/
19070918_reps_3_39.xml
12983 lines (12983 loc) · 654 KB
/
19070918_reps_3_39.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>1907-09-18</date>
<parliament.no>3</parliament.no>
<session.no>2</session.no>
<period.no>0</period.no>
<chamber>REPS</chamber>
<page.no>3408</page.no>
<proof>0</proof>
</session.header>
<chamber.xscript>
<para>House ofRepresentatives. </para>
<business.start>
<day.start>1907-09-18</day.start>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker</inline>took the chair at 3 p.m. and read prayers. </para>
</business.start>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>PETITION</title>
<page.no>3408</page.no>
<type>petition</type>
</debateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3408</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate>HUME, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role>Treasurer</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNE, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir WILLIAM LYNE</name>
</talker>
<para>- In presenting a petition from certain persons in the neighbourhood of Wagga and elsewhere, which is an addition to that which I presented a fortnight ago, I wish, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker,</inline> to draw your attention to the manner in which it is signed, and to askyou whether you think it should be received. It is a petition in reference to the Tariff. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3408</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>L17</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WILKS, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr Wilks</name>
</talker>
<para>- In favour of the Tariff? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3408</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNE, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir WILLIAM LYNE</name>
</talker>
<para>- No; against the Tariff, and it refers also to the duty on wire netting. It would appear to have been signed by Alfred Deakin, Harry Foran, myself, and a number of others whom I do not know. I should like to direct the attention of the House to this example of the manner in which some petitions are prepared. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3408</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>- Is the honorable member in order in dissecting a petition before it has been presented to the House, and we have decided what shall be done with it? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3408</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 member has asked me whether the petition can be received, and is stating the grounds for asking my opinion. He is entitled to take this course. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3408</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNE, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir WILLIAM LYNE</name>
</talker>
<para>- All I wish to do is to direct your attention, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker,</inline> to the fact that signatures are attached to the petition which were not put there by the persons whose names they bear. I have not analyzed the list of signatures, but the two or three names which I have given caught my attention-. I am quite willing that the petition should be received, but I wish the House to understand its nature. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3408</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 impossible for me, before perusing the petition, to determine the issue stated by the Minister. If there are attached to it signatures which are forgeries, and others which may or may not be so, it is competent for the House to receive it or not as it pleases. If the Minister moves that it be received, I shall put that question. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3408</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 suggest that its consideration might be deferred until a later hour of the day. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3408</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 think that, in order to attain that end, the better course would be to negative the motion for its reception. If, later on, any honorable member desired to call attention to the petition, he could do so. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3408</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K7U</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CROUCH, Richard</name>
<name role="display">Mr Crouch</name>
</talker>
<para>- I take the point that the Acting Prime Minister had no right to present the petition, because, under the Standing Orders, the member presenting a petition must certify that it is in order, which means, amongst other things, that there are no forgeries in it, that it contains nothing offensive, and that it concludes with a prayer. I understood that the honorable gentleman was addressing you on a question of privilege, because a person who forges a signature to a petition to this House is guilty of a breach of the privileges of the House. I submit that it was improper for the petition to be presented without the certificate of the Minister that it is in order. If a petition doss not bear that certificate, an honorable member cannot present it, and the House cannot receive it. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3408</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 seems to me that the question which should be asked is whether the Acting Prime Minister is prepared to say that certain signatures, bearing the names of well-known public men, are forgeries. If he is, I take it that he will not be in order in presenting the petition; but if he is not, I fail to see how the House can reasonably Be expected to come to a determination in regard to, the matter. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>L17</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WILKS, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr Wilks</name>
</talker>
<para>- There may be local Alfred Deakins. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KJ8</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HUTCHISON, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr Hutchison</name>
</talker>
<para>- I submit that both the honorable member for Corio and the honorable member for Lang are wrong, and that the only thing a member presenting a petition has to do is to see that it is respectfully worded, and concludes with a prayer, lt would be impossible for an honorable member to say whether all the signatures attached to a petition were or were not forgeties. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</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 Minister, in presenting the petition, mentioned that it was similar to one presented a fortnight ago. If this be a copy of that petition, which was in order, it must also be in order, being respectfully worded, and concluding with a prayer. But he also raised Ihe question whether certain signatures attached to it are genuine. I see that some of the signatures which he mentioned have been struck .out, .and therefore do not appear on the petition. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNE, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir William Lyne</name>
</talker>
