/
19051218_reps_2_30.xml
14790 lines (14790 loc) · 762 KB
/
19051218_reps_2_30.xml
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<hansard xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.1" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<session.header>
<date>1905-12-18</date>
<parliament.no>2</parliament.no>
<session.no>2</session.no>
<period.no>0</period.no>
<chamber>REPS</chamber>
<page.no>7244</page.no>
<proof>0</proof>
</session.header>
<chamber.xscript>
<para>House ofRepresentatives. </para>
<business.start>
<day.start>1905-12-18</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>SEAT OF GOVERNMENT BILL</title>
<page.no>7244</page.no>
<type>bill</type>
</debateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4S</name.id>
<electorate>PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, Joseph</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOSEPH COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- I wish to know from the Prime Minister if he thinks it fair, at this stage of the. session, to place the consideration of three other measures before that of the Seat of Government Bill ; in other words, does he consider it right' to defer the consideration of the measure until the last moment of the session? I should like to hear from him some reason for this extraordinary, step. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</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>- I thought that the honorable member knew that this was to be done. On Saturday at least half-a-dozen members of one party and another spoke to me on the subject, and were in favour of the course which is now being proposed, since they were leaving Melbourne that evening, and would not return until late to-day, or because they wished to have time to read and considerthe report of the Minister's speech on the motion for the second reading. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4S</name.id>
<electorate>PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, Joseph</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOSEPH COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- This is news to me. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</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>- The Government were urged not to proceed with the measure immediately, and I said that it would suit us to postpone its further consideration until after the three measures to which the honorable member has referred have been dealt with. Two of them should occupy practically no time, while the third - the Copyright Bill - should not keep us very long, because it is proposed to omit the contentious provisions which it contains. We can resume the consideration of the Seat of Government Bill this afternoon, when other honorable members have returned if we finish the business to which I have alluded. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4S</name.id>
<electorate>PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, Joseph</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOSEPH COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- We shall not have finished it by to-morrow afternoon. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</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>- I understood the Prime Minister to say that he would deal with the Seat of Government Bill immediately after the Copyright Bill had been disposed of. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</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>- If honorable members consider the little Patents Bill- </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KTT</name.id>
<electorate>PARKES, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">SMITH, Arthur</name>
<name role="display">Mr BRUCE SMITH</name>
</talker>
<para>- The "little" Patents Bill ! There are considerable objections to that measure. The honorable and learned member for Northern Melbourne entirely indorses the view which I take in regard to it. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</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 think that the honorable and learned member will find that those objections can be removed. If not, the Bill will not be pressed at this time. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4S</name.id>
<electorate>PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, Joseph</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOSEPH COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Will the Prime Minister let us resume the consideration of the Seat of Government Bill this afternoon ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</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>- If we have finished With the Copyright Bill, from which we propose to omit the contentious provisions. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4S</name.id>
<electorate>PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, Joseph</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOSEPH COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- A Bill that took the Senate a month. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</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 is one reason why it should, not take us so long. It is a purely technical measure, entirely devoid of party significance. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4S</name.id>
<electorate>PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, Joseph</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOSEPH COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- I do not suggest that it is a party measure, but I say that it is full of debatable provisions. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7244</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 think that the honorable member will find, when he comes to examine it, that the questions involved are purely questions of detail, which we can dispose of this morning. I shall be only too happy to resume the consideration of the Seat of Government Bill as soon as possible, and to continue it as long as honorable members think fit- </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4S</name.id>
<electorate>PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, Joseph</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOSEPH COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- What does the Prime Minister mean by as soon as possible ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</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>- As soon as we have finished the Copyright Bill. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4S</name.id>
<electorate>PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906; LP from 1910; NAT from 1917</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">COOK, Joseph</name>
<name role="display">Mr JOSEPH COOK</name>
</talker>
<para>- Not before? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
</speech>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>DEFECTIVE CARTRIDGES</title>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>L0Y</name.id>
<electorate>MORETON, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WILKINSON, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr WILKINSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- In this morning's newspapers, there is an account of the bursting of another cartridge at Castlemaine. It seems to me that the ammunition is not entirely at fault in these cases, and I ask the Vice-President of the Executive Council if he will' request the Minister of Defence to see that in any further inquiry that is made, the condition of the rifles, as well as the composition of the ammunition, is looked into. In my opinion, the bursting may be due partly to want of care of the rifles. If rifles are neglected after cordite has been fired in them, and nickel-plated bullets are used, they are far more apt to choke, and thus cause an explosion, than was the case with the old rifles, in which the twist of the bore was not so great, and which were not corroded by the black powder used in them, while the missile was a soft leaden bullet. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDR</name.id>
<electorate>RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role>Vice-President of the Executive Council</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">EWING, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr EWING</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Minister of Defence made ah inquiry into this matter, a month or two ago, on the first occasion of the bursting of a rifle, and it was confidently hoped that there would not be a recurrence of these accidents. The Department view this matter very seriously. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</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>- Should we not have an ammunition factory of our own ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDR</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">EWING, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr EWING</name>
