Permalink
Switch branches/tags
Nothing to show
Find file Copy path
Fetching contributors…
Cannot retrieve contributors at this time
6566 lines (6565 sloc) 338 KB
<?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>1905-11-03</date>
<parliament.no>2</parliament.no>
<session.no>2</session.no>
<period.no>0</period.no>
<chamber>REPS</chamber>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<proof>0</proof>
</session.header>
<chamber.xscript>
<para>House ofRepresentatives. </para>
<business.start>
<day.start>1905-11-03</day.start>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker</inline>took the chair at 10.30 a.m., and read prayers. </para>
</business.start>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>IMPORTATION OF OPIUM</title>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate>LANG, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I wish to know from the Prime Minister if he proposes to take steps, before the close of the session, to give effect to the unanimous resolution of the House in regard to the importation of opium? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MD</name.id>
<electorate>BALLAARAT, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role>Minister for External Affairs</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DEAKIN, Alfred</name>
<name role="display">Mr DEAKIN</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yes. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>FEDERAL CAPITAL SITE</title>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JWA</name.id>
<electorate>FREMANTLE, WESTERN AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CARPENTER, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr CARPENTER</name>
</talker>
<para>- In view of. the continued objection on the part of the Government of New South Wales to granting the territory desired by this Parliament for the site of the Federal Capital, is the Prime Minister prepared to consider a proposal for amending the Constitution in such a way as will allow the choosing of the site, and the appropriation of territory in some other State? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DEAKIN, Alfred</name>
<name role="display">Mr DEAKIN</name>
</talker>
<para>- I hope, at the rising of the House, tolay on the table a copy of the reply which I am sending to the letter laid on the table last night. That document will partly answer the honorable member&#39;s question. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSM</name.id>
<electorate>CANOBOLAS, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BROWN, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr BROWN</name>
</talker>
<para>- Has the attention of the honorable and learned gentleman been called to a newspaper paragraph to the effect that the Government of New South Wales are taking steps to cancel the reservations made round Dalgety in connexion with the choosing of the Federal Capital site? If so, has he made any representations to them on the matter? </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DEAKIN, Alfred</name>
<name role="display">Mr DEAKIN</name>
</talker>
<para>- I have made representations, and, in reply to my request, the Premier of New South Wales has consented to defer, for one month, the proposal to cancel the reservations. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXK</name.id>
<electorate>MACQUARIE, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WEBSTER, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr WEBSTER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Has the Prime Minister heard the rumour which is in circulation throughout New South Wales that the action of the Premier of that State in opposing the granting of the territory chosen for the Federal Capital is designed, first, to embitter public feeling against the Commonwealth, and, secondly, to draw public attention from the scandalous revelations now being made before the Lands Commission ? </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DEAKIN, Alfred</name>
<name role="display">Mr DEAKIN</name>
</talker>
<para>- That rumour has not reached this State. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>POSTPONEMENT OF BUSINESS</title>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<type>miscellaneous</type>
</debateinfo>
<para>Motion (by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Deakin)</inline> proposed - </para>
<quote>
<para>That Notice of Motion, No. 1, Government business, be postponed until after the consideration of the Orders of the Day. </para>
</quote>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. JOSEPH</inline>COOK (Parramatta).What are the reasons for postponing this motion ? </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DEAKIN, Alfred</name>
<name role="display">Mr Deakin</name>
</talker>
<para>- Because I hope &#39; to be able, later, to make a full statement of the work to be done on Tuesday afternoon, which, I think, will remove difficulties in the way of its adoption. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4601</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- I think that we should determine the matter in a full House, and not when there are only ten or eleven members present. I strongly urge the Prime Minister to proceed with the motion now. </para>
</talk.start>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. SYDNEY</inline>SMITH (Parramatta).I trust that the Prime Minister will adopt the suggestion of the honorable member for Parramatta. It is very unfair for honorable members to be compelled to deal with a matter of this kind, just as they are being called upon to rush away to catch their trains to other States. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DEAKIN, Alfred</name>
<name role="display">Mr Deakin</name>
</talker>
<para>- Iwill move the motion earlier. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</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>- At what time? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>009MD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">DEAKIN, Alfred</name>
<name role="display">Mr Deakin</name>
</talker>
<para>- Probably at 2 o&#39;clock. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<para>Question resolved in the affirmative. </para>
</speech>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>APPROPRIATION BILL</title>
<page.no>4602</page.no>
<type>bill</type>
</debateinfo>
<para class="block">High Court.- Federal Capital Site. - Personal Explanations. </para>
<para class="block">Motion (by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Deakin)</inline> proposed - </para>
<quote>
<para class="block">That the resolutions reported from Committee of Supply be now adopted. </para>
</quote>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4E</name.id>
<electorate>Werriwa</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>- I wish to call attention to a matter which was not discussed last night, because of the lateness of the hour at which the AttorneyGeneral&#39;s Estimates were dealt with - the need for making some arrangement in connexion with the High Court, which will meet the present urgent position of affairs. The work of that Court is increasing so fast that the present number of Justices is not sufficient to properly cope with it, and if it continues to increase, we shall soon have here the notorious delays which occur in America, where an appeal is at least two years, and sometimes as much as four years, before it is dealt with. Of course, such a congestion of business will not occur immediately. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JWA</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CARPENTER, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr Carpenter</name>
</talker>
<para>- Then why worry about it now? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</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>- Because the matter calls for immediate attention. It is far better that the Justices should be idle half their time than that suitors should not be able to get immediate justice. It is the delay involved in the settlement of cases that is largely responsible for the tremendous expense involved in law suits. Honorable members, knowing that it is unpopular to advocate the appointment of more Justices, wish to shirk this problem. I pointed out, when the Judiciary Bill was before the House, that if the High Court were given all the powers proposed to be conferred on it, not three, but ten Justices would be necessary ; but, fortunately, owing to the representations made by me and a few other honorable members conversant with judicial business, the original jurisdiction proposed to be conferred on the Court was cut down, and consequently the business of the Court is not now as great as if would otherwise have been. The Court, however, has still too much original jurisdiction. We should have confined its work entirely to appellate jurisdiction. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4R</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WATSON, John Christian</name>
<name role="display">Mr Watson</name>
</talker>
<para>- Under the Constitution the High Court must have original jurisdiction in some matters. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</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>- Yes ; but I am speaking of the original jurisdiction which it possesses over and above that required to be given to it by the Constitution. The Court, as at present constituted, cannot satisfactorily carry on its work. I am not now entering into the question whether five Justices would make a better appellate Court than three, though when the matter was before Parliament, I held that if we were going to institute the High Court then, five would be a reasonable number of Justices to appoint. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</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>- Why not ten? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</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>- As I have said, if the original jurisdiction proposed to be conferred on the Court had not been cut down, ten Justices would hardly have been sufficient. I think that the honorable member was one of those who supported an amendment which I moved to cut down the original jurisdiction proposed. At the present time there are not enough Justices to deal with the business of the Court, and it devolves upon Parliament to determine whether the number of Justices shall be increased or the original jurisdiction of the Court reduced. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</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>- Does the honorable and learned gentleman wish for the appointment of more Justices to give greater weight to the decisions of the Court, or because the present Court is not large enough to do the work? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</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 press of work is now so great that the danger of delay occurring is an immediately pressing one. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX9</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRAZER, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Frazer</name>
