Skip to content
Permalink
Branch: master
Find file Copy path
Find file Copy path
Fetching contributors…
Cannot retrieve contributors at this time
11577 lines (11576 sloc) 571 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>1908-03-17</date>
<parliament.no>3</parliament.no>
<session.no>2</session.no>
<period.no>0</period.no>
<chamber>REPS</chamber>
<page.no>9088</page.no>
<proof>0</proof>
</session.header>
<chamber.xscript>
<para>House ofRepresentatives. </para>
<business.start>
<day.start>1908-03-17</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>SUPPLY BILL (No. 5)</title>
<page.no>9088</page.no>
<type>bill</type>
</debateinfo>
<para>Assent reported. </para>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>DEATH OFTHE MARQUIS OF LINLITHGOW</title>
<page.no>9088</page.no>
<type>miscellaneous</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>First Governor-General</title>
<page.no>9088</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9088</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 received from His Excellency the Governor-General a letter, dated 16th inst., intimatingthat he had forwarded to the Marchioness of Linlithgow the resolution of sympathy passed by this House on the death of the Marquis of Linlithgow. To-day I received from His Excellency another letter covering the reply, by cable, from the Marchioness. With the consent of honorable members, I shall direct that it be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes and Proceedings.</inline></para>
</talk.start>
<para class="block">Honorable Members. - Hear, hear. </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>PETITION</title>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<type>petition</type>
</debateinfo>
<para>
<inline font-weight="bold">Mr. HEDGES</inline>presented a petition from the Perth Chamber of Commerce, praying that the House would lay aside the Australian. Industries Preservation Bill. </para>
<para>Petition received and read. </para>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>TELEGRAPH IC COMMUNICATION WITH QUEENSLAND</title>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>F4N</name.id>
<electorate>WIDE BAY, QUEENSLAND</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>- Canthe PostmasterGeneral inform the House how long telegraphic communication between Queensland and the southern Stateshasbeen cut off, and what efforts are being made by his Department to restore it? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KNJ</name.id>
<electorate>MARIBYRNONG, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role>Postmaster-General</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MAUGER, Samuel</name>
<name role="display">Mr MAUGER</name>
</talker>
<para>- The damage done by the floods in the north appears to be farreaching and serious, and the restoration of telegraphic communication will involve some time, and considerable expense. I shall lay upon the table of the House the telegrams that I have received on the subject. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</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>- How long has telegraphic communication with Queensland been interrupted ? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KNJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MAUGER, Samuel</name>
<name role="display">Mr MAUGER</name>
</talker>
<para>- For some hours. I have issued instructions that neither effort nor money shall be spared in restoring communication. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</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 regard to the interruption of the telegraphic service with the north, I desire to ask the PostmasterGeneral whether he will arrange for a cheap service through New Zealand during the period that the interruption continues? It is a serious thing for the whole of Queensland to be cut off from communication with the southern States for two days, and the Government ought certainly to take some steps to ascertain the state of affairs which exists in that portion of Australia. Will the Postmaster- General do his test to arrange for a reasonably cheap service to and from Queensland through New Zealand ? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KNJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MAUGER, Samuel</name>
<name role="display">Mr MAUGER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I shall consult the Prime Minister in regard to the matter, and if any facilities can be afforded to the public of Queensland they will be. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</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>- And oblige the press. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KNJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MAUGER, Samuel</name>
<name role="display">Mr MAUGER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Certainly. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>NAVIGATION BILL</title>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<type>bill</type>
</debateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KYT</name.id>
<electorate>KOOYONG, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KNOX, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr KNOX</name>
</talker>
<para>-Will the Prime Minister lay upon the table, with a view to their circulation amongst honorable members, the objections to certain clauses of the Navi gation Bill which have been transmitted to him at the instance of the British Board of Trade, together with the correspondence connected therewith ? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</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>- With pleasure. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>AMERICAN FLEET</title>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>Visit to Australia</para>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>L17</name.id>
<electorate>DALLEY, NEW SOUTH WALES</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>- Has the Prime Minister received official verification of the report published in the press that the Government of the United States of America have accepted the invitation extended by him, on behalf of the Commonwealth, to the American fleet to visit Australia. If so, will he invite the British Government to have special naval representation on the occasion of the visit, so that the ceremonies may partake of something in the nature of a British-American naval demonstration in Australian waters? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</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 Government are not yet in receipt of the official reply. The invitation was tendered through the British Government, and the reply will follow the same channel. No doubt a proper recognition of the visit of the fleet by the British squadron will be arranged bythe Imperial Government. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K5D</name.id>
<electorate>DARWIN, TASMANIA</electorate>
<party>ALP</party>
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">O&#39;MALLEY, King</name>
<name role="display">Mr KING O&#39;MALLEY</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to ask the Prime Minister whether a port of Tasmania is included amongst those to be visited by the American Fleet? </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</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 invitation to the American Fleet is to visit the Commonwealth of Australia. I presume that when the acceptance reaches us, or soon after, we shall know the ports they propose to visit, though, as I say, the invitation covers the whole of the Commonwealth. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>CUSTOMS PROSECUTION : ADELAIDE</title>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KJ8</name.id>
<electorate>HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA</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>- Can the AttorneyGeneral inform the House of the reasons that prevented the case of The King <inline font-style="italic">versus</inline> Harris, Scarfe and Company being proceeded with recently at Adelaide, seeing that the High Court had arranged to sit there ? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate>DARLING DOWNS, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role>Attorney-General</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>- Negotiations for a settlement of the case had been started, and were, at the time, nearly concluded. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9089</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JOC</name.id>
<electorate>BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BATCHELOR, Egerton</name>
<name role="display">Mr BATCHELOR</name>
</talker>
<para>- I should like the Attorney-General to say whether full details of the terms of any proposed settlement will be published ? </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9090</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>- Yes. The terms of the settlement will necessitate an appearance in Court, and the whole case will be made public. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9090</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>- But the settlement will be arranged in private. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9090</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>- I have been informed of the general principles of the proposed settlement, but am not in possession of the whole of the details. I ask the honorable member not to press the question, because I cannot make any further disclosure at this stage. I may say that the Crown issued certain informations, and the defences to them were demurred to on grounds of law. Negotiations have been going on in regard to the pleadings, and certain settlements have been arrived at, details of which I have not yet received from the Crown Solicitor. The judgment in the case will have to go to a single Judge, and be entered up in Court. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9090</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>MOUNTED CADETS: MILITARY OFFICERS</title>
<page.no>9090</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9090</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JYR</name.id>
<electorate>FAWKNER, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FAIRBAIRN, George</name>
