/
19010530_reps_1_1.xml
5977 lines (5977 loc) · 468 KB
/
19010530_reps_1_1.xml
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<hansard xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.1" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<session.header>
<date>1901-05-30</date>
<parliament.no>1</parliament.no>
<session.no>1</session.no>
<period.no>0</period.no>
<chamber>REPS</chamber>
<page.no>482</page.no>
<proof>0</proof>
</session.header>
<chamber.xscript>
<para class="block">House ofRepresentatives. </para>
<business.start>
<day.start>1901-05-30</day.start>
<para class="block">
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker</inline>took the chair at 2.30 p.m. </para>
</business.start>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>482</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SPEECH</title>
<page.no>482</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>Address in Reply. </para>
<para>Debate resumed from the 29th May <inline font-style="italic">(vide</inline> page 431) upon motion by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. W.</inline> H. Groom : - </para>
<quote>
<para>That the following Address, in reply to the speech of His Excellency the Governor-General, be agreed to by this House : - </para>
</quote>
<para>May itplease Your Excellency : - </para>
<quote>
<para>We, the House of Representatives of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, in Parliament assembled, beg to express our loyalty to our Most Gracious Sovereign, and to thank Your Excellency for the gracious Speech which you have been pleased to address to Parliament. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">Uponwhich <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Joseph</inline> Cook had moved, by way of amendment - </para>
<quote>
<para>That the following words bc added to the proposed amendment : - " We desire, however, to inform Your Excellency that in our opinion the proposals of the speech regarding the question of what has been termed a white Australia are inadequate, and not iu accord with the views of the majority of the Australian people. " </para>
</quote>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>482</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- The State of Queensland is in a very unfortunate position to-day, and will doubtless suffer inconvenience for some years to come, through the great error of judgment which was made by the Ministry of the day in not allowing her to be represented at the second great Con vention which drafted the Constitution under which this Parliament has been elected. Many of the inhabitants pf Queensland, and, indeed, many of her public men and the writers in her press, are to-day in comparative ignorance as to what transpired at the Convention, and at the meeting of Premiers which was held subsequently. Western Australia, by being represented in the Convention, was able to obtain concessions which are of vast importance to her, and if Queensland had been represented she also might have done so, and secured the existence of her great sugar-producing industry by maintaining, for a time at least, the existing conditions of labour. We were, however, placed atadisadvantage, because thehead of the Government of the day determined that we should not be represented at the Convention, primarily - and </para>
</talk.start>
<para class="block">I say it unhesitatingly - because he was not a federalist. </para>
<para>An HONORABLE Member. - Why did not the honorable gentleman advocate it <inline font-style="italic">1</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>483</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate>KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDONALD</name>
</talker>
<para>- PATERSON.- I did advocate it, mid it is because I have advocated federation that I am here to-day. Although I was not a member of the Government, I did all I could, by reasonable and respectful remonstrance, to secure the representation of Queensland at the Convention. But I wish to ask the House for its kindly consideration and liberal interpretation of our circumstances on other grounds than the fact that we were not represented at the Convention, whenever within the next year or two questions affecting our great State arise to be dealt with ; though I have not come here to advocate, as some who have already spoken have done, the confinement of our political vision to the particular State from which we each come. I am here to advocate the taking of the broadest views possible, to secure the good of the whole Commonwealth without forgetting any part of it. I do not intend to refer to the various matters mentioned in the GovernorGeneral's speech in the order in which they occur there ; I shall deal with them as they occur to me, and, as I am still suffering from bronchial trouble, the state of my health demands that I shall be brief. In the first place, I should like to advert to what has fallen from the lips of some honorable members in regard to the proposed Inter-State Commission. It has been alleged by some that, if the commission is appointed, its powers and authority will be practically null and void. Others say that the commission will have nothing to do. Others, again, say that what it may do is likely to be harmful, while others allege that the purposes for which it was intended that the commission should be created cannot be given effect to under the provisions of the Constitution. I assert, however, that the appointment of an Inter - State Commission was regarded throughout Australia as essential to federation. It was intended that the commission should harmonize the rates of freight charged on the railways of the different colonies, and that the policy of " beggar my neighbour " which has been adopted by Victoria, Queensland, and New South Wales should be abolished at once and for ever. Has it not been a scandal that the New South Wales railways should have been carrying goods to Riverina, and taking away productions from that district in competition with the railways of Victoria <inline font-style="italic">1</inline> Is it not u fact that the same State has addressed itself to the reduction of rates and the establishment of favoritism in regard to railway charges in connexion with the trade on her northern borders <inline font-style="italic">1</inline></para>
</talk.start>
<para>An Honorable Member. - Queensland has been doing the same thing. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>483</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4E</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CONROY, Alfred</name>
<name role="display">Mr Conroy</name>
</talker>
<para>- The stupid politicians here would not let New South Wales produce come into Victoria. They drove away trade from Melbourne. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>483</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KPM</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCCAY, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr McCay</name>
</talker>
<para>- We do not call other people stupid. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>483</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate>KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDONALD</name>
</talker>