</talker>
<para>- Does the honorable and learned member think it an anomaly that a High Court of three Justices should reverse the decision of a Full Court of five Judges ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</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>- Perhaps it is sometimes. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXK</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WEBSTER, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr Webster</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is it as a general rule? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</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>- I think that an appellate Court of five Justices would be a fair Court to constitute. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXK</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WEBSTER, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr Webster</name>
</talker>
<para>- Would the honorable and learned member support the appointment of two additional Justices? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4602</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>- Undoubtedly, as matters stand at present. If we adopted the alternative of cutting down the original jurisdiction of the Court it would be quite possible for us to get along with only three Justices; but it is not practicable to continue the Judiciary Act in its present form with such a limited Bench. I should have thought that honorable members or the Labour Party would be the first to favour an increase in the number of Justices. No greater injury could be inflicted upon the community! than to increase the already heavy expenses of litigation. This matter is &#39;clearly one calling for immediate attention. If we pass legislation, we must see that it is properly administered, and we shall fail in our duty if we refrain from applying the remedy merely because it is unpopular to suggest new appointments, or to increase the expenses of the Court. By permitting the present state of affairs to continue, we shall increase the cost to the general community in a hundred ways, and deny to the poorest classes that ready justice to which they are entitled. The law&#39;s delays fall most heavily upon, the poorer classes of the community. We know that if, owing to the lack of a magistrate in a country town, a working man is compelled to wait for three or four weeks in order to obtain a. decision upon his claim, he is put to great loss, and is practically denied justice. As we ascend the scale in connexion with litigation exactly the same difficulty arises. If people find that they cannot readily obtain judicial decisions, they suffer wrong rather than seek a legal remedy. Any mention of &#34;a clearly necessary alteration in the High Court is brushed aside as something unpleasant, and it seems to me that the Government are shirking their dutv because they are afraid of the trouble that would be involved in explaining to the great mass of the people the necessity for strengthening the Bench. I admit that the present situation does not arise from any fault of the Prime Minister, because from the outset he has urged the appointment of five Justices. Experience has shown that it is necessary, apart altogether from the question of strengthening the Court for the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction to have a stronger Bench. The Court will have to carry some of the current year&#39;s business over to next year, and in view of the increasing number of cases demanding its attention, serious delays are bound to ensue. Every honorable member is, I think, conscious that the attitude of honorable members generally towards the Federal Capital Site question is not worthy of the House. The majority have no wish to see the question settled. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX9</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRAZER, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Frazer</name>
</talker>
<para>- I absolutely repudiate that statement. I think that all the obstruction comes from New South Wales. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</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>- I desire to be clearly understood. When I say that the majority of honorable members desire to block the settlement of the Capital Site question, I naturally except the representatives of New South Wales, most of whom are veryanxious to see the Capital established at the earliest possible date. I submit that the Dalgety site would never have been selected if it had not been felt by many honorable members that, its choice would have the effect of delaying a settlement. Not only is the site some distance from any existing railway line, but it has several drawbacks, apart altogether from the rigours of the climate. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</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>- That has all been settled by the Parliament. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</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 Dalgety site is at least thirty miles away from any existing line of railway. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXO</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PAGE, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr Page</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is not that far enough ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</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 honorable member knows that it is a great deal too far away. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXO</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PAGE, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr Page</name>
</talker>
<para>- I voted in, favour of Dalgety, because I thought it was the best site. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</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 honorable member had not that acquaintance with it that many other honorable members possessed. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXO</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PAGE, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr Page</name>
</talker>
<para>- I knew that the honorable and learned member was acquainted with it, and he not only recommended it, but asked me to vote for it. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</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>- I told the honorable member that he should vote for Dalgety in preference to Tooma, because the selection of the latter site would have involved a violation of the spirit of the agreement embodied in the Constitution. I have always argued that the Federal Capital should be situated at some point upon the main railway line between Sydney and Melbourne. It appears to me to be ridiculous to select a site some distance off the trunk line of communication between the two great capitals, and to delay the mails of the whole Commonwealth for half-a-day each way. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr Austin Chapman</name>
</talker>
<para>- Does the honorable and learned member want to reopen the whole subject. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</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>- It will have to be reopened. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4603</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr Austin Chapman</name>
</talker>
<para>- I thought that the honorable and learned member&#39;s leader was satisfied with the settlement arrived at? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</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>- Some of us are prepared to see the Capital established in almost any locality in order to secure a settlement of the question. We complain, however, that, although the Government talk a great deal, they do not evince any sincere desire to bring matters to a head. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</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>- What does the honorable and learned member wish the Government to do? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</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>- I think that they should have consulted the State concerned, especially when 1,000 miles of territory was selected to form the Federal area. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXO</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PAGE, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr Page</name>
</talker>
<para>- Have not the other five States any right to a voice in the matter ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</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 Constitution provides that the Capital shall be situated within the State of New South Wales, and, in the view of some persons, it also provides that the territory shall be selected by the Parliament of that State. <inline font-weight="bold">Sir Edmund</inline> Barton was one of those who, in the initial stages, called upon the Premier of New South Wales to select a territory, and the present Parliament of New South Wales has offered not only one territory, but halfadozen, and has thus given us a very fair choice. All those who really desire to bring about a settlement of this question should be prepared to negotiate upon an amicable basis. The delay in settling this question, combined with the neglect to grant to New South Wales adequate representation, has imposed a perilous strain upon the Federal Union, and if honorable members are not careful they will soon find their business gone. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXO</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PAGE, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr Page</name>