<name role="display">Mr FAIRBAIRN</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to know whether the Minister of Defence noticed in the press of yesterday some serious statements made by Captain Rushall, commanding officer of the Melbourne Cavalry, in reference to his retirement from the Forces. The statement is in reference to the Mounted Cadets, and is as follows : - </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>The boys have no rifles, no belts, no bayonets, no haversacks, no capes. Theyhave nothing except their horses, saddles, bridles, and uniforms, all of which they have themselves provided. </para>
</quote>
<para>If the Minister did notice that statement does he propose to have steps taken to remedy this state of affairs, and secure the services of this valuable officer? </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9090</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDR</name.id>
<electorate>RICHMOND, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role>Minister for Defence</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>- I did see the statement referred to, and the case originated in this way. It is laid down by the regulations that an officer shall hold only one position in connexion with the Defence Forces. For instance, a man may not be an officer in the Artillery and in the Light Horse at the same time; and so he cannot be an officer of cadets, and also an officer of Light Horse. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9090</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JYR</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">FAIRBAIRN, George</name>
<name role="display">Mr Fairbairn</name>
</talker>
<para>- Have the boys none of the accoutrements mentioned ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9090</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>- I am not aware of the fact, but I shall look into the matter, and, if such should prove to be the case, I shall endeavour to get over the difficulty. I do not desire to say any more about the case at present. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9090</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JUV</name.id>
<electorate>FRANKLIN, TASMANIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCWILLIAMS, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr McWILLIAMS</name>
</talker>
<para>- In view of the answer just given I desire to know whether the Minister of Defence will take into consideration the advisability of amending the regulation which provides that an officer, holding a commission is compelled to resign that commission so soon as he takes up an appointment in connexion with the cadets. For instance, a school teacher may be a valuable officer, but the moment he takes charge of the cadets, as he must do in connexion with the schools, he is compelled to resign his position in the volunteers or the militia. I trust the Minister will see the advisability of giving greater range, so that officers, under such circumstances as I have indicated, may be allowed to continue to give their services in both capacities? </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9090</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>- Under such circumstances as those described an officer is seconded for the time being - it is not a question of absolute severance. My personal opinion is, with regard to the cadets, that it would be wiseto permit militia officers, who are prepared to give their time, to accept appointments. That is my personal opinion, but beyond that I do not think the honorable member will ask me to go at present. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9090</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>TARIFF :</title>
<page.no>9090</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>Stimulus of Industries : Immigration</para>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9090</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 Minister of Trade and Customs inform us whether any stimulus to Australian manufactures has followed, or is expected to follow, the imposition of the new Customs duties? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9090</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate>EDEN-MONARO, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role>Minister for Trade and Customs</role>
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN</name>
</talker>
<para>- Yes ; and I should be very glad if the honorable member will allow me to give a great many instances of where Australian industries have been very much stimulated. The honorable member must have seenthis stimulus in his own city of Sydney, or he goes about with his eyes closed. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9090</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KEA</name.id>
<electorate>WENTWORTH, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KELLY, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr KELLY</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire, following on that question, to ask the Prime Minister whether, in view of the stimulus given to Australianmanufacturing industries by the recent imposition of higher duties, the honorable gentleman will further assist these industries by advertising in the United Kingdom the opportunities which Australia offers to industrial immigrants particularly, and by arranging to assist such immigrants with reduced fares, and by such other means as may be found necessary, in order to show that the Commonwealth is ready to encourage immigration without waiting any longer for the States. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</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 received no intimation that this question was to be asked, and until the last few words thought.it would be possible to give a short and favorable answer. But, as a matter of fact, we are still in communication with the States, and I am exchanging letters with the Premier of New South Wales in connexion with these very questions. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KEA</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KELLY, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr Kelly</name>
</talker>
<para>- My question relates to industrial immigrants, and not to immigrants for the land. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</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 whole question has been discussed in the correspondence which will shortly be laid on the table of the House. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9091</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>METEOROLOGICAL FORECASTS</title>
<page.no>9091</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JOC</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BATCHELOR, Egerton</name>
<name role="display">Mr BATCHELOR</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to ask the Minister of Home Affairs whether he has received a report as to the advisability of reverting to local meteorological forecasts ? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</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 Minister has furnished me with a report from the Commonwealth Meteorologist, <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. H.</inline> A. Hunt, and as it is a somewhat lengthy paper, I propose to lay it on the table. For the immediate information of the honorable member, however, I may say that the report, amongst other particulars, states that out of a total of sixty-two forecasts, thirtytwo were correct, eighteen were partially correct, and twelve were failures. The report adds that had the forecasts been issued from Adelaide, the probabilities are that they would have been still more unsatisfactory than has been the case, for in framing the forecasts in the Central Bureau, the Commonwealth Meteorologist has. the advice not only of the best South Australian expert, but also the combined opinions of the central staff of experienced meteorologists. </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JOC</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BATCHELOR, Egerton</name>
<name role="display">Mr BATCHELOR</name>
</talker>
<para>- Upon Sunday last the official forecast issued by the Meteorological Department for South&#39; Australia generally was &#34;fine and warm.&#34; As a matter of fact, the day was cold, and wet. Would that forecast be included amongst those to which the Minister representing the Minister of Home Affairs has referred as &#34; partially correct.&#34; </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</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 would recommend the honorable member to read the whole of the memorandum which has been submitted in regard . to this question, and which has already been laid upon the table of the House. When he does so, perhaps he will find an answer to the question which he has just put. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9091</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>FEDERAL CAPITAL SITE</title>
<page.no>9091</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</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 desire to ask the Minister in charge of the Federal Capital site matter a question, without notice. I understand that it is proposed to make visits to certain proposed sites before the question is finally decided in this House, and I should like to know &#34;whether the time of these visits has been fixed, and when we may expect the matter to be ripe for decision by Parliament? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</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 Government are projecting no visit, but honorable members have expressed a desire to see one or two sites. I understand the visits will take place within the next fortnight. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</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>- Next Saturday week, and, perhaps, on the following Saturday. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</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>- But those visits do not necessarily imply any delay in the necessary preliminary steps for the introduction of the Bill. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9091</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>ADMINISTRATION : PAPUA</title>
<page.no>9091</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JRH</name.id>