<para>- PATERSON. - The Inter-State Commission was, I thought, to be appointed to remedy these parochial evils. I think, however, that the members of the commission should number five instead of three, so that each State may be represented upon it. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para>An Honorable Member. - There are six States in the union. </para>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>483</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate>KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDONALD</name>
</talker>
<para>- PATERSON.Tasmania is not very much interested in this matter; but all the States which are interested should be represented. It is quite time that the InterState robbery and thriftlessness to which I have referred should cease. The railway authorities of the States have in the past been carrying produce at rates lower than the actual cost of haulage, in order to compete for the trade of their neighbours; and I hope that the Government will take steps to appoint an Inter-State Commission to carry out the purposes for which that commission is provided for in the Constitution, and will see that all necessary powers and authority are vested in it. A minor matter to which I wish to refer is the choice of a site for the federal capital. It has been suggested that the federal capital should -be built somewhere out in the wilderness, amongst the gumtrees which surround Mount Kosciusko; but I think we should not be in a hurry to choose a site. When the Premier of New South Wales was over here the other day, I and other honorable members had a conversation with him about the matter, and we ascertained that he did not regard it as one which should be unduly hurried. It has been contended that the question of climate is a strong reason for selecting a particular site ; but I hold that nearness of population should be a much more important consideration. Most of us come from warm latitudes ; very few of the members of either the Senate or the House of Representatives come from cold climates. ' If Providence spares me to continue a member of this Parliament, I do not want to be sent to a cold climate. I should like the federal capital to be situated somewhere near the sea- - -within an hour or an hour and a half's journey, by the most modern and expeditious electric tramway from some lake or harbor - so that our families may live near the sea when the severe winds of summer are blowing. We all acknowledge that the population of Victoria is at a stand-still. To use the phrase of a squatter, Victoria is stocked up ; it cannot carry any more people. But Victorians need not grumble at this, because their sons and daughters are almost countless in Queensland, and it is their energy and capital which have been the means of making Queensland a second Victoria. In Queensland we have the men and women and the money too. They have valiantly battled with the wilderness in Queensland, as the people in the mallee scrub have also battled with adverse conditions. They are the right sort of people for Queensland. With their capital and their indomitable enterprise and perseverance they have contributed largely to establish the position Queensland at present occupies among the Australian States. As to the federal capital, there is a beautiful piece of land available near Armidale, not very far from the Queensland border. The climate is lovely, and there is every comfort, with plenty of fishing and shooting for those who are fond of sport. It is a moderate distance from Port Macquarie. I think that land should be reported upon before we finally adopt any site for the capital. Though Victoria is alleged to be. standing still in the matter of population, New South Wales has not taken such a very big jump after all. One honorable member last night went back 30 years, and spoke of the earlycondition of Victoria. I never heard anything so nonsensical. There is no comparison whatever between the position of "Victoria now and then. The comparison was founded upon a most unjustifiable juxtaposition of circumstances. Take the condition, of Queensland when, on leaving Victoria, I entered it in 1861. I do not think that State had 35,000 people then. She now has over 500,000, thanks to Victoria, and to her liberal system of immigration. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>484</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4E</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CONROY, Alfred</name>
<name role="display">Mr Conroy</name>
</talker>
<para>- Immigration forced on her. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>484</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- No, voluntary immigration. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>484</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4E</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CONROY, Alfred</name>
<name role="display">Mr Conroy</name>
</talker>
<para>- Many persons were driven away from Victoria. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>484</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate>KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDONALD</name>
</talker>
<para>- PATERSON.- I am as intimate with Victoria as is any man living. I have been in most parts of it. I was many years ago at Cooper's Creek, where Burke and Wills were lost ; and with regard to Australia generally, I have read nearly every book on the exploration of the continent, including the works of <inline font-weight="bold">Sir John</inline> Forrest ; so that, where I have not been myself, I have had the brains of explorers to rely on for my information. Consequently, I am speaking as a man as intimate with Victoria and New South Wales as I am with my own State. I am likewise thoroughly, familiar with the conditions and history of South Australia. I touch upon this point for the purpose of saying that I believe the people of Queensland are in no hurry about the adoption of any particular territory. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>484</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDonald</name>
</talker>
<para>- That is not so; let the honorable member speak for himself. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>484</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am speaking for the largest constituency in the State. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>484</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4N</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FISHER, Andrew</name>
<name role="display">Mr Fisher</name>
</talker>
<para>- I represent the largest constituency in Queensland, reckoning <inline font-style="italic">the</inline> numbers of electors. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>484</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate>KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDONALD</name>
</talker>