<para>- Only one has been struck out. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</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 signature of the Prime Minister may, or may not, have been attached to the petition by him, though I think it probable that it was not. How-, ever, that is a matter of which the House or I can have no knowledge until it has been inquired into. The Minister has a perfect right to present a petition which is respectfully worded and contains a prayer; but I think it was proper for him to warn the House in regard to certain facts relating to it. I see no reason why the motion, that the petition be received should not be put, for the House to agree, to or reject, as honorable members may think lit. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para>Motion (by <inline font-weight="bold">Sir</inline> William Lyne) proposed - </para>
<quote>
<para>That the petition be received. </para>
</quote>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</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 take it that the Acting Prime Minister has already intimated to the House that his own signature, amongst others, has been forged. ; </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNE, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir William Lyne</name>
</talker>
<para>- My signature has been struck out. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</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>- The honorable gentleman had no right to present to the House a petition which he knows to be a faked one. He was trifling and playing tricks with the House in doing so. His action was entirely out of order. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4R</name.id>
<electorate>South Sydney</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 take it that there is nothing to prevent the House from rejecting the petition. I do not think that we should receive a petition to which are attached forged signatures. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K7U</name.id>
<electorate>Corio</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CROUCH, Richard</name>
<name role="display">Mr CROUCH</name>
</talker>
<para>.- Mav 'l draw your attention, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker,</inline> to this fact. You say that the House can have ::o knowledge as to the genuineness of the signatures. The honorable member for Hume, however, stated when he presented the petition that attached to it is a forgery of his own signature. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNE, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir William Lyne</name>
</talker>
<para>- I did not say that. The signature bearing my name has been struck out. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K7U</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CROUCH, Richard</name>
<name role="display">Mr CROUCH</name>
</talker>
<para>- You, sir, and' the House must take notice of the Minister's statement that a forgery of his signature is attached to the petition. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNE, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir William Lyne</name>
</talker>
<para>- I did not say that. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K7U</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CROUCH, Richard</name>
<name role="display">Mr CROUCH</name>
</talker>
<para>- I understand that that, signature has since been struck out; but the honorable gentleman when he presented the petition said that his name was attached to it; and that the signature was a forgery. If that be so, the petition must be informal and void. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNE, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir William Lyne</name>
</talker>
<para>- I did not say that any signature was a forgery. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSM</name.id>
<electorate>CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BROWN, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr THOMAS BROWN</name>
</talker>
<para>. - I understand from what has been said that the petition contains signatures believed to be forgeries. But I presume that it also contains legitimate signatures. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</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>- That may or may not be so. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</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>- All the signatures may be faked. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3409</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JSM</name.id>
<electorate>CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BROWN, Thomas</name>
<name role="display">Mr THOMAS BROWN</name>
</talker>
<para>- I should like to call attention to this phase of the question : It would be possible for any person to nullify any properly prepared petition if the fact that all the names attached to a. petition are not genuine is to be a ground for rejecting it. Is it fair, because of the wrong-doing of persons into whose hands the petition has fallen, to punish those who have signed it in good faith ? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KCO</name.id>
<electorate>Angas</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">GLYNN, Patrick</name>
<name role="display">Mr GLYNN</name>
</talker>
<para>.- I shall vote for the reception of the petition; because, as it has been held that by the elimination of certain signatures it has been so purged as to render it fit for presentation, there is no reason why, by refusing to receive it, we should penalize those who have signed it in good faith. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>L17</name.id>
<electorate>Dalley</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">WILKS, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr WILKS</name>
</talker>
<para>-If the question goes to a division, I shall vote for the reception of the petition, as I consider it the highest prerogative of the electors to be able to petition the House at any time. It is impossible for honorable members to scrutinize the signatures to a petition, and say which are and which are not genuine. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<division>
<division.header>
<time.stamp />
<para>Question - That the petition be received - put. The House divided.</para>
</division.header>
<division.data>
<ayes>
<num.votes>26</num.votes>
<title>AYES</title>
</ayes>
<noes>
<num.votes>23</num.votes>
<title>NOES</title>
</noes>
</division.data>
<para>Majority ... ... 3 </para>
<para>AYES</para>
<para class="block">
<graphic href="039331190709182_2_1_1_A.jpg" />
</para>
<para>NOES</para>
<para class="block">
<graphic href="039331190709182_2_1_2_N.jpg" />
</para>
<division.result>
<para>Question so resolved in the affirmative. </para>
</division.result>
<para>Petition received. </para>
<para>Motion (by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Liddell)</inline> proposed - </para>
<para>That the petition be read. </para>
</division>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</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>- Is it competent for me to move to amend the motion with a view to having the signatures read also? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</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>- Yes. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para>Amendment (by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Watkins)</inline> proposed - </para>
<quote>
<para>That the following words be added : " including the names attached thereto." </para>