<electorate>NEPEAN, NEW SOUTH WALES</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BOWDEN, Eric</name>
<name role="display">Mr BOWDEN</name>
</talker>
<para>- I desire to ask the Prime Minister whether the Government propose to take early action in regard to the appointment of an Administrator in Papua, and whether there is any truth in the report that it is proposed to appoint Judge Murray ? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</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 vacancy has not yet arisen technically, nor, when it does arise, is there any immediate urgency for the appointment. On the contrary, this: appointment, together &#39;with certain other changes, will require to be considered by the Government, and brought before this House, before any definite action is taken. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>HIGH COMMISSIONER BILL</title>
<page.no>9091</page.no>
<type>bill</type>
</debateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</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 desire to ask the Prime Minister whether it is the intention, of the Government to introduce the Bill relating to the appointment of a High Commissioner during the current session? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9091</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>- All questions relatingto the current session are necessarily ambiguous, on account of the uncertainty which, exists concerning its duration. If thesession be a short one, I doubt whether itwill be possible, during its continuance,. to introduce the Bill to which the honorable member has referred. If, however, it should be prolonged, the measure in question will most certainly be brought forward. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9092</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>SECRET DRUGS, CURES AND FOODS</title>
<page.no>9092</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9092</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>- I wish to ask the Prime Minister a question relating to the report of the Royal Commissioner upon secret drugs, cures and foods. In the <inline font-style="italic">Age</inline> of Saturday last the statement appeared that the Parliamentary Medical Committee appointed to deal with the report had de- clared that the Government were holding back the circulation pf the document in question, and that it would be necessary to introduce a Bill to protect the Royal Commissioner, as the contents of the report are not covered by parliamentary privilege. I desire to know what is the attitude of the Government in regard to the report in question, and whether it is necessary that a protecting Bill should be introduced to cover the matter of privilege? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9092</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>- It is necessary that such a Bill should be introduced, and the Attorney-General is now engaged in drafting it. &#39; I hope that it will be laid on the table of the House in a day or two. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9092</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>POSTAL ADMINISTRATION</title>
<page.no>9092</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9092</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>- I wish to know whether the attention of the PostmasterGeneral&#34; has been directed to the following remarks, which are reported to have been made by the Secretary of his Department, and which recently appeared in the press - &#34; Any sensible man would know,&#34; said the secretary, referring to the article in the <inline font-style="italic">Herald,</inline> of -Friday last, &#34;that no relief can be given until officials are appointed. What has to be done before a permanent hand can be appointed ? The postmaster has to ask for it. ft has to be reported on by the inspector. It has to be approved by the Postmaster-General. It has to be passed by the Public Service Commissioner, and then the question of money comes in. Men cannot be put on until there is money to pay them. . . . The PostmasterGeneral himself cannot appoint a messenger boy. He has to apply for what he wants. </para>
</talk.start>
<para>As to the delays and losses referred to, we cannot be expected to be responsible at head-quarters for the inefficiency of men. They are not appointed by the PostmasterGeneral, and he cannot remove them from their offices. No other large &#39;business establishment would ever expect lo carry on under the conditions the Postmaster-General is bound down to.&#34; </para>
<para class="block">If the attention of the Minister has been directed to the foregoing remarks, does he think that the permanent head df his Department should reflect upon the policy adopted by this Parliament, and by the Ministry, under whom he holds office? If he does not, will he take steps to see that in future any expressions of opinion upon matters of policy emanate from the Minister himself, in that discreet way in which he generally deals with such matters? I think it is unfortunate that reflections should be cast upon another Department of the Commonwealth, and upon the policy of the country, by the permanent head of the Postal Department. </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9092</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KNJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MAUGER, Samuel</name>
<name role="display">Mr MAUGER</name>
</talker>
<para>- The statement to which my honorable friend has drawn attention is largely correct. The question of the advisableness or otherwise of the permanent head of the Department giving expression to opinions upon matters of policy is one which will&#39; receive attention. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9092</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>CRIMEAN AND INDIAN MUTINY VETERANS</title>
<page.no>9092</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9092</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFJ</name.id>
<electorate>SWAN, WESTERN AUSTRALIA</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>- Before the Christmas adjournment I asked the Prime Minister whether he would ascertain how many veterans engaged in the Indian Mutiny and the Crimean War were inmates of charitable institutions of the State, and he promised to make inquiries into the matter. I now wish to know whether he has any information upon the subject to give to the House? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9092</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 have obtained an. incomplete list, which, of course, it did not seem desirable to present to the -House, because odd veterans are to be found in various parts of the Commonwealth. I think, however, that the complete list will shortly be available, and it will then be laid upon, the table. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9092</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>ST. PATRICK&#39;S DAY</title>
<page.no>9092</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9092</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>- I wish to ask the PostmasterGeneral whether he recently issued the following memorandum - </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>Officers of your office desiring to lake part in St. Patrick&#39;s Day procession on 17th inst. should make application for half-holiday on day in question. If their services can be spared without public inconvenience, applications will receive favourable consideration. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">It is alleged that this memorandum was issued on the 12th inst., and I desire, to ask the Minister whether he will issue a similar memorandum prior to St. George&#39;s Day, St. Andrew&#39;s Day, and St. David&#39;s Day ? </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KNJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MAUGER, Samuel</name>
<name role="display">Mr MAUGER</name>
</talker>
<para>- I may tell the honorable member thatI knownothing whatever of the circular in question. I desire to add that similar facilities are afforded to postal employ&#233;s in every State upon public holidays. The action in question was taken by the Deputy PostmasterGeneral in accordance with the custom that has obtained for some years. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9093</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>KALGOORLIE TO PORT AUGUSTA RAILWAY SURVEY</title>
<page.no>9093</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KYD</name.id>
<electorate>GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">POYNTON, Alexander</name>
<name role="display">Mr POYNTON</name>
</talker>
<para>- I wish to ask the Minister representing the Minister of Home Affairs, what is the cause of the delay in proceeding with the survey of the proposed line of railway from Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta? </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</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 do not know that any real delayhas taken place. A Conference of experts recently met in Melbourne, and arrived at a certain determination, which was submitted to the Cabinet, and approved. Steps have since been taken to allow of the work being proceeded with as soon as possible. </para>
</talk.start>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KQP</name.id>
<electorate>KENNEDY, QUEENSLAND</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCDONALD, Charles</name>
<name role="display">Mr McDONALD</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is it true, as reported, that the experts have decided to survey a route passing through Tarcoola, although it would cost&#163;800,000 more to take the railway that way? </para>
</talk.start>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</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 shall ascertain, and reply to the honorable member&#39;s question to-morrow. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KYD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">POYNTON, Alexander</name>