<para>- PATERSON.There might be a difference of a dozen or two in the honorable member's favour. I hope influence will be brought to bear on the Government of New South Wales to send <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Oliver</inline> or some other gentleman to report upon the beautiful territory to which I have referred, with its excellent climate, and with so much Government land available. In the near future, the population of Queensland and New South Wales will be almost double that of Victoria and South Australia. Consequently, we must look to the future in this matter. The Governor-General's speech says - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>Bills for the firm restriction of the immigration of Asiatics and for the diminution and gradual abolition of the introduction of labour from the South Sea Islands will be laid before you. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">With that paragraph in the speech I cordially concur. It is simple and to the point and it represents public opinion in Queensland. Whatever may be the prevalent opinion in Victoria and New South Wales, the declaration made in the GovernorGeneral's speech is exactly what the people of Queensland desire. There are some who, through their representatives in this House, want to discontinue the use of the labour of the South Sea Islanders instanter. What harm has kanaka labour done to Australia ? On the other hand, has it not done much good for the other States ? Have we not sent sugar to Adelaide and brought back flour and wheat ? Have we not sent sugar to Victoria and brought back oats, hay, and other produce? The ramifications of this question are so important that to strangle kanaka labour instanter, would be to hurt, not only Queensland, but also the other States. The shipping trade would also be injured. The importance of different ports of call would be diminished, and a vast difference would be made to labour in many directions, - in the production of coal, for example, and in connexion with the vest mercantile marine we have upon our coasts. I should like to inform honorable members that there was not a single patch of cane grown in Queensland when I became one of the colonists of that State in my youth. I have grown up with the industry and have constantly watched it. I have had two or three of the islanders in my own employment. They were shipwrecked men ; and I found them docile and cleanly, and their habits were as correct as I could desire. They took their baths as regularly as any white man. In their work they were competent, and their habits were simple. The legislation in Queensland narrowed down the employment of kanaka labour on the plantations to very little indeed. The few who are now employed cannot trouble us much. A kanaka is not allowed, for instance, to drive a horse and dray. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>485</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KNJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MAUGER, Samuel</name>
<name role="display">Mr Mauger</name>
</talker>
<para>- I saw them doing it a few clays ago. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>485</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate>KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDONALD</name>
</talker>
<para>- PATERSON. - Then somebody in authority must have winked at it. Why did not the honorable member give information, and cause a prosecution to take place ? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>485</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KNJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MAUGER, Samuel</name>
<name role="display">Mr Mauger</name>
</talker>
<para>- I saw no less than five kanakas doing it. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>485</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDonald</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is repeatedly done. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>485</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Of course, we have what are called free men in Queensland. They are able to obtain a ticket or some evidence that they are not to be compelled to return to the islands, and they are as free as I am to live at their own homes. The abolition of the kanaka traffic is not as simple as it appears to be. Why has there not been competition on the part of white men so as to put an end to the necessity for employing kanaka labour <inline font-style="italic">1</inline> Many of the planters would prefer to employ white labour. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>485</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4S</name.id>
<electorate>PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, Joseph</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOSEPH COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Would white men work for <inline font-style="italic">£6</inline> a year ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>485</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- No, I do not say they would work for that rate of wage. The crassest ignorance prevails concerning the kanaka traffic. Take the evidence of the Royal commission, of which my honorable friend the member for Darling Downs, the ex-Speaker of the Queensland Legislative Assembly, was chairman. The evidence brought before that commission showed clearly that the planters would rather employ white men, and that they employed the nigger or the islander only because they lost by the white labour. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>485</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KHC</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HIGGINS, Henry</name>
<name role="display">Mr Higgins</name>
</talker>
<para>- That was in the southern portion of Queensland, was it not - south of Townsville? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>485</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- There is not much sugar country there. You might as well go to the Melbourne Botanical Gardens and try to grow bananas at a profit. The whole of the sugar area is on the coast, within high-water mark, and these hot climates are totally unsuitable for the labour of the white man. What did Captain Cook do when he was going up the coast ? He called it a second India, and named one of the capes India Head ; and he was right in his judgment. Why does not the white man contend for a white Ceylon, or a white Mauritius? One speaker last night said that Australia will have to annex the islands of the Pacific. What should we do with the islands if .we annexed them, if we had not a particular class of labour to employ there ? I am as anxious for the gradual abolition of this class of labour as is any honorable member, but I say unhesitatingly that it is most un-British to annihilate it by legislation as is suggested by some persons. In Victoria, for example, persons are calling out for a white Australia. What do they know about it % I believe the demand for a white Australia was a political trick to catch votes in tile populous centres of the States. The cry was raised by politicians who were doubtful whether they could win their seats, and they imposed upon certain people. It is rare to find in Melbourne a man who has even been to Sydney. How can such people understand the sugar industry of Queensland <inline font-style="italic">1</inline> Do they think when they reach Brisbane that they have really entered Queensland <inline font-style="italic">1</inline> Why, <inline font-weight="bold">Sir, they</inline> are only at the gate of the paddock. When viewing the trades procession in Melbourne from the steps of Parliament House I saw that there were black skins helping to hold up some of the flags carried by the eight hours men. