GALLERY.

SUNDAY OPENING.

Mr. L. L. SMITH (in the absence of Mr. TRENWITH) moved-

"That, in the opinion of this House, it is de­sirable that the Melbourne Public Library, Art Gallery, and Museum should be open to the public on Sundays."

The honorable member remarked that the question had been so frequently discussed

. that it was not necessary to say anything in regard to it now, except that it was desirable that the matter should be finally settled by a vote of the House.

Capt. TAYLOR seconded the motion. Mr. DIXON stated that the question

had been before the House for a long time in various forms, but on the present occa­sion there was a straight issue. The ex­perience of New South Wales and New Zealand was favorable to the proposed experiment being tried here, and he would recommend that if, after a trial of six months, the results were not satisfactory, the old arrangements should be reverted to. He would support the motion, on the ground that it was desirable that the experiment should be tried.

Mr. BENT remarked that he would. follow the example of the honorable mem­ber for Mornington, and refrain from making a speech. He would also mention that, as he had not expected the motion to come on

Public Libl'Ct1·y, Museums, [OCTOBEH 15.J and lVational Gallel·!}. 2105,·

that night, he had paired with the honorable member for Port Fairy.

Mr. BOWMAN submitted that the responsibility of opening the Public Library and Museums on Sundays should rest on the trustees, who sbpuld be elected by the people, who would vote according to the principles announced by the candidates. Until that was done, he would vote against the proposal contained in the motion.

Mr. McINTYRE pointed out that the trustees opened the Library and the Mu­seums to the public on Sundays some time ago, and that the Assembly closed them. As a churchman and a Presbyterian he knew the value of liberalism in matters of education, and he cOlllU not believe it possible for any man who belonged to the Scottish Ohurch to oppose the opening of libraries and picture galleries on Sundays. If any difficulty arose about the employment of doorkeepers on the Sabbath, he was willing to devote two months in each year to standing at the library door to receive sticks and umbrellas. Some years ago, when the larrikins were giving trouble at Sand hurst, the public library there was opened on Sundays, and the difficulty vanished at once. He trusted that a straight vote would now be given on this question.

Mr .. ANDREWS said the motion was a purely metropolitan one, and it was not likely to exert any influence upon the country districts. The feeling in the country districts was against the opening of these institutions 011 Sundays, and, as those dis­tricts contributed very largely to the main­tenance of the institutions in question, they were entitled to a voice in the matter. He regarded the motion as one introducing the thin end of a very dangerous wedge. The Sabbath f>ught to be held sacred from labour. As religious instruction had been banished from the State schools, it was especially undesirable that anything should be done to attract the children from the Sunday schools. He believed that his constituents would strongly resent the innovation proposed.

Mr. MURRAY remarked that it was evident to him t.hat the honorable member who had last spoken had never been a Sunday-school pupil in Victoria. From his (Mr. Murray's) many years' experience as a Sunday-school pupil, he could assure the honorable member that the Sunday schools were so attractive to the children who attended them that it was impossible for the opening of the public libraries or

picture galleries to draw them aW,ay. If the honorable member for Geelong (Mr., Andrews) had no other objection to the motion he could conscientiously support it._

The House divided on the motion-

Ayes ... 23 Noes ... 37

Majority against the motion 14

AYES.

Mr. Bailes, " Bennett, " Calvert, " G. D. Carter, " Deakin, " Dixon, " Duffy, " Gillies, " J. Harris, " Hunt, " Langridge, " McIntyre,

Mr. Anderson, " Andrews, " Be~tzley, " Best, " Bowman, " Brock, " Burrowes, " Cameron, " D. M. Davies, " Dow, " Duncan, " DUIID,

" Gardiner, " Gordon, " Graham, " Groom, " Hall, " A. Harris, " Keys,

Mr. Mason, " Methven, " Murphy, " Murray,

Dr. Pearson, Mr. C. Smith,

" Taverner, Capt. Taylor, Mr. Zox.

Tellers. Mr. Shiels,

,. L. L. Smith ..

NOES.

Mr. Kirton, " Leonard, " McColl, " Mountain, " Munro, " Outtrim, " Peacock, " Richardson .. " T. Smith,

Lt. -Col. Smith, Mr. Sterry, " Tatchell, " Tucker, " Uren, " V\Theeler, " Williams.

':Pellers. Mr. Baker,

" A. Young.

PAIRS.

Mr. Derham, " Officer,

Sir B. O'Loghlen, Mr. Trenwith.

Mr. C YOlmg,. " Levien, " Bent, " Stuart.

PRECEDENCE.

Mr. BENT moved-"That an address be presented to His Ex·,

cellency the Governor, praying His Excellency to cause to be laid on the table of this House, copies of all rules or regulations in force in Victoria concerning precedence, and of all des­patches, circular letters, and other communica­tions relating thereto which have been received by his Excellency's predecessors or hy himself.'~

The honorable member said he under­stood that the Premier had no objection to­the motion. A lot of trouble had occurred over this question of precedence, and he was informed that correspondence had taken IJlace on the subject. He entirely disagreed with the opinion that certain.

:2106 Public InlSt1'll/;tion. [ASSEMBLY.] Railway Department.

persons should rank before members of the Assembly.

Mr. GILLIES remarked that he was .not aware that any correspondence on the -subject had been received.

Mr. L. L. SMITH seconded the motion, ,which was agreed to.

PUBLIO INSTRUOTION.

TEACHERS' SALARIES.

Mr. BURROWES moved-"That there be laid before this House a,

return showing-I. The names of the teachers now in the service who, during 1875 and 1876, received a larger salary than the one they at present receive, the lower salary not being the result of any fault or misconduct on the part of the teacher, or of his or her obtaining a lower percentage of results. 2. The difference be­tween the amount each such teacher would have received to date on the basis of the higher salary, and the amount he or she has actually received."

He said that injustice had been done to several teachers who had excellent records, and he hoped that the Minister ()f Public Instruction would do his best to remedy 'What he complained of.

Mr. BAILES seconded the motion. Dr. PEARSON observed that, if the

motion were passed, it would form a very inconvenient precedent, because the hard­-ship complained of related to only one or two instances. The particular case in view was that of a single lady teacher, who had

;3, school at Portland some years ngo, which had to be amalgamated with another, owing io the decrease in the population. The teacher, like others similarly situated, had to be transferred elsewhere, and, having :a claim to a superior school, she suffered a loss of salary through no fault of her own. Df course there was no desire on the part ·of the department to do her any injustice, .and she hall since obtained an inoome larger than she had before. What the lady now asked for was the preparation -of a most complicated return, in order that she might base upon it a claim for -special compensation. The preparation -of such a return would involve great ex-pense, because 500 or 600 names would have to be gone over, and such things threw the department out of gear. W hen the return was obtained, what would be the result? It would be followed by a -claim for compensation, and if the House voted a special grant of £50 or £100 t.o the lady in quest.ion, some 600 or 800 teachers would bring forward similar claims. (Mr. Burrowes-" I have not asked a penny for

the lady.") He was aware of tlJat, but the honorable member knew perfectly well that this motion would have no meaning what­ever unless it was to be followed up by a claim for compensation. If it was merely intended to ascertain certain facts, and not with a view to make it the basis of claims for compensation, then he would urge the House not to consent to the motion, because the return would cost a great deal more than the information was worth. (Mr. Burrowes-" Has this injustice to go on for ever ?") What injustice? It was im­possible to prevent such changes-schoolR going up and schools going down, owing to increases and decreases of population in their vicinity. He llOped honorable members would understand that in opposing this motion he was simply acting in ,defence of the public purse, and because its adoption would create a most inconvenient precedent. He had not the slightest feeling against the teacher in question, and he only desired to point out that the House would commit itself to several hundred inquiries if it con­sented to this one.

The motion was agreed to.

RAILWAY DEPARTMENT.

Mr. MUNRO said he desired to call attention to a matter of extreme importance to persons residing in the vicinity of the Caulfield railway line, and to the shameful treatment they got through the outrageous conduct of the Railway department in dis­arranging the ordinary suburban trains every Saturday on which races were held at Oaulfield. It was simply disgraceful. The railway authorities had no right to treat their regular travellers in the way they treated passengers on the Oaulfield line, who on race days had sometimes to wait for hours for a train. No community would stand such treatment, Saturday after Saturday. The whole time-table was altered, ladies were kept waiting for hours before they could get to their homes, and the platform arrangements were put out of order, merely for the sake of the people who went to the Oaulfield races. It was a disgrace to the officers who were responsible for the conduct of the railway traffic. Surely it would be possible to put a stop to this shameful disorganiza­tion, and make proper provision for the ordinary traffic? It should be remembered that the Ra~lway department was in duty bound to provide train accommodation on race days, as on other days, for those who

Railway Department. [OCTOBER 16.J P'llblt'c Finances. 2107

-had paid for yearly, quarterly, and monthly -tickets.

Mr. GILLIES said he was afraid it did -sometimes happen, on the occasion of large race meetings, that the ordinary traffic 'was slightly disarranged. (Mr. Munro­"Entirely disarranged.") He would make careful inquiries, and satisfy himself as to -the trains that were stopped by the race -traffic; and also as to whether any better arrangements could be made for the con­-venience of regular passengers on the Caul--field line.

Mr. BENT remarked that his con­-stituents had complained of the disorganiza­tion or the traffic on race days, and he would suggest that they should be compensated ,by receiving free passes to the grand stand at the race meetings.

Mr. RICHARDSON said he desired to draw the attention or the Minister of Rail­ways to the fact that while a number of the ordinary country trains had been stopped to save fuel, and the public thereby put to very great inconvenience, excursion trains were being run between Melbourne and various places in the country. He could not get to town in time for his parliamentary duties without coming round by Ballarat, and 11e felt that if there was fuel enough to run -excursion trains there was fuel enough to run the ordinary trains.

Mr. ZOX observed that he would like to ask the honorable member for Creswick who got the benefit of the excursion trains to -country districts? (Mr. Burrowes-" Mel­bourne.") The honorable member knew that those excursion trains were more for tbe benefit of the country people, who were thereby enabled to visit Melbourne on very -cheap terms.

Mr. ANDREWS stated that theentrain­ing of race-horses on the passenger station at Prince's-bridge at all hours of the day was .a source of danger and inconvenience to the public, and he hoped that steps would at .once be taken to alter the arrangement.

Mr. MURRAY remarked that some time ago the Premier promised that honorable member::; who desired to propose that certain rail way lines should be remitted to the Railways Standing Committee should have an opportunity of doing so at an early date. He was one ef those who had lines to pro­pose, and he would like to know when he would be able to submit his proposal.

Mr. GILLIES suggested that the hon­omble member should give notice to-morrow, if po~sible, of any lines he desired to pro­pose. (Mr. Murray-" I won't be here

to-morrow; I understood there was to be a day specially appointed on which all notices of the kind would have to be given.") He (Mr. Gillies) proposed to give notice to­morrow or Tuesday of certain lines, and he would name a day for honorable members to submit their notices. eMr Burrowes­"Honorable members who have given notice of lines will have an opportunity of bring­ing them forward on that occasion.") Yes, all honorable members who had given notice.

The House adjourned at twenty-one minut~s to eleven o'clock.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL-Y. Th1l1'sday, Octobe1' 16, 1890.

Coal Contracts-Public Finances-Railway Loan Act Amendment Bill-Personal Explanation - Votes on Account: Defence Department: Special Grants to Municipalities - Consolidated Revenue (£1,189,773) Bill-Supply: Forest Conservation: Yea River Com­pany.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER took the chair at half-past four o'clock p.m.

PETITION.

A petition was presented by Mr. GRAHAM,

from residents in the district served by the Dookie and Katamatite Tramway, praying that the House would take into considera­tion certain alleged grievances against the Railway department.

COAL.

Mr. W. T. CARTER moved-" rrhat there be laid before this House a copy

of all contracts for the supply of coal to Govern­ment departments."

Dr. MALONEY seconded the motion, which was agreed to.

PUBLIC FINANCES.

Mr. MUNRO moved-" That there be laid before this House a return

showing as on the 14th October, 1890-1. All unexpended balances of moneys borrowed under the authority of the Act No. 1032, giving par­ticulars of each division under the three head­ings in the first schedule to the said Act. 2. The balances in the several banks to the credit of the Public Account. 3. The amount of Trust Funds held by the Government. 4. The amount of all existing liabilities for railway contracts."

Lt.-Col. SMITH seconded the motion, which was agreed to.

2108 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Votes on Account.

RAILvVAY LOAN AOT AMENDMENT BILL.

Mr. GILLIES moved for leave to intro­duce a Bill to amend the Railway Loan Act 1888. He observed that the only alteration it was desired to make was in the term of the stock. The Government had a balance of £1,600,000 still to float, and, as honorable members were aware, the sum or £850,000 had to be redeemed on the 1st January next. It was suggested that this should be issued in bonds, an alteration being made, so that the bonds should be redeemable at the end of 30 years by giving twelve previous months' notice to the bond­holders, and, if they were not redeemed at the end of 30 years, the Government was to have power to redeem them at any time between 30 and 50 years. Seeing that there was this £1,600,000 balance of the loan authorized in 1888 still to be raised, it was thought desirable that it should be placed on the same terms as the £850,000. That was to say, instead of the term being 35 years it would be 30 years, at the end of which time the Government would have power to redeem, bllt, if it did not exercise that power, it could redeem any time within 50 years, which was the extreme term of the loan.

Mr. DEAKIN seconded the motion, which was agreed to.

The Bill was then brought in and read a first time.

PERSONAL EXPLANATION.

Mr. LAURENS said he desired to explain that he had to attend a public meeting in his district the previous night, and tbis was the cause of his absence from the division' on the question of opening the Public Library on Sunday. If he had been present he would have voted with the noes.

SUPPLY.

The House went into Oommittee of Supply-Mr. McLean in the chair.

Mr. GILLIES moved-"That a sum not exceeding £819,683 be

granted to Her Majesty on account for or to­wards defraying the following services for the year 1890-91, viz. :-Defence, £16,550; survey, sale, and management of Crown lands, £11,782; State forests and nurseries, £2,912; public parks, gardens, and reserves, £1,564; Botanical and Domain gardens, 1,765; expenses of carry­ing out the Land Tax Act, £380; extirpation of rabbits and wild animals, £6,126; public works, £9,240; Melbourne water supply, £4,600; mis­cellaneous (Public Works department) £200; works and buildings, £97,000; defence works

and buildings, £5,000; road works and bridges,. £5,000; Melbourne water supply, £56,479; additions to Parliament buildings, lunatic asy­huns, &c., £29,500; extension of Titles-office, &c., £3,000; towards Moe Swamp drainage works, &0., £22,000; Trade and Customs, and Customs, £17,233; Ports and Harbours and immigration, £9,151; Mercantile Marine-office, £329; distilleries and excise, £3,159; powdel~ magazines and dynamite hulk, £685; fisheries, £249; Marine Board, £958; miscellaneous (Customs department) £123; Post and Tele­graph offices, £76,150; telegraph lines, £7,500 ; mail service, £22,000; miscellaneous (Postal de­partnient) £150 ; mines, £4,000; prospecting for gold and coal, £18,700; miscellaneous (Mining department), £2,400; water supply, £4,125;. waterworks in country districts, £4,000; miscellaneous CVVater Supply department), £225; water and irrigation trusts, £3,000; agriculture and industries, £749; experimental cultivation, £25; vine diseases eradication,. £250; scab prevention and diseases in stock, £1,357; grants, £25; miscellaneous (depart­ment of Agriculture) £150; public health, £3,404; Victorian railways, £365,000; miscel­laneous (Railway department), £723; Mel. bourne aud Hobson's Bay Railway-interest on debentures, &c., £765; total, £819,683.

He observed that he desired to pass a Supply Bill for two months, ending 30th November, and this amount of £819,683, together with £370,090 out of votes already passed in Oommittee of Supply, and re­ported to the House, would make a total oE £1,189,773.

Mr. MUNHO said he noticed one item of £365,000 for the Victorian railways. Surply this was a large sum to be voted on a Supply Bill.

Mr. GILLIES stated that it was only two months' supply.

Mr. WILKINSON expressed the opinion that the committee should have some in­formation as to why money should be voted in this extmordinary manner.

Mr. GILLIES remarked that, as most honorable members were aware, when the session had lasted a few months, it was necessary to obtain a Supply Bill, in advance of the Appropriation Bill, in order to pay the curren t services oE the yenr. A large proportion or the amount of the supplies for which he was now asking had already been voted in Oommittee of Supply, reported to the HOllse, and approved of. The votes on account contained no advances for new matters which Parliament had not had an opportunity of discussing. (Mr. Laurens­" We have not yet dealt with the estimates for the Rail way department.") No; it was always necessary to obtain supplies in ad vance before the whole of the Estimates could be dealt with. The public service must go on.

Supply. [OCTOBER 16.J rotes on Account. 2109

Mr. HUNT said he saw certain items on the list which ought to be discussed, and, if the Assembly passed this money now, they would have no control over the funds of the country. For instance, there was the vote for the Government Printing-office. The Treasurer had frequently promised that some provision would be made to distribute a portion of the printing work among private establishments. (Mr. Gillies­"The v8te for the Government Printing­office has already been passed in Committee of Supply, and adopted by the House.") Then there was a vote on account for" pro­specting for gold and coaL" The prospect­ing vote had not yet been discllssed by the Assembly, and that vote was now distributed in such a fashion that neither Parliament nor the country had any control over it.

Mr. STU ART inquired to what particular purposes the vote for defence works was to be applied?

Mr. GILLIES said the vote was for the continuation of works which were already in progress, and also for the purpose of placing in position guns ordered from England which had arrived in the colony. There were no new works at all included in this vote, and the total amount on the Estimates for defence work~, as honorable members would see, was very much below the expenditure of last year.

Mr. FOSTER asked whether the £18,700 on the list for "prospecting for gold and coal," was money already expended? (Mr. Gillies-" No.") He desired to have the prospecting vote placed on a different basis, so that money might be available for prospecting for other minerals as well as gold and coal.

Mr. GILLIES observed that there would be an opportunity of discussing that matter when the prospecting vote on the Estimates was under consideration.

Mr. W. T. CARTER said he failed to see why they should be asked to vote money for the Defence department wIlen the whole of the estimates of that department had yet to be considered. There were some of them who had very strong views with reference to the defence force-the proportions to which it was growing, the objects for which it was likely to be used, as indicated by recent events, and also as to the utility of building up a military system in such a country as this. (Mr. Gillies-" This is only two months' supply for the department.") It was anticipating the Estimates. (Mr. Gillies-" But you must pay them.") 'Y [IS

SESe 1890.-7 K

the money for salaries, or for guns that wouldn't work?

Mr. RICHARDSON remarked that the proceeding which honorable members ob­jected to was not the Treasurer's fault, but the fault of the system.

Dr. MAT ... ONEY inquired whether Lt.­Col. Price's salary was included in the votes on account? (Mr. Gillies -" Up to date.") Then he would have something to say on thp, matter.

Mr. GILLIES said that whatever hap­pened a public servant must be paid up to date-even if he was to be dismissed to­morrow.

The resolution was agreed to, and was reported to the House.

Mr. GILLIES mO\Ted that the standing orders be suspended, to enable the resolution to be considered forthwith.

Mr. HUNT said be objected to the standing orders being suspended. He did not see why the House should be asked to pass at a moment's notice a Supply Bill containing several items which required discussion. His district had been treated in a most shameful fashion in the matter of special grants which had been promised to it by successive Ministers or Public Works, but which did not appeal' on the Estimates. It was now sought, he believed, to evade those promises, and he did not know that he would have another opportunity of dealing with the matter. He would not persist in his objection if the Tl'easurer would undertake to see that this matter was dealt with in a fair spirit.. He believed the present Minister of Public VV orks was prepared to consider the question fairly, and, as far as practicable, to carry out what was promised by his predecessors.

Mr. GILLIES stated that the passing of these votes on account would not in any way determine or affect the question in which the honurable member was interested. The honorable member, as an old member of the Honse, must know that it was necessary to bring down two or three Supply Bills every session to enable the Government to pay salaries and wages, and the Government always undertook, in connexion with those supplies, not to spend any of the money on any new work not authorized by Parliament. When the estimates for the Public Works department were under consideration the honorable member would have a fllll oppor­tunity of stating the case of his district. He (Mr. Gillies) might say that the Gon~rn­ment intended to take care that any promise

2110 lVa?/s and JIeans. [ASSEMBLY.] Forest Conse1·vation.

which was really made to carry out any public work wuuld be redeemed.

Mr. HUNT intimated that he was satis­fied with the Treasurer's assurance, and would withdraw his objection to the sus­pension of the standing orders.

Mr. DUFFY remarked that the Ministry could hardly be surprised at the objection which had been raised, considering the curious little surprises which had been sprung on honorable members once or twice this session, not to speak of the case in which, by retrospective legislation that the House or the Government did not understand, a man was deprived of his legal rights. (Mr. Gillies-" Foran once again.") There was another case, if the Treasurer would recollect, in which Supplementary Estimates were passed through the House without a single member being any the wiser. When the question arose afterwards, the Treasurer said "what fools honorable members were not to know anything about it." When the Trea­surer did that sort of thing he must not be surprised if honorable members were now a little more particular in scrutinizing every item than they would be under other circum­stances. At the same time, he (Mr. Duffy) was convinced that on this occasion the Treasurer did not mean to spring any sur­prise, and that there was nothing in these votes but the ordinary routine expenditure, which must be paid.

Mr. WILKINSON expressed the opinion that it was extremely objectionable to place a long list of votes in honorable members' hands, and then ask them to pass a sum of £1,189,773 at a moment's notice.

The motion for the suspension of the standing orders was agreed to.

The resolution was then adopted.

'VAYS AND MEANS.

The House having gone into Committee of Ways and Means,

Mr. GILLIES moved-"That, towards making good the supply

granted to Her Majesty for the service of the year 1890-91, the sum of £1,189,773 be granted o:.!; of the consolidated revenue of Victoria. "

Mr. W. T. CARTER said it was a pity that the Lands department and the Mining department did not work more harmoniously together. The other day one of his con­stituents applied for some land in the parish of Yarram, and his application was allowed by the land board, but then he was calmly told by the Lands department that some mining regulations, or regulations of the Mining department., llad to be passed.

before he could be put in possession. When he asked when he would be informed of any further arrangement of the matter, he was told by a clerk in the Lands department, " Oh, we are not going to attend to your business; you have to look after that your­self." Such a remark was altogether out of place, as the applicant had no means of knowing when the circumlocution office, otherwise called the Mining department, would be pleased to remove any bar to his claim. The Mining department and the Lands department, although under one Go­vernment, acted towards each other as if they belonged to different nations. This was not the first occasion on which regulations of the Mining department had interfered with the proper administration of the lands. Of course it was necessary to guard the mining interest, but it was a pity two State depart­ments could not be worked without such friction, which had the effect of putting off legitimate settlers from occupying the spare lands of the colony.

Mr. GILLIES remarked that the ques­tion raised by the honorable member could be discllssed when the estimates for the Lands department were submitted.

The resolution was agreed to, and was reported to the House.

CONSOLIDATED REVENUE (£1,189,773) BILL.

The resolution passed in Committee or 'Vays and Means was considerecl and adopted. .

Authority being given to Mr. Gillies and Mr. Deakin to introduce a Bill to carry out the resolution,

Mr. GILLIES brought up a Bill" to apply out of the consolidated revenue the sum of £1,189,773 to the service of the year 1890-91," and moved that it be read a. first time.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill was read a first time, and passed through its remaining stages.

FOREST CONSERVATION.

LEASING.

The House then went into Committee of Supply.

On the vote of £54,042 to complete the vote (£71,912) for the survey, sale, and management of Crown lands,

Mr. MUNRO said he thought this would be a fitting opportunity to ask the Minister of Lands to clear up the grave doubt that had arisen in the minds of honorable members

Suppl,!). [OCTOBER 16.J 2111

in regard to the manner in which the hon­orable gentleman had treated the parties interested in the Yea River Company, in relation to the concessions which were said to have been promised to them. The hon­orable member for Stawell brought this matter under the notice of the House on the 21st November last year, and the Minister of Lands then said-

" If necessary, the intended regulations could be laid on the table that night. Matters ha ving gone on to this extent, the question arose as to whether he, as Minister of Lands, and also the Government and the House, could give the application fair consideration on its merits. Of course, to grant such a lease would be an entirely new departure. (Mr. Munro-' Has a lease been promised ?') No, nothing had been promised."

(Mr. Dow- "That is in connexion with the lease.") He thought he could show that a great deal had been promised. (Mr. Dow-" In connexion with the lease ?") Yes. Amongst the papers which had been laid on the table of the House was a memorandum by the Conservator or Forests (Mr. Perrin), which gave a vel'y correct statement of the case, although it had no doubt been modified as far as possible, in order to let the Minister down easy. '1'he memorandum was prepared after the event, but still it contained enough to show that the Minister was not so frank as he ought to have been last session. His (Mr. Munro's) personal feeling was that the gentlemen connected with the Yea River Company were promised a great deal too much. Owing to the action of the Minister in departing from his promise, some of them had been ruined, and he did not think that they had been treated fairly. He believed that the Minister and Mr. Perrin made a mistake; but when a Minister of the Crown made a mistake of that sort, he should not allow the parties interested to . be ruined. In the memorandum to which he had referred, Mr. Perrin said-

"Re Proposed Concessions to Yea River Com­pany.. Memo.-It will be seen from the papers attached, in which I deal with the question fully, that during the month of December, 1888, Mr. Walkeden was sent to me by the Minister re his (Mr. Walkeden's) scheme for timber cutting; that I visited and inspected the land during that month by direction of the Minister, and again on a later date; that my inspection and interviews with the local people led me to think the scheme, lmder proper regu­lations, a good one for the forest branch and for the country; that my inspections were thorough and exhaustive; that I spent much time and anxious thought in preparing such regulations; that the said regulations protect the forest and the departme1).t io every way;

7K2

that I requested that their legality be affirmed by the Law department; that this was done-the Crown Solicitor certifying to their legality; that upon receipt of that certificate I recom­mended that the concessions be granted under the conditions provided in the regulations; that

. such recommendation was submitted to the Minister by the permanent head and approved. "

(Mr. Dow-" Nothing of the kind; you will find nothing in the papers to show that that was done.") Thp. Minister of Lands could not get out of it in that way. The Minister of Public Instruction was acting for the honorable gentleman at that time, and he gave his approval as acting Minister of Lands. (Mr. Dow-" If you will show me that in the papers, I will be satisfied.") Mr. Perrin further stated in his memorandum-

" That I ~hen issued a certified copy of each. regulation to Mr. 'Valkeden on behalf of the company, obtaining his signature to the regula­tions in the papers; that I am still of the opinion that it would be a good thing for the depart­ment and the cOlmtry for the licence to issue." .

Would any honorable member believe that Mr. Perrin would do that without the appro­val of the Minister? The Minister said none of these documents were approved. (Mr.· Dow-" Perhaps the regulations were.") And yet the honorable gentleman stated last session that nothing was promised. (Mr. Dow-" Nothing in the shape of a lease.") The Crown Solicitor was asked to give his opinion as to whether a lease could be issued. (Mr. Dow-" Did we issue a lease ?") No. (Mr. Dow-" Did we inform the company that they could not get a lease ?") Yes, afterwards. (Mr. Dow-" Did the company get any promise that a lease would be issued to them ?") He did not say so; but he did say that the company were led on, step by step, and were promised that everything would be done that could be done, and when the Crown Solicitor approved of the lease notice was given to the company that they could proceed to work. (Mr. Dow-" The honorable member is mixing up the question of the regulations and the lease; nothing at all has bee~ issued.") vVonld the honorable gentleman say that Mr. Walkeden and the other gentlemen acting with him were not i.n possession of a lease of this land from the Crown Lands department? (Mr. Dow-" Yes, and they never were.") Well, the question he was dealing with was what was promised. (Mr. Dow-" The company are in possession of nothing.") He was afraid that they were in possession of a great liability. (Mr. Dow-" 1 am

2IIZ Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Forest Cons81·l'ation.

sorry for that; the negotiations were pre­liminary to the issue of a lease, but 110

lease was issued.") Well, he would read the opinion obtained from the Crown Solicitor. It was as follows:-

" Crown Solicitor's Office, 231'd July, 1889.

"MEMO. - Under sections 87 and 89 of the Land Act 1884-under one of which I presume this concession is proposed to be made - the Governor in Council has power to issue licences to cut timber in a State forest or a timber re­Sflrve. In view of the fact that no term is limited to these sections, while other sections of the Act (sections 42 and 95) restrict the term of the licences under them, I see no reason why the Governor should not grant licences to cut timber for any definite term. As I read the sections, however, the power conferred on the Governor merely empowers him to issue the licences and to impose any terms and conditions he thinks fit, and is not intended to give the Governor in Council a free hand to make any contract con­ferring rights on the licensee. In other words, the 'terms and conditions' are to be restrictive on the licensee, and are not intended to enlarge the Governor in Council's power. Any conces­sion beyond the right to cut timber would, in my opinion, be more than the Act contem­plated, and therefore unwarranted. Possibly, if the licence was granted with concessions, it might be held that the Crown was stopped from pleading illegality. At the same time I don't see, as long as the Crown is quiescent, how the legality or otherwise of the licence can ever be brought in question in a court of law."

That was signed by Mr. E. J. D. Guinness, Crown Solicitor. If nothing was promised, the department would not have taken so much trouble to see if they could do what they were asked to do. (Mr. Dow­" That opinion waR as to the lease; we did not consider it strong enough, and t.he lease was not issued.") He would read t.he state­ment of Mr. Morrah, Secretary for Lands, which would show what the Minister did. Mr. Morrah said--

"I heard for the first time of this company in November or December, 1888, when the Minister of Lands informed me that an association was negotiating with him with a view to obtain certain leases and concessions for the purpose of establishing works and a tramway whi<.:h would be of advantage to the country generally, and to the district selected for its operations in a special degree. On the 27th December the Conservator of Forests reported favorably on the company's application for timber rights. The first application in writing appears to have been made to the Minister of Lands by Mr. A. E. 'Yalkedell, secretary to the company, on 1st January, 1889, when the scheme and desired concessions were set out by that gentleman. I heard little more of the matter until early in June, 1889, when three grazing areas were, by the direction of the Minister, converted into four pastoral allotments, in order to afford members of the association an opportunity of

Mr. M1mro.

obtaining leases under section 21 and freeholds under section 29 of the Land Act 1884,."

And yet the Minister of Lands said that nothing had been done. It was surely something to convert three grazing arQaS into four pastoral allotments for the purpose stated. (Mr. Dow-" It was a mere appli­cation.") Why was that done if the company were not to get a lease? (Mr. Hunt-" Theft'is no power under the Act.") He did not say there was. He was referring to the manner in which the Minister and the officers of the Lands department led these parties on. (Mr. Dow-"It was all preliminary.") Then he would read the next paragraph in Mr. Morrah's statement, which was as follows :-

" Leases were accordingly applied for on 17th June by Messrs. Stephen Cureton, A. E. Walke­den, Henry Parfitt, and John Kerr, all of whom are, I believe, connected with the association. The approval of the leases (which have not yet, issued) was gazetted 011 2nd August last."

And yet nothing was done! (Mr. Dow­"That is the grazing leases.") Which was to give them possession of the land. (Mr. Dow---" A mere approval was given, but nothing was issued; that has nothing to do with the forests at all.") He could show the Minister the plan. Mr. Morrah further stated-

" In July the Conservator of Forests brought to me a draft of 'conditions and regulations to secure certain concessions and privileges to Mr. A. E. 'Yalkeden.' On the 12th July I forwarded the draft to the Crown Solicitor, and requested his opinion as to the validity and legality of the proposed concessions. On 23rd July the Crown Solicitor furnished an opinion favorable in the main to the proposals, which were then approved by the Minister."

(Mr. Dow-" The regulations.") No, the application for the leases. (Mr. Dow-

. "Have we given a lease?") No, but he wanted to show that the Minister led these men on step by step to their ruin, and, instead of saying in a manly way ~hat he made a promise, the honorable gentleman stated that he had made no promise. Mr. Morrah continued-

"The Conservator of Forests, on the 24th August, delivered a copy, signed by himself, of the conditions and regulations to Mr. W alkden. On 12th August the Governor in Council, at the instance of the Minister of Lands, who acted on the recommendation of the Conservator of Forests after cons~ltation with the Mining department, temporarily reserved for the growth and preservation of timber 14,000 acres, more or less, in the parishes of Kinglake Tarrawarra North, Granton and Woodbourne being portion of the land referred to in the con ditions and regulations." .

Supply. [OCTOBER 16.] FOJ'e8t Con8ervation. 2113

'Y ould the Minister still say that he pro­mised nothing and gave no concessions? He (Mr. Munro) had felt very strongly in this matter, because he knew what it meant. He knew that it meant the final destruc-

II tion of one of the finest forests in Victoria. Fortunatelv for the countrv and unfortu­nately for· the individuals· concerned, the Minister, instead of carrying out the pro­mise he made, kept the question hung up until now, although he stated last session that he would bring it befot·e Parliament at the heginning of this session. (Mr. Dow -" Here I am.") 'Vas this the beginning of the session? (Mr. Dow-H It was not my fault that it was delayed.") It was not the Minister's fa.uIt that, although the House had been sitting so long, nothing had been done to relieve the men interested in the company in the unfortunate position in which they were placed, after spending their money and getting no return for it! The statement had been made that this land did not come up to the Dividing Range at all. The plan submitted by the Minister showed that the land extended to the top of Mount St. Leonard. Mount St. Leonard was only a part of the Dividing Hange, which went on to the Black Spur. If the company had been allowed to go on, that fine old forest would have been d~stroyed. (Mr. Foster-" What are forests for ?") What were the sky and the air for, but the benefit of men? (Mr. Foster-" Do not you want the timber to be used? ") There was plenty of timber obtainable in the colony without destroying a forest which people from all parts of the world came to ,see. He had been in Switzerland, Ireland, Scotland, and New Zealand, and he had never seen any scenery which for foliage was equal to that of this mountain range. It was one of the finest spots on the face of God's earth, and yet this place was to be ruthlessly destroyed. vVhy he found fault with the Minister of Lands was that after he had given his ap­proval, and had led this company on step by step, he did not go so far as to allow them to take the timber which did not inter­fere with the forest. The documents which were laid on the table, however, showed that the company were to go on until they came to the parish of Granton. (Mr. Foster­" Splitters are destroying that forest now.") He admitted it, and he said more shame to the Government for allowing it. In places in which thfl Government paid thousands of pounds in order to clear people out, so as to prevent the forest from being destroyed, men

wera employed splitting timber. (Mr. Foster -" Under the present law.") He believed t.hat under the present law the whole of the forests could be destroyed; but why were there Ministers in charge of the public depart­ments? Surely it was intended that public property should not be ruthlessly destroyed. (Mr. Cameron-" They wer0 splitting in the Black Spur twenty-five years ago.") (Mr. Langridge-" And I stopped it at the request of the House.") Thet·e were resi­dents and hotels in Pernshaw twenty year~ ago, but by the authority of the House they were all bought out, and the land reverted to the Crown. vYhy? Because this House wanted to secure the watershed from pollution. Now, after that had been done, the Minister of Lands licensed people to cut timber. Last week, on the very ground the Government paid for, he saw Ulen cutting down trees, splitting them into palings, and carting them away through Fern~haw. The thing was a disgrace. Honorable members had snrely sufficient patriotism to insist on some of the magnifi­cen t forest country in the colony being conserved. (Mr. Langridge-" The cutting up of the roads injures the watershed.") Yes. On going to the Splitters' Track, not three miles from his own house, he found at least half-a-dozen very tall trees cut down. (Mr. Cameron-" You had better close the road over the Black Spur altogether.") He was not talking of the road, but of Stony Creek, where the Splitters' Track was. When one of the tremendous trees there was cut down, half-a-dozen other trees were smashed by it in its fall. A few years ago that was such a magnificent place that he used to take gentlemen to see it. He took the Rev. Dr. Macgregor, who came from Edinburgh, to see it, and that gentle­man said that if he had not been in the presence of the Melbourne Presbytery, he would have fallen down and worshipped it. The place now looked as if it had been bom­barded, trees lying about smashed, and it was high time the splitting of timber there was stopped. With regard to the Yes River Oompany, the Minister should carry out what he promised so far as the timber was concerned, so lorig as the forest was not injured. If the company were confined to the land indicat'ed in their first application, no serious' harm would be done to the forest; but if they were allowed to extend their

,operations, as was proposed a,fterwards, tile , forest would be destroyed. (An Honorable Member-" Stop it altogether.") He would not say that. The Minister had, made a

2114 Suppl?;. [ASSEMBLY.] Forest Gonsen'atz'on.

promise, and he ought to carry it out so far us he could without doing any public injury. The rest of that magnificent forest ought to be resen'ed by Act oE Parliament, so that no one should dare to destroy it.

Mr. GILLIES stated that if the countrv about Mount St. Leonard was being d;­stroyed the Minister of Lands was not aware of it, and it CQuid soon be stopped. The land to which the honorable member for Geelong (Mr. Munro) referred was not the land involved in the dispute with the Yea River Company. (Mr. Munro-"It is a continuation of it.") No; it was twenty­eight miles away.

Mr. MUNRO said that the application last made was that the company should be allowed to go as far as Mount Juliet. They were to go over Mount St. Leonard, across the Black Spur, and east to Mount Juliet. If the concessions originally applied for were granted, no harm would be done. (Mr. .Burrowes-" 'Vould it injure the water-shed? " ) No; the land was on the other side of the Dividing Range. The Govern­.ment ought to at once put a stop to the splitting of timber on the waterahed. (Mr. Gillies-" I do not think it is done.") He saw it himself last week. (Mr. Gillies­." Then it can be stopped in a day.") The ·land he referred to was reached by the road running' down into Myrtle Creek, and was about haH-n-mile lower down than the land bought from .Tefferson.

Mr. LEVIEN remarked that he did not know the whole of the circumstances of this

· case, because he had not read the papers. · He thought, however, that the Lands department might, with very great ad van-

· tage, grant concessions to persons or to · companies who would undertake tocuttimber, and would consent to be bound by much more stringent regulations than those under which the mill-owners worked nt present.

· The department would certainly have to guard these forests jealously, and not give a monopoly of them to a few favoured

· persons. At the same time, a longer lease ·and better security of tenure should be given to those who invested their money in the. saw-mill business, but too large an area

· should not be allowed to any person or firm. A great deal of missapprehension existed

· in the public mind and in the minds of honorable members as to the forests of this country. The leader of the Oppositio~

, seemed to think that the forests should be preserved as if they were something very

-sacred, but if they were locked up they . would very quickly go to ruin. Did tIle

honorable member know that 35 years ago­there was hardly a stick of timber on the­ground where the forest he referred to now existed? (Mr. Munro-" Trees don't grow 32G feet high in 35 )'ears.") All the timber in tha t part of the country was entirely swept away by fire on Black Thursday. (Mr. Burrowes-" Nonsense; some of the­trees there are over 100 years old.") He (Mr. Levien) was assured by gentlemen wh() had driven through. that forest country shortly after Black Thursday that aU the trees were destroyed on Black Thursday. (Mr. Munro-'; It is an absolute impossi­bility.") The honorable member for Evelyn had also informed him that, growing in the chinmeyof a hut in which he had boiled his billy 200dd years before, there was a tree over 200 feet in height, and some 3 feet in diameter. (Mr. W. T. Carter-" Tha t is one of Cameron's romances.") Hehad himself been through most of the forests of this colony, and he did not hesitate to say that, if the forest in question was not cleared of the older trees, it would be swept away by fire, or would go to decay. The timber was of mushroom growth, and it decayed just as rapidly. After 45 or 50 years' growth the timber would not improve. The proper way oE conserving the forests was tv cut down the trees when they reached maturity, and remove the fallen timber, in order to prevent the destmction of the trees by fire, which was what had to be feared more than anything else. Large timber was now growing up in the Ironbark Forest, near Sandhurst, and in the Bullarook l~orestt where the timber was cleared away 30 years ago, and the sawmillers would soon be able to commence operations there again. If the Minister had made a promise, and induced Mr. Walkeden and his friends to spend large sums of money, as had been stated, then, as far as would he proper in the public interests, he should carry out in good faith the engagement he had entered into. The honorable gentleman was quite right in saying that he would do nothing until Parliament had had an opportunity of expressing its opinion. The Minister of Lands did not offer any objection to the issue of leases under proper regulations, and with an effective penalty for non-observance of their provisions; but forest legislation was badly wanted to strengthen the hands of the Minister. Every year there were about 1,000 prosecutions for the violation of forest regulations, but the fines inflicted were altogether too small to effectually deter persons from breaking the law. Severer

Supply. [OCTOBER 16.] F01'est COllse7'l'atiol1. 2115

penalties should be imposed by law, and arrangements made whereby the forest regulations could be properly enforced. The forests of the colony would be perennial if properly dealt with. The more large timber was cut out in every direction, the more certain. would the permanency of the forests be; and, in order to prevent theil' uestruction by fire, it would be desirable to clear strips of good land, which might be leased for farming.

Mr. MUNRO stated that. if the honor­able member for Barwon could prove by satisfactory evidence that any of the trees called white gum or mountain ash grew 300 feet in 35 years, or even 100 years, he would prove what nobody had ever proved before. (Mr. Levien-" There are a hundred wit­nesses in Melbourne who could prove it to-morrow.") The honorable member stated that the great fire on Black Thursday swept away the forest in question, but he might inform the honorable member that last summer a portion of the Black Spur, for a distance of about three miles, was swept by fire, and the whole of the undergrowth de~troyed, but not one single big tree was touched by the fire, their stems being as s,traight as an arrow, and their branches 200 feet high. The fire destroyed some of the box trees and other trees that had holes in them, and were partly decayed; but a green solid white gum or mountain ash, without holes into which the fire could penetrate, was not in the least affected by a forest fire. (Mr. Groom-" Mountain ash trees have been killed by fire in Gippsland to my knowledge.") He did not deny that, but 110 had himself seen the tre~s to which he now referred, had had some of them photo­graphed and measured, and the fire had certainly done them no harm. He 11ap­pened to be present, in February last, when a paper was read at the Whitehall Cham­bers, in London, before the Colonial Institute, upon the forest trees of the British Empire, and the gentleman who contribute,d that paper called the Victorian forest administration by all the vilest names lIe could use for the manner in which tIle forests of this colonv had been allowed to 'be ruthlessly destroyed". Under section 32 of the Land Act, areas up to 1,000 acres were

. leased at 2d. per acre per annum; and along the watershed of the Acheron, on the moun­

, tain l'anges-w here the land was really of no value for grazing purposes, the trees being so close together tha.t grass would not

.. grow-the people were ringing ~ll. the 'timber, and there would soon be a dead

forest there, of no use to anybody, b<?C'.lUse the timber could not be brought to town for firewood. (Mr. Foster-" You must ring the trees if you wan~ gmss to grow.") He did not object to the destruction of timber where land was worth clearing, but it would take £20 per acre to clear the land in question; and, when it was cleared, it would not be worth more than £5 pel' acre. The timber was certainly not very valuable, but it was too valuable to be ruth­lessly destroyed, and the whole of the Black Spur Forest ought to be preserved as one or the show places of the colony.

Mr. CAMERON remarked that, not­withstanding what the leader of the Opposi­tion had said, it was a fact that the timber on a large portion of t,he Di\Tiding Range, between the Plenty Ranges and Mount St. Leonard, was dest.royed by fire on Black Thursday. (Mr. Munro-" That was not the forest I meant; I was referrillg to the Black Spur.") The Black Spur and the forest in question were two different locali­ties. He did not tell the hon'orable member for Barwon anything about the Black Spur. The timber in the part of the country he had named was of very recent growth, and it was an undoubted fact that trees on the ranges had grown over 200 feet high in 30 years. The tree that grew through the chimney of an old hut was on the Plenty Ranges. That tree grew after Black Thursday, and, when it was cut down, less than 30 vears after he had boiled his billy there, it was over 200 feet long, and three feet in diameter. (Mr. Munro-" 'Vhat sort of timber was it ? ") Mountain ash. He could show the honorable member thousands of such trees, that had grow,n in the same period of time. (Mr. Munro-" I can take you to trees 25 feet in diameter.") He was talking facts. There were t.rees on the Black Spur as large in diameter as anv the honorable member ever saw. He (1\11'. Cameron) travelled over the Black Spur 25 years ago, and he thoroughly agreed with all that had been said as to the magnificence of the scenery and the beauty of the fern-tree gullies, which ought never to be destroyed u.nder any circumstances. It would be worth while travelling thousands of miles to view the scenery over the Black Spur, but the forest in question was not part of the Black Spur, and the topography of the leader of the Opposition, in reference to Mount St. Leonard and Mount .J uliet, was alto­gether wrong. The honorable gentleman alluded to those two mountains as ift1,1ey were' a continuatioIlO[ one range,· but

2116 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.J F01'est Conse1'vation.

Mount Juliet was east of Fernshaw and the Watts River, and was not a co'n­tinuation of the Dividing Range. (Mr. Munro-" It is a detached portion.") It was a separate mountain, as separate as a Ministerial supporter was from a member of the Opposition. The timber in that forest would decay in 30 or40 years. Moun­tain ash was not long-li\1ed, and, unless the trees were cut down and made use of, a lot of wealth would be lost. He knew nothing about the arrangement between the Minister of Lands and t.he Yea Ri vel' Company, but, whatever the agreement was, it ought to be honorably carried out. He was just as much opposed as the leader or t.he Opposi. tion to the saw-milling being carried on beyond Mount St. Leonard, and was not in favour of allowing the splitters to do what they liked in the forests; but matured timber should becutdown, thepermanencyofaforest being best insured by regular thin ning out. (Mr. Munro-HBut they are not thinning out; they are destroying the whole lot.") The Government or which the honorable member for Collingwood (Mr. Langridge) was a member caused the wood-splitters to iJe sent from the waters,hed of the Plenty River to a place ten or fifteen miles east of the same range, and provided £800 for the construction or a road to enable the splitters to get their produce out or the forests. But the land now in question was not within seven miles or the Black Spur "as the crow flies "; there was a high range dividing the two places, and it had nothing to do with the watershed of the 'N atts River, the water from which was being brought into Mel­bourne. There could be no reasonable objection to a fair bargain being made with this company, as well as with other saw­millers throughout the colony; and he would ad vise the Minister of Lands to let the com­pany take possession of the area applied for. Every forest in the colony would be all the better if saw.millers were allowed to thin the timber, and it was a fact .that tens of thousands or pounds' worth of timber was being ,wasted every year.

Mr. RICHARDSON observed that, of all the tall stories he had heard about tall trees, that of the honorable member for Evelyn was the tallest. He had never heard before that trees would grow 200 feet high, and 3 feet in diameter, in 30 years. The real question to be considered, how­ever, was the. important question intro­duced by the leader of the Oppositioll. If the Minister of Lands had ,made a pro­mise, and afterwards found it necessary to

withdraw that promise, in the interests of the country, the honorable gentleman was justified in taking that step; but he ought to consider what recompense or reparation he should make to'those persons to whom he gave the promise. The papers seemed to bear out the statement of the leader of the Opposition, and perhaps it was not the Minister, but the officers of the Lands de­partment who had made the promise. The precis of the case showed that Mr. Walke­den and his friends had been led to suppose that their application for a lease would be granted. He had tried to trace the thing to the fountain head, and put the blame on the right shoulders; and he had come to the conclusion, after a careful examination of the papers, that the Conservator of Porests, acting on his regulations, which had been recently gazetted, and upon recommenda­tions which he had made to the Minister, had led the Lands department into the whole of this trouble, and led the applicants to expect something which they did not and ought not to get. If the Minister of Lands did not take the administration of the forests into his own hands, and insist on the exercise of discretion by the officers of his department, the whole country would be led into confusion, and there would be still greater wrangling over the way in which the State forests were managed. More stringent measures would have to be authorized by Parliament to put a stop to the wasteful destruction of timber now going on. He (Mr. Richardson) had seen the time when a tithe or what had recently been done in connexion with the State forests would have created the greatest uproa.r in Parliament and throughout the country. The Conserva.tor of Porests had apparently almost absolute control of the State forests, and all that had been done in the case or the Yea River Company by the department appeared to have been done on the recommendation of that officer. (Mr. Armytage-" You don't mean to say that the Minister of Lands did not know of what was being c;lone 7") No, but the honorable g~ntleman might not have known. Of course, if the Minister had sanctioned what was done, he would have been to blame, but, when his attention was called to the matter in Parliament, and he promised to hold his, han,d, the honorable gentleman was justified in breaking the promise or the part ,proniise that had been made. He desired to point out that while' the officers of ,th~ ,department might call uPQn the Min~ster .to do certain things, they

S~tpply. [OOTOBER 16.J Fm'est Conse1·vation. 2117

would shelter themselves entirely behind the Minister. The Oonservator of Forests, for instance, acting upon regulations he had himself recommended, might land the Ministel' in a curious difficulty. The Secre­tary for Lands said he knew nothing about the matter in question, and in contradiction of that, Mr. Perrin had stated that he laid the subject before the Minister, through the secretary or permanent head of the depart­ment. It was very difficult to get at the real facts of the case, and the Minister might be shielding himself or his officers when he dellied that any promise was made to the company with regard to a lease. The statement of the Secretary was this-

"On 27th December the Conservator of Forests reported favorably on the company's :application for timber rights. The first appli­cation in writing a.ppears to have been made to the Minister of Lands by Mr. A. E. Walkeden, ,secretary to the company, on the 1st January, 1889, when the scheme and desired concessions were set out by that gentleman. I heard little more of the matter until early in June, 1889, when three grazing areas were, by the direction ,of the Minister, converted into four pastoral .allotments, in order to afford members of the .association an opportunity of obtaining leases under section 21 and freeholds under section 29 of The Land Act 1884. "

The Oonservator of Forests stated that in December, 1888, Mr. vValkeden was sent to him by the Minister 1'e a scheme for timber cutting, that he inspected the land and prepared regulations, and that upon their confirmation by the Law department he recommended tl1at the concessions in question be granted. According to Mr. Perrin's statement, his recommendation was submitt.ed to the Minister by the permanent head of the department and approved, and it was a very difficult matter to fix where the blame should lie. The Minister would have been perfectly justified in disregarding regulations which infringed upon the public estate, and he would call the attention of the honorable gentleman to an important fact in connexion with the present case, namely, that from Mount St. Leonard" several miles along the Black Srur and on to the level land, the country was a pro­claimed forest.' It ,vas a virgin and still growing forest which had not reached maturity, and if any forest land ought to be reserved that ought to be. The department had got into the habit of reserving forest lands on which there were young trees of no value, and of giving up to some public use virgin forests which had not aUained their highest development. The result was that. the country was denuded of the timber under

r •• ,:: I,' !

regulations, which made no provision to secure the renewal of the trees. He wished to call attention to the fact that some graz­ing areas had been converted into pastoral allotments. The effect of this was that under the Land Act of 1884 the occupant had the right of taking up 320 acres as a freehold, and as the land adjoined a virgin forest it ought to be resel'ved to protect the country from the loss of its timber supply. He quite agreed with the leader of the Opposition, also, that fine mountain scenery ought not to be allowed to be spoiled by alienation. In all there were 13,000 acres in the block in question, of which 3,000 acres were pastol'al country, and 5,000 acres grazing areas. He did not say that the Minister had acted contrary to the regulations, but he could not understand how the officers of the de­partment could recommend the leasing of such lands. He was informed, on what should be very good authority, that when the application from the Yea River Oom­pany was first considered, a very much larger area was included in the land pro­posed to be leased than was shown on the plan. (Mr. Dow-" The original boun­daries were not larger than those now shown.") He hoped that the Minister would in the future watch his officers, and see that nothing objectionable was done again. The whole of this business from the commencement was an attempt to get possession of a large area of special lands under ordinary conditions. Matters of that sort ought to be determined by the House, and not hy officers of the Lands depart­ment. The Oonservator of Forests stated that he consulted the residents of the locality concerned, and that they were of opinion that the lease would be ad van­tageous to the neighbourhood and to the colony. vVhat right had he to consult the residents of the locality at all? In the Bullarook State Forest the dead timber and undergrowth could be taken away and used, and if that were carried out under proper regulations the forest would grow again

. magnificently. The men who were really making that forest were the men who were

carting wood from itfor a living, and not those who were employed by the depart­ment to secure its conservation, and who were walking about doing nothing. Tenders

. had also been accepted for the destruction of rabbits in a portion of the Bullarook Forest, but nothing was being done in this direc­tioll on the edge of the 'forest. In matters

, of forest conservation the' Minister should

2118 [ASSEMBLY.] F01'est Gonsen'ation.

not rely upon men who had only colonial experience, and who recommended regula­tion:3 which were contrary to the practice of India and of European countries. People, also, ought not to be allowed to take up, under the 32ml section of the Land Act, land which had timber worth preserving on it; amI when an application for land was objected to by the Mining depart­ment, there ought to be some method of dealing with the difficulty without putting the applicant to expense, Arrangements ought to be made to prevent the Lands and Mining departments from coming into con­flict on these questions. There was a man in his district who had suffered great loss in consequence of this want o(harmony between the two departments he had named. It often happened that a man occupied a 'residence area for years, and after he had spent money in improving it, it was declared to be auriferous, and. he was held to be in illegal possession. The Lands department ought to take this matter into it.s own hands; lands occupied for resi­dence apart from mining should be granted by,the Minister of Lands, without the Mining department being allowed to inter­fere. Compensation ought to be given to a person who was dispossessed in the way lIe had spoken of. All that the mining boards had to do was to send in a report as to the character of lands when instructed to do so by the Minister of Mines, and one officer would guard the mining interest just as well as those boards. The difficulty he complained of might be removed if the

'Minister of Lands had these reports sent to him instead of to the Mining depart­ment. (Mr. D. M, Davies-" Why did not you do that when you were Minister

. of Lands ?") He took steps to bring about the change, and it would have been brought about had he remained in office.

Mr. FOSTER remarl{ed that the ques­tion before the committee was whether a contract was about to be entered into by the Government with the Yea River Com­pany. It appeared to him that, from the printed slips which had been circulated amongst honorable members, there could be no doubt whatever that arrangements had been entered into between the Government, or some official of the Government, and the company, because the papers showed in detail the initiatory steps for the formation of the company up to a point at which they l1ad spent about £10,000. How. was it possible, under such circumstances, to say that the Lands department was not

thoroughly cognisant of all these facts, for' nothing remained but the signing of a formal agreement to complete the transaction? If all that appeared on the papers was true, a second Mildura scheme was in contemplation •. It was proposed to layout a complete town-, ship, water supply and dl'ainage systems were to be established, stores, schools, churches, pleasure grounds, and general industries were to he carried on, and every­thing was to be done to make the place attractive to tourists. It was absurd to· suppose that any number of men would com­bine together to do those things, and enter' into preliminary arrangements involving the expenditure of £10,000, unless they had reasonable grounds to justify them in so acting. Everything had been done except the granting of the lease, which would have­been for 21 years, renewable for a like· term. He did not say that the department. would not have been justified in signing the lease, because that was a matter for inquiry;: but if the company were encouraged to spend the money they said they had spent,. it would be very unfair for the Government and the Honse now to refuse them any redress. The Conservator of Forests had expressed the opinion that the State was making a good bargain, and he no doubt thought so, because he was an enthusiast; but an important alienation like this ought not to be allowed to take place without Parliament having first been consulted. If the matter llad been brought before Par­liament, something would have been done, and the company would now have been in possession or a lease which would be work­ing advantageously for them and for the colony. He desired to call attention to the suddenness with which operations were stopped in this business. The State was about to make an excellent bargain, and all at once the proceedings were stopped because a question was asked in the Assembly as to what position matters were in with regard to the Yea River Com­pany. That 'being so, it was the duty of the Minister of Lands to inform the House why the negotiations were stopped. When the officers of the department had recommended that this lease might issue without injury to the public, why had it been stopped? I t was to be hoped that some satisfactory arrangement would be come to between the department and these men who had gone to so much expense.

Mr. MUNRO remarked that new light had dawned upon this matter, which seemed to show that the Minister was deeper in the

Suppl;lj. [OCTOBER 16.J l'''''Ol'est Conservation. 2119-

affllil' than he (Mr. Munro) had supposed. He had received a press copy of a lettel' which went to the Minister, lind the reply thereto, neither of which appeared among the papers laid on the table of the House, although it was promised that all the papers would be submitted. The letter to which he referred was as follows :-

" Yea River Company's Office, "Swanston-street, 23rd August, 1889.

"Hon. J. L. Dow, Minister of Lands. "Sir,-I have the honour to submit for your

consideration a copy of our advance prospectus, giving an outline of the manner we propose to operate the concessions you have so kiudly 'secured to us. Should you see any objectiona,ble point in it, or desire further information, will 'you kindly communicate?

" Your obedient servant, "A. E. \V ALKEDEN."

To this letter the following reply was re· . ceived :-

"Office of Lands and Survey, " 27th August, 1889.

"A. E. \Yalkeden, Esq., Yea River Company. "Sir,--I have the honour to inform you tha,t

the Hon. the Minister of Lands desires the following alterations, as marked in pencil, on .prospectus attached :-Clause 2, first line, the words 'from the Victorian Government very' to be struck out. Clause 2, second line, the word ' conditional' to be inserted between the words 'with' and 'promise.' Clause 2, third line, the words ' the well-known Victoria State forest and land adjoining it in' to l)e struck out.

"Your obedient servant, "G. S. PERRIN,

" Conservator of Forests."