</talker>
<para>- That is a matter which I do not wish to discuss just now. The further inquiry that is to be made will be n.s searching as even the honorable member for Moreton would desire. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JWY</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHANTER, John</name>
<name role="display">Mr Chanter</name>
</talker>
<para>- Will the Minister lay on the table a copy of any report which has been received in connexion with the previous inquiry? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDR</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">EWING, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr EWING</name>
</talker>
<para>- T think the report was published in the newspapers, but there is no objection to making it a parliamentary paper. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>PERSONAL EXPLANATION</title>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
<type>personal explanation</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Members' Travelling Expenses</title>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. DUGALD</inline>THOMSON (North Sydney). ' - I wish to make a personal explanation in connexion with a paragraph appearing in this morning's newspapers about the payment of expenses to two senators, one of whom, in the last recess, visited New Guinea, and the other Northern Queensland. My name is mentioned in the paragraph, and the implication is, made by one newspaper, at any rate, that the Cabinet minute which guided us in sanctioning the expenditure had been strained to some extent. Both the late Treasurer and myself were against the system of the payment of these expenses, and would have declined to authorize it, had we seen our way to do so; but the Cabinet minute on the subject states that members travelling on Commonwealth business shall receive such expenses, and we found that the two gentlemen whose cases have been specially singled out for remark were entitled by all precedents to be paid their expenses. A number of honorable members visited Queensland, and another party visited Western Australia., and had their expenses paid. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</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>- That is, their tickets were paid for; not their personal expenses reimbursed. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KW6</name.id>
<electorate>NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">THOMSON, Dugald</name>
<name role="display">Mr DUGALD THOMSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Thenmeans of conveyance. That is all that was paid in any case. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</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>- The only means of getting to Western Australia is by sea. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7245</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KW6</name.id>
<electorate>NORTH SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>FT; ANTI-SOC from 1906</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">THOMSON, Dugald</name>
<name role="display">Mr DUGALD THOMSON</name>
</talker>
<para>- The members to whom I have referred could not have made the whole of their journeys by railways. One went to Northern Queensland to make inquiries relating to the sugar industry, which was the object of the parliamentary party which went there, while the other visited' New Guinea, to inquire into matters of Commonwealth concern, and furnished a valuable report on his return. But, although <inline font-weight="bold">Senator Staniforth'</inline> Smith went to New Guinea <inline font-style="italic">via</inline> the South Sea Islands, and incurred an expenditure of between £200 and ^300, he asked the reimbursement of his expenses only from Samarai to the gold-fields, and back to Australia, and received only between <inline font-style="italic">£20</inline> and ^30. In my opinion, there should be a definite understanding, in this matter, because, in the present position of affairs, questions arise which it is very difficult to satisfactorily settle. The late Treasurer and myself, however, felt that, following precedents and the Cabinet minute on the subject, we were bound to sanction these payments, and I take the fullest responsibility for whatwas done. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>7246</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>PROROGATION</title>
<page.no>7246</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7246</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>- Can the PrimeMinister say definitely when the prorogation will take place? A number of honorable members are unable to complete their arrangements for the removal of their families from Melbourne until they know what date is fixed? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7246</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>- The date of the prorogation depends on the progress of business, but Ihave every reason to hope that we shall be able to prorogue by Thursday. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>7246</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>PUBLIC SERVANTS' INCREMENTS</title>
<page.no>7246</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7246</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JWY</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHANTER, John</name>
<name role="display">Mr CHANTER</name>
</talker>
<para>asked the Minister of Home Affairs, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>When will the amounts due to the New South Wales officers, as increments for the past seventeen months, which have been sustained on appeal, be paid to the several officers? </para>
</quote>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7246</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate>DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role>Minister for Home Affairs</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GROOM, Littleton</name>
<name role="display">Mr GROOM</name>
</talker>
<para>- The Treasurer has issued instructions for the immediate payment of increments under the classification, and those which have been sustained on appeal. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>COPYRIGHT BILL</title>
<page.no>7246</page.no>
<type>bill</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>Second Reading</title>
<page.no>7246</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>Debate resumed from 7th November <inline font-style="italic">(vide</inline> page 4655), on motion by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Groom</inline> - </para>
<quote>
<para>That the Bill be now read a second time. </para>
</quote>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7246</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 regret that, owing to the long sittings during the last two or three weeks, I have not had am opportunity to give this Bill the consideration which it merits. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7246</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>- May I, at the commencement of this sitting, call the attention of honorable members to the fact that it is grossly unfair to the honorable member addressing the House to carry on conversations in a loud tone of voice. I would ask those who wish to converse either to go outside for that purpose, or else to do so in such low tones that honorable members who desire to follow the debate will not be prevented from doing so. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7246</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>- In this Bill an attempt is being made to amalgamate the laws of six States into something like a harmonious whole. The fact that the measure has been discussed at some length in another Chamber is not sufficient in itself to enable me to form any conclusion with regard to it. So far as I have been able to gather from a glance at the Bill, the laws of the States have been partly embodied and partly discarded, whilst new provisions have been adopted, which are at variance with international law. I see great difficulty in dealing with this very complicated question at the close of the session, and I had hoped that the Minister would consent to allow the Bill to remain over until next session. The public now know where they are under the States laws, but it is proposed to hurriedly bring into operation 3 measure which will alter the whole of the conditions affecting copyright in Australia. It is urged that we shall be able under the Bill to take advantage of international copyright law, but any benefit that may accrue in that direction will not compensate for the injury that may be inflicted upon individuals by passing a measure without full discussion. If this Bill had been introduced at the beginning of the session, its consideration would have occupied at least a month, and I fail to see why we should be asked to pass it without subjecting it to criticism, which, when not carried to extremes, is always in the interests of the public, and" affords one of the best safeguards against slovenly law-making. The Bill appears tome to foe framedupon two conflicting principles. When the Electoral Act was before us, I pointed out that it had been framed upon two conflicting principles, but I was laughed at for my pains. What has been the result? We have had to devote our attention during this session to no less than three Bills relating to matters which should have been effectively dealt with in the original measure. I refer to the Electoral Act Amendment Bill, the Representation Bill, and the Census and Statistics Bill. If the original measure had been properly considered, these Bills would not have been necessary. I have no hesitation in saying that if we pass the measure now before us with undue haste, it will lead us into trouble. I would point out that, whereas in the case of the Electoral Act, our action resulted merely in depriving persons of rights, which, in many cases,. they had no special desire to exercise, we shall, by passing a faulty copyright law, deprive a number of people of their bread and butter. I understand that it is intended to strike out the provisions in the Bill relating to newspaper copyright. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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>- We intend to strike out clause 34. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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 can be no doubt that that clause contains a proposal to entirely alter the law of copyright as it exists in Great Britain, and although it is desirable that its consideration should be deferred, I would point out that no radical alteration such as is proposed can be made in the measure without affecting a number of other clauses. The Bill has been framed as a harmonious whole, and if we adopt the course proposed by the Government, </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para>Ave shall considerably vary the incidence of copyright as dealt with in other parts of the Bill. I strongly protest against the measure being proceeded with under present circumstances. </para>
<para>Question resolved in the affirmative. </para>
<para>Bill read a second time. </para>
<para class="italic">
<inline font-style="italic">In Committee:</inline>
</para>
<para>Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to. </para>
<para>Clause 4 - </para>
<quote>
<para>In this Act, unless the contrary intention appears - "Pirated book" means a reproduction of a book made in any manner without the authority of the owner of the copyright in the book. . . . </para>
</quote>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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>- It seems to me that the definition of " artistic work" is too wide. It includes - </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>Any painting, drawing, or sculpture; and any engraving, etching, print, lithograph, woodcut, photograph, or other work of art produced by any process, mechanical or otherwise, by which impressions or representations of works of art can be taken or multiplied. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">It is proposed to give to owners of photographic work protection, which certainly is not possessed by them in any other part of the world. </para>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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>- Quite right, too. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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 very much doubt whether it is right. To begin with, the law in every other country has been framed with a strict regard to the liberties of individuals. Photography is now so much in vogue that the ordinary touring amateur can produce very good work, and I think we should take care that we do not inflict injustice by adopting too wide an interpretation under this clause. Take, for instance, the case of the photograph of a famous picture. Would no one else have the right to photograph the picture? We have had no discussion or explanation, to make that clear, and we cannot foresee the difficulties that may arise. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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>- We are proposing merely to do what was provided for in the Bill approved of by the House of Lords. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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 it is now proposed to go further than that. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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>- No. The two provisions are practically the same. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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 thought they were widely different. I now come to the definition of the word " book." </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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>- That is absolutely the same as the definition which was recommended by the House of Lords. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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>- Is a limitation imposed in the English Act? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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>- It is the same definition as that proposed in the Imperial Bill. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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>- We ought to allow the Bill to stand over until next session. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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 agree with the honorable member. I cannot conceive of any individual being injured as the result of delaying its passage. However, I feel that, in pointing out some of the difficulties which may hereafter arise, I have discharged my duty. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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>- The honorable and learned member for Werriwa has directed attention to the question of photographs. He has argued that under the Bill if a photographer took a picture of a celebrated painting, he could copyright it so that no other person would be able to take similar photographs. Photography is practically a new art, and I fail to see why an able and skilful man, who may expose himself to considerable danger in securing abeautiful photograph, should not be allowed to copyright it. The photograph is his own just as much as a painting is the property of the artist who creates it. I know of a case in which a photographer went down a mine and obtained a brilliant picture. The State Government has pirated that particular photograph, and has declined to allow him any compensation whatever. Under such circumstances, I claim that we ought to protect a photographer equally with any other artist. </para>
</talk.start>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. McLean.</inline>The honorable member would not prevent another artist from taking a similar picture? </para>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7247</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>- We ought not to allow persons to take a copy of a brilliant picture without recognising the right of the owner. Consequently, I say that the clause should not be amended. I feel that his own sense of fairness would induce the honorable and learned member for Werriwa to admit that a photographer is as much entitled to protection, if he thinks it worth while to copyright a particular picture, as is the author of a book. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>7248</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 difficulty is that so much of the work of producing a photograph is truly mechanical. For instance, the use of a fine lens will assist a photographer in a way that nothing else will. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>