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para>An Honorable Member. - Perhaps they wei;e coloured for the occasion. </para>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>486</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- No ; they were not blackened for the occasion. The next remark I have to make is that the conclusion of our Queensland people is, that in abolishing coloured labour we should begin where the Asiatic is thickest, and where competition is keenest. We should first take action in Little- Bourke-street, in Melbourne, and in Lower George-street, in Sydney. That is my own opinion, and that of many hundreds of working men who voted for me. I had to face a strong labour constituency, and I got many votes from working men. The respectable wageearner, for whom I claim to speak, is the man who delights to live in a little cottage of Lis own with some land, attached to it, who is proud of his children, and who, at the end of his day's work, goes home, has his bath, and turns out into the fine clear night air of Queensland to enjoy his rest. They are the class of men who voted for the retention of the kanaka for a reasonable period. An honorable member said the other day in regard to this question that he had had certain facts from <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. So-and-so,</inline> who had been there. I beg honorable members not to take the opinion of any one man, or any halfdozen nien. I sincerely hope the Government will not introduce a Bill until they have appointed a Royal commission from both sides of the Chamber, whose duty it will be to let daylight into the whole question and bring up a report in which the full truth will be told. Then let this House and the other Chamber judge for themselves. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>486</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4N</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FISHER, Andrew</name>
<name role="display">Mr Fisher</name>
</talker>
<para>- This House is the Royal commission that will decide the question. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<para>Mi:. MACDONALD-PATERSON.- How can this House be a Royal commission ? Is it not the duty of the Government towards members of this House to place us in possession of the latest information from all sides, and to throw all possible light upon the question? We ask that daylight may be let into it. I am not afraid of that, and if that course were taken all Queensland would be prepared to abide by the result. Every planter in Queensland would be quite willing to abide by the result of such an inquiry, and I strongly urge upon the Government that that course should be taken. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>486</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDonald</name>
</talker>
<para>- Why not abide by the referendum just taken <inline font-style="italic">1</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>486</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- No referendum was taken on the question. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>486</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDonald</name>
</talker>
<para>- Practically, there was, and we secured . three senators at the head of the poll by big majorities. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>486</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- The fiscal question occupied no mean position in the discussion by press, public, and politicians, in Queensland, notwithstanding the statement of the leader of the Opposition that the Tariff did not move that State. The question, has moved Queensland very much, indeed, but in a strong silent sort of way - very strong, notwithstanding, the apparent want of agitation and public prominence'. One of the principal reasons for this is that we have- had a drought in some of our regions for from five to seven years. Where there were millions of sheep and cattle, there are now none. Even native dogs and rabbits have diminished, and the people have fled to the coastal regions to wear out their old clothes and live on credit. Year after year we were hoping, against hope, and having been a commercial man for many years, I have invariably felt the strongest interest in every movement connected with commerce and shipping in. Australia. I have had particular sympathy for those with whom I have been so long associated in Queensland, Victoria, and New South Wales. The cloud that is over us just now indicates a terrible disaster. As to how it has been brought about, I quote several merchants with whom I have had conferences within the last six or eight weeks. Those merchants have stocked up as usual, thinking the volume of business would, when the rain came, be as before ; and so they have been going on from year to year. Their stocks are now immense - far and above what are commensurate with the wants of the country. Hence they are in great difficulty, and I suppose the renewal of bills and continuation of credit has been resorted to ; but in the meantime they are in very great straits. They are over supplied, and I had a letter this morning expressing anxiety as to what the federal duties may be, and the fear that if the Tariff be less than the existing Tariff in Queensland, it will operate most disastrously to holders of stocks in that State. I am in favour of the Tariff being promptly dealt with, and I am also of opinion that the Government should adopt a half-yearly date as from the 1st July next, or thirty-three days hence, when the duties shall begin, or else leave the matter over until next session and let the duties commence on the 1st of January. The merchants of Brisbane and others who have large stocks in the provincial towns and on the coast, do not want the Tariff for years if they can possibly prevent it. They wish naturally to be able to clear their stocks. Their fear is that the duties will be less than those imposed at present in Queensland. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>487</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDonald</name>
</talker>
<para>- More provincialism. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>487</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- -I am giving reasons for the early operation of the uniform Tariff. I do not believe it is going to be a very low Tariff - I know it cannot be a low Tariff- - and there will be a good free list, or I misjudge the Government and this House. Pig iron, for instance, is an item on which a duty cannot be put, seeing it is the bed-rock of all industry ; and there are a host of other things which must be on the free list. Any idea of a uniform Tariff of 10 per cent., or 12^- per cent., or 15 or 20 per cent., is nonsense. The Tariff must be a graded Tariff. I remember trying to obtain a copy of the American Tariff, and ultimately I borrowed one from Colonel Bell, United States consul at Sydney. It was as thick as a family bible, whereas the Queensland Tariff could be put on a sheet of foolscap, and so, I believe, could the Victorian Tariff: But I was very much impressed with the manipulation and scientific mode of dealing with certain articles in the American Tariff. For instance, a log of timber which comes into the United States is charged a certain duty, but if that log be squared, the original duty has to be paid, plus a duty on the labour of squaring it. If the log caine in as flitched timber, the duty has to be paid on the original log, plus duty on the labour which brought it into a flitched state. I hope, however, we shall have nothing of that kind in the Commonwealth Tariff, and that the clause on this subject in His Excellency's speech fairly represents the decision of the Cabinet. I am sure they do not want to mislead us. In the speech we read : - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>The fiscal proposals of any Federal Government must be largely dependent on the financial exigences of the States. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">That is a truism ; it goes without saying. Then we read : - </para>