<name role="display">Mr POYNTON</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is it intended to give effect to a promise made in this Chamber when the Bill was being considered, that a prospecting party would be equipped to go with the survey party so that the country should be not only surveyed, but also prospected ? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</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 that promise was made, no doubt the Minister&#39;s instructions to the party will give effect to it. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9093</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>OATH OF ALLEGIANCE</title>
<page.no>9093</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXP</name.id>
<electorate>ECHUCA, VICTORIA</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PALMER, Albert</name>
<name role="display">Mr PALMER</name>
</talker>
<para>- Has the attention of the Prime Minister been called to the following report, which appeared in the <inline font-style="italic">Argus</inline> of 20th February last, of a speech made by the honorable member for West Sydney, at the annual picnic of the Wharf Labourers&#39; Union - </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>Nothing was easier for them thanto bring about a condition of things that would be distasteful to the country by a cessation of work. They had never broken an award of the Arbitration Court, although they were under no obligation to observe it, seeing they had been denied preference. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">I wish to know from the honorable and learned gentleman if a statement or assertion made by a member of the House to induce persons to break the law is in accordance with the oath of allegiance which he takes on being sworn in ? </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</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>- No doubt,I read the report, though I do not remember the expressions quoted. I take these as a criticism of theState law, in regard to which an amending Bill is now before the New South Wales Parliament, and am not aware that they can imply any breach of the oath of allegiance. </para>
</talk.start>
<para class="block">ADJOURNMENT <inline font-style="italic">(Formal).</inline></para>
<para class="block">Alleged Customs Frauds. </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KJ8</name.id>
<electorate>Hindmarsh</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 move the adjournment of the House to call attention to a definite matter of urgent public importance, viz., &#34; The alleged Customs frauds by the firm of Harris, Scarf e and Company.&#34; </para>
</talk.start>
<para class="italic">
<inline font-style="italic">Five honorable members having risen in their places,</inline>
</para>
<para>Question proposed. </para>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</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>- Following upon the reply of the Attorney-General to a question I put to him on the subject, I have taken this action because I wish to know whether, in any settlement arrived at the Government is to be a party to the compounding of a felony. It should not be possible for the public to think for a moment that this or any Government would be allowed by Parliament to do such a thing as that. Ever since the right honorable member for Adelaide ceased to administer the Customs Department, the comment has been common that justice is not being done to the revenue, as it was in his time, by the punishing of persons defrauding the Customs. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JUV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCWILLIAMS, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr McWilliams</name>
</talker>
<para>- That is a very serious charge to make against his successors. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9093</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>- It is a very serious charge; but I, and many others, have been led to think that there is ground for the common statement that the Customs Department does not appear to be entirely free from taint. Since the resignation by the right honorable member for Adelaide of the portfolio of Minister of Trade and Customs, case after case has been reported in the newspapers, but the names of those committing offences have been kept back. This leads to the suspicion that there is something of the backstairs method in the present settlement of disputes, which should not be tolerated. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JUV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCWILLIAMS, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr McWilliams</name>
</talker>
<para>- That is a charge against the present Minister. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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>- Iam merely stating my suspicions. I have good grounds for believing that in this case an enormous sum is involved. The firm concerned is one of the wealthiest in the Commonwealth, and it must not be thought that this House will allow the treatment meted out to a strong firm to be different from that meted out to the smallest offender against the Customs Act. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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>- What is the firm supposed to have done? Is there a difference of opinion as to rates of duty, or is fraud alleged ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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 believe that the commission of a criminal act is in question. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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>- Does the honorable member know that to be so? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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>- No; it can be known only by allowing the case to go into Court. I have very strong grounds for suspicion, and they will not be allayed unless the Court deals with the case. We took Robert Reid and Company to Court to prove what that firm had done, and this firm should be similarly treated. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K8L</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">THOMAS, Josiah</name>
<name role="display">Mr Thomas</name>
</talker>
<para>- The right honorable member for Adelaide was Minister then. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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 am certain that he would have taken this case to Court. In certain circles it is commonly reported that the firm in question has been guilty of representing imported goods to be of less than their true value, as if, for instance, it had imported silverware, and entered it as electroplate. If that, or anything like it, has been done, a criminal offence has been committed. The sum involved is. I am sure, a very large one, and in a big case like this, there ought to be no private settlement. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KEA</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KELLY, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr Kelly</name>
</talker>
<para>- What is the charge against the firm? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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>- That it has been guilty of defrauding the Customs. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KEA</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KELLY, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr Kelly</name>
</talker>
<para>- Just a general charge? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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>- The case is a civil one; but if it is settled privately how can we ascertain the facts? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K5D</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">O&#39;MALLEY, King</name>
<name role="display">Mr King O&#39;Malley</name>
</talker>
<para>- Tucker&#39;s case was not settled privately. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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>- Unfortunately there has been the greatest laxity in the administration of the South Australian branch of the Customs Department. On page 169 of his report, the Auditor-General says, that for years past no less than &#163;3,000,000 of revenue has not been subjected to a detailed audit. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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>- Was that before Federation? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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>- Both before and after, but mostly before. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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>- That makes matters worse. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JUV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCWILLIAMS, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr McWilliams</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is this sort of thing still going on? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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>- Yes. It is complained that in Adelaide, at present, there is no audit staff, such as there is in all the other States. Only one audit officer is employed there. I believe that complications have prevented the staff being placed on the footing that prevails in other States, but I do not want honorable members to imagine that, although there is only one Commonwealth audit officer in Adelaide, the accounts of the Customs Department are not being audited. I cannot say how long these alleged fraud&#39;s have been going on. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JUV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCWILLIAMS, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr McWilliams</name>
</talker>
<para>- Some of us do not know anything about the case. What are thefacts ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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 have not all the facts. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JOC</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BATCHELOR, Egerton</name>
<name role="display">Mr Batchelor</name>
</talker>