The Minister had been saying all along tllat there was no promise of a lease. Nvw the

· second clause of this prospectus, after the corrections made by the Minister, which appeared on the face of it, read as fol· lows:-

· "T~le promoters have secured extensi\Te lease­hold concessions under special conditions for 21 years, with conditional promise of renewal for a further term of 21 years, in the finest part of the Alpine Ranges, to the north of Healesville, only 40 miles from Melbourne. The whole of this land is now heavily timbered with the finest and most valuable varieties of hardwood, in­cluding blue gum, messmate, stringy bark,·

· mountain ash, blackwood, &c., and covers an · area of more than 20,000 acres, which may be added to as the timber is worked off."

In tIle face of these documents, fotthe Minister to stand up on the floor of' the

· House and say that no lease was promised, and that it was only intended to give the small portion originally applied for, was the most marvellous statement he (Mr. Munro) had ever heard. .

Mr. DO"\V remarked t.hat perhaps it would be as well, before the discussion went any further, for him to say a few words on this question. I n the first place, he might say that he thought this company were acting very much to the detriment of their­own interests. IE they wanted to get what they had asked for, they were not taking the­best means to achieve their object by having charges brought which were without founda­tion.

Mr. MUNRO stated that the papers he· had read were not offered to him. He sent and asked for them because he knew they existed. They were given' to him at his­request.

Mr. DO'V said he knew nothing at aU about the letters the honorable member had: read. (Mr. Munro-" Why were they kept back from the House ?") He did not wish, to throw any blame on any officers of his­department. It was the meanest thing possible, if anything occurred in a depart­ment, for a Ministertoturn round and blame his officers. He had been prepared from the beginning, with reference to this matter,. not to speak about his officers, but to take any responsibility on himself. The history of this affair, shortly stated, was as fol·· lows :-At the end of 1888 this Mr ~ 'Valkeden, who represented a proposed company, interviewed him with regard to I:li

certain scheme for constructing a railway from Yarra Glen, on the Healesville line, to­the borders of the forest, and acquiring certain forest rights. He told Mr. Walke. den that he had better put his scheme in writing, and referred him to the Oonservator' of Forests. The scheme was submitted in writing on the 1st January, 1889, and it told in a very straightforward way what the­company proposed-namely, to construct a railway, and to get certain forest rights over certain timber lands. When he

· received the scheme he consulted the­Oonservator of Forests, who was then

· new to office, and an enthusiast in his. work. And here he (Mr .. Dow) would take the opportunity of saying, with all due-

· respect to the honorable member for Ores­wick as a'n old Minister of Lands, that he considered that theOonservator of Forests was doing extremely good work in regard to forestry. He was such an enthusiast that, if he erred at all, it was, perhaps, in going a little too fast, but that Mr. Perrin was doing good work he (Mr. Dow) was

· thoroughly convinced. (Mr. Richardson­"In recommending that this lease should be granted? ") He did not want any

:2120 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Forest Conservation.

honorable member to shield him by blaming .any officer. (Mr. Richardson-" Either he 01' you are to blame.") Mr. Perrin visited the locality, and came back and reported to him generally upon the scheme as being, from his point of view, a very good ·scheme. These people proposed to make a railway which, besides bringing timber to market, would also bring the produce of the farmers in the district, and all the people in the district wanted a railway to .carry their produce. It was proposed to put money into the affair by means of a company. (Mr. vVilliams-" Is it not ·contrary to the policy of the country to have private lines? ") He was not prepared to ·say that it was, unless the House declared its opinion to that effect. From what had ,been said of late about railways, he thought they were coming rapidly to the view that inducements might be offered to put private capital into making lines. This proposed company desired to obtain forest rights over .5,000 acres in the permanent forest reserva­tion of 50,000 acres, but there were also other forest lands not in the permanent reserva­tion over which they wished to obtain rights. On the plan honorable members would see that those lands were coloured brown, blue, .and yellow respectively. As honorable members knew, brown meant "open for selection," blue "open for pastoral pur­poses," and yellow" auriferous reservation." The land in the yellow and blue had been lying open for selection previous to the .application of these gentlemen. It might have been selected, and in the hands of the people to whom the honorable member for Geelong (Mr. Munro) had referred as ring­ing the timber. (Mr. Munro-" I referred to the 32nd section land.") Brown was the 32nd section. He found there was 5,000 acres of land on the fringe of the forest, which, although coloured brown, was still unselected, and what did the depart­ment do? They immediately put in their pegs, made it a forest, and reserved it. Then there was 3,000 acres in the blue, and that was found to be good land, and they' reserved it also from selection as timber

·land. (Mr. Baker-" For what purpose ?") For any purpose. Perhaps as preliminary to dealing with this or any other company. Then there was 8,000 acres of auriferous land which had been already cut over, and' was in the hands of the saw-mill proprie­to~s; and one of the points of the applica­tion of this c~mpany was to get a transfer 'of the saw-mill licences, as the saw-millers ,were a portion of the company. , (Mr.

Mr. Dow.

Munro-" Which they have got.") Which they had not got. Mr. Perrin having reported favorably, the question then was -was this proposed company to obtain forest and timber traffic rights over 5,000 acres in the permanent reservation, over 3,000 acres reclaimed from the blue and made a forest, over 5,000 acres reclaimed from the brown and made a forest, and get a transfer with respect to the 8,000 acres from Mr. Kerr and others who were to be members of the company? These were the propositions, and these gentlemen intended to make a railway, and put capital into the affair by means or a company; but they said they could not ask people to put capital into the thing on a mere temporary tenure. (Mr. Hunt-" How could they get land for the railway?") They had arra,nged with the freeholders along the route. (Mr. W. T. Carter-" Taken them in ? ") Yes; along the route of the proposed line, from Yarra Glen to the forest, the whole of the land was in the hands of freeholders. After Mr. Perrin had reported generally in favour of the scheme, the point was raised that these gentlemen wanted a more fixed tenure and a larger area than had hitherto been granted. Instead (if a licence, they wanted a lease, and they said they must have a larger area, or else they could not appeal to the public to provide money to make the railway. (Mr. Armytage -" On what date did they want a larger area ?") On the 1st .January, ISS!). The point put by Mr. Perrin then was that, if this company was to get an exceptional tenure and an exceptional area at all, it should be on exceptional conditions. Ever since Mr. Perrin took office he had been urging the necessity of the State getting some money from the timber, and also the introduction of regulations which would prevent the in­discriminate slaughter of the trees. He urged that this colony should run its timber business on the commercial lines adopted in India and Germany-that it should get a commercial value for the timber, and the only way, he said, to do that was by adopt­ing the royalty system. Mr. Perrin said, " I will draft regulations, which I will sub­mit to you, as conditions for this company to work under, and, if they will agree to work under those severe conditions, then you can consider whether you can give them this exceptional tenure and larger area." The conditions <lrafted by Mr. Perrin were very stringent. In a memorandum on the sub­ject he pointed out that that they provided for the protection and conseryation,of young

Supply. [OCTOBER 16.] Forest Conse1'vation. 2121

timber; that danger from forest fire was specially guarded against; that the com­pany were bound to utilize all the timber· felled,and not leave, as was done bysplitter~, two-thirds of each tree in the bush; and tl1at they were to spend £100,000 in opening up a portion of the forest which, but for this expenditure, or at least a very large outlay, could never be opened up for the Melbourne markets. The company l1ad secured Mr. Kerr's rights to two saw-mill sites, one of which quite monopo­lized the auriferous lands over which timber rights were proposed to be given, and, there­fore, was merely a transfer from Mr. Kerr to the company. (Mr. Munro-" Did you not say just now that was not so ?") They obtained the rights from Mr. Kerr, but they could not utilize them without the permis­sion to transfer, and that permission was one of the things to be considered. In his memorandum Mr. Perrin further said-

"The company had secured the sole right to run a railway through private lands up to Steele's and Dixon's creeks, before approaching the department on the subject, and the entire support of all the residents and timber people living in the locality is given to the company. As the company relies upon tourists for passenger traffic, the preservation of the fern gullies and other scenic accessories will form a prominent feature in the protective policy of the company, and their direct interest lies in the protection and conservation of the forest generally. The Conservator of Forests has protected the Govern­ment interests, and the forest under his direct supervision will be properly looked after, and a large revenue derived therefrom. Every pro­tection is given to saplings, there being a con­dition providing a fine of £2 for every tree cut under 2 feet in diameter. The bulk of the land over which timber rights are proposed to be ghren has been culled of its splitting timber over and over again for the past 30 years, and little if any portion of it is virgin forest. The timber now standing on the land is only suitable for saw-mill purposes, as the splitters have taken out the best splitting timber; here and there a few trees are found to split. The land in question is not within six miles of the Black Spur range."

In another memorand um Mr. Perrin stated t.hat he had carefully gone into the pro­posals of the company, and he felt sure that the interests of the Government would be conserved by the very stringent code of regulations devised by him. He also called attention to the fact that the royalty charge of 2s. 6d. per 1,000 feet on all timber cut was a new departure in working the forests, introducing an important change, which was likely to result in a permanent revenue, while at the same time conserving the forest, and stopping careless destruction. This royalty business was dinned into his ,(Mr.

Dow's) ears. Mr. Perrin got these people to agree to the very stringent conditions he­had drafted, and, having reached this point,. -this was early in 1889-the question then to be considered was whether it was· desirable to give this proposed company a special tenure and a special area. Now he (Mr. Dow) was not in the habit of doing things in a burry-of doing things that would get him into trouble-and he had to take proper care to find what they were proposing to do. (Mr. Baker-" 'Vas there nothing about a freehold ?") Nothing· in the forest. (Mr. Baker-H No freehold at all ?") No freehold in the forest. There were three blocks at the terminus of the railway near the forest-land in the­IC brown," open for selection, but which had not been taken up-and they wanted this· for a freehold upon which to put their permanent machinery and buildings. As honorable members were aware, saw-millers­had freq uen tly pointed out to the depart­ment the great detriment they suffered by not being able to get a freehold paddock. for their stock and permanent illlpro~e-· ments. No such concession could be given,. because a concession could not be granted that would lead to a prospective freehold in a permanent reservation. But these­three blocks, amounting altogether to 1,100 acres, were open for selection, and not taken up; and the proposal was to bring this under such a provision of the Land Act as would· give the company the privilege of making· them a freehold. (An Honorable Member­-" Buying them ?") Buying them. This· was a portion of the whole proposal, and: there had been no issue of any lease to or­acceptance of any rent with regard to that land from other persons. (Mr. Munro­" Are you sure others have not selected that· land since?") Quite sure. Within the last two months the company had been urging him to let them have these particular blocks to put their improvements on. (Mr. Munro -" I have been informed that some of them have been selected, and the selection approved of by your department.") In reply to this request he said-" No, this matter was referred to before the close of last session, and a promise was given that nothing whatever should be done in this matter­until Parliament had the papers and plan before them, and were acquaint.ed with the· whole matter." (Mr. Munro-" At the· beginning of the next session.") When the next session came he was not in the House, and the honorable member for Sta­well very courteously said he would prefer

.2122 Supply . [ASSEl\113L Y. J Forest C0I1S:!1·t"(ltion.

the matter to be postponed until he (Mr. Dow) was in the House. After the com­pany had agreed to the stringent regulations ·drafted by Mr. Perrin., the next point was to ascertain whether such a lease as was de­:sired could be issued, if approved of, because .there was no use going to the Cabinet with ,a scheme, which perhaps might have to be submitted to Parliament., until every­thing was shipshape. Accordingly the matter was submitted to the Orown Solici­tor. When the matter was sprung upon him in the House on the 20th November last, and his attention was called to a para­graph stating that a lease had been issued, he could aSSllre honorable members that at the moment he did not know whether it had been issued or not. The last time he had touched the matter was back in the previous September, but one did not know what might be done in a department when the Minister was pushed with other matters, unless he had officers he could rely on, as be (Mr. Dow) was happy to say he had. He had signed hundreds of documents, and it occurred to him at the moment­" Have I signed that lease ?" Next night, however, he was in a position to say that no lease had been issued or promised. (Mr. Munro- H What! in the face of your signing that document?") There was no promise in regard to a lease, because they had only got to the point of discussing the question. If the Orown Solicitor had advised him positively, and had satisfied the permanent head of his department that a lease could be issued, he (Mr. Dow) would have gone to the next Oabinet, submitted the proposal, and asked the Government whether they thought it was ad visable to carry {)ut the proposal. From beginning to end he never contemplated anything else than that this matter should be submitt.ed to the Oabinet, and possibly to Parliament. It was altogether too big a thing for him to take the responsibility of it. On 23rd July, the Orown Solicitor gave the opinion which the leader of the Opposition had read. Like a great many legal opinions, it could perhaps be read in any way one liked, but it was not good enough for the permanent head of the department, Mr. Morrah. Mr. Perrin, who was an enthusiast, and wanted to get his new regulations brought into operation, said he thought. it was good .enough; but Mr. Perrin was subordinate to Mr. Morrah. Mr. Morrah instructed Mr. Perrin to write to the company on the 10th September, 1889, the letter which .appeared among the papers, stating that the

Mr. Dow.

lease could not issue. When he (Mr. Dow) found that could not be done, he could not submit the matter to the Government. Being busy with other affairs he let the matter drop, and heard nothing further about it until the 19th November. He might state that, while the question of whether this was something which could he done was going on, a young gentleman­the secretary who had been running this company-came to him, and submitted the prospectus, and he (Mr. Dow) remem­bered glancing over it He regarded it as something in the nature of infor­mation given to the Government as to how these people were to raise the money, but as to there being the slightest intention of granting a lease, which the Orown Solicitor practically said 'was con­trary to law, and which the permanent heacl of the department said could not issue, he (Mr. Dow) would give honorable members his word of honour that he had not the faintest conception of doing so. (Mr. Munro-" In face of the fact that you approved of the second clause of the pros­pectus, stating that a lease would issue ?") However the letter read by the leader of the Opposition came to be written, he (Mr. Dow) approved of nothing of the kind. He knew nothing of the letter. Mr. Morrah, in his resume of this case, said-

":Mr. 'Valkeden's assertion in his memoran­dum of 25th November, addressed to the Honor­able the Premier, to the effect that I promised to prepare him some extra form of agreement or lease, is misleading. I stated, whenever con­sulted, verbally or in writing, that no lease could issue, and the only additional agreement contemplated was to be a bond to secure full compliance with the conditions and regulations. His accOlmt of other conversations is equally in­accurate. Mr. Walkeden's reference, in the same memorandum, to the proposed' prospectus of the company, as having been revised by me, is un­warranted. I have no recollection of receiving the prospectus, and neither revised nor corrected it. "

Mr. MUNRO stated that he had read Mr. Walkeden's letter to the Minister, and the reply signed by Mr. Perrin, snggesting the corrections in the prospectus.

Mr. DO"V repeated that he knew nothing of the letter. He remembered when Mr. Walkeden came in with his prospectus looking over it, and the first thing he noticed was the words I'eferring to a concession" in the Victoria State Forest." He (Mr. Dow) told him that was a wrong thing to say, be­cause it was not in the Victoria State Fore~t. But, as for revising or accepting his prospectus as something settled in

Supply. [OCTOBER 16.J Forest Con8enatz'on. 2123

August, how could that be when, in Septem­ber, the department officially informed the ·company that no lease could issue? If these men considered on the 10th September that they had a lease and proper authority to go on, why was nothing done between then and the 19th November? Even if Mr. Perrin did write the letter, did the mere looking over the prospectus in August justify the company in November in inspiring the newspapers with paragraphs saying that these concessions had been granted to them when they had not been granted? '\Vhat promise had this company got? The whole of the negotiations were merely preliminary to a scheme which was to be submitted to the Government, and probably. to Parliament. The leader of the Opposition bad said that these men should get what thE'Y asked. (Mr. Munro-" No, I said they should get what they were pro­mised.") He would give them everything they were promised. (Mr. Williams­"What was that ?") Nothing. But he would give them everything the company themselves nowasked,and which was entirely within the law, and did not require a Forest Act or an amendment of the Land Act. The gentleman who had been trying to facilitate this matter had omitted altogether to say that his company was dead. When the honorable member for Stawell rose in the House last session, and stuck the thing up for the session, it was only being proposed to start a company. (An Honorable Member-" \Vho spent the money?") He did not know who spent the money. As for him leading them on it was rather the other way.

Mr. WILLIAMS observed that he had just noticed a letter which seemed to require explanation. It was from .Mr. Walkeden, and stated-

"Adverting to my last interview, when you kindly agreed to give me some additional secu­rity in holding the land conceded to me other than the conditions and regulations as adopted

. by the Conservator of Forests, I have the honour to advise you that the conditions as mentioned have now been finally approved by the Con­servator of Forests, and signed and accepted by him and by me, and that I have been furnished with a certified copy which authorizes me to commence operations under the powers thereby .conferred."

Surely the Minister would not authorize people to commence operations if he had given them no tenure.

:Mr. DO W remarked that the letter re­ferred to the proposed draft of regulation!=!. (Mr. Williams-" But they were signed

and sealed.") They were signed by the Oonservator of Forests, as conditions he proposed to adhere to if the company got a lease. This gentleman was officially in­formed on the lOth September that a leasE', for which he had asked, could not be issued; and if-being informed that a lease was re­qu'it'ed, and that the draft regulations were of no use without a lease-he tried to float a company on something that was not a lease, who was to blame for that? (Mr. W. T. Oarter-" He was relying on Perrin.") He could not be relying on Perrin, because he had been officially informed that he could not have a lease. Mr. Perrin could not be blamed on this point. He (Mr. Dow) bE'­lieved that, if the House had remained in session for some time longer, it would have been a good thing to have sub­mitted this scheme of Mr. Perrin's to it. The scheme was considered to be a gooll one on its merits, but the la.w would not allow the issue of the lease. If on the 10th September the company, by asking for a lease, admitted that a lease was necessary, and if, after being informed that they could not get n lease, they went to work on the 19th November-who was to blame? (Mr. W illiams-" Y out' officer gave a certifi­cate.") The certificate was merely pre­liminary, and did not mean anything. Tho company deserved to be dealt with as liberally as possible, and he would tell honorable members what was now proposed. He asked the promoters of the company what they wanted the fixed tenure for, and they stated that they desired to construct a rail­way and other works which would cost £100,000. They had now discovered that there was another way in which they could build a railway, which would make it un­necessary to float a company. They had approached the Premier with reference to the provisions of the Tramways Act, under which shire councils could construct mountain railways; and they Wire satisfied that their difficulty would be overcome if they could get the shire council of the district to build a railwav for them. He (Mr. Dow) belie"ed that" the shire council were heart and soul with these gentlemen. The shire council proposed to apply for power to construct a railway or tramway under the Tramways Act, and they e@uId afterwards lease the line to a private company. (Mr. Munro-" They cannot lease Orown lands.") No, but the Orown had nothing to do with freehold lands. If a tramway was constructed in that way, it would not be necessary to form

2124 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] F01'est Conservation.

a private company to build a tramway. (Mr. Munro-" They would require the consent of the Governor in Council.") That was clear. The promoters of the company wanted to find out how to get the money. Their original idea was to form a company. They could not form a company unless they had a more fixed tenure than the department could give them. Now it was proposed that the shire council should build the tramway, and they. would not want an exceptional tenure. Therefore they could take from the department what was given to every saw-miller in the colony. They would simply deal with the Forest department with regard to the timber at the terminus of the tramway, and they could get an annual licence, such as would be granted to any other persons. He said to these genHemen-" You wanted a 21 years' lease; but, if you get an annual licence, that annual licence will be renew­able from year to year on good behaviour, and no Government would take it from you so long as you adhered to the regula­tions." That was the position in which the whole matter now stood. The depart­ment had been very anxious to meet the views of these gentlemen, and he would be very glad to facilitate their efforts to obtain what they required in the manner now suggested.

Mr. W. T. CARTER said that he would be very sorry to attempt to traverse the statement of the Minister of Lands. That statement showed that the honorable gentleman had undoubtedly been the victim of circumstances, which seemed to have a meaning which the honorable gentle­mon declared they had not. He (Mr. Carter) was not in a position-and he would consider it unfortunate if he were-to contradict anything the Minister said. The honorable gentleman generously took the whole blame upon himself, but at the same time he showed that there was in his depart­ment an enthusiasm in favour of a certain course, which needed checking, to say the least of it. He (Mr. Carter) had always felt proud of the fact that he was reared in a district in which the largest trees in the world grew. If the Acting Chairman (Mr. McLean) had been able to take part in this discussion, he would no doubt have been glad to give the House his experience in Gippsland of Black Thurs­day, and to show that a fire could pass through a forest and leave iii. great many of the giant trees unscathed. He (Mr. Carter) now noticed that the tall

trees of Victoria, if not of Gippsland,. had attracted the attention of speculators,. and excited the greed of the money­makers. It had been said that certain troubles in the industrial world had their' effect on some honorable members, and he thought that they rightly had that effect~ It was no disgrace to an honorable member to own that he owed his seat to the vote· that labour gave him, and it was only right that matters which closely affected labour should have their echo wherever the repre­sentatives of labour were to be found. He observed that when certain movements were made in the financial world they had their echo in this House also. The honorable member for Barwon, for instance, took a very deep interest in such questions as that which was now under discussion. The honorable member told some tall stories about big trees, and called on the honorable member for Evelyn to back him up. He would not waste the time of the House by attempting to out-teU those stories, or he thought that he could find plenty of material which would enable him to do so. It appeared that a splendid district of this colony had attracted the attention and ex­cited the greed of the money lenders, and the transaction with the Ohaffey Brothers was to be repeated. In the latter case the State paid very dearly for its whistle, but he thought that the establishment of an irrigation colony would be a very useful experiment. He did not see why the State should not i tseif plant irrigation colonies, or why the people of the colony should not have an opportunity of doing so; but still he was inclined at the time to consent to the concessions granted to the Chaffey Brothers. What, however, had been the result? Certain persons were looking longingly at one of the finest spots in Victoria, and determining that they would have it as the Chaffey Brothers had Mil­dura. While lle might have been reaely to allow the Chaffey Brothers to make their little experiment at the expense of the State, he objected to the eyes or the colony being taken out by syndicates like the Chaffey Brothers, because then the colony would be experimented to death. (Mr. Taverner­"There is no analogy between the two cases.") He was referring to an irrigation colony, and a beautiful township that was to have been established in some remarkably nice place, and of a. job that was to have been perpetrated in connexion with a rail­way. He was bound to take th~ Minister's assurance that all this was to be submitted

· Supply. [OeToBER 16.] Forest Conse1'vation. 2125

to the House, but he had feared, from what he had heard, that an attempt was to have been made to rush the scheme through with­out the consent of the House. He now saw that there was a loop.hole by which it could be put through without coming before the House at all. The Conservator of Forests showed a remarkable enthusiasm, not only in growing trees, but in endeavouring to make money out of timber; why did not that officer expend some of his enthusiasm in organizing means whereby men might be employed by the State in cutting timber, instead of advising the Minister to accept the proposition of-he was nea.rly saying-this gang of thieves? He took the view that a deliberate attempt was being made to get hold of some of the public estate, to create a monopoly, and to insert the thin end of the wedge towards the es­tablishment of proprietary railways, and all the curses that would follow in their train. That scheme was calmly considered by the Minister of Lands, .who, whatever rumours there might have been in the air, ought to have accepted the principle laid down by Parliament and the country that all the railways should belong to the State. Would to God there was State shipping as well as State railways! There would not then be monopolies to grind the people down. He wondered what the promoters of the Yea River Compa.ny took honorable members for that they should deliberately issue a complaint as to the manner in which they had been treated by the Government, and should ask honorable members to force the Government to grant them certain conces­sions. He wondered that any body of men should have thought honorable members to be so thoroughly simple unless they were prepared to do with them as they did with the people in the Yea River district -take them all in. He approved of the provisions of the Tramways Act, but he trusted that that Act would not be pros­tituted as now proposed. He hoped that the Government would have the wisdom to say to these gentleruen-" No, you want these concessions for the purpose of land speculation, and to make money out of the State without giving any equivalent to the State." It was evident that a big ring was being formed to rob the people of a large slice of territory, and if the facts of the case, as stated by the Minister of Lands, were published, he was confident that sl1ch a proposal would not, for one moment, be tolerated by the people. He protested against it, and he would pledge his life and

SES. 1890.-7 L

soul to use all his energies in order to prevent this colony from submitting to the tyrannous monopolies that would be built up if the construction of private rail ways were allowed.

Mr. ARMYTAGE remarked that he wished the honorable member for Williams­town would distinguish between his audiences. (Mr. W. T. Carter-" I will never take a lesson from you.") Perhaps others would be glad if the honorable mem­ber would do that. He could assure the honorable member that the style of speech he had adopted in reference to this matter did not' find appreciation in the House. The honorable member alluded to the fact that he was reared in a pa.rt of the colony in which very big trees grew. Perhaps that was the reason why the honorable member was so particularly wooden-headed upon some su0jects. He supposed that, as the honorable member did not excel in stature like the big tries he talked about, he tried to excel in some other way, namely, in the high appreciation he had 0.£ his own powers of speech. It would be bettir if the honorable member studied the facts of a case, and did not treat the House to remarks which were entirely ignorant and wide of the subject. The honorable member had referred to the gentleman who promoted the Yea River Company in rather peculiar terms, but, when the public knew who it was that had uttered such sentiments, they would know what value to attach to them. (Dr. Maloney-" Are you in this swindle?") The manner in which the Minister of 'Lands hushed this matter up at the end of last session, or rather the manner in which he deBit with it, did lead him to think that it was a swindle, and that the Minister and Mr. Perrin were in it. "Vhen he looked into the matter, however, he found that it was no swindle, and that the Minister and Mr. Perrin weri not in it. That impression had, however, gone abroad, and it was entirely owing to the manner in which the Minister of Lands dealt with the matter last session. The question honorable members had to consider was whether the action of the Lands department was such as to lead these gentlemen to think that they had a right to float the company. He held in his hand the pro­spectus of the company, which was sub­mitted to the Minister, and was altered in accordance with his suggestions. The prospectus referred to the land the company proposed to deal with·-and that land was at the nearest point, at least four miles from

2126 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] FOl'est Oonse1'vation.

the Black Spur-and that, and every step which the company took, was submitted to, and approved by, the Minister. (Mr. Dow -" No.") Would the Minister stand up and deny it? (Mr. Dow-" Yes.") Well, he asserted, without fear of contradiction, that every step the promoters of the com­pany took was submitted tothe Minister, and approved by him. (Mr. Dow - "No.") The Minister saw and approved of the prospectus. (Mr. Dow-" No; but if ldid, what does that amount to?") It seemed to him to amount to leading these gentle­men up to the supposition that they had a right to float the company. Several Gazette notices were published with refer­ence to the land. (Mr. Foster-" Signed by the Minister 7") The notices would not be published unless they were signed by the responsible Minister. One of these notices related to a mining reserve that waf! converted into a timber reserve, and another had reference to 4,000 acres of land that was withdrawn from selection, and declared to be a forest reserve, both for the purpose of these concessions. Surely, if those notices were published in the Gove1'n­ment Gazette with the authority of the Go­vernment, there could be no doubt that the Government agreed to the concessions. The gentlemen intereeted in the company bad already spent £6,000 on the ground. They were in ,,01 ved to the extent of another £6,000, and they were threatened with an action for £2,500 commission for the flotation of the company. One gentle­man, in order to join in this scheme, re­signed the position of chief engineer of one of the largest iron firm! in England-the Patent Nut and Bolt Oompany-and another resigned the position of works' foreman of the Birmingham Oorporation. There could be no doubt at all about the bona fides of the company. The following memorandum was written across the last page of the conditions attached to the prospectus:­"Certified copy of conditions and regula­tions under which certa.in concessions and privileges are secured to Mr. Walkeden and others, conce9sions to take effect from 8th June, 1889.-G. S. Perrin, Oonserva­tor of Forests, Victoria." (Mr. Baker­" That is a clear committal of the depart­ment.") The Minister had indorsed every step the company had taken up to the present time. (Mr. Dow-" The honorable member is making a claim for the company that they themselves do not now make.") What claim? (Mr. Dow-" That the com­pany should get a lease; the department

Mr. Army tag ••

is willing to give the company all that could be given to them under the law.") Well, the Minister reminded him of one point, and that was that he had kept the company hanging on ever since this matter was brought before the House last session by the honorable member for Stawell. The company had been endeavouring to get a settlement, and they were averse to bring­ing the matter before this House, as they eventually felt it necessary to do. The Minister wanted to make a point of the fact that -he promised last session to do nothing until the House met again. The honorable gentleman had, however, given the company every reason to understand that they had full power to complete the contract, and full power to issue the pros­pectus to the public. Mr. Walkeden, in the interest of the company, did not ask for a lease, but for further security; and Mr. Morrah, the Secretary for Lands, assured him that, although at that particular time a lease could not, through some techni­cality, be issued, still he (Mr. W alkeden) had every possible security, and would be quite right to go on. As every step these people had taken had been sanctioned by the Minister, he could not see that the honor­able gentleman had any right to go back on his word, and to land them in the bankruptcy court. Amongst the conditions was one to the effect that the company should spend £100,000 upon the land. There was also a clause providing that a complete and authentic plan, prepared by the company, and signed by the Governor in Oouncil, or some duly authorized person acting for him, should form part of the conditions and regulations. That plan was actually prepared, and was signed by the Oonservator of Forests. There was a further condition that a royalty of 2s. 6d. per thousand superficial feet of timber cut should be paid, and there was no doubt that the company was to pay for the concessions to be granted .. As far as the company was concerned, the whole thing was regarded as settled when the prospectus was issued, and, when the que9tion was mentioned in the House last session, the Minister of Lands was furnished with all the papers, under the supposition that he would fully explain the matter to honorable members. The Minister, however, simply told the House that the company had obtained no rights from the Government. The matter was an extremely serious one, and it seemed to him to be hardly possible for the Minister to explain it awa.y.

Supply. [OCTOBER 16.] Forest Oonservation. 2127

Mr. J. HARRIS observed that he was unfortunately called out of the House when the Minister of Lands was speaking, and he did not therefore hear the honorable gentle­man's defence. He was not prepared to say much about the matter, but things did look very black against the Lands department. It would have beena very remarkable circum­stance for a man like Mr. Walkeden to hazard a sum of £10,000 in this risk with­out having very good grounds to go upon. J udg-ing from t he speeches of the two honorable members who had last addressed the House, the explanation of the Minister had not been so satisfactory as it might have been, and the question was one that might very well be referred to a select committee. (Mr. Dow -" What for ?") So that the charge made by the leader of the Opposition might be inquired into.

Mr. DOW said that the papers relating to the case were on the table, and, if there was any point on which honorable members desired to be enlightened, he would be glad to give them the necessary information. The thing was as simple as daylight, and was all on the face of the papers. (Mr. Munro­"No.") Would the honorable member say what else he would like to know?

Mr. MUN RO stated that a return was moved for of all the papers connected with this case. He had been put in possession of three or four important documents which were not included in those papers.· One was a copy of a letter sent by Mr. Walkeden to the Minister of Lands, and another was the honorable gentleman's reply thereto. Those letters related to the prospectus, and were a most important part of the cor­respondence. There was also the original document upon which the conce~sion was granted. The Minister had failed in his duty in not giving to the House a return of all the papers as ordered.

Mr. DOW said he could assure the leader of the Opposition and every honor­able member that the papers were submitted to the House as he got them, and he knew nothing at all about any other papers in connexion with the case, except, perhaps, some letters that had passed since the return was prepared. If honorable mem­bers were in possession of any other papers relating to the case, let them use the con­tents of those papers by all means, and give him. the opportunity for explanation. The secretary of the company was in the gallery, and he had perhaps given letters to honorable members which he (Mr. Dow) knew nothing about. He was anxious the

committee should know everything about the matter, and if there were any other papers bflsides those already submitted, he would be very glad to have them brought before the committee.

Mr. MUNRO stated that the Minister of Lands had not met the charge which he (Mr. Munro) was bringing against him, namely, that although the House had called for all the papers in connexion with the case, some of the most important docu­ments had not been included in the return. Here was a press copy of a letter addressed to the Minister of Lands on the 23rd August, 1889, also the original letter sent by the officer of the Minister of Lands in reply thereto, and a document which the Minister himself revised and returned along with that letter to the parties themselves; and here was the original document on which the concession was granted. All those documents were omitted from the return which was laid before the House; and what he wanted to know was, why all the papers in the case had not been pre­sented, in compliance with the order of the House, and why important papers had been withheld?

Mr. DOW remarked that he could only assure the leader of the Opposition again that he called for all the papers in this case, that he did not authorize the letter alluded to by the leader of the Opposition, and that he knew nothing about the papers which the honorable member referred to. He wished every possible inquiry to be made into the matter, and justice to be done to every body. (Mr. Munro­"Somebody, it is clear, is to blame, and he should be made to answer for it.") He (Mr. Dow) had submitted all the papers he had received from the officers of his depart­ment, and if the leader of the Opposition had any other papers it was to be presumed that he got them from the secretary of the company. (Mr. Williams-"Why, your own correction is on the prospectus.") He saw the prospectus; but as to giving any formal authority to revise and amend the prospectus, he could assure the honorable member that he did nothing of the kind, and he knew nothing whatever about such a revision. (Mr. Munro-H Then you have been kept in the dark, that is all.") He had told the committee all that he knew about the matter.

Mr. J. HARRIS expressed the opinion that the Minister of Lands did not want to hide anything from the committee, and that no attack was intended on the Minister's

2128 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] FOfest Oonse1'vation.

integrity. The honorable gentleman had been away from his office for some time, and possibly he was not en mppol't with all the facts of the case. The leader of the Opposition seemed to be well posted up in the matter, and had got some papers in ad­dition to those belonging to the department. (Mr. Munro-" No, the department must have all these papers or copies of them.") It would be very unfair for him (Mr. Harris), not having heard the Minister's explanation, to say anything more about the matter, except that his impression was that honorable members were hardly com­petent to deal with the case, which should be sent to a select committee. What had the Minister of Lands to fear from the in­vestigations of a select committee? But what he rose to complain of was that the Forest Bill, which had been promised session after session, had not been intro­duced, although the House had been occupied night after night in far less im­portant legislation. It was too near the close of the session to hope that the mea­sure would be dealt with this year, but he sincerely hoped it would be introduced early next session. He would like to know why the report of the Conservator of Forests, written in July, was not presented to the House until the middle of October. It should have been published three months ago. He was sure that the Minister of Lands would see that the Black Spur was reserved for all time as one of the beaQty spots of the colony. The honorable mem­ber for Barwon was very near the mark when he stated that trees grew 200 feet high in 35 years. Ba,ron Von Mueller, whose reputation as a botanist was unsurpassed throughout the wide world, stated in one of his works ~hat in the Madras Presidency there were trees which had grown to a height of 20 feet to 25 feet in eighteen months, and that some gums would grow in one day from 2 to 5 inches. (Mr. Munro­" It states in the same book that there were trees in this colony 480 feet high; but the' Exhibition Ce>mmissioners vainly offered a handsome reward to anyone who could point out a tree 300 feet high.") He (Mr. Harris) was one of a party who measured a fallen tree in Dandenong State Forest which was 470 feet long.

Mr. WILLIAMS observed that this case, after all, was a simple one. He approved of the action of the Minister of Lands in re­treating from the position which the depart­ment had taken, because it would be very bad policy to alienate any part of the State

forests; but he could not exonerate the honorable gentleman from blame for leading Mr. Walked en and his friends astray. They appeared to have gone about the matter in a straightforward, honest, open way; it was not a hole-and-corner affair, everything was done above-board, so that anybody might have inspected what was being done, and they came to an agreement with the depart­ment, signed by the Oonservator of Forests, and indorsed by the Minister, in which it was stated that the applicants were authorized to commence operations, to begi'n spending their money. Under these cir­cumstances, how could the Minister of Lands say that there was no reasonable ground for expecting that a proper title would be given to the company? In his (Mr. Williams's) opinion Mr. Walkeden and his friends had a solid claim against the Lands de­partment, which had authorized them to commence operations involving a heavy ex­penditure on a title that the Minister him­self now said was worth nothing. The position taken up by the Minister was not tenable. The honorable gentleman stated that the agreement made out in this case was similar to the agreement entered into with the Chaffey Brothers; but the Chaffey Brothers' agreement required to be ratified by Parliament, whereas in this case the Minister had power to give the company a valid title under lease or some other security, with the assurance that iii. better and more permanent title would follow. Mr. Walked en and his friends were therefore entitled either to a lease or to compensation. Before they issued the prospectus of their company and invited the public to launch their capital into it, in order that they might not be accused of doing what was not honest or just to the public, they sent their prospectus to the Lands department and asked that it should be revised, with a view to see that there was nothing in it to induce people to put their money into the company under false pretences. The prospectus underwent the scrutiny of the Conservator of Forests, and also of the secretary of the Lands department, and the Minister's own correc­tion was on it. That document came out of the department containing a distinct statement that the company had secured a lease of the land in question. and the Minister must have known that if no better title could be granted by the department than a title which he now said was worth­less, he, having corrected their prospectus in August, was actually consenting to one

Supply. [OCTOBER 16.] Forest Oonservation. 2129

of the biggest frauds ever palmed off on the people of this country. The honorable gentleman, he must admit, was bound to resist the demand for a select committee, because it would be virtually putting him on his trial; and personally he (Mr. Williams) would not be a party to the singling out of any Miuister in a matter of this kind. All the members of the Govern­ment should stand or fall together. If the Minister of Lands was to be assailed the whole Ministry must be assailed, and they should be loyal one to another. It was clear to his mind, from a careful inspection of the documents, that the company had a fair, legitimate, and valid claim against the Government for compensation for money expended, because the agreement, indorsed and ratified by the department, authorized them to expend money in accordance with its terms. Honorable members could not come to any other reasonable conclusion from a perusal of the original documents. The Government must admit that they had mis­led the promoters of this company, and that they were liable for having so misled them.

Mr. DOW stated that honorable mem­bers would find in the report of the Oonser­vator of Forests-he did not know why it was not circulated before-a statement to the effect that when the forestry branch of the department was first organized, Mr. Perrin experienced considerable difficulty, from the want of clerks and office accom­modation, and it might be that the letter, to which the leader of the Opposition had alluded as not having been included in the papers submitted to the House, was sent to the company without being registered in the forestry branch. (Mr. Munro-" But it is addressed to you.") That might be so, and yet he might not have seen it. He did not remember having authorized any letter in reply; but if such a letter had been sent, and it did not appear among the papers, that might be because it was not registered in the forest branch of the Lands department. (Mr. Munro-" But the regulations agreed to by the Minister are not among the papers submitted to the House.") He could assure the leader of the Opposi­tion that they were all among the papers. Here they were.

Mr. MUNRO said he had not observed the regulations before in looking through the papers.

Dr. MA LONEY expressed his regret that the honorable member for Grant had spoken so disparagingly of the abilities of the honorable member" for Williamstown. He

was sure that if the honorable member had only known the attainmQnts of his friend, he would not have indulged in such unfair remarks. With regard to the allega­tion that the Minister of Lands had revised and corrected the prospectus of the .Yea River Oompany, he felt it was only right to say that the original prospectns which was submitted to the Lands department contained only one correction, the word "conditional," which he believed the Minis­ter of Lands would state was not in his handwriting. It did not appear to him (Dr. Maloney) to be in the handwriting of the Minister, and he was informed that it looked like the hand writing of the late secretary of the Lands department. The Minister had very wisely withheld the con­cession which the company desired. The people of the colony would not approve of large tracts of State land Leing given away. The idea of giving up 20,000 acres for a term of twenty-one years, with a possible chance of its future alienation for twenty­one years more, was perfectly absurd, and he hoped that before twenty-one years had passed, the people would tell the Govern­ment of the day, through their representa­tives in Parliament, that they must not part with a single inch of State land. (Mr. T. Smith-" There will not be an inch left to part with twenty-one years hence; it will be all gone before then.") He felt certain that the new members of Parliament would insist that the land should be nationalized and not sold. The Yea River Oompany undertook to pay a royalty of 2s. 6d. per thousand superficial feet of green

. timber; but if the company decided to erect works and manufacture the timber, the Government would lose that royalty, so far as the manufactured timber was concerned. The hints that had been thrown out about the construction of private railways were simply ridiculous, because no one could suppose that the people of this colony would ever go back to the days of private railways. The burning question in America and England at the present time was the desirability of the resumption of the railways by the State. In the old country, since 1853, the Government had had power to take over the rail ways at any time. He " hoped that the Minister of Lands would regard this discussion as an expression of opinion from both sides of the House that large areas of State land must not be parted with in future.

Mr. OFFIOER said he thought that the question involved was not merely the

r 1

2130 Supply. [ASSEMBL Y.] Forest Oonservation.

preservation of the State forests-concerning which there was only one opinion, that every­thing should be done in that direction­but also the very much more important question of justice. Until the Minister of Lands gave his explanation he (Mr. Officer) was under the impression, from a very careful reading of all the evidence he could get in regard to this case, that there was a clear breach of faith with the Yea River Company; but since hearing the Minister's statement, he had come to the conclusion that there was something to be said on the other side. The leader of the Opposition had clearly shown that certain evidence had been withheld-he did not say purposely withheld, or withheld by the Go­vernment, but that in some way or another the letters and documents which should have been produced had not been submitted to the House, so that honorable members were unable to view the matter in a proper light. They ought to have all the evidence that could be produced laid before them prior to coming to a decision. At present they were not in a position to decide the matter, and he would, therefore, suggest that, under these circumstances, a select committee should be appointed to inquire into and report upon the case. On a future day he would be pre­pared to move for the appointment or such a committee, because that was the only way in which honorable members could arrive at the facts and do justice in the matter. Everything appeared to have been done in a very careful and deliberate manner by the different officers of the Lands department. They proceeded step by step, and if· the Minister of Lands did not sign any agree­ment he authorized the Conservator of Forests to do so, and that officerdid so, and, acting upon his authority, the company went to work. It was past belief to suppose that any sane man, and especially any man of business, would go into such an undertaking and spend a lot of money, except it was on the faith of the promise made on behalf of the Government being carried out. He would seriously advise the Government to agree to the appointment of a select com­mittee. If everything was as stated by the Minister of Lauds, what had the Go­vernment to fear from an inquiry into the matter? (Mr. Dow-" The Government have nothing to fear.") Very well, then, why not agree to the appointment of a committee?

Mr. DOW stated that if the honorable member was not prepared to accept his statement, and propose:! the appointment of

·a select committee, he (Mr. Dow) would take it as a vote of censure upon himself.

Mr. OFFICER said he would be pre­pared to accept the Minister's statement if he could believe that all the documents re­lating to the case had been submitted to the House; but the honorable gentleman him­self stated that the documents comprised in the return were the only documents he knew anything about, leading honorable members to suppose that there were possibly other documents. Were the documents which the leader of the Opposition had brought under the notice of honorable mem­bers false documents? If so, that fact should be ascertained. And all the facts could be ascertained by a select committee.

Mr. BAKER remarked that, although the matter had been pretty well thrashed out as far as honorable members could comprehend it, he still felt that there was something radically wrong. Possibly there might be some mistake about the matter. After the explanation given by the Minister of Lands, he entirely exonerated that gentleman from blame; but he could not exonerate the officers of the Lands depart­ment, because all the paperd should have been submitted to the House. The Minister himself must see the necessity of furnishing the committee with fuller information, without which they could not deal with the matter effectively. One thing must have struck the minds of all honorable members, namely, that it would be advisable for residents in the colony, and even for those who had been born here, to go away for a. time and come back aga.in as entire strangers, if they wanted to get some land. That was the lesson furnished by the Chaffey Bro­thers' arrangement, and it was the lesson taught by the case under discussion. People who had lived in this colony for years found great difficulty in getting any land at all, whereas utter strangers were dealt with most liberally. The mallee country was successfully cultivated long before the Chaffey Brothers came to this country. (Mr. Shackell-" It was a barren wilder­ness.") The mallee fringe was occupied and cropped some considerable time be. fore, and, instead of alienating lal'ge tracts of country, as was proposed in this case, why not resume the mallee land and give facilities and inducements for the people to settle upon it? Why should greater consideration be shown to strangers than to the people who had struggled for years and years past to bring the land of the colony under cultivation? He believed

Supply. [OOTOBER 16.J F01'est Conservation. 2131

this discussion would have a beneficial effect on the minds of honorable members, and that before long a measure for the amendment of the Mallee Lands Act would be passed. The proper way of opening up the mallee land would be to intersect it with light and inexpensive railways. Some of the mallee land, during last year, yielded from seven to ten bags of wheat to the acre -land that a few years ago was in the possession of wild dogs and rabbits-and there was no sign of rust in the grain. He hoped the Minister would give further in­formation to the committee with regard to the arrangement with the Yea River Com­pany. (Mr. Munro.-"It would be better to report progress until we get further in­formation.") The law with regard to forests and mallee lands was being interpreted so as to authorize the Gavernment to part with the freehold of enormous tracts of country, while a small block of land adjoining a selection could not be sold at all? This anomaly ought to be rectified, and in order to prevent quarrels over boundaries of land selected in future, provision should be made for surveying all land that was thrown open to selection. Reserves for water and timber, and for schools and townships, should be marked out; and in selecting the sites of townships care" should be taken to fix upon places where it would be pleasant to live. The House would be prepared to vote the funds necessary to prepare the mallee lands for settlemen t by the honest, straig h tforward, hard-working people, who had done so much to reclaim the waste wilds, and turn the wildernesses of the colony into fruitful gardens and rich pastures.

Mr. ARMYTAGE stated that in the conditions signed by Mr. Perrin, on the 8th June, 1889, there was a clause which commenced as follows :-

"The concessions, rights, and privileges shown on plan A, and hereinafter described and referred to, or which may from time to time be added hereto, shall be granted to and enjoyed by the company for a term of twenty-one years from the acceptance of these conditions and regulations, and may, on the expiration of such term, be again granted to the company for a further term of twenty-one years."

And at the end of the conditions, signed by Mr. Perrin and approved by the Minister of Lands, there was the following extra­ordinary clause :-

H By mutual consent of the Conservator of Forests and the company, these conditions and regulations may from time to time be modified or added to as experience in their application may show to be required. "

Surely the company had a right to consider that they needed nothing more to justify them in commencing operations.

Lt.-Col. SMITH expressed the hope that the Minister of Lands would take time to consider the case and to consult his col­leagues, who did not appear to have stood by him on this occasion. (Mr. Munro­" They have been out all night, leaving the poor fellow alone.") He had no personal feeling against the honorable gentleman, but all honorable members were agreed that the forest lands of the colony must be preserved. As the Minister of Lands had been a long time away from office, and as during his absence many things might have occurred with which the honorable gentle­man had not been made acquainted, he thought it was unfair on the part of hon­orable members to press the matter against him; and, in order to give the honorable gentleman an opportunity of consulting his colleagues and obtaining the further infor­mation which the committee required, he begged to move that the Chairman report progress.

Mr. DOvV said he would like the com­mittee to pass the votes of the department as far as " State forests."

Mr. DEAKIN asked the honorable member for Ballarat West (Lt.-Col. Smith) to withdraw his motion for a minute to enable him to make a few remarks.

The motion was withdrawn. Mr. DEAKIN observed that absolutely

no progress had been made with the esti­mates that night, and as this question could be discussed on almost any item in the estimates, it would be more eatisfactory if the committee would pass one or two votes before the House rose. Every member who had heard the statement of the Minister of Lands in the early part of the evening must admit that i~ was a very full, clear, and frank exposition of the case as far as he was personally concerned. No statement of all that happened from the inception of the thing could have been more explicit. It had been stated that certain documents of importance were not included in the papers laid before the House, and some honorable members had directed attention to this in a manner which was calculated to lead the public to suppose that the exclusion was the fault of the Minister. As a matter of fact, returns to orders of the House were furnished by the permanent heads of depart­ments, and in ninety-nine cases out of one hundred the Minister never saw the papers; but the head of the department concerned

2182 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Fm'est Conse1'vation.

was under a very serious responsibility if he knowingly concealed allY papers in such a case, and he (Mr. Deakin) could not believe that any public officer would do such a thing. The Minister had not gone through the papers to see if they were all supplied, and if any were missing, it was not his fault but the fault of the officer who furnished them. As to the question concerning the Yea River Company, it might be considered from several points of view. Some members had spoken of this scheme as an excellent one, which deserved the consideration of the House. On the other hand, it had been contended that it was a measure of private enterprise which should be jealously criticised and not encouraged. The Minister seemed to take a view which was midway between these two. He appeared to think that the proposition made to him had sufficient merit to warrant him in carefully investigat­ing it, and as he could not carry out the investigation himself, the work fell upon the head of the department most affected by the proposal. The conditions to which the honorable member for Grant had referred were not even signed by the head of the department, let alone the Minister. (Mr. Armytage-" They are approved by him.") They were only signed by the head of the sub-department. The clause to which the honorable member called attention was one which evidently indicated the kind of con­dition which was in the mind of the officer who signed the regulations, for he considered that in the fut.ure they should be consider­ably varied, if thought desirable, by the Con­servator of Forests, and not by the Minister or head of the department. Negotiations were carried on by a very important sub-depart­ment with the people concerned without any apparent knowledge of the secretary of the department, until he intervened at a par­ticular stage with a statement that the proposed agreement was not one which the Minister could sign or give legal effect to. The papers showed that the negotiations were conducted by the head of the sub­department, who was an enthusiast in his business. Ho interested the Minister in his view of the matter, but no sanction was given except in a provisional manner, be­cause sanction in a matter of this kind could not take effect until it had received first the approval of the Cabinet and then of the House. The sanction of the Cabinet was not obtained, because the Government had not been consulted on the details. (Mr. Hunt-" Would an alteration of the law have been necessary ?") Yes. If the

Mr. Deakin.

Minister had desired to grant the lease without consulting the House, he could not have done it. In addition to that, his colleague had told them that he fully intended to consult the House. The can·· ditions which had been spoken of as commending themselves to the head or a sub-department could not have been adopted without running the gauntlet of the Ministry and of the House. U n­doubtedly the House was entitled to have every paper bearing on the subject laid before it, and the Government believed that the documents laid on the table con­tained everything. If by any chance the Government were under an error in this respect, the missing papers would be pro­duced at the earliest opportunity. His colleague had nothing to gain by conceal­ing anything, and if the officer who sup­plied the papers had kept anythmg back, he would be required to explain why he did so. The mere fact of any suspicion having been cast upon a return to an order of the House was a sufficient reason for the House insisting, before proceeding further, that every particular should be supplied. The Government would see that every inquiry was made next· week, and he now asked the committee to pass a few items of the estimates for the Lands department, leav­ing the particular item in question for a future occasion.

Mr. MUNRO stated that the Goyern­ment had been allowed to pass a Supply Bill that night, and there was no reason why progress should not now be reported.

Mr. DEAKIN said he would not press his req ues t.

Mr. MUNRO observed that the Chief Secretary had spoken of papers being inad­vertently kept back. (Mr. Deakin-" I said if they were kept back.") There was no doubt that papers had been kept back, because he held some of t.he missing ones in his hand in their original form. A delay was necessary to enable all the papers to be produced, and the Minister of Lands ought to be prepared on Tuesday to make a clear and emphatic statement as t.o what he intended to do. (Mr. Dow-" I have said all I have to say to night.") After the Minister had consulted his colleagues and the documents, he ought to be in a position to make a clear and emphatic state­ment as to what was to be done with the promoters of the company. If there was no engagement which was binding on the Government in the matter, the Minister would only have to consider what his policy

Railways Standing [OCTOBER 21.] Committee. 2133

in the future should be in regard tQ such applications to his department. The state­mentof the Minister, that when the question was formerly raised in the House he did not know at the moment whether the lease had been issued or not, had greatly surprised him (Mr. Munro), because the Minister's plea all along was that he had never agreed to a lease at all.

Mr. DOW observed that, in referring to the manner in which this question was sprung upon him, a newspaper paragraph having stated that a lease had issued, and an honorable member having called the attention of the House to that paragraph, he stated that his last letter informed the company that a lease w.ould not be issued ·to them, and nothing was done from Sep­tember 10 to November 19 ; but as he had to sign a hundred documents every morning,he wondered if he had inadvertently authorized the lease, or if something had been done without his knowledge. When he looked the matter up on the following day, how­ever, he found that no lease had been issued, and that no promise bad been given that a lease would be issued. With regard to the proposal to report progress, he could not give the House any further information next week. The promoter3 of the company had informed him that the project was dead, on account of the delay that had occurred, and he' was prepared to do all they now asked him to do.

Mr. MUNRO said he would like to know if it was possible for the Minister's officers to submit to him an important document for his signature without calling his special' attention to it?

Progr~ss was then reported. The House adjourned at seven minutes

to eleven o'clock, until Tuesday, October 21

LEGIS~ATIVE COUNCIL. Tuesday, Octobe1' 21, 1890.

Railways Sta.nding Committee-Prince's Bridg-e Station­Trade Marks Act Amendment Bill-Marriage Aot Amendment Bill-Municipal Overdrafts (Indemnity) Bill-Consolidated Revenue (£1,189,773) Bill-Mel· bourne and Metropolitan Board of Works Bill.

The PRESIDENT took the chair at twenty minutes to five o'clock p.m., and read tbe prayer.

SES. 1890.-7 M

DEOLARATION OF QU ALIFIOATION.

The Hon. W. H. ROBERTS delivered to the Olerk the declaration of qualification required by the Act No. 1075.

RAILWAYS STANDING OOMMITTEE.

The Hon. D. MEL VILLE stated that he had received from Mr. Zeal, who was unavoidably absent, a letter which, with the permission of the House, he would read, as follows :-

"Melbourne, 21st October, 1890. "My dear Melville, - I am unable to be

present at the Council this evening, having to attend on my constituents at Castlemaine. Please, therefore, say to the President and to honorable members, on my behalf, how much I appreciate the compliment paid to me on Wed­nesday last, when, to my great surprise, I was elected by the House one of the members of the Railway Committee. After such a mark of con­fidence I should be most ungrateful if I hesitated for one moment to accept the honorable position I have been nominated to fill. \ViII you inform the Council that I will act on the committee, and do my utmost to prove to honorable mem­bers that their confidence has not been mis­placed. Had I been asked by the Government to serve on the committee I should probably have declined the request, being one of the hardest worked members of the House; but as, I was overlooked-whether by accident or design it is needless to discuss-I feel doubly grateful to my brother members for their generous recog­nition of my services."

The Hon. J. BALFOUR remarked that be was glad to hear the letter just read, and to find that Parliament and the country were to have the benefit of the ser­vices of such an able man as Mr. Zeal on the Railways Standing Oommittee. When he first beard the names of the proposed members of the committee, he stated that he had expected that Mr. Zeal's name would be on the list, but he was informed by bis honorable colleague that Mr. Zeal had not been asked, because, being such a busy man, it was not likely that he would undertake the duties. It was very gratifying to learn, however, that the honorable member had seen his way to accept the appointment.

The Hon. J. H. OONNOR said he begged to give notice that on Tuesday next he would move-

"That, in the opinion of this House, the fol­lowing line of railway ought to be referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Railways for consideration and report :-The surveyed line of railway from Colac to Beech Forest and thence to Apollo Bay."

The Hon. N. FITZGERALD remarked that tbe motion would be contrary to the Act; this House had no power to refer a

2134 Trade Marks Act [COUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

proposed line to the Railways Standing Committee.

The Hon. J. H. CONNOR observed that tllat was not what the Minister of Justice said when the measure was under consideration. (Mr. FitzGerald-" Ask the Minister now.") He did not see any necessity to do so. (Mr. FitzGerald-, " Strike out the word 'ought.''') Very well. (Sir F. T. Sargood-" Oh, no.") He understood, when the Railways Standing Committee Bill was before honorable mem­bers, the Minister of Justice to state that--

The Hon. F. S. DOBSON asked the President if, in giving notice of a motion, any debate whatever was allowed 1

The PRESIDENT.-I do not think this is the time to discuss the motion. The honorable member is entitled to give notice of the motion, and if it is not in order he can amend it himself when it. is brought forward on Tuesday next, or the House can amend it for him or reject it altogether. That will be the proper time to discuss the matter.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT stated that on Tuesday next he would ask the Presi­dent's ruling as to whether the Council had power to deal with this subject.

PRINCE'S BRIDGE STATION.

The Hon. G. S. COPPIN brought up the following report from the select com­mittee appointed to consider and report upon the quest,ion that an open space should be formed from Flinders-street to Prince's-bridge, for the purpose of increas­ing the accommodation at the intersection of Swanston and Flinders streets, and pro- . viding a suitable approach to the Prince's­bridge railway station :-

"That the Chairman of the Victorian Railway Commissioners having submitted to your com­mittee a plan showing that it is proposed to widen the junction of Flinders-street and Swanston-street to 199 feet, and having further intimated that the Victorian Railway Commis­sioners are willing to round off the corner at the intersection of Swanston-street and Flinders­street, your committee are unanimously of opinion that such plan and such suggested alterations would meet the requirements of the public traffic."

The report was ordered to be printed.

TRADE MARKS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

This Bill was recommitted for the con­sideration of a new clause.

The Hon. J. BALFOUR said that a communication had been received from the

Imperial Government, pointing out that while the Trade Marks Act which had been passed by the Victorian Parliament made every proper provision to protect trade marks belonging to persons or firms in Victoria, the same protection was not afforded to the trade marks of persons or firms in other parts of the British do­minions. A new clause, amending section 26 of the Trade Marks Act, had been framed, to afford protection to all trade marks in con­nexion with British manufactures, as in Canada, and he begged to move that it be agreed to.

The clause was agreed to. The Bill was then reported with a further

amendment, and the report was adopted. On the motion of the HOll. J. BAL­

FOUR, the Bill was read a third time and passed.

MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

On the motion of the Hon. J. BAL­FO UR, this Bill was read a third time and passed.

MUNICIP AL OVERDRAFTS (INDEMNITY) BILL.

The debate on the Hon. J. Bell's motion for the second reading of this Bill (ad­journed from October 8) was resumed.