<quote>
<para>The adoption of the existing Tariff of any one of these States is impracticable, and would be unjust. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">It would be extremely unjust to adopt either the Victorian Tariff or the New South Wales Tariff ; and I refer to those States because we have had no discussion about the Western Australian, the Tasmanian, the South Australian, or the Queensland Tariff. The whole debate seems to have been a haggle as to the development of the two former States under their respective policies. Further we read - </para>
<quote>
<para>To secure a reasonably sufficient return of surplus revenue to each State so as fairly to observe the i intentions of the Constitution, while avoiding the unnecessary destruction of sources of employment, is a work which prohibits a rigid adherence to fiscal theory. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">Even free-traders will admit that. In my opinion, free-trade means no Customs house at all ; have as much direct taxation as you please, and there are hundreds of ways of taxing people. But if we are to retain the Customs house, the Tariff must be such as will realize from luxuries as much" as possible without diminishing consumption ; duties should at the same time be placed on certain articles, the introduction of which will assist the employment of labour. As to free-trade in New South Wales - I am at liberty to give names to any honorable members if they be wanted - for the last 30 or 35 years I have had buggies built at two establishments. They were of particularly excellent workmanship, and could be relied on. One of these manufacturers the other day said to me - "We had 160 men and boys employed under the Dibbs Tariff, and they increased to 250, but now we have not sixteen men and boys employed, and we are simply a repairing shop for American rubbish." I will not refer to other things, such as boots and shoes, but will only mention, as an instance, that in Queensland we have factories which produce every month scores of buggies as good as any produced elsewhere in the States, and better than those produced in America. I never come to Melbourne and go to St. Kilda but that I admire, for their splendid style, the two-wheelers and four-wheelers I see on the road. In my opinion, a better article is got here for less money than in America ; and that is the result of the development caused by reasonable protection ; whereas the coach-building and carriagebuilding industry in New South Wales has gone bung - -it is dead. I will not trouble the House with any more observations about the Tariff.. I have said sufficient to indicate that I am, what may be termed, a moderate protectionist. But I am inclined to be very conservative in the number of the articles we protect ; I do not want any "hothouse " plants started here. I am not in the secrets of the Ministry ; but I am sure the majority of the House, when the Tariff is introduced, will approve of it. A clause in His Excellency's speech expresses the hope that a common penny postage system and a common telegraph rate will be established in the Commonwealth ; but I have not the slightest hope of either, and do not think either practicable. We must have the zone system for telegrams. If the cost of the telegraph wires and the different establishments in towns were capitalized and taken at 3 per cent., it would be utterly impossible to obtain the necessary interest if a shilling were charged for a telegram to any part of Australia and the same is the case in regard to penny postage. </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>488</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JOC</name.id>
<electorate>SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BATCHELOR, Egerton</name>
<name role="display">Mr BATCHELOR</name>
</talker>
<para>- It would increase the business very largely. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>488</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- It would increase the business very little indeed, because we have not the distribution of population that they have in Canada and the United States of America. Our telegraph rate in Australia is not onethird of that charged in the United States ; and the charge is lower here than on the Continent of Europe, where it is impossible to get telegrams sent any distance for 3s. the ten words and 3d. per extra word. Indeed, you could not get such messages sent in Europe for twice the money. As to penny postage, I would beg the Government to give the Post and Telegraph department a run of a couple of years at least, and watch the result of Commonwealth administration before any attempt is made to alter the rate. The telegraph rate should be altered and modified, but the postage rate should be twopence. I remember when the postage rate was 4d. between the States ; but my reason for adhering to the present rate of postage is that I think the accounts, if not false, misrepresented the facts. When Postmaster-General for some years I tried to get power to alter the system of accounts, but I was not able to do so. I called attention, however, to the fact that the interest on loan moneys expended by the department - I do not know how it is in other States - are not debited at all. In regard to the railways of Victoria, or those of any other State, the Government can say - " Well, we have earned 3£ per cent., and we know that these railways cost 3^- per cent, on the average." But in the Post and Telegraph department of Queensland, I have not found any debit of interest on the cost of the thousands and thousands of miles of telegraph lines and the buildings in the capital and provincial towns. Although the cost appears on the general vote of the Treasurer, the interest never appears on the departmental accounts, so that any honorable member looking at the report of the Postmaster-General or the Under-Secretary, can see only a statement that the loss for the year had been, say, £166,000, the further loss that lies in the background, represented by the total interest on the moneys expended, being omitted. If we work out the Commonwealth Post-office returns and accounts in the same way as is done in Queensland, the Commonwealth will be building the fabric of cheap postage on an unreliable foundation. This brings me to the great Inter - State railway, which is projected by the member for Swan, and I think I can deal with that measure almost in a sentence. In my opinion, the proposal is fatuous folly, and I wonder the Government have not kept it in check. I suppose it is because the member for Swan has not got used to the collar team, and because the Premier was good enough to overlook the impetuosity of the honorable member's manly character. I believe the cry for a transcontinental railway has done very well in Western Australia, serving, as did the cry about kanaka labour in other colonies, like a trumpet to tickle the ears of the voters. But sane financiers who understand this country will simply say the member for the Swan may blow his trumpet as long as he pleases ; he will not get Parliament to approve of the project. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>489</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KYD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">POYNTON, Alexander</name>