<para>- The case itself is immaterial to the question before us. The point is whether a case of this kind should be dealt with in open court. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9094</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>- Or settled privately in the office of the Minister. I hope that no big case will be privately settled ; all should be treated alike. Under the old system,a reputable firm could be brought before the police court for a mere error of judgment, but nowadays the practice is for the Minister to deal privately with such matters. All cases should be dealtwith in open court, so that the public may know the real facts. I should prefer to deal with a man who had never defrauded the Customs Department rather than to patronize a man who had beenconvicted of doing so. There is; however, a far more important principle involved. When it was alleged that Charles Tucker had defrauded the Department of Trade and Customs of about &#163;30,000, the people were astounded. Yet we find from the report of the AuditorGeneral that the administration is still as lax as ever. Many of the officers who were administering the Department when the Tucker frauds took place still retain their positions, and no change has been made in respect of the office of Collector. The Auditor-General shows that, instead of the Department having been defrauded of &#163;30,000, it has in that way lost at least &#163;60,000, to say nothing of what has happened during ten years in respect of which no record can be obtained. This firm ought to be brought before the Court in order that we may discover whether or not it has been doing what Tucker did. I sincerely hope that it has not, but I believe that either frauds or offences covering very large sums have been entered into by the firm. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9095</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KEA</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KELLY, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr Kelly</name>
</talker>
<para>- Is the honorable member sure of his facts? His statement is a very serious one. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9095</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>- It is alleged that serious frauds have been committed, and I wish to ascertain whether that allegation is correct. The honorable member must not put into my mouth statements that I do not make. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9095</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KEA</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KELLY, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr Kelly</name>
</talker>
<para>- I thought that the honorable member said he believed that such things had happened. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9095</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>- So I do, but I cannot prove that they have. I should not have taken the extreme step of moving the adjournment of the House had I not strong grounds for the belief that all is not right - that not only a civil, but a criminal offence has been committed. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9095</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KEA</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">KELLY, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr Kelly</name>
</talker>
<para>- Would the honorable member make that statement outside, where he would not be sheltered by privilege? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9095</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>- Why should I? I once declared that I would not say in Parliament what I was not prepared to say outside, and my adherence to that resolution cost me &#163;350. The man of whom I spoke was Charles Tucker, who is now in gaol . </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9095</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>- How did he get a verdict ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9095</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>- There was a property jury, and one of Tucker&#39;s relations was a member of it. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9095</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JUV</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MCWILLIAMS, William</name>
<name role="display">Mr McWilliams</name>
</talker>
<para>- This is a coward&#39;s castle. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9095</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 do not begrudge the &#163;350 that the case cost me, since it has led to a scoundrel being convicted of the offence charged against him. He has been sent to gaol, and thus prevented from committing other swindles. My desire is that no other swindlershall have an opportunity to rob the Department. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9095</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>- I suppose that the honorable member is speaking of what is current rumour in Adelaide? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9095</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>- The Minister, if he chose to speak, could show that there is something more than mere rumour involved. This is one of the most serious matters that the Court could deal with, because it involves the reputation of one of the largest companies in Australia. I certainly have no desire to injure any firm, but, on the other hand, I do not wish the revenue, and, consequently, the taxpayers to be injured. There are some men who think that they have a perfect right to get at the Government if they can do so, and they are merely looked upon by many as smart business people who are doing that which is immoral but not illegal. Such practices, to my mind, should be both illegal and immoral. I am not prepared to remain silent whilst a case like this is being hushed up in a private office. To show the laxity of the administration at Port Adelaide, I would point out that when Messrs. Meucke and Company were acting as agents for Messrs. John Martin and Company the payments to the Department on behalf of the principal item were much larger than they were whilst Tucker acted as their agent. In an extract from the report of the Chief Clerk of the Audit Office, which appears in Appendix C to the report of the AuditorGeneral, it is shown that - </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<quote>
<para>Following Tucker&#39;s appointment, the payments to the Customs on John Martin and Company&#39;s account in July and August 1884, totalled &#163;2430s. 6d., as compared with&#163;9819s. 4d. for the corresponding months of the previous year, when Messrs. Meucke and Company were acting as agents. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">The Chief Clerk shows that for July and August, 1893, the duty payable by John Martin and Company, after allowing 7 per cent. for charges, was &#163;1,018 16s., and that the amount actually paid to the Department was only &#163;190 2s., or a shortage of &#163;828 14s. In the months of January, February, July, and August, 1894, the amount payable by the company was &#163;2,0881s. 2d., but the amount actually paid was &#163;205 8s. 9d., theshortage being no less than &#163;1,882 12s.5d. He points out that - </para>
<quote>
<para>From the 6th March, 1897, until the 31st December, 1897, the amount paid to the Charles Tucker account - by Messrs. John Martin and Company - in respect of duty was &#163;4,068 7s. 2d., out of which there was paid to the Customs the sum of&#163;1,940 19s.1d., thus leaving a shortage for the period of&#163;2,127 8s.1d. </para>
</quote>
<para class="block">It is remarkable that year after year this state of affairs prevailed at Port Adelaide, and that notwithstanding that the volume of merchandise handled on behalf of Messrs. John Martin and Company was the same as before, the Customs authorities did not notice the falling off in revenue from that source. The firm of John Martin and Company is one of the most &#39; reputable in Australia; but it was victimized t a,s the result of its effort to do a good turn to a relative of a member of the company. I trust that when the Government are called upon to determine what payment it shall make in respect of the amount short paid on its behalf bv Charles Tucker, .thev will extend to it some consideration. There can be no doubt that the firm honestly handed over to Tucker, as its agent, every penny for which it was liable in respect of Customs duties, and that Tucker, to whom, as I have said, they tried to do a good turn, robbed the Department. When such things are possible, something must be wrong with the administration of the. Department in South Australia. We have a right to know whether in this case a mere error of judgment has been committed, or whether a criminal offence has been perpetrated. I believe I shall have the House with me when I say that our desire is that every individual, whether influential or not, shall have justice. I hope that no suspicion that corruption exists in the Department will be allowed to remain in the public mind ; but if important cases are settled in private, the public certainly will suspect that there- is something wrong. Having regard to the lax state of affairs which has prevailed and the comparatively trifling attempts that have been made to remedy the defects in the administration, we certainly have cause for dissatisfacion . I trust that the Attorney-General will inform the House that this case will not be settled except in the most public manner. &#39; </para>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9096</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KFK</name.id>
<electorate>Darling Downs</electorate>
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role>AttorneyGeneral</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 honorable member for Hindmarsh was a little precipitate in moving the- adjournment of the House, and would have done well to refrain from taking action until to-morrow, so that he might have an opportunity to make inquiry as to the exact position of affairs. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9096</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>- It might then have been too late to take action. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9096</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 facts relating to the question immediately before us may be briefly stated. An action against this firm was instituted in the High Court, and on the pleadings certain defences, involving questions of law, were raised by way of demurrer.. . The matter that was set down for. hearing by the High Court was the determination of the points of law so raised. Late last week certain negotiations transpired, which obviated the necessity for the questions of law being dealt with by the Court. The firm in question were charged on seventeen sets of charges with having passed false entries with intent to defraud. The fullest investigation was made by the Crown Solicitor&#39;, by counsel in Adelaide acting on behalf of the Department, by the Department itself, and by a solicitor in London, who, acting on behalf of the Commonwealth, had access to all papers there relating to the case. The books of the firm were placed at the disposal of the Department, and the fullest investigation was made. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9096</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KYD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">POYNTON, Alexander</name>