</talker>
<para>- I wish it would vanish tomorrow. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</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>- There is no doubt that this Parliament, by its actions in the past, has brought absolute discredit on the Federation. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Order. The honorable and learned member will see that if it be irregular to make reflections upon individual members, it is most improper to make reflections which will tend to bring the whole House into discredit. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</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>- I regret that the House by its actions has brought discredit on the Federation. I am not condemning the Federal Union itself, but the incapacity of those who have been intrusted with the administration of its affairs. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honorable and learned member is now repeating his offence. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</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>- I am merely pointing out that the present Government and their predecessors have so managed our affairsthat they have brought discredit upon us, not only in regard to all our foreign relationships, but in connexion with our relations to the States. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honorable and learned member is not in order in discussing any matter which is not the subject of a vote upon the Estimates. He would be quite in order in discussing the Federal Capital Site question, but is not at liberty to deal with the general policy of the Government and their predecessors, and the general results, as he views them, of Federal legislation. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</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>- I was about to point out that large sums of money have beenextracted from the public in the form of taxation, and are being devoted to extravagant expenditure. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- If the honorable and learned member had been speaking from that point of view I should not have interrupted him ; but he was out of order im indulging in a general criticism such as I indicated. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</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>- I desire to point out that the irritation which has been created by the policy of t Ke present and previous Governments must of necessity cause a vast increase in our expenditure, because, unless we are able to establish harmonious relations with the States, the cost of carrying on our various Departments will be largely increased. Unquestionably, the Ministry have succeeded in irritating not only everybody outside of this House, but everybody inside of it. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</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>- Is the honorable and learned member endeavouring to calm that irritation by his speech? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4604</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>- A great portion of my time here has been occupied in exposing, the foolish character of our Federal legislation. The Government deserve to be criticised. The majority of its members were members of a previous Administration, and consequently they are to some extent responsible for the Estimates under consideration. We know very well that every occasion upon which the State and Commonwealth, authorities fail to work harmonious! v together, increases the friction which already exists, and consequently adds to our ex- penditure. That is a truism amongst educated persons, but it is not so amongst the great majority of Ministerial supporters. They are unaware that there are such things as social science and social economy. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4605</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Will the honorable and learned member please discuss the question that is before the Chair? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4605</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Do I understand, sir, that you rule that in discussing this motion, an honorable member is not at liberty to debate the relations which exist between the States and the Commonwealth ? It seems to me that under our bookkeeping system every item of supply directly and vitally concerns that question. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4605</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am not attempting to prevent the honorable and learned member from discussing any matter from that aspect. If he will confine his remarks to such questions as the honorable member for Parramatta has indicated he will be perfectly in order. But when he proceeds to discuss the question of whether or not honorable members are acquainted with social science he is going, entirely beyond the scope of the motion. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4605</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>- I &#39;say that a knowledge of social science should be one of the first qualifications of honorable members. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4605</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honorable and learned member is again going beyond the scope of the motion. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4605</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>- Just as it is necessary for a man to study medicine- </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4605</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Order ! Either the honorable and learned member must take the proper course of disputing my ruling or he must obey it. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4605</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>- Then I understand that I am&#34; not at liberty to discuss matters connected with economics at all. If a knowledge of the science of economics should not enter into a consideration of these Estimates I do not know what should. As a matter of fact, I know that it does not. I recognise that we are fast getting back to the system of corvee by which in times past men were compelled to work three or four weeks each year for the King or for the Government. Under our present system of government the taxation imposed upon the people is becoming so great that each year men are called upon to devote to the Government not three or four weeks, but six or seven weeks of labour. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4605</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KVJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">STORRER, David</name>
<name role="display">Mr Storrer</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yet the honorable and learned member wishes to increase the number of Justices of the High Court. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4605</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>- I desire to do so, in order that the expenses of litigation may be diminished, which would be a very good thing. I do not blame the honorable member for failing to understand my point - I sympathize with him. When theJudiciary Bill was under consideration, I pointed out that we ought to invest the High Court with appellate jurisdiction only. Of course, I did not expect the majority of honorable members at that time to see beyond their noses. But now that a case has arisen, I do expect them to recognise, facts. I cannot discuss with the honorablemember for Bass the question of the wisdom or otherwise of investing the High Court with more than appellate jurisdiction, because it is entirely beyond him. I might just as reasonably expect him to under stand me when I say that a. knowledge of quaternions is of use in promoting a research in physics, or that the differential calculus is of assistance in, discovering the laws relating to astronomy. As far as he is concerned, he would never be able to grasp the situation. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4605</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Will the honorable and learned member discuss the question which is before the Chair? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4605</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>- We are perpetually being called upon to take from the pockets of the people further sums for carrying onthat central agency, which is called the Government. The working expenses of this so-called Government are steadily increasing year by year, so that very soon we shall have to take from every man, perhaps, the equivalent of a couple of months&#39; forced labour each year. Whether a man is forced&#39; to work two months for a Government,, or for a slave-master, is quite immaterial, because to the individual the result is thesame. I say that a halt should now becalled, and that the Estimates should receive that scathing criticism which thev deserve. Day after day we are allowing matters which should be within the control of the House to pass under the domination of the Government. Year after vear our expenditure is piling up, simply because Parliament is not afforded an opportunity to exercise complete supervision over it. We frequently hear honorable members urging that it ought to be the policy of the Government to impose taxation upon large numbers of our citizens, whose only offence is that they . are too industrious, and that this should be done simply for the benefit of one or two individuals who have invested their capital in certain enterprises, and who wish to make large profits out of them. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXO</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PAGE, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr Page</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is not the honorable and learned member satisfied with that? The money is still in the country? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</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>- I quite understand the allusion of the honorable member. So far as many Ministerialists are concerned, it would not matter if we imposed ten times the amount of our present taxation- </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Order ! The honorable and learned member is again digressing. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</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>- If I am not entitled to say that it would be a great evil to increase the taxation levied upon the community, I am at an absolute loss to know what I am allowed to say. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am afraid that the honorable and learned member is under a misapprehension. The motion under consideration in no sense admits of a criticism of the Government, or of their policy. It simply affords scope for criticism of any matter coming within the Estimates. The honorable and learned member has said a good many things which are in order, but every now and again he desires to go beyond the limits of the motion. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</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>- If I attempted to show that the cost of administration is being increased for the purpose of bolstering up a particular firm of manufacturers, I submit that I should even then be in order. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- It was because the honorable and learned member was travelling in that direction that I prevented him from proceeding. The honorable and learned member was about to enter upon a discussion of fiscal policy. The question immediately under consideration is not how much revenue should be raised from a particular form of taxation, but whether these Estimates are such as should be adopted by the House. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</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>- Why does mot the honorable and learned member abandon these shuffling tactics, and move that <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker&#39;s</inline> ruling be dissented from? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</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 Minister of Trade and Customs has endeavoured to collect a larger revenue from certain importations than he is entitled to do under statute. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- That is not the question before the Chair. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</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>- I submit that it is so connected with that question that I am entitled to discuss it. The Minister of Trade and Customs has taken it upon himself to go beyond the scope of an Act of Parliament. . He has declared that certain things ought to be done. I should not complain if the persons aggrieved by his action were at liberty to appeal to the law courts. But we have placed the Minister above the law. We have opened the doorto all sorts of fraud and corruption. We have done exactly what was done in. New South Wales when the Minister of Lands was placed above the law. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KVJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">STORRER, David</name>
<name role="display">Mr Storrer</name>
</talker>
<para>- I rise to a point of order. Is the honorable and learned member in order in saying that this House has opened the door to fraud and corruption? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is not an expression which should be used by an honorable member. I must ask the honorable and learned member for Werriwa not only to avoid the use of such expressions, but to confine himself to the subject-matter of the motion. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</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>- I was pointing out that, by placing the Minister of Lands in New South Wales above the law the door had been opened to all sorts of fraud, jobbery, and corruption. Although the honorable member for Bass may sympathize with what has taken place there- </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Order ! The honorable and learned member is distinctly out of order upon two or three points. For instance, he is out of order in discussing the conduct of the honorable member for Bass, and also in charging him with being concerned in the matters to which he has referred. I must ask the honorable and learned member to confine his remarks to the question which is before the Chair, otherwise I shall have to take further steps - a course which I have no desire to pursue. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4606</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>- I confess that I do not recognise the force of the objections that have been offered to my criticism. It is clear that these matters might be more fully debated on some other occasion, but if the House is to safeguard its rights, it must insist upon being afforded an opportunity to fully discuss the Estimates. I am not going to ask the House to dissent from your ruling, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker,</inline> but if we were always kept within the lines just laid down by you, sir, I think that the result would be a most serious limitation of the rights of debate. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4607</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>- And a good thing too. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4607</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 Ministry doubtless would be pleased if there were no discussion on the Estimates, but their satisfaction would arise from motives which, I am sure, would not influence the public. The people desire to know exactly how we are dealing with the financial affairs of the Commonwealth, and if we wish to- exercise any control over the Estimates, it is absolutely necessary that we should have an opportunity to deal with them earlier in the session. The votes for which provision has been made have practically been expended, so that the matters to which they refer have passed beyond our control. And yet we would lead the public to believe that the Parliament is exercising some supervision over the expenditure of the Commonwealth ! I should welcome the return to power of any party which would introduce a sound system of administration. The keeping of a close check upon our expenditure is vitally associated with the progress of the country. The bulk of the workers do not recognise that unless we secure an effectual return for the money we expend they are just as much bondsmen as if they were working for slave masters. I am satisfied that the people are not securing a full return for their money, and that the present Ministry are largely responsible for the steady growth of Federal expenditure. It seems that when men complain of hard times, the only cure is to make those times still harder ! Taxation is steadily increasing, and yet when we rise to object to this increase honorable members opposite endeavour to silence us. Had the members of the Labour Party done their duty they would have insisted upon the Estimates being introduced early in the session, in order that the Parliament might exercise proper control over the expenditure. They do not appear to realize the intimate connexion between the prosperity of the people and the lightening of the load of taxation. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4607</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXO</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PAGE, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr Page</name>
</talker>
<para>- We shall not seek enlightenment from the honorable and learned member. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4607</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 trouble is that some honorable members of the Labour Party do not know where to seek enlightenment. The great bulk of them are as absolutely ignorant of these matters as they are of the origin of the Greek Kalends. The injury inflicted upon the community by the return to Parliament of a body of men who have not fitted themselves by study to deal with the questions that must come before them is so great that a monetary estimate of it cannot he formed. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4607</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXO</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PAGE, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr Page</name>
</talker>