The Hon. J. BELL said he would now give the information which was asked for by Sir Frederick Sargood when this Bill was last under consideration. The number of municipalities whose accounts were over­drawn on September 30, 1889, was 53, and the total amount of their overdrafts was £38,474 98. 1d. In order to comply with the request of the House, telegrams were sent last week to the municipalities throughout the country, and replies had been received from 170 out of the 192 com­municated with. Of that number 44 had overdrafts on September 30 amounting in the aggregate to £25,612, so that there was a reduction, so far as the information was to hand, of £12,861 16s. 9d. (Mr. Service - "No; all the 22 who have not replied are defaulters, you may de­pend upon it.") The Government had not received any information to that effect. So far as the replies had come to hand, there were 44 defaulters this year, as com­pared· with 53 last year. (Mr. J. M. Davies-" Are all the 44 included in the 53, or are there some new ones 1") There were seven new ones, with a total over­draft of £11,313 16s. 1d. (Sir F. T. Sargood -" Get the rest, and have the

Municipal Ovel'c7mjt8 [OCTOBER 21.J (Indemnity) Bill. 2135

,list printed.") It would be unwise and rather invidious to print the list; it was :surely sufficient for the House to know that there was an improvement. (Mr. Service _I' What objection can there be to print­ing the list; all their balance-sheets will ,be published ?") If the House really desired it, he would have the list printed; but he would require instructions from the House before he would make pnblic the ,names of the municipalities whose accounts were overdrawn. (Mr. Fraser - " Read the separate amounts without the names.") He would mention the sums. There was ,one municipality within a few miles of Mel­bourne whose overdraft was increased from £1.324 4s. 9d. in 1889 to £1,737 6s. Id. in '1890. In another case the overdraft had been £285 3s. 5d., and the municipality

·in question was quite clear this year. In two other similar cases the overdrafts had been £295 17s. Id., and £55. Instances also occurred in which the amounts were as follows :-£577 9s. 7d. in 1889 ; £3411s. 5d. in 1890 ; £339 5s. 6d. in 1889; and £1,524 lOs. 8d. in 1890. In one instance there was a new overdraft this year of £10 4s. lId. In country municipalities the following sums occurred :-£248 6s. 4d. in 1889, and £121 18s. 4d. in 1890; £50 2s. 3d. in 1889, and nothing in 1890; £262 13s. 7d. in 1890, and nothing last year; £4,206 13s. 3d. in 1889 (a metro­politan municipality), and £3,763 17s. lId. in 1890. Overdrafts of £2.404 and £1,650 had been cleared off, and in another instance an overdraft of £1,390 14s. lId. had been reduced to £676 12s. 2d. The circum­stance of the House having shown some hesitancy in regard to passing this Bill might make the municipalities more careful in the future. He thought that honorable members should now pass the measure, on the understanding that if a similar Bill were submitted again it would be very narrowly scrutinized, while the liabilities it dealt with would be scheduled.

The Hon. J. M. PRATT stated that his ()bject in moving the adjournment of the debate when the Bill was last before the House was to secure the supply of fuller information in regard to the financial posi­tions of the municipalities. The Minister of Defence had now, in a measure, supplied that information, and he understood it to ;showa substantial reduction in the aggregate ,amount of the overdrafts. He nevertheless objected to a Bill of the kind being pre­sented annually. It seemed to suggest t.he -', swallows homeward flying," because it was

7M2

always presented about the time that the first notification was received of the Appropria­tion Bill and the Ministerial trip to the Heads. The regular recurrence of a measure of the kind was a strong proof of the neces­sity for so amending the law as to render the introduction of another such measure un­necessary. The subject was one which might be dealt with in the Local Government Act Amendment Bill now before Parlia­ment. Under section 342 of the prin­cipal Act municipalities could borrow from banks an amount equal to one-half the revenue of the previous year, the over­draft to be liquidated before the conclu­sion of each financial year. According to this arrangement the municipalities were allowed to borrow for six months, and in the next half-year they had to set their wits to work to provide the means of repaying the money. It would be advisable to do away with the provision in regard to liquidating the overdraft before the conclu­sion of each financial year. It was also objectionable that absent councillors should be made liable for the acts of those who were present at a meeting. The provision rendering councillors liable to a fine of £200 as well as for the amount of the overdraft if the overdraft was not liquidated by a certain date he regarded as a penal one. There was no reason why banks should not be allowed to deal with municipal overdrafts as with other overdrafts. If that plan were followed, tIle municipalities would not be in need of an annual Act of indemnity. It sometimes happened that a bridge was washed away in a shire at a time when there were no funds available to construct a new one, and if a traveller sustained injury in consequence of the bridge not being in a proper state of repair, the local body was liable to have damages recovered against it, while it might bappen that the councillors could not build a new bridge or repair the old one without making themselves per­sonally liable. He did not say that the House should legalize an illegality, but he maintained that something ought to be done to grant relief to the councils in another way. He would support the Bill, but he thought that a circular ought to be sent to the councils pointing out the unwillingness of the House to pass these indemnity Bills.

The Hon. J. SERVICE said the Bill was not submitted at the present time because the session was drawing to a close, but because it was necessary to bring it in as soon as possible after the 1st of Septem­ber, when new members became responsible

213.6 Consolidated Revenue [COUNCIL.] (£1,189,773) Bill.

for the overdrafts. It was to be regretted that full information had not been supplied to the House in regard to the indebtedness o-f the councils, and he would suggest that further telegrams be sent to the defaulting bodies, the debate to be adjourned until the desired information had been received. That was the proper and self-respecting manner in which Parliament should deal with a matter of the kind. He presumed t.hatthe Bill contained the usual retrospective clause, and theadoption of such a course would not place the councils under any duress. A remark which had been made about new councils requiring to be tenderly dealt with did not apply, because some of the oldest municipalities in the colony had overdrafts. With regard to the clause which had been objected to as penal, he would remind Mr. Pratt that councillors sometimes deliberately incurred liabilites lmowing that it was their successors who would have to liquidate them. That was one reason why the clause in question was introduced, and why it was supported by one of the most distinguished statesmen Victoria had ever possessed, and who:> was not now in Australia. If the law was not regarded as it now stood, it ought to be altered; but it would be impossible to. so alter a law as to secure that it should not be disregarded if the people affected by it chose to disregard it. The debate might now be adjourned, and if the Minister of Defence insisted upon the required informa­tion being supplied, the Honse would pass. the Bill as soon as it had been furnished.

The Hon. J. BELL remarked that pro­bably some of the councils had not replied to his communication because they were not within reach of a telegragh office. He would not oppose the adjournment of the debate.

On the motion of the Hon. J. SERVIOE, the debate was adjourned until Tuesday, 28th October.

OONSOLIDATED REVENUE (£1,189,773) BILL.

This Bill was received from the Legis­lative Assembly, and read a first time.

The Hon. H. OUTHBERT moved the second reading of the Bill.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was then read a second time and

committed. On the preamble, The Hon. D. MEL VILLE directed

attention to the item "Powder magazines

and dynamite hulk, £685." . He under­stood that the qnantity of powder stored in the Footscray magazine was dangerously large, and he thought the Government ought to give some assurance that it would be reduced.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT said the­subject was now under the consideration of the Cabinet. There were at present 600-tons of powder in the Footscray magazine, but the Minister of Defence was making arrangements by which half of it would be distributed among different magazines in other parts of the colony.

The OHAIRMAN.-The clauses of the· Bill have already been agreed to, and it is not in order to discuss these matters on the preamble.

The Hon. O. J. HAM moved that pro­gress be reported. He said he was in­formed on good authority that in the event of an explosion occurring at Footscray the city of Melbourne would be levelled. Not m·ore than 100 or 150 tons of gunpowder ought to be allowed to be stored in one magazine. In Sydney the powder hulk was a great distance from the city.

The Hon. J. BELL stated that some time since the Oabinet had the question of the amount of powder in the magazine at Footscray under its consideration. After­wards a deputation from Footscray waited upon the Premier in reference to the sub­ject, and the Minister of Oustoms, the Inspector of Explosives (Mr. Hake), and himself went down to Footscray and examined the magazine. Mr. Hake reported that the amount of powder stored there was too large, and recommended that some of it be placed on board a hulk. Mr. Duthie, an expert in shipping matters, who had been .consulted, did not, however, approve of this, and the Minister of Oustoms undertook to communicate with Mr. Hake with a view to some better arrangement being entered into. In the meantime, no more powder would be placed in the Footscray magazine, and the quantity stored there was being reduced as quickly as possible. Some of it would be sent to magazines up country, and it was probable that a magazine would be established at Langwarrin.

The Hon. J. SERVIOE remarked that a very great mistake was made in building this immense magazine so near the city. It would be of no use to reduce the quantity of powder at present there, unless a portion of the building were pulled down or devoted to some other purpose. Some years ago it

Consolidated Revenue [OCTOBER 21.J (£1,182,773) Bill. 2137

was proposed to reduce tIle quantity of powder in store at Footscray, and he was perfectly astounded when he learned that 600 tons had gradually accumulated there. He strongly recommended the Go­vernment to reduce the building to small dimensions. It would be objectionable to -establish a magazine at Langwarrin, because that would be placing ammunition in a position in which it might be captured by an invading enemy.

The Hon. D. MEL VILLE asked if the sum of £19,670 for hospitals for the insane included expenditure upon new cottage hos­pitals, or if it was all for the maintenance ()f the older establishments?

The' Hon. H. CUTHBERT said the Treasurer had explained in another place that the items did not include'any new vote. The honorable member would have an opportunity of checking the votes when the Appropriation Bill was submitted.

The Hon. D. ME L VIL LE said he wished to bring under the notice of the Government, in connexion with the proposed expenditure of £6,126 upon" Extirpation or rabbits and wild animals," the complaints made by many agriculturists, particularly in the Kilmore and adjacent districts, to the effect that the provisions of the Rabbit Act with respect to the destruction of log fences were frequently enforced in an arbitrary, partial, and oppres­sive way.

The Hon. J. BELL remarked that there were no doubt some cases of hardship, but the complaints made on the subject were by no means general. On the other hand it was absolutely essential that the law should be carried out.

Sir F. T. SARGOOD stated that his attention had been directed to the fact that, in enforcing the provisions of the Rabbit Act, farmers were frequently subject.ed to unnecessary legal expenses. It was to be hoped that the Minister of Justice would try to provide some remedy in this direction.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT said he would make a note of the point.

The Hon. D. MELVILLE remarked that although Mr. Fraser seemed to have nothing to say with regard to the pro!>osed expenditure of £16,550 for "Defence," it would be well if the committee were in­formed as to the result of the investigation recently made with respect to the founda­tIOns of the intended Pope's Eye fort.

The Hon. J. BELL stated that the sum referred to involved no pl'Ovision with respect to the Pope's Eye fort.

The motion for reporting progress was put and negatived.

The preamble was then adopted, and the Bill was reported without amendment.

On the motion of the Hon. H. CUTH­BERT, the Bill was read a third time and passed.

MELBOURNE AND METROPOLITAN BOARD OF

WORKS BILL.

The House went into committee for the further consideration of this Bill.

Discussion (adjourned from Wednesday, October 15) was resumed on clause 50, providing, inte1' alia, as follows:-

"The Governor in Council may if he shall think fit, whenever requested by any counCilor any twenty ratepayers in any municipal district or districts of the metropolis, and upon the deposit of such sum of money not .exceeding £100 as security for costs and expenses as the Minister may require, by notice in the Govern­ment Gazette appoint for the hoard auditors, who shall be called ' special auditors.'"

The Hon. J. M. PRATT moved the omission of the words" or any twenty rate­payers in any municipal district or districts" (lines 2-4). He said that this amendment was suggested by Mr. Service when the clause was last under consideration, and he entirely coincided with the honorable mem­ber's view that the right to call for a special audit should rest solely with the various councils represented on the board. To adopt any other plan would he to enter upon a very dangerous system, the outcome of which could hardly be foreseen. If any body of ratepayers felt that they had any good ground forcomplaintagainst the board, they would have, under the clause as amended in the way now proposed, a ready means of obtaining a remedy through the particular coul1€il or councils representing them. The fact that the clause as it stood provided for the deposit as security for the costs and expenses attendant upon a special audit of only a sum "no·t ex:ceeding" £100 was also a point requiring considera­tion. His own idea was that the words "not less than" should be substituted for "not exceeding."

The Hem. H. CUTHBERT expressed the opinion that if the clause were amended as proposed its usefulness would be greatly impaired. If any of the councils represented, on the board was to be able to call for a special audit, why should not a similar power rest with the ratepayers represented by that council? It was always very difficult to set a corporation in motion with respect

2138'; Melb.oufne and Jfetropolitan [COUNCIL.]

to matters of this sort, and if any body of ratepayers felt so seriously dissatisfied that they were prepared to deposit £100 to cover the expense of the inquiry they wished to see made, why should any very great obstacle be placed in their path? Of course, if any particular body of ratepayers were successful in obtaining an audit, the council representing them would also take part in the affair. A similar power to that contained in the clause was conferred under the Local Government Act,and in proposing to continue it under the Bill the Govern­ment felt that they were on safe lines.

The Hon. J. SERVICE remarked that the provision which Mr. Pratt proposed to omit seemed a rather absurd one. There could be no doubt that any dissatisfied rate­payer would always be able to get at least twenty others to join him in demanding a special audit, or that it would frequently be not very difficult to induce the Government of the day to take a lenient view as to the amount of the sum to bc deposited. There­fore, if the clause was passed as it stood, it would often happen that a single can­tankerous ratepayer who had a few pounds to spare would be able to subject the board to a vast amount of expense and trouble. The provision on the same subject which was contained in the Local Government Act was a very proper one, but it was entirely out of place in the Bill. It was scarcely to be supposed that any considerable body of· ratepayers could have appreciable grounds of complaint against the board without the local council representing them being ready to take up their case.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT pointed out that nnder the clause the ratepayers de­manding a special audit would have to make out a good case to begin with, because the Governor in Council would be able to exer­cise discretion in the matter of granting their request.

The Hon. J. SERVICE observed tllat carrying the amendment would save the Governor in Council from being frequently placed in a very false position.

The Hon. D. MELVILLE said he was unable to see that carrying the clause as it stood could possibly result in any harm. On the other hand, it would provide a remedy in cases where perhaps some 20,000 ratepayers had only one representative on the board, and he happened to be disinclined to take up the grievance of only a portion of them. The great security in the matter would be, not that twenty ratepayers would have to unite in demanding a special audit,

but that a sum to cover the expense of the­audit would have to be deposited before­hand. (Mr. Pratt-" No thorough audit would cost less than £100.") If the· accounts of the board lVere at all properly kept, a special audit would often not occupy more than half R day.

The Hon. T. DOWLING remarked that it was surprising to find that Mr. Melville,. who was so thoroughly acquainted with the-

. working of the local government system of the country, did not appreciate the great danger that would arise from carrying the clause in its present form.

The Hon. J. S. BUTTERS contended that if any power was to be given to the ratepayers to call for a special audit, they should only be able to exercise it through the council or' councils representing them. Of course, if the councilor councils con­cerned recognised that the request was a just one, the £100 required would be at once advanced out of the municipal funds. It would never do to place the power in question in the hands of any twenty rate­payers, because it would then become com­paratively easy for a single individual, who had a grudge to satisfy, and did not mind advancing £100 for the purpose, to put the board to an enormous expense. As every one experienced in municipal affairs well knew, there were audits and audits, and the dangers of cheap auditing were well illustrated by the history of the Premier Permanent Building Society. If the clause was carried as it stood, it would frequently

. happen that £100, or less, would be paid to cover the expense of a special audit which might cost fully £500.

The HOll. J. M. DAVIES said he would support the amendment, because it would always be difficult to know how much a special audit would cost. It might be less than £100 or more than £500.

The Hon. A. 'VYNNE expressed the opinion that the clause as it stood was very properly framed, although it might perhaps' be well to increase the maximum of the de­posit to be required. Honorable members' should recollect the case of the Tammany ring in New York, and how possible it would' be, unless the utmost precautions were taken, . to form a similar ring in connexion with the proposed board without the ratepayers being able to interfere.

The Hon. C. J. HAM pointed out that· clause 48 provided for the accounts of the' board being audited by the Commissioners· of Audit, so that there need be no fear of, anything like a Tammany ring.

Melb~U1'ne and Met1'opolitan [OCTOBER 21.J Board of Wod.'s Bill. 2139

·The Hon. J. SERVICE observed that the Tammany ring of New York was broken up through the exertions of a single in­dividual, and not by means of. any special audit. Mr. Wynne seemed to overlook the fact that what the amendment had in view was not that there should be no power to demand a special audit, but that it should be demandable only in the right way.

The committee divided on the question that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the clause-

Ayes •.• 9 Noes ... 12

Majority for the amendment S

Mr. Balfour, " Brunton, " Buchanan, " Connor, " Cuthbert,

Sir B. Benjamin, Mr. Butters, " Coppin, " J. M. Davies, " Dowling, " C. J. Ham, " D. Ham,

AYES.

Mr. Gore, " Melville, " Wynne.

Telkr. Mr. Bell.

NOES.

Mr. Morey, Sir F. T. Sargood, Mr. Service, " J. A. Wallace.

Teller. . Mr. Pratt.

The Hon. J. M. PRATT proposed the omission of the words" such sum of money not exceeding" (line 5). The effect of the amendment would be to fix the amount of the deposit at £100. 'The Hon. H. CUTHBERT said he

would accept the amendment; but he miglIt state that he intended to ask for the recom­mittal of the clause, with the view of altering it, so that any 50 ratepayers, by depositing a sum not exceeding £200, could apply for a special audit.

The amendment was agreed to, as was also a consequential amendment.

On clause 53, providing that every order by the Governor in Council of confirmation of a certificate of the special auditors that money had been misapplied by the board should be "conclusive evidence" in all c9urts of the fact of the misapplication of the moneys therein mentioned, and of the liability of the member or members of the

" bpard named in ~uch order, and also that-

"The sum: or s~lins of money mentioned in' any such order of confirmation may be re­covered in any court of competent jurisdiction,

, tpgether with full costs of suit, from anyone or more of the members mentioned in such order, at the suit of any of the ratepayers of any municipality in the metropolis; and such sum or. ,sums so recovered s4all be paid into the

Metropolitan General Fund or any other fund or account to which the same may belong."

Sir F. T. SARGOOD expressed the opinion that it was very undesirable to use the words "conclusive evidence." Surely it could not be intended that there should no appeal. Auditors, like other persons, were liable to mistake, and yet their report was to be "conclusive evidence," which could not be controverted.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT observed that, by the preceding clause, the members of the board had three months in which to show to the Governor in Council that the report of the special auditors was wrong. If they did not avail themselves of that pro­vision and the Governor in Council published an order in the Government Gazette confirm­ing the certificate of the auditors, he thought it was only right that that certificate should then be accepted in courts of justice as con-' elusive evidence. Why should the court be' troubled to go behind the certificate, when the board had made no attempt to show that the auditors were wrong? The special auditors who would be appointed would be men of such a stamp that they could be relied upo~ to perform their duties efficien tl y .

The Bon. C. J. HAM said that some of the Government auditors of municipal ac­counts were not very efficient, and if these auditors were not more efficient they might make a serious mistake.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES stated that he objected to the words" conclusive evidence." The effect of them would be that, the audi­tors having certified that certain members of the board had, through culpable negligence, concurred in or connived at the misapplica­tion of money, and the Governor in Council having by an order in the Govemment Gazette confirmed that certificate, those members of the board could be sued for the money, and they would be shut out from,

, submitting any evidence to show that they had not been negligent and had not connived at the misapplication. The certificate of the auditors would be "conclusive evidence." The clause would deprive a defendant of his proper right to have his liaLility tested by a Judge and jury. It was unheard-of legisla­tion to make a man liable to refund money on the certificate of auditors without per-,

, mitting him to make any defence. It was a most dangerous provision, and one which the committee s40uld not pass. He would move the s.ubstitution of the words" p1'ima facie evidence." There was no provision for evidence being'taken by the Governor in

2140 Melbow'ne and },letropoUtan [COUNCIL.] Boa1'd of Worles Bill.

Council, who would probably confirm or dis­allow the certificate on the evidence offered by the auditors alone.

The Hon. A. WYNNE said he thought the words" p1'imd facie evidence" were the proper ones to use in such a case. The use ot these words would render the certificate of the auditors virtually conclusive unless it was shown to be wrong, while at the same time they would not shut out the party accused from showing that the auditors had made a mistake.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT remarked that a precisely similar provision with respect to special audits of municipal accounts had been in existence in the Local Government Act since 1874, and he had never heard any objection to the manner in which it worked. (Mr. W ynne-" It has never been tested; there has never been a case under it.") It would be a satisfac­tion to the English creditors to know that there were very strict provisions as to audit. When it was a matter of accounts, surely the evidence of special auditors, who had given days and perhaps weeks to their work, ought to be accepted as conclusive when their certificate, after inquiry; had been accepted by the Governor in Council. The certificate of the special auditors had to be confirmed by the Governor in Council before it was made conclusive evidence, and before this confirmation was given the parties aggrieved would have an opportunity of making their defence, and showing why the certificate should not be confirmed.

The Hon. J. SERVIOE said he ap­proved of the amendment. The argument of the Minister of Justice that a similar provision had been in operation for sixteen years in the Local Government Act was far from conclusive; in fact, it was no argument at all. A thousand reasons might be urged why that fact should not be accepted as a sufficient ground for making the proposal contained in this clause, which was a mon­strous proposal. If a man was to be charged with a criminal act, he ought to have the opportunity of being tried before a jury of his peers. The Governor in Council was not a proper court of appeal for such cases. It would be going quite far enough to pro­vide that the certificate of the special auditors should be accepted as p1'ima facie evidence, and it would be going altogether too far to make such a cp.rtificate conclusive evidence of the guilt of an accused person.

The amendment was agreed to. ' The Hon. J. M. DAVIES asked the

Minister of Justice whether it would not be

advisable to substitute "may be sued for " in place of "may be recovered," now that' the certificate was to be only p1'ima facie and not conclusi ve evidence? As the clause stood, it might mean that the total sum or sums of money mentioned in the certificate might be recovered in full, although the defendant was able to prove that he had misapplied only a portion thereof. Money' should only be recoverable to the extent to which misapplication of funds was proved.

The Hon. H. CU.THBERT expressed the opinion th~t the words "may be re­covered " merely provided that an action might be commenced and prosecuted-that the money in question might be sued for and recovered. It was not necessary to insert the words "may be sued for."

The Hon. J. SERVICE remarked that if there was any doubt with regard to the matter there could be no objection to set. it at rest by the insertion of the words" may be sued for."

The Hon. A. WYNNE observed that the . clause referred specially to the misappli­cation of' money. The second part of the clause aught to be made consistent with the first part, by the substitution of the words "money '1:10 misapplied" for the words "money mentioned in any such order' of confirmation." If a person was charged with having misapplied £1,000, and he could prove that he had misapplied only £750, the clause should provide for the recovery of the amount misapplied, and not of the larger amount mentioned in the order of confirmation. The amendment he now suggested would not affect the strength of the provision to recover moneys actually misapplied.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT stated that the certificate c(')uld only refer to money that had been misapplied, and as it was not to be accp.pted as conclusive but only as pn'mo, facie evidence, it would be quite open to the defendant to prove to the court that a certificate which rendered him liable in the sum of £1,000 was incorrect, and that his liability should be reduced to £750. The court would have sufficient power to deal with questions of that kind, and to rectify any errors in the certificate which the de­fendant was able to prove, and he did not think it'would be possible for any injustice to be done under the clause as it stood.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES said that the' clause seemed to provide that a sum which' could not be proved to be owing might be recovered. He doubted whether any statute' provided that money might be recovered

MelboU1'ne and Met1'opolitan [OCTOBER 21.J Boa1,d of W01,lcs Bill. 2141'

when it had not been first made absolutely due. While it would be right to provide that all moneys misapplied might be recovered, it would be unjust to provide that the sum mentioned in the certificate, which might be greater than the amount misapplied, should be recoverable. It would be well to adopt the amendment suggested by Mr. Wynne. (Mr. Outhbert-" How would you ascertain what was misapplierl ?") The plaintiff would put in the certificate as p1'ima facie evidence, and it would be for the defendant to dis­prove its accuracy if he could. (Mr.Outh­bert-" That could be done under this clause.") He doubted it.

The Hon. S. FRASER expressed the opinion that it was inadvisable to open the door so wide as to admit of too much litiga­tion, because it would then be very difficult to prove the misapplication of the money, and defaulters would be able to escape altogether. Many defaulters had escaped owing to the fact that it was becoming more and more difficult to prove anything in a court of law. One auditor would say the amount mi sapplied was so much, and another auditor would say it was nothing of the kind. The fact that this provision had worked well in the Local Government Act for sixteen years was a strong argument in its favour. The verv strictness of the law probably deterred those who would otherwise misappropriate moneys in their charge, and if the law was not so stringent misappropria­tions would no doubt be more frequent.

. The Hon. J. SERVIOE asked the Min­ister of Justice if a similar provision of the law had been in operation in England under similar circumstances 1 Perhaps there would be some precedents in the English statutes which would materially assist the committee in dealing with this matter. At present he felt that, without some such limitation as Mr. Wynne had suggested, the provision contained in this clause would do injustice, and to a very great extent diminish the value -of the amendment already made in the clause.

The Hon. H. OUTHBER T stated that it would necessitate some little research to get the information desired by Mr. Service, .but if he were allowed a little time he would be able to inform the honorable member whether the provision in the Local Govern­ment Act18 74 was founded on English legis­lation or not.. If the amendment now sug­gested was made, the certificate granted by the special auditors would have little or no effect. (Mr. Fraser-Thatis the danger.") A Judge and a jury would be obliged to go into accounts which the special auditors

had already examined, and it would be almost impossible to get a conviction. (Sir F. T. Sargood-" Special assessors might be employed.") Surely the special auditors would be the best assessors. If it ever happened that a special audit was called for, that special audit should be made full and complete. The certificate of the special auditors would show the amount of the money misapplied; it would be for the defendant to prove that he had not misap­plied so much, but only a lesser sum, and the verdict would be for the amount actually proved to have been so misapplied.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES observed that a~ the clause originally stood, it provided that: when the certificate of the special auditor had' been confirmed by the Governor in Council it was to be accepted as conclusive evidence of the misapplication of the money men­tioned therein, but the committee had decided against that, and they ought to take care to carry out their determination not to allow a new tribunal, namely, the special auditors' and the Governor in Oouncil, to be substi­tuted for a court and jury. vVhy should· the defendant be made liable for more than the amount he had actually misapplied? The amendment could not let in anyevi­dence, any defence, or any litigation that the committee did not intend to let in. (Mr. Outhbert-" What will be the use of the certificate 1") It would be accepted as . p1'imc1 facie evidence of the misapplication of funds, and the onus would be thrown on the defendant of proving that the certificate was untrue.

The Hon. J. SERVIOE remarked that the difficulty feared by the Minister implied a complication of circumstances which would probably be quite as puzzling to the Governor in Oouncil as to a court of law, and might require days if not weeks of con­sideration, as things were considered in the Oabinet before being submitted to the Governor in Oouncil. It would be highly inadvisable to impose such an enormous labour and responsibility on the Execu­tive. If the certificate was impeached by the person accused, Ministers would have to go into the case almost afresh, as if they themselves were a new set of special audi. tors, and there was the danger of political influence being brought to bear to save a man from the consequences of his own act. Honorable members knew that in this colony political influence had been brought to bear in cases of capital punishment. (Mr. Outhbert-" In years gone by.") Of course, such a. thing would not be don~ by

2142 Melbott1'ne and Metmpolitan [COUNCIL.] Boa1'd oj Works Bill.

the present Government; but he (Mr. Service) would like to know whether this was a new departure, or whether it had been the law and the practice in England, because the answer to that question would materially affect his opinion. U uder all the circumstances he thought it would be better to postpone the c1anse.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT said he had no objection to the postponement of the clause.

The clam;e was postponed. Discussion took place on clause 60, which

was as follows :-" That portion of the public debt of the colony

which was incurred for purposes in connexion with the Yan Yean water supply and is at pre­sent outstanding (viz., £2,139,933 14s.), together with the interest payable thereon al:! set forth in the 4th schedule to this Act, shall also be and be deemed to be a liability of the board, and the board shall be charged with the payment of principal and interest as expressed in the said schedule. In respect of such outstanding prin­cipal the board shall from time to time loUge with the London and Westminster Bank, in London, the amounts required to liquidate the same at least one month prior to the due date mentioned in the said schedule. In respect of the interest the board shall from time to time lodge with the Treasurer of Victoria, in the Treasury, at Melbourne, the amounts required to pay the interest due in London at least two months before the same shall become due in London, and the amounts required to pay the interest payable in Melbourne at least three days before the same shall become due in Melbourne."

Sir F. T. SARGOOD stated that as the money expended in connexion with the Yan Yean water supply was borl'Owed in the English market by the Government, the amount now outstanding, together with interest thereon, was a liability upon the Go­vernment, but this clause provided that tlle board should be made responsible for the payment of both principal and interest.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES said that the clause would make the board liable for the payment of principal and interest, but it would not relieve the Government of their" liability to the English capitalists who had lent the money.

The Hon. J. SERVICE expressed, the opinion that the board should not be allowed to communicate with the London, and Westminster Bank, but that the sam~ provision should be made for repayments on account of principal as for the payment of, interest,namely, the board should be required to lodge the money with the 'Jreasurer of the colony, in the Treasury at Melbourne, instead of with the London and West­minster Bank in London, leaving the Go­v,ernment to send the money to Lon,don.

That would be a common-sense arrange­ment. (Mr. Bell-" Then the clause would require to provide that the money must be lodged with the Treasurer two months prior to the due date? ") Certainly. He begged to move the substitution of "Treasurer of Victoria, in the Treasury at Melbourne," for the words " London and Westminster Bank in London." He would also move the sub­stitution of "two months" for" one month." As to the length of time for which thp. draft should be drawn, he would put himself to some extent in the hands of the Govern­ment. Two or three years ago the banks adopted a stringent contract. The Govern­ment used to buy sixty day drafts in time for them to reach London a. week or a fortnight before they were due, and they were then available for discount; a custom which was useful when the Government was behindhand with the payment of interest. But two or three years ago the banks took exception to this, and insisted on the per­formance of the contract as it stood, which bound the Government to lodge a cheque in the bank for the amount of the money coming due in sufficient timeto allow of the bill being transmitted to London, and of its maturing before the money was paid. That would

"mean sixty days more, during which the interest was running on.

The Hon.J. M.DAVIESsaidhe thought the amendment was right in principle. He imagined that the reason the money was made payable in London was because the board was to borrow there, and it was con­sidered desirable to save the delay and ex­pense of exchange.

The Hon C. J. HAM thougllt that some words ought to be inserted in the clause to enable the board to take advantage of the money market at favorable seasons, with­out being compelled to pay sums to the Government at the times stipulated in the 4th sched ule. '

Sir F. T., SARGOOD observed that he presumed the object of the Government would be to place the board in such a posi­tion- that the Government would neither

'lose nor make money by the transaction. He"believed tbe Government were bound to pay,the exchange to the banks, ev.en though they had money in England at the very time the debentures were ,due. '

The Hon. J. SERVICE said he did not think that the latter surmise of SIr Frederick Sargood was correct. As to the remark of Mr .• J. M. Davies, if the board had any in ... tention of adopting that course, the 4th schedule was entirely mis,leading, because it,~

Melbourne and Met1'opolitan [OCTOBER 21.] Board oj Works Bill. 2143

provided that payments should be made, not in one lump sum, but in eleven different sums. The sums were spread over a num­ber of years, and the board would never go to London to raise a loan for one of these small sums only. There ought to be a special clause to meet the case, because the 4th schedule provided for "the amount of principal to be redeemed and due dates of payment." But even if the board desired to borrow these small sums, the clause ought to read "the board shall lodge to the credit of the Treasurer of Victoria." The money ought to he paid by the board to the Treasurer, and the Treasurer ought to pay the debentures. Perhaps it would be best to postpone the clause for further con­sideration.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT remarked that he would agree to the postponement of the dause, but he would first like to have all the proposed amendments submitted to him, in order that he might understand their effect.

The Hon. J. H. OONNOR stated that he intended to move an addition to the clause, to the effect that £200,000 should be allocated to the Geelong water supply, as provided in the Acts passed in 1855. When the Yan Yean water supply was first authorized, the sum of £200,000 was set apart for Geelong; but the whole of the money was expended on the Yan Yean scheme, so that the money was misappro­priated, and the Geelong works were not commenced until fifteen or sixteen years afterwards, while the intention of Parlia­ment was that Geelong should be supplied with water at the same time as Melbourne. He would ask the Ministel'of Justice to bring this matter before the Oabinet, with the view of having justicedonetothetownof Geelong.

The Hon. J. SERVIOE remarked that although Mr. Oonnor complained that Geelong did not get the sum of £200,000 originally voted by Parliament, that town had, as a matter of fact, received double that amount for water supply. The original vote was for Melbourne water and s6werage works and for Geelong waterworks. If Geelong had now a fair claim to the money, ' the city corporation had an equally fair claim to payment of the cost of the sewerage scheme it had been considering for the past twenty-five years.

. The Hon. J. H. OONNOR said Mr Service forgot that the Geelong scheme was not commenced until fifteen years after the money was voted. When the ]lOnorable member was at the head of a Government·

he promised the completion of the Geelong scheme, and he ought now to see that justice was done in the matter.

The Hon. J. M. PRATT suggested that Mr. Oonnor should move for a select com­mittee to inquire into the claims of Geelong, the committee to sit when Parliament was not in session.

The clause was postponed. Olauses 61 to 67 (inclusive) were also

postponed. On clause 77, providing, inter alia, that

the board shall have powerto construct venti­lating shafts, pipes, or tubes, and to carry them up the exterior wall of any buildings, whether public or private, provided that the mouth' of every such shaft, pipe, or tube shall be at least 6 feet higher than any window or door situate within a distance of 30 feet therefrom; and also to make use of the chimney of any public building or of any factory, or of any tramway building, as a ventilating shaft or tube,

The Hon. J. SERVIOE remarked that when it was once proposed to carry a venti­lating shaft up the wall of his own house, to the top of the chimney, his architect cautioned him particularly against allowing any such thing to be done, because such an arrangement might cause foul gases to go down the chimney.

Sir F. T. SARGOOD said he had had a similiar experience in his present house. A ventilating flue was carried up by the chimney­shaft, and it was found that at night time, when the fire was out and the air was cooled in the shaft, there was a down draught which carried the fumes into the kitchen, so that the flue had to be removed far away from the shaft. Sanitary authorities were par­ticular in directing attention to the danger of having ventilating flues near chimney-shafts.

The Hon. H. OUTHBERTobserved that he would make a note of the point.

On clause 79, empowering the board to cause the sewage and refuse from the sewers under its control "to be discharged 'upon such land as it may acquire for that purpose,"

Sir F. T. SARGOOD remarked that if the sewage or refuse so dealt with was pro­perly purified no harm would be done by depositing it on land, but he thought the clause required a little guarding.

The Hon. H. OUTHBERT said he 'would make a note of the point • . The committee having advanced as far as .clause 95,

Progress was reported. The House adjourned at 10 o'clock.

2144 Order of Business. [ASSEMBLY.] Ordel' of Business.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. T'l.tesday, Octobm' 21, 1890.

The Speaker-Order of Business-Railway Department: Carriage of Coal-Plural Voting-Coal-Conduct of Business: Drafting Questions and Notices of Motion­Goulburn River-Yarra River-Personal Explana­tion: Mr. Groom-Public Finances-Shipping Strike -Local Government Act Amendment Bill-Marriage Act Amendment Bill-Personal Explanations: Mr. G. D. Carter: Mr. Derham.

The SPEAKER took the chair at half-past four o'clock p.m.

THE SPEAKER.

The SPEAKER.-I desire to express my acknowledgments to honorable members for relieving me during last week of my duties in connexion with the service of tho House. I have to thank the Chairman of Committees for having discharged, during my absence, the duties c0nnected with the chair.

ORDER OF BUSINESS.

Sir B. O'LOGHLEN begged to move the ndjournment of the House, the subject being-

"That this House will not proceed with any other business until it has had an opportunity of discussing and resolving on the last order of the day on the business paper of this day.,J

The order of the day in question was as follows:-

"Unconditional Conference on Labour Dis­pute-Resumption of debate on the question -That this House deeply regrets that the Employers' Union does not meet the trades unions in an unconditional conference; and on the previous question-That that question be now put."

The SPEAKER.-I should he glad if the honorable member for Port Fairy would mention some authority for taking a course <)f this kind. The honorable member is aware that it is improper to discuss an order of the day on a motion for the ndjournment <)f the House. At present I am inclined to think the honorable member's motion cannot be proceeded with.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN said he had no doubt that the rule of the House was as stated by the Speaker, but he did not think it applied on the present occasion, because the motion he had in view was one for the adjournment of the House, and it would not have anything to do with the order of the day referred to. The question for dis­cussion would of course be the subject matter of the order of the day, but the

actual motion proposed would not touch the order of the day at all. In any case the discussion could very easily be put an end to by the Government consenting to a vote of the House being taken on the matter at issue. That was all that -was wanted.

The SPEAKER.-It is very clear to my mind that the adjournment of the House cannot be moved in order to allow an honor­able member to discuss the subject matter of an order of the day. The point then arises whether it would be in order to move the adjournment of the House in order to discuss the time when an order of the day should be taken into consideration. I am inclined to think that it would not, and unless the honorable member can show me a satis­factory precedent upon the point I shall be obliged to rule that he cannot dQ it.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN remarked that the llew standing order with respect to moving the adjournment of the House was no doubt very stringent.

The SPEAKER.-The old practice was the same. In fact, under the old practice, the honorable member would have been in even a worse position, as the new rules, as far" as they go, do not increase but limit the power cjf an honorable member in moving the adjournment. Under the old practice no honorable member could discuss nn order of the day on a motion for the adjournment of the House. The new rule simply limits the former power, and requires that the subject to be discussed on a motion for the adjournment of the House shall be. one of urgency.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN observed that the subject he had in view was one of very. great urgency. He would again call the Speaker's attention to the fact that what it was now sought to bring forward was rather the order of business than any particular order of the day. Moreover, there was no desire that the matter should be even discussed. All that was wanted was that a vote should be taken.

The SPEAKER.-I must rule against the honorable member, but I will see if I cannot allow him to accomplish what he desires. I understand the honorable mem­ber to desire that the order of the day he has referred to, which comes under the head of "General Business," shall be taken into consideration as soon as possible.

Sir B. O'LOGHLEN stated that that was practically what he wished to bring about.

The SPEAKE R.-In that case I would. ad vise the honorable member to wait until'

Coal. [OCTOBER 21.J Goulburn River. 2145 .

the notices of questions and other pre­liminary matters of the sitting have been disposed of, and then to test the feeling of the House by moving, as soon as the first order of the day is read, the postponement thereof until after the consideration of the particular order of the day the honorable member has in view has been disposed of.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN intimated that he would accept the Speaker's suggestion.

RAILWAY DEPARTMENT.

Mr. STUART asked the Minister 0"£ Railways what was the actual cost per ton per mile to the Railway department of hauling coal from Gippsland to Melbourne?

Mr. GILLIES stated that great diffi­culty had been experienced in arriving at any definite conclusion on this point. In fact, it was impossible to estimate with exactness the cost of carrying a ton of any particular item of goods. But by taking into consideration the cost of carrying all sorts of merchandise, an estimate had been arrived at to the effect that, without charging for interest on the cost of railway construc­tion, the cost of hauling every ton of freight was ·96d. per mile. To give a special estimate of the cost per mile of hauling coal was out of the question.

PLURAL VOTING.

Dr. MALONEY asked the Premier whether it was his intention to submit to this House, early next session, a measure to provide for the abolitionof plural voting and to g~ve effect to the popular demand' ex­·pressed in the words, "One man, one vote ?" .

Mr. GILLIES remarked that, as the honorable member could see for himself, the state of business rendered it impossible for the Government to introduce a Bill of the kind during the present session, nor was he (Mr. Gillies) able to give a definite promise

.on the subject with respect to next session, for he could scarcely predict what the Go­vernment would be in a position to do next session.

Dr. MALONEY asked if the Govern­ment would object to the introduction of such a measure by a private member?

Mr. GILLIES said he thought that no measure of the kind could be successfully dealt with unless it was introduced by the Government.

COAL.

Mr. GILLIES presented, pursuant to an order of the House (dated 16th October),

a return relative to the supply of coal to Government departments.

Mr. MUNRO (in the absence of Mr. L. L. SMITH) asked the Minister of Railways whether he had taken steps to cause a small tram, or other line of road, to join the J umbunna, Strzlecki, Korum burra, and Coal Creek black coal mines with the Great Southern line. at Korumburra-the dis­tance being about seven miles---:-so that the mines could supply Melbourne with black coal?

Mr. GILLIES stated that no steps had been ta.ken to connect any of the mines mentioned with the Great Southern Rail­way. Some of them were a considerable distance from the line, while others were not sufficiently developed to warrant the Railway department in going to any large expense with respect to them. One of the mines, however-that of the Coal Creek Company-was so near the railway that the Rail way Commissioners had the question of connecting it under their consideration. But the matter required very careful handling, for it was important that, before any outlay was entered upon, it should be made perfectly clear that it would be justified. Still the mine appeared to be a good one, and probably the communications now going on between the company and the Railway department would eventuate in something being done. When affairs in this direction were sufficiently developed he would take care to bring the whole matter before the House.

CONDUCT OF BUSINESS.

Dr. MALONEY asked the Chief Sec­retary whether he would consider the desirability of causing honorable members to be supplied with printed forms to facili­tate the drafting of questions and notices of motion for presentation to the House?

Mr. DEAKIN stated that the matter referred to, inasmuch as it related to the management of affairs within the House, came under the control of the Speaker, who would doubtless be glad to receive any suggestions from the honorable member.

GOULBURN RIVER.

Mr. HALL asked the Minister of Water Supply whether, in view of the expenditure of the money granted by the Water Supply department to the Waranga and Goulburn shires, he would issue instructions to the effect that,in the erection of the bridges over the Goulburn, near N agambie, the navi­gation of the river shall not be impeded?

2146 Order of Business. [ASSEMBL Y.] Pel'sonal Explanation.

He stated that this matter was one of truly national importance. Already the erection of a bridge at a particular point had blocked up a portion of the river, and if a second bridge of the same character was erected, as was, he believed, intended, a much larger portion of the river would be rendered un­navigable.

Mr. DEAKIN remarked that, before the Goulburn . weir was constructed, the river was not navigable. (Mr. O. Young-" It was navigable up to Seymour.") At the time the money for the Goulburn weir was voted the part of the river now in question was not navigable. The bridges in ·existence prevented navigation. When, however, the Water Supply department obtained fnnds for the construction of the weir, it became bound to make good any injury done by the backing up of the water; .consequently, the existing bridges having become unsuitable, Hew ones had to be built. Under these circumstances, arrange­ments were made that the new bridges should be constructed on the drawbridge principle, so as to allow of vessels passing up and down the river. But when the matter came to be considered by the department it was found that the trusts could not legally enter upon any special expenditure for this purpose. The money at disposal having been voted for water supply, and the farmers of the northern areas having to pay the interest, it was obvious that it would be not only illegal but grossly unfair and unjust to place upon them the burden of extra ex­pense in the construction of bridges, in .order to render the Goulburn navigable. Subsequently, when the honorable member for Shepparton waited upon him with respect to the subject, he took the opportunity of pointing out to him how desirable it was that the bridges should be erected with drawbridge appliances, and of calling his .attention to the great extent to which the local bodies were interested in the matter. For one thing, traffic on the river would be fOllnd to greatly relieve the traffic on the roads. He also told the honorable member that if the local bodies were satisfied of the importance of provision being made in this direction, and were willing to do something, he would join the honorable member in waiting upon the Public Works department, in order to ascertain how far it would go in rendering assistance. As a matter of fact, however, the local bodies appeared to regard the affair as one of very small importance, for they had, so far as he (Mr. Deakin)

was aware, made no proposal with respect to it. It seemed, therefore, hardly right for them to expect the Government to do what they would not themselves even encourage.

Mr. HALL said he would take an early opportunity of stating the whole facts of the case to the House.

YARRA RIVER.

Mr. LANGRIDGE asked the Minister of Public Works whether, in granting per­mission to the Melbourne Hydmulic Power Company to take water from the reservoir constructed to supply the Botanic Gardens and Albert-park Lagoon, he had given due consideration to the fact that the Watts Ri ver and its tributaries would shortly be diverted from the Yarra, and that sufficient water would not then be left for the scour of the river, so as to prevent the accumu­lation of filth in its bed, and also at the wharfs; and that danger to health would be caused thereby? .

Mr. ANDERSON stated that he had received the following departmental com­munication on the subject :-

"This question has been carefully considered. The minimum gauged discharge of the river at Dight's Falls is 270,000,000 gallons a day. The Dight's Falls scheme of irrigation at present being carried out will only abstract 2,800,000 gallons a day, and when the engine-power is doubled 5,600,000 a day. This amount of water will have no appreciable effect in reducing the scouring power of the river. As to the abstrac· tion from the head waters of the river for water supply, and the consequent loss of scouring power, it must be pointed out that the foulness of the river is due chiefly to polluted water supply entering it, instead of being carried off by a sewage scheme. The increased demand for water supply will now be accompanied by a complete system of sewers, and the future requisite scouring will be done in them, and not in the river." (Mr. Langridge-" How will the case be five years hence ?") The case would not be different ten years hence. If three 18-inch pipes were laid down there would be no appreciable diminution of the scour ill the Yarra.

PERSONAL EXPLANATION.

Mr. GROOM said he wished to make a personal explanation with respect to certain statements which appeared in the Leadel' newspaper of last week. They were to the following effect :-

"The dissatisfaction of the Ministerial sup­porters was not so much with the exclusion of one of the Opposition nominees as with the selection on the Government side. The choice of Messrs. Tucker and Groom, in whose districts the Railway Bill proposed to spend £1,750,000

ShzjJping St1"ilce. [OCTOBER 21.J Shipping Stdlce. 2147

·on new lines, was reco/:{nised as a gross outrage ·on public decency, and an attempt to carry the Government railway schemes irrespective of their merits. It has always been a mystery that the Government should have taken so warm an interest in Mr. Groom, whose influence in the House is nil. An eighth or a tenth of the whole mileage proposed for the colony in the Railway Bill was to be given to his district, and Mr. Gillies tried to foist him on to the Railway Committee which is to judge of the merits of the proposed lines. An explanation, which is .not creditable to the Premier or his colleagues, is whispered in the lobbies. It is said that it is not Mr. Groom at all that is in question, or his constituency eitherfor that matter, but that the proposed gift of a million to West Gippsland for railway purposes means the improvement of lands held in Mr. Groom's district by an in­fluential Melbourne syndicate."

He would pass over the slighting remarks with respect to himself, treating them with the contempt they deserved, but to the state­mentin regard to "an influential Melbourne -syndicate" he begged to give, as far as he was concerned, the most unqualified denial. In the first place, so far as he was aware, there was no syndicate possessing an acre -of land in his district which constructing the proposed railways would benefit in the least. To this he would add, for himself, that neither did he hold an inch of land in his district which would be so benefited. He knew the whole of his district intimately, .and had such a syndicate been in existence he must, he felt sure, have known of it. He trusted the Railway Commissioners would consider it to be their duty to make every possible inquiry into the truth of the news­paper statement he had read.

PUBLIC FINANCES.

Mr. MUNRO asked the Premier when the return as to the state of the loan account, and other matters relating to finance, which he (Mr. Munro) moved for the previous Thursday, would be ready for presentation?

Mr. GILLIES stated that the prepara­tion the return rested with the Railway department, and he did not think it was ready. Certain information with respect to railway contracts had not yet been supplied. He would inquire next morning how the matter stood.

SHIPPING STRIKE.

Sir B. O'LOGHLEN moved that the consideration of the orders of the day relating to Government business, and of the notices of motion rela.ting to general business, be postponed until after the con­sideration of the order of the day relating

to general business. He said that the matter he wished honorable members to take in hand at once was the resumption of the debate on the motion moved by himself the previous Wednesday, expressing the regret of the House that the Employers' Union did not meet the trades unions in an unconditional conference. That motion was brought forward by him in no party spirit, and he sincerely hoped that no party spirit would be displayed in con­nexion with it. He trusted in'deed that even Ministers would support it. He thought it would be seen that the course he now pro­posed would be the shortest, because there need be little or no debate, and when a division was taken the whole subject would be got out of the way. The Premier would doubtless recollect that two conferences had already been held-one unconditional, which was a success, and one conditional, which was a failure, and the reason of the failure must be obvious to every honorable member. It was greatly to be hoped that another uncon­ditional conference would be held, for it would probably be attended with the best results.

Mr. KIRTON seconded the motion. Mr. GILLIES remarked that, of course,

it would be very convenient to have the matter of the honorable member's motion, which had been hanging over for nearly a week, settled one way or another, but it would be extremely inconvenient to have it brought forward at the present stage when the Government were anxious to proceed with the debate on the second reading of the Local Government Act Amendment Bill, in order to get at least some portion of the measure carried during the present session. vVith this in view, would not the honorable member for Port Fairy be content if the question he was interested in were brought forward later in the evening? It was very important that the Local Government Act Amendment Bill should be dealt with, and it would be hardly right to postpone it in order that the House should express an abstract opinion which would be of no practical value, and would probably have no practical effect in connexion with the strike. Personally, he (Mr. Gillies) would be glad to see the .question of the strike discussed at a conference between the parties to the disput.e, but still he felt, as he stated the other evening, that it would be a great mis­take for the House to express any opinion on the subject either on one side or the other.

·2148 Shipping St1'l'ke. [ASSEMBLY.] Shipping St1,tke.

That had been his deliberate judgment all along. In any case, while he could not preven~ honorable members from speaking on the point, he hoped that the question of postponing the businesss on the paper would be settled with as little delay as possible, and that, if the postponement was agreed to, the further question arising out of the motion mo,Ted by the honorable member for Port Fairy the previous Wednesday would be disposed of without more debate than could be helped.

Mr.LEVIEN expressed the opinion that, if the subject-matter of the motion pro­posed by the honorable member for Port Fairy last \Vednesday were again brought before the Honse, it would be impossible to prevent honorable members from stating their views with respect to it, and he firmly believed that to discuss the question in any way would necessarily be a waste of time. Moreover, it would do harm r~ther than good. In fact, carrying the motion or re-jecting it would be certain to result in mischief. What advantage could the House passibly gain by merely expressing an opinion? Of course, if legislation were proposed, the case would be different. He believed that the best plan by far would be for the House to refrain from any inter­ference whatever in the matter.

Mr. LANGRIDGE stated that it would not be a waste of time to deal with the motion of the honorable member for Port Fairy. There was llO doubt the question would have to be dealt with. He would ask the honorable member for Port Fairy whether, if the Premier was willing, say at nine o'clock, to postpone the Government business, it would not suit the honorable member to bring his motion on then? (Sir B. O'Loghlen-" Let us vote now.") Very well.

The motion was agreed to, and the notices of motion and orders of the day referred to were postponed accordingly.

The debate (adjourned from OC.tober 15) on Sir B. O'Loghlen's motion-" That this House deeply regrets that the Employers' Union does not meet the trades unions in an unconditional conference "-upon which Mr. Shiels had moved the previous question, was then resumed.

Mr. DUFFY said he could not give an altogether silent vote on this occasion. He could not vote for the proposal of the Ministry that they should carry the previous question, and he could not see his way to vote for the motion of the honorable

member for Port Fairy. The Ministry had not acted creditably in this matter. They afforded time and opportunity for this motion being brought before the House, and then the moment it was brought for­ward they cried-" Do not touch it, let us. have the previous question, let us run away from it, let us hang it up again." Why did they not take up a stand at first, and say they would not allow the question to be brought on; or, when it was brought on,. why did they not take up a stand and say it should be decided one way or the other? The only conclusion he could come to was that the Government had been "backing and filling" with this question in the same way as they had done with every oth.~r question. The consensus of opinion in the colony, with which he thoroughly agreed, was that our present labour troubles should be done away with as speedily as possible, and that when we had a peace it should not be merely a patched-up peace, but a real permanent peace between labour and capital, which would last for this generation, at all events. The question was-how was this to be brought about? Was it to be brought about by having on the floor of the Assembly speeches such as those, to which he listened with pain and regret the other evening, from the honorable member for Normanby, on tIle one side, and the honorable member for Ballarat West (Lt,-Col. Smith), on the other? The debate last week, on both sides, instead of doing any good to the country­making things better and the quarrel more likely to be healed-had only made matters worse, and he thought it was a great pity, a mistake, a shame, that the debate should have been entered upon. No doubt the honorable member for Port Fairy brought forward his motion with the best inten­tions; he thought, perhaps, that the fact of the House passing it unanimously, and being backed up by public opinion, might have some effect. But instead of that, the honorable member had found that the wording of his motion had led to its object being misconceived by the public And that was inevitable. The honorable member said he did not wish to take sides in this matter with either party -that his motion was not aimed at either party-but the honorable member for Mel­bourne West the other night admitted that the motion went against the employers. Indeed it was obvious that that was so, and tllat was the unfairness of the position the House was asked to take up. The

Shippz'ng St1·ike. [OCTOBER 21.] Shipping St1·ike. 2149

honorable member for Port Fairy asked the House to say that the employers not enter­ing into an unconditional conference was a subject of regret, and was not this saying that the employers were wrong in the posi­tion they had taken up, and that the other side was right? If not, he (Mr. Duffy) could not understand the English language. (Sir B. O'Loghlen - "It merely sup­ports an unconditional conference.") Two parties were contending; one said, "We must have an unconditional conference;" the other said, " You shan't, we won't allow you to have it ;" and the honorable member for Port Fairy, by way of showing his impartiality and neutrality, wished to make the House say it regretted the action of the employers in not granting an uncon­ditional conference. Surely that was not holding the balance fairly and squarely be­tween the two parties, as the honorable mem ber professed to do, as the House professed to do, and as he (Mr. Duffy) believed the country expected the House to do. He did not wish to take up the time of the House on this question, as honorable members, no doubt, were anxious that a division should be taken, but he must again protest against the action of the Go­vernment. He would -not vote for the previous question; he would vote that the matter be settled' one way or the other; but when the original motion was put, he in­tended to move an amendment which, to his mind at all events, would make the matter fair between the two parties-words to the effect" that this House regrets that no fair arrangement "--

The SPEAKER.-The honorable mem­ber will not be able to do that. If the previous question be decided in the affirma­tive the original motion must be put without further debate or amendment, and if the previous question be decided in the nega.tive

. the House will proceed with the next busi­ness on the notice-paper.

Mr~ DUFFY regretted that the Premier had got the House into the position that, technically, no amendment could be moved. Such an amendment as he (Mr. Duffy) had intended to propose would certainly suit him, and he believed it would suit the House and the country. What they all wanted was that some fair arrangement should be made

. between these two parties. The House did not want to 3ay to either party "You did wrong." What they wanted to say was that they regretted from the bottom of their hearts and in the interests of the country ~that this quarrel had arisen, and that they

SES. 11390.-7 N

would be very glad if it was l1ealed. (Mr. LeTien-" We have said that already.") Then they would say it again. They could not say anything of that sort too often. But he did object to the honorable member for Port Fairy, while professing to deal fairly between the two parties, asking the House really to take a part on one side, and he (Mr. Duffy) also regretted extremely that by the conduct of the Government they were put in such a position that they must vote for or against the motion as it stood, instead of for some fair amendment.

The House divided on the question "that the question be now put"-

Ayes ... 46 Noes ... 20

Majority for putting the question 26

AYES.

Mr. Andrewl3, " Baker, " Beazley, " Bennett, " Best, " Burrowes, " W. T. Carter, " Clark, " D. M. Davies, " Deakin, " Duffy, " Dunn, " Gardiner, " Hall, " A. Harris, " J. Harris, " Hunt, " Kirton, " Langridge, " Laurens,

Dr. Maloney, Mr. Mason, " Me·thven, " Mountain,

Mr. Munro, " Murphy, " Murray,

Sir B. O'Loghlen, Mr. Outtrim, " Richardson, " T. Smith,

Lt. -Col. Smith, Mr. Sterry,

" Stuart, " Trenwith, " Tucker, " Turner, " Uren, " vVheeler, " Wilkinson, " Williams, " 'Voods, " A. Young, " Zox.

Tellers. Mr. Bailes,

" Peacock.

NOES.

Mr. Anderson, " Armytage, " Cameron, " Dow, " Duncan, " Gillies, " Graham, " Groom,

Mr. McLean, " McLellan, " Officer,

Dr. Pearson, Mr. Shiels, " Tatchell, " C. Young.

" Highett, Tellers. " Levien, Mr. Madden, " McColl, " C. Smith.

The SPEAKER then put the question­"That this House deeply regrets that the

Employers' Union does not meet the trades lUlions in an unconditional conference."

The House divided-Ayes ... .., Noes ..• , ..

Majority for the motion

46 21

25

2150 [ASSEMBLY.] Act Amendment Bill.

Mr. Andrews, " Baker, " Beazley, " Bennett, " Best, " Burrowes, " W. T. Carter, " Craven, " D. M. Davies, " Deakin, " Dunn, " Gardiner, " Hall, " A. Harris, " Hunt, " Kirton, " Langridge, " Laurens, " McColl, " McLellan,

Dr. Maloney, Mr. Mason, " Methven, " Mountain,

Mr. Anderson, " Armytage, " Cameron, " Dow, " Duffy, " Duncan, " Gillies, " Graham, " Groom, " J. Harris, " Highett,

AYES.

Mr. Munro, " Murphy, " Murray,

Sir B. O'Loghlen, Mr. Outtrim, " Peacock,

Dr. Pearson, Mr. Richardson,

" T. Smith, Lt. -Col. Smith, Mr. Sterry, " Stuart, " Trenwith, " Tucker, " Turner, " Uren, " 'Vilkinson, " Williams, " vVoods, " A. Young.