<name role="display">Mr Poynton</name>
</talker>
<para>- Who acted in London for the Department ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9096</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>
<inline font-weight="bold">- Mr. Galbraith,</inline>who always acts as solicitor for the Common - _ wealth in London. <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Culross,</inline> solicitor, and <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Piper,</inline> counsel, of Adelaide, acted for us in that city, whilst <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Whitton,</inline> an officer of high standing in the Audit Department, examined the whole of the books. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9096</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>- Is the AttorneyGeneral sure that the officer saw ail the books? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9096</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>- Yes, I believe so. The officers made the fullest investigation, and they are satisfied that all the books relating to these &#34;matters were seen, and, further, that the firm did not receive one single penny -benefit by reason of the fraudulent acts. But certain individuals are to be charged with fraud. . In regard to the firm, the charge of intent to defraud will be withdrawn ; but, at the same time, the proceedings are to be continued against them. The firm will admit seventeen distinct charges of, through their servants, making false entries; and all those charges will come before the Court, which will have to assess the penalty in each.- </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9096</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KYD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">POYNTON, Alexander</name>
<name role="display">Mr Poynton</name>
</talker>
<para>- Have the firm participated in the frauds? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9096</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; I thought I had made that clear. The fullest investigation has been made, and it has been shown that the firm did not benefit at all. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9096</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>- Some intermediaries benefited ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- Yes; and those intermediaries will be prosecuted. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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 what respect do these charges differ from those made against Messrs. Robert Reid and Company? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- In the latter case there was evidence that the firm benefited. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KYD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">POYNTON, Alexander</name>
<name role="display">Mr Poynton</name>
</talker>
<para>- Why should these Adelaide cases not go into Court? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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 aregoing into Court; the whole of the charges, in which the firm have admitted their liability, will go before the Court. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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 they are going to plead guilty on seventeen charges? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- Yes. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- Except that they do not admit they received any benefit from the frauds. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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 so. I may mention that the amount of duty at stake in the particular charges is not very great, but the firm have agreed to pay &#163;950 duty which we claim. A Judge of the High Courtwill determine on the facts submitted in the case, and assess the penalty on each charge. It will be seen, therefore, that there has been no private settlement in the Minister&#39;s office. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- A great number of cases have been settled in the Minister&#39;s office. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- I am now referring to this particular case ; and after what I have said, I think the honorable member will withdraw anycharge orsuggestionthat there is a taint of personal, impropriety on the part of any one connected with the matter. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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 have not made a definite charge. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- I can assure the honorable member that no single step in the action has been taken without the advice of counsel who have been in touch with the case from start to finish - without the advice of eminent counsel, as well as that of the Crown Solicitor. The latter gentleman has, perhaps, had more experience of Customs matters than most, and I think we can say that he has been eminently successful in bringing parties to justice. Every step in this matter has been the subject of most anxious investigation, and, as I say, we must admit on the reports, that the firm has not benefited from the frauds. On the whole, I &#39;think -that justice is being done in the settlement which is now being made. It is not a private settlement, nor is there any endeavour to keep facts from the public; indeed, the very nature of the settlement will necessitate the case going into Court for the assessment of penalties. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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 <inline font-style="italic">Fish</inline> case went into Court, where the penalties were assessed after evidence had been laid. Would not that have been the better course in this case ? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- In theFish case, the facts were disputed; whereas in the present case they are admitted, and they will all come before the Court, just as if evidence had been given. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- Why not give every person charged with Customs fraud the same opportunity as has been given to this firm? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- In the present case, as I have said more than once, the firm have not benefited to the extent of a penny. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- But they are responsible for the acts of their servants. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- Yes; and for those acts the firm are beingprosecuted. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- This is a new way of encouraging fraud ! </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- Those who committed the frauds will be prosecuted. With the facts as we have them laid before us by our own officers, it would have been idle to go into Court and attempt to prove a charge when we knew we could not succeed.The law officers must be guided by the evidence in their possession. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- And on that evidence there is not a criminal, but only a civil, remedy against thefirm. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- In regard to the <inline font-style="italic">Fish</inline> case mentioned by <inline font-weight="bold">Mr. Fisher,</inline> I am informed that only one charge was tried, the others being settled in the same way as in the present instance. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- That was after the cases had gone to Court. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- But only one case was tried. In the face of our officers&#39; advice that the firm did not benefit by the frauds, what other course could we adopt than that I have laid before honorable members? </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- The Crown proceeds against the firm civilly, and against the servants or intermediaries criminally. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9097</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>- Strictly according to law. This is a Customs prosecution against the firm, who admit seventeen charges. In any criminal case, if the accused pleads guilty, the proceedings are at an end. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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>- It is peculiar that frauds should be committedand no benefit received by the firm. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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 misunderstands the position. The firm&#39;s agents passed those false entries, for which the firm are responsible. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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>- Who got the monetary benefit - the firm or the agents? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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>- Apparently, the agents or the intermediaries. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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>- Somebody got the money. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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>- But the firm who are charged did not get the money. If we proceeded without any evidence of fraud, it would only be inviting failure, with the attendant heavy costs. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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>- Will the Attorney-General give us a supposititious case? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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>- I prefer dealing with the case before the House. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KYD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">POYNTON, Alexander</name>