<para>- That is the trouble. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4607</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>- I have never cast a shadow of blame upon the honorable member. He has recognised that the less the taxation on the mass of the people the better it is for their general prosperity, but he must admit that his position ds different from that of many of those with whom he is associated. The sooner we revert to a sound position of affairs and exercise proper control over the expenditure the sooner will there be a return of prosperity. I am not going to say that the people of Australia cannot bear reasonable taxation. We know that they can, but there is no justification for increasing taxation until it becomes absolutely burdensome. To the extent that we increase taxation, so must the prosperity of the workers be decreased. They are the people with whom we are most directly concerned. Unless they are prosperous the general community cannot hope for prosperity. An improvement in the condition of the great mass of the workers tends to bring about a more contented spirit in the community. Is it reasonable that the Estimates should be submitted to the House so late in the session; that we cannot exercise effective control over the expenditure? Year after year we hear the cry, &#34; We are approaching the end of the session ; most of the amounts provided on the Estimates have been expended, and why should we bother about them now? Next year we will make a better start.&#34; Next session the Estimates are submitted at a still later period. I feel it my duty to criticise the present Government, in respect of both their acts of omission and commission. They have introduced Bill after Bill which must tend to increase the cost of administration. The Commerce Bill, the Trade Marks Bill, and the Copyright Bill, unless they are to be dead letters, must involve a considerable outlay. One measure calls forth another, and in this way the original estimates of the cost of Federation are gradually being outstripped. Take, for instance, the Sugar Bounty Act. The Estimates do not convey an adequate idea of the loss which the people have sustained from the passing of that measure. When it was under consideration nearly four years ago the honorable and {learned member- for Angas and myself pointed out the loss that it would entail upon the people of several States. So far as the people of South Australia, Victoria, Western Australia, and Tasmania are concerned, that measure has imposed a heavy burden upon them. If their load of taxation in this regard were lightened, the result would be beneficial. We have come to this ridiculous position, that, at enormous expense to the people, we are paying farmers to Keep some of the richest farm lands in Australia under cultivation. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4608</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I would point out to the honorable and learned member that the Sugar Bounty is provided for by Act of Parliament, and does not appear in these Estimates. That being so, the question of whether it has increased or reduced the taxation of the States has nothing whatever to do with the matter now under consideration. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4608</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>- I am pointing out, sir, that the Sugar Bounty has had an injurious effect upon South Australia and other States. As all the States are called upon to share the. cost, I submit that I am entitled to show that the expenditure will increase year by year. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4608</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- If a sum were voted in these Estimates for the sugar bounty, the honorable and learned member would be in order. But seeing that the bounty is paid under an Act of Parliament, it cannot be discussed now. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4608</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honorable and learned member is arguing that the expenditure of t!he Commonwealth is steadily increasing, without a corresponding increase of revenue, which, sooner or later, will lead to financial trouble. Surely in doing so he may make an incidental allusion to the sugar bounty, or to any other expenditure which necessitates the raising of taxation? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4608</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I allowed the honorable and learned member five minutes for an incidental reference, but when he proceeded to discuss the policy_ of the sugar bounty I was bound to call him to order. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4608</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>- I bow to your ruling, sir. We know that the expenditure of the Commonwealth is increasing year by year, while the capacity of the States to bear it is becoming less. If the whole of the taxation raised from the. people went into the </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para class="block">Treasury, there would be less occasion to complain of this state of things, because we should know exactly the load which the community is bearing ; but, as a matter of fact, the public is heavily taxed without the Treasury getting the full benefit of the taxation. That the expenditure of the Commonwealth is increasing no one who has studied trie history of Federation can doubt. The estimated cost of the sugar bounty is &#163;200,000, but the real cost is to-day much nearer ,&#163;700,000. I do not blame the Government for wilful wrong-doing, but for ignorance, which is much more harmful to the community, because wilfulness arouses opposition, while allowance is made for ignorance on the part of those who have not time to study the true condition of affairs. The members of a Government are often maleficent, though seldom malevolent. I think that the present Government show great want of knowledge of the affairs of *. country. Certainly, under their administration, the expenditure of the Commonwealth is increasing by leaps and bounds, and while that is so there can be no true prosperity. Of course, the limits of taxation have not yet been reached, but it would be unwise to attempt to tax the community up to anything like exhaustion point. The best insurance fund the Government can have is the amount left to its people to spend in productive works. We depart from sound administration when we fail to recognise the fundamental principle underlying all government, and when, by our taxation, we make the people work harder than is necessary to provide effectively for the maintenance of peace and security. </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4608</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4N</name.id>
<electorate>Wide Bay</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 agree with the honorable member for Werriwa that the representatives of the people should have the fullest opportunity to discuss financial matters on every possible occasion, though I may be unable to approve of the method which he has taken on this occasion to do so. I do not intend to speak at length, because I feel that the members of the Opposition are quite capable of continuing this debate; but I wish to refer to one or two matters raised by the honorable and learned gentleman. In the first place, I differ from him respecting the suggested appointment of additional Justices to the High Court. I think that it is inadvisable that it should be publicly stated that the work of the High Court is so great that it cannot be coped with, &#34;because, according to a return which has been laid on the table, judicial work has never been done more expeditiously than by the Court. I trust that it will be a long time before it will be necessary to appoint more Justices, and that the Court will not be increased until the States have seen fit. to reduce the number of their Judges. As a layman, I cannot see why litigants should commence in the lowest Court, and proceed through every other Court to the highest tribunal, if they can go direct to the High Court. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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 lower Courts are cheaper, and the bulk of the cases are settled there. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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>- My view is that it would be better for litigants to appeal direct to the High Court, to get a final decision as soon as possible. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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>- The legal profession would support that view for personal reasons, because such a course would mean more expense, owing to the delay which would take place. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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>- In my opinion, greater expedition would result from following such a course. With regard to the Capital Site question - the only other question dealt with by the honorable and learned member deserving consideration at this moment - I would point out that, if very eminent lawyers are of the opinion that this Parliament has not power to select the Federal Capital Site, while other eminent lawyers are of a contrary opinion, the question can be determined only by reference to a properly constituted tribunal. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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>- It should be a matter for amicable arrangement. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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>- Why has there been delay in regard to the submission of the question to the High Court? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- If this Parliament is all-powerful, as some honorable members suggest, why has not the whole thing been carried through ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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 am prepared to go on with the necessary arrangements if it is found impossible to submit a case to the High Court., </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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>- Then the honorable member should give his orders to the Government. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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>- The honorable and learned member knows that the Labour Party have not given orders to any Government - either to this Government, or to that of which he was a member. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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>- Certainly not to the Government of which I was a member. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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>- No party will ever, with my consent, give orders to a Government. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Whom does the honorable member consider to be to blame for the delay which has occurred ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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 think that a great deal of the fault lies with the Parliament of New South. Wales. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Does that justify delay on the part of this Government, seeing that according to the honorable member, this Parliament had a right to determine the question, and has power to see that its enactments are put into force? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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 think that we have the necessary power, but the Federal Government has always been ready to refer the question to the High Court. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIC</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LONSDALE, Edmund</name>