<name role="display">Mr Poynton</name>
</talker>
<para>- Does the honorable member profess to know what is both under and over the land there <inline font-style="italic">t</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>489</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate>KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDONALD</name>
</talker>
<para>- PATERSON. - I do not ; but I say that if the railway is to be constructed it must be constructed by the States owning the land, whatever its value may be. South Australia and Western Australia must combine and make it a joint-State incubus. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>489</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FORREST, John</name>
<name role="display">Sir John Forrest</name>
</talker>
<para>- Would it not be well for the honorable member to reserve his judgment until he gets full information ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>489</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate>KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDONALD</name>
</talker>
<para>- PATERSON.- I am talking of a principle. I wish it to be distinctly understood that my conviction and the conviction of many others is that the Commonwealth must not begin to make railways at this period of its history. If the construction of this railway is to be the price of Western Australia coming within the Commonwealth arena, then I have a proposal to make on behalf of Queensland. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>489</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KYD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">POYNTON, Alexander</name>
<name role="display">Mr Poynton</name>
</talker>
<para>- How would it do to establish the federal capital midway between the two States ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>489</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate>KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDONALD</name>
</talker>
<para>- PATERSON. - That is not the topic under consideration at the present moment. The argument of the Minister of Defence is that the railway will give us our mails so many hours earlier ; but, in these days of cheap cable rates, merchants and others are not so particularly anxious about saving 48 or 50 hours in the delivery of their letters. The importance of such a saving has, to a great extent, vanished during the last ten or fifteen years. But, in coming from Brisbane to Sydney, a person travels twelve hours in the train before reaching the border ; and, when he gets there, he is farther from Sydney than when he started, so that, if the object of the proposed line be to connect the principal cities of two States by a direct route, then Brisbane must have a trunk line also. One travels from Brisbane for nearly fifteen hours before one gets within the distance from Sydney that Brisbane is travelling by steamer through the southern passage. There is a railway that will never carry many passengers. It h a wearisome journey-- </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>489</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FORREST, John</name>
<name role="display">Sir John Forrest</name>
</talker>
<para>- But it does carry a large number of passengers. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>489</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I know that Queensland is losing a good many thousands of pounds a year upon it, and New South Wales must be losing a lot more, because the former State has less mileage. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>489</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KYR</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KIRWAN, John</name>
<name role="display">Mr Kirwan</name>
</talker>
<para>- Surely that is not an argument against the Western Australian railway. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>489</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIQ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MACDONALD-PATERSON, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr MACDONALD-PATERSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is not an argument for it. If the primary purpose be to facilitate speedy transit by the shortest route between the capitals of the various States, the work I have suggested is equally - indeed, it is more - entitled to consideration than is the Western Australian line, because it would pass through far better country. It would go through a settled country with plenty of population. I shall conclude my observations with a reference to the Federal High Court.. Some honorable members have decried the early establishment of a federal High Court. I look upon it - and I am sure the great majority of the common sense men of this country also regard it - as essentia] that this Court should be established as early as practicable. The people look to its establishment as an essential, and they want it established early. I hope, therefore, that when it comes to a question of voting, the Government will have a good majority in support of their proposal. In conclusion, I wish to express my grateful thanks to honorable members for the kindly attention they have given to my somewhat disjointed observations, but being somewhat out of health, I have treated the various points as they occurred to me at the moment. I think, however, that what I have said will give scope for thought, and I trust that my remarks will not be productive of want of harmony between myself and any honorable members who do not quite agree with my views. On the contrary, we are all here, I trust, as loyal Australians - loyal to our own respective States, but essentially loyal to the Commonwealth of Australia - and I hope that the result of our deliberations will be creditable alike to the Commonwealth of Australia and to the various States that have sent us here. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>489</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KU9</name.id>
<electorate>SOUTH AUSTRALIA, SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>FT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SOLOMON, Vaiben</name>
<name role="display">Mr V L SOLOMON</name>
</talker>
<para>- At the risk of continuing this debate somewhat longer than has been anticipated by some honorable members, </para>
</talk.start>