Tellers. Mr. Bailes, " Clark.

NOES.

Mr. Levien, " McLean, " Officer, " Shiels, " Tatchell, " Wheeler, " C. Young, " Zox.

Tellers. Mr. Madden,

" C. Smith.

LOOAL GOVERNMENT AOT AMENDMENT -BILL.

The debate on Mr. Anderson's motion for the second reading of this Bill (adjourned from October 14) was resumed.

Sir B. O'1..OG HLEN said he thought this Bill had been made use of for a certain purpose by the Government, and that they did not really intend to pass the measure. There was a thing known as a disappearing target, and this _ Bill was something of the kind. The disappearing target when it got a blow disappeared, and it afterwards came up again. Now, this time last year, a Local GovernmentActAmendment Bill was before the House, and the Premier then announced that it was of no use attempting to pass it that session. The real question, the Pre­mier said, that the Bill was to -settle was the

""question of the subsidy, and as the Govern­ment bad paid the second instalment of the

. subsidy there was really no necessity to pass the measure; there was to be an early session of Parliament this year, at the com­mencement of which the Ra.ilw~y Bil1 would be submitted, and between the introduction amf second reading of the Railway Bill there would be a gap which could be well

filled up by·the House disposing of the Loc"al Government Bill and the question of the subsidies. Well, that gap was used for some other purpose, and now at the end of the session-it was said the Government intended to prorogue the House next month -the Government had brought forward this Bill, with the intention, he supposed, t.hat it should disappear, and appear again next session. The real question the House had to grapple with, and put on what it con­sidered a fair and proper basis, was the question of the subsidy. The other questions in the Bill were minor questions. Every member who had to deal with municipalities -and he believed there was not a single member, at all evepts outside the metropolis, who had not-had received pressing letters from the local bodies in his district, calling upon him urgently to support the proposal of which notice had been given by the honorable member for Maryborough. On inquiring into the matter, he (Sir B. O'Loghlen) found that the more money wa.s voted the.less the local bodies in the country got. The shires, in place of getting their £2 to £1, got only something like £1 2s. or £1 3s., and the boroughs, in place of getting £1 for £1, got only 14s. While the municipal subsidy had been increased to £450,000, the two boroughs in his district -Port Fairy and Koroit-had sustained an

- absolute loss of subsidy to the extent of £600 per annum. (Mr. Anderson-"N 0.") The list published by the Government showed that those two boroughs received less now than they did five years ago. (Mr. Anderson-" But what would they have received if the subsidy had not been in­creased ?") In 1885 they received some £1,300, while now they received only £700 or £800. The two shires in his district-the shires of Minhalllite an:i Bel­fast-had been rated to the extent of Is. 6d. in the £1, but they never got more than an allowance on a rate of Is. in the £1. During the last thirty years he did not suppose those shires had received £6,000 of Government grants outside the subsidy. Their rates had gone to do all the public works in the shires, and they had had to tax themselves continuously to the extent of Is. 6d. in the £1 to carry out the works required. On the other hand, what did he find with regard to the shires near Mel­bourne? The honorable member for Mary­borough sh{)wed that eight shires in the neighbourhood of Melbourne received £26,000 a year more now among them .than they received five years ago. While

Local Govel'nment [OCTOBER 21.J Act Amendment Bill. 2151

there were country shires that only got £1 2s. on every £1 lOs. of rates collected in them, wealthy suburban shires were getting £1 2s. per £1 on the larger amounts col. lected in them on a Is. rate. That was not a proper distribution of the subsidy. He also found that the £3 to £1 shires received a largely increased amount on account of their increased ability to collect rates. The proper and reasonable way to deal with the question was to allo­cate the whole £450,000 on the lines proposed by the honorable member for Maryborough, or as nearly on those lines as possible, and then if more money was wanted by the shires now receiving £3 to £1 let the consolidated revenue pay it, because this expenditure would save the Government correspondingly in extra grants to those shires. He believed it was the present Postmaster-General, when formerly Minister of Public Works, who introduced the system of giving £3 to £1 to certain shires, and no doubt it was only fair that certain shires should be granted that assistance; but why should the other shires suffer? The £3 to £1 was granted for the purpose of easing the general revenue-in order that special grants need not be paid to those shires. It was thought that, by gi ving those local bodies a larger subsidy , they would expend the money better and carry out the works required more cheaply and effectively than would be done under the system of Government grants; but why, when those shires got £3 to £1, the public revenue should not make up the difference between what they were to get as ordinary shires and the extra amount' he was at a loss to understand. He did not think the other shires should suffer for the purpose of making up the extra allowance to the £3 to £1 shires. He believed the lattel' shires were entitled to the additional amount, but they should get it out of the general revenue, because the revenue was saved that amount in special grants. In fact, all the Government had to do was to add £60,000 or £70,000 to the £450,000, and in that way justice would be done to all the shires. As to the metropolitan dis­tricts, he thought such cities as Melbourne, South Melbourne, and St. Kilda were able to run alone. (Mr. Turner-" Except St. .Kilda.") He had lived for nearly thirty years in St. Kilda, and he had never known a higher rate than Is. in the £1. (Mr. Turner-" It is Is. 3d.") In some of the country 'districts the rate was Is. 6d. in the ,

7N2 '

£1. (Mr. Wheeler-Ie And 28.") The simple way of settling the claims of the £3 to £1 shires, and also satisfying the other country municipalities, was by making an addition to the amount of the endowment, which would enable justice to be done all round. A curious thing about this matter was that last year the Government post­poned the Bill because the second instalment of the municipal subsidy for the year had been paid, but this year, although the notice of motion of the honorable member for Maryborough had been on the paper for some months, the Government, without consulting the House as to whether it desired to alter the basis of distribution, actuaUy paid the first instalment on the old basis, and he believed they would proceed to pay the second instalment also on the old basis, whether this Bill passed or not. He believed the Bill would not pass, and he believed the Government did not intend that it should pass. They merel v wished to make a show to the count~y of their desire to deal with this important question, and then, owing to stress of business, they would he compelled to sacrifice the measure at the last moment. Then they would say that as the House had not sanctioned a different scheme of distri­bution, they must act on the old scheme, and must have an early session next year to deal with the matter. The Government were playing the same old game that they had been playing ever since he returned to the House three years ago-fooling the House. As far as voting for the second reading of the Bill was concerned, he sup­posed they must all vote for the second reading, but he wanted to see no reference to a select committee. The committee that knew most about the necessities of the country was the committee of the whole House, and the Bill and the question .of the distribution of the subsidy should be settled in committee of the whole. The object of referring the measure to a select committee was to take the allocation of the municipal endowment away from the purview of the House; but honorable mem­bers, certainly the country members, were not inclined to let this session close until a new plan of distributiJag the municipal subsidy among the local bodies had been settled ,by Act. of Parliament. ,The Government talked of the session ending in November, but unless they changed their mode of dealing with this Bill the session was likely to be prolonged, because the people in the

-2152 Local (JO'lJe1'nment [ASSEMBLY.] Act Amendment Bill.

'country districts were very earnest about the settlement of this matter. He questioned if tbere was a single municipal council that had not communicated with the member for its district more than once-he had received repeated communications - and resolutions had been passed by the various councils on the subject over and over again, clearly showing that the real point was t1le distribution of the municipal endowment, and that all the other points were merely minor points. By striking out the metro­-politan area they would be enabled to meet the difficulty now in the way of a fair distribution of the money among the country municipalities, where public works were most wanted, and where there was less money to carry them out. Unless the country dis­tricts got a fair share of the subsidy, the roads, bridge£!, and other public works eon­structed by the municipalities would get into disrepair, and would not be in as good a condition as they were five years ago.

Mr. Mc'COLL observed that -if honor­able members desired the Bill to be passed into law they should bring the debate to a speedy close, and get the measure into committee. There was nothing whatever in the Bill that could not be dealt with fully and entirely in committee. He rose priucipally to express his surprise that no member of the Government had replied to tlle very trenchant speech of the honorable member for Maryborough, who submitted facts of such a nature as to astonish the House, many honorable members having no idea of the inequitable way in which the municipal subsidy bad been allocated for years past. There was all the more reason for a ministerial reply to those criticisms because of the fact that the honorable member for Maryborough spoke not for himself alone, but as the representative and mouthpiece of more than 150 municipalities in the colony, a conference of their repre­sentatives having selected the honorable member to bring the question before the House; and if a ministerial reply was not due to the honorable member in the opinion of the Government, as he (Mr. McColl) certainly thought it was, it was certainly due to those 150 municipalities. He did not say that the Minister of Public Works was responsible in the matter, but certainly some member of the Government ought to have replied to the strictures of the honor­able member for Maryborough. Every session since he had been in the House the Government had promised that this

question of the distribution of the municipal subsidy should be settled during the next session, but he found that amounts were still put on the Estimates fettered by the same conditions as had been imposed in previous sessions.

Mr. METHVEN stated that, after the decided snub which was given to new mem­bers by the Premier the other evening, he rose with a certain amount of fear and trembling to speak on this Bill, and even after ten or twelve years' experience of the working of the Local Government Act he hardly felt himself qualified to express an opinion on the measure before the House. (Mr. Hunt-" You are too modest.") However, he must say he was rather sur­prised that the Government found it necessary to introduce a Local Government Act Amendment Bill every session. It would be far better for the Government to frame and submit to tho House a measure that would grapple with the whole subject, and pass a Local Government Act which those who had the working of it would be able to understand, in'stead of submitting amending Bills session after session, making the local government law more and more unintelligible. He failed to see why a municipal treasurer should not be allowed to hold any other office. In the municipal €listrict with which he was connected the treasurer happened to be the assistant town clerk, and he (Mr. Methven) would like to know what argument could be brought for­ward to show why the assistant town clerk of that municipality was not perfectly qualified and entitled to hold the position of treasurer, which enabled the council to supplement his salary by an addition of £20 to £30 per annum. He was sure the country members would make a stand, as a body, in opposition to the clause with relation to the appointment of engineers, because they felt that it would inflict considerable hardship on a large number of municipal districts and their present engineers. It had been suggested that several shires would combine together to employ a certificated engineer to certify to the municipal works carried out in the different districts; but what would be the value of such a certificate? What would the engineer know, of his own knowledge, about the way in which the work had been carried out? Little or nothing ~ he must be guided by the opinion of the man who had superintended the work. He would be called upon to go from one district to another merely to give his

Local Government [OOTOBER 21.J Act Amendment Bill. 2153

certificate as a matter of form, and even if 'he sought to satisfy himself as to the -quality of the work, all he would see of it would be the outside, the surface; he would know really nothing about how it had been constructed. His experience of these visit­ing engineers, as he called them, was not very satisfactory, and he thought that they would be aU the better able to discharge their duties if they were to enter into a little actual practice on such works as they were likely to be engaged in before they , were appointed as shire engineers. Book

'knowledge was, no doubt, very useful, but there was no better knowledge than that gained by practical experience. The clause with regard to the liability of municipali­ties for negligence in respect of streets was worthy of the serious condideration of hon­orable members in committee. Something ought to be done to protect the municipali­ties from the heavy losses and expenses they had to in,cur year after year in respect of claims for acciden ts for which thev could scarcely be quite liable. Recently, there was a case ill which an unfortunate girl, who had been a cripple from infancy, fell on the footpath and broke her leg. She sued the municipal council and obtained a verdict for damages; but had that case been tried by a Judge without a jury the girl would not have got a verdict, because the pavement was as level as the floor of this chamber. As far as the municipal subsidy was con­cerned, a very great hardship would be inflicted on some of the outlying districts of the colony if the Government did not give them more substantial assistance than was proposed in this Bill in their efforts to carry out public works in their districts. He hoped that the provisions of this measure would be thoroughly thrashed out in com­mittee.

Mr. TATCHELL observed that the honorable member for Port Fairy had truly s'aid that the country districts were very much in earnest with regard to the re­allocation of the municipal endowment. A

, conference of delegates from more than 150 of the country municipalities recently met in Melbourne to consider this very question, and those men-men of practical experience, integrity, and honesty of purpose-came to the conclusion that the Government should he recommended to ask the authority of Parliament for the distribution of the sub­~idy to local bodies on the basis of £1 2s. 6d. per £1 to boroughs and £2 per £1 to shires. He hoped this recommendation would carry que weight with the House in arriving at a

decision on the endowment question. From. several years experience of municipal affairs, he could bear testimony to the fact that the municipal subsidy was expended with strict economy, at all events in his part of the country. Special consideration ought to be given to the municipalities ill his electorate,. because of the fact that Inglewood, Tarna­gulla, and Dunolly were situated in a belt of auriferous country some miles wide, over, which roads had to be constructed and maintained to enable the farmers to bring their produce to market from the rich agricultural lan~s beyond. Although that auriferous belt was dead country so far as the shire councils were concerned, ithad been by no' means dead country to the colony as a whole. It still contained vast stores of mineral wealth, and in times past it had contributed largely to the great prosperity and progress of Victoria.. In the immediate neighbour­hood of Dunolly there was the celebrated Queen's Birthday line of reef, which, from one claim alone, had yielded no less than five tons of gold. At Tarnagulla there was the well-known Prince of Wales and Poverty reefs, and at Inglewood, the Unity, Max­well's, and Jersey lines, all rich reefs, and so far only worked down to their first for­mations. (Mr. Mason-" If the district is so wealthy as that, you ought to do without any subsidy.") The honorable member had better hear him out before coming to any such conclusion. The mine-owners of the district were busily at work developing their second formations, notably the Prince of Wales and Poverty, at Tarnagulla, and when that was accomplished it would give a very great impetus to the mining industry in that part of the country. A Government scent farm had been established on the auriferous land in the neighbourhood of Dunolly, and such was the confidence in the success of, the novel industry that application was now being made for the reservation of 1,000 acres, in addition to the 1,200 acres already. reserved. It was expected that land would be applied for in small holdings for viticulture and other purposes. He was glad to see the Minister of Lands in his place, because he desired to pay him a just tribute of praise for the energy he had shown in the establishment of this new industry,

: as it was mainly due to the honorable gentleman that such wonderful success had attended the project. The people of the district were very grateful for the sympathetic Action of the Minister of Lands in this matter, and they had resolved to perpetuate his name by christening.

2154 Local Gove1-nment [ASSEMBLY.] A'ct Amendment Bill.

a hill in the neighbourhood of the scen.t farm Mount Dow. In order to insure the success of this new industry, however, it would be necessary to construct a road, and with their present allowance from the muni­cipal endowment it would take the shire a long time to construct the road. Parts of the country which were exceptionally situated were entitled to exceptional consideration. To what better purpose could the revenue received from Crown lands, licence-fees, &c., in the country districts be applied than to improving the· interior of the country by bridging rivers and creeks and making good roads? As to the proposal to prohibit the treasurer of a municipality from holding any other office, he was inclined to advise the Government to let well alone. In his dis­trict they generally appointed one of the bank managers as treasurer, and he would remind the Government that during the late boom time there had not been any defaulters among the municipal treasurers of the colony. With regard to the new system of audit, he must confess that when he first heard that twelve men were to be expected to audit all the municipal accounts throughout the colony in the time allotted he very much doubted whether it was pos­sible for them to do so; but he had been given to understand that the Commissioners of Audit were willing to undertake the respon­sibility of this work, and, therefore, that matter need not further trouble the minds of honorable members. It would certainly be very ha.rd on some of the poorer muni­cipalities if they were compelled to employ certificated engineers, because they would have to pay double the amount of salaries that were accepted by their present engineers, who possessed every qualification except the certificate. He had great pleasure in sup­porting the motion for the second reading of the Bill, and he trusted that the measure would be dealt· with to the satisfaction of the country without being referred to a select committee.

Mr. C. YOUNG remarked that almost all the members who had spoken with respect to the endowment clauses of the Bill seemed to think that the allocation of the municipal subsidy at the rate of £0 to £1 to the shires mentioned in the Bill was fair and reason­able, because they were principally new dis­tricts; but there was a good deal to be said on the other side. Honorable members would observe on the Estimates that those new shires, which were to receive such a large amount of the municipal subsidy, were also to receiv.e a very large amount of State

aid, and a very much larger amount of Go­vernment money had been expended in those districts in years past, beforB the territory in question was part of any municipality. When the municipal subsidy was increased by £140,000 per year the estimates of the Public Works department were severely cut down, and almost all the special grants pre­viously given to the other shires disappeared, but the grants to these new shires-the Gippsland shires principally-still loomed very large in the estimates of the Public Works department. The Healesville shire . was to get £2,500. (Mr. Munro-" In lieu of the £3 to £1.") But the Omeo shire was to receive a special grant to the amount of £2,250, in addition to the £3 to £1. The Tambo and Walhalla shires werenotonly getting municipal subsidy at the rate of £3 to £1, but also special grants. (Mr. A. Harris -" And the Government save thousands of pounds by that arrangement.") No doubt other shires applied for the same liberal treatment, but did not obtain it. Honor­able members should bear in mind that a large amount of Government money had been expended if! those new Gippsland shires before they were brought under the provisions of the Local Government Act. The Upper Yarra shire was to receive a special grant to assist the council in com­pleting the works that were left unfinished by the Public Works department. (Mr. A. Harris-" They ought to have more.") He was quite aware that the district of the honorable member would swallow up all the· revenue of the colony, if it could get the chance. What he was pointing out was that before some of these new districts were constituted municipalities or parts of munici­palities, a large amount of public money was expended in making roads and bridges within their area., and. therefore the arrange­ment that thosp. new shires were entitled to receive subsidy at the rate of £3 per £1 be­cause they were new shires ought to be scouted. The Public Works department tried for years to get various isolated por-­tions of Gippsland taken into the adjoining shires. The department had spent £4,000, £5,000, and £6,000 per year on the con-· struction and maintenance of main roads in those districts, and yet they now claimed exceptional consideration, on the ground that they were new shires. (Mr. A. Harris. -" That was one of the conditions on which the territory was taken in by the· shires.") In point of fact the shires had been bribed to take up those pieces of territory. (Mr. A. Harris-H And the-

Local Government ' [OCTOBER 21.] Act Amendment Bill. 2155

Government are to be relieved.") Re­lieved of £2,000 or £3,000 per year. The endowment clauses of the Bill were really the only important provisions it contained: He questioned very much if the Bill would pass, but if it got into committee he proposed to move an amendment, so as to provide that, instead of requiring the consent of every property-owner, it should only be necesssary to obtain the consentof a two-thirds majority of the owners of property abutting upon a road, and also the consent of the shire council and the Board of Land and Works, in order to close the road. (Mr. Madden­"A very good amendment.") In some cases owners of pieces of land abutting upon a road were out of the colony, and in other cases a single individual had been known to adopt the "dog-in-the-manger" policy, and refuse his consent. Those who were benefited by the closing of a road should pay any compensation that was justly due to those who sustained loss through the closing of the road. That principle was recognised in the measure as it stood. He really thought it was a very h~rd thing to propose to dispense with the services of men who had served ably

. and faithfully as shire engineers for the last sixteen years, and he would suggest that all who had served satisfactorily for, say, ten years should receive a certificate of service, and be allowed to continue in their present employment. The Public Works department had allowed them to go on until now, and had gone through the form of accepting the certificates of engineers in Melbourne who never saw the works in respect of which they certified, and who depended entirely on the statements of tIle ~ncertificated shire engineers that the work had been carried out satisfactorily.

Mr. CAMERON observed that the honorable member for Kyneton had referred to the fact that before the formation of the Healesville shire the Government had spent £5,000 or £6,000 a year in keeping the roads of its area in repair. But the shire had only been in existence two years, and the large expenditure on roads was not for the benefit of its inhabitants, but to estab­lish communication with the gold-field of Wood's Point. Some years ago the Government were very anxious that the people on both sides of the Dividing Range should form themselvescinto a shire. and with the view of inducing them to do so they promised a grant of £2,500 for three years. No district in the colony was more deserving of Government support than

the shire of Healesville, because 40,000 acres of its territory was within the water- . shed of the metropolitan water supply, and not one penny of rates could be raised within that area. The Coranderrk reserve, of 5,000 acres, was also in the centre of the shire, and yielded no rates. The same remarks would apply to a large extent to the shire of Upper Yarm, which was also promised £2,500 for three years by the Go­vernment. Neither of those shires received subsidy at the rate of £3 to £1. The Muni­cipal Association of Victoria, of which he was a member, approved generally of the Bill, but disagreed with clauses 11, 12, and 15. The association, which represented 8 cities, 7 towns, 22 boroughs, and 67 shires, out of a total of 189 local bodies in the colony, objected to the proposal that the treasurer of a municipality should hold no other municipal office, as well as to the proposal empowering a municipality to reduce the minimum valuation to· £3 per cent., and to limit the maximum valua-. tion to £5 per cent. upon the capital value. He agreed with the honorahle member for Kyneton that the provision in the existing Act with regard to reducing the width of roads and streets should be liberalized. In­stead of one owner being allowed to obstruct, the matter should be settled by a two-thirds majority, or, at all events, by a majority. Increased powers ought also to be given to municipalities in relation to carrying water­courses through private land. As to the endowment question, his personal sympa­thies were with a majority of the shires which had received subsidy at the rate of £3 to £1, but he thought a better arrange­ment could be made. There ought to be a classification of the shires and an equal division of the money, but that could not be insisted on now without causing the loss of the Bill. He hoped that the measure would be allowed to go into committee, when he intended to submit fifteen or six. teen new clauses which bad been prepared at the suggestion of the Municipal Asso­ciation.

Mr. BAKE R observed that there was no Bill which affected the country districts more than tllis one. He was much interested. in the remarks of the honorable member for Maryborough in regard to the endowment, and he thought that they ought to have been answered by the Government. For years past the shires had not received their fair share of subsidy, and something ought to be done to help them. The shires in the north-western portion of the colony were,

2156 Local Gove1'nment [ASSEMBLY.] Act Amendment Bill.

especially in need of consideration, for many of them were absolutely without roads. He knew a farmer who had a large quantity of wheat stored, and he could not get it taken to a railway if he offered its weight in gold. Much of the same country was also inundated at the present time, and he won­dered how the farmers contrived to live. The drainage clauses of the Bill did not seem to him to have been fairly drafted, and it was of the greatest importance that they should be equitably arranged, as he knew of an instance in which 200 or 300 acres of land in one holding were under water. When the Bill was in committee he would endeavour to amend it so as to secure fair treatment for his district.

Mr. TUTHILL said he thought the endowment part of the Bill was the only part which the Government would be able to deal with this session, because so many new clauses had been given notice of by different· honorable members. He asked the Minister in charge of the measure if he intended to go f\lrther than the 34th clause? (Mr. Anderson-" Yes, I intend to go on with all the clauses.") If the Minister was really in earneet, he would do all he could to assist him, but he was entirely opposed to a Bill of the kind being sent to a select committee. Almost every member of the House had received instructions from . his constituents in regard to the measure, and it would be impossible to pass those instructions on to a select committee. He objected that the provision prohibiting a treasurer from holding any other municipal office was very much like cracking a nut with a N asmyth hammer. The proposed penalty-that the Minister should have the power of withholding the subsidy-was also out of proportion to the offence. Olause 15, empowering municipalities to reduce the minimum valuation to not less than £3 per cent. upon the capital value, contained an important provision in disguise. It was a pity that the Minister had not seen his way to make a llew departure. He had always understood that the way to ascertain the capital value of property was to learn its annual value and multiply that by ten or fifteen, but the Government seemed to be reversing the natural order of things. Not only was power given to reduce the minimum valuation, the maximum valua­tion was fixed at 5 per cent. for the first time, and the provision might work harshly when applied to small holdings. He never heard of any cases of hat'dship under the old system, but such might occur under

the new. He should certainly move an amendment on this clause in committee. With regard to a treasurer not being allowed to hold any other office, he saw no harm in the local bank manager acting as treasurer; buton the other hand other municipal officers had also acted satisfactorily as treasurers; and he thought the provision was unneces­sary. The exclusion of uncertificated engineers was also unnecessary. He cor­dially agreed with the suggestion which had been thrown out, that the wealthy suburban shires of the metropolitan dis­trict ought not to be subsidized in the same proportion as the country shires. (Mr. Anderson-" And that they should' be made into boroughs.") Certainly they should be made to become boroughs. The' section in the principal Act requiring the assent of all the owners to an alteration in the width of a road ought also to be modified. In many instances all the owners could not be found, and it always happened that one man was desirous of taking advan­tage of the straits of his neighbours. He would have the matter determined by a majority of three-fifths. While he persoQ­ally sympathized with the claims of some shires to special consideration, he did not approve of young shires, whose difficulties were now over, being singled out for special favours. The subsidy of £3 to £1 was no doubt necessary when it was first started, but it was now time to have the whole system re-organized on a proper basis. All shires ought to be placed upon the same footing, and special treatment should be allowed to special cases. No member could have listened to the remarks of the honor­able member for Maryborough without feeling that the existing system was a wrong one. It not only worked unjustly, it created jealousies, by setting district against district and member against mem; ber. Oareful inquiry ought to be made as to what shires were entitled to special con­sideration, because it must be remembered that local conditions had altered greatly in the last fifteen years, and when special consideration was required, it should be given by special grants, instead of by in­creasing the subsidy. Each shire ought to. get fair play, and he objected to the subsidy of shires in his own district being reduced in order that the subsidy of others might be increased. There was no doubt that the fate of the Bill depended on this point, and he hopej that the Minister would see his way to adopt the view he (Mr. Tuthill) had expressed.

Local Govemment [OCTOBER 21.] Act Amendment Bill. 2157-.~

Mr. A. HARRIS said the honorable member for Maryborough had explained the case on behalf of the Municipal Associa­tion in a very fair and impartial way. He was aware that many municipalities had had good grounds to complain of the distribution ()r the subsidy. - The borough of Sale only received about 9s. 6d. in the £1, a sum which was altogether inadequate to the work it had to do; and the Rosedale shire, with an area of about 800 square miles, was only paid a few shillings in the £1. Some altera­tion of this state of affairs was undoubtedly called for, but at the same time he did not think it should. be done at the expense of those shires which were receiving £3 to £1. Several years ago it was the policy of the Go­vernment to induce municipalities to include within their areas such outlying territory adiacent to them as was not then under municipal rule, and to a large extent their wish had been carried out. For example, one shire in which he (Mr. Harris) was interested took up territory which included 70 miles of main roads, 160 miles of pack tracks, and a number or bridges. The hon­orable member for Kyneton referred to the amount placed on the Estimates for the Walhalla shire, but would. it not be a monstrous injustice if, after inducing that shire to take over an immense amount of outlying territory, the Government were to repudiate their obligations in respect to it, and to refuse to grant it the pecuniary assistance to which it was fairly entitled? He (Mr. Harris) did not think that any honorable member could speak more forcibly respecting the state of the roads in various parts of Gippsland than the honorable member for Ararat could, for on one occasion, when the honorable member was travelling through the district, he had to hold on to his horse's tail for over 40 miles. He was afraid to get 011 its back, lest he -should break his neck in the crab-holes. In another instance it took a team or twenty bullocks rourteen days to draw a load of two tons only nine miles. Honorable members -could gather from these facts a pretty good idea of the nature or the roads the Gipps­land municipalities had to deal with. As for the Walhalla shire, it had to maintain . about 90 miles of main roads for wheel traffic, about 170 miles of pack and other tracks, and 42 bridges. In connexion with some of the roads there were road cuttings in rock 12 feet wide which cost £1,000 per mile without metalling, similar cuttings in soil or clay which cost £250 .a mile, cockspurs in clay 4 feet wide

which cost £60 per mile, and cockspurs in rock of a similar width which cost £250 per mile. Two years' revenue would not enable the shire to fence all the cuttings which urgently required protection. Another great difficulty the shire had to contend with was the large amount or territory from which it received no rates worth speaking of. For instance, from the territory between Walhalla and Toongabbie, the nearest rail­way station, a distance of eighteen miles, it only obtained £10 worth of rates, while from the territory between Walhalla and Jericho, a distance of 35 miles, it only obtained £75 worth or rates. At the same time, Walhalla was the centre of a mining district which Mr. Murray believed would one day be the salvation of the colony. Indeed, it was his (Mr. Harris') belief that but for the way in which the district had been buried it would ere now have rivalled Ballarat or Bendigo. However, that day was yet to come. Another fact was, that it had cost the Walhalla shire about £2,500 to keep about 21 miles of road metalled for two years. The cure for this kind of thing was either an increase of the endowment or else giving assistance in some other way. It would be simply impossible for some of these shires, that of Walhalla especially, to keep going on unless they received at least an equivalent to what they were getting at the present time. Even under existing circumstances some or . the councils were often at their wits' end for want of money. Of course there might be cases where only some portions of the shires need receive the £3 to £1 subsidy, and for that reason he was of opinion that the way in which the money should be distributed ought to be referred to a select committee. Certainly the subject could be better thrashed out before such a committee than it could in full House. The Government made a very good bargain when it induced many or the Gippsland municipalities to take over a lot or outlying territory, for other­wise it would have had to spend a large amount oE money which it was now enabled to save, and this ought to be taken very seriously into account. There were a few other points in the Bill which were worth alluding to. One was the matter of auditors • He altogether failed to understand why it wa.s desired to do away with local auditors. No doubt the Government contributed largely towards the funds of the various municipali­ties, but the local people also c~)l1tributed a great deal; why, therefore, should there not be both lo~al auditors and Government

2158 Local Gove1'nment [ASSEMBLY.] Act Amendment Bill.

auditors? Again, how could only twelve Government auditors do the auditing work of all the municipalities? There were at the present time 190 municipalities, 190 local auditors, and 60 Government auditors, and the auditing had to be done between t.he 1st October and the third Tuesday in N 0-

vember, a period of six or seven weeks. Was it possible for only a dozen men to get through the business within the time? It was hopeless to think of snch a thing. Upon the whole, he saw no reason for any depar. ture from the present arrangement. With regard to the existing method in relation to municipal treasurers, he was of opinion that it worked well, and that it need not be varied. He also thought each council should be empowered, upon an emergency, to ap­point its town clerk or secretary as treasurer. As to municipal engineers, he was by no means disposed to indorse the plan proposed by the' Government, namely, that none but certificated engineers should be employed. Such a system would operate most unjustly towards a number of able men, who were now in office as engineers, but whnm the new rule would throw out of their situations. If it was absolutelv neces­sary that every municipal enginee; should be certificated, let each of the existing engineers get a certificate of service. On this subject he received, the other day, the following communication from a gentleman of great experience:-

"One portion of the Bill which would affect us, and is, in my opinion, uncalled for, is that no council shall employ any person as engineer who does not possess a certificate. We have a good man who would have to go. An engineer with any practical experience ca~not be obtained at the salary we can afford to give, and the young men who, it is suggested, would be glad of the billets would prove in most cases very expensive' luxuries. As soon as they had gained some knowledge, probably at our cost, they would say they could not stop without a rise in their salaries. "

It was not always that a certificated engineer was required in connexion with municipal work, for frequently a good prac­tical man with plenty of experience would answer much better. In any case the matter might be safely left to the decision of the different cOllncils concerned. In conclusion, he begged to express his grati­fication at the kindly way in which the municipalities of the country had been referred to during the present debate. It was obvious that honorable members were, a.s a rule, not at all anxious to see them in any way redul!ed in position.

Mr. A Harris.

Mr. ANDREWS observed that this Bm seemed to have been received with general dissatisfaction throughout the colony. In no shape or way did it appear to have come up to the expectations of the municipal bodies with respect to it. Nor was it, as a whole, very likely to become law. In fact it had been pretty clearly intimated in the press, and in other ways, that the fate of the measure would almost certainly be that, after taking up a great deal. of valuable time, it would, towards the close of the session, be quietly dropped. The main feature of the measure, namely, the pro­posal for a redistribution of the Govern­ment subsidy, was introduced, no doubt, to meet a great want, nevertheless it was highly probable that no satisfactory arrange­ment on the subject would be arrived at this session. With this fact before honor­able members, ought not they to rouse themselves? With half the subsidy for the present year distributed on the old basis, why should· they run any risk of the same thing beine done with the remaining half? Did it not seem very likely that between two stools the municipal interests of the colony would fall to the ground? Another point which deserved very careful considera· tion was that a number of shires at present in receipt of subsidy at the £3 to £1 rate were complaining that they could not, owing to local circnmstances, make roads in their districts, and they therefore urged that they should be supplied with rail ways at the expense of the general community. In fact they were applying for the expenditure of millions of money in this direction. In any case it was to be hoped that the present plan of distributing the municipal subsidy would not be continued any further, for it was very unfair. In this respect the £2 to £1 shires appeared to have most ground for complaint, for their share of the money decreased just in proportion to the increase in the valuations in the £3 to £1 shires. No doubt the country had indorsed the increase of the endowment to £450,000 per annum, but at the same time it wanted to see the money fairly distributed, and that demand must be complied' with. A good deal had been said concerning the large share that had fallen to certain old shires, but it was important to notice, on the other hand, that for the land in those shires the State had received fully £10 per acre. Surely consideration should be given to that circumstance. Surely the shires which had contributed comparatively nothing to the Treasury ought not to be placed on a better

Local Gove1'nment [OCTOBER 21.] Act Amendment Bill. 2159

footing-to have not only an ample supply of money for roads which they could not make, but railways as wel1. No doubt railways were better for the country than roads, but saying that did not dispose of the argument. In short, what was abso­lutely needed was that honorable members should determine before they separated for the session that there should be no more distribution of the municipal subsidy upon the old lines. Indeed, they ought to pause very long before they conceded to the Government the power of continuing the existing arrangement in any shape, or allowed the municipal subsidy to be operated upon in the future as it had been operated upon in the past. Moreover, it was important that a distinct decision on this point should be arrived at very soon, because it was probable that the session would close in November, and it could hardly be' expected, all things considered, that the Bill would be got out of committee by that time. In the light of this state of things he would urge that the valuable statistics adduced by the honorable member for Maryborough should be most carefully studied, for only a close attention to the facts of the caRe would enable honorable members to rectify the glaring in­equalit.ies they had to deal with. He ~ould repeat that some absolute decision with respect to the distribution of the subsidy in the future ought to be come to with the smallest possible delay, for there was hardly any hope that the Bill as a whole. would be got through this session. Why, the amendments of which the honor­able member for St Kilda had given notice were almost equal in bulk to the Bill itself, and no doubt they were entitled to most careful attention, because the measure as it stood was unquestionably a very ill-matured affair. It was only a skeleton which honor­able members were called upon to clothe with flesh and blood, and how that process could be accomplished before Christmas, to say the least, was more than he (Mr. Andrews) could say. Under these circum­stances he wished to record his protest against honorable members being dragged into a discussion upon the present measure only to find it disappear before the end of the session, and themselves remitted to a recess in which the matter at issue would be dealt with in much the same way as the charities question had been. He sincerely hoped that the honorable member for Maryborough would persevere in his efforts to secure a plan of distribution which would have some

claim to be regarded as both equitable and likely to receive the approval of the country.

Mr. ORA VEN said he very much re­gretted that the Bill, which was one of very great importance, had been brought forward at so late a period of the session. Indeed, rather than see the measure dealt with too hurriedly, he would prefer that it should be dropped for tIle present and brought up next session, when more time could be devoted to it. (An Honorable Member-" And the £3 to £1 shires kept at their present rate.") At all events he did not intend to refer to more than the endowment clauses. What he could not help looking at was that out of the 192 municipalities of the colony there were only sixteen receiving subsidy at the rate of £3 to £1, and that those sixteen, having only seven honorable members to represent them, found themselves, so far as the House was concerned, in a hopeless minority. U uder these circumstances he would ask that those sixteen municipalities should receive generous treatment. Let honorable members take the case of two of them-the shires of Towong and Yackan­dandah-as a sample. What was their condition? They included a great deal of mountainous country, whereitwasextremely difficult to make roads, yet roads there were greatly needed, for the selected land lay in patches some distance apart. Oonsequently for those shires to lose their £3 to £1 sub­sidy would be like their losing their life. In fact they were at present. in more need of assistance than they ever were before.

The motion for the second reading of the Bill was agreed to.

The Bill was then read a second time and committed.

On clause 1, setting forth the short title of the measure,

Mr. OUTTRIM said he desired to point out that the Bill comprised a great number of provi~ions relating to various matters connected with local government, in which, no doubt, a certain number of honorable members were much interested, but in the clauses relating to endowment almost every honorable member was interested. Under these circumstances what would be the good of wasting time overclausesof comparatively little general interest when the endowment clauses might, by arrangement, be got at at once? He would, therefore, ask the Minister in charge of the Bill to let the endowment clauses be taken first, and the other clauses afterwards.

Mr. ANDERSON remarked that many of the provisions which the honorable

2160 Local Govel'nment [ ASSEl\IBLY.] Act Amendment Bal.

member for Maryborough desired to see passed over for the present were absolutely necessary in order to render the existing Act workable. It would, therefore, be much better to go on with the Bill in the usual way. Besides, the majority of the clauses were mere machinery clauses, and could be disposed of very speedily, for they. ~ere stamped with the approval of the MUlllClpal Association.

Mr. GILLIES stated that the Govern­ment were extremely desirous that the whole of the Bill sh;uld become law this session, for many of its provisions repre­sented what the municipal bodies of the country had been earnestly asking for during a number of years past. At the same time Ministers were even more anxious that the endowment clauses should be passed, and if any difficulty was experieneed in carrying the preceding clauses, his honor­able colleague, the Minister of Public Works, would, he believed, be prepared to go on to the endowment provisions at once.

Mr. BENT expressed the opinion that the Premier had, so far, hit the feeling of the committee. But would it not be best to adopt the suggestion of the honorable member for Marybor~ugh at once? Some of the intervening clauses-clause 3, for instance-would require a great deal of discussion.

The CHAfRMAN. - The honorable member must confine his remarks to the clause before the committee.

Mr. MUNRO remarked that the ruling of the Chairman was, no doubt, perfectly correct, but there was a strong feeling on the part of honorable members that the committee should be enabled to proceed at once with the consideration of clause 33. Would it not be well if that feeling were conceded to? Could not some process be adopted by which clause 33 could be reached without further delay, and dealt with prior to the rest of the Bill? (Mr. Gillies-" Easily.") If there was a process by whic~ the committee could im­mediately get to cllmse 33, it would be well to adopt it.

Mr. ANDERSON observed that the process was simple enough. All that was necessary was, after clause 1 was passed, to postpene the other clauses up to clause 33. (Mr. Munro-" Will you do that 1") Yes.

Clause 1 was agreed to. Mr. ANDERSON moved that clauses

2 to 32 inclusive be postponed.

Mr. BEAZLEY said he objected to the" postponement of these clauses. He did not see why the committee should not go through this Bill in the same way as any other Bill. There was plenty of time to get through the clauses in the ordin:uy sequence.

Mr. McLEAN remarked that there was a large number of honorable members deeply interested in the endowment clauses who did not expect that they would come on that night, and it was very desirable that the matter should be dealt with in a full com­mittee. He would suggest that a date should be fixed for dealing with the endow­ment question, so that all hon0rable mem­bers might be present.

Mr. ·LEVIEN stated that he took the same view as the honorable member for Gippsland North. The committee would be taken by surprise if the endowment clauses were dealt with that night, and it would be better to fix a particular night for dealing with the question.

Mr. MUNRO said he did not know any night in the week when there were so many members present as on a Tuesday night, and he thought it would be better to settle this question right off. That there was a large attendance was shown by the divisions which had been taken, and it was well known that the Bill was to corrie on that night.

Clauses 2 to 32 inclusive were postponed. Discussion took place on clause 33, which

was as follows:-

" " There shall be payable out of the consoli­dated revenue for the endowment of munici­palities in. every year from the 1st day of January, 1891, to the 31st day of December, 1901, the sum of £450,000."

Mr. HUNT said he desired to move that "£450,000 " be struck out, with the view of substituting "£500,000 ". .

The CHAIRMAN. - The honorable member cannot propose an amendment increasing the amount.

Mr. HUNT observed that in that case he could only express the hope that the Treasurer would try to meet the require­ments of the shires which had been receiving £3 to £1. There was a great desire in the country districts that some special consideration should be given to these shires. In his district and others similarly circumstanced, it would be really impossible to carryon local government unless those districts were dealt with more liberally than the Bill proposed.

Mr. GILLIES said he thought the Go­vernment had shown their desire to give

Local Gove1'nment [OCTOBER 21.J .Act .Amendment Bill. 2161

every consideration to the local bodies by increasing the endowment by £140,000-from £310,000to £450,000. He could assure honora.ble members that it would not be possible to keep on increasing this endow­ment, and it was certainly hopeless to expect any further increase to be made at the present time. It was quite impossible to do so, and to place a permanent charge exceeding what the Government had asked Parliament to vote would in his judgment be a most grave mistake, which would lead to serious difficulty.

Mr. MASON remarked that the Premier ga.ve the £3 to £1 shires to understand, many months ago-before this Bill was introduced at all-that they would be placed on the same footing that they had previously occupied. But what was the position of those shires now? This Bill proposed to red uce by at least one-third the amount of subsidy which those shires had been receiving for the last six or seven years. It would be impossible for those local bodies to carryon local self-government in a manner satisfactory to the residents of the localities without the additional sub­sidy. He would appeal to honorable mem­bers generally whether they were going to punish these few shires by this reduction, while the other local bodies would only be benefited to the extent of a few shillings in the pound. If the total amount of the subsidy was increased to £500,000 as pro­posed by the honorable member for Anglesey, these £3 to £1 shires would have some prospect of having their sub­sidies continued as in the past. The Bill had not been introduced in the form the public were led to believe it would be, on the basis of the old endowment. The £3 to £1 shires were losing £1 5s. or £1 6s., while the other local bodies were only benefiting to the extent of 2s. or 3s. in the pound. He trusted honorable members would see the justice of giving special consideration to those local bodies which were so heavily handicapped-where the people had only tracks to travel on, and where the country was heavily timbered and covered with dense scrub, so that selectors had to bring their families to selections on pack-horses. He thought the Government, in fairness to those districts, should agree to increase the amount of the subsidy. Although there was a technical difficulty in the way of a private member proposing an increase, if the majority of the com­miUee were in favour of the increase the difficulty could be easily got over.

Mr. WHEELER observed that on the second reading of the Bill he pointed out that it was not possible for the £3 to £1 shires to do with less money than they re­ceived now, and he felt that they were deserving of consideration from the Govern­ment and the Assembly. He had himself intended to move an amendment for the increase of the subsidy to £500,000, but as the Treasurer had stated that it was impos­sible that the sum could be increased he (Mr. Wheeler) presumed that the honorable gentleman was speaking from a Treasurer's point of view, and that the money could not be found this year. Of course, if the Trea­surer had not the money, it was impossible for the increase to be made. However, if the increase could be granted, he would like to see the extra £50,000 voted separately from the £450,000 and given to the £3 to £1 shires, to make up the amount they had hitherto been receiving. If this were done it would be something like a fair and equit­able way of dealing with the matter. The Treasurer represented that the Government had been very good in increasing the amount· of the subsidy from £310,000 to £450,000, but he might have been equally candid in pointing out that he did not propose in future to give special grants. These grants had amounted to £100,000 in many years, and therefore the liberality of the Govern­ment was not quite so great as the Treasurer would make it appear. To his (Mr. Wheeler's) mind the net gain to the municipalities was very little more than £40,000 a year. If. the Government did increase the subsidy, ,would it not be money spent in the country to the very best advantage? It would be a very grea~ boon indeed to the municipal bodies if the Treasurer could see his way to afford the increase asked for the honorable member for Anglesey.

Mr. BENT said the increase in the sub­sidy only represented little more than the amount usually voted in special grants, so that the Government did not lose much by the transaction. He would suggest tha.t, if the total amount of the subsidy could not be increased, £400,000 should be voted for the other municipalities, and £50,000 for the £3 to £1 shires. Would the Premier have any objection to that? (Mr. Gillies­"I have no objection, if the committee thinks proper to distribute the money in that way.") Although he represented a district which only receive:! about £1,200 a year, he would vote lor £50,000 being 'diviqed among the £3 to £1 shires. He

_2162 Local Government [ASSEMBLY.] Act Amendment Bill.

would, however, leave it to those interested to propose an amendment to that effect.

Mr. GROOM observed that it would be a reasonable arrangement to divide £420,000 1)1'0 mta, and allow the £3 to £1 shires to share the remaining £30,000.

Mr. ANDRE WS inquired whether a -discussion of the plan of distribution was in order on this clause?

The CHAIRMAN.-No; it is quite irregular. The discussion should take place ·on the next clause.

Mr. ANDREWS observed that the Treasurer had stated that it was impossible to increase the total amount of the subsidy, and he (Mr. Andrews) quite sympathized wit.h that view. He thought Parliament bad gone quite far enough in regard to .special appropriations in this direction. This amount was being placed out of the control of the representatives of the people, and personally he was hostile to these special appropriations at all.

Mr. McLEAN expressed the opinion that either the amount of the subsidy should be increased )r some understanding should be arrived at as to the distribution before disposing of this clause. He regretted very much that they had heard from the Treasurer that night that the country could not stand allY further increase in the endowment. It would have been very much better if they had been told that when, within the last year, they were giving up £300,000 or £400,000 worth of revenue never asked for by the country, or when they were voting away £3,000,000 worth of the country's property a few weeks ago to a few municipalities. There was only a portion of one shire in his electorate that was endowed on the higher scale, but that shire had more difficulty in carrying on its work than any other he knew of. It had borrowed up to the full extent of its powers, and £7,000 or £8,000

. worth of works constructed out of borrowed money had been destroyed by floods. It was impossible for the shire to borrow money to reconstruct those works, which were absolutely necessary to preserve communica­tion between two sides of the river. . There were a number of other £3 to £1 shires' which could not possibly provide reasonable accommodation for traffic if their subsidy . was reduced to the extent proposed by the' Bill. Although there were only seven re­presentatives of those shires in the Assem­bly, he hoped honorable members generally would not inflict this hardship upon them, and that they would arrive at some mode of distribuiion which would be reasonably fair

to those districts which had such excep­tional difficulties to contend with. He could not really see why they should not in­crease the endowment bv some reasonable amount, in order to mak~ special provision for those shires. Even if Parliament had to re-impose some taxation, which would not be felt. by the country, that would be far better than to paralyze traffic in these new districts.

Mr. LEVIEN remarked that of course it was to be regretted, as the honorable member for Gippsland North had stated, that matters were not made more clear when the House was giving up so much revenue in what was known as the" boom " Budget, but they had all been parties to that. At the same time, he thought these large special grants to new districts like Gipps­land could not be justified. Parties had gone there knowing it was expensive country to deal with, and had taken up land which the State gave them for next to nothing .. It was unfair and unreasonable that those persons should expect the taxpayers generally to pay for improving their pro­perty, and making it worth from £20 to £50 an acre. Let them tax themselves, seeing that the work was for the benefit of their own property. They might be entitled to some little consideration in connexion with works which were not purely local­such as the construction of bridges, which would benefit perhaps a whole community­but he, for one, objected to the State supply­ing large sums to those districts to benefit the property of a handful of people. He submitted that there should not be these differences made in the distribution of the endowment, but that the shires should share and share alike. If a good case was made out at any time for a special grant, he was sure that those shires would have no reason to complain of the generosity of the House.'

Mr. HALL said he thought the difficulty might be got over if the committee passed this clause as it stood, and in connexion with the next olause, relating to the dis­tribution of the endowment, adopted the recommendations made by the municipal conference which met some time ago, to divide the subsidy in the proportion sug­gested by the honorable member for Mary­borough. Then in the case of those shires which were exceptionally situated, like the shires in Gippsland, he did not think the Government would refuse to provide a few special grants. He believed that honor­able members would not object to a special grant bei~g given here and thel'e where a

Local Government [OCTOBER 21.] Act Amendment Bill. 2163

good case wa's made out. The statement of the Treasurer that the total amount of the subsidy could not be increased was, no doubt, startling to some honorable members,

. in view of the sums of money which had been given away in other directions. The position showed that he (Mr. Hall) was perfectly justified, a week or so ago, when he drew attention to some of the items on the Estimates. He maintained that the £3,000 which was given to the Victorian Orchestra would have been far better ex­pended if it bad been devoted to the local bodies.

Sir B. O'LOGHLEN suggested that the clause should be postponed, and that the Premier next day should bring down a message for increasing the endowment to £500,000. (Mr. Gillies-" It can't be done.") There was no doubt that £450,000 was little enough to divide among the muni­cipalities generally, and if the £3 to £1 shires deserved extra consideration, as he believed they did, an additional sum should be provided. The Premier was very liberal to these districts in the matter of railways, and he should show a little liberality in the matter of roads and bridges. It was all nonsense saying that there was not money in the Treasury to provide the additional amount required. If the thing ought to be done, let it be done, and there was no doubt that the money would be forthcoming. The extra £50,000 would make little difference in the financial result of the year.

Mr. BURROWES stated that all honor­able members must admit that £450,000 was a very liberal subsidy for Parliament to give to the municipalities. If the Treasurer had proposed £500,000, some honorable member would have asked for £600,000, and the line must be drawn somewhere. \Vhile old shires had been receiving a subsidy for the last twenty-five or thirty years, the new shires, such as those in Gippsland, had only been receiving it for a comparatively few years. Some little consideration ought to be shown for the newly settled parts of the colony, and it would be very hard to deprive those shires of the assistance they had received in the past, and been led to expect for some time, at any rate, in the future. If the Gipps­land shires had made out a fair case for .assistance in regard to roads or bridges, or damage by floods, help should be given to ·them in the way of special grants.

Mr. WOODS said he was very sorry that the Government had proposed to increase the municipal endowment to the extent of .£140,000 per year. No Act of Parliament

was ever passed by this or any other legislative body in the world that had done so much to demoralize the community as the payment of this subsidy to the local bodies out of the general revenue. There were a thousand other ways in which relief could be better given. The Government collected taxes in the various municipalities, and after spending a large amount of money on the colleetion of those taxes they doled the proceeds of the taxation out again in whatever proportions they thought proper, reducing local government to a perfect mockery. There were six metropolitan cities, seven metropolitan towns, four metropolitan boroughs, and four metro­politan shires who received in the aggre­gate no less than £84,000 last year out of the general revenue of the colony. . Was it fair that the miners of Stawell, working i.n their claims, should have to contribute P1'O

rata towards providing that £84,000 for wealthy communities, which were popu­lated, to a large extent, by non-producers, middle men, and agents? It was most unfair. The municipalities should be left to cut their coats according to their cloth; and in ·cases of emergency, such . as floods, &c., special grants should be given in preference to the present systematised organized demorali­zation. He did not like to characterize it by the term it required; in fact, he was afraid the Chairman would not allow him to use the only expression that would properly characterize the system. The municipalities should get their local revenues and expend them. That was the sort of socialism in which he believed. There was some show of independence among the municipalities of the colony before this demoralizing system was introduced by the Treasurer, and before the colony wa.s demoralized by this annual scramble for the municipal endowment. There was another name for it, which the rules of Parliament forbade him to use, but it meant payment for services received. That was about the meaning of it, call it what they liked. The Government virtually said to each mem .. ber-" We propose to give this sum to your constituents; are you not going to vote for this Government that proposes to rob the community in order to give so much toyour constituents 1" Why should rich munici­palities in the neighbourhood of Melbourne, who were well able to pay their own way, and who were supported by the country generally, be allowed grants from this

.municipal subsidy? The whole system

2164 - Local Government [ASSEMBLY.] Act Amendment Bill.

needed re-casting. Could not the munici­palities collect the local revenues in their respective districts at a less cost than the present highly-paid Government officers? And instead of giving them more money out of the municipal subsidy,_ why not adopt that method of encouraging local govern­ment, allowing the local bodies to collect and expend the local revenues? He knew that his words would have no more effect on the committee than pouring water on a duck's back, hut he was bound to give expression to his views, and protest against the continuance of a policy that took away that self-reliance which ought to be the credit and glory of local government in this colony.

The clause was agreed to. Discussion took place on clause 34, which

was as follows :-"For section 352 of the principal Act, the fol­

lowing section shall be substituted, namely:-" '352. There shall be payable out of such

moneys in such year to every municipality, including the city of Melbourne and town of Geelong, a sum by way of endowment, to be computed, in the case of the shires and part of a shire hereinafter mentioned in that behalf, at the rate -of £3 for every £1; in the case of other shires, at the rate of £2 for every £1 ; and in the case of boroughs, at the rate of £1 for every £1 of general rates received therein respectively, but so that the endowment to any one borough shall not exceed the sum of £2,000. Provided always that if the council of any municipality have made and levied within any year a general rate or rates exceeding in the whole the amount of one shilling in the pound, then only such portion of the sum actually re­ceived by such council in respect of such general rate or rates as bears to the whole sum so re­ceived the same proportion which one shilling bears to the whole amount in the pound so made as general rates in such year shall, for the pur­poses of the payment to be made to such coun­cil out of such moneys, be deemed to have been received by such council; and in case the amount of such moneys be not sufficient to admit of payment in manner hereinbefore pro­vided, then a proportionate reduction shall be made in the amount which, but for this proviso, would haTe been paid to each municipality.

" 'The shires to receive endowment at the rate of £3 for every £1 of general rates shall be the following (that is to say) :-Alberton, Alexandra, Bairnsdale, Buln Buln, Howqua, Narracan,Omeo, Towong, Traralgon, Tambo, Walhalla, Warragul, W oorayl, Yackandandah, Yea. And the shire of Avon shall receive endowment at the rate of £3 for every £1 of general rates received in respect of the district now constituting the North riding of such shire, and the difference between the amount of en­dowment received in respect of such district and the amount which would have been received had the shire been entitled to endowment only at the rate of £2 for every £1 of general rates received therein, shall be dealt with in every way as if it were endowment received in respect

of extra rates made and levied in such district now constituting the North riding.' "

Mr. TURNER moved the insertion, after the words" there shall be payable out of," (line 3) of the words "£420,000 part of" such moneys. He thought the shires to whom it was proposed to give £3 to £1 were fnirly entitled, considering the difficulties under which they labourerl, to every consideration Parliament could give them, and as it was not possible to increase the municipal sub­sidy, he desired that, instead of dividing the whole of the £450,000 in the manner proposed by the Government, they should divide £420,000 P1'O mta among all shires and boroughs in the proportion of £1 to £1 for boroughs and £2 to £1 for shires, leaving £30,000, which he proposed should be allocated among the exceptionally situated shires named in the Bill, according to the amount of their general rates. Under this arrangement he believed the various cities and towns in and around Melbourne would get at least as much as they were getting now. They might receive 6d. or 7d. in the £1 less than they would get under the system which the Government now proposed, but he thought they ought to be willing to give up such a small amount in order that justice might he done to the shires named in the Bill. As far as his district was concerned, he had no hesitation in giving it up. Under his amendment, the shires now supposed to be receiving £2 to £1 would get about £1 16s. to £1, while the shires which were supposed to receive £3 to £1 would get £2 15s to £1. This was a fair compromise and ought to be accepted.

Mr. OUTTRIM remarked that if the amendment of the honorable member for St. Kilda was adopted it would virtually shut out the amendment of which he had given notice at the request of 150 munici­palities of the colony. He begged to suggest that he should be allowed to submit his amendment, and that the honorable member for St. Kilda might move the present amendment after his (Mr. Outtrim's) proposal had been dealt with. There was objection to the payment of £3 to £1 t<> such shires as Bairnsdale, which had received £120,000 during the last eleven years, but many otl1er- shires deserved the utmost consideration that Parliament could give to them.

Mr. TUTHILL observed that honorable members had no desire to deny justice to the shires that deserved special considera­tion, but the municipal subsidy should in

Local Govemment [OCTOBER 21.] Act Amendment Bill. 2165

future be distributed on some fixed prin­ciple, and not on any rule of thumb. Honor­able members had advanced no reasons why the fifteen shires named in the clause should receive £3 to £1, save that they had been getting it for the last fifteen or sixteen years. (Mr. A. Harris-"No, they have not.") A number of them had, and for years past they had also been receiving special grants out of the Estimates, although no substantial reason for those grants was given. Some of the shires in question deserved £3 to £1 and others did not, and the names of more deserving and more needy shires ought to be substituted. In­stead of the whole of the £450,000 being distributed, some £30,000 or £25,000 of the amount should be retained by the Go­vernment for the purpose of dealing out timely assistance to those shires that could show special claims for assistance. (Mr. Turner-" Then favoritism might come in.") Well, he would rather see something like discreet favoritism than the allocation of the money on the rule of thumb. Hon­orable members would have an opportunity of discussing the mattel' on the Estimates, and of dealing justly by those shires that merited special consideration.

Mr. GROOM suggested that progress should be reported, so that honorable mem- , bel's interested in the matter might meet next morning and try to come to some rea­sonable arrangement with regard to the allocation of the municipal endowment. It was perfectly clear that an arrangement could not be arrived at on the present occasion.

Mr. McLEAN expressed the opinion that time was required for further considera­tion of the proposals before the committee. Honorable members were evidently prepared to deal fairly with shires that had special claims, but they wished to arrange a proper basis for the apportionment of the municipal subsidy. The honorable member for St. Kilda would be able to show the effect of carrying out his proposal-how much the cities, towns, and boroughs would lose, and how much the other municipalities would gain if his proposal were adopted. The request for a postponement was quite reason­able, in view of the fact that an important question affecting the interests of munici­palities for many years to come was to be determined.

Mr. RIOHARDSON said he would like the honorable member for Maryborough to state his proposal, and he also desired, before progress was reported, to hear the reasons

SESe 1890.-7 0

of the Government for inserting the pro­visions with regard to the distribution of the subsidy, and their objections to the amendments, if they intended to abide by the proposals contained in the Bill.