<name role="display">Mr Lonsdale</name>
</talker>
<para>- There cannot be a reference to the High Court until it has been provided for by legislation. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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>- The Bill to which the honorable member refers is a secondaryconsideration, and was suggested on behalf of New South Wales at the Conference between the two Governments. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is not the plain fact this - that we have made proposals to the New South Wales Government in regard to bringing down a Bill, and in regard to other matters, and that at the Conference the Attorney-General of New South Wales threw them all out? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</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>- It is not the case that the Bill referred to was suggested by the Commonwealth Government. In mv view, this Parliament, in passing the Seat of Government Act, exercised powers conferred upon it by the Constitution. The New South Wales Government and Parliament then took action which was certainly antagonistic to the action taken bv this Parliament. Subsequently, negotiations were held, and the representative of the New South Wales Government then suggested that a technical offence might be committed, and the question referred to the High Court. The introduction of a Bill and other procedure referred to was to carry out that suggestion. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4609</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Brit everything appears to have been done wrongly or defectively, as the Attorney-General now admits. We should not blame the State Government for that. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4610</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 wish to see the Federal Capital established in New South Wales, and I am ready to do anything within reasonable bounds to bring about a settlement of the question. But I am not at all satisfied with the action of the New South Wales Parliament in this matter, and I am not prepared to allow the matter to be blocked by that body. If this Parliament is not paramount, we must, of course, humbly submit to what the New South Wales Parliament, and people are prepared to propose. If that be the situation, it will be the duty of the representatives of all the other States to refer the matter to the people of Australia, and ascertain if they are agreeable to submit to the decision of New South Wales. Personally, I decline to accept any such dictation. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- What dictation? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4610</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 am speaking of the resolution of the State Parliament, which has practically declined to grant us the site we selected. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honorable member must have overlooked the fact that the Premier of New South Wales has suggested that the matter should be referred to the High Court, and has set forth the Issues to be submitted for their decision. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4610</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 am quite aware of that, but a settlement is always blocked by some technical point. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Because the AttorneyGeneral admits that the action so far taken by this Parliament has been defective. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4610</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>- Does the honorable member assert that the Parliament of New South Wales are anxious to have the matter submitted to the High Court? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yes, I do. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4610</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>- Then there is no reason why a satisfactory determination should not be arrived at. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4610</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>- Does not the honorable member think that it is a bad thing to refer to the High Court a matter which should be the subject of an amicable arrangement ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4610</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>- The High Court is the only authority which can determine our powers under the Constitution, and in a difficulty such as the present we must exercise such powers as we possess. As soon as our position is defined, we shall take such action as we deem best in the interests of the whole Commonwealth. I am quite in sympathy with the desire of the representatives of New South Wales to have the question disposed&#39; of, and I shall assist them in every way I can. I am compelled to say, however, that they are largely to blame for the delay that has taken place. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4610</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate>Lang</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I think that, before we adopt the resolutions of the Committee of Supply, we should have some assurance from Ministers that the &#34;suggestions made by honorable members during the discussion of the Estimates will receive proper consideration. Referring first to the Defence Department, I would point out that several honorable members have made important suggestions. For example, the view has been strongly expressed that one arm of our defences has been developed to some extent at the expense of that which must be regarded as by far the more important. So far we have had no assurance from the Minister that the question of strengthening our coast and harbor defences will receive the serious attention of the Government. I regard the matter as of paramount importance. I do not go so far as to advocate that we should establish a local navy, because I am quite satisfied that, for trie protection of our commerce on the seas, we shall have to rely upon the Imperial Navy. It is necessary, however, to look to the protection of our coast from invasion and hostile raids, and for that reason I urge that special attention should Le paid to the question of coast and harbor defence. It has been admitted that our vessels of war are absolutely useless, and that in, other respects our coast defences are deficient, and I trust that the Vice-President of the Executive Council will be able to assure us that this matter will receive the fullest attention at an early date. With regard to the arming of the Fremantle forts, a suggestion was recently made in the press - I do not know whether it was officially inspired - that the Government should consider the advisability of substituting 9.2 guns for the 7.5 weapons that were originally proposed. Upon this point we have had no clear expression of the intentions of the Government, and, in view of the general understanding that 7.5 guns should be emplaced, we are entitled to an assurance that the Government will not substitute ordnance of higher calibre, which, though it would cost twice as much money, would probably prove less effective owing to the peculiar situation of Fremantle harbor.. </para>
</talk.start>
<para class="block">Passing from the Defence Department, I desire to say a few words with regard to the policy of the Government in regard to the Braddon section of the Constitution. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4611</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>- I have already gone into that matter fully. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4611</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- We have had a number of evasive replies from the Treasurer, but no definite intimation. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4611</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- There is nothing in the Estimates about the Braddon section. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4611</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- But the matter was referred to in the Treasurer&#39;s financial statement. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4611</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- That does not affect the question. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4611</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- As I presume that under your ruling, sir, I shall also be precluded from referring to the States debts question, I shall pass on to some other subject. I wish to say a few words with reference to the administration of New Guinea. I have read the report of <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Atlee</inline> Hunt, which seems to have been prepared with great care, and to contain much valuable information with regard to the administration _ and resources of the Possession. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Hunt</inline> makes certain recommendations, with some of which, however, I do not agree. I do not however, attach any blame to him. because no doubt he has formed his opinions after careful inquiry. Moreover, he has acted quite within his province, because he was asked to report upon the best means of promoting settlement, consistent with the preservation of the interests of the natives. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Hunt</inline> sets out the different policies that have at various times been suggested in connexion with the administration of the Possession. The first of these is described as follows: - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>Having achieved ownership, to remain content with the fact that foreign nations may not use the territory as a base from which operations against Australia might be organized and conducted. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Hunt</inline>says that this is impracticable, and he adds - </para>
<quote>
<para>Apart from other questions, ownership involves responsibilities towards the inhabitants which cannot be evaded by any civilized nation. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">I am absolutely in accord with that opinion. It is our duty, not only to prevent the Possession from being used by any foreign Power as a naval base or otherwise, but to make the best possible use of it as an adjunct to the trading resources of the Commonwealth. Another proposal was that the </para>