<para class="block">I desire to add my few remarks, which will not be more lengthy than I can possibly help, to those of the many able speakers who have preceded me. I desire first to congratulate the honorable member for Darling Downs, who moved the adoption of the Address in Reply, and the honorable member for Corio, who seconded the motion, upon the very able, tasteful, and tactful terms in which their speeches were couched. I also desire, as an old colleague of your own, sir, in the South Australian Parliament, as one who has been very frequently opposed to you politically, to congratulate you upon the high office to which, by the good will of this House, you have been called. I am sure that no honorable member will ever regret the choice made of our Speaker, and that you, sir, will - as you have done in the smaller arena of State politics - always uphold what is right and what is dignified in the best traditions of past parliaments. We have heard a great deal during this debate upon the leading paragraph in the opening speech ; for I suppose the line of cleavage between the Government side of the House and the opposition side will be that of the fiscal policy. A great deal that we have heard has consisted of <inline font-style="italic">a</inline> comparative examination of the advancement made respectively by the States of New South Wales and Victoria. As a comparative outsider belonging to one of the numerically smaller States, I have listened to the arguments on both sides with a very great deal of interest. With such able speeches before us as those of the honorable member for Bendigo, the honorable member for Wentworth, and the honorable member for Parkes, who spoke last night, I feel that it is somewhat difficult to decide as to the merits of the question as between the different States, and to arrive at a conclusion as to whether the difference in their fiscal policies has been either the sole element in their relative successes, or the principal one. But I am satisfied of this, after some fifteen years or more of experience in the State from which I come - South Australia - that all the prophecies made by the protectionists at the time the present protectionist policy of that State was introduced - prophecies as to the advancement which that State would make and the increased employment which would be found for its people, have been absolutely belied. However, I do not intend to repeat the many able arguments that have been used on both sides of this House by speakers who have made a closer study of the fiscal problem than I have had an opportunity of doing. There are plenty of other subjects touched upon in the address from the Crown which call, I think, for our attention and for careful debate. But, before I leave the question of the fiscal policy, I must say that I am at a loss to understand many honorable members who profess to see no difference between the policy announced by honorable members on this side of the House, who are distinctly in favour of a revenue Tariff and a revenue Tariff only, and the policy announced by the Prime Minister at Maitland, and since incorporated in the Governor-General's speech, of a revenue Tariff in the first place and a semi-protective Tariff in the second. The honorable member for Northern Melbourne professed himself utterly unable to distinguish any difference between the policy of the Government and the policy of the Opposition. This is the same old herring that has been drawn across the fiscal, track by certainly every, protectionist speaker who has addressed himself to the subject - the same little bogey that has been put up at every meeting where protectionists were advancing their theories - at least, at every meeting that I have attended or of which I have read reports either in my own State or in Victoria. These gentlemen say that there is no more difference between the policy of a low Tariff - and we are forced to a low Tariff by the financial necessities of the States - and that of the protectionists, whose modified policy was announced by the Prime Minister, than there is between tweedledum and tweedledee. Now, why a clear-headed equity lawyer, a clear-sighted intelligent man, like the honorable-member for Northern Melbourne, should state that he, above all others, fails to see any difference between these two policies is beyond my comprehension. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>490</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JOC</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BATCHELOR, Egerton</name>
<name role="display">Mr Batchelor</name>
</talker>
<para>- Will the honorable member explain it"? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>490</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KU9</name.id>
<electorate>SOUTH AUSTRALIA, SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>FT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SOLOMON, Vaiben</name>
<name role="display">Mr V L SOLOMON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I think I can explain the difference as it presents itself to my modest intelligence fairly clearly. Up to a certain point there is undoubtedly little difference between the policy of the Barton Government and the policy of the freetraders on this side of the House, who are forced for a time to advocate a revenue Tariff policy. Up to a certain point the difference is indeed slight. That point is this : Under the Barton policy, it is admitted that through the Customs and Excise it is necessary to raise a sum amounting in the aggregate to something like£8,000,000 or £8,500,000 in order to preserve the solvency of the States, and in order that they may receive back from the Federal Government a sum as nearly as possible equivalent to that which they now obtain through their Customs revenue. On this side of the House, the revenue tariffists - free-traders if they could be, but revenue tariffists by force of circumstances, say - " We also admit that the Tariff of federated Australia should be such as will yield a sum of ±"8,000,000 odd, or an equivalent to the amount at present produced by the varying Tariffs of the different States." Up to that point there is no difference, or little difference, between the policy of the Government and that of the Opposition. But, having reached that point, our courses absolutely diverge. There the free-traders and revenue tariffists say - " We stop ; " and there the protectionists say - "Having taken this <inline font-style="italic">£S,</inline> 000, 000 out of the pockets of the general taxpayer for the purpose of the States, we will proceed to enable the owners of factories, those who are interested in the various industries which have been bolstered up for the last 25 or 35 years, to make a further demand upon every taxpayer in the Commonwealth, by giving them a protective Tariff, which, to be of any use, must to a very great extent be prohibitive." So that, to put it as clearly and in as few words as possible, the difference between the two parties in the House is that we on this side propose to tax the people of the Commonwealth only to a point sufficient to yield the revenue required for State purposes, while the Government policy is to tax the people, not to obtain revenue only, but to protect industries which, at this late period, should require no further assistance, and in that way to take an unknown amount out of ' the taxpayers' pockets to put it into the pockets of the manufacturers. Sufficient has been said about the policy of fostering new industries. Somewhat later we heard in the State Parliament of South Australia the old cry that was heard in Victoria 30 years ago - that protection would provide employment for a greater number of our people. But ft close examination of the statistics of South Australia for the- past 10 or 15 years shows that this statement which was made so earnestly, and I believe honestly, by those who advocated protection, has not been borne out. The taxation of the people has increased, but there has been no corresponding increase in employment. But there is one point with reference to the fiscal question that has not yet been touched on either by a member on the Government side of the House or by a member of the Opposition, and it is a point which was carefully avoided by the Prime Minister in making his utterances. The right honorable gentleman when advocating a modified system of protection - I refer to the occasion when he hauled down the protectionist flag to half mast - pointed out that there were certain industries which it would be horrible, and almost scandalous, to cease to protect. He said, to quote the report of his speech which was telegraphed to the leading newspapers of Australia, that he and all his colleagues were protectionists - I think this was before the honorable member from Tasmania, <inline font-weight="bold">Sir Philip</inline> Fysh, became a member of the Ministry and he continued - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>In all the States there has been more or less protection of all the industries that have sprung up, and' men are earning their living by them. Capital is invested in them ; labour is invested in them. Even in New South Wales there is still a duty of .