<name role="display">Mr Poynton</name>
</talker>
<para>- Do I understand the Attorney-General to mean that the firm paid the full amount of duty, and that some agents swindled the Customs? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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 firm paid the duties and they received no benefit whatever from the passing of these entries. The Crown Solicitor has only just returned from Adelaide, and in the last ten minutes has supplied mewith the information I am laying before theHouse. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KYD</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">POYNTON, Alexander</name>
<name role="display">Mr Poynton</name>
</talker>
<para>- Have any arrests been attempted of these intermediaries? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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>- I can make inquiries and let the honorable member know later. The action taken by the Government is strictly in the interests of justice, and we have only followed the usual practice. The Customs authorities have strenuously insisted upon complete proof. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KJ8</name.id>
<electorate>Hindmarsh</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>. - The Attorney-General is entirely responsible for the motion for the adjournment, because he led me to believe, from his reply to my question, that the case had been completely settled. </para>
</talk.start>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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>- I told the honorable member that I had. not seen the Crown Solicitor since his return. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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>- At any rate, that is what I understood. I am glad to know, however that these charges are to come into Court. But while it is quite true that; in the face of the evidence in their possession, theGovernment are taking the only possible action, the inquiry of the honorable member for Grey, as to who has obtained the advantages of the frauds, is most pertinent. This is a matter the Customs Department ought to look into; and I am very glad the question has been raised. I have never known a fraud to be committed without somebody receiving benefit, and if the firm did not receive the benefit of these seventeen distinct frauds, the intermediaries must have done so. It is necessary that Parliament should know how these intermediaries benefited. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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>- I have told honorable members that proceedings are to be taken against those intermediaries. </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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>- What I said was that there were strong grounds for suspicion that the firm were implicated, and that a fairly large sum was involved. We cannot say whether the charges which will come before the Court represent the whole of the amount of which the Customs have been defrauded, because, I take it, that only those charges which can be sustained will be put forward. In another case, which has been mentioned, a number of sums were involved, but the Government could not proceed with every charge, and the offender was sentenced to eighteen months, while he ought to have been sentenced to eighteen years, and then he would have got off cheaply, scoundrel that he was. I am glad the Attorney-General has made a statement to the House, and if he had done so in reply to my question, it would not , have been necessary to move the adjournment. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para>Question resolved in the negative. </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9098</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>UNIFORM THERMOMETERS</title>
<page.no>9098</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9098</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 for Wimmera, on Thursday last, asked a question in reference to the want of uniformity in the exposure of thermometers throughout Victoria, and the following reply has been furnished by the Meteorological Department - </para>
</talk.start>
<quote>
<para>In reply to the complaint of the <inline font-weight="bold">Hon. Mr. Sampson,</inline> M.P., with regard to the want of uniformity in the exposure of thermometers in various parts of Victoria, it should be understood that the Commonwealth only assumed control of the States&#39; Weather Services from the first of January last, and consequently was only in a position to initiate a system of uniformity from that date. A number of regulation screens have already been sent to the country to remedy the most urgent defective exposures. The less urgent cases are being dealt with as quickly as supplies, equipment, and circumstances will permit. </para>
</quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9099</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>FINANCE</title>
<page.no>9099</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<para>Relations between Commonwealth and States - Revenue and Expenditure - Other New Commonwealth Expenditure. </para>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9099</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>asked the Prime Minister, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
</talk.start>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Whether the Government still adheres to its proposal in regard to the financial relations between the Commonwealth and the States after 31st December, 1910, as submitted to Parliament on 31st July, 1906, and afterwards to the Melbourne Conference, 1906, and again to the Brisbane Conference, 1907, and, if so, are such proposals still open to acceptance by the States? </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>Whether any legislation is proposed to be introduced dealing with the question? </para>
</item>
</list>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9099</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>Protectionist</party>
<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>- The answer to the honorable member&#39;s questions is as follows - </para>
</talk.start>
<para>The proposals of the Government in regard to the finances ofthe Commonwealth and their relation to those of the States will be submitted to Parliament prior to the Conference of State Premiers next month. As these proposals will provide for a permanent instead of a temporary settlement of the financial relations between the Commonwealth and the States, some of the propositions laid before the Conferences of1905-6 are being reconsidered. </para>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9099</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>asked the Treasurer, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
<para>Whether he will have the two Treasury returns dated 5th November, 1906, and 9th October, 1906, </para>
<para class="block">Drought up to date of last financial year, and submitted; viz. : - </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Statement showing the total revenue and expenditure (Commonwealth and State) of the Commonwealth of Australia, for each of the six States, and also the summary of the whole? </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>Statement of other new expenditure of the Commonwealth for 5&#189; years, ended 30th June. 1906? (These returns were printed for use at Brisbane Conference.) </para>
</item>
</list>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9099</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>- Certainly. </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9099</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>RECEPTION OF COMMODORE BOUCHARD</title>
<page.no>9099</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9099</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>K7U</name.id>
<electorate>CORIO, VICTORIA</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>asked the Minister of Defence, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
</talk.start>
<para>In reference to the following paragraph from the Queenscliff <inline font-style="italic">Sentinel</inline> of the 7th March - &#34;A guard of honour of 50 rank and file, in charge of Captain J. E. Robertson, left here for Melbourne on Thursday morning and returned on Friday. The occasion was the reception of Commodore Bouchard, of the French manofwar R.S.S. <inline font-style="italic">Catinat,</inline> on his official visit to the Military Board and State Commandant.&#34; </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>For how many Melbourne functionaries is it necessary to transport a body of men 130 miles? </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>Who are they? </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>What railway travelling and other expenses are incurred in such displays? </para>
</item>
<item label="4.">
<para>Are any travelling allowances and other expenses made to officers and men, and what are their amounts respectively? </para>
</item>
</list>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9099</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KDR</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>Protectionist</party>
<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 answers to the honorable member&#39;s questions are as follow - </para>
</talk.start>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>The guard of honour for the reception of Commodore Bouchard of the French warship <inline font-style="italic">Catinat</inline> was arranged in accordance with Commonwealth Military Regulation 34, which prescribes that - &#34; A guard of honour of 50 rank and file, with two officers, one carrying the regimental colour, and a band, will attend. When a foreign general or flag officer lands at a military station within His Majesty&#39;s dominions, to visit the Governor-General, the Governor, Military Board, or District Commandant.&#34; </para>
</item>
</list>
<para>The replies to questions 1 and 2 are in keeping with the second paragraph of regulation quoted. </para>