<para class="block">Territory should be handed over to a chartered company. In this connexion, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Hunt</inline> says - </para>
<quote>
<para>While such a proposal would perhaps relieve the Government of much trouble, and possibly some cost, it is not here recommended for consideration, much less for adoption. The experience of other countries has shown that such companies are not too anxious to promote the welfare of their native subjects, which should be our paramount consideration. </para>
</quote>
<para>He is perfectly right in making that statement. There is a danger that the handing over of large areas to private syndicates may lead to the wholesale monopolization of the natural resources of the country. We must guard against any such evil. In Australia we have had experience of what can be done in that direction, with the result that at the present time we complain of the wholesale destitution which prevails, and of the tendency of population to flock to our cities. We ought to prevent the development of similar evils in this new Territory, and in administering its affairs to guard against the abuses of the land system with which we are familiar in the Commonwealth. I notice, also, that <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Hunt</inline> refers to another point- </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4611</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K87</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CULPIN, Millice</name>
<name role="display">Mr Culpin</name>
</talker>
<para>- I rise to a point of order. Is the honorable member in order in discussing <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Hunt&#39;s</inline> report point by point ? I was under the impression that we did that last night. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4611</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>10000</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SPEAKER, Mr</name>
<name role="display">Mr SPEAKER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Included in the Estimates is an item connected with the administration of New Guinea. That being so, the honorable member is entitled to discuss it, just as an item relating to the Federal Capital enables honorable members to debate that question. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4611</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Perhaps the honorable member for Brisbane is not aware that I refrained from addressing myself to this question last evening because I intended to speak upon it to-day. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Hunt</inline> also refers to the development of the Territory. He says that a suggestion has been made - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>To encourage the development of the country under European auspices by the employment of imported capital to be expended under European direction, employing native labour, and at the same time extend the influence of the Government until the whole Possession is brought under control. </para>
</quote>
<para>Speaking generally, whilst that is a policy which should be encouraged, it is one which should be adopted very cautiously, otherwise we may develop a system which is very closely allied to slavery. We must guard against that. It must be generally </para>
<para>Possibly the freedom of the Papuan from the debasing effects of intoxicating drink largely contributes to this result. </para>
<para class="block">In this connexion we should recollect that in promoting civilization in the Territory we are apt to communicate to the natives a great many of our vices and few of our virtues. I sincerely hope that the </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4612</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JNV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BAMFORD, Frederick</name>
<name role="display">Mr Bamford</name>
</talker>
<para>- But the Government of that State would do nothing. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4612</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I do not think that New South Wales has exhibited any unreasonableness in this matter. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4612</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JNV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BAMFORD, Frederick</name>
<name role="display">Mr Bamford</name>
</talker>
<para>- For three years the Government of that State were asked to do something, without avail. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4612</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I do not think that any negotiations of a serious character were entered upon by the Commonwealth Parliament until recently. What it did was to select a site before the necessary territory had been secured. I admit that there is a great divergence of opinion as to the con- struction to be placed upon section 125 of the Constitution ; but my reading of it is that we should have first acquired the territory. To my mind, no other reasonable interpretation can be placed upon it. It provides that - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>The seat of Government of the Commonwealth shall be determined by The Parliament, and shall be within Territory which shall have been granted - not &#34; shall be granted &#34; - to or acquired by the Commonwealth. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">It seems to me that, had it been intended that the selection of the site of the Capital should be made prior to the acquisition of the territory, the words &#34; which shall be hereafter granted,&#34; instead of &#34;which shall have been granted,&#34; would have been used. We should have entered first of all into an arrangement with New South Wales for the acquisition of territory, by grant or otherwise. That having been done, we could then have proceeded to select the particular site within the territory which we desired. That was solely the province of the Commonwealth Parliament. Had we reported to that proceeding we should have avoided the complications that have arisen. It must be remembered that this Parliament was not unanimous as to the eligibility of the site selected. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX9</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRAZER, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Frazer</name>
</talker>
<para>- The selection was determined, as all other questions are decided, by a majority vote. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Quite so; but that does not affect the point at issue. The action of the Government of New South Wales has been criticised on the assumption that Dalgety was selected by the unanimous will of this Parliament. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KVJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">STORRER, David</name>
<name role="display">Mr Storrer</name>
</talker>
<para>- It was the will of the Parliament, as expressed by the vote of the majority. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- But that vote was taken under conditions which largely nullified its value as an expression of the will of Parliament. I voted for Dalgety. not because I approved of it, but because Lyndhurst having been struck out, I and others who favoured its selection had to choose between the remaining sites, although we objected to both of them. We were thus prevented from making a selection of which the people of New South Wales as a whole would have approved. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX9</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FRAZER, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr Frazer</name>
</talker>
<para>- Why does not the honorable member say &#34; the people of Sydney &#34; ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Because the term I used was the correct one. It was not the people of Sydney alone, but the majority of those in the country also. At the last elections there was a consensus of opinion in favour of Lyndhurst as against Tooma and Dalgety, the only other sites then under consideration. I do not say that the people of New South Wales would prefer Lyndhurst to any other selection that might be made; but having regard to the circumstances in which the ballot was taken in this House, and particularly to the fact that our choice was limited to three sites, I and a number of other honorable members had in the last resort to vote for Dalgety, although we did not approve of its selection. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JNV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BAMFORD, Frederick</name>
<name role="display">Mr Bamford</name>
</talker>
<para>- Then the honorable member should have declined to vote. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. JOHNSON.</inline>Had my parliamentary experience been greater, I probably should have taken a different course. It seemed to me, however, that, upon the rejection of Lyndhurst, I had no option but to vote for one of the two remaining sites. I accordingly selected Dalgety as being the less objectionable. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JUJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CAMERON, Donald Norman</name>
<name role="display">Mr Cameron</name>
</talker>
<para>- Has the honorable member visited the Tooma site? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I lived in the district for about four months,, and know that it is absolutely unsuitable for the purposes of the Federal Capital. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JUJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CAMERON, Donald Norman</name>
<name role="display">Mr Cameron</name>
</talker>
<para>- Dalgety is better. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am familiar with both sites, and consider that they are immeasurably inferior to Lyndhurst. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr Austin Chapman</name>
</talker>