-£3 per ton on sugar to protect that product of our own soil. Are Ave to abolish this protection now, and begin the union by ruining our northern farmers ? </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">A very pretty sentiment for a gentleman seeking election at the hands of the people of New South Wales ! But what a piece of misleading political twaddle it was to tell the northern farmers of New South Wales who are engaged in growing sugar-cane that the Government intend to continue protection for the sugar industry, and at the same time to omit to allude - and I desire to especially emphasize this point - to the necessity for imposing an excise duty upon colonially-grown sugar.. Did not the right honorable gentleman know that while New South Wales produces from 16,000 to 17,000 tons of sugar per annum, Queensland produces 120,000 tons per annum? Did he not know that to protect the northern farmers of New South Wales an excise duty must be placed upon sugar, as otherwise the Queensland sugar, directly a uniform Tariff is imposed by the Commonwealth Parliament, will swamp the local production of New South Wales. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>492</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDR</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">EWING, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr Ewing</name>
</talker>
<para>- Does the honorable member believe that ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>492</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KU9</name.id>
<electorate>SOUTH AUSTRALIA, SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>FT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SOLOMON, Vaiben</name>
<name role="display">Mr V L SOLOMON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I shall quote figures which will induce the honorable member to believe it, too, and no doubt he will have an opportunity to refute my figures if he is able to bring others to beat them. In the year 1898, which is about the date of the latest statistical returns, the production of sugar in Queensland amounted to between 116,000 and 120,000 tons. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para>Mi'. W. H. Groom. - Our production of sugar last year was 163,000 tons. </para>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>492</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KU9</name.id>
<electorate>SOUTH AUSTRALIA, SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>FT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SOLOMON, Vaiben</name>
<name role="display">Mr V L SOLOMON</name>
</talker>
<para>- In 1898 Queensland exported to New South Wales 49,000 tons of sugar, and under the New South Wales Tariff a duty of £3 a ton was paid upon that sugar, producing £147,000 of revenue. Queensland in the same year exported to Victoria 49,000 tons of sugar, which, with a duty of £6 per ton, produced £294,000 of revenue. She also exported to South Australia 15,000 tons of sugar which, with a duty of £3 per ton, produced £4.5,000 of revenue, so that the revenue produced by the importation of Queensland sugar into the other States of the Commonwealth amounted to £486,000. This is no trifling matter, and should not have been passed over without remark by the Prime Minister when he was dealing with such an important question as the fiscal policy of the Commonwealth. I have concluded that at the time of making his speech he had no intention to impose an excise duty upon sugar, though sugar must be considered by free-traders as a fair revenue-producing article. ' </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>492</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDR</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">EWING, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr Ewing</name>
</talker>
<para>- Would the honorable member impose an excise duty upon colonial wines ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>492</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KU9</name.id>
<electorate>SOUTH AUSTRALIA, SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>FT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SOLOMON, Vaiben</name>
<name role="display">Mr V L SOLOMON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I thank the honorable member for the interjection, and I shall deal with his question presently. That the Prime Minister, when speaking at Maitland, had no intention to impose an excise duty upon sugar, appears to me to be manifestly proved by the fact that in his calculation of the financial necessities of the various States he included a sum of a little over £1,000,000 as the amount which would be lost by the establishment of intercolonial free-trade, and included in that amount is the whole of the sugar duties. The Commissioner of Customs is indulging in one of his characteristic smiles. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>492</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KEW</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KINGSTON, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Kingston</name>
</talker>
<para>- I was wondering if the honorable member recognises the difference between a customs and an excise duty. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>492</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KU9</name.id>
<electorate>SOUTH AUSTRALIA, SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party>FT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SOLOMON, Vaiben</name>
<name role="display">Mr V L SOLOMON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Had the Prime Minister intended to impose an excise duty upon sugar he would not have included the £486,000 obtained from sugar duties in the £1,000,000 set down as the loss to be incurred by the establishment of intercolonial free-trade. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>492</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>L2G</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCMILLAN, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir William McMillan</name>
</talker>
<para>- He said in another speech that he would not agree to an excise duty. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>492</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KEW</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KINGSTON, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Kingston</name>