<para>Theguards are usually furnished in connexion with the opening and prorogation of the Commonwealth and State Parliaments by the GovernorGeneral and State Governor respectively. </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="3.">
<para>On this occasion the following expenditure was incurred : - </para>
</item>
</list>
<para class="block">
<graphic href="044331190803174_11_0.jpg" />
</para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="4.">
<para>Travelling allowance is paid to officers and other ranks for whom quarters are not available at Victoria Barracks; for some time past no quarters have been available for the two officers of the guard, who were thus entitled to travelling allowance at the rate of 12s. 6d. per diem. </para>
</item>
</list>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9099</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>OPIUM SMUGGLING</title>
<page.no>9099</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9099</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JRH</name.id>
<electorate>for Mr. Johnson</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BOWDEN, Eric</name>
<name role="display">Mr BOWDEN</name>
</talker>
<para>asked the Minister of Trade and Customs, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
</talk.start>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Is he aware of the fact that large quantities of opium continue to be smuggled into the Commonwealth in defiance of the prohibition law? </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>Is there any truth in the allegations made in the newspapers that there is laxity of vigilance on the part of the Customs authorities in connexion with opium smuggling? </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>Is there any truth in the following statement published in the Sydney press : - &#34; The facts are thaton 20th February the Federal Customs authorities, who had been informed in September last that a seizure of twelve tins and twelve trays had been made in Hindley-street, Adelaide, were notified that on Saturday, 22nd February, the steamer <inline font-style="italic">Kyarra</inline> would leave Sydney with some tins of opium, now worth in Australia &#163;3 a tin, on board, and theywould be in possession of a certain employ&#233; of the boat, whose occupation and name were given. As far as can be ascertained in Adelaide no search was made of the boat in Sydney, although there were two days in which to do it. By the time the vessel reached Melbourne all papers relating to the trouble had been delivered at the head office, but it is stated that no search was made of the vessel there. At that port the man implicated received information through the newspapers that the whole plot had been discovered, and when the vessel arrived at Port Adelaide he met the police officials with a smile &#34; ? </para>
</item>
<item label="4.">
<para>Will the Minister state the facts of the case, and lay on the table of the House the correspondence and papers relatingto the matter? </para>
</item>
</list>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9100</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JX7</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">CHAPMAN, Austin</name>
<name role="display">Mr AUSTIN CHAPMAN</name>
</talker>
<para>- The answers to the honorable member&#39;s questions are as follow - </para>
</talk.start>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>The Department is aware that opium is being introduced into Australia notwithstanding the prohibition. </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>There is no laxity of vigilance on the part of officers as evidenced by the fact that from 1st January, 1906, date of prohibition, to 21st December, 1907, 2,863 lbs. of opium were delected and seized, of a value of &#163;8,589, and penalties inflicted on offenders of &#163;3,326, and further quantities seized during the current year. </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>This matter is being investigated now, but the statements made are all assumptions, and as the <inline font-style="italic">Kyarra</inline> was not an oversea vessel under any circumstances there is considerable difficulty in dealing with cases of this kind. </para>
</item>
<item label="4.">
<para>While I should be very happy to show the honorable member the papers if he wishes, yet they cannot be made public for reasons which the honorable member will, I am sure, appreciate. A recent report by the ComptrollerGeneral on the subject, which deals with the whole matter, will, however, be laid on the table. </para>
</item>
</list>
<interjection>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9100</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 Minister know whether it is being manufactured in the States? </para>
</talk.start>
</interjection>
<continue>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9100</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 have reason to believe that it is. . </para>
</talk.start>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9100</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>POSTAL FACILITIES: COUNTRY DISTRICTS</title>
<page.no>9100</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9100</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KXP</name.id>
<electorate />
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">PALMER, Albert</name>
<name role="display">Mr PALMER</name>
</talker>
<para>asked the PostmasterGeneral, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
</talk.start>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Whether, in view of curtailed postal facilities now proposed to be given to various country districts, he will, beforedeciding in any future cases, issueto the offices affected, for public inspection, a memorandum setting forth the reason for such curtailment? </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>Will he state to the House the policy of the Department in regard to this matter of decreasing country mail facilities? </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>Will he state if such policy is indorsed by the Government? </para>
</item>
</list>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9100</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KNJ</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>Protectionist</party>
<role />
<in.gov>1</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">MAUGER, Samuel</name>
<name role="display">Mr MAUGER</name>
</talker>
<para>- The answers to the honorable member&#39;s questions are as follow - </para>
</talk.start>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>It is not proposed to curtail postal facilities in country districts, except that in some few cases, where the business is very small and very few letters are posted and received, the frequency of the mail services have been or are proposed to be reduced to accord with actual requirements. </para>
</item>
</list>
<para>The total provision for inland mail services, apart from those carried by the railways, asked for on the Estimates-in-Chief for the current year, exceeds that of last year by &#163;6,300, and it has been found necessary to askfor a further sum of &#163;4,500 to meet the actual necessities of this financial year in this respect. </para>
<para>The States are also to be paid &#163;25,000 additional for the half-year ended 30th June next for the carriage of mails by the railways, and as all the passenger and mixed trains are now available for mails, greater facilities will be afforded generally, and particularly in country districts. </para>
<para>I shall be pleased to inform members in every case of any curtailment of postal facilities in their electorates, but cannot undertake to issue public notices of such curtailments and&#39; the reasons therefor. </para>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="2.">
<para>The policy of the Department, as shown by my reply to the previous question, and the increased facilities lately given in country districts, is to afford every facility required by the business to be transacted, so far as the money at its disposal will allow. </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>Such a policy must necessarily be indorsed by the Government. </para>
</item>
</list>
</speech>
</subdebate.1>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>CUSTOMS TARIFF BILL</title>
<page.no>9100</page.no>
<type>bill</type>
</debateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9100</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>JRH</name.id>
<electorate>for Mr. Joseph Cook</electorate>
<party />
<role />
<in.gov>0</in.gov>
<first.speech>0</first.speech>
<name role="metadata">BOWDEN, Eric</name>
<name role="display">Mr BOWDEN</name>
</talker>
<para>asked the Treasurer, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
</talk.start>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Is he following with active interest the fate of the Tariff schedule since it left this Chamber? </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>Has it been arranged that some members of the Government shall support the alteration of rates of duties agreed to by the Treasurer in this House? </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>Does he not regard such conduct as trifling with his obligations as a Minister responsible to this House? </para>
</item>
</list>
</speech>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9100</page.no>
<time.stamp />
<name.id>KIN</name.id>
<electorate />
<party>Protectionist</party>
<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 reply to the honorable member&#39;s questions I desire to state - </para>
</talk.start>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">
<para>Certainly. I do not think the word &#34;fate&#34; is properly used. </para>
</item>
<item label="2.">
<para>I should like the honorable member to say to what items he refers. There is no such arrangement. </para>
</item>
<item label="3.">
<para>There is notrifling with obligations as insinuated. </para>
</item>
</list>
</speech>
</debate>
<debate>
<debateinfo>
<title>QUESTION</title>
<page.no>9100</page.no>
<type>Questions</type>
</debateinfo>
<subdebate.1>
<subdebateinfo>
<title>NORTHERN TERRITORY</title>
<page.no>9100</page.no>
</subdebateinfo>
<speech>
<talk.start>
<talker>
<page.no>9100</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>asked the Prime Minister, <inline font-style="italic">upon notice -</inline></para>
</talk.start>
<list type="decimal-dotted">
<item label="1.">