Mr. 0 U TTRIM stated that he was opposed to the proposal to report progress, as it would jeopardize the chance of having the matter dealt with this session. His amendment had been before the House for two months, so that there had been ample time to consider it and to consult with the municipalities. He asked honorable mem­bers representing the 150 municipalities, whose mouth-piece he was, to proceed with the consideration of the question.

Mr. TURNER remarked that his amend. ment was not at all counter to the pr@posal of the honorable member for Maryborough. He agreed with the view of the honorable member that the shires scheduled in the Bill were entitled to exceptional considera­tion. (Mr. Tuthill-" Some of them are.") Well, if any of those in the list did not deserve exceptional consideration they could be struck out at tlle proper time-he would have no objection to that-his only desire being to see a fair compromise. He was quite willing that £420,000 of the municipal subsidy should be divided on the basis desired by the honorable member for Maryborough, if £30,000 was reserved for such shires as might be deemed worthy to receive special aid.

Mr. ANDREWS expressed the opinion that the best plan would be to carry the amendment of the honorable member for Maryborough first, as it dealt with the distribution of the subsidy in a compre­hensive manner, and consider the question raised by the honorable member for St. Kilda afterwards. Some of the shires in the £3 to £1 list should be struck out, and more deserving shires inserted. He hoped the honorable member for Maryborough would be allowed an opportunity of ex­plaining his amendment forthwith.

Mr. MASON observed that the he~t course would be to report progress, so as to enable the Minister of Public Works to be able to inform the House the following day what would be the exact effect of each of the amendments. He was sure the committee would see that fair play and justice were done to the local bodies. It would he impossible for some of the muni­cipalities to carryon if they were to be deprived suddenly of the proportion of sub aidy which they had been accustomed to receive.

2166 Local Gove1'nment . [ASSEMBLY.] Act Amendment Bill.

Mr. ANDERSON said the committee would be in a very much better position to determine the question after hearing all the proposals and the reasons in support of them. Honorable members could then thrash the whole matter out, and come prepared to vote on the question.

Mr. STERRY stated that the honorable member for Gippsland South desired to know what would be the effect of the very liberal proposal made by the honorable mem­ber for St. Kilda? Well, it was an easy matter to calculate. The total valuation of the £3 to £1 shires for the year 1889 was £509,000, and a rate or ] s. in the £1 would bring in about £25,000. There­fore, the £30,000 which it was proposed to disburse among those shires would be equal to £1 4s. in the £1 over and above wha.t the shires would receive out of the £420,000. (Mr. Turner-" They would only get £2 to £1 instead of £3 to £1 out of the £420,000.") Quite so; they would get the same as the other shires out of the £420,000, and £1 4s. to £1 additional, taking the valuations of last year. The shire of Warragul was receiving subsidy at the rate of £50 per square mile of the area of that shire. Its area was 152 square miles, and the municipality received £7,200 subsidy in 1889, an increase of £2,850 as compared with what the same shire re­ceived a few years before. The Gippsland shires had been growing in wealth and importance, their lands were some of the richest in the colony, while the lands in the Maryborollgh district and in his own dis­trict were among the poorest in the colony; in fact, nothing but a great amount of labour and capital in the establishment of vineyards could make those lands of any greater value. (Mr. Mason-" Don't you get money for irrigation works? ") No; and the shire of Strathfieldsaye, with an area of 230 square miles, had only a total income from all sources, subsidy included, of £2,300 per annum. Justice ought to be done to those shires which had been struggling for years with poor land and small incomes.

Mr. GROOM remarked that in districts like Maryborough, where the land was poor and the climate dry, it was easy to keep the roads in good order; while the real difficulty occurred in shires like that of Warragul, where the land was rich and the climate wet. There was not a more thickly-populated shire in the colony than that of Warragul, nor was there any other district in which the land was so easily cut up under heavy rain.

These were the shires which required special consideration.

Mr. McLEAN pointed out that if the committee limited the amount that anyone shire could obtain, it would encourage sub. division, which was not a desirable thing. The committee ought to endeavuur to en­courage the aggregation of municipalities, with a view to economizing the working expenses.

Mr. WILLIAMS remarked that no subdi\Tision could take place without the consent of the Minister of Public Works, and the Minister would naturally exercise a proper discretion in the matter.

Mr. RICHARDSON observed that no private member could deal with the endow­ment question. Two distinct proposals had emanated from the honorable member for St. Kilda and the honorable member for Maryborollgh, in addition to the proposal contained in the Bill, and the Government ought to say what it proposed to do in this important matter.

Mr. ANDERSON said he would like to have all the proposals before the committee that night, so that they would be able to enter upon a final discussion of them at the next meeting. The proposition of the Go­vernment was simply the old one, slightly modified. He knew where the shoe pinched with the municipalities, and he believed that if all the shires were made subject to the same reduction there would be much less dissatisfaction.

Mr. RICHARDSON stated that the Minister ought to lay before the com~ittee the views or the Government in regard to: the different proposals which had ber.ll made, in order that the committee might be seized of the proposals and views of the Govern­ment in regard to them at the same time.

Mr. WHEELER said he quite agreed with the Premier that it was almost impos­sible in the case of this Bill to discuss one particular amendment without discussing all that bore upon the subject. He had an amendment to propose himself, and he would like to have all the amendments bear­ing on the endowment question submitted together, to see if they could not be made the foundation of a new clause.

Mr. MUNRO remarked that it would be quite impracticable for the Chairman to receive half-a-dozen amendments at the same time. The best plan would be to have all the amendments printed and laid before the Minister, who could then study them in pri vate before the next meeting of the House. He moved that progress be reported.

Pel'sonal Explanations. [OCTOBER 22.J Railway Depa1'tment. 2167

The committee divided-Ayes- .•• 38 Noes ... 26

Majority for reporting progress... 12

Mr. Andrews, " Armytage, " Beazley, " Bowman, " Brock, " Burrowes, " W. T. Carter, " Clark, " Craven, " Forrest, " Groom, " A. Harris, " J. Harris, " Hunt, " Keys, " Kirton, " Langridge, " Laurens, " McLean, " :Mason,

Mr. Anderson, " Bailes, " Baker, " Cameron, " G. D. Carter, " Deakin, " Derham, " Dow, " Dunn, " Gillies, " Graham,

AYES.

Mr. Methven, " Munro, " Murray,

Sir B. O'Loghlen, Mr. Richardson, " Shiels, " C. Smith, " T. Smith,

Lt. - Col. Smith, Mr. Sterry,

" Stuart, " Taverner, " Uren, " Webb, " Wheeler, " Zox.

Tellers. Mr. Shackell, " Turner.

NOE~.

Mr. Mountain, " Murphy, " Officer, " Outtrim, " Peacook,

Dr. Pearson, Mr. L. L. Smith, " Tatchell, " Tuthill, " A. Young.

" Hall, Tellers. " Levien, Mr. McColl,

Dr. Maloney, " Williams.

Progress was then reported.

MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

This Bill was returned from the Legis­lative Council, with a message intimating that they had agreed to the same with an amendment.

The message was ordered to be taken into consideration next day.

PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS.

Mr. G. D. OARTER said he regr.etted that he was absent from the House when the motion of the honorable member for Port Fairy in regard to the labour difficulty came on. Had he been in his place he would have voted with the minoritv.

Mr. DERHAM remarked that he was also absent on the occasion referred to, and that had he been present he would have voted with the honorable member for Port Fairy.

70!

SESSIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.

Mr. OUTTRIM asked the Premier if he would make arrangements for the House to meet at an earlier hour during the closing days of the session?

Mr. GILLIES stated that he intended shortly to ask the House to meet earlier than usual on some days, to secure the more speedy despatch of business.

The House adjourned at three minutes to eleven o'clock.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Wednesday, October 22, 1890.

Railway Department: Racing Days at Caulfield-Goulburn River-Melbourne Hydraulic Power Company's Act Amendment Bill-Suburban Tramways Company Bill -Mines Act Amendment Bill.

The PRESIDENT took the chair at twenty minutes to five o'clock p.m., and read the prayer.

RAILWAY DEPARTMENT.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES asked the Minister of Justice whether some arrange­ment could be made to enable passengers to Hawksbl1rn, Toorak, Armadale, and Malvern to travel by train to and from Melbourne on the days on which races were held at Caulfield as on other days? He stated that on several days lately the traffic on this railway had been very much dis. turbed, to make way for the special traffic to the Oaqlfield station on racing days, and the result had been great inconvenience to the ordinary passengers. He had no desire to interfere with the comforts or convenience of the racing public, but he did not think tha.t the residents along the line should be made to suffer too much. (Mr. Cuthbert-" It is only two days a year.") The great meetings took place only twice a year, but there was racing at Caulfield at other times, when it was quite a common thing for a passenger to be carried past the particular station at which he wished to stop.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT stated that he had received the following memorandum on the subject from the Chairman of the Railway Commissioners:-

" It is impossible to make any other arrange­ment than is made for the accommodation of the race and local traffic on the special days of the Caulfield meeting, which amotmt to two days per

2168 S~tburban Tramways [COUNCIL.] Company Bill.

annum; the trains have to be passed over one line as rapidly as it is possible to get them through, and if the ordinary train service stop­ping at every station were run on these days during the busy hours, the whole traffic would be disorganized. The local public are con­venienced by trains at intervals, although they do not, of course, run as frequently as on ordinary occasions; but the provisions made are in the interest of the greatest number, and everything is done to reduce to a minimum the incon­venience to the smaller number."

The Hon. W. A. ZEAL expressed the opinion that it was very unfair to incon­venience the regular residents along the route of the railway referred to, for the sake of occasional travellers upon it.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT remarked that the special traffic on race days only lasted during certain hours, and the incon­venience suffered by the regular travellers on the line was after all not very great. Besides, it should not be forgotten that the interference, whatever it was, only occurred on two days in the year.

GOULBURN RIVER.

The Hon. J. S. BUTTERS moved that the petition presented by him on the 14th instant from certain residents of Nagambie, Seymour, and Waranga districts be printed.

The motion was agreed to.

MELBOURNE HYDRAULIC PO\VER COMPANY'S

ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

The House went into committee for the consideration of this Bill.

The whole of the clauses llaving been agreed to, the Bill was reported without amendment, and the report was adopted.

On the motion of the Bon. W. A. ZEAL, the Bill was then read a third time and passed.

SUBURBAN TRAMWAYS COMPANY BILL.

The House went into committee for the further consideration of this Bill.

On elauRe 2 (interpretation clause), Sir F. T. SARGOOD called attention

to the following definition :-" The word' oath' shall include a declaration

and an affirmation in cases where persons are allowed by law to declare or affirm." .

He stated that this definition was unneces­sary, because due provision with respect to the matter was contained in the Acts Interpretation Act. He moved that the definition be omitted.

The amendment was agreed to.

On clause 12, providing, z'nte1' alz'a, that­"Where the roadway as formed has a width

between the outsides of the footpaths exceed­ing 33 feet the tramway shall be so laid that at no part thereof for a distance of 200 feet or up­wards a less space than 9 feet and 6 inches shall inte~vene ~etween the outside of the footpath on eIther SIde of the road and the nearest rail of the tramway."

Sir F. T. SARGOOD observed that section 12 of the Melbourne Tramway and Omnibus Oompany's Act fixed the distance in question at 30 feet instead of 200 feet.

The Hon. W. A. ZEAL expressed the opinion that the provision in the clause was reasonable enough.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES remarked that the Bill was very carefully examined by the various municipal bodies concerned, and they raised no objection on the score referred to.

On clause 14, empowering the company to break up streets, &c., subject to regula­tions, and providing in sub-section 6 that the company should not, without the consent of the local authority, open or break up at anyone time a greater length than 400 yards of any road,

Sir F. T. SARGOOD pointed out, with reference to sub-section 6, that the limita­tion in the Melbourne Tram'way and Omnibus Company's Act was 100 yards.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES stated that when the Bill was first introduced the limita­tion was 700 yards,and the select committee, after argument, altered it to 400 yards. The lines of the new company would not pay so well as those of the old one, and it was de­sirable to give every facility for construction. No objection had been raised by the city corporation.

On clause 15, providing, inte1' alz'a, that the company should pay the cost of con­structing, and also "two-thirds of the costs, charges, and expenses" incurred in maintaining crossings, &c., with the Mel­bourne company's lines,

The Hon. W. A. ZEAL moved the­omission of the words "two-thirds o f.'" The marginal note made reference to an English Act, 26 & 27 Vict., c. 92, s. 12,. and he found that tRis Act obliged a new companyjunctioning with a company already in existence to pay all the charges and keep· up the junction. A crossing, he might point out, involved precisely the same super­vision as a junction.

The Hon. J. SERVICE said the word " junction" was used in the English Act,. and the word "crossing" in the Victorian Act, but he thought there was a clear-

Suburban Tramways [OCTOBER 22.] Company Bill. 2169

-distinct.ion between the two things. In the present instance, howe'Ver, the new company had as much right over the road as the old ·company had; the crossings were entirely for the benefit of the new company, and he thought the proportion of payment named in the clause was very fair.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES stated that this clause was inserted by the select com­mittee. A suggestion was made that one­half of the costs should be borne by each company, and ultimately the committee recommended that the new company should bear all the cost of making the crossings, and two-thirds of the cost of maintenance. The old company was not satisfied with this, and wanted to throw the whole of the cost upon the new company. In England, it must be remembered, the land belonged to the railway or tramway company, while here the streets did not belong to the company, and the question might now be settled once for all whether the old company was to have an absolute monopoly of the streets to the exclusion of future tramways without paying the cost of crossings. The new tramway lines would cross the old ones in about four places, and two-thirds of the burden of maintenance seemed to be a fair share to place upon the new company.

The Hon. W. A. ZEAL observed that while in England the company would have the fee-simple of the land, the company here was practically worse off than if it pos­sessed the fee-simple, because it was obliged ultimately to surrender the works to the municipalities.

The Hon. N. FITZGERALD said it was not worthy or the old company to raise this point, considering the large concessions it had obtained.

The Hon. J. M. PRATT pointed out that the old company had not only to main­tain their roads, but to hand them over in good working order to the municipalities at the end of the lease, which might involve reconstruction.

The amendment was negatived. On clause 41, empowering the company

to publish advertisements upon the inside of carriages or cars, any statute or by-law to the contrary notwithstanding,

The Hon. J. RERVIOE suggested that power ought to be reserved to the Governor in Oouncil to approve of by-laws of the kind referred to in the clause.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES said the words had been taken from the Melbourne company's Act.

The Hon. O. J. HAM stated that the tram-cars in New Zealand were greatly dis­figured by the use of exterior advertisements, and he hoped that the practice would not be allowed in Melbourne. .

The Hon. T. DOWLING remarked that advertisements might as well be allowed out­side the tram-cars, as the city of Melbourne was plastered with advertisements from one end to the other.

Sir B. BEN.J AMIN observed that the by-laws or the city corporation prohibited the use of advertisements on the outside of licensed vehicles. During the recent elec­tion for the Melbourne Province, a placard round a vehicle was ordered to be removed.

The Hon. O. J. HAM remarked that the by-laws or the city corporation had no effect beyond the city limits.

The Hon. W. A. ZEAL moved the addi tion to thp. clause of the following words:-

"Provided always that no placards or adver­tisements shall be placed on the outside of such carriages, cars, or other conveyances."

He could corroborate the statement of Mr. O. J. Ham, that the advertisements on the outside or trams in New Zealand became a great nuisance. Some or the advertisements were very objectionable.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES said he did not think the amendment necessary, but he would not object to it.

The amendment was agreed to. On clause 51, referring to inquiries before

a referee appointed by the Suburban Tram­ways Board,

. The Hon .• J. M. DAVIES proposed an amendment to provide that a witness failing to attend an inquiry when summoned should be liable to a fine not exceeding £5.

The amendment was agreed to. Formal amendments were made in

various clauses and in the 4th schedule. The Bill was then reported with amend­

ments.

MINES AOT AMENDMENT BILL.

The House went into committee for the consideration or this Bill.

Discussion took place on clause 2, which was as follows :-

'.' Notwithstanding the provisions contained in the 327th and 329th sections of the principal Act, leases may be granted under the provisipns of such principal Act of mines under the lands excepted therein freed and discharged from all liability on the part of the applicant of the owners taking payment of purchase money or consent of owner or trustees as mentioned in

2170 Mines Act [COUNOIL.] Amendment Bill.

such sections, and notwithstanding such owner or trustees do not consent thereto, but the granting of such lease shall be subject to the following conditions and restrictions."

The Hon. A. WYNNE proposed the insertion, after" granted" (line 3), of the words" within the mining district of Sand­hurst."

The amendment was agreed to. Sir F. T. SARGOOD observed that this

clause, so far as the mining district of Sandhurst was concerned, would do away entirely with the 327th and 329th sections of the Mines Act 1890. (Mr. Wynne­"Subject to the payment of compen­sation.") He referred principally to the section excepting from mining land on which there was "any spring, artificial reservoir, dam, or sneep-wash." There was not so much water in the colony that the risk should be run of losing what there was, and he was advised that it would be a most dangerous thing to pass this clause. It was possible to purchase the right to mine for gold at too great a cost-at the cost of losing most vnluable improvements in con­nexion with the supply of water.

The Hon. J. SERVIOE asked if it was intended to confine the operation of the measure entirely to the Sandhurst district?

The Hon. A. vVYNNE said it was not. The present clause and the two following ones were confined to the Sandhurst district. By a new clause, of wl1ich he had given notice, he proposed to qualify this clause by compelling the applicant to pay eompensa­tion, and he could not see what objection there wonld be to take a reservoir or dam if the owner was compensated in the manner. provided by the principal Act.

The Hon. J. SEBVICE observed that the clause was peculiarly worded. He. thought honorable members did not under­stand the Bill, and required more time to consider it. He therefore begged to move that the Chairman report progress. The clause ended in a very unusual manner, by stating that "the granting of such lease shall be subject to the following conditions and restrictions." 'Vhen such phraseology was used, the conditions were generally given in sub-sections of the same clause, but in the Bill the conditions were supposed to be contained in subsequent clauses. It was difficult to tell at what point the limitation of the Bill to Sandhurst alone ceased and its' application to the colony as a whole began.

The Hon. A. WYNNE stated that the present clause, and also clauses 3 and 4,

would apply to Sandhurst alone, because­clause 2 provided that leases could be granted only for the Sandhurst district. Re­thought it was scarcely fair to seek to report progress, as honorable members had had an ample opportunity of studying the Bill and the proposed amendments which had been· drafted for incorporation in it. (Mr. Butters -" It is practically a new Bill; and should be reprinted.") That could not be done at the present stage. The new clauses which had been given notice of must be dealt with as amendments. He would point out that some of those clauses had been drawn t() assist the Mining department, which was· blocked, owing to there being no power to subdivide leases.

The Hon. T. DOWLING supported the proposal to report progress. Honorable members were not there to draft Bills, and they ought to have a measure before them which was properly drafted. Moreover, there were honorable members absent who were greatly interested in this subject.

The Hon. J. 1\:1. DAVIES considered that it would be scarcely fair to ask the honorable member in charge of the Bill to withdraw it and introduce a new Bill, as the end of the session was approaching. He thought the committee ought to be able to say whether they would accept the pro­posals or not, instead of shelving the Bill in any side way.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT said that, in the interests of his constituents at Ballarat,. he would certainly have opposed the Bill had it remained general in its application. As the present clause, however, with the clauses dependent upon it, had been limited to the Sandhurst mining district, he did not intend to offer any opposition to them; but as to the rest of the Bill and the amend­ments which had been drafted, he considered. himself quite free to object to any of them.

The Hon. J. SERVICE observed that when he moved that progress be reported it was not with any intention of obstructing the Bill, but merely to obtain information. As it was now distinctly understood that the leasing clauses were limited to Sand­hurst, he would ask leave to withdraw the· motion for reporting progress.

Sir F. T. SARGOOD remarked that the question of water rights still remained. The· honorable member in charge of the Bill stated that compensation was to be paid,. but what compensation could be awarded in the case of a dam when perhaps it was the only catching ground a man had? When the principal Act was being passed, a very

ltfines A.ct [OCTOBER 22.J A.mendment Bill. 217~

lengthy discussion took place on this q ues­tion, and he confessed that he had a very strong feeling in favour of the two sections of the principal Act which it was proposed to do away with. He thought the Oouncil ought to pause very considerably before inter­fering with them. Every encouragement should be given to mining for gold, but not at the expense of other equally important iud ustries.

The motion for reporting progress was withdrawn.

The Hon. H. OUTHBERT moved the substitution for the words "of the owners taking payment of purchase money" (lines 6-7) of the words ,. t<? pay to the owners any purchase money."

The Hon. D. HAM expressed the opinion that this clause would open the door to the very trouble which the promoters of the measure sought to remedy. Many public streets and public buildings in Ballarat were directly over the old alluvial workings, o~ adjacent to the gutters, and it would not be safe to allow mining at a depth of 400 feet. (Mr. W ynne-" This clause is confined to ~andhurst, and there is no alluvial mining there.") With that limitation it might, perhaps, be safely passed. He quite ap­proved of the removal of all obstacles in the way of legitimate mining, and as all parties were to receive just compensation, there could be no objection to this proposal. Under existing arrangements many mining compani~s had either to pay black-mail or find, after spending thousands of pounds in sinking a shaft, that the owner of a small allotment was able to effectually block their operations.

The Hon. J. H. ABBOTT stated that the clause had been carefully drawn, and he would like to know the effect of adopting ~he amendment proposed by the Minister of

. Justice. If a mining company had to pur­chase the consent of the owner of an allot­ment before they could enter his ground, they would be where they were.

The Hon. H. OUTHBERT said that the owner of a small allotment of less than half-au-acre might tal~e out a miner's ~ight, and, with the assistance of friends, occupy his own land for gold mining pur­poses as a block claim; and, after it was registered, he could successfully block the operations of any mining company whose _claim was diviued by his small allotment. The right to such a mining claim ought to ;be subject to all the provisions relating to "plock claims on Orown lands, and if the claim was not worke.d the. mining lease

should be liable to be forfeited. If there was no block claim taken up, the adjacent company had the right to purchase the land under section 327 of the Mines Act, the compensation to be fixed by the gold-fields warden; but the company would have to take the whole of the land within 100 yards of any garden, orchard, vineyard, artificial reservoir, spring, dwelling-house, manu­factory, or other building. His amendment would not interfere with or alter the intention or meaning of the clause, but only make it clearer.

The Hon. J. A. W ALLAOE observed that he was surprised to find that a man could hold auriferous ground as a mining claim without working the same. (Mr. Outhbert-" On private property.") Then the law should be altered. (Mr. Wynne­" We want to alter it now. ") There was no danger to dams or even springs from quartz mining, but in drift country mining operations might draw the water from a. distance of two or three miles. (Sir F. T.

. Sargood-" What about wells ?") Quartz mining at a depth of 100 feet would not affect wells that were any distance away from the claim, because the dykes and cross­courses dammed the underground water back. It was necessary to drive through them in order to get water for mining purposes.

The Hon. E. MOREY remarked that the Minister of Justice represen ted perhaps the greatest mining centre in Victoria, a district that needed a measure of this kind very badly, because mining operatIOns were blocked from time to time through the holders of small allotments refusing to allow main drives to be put through their ground except on payment of most excessive compensation. The New Koh - i - noor Oompany, after spending £60,000, wer~ blocked only last week by the owner of a quarter-acre allotment. The warden ought to have power to fix fair compensation either for buying up the allotment or purchasing the right to mine underneath it. (Mr. Outhbert­" I contend the company can buy it now.") There. was no reason why this measure should not be made to apply to Ballarat, because mining operations were perfectly safe, as far as the surface and the buildings upon it were concerned, so long as the mining was deep enough. The principal part or mining at Ballar~t was in the centre of the city, and mining operations were being safely carried on at Ballarat East at a depth of 400 feet under the site of one of

2172 Mz'nes Act [COUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

the largest buildings in that part of the colony, the owners having first taken the precaution to send competent men down the mine to ascertain whether the safety of their building would be imperilled. The law should give the right to mine any ground subject to the payment of fair and just com­pensation to the owners of the property. The industry was being hampered in various parts of the colony by the extortionate demands made upon mining companies for the right to mine through private land. He trusted the Minister of Justice would alter his opinion, and allow the provisions of this measure to he made applicable to Ballarat and other mining centres where the shallow workings had been exhausted. In the Ballarat district they were now down 400 or 600 feet, in hard settled country, where everything had to be removed by powder. What the Bill proposed to do for the Sandhurst district it ought to do for other mining districts, separate depths from the surface being adopted in each instance.

The Hon. J. A. WALLACE said he quite agreed with the view taken by Mr. Morey. Why should not Ballarat share in the advantages which the Bill would confer? There were also other localities where quartz mining could be safely carried on at a reasonable depth without any possible injury to the surface. It might be different with regard to alluvial workings under trap formations, but the quartz reefs of the colony were generally speaking in schistose country, where the natural cleavage of the rock enabled it to bridge over any amount of excavation. He saw no material difference in this respect between the quartz country at Ballarat and any other quartz country.

The Hon. J. H. ABBOTT remarked that if power was given to miners, upon paying proper compensation, to follow a lead or reef under any allotment, everybody concerned would be satisfied.

The Hon. J. BALFOUR pointed out that the question of how far the Bill should apply to Sandhurst alone had been decided upon, and could not now be reconsidered. Besides. it should be borne in mind that a strong feeling had been expressed on the part of the Ballarat people against the Bill applying to their district.

The Hon. A. WYNNE expressed con­·currence with the amendment proposed by the Minister of Justice. It would be a great improvement.

The Bon. D. HAM observed that there were many striking differences between the geologic formation at Ballarat and that at

Sandhurst. At Ballarat alluvial gutters ran under the principal buildings of the city_ Even when three rocks had been passed through, there was frequently subsidence on the surface. If the Bill was to apply to Ballarat, the depth at which mining should be permitted under it should be at least twice 400 feet. The same argument did not, however, at all necessarily apply to districts like Bethanga.

The Hon. E. MOREY said he considered, as one of the representatives of Ballarat, that in contending for the Bill being en­larged, so as to apply to that district, he was expressing the true view of the majority of the people there. As for enforcing a depth of 800 feet, it would be a mistake to do so in respect to the Sebastopol plateau, for underneath the alluvial workings there quartz of great richness had been struck at a considerably less depth. He hoped that the Ballarat mi~ers would not be compelled to leave tons of gold untouched because it lay at less than 800 feet from the surface.

The Hon. J. M. PRATT remarked that the Maryborough mining district, which was not to be confounded with Maryborough proper, was very similar in character to the Sandhurst mining district, and he thought it ought to have equal adva.ntages conferred upon it. The same thing might be said for Dunolly, Tarnagulla, Inglewood, Korong, and other localities. In short, he would have all the leading mining centres of the colony provided for under the Bill.

The Hon. J. A. W ALLAOE expressed the opinion that adopting, in connexion with some localities, even a depth of 800 feet would be often found advantageous.

The H0n. W. A. ZEAL suggested that for the present it would be well, inasmuch as the people of Sand hurst were crying out for the Bill, to let them have it for them­sel ves alone. If its provisions could be carried out there without depreciating the value of property on the surface, other districts would soon want to come in, and then their claims could be considered in the light of experience. The interests of private property-holders ought never to be inter­fered with, except in the most cautious way.

The Hon. J. SERVICE stated that his great objection to the clause was that it provided for the payment of compensation at the very outset of the operations, whereas the extent of the injury actually done might not be ascertained or ascertainable for many years afterwards. At the same time, he was strongly inclined to take the view just ex­pressed by Mr. Zeal.

Mz'nes Act [OCTOBER 22.] Amendment Bill. 2173

The Hon. S. FRASER remarked that if the Sandhurst people were prepared to accept all risks in connexion with the Bill -not that he thought they would come to very much-he would not be one to stand in their way.

The Hon. O. J. HAM expressed the opinion that it would be a perfectly safe course to adopt the Bill, in the first instance, with respect to Sand hurst alone. The Sandhurst people had asked for it, whereas the Ballarat people had signed petitions against it. If the arrangement worked well with Sandhurst, it would be easy to extend it to other districts. He wished, however, to mention that he did not at all approve of a Bill of this character being in the charge of a private member.

The amendment was agreed to. The Hon. H. OUTHBERT moved the

substitution, for the words" following con­ditions and restrictions," at the end of the clause, of the words "provisions of this Act."

The amendment was agreed to. On clause 3, providing that no leases

should be granted "except for mines lying at a depth of not less than 400 feet from the surface,"

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT moved the the insertion, before the word "mines," of the word" quartz."

The Hon. A. WYNNE said he saw no objection to the alteration.

The amendment was agreed to. Discussion took place on clause 4, which

was as follows:-

" Before any such lease shall be granted, the applicant or partnership or corporation on whose behalf the application is made shall prove to the satisfaction of the warden-I. That he or they possess a claim or lease for mining purposes, either adjoining the land applied for or a claim or lease, with such way-leaves and Qther rights through intermediate lands as will enable him or them to mine upon the land applied for without any occupation of or inter­ference with the overlying strata, or that such claim or lease is being worked by such shafts, adits, or tunnels as will enable him or them to mine on the land applied for without such occupation or interference. 2. That such work­ing can be carried on in the usual course of skilled mining, without appreciable damage to the surface or the upper strata of the land applied for, or any building, erection, or other work, whether public or private, existing thereon. Owners and trustees of lands under which mining has been authorized by this Act shall be entitled, on application to the warden, to inspect and survey the underground workings from time to time, as in the opinion of the warden may be deemed necessary."

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES pointed out that, with respect to the final provision of the clause, there arose this important question-who was to pay the cost of inspection and survey? If the onus was thrown upon the property-owner he would, so long as the mine was working, be subject to a perpetual tax.

The Hon. J. A. W ALLAOE remarked that if the claim-holders were required to pay, the property-owner might ask for an inspection and survey almost every day.

The Hon. H. OUTHBERT contended that the question of when an inspection and survey should take place might be safely left to the discretion of the warden.

The Hon. A. WYNNE stated that in all leases issued by the Mining department every care was taken of the interests of the property-owners.

The Hon. H. GORE said he thought a small amendment would meet the case. All that was reqQired was to compel the mining manager of each claim concerned to make a statutory declaration at certain intervals that mining was being properly carried on there.

The Hon. E. MOREY expressed the opinion that, as a rule, a mining manager would be very unlikely to take on himself the responsibility of encroaching upon any one's property. Besides, there was thi~ safeguard, that where mining was carried on under streets, the municipal authorities, who would have the right to enter a mine at any time, would take pretty good care that property owners were protected.

The Hon. J. SERVIOE remarked that Mr. Gore's suggestion would probably meet the case, but he (Mr. Service) would be inclined to go a little further. He would say that periodical inspections should be allowed, at the expense of the mine-owners, but that for every additional inspection the property-owner should pay. This would prevent him from wanting an inspection too often.

The Hon. J. A. W ALLAOE saiel that if inspections were to be periodical, the object to be gained by them would be lost sight of. Miners would be able to block out a lot of land outside their boundary and fill it up again before the time ani ved for an inspection. He (Mr. Wallace) thought that every inspection should come more or less as a surprise.

The Hon. J. S. BUTTERS stated that he strongly supported the plan suggested by Mr. Gore. He was also in favour of

2174 lJfines Act [COUNCIL.] Amendment Bill.

periodical inspections-say once a quarter -because unless it was arranged before­hand that an inspection should take place it would be easy to adopt meaus to render it ineffectual. It should be borne in mind, aiso, that a surprise inspection of a mine would always greatly interfere with mining operations. The statutory declarations Mr. Gore referred to might be safely relied upon, because mining managers were almost in­variably as particular with respect to en­croachments underground as holders of freeholds were as to encroachmer..ts on the surface.

The Hon. E. MOREY observed that it would be quite possible for an underground survey to be erroneous, and therefore for a mining manager to make a wrong state­ment, for which it would be scarcely equit­able to hold him responsible.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES remarked that, in spite of the alleged great respecta­bility of mining managers as a class, it was notorious that encroachments were fre­quently made. The amendment suggested by Mr. Gore was quite right up to a certain point, but there should be, in addition, a right of inspection at certain times to be fixed by the warden. ,

The Hon. J. M. PRATT said he was perfectly willing to accept the terms of the clause as affording additional security; but, as he understood, the property-owner would be sufficiently protected by the terms of the lease issued by the Crown, which would require the mining inspector of the district to report periodically to the Mining depart­ment as to how the lease was being ,!arried out.

The Hon. S. FRASER expressed the opinion that property-owners ought to be pro­tected from mining encroachments free of cost, and he would object to any plan under which they would be required to go to any expense in the matter. Still he considered that adopting the suggestions of Mr. Gore and Mr. J. M. Davies would meet the whole case.

The Hon. H. UUTHBERT said he quite agreed with Mr. Fraser. As for Mr. Pratt's argument, it was rather weak, for what could the property-owner have to do with any lease as between a certain set of miners and the Crown? How could he enforce any claim under such a lease?

The Hon. A. WYNNE moved that the last sentence of the clause be amended by the insertion, after the word" warden," of the words" if such warden is of opinion that ,any trespass has taken place.'~ He intended

to move subsequently the insertion, after the word "survey," of the words "at the expense of the lessee." He thought that under this arrangement every property­owner would be sufficiently protected. The warden would have full discretionary power, and if he saw any cause for suspicion he would, of course, order a survey. At the same time, he (Mr. "Vynne) would have no objection to such an amendment as that suggested by Mr. Gore.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES said he did not see why it should be provided that, before an inspection could be ordered, 'the warden must be of opinion that a trespass had taken place. He quite agreed, however, with the other amendment indicated by Mr. Wynne.

The amendment was withdrawn. The Hon. A. WYNNE moved the in­

sertion, after the word" survey," of the words "at the expense of the lessee."

The amendment was ngreed to. On clause 5, which was as follows:-

"It shall not be necessary to mark out, with pegs the surface of the land overlying the land applied for,"

The Hon. T. DOWLING said he saw no necessity for this clause.

The clause was struck out. On clause 7, which was as follows:-

, , Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to apply to any lake or reservoir,"

The Hon. H. GORE said he thought the word" reservoir" should be carefully defined. Any man might dig a hole and call it a reservoir.

The Hon. A. WYNNE stated that he did not regard the clause as at all essential.

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT expressed the llOpe that the clause would be retained, otherwise such a piece of water as Lake Wendouree might be mined under. It would be an excellent plan to divide the Bill into two parts, one applying to Sand hurst alone and the other to the whole colony.

The clause was agreed to. On clause 8, providing that nothing in

the measure should apply to, vary, or affect any agreement or contract already entered into to authorize mining 011 private pro­perty,

The Hon. H. CUTHBERT observed that Mr. Morey had suggested that com~ pensation should be given in every case in which the rights of an individual were interfered with. ]'or instance, in the case of a man who had a mortgage over propertr,.

Mines Act [OCTOBER 22.] Amendment Bill. 2175

as soon as this Bill passed, and mining was allowed under the property, the mortgagee might consider that the property was depre­ciated, and as soon as the time came he would demand his money, with the result perhaps that the mortgagor would be ruined. Regard had to be paid to these rights, and he thought that wherever there was a charge on property it should be respected, and if there was an interference with the rights of the owner of property, the person who wanted to mine should pay compensation. The clause required to be enlarged, so as to provide for existing mortgages, and therefore he would ask that it should be postponed.

The clause was postponed. The Hon. A. WYNNE proposed the

following new clause to follow clause 4:-"The applicant shall payor provide to the

satisfaction of the warden for payment to the owner or occupier of compensation, to be ascer­tained under the provisions of the principal Act."

He observed that no provision was made in the Bill as passed in another place for pay­ment of compensation to the owner of the freehold, and he had prepared this clause to remedy the omission. The mode of ascer­taining the compensation to be paid for land taken for mining purposes was fully provided for in the principal Act.

The Hon. J. M. DAVIES expressed the opinion that the clause was very vague. It said" owner or occupier," but if the occupier was compensated surely the owner should not be excluded. The construction of the clause, also, was incorrect. What was the meaning of "occupier of compensation"?

The Hon. A. vVYNNE said he thought that under the interpretation section of the principal Act "owner" was defined to in­clude mortgagees, lessees, and all parties possessing an interest in the estate. He thought therefore it would be sufficient to use the word" owner" alone.

The Hon. O. J. HAM submitted that if the word "owner" only was used it would not include a tenant.

The Hon. H. OUTHBERT moved that ·the clause be amended, to read as follows:-

"The applicant shall pay to the owner and occupier such compensation as may be ascer­tained under the provisions of the principal Act."

Sir F. T. SARGOOD remarked that under the principal Act the compensation had to be paid to the Minister. The clause would clash with that provisiou.

The Hon. H. OUTHBERT stated that the clause could be recommitted if necessary

to meet the point raised by the honorable member.

The amendment was agreed to. Progress was then reported. The House adjourned at ten O'clock, until

Tuesday, October 28.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. Wednesday, Octobel' 22, 1890.

Wattle Planting on Railway Lines-Public Instruction: Temperance Lessons: School at Clementston: Teacher'S Residence at Allendale-Butter: Bonuses for Cold Storage: Exportation Bonuses-Railway Depart­ment: Advertising Time Tables-Lt.·Col. Price­Forest Conservation: Yea River Company-Lands at Mildura-Railway Revenue and Expenditure-Trade Marks Act Amendment Bill-Railways Standing Com­mittee: Reference of Proposed Lines-Fire Brigades Bill-Law of Evidence Amendment Bill.

The SPEAKER took the chair at half-past four o'clock p.m.

WATTLE PLANTING ON RAIL VV A YS.

Mr. PARFITT asked the Minister of Lands whether he would, considering the growing importance of the cultivation of the wattle in this colony, take the necessary steps to have the large areas of spare land comprised within the various railway lines, or as many of them as might be deemed suitable, planted with that valnable tree; and, if not, what were the objections to so doing?

Mr. DOW stated that he had received the following reply to the question from the Oonservator of Forests-

"The department considers that it is not advisable to extend wattle planting along the various railway enclosures for the following reasons :-a. The danger from fire all through the summer months, in consequence of sparks from railway engines; also, by reason of the cost incurred in protecting the wattles in burn­ing off the grass annually. b. The impossibility of proper supervision over the lengthy strips of land along the lines, and consequent destruc­tion of trees by trespassers, railway employes, and goats. c. The careless destruction of wattles by employes of the Railway depart­ment during the annual burning off of grass, &c. d. The increased cost of pruning and thin­ning out of wattles when spread over miles of railway lines, instead of the compact form of "plantations" favored by the department. e. The inconvenience and trouble caused to the Post and Telegraph department, by reason of the rapid growth of wattles interfering with the telegraph lines overhead, and consequent ex­pense incurred in cutting and clearing the wattles away from the wires. j. The annoy­ance to the public when travelling, by reason of

2176 [ASSEMBL Y_.] Railway Department.

the wattles shutting out the view, &c. g. The intention of the department to form compact plantations of wattles in suitable places in the State forests, where proper attention and effi· cient supervision can be given to them, and where all operations involving expenditure of money may be carried out at a minimum cost to the colony."

PUBLIO INSTRUOTION.

Mr. GORDON asked the Minister of Public Instruction if he would state defi­nitely when temperance lessons would be given in State schools?

Dr. PEARSON said the department had been delayed in getting out these lessons chiefly from the difficulty of finding a book that would exactly suit the purpose, but one had now been prepared, and he thought he ,could promise to introduce it into the State schools immediately after Ohristmas.

Mr. PEAOOOK asked the Minister of Public Instruction the following ques­tions :-

"1. When it is intended to begin the erection of the school at Clementston, promised over eighteen months ago?

"2. The cause of the delay in the erection of the teacher's residence at Allendale, promised some twelve months since?"

Dr. PEARSON remarked that, with re­gard to Olementston, the conveyance of the site was not yet effected, but the transfer was now passing through the Titles-office, and would, it was hoped, be completed in a few days. Authority would then be given to erect a building. The site for a residence at Allendale had been surveyed, but the plan was incomplete, and conveyance could not therefore be effected. The plan had been returned to the surveyor, and it was expected that all difficulties in the way of the erection of a residence would shortly be -removed.

Mr. GORDON asked the Minister of Public Instruction if he would place on the -table of the Library all papers relating to the case of Mrs. Kiernan, of State school No. 1239? , Dr. PEARSON said he would be happy to comply with the request as far as pos­'sible.

BUTTER.

Mr. O. YOUNG asked the Minister of Agriculture if he would offer bonuses for butter to be kept for six months in cold 'storage in ltfelbourne? He observed that the farmers did not receive the bonuses now

'1>aid in connexion with the export of butter; the money was received by dealers and middle men, and the advantage to the

farmer was of the most infinitesimal charac­ter. Butter was being sent out of the country, without any advantage to the farmer, to supply the London market, whereas, a few months hence, the consumers of the colony would give more for the butter than it would bring under this bounty system in London. Under these circum­stances, he thought the Minister should adopt the course which he (Mr. Young) suggested eighteen months ago, and give a. bonus for butter kept for six months ,in' cold storage under the custody of the Go­vernment.

Mr. DOW stated that the suggestion of the honorable member would receive his careful consideration. He confessed that he had not yet flllly considered the matter.

Mr. GRAHAM asked the Minister of Agriculture if he would cause the return showing the quantity of butter exported last season,on which the bonus was claimed, to be completed and laid on the table of the Library? He remarked that the return, which was laid on the table early in the session, was incomplete, as a large quantity of butter had been exported on which the bonus had not at that time been claimed.

Mr. DOW said he would have the return completed at once.

RAILWAY DEPARTMENT.

Mr. WILKINSON asked the Minister of Railways whether it was the usual custom of the Railway OommIssioners to advertise, at the expense of the department, the time­tables of special trains running to race meetings; and, if so, why were not special trains for agricultural shows advertised in the same manner? He observed that when the Railway Oommissioners ran special trains to an agricultural show in his district the people interested in the show had to advertise the time-table themselves, at their own expense, whereas, in connexion with race meetings, the Railway Oommissioners advertised at the expense of the depart­ment.

Mr. GILLIES stated that in the case of large race meetings it was to the interest of the department to advertise. In the case of small race meetings or agricllitural shows the department did not advertise, because it had not the same interest from a com­mercial point of view in doing so.

LIEUTENANT-OOLONEL PRIOE.

Lt.-Ool. SMITH said. he desired to make a brief personal explanation. It ,would be remembered that, on the 7th

Lt.-Col. P1'l·ce. [OCTOBER 22.] Lt.-Col. P1'ice. 2171

instant, when the question was raised in the House of the orders given by Lt.-Col. Price to the mounted rifles with reference to the strike, he (Lt.-Col. Smith) made certain statements. He made those state­ments with the most perfect confidence in their accuracy at the time. Since then the Government, or the Minister of Defence had thought proper to appoint a board of inquiry into the allegations against Lt.-Col. Price, and he (Lt.-Col. Smith) had received the following letter from the chairman of that board :-

"Victoria Barracks, "Melbourne, 16th October, 1890.

" Sir,-I have the honour to inform you that a b?ard ~f inquiry into the allegations made agamst LIeutenant-Colonel Tom Price in con­nexion with an address delivered by him at the Victoria Barracks to certain members of the Victor~an ~ounted B:ifles~ on the 30th of August last, WIll SIt at the VIctOrIa Barracks, St. Kilda­road, on Thursday, 23rd inst., at 11 a.m.

" I take leave to inform you of the above in order that, if you think fit to furnish their names, I will issue summonses to any persons who may have communicated with you on the subject, or are prepared to give material evidence on the issue.

"I have the honour to be, sir, your obedient servant,

"C. H. NICOLSON, President of the Board."

When he received this letter he el1tered into ~ommunication with the gentleman who gave him the information, and asked him to relieve him from the promise he had made to hold the name of his informant as a matter of confidence, because he felt ~h~t he ha.d no right to disclose the gentle­man's name without asking his permission. However, his informant declined to do this. As a member of the House he had no desire whatever to stand on his privileges, because, of course, no member of the House could be called before a board of inquiry without the permission of the House. He was quite prepared to attend the inquiry, and had intended to ask the permission of the House to give all the evidence he could give, but he had recei\"'ed a letter from Lt.-Col. Price which, to his mind, was ~o~ched in most courteous and gentle­manly terms. He thought it was due to' this officer, before making the state­ment h~ was abont to make, to read the letter, which was as follows :-.. "Victoria Barracks, 20th October, 1890. "D~ar Sir,-I observe in the pages of Hansard

that, m the debate on myself and allegations made against me, you passed certain strictures on my alleged misconduct. You stated that you believed 'the allegations made about me, and .so believing ~t you took the ground of de~ fending the honour of a force which, while you

have ceased to belong to it, st.ill clainis your loyal support when any seeming discredit is cast upon it by the supposed unofficer-like condu~t of a member of the same. 'Vhile deeply deplormg that I should be the subject of your a~verse remarks, made believing my alleged mIsconduct to be true, I cannot refrain from applauding your desire to keep the Victorian Defence Force free from such persons as I have been represented, and believed by yon to be. At the same time, I would remind you of that bond of fealty which exists all over the world and nowhere more strongly than in Victoria' among good and loyal soldiers of the Queen: That bond makes it imperative amongst men of honour that an accusation made should be proved or withdrawn, and it is with this in view that I now write to you as one officer to another to invite your attendance and evidence before a board which will assemble at the Victoria ~arracks, at 11 a.m. on Thursday, the 23rd lOstant.

" 'Vh.en I inform y<;,u that I can completely contra;dlCt the allegatIOn you have been misled to belIeve as true, I feel perfectly certain that you, in your position as 'an officer and a gentle­man,' will respond to this invitation and be prepared to divulge to the board th~ name of the informant who has so gravely misled you.

"I shall esteem it a favour if you will kindly , ?blige me with your early answer as to your

mtended presence or otherwise. "I am, dear sir, yours faithfully,

"TOM PRICE, Lieut.-Col., " C. O. V. Mounted Rifles."

Inasmuch as the person who gave him the­information in confidence was not pre­pared to come forth and substantiate his' statement, he (Lt.-Col. Smith) felt that, as a man of honour, as an old officer of' volunteers, and as, 11e hoped, a gentleman,. there was o?ly one course open to him, and that was, In the same public way as he made the accusation against Lt.-Col. Price' in the House, to withdraw it. Of course he referred to the accusation as to the use of certain words; the use of other words Lt.-Col. Price had himself admitted.

FOREST CONSERVATION.

LEASING.

Mr. DOW stated that he begged to present to the House the missing papers in connexion with the Yea River Company to which reference was made by the leade: of the Opposition on the previous Thursday night, together with an official explanation from the officers of the department with regard to them. He desired also to state that, in view of the complications which had arisen, he came to the conclusion last week, and urged his view on his colleagues on Monday, that the case of the Yea River Company was one which could not be done justice to in open debate in the House. He therefore urged on his colleagues the

2178 }.f-ltnicipal Endowment. [ASSEMBLY.] . Magistmtes.

desirability or having such an inquiry as would get to the bottom of the matter, and he was very pleased indeed that the gentlemen who were to make the inquiry had been nominated by the leader of the Opposition.

Mr. MUNRO said he presumed, from the statement of the Minister of Lands, that the Premier would allow his (Mr. Munro's) motion for a select committee to go unopposed?

Mr. GIL LIES replied in the affir­mative.

Mr. MUNRO moved-

"That a select committee be appointed to take evidence and report to this House on all matters relating to the alleged proposal to lease certain lands to the Yea River Company; such committee to consist of Mr. J. Harris, Mr. 'Officer, Mr. T. Smith, Mr. Laurens, Mr. Foster, Mr. Hunt, and the mover, with power to send for persons, papers, and records, to move from place to place, and to sit on days when the House does not meet; four to be ·the quorum."

Mr. WOODS sec(:mded the motion, which was agreed to.

PETITION.

A petition was presented by Mr. RICHARD­SON, from Michael Dwyer, Oreswick, asking for relief in connexion with the death of his son, who was in the employment of the Rail way Oommissioners.

LANDS AT MILDURA.

Mr. O. YOUNG moved-" That there be laid before this House a copy

of all correspondence in connexion with the sur­vey of Crown lands for Chaffey Brothers at Mildura, and also tracings of land granted in freehold, and land applied for and surveyed, but not yet granted."

Mr. GRAHAM seconded the motion, which was agreed to.

RAILWAY REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE.

Mr. LAURENS moved-

"That there be laid before this House a. l'eturn showing (1) gross revenue and working expenses during each year on the several lines of railway opened for traffic since 30th June, 1888; (2) the extent to which the revenue has been less than the working expenses collectively in each of those years."

Mr. MUNRO seconded the motion, which was agreed to.

MUNIOIPAL ENDOWMENT.

Mr. GILLIES, in compliance with an order of the House (dated October 7), pre­sented a return relative to the rates collected

in, endowment received by, and cost of audit to each municipality for the year 1889.

MAGISTRATES.

Mr. DEAKIN, in pursuance of an order of the House (dated October 15), presented a return with regard to justices of the peace.

TRADE MARKS AOT AMEND­MENT BILL.

This Bill was returned from the Legis­lative Oouncil, with a message intimating that they had agreed to it with amendments.

The amendments were ordered to be taken into consideration the following day.

RAILWAYS STANDING OOMMITTEE.

Mr. GILLIES moved-

"That the following surveyed lines of rail­way be referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Railways for consideration and report, viz. :~

Alberton and Yarram, in lieu of Alberton, Yarram, and Boodyarn.

Port Albert, via Tarraville, to Woodside, in lieu of Alberton and Woodside.

Bacchus Marsh and Holden, an extension from Coimadai.

Bairnsdale and Bruthen, via Tambo Valley, in lieu of Bairnsdale and Bruthen.

Bruthen and Colquhoun, consequential on above.

Benalla and Hansen South, an extension beyond Fifteen-mile Creek.

Bittern and Flinders, an alternate route in­stead of Baxter's Flat and Merricks.

Donald and Wirmbirchip, an extension beyond Corack.

Dooen and Murra Warra, an extension beyond KeweU West.

Elmore and Gunbower, an extension beyond Tomara.

Glenloth and Quambatook, an extension beyond Ninyeunook.

Inglewood and J arklan, an extension beyond Munica.

Leongatha and Geachville, an extension beyond Boyle's Creek.

Moe and Moondarra (extended), an extension beyond Moondarra.

Stratford and Bengworden, in lieu of Mont-gomery and Strathfieldsaye. .

Nathalia and Tongala, change of route­Tongala instead of Kyabram.

N eerim South and N eerim North, an extension beyond N eerim.

N oradjuha, via Clear Lake to Fulham, an extension beyond Clear Lake,

Stawell and St. Arnaud, an extension beyond Wallaloo.

Allendale, via Powlett Hill to Maryborough. Bungaree Junction and Newlyn. Dawson and Glenmaggie. Alternate lines.-Dimboola and Werrap line,

branch to Netherby; Salisbury towards Nether­by.

Railways Standing [OCTOBER 22.J Committee. 2179

Echuca and Turrumberry. Mirboo North and Mardan. N yora and W oolamai. Sale and Clydebank. Sale and Longford. Alternate lines.-St. James and Ovens Bridge;

Devenish to Peechelba, Ovens River. Traralgon and Carrajung. Violet Town and Strathbogie. Warragul and McDonald's Track. Hartwell and Black Flats. St. Kilda and Elwood. Boort to Barraport. Bal1amt Cattle-yards to Bonshaw. Port Fairy to Yambuk. Geelong and Anglesea, via Geelongrace-course. Ninyeunook to Budgerum, an extension pro-

posed by Government to Quambatook. Allendale to N ewstead; portion of this line

included in Allendale to Maryborough. Elwood to Brighton. Tallarook to Glenaroua. Longwood to N alinga. Coleraine towards Chetwynd. Waubra to Lexton. Maryborough towards Daylesford; portion of

this line included in Allendale to Maryborough. Lancefied to Kyneton. Bethanga-road to Talgarno. Bairnsdale to Paynesville. Colquhoun towards Orbost. Seymour towards Ruffy. Yinnar towards Yarram. Avoca to Quarries. Nathalia to Barmah."

He observed that, by a section of the Rail­ways Standing Committee Act, the Railway Construction Bill, as read a second time, was absolutely referred to the standing com­mittee, so that honorable members need not now consider any of the lines that were in that Bill. They had, therefore, only to deal with additional lines. The lines mentioned in this motion were those which were adopted by a caUCU3 of honorable members, and were submitted to the Government. Certain of those lines were accepted by the Government and submitted by him as additional pro­posals on the second reading of the Bill, while there were a number of them which the Government did not accept. He now proposed, however, in order that the fullest consideration might be given to those lines, that those which the Government did not accept, as well as those which they accepted, should be referred to the standing com­mittee. The gentlemen composing the caucus no doubt gave a great deal of time and consideration to these lines, and adopted them after going through a great many pro­positions and rejecting a large number, as the House had been informed by members of the caucus. Under these circumstances, he thought it was only fair that the whole of the proposals adopted by the caucus should have an opportunity of being

considered by the standing committee. He did not know whether it was in­tended to have any lengthened discussion in the House on these proposals. He thought, perhaps, it would be better not. He believed the increases to the Railway Construction Bill proposed in the motion were sufficient to send to the committee, and he hoped the Assembly would coincide in this view. He was aware that a number of members who had had lines surveyed in their districts were anxious, naturally enough, to have those proposals submitted to the committee also; but although those honorable members felt perfectly justified in bringing those lines under the notice of the House, still he sincerely trusted tha.t they would not press them. l Cries of " Oh.") If all the lines that had been surveyed were to be sent to this committee, he ventured to say that the labour the com­mittee would be called upon to perform would be so great that there would be little chance of its work being done in any reasonable time. He was strongly under the impression that if the House did such a thing as to send all the lines that had been surveyed to the committee, it would commit a great mistake.

Mr. ANDERSON seconded the motion. Mr. MUNRO observed that there was not

the slightest douet that the House would agree to send all these lines to the committee, but he was afraid the Premier would not get honorable members to consent not to send their lines also to the committee. He thought that the Government having taken the step of putting the inquiry into this matter entirely out of their hands and rele­gating it to a committee, every member of the House who had a line which had been surveyed should be allowed to refer it to the committee. The Government by surveying lines in various districts led the people in those districts to believe that the lines so surveyed and reported upon would receive full consideration before a Railway Bill was passed, but if they were not sent to this committee they would not receive that con­sideration. Consequently he thought the wisest plan, and one which would save time and trouble, would be for the Premier to allow all the surveyed lines to be sent to the committee, and then the committee would deal with the lines and bring up a report upon them. He (Mr. Munro) had been. seriously considering the position of this com­mittee, and he felt that it would be utterly impossible to expect the gentlemen form­ing the committee to do their work as it ought to be done unless the House was .

2180 RaUways Standing [ASSEMBLY.] Committee.

prepared to pay them fees. This being the case, he thoug ht that before the session closed an arrangement should be made to provide for the payment of fees to the gentlemen on the committee, and to insist on the work being done in a thorough manner, so that when the committee reported tlleir report would be 'such as would give satisfaction to the country. Of course he did not expect that ten per cent. even of the lines referred to the committee at the in­stance of the Government would ever be passed, but it would save time, trouble, and an awful amount of worry if the Govern­ment would allow all members to have their lines sent to the committee. There ought to be fair play all round. He could speak disinterestedly on the matter because he was in the position of having no lines to refer to the committee.

Mr. FERGUSON observed that there were lines which had been surveyed, but which were not included either in the proposals of the Government or those of the caucus. Many of those lines had pre­ferential claims over some of the lines adopted by the caucus, and it would be very unfair if they were "snuffed out" without having fair consideration by the standing committee. He certainly thought all the surveyed lines should be referred to the committee.

Mr. DUFFY asked the Premier whether he intended to afford honorable members an opportunity, as he had promised, of bringing before the House the lines they wished to have referred to the committee? (Mr. Gillies-" Certainly.") Immediately after this motion? (Mr. Gillies-" Yes.") He was glad to hear it. The Premier had asked the House to refer to the committee a proposed line from Lancefield to Kyneton. There were several other surveys in the locality, and the com­mittee ought to have the opportunity of selecting the line they thought the best. (Mr. Gillies-" Submit your proposals after this motion is agreed to.") That was what he intended to do, but the Premier must see that the House was a little anxious about the matter.

Mr. McLELLAN observed that' as this was a question of the greatest impodance to the whole country, he felt that the Pre­mier ought to adopt all the lines proposed by honorable members, put them in a schedule, and submit them to the Railway Committee in the same way as he now proposed to submit the lines contained in the schedule under consideration. That would be the

wisest course. It would commit the Govern­ment to nothing, because it was only a matter of inquiry after all, and it would save honor­able members a great deal of trouble and inconvenience, although few of them, he was afraid, would live to see the end of the inquiry. The committee could deal with the lines on their merits, and the country would be glad to hear the result.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN said he felt that the proper way to test the question would be by submitting an amendment for the insertion, after the words "following sur­veyed lines of railway," oE the words" with the addition of those lines mentioned in notices of motion 1 to 28." (Mr. Gillies­" I object; let every line be discussed on its merits.") No honorable member should be deprived of the opportunity of proposing that any .projected line in his district be referred to the committee for investiga­tion and inquiry, and the other lines of which notice had been given this evening could be added later on.

Mr. LANGRIDGE said he understood the Premier to say that honorable members would have an opportunity of submitting to the House the lines desired by their respec­tivedistricts. (Mr. Gillies-" Certainly.") Some limit must be fixed. Many of the lines in the Railway Construction Bill pro­posed by the caucua, and given notice of by honorable members, were rival routes.

Mr. C. YOUNG remarked that the w hole thing depended on the powers of the standing committee. Had the committee power to recommend another line that would suit the requirements of the district better than the line submitted ? Would the' committee have power to say what particular route between the two points would be best? (Mr. Gillies-" Yes; there can be no doubt about that. ") The New South Wales standing c0mmittee had the power to look over the whole of a district and ascertain whether it would not be possible to con­struct a better line than the one submitted. The amendment of the honorable member for Port Fairy would not meet the case, because notice had not been given of many of the lines that had been surveyed by the Railway department, some of which lines might possibly be better calculated to serve the districts concerned than any of the lines in either the present motion or the amend­ment.