</quote>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KJ8</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HUTCHISON, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr Hutchison</name>
</talker>
<para>- And the erasures. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</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>- I should also like the erasures read. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</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 there would be some difficulty in reading certain erased names. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para>Amendment agreed to. </para>
<para>Question, as amended, resolved in the affirmative. </para>
<para>Petition read. </para>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KJ8</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HUTCHISON, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUTCHISON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to submit a motion in regard to the petition which has just been read. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</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 cannot accept a motion now, except one dealing with a point of order. The only motions which can be received on the presentation of a petition are that the petition be received, and that the petition be read; and both motions have been dealt with in the present case. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KJ8</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">HUTCHISON, James</name>
<name role="display">Mr HUTCHISON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to submit a motion, because, in my opinion, it is necessary that there should be some investigation in order to ascertain how far the petition is genuine. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</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 member cannot submit such a motion without notice, except by leave of the House. If the honorable member desires, I shall ask the leave of the House. Is it the pleasure of the House thatthe honorable member have leave to submit a motion without notice ? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</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>- <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Speaker--</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</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 there is any dissent the honorable member cannot submit a motion. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</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 a matter of personal explanation, I desire to say that I. did not intend to raise any objection to the proposal of the honorable member for Hindmarsh, but merely to ask that a similar course might be adopted in reference to other petitions if necessary. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3410</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 did not take the opposition to the motion as coming from the honorable member for Lang; I heard at least three other objections. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. BRUCE</inline>SMITH presented a petition, signed by 2,500 women resident in Sydney, praying that the House will lower the Tariff on household necessaries. </para>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. BOWDEN</inline>presented a petition from the wage-earning and income-drawing women of the Holroyd district of the Nepean electorate, praying that the House will reject any proposals for increasing Customs duties. </para>
<para>Petitions received. </para>
</speech>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>PERSONAL EXPLANATION</title>
<page.no>3411</page.no>
<type>personal explanation</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>New South Wales Expenditure</title>
<page.no>3411</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3411</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>- Irise to make a personal explanation. Last night the Acting Prime Minister charged me with having made some statements which were absolutely incorrect concerning something which he had said about the Premier of New South Wales. I understood the Acting Prime Minister to say that <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Carruthers</inline> had increased the expenditure of New South Wales to the extent of £2,000,000 while he had been Premier. When, later on, I attempted to prove that that was not the case, by quoting the actual figures, the Acting Prime Minister indignantly denied that he had made any such statement ; and his denial, of course was accompanied by the cheers of honorable members opposite. So indignant were his denials that I thought at one time he was likely to take a fit. I was inclined to believe that perhaps, after all, I might have been mistaken, but I determined, before saying one word upon the matter, to wait patiently until I had an opportunity to see the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> report. In the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> proofs supplied to me to-day, I find that it is reported that, during the course of my speech last night, the Acting Prime Minister interjected - </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>Did the honorable member say I had increased the expenditure of New South Wales by £2,000,000 ? </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">The report proceeds as follows - </para>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3411</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>- Yes. The Acting Prime Minister has endeavoured to saddle upon <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Carruthers</inline> the responsibility for an increased expenditure of£2,000,000 on the part of New South Wales. He tells me that he meant to indicate that <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Carruthers</inline> was responsible for the increase in question. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3411</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNE, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir William Lyne</name>
</talker>
<para>- I said so. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3411</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNE, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir William Lyne</name>
</talker>
<para>- Said what? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3411</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>- That <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Carruthers</inline> was responsible for this increased expenditure of £2,000,000 on the part of New South Wales. Those are the honorable member's words. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3411</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNE, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir William Lyne</name>
</talker>
<para>- Then they are wrong. I have not seen the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> proof. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3411</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>- Then the honorable member had better not talk of what he knows very little about. The report continues - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3411</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 think the honorable member is mistaken. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>3411</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">LYNE, William</name>
<name role="display">Sir William Lyne</name>