<para>- Who speaks for New South Wales - its representatives in this Parliament, or in the State Legislature ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- The members of the State Legislature have a better opportunity to gauge the wishes of the people than have members of this House, who, while the Parliament is in session, are necessarily absent for a long period from their contituencies. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr Austin Chapman</name>
</talker>
<para>- So that the honorable member proposes to delegate his rights to the State Parliament? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4613</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I do not; but I respect the rights which that Parliament undoubtedly possesses. I maintain that the Government of New South Wales, in opposing the selection of Dalgety, has not exceeded its legitimate functions, and that an attempt ought to be made by this Parliament to meet its reasonable objections to the establishment of the Capital there. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr Austin Chapman</name>
</talker>
<para>- Does not the honorable member think that the other States should have a voice in the matter? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I have never denied it. But, although it concerns them also, they are not equally interested1. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GROOM, Littleton</name>
<name role="display">Mr Groom</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honorable member means that, while they have an equal right to be heard, they have not an identity of interest. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- That is so. New South Wales, by reason of the fact that she will have to give up the necessary territory, is more directly interested in the question than any of the other States. For that reason I think the Government of New South Wales are justified in endeavouring to safeguard the interests of the State. Indeed they would have been false to their trust had they not taken action. A perusal of the correspondence satisfies me that the Premier of New South Wales has taken up a perfectly fair attitude. I know, of course, that the PostmasterGeneral has a personal interest in this matter, inasmuch as Dalgety is within his electorate. He should remember, however, that other honorable members may view the question from a different standpoint. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr Austin Chapman</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honorable member knows that the supporters of Lyndhurst were soundly beaten. That being so, why should we not unite in securing the establishment of the Capital? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is a question, not of whether the supporters of Lyndhurst were defeated, but of doing what is best in the interests oF-the Commonwealth, and of meeting the reasonable objections of the Government of the State chiefly concerned. Our desire should be to deal with the question in a conciliatory spirit. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KWL</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">TUDOR, Frank</name>
<name role="display">Mr Tudor</name>
</talker>
<para>- Does the honorable member believe that the Government of New South Wales really desire to settle the question ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am sure that they are acting in perfectly good faith. These suggestions of lack of <inline font-style="italic">bona fides</inline> on their part are unworthy of those who make them. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KX9</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WATKINS, David</name>
<name role="display">Mr Watkins</name>
</talker>
<para>- Why did they suddenly knock out the selection made by this Parliament? I did not vote for Dalgety, but I regard&#39; their action as an affront to the Commonwealth. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K4I</name.id>
<electorate>BOURKE, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>PROT</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUME COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Why should they not be presumed to be acting in what they believe to be the best interests of New South Wales? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Unquestionably they are so acting. I am surprised to find so many representatives of New South. Wales ready to decry their own State and its Government. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GROOM, Littleton</name>
<name role="display">Mr Groom</name>
</talker>
<para>- They are not decrying them. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- What other construction could be placed on the question which the honorable member for Gwydir put this morning to the Prime Minister in reference to this question? Some of the representatives of New South Wales in this House display a want of loyalty to that State with which I am not in sympathy and which I fail to understand. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KX9</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WATKINS, David</name>
<name role="display">Mr Watkins</name>
</talker>
<para>- Why does not the honorable member say &#34; Sydney &#34; ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- It must be remembered that the Capital cannot be established within 100 miles of Sydney. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KX9</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WATKINS, David</name>
<name role="display">Mr Watkins</name>
</talker>
<para>- The honorable member cannot see beyond Sydney. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- How can our decision possibly affect Sydney, having regard to the constitutional provision that the Federal Capital shall not be within 100 miles of that city ? I represent a metropolitan constituency, but no one has heard me advocate that Sydney should be made the Federal Capital. It is recognised by the New South Wales Government that Dalgety is one of the most inaccessible sites that could have been chosen ; it is not even easy of access from Victoria, the most contiguous State. It is at least thirty miles from a railway line, and the difficulties in the way of connecting it with the port its advocates desire to secure at Twofold Bay are almost insurmountable. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr Austin Chapman</name>
</talker>
<para>- Absurd. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- It is well known that the cost of constructing a railway line to Dalgety would be enormous. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr Austin Chapman</name>
</talker>
<para>- The connecting line would be only twenty-five miles long., and would pass through almost level country. The honorable member knows that, quite apart from the selection of Dalgety as the site of the Capital, the State Premier has already promised to construct a railway to the district. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am not aware of that. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4614</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSM</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BROWN, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr Brown</name>
</talker>
<para>- He was not the first to make that promise. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I am not aware that the Government of New South Wales propose to extend the State railway system to Dalgety. But I was referring to railway connexion with the sea coast at Twofold Bay. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr Austin Chapman</name>
</talker>
<para>- They propose to run a line past Dalgety to Bombala. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</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>- But the eastern route would probably be selected. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- That is so. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr Austin Chapman</name>
</talker>
<para>- At all events, the line would go within a few miles of the site. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- It must be remembered that the Commonwealth Government asked Tor a strip of territory extending from Dalgety to the sea-board, and would take from New South Wales the harbor of Twofold Bay. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr Austin Chapman</name>
</talker>
<para>- What has New South Wales ever done for that harbor? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Government of New South Wales are entitled to seriously consider the effect of the maintenance of a port by the Commonwealth in competition with the principal port of the State. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>L1N</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WILSON, John Gratton</name>
<name role="display">Mr Wilson</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is the honorable member standing up for vested interests? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- No ; but the State has a right to consider its interests, and to say whether it will assist the Commonwealth to divert trade to this port. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr Austin Chapman</name>
</talker>
<para>- Why should not trade go to its natural port? Does the honorable member contend that the Monaro trade should always go to Sydney ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Why does itnotgo to its natural port now? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KX9</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WATKINS, David</name>
<name role="display">Mr Watkins</name>
</talker>
<para>- Because the New South Wales Government will not allow it to do so. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">JOHNSON, Elliot</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOHNSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- That is not the reason ; it is because the port is inaccessible. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KX9</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WATKINS, David</name>
<name role="display">Mr Watkins</name>
</talker>
<para>- And the people of Sydney will see that it is always inaccessible. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>4615</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K99</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>