Mr. TUTHILL stated that the com­mittee 'Yould only have power to consider the merits of the lines submitted to their consideration. They must say yea or nay

Railways Standing [OCTOBER 22.] Committe~. 2181

to them, and therefore he would suggest that the Government should not place any restriction on the number of lines referred to the committee, who could easily weed out the unsuitable proposals. The honor­able gentleman asked the House to carry this motion, and at the same time informed honorable members that he would not agree to their proposals to the number of about 100; but if the Premier would not agree to the proposals of honorable members being sent to the committee he must expect to lose his own motion, because every honorable member was interested in one or more of the lines that had been tabled. As a matter of expediency, therefore, it would be advis­able to allow all proposed lines to go to the committee, leaving them to exercise their own judgment. (Mr. Graves­"Whether they are surveyed 01' not ?") No; only the surveyed lines. In what order was the committee to deal with the lines remitted to its consideration-in any order, or in the order in which they were referred? The Premier should rely on the good sense of honorable members, leaving them to consider the propriety of making what might be called foolish proposals.

Mr. L. L. SMITH observed that the House had no right to dictate to the stann­ing committee, who should be. allowed to enter upon their duties free from any inter­ference or bias whatever. The members of that committee were elected by the two Houses to work under an Act of Parliament which defined their p0wers and functions, so that all this talk was mere waste of time. When the committee was appointed it was understood that they would not be influenced by any extraneous means whatever, and yet at the very beginning of their labours honorable members desired that the House should dictate to the committee as to the course they ought to pursue. He believed that the committee would take into con­sideration certain promises which had been made by the House, but delayed, perhaps, by adverse circumstances, and that they would not go through the whole catalogue of proposed lines before making some recommendations to Parliament.

Mr. WILLIAMS stated that the railway of which he would have to give notice was an alternative route to one of the Govern­ment proposals, and he thought it would be only right that the committee should have an opportunity of considering which of the two lines ought to be constructed. If that was not to be allowed the persons who were vitally interested in the line he had to

SES. 1890.-7 P

propose would suffer an injustice, and he could not stand by and see their interests neglected, because they had a good and substantial case which ought to be inquired into by the committee.

Mr. LEVIEN expressed the opinion that, under the peculiar circumstances in which the House found itself with regard to the question of railway construction, it would be better to refer the whole of the surveyed lines to the committee. Many of the surveyed .lines were rival routes to the lines which the Premier had asked the House to refer to the committee, and it would be to the interests of the country to give the committee the widest possible scope of choice. That would be the most proper and satisfactory course. The people in all the districts where lines had been surveyed were expecting railway communi­cation, and this would be the last occasion on which honorable members would have an opportunity of proposing that certain lines be referred to the committee, because in future a Minister of the Crown would have to take the responsibility of submitting proposals to refer projected railway lines to the committee for consideration, and he would have to give good reasons before the House would agree to remiL the lines to the committee.

Mr. TRENWITH said the object of appointing the committee was to facilitate railway construction upon proper lines, bllt now an effort was being made to load the committee with work to such an extent as to render it absolutely impossible for them to report to the House within any reasonable period of time. Almost every member of the House was submitting a proposed line, and some honorable members were actually proposing as many as seven lines in one district. If the committee was to report upon the whole of those lines it would clearly be necessary to tell them how many lines they might recommend for con­struction, and if they were instructed to consider the whole of the lines now proposed they could not possibly bring .up an intel­ligible report before the end of the next Parliament, not even a progress report, because they would be unable to frame a progress report before they had given con­sideration to all the lines submitted for investigation. (Mr. Woods-" The com­mittee will do what they like, and take no dictation from anybody.") The com­mittee ought to do what they liked within certain lines, which should be fixed by the House after careful deliberation. For these

2182 . Railways Standing [ASSEMBLY.] Oommittee •

reasons he intended to support the proposal of the Government to send to the com­mittee certain lines which had been pre­viously submitted to the House, because that seemed to be an intelligible course, although the lines submitted by the Govern­ment were far too numerous, which would render the work of the committee extremely difficult. What the House had now to con­sider was whether the lines proposed by the Government should be submitted to the committee, and if honorable members had other lines to propose they could be COll­sidered on their merits afterwards. To overload the committee in the way that was apparently intended would be to reduce its work to the level of a farce.

Mr. BURROWES stated that the Minister of Railways had taken the House somewhat by surprise by his intimation as to the course which the Government in­tended to pursue. While the Railways Standing Committee Bill was passing through the House, the honorable gentle­man led honorable members to believe that w hen the committee was appointed all the lines of which notice had been given, and which had been surveyed but not included in the proposals of the Government or the caucus, would be submitted to the com­mittee. (Mr. Gillies-" I never said or even imagined such a ridiculous thing.") That was the impression, at any rate, left on the minds of honorable members, and if this motion was carried the lines which were not included in it would be left out in the cold, and would have very little chance of being dealt with by the committee. (Mr. Turner-" They will have no chance at .all.") He would oppose the motion of the .Minister of Railways unless the honorable gentleman gave the House an undertaking that all the lines which had been. surveyed, and of which notice had been given, were to be submitted to the House with a view, if a majority of the members considered it a.d visable, to remitting them to the stand­ing committee. Many of the lines not in­duded in the present motion were really more necessary to meet the requirements of various parts of the country, and for its development, than some of the lines in the Railway Construction Bill, and they ought to be submitted to the consideration of the cO!llmittee. Por these reasons he felt it neces­sary to move an amendment for the inser­tion, after the word "rail way" (lines l-~n, of the words" and the lines that have been given notice of up to date." That would enable the House to express an opinion·on

the matter. (Mr. Turner-';Make it all surveyed lines.") V ery well, he would alter his amendment so as to read "and all sur­veyed lines of which notice has been given by any member of the House on or before this date."

Mr. STERRY seconded the amend­ment.

Mr. GILLIES remarked that he was sorry honorable members had taken the view they did of the remarks he (Mr. Gillies) made when the Railways Standing Oom­mittee Bill was under consideration. Weeks ago he intimated that the lines prorosed by the Government in the Railway Con­struction Bill, which was read a second time, would, in accordance with the provi­sions of the Railways Standing Committee Act, be referred to that committee, and that the Government were also willing to have referred to the c0mmittee all those addi­tions and extensions of lines and new proposals which he stated, on the second reading of the Railway Bill, the Govern­ment were prepared to introduce into that measure, as well as the lines proposed by the caucus and not accepted by the Go­vernment. At the same time, he further intimated that any honorable member who thought proper could give notice of a rail­way line not included in any of those pro­posals and submit it to the House, and that if he could justify that course the House would pass a resolution referring the line to the standing committee for inquiry and report. But the House ought to con­sider very seriously the present situation. Honorable members should not only look at what was proposed to be done but also at its probable effect upon the credit of the colony. It was no use honorable memhers shutting their eyes or metaphorically put­ting their heads into the sand. The amendment of the honorable member for Sandhurst (Mr. Burrowes) would involve the reference of 6,000 miles of proposed railways to the standing committee-in fact, there had been upwards of 6,000 miles surveyed-and it would be highly dangerous to the credit of the colony to send 6,000

. miles of proposed railways to the joint com­mittee for consideration and report, because the people in London would arrive at the conclusion that the members of the Par­liament of Victoria had lost their heads. (" No.") Surely honorable members would recognise that. Was there a man among them who could say that the Assembly would be justified in remitting 6,000 miles of proposed railways to the joint committee?

Railways Standing [OOTOBER 22.J Committee. 2183'

(Mr. Burrowes-" Yes.") Then he could not follow the reasoning of honorable mem­bers. He sincerely trusted that they would take a reasonable view of the matter, because it would place the credit of the colony in a very serious position if 6,000 miles of proposed rail way lines were referred to the committee. Honorable members were bound to remember that the Govern­ment had to convert £850,000 of loan money in January next, and that there was a balance of £1,600,000 of the last loan to be borrowed next year. Surely these con­siderations ought to be kept in view, and the least honorable members could do would be to show that they were reasonable men and that they would not go beyond the lines of reason. If any honorable member was prepared to submit a proposed line of rail­way which he thought he could justify to the House, let him submit it, and if there was a p1'ima facie case for sending that line to the committee he (Mr. Gillies) would not object; but he earnestly hoped that the House would not adopt an amendment which proposed that, in addition to the intended railways that had been considered by the Government. and by the caucus, they should make a wholesale reference of new lines to the committee, including lines which had not been considered either by the Government or the caucus, and on which they were, therefore, not in a position to express any opimon. He hoped that the House would insist on each of the lines being submitted separately, and he did not think any great length of time would be re­quired for their consideration.

Mr. FERGUSON expressed the opinion -that the Premier had made a fair proposal -to honorable members, and that the House . ought not to refer to the committee any line submitted by a private member until he bad made out a p1'ima facie case for its con­·sideration. It would be highly inadvisable ,to send 6,000 miles of proposed lines to the .committee. The House should not forget that the credit of the colony was at stake, and that English capitalists might come to ;the conclusion that Victoria was going back ,to the evil days of "octopus " Railway ·Construction Bills.

Sir B. O'LOGHLEN observed that if ·the amendment was not carried the Govern­ment, as soon as they had got their motion passed, would be able to block the lines pro­posed by honorable members. All surveyed ;lines ought to be referred to the committee whether they had or had not beenapproved ..by the Government or the caucus.

7p2

Mr. ARMYTAGE remarked that while the Minister of Railways objected to whole­s!,!-le proposals being sent to the committee, he himself now proposed that that should be done in the case of the lines selected by the Government and the lines chosen by the caucus. The honorable gentleman had stated that private members would be re­required to justify the lines they proposed before they were sent to the committee, and he should now set honorable members a good example by justifying the proposed line to Boyle's Creek, which, although less than five miles in length, wa! to cost £110,000.

Mr. MASON said that as the Govern­ment had given uptothestandingcommittee their own functions with regard to future railway proposals, it was only right that all the surveyed lines should be remitted for con­deration. That would not commit the House to anything at all, because the committee could only inquire and report on the various proposals, and it would rest with Parliament to say which lines should be constructed after all. A number of proposed lines in his district that had been left out in the cold would compare favorably with manyof those which appeared in the Government liat, and it was only just and fair that their merits and claims should be investigated. The committee was merely. an inquiring and advisory body, and the House could either ratify, amend, or reject its recommenda.tions. He was therefore surprised to find tha.t it was not intended to refer to the committee all the lines which had. been surveyed by the authority of the Government. Honorable members would fail in their duty to their constituents if they did not insist that the claims of all the surveyed lines in their districts should be duly considered .

Mr. MUNRO remarked tha£ he could not follow the reasoning of the Premier as to the position of honorable members with regard to the various lines they desired to have referred to the committee. The honorable gentleman said that he would not object to any line being referred to the committee if the honorable member who proposed it could make out a prima facie case for sending it to the committee. Well every honorable member would get up and praise his own line, and tell the House all the advantages it would confer upon the district, the excellence of the lands through which it would pass, and the urgent neces­sityof railway communication in that part of the colony, and it would be an easy matter for him to make ont a In'imd facie

218t! Rai~way8 Standing [ASSEMBLY.] Oommt'ttee.

case, because other honorable members, knowing little or nothing about it, w(mld not be able to dispute his statements. Honorable members were not in a position to sit in judgment on lines proposed for reference to the committee, and the safest course would be to submit all the surveyed lines to the consideration of the committee. The Government had incurred the expense of making surveys of proposed railways in various parts of the colony, and all that was asked by the honorable member for Sandhurst (Mr. Burrowes) was that, in addi­tion to referring to the committee all the lines approved by the Government or the caucus,. the Government should go a step further and agree to refer to the committee, for investigation and report, all the lines that had been surveyed. When the com­mittee reported upon those lines the House would be in a position to sit injudgment upon them. To ask every honorable member with a line to propose to get up and explain what its claims were would be the height of folly. Why, if the House were to sit until Christ­mas it would not get through the work. The House had appointed a very important committee, and to that body should be referred not only the lines proposed by the Government but also the rival lines which had been surveyed. Snpposing that each honorable member with a line was to explain. what its merits were, how would honorable members be able to judge with respect to them? What would he (Mr. Munro), for example, know about them? He would have to sit and listen, but pro­bably he would be quite unable to appre­ciate the arguments brought forward. That would not be a fair position to place honor­able members in. It would be very muc11 easier to adopt the plan of the honorable member for Sandhurst. Honorable mem­bers would then get rid of a great trouble. It should be remembered that there could not possibly be the smallest need to borrow a shilling on account of any line until the committee had recommended it for construction. There seemed to be no end to the awful muddle into which the Government had got their railway affairs.

Mr. G. D. CARTER remarked that the leader of the Opposition had asked how he would be able to judge of the merits of a particular line, when he had no evidence with respect to it beyond what the hon'orable member proposing it might say in its favour. But how would the honorable member know how to vote upon such a line if it were submitted with a lot of others?

(Mr. M unro-"I never said I would lmow.") The honorable member would know no more· on the subject than he did at the present time, no matter whether each line was· submitted by itself or they were all sub­mitted in globo. The honorable mem­ber for Gippsland South stated that the' Government and the House had parted' with their functions with regard to the con­struction of railways. (Mr. Mason-" I only said that the Government had done so.") But, as a matter of fact, nothing of the sort was the case, because all the com­mittee could do would be to take evidence on the various lines submitted to them,. and to furnish to the House a report upon. them, accompanied by the evidence, and on that report the House would have to act. Neither the Government nor the House had parted with any of their functions in the' matter. All that had been done bad been to rid honorable members of a great amonnt of persecution, because every honorable member was bound to make a frightful struggle for the line or lines which his­constituents wanted. The extent of this persecution was shown by the desperate eagerness of honorable members to get their lines referred to the committee. The reason why honorable members objected to have their several lines considered on their­merits was the fact that they were afraid. that, if those merits were considered, the lines would not be allowed to go to the committee. But if they all went in one schedule everyone would have to vote for­everyone else's line, in order to secure the inclusion of his own. With great respect he (Mr. Carter) wOllld venture on the assertion that some honorable members did not at all understand what the functions of" the committee were. The New South Wales committee at one time struck out about half the lines sent to them and substituted others. It did not matter whether rival lines were or were not referred to them, because they had power, in taking evidence on any particular line, to take evidence also as to competing routes,

· and that evidence would naturally appear in their report .. If any honorable member-

· would glance over the evidence taken by the New South Wales committee he would

: at once see how the thing was done. It seemed to be the idea of some honorable

· members that if the standing committee : were considering a line, say, from A to B, ~ and a man came before them asserting' · that a line from A to C would be better, · they would say they could not hear him;'

Railways Standing [OCTOBER 22.] Commt'Uee. 2185

'but if;he (Mr. Carter) were a member 0f the 'committee he would do the exact opposite. Besides, after the committee had reported, Parliament would still have the matter to deal with, and it was to be presumed that it would exercise its judgment in the proper -way. In New South Wales, when the committee had recommended other lines 'than those submitted to them, Parliament frequently rejected them, showing that it did not regard the recommendation as binding. (Mr. Munro-" Why were these extra lines surveyed? ") Doubtless for many reasons. He presumed that the surveys extended over many years. If evidence was to be taken with respect to all the lines that had been surveyed-6,000 miles of railway-it would be years before the business of the committee could be got through. Nothing could be plainer than that. vVhat honorable members wanted to do at the present time was simply to please their constituents. But what ought to be done was to let the committee deal with the lines which were wanted most. He did not see why, with the powers with respect to alternative routes which the committee would possess, the Government proposal should not be accepted.

Mr. BAKER remarked that the honor. able member for Melbourne was hardly in a position to advise country members as to what those whom they represented really required. As a matter of fact, all that their constituents expected was that the committee should be able to look into every matter connected with the railway wants of the country, and report accordingly. He would mention, as one reason why the whole of the lines that had been surveyed should be 'sent to the committee, that if that were done they would be able to see, when they had the line from N atimuk to Goroke under their consideration, that to carry it some twelve or fifteen miles further towards the South Australian border would promote the railway interests of the country to an enormous extent. The case with respect to another line was very similar. Probably it would never be constructed unless the com­mittee had some such proposal with regard to it before them. He would not care if the committee had a thousand lines submitted

'to them, for he was quite sure they would be able to deal properly with the whole of them.

Mr. GRAVES stated that the proposal of the hono'rable member for Sand hurst (Mr. Burrowes) appeared to him to be a most reasonable one. Of course some respect should be paid to the opinion of

the Premier, who talked of honorable members losing their heads when they ad vocated sending 6,000 miles of line to the committee. But what honorable mem­bers desired was that, with regard to the future railways of the country, there should be no favoritism-that the committee should be able to report upon the rail­way wants of the country from the broadest possible stand-point. What was asked for was that the lines proposed by the Government should be tested in con­nexion with the various rival lines that had been surveyed, so that the very best might be selected; and how could the committee judge of the merits of the different competing routes unless they were regularly brought before them? What better reason could there be for submitting those competing routes than the fact that the Government had thought it worth their while to have them surveyed?

Mr. STERRY expressed the opinion that some deceit had been practised upon honorable members. 'Vere they not pro­mised by the head of the Government that they would have a chance to introduce their own lines ? Were they not clearly led to understand that they would be equally able with the Government to send new railways to the committee? As for proposing an additional 6,000 miles of railway, that was all a mistake. In the first place the increase in mileage would not be anything like as much; and, secondly, the House would not be committed to the construction of a single extra mile of line. It should also be re­membered that the present opportunity would be the last 11Onorable mem bers would have of bringing forward the railways which they were anxious to have considered on their merits.

Mr. BAILES said that the honorable member for Melbourne appeared to have got himself into an unnecessarily highstateof ex:" citementabou.tthelabours which the commit­tee would be asked to undertake. One thing he certainly seemed to have completely over­looked, namely, that if the committee were to find the evidence in favour of a line from A to B to be unsatisfactory, they would not be able to take a line from A to C into con;.. sideration at all unless it happened to have been previously brought under their atten­tion. It should also be remembered that the work thrown on the committee would be greatly shortened by the researches already carried out by the Age newspaper. What would the honor3 ble member for Melbourne say should some of the last proposed lines

2186 Railways Standing . [ASSEMBLY.] Committee.

turn out to be the best of the lot? Another important consideration was that the com­mittee having been called into existence, Parliament had no right to curtnil their labours. He (Mr. Bailes) regarded the amendment of his honorable colleague as a perfectly fair one.

Mr. LAURENS expressed the opinion that the head of the Government did not realize its true position in connexion with the present matter. When he (Mr. Laurens) first read the Act under which the com­mittee were to be a.ppointed it appeared to him most obvious that every line of railway that had been surveyed was as much en­titled to be remitted to them as any of the lines proposed by the Government. In fact, the House would have no longer to rely upon the Government for information with regard to such matters. Again, honorable members had been told that sending 6,000 miles of railway to the committee would affect the credit of the colony; but would it not be equally affected when it became known that such an extent of mileage had already been surveyed, as lUuch as £200,000 having been speut upon the work. There seemed to be nothing more plain in the' world than that, under the Railways Stand­ing Committees Act, the Assembly was clearly entitled to remit to the committee every line that had been surveyed, that body having no right to give the slightest pre­cedence to the lines proposed by the Govern­ment. Honorable members would not be true to their constituencies if they did not take the utmost advantage of the oppor­tunity now afforded them.

Mr. PATTERSON said that, for his part, he would like to see the committee perfectly unrestrained with respect to the lines they were to consider, but 'what was the intention of the Act on the subject? Obviously that some discrimination should be exercised. What, however, were the lines which it was now proposed to send to them? According to the notice paper their attention was to be directed to three separate lines to Strathbogie. The Government proposed one, and a private member two others. Was not that equivalent to the honorable memberaskingthe House tothrow on the committee a responsibility which he ought to taKe on himself? What could possibly be the use of occupying the time of the committee in this way? Then there was tIle honorable member for Dalhousie proposing three lines from Lancefield-one to Mia Mia, anothfH' to Carlsruhe, and another to Woodend. (Mr. Duffy-" They

are eaeh alternative proposals; only one to' be carried out.") 'Vhich was that one to be? (Mr. Duffy-" That is for the com­mittee to decide.") According to the spirit. of the Act, the honorable member himself ought to prove the merits of each of the lines. These additional proposals were a mere catch-a sham. Why, it would take the committee fully three years to deal pro­perly with the subject, and to throw such a labour upon them was not fair either to them or to the country. What effect might such a proceeding be expected to. have upon the financial position of the colony? (Mr. Munro-" None whatever.") He could not. agree with the honorable member. There were abundant reasons why the additional lines should not be sent to the committee in the way now proposed.

Mr. UREN remarked that he waS quite unable to follow the argument put forward by the head of the Government. If the Cabinet considered it advisable to spend an enormous sum of Government money on surveying these lines, what possible objec­tion could they have to sending them to the committee? For his (Mr. Uren's) part he was convinced that Ministers had submitted too many lines, and that when the com­mittee dealt with them they would not recommend the construction of more than 500 miles out of the 1,100 miles. This showed bad judgment somewhere, and it was to be feared that the effect would be a certain definite injury to the credit of the· colony. He would support the amendment.

Mr. DUFFY said he would not have risen to speak but for the personal reference made to him, for some particular purpose or another, by the Minister of Customs. What that purpose was he would leave honorable members to imagine. It was plain, how­ever, that the honorable gentleman wished to convey to the House the idea that he (Mr. Duffy) was proposing three or four lines for one locality . Was that idea a true one? The honorable gentleman must know well that it was not. He must know that he (Mr. Duffy) was only follow­ing an example set by the Government, namely, proposing alternative lines-devia­tions from one route-from which the committee would be able to select the best. The honorable gentleman was perfectly aware of this fact, but for special reasons of his own he suggested a motive of a very different character. Had the head of the Government carried out his promise, and stated plainly that, when the Government· proposition was carried, every honorable

Railways Standing [OOTOBEB 22.J Committee. 2187

member would be able to propose U. line or lines for the consideration of the committee, the whole of the present debate might have been avoided. He (Mr. Duffy) did not wholly concur with the amendment, but under the circumstances he would support it.

The House divided-Ayes ... 53 Noes ... 21

Majority for the amendment 32

AYES.

Mr. Andrews, " Armytage, " Beazley, " Bennett, " Best, " Bowman, " Brock, " Burrowes, " W. T. Carter, " Craven, " Duffy, " Duncan, " Dunn, " Forrest, " Gordon, " Graham, " Graves, " Groom, " Hall, " A. Harris, " Highett, " Hunt, " Keys, " Kirton, " Langridge, " Laurens, " Levien,

Mr. Anderson, " Cameron, " G. D. Carter, " Clark, " D. M. Davies, " Deakin, " Derham, " Dow, " Ferguson, " Gardiner, " Gillies,

The proposition agreed to.

Mr. McLellan, " Madden, " Mason, " Mountain, " Munro, " Murphy, " Murray,

Sir B. O'Loghlen, Mr. Outtrim, " Peacock, " Richardson, " Shiels, " L. L. Smith,

Lt .. Col. Smith, Mr. Sterry,

" Stuart, " Tatchell,

Capt. Taylor, Mr. Turner, " Tuthill, " Uren, " Webb, " Wheeler, " C. Young.

Tellers. Mr. Bailes,

" Baker.

NOES.

Mr. McColl, " McLean, " Methven, " Parfitt, " Patterson,

Dr. Pearson, Mr. C. Smith, " T. Smith.

Tellers. Mr. J. Harris,

" Shack ell.

as amended was then

The SPEAKER.-I must call attention 'to the fact that the motion as it now stands may not properly carry out the intentions of

"honorable member~ with respect to it, be­"cause it is worded in an ambiguous way. With the concurrence of the House, how- ,

:ever, I will cause the requisite alteration, to be made, that the views of honorable members, as expressed by the division just

:taken, may be given expression to. : Mr. McLEAN stated that, being a mem­ber of the standing committee, it was not his,

intention to record his vote in the division' just taken, but he found himself too late to retire.

FIRE BRIGADES BILL.

Mr. DEAKIN moved the second reading of this Bill. He said that very few remarks were necessary to explain the nature of the measure. It was the second Fire Brigades Bill that had been introduced this session, the first having been very favorably received w hen it was presented to the House in June last. After hearing the criticisms of honorable members, however, it was thought possible to improve the Bill by substituting two councils for one council-one for the metropolitan district, and the other for the country districts. And instead of having a small committee in every hamlet which possessed a fire brigade, it was thought to be better to follow the nine mining districts, and have nine local committees to look after local matters in connexion with fire brigades. This proposal had commended itself alike to the country and metropoli­tan districts. Another change was the enlargement of the metropolitan board, so as to give additirmal representation; and the board would have power to borrow money when it was considered necessary. The last change he would draw attention to was one which provided that when a fire occurred on uninsured property, a certain proportion of the expense of attending it should be recoverable from the uninsured persons. With these exceptions the Bill was the same as that which was introduced some months ago, and he trusted that it would receive equally favorable con­sideration. Since the introduction of the former measure, a terrible catastrophe had occurred in the great metropolis of a neighbouring colony, which should more than ever bring to the minds of the people of Melbourne the necessity for an immediate improvement of their organizations foJ.' fighting fires. He was assured on excellent authority that there were blocks of buildings in Melbourne which, if seized hy fire, would lead to an amollnt of destruction equal to that which had recently occurred in Sydney. The South Australian Legislature had at present before it a Bill closely allied to the one now under consideration, and efforts were being made to enlarge its scope. He would point out that, in dealing with this subject, the Victorian Legislature had to guide it the whole of the experience of the mother country, and also of . the other colonies.

Fife B1'lgades Bill. [ ASSEMBLY.] Fi1'e B1,zgades Bill.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was then read a second time

and committed. Discussion took place on clause 7, which

was as follows:-

"The metropolitan board shall consist of nine members-

"Three of such members shall be appointed by the Governor in Council, one of whom (to be named by the Governor in Council) shall be the president of the board;

" One member shall be elected by the counci1 of the city of Melbourne;

"One member shall be elected by the muni­cipal councils of the cities of Collingwood, Fitzroy, and Richmond, the towns of Bruns­wick, Essendon, Footscray, North Melbourne, and Williamstown, the boroughs of Flemington and Kensington and N orthcote, and the shires of Braybrook, Broadmeadows, Coburg, Darebin, Eltham, Heidelberg, Keilor, Preston, Whittle­sea, and Wyndham;

"One member shall be elected by the muni­cipal councils of the cities of South Melbourne and Prahran, the towns of Brighton and Haw­thorn, the boroughs of Kew, 1!ort Melbourne, and St. Kilda, and the shires of Boroondara, Bulleen, Caulfield, Doncaster, Malvern, Moor­abbin, Nunawading, and Oakleigh; and

"Three members shall be elected by the insurance companies carrying on business and insuring property within Victoria."

Mr. BENT said he did not wish to· interrupt the progress of the Bill, but he was informed that some amendments had been submitted from his district. and he would ask the Ohief Secretary to indicate their character.

Mr. DEAKIN observed that the pro­posed amendments had been printed and laid on the table. The first amendment, which was on the present clause, related to the second set of municipal councils who would each elect one member of the board. It was proposed to amend the provision tha tone member should be elected by the municipal councils of the cities of South Melbourne " and Prahran, the towns of Brighton and Hawthorn, the boroughs of Kew, Port Melbourne, and St. Kilda " by the substitution, for the words quoted, of the words" Prahran, St. Kilda, and Hawthorn, ,the town of Brighton, the borough of Port Melbourne." In clauses 8, 10, and 11 verbal amendments were proposed, and clause 28, authorizing the board to purchase existing plant belonging to fire brigades, was to be omitted. Olause 39 was to be amended so as to enable brigades to elect their own officers. Olause 69, dealing with

. paymen t of expenses in the case of fires in uninsured property, was also to be ,amended

by the insertion of words providing I!L limitation.

Mr. MOUNTAIN said he understood that the honorable member for Mel­bourne East (Mr. Zox), who was not now in the House, had intended to move an amendment on the present clause, to the effect that the president of the metropolitan board should be elected by the board instead of being appointed by the Governor in Oouncil.

Mr. DEAKIN remarked that this was a matter which had received very careful consideration, and the Government con­sidered it desirable that the president of the board should be nominated by the Governor in Oouncil. An equal number of representa­tives had been given to the insurance com­panies and to the municipal councils, and the Government representatives on the metropolitan board would also be the Government representatives on the country board, It was believed that the arrange­ment to have three members appointed by the Government on both boards would form a connecting link of great value. The special interests of the insurance companies and the municipalities would be protected by their representatives, and the Gov·ern­ment representatives would have no interest to serve but that of the public at large;

Mr. LEVIEN observed that the pro­posal to have the president appointed by the Governor in Oouncil had been objected to outside, but he thought that after the explanation of the Ohief Secretary the arrangement might be allowed to remain as provided in the clause.

Mr. O. SMITH said there was a strong feeling against the appointment of the president of the board by the Gov;ernQr in Oouncil. The Government only contributed one-third of the revenue of the board,' and if they exercised the: right of nominating the president they would have a larger representation on the board than the other bodies, because the casting vote of the president would in effect bring the Govern­ment representatives up to four. A great deal of friction would be done away with if the board was allowed to elect its own president. The subject of payment of members of the board was also one which would have to be discussed.

Mr. BURROWES remarlt\~d that the ri valry of the fire brigades would display itself in the matter of election of a president if the board elected him, and that it would save a great deal of trouble if the duty were performed by the Government •.

Fire Brigades Bill. . [OCTOBER 22.J Fi1'e Brigades Bill . 2189

Mr. G. D. CARTER submitted that it would be better to empower the board to :select its own president. The municipalities 'and the insurance companies contributed two-thirds of the revenue, and surely those two bodies were the best fitted to select the president. Far more friction would arise with a president appointed by the Govern­IDent than with a president appointed by the board. He had desired to make some Iremarks on the second' reading or the Bill, but in consequence of the Premier having told him that the measure would not come on that night, he was not in his place when the motion was agreed to. There were several points to which he desired to direct attention.

The CHAIRMAN. - The honorable member can only address himself to the clause now before the committee.

Mr. G. D. CARTER stated that he would like the board to have power to hold inquests upon fires.

The CHAIRMAN. - The honorable member is dealing with a subject outside the clause.

Mr. G. D. CARTER moved, as an' amendment, that the president of the board be appointed by the board and not by the Governor in Council. '

Mr. RICHARDSON said he hoped the Chief Secretary would accept this amendment. The board was empowered to determine what amount of money the muni­-cipalities and the insurance companies should pay; it had power to tax the municipalities and to collect the taxes, and it also had power to fine the municipalities to the s.mount of £50 if they did not pay the money due within a certain time. Under these circumstances it was very desirable that the board should be allowed to elect its ()wn president. There was nothing to show that the municipalities had agreed to allow themselves to be taxed in the way provided in the Bill.

Mr. ZOX remarked that he hoped that -the Chief Secretary would see his way to 'agree to the amendment of the honorable member for Melbourne. The intricate matters to be dealt with had on the whole been well handled in the Bill, but he saw no reason why the Government should require .to nominate the president of the board. He did not think the Government nominee would be more impartial than a president elected. by the other sections of the board. There was no reason why the ordinary rule should be d~parted from on the present occasion. ~he interest represented by the insurance

companies was a very important one. The premiums of the insurance companies, on which a duty of one and a half per cent. was paid, were as follows :-Melbourne and suburbs, within a radius of ten miles, pre­miums £176,000, duty £2,640; Ballarat, premiums £12,751, duty £191 ; Geelong, premiums £8,993, duty £134; Sandhurst; premiums £8,559, duty £128; other parts of Victoria, premiums £163,697, duty £2,455-or a total of £370,000 in pre­miums, and £5,548 in duty.

Mr. DEAKIN observed that the three representati ves appointed by the Govern­ment would be the same on both boards, so that the two boards might work harmo­niously together. The Government repre­sentatives would thus be able to note the country side of the case and the town side, and would have opportunities of acquiring information which no other members of the board would possess. In providing that one of those members should be president of both boards, the Government felt that they were securing a more perfect organiza­tion than could otherwise be obtained, and it was necessary that the Government should have the right of appointing that officer in order'to insure the president or both boards being the same gentleman. The represent a­ti ves of the other bodies would, of course, be liable to frequent change. The circum. stances were exceptional, and that was why an exceptional course was being pursued. The Government representation would not be of a party character, because the Go­vernment representatives would have no other object to serve than that of working for the best interests of the colony as a whole.

Mr. BAILES expressed the hope that the proposal of the Government would be adopted. The whole of the country fire brigades were in favour of it.

The amendment was negatived. Mr. DEAKIN moved the substitution

for the words" and Prahran, the towns of Brighton nr.d Hawthorn, the boroughs of Kew, Port Melbourne, and St. Kilda," of the words" Prahran, St. Kilda, and Hawthorn, the town of Brighton, the borough of Port Melbourne." He observed that there was some difficulty in connexion with Kew, but he would deal with that at a latter stage.

The amendment was agreed to. On clause 8, providing,inte1~ alia, that the

country board should consist of "nine" members, three to be appointed by the Governor in Oouncil (one of whom should

2190 Fh'e B1'igades Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Fire B1'igades Bill.

be president), two to be elected by the councils of the municipalities within any country fire district, two by the insurance companies, and two by the members of the brigades in the country districts,

Mr. STERRY moved the substitution of "twelve" for" nine" as the number of the board. This would enable three members each to be elected by the municipalities, the insurance companies, and the brigades. He thought it was unfair that the Government should have so large a proportion of the representation as one-third of the whole b.oard.

Mr. DEAKIN stated that personally he had no strong objection to the amendment, but as the clause in its present form had been considered and approved of by the parties concerned, he thought it would be injudicious to make any change in it.

Mr. BURROvVES remarked that the proposal as it stood represented the wish of the brigades, and he hoped the honorable member for Sand hurst South would not press his amendment. -

Mr. LANGRIDGE drew attention to the concluding provision of the clause, which was as follows :-

"The members to be appointed by the Go­vernor in Council to the country board shall be the same persons as shall be appointed by the Governor in Council to the metropolitan board."

He wished to know if the representatives of the Government on the board were to be paid? (Mr. Deakin-" No.") How could three members of the metropolitan board be expected to travel over the country and attend the meetings of the country board?

Mr. DE AKIN observed that there were to be nine local committees in different parts of the colony to transact the local business. The country board would only exercise a general supervision over the country brigades, and it would hardly ever be necessary for it to visit any parts or the country except such centres as Geelong, Ballarat, and Sandhurst. As a rule, however, it would sit in Mel­bourne, as being the most central place, so that the three gentlemen representing tIle Government would have very little t.ravelling to do.

The amendment was negatived. Consequential amendments were made in

clauses 10 and II. On clause 12, providing that the Governor

.in Council might at any time remove any member or the metropolitan board or of the country board or of any local committee,

Mr. KIRTON asked whether the clause­had received the approval of the country brigades?

Mr. DEAKIN replied in the affirmative. Mr. C. SMITH said this was the most

extraordinary clause he had ever seen in any Bill. There were three parties who elected representatives to these bodies besides the members appointed by the Government, yet the Government were to have power to remove any member. He could have under­stood a proposal that the Government should be able to remove any member appointed by them, but it was a most extraordinary pro­posal that the Government should ask for power to remove any of the elected members. No Government should possess such an arbitrary power. The next thing one might expect would be a proposal that the Govern­ment should have powerto remove an elected member of the Harbour Trust or of a local council. The clause was a most shameful one, and he begged to move that it be struck out.

Mr. DEAKIN remarked that the hon· orable member for Jolimont seemed to have more doubt about the wisdom and justice of Governments than he (Mr. Deakin) thought his experience could justify. The clause might have stated that a member could be removed who had been guilty of a mis­demeanour, but to avoid saying that the power of removal was placed abs01utely in the discretion or the Governor in Council. The only persons expressly disqualified from being members of either of the boards or of a local committee were uncertificated insol­vents. The object of this clause was only to reta.in power to remove persons from these bodies for sufficient reasons. He did not think there was any reason to fear the operation of the clause; but if the honorable member felt strongly upon it, he (Mr. Deakin) would consider the matter with the view of amending the clause at a later stage.

Mr. STERRY suggested that the clause might be amended so as to provide that a member could be removed on a petition from the majority of the board or committee.

At this stage, the time having arrived for taking business other than Government. business, progress was reported.

LAW OF EVIDENOE AMENDMENT BILL.

On the order of the day for resuming the­debate (adjourned from September 24) on Mr. Shiel~' motion for the second reading ot this Bill,

Law of Em'dence [OCTOBER 22.] Amendment Bal. 2191

The Bill was read a second time and committed.

On clause 3, providing, inte1' alia, as follows :-

"Every person upon objectil1gto being sworn, and stating as the grouud of such objection either that he has no religious belief or that the taking of an oath is contrary to his religious belief, shall be permitted to make his solemn affirmation instead of taking an oath in all places and for all purposes where an oath is or shall be required by law, which affirmation shall be of the same force and effect as if he had taken the oath,"

Capt. TAYLOR mo-ved the omission of the words" either that he has no religious belief or". He did not see why the Parlia­ment of this country should legislate to encourage people to say that they had no religious belief. By the clause as it stood they would admit quite a new class of people into their legislation-people who said they had no religion at all-and he thought that was highly undesirable. People who said they had no religious belief should be left to the law as it stood. The amendment would still enable persons with whom taking an oath was contrary to their religious belief to make an affirmation. He had every sympathy for those people, but for those who had no religious belief he had no sympathy.

Mr. L. L. SMITH observed that he would have liked to hear some stronger reasons for the amendment than those stated by tIle honorable member for Haw­thorn. Were they going at the end of the nineteenth century to define what a man's religion was? (Capt. Taylor - " No.") By striking out the words objected to the honorable member wanted a man to tell a deliberate falsehood-to say that he had a rJligion when he had none. A man should state the honest truth when he went into the witness-box, and if he hacT 110

religious belief should be allowed to say so and claim exemption from taking an oath.

Mr. McINTYRE said he thought there could be no objection to lea ving out the words in question. The clause would still provide that every person could object to be sworn if he stated that an oath was contrary to his religious belief. Surely a man who had no religion could offer that objection, because having no religion would be his religion.

Mr. BAILES observed that he could not see what good purpose would be served by the amendment .. If a man had no r€'ligious belief and was sworn, the oath would not be binding on his con.science, whereas if he-was allowed to make an affirmation he would be

just as liable to punishment for perjury as· if he had taken an oath.

Capt. TAYLOR stated that he objected to have on the statute-book any recognition of people who had no religious belief. He did not see why Parliament should go out of its way to legislate for such people.

Mr. STUART expressed the opinion that the amendment was a desirable one. There was no reason why Parliament in its legislation should needlessly offend the great mass of the people who had a religious belief. The difficulty might be got over by simply using the phrase" that the taking of an oath is contrary to his belief", learing out the word" religious".

Mr. SHIELS stated that he hoped the committee would pause before accepting the retrograde amendment of the honorable member for Hawthorn. What was the exact position? The law actually barred from holding certain high offices in the State­from being a Member of Parliament, a Judge, a magistrate, and from holding other offices where the taking of an oath was ne~essary-not only the man who held infidel opinions, but the man who, while he might have a thorough belief in an all-ruling Deity, did not go further and hold that that Being either punished in this life or in a life to come. Because a man held such views was he to be stamped by this Parliament, as representing a liberal community, as being unworthy of the confidence of the community in any position in which the taking of an oath was at present required? Were they going back to medireval times? Were they going to visit with civil disabili­ties men who honestly avowed that they differed from honorable members, or it might be the majority of the community, and were bold enough to tell it and ask for some other form of affirmation which, while satis­fying their consciences, would not commit them to a belief which they did not in reality hold? This Legislature was only being asked to adopt the very words of the later English statnte. "'VVere they going to say to the whole community of Australia that they were less liberal in religious matters than the people of England? The state­ment of the honorable memberfor Hawthorn,. that they should afford no recognition by legislation of the people in this country who were without a religious belief such as the majority entertained, was a sentiment such as he never expected from the honorable member. The amendment was only calcu­lated to make people hypocrites. Was it encouraging honesty to ma.ke people kiss

2192 Law oj Evidence [ASSEMBLY-.] Amendment Bill.

the Bible if they did not believe in it? It would be going back to the dark days of the middle ages to adopt such an amendment as that of the honorable member for Haw­thorn.

Mr. McINTYRE said he thought the .honorable mem bel' for N ormanby was wrong in his view of the effect of the amendment. He (Mr. McIntyre) believed that, notwith­standing the amendment, a man with no religion would be able to make an affirma­tion. He would be satisfied if the honor­able member would agree to make the amendment after the third reading, so as to aUow the Bill to get through committee that night.

Capt. TAYLOR remarked that the honorable member for N ormanby seemed to have forgotten that. the committee had already passed clause 2, which allowed any person to swear by raising his band accord­ing to the manner practised in Scotland. From his experience in the courts he knew that· there was a great number of people who had an inherent dread of kissing the Bible and telling an untruth afterwards, quite apart from their fear of being punished for perjury. These were the people who kissed their thumbs or held the Bible a certain distance from their lips while pre­tending to kiss it. If the clause was passed in its present form, this class of people would relieve themselves of the nameless terror to which he alluded by stating that they had no religious belief, and asking to be allowed to make an affirmation.

Mr. STUART said he did not see why they could not make the clause sufficiently effecti ve while removing from it any matter which would give offence to a large number of their fellow citizens. He thought there-

. fore the honorable member for N ormanby ·ought to adopt the amendment.

Mr. ARMYTAGE expressed the hope that the committee would pause before passing this clause, and consider seriously the arguments in favour of the amendment. The honorable member for Normanby, whenever he rose on a point of this sort, always claimed for himself and party that they were the only honest straightforward people in the State-that was to say, the people with no religion at all. This clause raised the whole question whether they were to divorce the laws of God from the laws of the State. The honorable member for Normanby was an exp'ert at divorce, and this clause was in the honorable mem­ber's favorite direction·. It mU'3t be seen,

however, that if honor9.ble members were going to give the stamp of approval of the State to infidels, this was no longer a Christian State. He hoped h(morable members who had a true interest in the State would hesitate and consider whether it was right for them to legislate for infi­delity.

Mr. OFFIOER said he. hoped the hon­orable member in charge of the Bill would. stick to the clause as it stood. It was time to put an end to the horrid mockery of swearing people who had no belief whatever. .

Mr. LEVIEN remarked that, even if the amendment was carried, those who desired to do so could still object to be sworn. If the clause was passed fiS it stood there would be some appearance of recognising infidelity by Act of Parliament.

The committee divided on the question that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the clause-

Ayes ... 55 Noes ... 16

Majority against the amendment 39

AYES.

Mr. Anderson, " Beazley, " Bennett, " Best, " Brock, " Burrowes, " Craven, " D. M. Davies, " Deakin, " Derham, " Dow, " Duncan, " Dunn, " Ferguson, " Forrest, " Gardiner, " Gillies, " Gordon, " Graham, " Hall, " A. Harris, " J. Harris, " Highett, " Hunt, " Kirton, " Langridge, " Leonard, " McColl,

Mr. Armytage, " Bent, " Bowman, " G. D. Carter, " Graves, " Laurens, " Levien, " McIntyre, " Sterry,

Mr. McLean, Dr. Maloney, Mr. Methven,

" Mountain, " Munro, " Murray, " Officer,

Sir B. O'Loghlen, Mr. Outtrim,

" Parfitt, " Patterson, " Peacock, " Shack ell, " Shiels, " C. Smith, " L. L. Smith, " Tatchell, " Taverner, " Tucker, " Turner, " Webb, " Wheeler, " Wilkinson, " Woods, " A. Young.

Tellers. Mr. Bailes, " Clark~

NOES.

Mr. Stuart, Capt. Taylor, Mr. Uren,

" C. Young, Zox.

Tellers. Mr. Baker, " Keys.

Law of Evidence [OCTORER 22.] Amendment Bill. 2193

Discussion took place on clause 5, which was as follows:-

"When an oath has been duly administered and taken, the fact that the person to whom the same was administered had at the time of taking such oath no religious belief shall not for any purpose affect the validity of such oath. "

Mr. STU ART moved the omission of al1 the words after the word "administered," and the substitution of the words" nothing in the belief .of a person to whom the oath has been so administered shall affect the validity of such oath." The arguments in favour of the amendment of clause 3 desired by the honorable member for Hawthorn applied even more strongly to this clause, and it was desirable that the committee should adopt the amendment he now proposed.

Mr. LE V LEN expressed the opinion that it would be necessary to pass the clause as it stood, in order to keep it consistent with clause 3.

The amendment was negatived. Discussion took place on clause 7, which

was as follows:-"All the words in the 62nd section of the

Evidence Act 1890 following the word 're­spectively,' the 6lkd section of the said Act, the 63rd section of the Juries Act 1890, the 112th section of the Public Service Act 1890, and all the words in the 28th section of the Constitution Act Amendment Act 1890 following the words , the said Crown' are hereby repealed."

Sir B. O'LOGHLEN observed that this clause proposed to repeal several sections of Acts of Parliament, and he would like to have the reasons explained.

Mr. SHIELS said he only proposed to repeal such provisions of the existing law as would be unnecessary when this measure came into operation-partial enactments which dealt with the subject piecemeal.

Mr. GRAVES stated that before the proposal that Parliament should pass a vote of thanks to the Chief .J ustice for con­solidating the statute law of the colony had been carried, and before the consolidated Acts had been published, the honorable member was asking Parliament to repeal several sections of those Acts, so that it would be necessary to issue an amending measure simultaneously with the con­solidated statutes.

Mr. BENT remarked that the honorable member for Normanby must be aware of the improper system of drawing juries at the Supreme Oourt. The officers of tIle Orown law department made inquiries abeut the jurymen, and took care that if a carpenter was to be tried for any offence there should be no carpenter on the jury. It was tIle

same with regard to any other trade or profession, and as the honorable member was going ill for law reform, perhaps he would submit a clause which would stop the continuance of this objectionable system, which, in some instances, might prevent accused persons from getting a fair trial. These private inquiries with regard to jury­men should be stopped, and he would be glad if the honorable member for N ormanby would afford some relief in that direction.

Mr. SHIELS said that while he was most anxious to assist the honorable mem­ber for Brighton, he bad not the rare political courage of that· honorable member,. and he was afraid that if he were to enlargo on the faults and vices of the jury system he would delay the passing of his own mea­sure, and would probably be called to order by the Chairma.n.

Oapt. TAYLOR observed that the honor­able member for Normanby had not given the committee a satisfactory reason for proposing to repeal the provisions of the existing law mentioned in this clause. The honorable member sought to reveal section 63 of the Juries Act, which provided that-

" If any person called as a juror decline from alleged conscientious motives to be sworn it shall be lawful for the court, upon being satisfied of the sincerity of such objection, to permit such person, instead of being sworn, to make his solomn affirmation in the words in the form in the 9th schedule to this Act or in words to the same effect, which affirmation shall be of the same force as if the person had taken an oath in the usual form."

What was going to be the result? Jury­men would not be allowed to decline to be­sworn because of conscientious objection~. The honorable member evidently wanted to put such conscientiolls men in the same category as atheists and unbelievers. The· next provision of the law which the honor­able member for Normanby desired to excise· from the statute-book was section 112 of the Public Service Act, providing that-

"If any person shall be unwilling, from al­leged conscientious motives, to be sworn, it shall be lawful for such person instead of being sworn to make his solemn affirmation in the form con­tained in the 11th schedule to this Act; which solemn affirmation shall be of the same force and effect as if such person had taken an oath in the form hereinbefore prescribed in that behalf."

The honorable member evidently wanted to do away with every provision of the law which allowed a man to say that he had conscientious objections to being sworn. The honorable member went still further, for he proposed to repeal section 28 of the Oonstitution Act, making clause 7 a sort of

2194 Law of Evidence [ ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

Bradlaugh clause. But what would be the ·effect of repealing section 28 of the Con­stitution Act? That section provided that-

"No member either of the Legislative Council or the Legislative Assembly shall be permitted to sit or vote therein respectively until he has taken and subscribed before the Governor, or some person authorized by the Governor in that behalf, the oath in the 2nd schedule hereto. Whensoever the demise of Her Majesty Queen Victoria or of any of her successors to the Crown is notified by the Governor of Victoria to the said Council and Assembly, the members of the said Council and Assembly shall, before they are permitted to sit and vote therein, respectively take and subscribe the like oath to the successor for the time being to the said. Crown.

" Every person authorized by law to make an .affirmation instead of taking an oath may make such affirmation in every case in which an oath is herein required to be taken."

He hoped the honorable member for N 01'­

manby would really consider what he was about, because clauso 7 would actually take away section 28 of the Constitution Act without substituting anything for it. It Jid not even say that a Member of Parlia­ment should be allowed to affirm, but hereafter members elected either to the Assembly or to the Council would simply walk into the chamber, put their hats on the seats they intended to occupy, or pin their cards to the benches, and would thereby become members of the Legislature, .and sit and vote without taking the oath of ·allegiance. (Mr. G. D. Carter-" A very immoral proceeding.") If the honorable .member for N ormanby intended that honor­able members should makean affirmation in­. stead of taking the oath he had not carried ·out his intention in this clause.

Mr. SHIELS expressed the hope that honorable members would not be unduly

.alarmed· at the fearful evils which the honor­cable member for Hawthorn seemed to think would follow the adoption of this clause. Out of his too lively imagination the hono1'­

.able member drew a horrible picture of Members of Parliament coming into the House after election by their constituents, Jaying their hats on their seats or pinning -their cards to the benches, and then pro­ceeding, unsworn, to the performance of their duties. He assured the honorable member that he was perfectly loyal, and although it was true that he did not join ,in singing "God Save the Queen" in the Assembly on a particular occasion, he had 'not the slightest intention of introducing a clause to repeal that portion of section 28 ·of the Constitution Act which required Members of Parliament to promise due

allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen. If the honorable member had looked carefully at the clause he would have observed that it proposed to repeal only the last sentence of section 28 of the Oonstitution Act, which would be unnecessary if Parliament passed the general provision contained in this Bill, with which provision the honorable member for Port Fairy had expressed himself satis­fied. The first part of section 28 of the Constitution Act would remain in force, still imposing upon Members of Parliament the necessity of taking the oath of allegiance. (Mr. G. D. Cartel'-" Then we should still have to swear?") To swear or to make an affirmation. (Capt. Taylor - " You take away the right of making an affirmation.") No; he extended the right of making an affirmation. As the law at present stood, if a man, having a religious belief, declared thathe had conscientious objections to being sworn, he was allowed to make an affirma­tion, but if he was without such religious belief, and objected to take the oath on that account, he could be debarred, as the law now stood, from taking the position in Parliament to which he had been elected by his constituents. (Mr. Baker-" What is the oath in the schedule to the Constitution Act ?") It was as follows:-

"I do sincerely promise and swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Victoria, as lawful sovereign of Great Britain and Ireland and of this colony of Victoria, so help me God."

Raving said that, the honorable member had to kiss the boole Supposing two members were elected to the Assembly-one a gentle­man of declared unbelief, like Mr .. Bradlaugh, and another a gentleman who admitted the existence of an overruling Deity but had doubts as to whether that Deity punished wrong-doing in this life or in the life to come, unless this Bill was passed, any hon­orable member could rise in his pla.ce and object to either of them being sworn. (Mr. Turner-" Do you propose to alter that?") Yes, because that wa.s a state of things which was not to be tolerated. If a man was honest enough to state that he had no religious belief he ought to be allowed to declare his allegiance to the Queen in some unobjectionable form. If that was not allowed then olie of two things must happen, such a man would either be made a martyr for his honesty or else a hypocrite. This Bill proposed to allow a man of that kind to be what t.hey all de­sired he should be-a bold and honest man, who would not be made to suffer for

Law of Evidence [OCTOBER 22.] Amendment Bill. 2195

~uch conscientiousness as he possessed. The Bill provided that, in lieu of the oath, a person might make a solemn declaration, and if elected to' Parliament he would affirm as follows :-

" I do solemnly, sincerely, and truly declare and affirm that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Victoria, as lawful sovereign of Great Britain and Ireland and of this colony of Victoria. "

It was distinctly provided in clause 3 that if any person made a false and corrupt affirmation which, if deposed on oath, would have amounted to wilful and corrupt perjury, he should be liable to prosecution, indict­ment, sentence, and punishment in all respects as if he had committed wilful and corrupt perjury.

Oa.pt. TAYLOR said the honorable member had landed himself in another diffi­culty. Admitting that the clause would not do away with tbe oath of allegiance pre­scribed by section 28 of the Oonstitut.ion Act, which provided that no Member of Parlia-

. ment should be permitted to sit or vote until he had taken the oath of allegiance, ho (Oapt. Taylor) must point out that, as the affirmation was still to be made in the language of the form prescribed in the 2nd schedule, it would conclude with the words, "So help me God." (Mr. Shiels-" No, those words are not put in the affirmation; look at clause 4.") The affirmation would become a most tangled and complicated thing, and it would be inconsistent to adopt the same mode for the affirmation of the truth of some statement of evidence about to be made and for the declaration of allegiance to the Queen.

Discussion took place on clause 8, which was as follows :--

" In the construction of this part of this Act the word' court' shall include all .J udges and justices and all persons by law or by the con­sent of parties authorized to hear, receive, and examine evidence."

Mr. TURNER moved the addition to the clause of the following words:-

" And this part of this Act shall not apply to any proceedings of a criminal nature."

He remarked that civil and criminal actions stood on a very different footing. In civil a.ctions all parties had the opportunity of going into the witness-box and giving their account of the matter, but when a man was prosecuted for any criminal offence he was put in the dock and had not the opportunity of giving evidence. It very frequently hap­pened that the only chance of a successful defence was in the cross-examination of the

witnesses for the prosecution, and seeing that this measure made it compulsory on the part of the Judge to stop certain kinds of cross-examination, the unfortunate prisoner would be in a very difficult position indeed. It was very clear, therefore, that they ought not to make this stringent measure apply to matters of a criminal nature. If it was limited to civil actions it would not be so objectionable, but if it was applied to all classes of cases, civil and criminal, in all courts, superior and inferior, he felt satisfied, from his own knowledge of the procedure in those courts, that the measure would do far more injury than it would confer benefit. If the honorable member would limit its provisions to civil actions, he (Mr. Turner) would assist him in passing it pretty much as it stood. Should experience show the desirability of extending its operation to criminal proceedings, an amending measure could be introduced for that purpose.

Oapt. TAYLOR remarked that there was a large class of cases which were not properly of a criminal or quasi-criminal nature, in which it would be undesirable to limit the right of cross-examination. He might mention summonses for assault, or for driving on the wrong side of a road, or a case in which one man having a grudge against another charged him with being drunk. The proper name for such offences was" offences punishable on summary con­viction," and not quasi-criminal offences. He would suggest the insertion, after the words "of a criminal cllaracter," of the words "punishable on summary convic­tion."

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN asked the honor­able member for St. Kilda (Mr. Turner) to add to his amendment the words "before the said court." A large part of his objection to the. Bill would then be removed. In civil matters an unjust verdict could be remedied afterwards, but in cases where the accused person's life, liberty, or character were at stake the wrong could not be reme­died after the perjury had been discovered. He had already given the House instances in which great evils had arisen from perjury not being detected during a trial, and also in which it had been detected by what ap­peared to be at the time unnecessary cross­examination. A great number of objections to the Bill would be obviated if its opera­tion in this respect were confined to suits of a civil nature. When there was nothing standing b'3tween a prisoner and his sen­tence but a cross-examination as to the credibility of a particular witness, the

2.196 Law of Evidence [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

protection which every individual in the community possessed ought not to' be thrown away. Many learned members of the bar with whom he had spoken felt as strongly on the subject as he did himself, believing that it was the actual liberty of the subject which ~as at stake.

Mr. BEST observed that the committee had now arrived at what had been desig­nated the dangerous portion of the Bill, and he was perfectly satisfied that honor­able members would see that the lawyers taking part in the discussion were actuated by a desire to secure the best interests of the community in drawing attention to the dangers to be apprehended under this portion of the measure. He had already urged at length that these clauses were against the views of the highest English authorities who had written on the law of evidence. The power of cross-examination in criminal proceedings was of the utmost importance, and its value in civil proceed­ings was not under-estimated by the pro­fession. Any curtailment of that power would only be accepting the lesser of two evils. There were very strong objections to curtailing the right of cross-examination, and they should be yielded to as far as criminal proceedings which affected the life and character of individuals, were con­cerned. It was well within the knowledge of all of them that innumerable cases arose in which a prisoner's only chance rested upon the skill of his ad vocate. Not very long ago a case was tried in Sydney in which a man was actually condemned to deat·h upon the evidence of a woman of doubtful character, and his life was on ly saved by the woman's untrustworthiness being discovered at the last moment. If the right of cross-examination were curtailed the danger of such cases recurring would be very great indeed. However, some of tl1e evils to be apprehended under the Bill would be considerably mitigated if the proposal that the provision in question should not apply to criminal cases were adopted.

Mr. BAKER said hehadeveryconfidence in the honorable member for Normanby, but laymen could not follow the arguments of lawyers, and he very much regretted that there was not a law officer of the Crown pre­s~mt to tell them which way they ought to vote. He was not even sure that the clause did not affect the Constitution Act.

Mr. G. D. CARTER stated that he was very much surprised at the remarks of the honorable member who had just resumed his seat. The honorable member said he

regretted there was not a law officer present to tell him and his friends which way to vote~ but he (Mr. Carter) noticed that whenever­a law officer of the Crown was present the, honorable member and his friends always voted against his advice. There had, no· doubt, been cases in which cross-examination. had been carried to very improper lengths;· but the Bill proposed to make a sudden jump, and he thought the ends of justice might be served by the Judges exercising their discre­tion in the matter. The honorable member' for St: Kilda proposed that the provision in question should only apply to criminal cases;: but where did the criminal law stop and the civil law begin? Parliament had devoted itself for years to making the most venial offences crimes. He was informed by a lawyer that whenever an ·information was filed a criminal offence was concerned. In that case, if his Yan Yean tap was round running, and an information was laid against him upon which he was summoned to the police court, it would be a criminal offence. In an action involving not only his reputation but all his means, he could not have the witnesses cross-examined; but the difficulty was removed in the case of a half-crown penalty for allowing his Yan Yean tap to run. It was also a criminal offence to buy a box of matches after 7 p.m.,

. or to go shooting on a Sunday. The honor­able member fvr Port Fairy had spoken of the liberty of the subject, but that was a thing which had departed from Victoria years ago. It had been the· purpose of our modern legislation to deprive the subject of every liberty that could be taken away from him. The honorable member for St. Kilda. desired that the clause should not apply to criminal cases. He (Mr. Carter) proposed to add" or civil cases." If the honorable­member for N ormanby would accept that. amendment, he would vote for the clause. The committee ought, at all events', . to pause before rushing madly into new legis­lation of this kind. If a charge were made against him, it would be no satisfaction to­him to be told that the offence was" quasi­criminal," for the result would be the same­to him. He knew a respectable widow woman who had been branded as a quasi •. criminal for selling a penny box of matches. after 7 o'clock in the evening. It would be better to omit the second part of the· Bill altogether, and leave the protection of" witnesses in the hands of the bench. If" the Judges had not the power to stop jm·· proper questions a clause might be intro­duced to give them that power.

Law of Evidence [OCTOBER 22.] Amendment Bill. 2197

Mr. SHIELS remarked that even if he were willing to abandon the second part of the Bill the House would not agree to it. While 'he had the strongest possible belief that the Bill was necessary in the interests . of justice, and to protect witnesses under cross-examination, he did not shut his eyes to the fact that the arguments of the legal gentlemen who had spoken were shared in by some members of the bar. But it did seem wrong that a man should be rendered liable to have the whole field of his life laid bare, and that he should be liable to be subjected to unmerited obloquy in a way calculated to prevent him from going into the witness-box to assist a fellow man in obtaining justice. The late Dr. Hearn had agreed with him that this was a public evil which ought to be remedied. Clauses 11 and 12 of the Bill ought to apply to criminal as well as to civil proceedings. Howevel', if the amendment were withdrawn he would give the honorable member for St. Kilda an opportunity of moving it on the motion for the third reading of the Bill, but he would ask him not to make it apply to clause 13. If the Bill were amended at the present stage it would be impossible to obtain the third reading that night. His own opinion as to the value of the measure ha.d not undergone any change, and he did not think the distinction sought to be drawn between criminal and civil cases was of so much importance as had becn represented, but he was willing to meet'the views of the honorable member tentatively.

Sir B. O'LOGHLEN obsened that the honorable member for Normanby could not secure the insertion of an amendment on the third reading, because a private member was not in the position of a Go­vernment with a large party at its back.

Mr. SHIELS said that if amendments were inserted now the Bill must be lost, a! the Government intended to prorogue Par­liament at the end of next month.

Mr. TURNER stated that he would withdraw his amendment on the under­standing that the honorable member for Normanby would himself propose the alter­ation on the third reading of the Bill.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN remarked that this would not dispose of the matter, as he had other amendments to propose in the clause further' on. He desired to give power to appeal in the event of a question being disallowed which was considered by' the counsel asking it to be 8. Tital one. He was sure the honorable member for

SE3. li90.-7 Q

N ormanby did not mean that there should be no appeal, and yet the clause did not provide for it. '

Mr. SHIELS said he would ask the honorable member for Port Fairy to defer the action he intended to take until the third reading of the Bill, when he (Mr. Shiels) would accept the amendment of the honor­able member for St. Kilda. He would also at that stage, if he saw that the right of appeal would be jeopardized, accept an amendment which would remove the danger, for he was very strongly of opinion that the right of appeal should be kept perfectly open.

Mr. Turner's nmendment was withdrawn. Discussion took place on clause 9, which

was as follows :-

"If any question put to a witness upon cross­examination relates to a matter not relevant to the suit or proceeding except in so far as it affects the credit of the witness by injuring his charac­ter, it shall be the duty of the court to decide whether or not the witness shall be compelled to answer it, and may, if it thinks fit, warn the witness that he is not obliged to answer it. In exercising this discretion the court shall have regard to the following considerations :-

'r a. Such questions are proper if they are of such a nature that the truth of the imputation conveyed by them would seriously affect the opinion of the court as to the credibility of the witness on the matter to which he testifies.

"b. Such questions are improper if the impu~ tation which they convey relates to matters so remote in time or of such a character that the truth of the imputation would not affect or would affect in a slight degree only the opinion of the court as to the credibility of the witness on the matter to which he testifies.

"c. Such questions are improper if there is a great disproportion between the importance of the imputation made against the witness' character and the importance of his evidence, '\

Mr. TURNER moved the insertion, after the word "cross-examination" (line 1-2), of the words " is vexatious or." The effect of this amendment would be that if the question was only put by way of annoyance the court would have power to stop it.

Mr. SHIELS said he expp-cted, when hQ promised to limit the second part of the Bill to civil suits, that no more amendments lVould be brought forward at the present stage. All he could say now was that if honorable members insisted upon proposing amendments in committee he would not argue them, but let them go without remark. He felt keenly that he had all the lawyer! of the House against him, still if they would accept his assurance that every one of their amendments would be fully considered by him, he would give it most heartily. H. ceuld not, however; hare

2198 Law of Evidence [ASSEMBLY.] Amendment Bill.

,amendments of which he did not approve forced upon him. He had not heard of the present amendment before.

Sir B. O'LOGHLEN remarked that the honorable member f9r N ormanby wanted to

. carry his Bill in a way which was foreign to proper legislation. The proper way to' legislate was to thrash out matters of detail in committee. It was obvious to him (Sir B. O'Loghlen) that if the Bill was not amended in committee, it would be sent to another place in a very objectionable shape.

Mr. SHIELS stated that in his opinion the right of appeal would be fully secured under the Bin as it stood. Nevertheless, ,if the honorable member for Port Fairy would draft a clause expressly saving the right of appeal, he (Mr. Shiels) would accept ,it on the third reading.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN said the honorable member for Normandy knew perfectly "Well that so long as the mandatory words of the clause were retained no amendment that could be drafted would do away with their effect. In its presentshapethe Bill was most dangerous, and he said this in the light of thirty-four years' experience, which was more than the honorable member bad had. As for the words it was now proposed to in­·troduce, they were in the South Australian' Act, and the honorable member in his second reading speech cited South Aus­,tralian legislation on the pr£:sent subject as . .an example to this colony. The words ought :to have appeared in the clause in the first instance. The honorable member had not {)iIered a single reason for leaving them out.

Mr. SHIELS remarked that he had adopted the wording of the measure drafted by Sir James Fitzjames Stephen. It would be seen that the Bill contained no reference to the South Australian Act; As a matter ot fact, the original Victorian measure on the subject was introduced to the Victorian Parliament before the South Australian Bill was introduced to the South Australian Parliament.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN observed that Sir: James Fitzjames Stephen framed his Bill for India. He had never been able to . ~arry it in the mother country. It was' framed for adoption by a practica.lly des- , potic Government, and even .then it was' only an experiment. Besides, from what: he (Sir B. O'Loghlen) read to the House' the other night, it was pretty evident that, Sir .T ames Fitzjames Stephen had modified ~ his views' on the subject.

The amendment was negatived without a' division. -' ,I ' . .

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN moved the sub­stitution, for the words "it sha.ll be the duty of the court to " (line 5), of the words "the court may, if it think fit." The clause, as it stood, proposed. a complete change in the law, and it would also, in his opinion, take away the right of appeal. It would make it the compulsory duty of the court to decide whether a witness should or should not be compelled to answer a par­ticular question, and it was hard to see how a J lldge could come to a final deci­sion upon such a point on the spur of the moment. At present the matter was one of every day procedure, and there was a right of appeal; but under the Bill the party injured would have no remedy. He (Sir B. O'Loghlen) did not think it right to make such a mom en tOllS change in the la.". in order to protect witnesses who probably had no' character to lose. A witness with a good character had nothing to fear.

Mr. GRAVES remarked that when the Attorney-General, who was now ill England, spoke on the second reading of the Bill, he told the House that the right of appeal would be preserved. He said-

" There was one provision to the effect that the decision of a court as to the fi tRess of any question should be final without appeal. That, I think, was objectionable, and it is not in this Bill."

If a question was disallowed, would there be, under the Bill, a right of appeal? (Mr. Shiels-"Yes.") Then he (Mr. Graves) would like to know who was wrong, the Attorney-General and the honorable member for Normanby, or the honora.ble member for Port Fairy.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN said the point with respect to the right of appeal lay in a nutshell. What the Attorney-General referred to was simply a clause, specifically taking away the right of appeal, which was not included ill the present Bill. But the right of appeal might be ta.ken away in another way altogether. Let honorable members mark the words-" it shall be the .duty of the court." Those words' were mandatory. Again, there could be no appea.l aga.inst the" discretion" of even a justice unless it was an illegal" discretion." For instance, a justice applied to for a licence was not entitled to refuse it on the ground that the applicant wore a white hat. With legal "discretion" it was, however, very different, and under the clause it would

. be compulsory on the Judge concerned' to exercise his "discretion." He (SirB. O'Loghlen) protested against the present

Law of Evidence [OCTOBER 22.J Amendment Bill. 2199

proposal, which would make it compulsory on the Judge to intervene, and he begged the committee to support the amendment.

The amendment was negatived. Sir B. O'LOG HLEN moved that the

Chairman report progress. The motion was negatived. Sir B. O'LOGHLEN moved the omis­

sion of the word "discretion" (line 9) with the view of substituting "power." According to the decision of the com­mittee, as indicated by the last vote, they were giving the court fresh powers, and yet the word" discretion" was used. The honorable member for Normanby, if he was smcere in the desire he had expressed to give a right of appeal, should allow the amendment to be passed. If the word " discretion" was used instead of " power" it would show that there was no intention of giving an appeal.

Mr. SHIELS remarked that if the honorable member objected to the word ~, discretion" he had no objection to substi­tute "duty," after the third reading. The earlier part of the clause provided that it should be the" duty" of the court to shut ~ut improper ,questions. '

Sir B. O'LOG HLE,N said the alteration suggested by the honorable member in charge of the Bill would onlv make matters worse. This was a tyrannic~l Bill, because it put despotic power in the hands of the Judge, and made the exercise of that despotic power mandatory on him. If the Assembly were going blindfold to pass this measure he would warn them that it would not be long before some member of the community would suffer from it.

The amendment was negatived. Capt. TAYLOR suggested that the

word" seriously" (line 13) should be struck out. The clause provided that questions were proper if they were of such a nature that the truth of the imputation conveyed by them w6uld seriously affect the opinion of the court as to the credibility of the witness. Surely questions were proper if the opinion of the court would be affected at all.

Mr. SHIELS said he hoped the honor­able member would not press the suggestion. The word" seriously" was balanced to some extent by sub-section b. He would not like to interfere with a provision which was so carefully drawn and had been in force so long in other places. If it was sought to put questions going far back into a man's life for the purpose of raking up some matter which, even if true, would only affect in a small d~gree the credibility of

7Q2

the witness, then he (Mr. Shiels) submitted that such questions should be shut out in the interests of justice.

Capt. TAYLOR observed that if the honorable member in charge of the Bill had a sufficient following to carry it through without the dotting of an "i" or the crossing of a "t" of course it was useless to propose any amendment. He would point out that the word "seriously" was not used as affecting the credibility of the witness, but as affecting the opinion of the court, which was a very different thing. If the opinion of the court might be affected by the answer to a question it was a proper one to put to a witness.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN said the honorable member in charge of the Bill justified the clause on the ground that it had been in operation in other places, but the marginal note showed that the clause was taken from Mr. Justice Stephen's book on evidence.

Mr. SHIELS pointed out that, -the marginal note also referred to the Indian E vidence Act. The clause, with the t~ree sub-sections, was taken word, for word fr,om that Act. The clause was also exactly in the sallie form as it was in the Bill intro­duced by Dr. Quick, the late Dr. Hearn,and himself in 1883.

On clause 10, . Sir B. O'LOGHLEN said he thought

it was time to go home. Ue begged, to move that progress be reported.

The motion was negatived. Mr. 'GRAVES said he 'thought the

honorable member in charge of the Bill had taken a very unusual course in giving a pledge to support certain vital alterations in the measure after the tllird reading. Apparently this was do'ne with the object of getting the Bill through committee; but surely it was unfair to those who had ~upported the Bill for the honorable mem­ber to agree to a provision that the measure should 'not apply to criminal cases. This was giving up one of the vital principles which those who supported the Bill had been fighting for. . On clause 11, providing that the court "shall" forbid any question which it re­gards as indecent or scandalous, , Sir B. O'LOG HLEN moved the sub­stitution (If "may" for "shall." This clause again made the matter mandatory on the court. If the honorable member for Normanby was going to carry this Bill with a high hand, he (Sir B. O'Loghlen) fore­warned honorable members that they were putting a rod in pickle that wouid be, used:

220() Oonsolidation of [ASSEMBL Y.] the Laws.

on some members of the community before long.

The amendment was negatived. The Bill, having been gone through, was

reported without amendment. On the motion of Mr. SHIELS, the Bill

was then read a third time. Mr. BEST moved that the following

words be added to clause 8 :-" And this part of this Act shall not apply to

criminal proceedings." He observed that the amendment had been accepted as fair and reasonable by the honorable member in charge of the Bill.

Mr. SHIELS seconded the amendment.' The House di vided-

Ayes ... 10 Noes ... 21

Majority against the amendment 11 AYES.

Mr. Best, " Brock, h Shiels, " Gillies, " Leonard, " Methven,

Sir B. O'Loghlen, Mr. Patterson.

Tellers. Mr. Cameron, " Hunt.

NOES.

Mr. Anderson, Mr. Peacock, " Bailes, " C. Smith, " Beazley, " L. L. Smith, " Dow, " Sterry, " Dunn, " U ren, " Gordon, " "Vebb, " Graham, " Williams, " Graves, " A. Young. " Hall, Tellers.

Dr. Maloney, Mr. Gardiner, Mr. Outtrim, " Shackell. The Bill was ordered to be transmitted

to the Legislative Council. The House adjourned at thirteen minutes

to one o'clock a.m.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY; Thursday, Octobe1' 23, 1890.

¥r. Henry Frencham : Discovery of the Bendigo Gold Field ~Public Finances-Goulbum Weir-Yea River . Com­pa.ny Committee-Railways Standing Committee­Consolidation of the Laws: The Chief Justice­Debentures Conversion Bill-Supply: Lands Depa.rt­ment: Administration of the Land Law: Relations between the Land and Mining Departments: Tree Planting: The Late Mr. E. M. Curr: Forest Con­servation: Splitting on Watts River Watershed: Elsternwick Park Race-course: Parks and Gardens: Melbourne Botanic Gardens: Land Tax Act: Rabbit Extirpation: Customs Department: Mr. Dawson: Ports and Harbours: Alfred Graving Dock: Brewing with Sugar: Filheries: Goulburn River.

The SPEAKER took the chair at half-past four o'clock p.m.

MR. HENRY FRENO HAM.

DISCOVERY OF THE BENDIGO GOLD'

FIELD. Mr. BAILES brought up the report of

the select committee appointed to inquire· into and report upon the claims of Henry­Frencham as discoverer of the Bendigo. gold-field.

The report was ordered to be printed.

PUBLIO FINANOES. Mr. GILLIES presented, pursuant to­

order of the House (dated October 16), a return relating to unexpended balances oE" loans and other matters relating to publiC' finances.

GOULBURN WEIR.

Mr. WILLIAMS moved that there be­lai<l before this House a return showing-

"1. The names of property-holde,rs whose' holdings will be affected through the flooding of their lands by the erection of the Goulburn weir. 2. The number of acres affected in each. case. 3. The amount of money to be paid to each individual. 4. The title the Water Supply department will hold for such lands."

Lt.-Col. SMITH seconded the motion,. which was agreed to.

YEA RIVER COMPANY COMMITTEE.

Mr. MUNRO moved-c, That the select committee on the Yea River'

Company have leave to report~ the minutes and evidence from time to time."

Lt.-Ool. SMITH seconded the motion,. which was agreed to.

RAILWAYS STANDING OOMMITTEE.

Mr. BENT stated that the Railways Standing Committee had met that day, and had unanimously apppointed himself as chairman, and that Mr. Zeal, a member of the upper House, had been appointed to act as vice-chairman. The House would be pleased to know that the committee had begun its labours in the most harmonious manner possible, and he felt sure that the committee had the good wishes of honor­able members generally.

CONSOLIDATION OF THE LAWS.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE.

Mr. GILLIES moved-I' That this House records its high sense and

appreciation of the valuable services rendered to the people of this colony by His Honour the

Qonsolz'dation of [OCTOBER 23. ] the Laws~ 220L

·Chief Justice, George Higinbotham, .Esquire, in undertaking and successfully carrymg out the great work of consolidating the statute law of the colony."

He said he believed that in submitting this motion he had the entire sympathy of the House. The career or the Ohief Justice had been a great one, and all parties, whether opposed to His Honour on other grounds or not, would. admit ,that ?e had alwaY:3 striven to do hIS best, from hIS own point of view, for the interests of the colony in whatever' position he had been placed. In a?dition ,to his arduo~s labours as Ohief J ustlCe, whICh he hlld dIscharged laboriously and with distinction, he volun­tarily undertook to carry out a great work which he was not called upon in any way to perform, and he had carried it o~t in as satisfactory a manner as it was possIble for any man to accomplish. One or two trifling amendments in the consolidated statutes had been necessary, but there were no serious blemishes, and those who were best able to form a judgment on the subject were satisfied that it would be scarcely possible for any man, or for any number of men, to have done the work in so admirable a manner. Perfection was, of course not attainable in human things, but as fa~ as it was attainable the Ohief Justice had attained it. He had worked for a noble object in the most painstaking 'Way, employing all the leisure left by his hea.vy judicial labours, and the colony ought to recognise its obligations to him.

Mr. MUNRO observed that he had very great pleasure in seconding the motion. He was sure the whole colony would be grateful to the Government for having introduced it and that the House would unanimously s~pport it. He knew of no gentleman who could have gone into this work with such O'reat determination or single-mindedness to do what was right as the Ohief Justice. It was a marvel that, with all his engage­ments he found the necessary time, and he was sl~re that he had earned the gratitude ·of the representatives of all shades of .opinion.

The motion was agreed to, and a message 'was ordered to be transmitted to the Legis w

ilative Oouncil, inviting their concurrence therein.

Mr. GILLI~S moved-. "That the Clerk be instructed to place on the

'records of the House that the foregoing resolu­tion was passed unanimously."

.. The motion was agreed. to.

DEBENTURES OONVERSION BILL.

The House having gone into committee to con "sider His :Excellency the GovernOl;'s message on the subject of this Bill,presented September 24th,

Mr. GILLIES moved-

"That it is expedient that an appropriation be made out of the consolidated revenue for the purposes of a Bill to provi'de for the conversion into Victorian Government inscribed stock of certain debentures redeemable in London,"

He observed that honorable members had already been informed that on the 1st of January next the last of the Victorian 6 per cent. debentures, to the amount of £850,000, would fall due in London. For some time past the Agent-General had been in communication with some of the best financial authorities in London with regard to certain proposals that were recom­mended for the consideration of the Go­vernment. These were to the effect that when certain loans fell due, instead of issuing new loans to take their place, an endeavour should, if possible, be made to induce the present holders of debentures to exchange them for insG:ribed stock at 3~ per cent. This was not, however, the time to follow out the very long and forcible argument in which a gentleman of dis­tinguished financial position in London had expressed his views on the subject., He (Mr. Gillies) would only say that It was strongly recommended that, instead of raising a new loan to meet the de­bentures falling due in London on the 1st January next, an Act should be passed to enable those debentures to be converted into 3A per cent. inscribed Victorian stock. The communication which the Government firRt received on this subject conveyed the idea that this could be easily done, and that at least three-fourths of the debentures would be taken up in that way. The success which the adoption of the same plan by the Government of Oape Colony had met with justified this expectat.ion. The.re ,,:as a great advantage to be gamed by IssUIng stock instead of debentures. As was well known inscribed stock held a higher position in the market, other things being equal, than debentures. The Government of Oape Colony secured the exchange of nearly three-fourths of their debentures' for in­scribed stock at lower prices, and this was a strong argument in favour of the Victo~ian Q-ove·rnm~n t a~opting th~ l3ame course,

2202 Debent'w'es' (ASSEMBL Y.] Conve1'sion Bill.

But it 'was proper to inform the House that the Government, since receiving the advice he referred to, had been given to under­stand that, in consequence of the very perturbed state of the London money market, brought about by a variety of causes, the chances were that very few of the debentures would be c0nvel'ted on this occasion, and tllat opinion was strongly supported by views held in other quarters. He did not desire, thereforE', that the House should be misled by believing that anything like a considerable proportion of the outstanding debentures would be con­verted under this Bill, and he would insert a provision, when in committee, to 8ecure that, in the event of the conversion proving to be only partial, the unconverted balance might be issued as stock on the market. In regard to the Bill, of which he had already given not,ice, for the £1,600,000 loan that had still to be floated next year, it was proposed to place it in exactly the same position as the present Bill in regard to redemption. The present Bill had also this other peculiarity-instead of fixing the term of years for paying off the stock at 34 or 35 years, as had been the cllstom, it was proposed, on advioe from England, to make the term 50 years, redeemable after 30 years on giving twelve months' notice. That would give a great advantage over the present system, because, when the term was absolutely fixed at 30 01' 35 years, the loan must be paid off when that time expired, whether the Government felt it to be con­venient or not, or whether the market was favorable or unfavorable. It was very de­sirable that an opportunity should be afforded to tnke advantage of a season at which money was obtainable at low rates. Under the new system, if at the expiration of 30 years, the market should be unfavor­able to the floating of a loan to payoff the debentures which then matured, the Govern­ment need not take up the debentures, but could postpone doing so for any period from one to 20 years, so as to make sure of floating the loan to redeem the debentures at a time when the money market was most favorable. That was the object of the provi­sion to enable the Government to redeem the debentures at any time after the expiration of 30 years up to 50 years,on giving the holders twelve months' notice. The Government proposed, in a Bill of which he had given notice, to place the balance of £1,600,000, remaining out of the last authorized loan, jn'the':same position, giving the debentures

Mr. Gillies.

a currency of not less than 30 years nor more than 50, with the option of being taken up during the interval of 20 years on giving the holders twelve montLs' notice. (Mr. Laurens-" What will be about the date of issue of the £1,6,00,000 loan?") It would probably run from the 1st of January next. The conversion of the, £850,000 of debentures might be accom­plished immediately before the 1st of January, and, if so, the loan ~ould run from that date, because the £850,000 of 6 per cent. debentures did not faU in until the 1st of January. The holders of those debentures would then be entitled to have issued to them 3~ per cent. stock in lieu of the debentures, so that the dates in both bills would be the same. It was quite possible that the London market might be in such a condition at the beginning of the year as to render it unde­sirable to float any portion of the £850,000-loan which could not be converted by the 1st of January, or any part of the proposed loan of £1,600,000, but the best authorities agreed that the market was likely to change in one, two, or three months. The market very often changed quite suddenly, and after the beginning of the year it would be' thedutyofthe Government toobtain the be!it English ad vice with the view to fixing the most suitable time for the floating of the new loan, consisting of whatever part of the, loan of £850,000 remained unconverted into 3t per cent. stock, and the balance of £1,600,000 remaining out of the authorized loan of £4,000,000.

Mr. MUNRO said he thought the colony was in rather 3,n awkward position. Of course, the Treasurer would be advised' from London of the state of the market from time to time, but he (Mr. Munro) believed that there was no hope at all of the Government being able to convert the de­bentures at the present time; nor would they probably be able to convert them on the 1st of January, so there was no getting over the fact that the banks must be looked to for the money. (Mr. Gillies-" It is all arranged.") The advices from London the Treasurer showed him some time back seemed to be pretty favorable, but he did not now believe that there was any hope of the holders of the 6 per cent. debentures agreeing to their conversion into 3! per cent. stock. It was a most unfortunate circumstance that £850,000 of an old loa~ and £1,600,000 'of 8 -new loan, making altogether a new loan of £2,450;0001 sho'uld

. pebentu1'es " [OCTOBER 23.] Conve1'sion Bill. 2203

have to be placed on the London market at a time when it was not at all favorable to borrowers. The New South Wales Go­vernment managed its business with regard to the authorizing and floating of loans in a superior way to that which was adopted by the Victorian Government. In the neighbouring colony authority was given by Parliament to the Governmen t to float a large loan which would suffice for some few years, leaving it to the discretion of the Govern­ment to float from time to time whatever portions it thought desirable to meet the requirements of the colony. Here, however, loans were authorized in driblets, and Loan Bills were continually coming before the House s"ession after session. The result was that each time a new Loan Bill was brought down an opportunity was afforded to the carping critics of the London press to dis­euss the matter and injure the financial credit of the colony. If the conversion of the loan of £850,000 had been provided for in the loan of £4,000,000 authorized last session, those critics would not have known now that which these proceedings would make them acquainted with in regard to the present state of the finances of the colony. He was even now talking under restraint, because these critics had the unfortunate habit of improperly using statements made in the House. He believed it to be a right thing to pass the Bill now contemplated, but he was not at all sure that it would be possible to convert the debentures into inscribed stock at the present time. He stated last week that the Government would not have any money at its disposal for the making of new railways next year, and the Treasurer said that he was wrong. The Treasurer must admit that the Government could not meet its present engagements without borrowing a considerable amount of money. (Mr. Gillies-" Certainly.") But the Treasurer said last week that he did not l'eq uire to borrow money.

Mr. GILLIES observed that there was some misapprehension in regard to this matter. It was not contemplated that a large number of lines would nesubmitted to Parliament by the Railways Standing Com­mittee this session. (Mr. Munro-" There is no money for any line at all.") What was expected was that some two or three_ lines would be passed this session; no expenditure on them could take place this: year, and the expenditure required on tIl em" :next year would not exceed £250,000 at-" the,'utmost." Some persons ,imagined ~ha:t'

he proposed to ask the House to authorize a new loan for railway purposes this session, but he had not the slightest intention of doing that.

Mr. ZOX said the Government were quite right in refraining from asking for a new loan.

Mr. L. L. SMITH observed that in that case it was clear that the Government could not go on with any railways which might be authorized before the close of the session.

Mr. MUNRO stated that in the return presented to the House that evening it was shown that the total amount to the credit of the public account at the banks on the 14th inst.1llt was £959,617, while the amount of the trust funds wa9 £2,642,565. Of this latter sum, however, there was £965,885 invested, leaving a balance of £1,676,679. It was thus clear that the trust funds had been drawn upon to the extent of £700,000." In addition ta that the Government had uged up the money intended for irrigation purposes. (Mr. Gillies-" That is standing~ to the credit of the irrigation loan account."} There ought to be £395,499 to the credit of' that account. W hen he directed the attention of the House-last week to the fact that there was no money in the Treasury for railway purposes, the Treasurer contradicted him. The honorable gentleman now stated that £250,000 would be required for any new railway lines authorized this session, but there were existing liabilities in the Railway department on contracts let to the amount of £1,072,000, and there had to be taken into account the liabilities to be met by the new loan of £2,450,000 to be floated next year, with the possibility of the loan being unsuccessful. (Mr. Gillies-H Do you imagine that the new loan cannot be floated next year ?") According to the information he at present possessed he did not believe that this loan could be success­fully floated next year., (Mr. Gillies­"That is not the opinion of all the authorities.") If the Government were_ willing to sacrifice the credit of the colony, of course, it could float anything. If the Governmen t were compelled to float the new loan while the London market was un-: favorable, there would be a change of opinion in that market in regard to Victorian invest­ments which would be injurious to the colony. The statement he made last week, that the Governmerit had not money enough to construct a single railway line, and that they had "no prospect of obtaining ~oney" enough, wa8~ab§olutely true;

2204 Debentw'es [ASSEMBLY.] Conversion Bill.

Mr. GILLIES remarked that he would take an opportunity of reviewing the finan­cial position of the colony when he submitted to the House the resolutions with reference to expenditure on railway construction.

Mr. ZOX submitted that the return which had been presented to the House at the instance of the leader of the Opposition ought to be printed and~ circulated for the information of honorable members, as it contained a large amount of valuable infor­mation. It was very desirable that a detailed account of the position of the finances of the colony should be made public, for the information of investors in London as well as of the people of this colony. He did not believe that there was a. colony in the world which was sounder financially than Victoria, but they ought to be placed in a position to protect themselves against adverse criticisms.

Mr. GILLIES said he had no objection to the return being printed and circulated.

Mr. ANDREWS stated that last session he called the attention of the Treasurer to the desirability of placing the negotiation of future loans in the hands of the asseciated banks instead of in those of the London and Westminster B~nk, and the facts now be­fore the House showed the desirability of that course being adopted more than ever. The Treasurer had grave doubts as to whether the operations contemplated in January would be successful, and the time being so limited it would be much better to rely on the associated banks, who had come to the rescue of the Government on former occasions. It could not be denied that the colony was about to approach the London market under ,-ery disadvantageous conditions, owing to the labour troubles and the views at present existing among capitalists in regard to colonial stocks, and the services of the associated banks would be of great value. The proposal of the Government that the English investors should exchange 6 per cent. debentures for 3~ per cent. inscribed stock was an enormous leap, and it was not likely to be well received. The associated banks were the mainstay of the Victorian loans in London, and if it could be made worth their while to represent the Govern­!ment on this occasion, and do its bnsiness ·on equitable terms, 80 as to prevent the ." bears" of the Stock Exchange manipu­'lating the loans, the colony would gain ;greatly by the arrangerpent. N otwith­·standing'the failure of negotiations with

the associated banks a few years ago, which occurred over a matter connected with only one of them, they ought now to be allowed un opportunity of distinguishing themselves. The fact of the Victorian loans maturing so quickly always rendered the colony liable to be placed in difficulties like the present, and an effort ought to be made, as he recom­mended, for the protection of its interests.

Mr. LA URENS said he agreed with the honorable member for Melbourne East that the public ought to be placed in a position to know the best and the worst in regard to the financial position of the colony. They had everything to gain and nothing to lose by publishing all the facts, while the appear­ance of concealment could not fail to do lllJury. If the return which had been pre­sented gave a fair idea of what the colony'S financial position was now, or was likely to be at the beginning of next year, its dis­semination would achieve a large amount of good.

Mr. GILLIES remarked that the return would require to be supplemented bya good deal of other information to accomplish the end the honorable member had in view.

Mr. LAURENS observed that he had understood, from a remark interjected by the Premier, that an arrangement had been entered into with the banks to provide for the event of a partial failure of the plan to convert the debentures into inscribed stock, and that was why he asked about the date of issue. If he remembered aright, when Victoria had to redeem £9,000,000 of debentures, during the years 1884-5, the money was provided for long before the claim had to be met; bllt the present transaction was being discussed within two months of the time at which the money must be found in London. The House ought to have been asked to pass a Bill of this kind some time ago. The Treasurer said that the Govern­ment of Cape Colony had redeemed deben­tures bearing a comparatively high rate of interest by exchanging them for inscribed stock at a lesser rate, but there was no doubt that this financial arrangement was open to the debenture.holders, in the case of Cape Colony, for a far longer period than was now proposed for Victoria. In fact, the Cape Colony debentures must have been of a currency that had not expired, or was not about to expire, as in the case of Victoria. (Mr. Gillies-" They were about to expire.") Like those of Victoria? (Mr. Gillies­"They had a little longer time to fun.") They must have had far more t~me t.o ru~,

Debentures [OOTOBER 23.J Conve1'sion Bill. 2205

or the operation would not have been suc­cessful, as the consent of every debenture­holder had to be obtained.

Mr. GILLIES said the honorable mem­ber must remember that the Victorian ·debentures f~ll due on the 1st of January, and that if the holders had arranged before­hand to exchange their 6 per cent.' deben­tures for 3~ per cent. b0nds, their coupons must be paid on the last day of the present year, as the exchange had to be made on the 1st of January.

Mr. LAURENS remarked that he quite understood that, but he wished to point out that debenture-hQlders could not be forced to make the proposed exchange on the 1st of January. (Mr. Gillies-" We do not want to force them.") The consent of the debenture-holders was necessary, and as the Government could give them very little offici81 information before the close of De­.cember, it was not fair to assume that their .consent would be given. (Mr. Gillies­," A copy of the Bill will give them the necessary information.") In the present -state of the London money market, no matter what information was given, it could not be expected that the proposed exchange would be made to any extent. He approved of the proposal to give the colony a latitude ,of twenty years in redeeming its stock. , Sir B. O'LOG HLEN observed that he congratulated the Treasurer on the prin­.ciple he had embodied in this measure, for the reason that imitation was the sin­cerest flattery. In this, as in some other things, the honorable gentleman had imi­tated a measure introduced by his (Sir B. ()'Loghlen's) Government in 1882. He congratulated the Treasurer on his con­version, because when tbat Bill was intro­duced he (Mr. Gillies) strongly opposed it. He held. in his hand a report of the honorable gentleman's speech on tllat -occasion, in which he characterized the proposal as a very peculiar way of meet­ing the obligations of the colony, and 'Stated tbat he sided with all those mem­bers who then asked the House to alter the redemption plan, and to provide a sum of money so tbat every holder of a £100 debenture would get £100 cash in the Lon­don market. The honorable gentleman was at that time afraid that the credit of the colony would be affected by this peculiar method of paying its debts. However, there was one matter in which the Treasurer did not imitate bis (Sir B. O'Logblen's) Go­vernment, and that was in giving to the Bouse sufficient information from time to

time as to how the public accounts stood. He particularly referred to the loan accounts. When he (Sir B. O'Loghlen) was in office, he always invited members who required information, including his most bitter opponents, to go to the Under Treasurer. and he instructed that officer to place what~ ever information that might be asked for at the disposal of honorable members. Surely if the Treasurer could not find time to supply this information to the House, he could adopt a similar course. The less secrecy there was about the public accounts the better. If the Trea.surer had from time to time supplied the House with proper information in regard to the finances, the delusions which had arisen in regard to the alleged surplus would never have occurred. That imbroglio was due to the reticence of the Treasurer, and the consequent darkness on the part of the House and the country. Now that the honorable gentleman pro­posed to convert the debentures, it was the proper time for him to give the House full, clear, and precise information in regard to tbe position of the loans, showing how much was in hand, what sums he intended to raise, and how the general account, as well as the loan account, stood. If the Govern­ment of eight years ago bad proposed to go to the banks on an occasion like this, the present Treasurer would have entered an indignant remonstrance. When his (Sir B. O'Logblen's) Government was in power, they had to give way to the honorable gentleman's remonstrances. They did not abandon their measure, but they had to back down to some extent, though not so badly as the Treasurer had been backing down of late.

Mr. LEVIEN remarked that it was quite impossible to say at present whethet the stock would be taken up by the public as proposed or not, but it was quite clear that the Treasurer could not sell the Victorian 3t per cents. at par, and he thought the House would not approve of their being sold under par, but would prefer waiting to see if the market was permanently or only temporarily depressed. His own belief was that the depression was only temporary. If the Victorian stock rose to anything approaching par, it was his opinion that this new stock would all be absorbed, unless the stock had been speculated in antioipation of the debentures faUing in. He did not think the provision contained in clause 40f the Bill, enabling the Government to payoff the bonds after thirty years, was a. very good one, because he belie'ved the

. colony would have to pay more for th~t tbfl.~

2206 " Debe'litu1'es [ASSEMBLY.] Conversion- Bill.

it was worth. A higher price would be obtained for the stock without this pro­VISIOn. It was also very undesirable to have stocks which were not well understood­stocks the terms of which varied. If the bonds terminated in thirty years, the Treasurer would obtain a higher price for them, and the introduction of the optioIr would be at the cost of the realization of the loan. The provision he referred to might be left out.

The motion was agreed to, and the reso­lution was then reported to the House and adopted.

Mr. GILLIES moved the second rea~ing of the Debentures Conversion Bill. '

Mr. RICHARDSON said he thought the Treasurer would have taken this oppor­tunity of replying to criticisms which had been lPade on the state of the public finances.

Mr. GILLIES remarked that he 'had given notice of a motion that night in regard to the expenditure of money in con­nexion with railway construction, and when that motion came on he would give all neces­sary information as to the public account.

Mr. RICHARDSON asked if it was intended to have an office in London to carry out the objects of the Bill ?

Mr. GILLIES stated that the exchange would be effected through the agency of the London and Westminster Bank, who were agents for the placing of Victorian loans on the T ,ondon market.

Mr. RICHARDSON said it had been suggested by a financial authority of large experience that it would be better for the colony to have an agency of its own.

Mr. GILLIES remarked that an arrange­ment was made some years ago with the London and Westminster Bank to take the position which it now held, and that arrange", ment could not be disturbed without giving the bank notice. IT nder present circum;.. stances he could not make the arrangement suggested by the honorable member. The matter was a very important one; it wo~lq require great consideration, and, from what he had 'rAad of the views of other people on the subject, he was afraid the plan would not answer. He had not, however, arrived. at a fixed opinion on the subject.

Mr. RIOHARDSON observed that it )Vouid be well not to change the existing. arrangement until the colony was su're of being able to substitute a better one. ; ;

The motion was agreed to. , . The Bill was then read a second time and. oommit.te<f." . '1

Discussion took place on clause 2, which was as follows:-

"The Treasurer of Victoria may at such time or times as he may deem convenient issue in exchange for the said debentures or any of them­Victorian Government inscribed stock (herein" after called 'such stock ') to be inscribed in the books of the London and Westminster Bank in London; and the holder of . any of the said de­bentures may exchange such debentures "at the rate of £100 of such debentures for £100 in such stock. All things necessary shall be done to bring such stock within the provisions of the Act of the Imperial Parliament called the Colonial Stock Act 1877." '

Mr. GILLIES said he desired to move an amendment in this clause, which was de-:­signed primarily to pro~ide for the con version of the debentures, but it was also contem­plated that in the event of the whole of the debentures not being conTerted into 3~ pe~ cent. stock another course would have to be taken to dispose of them, and in looking over this clause there seemed to be a doubt ex­pressed as to whether it was quite clear that the Government would have power to authorize the disposal of what was not taken up by issuing it in the same way as they had issued other stock. In order to make the point perfectly clear he proposed, after the word " stock" (line 1 0), to insert the following words :-

" In the event of the holder of any of the said debentures not so exchanging the same, the Treasurer of Victoria may, from time to time, sell stock to the amount of the debentures not so exchanged."

Mr. MUNRO remarked that this amend­ment would be calculated to damage the floating of the loan. The Government werre taking power to float a loan on the 1st ot .January, and they were also taking power to keep the stock on hand. It ought cer­tainly to be made clear that the stock would not be disposed of in small parcels.

Mr. GILLIES said it was not intended to dispose of the stock in small parcels. H it was not convenient to float the whole loan it would be divided, in accordance with the invariable custom. When Parliament authorized a loan, it was the"practice of the Government to issue it as necessities re­quired, or as the existing situation seemed to justify. ". .

Mr. MUNRO 'observed that there was a dange"r that the Government, in converting the dehentures, would come into competition with parties buying old stock in large quan­tities with a view of re-selling it. .

Mr. GILLIES stated that there was no difference between this and QtI1~~ lqans. , "-+

Supply. [OCTOBER 23.J Lands Depa1·tment. 220T

Mr. RICHARDSON said he desired to know if, in the event of stock being sold, it was intended to cover the debentures in hand, or to be an addition to them. ?

Mr. GILLIES remarked that it would take the place of the debentures which fell due on the 1st of January. The amount of the loan would be the same, but it would pa.y less interest.

Sir B. O'LOGHLEN asked what was the price of the Victorian 3i per cent. stock on the London market at the present time?

Mr. GILLIES said he believed it was 1 per cent. below par. A little while ago it was 3:1 per cent. below par, but he was told that the market was gradually steady­ing. Other stocks had also been affected by the depression. It was well known that there were a number of financial and bank­ing companies in the Australasian colonies which had borrowed large sums of money in the English market at 4,4:1, and 4i per cent. for short periods of three to five years. If there was much borrowing of that kind, what chance had the Victorian Government in offering 3i per cent. in a disturbed market? "Vhen the fall in South American stocks had been remedied there would be an improvement, and if the miserable strike could be got rid of there would be no fear of the Government being able to success­fully float its loans.

Sir B, O'LOG HLEN remarked that he understood that if there was any deficiency in the conversion transaction the Govern­ment would pay cash for that deficiency, and that stock not taken up would be sold with the £1,600,000 loan.

Mr. GILLIES said the honorable mem­ber had correctly stated the case.

The amendment was agreed to. The Bill, having been gone through, was

reported with an amendment, and was then passed through its remaining stages.

ADMINISTRATION OF THE LAND LAW.

T.he House having resolved itself into Committee of Supply,

'Discussion (adjourned from October 16) was resumed on the vote of £54,042 to com­plete. the !,ote (71,912) for the survey, sale, and management of Crown lands. . ~ Sir B. O'LOGHLEN said .he desired to call the attention of the Minister of Lands to the case of a seleetor named Heavey., who had ~pplied for a piece of land ileal' Casterton, but had 'not obtained :it, though there was a ·geneml" feeling .in the ~ljl?tfi~~ that he', was entitled tQ it~

He (Sir B. O'Loghlen) hoped the Minister of Lands would deal with the matter at once. The officers of the department might think there was some difficulty in .agreeing· to what the applicant asked, but as far as he (Sir B. O'Loghlen) could see the matter was one which could be legally dealt with.

Mr. L. L. SMITH said he wished to ask the Minister of Lands what he intended to do in the matter of renewing the lease· for the Elsternwick race-course? The Minister signed a document agreeing to, give a renewal of the lease, but although, the authorities of the race-course had laid out large sums of money on the property' the honorable gentleman would not go any further with the matter. There was a' belief that the Minister had yielded to back-stair influence from two or three mem­bers of the upper Honse. The authorities"· of the race-course had taken a waste piece of land and turned it into a beautiful place' on the strength of their being promised a renewal of the lease. The Minister desired, that the Brighton Council should be con-· suited as to the renewal, and that body had consented.

The CHAIRMAN.-This matter 'can be more properly discussed on another vote.

The vote was agreed to. On- the vote of £10,351 to complete'

the vote (£17,678) for State forests and' nurseries,

Mr. W. T. CARTER said he understood the previous week that some Ministerial statement was to be made in connexion with these estimates, with regard to the friction which existed between the Lands depart-. ment and the Mining department.

Mr, DOW observed that he was under the impression that the Premier stated that the right way of dealing with the matter, was by legislative action-not necessarily elaborate legislation, but a simple amend­ment of the present law-and that the Premier had promised to consider the matter of bringing about an amendment of the law.

Mr. W~ T: CARTER remarked that he did not understand such a promise to b~· given by the Premier. What he under~ stood was that the matter was to be discussed on the estimates for the Land~ department. . It was' a great pity that;· while grievances were' undoubtedly being suffered by people through the friction or the· two departments, no clear indication was given as to what was to be dQne to. r~megl thol;le g:riey.an(les! .,

2208 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Lands Depa1'tment.

Mr. C. YOUNG stated that he desired ·to refer to the matter of the Mildura lands. When would the return ordered on the sub­ject be presented to the House?

M. DOW said that all the papers would be laid on the table as soon as possible.

Mr. C. YOUNG asked if the Minister would agree to postpone one of the votes for the Lands department in order to afford 'an opportunity of discussing the matter when the papers were presented? (Mr. Dow-" It does nGt bear on these esti­mates. ") No, but it bore on the ad ministn.­tion of the Lands department.

Mr. DO W remarked that it was un­necessary to postpone any of these votes to enable, the matter with reference to the Mildura lands to be discussed. It could be discussed in the House. (Mr. C. Young­"Will you promise to givean opportunity?") Yes. ,

Mr. RICHARDSON said the question raised by the honorable memberfor Williams­town deserved considerable attention. The friction alluded to between the Mining department and the Lands department was not a matter depending entirely on legisla­tion. What was required was a better understanding between the two departments. A great deal of hardship was caused by the present state of affairs, and there were good grounds for the complaint made from the selectors' point of view. After a selector had applied for land which was open for selection, and had prosecuted his application successfully up to a certain point, the Mining department stepped in and blocked him. This was the complaint -of the honorable member for Williamstown in the case mentioned by the honorable member the previous week. On the other ,hand, there were a number of people who -contended that the miners ought to nave power to go on all lands whether they had been selected or not. The Minister in dealing with the matter would have t~ weigh the right the selector required and the claim of the miner to go on land and undo all the selector had done. The search for coal was not subject to the same regula­tions as the search for gold,and the attention of the Government would have to be given to t.he speculative companies formed for 'coal mining, who wanted to have the oppor­tunity of going on' selectors' lands and interfering with their improvements without giving any compensation. He (Mr.Richard­Bon) thought that wherever there was a probability of mining operations being carried on the la~ds should be withheld

from selection; but if a selector was allowed to obtain land and improve it, his improve­ments ought to be considered before any one else was allowed to occupy the land. The Mining department had now discovered that they had been issuing leases without a.ny authority, and this was causing a large a.mount of trouble and expense. He thought it would be well for the Minister of Lands to bring under the notice of the Cabinet the present position of theLandsdepartment and the Mining department in relation to each other, because the sooner there was a proper understanding between the two departments the better it would. be for all parties con­cerned. He had previously mentioned the case of a. constituent who had suffered serious lo~s by the working of the present system. The man occupied land for a length of time under the mining by-laws, and he had fenced and cultivated it and built a house upon it when he was dispossessed by the Lands department. He (Mr. Richardson) hoped the Minister would consider the case, and afford the man at least sufficient compen­sation to enable him to remove his house to some other place.

Mr. GROOM said there were a large number of cases in West and South Gipps­land in which selectors took up land under the Land Act of 1884, and after two, three, and four years they were still unable to get a satisfactory title, owing to the mining objections raised. It was certainly time something was done in the matter. Either the Mining department should step in and clear off people who had no title or else the Lands department should prevent the Mining department from interfering for the fut.ure. He would suggest that the Lands department, before throwing open land for selection, should submit the area to the Mining department, and then if the latter had any mining objections the land should be ad vertised as open to selection subject to mining conditions; selectors would then know what they were going into. On the other hand, if the Mining de­partment made no objections, the land should be thrown open without any con­ditions, and the Mining department should not be allowed to come in and object after­wards.

Mr. W. T. CARTER observed that, as he men tioned the previous week, when the selector to whom he then referred found himself blocked from further progress by the objections of the Mining, depart­ment, he inquired at the Lands depart­ment when he would, be ,informed 0,£

Supply. [OCTOBER 23.] Lands Depa1'tment. 2209

any further developments, and the reply was, "You must look after your own business." Seeing that the man had been granted a status by having the land recommended to him °by the land board, the least that the officials of -the Lands department might have done was to inform him if the embargo of the Mining depart­ment was removed. These hindrances offered to honest hard-working men, who wished to make a home on the lands of the country, were very vexatious, and were cer­tainly bad policy from a public point of view.

Mr. T. SMITH remarked that he knew a case similar to that mentioned by the honorable member for Gippsland West, and in which very great hardship had been caused. A piece of land was advertised in the Government Gazette as open for selec­tion. It was selected, and a certain amount of money paid, and shortly afterwards intimation was sent that the land was supposed to be auriferous. There had never been a speck of gold found on the land, but, nevertheless, the selector had been kept trotting about between the Mining department and the Lands department without being able to get any satisfaction. He (Mr. Smith) hoped that the remarks of honorable members would bear some fruit in causing a business-like understanding to be come to between the two departments. The same matter was mentioned in the Assembly last year, but nothing had been done since to introduce a better system. It was surely not too much to ask that a common-sense business under­standing should be arrived at between two Government departments, so that men having business to transact with one or other of the departments might be able to transact it in a reasonable time.

Mr. DOW said that, in 1884, Parliament passed a Land Act, under which all the country was thrown open to selection in accordance with an elaborate series of plans. By referring to those plans a man could ~ee where he could take up land, and make an application accordingly. Since the pass­ing of that Act, however, 'extensive coal areas had been discovered, especially in Gippsland, and these, of course, were not shown on the plans. The Lands depart­ment could not say to selectors, "You shall not go here or there," because the selectors were invited by the Land Act to make application for the land. When land was applied for and was recommended by the local land board this was the

first intimation to the Lands department that selectors wanted the land, and then the next step was to refer to the Mining department to ascertain whether there were any mining objections. This was where the friction between the departments came in. Any honorable member who was Minister of La.nds would have to be very careful how he interfered with the mining adminis­tration. If the Minister of Lands simply said to a selector who was recommended land by the local land board, "All right, go and take that land," there would be a little criticism in the Assembly from the ruining members. He (Mr. Dow) was quite of opinion, however, that selectors must not be interfered with in going on the lands to a greater I'lxtent than could possibly be avoided, and if it was to be said that every piece of land applied for in Gippslan:l was wanted for coal mining, then it was time that there was a Mining on Private Pro­perty Act passed with regard to coal mining, because people must get on the land. He would ask the sympathy of honorable members for the Lands depart. ment in this matter. The policy of that department was to get as many people on the lands as possible; but when land was applied for by selectors the department 11ad to stay its hand, because some one put in an application for a lease for coal mining, in the hope that there might possibly be coal there. This was a very difficult state of things, but one that would have to be met, and he could assure honorable members that he would do his utmogt to press on his colleagues the necessity for taking some practical steps to deal with the matter.

Mr. L. L. SMITH remarked that the Minister of Lands had spoken from a !elector's point of view, but not from a coal. explorer's point of view. A case ca.me before the Coal Commission in which a man alleged he had spent £1,200 in trying to develop a coal region, and then the Lands department popped in, with the result that he was practically ruined. Between the Mining department and the Lands depart­ment-he (Mr. Smith) did not know which was in fault-the man lost his money as well as the money of those who assisted him, He (Mr. Smith) desired to call the atten­iion of the Minister of Lands to the case of Mr. Andrew Lyell, who was ruined by the Land Act of 1862. The late Mr. Grant, a former Minister of Lands, and !everal other. gentlemen who went carefully into the case, supported Mr. Lyell's claims for con­sidera.tion. At the time when free selection

(2210 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Lands Depa1'tment.

before survey took place, Mr. Lyell had a large number of cattle on his run, and was ·in affluent circumstances, but when the sudden change took place his cattle were

·driven off and he was practically ruined. He (Mr. Smith) did not wish to· gQ in.to the details of the ca~ at present, but he wanted a promise from-the Minister of Lands that he would go into the case and examine it. Another point on which he wished informa­tion from the Minister of Lands was as to whether any private individual who wanted to plant trees along a main road in an out­lying district could obtain the trees from the public nurseries. In many places men 11ad purchased land, and before they built a house upon it they wanted to plant trees ·outside along the road.

Mr. DOW stated that there was the greatest desire on the part of the Forest department to induce as many persons to :plant trees as possible. ,Hitherto the nurseries had only been able to supply the requirements of public bodies, but the supply of trees was being increased, and he hoped that the department would soon be in a position to meet such ,cases as that referred to by the honorable member for Mornington.

Mr. McLEAN said he could certainly indorse all that had been said by honorable members as to the delay which occurred in the issue of leases and licences owing to the want of some proper arrangement between the Lands and Mining departments, and -the Minister would do well to look into the matter. It ought to be possible to establish some fixed rules by which delays would be .obviated in future. Unreasonable delays frequently occurred in cases where there were no mining objections to the land being selected, through some laxity, he was given to understand, in the survey branch of the Lands department. There were many {lases of that kind in his district. Selectors had applied in the usual way, their applica­tions had been recommended by the land board, they had paid all the necessary fees, and yet they had to wait, some of them considerably over two years, before a licence or a lease was issued. One case had been going on for three years, although he had directed the attention of the Lands depart­ment to the case every three or four months. These delays inflicted serious losses on the persons who desired to select the land, because they were put to expense and kept out of any settled occupation, expecting their leases or licences to be issued. If they had known beforehand that they would have had to wait one-third as long as they

had done, they would never have dreamt of paying their money or wasting so much time.

Mr. BENNETT expressed the hope that the Minister of Lands would take into his favorable consideration the advisability of placing on the Estimates a sum of money as a gratuity to the family of the late Mr. E. M. Curr, who was for many years the Chief Inspector of Stock in this colony. Mr. Curr rendered most valuable service to . the colony in regard to the eradication of scab in sheep. He wrote a book of great interest and value on the aborigines of Australia, and declined the offer of any remuneration for that work from the Go­vernment, because, as he himself said, he had done it as a labour of love. The family of Mr. Curr had received the usual nine months' salary allowed to the relatives of an officer who died in harness, but in view of the exceptional circumstances sur­rounding this case, and of Mr. Curr's long and valuable. services to the State, his family were entitled to exceptional con· sideration.

Mr. J. HARRIS stated that last week he complained of the delay in the issue of the report of the Conservator of Forests. Since then he had read that report, and found that it contained some most n.luable suggestions. He hoped the Minister would adopt Mr. Perrin's recommendation that the department should train its own fores ... ters, who should be instructed in botany, chemistry, and other scientific subjects con­nected with arboriculture. The science of forestry was very little understood in this colony, and in no part of the world had it kept pace with the cognate subjects of agri­culture and horticulture. Another valuable suggestion made by Mr. Perrin was that steps should be taken to prevent the im­mense waste of timber in the State forests by the splitters. The Conservator of Forests ought to have more power to put a stop to this waste. It was to be hoped that next session the Government would bring in a comprehensive Forest Bill. The subject seemed to be the bete noi1'e of each successi ve Government. Ministers apparently did not like to tackle it, but there were few subjects of greater importance to the country, and it ought to. be taken in hand without further delay.

Mr. MUNRO stated that a little in­justice had been done to himself personally by the Minister of Lands, or by the officers of. his department, in the information they had' supplied. to the newspapers, by throwing.

Supply. [OCTOBER 23.J Lands Depat·tment. 2211

doubt on the statement he made to the committee last week that men who were licensed by the Lands department were cutting down trees and splitting timber within the water reserve. The remarks he (Mr. Munro) made last week in reference to the matter were very imperfectly and very badly reported in IIansat'd, but still what appeared in IIansard gave sufficient in­formation to show that men licensed by the Minister or Lands were cutting down trees and splitting them into palings on the very land which the Government bought back by the authority of Parliament, with a view to secure the watershed from pollution. The department, or the Minister, or somebody, was trying to wriggle out of the charge which he (Mr. Munro) made last week by -stating that the men were trespassing inad­vertently, and were working at a place where it was difficult to define the boundary of the water reserve. He (Mr. Munro) distinctly stated last Thursday that the place within the water reserve where the trees were being felled and cut up by the splitters was below ,Jefferson's land, which was half-a-mile further down than McCaughan's land, and that McCaughan's land was recently pur­,chased by the Government because it was within the water reserve, so that the wood­splitting was taking place at a spot half to three-quarters of a mile within the water reserve, alongside the main road to the Myrtle Creek. A paragra'ph appeared in the papers on Monday morning to the effect that the officers of the department had annO'unced that it was utterly impossible that anything of the sort could have taken place, and another paragraph appeared on Tuesday in which it was stated that the wood splitters were found to be working a few yards inside the boundary of the water reserve" but that they had only been there a few day~, and that their trespass was believed to be inadvertent, as they were working close to the boundary line, on a ' plateau where it was difficult to define the, actual boundary from the contour of: the country." If the Minister of Lands' ,would come with him he would take him to ~ the very place. They could go by the seven o'clock train in the morning and he would 'land the honorable gentleman back in Mel- ' 'bourn'e at half-past three o'clock in the: afternoon, and they would not need to go off the coach road to see the spot where the 'splitting was going on-a.t least, where it was going on last week. It llad also bee~ .~tated that the ,wood splitters were not legally t~~re, bu~ the principal man' of the'

party informed him (Mr. Munro) that he had paid the usual f.ee of 5s. for a quarterly licence, and therefore that man was pro­perly licensed, and he was splitting timber below Jefferson's land, within the water reserve. McCaughan's land was about haIf­a-mile above Jefferson's land, so that the particular spot where the felling and split~ ting of timber had been going on was in the finest part of the Black Spur Forest, and fully three-quarters of a mile inside the boundary of the watershed. All the non­sense that had been published about not being able to define the boundary, and that the wood splitters were only a few yards inside the boundary of the water reserve, was, therefore, all humbug. He (Mr. Munro) knew the place as well as he knew Collins-street; he had often been up and down there; and he was quite surprised to find that, after £30,000 had been spent in buying out the owners of the land so as to preserve the watershed from pollution, men had been licensed to fell trees and split timber there. The statement he made last week he made from his own personal know­ledge, being well acqua.inted with the place ' where the wood-splitting was going on, and all the wriggling of the department, by means of correspondence and paragraphs iIi the newspa.pers, could not get rid of the fact that a man licensed by the Lands de­partment was cutting down trees and splitting wood within the area of the water reserve.

Mr. MASON remarked that a number of timber reserves in South Gippsland were infested with wild dogs and wallabies, and while the country was getting no benefit from those reserves the settlers in t.he ~icinity had their grass eaten and their sheep destroyed by the vermin. The Mount Fatigue reserve, covering 40,000 acres, was simply a harbour for vermin, and he ques­tioned if a single officer of the Lands de.;. partment had ever visited the place. Large portions of the land there were quite value­less for growing timber, and the people of the district natura.lly objected to snch an immense area being withheld from occupation as a State forest, when there was really no 'timber there of any value whatever. It was the duty of the department to destroy the nrmin, and he hoped that steps would b~ taken to exterminate the wild dogs and wallabies. The same remarks would apply to the agricultural college reserve betwee~ Yinnar a'nd Yarram. It was perfectly useless for the department to retain thes,e reserves unless something was done with

2212 S~tpply. [ASSEMBLY.] Lands ])epm·tment.

them, and it was unjust to leave the settlers on the adjoining lands exposed to the ravages of the wild dogs, which destroyed their sheep,and of the wallabies, which ate up their grass. The existence of these useless reserves also prevented the local bodies from making roads throllgh the country. Great difficulty was experienced by selectors in getting their licences and leases in certain parts of Gippsland, and he believed in other parts of tEe colony, owing to the con­flict between the Mining and Lands depart­ments, and some applications had on that account been strung up for years. The only way to remedy that defect would be to amend section 118 of the Land Act to facilitate the issue of leases to applicants for land as well as to applicants for mining leases. Section 118 of the Land Act pro­vided that-

" There shall be inserted in every lease of a. pastoral allotment, and in every lease of a grazing area, a covenant that the lands demised under such leases are granted and held subject to a condition that the holder of a miner's right or of a mining lease shall have the right and shall be allowed by such lessee to enter upon such pastoral allotment or grazing area, as the case may be, and search for gold, and to mine thereon, and to erect and occupy mining plant or ma­chinery without making compensation to the lessee thereof for surface or other damage." The insertion after the word "gold" of the words "or other minerals " would save the department, honorable members, the selectors, and the miners an immense amount of trouble, facilitate settlement, and enable the miners to search for coal, tin, iron, and other minerals a's well as for gold. Parliament would be, willing to pass an amending Bill for that purpose in two or three minutes. (Mr. Dow-" What about the selectors ?") The selectors would be perfectly satisfied to get the land, subject to the right of miners to search for minerals at a depth of 50 feet below the surface, without pa.yment of any compensation. Only that day he had received a letter from a consti­tuent, informing him of an important dis­covery of iron in Gippsland.

Mr. DUNN observed that honorable members were indebted to the honorable member for Gippsland South for his excel­lent suggestion, and he trusted the Minister of Lands would ask the Government to authorize him to bring in a Bill to gin effed to it, at the same time providing not only for the right to search for all minerals but also for mineral earths as well. Such a measure would have his hearty support, hecause it would do justice to the interests of both miners and selectors.

Mr. TATCHELL said that in most of the forests in his district the ground was strewn with old trunks and the tops of iron­bark trees. The wood splitters desired per­mission to cut up those old trunks, under the !tuthority of the lower-priced licences,. and their request might be granted with advantage. The fallen timber was a harbour' for foxes and other vermin, which were' becoming most prevalent and destructive" so that it would be well to allow the wood splitters holding the cheaper licences to cut the fallen trees and not be restricted to the standing timber. (Mr. Dow-" They can do so now.") He was very glad to hear it.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN stated that he desired to support the suggestion of the honorable member for Richmond (Mr. Bennett) that a sum of money should be placed on the Estimates for the family of the late Mr. Curr, who had done so much to improve the condition of live stock, not only in this colony but throughout Australia. When Mr. Curr was appointed Chief In­spector of Stock people laughed and sneered at his idea that scab in sheep could be eradicated, but within four or five years,. thanks to his vigorous exertions, the flocks of this colony were rid of the pest, and they II ad continued clean ever since. He (Sir B. O'Loghlen) was counsel for the Crown in various prosecutions of stock-owners who­failed to comply with the provisions of the Scab Act, and it was largely owing to Mr. Curr'S able assistance that he suc­ceeded in obtaining convictions against some of the more flagrant offen·ders. In one case a fine of £1,200 was imposed, in another of £1,400, and in a third case a fine of £1,600. The success which attended Mr. Curr's efforts induced the other coloniez· to follow the example of Victoria, and the­result of the general establishment of the­system was that there were now some 80,000,000 sheep in Australia all free from the disease-a very important thing for the­wool industry. Mr. CUrl' devoted a good deal of his spare time to studying the lan­guages and customs of the aborigines, and he brought out books that would hereafter' become valuable historical works. Con­sidering the substantial, and indeed national,. charaeter of the services which Mr. Curl'" gaTe to the country, his family were entitled' to receive a special sum in addition to the nine months' pay which had been awarded' to them in accordance with the usua] practice.

Mr. W. T. CARTER observed that he­did not agree with the honorable member

Supply. [OCTOBER 23.] Lands Depa1·tment. 2213

for South Yarra that the Conservator of Forests had not sufficient power, because it was evident from certain facts which had recently transpired that the officer in ques­tion was likely to make a very free use of any power that might be placed in his band s, so that it would possibly be dangerous to give him more power than he at present possessed. In exercising his power with regard to the appointment of foresters, Mr. Perrin was discouraging young men who had a natural aptitude for forestry-and who had to some extent made a special study of the subject, in which they took an earnest .and intelligent scientific interest-because their claims had been ignored, although

·they had qualified themselves for appoint-ment by passing the necessary examination, and Mr. Perrin had given the preference to persons who were not so qualified. Was it advisable that the Conservator of Forests 'should be allowed to dishearten these really promising young men? He (Mr. Carter) knew one of them, a personal friend of his ,own, whose qualifications he could judge to some extent, and who had been placed at Dandenong at a salary below the wages of the men he had to direct, damping the young man's enthusiasm for forestry to such an extent that he was not only discouraged but almost heartbroken; and he observed, by the assent of other honorable members, that similar cases of the kind had evidently occurred elsewhere. No doubt the Con­serva.tor of Forests was an enthusiast, but his was a kind of enthusiasm which had .better be directed, and if he had a special .knowledge of forestry it would be well that be should work in future under a man with better administrative ability.

Mr ZOX expressed the hope that the Go­vernment would accede to the appeal which bad been .made on behalf of the family of the late Mr. Curr, who was for so many years one of the most Taluable and energetic officers in the public service. The colony ought to recognise the successful efforts which Mr. Curr made for the eradication of scab in sheep, and it should not be forgotten that Mr. Curr declined the remuneration offered to him by the GOTernment for his book on the aborigines. The Assembly should be afforded an opportunity, on some future occasion, of discussing this proposal on its merits. The Minister of Lands, he believed, was favorably disposed towards the claims of Mr. Curr's relatives, a.nd he understood that the Premier had also pro­mised to give the matter his careful con­eideration.

SB8. 1890._7 n

Mr. OFFICER inquired whether any decision had been arrived at in regard to the land at Murra Murra, formerly reserved for water supply conservation in connexion with the Wimmera irrigation trust, but not now required for that purpose. Many men had taken up selections there on some sort of right to occupy the land, but leases were re­fused them pending the settlement of the question whether the site was to be used for water supply purposes or not. The Murra. Murra site had been abandoned in favour or another site lower down the river, at Bal­moral, and he was told that there was no reason to be urged by the Water Supply department why leases should be any longer withheld from the selectors who had been kept hanging on there for years. The Minister of Lands stated a little time ago that it was the desire and effort of the Lands department to get selectors on the Crown lands, a.nd if that was a fact, the men who had been occupying the Murra Murra reserve for years ought to receive their leases without further delay. He was informed, however, that although the Water Supply department had given up their claim to the area in question, the Forest department had put in a claim for it, so that there was another impediment put in the way of the selectors. He wished the Minister of Lands would give his attention to the matter, and have the land settled in one way or another, because the present unsatisfactory arrangement was not fair tl.> the men who had been allowed to occupy the land and spend money on it for years past and yet had got no title whatever to the land. He further desired to know what steps, if any, were being taken to preserve the State forests against the only two enemies he knew of-fire and stock. It was no ose whatever having State forests if they were to be exposed periodically to fires or open to' the inroads of stock. .

Mr. BAKER remarked that the Minis-' ter of Lands had had before him for SOllie years the question of issuing leases to the' men on the Murra Murra selections, and he belieTed it had been the desire of th'~ honorable gentleman from the first tbat those settlers should have their leases. Seeing that the Wimmera irrigation trusi had pulled up their pegs and moved ·to another place, there was no reason wby, these men should not get their leases now. If the MiQister of Pu~lic Works was pre ... sent he would be able to .speak on behalfol' the settlers in question, because many oj them belonged to his constituents in t~~ western district. Formerly they were hi!

2214 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Lands Depa1'tment.

(Mr. Baker's) constituents, and although they were not so now, he felt a strong interest in their claim, knowing that they had spent a lot of money in the improve­ment of the land. There was no better land for grazing purpoges,and he failed to see why it should be made a forest reserve sill1ply' in order to drive the settlers off the land. The Minister of Lands must know that that was exactly why it was proposed to ask the Government to make it a forest reserve, . and he would like to know if the honorable gentleman would take care that the people: now on the land would get their .leases ?

Mr. GORDON said that a good' deal of : friction undoubtedly existed between the Lands and the Mining departments, and the Lands department seemed to give no consideration, or very little at all events, to the interests of the mining industry; but he ventured to say that if that de­partment attempted to ignore the mining interests the attempt would be very warmly resented. He rose, however, to ask the Minister of Lands whether he had. received any official infgrmation with rega~d to the statements that appeared in'a para­graph recently published in the newspapers as to the destruction of timber in some of , the State forests in the neighbourhood of gold-fields when the mounted police, who. generally acted as foresters, were withdrawn . from the country districts to take temporary duty in Melbourne? He ob3erved that, : according to the newspaper statements in . q\lestion, a great deal of useful mining' timber had been cut and removed, wasted in fact, and he would like to know whether the Minister of Lands had heard anything about the matter? If such a. thing could have occurred on the occasion of the mounted police being removed from the mining districts it said 'ferylittle for the management of the department, and he l'eally hoped that the statement had no foundation.

Mr. L. L. SMITH said he wished to draw the attention of the Minister of Lands to the fact that at Kilcunda there wasalargereserve which was at present entirely useless except . for grazing purposes. It was true that the district was supposed· to .possess coal, and that it would be wrong for the State to part wholly with territory which might eventually develop into a splendidly-paying coalfield; but could not the Lands department sell the surface of the soil dQwn to ~ depth of say {)O feet', which. would nQt interfe're with any coal mining that .might hereaf.ter be entered upon? The land would fetch from £15 'to

£20 per acre, a large population would settle upon it, and the purchase-money would go a long way towards paying for the proposed railway to Kilcunda, which appeared on the Railway Bill as one" from Nyora to WooI­amai." Why, the sale of the resp-rve upon these terms would bring in fully £80,000, which would be sufficient to half finish the line. He hoped the Minister of Lands 'would bring the matter before his col­leagues.

Mr. J. HARRIS stated that the remarks of the honorable member for Williamstown with respect to Mr. Perrin pointed to a state of things quite contrary to the description given in that gentleman's latest report, which contained the following passage:-

"Notwithstanding the fact that 135 men have been employed, not the slightest friction has occurred amongst them, the whole of the em· ployes of the department having worked har­moniously, and with energy and intelligence, as the excellent nature of the work done shows most unmistakably."

He (Mr. J . Harris) knew personally very little of Mr. Perrin, but he was satisfied that in that gentleman the colony had a first-rate officer. He was an enthusiast with respect . to his work, and deserved encourageme'nt rather than snubbing. He (Mr. Harris) would be glad to support the honorable member for Richmond (Mr. Bennett) in any action he might take on behalf of the family 'of the late Mr. E. M. Curr, Chief Inspector of Stock.

Mr. DIXON remarked that he had a word or two to say with respect to the reserve mentioned just now by the honorable member for Dundas, which wa.s situated, he (Mr. Dixon) understood, in the Victoria Valley, and in connexion with which,it was fumoured, that the Minister of Lands was about to take certain decided steps. What should be pointed out was that the State had been for a long time sustaining a great loss through this land being locked up~ professedly in expectation of .it being re­quired for a 'water reserve. He was not now 'referring to the lower po!~ion of th~ valley, which had been selected, but to the higher ground which was covered witlj wattle trees from which a great deal of money might be earned. Some consider~:

· able period ago, shortly after the very · valuable report of the Wattle Bark Com';;

mission was. published, he and a number of , other:gentlemen were prepared to invest a

large amount of money in the promotion 'of · the wattle-bark industry in this valley; b~~, , they were kept out of it ~or years,. and now

Supply. [OCTOBER 23.J Lands Department. 2215

the inclination for the en terprise was gone. Still others might enter upon it, and were they to do so the land would be put to its best use, for 20 acres of it would not feed one sheep, and tIle result would be extremely profitable to the colony. Perhaps some honorable members would like to know why people had been so long kept out of this reserve. Well, it was simply because of the influence brought to bear by one or two members of this Ohamber, who, not being able to get the lanG for themselves, had nevertheless managed to block out others.

Mr. FERGUSON said he quite agreed with the remarks with regard to Mr. Perrin, which fell a few ·minutes ago from the honorable member for South Yarra. Mr. Perrin was 'an able officer, of whom the colony might well be proud, and he (Mr. Ferguson) was very sorry to hear him attacked in the Honse. Indeed, he was always sorry to hear disparaging remarks made by honorable members with respect to public officers, who had no means of defending themselves; and he hoped that that sort of thing would be desisted from in future. As for the honorable member for Williamstown, he ought to have been more sure of his facts. With respect to forestry and t"he growth of trees, he (Mr. Ferguson) would offer a suggestion. In earlier days, before the Land Act of 1869 found its way to the statute-book, the roads in country districts were surveyed from It to 3 chains wide, and now the greater part of the land was not wanted, except for the use of stray cattle, and to encourage them to break into farmers' crops. But it would be very easy to utilize it by allowing the adjoining occu­piers to enclose about half or a quarter of a chain of the road within a second fence, in order to plant trees. The result would be a benefit to the country in many ways, and a, decided encouragement to the growth of timber.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN observed that reference had been made that evening to the friction between the Mining and Lands departments, and there could be no doubt that much friction existed. The evil might, however, soon be cured by the Minister of Lands bringing in a short Bill of hvo or three clauses, enabling strict covenants to be put into all leases, grants, or licences­in short, into every document authorizing people to hold land. These covenants should be to the effect that the occupier would be unable to claim compensation for any injury done to him by mining b,~peath the surface, and that persons

desiring to mine under particular land, no matter for what mineral, should have free access to it for the purpose. He believed that conditions of this sort would be accept­able to both the occupiers of land and to ruiners.

Mr. W. T. OARTER remarked that the honorable member for Ovens had complained that he (Mr. W. T. Oarter) had made statements against Mr. Perrin without offering any proof; but the honorable member ought to know that he had offered proof. He would also read an extract from a letter, the writer of which he would namet

and whose character he could testify to. It was as follows:-

" My case is that J fulfilled all the conditions required by the Act to obtain an appointment as, forester, but through . . . I have been set aside, and other men have been appointed in contravention and in spite of the Act. I had an officer's position at Ferntree Gully on laborer's wages, and hired men under me had a, higher rate of wage than I was in receipt of."

The writer was Mr. F. A. Wilson, of Lower Broughton, South Australia. As for references in Parliament to public officers, if those gentlemen did not know that they were always under the criticism of the House, they ought to know it. Mr. Perrin had ability and was an enthusiast in forestry, but it would be well if in matters of administration he was kept within the law. Moreover, with all his enthusiasm, he was not always ready to have his atten­tion directed towards persons who happened to possess certain special knowledge, who were equally enthusiastic,and who possessed qualifications at least nearly as great as hif:i. He (Mr. W. T. Oarter) was perfectly right in charging Mr. Perrin with having set the writer of the letter on one side and, by his treatment of him, thoroughly disappointed and discouraged him.

Mr. RIOHARDSON expressed the opinion that public servants might very properly be attacked in Parliament, but the thing should ,be done very carefully and only within certain limits. However, his experience of the service quite bore out some of the statements of the honorable member for Williamstown. It should be remembered that the department of the Oonservator of Forests was not under the control of the Public Senice Board, and that therefore the status and qualifications of the officers did not come withiR their purview. The officers had not to pass any examination fixed by the board; in fact, the patronage of the department rested

2216 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Parks and Gardens,

entirely with its head. He (Mr. Richard­son) would urge the Minister of Lands to take a note of this, and to see that the Forest department was brought under the control of the Public Service Board. More­over, some change should be made in the manner in which the department obtained its revenue.

Mr. FERGUSON begged. to point out to the honorable member for Williamstown that the letter just read by him contai~ed only an ex parte statement. He (Mr. Fer­guson) would never attack the character of a public servant in Parliament without knowing both sides of the question.

Mr. UREN drew attention to the un­favorable character of the conditions attaching to many of the lessees under the 32nd section of the Land Act. In Gipps­land 32nd section leaseholds were, generally speaking, densely covered with young timber, which the lessees dared not cut without special permission from the Lands depart­ment. Under these circumstances, how could they possibly keep their land clear -of vermin? It was to be hoped that some remedy would be applied to this state of things.

The vote was agreed to.

PARKS AND GARDENS.

On the vote of £5,549, to complete the vote (£9,484) for public parks, gardens, and reserves,

Mr. L. L. SMITH said that perhaps the Minister of Lancis would now reply to his inquiries with respect to the lease of the Elsternwick race-course. Formerly, this land was waste, undrained, and unhealthy, but certain persons took it in hand and turned it into a race· course, which was an immense improvement. After a while, wanting to put additional buildings on it, they asked for a longer lease, and the Minister of Lands replied, so he (Mr. L. L. Smith) was informed, that if the Brighton council would agree to the issue -of such a lease, it should be granted. Sub­sequently, when the lease was on the point of being issued, certain gentlemen came forward to oppose it being granted, and .eventually, after the holders of the ground had been deluded into going into a lot of ·expense, they found themselves left out in ihe cold.

Mr. DOW remarked that the case put forward by the honorable member was a rather old one. As a matter of fact, the -existing lease would not expire for some years, but the holders of the ground wanted

I a promise of renewal, in anticipation of new buildings being put up. Difficulties arose, however, in connexion with the local muni­cipal body, and fears were expressed that if a renewal was granted the right of the people of the district to the ground as a recreation reserve would be interfered with. (Mr. L. L. Smith-" The local municipal body agreed to the lease issuing, so no difficulty existed on that score.") The difficulty was with respect to renewing the lease so far in advance, and uuder these circumstances it was thought best to let the matter stand over until the lease was about to expire. He believed that the lessees were satisfied \Vith. that arrangement. (Mr. L. L. Smith­" Nothing of the kind.") _ Well, he had not been approached on the subject for the last two years. He had made a careful note of the honorable member's remarks, and if, three years hence, when the lease was about to expire, he was still in office, he would give every consideration to them.

Mr. J. HARRIS expressed the opinion that the department now in question ought to be brought within the control of the de­partment of Agriculture. The same thing should b~ done with respect to the Domain Gardens.

Mr. GARDINER said he would like to know whether the new curator of metro­politan parks and gardens, who was to be appointed by the :Minister of Lands in con­junction with the city council, would 1.ake office under the public service regulations; and also whether he would be under the control of the Minister of Lands? He (Mr. Gardiner) was aware that the city council wished to have the new curator entirely in their own hands, because the present curator had more than once refused, on the gronnd that he was an officer of the Crown, to do their bidding in connexion with Prince's­park. They wanted certain information about fences which he would not give.

Mr. DOW stated that the vote included a sum of £6,000 for-

"Maintaining and improving the following gardens and parks, jointly vested in the Board of Land and Works and the city council of. Melbourne, on the understanding that a sum of £3,000 be contributed by such council, viz.:­Fitzroy-gardens, Carlton-gardens, Flagstaff­gardens, Yarra-park, Fawkner-park, Prince's­park, Flinders'-park, Lincoln·square, Argyle­square, Curtain - square, Macarthur - square, Murchison-square, Darling·square, and Uni· versity-square. "

These had been for many years' under the curatorship of Mr. Bickford, a very ex­cellent officer, but now that he was about to

Supply. [OCTOBER 23.J Pw'ks and Gat'dens.

retire on account of advanced age, it was thought desirable to have for his successor a man well up in modern arboriculture, who would also act as Crown lauds bailiff. Filling an office of this sort would be too much for Mr. Bickford, even if he were willing to take it. So it had been arranged that the joint committee should appoint a man at something like £300 a year to manage the parks, and also to be generally under their control. The officer who would ·succeed Mr. Bickford in the management of the other metropolitan public parks and gardens, ~uch as Studley-park, Richmond­park, and the Treasury-gardens, would be under the Public Service Board.

Mr. GARDINER drew attention to the following item :-

"For the completion of the restoration of 'Carlton-gardens north, and for the erection ·of caretaker's lodge, £1,200."

He stated that for the past year or two, on account or the Exhibition, the gate at the northern end of these gardens had been ·closed to the public. He had frequently waited on the Lands department to ask that at should be opened, but he was always told ihat that could not be done until certain works were completed. Now that the works were fini.'!hed, when would the public be :admitted?

Mr, DOW said he would look into the matter.

Mr. GARDINER said he would take .advantage of the present opportunity to also call attention to another matter. It was high time that the request of the people -of Carlton, that a portion of Prince's-park Rhould be set aside for them for recreation purposes, was complied with. The body which stood in the way was the city council, who were joint trustees with the Board of Land and Works, and he would ask the Minister of Lands· to use his influence to bring about an amicable settlement of the question. Why should the people of Carlton be denied the park privileges which were accorded to the inhabitants of other portions of the metropolis?

Mr. J. HARRIS remarked that the statement just made by the honorable mem­ber for Carlton was not entirely correct; at all events it was a little misleading. He (Mr. Harris) wa! a member of the Parks -and Gardens Committee, and he was there­fore in a position to assert that a consider­able part of Prince's-park had already been set apart for recreative purposes. The committee were, however, strongly adverse, in the interests of the general public, to

portions of the park being permanently handed over to particular clubs. Every spring they were inundated with applica­tions from cricket and other clubs for concessions of that sort.

Mr. GARDINER stated that the Carl­ton Football Club had for years been allowed the use of about eight acres of the park, but only during the football season. When that was over they had to take down their fences and stack them, with the result that all their improvements were speedily destroyed ; cows were allowed to come in and graze over their ground, and the pre­vious half year's work was at once undone. Again, although the Carlton Football Ulub had a larger number of mem bers than any similar club in Melbourne, theywere unable to provide accommodation on their ground

, for their friends. They were, in fact, almost wholly without the conveniences enjoyed by other football clubs. It should be men­tioned that since this club made their application for something like permanent possession and got a refusal, no less than two acres of the park had been granted to certain persons for a bowling-green and a lawn-tennis court, and they were allowed not only to keep up a permanent fence, ~llt to put padlocks on their gates. He would ask the honorable member for South Yarra to do what he could to grant the very reasonable request now put forward. It was very ~nfair to a large district like Carlton that, when the local club had to playa match with any of the other metro­politan clubs, the residents of Carlton had to be dragged to Melbourne or South Mel. bourne, because the Carlton club had no ground of its own. There were also the people of Brunswick to be considered in this matter. Why should the residents of the northern suburbs be deprived of recrea­tion grounds, especially when one of the regulations provided that those grounds should be set apart for recreation purposes? He sincerely hoped that the Parks and Gardens Committee, which was represented in the Assembly by the honorable member for South Yarra, would take some decisive action in the matter.

Mr. METHVEN observed that he had some interest in this question, seeing that the people of Brunswick had no ground for recreation purposes in their own district, and therefore had to avail themselves of some place outside the municipality. He was at a loss to know what Prince's-park had been reserved for. Was it for grazing purposes-to enable the Melbourne City

2218 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.]

Council to derivei8 revenue from the graz­ing of cows on the land? That was the only thing it was used for. The land was so divided by fencea and gates that it was impossible for either a pedestrian or a horse­man to get from one end of it to the other. He would like to see the whole of those fences swept away, as Prince's-park and th~ Royal-park were the only places his constituents could go to for recreation. He believed the Melbourne City Council obtained £1,000 a year from the grazing of cattle on Prince's-park, and they had no right to derive a shilling from such a source. The land was intendecl for the recreation of the public, but the park was full of cattle from one end of the year to another, and was fenced off in squares, so that the public had no proper access to it. What were the pathways in the park for? Were they for cattle? The Minister of Lands should take the matter into his own hands a.nd see that the whole of these fences were swept away, so that the park might be enjoyed by the public, for whom it was intended. As to the Carlton club, he did not see why they should not have a piece of ground for their matches, in connexion with which they could charge for admission like the clubs in Melbourne and the ot.her suburhs. .

Mr. J. HARRIS stated that the only reason Prince's-park had not been opened fully for vehicular traffic was that the roads through it were not yet made, but simply formed. The Parks and Gardens Com­mittee had for some time been considering the propriety of asking the assistance of the Government in making the roads, which were about two miles in length, and would cost £2,000 or £3,000. He hoped that in the next Estimates the Minister of Lands would provide a sum for this purpose.

Mr. DO W observed that these parks were under the control of a joint committee, representing the Board of Land and VV orks and the Melbourne Oity Council. Of course the Government had the greatest confidence in that body, though, perhaps, every detail might not be carried out exactly a!! could be wished. He would consider it his duty to make a careful note of what had been said, with the view of SUbmitting the matter to the body which had charge of the parks and gardens. He was sure they would give every attention to any fair representation from the public.

Mr. LAURENS said the people in Parkville, whom he represented, felt very sore over the state of matters in connexion

with Prince's-park. They were deprived of a right and an advantage which was readily conceded to residents on the south side of the Yarra with reference to reserves there, which were under the same control. Although these parks were under the joint control of the Board of Land and Works and the city council, they were only placed under the control of those bodies for pur­poses of recreation, and no action should be allowed which deprived the youthful population of the enjoyment of the public reserves. Even if it was necessary to legis­late so as to alter the order of things, he believed Parliament would be quite- riady to pass any legislation that might be necessary to more clearly sanction a fair and impartial administration of the public reserves.

Mr. LANGRIDGE expressed tue hope that the Minister of Lands would place a small sum of money-say £200 or £300-on the Additional Estimates to assist the Oollingwood Oouncil in improving the Darling-gardens. All the money that had been spent on those gardens hitherto had come from the funds of the council. If the Minister would comply wita the request, the council would undertake to spend an equal sum to that granted by the Government.

Mr. DOW intimated that he would consider the application before the Addi­tional Estimates were submitted.

'rhe vote was agreed to.

MELBOURNE BOTANIO GARDENS.

On the vote of £7,199, to complete the vote (£10,616) for the Botanical and Domain Gardens,

Oapt. TAYLOR said he desired to call the attention of the Minister of Lands to the case of an employe in the Melbourne Botanic-gardens named Parish. Some years ago, when he was earning from £3 to £3 lOs. per week as a· painter, l1e was induced to enter the service as an employe in the Botanic-gardens, where he painted the labels for the plants. He was given £120 a year to start with, but it was stated that he would gradually get promotion, which would make up what he lost by enter­ing the Government service. Owing to the manner in which he had been classified by the Public Service Board, however, he only received £132 per annum, with annual increments of £6, and the maximum he could reach was £12 lOs. per month. As the man was induced to leave his business as a master painter, he (Oapt. Taylor) would af:lk the Minister to consider his case~.

Supply. [OCTOBER 23.J Rabbit Extirpation. 2219

Mr. DOW intimated that he would make a note of the matter.

The vote was agreed to.

LAND TAX ACT. On the vote of £605, to complete the

·vote (£1,310) for expenses of carrying out the Land Tax Act,

Mr. GORDON asked whether the Go­vernment had any intenti@n of introducing a Bill to amend the Land Tax Act? It was within his knowledge that in many cases injustice had been done hy land being wrongly classified, and as the Act stood at present it was impossible to alter the 'classification.

Mr. DOW stated that the matter would receive consideration.

The vote was agreed to.

RABBIT EXTIRPATION.

On the vote of £22,689, to complete the vote (£39,755) for the extirpation of rabbits and wild animals,

Mr. MUNRO said he had been informed that the Rabbit Destruction Act was rather peculiarly administered. He knew nothing of the facts himself, but 11e was told that in some cases persons were so severely pursued for penalties that they could not live on the land. One man told him that he had land worth about £7 per acre, and that if he was going to be worried in the way he had been by the inspectors he would abandon his land. This man said he was doing all he could to keep down the rabbits, but he could not kill them all, and as the inspector had taken a "down " upon him, he was visited with all the penalties of the law. Other persons, his informant stated, were also seriously considering whether they would not abandon their land altogether, owing to the manner in which they were being harassed. . Mr. MADDEN remarked that desperate cases required desperate remedies. It was admitted on all 'hands that the rabbit pest had become a desperate evil, and hardship had to be inflicted on some people in order that great good might be brought about. He had no hesitation in saying that great good had been done by the various Rabbit Destruction Acts, and particularly the last one, which dealt with the question in a comprehensive way. It was necessary to take very stringent measures in some cases, ~ut :J?arliament and the country ought to be . glad indeed that the result of those measures was that the rabbits had been practically got rid of.

Mr. OFFICER stated that there was no doubt the last Rabbit Act had done a. great deal of good, but it would have done much Inore good if the money voted for wire netting had been better expended. A section of the Act made provision for selections being fenced in groups, so that less wire netting would be required; but the wire netting had been devoted to fenc­ing small holdings of 820 or 1,000 acres, instead of holdings being grouped into areas of 4,000 or 5,000 acres. The result was that the sum voted for advances to shire councils had proved nothing like suf­ficient to provide all the wire netting required. He would like to know whether the Minister, on the Additional Estimates, would supplement the amount advanced for the' purchase of wire netting by a further sum, to be lent on the same terms. He believed that enclosing the land was the only way in which the rabbits would be got rid of.

Mr. BAKER said there were a large number of applications for wire netting in his district, and he thought that if the amoulilt already granted was supplemented, with the view of enclosimg a larger area of country, the rabbit difficulty would be coped with very effectually. He was satisfied that until the land was enclosed, and the owners made responsible for the destruction of the rabbits within their fences, the pest would not be got rid of. The advance of a further sum would eventu­ally reduce the expenses of the department materially, by practically getting rid of the rabbit difficulty.

Mr. DUNN stated that in his district there were reserves from which no revenue was derived, but yet the trustees were made responsible for keeping them clear of vermin. As they had no funds for the purpose, they had to pay the money out of their own pockets, and surely this was never intended. He would ask the Minister of Lands whether he could not frame a regula.~ tion by which the Government would destroy

-the rabbits on those reserves, while allowing the reserves to remain in the hands of the trustees. The residents decidedly objected to hand over the reserves to the Lands department.

Mr. HA'LL drew attention to the item of £32,000 for" expenses generally." This was a very large sum of money to be placed under a heading so vague, and he would like the Minister to give some explanation of the expenditure. It would sa.ve time, and be better for the Asaembly, if the leading

Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] M1'. R. H. Dawson.

,details of large items were set out in the Estimates.

Mr. DOW said that although the ex­penses were put down under· a general heading in the Estimates, in accordance with the usual practice, detailed information was given in the report of the Lands de­partment. The Act passed last session was generally acknowledged to be really coping with the rabbit pest. It was a lamentable thing for the House to be faced year after year, as used to be the case, with votes on the Estimates, running from £18,000 to £24,000, for rabbit destruction, while at the same time complaints were coming from all quarters that the rabbits were not diminishing but increasing. The Act passed last year changed that state of things., One feature of the Act was to relieve the municipal bodies or the duty of enforcing the law, as it was considered that inspectors who were paid officers of the municipal councils, and therefore, practically, of the landowners themselves, could not act with so free a hand' as a body of in­spectors employed directly by the Govern­ment. By this change the municipal bodies were relieved of an expense of £16,000 per annum, which they had been paying to inspectors, and this accounted for the vote being increased to £32,000 on the present Estima~es. The department employed sixty­five inspectors and ten assistant inspectors, besides a body of 200 men who were keep­ing the rabbits down on Crown lands. Although the vote was large this year, it was E'xpected that the operation of the Act would shortly enable the working expenses to be greatly reduced. The officer in charge of the administration of the Act was a gentleman of great ability and energy-an admirable officer indeed-and he (Mr. Dow) was confident that the money was being economically and efficiently expended. He hoped that in a few yeare the pest would b~. so far got rid of that only a small staff woulct~ be required.

Mr. MURPHY stated that he had heard several complaints from farmers whose lands abutted on the Bullarook State Foreet to the effect that, while the inspector was Tery strict in hauling up any poor farmer if rabbits were found on his lands, the forest itself was a regular den for Termin. Mount Warrenheip was in a similar state some time ago, but had been greatly improved by the use of rabbit.proof fencing, and he hoped the Bullarook Forest would be fenced off in a similar manner, as a~ present the farmers had their crops destroyed by rabbits

coming from that forest, and were then fined for having rabbits on their land.

Mr. BAKER asked what was intended to be done to assist the farmers in dealing with the locust pest, which was almost as bad as the rabbit pest?

Mr. DOW stated that he would refer to tIle matter when the estimates for the Agricultural department were under con­sideration.

The vote was agreed to.

MALLEE LANDS. . On the vote of £7,083, to complete the

vote (£9,233) for" miscellaneous" in the. Lands department,

Mr. BAKER drew attention to the item of £5,000, " cost of making wells and com­pensation for improvements in the mallee country-to be partly recouped," and asked for an explanation of the expenditure.

Mr. DOW remarked that the money was being expended in resuming mallee lands to be cut up for selection and sinking wells. The cost of the well sinking, however, was charged to the Water Supply department.

The vote was agreed to, as was also the vote of £4'7,885 to complete the vote (£55,440) for the Public Works department (ad minis tra tion).

MR. R. H. DAWSON.

On the vote of £34,468, to complete the vote (£77,551) for the Customs depart. ment,

Mr. LANGRIDGE said he desired to refer to the appointment of Mr. R. H. Daw­son as landing surveyor. The papers in connexion with the case had been presented to the House, printed, and circulated among honorable members. He must say that it was very disheartening to public servants to he treated in the way in which officers of the Customs, department haa been treated by the appointment of Mr. Dawson. The facts of the case were briefly these. Mr. Dawson was formally a landing waiter in the Customs department, but some six or seTen years ago a new office-that of in. I!pector of stores-was created in the Chief Secretary's department, and he obtained the position. He (Mr. Lang. ridge) was Minister of Customs at the time, and Mr. Dawson could be ill~ spared from the department just then; but the department did not desire to stand in his way, and he received the promotion with an incre'ased salary. Ma~ters had'

Supply. [OCTOBER 23.J M1·. R. H. Dawson. 2221

gone thus until recently, when Mr. Macfar­lane retired from the position of landing surveyor, and Mr. Goodsir was promoted to take his place. This left a vacancy in the ranks or the landing surveyors of the second class, and it became a matter for the department to consider who was the officer most fitted to fill it. The question was referred to Messrs. Hammond, Goodsir, and Oxenbould to report on the capabilities of certain officers who were candidates for the position; and they recommended that Mr. A. W. Smart, who had been acting as landing surveyor for several months, and who was reported as being a highly efficient officer, should have the vaeancy. Now, however, Mr. Dawson, who had left the Customs department for years, appeared on the scene, and became a candidate for Mr. Goodsir's position. He (Mr. Langridge) had nothing whatenr to say against Mr. Dawson, who, during his service in the Customs department, proved himself a most excellent and meritorious officer, and it wa.s only natural that every man should seek his own advancement. At the same time it seemed very hard on the officer! who had remained in the Customs department that an outsider should recei va the position, thus debarring several officers from the promotion which would have taken place in due course had an officer from within the department been appointed to Mr. Goodsir's former position. There was no doubt that it was calculated to take all the heart out of public servants in the performance of their duties if they were to be prevented from obtaining tIle legitimate promotion to which they had looked forward by persons from other departments being appointed to positions above them. That it was intended, when the Public Service Act Amendment Act was passed, that if there was an efficient officer in the same department to fill a vacancy lJe should receive it was shown by the following remarks by the Premier in proposing one clause of the measure :-

"Mr. Gillies pointed out that the clause pro­vided for fitness having special merits even above seniority. If a vacancy in the 2nd class occurred in a department, the present law required the Public Service. Board to look throughout the whole service for an officer who, by seniority and merit combined, was entitled to promotion; but the clause provided that if a 3rd class officer could be found in the depart­ment in which the vacancy occurred who had a thorough knowledge of the duties, and therefore ~ special fitness for the position, he must be : chosen. If such an officer could not be found ' in that department, then the board would be ' entitled to look throughout the entire service."

SlIS. 1890.-7 S

Notwithstanding the recommendation of the department that Mr. Smart should be appointed to the vacancy, the Public Service Board nominated Mr. Dawson for the position. He (Mr. Langridge) might point out that since Mr. Dawson left the department a new Tariff had come into operation, with which, naturally, the officers remaining in the department were more familiar than Mr. Dawson. The Minister of Customs took up a strong position with regard to the matter. The following memorandum was sent to the Public Service Board at the instance of the Minister:- '

"Mr. Patterson desires me to state that he has given the suggestion made by you as to Mr. Dawson's transfer every consideration, and now feels driven to the conclusion that it would be inadvisable that it should be carried out. The Minister desires me to mention that the reasons which have prevailed with him in arriving at this opinion are the following :-1. The provisions of section 6 of the Act 1024 seem to imply that the officers in a department should be exhausted before recourse is had to those of other departments, and that this is the correct view of the intentions of Parliament seems to be unmistakably proved by the assur­ances given by the Premier while the Bill was passing through the House, and by the trans­position of the sub·section. Mr. Patterson directs me to invite your particular attention to Mr. Gillies' remarks and the undertaking given by him. (Vide, copy enclosed, Hansard, vol. 60, pp. 397 and 398.) 2. That to transfer Mr. Dawson would be to make him senior to Messrs. Hollick and Oxenbould, and other officers, to whom he was junior when formerly in this department. 3. That very great dissatisfaction would be occasioned thereby, and such transfer would, it is feared, lead to the inharmonious working of the out-door staff.

," I have, &c., "A. W. MUSGROVE."

To this a reply was sent by the Public Service Board stating reasons for the ap­pointment of Mr. Dawson. The corres­pondence concluded with a memorandum from the Minister of Customs, from which he would only quote the following ex· tracts-

"Since Mr. Dawson left this department a good many years have elapsed. We have now a new Tariff, with which our present officers are familiar, and circumstances have altered considerably. The passing of the Act 1024, and the effect of its provisions, as interpreted by the utterances of the Honorable the Premier during the passage of the Bill through the House, clearly indicate the intention of Parliament. You state in your memo. that the board cannot accept the view put forth by this department. It is pointed out, however, that the question is not what the board can accept, but what is the correct reading of the law. The question once havillg been decided by the proper authority,

2222 Supply. [ASSEMBL Y.] Mr. R. H. Dawson.

t., Parliament, it is presumed the board would be guided by the law. . . . . The board refer to certain hard cases. Whether they are so or not is not to the point at present, but it may be remarked that the resort to extra­ordinary expedients by the board to relieve snch cases is bound to lead to much greater injustice and discontent than a proper com­pliance with the law. Iwouldfurtherpointollt, with reference to Colonel Couchman's remark as to Mr. Dawson being placed in a cul-de-sac, that his successor would be apparently in the same position, and would inquire if the same course is to be followed as regards the new occupant as is proposed in Mr. Dawson's case. If so, as seems to be assumed, I would point out that such a practice would be highly objection-able." . He desired to repeat that he did not blame Mr. Dawson, who was an excellent officer, in any way for seeking further preferment; but he thought that, in justice to the officers -of the Customs department, this was a case in which Parliament ought to put its foot down, unless it wanted to disorganize the w hole public service.

Mr. PATTERSON said there was no doubt that the department had a very excel­lent officer in Mr. Smart. Another vacancy had recently occurred, which had enabled them to settle the matter in a way that had given perfect satisfaction in the department. (Mr. Langridge-" It has only been done within the last twe or three days, if at all.") The dep~rtment had retained the services of Mr. Smart in a position where it was desirable to have them, and had also got Mr. Dawson back again, so that now -there was a supremely good staff of landing ·surveyors-a very desirable acquisition, be­cause upon that staff the revenue very largely depended. (Mr. Langridge-" Will Mr. Smart and the other officers get their promotion ?") He wa.s not concerned about promotions, as that was a matter for the Public Service Board to deal with. A Minister could do what he liked within his {)wn department in the way of transferring .officers from one position to another in the same class, but when it came to a question .of promotion that rested with the Public Service Board. The Crown Law department advised that the Public Service Board had the legal right to nominate Mr. Dawson for the position of landing surveyor, and although he (Mr. Patterson) had written a memorandum to the board to the effect that Mr. Smart was thoroughly qualified for the position, and that the officers at present in the department were likely to be the most serviceable, having mastered the details of the new tariff, he was not sustained on the law, and he did not want to take up

a position or hostility to the Public Service Board, or to assume a function which clearly belonged to the board. Nobody w()uld be injured by the arrangement that ha.d been made. (Mr. Langridge-" Oh yes, there is a vacancy, and a man from outside the department is brought in to fill it, thus stopping the promotion of other officers.") The public service must be regarded as a whole; and he could assure the honorable member that he had not heard any complaints in the office about the arrangement, and that everything was work­ing smoothly and amicably.

Mr. MUNRO said he would like to offer just one remark with regard to the state­ment of the Minister of Customs, that the public service must be regarded as a whole. The honorable gentleman was, of course, aware that a measure amending the Public Service Act was passed last seesion, and it was distinctly understood that if there was an officer in a department who had the qualifications to take a position that became vacant in that department, he should get it in preference to an officer from another department. In fact, that was specially pro­vided for in the amending Act, and there­rere the Minister was not justified in saying that, in filling up vacancies of this kind, the public service must be regarded as a whole, nor was it right to give the promo­tion to a man from another department.

Mr. MOUNTAIN stated that Mr"1 Dawson did not leave the Customs depa.rt-' ment of his own accord. (Mr. Graves­" He was ordered out of it.") He was re­quested to take the position of inspector of stores, but at the same time given to under­stand that it would not affect his promotion in the Customs department. Mr. Dawson was an excellent officer, and he believed that his return to the Customs had given general satisfaction to the officers of that depart­ment.

Sir B. O'LOG HLEN expressed the opinion that the honorable member for Col­lingwood (Mr. Langridge) had made out 8

pretty good case for Mr. Smart, but he wished to mention that, some years ago, in connexion with the great commercial frauds that took place in Melbourne, he (Sir B. O'Loghlen) prosecuted on behalf of the Crown, and he could testify that one of the best officers engaged in getting up those cases was Mr. Dawson; indeed, a great deal of the practical success of those prosecutions wa:s undoubtedly due to that officer. If the Minister of Customs would take the trouble

Supply. [OOTOBER 23.] Alfi'ed G1'aving Docle. 2223

to look into the matter he would find that Mr. Dawson had a good record.

Mr. GRAVES said that Mr. Dawson was appointed inspector of the stores de­partment by the Public Service Board with­out his own wishes being consulted, and now that a vacancy had occurred he was entitled to the promotion. (Mr. Lang­ridge-" He got his promotion; don't make any mistake/') The Minister had stated that the friction which did exist in the d.e­partment had ceased, and that an arrange­ment had been made satisfactory to all parties. Mr. Smart was a very good officer, but there was no better officer in the service than Mr. Dawson, who ought not to suffer for an action of the Public Service Board to which he was not a consenting party.

Mr. LANGRIDGE remarked that the honorable memberfor Delatitewas evidently labouring under a mistake. Mr. Dawson was not suffering, because when he was removed from the Customs department he got promotion, taking a higher rank and a higher salary; and although his coming back to the Customs did not give Mr. Dawson a better position, it debarred several men from the promotion to which they had been looking forward for years. One officer had been in the department for 30 years, 'and just at the time he expected to get his promotion Mr. Dawson was brought ba:ck to the Customs, so that he was doomed to disappointment.

The vote wa,s agreed to.

PORTS AND HARBOURS.

On the vote of £26,642 to complete the vote (£40,368) for ports and harbours and immigration,

Sir B. O'LOGHLEN suggested that 'harbour trusts should be established to im­prove and mana.ge the principal ports and harbours in the colony other than the port of Melbourne, and that a certain portion of the revenue shC!>uld be given to those trusts to be used in the management and improvement of the harbours, which would be best brought to a state of efficiency by appointing local harbour trusts to look after them.

Mr. PATTERSON said he thought that, as a matter of policy, the Government would be very glad to have all the principal ports and harbou!s of the colony-Geelong, Port Fairy, and W arrnambool- managed by local harbour trusts, if trusts could carry on the work by means of the fees obtained' from the shipping, but there was a loss in connexion with all harbours. .(Sir B.'

O'Loghlen-" The trusts might be granted a share of the general revenue.") The suggestion of the honorable member for Port Fairy was certainly worth considering, and he would be happy to bring it under the notice of the Government.

LIGHT-HOUSE KEEPER. Mr. BAKER expressed the opinion that

some consideration should be given to light­house keepers with young families, who ought not to be sent to out of the way places where their children could not attend school.

Mr. P A1. TERSON observed that the occupation of a light.house keeper was of a peculiar character, and when a man under­took the position he was necessa!ily cut off from society. The light-house keepers were removed from place to place in rotation, because it was such a lonely life that it was not desirable to keep any of them in one place too long at a time. (Mr. Baker­" Some of them have not got young chil­dren, and there is less objection to sending them to isolated places like Wilson's Pro­montory.") He would take into consideration any case of hardship that was brought under his notice, but he could not undertake to provide the means of education for the families of light-house keepers.

ALFRED GRAVING DOCK. Mr. W. T. CARTER asked why the

Minister of Customs had not carried out his promise in connexion with the enlargement of the Alfred Graving-dock at Williams­town? It was a matter of national concern.

Mr. PATTERSON stated that tlie dock was capable of accommodating the largest ships afloat, if they did not draw too much water to prevent them getting over the sill. At the time it was first proposed to enlarge the dock it was ex­pected that new ships would be constructed of greater size in future, but since then shipbuilding opinion had been decidedly against lengthening ships, so that the expected necessity for the enlargement of the dock had not occurred, and was not likely to occur.

Mr. W. T. CARTER remarked that a plan was submitted to· the Minister not merely for an enlargement of the Alfred Graving-dock but for the purpose of prac­tically making two docks. The dock cost something like £300,000, and it was a. really splendid work, and thoroughly equipped with the best machinery, but, unfortunately, it was lying almost idle;

2-224 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] A.lfred G1'aving Dock.

and why was it not used as it ought to be? Because it would pay owners of Melbourne vessels to send their ships to Sydney to have them docked and cleaned rather than take advantage of the great white elephant that the Government had at Williamstown. For seven years past the revenue of the dock had not paid the interest on tIle cost of its construction, ana in the interests of the colony the Government should devise some policy which would bring the dock into more general use. Could it be true that private interests stood in the way of the proper utilization of this great national property? Private docks in Melbourne had not the same mean!!! of accommodation as were provided in the Alfred Graving-dock;

. and as the iron vessels now in almost general use needed constant cleaning, it seemed unwise to maintain such a high s"ale of charges as to make it cheaper to send ships to Sydney to be docked than to dock them in Melbourne.

Mr. ZOX asked the Minister of Customs if the statement of the honorable member for Williamstown, that vessels could be docked at Sydney at a less cost than they could be docked in Melbourne, was in accordance with the facts as they were known to the department? (Mr. W. T. Carter-" Vessels can be docked in Sydney at half the charge which is made at Wil­liamstown.") The Minister ought to ex­plain what was the reason for that great difference in the scale of charges. The question was one of vital importance, be­cause it was desirable that Melbourne should not be behind other ports in the matter of dock accommodation.

Mr. PATTERSON said the Alfred Graving-dock was an admirable adjunct to the port of Melbourne, and the harbour of the metropolis of this colony would be a long way behind other harbours if there was not some accommodation of that kind. It was hardly fair to say, taking a broad view of the matter, that the dock involved the loss to the colony which some people calculated. He believed there was some difference. between the dock charges here and in Sydney, but he did not think that the difference was so great as had been stated. (Mr. W. T. Carter-" A shipping firm told me there is a difference of 50 per cent.") There ought, certainly, not to be such a difference as to induce ship owners to send their vessels to Sydney to be docked instead of docking them here. He would make further inquiry into the matter, and before the estimates of his department

were reported he would bring down II

comparative statement showing the dock charges here and in Sydney.

Mr. MOUNTAIN observed that, while formerly ships which drew more than 14· feet could not come up the Yarra, now that the Melbourne Harbour Trust had deepened. the channel, vessels drawing 22 feet could come up the river and get the same accom­modation in the Yarra as they could get at Williamstown, and this was of course de­trimental to the revenue from the Alfred Graving-dock. Ship owners were not likely to dock their vessels at Williamstown when they could get accomodation in the Yarra, and he might mention that there were going to be increased depths for docking accom­modation up the river.

Mr. W. T. CARTER asked the Minister of Customs to take into considera­tion the case of a watchman who was employed in safeguarding the AUred Grav­ing-dock for twelve hours at a stretch every night, Sunday night included. Although the man wished to attend church he was prevented from doing so. It might be said tha.t his work was only watchman's work,. and that the man had simply nothing to do, but it was a very responsible position; he was obliged to be in constant motion from one part of the property to another; and he had his twelve hours beat to walk, night after night, from one year's end t~ another. The man had made representa­tions to the department about the matter, but he had obtained no relief. (Mr. Pat­terson-HI will inquire into the case.") He had also to bring under the attention of the Minister the case of a man named Rogers, who was taken from the Railway depart­ment some years ago, put in the position of engine-driver in one of the branches of the Customs department, and, after having been there for some time, unceremoniously sent back to the Railway department, losing status in consequence. The man felt that he had suffered a grave injustice. He would furnish the particulars of the case to­the Minister with a request that, if possible, the honorable gentleman would see that justice was done.

The vote was agreed to, as was also the vote of £990 to complete the vote (£1,485) for the mercantile marine office.

BEER.

On the vote of £9,481, to complete the vote (£14,221) for distilleries and excise,

Mr. GRAHAM remarked that an unduly large quantity of sugar was llsed in the

Supply. [OCTOBER 23.J Beel·. 2225,

distilleries instead of barley, and in the breweries instead or hops. In fact the brewers and distillers were gradually snuff­ing out the farmer's industry altogether, and they were also snuffing out another large industry, that or malting. Although there was more beer brewed in this colony now than ever there was before, less malt and hops were used. The Minister ought to take steps to put a stop to the excessive use of sugar in the breweries and distilleries, and the public had a right to demand that the brewers and distillers should brand their beer and spirits in such a way as to let the pevple know what they were drinking. The excessive use of sugar and chemicals in place or malt and hops deprived the fatmers of not less than £100,000 per year. It had almost killed the hop industry in the northern districts, and there could be no question that the drinking of such spirits and beer as were now produced in this colony increased the number of criminals and lunatics in the prisons and asylums.

Mr. FERG USON expressed the opinion that something should be done to abate this nuisance, as he would call it-a nuisance which ought not to be allowed to exist. He had a communication on the subject from a number of his constituents, who were among the principal hOJ:>-growers in the Bright district, and strange to say the first signature was that of a brewer. The letter was as follows:-

"Bright, 14th July, 1890. "DearSir,-'Ve, the undersigned hop-growers

in the Bright district, will esteem it a great favour to us if you will support Mr. Graham and co-operate with him in his endeavours to compel brewers to use malt and hops in the manufacture of their beer. We are also of opinion that Mr. Patterson's reply to Mr. Graham will not assist in restoring the present depressed state of the hop market to a sound condition. Many of us have two crops on hand, and thus know from experience that, for the last eighteen months, the demand for hops has been that small as to be quite phenomenal. If this state of things lasts much longer, and if brewers are allowed to use substitutes, the industry of hop-growing must collapse, which means that the greatest labour-producing agri­cultural pursui~ in the colony must cease for all tinle, to the great detriment and loss to thousands of industrious workers."

The first signature attached to the letter was thut of Mr. vVillia.m Hooper, the owner of the Bright brewery, who used nothing but pure hops, and wanted other brewers to be compelled to do the same. He had also received from another of his constituents ~he following letter:-

SES. 1890.-7 T

"Anglesea, E,-erton, 19th June, 1890. "DearSir,-vVill you kindly inform me whether

there is an inspector of breweries or not in this colony? If not, could you not bring in a small Bill to have inspectors created, as I believe that the beer made in Melbourne is not made of malt and hops, but of quassia, &c. I cull this paper from the .Age commercial article of the 13th of June, 1890, which is, in itself, a sufficient reason for appointing inspectors to look after the brewers. I believe the substitutes they use in making beer is filling the gaols and lunatic asylums of the colony with thieves and lunatics. Such a state of things should not be tolerated by any Government of a civilized Christian country. W'hy should brewers be allowed to poison the community wholesale? I am fully certain that the brewers a,re not using hops much, as the quantity of hops in Melbourne is decreasing very slowly while the output of beer is very large."

'He would read t.he newspaper ext.ract referred to in that communication. It was as follows :-

"Our contention has always been that it is not in the direction of illCreased duties, but rather in the prevention of the use of substitutes, that the protection of our hop industry lays. In the evidence given before the committee of the House of Commons, appointed to inquire into the decline of the hop industry in England, Mr. M. Algernon Adams, of the Chemical Society, and president of the Society of Public Analysts, stated that there was a great distinction between the bitters of hops and the bitters of hop sub­stitutes. The one was a fugitive bitter and the other was a fixed bitter. The bitter of sub. stitutes paralyzed the organs of taste, so that for a considerable time after taking them these organs could not perform their office. The fugitive bitters had not anything like so pene­trating, an effect, and the effect lasted but a short time. By a simple chemical treatment the fugitive bitters were removed, but the fixed bitters remained aftel' chemical treatment. The constituents of the hop were good as food, but the constituents of quassia and its allies were physic, and might produce vomiting. He had analyzed 30 specimens, which he exhibited in phials. In answer to Sir H. Roscoe, he said he had kept the results to himself for some years) and he would be willing to tell the honorable member privately the reason why. Mr. Allen, analytical chemist, practising in London and Sheffield, admitted that he had recanted opinions held by him in 1888, and he now agreed with Mr. Adams that the presence of hop sub­stitutes could be detected. The attention of those interested in the Victorian hop industry should be given to the evidence now being taken in England."

That showed plainly how injurious tl1e in­gredients in question were. In a protective colony like Victoria surely hop-growing' ought to be regarded as entitled to equaL protection with other industries. Again, why should there not be inspectors of' breweries as well us inspectors of distilleries" so that people could feel sure that the bee 1·

supplied to them was a sound article?

2226 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] J[aTine Bow'd.

Mr. BAKER expressed the opinion that the use of sugar instead of barley in brewing was a much more serious matter, for the colony did not grow sugar at all while it produced barley in large quantities. During the last four years the use of sugar in brew­eries had cost the farmers of Victoria nearly a quarter of a million of mouey. He would also urge on the Minister of Customs that the sooner legislation was adopted in order to secure purity in the articles of food placed on the market the better it would be for the community as a whole. "

Mr. McLEAN contended that every possible encouragement should be given to hop O'rowing, because there was no other indu~ry of the kind that afforded so much employment, and that, too, ~t a tin~e when employment was most reqUlred." To grow hops successfully involved an outlay of at least £40 per acre per annum, and the labour in connexion with it was of such a character that old men, women, and even children could share in it. He quite agreed with the doctrine that it was most desirable to discourage the use of deleterious ingredients in the manufacture of beer, but the plan he would adopt would be to l¢t brewers use whatever ingredients they chose so long as they were not injurious. At the same time he would require them to label their casks, or other vessels, with the names of the articles employed in producing the contents. The public could then please themsel ~es as to what they would buy. He was satIsfied, however, that they were not likely to knowingly patronize very largely beer that was not made from malt and hops alone.

Mr. ZOX said the community ought to feel considerably indebted to the members or the temperance party who had, like the honorable member for Lowan, endeavoured to impress the House with the importance or supplying people with good beer. He was certain that the brewers of Melbourne would not at all object to the plan indicated by the honorable member for Ovens, for every honorable man in the trade would be certain to regard the arrangement as a protection.

Mr. PATTERSON stated that he had been furnished with a report, which went to show that the abuse several honorable mem­bers had referred to was not so great as they seemed to suppose. The document was too long to read, but he would hand it to the press for publication.

The vote was agreed to, as was also the vote of £1,374 to complete the vote

(£3,088) for powder magazines and the dynamite hulk.

FISHERIES.

On the vote of £2,407, to complete the vote (£3,120) for fisheries, "

Mr. J. HARRIS asked what was being done with respect tothe£2,000 bonus offered for the encouragement of the fishing in­dustry of the colony?

Mr. PATTERSON stated that several inquiries had been made on the subject by different private individuals, but the bonus offered did not seem sufficient to induce them "to engage in the enterprise in ques­tion. The amount ought to be very much larger.

The vote was agreed to.

MARINE BOARD.

On the vote of £1,915, to complete the vote (£4,310) for the Marine Board,

Mr. HALL asked for information as to the action the Government intended to take on the letters sent to them by the Marine Boat'd with reference to the bridge about to be erected over the Goulburn, near N agambie? If this bridge was built ac­cording to the present design, it would block the navigation of the river.

Mr. PATTERSON stated that the matter would be more properly dealt with when the estimates in connexion with the Public Works department were under con­sideration.

The vote was agreed to, llS was also the vote of £243 to com plete the vote (£2,083) for miscellaneous (Customs department).

The resolutions were reported to the House.

RAILWAYS STANDING OOMMITTEE.

Mr. MUNRO (in the absence of Mr. BUTTERLY) begged to be allowed to give notice of motion with reference to a line of railway from Scarsdale Junction to Bal­larat Race-course.

The SPEAKE R.-Perhaps the House will allow the motion to be moved at once.

Mr. MUNHO moved-"That the following line of railway be

referred to the parliamentary standing com­mittee on railways for consideration and report, viz. :-Scarsdale Junction to Ba.llarat Race­course."

The motion was agreed to.

The House adjourned at ten minutes to eleven o'clock, until Tuesday, 28th October.